Is the United States of America a communist country??

By these comparisons, it would surely seem so.

http://www.criminalgovernment.com/docs/planks.html

Quote :

The Communist Manifesto states that ten things need to occur in order to transform a society from capitalism to communism. Let's see how the USA scores. By my calculations, communism wins a resounding victory.

This list of Communist Manifesto planks was copied from Wikipedia. The exact same text can also be found in other sources.

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

Anyone who owns land pays property tax. For example, with a property tax rate of 5%, you pay 5% of your property's value each year to the government. If you don't pay property taxes, your land is confiscated. Effectively, a person doesn't own their land; it's a perpetual transferable lease from the government. Owning something means you don't have to pay anything for the continuing privilege of ownership. By this standard, nobody in the USA owns land. All land is owned by the government and rent is paid.

Score: Communism 1, free market 0

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

Need I say more?

Score: Communism 2, free market 0

3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.

Estate taxes are pretty hefty. The Bush tax cuts eliminate the income tax in 2010, although it reverts to the old law in 2011. People with tremendous wealth can use trusts to dodge estate taxes. However, they're paying an effective tax to their accountants and estate planning lawyers; for large estates, estate planning services take a percent of assets. Estate taxes hit hardest on families with a business valued in the $1M-$10M range. Their business may not have the cashflow to pay the estate taxes and they may be forced to sell. I'll score this as half a point for each side.

Score: Communism 2.5, free market 0.5

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

Are you kidding me? There are many laws making it very easy for the government to confiscate the property of "terrorists" and other criminals. The law makes it very easy for the government to seize assets of people accused of tax evasion. With a globalized economy, you can't really transfer wealth outside of the country. Where else could it go? All countries have the same bad rules for capital ownership, with the USA having slightly better rules!

Score: Communism 3.5, free market 0.5

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

This is easy: The Federal Reserve.

Score: Communism 4.5, free market 0.5

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.

There is pretty heavy government regulation of transportation and communication. Most telecommunication companies are big corporations that are heavily regulated. Centralized control in a few corporations is effectively the same as State control. A government-granted monopoly with heavy regulation is the same as State control. Televisions and newspapers are concentrated in a few corporations. However, the Internet is one noteworthy exception that is at risk for being crushed soon, if "network neutrality" is stopped. The free market manages another half-point here, due to the Internet. Will it be able to hang onto this half point? Will the free market score again?

Score: Communism 5, free market 1

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

The farming industry is heavily regulated and government subsidized. Most industrial farms follow the practices set out by a few agricultural companies (i.e. Monsanto). Factories are hardly even built in the USA. Besides, concentration of manufacturing power in a few big corporations is effectively the same as State control. Maybe the free market should get partial credit here, but I'm going to give Communism a full point.

Score: Communism 6, free market 1

8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

I think that "industrial armies" could be interpreted as huge corporate control of factories and farms. The food industry is certainly heavily regulated.

"Equal liability of all to labour". I'm not sure what that means. I think it means that most people are employees/wage slaves, rather than entrepreneurs. There are so many barriers to starting a small business that most people are effectively forced to work as employees. The average person is a laborer, not a capital owner. Even a small business owner is effectively a government employee, because of the confiscatory effect of income taxes.

Score: Communism 7, free market 1

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.

Agriculture is mostly industrialized now. Small farmers are mostly squeezed out or marginalized. The increasing power and regulation of the Federal government means that the ability of cities to make their own laws is reduced. For example, people in California want to legalize marijuana but are forbidden by the Federal enforcement of drug laws.

Score: Communism 8, free market 1

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.

This is another huge win for Communism. There are huge problems with the current implementation of schools, enough for another article. Even though there are private schools, most of them follow the model set by public schools. They are better in quality, but suffer the same structural defect.

The structural defect in schools is that they teach loss-avoidance rather than value-creation. You start with a grade of 100% and are punished for each mistake. Perfection is required to avoid punishment. There is no benefit to learning the material after the test; you just move on to the next subject. If a student sees his mistakes after a test and correctly relearns the material, there is no reward.

Schools are designed to created obedient workers. Their "loss-avoidance" training means that they are reluctant to risk any sort of job loss, making them obedient workers. They are reluctant to risk money in the stock market, and invest in savings accounts or bonds where inflation erodes their savings.

Score: Communism 9, free market 1

By my scoring, the Communist Manifesto has been nearly completely implemented in the USA. The free market only scored two half-points. It scored a half-point for the ability of wealthy people to dodge estate taxes. It scored another half point for the Internet. The half-point that the free market won for the Internet is at risk, if telecommunications companies have their way and abolish network neutrality.

Is there a free market out there anywhere?

.

