Exegesis - Cap/Com-ist

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Flubber
Even now I get a real sense of satisfaction out of building things. I enjoyed building my fence. There's actually a little bit of satisfaction with ever nail driven straight and true.

EXACTLY!!!!! Humans are a creative species, and we get an emotional reward for engaging in behavior which encourages survival, which creativity does. This is why people will continue to work, even when there is no longer a financial incentive. Because people like to work! It when they see no point to their work or they have no control over it that they begin to hate it.

I agree that some people would love school and they would tend to try to stay there even more than they do now . . . But a lot of smart people will know what they really enjoy and if that involves no college, that is what they will choose.

Why not work and go to school for the rest of your life? Why limit learnig to a specific period of life. I would love to learn new things until the day I die. I really miss learning.

personally I think that jobs at national parks, ski hills and golf courses will be in VERY high demand

We might have to ration those, too.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Kidicious
O M G!
I can not support you in any kind of political pursuit that you have. You have no justification for overthrowing the current rulers just so that you can set up your own little rule. You scare me.

No, I have a different justification for overthrowing our current rulers, which is that they misrule. If they were capable of providing a stable economy and a decent standard of living for all without the periodic crises to which capitalism is subject, there would be no point in overthrowing them. This is the fundimental core of Marxism. It is not the capitalism is unfair, it is that capitalism is insane.

So you must disagree with Marx when he claims that the workers have a moral claim to their labor, and that they are justified in revolt. That really explains why you think that some people whould be given advantage in your state capitalist state.

Ah, no. It would be the same as it is today. They would vote with their pocket book.

Society would vote, not the doctors.

Society is just a bunch of self-interested individuals. What the hell? Who is going to vote exactly? The doctors are not going to vote?

As shocked as I am that you can misinterpret Marx, maybe you don't like Orwell because it would be harder to fit your own desires into it, and use it for political propaganda purposes.

As for Orwell, I didn't say I didn't like him. I think he's a fine author and I like his work, at least until he began ratting out other leftists, and 1984 is still pretty good. Be that as it may, he doesn't supplant Marx and Lenin and others.

Yes, exactly what I thought. Animal Farm is a threat to your world view. Incidentally, the book is not an attack on Marxism, but only an attack on your kind of 'communism'.

Yes, we have already agree upon that. You were going to show me where Marx said that doctors should be compensated beyond the cost of their education. You haven't done that.

I think part of your problem is the fact that I didn't sufficiently distinguish when I was writing about socialism and when I was writing about communism. In socialism, many of the market's mechanisms will still be in operation. Thus during this period, docotors will still be compensated according to supply and demand, in addition to the increased cost of their labor due to their training. In The State and Revolution, Lenin limits wage differentials to five times the lowest pay scale. When inheritence taxes are included, this prevents the rise of a new class.

When society becomes so productive that wages become meaningless, we will have reached communism. Doctors will still probably recieve greater social rewards for their labor, but it won't take the form of money.

I don't care about Lenin. Stick to Marx. If you claim Leninism fine. In this discussion let's stick to Marx. And I am not what you call a socialist, but maybe you want to tell me how that brand of 'communism' is compatable with Marxism.

His argument is a MORAL argument.

Ah, no. His argument is that capitalism is irrational and unplanned and that it is insane for humans to be the slave of a mechanism they created (the market). While he makes moral arguments, they are to support his philosophical argument. You put the cart before the horse when you make moral arguments your chief arguments.

He doesn't just make moral arguments to support his philisophical claims. Jeez, you are just calling him a bull****ter. How could he justify the overthrow of a classist sytem and justify another class system. That's incredible to think of you believing that.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


You're also forgetting about the supply and demand part, which also operates in the market for labor.

Oh come on! Come with it. What the hell are you talking about?

[Flubber]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Well, presumably we'd have far less need for lawyers.

As far as the really ****ty jobs in society go, like coal mining or garbage collection, I imagine some kind of work sharing by the rest of society. Rather than have dedicated garbage collectors, we take turns, as part of our debt to society so that we can all spend more time doing the work we'd perfer to do.

Job-share as coal miners-- Sorry but thats just laughable-- the innefficiency involved in the required trainign and the safety concerns of part time miners. sorry.

