Quote from: Xephan on July 28, 2011, 03:59:27 PM

Which is why sadly, socialism/communism will never work in the real world. It fails to take into account the inherent flaw in humanity.

You can easily make the same argument about capitalism or anything else. Nepotism, cronyism, etc, will always be with us. In a truly merit-based system, what are the odds that we'd have multiple father/son presidents? All you can do is try to be as fair as possible. Socialism attempts that, even if it doesn't always come out right. Our system doesn't even pretend to try.

Saying "socialism fails because it doesn't take human nature into account" is about as cliched and shallow as saying "but all of those countries FAILED!" and does a pretty good job of marking the speaker as someone who knows very little or nothing about the subject.

Quote from: Rassah

and btw, despite what people's opinions are, Poland is way better now than it was under Communism.

I don't know if you can't read graphs or what, but Poland was one of the only two countries where people think they're better off now than under Communism.

Quote

As for the rest of the countries, it's not really fair to compare how things were under USSR versus how they are now. Once "free market" took over, the corruption was rampant, and those corrupt people received ownership of large portions of their country's economy and production thanks to their previous connections. So now, the people in charge of their government and corporations are largely the same communists who were in charge of the government under USSR.

See, here's your free market with massive corruption, and you're still trying to blame it on the Communists, 22 years after their governments fell. And you're telling the people that actually remember Communism and lived under both systems that their lives are better now because you know better... having never lived under it yourself, and probably not even having visited their countries. Isn't that awfully presumptuous? What would you say if those people started making assumptions about your life based on things that they figure must be true without ever having been to the U.S?

Quote from: Rassah

Hmm, I don't use any of those companies for my car insurance. I use Blue Cross blue Shield for health, and haven't seen them advertise in for ever. My home owner's insurance is from State Farm, who also almost never advertise. The banks and credit cards I use are usually not ones I get advertisements from. My bank that I refinanced with, or opened a home equity loan with, does not advertise. My phone service from Skype doesn't send me adverts. I get some advertising from competing internet and electric companies, but upon researching their price structure, I find out they are more expensive, and dismiss them. Places where I shop for groceries don't advertise. Neither does my car mechanic. Most of the services I use I know about either due to word of mouth, or because I went online and did some research to find what kind of business and prices are out there. So, that's kind of my point. People who get duped will get to pay higher advertising costs. People who have learned their lesson will not.

I have literally no clue what you're trying to get at here. That some businesses don't advertise? Is that supposed to be some sort of revelation?

The average American is exposed to over 3,000 advertisements a day. It's a $150 billion a year industry in the U.S. alone. Just the insurance industry spent $4.15 billion on advertising in 2009, double what they spent in 2000. And State Farm, who almost never advertise according to you, was responsible for $514 million of that.

http://adage.com/article/news/insurance-industry-s-4-billion-advertising-brawl/148992/