Question for strident capitalists...

Because what they need (in the eyes of the government) is not the same as what they want. If you doubt this, the US military is a good example. They give their troops everything they need. But few people really want to live like that.

Absolutely! The problems of people wanting things transcends economic systems. That's why capitalism works - those behaviors drive capitalism, and thus the required governmental regulation is greatly reduced. Communism pretends those drives don't exist - which is why it's failed every time it's been tried. It's a great idea, but again, doesn't work in the real world.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

In both systems, it requires cooperation to produce the things they want. In Capitalism, that cooperation is inspired by money. In my system, it is inspired by having an abundance of the goods they want.

If people want more of something they feel they are lacking, they are permitted to cooperate to produce enough to satisfy their needs.

You make it sound like there is a limit to how much can be produced in my system but how much of something gets produced is not up to the state, who only monitors how it gets produced and distributed, it's up to the people.

You seem to think the government in my system is preventing people from having more things when it is encouraging them to produce them.

And that's why people wanting things is not a problem in my system. People are free to cooperate to produce more of what they want, they just do it within the law, just like in any system.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If enough people decide they want more gold watches, they can get together and make them just they do under Capitalism. It's mostly not up to the government what gets made.

As for some not getting gold watches, I said that to illustrate that production was dependent on the citizens continuing to produce, not government decrees.

If no one wants to build a micro electric bicycle motor that can fit in your pocket under Capitalism, then there are none at all either. There are plenty of goods under Capitalism I want but can't get anymore no matter how much money I've got. The manufacturers has chosen not to make them anymore. Does that mean Capitalism can't work?

Then why do you cite it like it would be the death knell for a cooperative non-monetary system?

The people.

The people.

If only three people showed up at a Seiko watch factory, do you think watches would get build?

If no one is making the gold watches you want, you are going to have recruit and organize all the necessarily skilled people to make them.

The nutritional supplies are slightly over calibrated to provide enough for even the most extreme glutton. The man will be able to get enough potatoes.

Do you not think junk food doesn't get produced under a cooperative system? If the people want cake instead of vegetables they can swap them out of the meal packages.

Okay. Well, here's a way they can get French fries and gold watches: pool and organize their energies to make them.

But apparently not the easy one designed to provide what they want.

The brother is perfectly free to produce his great beer at the cooperative breweries, which can provide him the barely he requires.

I doubt such minor advantages would ruffle any feathers in a cooperative system. Besides, there are far worse inequalities under Capitalism and I don't hear you questioning its entire legitimacy.

Good thing there's no bribes like that under Capitalism, right?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Sorry for all my typos. It's this autocorrect on my iPod touch that sometimes changes words on me to ones I didn't mean to type. And the keyboard is very small.

 

I just wanted to add there would be so many legal options to someone who wanted to give away more of their home-made beer it wouldn't make any sense for them to go about it in the one illegal way.

In addition, to cooperating with others through the legal channels, instead of appropriating more of your neighbor's land for your use, since your neighbor wants the beer, you could freely show your neighbor how you make the beer and they can produce it for themselves without violating any laws and, more importantly, without depending on your free labor for their beer, beyond your initial instruction session.

It would seem someone so worried about being cheated or denied by the government would be equally concerned about regularly granting their energy to their neighbor for something they could do themselves legally with a little education and training.

 

In addition, I don't think it has sunk in to those objecting to my proposed system, that if anyone objects to the manner in which resources are managed within this system, they are free to go. Staying while violating its laws to impose your own brand of resource management upon unwilling participants who choose non-monetary cooperation is no less wrong.

If you get enough adherents together you are perfectly allowed to use a clearly demarcated section of the land freely allowed you to experiment with your own brand of resource management. But the lines, both physically and in practice, between your brand of resource management and a non-monetary cooperative brand of resource management must be clearly defined and respected.

 

Probably not impossible to get and train them to make watches but:

Without out money etc. how will you get people to do unpleasant but necessary jobs. Like go down into sewers to remove items blocking them, or just haul away the trash?

