Communism and socialism failed... in 52 countries. Yes, there are exceptions, on small scale. (Co-ops, and small partnerships). But in large scale, it doesn't work.

Law Firms are one example where it could work, but even there you have Partners and Associates. And even Partners have levels (Equity Partners, Junior Partners, Full Partners... etc).

Communism and socialism are two very different things. I'm not sure most Americans appreciate how different the are, and tend to conflate the two.

Communism itself has many flavors, and while soviet communism failed (arguably because it was just tsarism with a different tsar), Chinese communism is still very much a working model and a very successful one (for some definitions of success.)

Democratic socialism is also well represented today, with some stand-out performers in Europe.

As with all social systems, capitalism included, there are pros and cons, haves and have-nots. Some systems promote equality, some promote huge winners and losers. Naturally US businesses tend to model the national system (the only thing that matters is money) which typically makes them poor places to work.

But companies don't have to follow the national model - there are plenty of exploitive companies in Europe, and more than a few humane companies in the US.

The Chinese economic model is very much capitalist, so yes, capitalism is very much a working model.

During the Cultural Revolution, China tried to become "more communist" economically, with predictably bad outcomes.

Funny how when China is being demonized it's "Communist China", but when China is doing something well its "Capitalist China".

What socialism? What communism? We were talking about having some sort of protection for the workers. What is it with Americans that they think that if they do anything to make people's lives easier next thing you know you're Soviet Russia?

Communism can work if you can kick out bad actors. That’s why kibbutzim have historically worked. But for any sufficiently large system that’s not possible, which is why it failed to govern countries.

Communism where disabled people are consider “bad actors” who “don’t contribute” loses a lot of its appeal. If you can kick people out seemingly arbitrarily then it’s not a social safety net.

I think by "bad actors" they meant psychopaths and malignant narcissists who would aim to take over the system for their own gain. People like Stalin. The problem at scale is figuring out who these people are, and keeping them out of exactly that system. Unfortunately even the American system of checks and balances can't really keep psychopaths out of high office, so it's an unsolved problem of how to deal with this.