Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are speaking intentionally vaguely, how does YOUR labor support the continuation of that society? When you need groceries or a laptop, is the vender going to say, here you go? Enjoy! I expect nothing from you because I like to continue this "moneyless" society because that's the whole heart of Marx's theory, that society will no longer have money and will do things for free... the only things I do for free are the things I enjoy and the things I enjoy consume money and doesn't produce money or anything of value for anyone (and that about sums up the people in this world)... so if I can do that, what is to stop from doing just that? If everything is given for free, why would I work? To continue society... I think Marx is delusional if he thinks everyone is going to be like that... why slave over 8 hours when I can sit at home enjoying everything for free... there is no one to force me in Marx ideal world, there are no governments and there are no class systems so there is nobody above me... I don't work for free and what motivates me is to get everything I want, and not for the continuation of a society...
The video is great and makes some good remarks and then it crashes in the end... everything goes smoothly with the animation and he injects his own personal philosophy that people will do they things that they enjoy (but obviously necessary for the continuation of society)... that's the whole missing point... he puts up examples of things people enjoy doing... I enjoy doing nothing but that isn't what Marx society needs and if you think I am a rare bird in this world, you are flat out wrong... if you gave people million dollars with purpose, autonomy, and mastery, I doubt they go out and do the work they don't like but society needs...
I put enough qualifiers in my post to satisfy even the most recalcitrant mind. I'll never make that mistake again.
Quote:
in the classless society/wageless society there is NO reward for a job otherwise you disrupt its balance
That's probably the...
Intrinsic value of labor isn't a reward and if it were would disrupt the balance of what!?!
Quote:
the coach will not coach 8 hour days for free cause if they did,
Just a reminder:
"People don't work for free is not verifiable? Are you an idiot?"
You were provided with ample examples of individuals providing labor for free. Period.
Whether it is their "job" is totally irrelevant. From a purely economic point of view, a little league coach who coaches for x hours a day is providing x hours of labor. Period. The coach is either being paid in money, an extrinsic reward or is deriving some other intrinsic value for their labor. Either way, some form of value is being exchanged. If that is the case, we can verify that individuals will provide labor for nothing more than intrinsic value, i.e., without an exchange of a good or service (extrinsic value).
If that is the case, it isn't rocket science to extrapolate that if a person has maximized their needs for material goods and services that they would have otherwise had to acquire through the material exchange of goods, services or some other item of monetary value, that freed from having to exchange their labor for those goods, services of items of monetary value that an individual would find the intrinsic value of providing their labor to others of greater value than just sitting on their behind playing Xbox 360!
I put enough qualifiers in my post to satisfy even the most recalcitrant mind. I'll never make that mistake again.
That's probably the...
Intrinsic value of labor isn't a reward and if it were would disrupt the balance of what!?!
Just a reminder:
"People don't work for free is not verifiable? Are you an idiot?"
You were provided with ample examples of individuals providing labor for free. Period.
Whether it is their "job" is totally irrelevant. From a purely economic point of view, a little league coach who coaches for x hours a day is providing x hours of labor. Period. The coach is either being paid in money, an extrinsic reward or is deriving some other intrinsic value for their labor. Either way, some form of value is being exchanged. If that is the case, we can verify that individuals will provide labor for nothing more than intrinsic value, i.e., without an exchange of a good or service (extrinsic value).
If that is the case, it isn't rocket science to extrapolate that if a person has maximized their needs for material goods and services that they would have otherwise had to acquire through the material exchange of goods, services or some other item of monetary value, that freed from having to exchange their labor for those goods, services of items of monetary value that an individual would find the intrinsic value of providing their labor to others of greater value than just sitting on their behind playing Xbox 360!
Heaven help the human race!
You are telling me that I will get a 12k sq feet house completely furnished and driving a fleet of Mercedes because I can go up to someone and get it for free? Okay back to reality now... no matter what intrinsic reward you get, nobody cares... that intrinsic doesn't last very long when it becomes "work"... whats to stop the little league coach from saying, well not tonight I don't feel like it.... nothing stops him... nothing stops ANYONE... a system cannot work because people do not work for free... unless you like brownouts/blackouts/food shortages or whatever, people do not do things for free... if left to their own innate nature, they work whenever they feel like it and they better like doing what they are doing cause they aren't doing it otherwise... who here likes to work garbage dumps or sewer lines? hm.... continuation of a society only goes so far even Marx thinks it never ends.... not true at all... people don't work for free... but it is nice to think that if I go fishing cause I enjoy it, people will consider that a job and that I am working for free... but not in the real world... you can never maximize someone's material needs, that is a recognized fallacy in itself......
Honestly, its degrading to Marx how people simplify his work. I certainly don't agree with him, but the book deserves to be read before it is compared with modern politicians.
"Big government" is not what Marx had in mind, and it is not the same as socialism. Especially since "big government" is such an ambiguous term.
We're fighting two wars right now, if we don't have a "big government" I'd say we're screwed.