 

There will be many citizens who lack any particular calling to any of the more prominent and prestigious fields and are not fussy about how they give back their energy to the system as long as they can obtain their monthly supply packages. Not everyone is going to want the responsibility or tolerate the training of a doctor or scientist or engineer. Such persons will be provided a list of occupations that are in the greatest need of volunteers where they can apply their restless energy.

 

So when they show at the distribution center to claim their monthly supply package they will show some proof that they have been "applying their restless energy." - That is your system also needs "value coupons" (worth one supply package) to distinguish those contributing some "energy" to the cooperative community from those just trying to "free load" on the efforts of others.

Why not just pay them money, instead of these certificates that show the worked H hours* that month. Who will issue these certificates? Will they be as difficult to counterfeit as US currency, even thought every production center issues them? Perhaps the production centers sends to the government monthly statements of how many hours each of the people working there worked each, and then the government mails to them hard to counterfeit green certificates, that for historical reasons still have George Washington's portrait on them. (But no one is allowed to refer to them as "money" as they have value at the supply centers only.)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

In fact the ONLY way your system differs from the current one is that everyone gets the same pay, regardless of the values of the service they provide the community. I.e. they get certificate each month for one "supply package." The result of this will be a great shortage of skill workers, like doctors, airline pilots, machinists, welders, police and firefighters (putting their lives at risk), etc. and long line of people applying for easy "Big Mac" jobs that any one who can learn to do in less than day. - For example change reals every half hour or so at some motion picture theater while watching the movie.

If you disagree and think there is some other important difference, please elaborate on it.

* That is how the current systems works. You get dollars = "$-rate" of your job times H, the number of hours you worked that month. (Or annaual average of that, called a salary.)
Again the ONLY difference ** from your system is the "$-rate" is same for all ( and H > Hmin >> 0 is required, I assume) in your system.
Not a higher $-rate for high skill jobs that took years of qualification study and/or practice.

** No there is one other, terrible difference: You get the standard "supply package" which has many things you don't want that you must try to find someone who loves them and wants more to barter with. - No convenient money and grocery stores where you buy what you want. For example the standard supply package probably has some canned or dried meat, but no fresh yogurt - big problem for me.

BTW: Do you soak the dried meat in water over night so it will not just burn up when charcoal fire Bar-B-Q ed?

 

Every citizen will be identifiable on a labor data base that will confirm at the supply depot that they have put in at least their minimum required labor hours for their supply packages. All you will need at the depot is your card identifying who you are. If you want to call the digitally tracked labor hours under your name "coupons" that's up to you.

Are the benefits derived from having doctors, airline pilots, machinists, welders, police and firefighters worthless to humanity without money? If everyone just applied their energy to only menial activities, humanity would quickly notice the lose of the benefits from pursuing the other fields. That, in itself, would be a great incentive to spur activity in those fields that greatly improve human life. Do you want people, maybe someone you know and love, to die of appendicitis? The benefits of so many fields are too precious to people to be made irrelevant just because there's no money involved in their pursuit. For thousands of years humankind pursued its food without the reward of money. What greater evidence is there that humans will pursue what they want without the incentive of money?

If you had read my post on the different Supply Packages carefully, I made clear citizens would be able to swap "meal packages" and "day packages" for the ones they prefer. The "Supply Package" is just value given to what each individual will be allowed each month. While there might be some pre-prepared supply packages, it's not like these packages will sit in a warehouse spoiling. Obviously, refrigerated items will be refrigerated and available for inclusion with non-perishable items in supply packages.

There is no need to barter because, chances are, the person who has what you want, got it from a cooperative distribution center, which are partly set up for the exchange and swapping of cooperatively produced goods.

 

Why would anyone become a surgeon in that case? 4 years of college, 4 of medical school, internship, 3-6 years of residency (and being treated like crap) just to get the same lousy supplies everyone else gets? Why not just work at a hospital as an aide if they want to work with patients? Exactly the same position (and supplies) far less work and far less being treated like crap.

And they will tend to choose the easiest, least stinky job they can - leaving no one to unclog the sewers.

 

Why? It won't improve their lives. You could get the greatest engineer in the world to design all sorts of great things. And when his work was divided 300 million ways, he would get an infinitesimal, unnoticeable fraction of that work. In other words, his life would not be improved one bit. He would be far better off designing and building his gadgets for himself and his family while working the easiest, least time consuming job he can (to allow him time to do what helps him.)