LukeTHr wrote:

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

Anyone who owns land pays property tax. For example, with a property tax rate of 5%, you pay 5% of your property's value each year to the government. If you don't pay property taxes, your land is confiscated. Effectively, a person doesn't own their land; it's a perpetual transferable lease from the government. Owning something means you don't have to pay anything for the continuing privilege of ownership. By this standard, nobody in the USA owns land. All land is owned by the government and rent is paid.

Score: Communism 1, free market 0

How about if instead of appraisals, they increase the taxed value of your home by only 2 percent every year, into perpetitude?

Proposition K

LukeTHr wrote:

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

This is why we need the Fair Tax.

mikecc wrote:

LukeTHr wrote:

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

Anyone who owns land pays property tax. For example, with a property tax rate of 5%, you pay 5% of your property's value each year to the government. If you don't pay property taxes, your land is confiscated. Effectively, a person doesn't own their land; it's a perpetual transferable lease from the government. Owning something means you don't have to pay anything for the continuing privilege of ownership. By this standard, nobody in the USA owns land. All land is owned by the government and rent is paid.

Score: Communism 1, free market 0

How about if instead of appraisals, they increase the taxed value of your home by only 2 percent every year, into perpetitude?

Proposition K

sure why not...... either way they will do what works best to their advantage, the hell with "we the people...."

The US isn't really a communist country. It's a more complex situation. In the US the corporate giants and the bankers rule and the wealthy have more rights. It's kind of capitolist socialism where the rich have all the rights and they try to look good by sucking away the middle class rights to give to their pet impoverished person of the month.

This list didn't even hit on the multitude of personal freedoms and Constitutional protections we have lost, and without those it doesn't much matter who property belongs to.

Flat Tax...

LukeTHr wrote:

By these comparisons, it would surely seem so.

http://www.criminalgovernment.com/docs/planks.html

Quote :

The Communist Manifesto states that ten things need to occur in order to transform a society from capitalism to communism. Let's see how the USA scores. By my calculations, communism wins a resounding victory.

This list of Communist Manifesto planks was copied from Wikipedia. The exact same text can also be found in other sources.

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

Anyone who owns land pays property tax. For example, with a property tax rate of 5%, you pay 5% of your property's value each year to the government. If you don't pay property taxes, your land is confiscated. Effectively, a person doesn't own their land; it's a perpetual transferable lease from the government. Owning something means you don't have to pay anything for the continuing privilege of ownership. By this standard, nobody in the USA owns land. All land is owned by the government and rent is paid.

Score: Communism 1, free market 0

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

Need I say more?

Score: Communism 2, free market 0

3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.

Estate taxes are pretty hefty. The Bush tax cuts eliminate the income tax in 2010, although it reverts to the old law in 2011. People with tremendous wealth can use trusts to dodge estate taxes. However, they're paying an effective tax to their accountants and estate planning lawyers; for large estates, estate planning services take a percent of assets. Estate taxes hit hardest on families with a business valued in the $1M-$10M range. Their business may not have the cashflow to pay the estate taxes and they may be forced to sell. I'll score this as half a point for each side.

Score: Communism 2.5, free market 0.5

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

Are you kidding me? There are many laws making it very easy for the government to confiscate the property of "terrorists" and other criminals. The law makes it very easy for the government to seize assets of people accused of tax evasion. With a globalized economy, you can't really transfer wealth outside of the country. Where else could it go? All countries have the same bad rules for capital ownership, with the USA having slightly better rules!

Score: Communism 3.5, free market 0.5

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

This is easy: The Federal Reserve.

Score: Communism 4.5, free market 0.5

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.

There is pretty heavy government regulation of transportation and communication. Most telecommunication companies are big corporations that are heavily regulated. Centralized control in a few corporations is effectively the same as State control. A government-granted monopoly with heavy regulation is the same as State control. Televisions and newspapers are concentrated in a few corporations. However, the Internet is one noteworthy exception that is at risk for being crushed soon, if "network neutrality" is stopped. The free market manages another half-point here, due to the Internet. Will it be able to hang onto this half point? Will the free market score again?

Score: Communism 5, free market 1

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

The farming industry is heavily regulated and government subsidized. Most industrial farms follow the practices set out by a few agricultural companies (i.e. Monsanto). Factories are hardly even built in the USA. Besides, concentration of manufacturing power in a few big corporations is effectively the same as State control. Maybe the free market should get partial credit here, but I'm going to give Communism a full point.

Score: Communism 6, free market 1

8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

I think that "industrial armies" could be interpreted as huge corporate control of factories and farms. The food industry is certainly heavily regulated.

