14-12-2004 22:52									#421
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious That's not arguing otherwise. I'm agreeing that you need someone to organize labor, and that that is work. I'm saying that it's not necessary to compensate the owners of business for nothing but owning the business.

Why do you deny that you're arguing something, and then go and argue that very thing in the next sentence? Without the business, the labor is not providing any value. So you only want to compensate the labor, and nothing else. Why can't you see this?

quote: Actually, it's not hypothetical. What do you think happened in Cuba, China, Russia etc...

Nothing even remotely close to what you're suggesting, and I find it difficult to believe that you really think otherwise.

quote: That's not the question. The question is how much they should be compensated. Should they be compensated out of what labor produces or should they simply be compensated for the labor that they perform, and the risk and depreciation of their capital?

Maybe you should re-read what you've typed here and ask yourself if that's what you meant. Because as it stands, you haven't presented dichotomous choices and the obvious answer to both is "duh, yes".

quote: That's ridiculous. We are discussing the amount of fair compensation. Not whether he should be compensated or not. So again I ask you. What is wrong with all of deciding that the capitalists will no longer be compensated for this thing that isn't their work and losses to their capital?

Same problem here. Take a step back and think about it for a minute. First, if you agree that compensation needs to be paid, where do you propose it comes from? And second, think about how risk compensation works.

	14-12-2004 23:23									#422
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Flubber Where communists lose me on this issue is where some say that this means that the lawyer and the ditchdigger earn the same money. I reject any system where a person is unable to better their condition through application of their skills and their effort.

Most communists don't understand their own theory and are communists for moral reasons. A reading of Marx should dispell comrades of this notion, since the value labor, like any other commodity, depends on the amount of socially-necessary labor which goes in to making it. In other words, the value of a doctor's labor (at least in his function as a doctor) is more valuable than the labor of a ditch-digger. The labor of faster and or more skilled workers are more valuable, and should be so compensated. The eventual goal of communism is to create a society so productive that economic compensation isn't an issue and that we all live in a world of plenty.

quote: Abolishing periodic economic crisis-- I would be most interested in how this is accomplished.

Presumably with rational economic planning, capital will not be over-invested in "profitable" sectors, which is what leads to economic crises.

quote: I am also curious as to what level of economic issue is classified as a crisis.

I would argue that when the economy contracts, or at least fails to grow enough to keep up with population growth, we have a crisis. In addition, if we can't produce enough to meet demands in basic services an goods like housing, food, health care, etc, we also would have a crisis. I would add, however, that this is my opinion.

quote: Past communist economies have not been viewed as major successes so I am interested in what would be done differently.

Well, past communist economies suffered from several inital problems. The first, of course, is starting from a low level of development. We've taken power, so far, only in countries which were primarily agricultural and/or devestated by war. We started with a handicap. In addition, due to the political situations facing these countries, they were forced to take certain short term measures which were harmful in the long run (such as war-communism in Russia) or invest more in military expenditures than in civilian ones. On top of this, the dictatorial and bureaucratic nature of these countries meant that when decisions were made that weren't rational, those who were in charge of implimenting these decisions were unable to comply, and unable to challenge their responsibilities. And, in fear for their lives, they would falsify their results. So when the bureaucrats made the next set of projections, they did so with inaccurate data, which only compounds the problem. Finally, the dictatorial and bureaucratic nature of these governments alienated people from their society, and even high levels of the bureaucracy saw no incentive to expend extra effort to make things better.

Now, it may very well be that the first two situations are outside our control. Given that revolutions only happen wen governments lose legitimacy, an they only lose legitimacy when they confront a crises with which they cannot cope, even in the U.S., it's possible we'd be starting from a low point. It's also a given that the surrounding capitalist world would be hostile, and we'd need to concentrate on military production. What we do have control over, however, is whether or not we are a dictatorship or a democracy, and whether the bureaucracy rules the people or serves the people. If we take the most strident measures to ensure the democratic process survives and thrives, then we avoid the problems that the previous socialist states encountered. And, we have computers, so we can collect and analyze data much more accurately, and thus make more accurate allocations of resources. And maybe I'm being hopeful.

quote: End economic causes for war-- I seriously don't see this one as a big issue for capitalism.

It has been in the past. The war against Iraq in 1991 was primarly a war of economics, i.e., preventing the majority of the world's oil supply being under the control of one man (assuming he had plans to overrun the Arabian peninsula). Both world wars had economic causes at their base, evevn if the proximate causes took different forms.

