• Botree@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago
    • Universal access to healthcare, food, water, shelter, electricity, and education without cost.
    • Prohibit the operation of businesses or investments in basic necessities mentioned in previous point.
    • Non-essential amenities such as entertainment, fashion, travel, luxury goods etc continue to be available for purchase.
    • A reasonable tax structure that ensures higher taxes for the rich.

    Is that Communism? Is that too much to ask for?

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s more like socialism though, where capitalism coexist with worker/government run corporations.

      • Stoneykins@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Reading arguments about these concepts while many people completely disagree what their definitions are feels like treading water waiting to exhaust myself and drown.

        Maybe the point is the policies and anyone who argues about words is part of the problem.

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well the definitions are pretty clear, some people might just be uninformed because mixing the two has been very common in the right’s communication for decades.

    • astral_avocado@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Since China is communist like tankies believe, you also forgot a fascist police state with total control over the internet tot he point where you’ll get a police visit if you post a meme critical of the government.

    • Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Your first and second point combined basically means that everybody has to live in some government designed and funded flat. If you don’t like that, there’s nothing to be done. Same with food and everything. Oh you don’t like the government mandated 1500kcal protein slurry per day? Sucks to be you then… Of course it doesn’t have to be bad, but you are enabling a system where it could be bad and nobody could do anything about it.

      • voidMainVoid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I don’t see why #2 is necessary. Make the government have to compete with the free market. If you’re poor, you get a government-funded apartment, but if you’re wealthy, you can afford a luxury condo.

        There are food banks in my city, and nobody believes that they’re a threat and they’re going to put supermarkets out of business. You could just have standardized, ubiquitous food banks run by the government.

        • Sanctus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think they mean all this business with water and housing. Investment properties are a plague all over this country. They inflate the price of housing so that someone can make a living off of someone else’s need for shelter.