Team Marx or Team Smith

Walking into a class and seeing two humongous bags of Hershey’s Kisses always brightens up a morning. In class on Monday, we recreated Charles Marx’s theory of communism with pieces of chocolate. Everyone in the class started with two Hershey’s Kisses, except for the two lucky students who got eight. My classmates were very upset, not at our teacher for the unfair distribution, but rather at the students who got lucky during the distribution, saying things like, “Let’s gang up on Brian”. Poor Brian. We then went around the room playing rock, paper, scissors, shoot; the winners got a piece of the loser’s chocolate. When a student lost all of their candy they had to sit down. Few kids who started with two kisses ended up with any chocolate but those who got eight lasted until the end. Comments were made along the lines of “rich people stink” and “I hate my life”. The teacher then collected all of the candy and redistributed it so everyone got two and only two. When given the option to play rock, paper, scissors again, the class voted against it in fear of losing their chocolate again.

Karl Marx.
http://spartacus-educational.com/TUmarx.htm

Marx's theory of communism starts with capitalism. This includes private ownership of industry and freedom of competition. Marx says capitalism results in unequal economic classes, lower classes struggling and workers revolting. In order to make things more fair, Marx said people would create a government system of socialism. This government system would own industry and hopefully bring economic equality in a classless society. Marx said that people would revolt against divisions between rich and poor and by any means necessary, even violence, the people would create communism. In this system, no government is needed and the goal of a classless society is achieved. This gives the poor an equal chance at success as the rich because everyone starts on a level playing field thanks to the redistribution of goods. Another theory is Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand. Companies will treat their workers better because the employees are also the customers.

Adam Smith.
http://livingeconomiesforum.org/Adam-Smith

Smith said that if government left industry alone, people will buy, sell, and run businesses on their own. Businesses that operate honestly and don’t cheat their customers will succeed and those that do not will fail. This benefits the poor because, eventually, high quality goods will be available at lower prices. Because employees work near the shops they live and shop at the stores closest to them, stores need to pay their workers enough so they can afford their products.

An alternate system would be a compromise between both Marx’s theory and Smith’s theory. These two systems don't include a government. Maybe that's what they're missing. If we could incorporate the level playing field that Marx wanted everyone to start with and smith's idea of a hands off economy, we might get respectable results. The government should have the ability to create and sponsor stores. When unemployment rates are up and poverty seems to have reached a high, the government should open some stores, such as a grocery store or a laundry mat. The government can buy the supplies and sell them at a reasonable price. Plus these government stores can employ citizens without jobs. These stores will function as the goal of the invisible hand: high quality goods at low prices. And once the economy is stable and more stores can match the rates of the government stores, those stores can sell their businesses and the hands off mentality can be resumed.