Nope. But the day you get appendicitis is too late to enroll in medical school.

And for those thousands of years, a very popular way to get that food was to kill someone else who had food and take it.

 

No, they can't. As a challenge, get two smart and ambitious friends of yours, some raw gold and try to build a gold watch.

??? Huh? You can get an NSM hub motor that fits in your pocket today. Of course you will have to pay about $200 for it.

No, it means that almost no one wants them.

Because in a cooperative non-monetary system there is no signal for what people want. Despite your claims, three people cannot show up in a field one day and build three gold watches.

And that's exactly what capitalism does - allow people to pool their resources to get what they want.

 

Look, overall a communist/collective society works great on paper. But the real world isn't paper - it's the real world.

We've been going over this for dozens of posts and haven't gotten anywhere. You keep posting about how you think collectivism SHOULD work, and I post about how it HAS worked in the real world. Capitalism isn't great - it's just the least bad of any economic system we've tried.

 

And your point is, because of money, theft and murder doesn't occur today?
Perhaps we just got better at producing food cooperatively?

 

Speaking of stinky jobs, money can be made in a host of more attractive occupations in the medical field and yet some still choose to be proctologists or podiatrists. Why? Is there no money working with less unappealing body parts? So your argument that money is the only way people are going to do certain jobs doesn't hold water.

 

That's not my claim. That's your claim of what I'm claiming.

But in what Universe can watches be manufactured consistently for the masses with three people? If you want more gold watches you will have to get the people who also want gold watches and the people who have skill in producing watches to organize a cooperative to produce more gold watches. Whether this is done in a paid monetary system or cooperative system where having more gold watches or securing your supply package are the only reward is irrelavent. The point is, I'm not suggesting it get done with three people anymore than three people take it upon themselves today to reproduce a favorite sneaker Nike stopped producing. Under Capitalism, you can't have that sneaker either unles the needed people to produce it are available. Look at any Kickstarter campaign where the people involved and cooperating who have the mutual goal of seeing something produced. If you subtract the money from it, there would still be people who would want to cooperate to see a new good realized. And if you don't get enough skilled people onboard with your plan, it fails just like any other Kickstarter campaign. Kickstarter campaigns fail all the time. I don't see you saying, "See? They can't get that produced! Capitalism doesn't work!"

 

What you fail to understand about my proposed system is that the size of supply packages and access to equipment would increase for equally all in proportion to production. That's why it is in everyone's interest to keep producing. So although everyone is limited to the same size supply package every month, there is nothing preventing the size of that monthly supply package from increasing with more efficient application of production.

 

No, what things are called is of little import. Yes, that is much like the alternative I suggested:
"Perhaps the production centers sends to the government monthly statements of how many hours each of the people working there worked each, and then the government mails to them hard to counterfeit green certificates ..."
But better as less costly, with no postal expense (just computer to computer data transfers or electronic "certificate printing") and avoids the possibility that the worker might lose his certificate. The data goes directly to all the supply depots in the US (you may move to another state).

That is the wrong conclusion to draw from last part, now bold. Correct conclusion is people work to get what money will buy. Societies can and have existed without money but always have some way to reward those whose work contribute greater benefit to the society more than the "free loaders" or those who create little value. HUMANS NEED INCENTIVES TO DO THING THEY DON'T LIKE DOING, but are needed.
(For slave based societies, these incentives are usually harsh - Do this job and you can eat and not be whipped.) - I agree money is not essential.
Do you remember popular song: "take this job and shove it..." (Few enjoy their work itself so much that they would do it even is the pay were zero.)

Money also has nothing to do with reason why people will chose to work at easier jobs that require only a day or less of instructions as to how to do, rather than spend about 6 years of study in Med school a two years of internship after graduation. Money is just a convenient, very flexible, automatic accounting system that facilitates exchange of your man-hours of labor for the man-hours invested in the thing you want and can afford.
(BTW, medical internship is the last legal form of slavery in the US. The inters staff the emergency room during night and still do "rounds" during the day - lucky if they get 6 hours sleep and a couple to eat in.) Few will chose 4 tough years in Med school followed by 2 of real hell as an intern to become a doctor when they can get the same benefits by dropping out of high school early to change reals in a movie theater, etc. for other easy "Big Mac" jobs.

