> I seen a comment by a "intelligent dude" like you, in his intelligence he compared North and South Korea, ignored that sanctions for the North and the tons of money US dropped on south and he got the conclusion he wanted.
Don't even get me started on the story of the two Koreas. Everything you need to build an open and shut case against communism can be found in the recent and well recorded history of those two countries.
You can object to my "superiority complex" but at the end of the day I'm still right and your still wrong. This is not one of those things where reasonable people can have differing opinions.
Btw China is a big economy and many of HNers tell me that their are communists and the party dictates everything etc, so you need some other skillful argument to attribute all the good in China to US and capitalism and of-course blame all the bad on communism.
Also I personally believe that most of us understand by communism is not superior to the systems we see in Western Europe, my objection was to your bad argument that there are good clean data where you can extract clear conclusions.
I'm getting less and less sure you're qualified to judge that as we go.
> Btw China is a big economy and many of HNers tell me that their are communists and the party dictates everything etc, so you need some other skillful argument to attribute all the good in China to US and capitalism and of-course blame all the bad on communism.
They're economically very capitalist with stock markets, free enterprise, billionaires etc. Having a totalitarian government has not been all bad for them, which is not an endorsement of such a system. However, communism very clearly failed for China, and the story did not change until they abandoned it - at which point that had a success story every bit as impressive as that of South Korea.
> Also I personally believe that most of us understand by communism is not superior to the systems we see in Western Europe, my objection was to your bad argument that there are good clean data where you can extract clear conclusions.
How much more data do you need to see before you can have a clear conclusion? You've got literally 40 case studies, roughly 20 of them independent "experiments", and 100% failure rate. Seriously, it's case closed already. This is not something reasonable people can disagree on. It's the economic equivalent of trying to argue the Earth is flat.
Garbage In Garbage Out
you want to prove that green color is better then red, so you put a rat in a green box, a rat in a red box, then you starve the rat in the red box and give a ton of food to the green rat.
Then like a "genius self claimed scientist" you claim to prove that this is a valid experiment that proves that green is better then red.
You've made up your mind without looking at the evidence, as you've already demonstrated your ignorance of history, and somehow think that qualifies you to reject all of it - without having even considered it. You've proved my point rather nicely I think.
Would be more simple if you find the perfect example from those 40 and let's talk that one.
I seen a comment by a "intelligent dude" like you, in his intelligence he compared North and South Korea, ignored that sanctions for the North and the tons of money US dropped on south and he got the conclusion he wanted.
The truth is that there is not enough good data, I would like to see some examples of countries that were not under sanctions or under a cold war or had some insane dictator leading them.