	14-12-2004 23:41									#423
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara It has been in the past. The war against Iraq in 1991 was primarly a war of economics, i.e., preventing the majority of the world's oil supply being under the control of one man (assuming he had plans to overrun the Arabian peninsula). Both world wars had economic causes at their base, evevn if the proximate causes took different forms.

Thanks che

I agree that many wars in the past have had economic basis-- often about control of colonies etc . .

I just don't see that as the possible cause of future wars and even if economic reasons were a reason for war, its not necessarily capitalism at the cause.

For instance China could make a play for certain offshore resources or , less plausibly, for Russian wealth in Siberia. In either case, the root cause could be economic but that reason could exist if China were pure communist or their existing communist-capitalist mix.

In fact some wars have been about ideology as the capitalist and communist blocs fought through proxies in Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan ( and to a lesser extent in some African and South American nations)

As for the rest, thanks for the response. I like that you approach issues with candour and forthrightness and don't just sprout incomprehensible dogma. I will respond again later today but I have to get busy here at work creating value.

	15-12-2004 00:01									#424
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara quote: Originally posted by Flubber Where communists lose me on this issue is where some say that this means that the lawyer and the ditchdigger earn the same money. I reject any system where a person is unable to better their condition through application of their skills and their effort. Most communists don't understand their own theory and are communists for moral reasons. A reading of Marx should dispell comrades of this notion, since the value labor, like any other commodity, depends on the amount of socially-necessary labor which goes in to making it. In other words, the value of a doctor's labor (at least in his function as a doctor) is more valuable than the labor of a ditch-digger. The labor of faster and or more skilled workers are more valuable, and should be so compensated. The eventual goal of communism is to create a society so productive that economic compensation isn't an issue and that we all live in a world of plenty.

Ditch-digging isn't socially necessary?

	15-12-2004 00:10									#425
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Ditch-digging isn't socially necessary?

I didn't say it wasn't. It is not, however, as socially necessary as doctoring. Furthermore, almost anyone can dig a ditch. A doctor, however, requires years of intensive training. Thus, like any commodity, the labor-power of a doctor costs more than the labor-power of a ditch digger.

	15-12-2004 00:12									#426
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara I didn't say it wasn't. It is not, however, as socially necessary as doctoring. Furthermore, almost anyone can dig a ditch. A doctor, however, requires years of intensive training.

So if he gets free training, then what?

	15-12-2004 00:15									#427
	Got spare money?

The amount of effort required learning medicine is independent of the out of pocket cost of training.

	15-12-2004 00:16									#428
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Kontiki The amount of effort required learning medicine is independent of the out of pocket cost of training.

Yeah, so he's paid for the opportunity cost and all of that. So then what?

	15-12-2004 00:17									#429
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious So if he gets free training, then what?

It's still more valuable to society. I don't believe that doctors should be treated like gods, but they are still more valuable to society. As long as a commodity economy exists, skilled and trained labor-power will continue to be renumerated better than untrained and unskilled labor-power.

	15-12-2004 00:20									#430
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara It's still more valuable to society. I don't believe that doctors should be treated like gods, but they are still more valuable to society. As long as a commodity economy exists, skilled and trained labor-power will continue to be renumerated better than untrained and unskilled labor-power.

Who determines that, and under what basis? Have you read Animal Farm? No comrades are more equal than other comrades, comrade.

And Marx certainly never said that they were. You are very mistaken. You have a very poor interpretation.

	15-12-2004 00:22									#431
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Yeah, so he's paid for the opportunity cost and all of that. So then what?

Move away from the economics of it altogether. It requires more time, effort and skill than knowing how to dig a ditch. Didn't you admit before that someone who works harder should be rewarded?

	15-12-2004 00:29									#432
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Who determines that, and under what basis?

Society determines it, democratically.

quote: Have you read Animal Farm? No comrades are more equal than other comrades, comrade.

Animal Farm, was written by Orwell, not Marx nor Lenin.

quote: And Marx certainly never said that they were. You are very mistaken. You have a very poor interpretation.

It's in the first section of Capital. Lenin also alludes to this in The State and Revolution.

quote: The value of labour-power is determined, as in the case of every other commodity, by the labour-time necessary for the production, and consequently also the reproduction, of this special article. So far as it has value, it represents no more than a definite quantity of the average labour of society incorporated in it.

	15-12-2004 00:38									#433
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Kontiki Move away from the economics of it altogether. It requires more time, effort and skill than knowing how to dig a ditch. Didn't you admit before that someone who works harder should be rewarded?

