Communism and capitalism - which is better?

I didn't read your rant. You need to figure out what the words mean. That is hard because very few people know what capitalism means, and very few people agree on what communism means.

In economics three things are required for a system: land, labor, and capital. Capital is defined as tools of production. None is more important than another, all three are required.

In real life companies often (usually) borrow the money to buy tools of production and other expenses, so the loan is called "startup capital". Since people are full of sloppy habits, they assume that capital means any available funds. And there you have your definition of capitalism: running a business on borrowed money.

I searched for a long time to find a definition of capitalism and the best I found was "the way we do things in the west". That was certainly accurate, since the eastern part of the world traditionally does business on money invested by friends and family, strictly avoiding debt. Many people assume that capitalism is synonymous with free market, but that is obviously not true.

Ok, there is half your answer. Now you figure out what communism is, or is supposed to be.

ROTFL. Boy have you got it all wrong. 1.

Not only are there no capitalist countries in the world, but for more of the time since 1949 India didn't even want to think about capitalism; it claimed to be socialist. http://reason.com/archives/2006/06/06/th... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_i... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licence_Raj The idea that anyone would even think of India as in any way capitalist before 1990 is just such a joke. 2.

It has frequently been the case that Communist countries have done a better job of delivering _public_ goods that non-Communist countries. Communist Cuba has a better health care system than the U.S. does and a better education system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_Index It was the Communist Soviet Union that first put a satellite into space; etc. Public health is just another public good.

And when it comes to heavy industry, the Soviet Union under Communism went from a third-world country to a world power that defeated Germany by outproducing it in tanks, etc. http://www.pkarchive.org/theory/Russia.html It is not the case that Communist countries can't produce, and setting that up as an argument against Communism is setting up a straw man. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man None of your examples have to do private goods, which is where Communist economies tend to lose out. http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/10/how-much-does-the-market-organization-of-economic-life-matter.html 3.

As for some of your other characterizations, they are clearly false. China has grown rapidly and the well-being of its people has increased greatly since the economic reforms of 1978 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_economic_reform But they were reforms away from Communism and in the direction of the free market, so you can hardly use them as evidence of the superiority of Communism. As for China increasing the number of scientists, again, that is recent.

Do you not remember the Cultural revolution that sent all the university professors and students to work as peasants in the fields? That burned the books? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution 4.

It is true that pure capitalism does not work at all; and that pure communism does work, but not very well. That is why all developed countries, including the U.S. since its founding, and all countries that are actually developing, including China since its reforms, and India since its reforms of 1990, are mixed economies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy But your arguments are all hot air and no substance. Stop talking and start reading, listening, and thinking.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.