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.
I’m not a pure pacifist either. The main goal would be to get a global society of no states therefore there would be no need for state vs state conflict. That being said, realistically anarcho-syndicalist societies would first be surrounded by states before such a system (state control) were abolished. Until then an army union could be tasked with defense (as life is certainly a base need for survival) which would operate much like any other union industry with its own syndicate. Once this need is no longer needed the union would naturally be disbanded.
For the discussion of wage, there is disagreement between left wing anarchist. Personally I’d support a cashless society but some believe there needs to be some sort of currency to form trade. For me at least production would be influenced by needs. People like to work, and the extra incentive would be to provide a base need. Say your community has a base need that is lacking, more people will go work at the subsequent union to provide it. Then there is the case of excess production. Lets say a base need is not in high demand as its general being met, but you yourself want more of it. Then you go produce there and excess production would go to you (it would be easier being as hypothetically your main load of work would be less).
None needs based unions like say a film union that produces entertainment won’t have the profit based motive so people wouldn’t have the same motive to work there as other unions that have their own syndicates and help maintain a community.
Either way, even in the case of a currency system, wages wouldn’t be able to be provided in the same way as they are today.
I think as we move towards an AI based workforce something like you are suggesting might be an option. It would solve the UI problem.
When I look at someone like Bill Gates or Elon Musk. The amount of effort that Gates made to get Microsoft off the ground and viable is quite incredible. Look at Musk and what it took for him to succeed with Tesla and some of his other projects.
If everyone is more or less equal who is going to create the next big thing? If something is invented the unions or whoever just takes it away. It takes a certain amount of greed and ego and pushing the envelope for new ideas and inventions to happen. There is a reason why American's come up with more great ideas than the rest of the world combined. You look at Silicon Valley, the entertainment industry, Netflix, Wal-Mart, McDonalds. I could go on and on. A lot of the motivation is getting really rich from it. And everyone benefits from these advancements. Stop people from the opportunity of being wealthy and everyone might suffer from creative stagnation.
If you look at Cuba. What invention or idea has come out of there the last 60 years? Besides creative ways to built a boat to leave? I think if other countries were still capitalist someone with a breakthrough invention would just leave your country. Why give it away for free when they can prosper somewhere else. Same with a great athlete. That again happens in Cuba.
Last edited by Oklazona Bound; 08-25-2018 at 11:56 AM..
I think as we move towards an AI based workforce something like you are suggesting might be an option. It would solve the UI problem.
When I look at someone like Bill Gates or Elon Musk. The amount of effort that Gates made to get Microsoft off the ground and viable is quite incredible. Look at Musk and what it took for him to succeed with Tesla and some of his other projects.
If everyone is more or less equal who is going to create the next big thing? If something is invented the unions or whoever just takes it away. It takes a certain amount of greed and ego and pushing the envelope for new ideas and inventions to happen. There is a reason why American's come up with more great ideas than the rest of the world combined. You look at Silicon Valley, the entertainment industry, Netflix, Wal-Mart, McDonalds. I could go on and on. A lot of the motivation is getting really rich from it. And everyone benefits from these advancements. Stop people from the opportunity of being wealthy and everyone might suffer from creative stagnation.
If you look at Cuba. What invention or idea has come out of there the last 60 years? Besides creative ways to built a boat to leave? I think if other countries were still capitalist someone with a breakthrough invention would just leave your country. Why give it away for free when they can prosper somewhere else. Same with a great athlete. That again happens in Cuba.
Most of these inventions are innovations. The technological development that you speak of come from government (defense spending)agendas, often times through the usage of public funding to universities. A major function of the pentagon is coming up with technological advancements to keep corporate America ahead.
Transistors are one of the few exceptions as they come from at&t but also important to know is that at&t at the time had a government monopoly.
Television (I think some university in japan, but you can search it up).
The internet
Rocket engines
Solar energy
Computers (ww2)
And much more.
A big reason why is companies that require a profit based motive can not measure the value of non-marketed goods.
Now, the application of these technologies are usually innovated on by private companies but the motive remains profit meaning the promote things based on consumerism.
Amazon expanded consumerism to costumers but that didn’t help build a healthier more functional society. Expecting to allow an accumulation of resources around profit driven humans (taking away free access to labor) niether expands human morality and creates personal power beyond personal ability.
Cuba’s problems are varied. For one they have a state authoritarian power that invests resources to stay in power and more importantly they’re cut off (to some extent) from the global supply chain and sharing of technology (usually happens between universities).
Inventions will still come, they just will be applied differently.
Just think, Bezos makes many times more than the average worker yet does not produce as much as they do. He should be paid less by the rules of input/output but because he controls the distribution of cash he makes the most.
Corporate CEOs generally lack basic trade skills that are needed to keep a society functioning and moral in nature, instead they are skilled at winning state subsidies, cutting financial costs that don't directly benefit their bottom line, and outsourcing production AND marketing. This is why when Obama or Trump selects one of them to help the US economy, they fail, because they have no real skills.
These concepts are basic yet everyone criticizes Bernie on this one tweet, why?
I don't, obviously. My question arises from why so many Americans are blinded by wealth to thinking Bezos personally adds to our economy or earned his money and therefore needs to defended. Why was this simple fact stated by Bernie criticized so?
how about the fact that bezos was the one that founded amazon, and is the one that took all the risks to get the company off the ground? how about bezos is the one that ends up taking all the responsibility if the company goes in the tank.
this is something non business owners always fail to understand, the guy at the top has all the responsibility on them to make the company go, and to make money for the share holders. if they dont , then they lose their jobs, not the guy pulling merchandise off the shelf to ship off to a customer. this is business 101, you might want to take a course someday and learn that for yourself.
how about the fact that bezos was the one that founded amazon, and is the one that took all the risks to get the company off the ground? how about bezos is the one that ends up taking all the responsibility if the company goes in the tank.
this is something non business owners always fail to understand, the guy at the top has all the responsibility on them to make the company go, and to make money for the share holders. if they dont , then they lose their jobs, not the guy pulling merchandise off the shelf to ship off to a customer. this is business 101, you might want to take a course someday and learn that for yourself.
Your glorification of self greed, the supposed risk he took, and his intentions are false. He didn’t risk much, he worked with others to profit off of the online boom and survived through skilled manipulation of consumer markets.
None of this is honorable, praiseworthy, nor does it answer my claim of his production being less than what he makes (to the extreme).
Most of these inventions are innovations. The technological development that you speak of come from government (defense spending)agendas, often times through the usage of public funding to universities. A major function of the pentagon is coming up with technological advancements to keep corporate America ahead.
Transistors are one of the few exceptions as they come from at&t but also important to know is that at&t at the time had a government monopoly.
Television (I think some university in japan, but you can search it up).
The internet
Rocket engines
Solar energy
Computers (ww2)
And much more.
A big reason why is companies that require a profit based motive can not measure the value of non-marketed goods.
Now, the application of these technologies are usually innovated on by private companies but the motive remains profit meaning the promote things based on consumerism.
Amazon expanded consumerism to costumers but that didn’t help build a healthier more functional society. Expecting to allow an accumulation of resources around profit driven humans (taking away free access to labor) niether expands human morality and creates personal power beyond personal ability.
Cuba’s problems are varied. For one they have a state authoritarian power that invests resources to stay in power and more importantly they’re cut off (to some extent) from the global supply chain and sharing of technology (usually happens between universities).
Inventions will still come, they just will be applied differently.
But you won't have corporate america, the pentagon nor much of government as it is now.
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.