The act of learning medicine requires more time and effort than the act of learning ditch-digging, obviously.

The act of practicing medicine does not necessarily requires more time and effort than practicing ditch-digging. It is often the other way around (depending of the doctor and the ditch-digger).

	15-12-2004 00:43									#434
	Remove this text

From Wage Labor & Capital
http://www.marxists.org/archive/mar...labour/ch04.htm

quote: Now, the same general laws which regulate the price of commodities in general, naturally regulate wages, or the price of labor-power. Wages will now rise, now fall, according to the relation of supply and demand, according as competition shapes itself between the buyers of labor-power, the capitalists, and the sellers of labor-power, the workers. The fluctuations of wages correspond to the fluctuation in the price of commodities in general. But within the limits of these fluctuations the price of labor-power will be determined by the cost of production, by the labor-time necessary for production of this commodity: labor-power. What, then, is the cost of production of labor-power? It is the cost required for the maintenance of the laborer as a laborer, and for his education and training as a laborer. Therefore, the shorter the time required for training up to a particular sort of work, the smaller is the cost of production of the worker, the lower is the price of his labor-power, his wages. In those branches of industry in which hardly any period of apprenticeship is necessary and the mere bodily existence of the worker is sufficient, the cost of his production is limited almost exclusively to the commodities necessary for keeping him in working condition. The price of his work will therefore be determined by the price of the necessary means of subsistence.

	15-12-2004 00:50									#435
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Who determines that, and under what basis? Society determines it, democratically.

How is that different from what we have today? Society today decides what compensation captitalists get, and you oppose that. So you still haven't told me on what basis doctors and whomever else you have chosen should get paid more.

quote: quote: Have you read Animal Farm? No comrades are more equal than other comrades, comrade. Animal Farm, was written by Orwell, not Marx nor Lenin.

Ah, it is at least as important as anything written by a communist for communist. Any comrade who does not concern himself with the message of that book does not understand communism very well.

Have you read it, or should I tell you about the book?

quote: quote: And Marx certainly never said that they were. You are very mistaken. You have a very poor interpretation. It's in the first section of Capital. Lenin also alludes to this in The State and Revolution. quote: The value of labour-power is determined, as in the case of every other commodity, by the labour-time necessary for the production, and consequently also the reproduction, of this special article. So far as it has value, it represents no more than a definite quantity of the average labour of society incorporated in it.

How in the world do you get your interpretation from that passage. That passage very clearly states that no one type of labor is superior to any other. It's true that Marx said that only socially necessary labor is valuable, but no where did he say that some labor was more socially necessary than others.

	15-12-2004 00:52									#436
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor The act of learning medicine requires more time and effort than the act of learning ditch-digging, obviously. The act of practicing medicine does not necessarily requires more time and effort than practicing ditch-digging. It is often the other way around (depending of the doctor and the ditch-digger).

And this mindset is why communism (at least this variety) is utterly doomed to failure.

	15-12-2004 00:53									#437
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara From Wage Labor & Capital http://www.marxists.org/archive/mar...labour/ch04.htm quote: Now, the same general laws which regulate the price of commodities in general, naturally regulate wages, or the price of labor-power. Wages will now rise, now fall, according to the relation of supply and demand, according as competition shapes itself between the buyers of labor-power, the capitalists, and the sellers of labor-power, the workers. The fluctuations of wages correspond to the fluctuation in the price of commodities in general. But within the limits of these fluctuations the price of labor-power will be determined by the cost of production, by the labor-time necessary for production of this commodity: labor-power. What, then, is the cost of production of labor-power? It is the cost required for the maintenance of the laborer as a laborer, and for his education and training as a laborer. Therefore, the shorter the time required for training up to a particular sort of work, the smaller is the cost of production of the worker, the lower is the price of his labor-power, his wages. In those branches of industry in which hardly any period of apprenticeship is necessary and the mere bodily existence of the worker is sufficient, the cost of his production is limited almost exclusively to the commodities necessary for keeping him in working condition. The price of his work will therefore be determined by the price of the necessary means of subsistence.

I'm really just shocked that you make the interpretation that you do. Please explain how you derived at it. That should be interesting.

	15-12-2004 01:02									#438
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious How is that different from what we have today? Society today decides what compensation captitalists get, and you oppose that. So you still haven't told me on what basis doctors and whomever else you have chosen should get paid more.

1. What we have today is anarchically determined, not democratically. Each doctor decides for himself what he will charge, based more or less on what the market will bare.

