: The people near the forest decide that they really want to make lots of boats. The folk further down the way want the wood for barns and furniture. Oops - their 'self defined' "needs" have come into conflict over the matter of wood and time being finite. So they must come to an agreement of mutual dissatisfaction, or try to trade respective products.
Two words: Job Rotation.
: Socialism assumes people will readily agree, that conflict will be resolved by the happy compromisers. Big assumptions.
And capitalism always assumes that everyone's a selfish shit. How convenient, considering that the regime in which we currently exists demands such behavior---which then so conveniently 'proves' the original assumption.
Again, job rotation will resolve such 'regional' conflicts because everyone will 'occupy' each region for a time.
I know: who will enforce job rotation?
The same people who enforce the minority's usurpation of privilege in the current regime: armed officials recognized by the state to enforce the rules of the state. (I've said all this before in this post.) The state, in the socialist future---however---will be operated by a different class than the class which operates the state presently: the great majority of workers will rule in the socialist future---instead of a small minority of capitalist overlords!
Stoller: [Socialism] is about people receiving all shares of what they produce (with, of course, a fund set aside for insurance, investment, and those unable to work---a fund determined by the workers) instead of handing over most of what they produce to the capitalist simply because the capitalist has a monopoly on the means of production.
: What about those who want it all now, and don't wish to be 'exploited' for future safety?
You again make the erroneous assumption that everyone has equal access to the means of production, Gee! That's utterly misleading!
According to Business Week magazine (that bastion of communist agitation):
Itís true: The U.S. has a two-tier economy, and many Americans are struggling to get ahead. Average wages today remain lower, after adjusting for inflation, than their all-time peak in 1973. A vast number of people labor in lower-skilled, lower-wage jobs that...offer few prospects for on-the-job training or advancement. Family incomes, adjusted for inflation, have recovered just half their losses from prerecession levels of 1989. Heady stock market gains primarily benefit the top 25% of families, leaving big-ticket items of the American dream such as new homes and cars still out of reach for many. And while income inequality at last has begun to narrow, the chasm between the top and bottom is much wider than it was 25 years ago.(1)
Care to refute that, Gee---or do you simply advocate that the 'people near the forest' get all the wood while 'the folk further down the way' get screwed?
1. Business Week, 1 September 1997, pp. 64 & 66.