Incentives under communism?

[Angst]

Capitalism could pay you Doble for example which is much the same as 20 hour week.

???????????

 

[Hygro]

Why does the idea of 20 hour weeks for "bad" jobs keep plinking off some peoples ears?

Because I said it first.

 

[Zardnaar]

???????????

If you cut the work week in half you have to hire another person to do the job.

You're paying same amount as paying one person double.

Remember communism as attempted did a version of thst with gross inefficiency eg hiring 8000 staff for a 3000 person job.

 

[Senethro]

If you cut the work week in half you have to hire another person to do the job.

You're paying same amount as paying one person double.

Remember communism as attempted did a version of thst with gross inefficiency eg hiring 8000 staff for a 3000 person job.

Ok, yeah, sure, but using your position we may conceive of a hypothetical one that I'm going to call Double Capitalism. The Double Capitalist intends to pay them triple for a 60 hour week, thus further increasing efficiency and reducing training costs.

Why is he wrong?

 

[Zardnaar]

Ok, yeah, sure, but using your position we may conceive of a hypothetical one that I'm going to call Double Capitalism. The Double Capitalist intends to pay them triple for a 60 hour week, thus further increasing efficiency and reducing training costs.

Why is he wrong?

Presumably exhaustion is what you're referring to?

I was assuming a 40 hour week since you used 20 in your example.

I'm used to a 45-50 hour work week or 12 hour days when I was at port.

Longest day I've done is 15 hours with a lot of lifting not sitting at a desk.

Wife does 50 hour week.

 

[Senethro]

Presumably exhaustion is what you're referring to?

I was assuming a 40 hour week since you used 20 in your example.

I'm used to a 45-50 hour work week or 12 hour days when I was at port.

Longest day I've done is 15 hours with a lot of lifting not sitting at a desk.

Wife does 50 hour week.

Here you're saying Human welfare (exhaustion) is the paramount concern.

Previously you were saying that (some undefined) efficiency was the foremost concern.

These could both be true in each scenario, but I don't think you could explain why or find the line where one crosses the other.

 

[Zardnaar]

Here you're saying Human welfare (exhaustion) is the paramount concern.

Previously you were saying that (some undefined) efficiency was the foremost concern.

These could both be true in each scenario, but I don't think you could explain why or find the line where one crosses the other.

Well you asked me about 60 hour week.

I was assuming that XYZ amount of work needs to be done. It takes 40 hours to do it. If one gets paid for 40 but works 20 you need to hire someone else. Or pay that 1 worker double the money will cost the same.

Money aside (communist bation isn't capitalist) they will need to train two people the new one probably won't be as good as the old obe (productivity goes down at least short term).

And that's assuming labour is available. I don't think it will be. Soviets ran low on workers once rural folk moved to cities something similar is happening in China (on top of running out of young folk).

It's also going to be less efficient if you have to transport said workers to where they're needed eg the farm or in USSR case the polar areas (they paid them more, apartments, more goods).

I'm assuming the 20 hour work week is basically the incentive which apparently was more normal pre industrialization or hunter gatherers. Except harvest season then you might be dawn to dusk for a few weeks.

 

[Moriarte]

I'm aware. Don't think to many people are aware of the scale of the Chinese bubble.

Are you pro bubble or anti bubble?

Here's what I see when I look at China:

GDP growth rates for Q2 2023:

• China: 6.3%
• US: 2.4%
• Japan: 1.5%

Petrol price in NZ: $2.77
Petrol price in China: $1.24

Cost of living in China is, on average, 52.3% lower than in United States.

The above means that Chinese worker can be paid less (a lot less) to enjoy the same standard of living as US worker.

The simple arithmetic translates into incentives for biggest companies in the world to move their production into China.

Which they did, for decades, expanding the Chinese bubble to the point it's the second economy in the world now.

I only wish my own countrymen could learn from the Chinese how to blow proper bubbles, but that is, probably, asking too much.

 

[FriendlyFire]

GDP growth rates for Q2 2023:

• China: 6.3%
• US: 2.4%
• Japan: 1.5%

Yes Chinese have done well under capitalism except that they kind went insane with Debt
250% is quite high, it was fine as long as China continue to grow but its going to be a challange to manage now they are likely contracting

US has 122% and they have the benefit of being the worlds reserve currency, though that has slipped thanks to certain financial crisis

 

[Zardnaar]

Are you pro bubble or anti bubble?

Here's what I see when I look at China:

GDP growth rates for Q2 2023:

• China: 6.3%
• US: 2.4%
• Japan: 1.5%

Petrol price in NZ: $2.77
Petrol price in China: $1.24

Cost of living in China is, on average, 52.3% lower than in United States.

The above means that Chinese worker can be paid less (a lot less) to enjoy the same standard of living as US worker.

The simple arithmetic translates into incentives for biggest companies in the world to move their production into China.

Which they did, for decades, expanding the Chinese bubble to the point it's the second economy in the world now.

I only wish my own countrymen could learn from the Chinese how to blow proper bubbles, but that is, probably, asking too much.

I think the average NZ worker gets paid note rhan double so comparatively still cheaper.

That Chinese growth rate is their figures I suspect that number has been massaged.

Western companies are moving out. I'm pro bubble theory but it may not burst as badly as some doomsayers are claiming eg China fails by 2030.

 

[Lexicus]

And it would answer the question.

"Democratically-organized" is an answer of equal caliber to "wage system".

 

[Lexicus]

I would imagine people had, though I have never learned any histories of wage-advocating abolitionists of antiquity.

The only abolitionist we're aware of in Antiquity appears to be Spartacus, a man who is known even today for his preference for working peacefully within the system for incremental change.

