- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Because you need to...

Posted by: Red Deathy ( Socialist Party, UK ) on April 12, 1999 at 18:48:16:

In Reply to: if everything belongs to me, why should I make a living or produce anything? posted by R. Jenkins on April 11, 1999 at 17:37:25:

: If we all produce exacly what we want, we would have a lot of surpluses and a lot of shortages. People do things that they don't love to do to make a living, but if they didn't have to make a living and still wanted to work, no one would do undesirable jobs.

They would, because they'd recognise that they were necessary, and teh general esteem and gratitude accompanying such jobs would increase. As for productions, again, people would be able to look and see what needed producing, and then go on to produce it, co-operatively, rather than now where production takes place for its own sake, and for teh sake of a few hoped for sales.

:Think of all the waste that poeple clean up. You don't really think that those people enjoy it, but it is something that has to be done.

If work is necessary but a drag, we'll try and find a way to avoid it, mechanise, or whatever, if not, then because it *must* be done, a way of seeing it done would be organised? Cleaning your house is a srag, but do you lets it rot? Do you leave it a tip? Or do you know someone who compulsively cleans up?

: OK, back to the problem: if everything belongs to me, why should I make a living or produce anything? In today's society people have thousands upon thousands of distractions, and I would rather read, watch TV, or do other things if I don't have an incentive to work.

because, you'd recognise that if youi didn't, your society would fall apart, and that you'd never achieve anything, and that you;d lose friends, and be bored.

: If you live in a country that is so poor that it has no need for computers, how could you be good with computers? If you are so rich that you got to have access to a computer, then you can certainly move to the US or other advanced countries. If your skills are artistic, you can sell your art to someone in another country.

It doesn't matter how I got my skills, I can't sell them, and must I be condemned to be indigent labour, and leave my community, in order to use my skills? What if teh people in my community appreciate my art, but are too poor to buy it?

: Society would take a long time to fall apart, but it happens to a communist country. A few people start off on their ass, and the rest of the country starts to follow, bit by bit. How would you lose your freedom if you didn't work? Not all work is enjoyable, but it has to get done. As you have said earlier, some skills aren't appreciated.

you'd lose freedom because eventually to stave off economic ruin, some people would turn around, and institute an autocracy, and return to capitalism ( I doubt this would happen, but within teh first one or two generations its a possibility, after that socialism would be as natural as breathing).

: You like to use the term 'wealth producers' when talking about factory workers. But you missed something: If the people up top didn't plan for distribution of their product, advertise the product, buy the neccesary materials to produce the product, sell the product, and set up factories, the factory workers wouldn't be able to make it.
Thats all done by workers, the people that employ all of them, that do no work at all, get all the profits, the managers, the ad men, the foremen are all workers, a capitalist can make millions without doing a stroke of work,merely giving their money to otehrs to get them to do something with it.

:Producing the actual product isn't producing the wealth, it's a small part of it. It could be argued that the people up top are the wealth creators, because they do everything but physically make the product.

And those people 'at the top', or at least most of the way up., are workers, the very top don't have much input into the running, and make most of the money. And I'd like to see someone create wealth without using labour. really, I'd love to see that.

: I'll assume that you meant why is it necessary to advance.

no, I meant why is it an advance?

: You yourself said that peoples needs might decrease because of the lack of a few factors. By human nature, consumtion/production changes with the time.
: There's plenty of better things to do. We could read books, there are probably literally billions of them, we could do other fun things, like writing, watching TV, relaxing on the shore, and countless other things. We don't do this until retirement because we HAVE to work.

But why should work be unenjoyable? Why should it only occur under compulsion?

: Whew, I was getting worried. I'll be long gone by the time that happens, with any luck at all.

you never know, majorities can occur fairly quickly...

: Sure you can. Go to N. Korea, China or Vietnam. These guys aren't giong anywhere. I don't think that a little commune is suficient for those of us that want capitalism. Besides, you wouldn't be the one to stop them, the government would. Also, whose to say that these guys can have their own property when that's against the communist rules?

1:N.Korea and vietnam are capitalist states.
2:there would be no 'communist government'
3:Its a free world, their free to go off and say that 'this siland is ours' or something, ignore them....

Follow Ups:

  • Deathy, the marketeer? borg Anarchy, Inc. Cyberspace April 16 1999 (2)
    • Nope. Red Deathy Socialist party UK April 18 1999 (1)
      • Gleaning borg Anarchy, Inc. Cyberspace April 19 1999 (0)

The Debating Room Post a Followup