Elimination of Wage Labor? A Viable Option? (Political)

[lesbiaphrodite]

Nothing is mutually exclusive in the two states.

I have never sought to acquire material things or capital. Anything that I have ever attained has been by grace.

I seek spiritual betterment in this life and the next. All that has been bestowed on me has nothing to do with my work or money.

Everyone has the right to pursue whatever goals they wish. I just think it's a shame to waste energy on the material world.

 

[cumallday]

"I would like to see a society ultimately based on free association of a people who live cooperatively, control their own institutions, their communities, their workplaces ... and a move towards elimination of wage labor"--Noam Chomsky.

Comments? Thoughts? Reactions?

I remember the images coming out of Argentina in 2001. Line-ups outside of banks that had no intention of opening, middle class workers radicalized into banging pots outside in the streets, five or six presidents coming and going within the span of a couple of weeks. After amassing a debt that was no longer sustainable, Argentina's neo-liberal experiment hit the fan like so much shit and the economy went into freefall. Unemployment mushroomed, the currency crashed, and industry was brought to it's knees, resulting in country-wide factory closures. When their bosses refused to reopen the factories, workers bravely dispatched with the old system and simply seized the means of production for themselves.

The Chilavert Artes Graficas - a printmaking factory - was recuperated by a handful of staff members in 2002. Fearing their factory was going to be sold and they'd lose their jobs, the workers occupied the factory for six months. They were supported by the city's unemployed and retired, and it was this local solidarity that enabled the workers to maintain their appeal to city government and takeover the factory. The workers have sice turned Chilavert into a company without bosses or hierarchy.

 

[gauchecritic]

What the hell is 'wage labor'?

Amicus...

Oh you know. When you sell your freedom and liberty so as to partake in the capitalist system. (which is generated by all living things, that surrounds us and penetrates us. Which (for you) produces fear, and fear leads to anger, anger leads to hatred and hatred leads to suffering which leads to the dark side.)
So take note for; Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration.
You must face your fear.
Permit it to pass over you and through you.
And when it has gone past, turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only you will remain.

 

[gauchecritic]

does no one have the imagination to recognise how non-wage labour works? The only reason that there is wage labour at all is that it evolved from barter. Accepting a promise on the understanding that all others will accept the same promise.

The single major problem is that there are those that trade in promises rather than anything useful. An English promise is worth two Yanqui promises? Gimme a break.

A couple of methods of non-wage labour:-

This is one of the partially successful ones of the industrial revolution. A factory owner requires local workers, but there is no locality. The factory owner creates a locality. There are any number of villages and whole towns that were built exclusively to supply homes for factory workers. Many of these villages had a local shop, courtesy of the factory owner. they became communities in their own right as a side effect of the courtesy of the factory owner.
Take that to the ultimate and provide the homes, shop (doctor's office etc) as a freebie. No costs for the workers means the only pay required is for other than essentials. (some factory bosses even realised that their workers would benefit from trips to the seaside and provided these too)
OK you can point out loads that the factory owners did wrong in those times too, child labour, long hours, firing those that were overproductive (Roxelby: I can't believe that. Gauche: Recorded fact. Piece work in mines was geared to a specific low cost output if a miner had to be paid a greater amount for the same hours of work they were financially inefficient.)

Another method of non-wage labour:-
This one depends on a cultural understanding that the job you do is the job you're fit for: Only companies (of whatever size) can trade in finished goods. Everything you require for your comfort is provided, free of charge, by the company you work for. Plasma TVs, 200 piece dinner services, car etc etc.

 

[WRJames]

If you have children wouldn't you like to be able to help them with college and other starting-out costs? Unless you are independently wealthy you must work to exist - wouldn't you like to not have to work for your entire life, but instead be able to enjoy leisure and economic security in your later years? Wouldn't you like to have some ability to travel and experience different things in your life? All those things require accumulating some surplus (savings). Pursuing higher income is not just about aquiring more knick-knacks.

Yes -- of course. What you are proposing is quite true within a certain range. Working hard and achieving and earning money are very good things -- within limits. But, as a society, we have the tiger by the tail. If we, collectively, were ever to look at the enormous number of possesions we have already acquired and say -- enough! -- our economy would collapse, overnight. And most people have made the choices I have listed before -- big mortgages, long commutes, lots of debt -- that trap them in a round of drudgery.

As for being able to enjoy leisure and economic security -- wouldn't a society that provided that to ALL its citizens be a desirable thing? Why restrict that to the wealthy few? If your only goal in working so to be able NOT to work -- maybe there is something wrong.

As for college -- what fiscal quicksand! Of course, every child needs to go to college -- and eneryone will pay whatever is required to do so -- so the debt burden our college graduates have built up already has condemned them to decades of servitude. Add to that the need to find some corporation to provide them with health insurance, and you basically have enslaved them before they get a whiff of freedom.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Oh you know. When you sell your freedom and liberty so as to partake in the capitalist system.

