• 1 Post
  • 19 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 2nd, 2023

help-circle

  • The people supported the economic system that had free healthcare and education, doubled life expectancies, dramatic improvements in science, made it to space, rapidly industrialized, and dramatically reduced inequality.

    Free healthcare still exists in all developed countries other than the US, life expectancies increased all over the world same with improvements in science, the space race was very close between the USSR and the US and the moon landing is very often brought up by US nationalists as well. I would say the industrialization was actually a bit too fast, people were, sometimes forcefully, relocated from rural areas to concrete boxes in cities. As for inequality, yes, there were no billionaires, and, while the quality of life for the poorest was maybe higher than it is today, I’d say the quality of life for average people was lower during communist time.

    Even prisoners were paid in the USSR for forced labor, this is ahistorical.

    While this may have been true at the beginning, later on, there were no wages. Still, conditions were very poor.


  • Furthermore, the vast majority of people voted to retain the USSR

    Wow, you’re telling me the people who were brainwashed into believing their country is the best (not saying it doesn’t happen nowadays (cough cough USA), voted to retain it?

    In my country (Romania) the only point I hear people praising the communist regime about is infrastructure. Why? Because, as it turns out, it’s much easier to build infrastructure when you have slaves prisoners which you don’t have to pay. Of course, the corruption in our post-communist government doesn’t help either.

    I agree, capitalism is VERY far from ideal, but, please, stop glazing the USSR regime just because it was “communist”.







  • Okay, that sounds fine, but what about an apartment high rise? That’s a residential property, and there’s not a great way to have it all be rental property without being owned by a corporation of some kind.

    Then not all of them have to be for rent. In my country at least you can buy individual apartments.

    Also you could allow them to own the property they build, but once sold off, they or another corporation (or individual with too many properties, maybe the limit can be 3 or 4) cannot buy them again.

    Obviously I’m not a lawyer and this was just a quick suggestion. I expect people more familiar with the law can word this better.








  • It’s fine as a concept, it allows you to live somewhere without making a commitment long-term.

    But there needs to be more regulations in place, like maybe making it illegal for corporations to buy residential property and requiring by law that any new residential building must have the option to buy as well as rent, with regulations to ensure it’s a fair price.