Are labor supply and freedom related?

[Velociryx]

:: nods in agreement with Arrian::

The loan facilitated your going into business at all.

Without the loan, you don't even get off the ground.

-=Vel=-

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by Kidicious


It will not be necessary to save money as in a capitalist system. Man-hours will have to be coordinated to produce the 'tangible' capital, and extract the necessary resources.

Anyway. I can't afford to spend this much time in this discussion today. I have too much to do. Maybe I'll be back latter today.

What is used for compensation for those man hours? Where does it come from?

[Arrian]

Ok, seeya later. When you return, I have another question:

How will the man hours be coordinated? I mean, since you seem to be very big on fairness, surely workers will be free to choose where they work? So if the government (the people, whatever) decides to build a factory to make spaceships to go to Mars, how to you "coordinate" man hours to make that happen, without ordering people to go there and work? Incentives? If so, what? Better working conditions? Less hours?

Oh, another question: you say there will be no need to save money. Will there be money at all? How will compensation be handled?

-Arrian

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious

But it's the work that generates the wealth, not the wealth. No it's not a zero sum game, but that don't make it fair.

The work itself would not generate the additional wealth without the factory.

Take oil workers-- The Hibernia offshore platform pumps 180,000 barrels of oil a day and lets call it 40 bucks a barrell. Thats 7.2 million bucks. Lets make it 4 million a day after taxes and royalties. Counting shift changes there are probably a thousand people working on that project overall. That works out to $4000 per worker each and every day all year long or 1.46 million per year.

Do you plan to pay each of these workers 1.46 million OR don't you think just a teensy bit of the value had to do with the $300 million spent on exploration wells or the 2.5 billion dollar platform the oil is pumped through??

Originally posted by Kidicious

No I'm not saying that. That would be stupid. Are you saying that rent isn't a barrier to them helping themselves?

Rent is no more a barrier than if the cost of food or clothing was too high. Obviously food and shelter should be available to all. But if you abolish rent, shouldn't you make food free as well ? Its even more of a necessity.

Conceptually rent is no different to me than the cost of any good and service . . . and many landlords make very little or no profit for years ( and arguably that profit could be attributed to their labor in advertising and repairing the property)

[Flubber]

I feel like I am understanding kid a little better.

It seems to be all about nobody getting too rich. If I understand him right, you can work hard and get richer than others but you then aren't allowed to do ANYTHING with this wealth that could ever make you richer. Its irrelevant if that "something" would also make a million other people better off, don't do it since it would be offensive to give anything less than 100% of the value of their work to the workers.


So as a worker in kids society, My only choice is consumption. I'm not sure how housing would work since if there is no rent, using resources to buy a home to live in makes no sense and investment properties wouuld be unknown. So I guess it would be government housing all around. I'm not sure how it would work if you want to move but I'm sure the bureacracy can allocate housing right?

With a practical inability to use increased wealth for a better home and no way to use it to produce an income, that only really leaves consumption. Oh and are there loans, I know there is no interest but can you borrow for that car you wanted?? if you can I'll borrow 1 million dollars!!


I just see a society with absolutely no incentives, no reason to innovate, no reason to work hard. If I bust my butt and save or if I laze around and spend frivolously, I will be in the same state housing regardless and nothing I can do can bring an additional income stream

[Velociryx]

Nahhh, in such a society, Master Flubber, the black market would be alive and crackling with energy.

There WILL BE a market. Kid would just drive it underground. Criminalize the act of commerce.

So be it.

-=Vel=-

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Nahhh, in such a society, Master Flubber, the black market would be alive and crackling with energy.

There WILL BE a market. Kid would just drive it underground. Criminalize the act of commerce.

So be it.

-=Vel=-

But in housing the only market will be in bribing the housing officials to get the nicer house.

I can see quite a black market though in tool rental, particularly if you can invent some new handy gizmo. Kid is dreaming in technicolor if he doesn't think the workers would be willing to pay something to get a time-saving device that allows them either more leisure or a greater income

And I guess if the regime does not offer loans at all, the loan sharks will do quite well.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Flubber


And I guess if the regime does not offer loans at all, the loan sharks will do quite well.

Zounds a return to the dark ages where only nonbelievers errr.... non-communists could lend money with usery fees.

[Velociryx]

Yeah, we'll all have to live in government housing, but the pent up demand for goods and services will be a GOLDMINE!

And of course, those renegade outfits will need financing to get them off the ground....