2. Within the capitalist system I do not oppose the compensation capitalists get, per se, though I might object to the obscene particulars. In any event, my objection to capitalism is logical and philosophical and not moral.

3. The bases for the pay differential will be determined by a democratic socialist government which will weigh social needs, the cost of producing and reproducing the laborer, and also supply and demand.

quote: Ah, it is at least as important as anything written by a communist for communist. Any comrade who does not concern himself with the message of that book does not understand communism very well.

As far as understanding the philosophy of Marxism, not it isn't. It is an allagory of what happened in the Soviet Union, and is necessarily simplistic in trying to explain that what was a workers' government has become its opposite.

And yes, I've read it several times, though not in the last decade.

quote: How in the world do you get your interpretation from that passage.

The cost of labor-power is the cost of its production and its reproduction. It costs more to produce a doctor and it costs more to maintain a doctor. Thus, the labor power of a doctor costs more.

	15-12-2004 01:03									#439
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious I'm really just shocked that you make the interpretation that you do. Please explain how you derived at it. That should be interesting.

What part of,

quote: It is the cost required for the maintenance of the laborer as a laborer, and for his education and training as a laborer. Therefore, the shorter the time required for training up to a particular sort of work, the smaller is the cost of production of the worker, the lower is the price of his labor-power, his wages.

don't you understand?

	15-12-2004 01:04									#440
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Kontiki And this mindset is why communism (at least this variety) is utterly doomed to failure.

I am not advocating to pay ditch-diggers and doctors the same amount. It is unpractical, and it will mean many people will have no motivation to learn a highly-skilled job (strictly morally speaking, I would reward a hardworking ditch-digger more than half-time doctor, but I am aware this cannot be applicable)

However, you have to acknowledge that there arehardworking people in low-paying jobs, who get much less of a penny than normal-working people in higher paid jobs. There is a societal justification as to why some jobs are inherently more paid than others, but it is absurd to dimiss every ditch-digger as "lazy" compared to every doctor (which is what you imply)

	15-12-2004 01:09									#441
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor I am not advocating to pay ditch-diggers and doctors the same amount. It is unpractical, and it will mean many people will have no motivation to learn a highly-skilled job (strictly morally speaking, I would reward a hardworking ditch-digger more than half-time doctor, but I am aware this cannot be applicable) However, you have to acknowledge that there arehardworking people in low-paying jobs, who get much less of a penny than normal-working people in higher paid jobs. There is a societal justification as to why some jobs are inherently more paid than others, but it is absurd to dimiss every ditch-digger as "lazy" compared to every doctor (which is what you imply)

I imply nothing of the sort. I'm merely pointing out that a person who has studied to become a doctor has put in far more time and effort in learning a skill than the ditch-digger has. And you acknowledge the issue in your first paragraph. I have no idea where you get the "lazy" thing from.

	15-12-2004 01:27									#442
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Kontiki I imply nothing of the sort. I'm merely pointing out that a person who has studied to become a doctor has put in far more time and effort in learning a skill than the ditch-digger has. And you acknowledge the issue in your first paragraph.

Yup.
But in the act of practicing the skill is no less tiresome for the ditch-digger than for the doctor. And this is what I wanted to remind, seeing the post I firstly replied to. Sometimes, the 'obvious' is worth saying.

quote: I have no idea where you get the "lazy" thing from.

When you said there should be avenues for people who want to get a better condition through hard work. I thought you considered doctoring to be much harder work than ditch-digging, and ergo, that ditch-diggers don't feel like working hard to better their condition.

	15-12-2004 01:37									#443
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara quote: Originally posted by Kidicious 2. Within the capitalist system I do not oppose the compensation capitalists get, per se, though I might object to the obscene particulars. In any event, my objection to capitalism is logical and philosophical and not moral.

O M G!
I can not support you in any kind of political pursuit that you have. You have no justification for overthrowing the current rulers just so that you can set up your own little rule. You scare me.

quote: 3. The bases for the pay differential will be determined by a democratic socialist government which will weigh social needs, the cost of producing and reproducing the laborer, and also supply and demand.

Ah, no. It would be the same as it is today. They would vote with their pocket book. You are setting up conflict in interests and class warfare. You are no communist at all.

quote: quote: Ah, it is at least as important as anything written by a communist for communist. Any comrade who does not concern himself with the message of that book does not understand communism very well. As far as understanding the philosophy of Marxism, not it isn't. It is an allagory of what happened in the Soviet Union, and is necessarily simplistic in trying to explain that what was a workers' government has become its opposite. And yes, I've read it several times, though not in the last decade.