"Equal liability of all to labour". I'm not sure what that means. I think it means that most people are employees/wage slaves, rather than entrepreneurs. There are so many barriers to starting a small business that most people are effectively forced to work as employees. The average person is a laborer, not a capital owner. Even a small business owner is effectively a government employee, because of the confiscatory effect of income taxes.

Score: Communism 7, free market 1

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.

Agriculture is mostly industrialized now. Small farmers are mostly squeezed out or marginalized. The increasing power and regulation of the Federal government means that the ability of cities to make their own laws is reduced. For example, people in California want to legalize marijuana but are forbidden by the Federal enforcement of drug laws.

Score: Communism 8, free market 1

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.

This is another huge win for Communism. There are huge problems with the current implementation of schools, enough for another article. Even though there are private schools, most of them follow the model set by public schools. They are better in quality, but suffer the same structural defect.

The structural defect in schools is that they teach loss-avoidance rather than value-creation. You start with a grade of 100% and are punished for each mistake. Perfection is required to avoid punishment. There is no benefit to learning the material after the test; you just move on to the next subject. If a student sees his mistakes after a test and correctly relearns the material, there is no reward.

Schools are designed to created obedient workers. Their "loss-avoidance" training means that they are reluctant to risk any sort of job loss, making them obedient workers. They are reluctant to risk money in the stock market, and invest in savings accounts or bonds where inflation erodes their savings.

Score: Communism 9, free market 1

By my scoring, the Communist Manifesto has been nearly completely implemented in the USA. The free market only scored two half-points. It scored a half-point for the ability of wealthy people to dodge estate taxes. It scored another half point for the Internet. The half-point that the free market won for the Internet is at risk, if telecommunications companies have their way and abolish network neutrality.

Is there a free market out there anywhere?

LukeTHr wrote:

ah, another cut and paste classic with no actual input by the poster

Heh, heh. Double dipper.

peg... I figured someone would say that but I do add in my own views when I copy/paste.

so in light of that ....

LukeTHr wrote:

peg... I figured someone would say that but I do add in my own views when I copy/paste.

so in light of that ....

So saying that you agree with the article constitutes adding your own views? Isn't it quite obvious that you agree with an opinion piece that you post?

As of Jan. 20, 2009, Republicans quite suddenly became concerned about rights and the scope of government size and power. Nice to have ya'll back after 8 years of cheer-leading every government expansion, power-grab, and and rights-infringement that Bush came up with.

But don't expect me to take ya'll too seriously. I know that there's no principle behind the political rhetoric. Just like the Democrats who had a similar change of heart on Jan. 20, 2001.

That's the curse of the two party monopoly Bighead. They both only exist to put money and power in the hands they choose and to use the Bill Of Rights for asswipe, and they take turns trashing each other for it.

I suppose one could argue that each party keeps the other in check this way... it's probably true to a point.

And I've no reason to believe that a 3-party system would be all that different.

I just think it's funny how sharply and immediately the rhetoric has changed. I feel like it's 1995 again. Except that I think I now have a better understanding of the Republicans. I never DID particularly like the Democrats.

A third party that based it's votes on The Constitution instead of special interests and pet projects could make a hell of a difference. The two party system isn't really keeping each other in check, but rather doing an "I won't try to take this, if you'll give up that" way of politics.

If we had even 30% of Washington being a serious Constitutionalist third party they could put a new kind of pressure. They could give one of the two warring parties the winning votes, but only if their terms were met. We continue to lose under the two party system so even constant stalemate would be an improvement.

Thing is, both current parties claim that they follow the constitution. I'm also familiar with the so-called "Constitution Party"... and they can go fuck themselves.

I reckon what I'm saying is that the constitution is kinda like a miniature version of the bible... 10 people can read it and interpret it 10 different ways.

Bighead wrote:

Thing is, both current parties claim that they follow the constitution. I'm also familiar with the so-called "Constitution Party"... and they can go fuck themselves.

I reckon what I'm saying is that the constitution is kinda like a miniature version of the bible... 10 people can read it and interpret it 10 different ways.

I'm speaking of a strict Libertarian when I say Constitutionalist. The last time I saw a presidential candidate from the party known as the Constitution Party he was a mentally deficient ultra right wing government as ruled by religion baboon.

Sorry, comparing him to a baboon was an insult to baboons.

The only third party with even a marginal chance of success will be the revolution party.

at the rate things are going, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if this country had another revolution. The people we have been voting for sure haven't done things to make this country better, only pad their own pockets and the pockets of their buddies. when it's election time, they all come out of the woodwork like the cockroaches they are and glad hand the public proclaiming how many great things they will do for the good of all if they are the ones in office and when it's all over, things are back to business as usual.

Republicans are going to get a "hip-hop" make over. Im gonna reregister into the Illinois Nazi Party.