Your "Every one doing the minimum, gets the same" is even less workable than "To each according to his needs & from each according to his abilities."

You want to blame everything on money and ignore the extremely common facts about human nature.

Again I say and ask:
" In fact the ONLY* way your system differs from the current one is that everyone gets the same pay, regardless of the values of the service they provide the community. I.e. they get certificate each month for one "supply package." The result of this will be a great shortage of skill workers, like doctors, airline pilots, machinists, welders, police and firefighters (putting their lives at risk), etc. and long line of people applying for easy "Big Mac" jobs that any one who can learn to do in less than day. "

If you disagree and think there is some other important difference, please elaborate on it. Please answer the question or admit the truth of this.

I also said:
* " No there is one other, terrible difference: You get the standard "supply package" which has many things you don't want that you must try to find someone who loves them and wants more to barter with. - No convenient money and grocery stores where you buy what you want. For example the standard supply package probably has some canned or dried meat, but no fresh yogurt - big problem for me. "

But you have modified (or made more clear) that your supply depots are really grocery stores, with all sorts of different items on shelves and in refrigerated cases. I. e. When I get my "supply package" I open it and put the items I don't want /can't use (like diapers) lose in the grocery store's shopping cart and go to the clerk at the cold case where the yogurt is, and ask her/ him how many small yoghurt cups my two cans of beef and packager of dried beef are worth and get to swap immediately, no need to use the internet to find someone, perhaps three states away, who wants more meat than is in the standard "healthy mix" of foods in the standard supply package, and also who makes fresh yogurt he will give me.

This modification of your stated plan (a clerk at various stations in what effectively is a grocery store), is an improvement, but a costly one in man-hours wasted for many "product exchange clerks."

On (1): Glad you finally realize that the "supply package" is not as originally described a box of the things the average person needs for a minimum (or better if the community can produce more for all) living standard BUT a VALUE which is divisible into many smaller values, much like 100 dollar bills are. You also now admit that to get this value one must work (contribute their energy is way you like to say this) some minimum amount each month. Just to make discussion easier, I assume the std value package is worth 200 hours of labor energy and a small can of beef/noodle soup, BNS, has value of 15 minutes. As everyone's "$-rate" is the same this 200 hour value could be equally well stated as 200 dollars and as 800 BNS = 200 hours = 200 dollars or one can of BNS has value in terms of dollars of 25 cents.

On (2): Yes with exchange points within the Supply Depot, staffed by helpful "exchange clerks" there is no need for barter; but I note that with only a few clerks (or even none with automation like now exists at Home Depot stores), not many at various points within the exchange area, the many wasted man-hours of "exchange clerks" needed in the "grocery store exchange section" of the supply depot COULD BE AVOIDED, if system were like now: Just take your shopping cart thru the grocery store filling it ONLY with the items you want and when done go to the check-out area and pay with dollars (usually electrons ones via your charge card)

Please explain to me why pushing my cart with BNS etc. in it to the yogurt area, etc. to exchange BNS etc. for other things I want that are not in the STD supply package, making exchanges at all these different locations within the "exchange area" and wasting many clerk man-hours at the various exchange points (in addition to wasting more of my own time) is better than the current easy to use system where you shop for what you want and pay with money at the check-out area.

 

You only post silly nonsense. Billvon's surgeon example does NOT produce anything more for the society to consume as you assert is the reason he would suffer all that effort to become a surgeon instead of take the easiest to do Big Mac job available to gain the same share of the society's production. Surgeon and many jobs essential to a good life, like traffic cops, firemen, and police etc. DO NOT INCREASE PRODUCTION that can be shared by all. - Why they are called "service jobs" and make up more than 70% of US's GDP without producing even one item that can be included in even one supply package.

I was "timed out" in post 159 when after noting (end of first section of my reply) that all supply depots in the US need the employment data on every one before could add:
When you go to the supply depot, you need an ID card, that lets the government know where you are monthly at least - a big step towards the Police State, your inconvenient and inefficient system creates.