well, SSRS was pretty smart.

>>2399311
>pic

Yes there can. Political power is also distributed unevenly, being General Secretary of the Gommunist Party makes you a 1%er even if your "on-the-books" income is the same as everyone else's.

it wasn't even real communism you faggot

File: 16298963_382229382140217_5909271070074639211_n.jpg (31KB, 479x480px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 479x480px

>>2399311
Yes everyone is poor even the soldiers, politicians and organs of the law, they all dressed in rags and didn't have access to clean water, which is why Stalin didn't have a suit and a well maintained mustache but a long dirty beard and an Adidas jumpsuit.

True communism is organized anarchism.

File: tumblr_me11dblOXE1rbmbw5o1_400.png (72KB, 254x253px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 254x253px

There also can't be a poor if everyone is rich.

Indeed, the concept of rich and poor are dependent on wealth inequality. And therefore for there to be a rich there must be a poor. The richer the rich are, the poorer the poor. Imagine that.

Proposition: the greatest amount of freedom and personal autonomy that can be reached for all individuals in a society economically would result in extremely small amount wealth inequality. In a word, equality.

>>2399389

Yes there can. Land is not equally desirable, living in a mansion in a beautiful park will always be better than living in a mansion surrounded by other mansions.

>2399389
>people get freedom
>some people use their freedom to easily commit crime, get addicted to drugs, fuck society up slowly
>state spends money trying to fix them
>others work hard/get lucky and become rich
>the richest buy their way into power
>nothing can be done about it because the state spends money on the general public
>the rich take over
>they take away freedoms
>the many more poor people take over again
>people get their freedom

It's as flawed as any other system pal