gay_Aleks
from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!
[With your epic retorts.] [Of course, one must always keep in mind Marx's comment about not creating 'cookshops of the future' when reading this.]
The expropriation of the expropriators, who have become such by dint of essential theft (i.e, primitive accumulation in the early stages of capitalism, and imperialism now). This would require a necessary flow of 'wealth' not just within a "country" like the U.S, but also, internationally.
The painting, being your own, personal property, would become yours, and it would be worth nothing more than the sentimentality that you hold towards it. Life insurance wouldn't exist under a socialist society; you are already insured in the form of social and public programs that serve the working classes.
End of it. Full stop.
Ideally, under socialism, the differences at least in what we create (for we cannot control fully nature, nor create a completely equal society), between Upper West Side and Staten Island, would be minimized to the best efforts.
Fixed, then later on, rendered unnecessary. They are a good tool in the early stages of transition, but will hold no use later on.
Depending on when it happens, it should be 'legalized' in a way - this is something Cuba has done, for an example, as a way of not having to do it in secret - and later on, it won't exist at all, for the distribution of goods would render it unneeded.
Guaranteed. I think you ought to do some publically necessary labour - community service - of some notable respect. The goal is twofold: one, build up the necessary connection between different members of the community, and secondly, instill skills into every worker that would be useful in her life. I personally dislike how a lot of work has been off-loaded to various hard-working people - garbage pickup, maids, etc - that must be rendered invisible, to keep up the illusion of everything working perfectly fine, like magic. And further still, those same people are denigrated for being lazy, low-class & so forth, when you would be lying in trash without them! Just an example, of course.
The local city/community authorities will presumably decide upon where and why labour is needed - it would be, in a way, a volunteer service, except you would get renumerated in some sense. Following that, yes, you can quit and get another one (unless it's really important), after all, it's guaranteed employment.
Unless you're disabled, physically or mentally, need to raise children, yes, you probably will have to work. Good news is, you'd probably be working less hours than today.
Lowered, in the lower phase of communism ['socialism'], to the inequality of the ability of different workers to do a different amount of work, for a different amount of pay. Nonexistent under communism.
Unnecessary past the ability of labour to redistribute all the fruits of the 'economic growth' to sustain basic subsistence for everyone, and I really mean everyone, and later on, to make sure that, [if you'd like a poetic flourish] to truly blossom in all of his skills and attributes. There, my friend, you will find the Mozarts, Bachs, Einsteins and Edinsons amongst the workers.
What does this mean? You can see people, even today, create beautiful, amazing things for basically free [look into the mod subforums for the various Civ games - you're probably not going to find many Patreon/venmo links!]. Can you imagine what would happen if we didn't live under the threat of our bosses cutting off our subsistence if we're not good peons? You seem to think that people would become lazy - at least I read it that way - without the need to sell their wages, or whatever. I do not think that I agree. Humans have a 'natural' urge to use their labour to shape the world around them - it's what separates us from other animals for the most part - and you can see that you've had amazing talents come out of the USSR and China.
Is it really 50% of Americans that slave for capitalists? I find this incredibly hard to believe. Furthermore, as memories go, that's where the hegemonic role of a communistic education would come in place, reinforcing the need to stay on the current path and to never stray away back to capitalism. You may say this is 'coercive', but it is as much as it is that capitalist education teaches us that feudalism was bad and what came after it was inherently superior, as it enabled free trade and private property.
Reallocation of wealth and means of production to create the necessary goods for the people. Of course, it's not a mere question of distribution - the current society, has to be broken up into pieces.
Free of charge and generally freed of its current school-to-employment pipeline, here in the sense that what a child wishes to work in her life should be her pwn desire, not one hoisted upon her. Therefore, the curriculum may as well be more opened up, individualized in some sense, even. There would be a basic framework around the communistic values, how to behave with fellow workers and their different backgrounds, etc; but it must be opened up; not a single assembly line for every student, but a broad, humanistic, if you will, way of educating children, while still respecting their agency (which would also mean that the teacher would have to be more of a guide and less of the cop-entertainer-social worker combo they are now).
Obviously. It will be better, once it is freed from the bourgeoisie that shape its foundations, that steal funding from it, that turn it into a tool of indoctrination and docility.
As it has been mentioned: planning, according for the needs of the people. It will be necessary for the mitigation of the great damages capitalism will leave inevitably in its wake. When Engels spoke about the 'anarchy of the marketplace' in the 1870s and 1880s, he was, of course, speaking of the great economic crises that rocked the world at that time. Today, the same anarchy isn't merely threatening the livelihood of millions of people, immiserating them, killing them, etc etc, but it is on a death march to end the planet as we know it. Therefore, it is a planetary crisis that we live in today. And you know who caused this? Lack of any foresight and planning! [Admittedly, a lot of logistics - Amazon and Walmart - already do exist and use a certain degree of planning (it really is impossible not to, considering the complexity of the supply chains involved.] There is no plan, beyond self-annihilating impetus for growth. You laugh, my friend, but the joke is on all of the believers in the great death cult of capitalism, which today tells us to just live with the coronavirus. I do not think this is a reasonable, sane, efficient or humane way of doing things, so planning it'll be. Beyond that, computer power allows us to do planning at a scale that the Soviets could've never imagined.
PS: In the end, there's so many authors available on marxists.org, who can offer answers - or, at the very least, the beginnings of answers - to all of these questions that you laid out. You're a big man, you can read through some silly Marxists, yes?
Eventually, they'll find humility in the act of serving society. But, Crezth pointed out that risk-assessment is something that insurers do, and I suppose that's something I haven't considered.
Did you read what I wrote? Was I saying that at all? No! I was saying that the unjust systems that we've lived so far in are already a constraint on talent! Communism isn't a project of vindicating those past dead - it is a work in progress for the liberation of the present and future generations.