That isn't their "job"... hobbies don't count either nor doing things they enjoy... just because I like to travel doesn't mean its a "job" ... there has never been a time where a job didn't exist and that job required something... in the classless society/wageless society there is NO reward for a job otherwise you disrupt its balance... and yes, a Star Trek society (or even Marx society) may seem nice but ultimately, its just that... a dream... Marx thought it was a logical conclusion but it was a dream and people come around professing its real... it can't be cause we don't do anything for free.... the coach will not coach 8 hour days for free cause if they did, they end up in the big leagues earning million dollar salaries.... and musicians don't create music 8 hours a day otherwise they would sell their music to the next Brittney Spears or whoever is popular nowadays...
I would not call a member of the Catholic clergy, a commissioned military officer, a high energy physicist or a tenured university professor as practicing a hobby or simply doing a job for money. They are doing something they enjoy, feel proud about their achievements, feel they are making a difference and view what they are doing is a contribution to society. This is what Marx viewed as the way society would be organized when it became possible to dispense with the market mechanism a time when we would not have to ration goods and services by setting wages and prices. Modern capitalism is all about what economists call the optimization problem and the socalled efficient use of the means of production and capital. Marx felt that technology would evolve to the point that society would only need a small number of specialists to produce all the food, clothing, housing and goods and services needed and wanted by everyone. This would present our society with a problem of what you would do with the vast majority who aren't needed to produce anything?
Would you let all of societies wealth fall into the hands of that very small minority and let the majority waste away. Marx felt this was a dangerous state of affairs since the majority might not tolerate being destroyed. Marx felt we would have to find a way to distribute societies wealth,and educate the people to want to do work because the only real crime is being a parasite. We already have elements of this communist norm in the examples I mentioned above and examples of how to organize this type of society. .
I would not call a member of the Catholic clergy, a commissioned military officer, a high energy physicist or a tenured university professor as practicing a hobby or simply doing a job for money. They are doing something they enjoy, feel proud about their achievements, feel they are making a difference and view what they are doing is a contribution to society. This is what Marx viewed as the way society would be organized when it became possible to dispense with the market mechanism a time when we would not have to ration goods and services by setting wages and prices. Modern capitalism is all about what economists call the optimization problem and the socalled efficient use of the means of production and capital. Marx felt that technology would evolve to the point that society would only need a small number of specialists to produce all the food, clothing, housing and goods and services needed and wanted by everyone. This would present our society with a problem of what you would do with the vast majority who aren't needed to produce anything?
Would you let all of societies wealth fall into the hands of that very small minority and let the majority waste away. Marx felt this was a dangerous state of affairs since the majority might not tolerate being destroyed. Marx felt we would have to find a way to distribute societies wealth,and educate the people to want to do work because the only real crime is being a parasite. We already have elements of this communist norm in the examples I mentioned above and examples of how to organize this type of society. .
Would I let all of societies wealth fall into the hand of a small minority? No, but its already happened and I have yet to see any destruction.... perhaps its because we haven't advance far enough so that food, materials things, etc are produced by very few and here we see another conundrum... those few people will have positions of power... it isn't a classless society anymore... I understand why Marx feels its dangerous but it doesn't change that it can never happen, not even in the distant future... If the majority are going to be unemployed because they are not needed to mass produce anything, they aren't going to be needed to be productive... society doesn't need all those people... you may call them parasites but when there really is nothing that society needs from a person, why would you want to make them feel bad? What if the person who wants to be a musician makes only one song their entire life, is that enough a contribution? Who determines that and why do they determine it when it would be a classless society... there are no manager, no directors, or anything and what happens to people that are "fit" for those roles that a classless/wageless society doesn't need? It may sound nice but its not even close to realistic and I do see what Marx fears but I disagree with his summations... and that's the great thing about this world... Marx doesn't have to be "right" merely because he was a smart guy... assuming he is right when he is wrong is the first mistake...
Marx was pretty dead on in talking about the problems of his time, although his solutions for those problems went from the rational to total utopian cloud-cuckoo land.
He did prefer democracy to dictatorship and would have not approved of Communism, particularly because most communist countries had not achieved capitalism first. He designed his theories to be applied in Germany, Britain, the US, France, Belgium, etc. and stated that Russia being an agrarian and ultra-religious society was not suited for them.
If he were alive today he'd probably consider modern Germany to be closer to what he wanted than Cuba, Venezuela, or North Korea etc.
Honestly, its degrading to Marx how people simplify his work. I certainly don't agree with him, but the book deserves to be read before it is compared with modern politicians.
"Big government" is not what Marx had in mind, and it is not the same as socialism. Especially since "big government" is such an ambiguous term.
We're fighting two wars right now, if we don't have a "big government" I'd say we're screwed.
It's been a long time since I read Das Kapital, but I keep up with the basic concepts by reading transcripts of Obama's speeches and the preamble to his first budget.
It's been a long time since I read Das Kapital, but I keep up with the basic concepts by reading transcripts of Obama's speeches and the preamble to his first budget.
In other words, you have never read anything written by Marx.
To quote Glenn Beck: "Have any of you actually read Das Kapital? I have, its the ramblings of an IDIOT!"
Basically, Marx says that a laborer works 12 hours for wages to feed himself, and give himself energy, so he can spend that energy at work, like a vicious cycle, all while the boss lays back and gets richer. He advises the common laborer, which he called "the proletariat" to rise as comrades against the rich elite, which he called the "Bourgeoisie". He failed to mention that in doing so, you give up any opportunity to make anything of yourself, you now have a tyrannical government over you, and.....get this......YOU'RE STILL POOR!!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