As shocked as I am that you can misinterpret Marx, maybe you don't like Orwell because it would be harder to fit your own desires into it, and use it for political propaganda purposes.

quote: quote: How in the world do you get your interpretation from that passage. The cost of labor-power is the cost of its production and its reproduction. It costs more to produce a doctor and it costs more to maintain a doctor. Thus, the labor power of a doctor costs more.

Yes, we have already agree upon that. You were going to show me where Marx said that doctors should be compensated beyond the cost of their education. You haven't done that. You aren't going to do that, because he never even came close to implying that. He central message is directly opposed to that idea. His argument is a MORAL argument.

	15-12-2004 01:42									#444
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor I am not advocating to pay ditch-diggers and doctors the same amount. It is unpractical, and it will mean many people will have no motivation to learn a highly-skilled job (strictly morally speaking, I would reward a hardworking ditch-digger more than half-time doctor, but I am aware this cannot be applicable) However, you have to acknowledge that there arehardworking people in low-paying jobs, who get much less of a penny than normal-working people in higher paid jobs. There is a societal justification as to why some jobs are inherently more paid than others, but it is absurd to dimiss every ditch-digger as "lazy" compared to every doctor (which is what you imply)

Do you actually think that people will rather dig ditches than go to college?

	15-12-2004 01:44									#445
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara What part of, quote: It is the cost required for the maintenance of the laborer as a laborer, and for his education and training as a laborer. Therefore, the shorter the time required for training up to a particular sort of work, the smaller is the cost of production of the worker, the lower is the price of his labor-power, his wages. don't you understand?

I understand all of it. It is very direct and clear. Very little room for interpretation actually. The question is how do you understand it.

	15-12-2004 01:47									#446
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor When you said there should be avenues for people who want to get a better condition through hard work. I thought you considered doctoring to be much harder work than ditch-digging, and ergo, that ditch-diggers don't feel like working hard to better their condition.

Nope but the hard-working ditch-digger should be compensated more than the average ditch digger since he digs more ditches.


More generally, it is necessary to compensate some people more than others or there is no incentive to do certain jobs. I am a lawyer and get paid reasonably well to be one. But if all jobs paid the same, I would not be one . . . I think I would enjoy teaching chess to young children or being a cruise ship activities coordinator, or park ranger.

Obviously some people would choose their current vocation but for me, the hours are too long and the stress level is too high. I look fondly back to when I was actually a ditch digger and to the times now when I do projects like building a fence. I enjoy the stress free element of pure labor. Its actually cathartic. Perhaps I would seek a mental challenge later I don't know.

I can imagine a whole bunch of jobs which are currently not all that well paid but which have other attractive features which a lot of people would gravitate towards. Hpw many people WANT to be a coal miner if they can be a tour guide in a beautiful park.

Who needs the stress of university if you make the same being a bartender ( and get to see the bands and see the local good looking girls at the same time)

	15-12-2004 01:49									#447
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious I understand all of it. It is very direct and clear. Very little room for interpretation actually. The question is how do you understand it.

I am relieved to see that not even the other apolyton commies agree with kid.

	15-12-2004 01:49									#448
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Do you actually think that people will rather dig ditches than go to college?

If you pay students as much as you pay ditch-diggers, pretty much everybody will be a student (and not that many will stop their studies, because being a student is far more interesting than having a job)

If, however, the years of study are a financial hassle as much as they are now, many people will prefer the immediate rewards of holding an unskilled job, over several years of financial trouble just to get as much money. True, those people will overwhelmingly come from a social background that doesn't value education much. But the problem will still be here.

Some skilled jobs will be less affected than others, depending if they are positively seen by teenagers (a teenager may feel more like becoming a doctor than a weapon-system engineer), but overall, the motivation to study will shrink considerably.

	15-12-2004 01:52									#449
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Do you actually think that people will rather dig ditches than go to college?

If college leads to no advantage YES-- perhaps its not ditch-digging that will attract them but something else. Why have the stress of exams and passing and failing when you can pick something right now that you enjoy and earn an income as good as you would ever get in a more stressful job.

Lots of smart people will logic it out as not worth the effort.

	15-12-2004 01:52									#450
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Flubber Who needs the stress of university if you make the same being a bartender ( and get to see the bands and see the local good looking girls at the same time)

We must have not had the same experience of college.

The objectively lazy person you are talking to (i.e. myself) is a student . A colleague of mine, who studies the very same thing and is even more lazy than I, worked once as a bartender, and clearly told me "never again"