A curious way to describe it. Consider the alternatives:

- You don't sell your labor, but it's taken from you by force by a communist dictatorship of the proletrariat; because there is incentive to innovate and be more productive, you experience a far lower standard of living than people in places where they may freely sell their labor, skills, talents and knowledge.

- You don't sell your labor (or its produce), but grow your own food and produce your own material goods all by yourself. This is called subsistence agriculture. It's backbreaking work and a miserable existance.

- You don't labor at all in the sense we understand, but spend your days hunting and gathering. In some seasons good things to eat are plentiful and very little of your time is required to collect them; other times you spend every waking minute grubbing and still can't find enough. You suffer greatly from the absence of material goods, suffer the tortures of the damned from routine ailments (sinse health care hasn't been invented yet), watch most of your children die in infancy or childhood, are worn out by 30 and probably dead by 40.

- You live in some imaginary ideal society where human nature has been improved to create New Socialist Men, sugar dumplings grow on trees and manna falls from the central committee. Then you wake up and go stand in bread lines.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

As for being able to enjoy leisure and economic security -- wouldn't a society that provided that to ALL its citizens be a desirable thing? Why restrict that to the wealthy few?

As for college -- what fiscal quicksand!

"Why restrict that to the wealthy few?"

What is your standard - an imaginary utopia, or the real world? Because to a greater or lesser degree the majority of Americans enjoy a level of leisure and economic security unprecedented in human history, and it's getting better all the time. Of course these are relative terms, and no one except the truly rich ever feel completely secure or that they have enough leisure. But your characterization of the U.S. hardly fits a society where half the households earn more than $46,326.

Regarding college - you have something there, although the balance of your statement on it is colorful polemics. The current higher ed model is broken and dysfunctional. Community colleges are a better model, but I think we can do much better by getting much more serious about distance learning using technology. Several high-quality Phoenix Universities on steroids is what we really need.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

I think the discussion a lot of people here really want to have is that beyond some reasonable level the pursuit of material things as an end in itself offends their aesthetic sense, and more substantively, on an ethical level it is not the way to acheive The Good Life.

That would be a good discussion to have, although there's probably not much to say given the way I've framed this - who could disagree? Of course the devil is in the details - what is a "reasonable" level of material goods? Finding consensus at the extremes is not hard - a mansion like Bill Gates' is absurd. Defining the "golden mean" - not too much emphasis on material goods, not too little - is where things get interesting.

Also, I suspect that most here would deny wanting to impose their own definition on others by force, but there may be government policies many favor whose primary effect is exactly that. That too is a discussion worth having.

 

[amicus]

I suggest that the films, “Logan’s Run” and to a lesser and more comic degree, “Demolition Man” reflect what the Socialists envision as the future of mankind.

Both films, in slightly different ways, portray a society with, ‘cradle to grave’ security in all things. No one works, there is little or no crime, all needs are produced by machinery, unseen somewhere, underground.

There are no obese or even unattractive people, no disease no psychological problems as all these negative traits have been bred out by genetic manipulation. Procreation, production of children is done in mechanical devices with eggs and sperm chosen from donors and normative pregnancies prevented and punished.

The sexual more’s strangely reflect the expressed opinions on many on the forum; sex is for pleasure and entertainment only, no formal, long term relationships are permitted, everyone just has a good ole time enjoying life in all aspects.

The society lives and exists in a totally controlled environment and atmosphere and food is grown by hydroponics, prepared and served automatically and all seems well.

By mutual agreement, acceptable by all, life ends at thirty years of age as each person is wafted away to some unexplained, nether land nirvana or utopia.

There are no politics, everything is decided by computer, and no source of stress of any kind as all needs are met and the entire society is stable and unchanging.

Pretty much what the left dreams of and expresses on this forum and in general.

What could possibly go wrong in this ‘wonderful’ socialist utopian society?

Amicus…

 

[gauchecritic]

A curious way to describe it. Consider the alternatives:

consider nothing. Take the cue of answer to five or six words from a largeish rant and note that the rest of the expurgated post is couched in quotes from science fiction. Lighten up.
Always remember posts by the gauchecritic are liable to be tongue in cheek or even just plain funny and sans smilies

A rather neat and concise parody of the untenable and often diametrically opposing consecutive meanderings of MiAmico is what you'll find.

Besides which your alternatives are neither believable nor vaguely alternative.

 

[gauchecritic]

I suggest that the films, “Logan’s Run” and to a lesser and more comic degree, “Demolition Man” reflect what the Socialists envision as the future of mankind.

Amicus…

Suggestion noted.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

consider nothing. Take the cue of answer to five or six words from a largeish rant and note that the rest of the expurgated post is couched in quotes from science fiction. Lighten up.
Always remember posts by the gauchecritic are liable to be tongue in cheek or even just plain funny and sans smilies

A rather neat and concise parody of the untenable and often diametrically opposing consecutive meanderings of MiAmico is what you'll find.

Besides which your alternatives are neither believable nor vaguely alternative.

Oh I do apologize - I am a fan of your dry wit. I should have picked up on the context.