 

[amadeus]

This thread has gone way off course, so one of the things rattling about in my head is more a question than anything: are material incentives even supposed to exist? I thought the idea was to separate the production of goods from social interaction, I’m not sure if this is what Marx meant by “commodity fetishism,” being unfamiliar with the exact philosophy—I could try reading it, but I just found it to be so time-consuming and verbose. Same is true with Adam Smith if anyone ever tried to read The Wealth of Nations. Big book. Too long for tiny brain.

 

[W|M]

there are some annotated editions with commentary that explains some of the more complex or dated parts

 

[Ajidica]

The only abolitionist we're aware of in Antiquity appears to be Spartacus, a man who is known even today for his preference for working peacefully within the system for incremental change.

Really? St. John Chrysostom was quite famously anti-slavery.

So, why do you have many servants? Since as in our case we ought to follow only our need, and in our table, so also in our servants. What is the necessity then? None at all; for, in fact, one master only needs to employ one servant; or rather two or three masters one servant. But if this is too difficult, consider those that have none and enjoy more prompt attendance. For God has made people in such a way that they can take care of themselves, or rather even their neighbor. And if you do not believe it, hear Paul saying, “These hands ministered to my necessities, and to them that were with me” [Acts 20:34].After that he, the teacher of the world and worthy of heaven, did not care to serve many others. Do you then not consider it shameful to have whole herds of slaves, not knowing that this truly is what most of all brings shame upon you? Did God not provide to us then both hands and feet for this reason that we might not stand in need of servants? Since the class of slaves is not there due to necessity, for otherwise even Adam would have had a slave formed for him, but it is the result of sin and the punishment of disobedience. But when Christ came, He put an end also to this. For in Christ Jesus there is neither slave nor free [Gal. 3:28]. Therefore, it is not necessary to have a slave. And if it is at all necessary, let it be about one only, or at the most two. What is the use of swarms of slaves? For as the sellers of sheep and the slave-dealers, so do the rich among us take their round, in the baths and in the forum. However, I will not be too exact. We will allow you to keep a second servant. But if you collect too many, you do not do it for the sake of basic human need, but in self-indulgence. Therefore, if it is in their aid, I ask you not to assign any of them in ministering to yourself, but when you have purchased them and have taught them trades whereby to support themselves, let them go free. But when you threaten them, when you put them in chains, it is no more a work of philanthropy.

https://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/4498/DeWet-SHEXXXIV_2_-December2008.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

And what is most disgraceful, some ladies are vicious and cruel that they lash their slaves so hard that the welts don't dissapear within a day. They even strip the girls naked, tie them down on the couch, and call their husbands in to do the deed.... Do you really want to show your slave-girl naked to your husband? And you incite him further by insulting the poor wretch by calling her a Thessalian witch, a runaway, a slut? Can this be allowed in a Christian household?

(Sourced to Anthony Kaldellis in A Cabinet of Byzantine Curiosities.

St. John Chrysostom was also an absolute chad.

Do you wish to honour the body of Christ? Do not ignore him when he is naked. Do not pay him homage in the temple clad in silk, only then to neglect him outside where he is cold and ill-clad. He who said: "This is my body" is the same who said: "You saw me hungry and you gave me no food", and "Whatever you did to the least of my brothers you did also to me"... What good is it if the Eucharistic table is overloaded with golden chalices when your brother is dying of hunger? Start by satisfying his hunger and then with what is left you may adorn the altar as well.

Do you pay such honor to your excrements as to receive them into a silver chamber-pot when another man made in the image of God is perishing in the cold?

John Chrysostom - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Joij21]

Really? St. John Chrysostom was quite famously anti-slavery.

https://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/4498/DeWet-SHEXXXIV_2_-December2008.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

(Sourced to Anthony Kaldellis in A Cabinet of Byzantine Curiosities.

St. John Chrysostom was also an absolute chad.

John Chrysostom - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yes, but one has to measure power levels between these two guys. Between a saint/clergyman who complained about slavery but sat on his @$$ all day and accomplished nothing on the matter, or Spartacus an actual rebelling slave who through force of arms nearly overthrew the entire slave owning society of Rome apon the Italian peninsula.

Both are ultimately failures, however the one who used violence came damn near close to genuine liberation. Therefore we can conclude that violence is always the preferable solution in "getting things done" for the sake of progress.

 

[Hygro]

I don’t think we can conclude any universalized theories from singular historical events.

 

[Joij21]

I don’t think we can conclude any universalized theories from singular historical events.

Well for those who believe violence is the solution, there are many more examples historically of violence "solving the problem" via "killing the problem".

 

[Joij21]

I think though our society is moving more left though. Even those who are otherwise socially conservative but blue collar are increasingly becoming more laborist and therefore skeptical of capitalism.

So I think what's going to happen is we will eventually reach "a reckoning" moment whereby most Americans will no longer believe that capitalism is the way to achieve the American dream anymore. That at some point the increased anomie from increasing issues from within the system will reach a boiling point and a powder keg will be set off.

What will happen once we reach this point is then unknowable, but it will likely lead to a split in what to replace capitalism with. A more autocratic version of it called fascism, or moving past it entirely and full porting to socialism.

Reforming this nation to return to a welfare style state such as during the FDR years I believe is untenable. This was tried, and of course failed. Such a welfare state was eventually overturned and reversed by the neoliberal counter reformation. Even during those years of an attempted welfare state our society failed in keeping par with the innovations of welfare statism in Europe such as universal healthcare.

This means there is something particular about our nation's culture and way of doing that makes reform an impossibility. A violent clash seems inevitable.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The Millennials and Zoomers will shape the future.