There would even be a lot of innefficiency with the garbage collectors in trying to find your way through unfamiliar neighborhoods

And what about other highly skilled jobs in the oil and gas industry that are well compensated and involve a fair bit of time away from spouses and girlfriends? Those people now get extra money to live in the bush-- many would not do it for the same money as a city-based job .


Take a real life example. Fort McMurray Alberta probably pays its tradespeople more than anywhere else in Alberta and even then has to work hard to attract people (There is a shortage of many trades here due to the construction boom). Equalize the wages and a lot of those people go back to working in the big cities or back in their hometowns

[Flubber]

dp

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Society will want to encourage people to become doctors and not limit themselves to digging ditches.

Like society today encourages people to be capitalists.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Spiffor

If their education was fully paid, many people would become doctors over manual labour. But there is the (strong) risk that the huge majority of people will avoid manual labour altogether, and study for the most interesting jobs, that will match their vocation. It will result in an overload of people in some kinds of job, while many other jobs will find very little people wanting to do them (repetitive unskilled manual labour, but also obscure or unattractive skilled jobs).

In France, where university is basically free and where most students are supported by their parents, we have this problem already, with some courses such as sports and psychology being overwhelmed. And still, France is a capitalist country where most students know they have to pick a cursus that will lead to an actual job, because of the financial pressure.

It's very difficult to talk to you about this when you are assuming a free market.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Like society today encourages people to be capitalists.

Bullcrap-- Some capitalists succeed other fail-- I believe something like 80-90% of new businesses FAIL.

Anyone with a little money can try to become a businessperson. Some try and some don't but there is no guaranteed profit for anyone

[Az]

I'll join in the next Cap/Com. This one has bad aura.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Oh come on! Come with it. What the hell are you talking about?

Part of the reason why doctor's labor is valuable is because the demand for doctor's doesn't meet demand. In the Soviet Union, where there were many more doctors, their status fell when compared with their Western collegues.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Part of the reason why doctor's labor is valuable is because the demand for doctor's doesn't meet demand. In the Soviet Union, where there were many more doctors, their status fell when compared with their Western collegues.

A ha! I see the problem here. You propose a free market for labor too. Right?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Flubber
Job-share as coal miners-- Sorry but thats just laughable-- the innefficiency involved in the required trainign and the safety concerns of part time miners. sorry.

Yeah, I know. But most coal mines are in areas where there really aren't a lot of other jobs. And people who live in these areas are pretty fierce about wanting to live there. Hopefully, however, we could further automate coal mining, so no one has to do it. I'm not a big fan of coal as it is. Nasty polluting stuff.

There would even be a lot of innefficiency with the garbage collectors in trying to find your way through unfamiliar neighborhoods

Yes, but that's not terribly important.

Take a real life example. Fort McMurray Alberta probably pays its tradespeople more than anywhere else in Alberta and even then has to work hard to attract people (There is a shortage of many trades here due to the construction boom). Equalize the wages and a lot of those people go back to working in the big cities or back in their hometowns

I don't have all the answers. Maybe we can sentence criminals to have to work up there.

[Kidlicious]

I'm less offended Che, but you can not claim that Marx proposed a free market, or pay differential. That was Lenin.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Kidicious
A ha! I see the problem here. You propose a free market for labor too. Right?

Not entirely, but there will be a market, at least at first. We're not going to fully impliment socialism on day one of the revolution. The working class needs experience in managing the economy before it begins making changes, and even then, we need to do so in a rational and planned way and not arbitraily. To do so would create the same economic dislocations we are seeking to do away with. The experiences with war communism in the Russian Revolutoin and The Great Leap Forward in China should be instructive here. If we're simply going to repeat the mistakes of the past, what's the point?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Kidicious
It's very difficult to talk to you about this when you are assuming a free market.

On the contrary. When I'm talking about this (in this thread), I assume a society where people can do what they wish without coercion. Be it financial coercion like it exists in free-market societies, or political coercion like it is in a purely planned economy where there is a numerus clausus for everything.

If people are free to do what they wish, they'll go toward their vocation. And this vocation will more often be firefighter, astronaut, teacher or doctor, than garbage collector or ditch-digger.

If you want to have people dig ditches, you need a system that forces them (or at least strongly encourages them) to do so. Capitalism threatens those people to live misery if they don't comply. How does YOUR system intend to force / encourage them to do that job?