 

[WRJames]

"Why restrict that to the wealthy few?"

What is your standard - an imaginary utopia, or the real world? Because to a greater or lesser degree the majority of Americans enjoy a level of leisure and economic security unprecedented in human history, and it's getting better all the time. Of course these are relative terms, and no one except the truly rich ever feel completely secure or that they have enough leisure. But your characterization of the U.S. hardly fits a society where half the households earn more than $46,326.

I'm not sure what characterization you are talking about. If you are talking about a nation where people have too much debt, too long a commute, and work too many hours -- that certainly seems a fair characterization of the life I see around me, where the average income is probably twice that figure. It's not that people don't have money -- what they lack is a sense of security in their lives. Their employment is not secure, and if they miss a beat, their debt burden is so high that they face ruin.

Regarding college - you have something there, although the balance of your statement on it is colorful polemics. The current higher ed model is broken and dysfunctional. Community colleges are a better model, but I think we can do much better by getting much more serious about distance learning using technology. Several high-quality Phoenix Universities on steroids is what we really need.

Polemics? Do you mean this?

so the debt burden our college graduates have built up already has condemned them to decades of servitude. Add to that the need to find some corporation to provide them with health insurance, and you basically have enslaved them before they get a whiff of freedom.

Well -- let's do a quick calculation. Four years at a private school will cost at least $120,000. Most schools, if they offere financial aid at all, do it with those easy to get student loans -- so $60,000 of debt would not be unusual, would it? That's a pretty big hole to dig out of. Even half of that is a lot for someone just starting out. And the need to find some way to get medical benefits is a very pressing one for recent college graduates.

 

[Liar]

I suggest that the films, “Logan’s Run” and to a lesser and more comic degree, “Demolition Man” reflect what the Socialists envision as the future of mankind.

In Demolition Man the world is pretty much run by a cartel of ogliarch mega corporations. Kinda the socalist's nightmare.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

I'm not sure what characterization you are talking about. If you are talking about a nation where people have too much debt, too long a commute, and work too many hours -- that certainly seems a fair characterization of the life I see around me, where the average income is probably twice that figure. It's not that people don't have money -- what they lack is a sense of security in their lives. Their employment is not secure, and if they miss a beat, their debt burden is so high that they face ruin.



Polemics? Do you mean this?



Well -- let's do a quick calculation. Four years at a private school will cost at least $120,000. Most schools, if they offere financial aid at all, do it with those easy to get student loans -- so $60,000 of debt would not be unusual, would it? That's a pretty big hole to dig out of. Even half of that is a lot for someone just starting out. And the need to find some way to get medical benefits is a very pressing one for recent college graduates.

I certainly won't disagree that many people make bad choices in terms of taking on debt to finance fripperies, like SUVs (instead of a used Taurus or Toyota sedan.)

An I agree with you completely about university. The absolute absence of any cost control in those institutions with the ensuing imposition of mountains of debt on student is an abomination. I'm really hoping that some high-quality University of Pheonix on steroids comes along and makes all those bastards obsolete and on the street.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

In Demolition Man the world is pretty much run by a cartel of ogliarch mega corporations. Kinda the socalist's nightmare.

Hi Liar.

Roller Ball too. The first one with James Caan was cool. I didn't see the other.

~~~~

I am going to try to duck out from this and the global trade thread now, because I've been stealing too much time from work and because I think I've done enough.

I always have this fantasy that someone will note all the heavy lifting I've done in these things presenting the free market point of view in a mostly civil manner more or less single handedly, and say, "Well done, Roxanne - even though I don't agree with you, you raised some good points, and weren't too obnoxious." I know that's not really realistic, but it describes how I feel at least (except I agree with me ).

 

[WRJames]

Hi Liar.


I always have this fantasy that someone will note all the heavy lifting I've done in these things presenting the free market point of view in a mostly civil manner more or less single handedly, and say, "Well done, Roxanne - even though I don't agree with you, you raised some good points, and weren't too obnoxious." I know that's not really realistic, but it describes how I feel at least (except I agree with me ).

Consider it done -- thanks

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Consider it done -- thanks

A fantasy realized! Thanks!

 

[matriarch]

What do you care how much a sports star or the CEO of a corporation takes home? If they provide good products and services for the price, patronize them. If they don't, don't. No need to be offended by the good negotiation skills of others.

I am offended, constantly by the obscene amounts of money paid to 'sports stars' for doing their job. Especially when I see the pathetic remuneration given to those people in society who really matter, the ones who keep society ticking over by taking ALL the risks, all the caring, all the responsibility for our wellbeing.

How can you possibly say it's not obscene when compared to what we pay doctors, nurses, firemen, policeman, hospital workers, social workers, home carers. THESE are the people we as a society should be valuing and setting up as role models...NOT the egotistical, over-pampered, constantly in your face moronic idiots who kick, throw or hit balls in one way or another.

It has nothing to do with good negotiation skills, it has everything to do with greed on mammoth proportions.