-=Vel=-

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


Zounds a return to the dark ages where only nonbelievers errr.... non-communists could lend money with usery fees.

well with "interest" being illegal, the regime can only do one of two things

1. Not have loans or credit at all OR
2. Offer interest free loans-- if they do this there is no incentive to pay them back quickly and I am unsure what remedies the regime would use if they were not paid back (probably an automatic garnishment of wages). But if they don't believe in interest its hard to even see a moral justification for quick repayment

In either case I fear that black market lending would become even more popular than it is today.

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by Flubber
I feel like I am understanding kid a little better.

It seems to be all about nobody getting too rich. If I understand him right, you can work hard and get richer than others but you then aren't allowed to do ANYTHING with this wealth that could ever make you richer. Its irrelevant if that "something" would also make a million other people better off, don't do it since it would be offensive to give anything less than 100% of the value of their work to the workers.


So as a worker in kids society, My only choice is consumption. I'm not sure how housing would work since if there is no rent, using resources to buy a home to live in makes no sense and investment properties wouuld be unknown. So I guess it would be government housing all around. I'm not sure how it would work if you want to move but I'm sure the bureacracy can allocate housing right?

With a practical inability to use increased wealth for a better home and no way to use it to produce an income, that only really leaves consumption. Oh and are there loans, I know there is no interest but can you borrow for that car you wanted?? if you can I'll borrow 1 million dollars!!


I just see a society with absolutely no incentives, no reason to innovate, no reason to work hard. If I bust my butt and save or if I laze around and spend frivolously, I will be in the same state housing regardless and nothing I can do can bring an additional income stream

I think there's a few flaws in your summary. First, Kid admits that he doesn't want workers to get 100% of the fruits of their labors because you need to pay taxes. And you can't buy a house because you're not allowed to own land, IIRC. I'm not too clear on how consumption works either. I suppose you can buy something, but it would have to be from the government and purchased for cost. Not sure how the government decides what to produce - it must be put to a vote, because otherwise someone would have more power than someone else.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Yeah, we'll all have to live in government housing, but the pent up demand for goods and services will be a GOLDMINE!


-=Vel=-

yup-- my first service would be a travel service/emigration assistance service to all the people that wanted to leave this paradise. Assuming it is not worldwide I think you would see a brain drain of epic proportions as people flee to places that reward talent and effort. . . Oh adn if people see this coming, the flight of capital would be HUGE . .. could even create a mini-economic boom in other countries all by itself

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kontiki


I think there's a few flaws in your summary.

I would think there would be since his beliefs are so alien to my own but I do try to be fair in my summary

Originally posted by Kontiki


First, Kid admits that he doesn't want workers to get 100% of the fruits of their labors because you need to pay taxes.

And don't forget that a usage fee (rent) for a tool is not objectionable if paid to the state. Its only offensive if another PERSON appropriates some of the value of the labor.

Originally posted by Kontiki


And you can't buy a house because you're not allowed to own land, IIRC.

well it wouldn't make economic sense anyway if the state was providing housing rent free.

Originally posted by Kontiki


I'm not too clear on how consumption works either. I suppose you can buy something, but it would have to be from the government and purchased for cost. Not sure how the government decides what to produce - it must be put to a vote, because otherwise someone would have more power than someone else.

I would also be curious as to the pricing model. If wages are equalized somehow you end up paying the clerks at the state equivalent of the 7-11 say 4 times what they make now. So does the price at the convenience store go up up up even more to bring the store to a break even point OR do you ignore individual sales areas and just raise prices across the board ( but a lot less) so that grocery sales as a general category breaks even. I assume a carton of milk would be the same price everywhere but that could be wrong because the 'crats might decide to reflect cost and charge more in remote areas with bigger transport costs.

etc etc what results is a huge bureacracy just to determine the price of milk in Alaska versus Butte, Montana.

Oh and on employment-- thats a whole 'notehr story since with the equalized wages, there is no incentive to do the harder jobs. I think I might even enjoy an outdoor job

[Velociryx]

Travel agent would be my first choice too!

As to the whole "usage fee" and "taxation" thing...I thought WE were the ones being accused of lacing our thinking with paradoxes?

These two things seem TOTALLY at odds with Kid's core theory.

If rent is bad, then it is always BAD, state mandated or no.

If workers should keep ALL the fruits of their labor, then that labor should also be immune to taxation (because per the theory, ANY infringement on the sanctity of labor is exploitation).

Kid...we got questions!

-=Vel=-

[Arrian]

Since he's away, at this point the thread is becoming a capitalist circle jerk. It can be fun and all, but leaves one feeling a tad dirty.

Let's wait until he comes back (he will, you know he will).

-Arrian