• All Purchases made this month instantly go into the draw to win a USD $ 100.00 credit to your HoP account.
 

Forums > Social Discussion > Communism? different way to be paid...

Login/Join to Participate
Page: 123
MiG
GOLD Member since Apr 2004

MiG

Self-Flagellation Expert
Location: Bogged at CG

Total posts: 3415
Posted:I've been thinking a bit, and toying around with an idea.

We're all familiar with the 'If i work x hours, i get y money'. That money, then, is used for all sorts of stuff.

Why not cut out the messy, tedious mucking around with money, and get paid in hours?

I work a 40 hour week, and get about AUD 250 (apprentice). Now, $250 isn't much to live on, after rent of $100pw is taken out, food is bought etc etc.

Howeve, if payment in hours took place, then i'd be getting paid just as much as anyone else that works a standard week, and thus would be able to afford stuff a bit easier.

now, this is almost definitely full of holes, so feel free to pick it to pieces, and i'll try and fill in the gaps smile


"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA

"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie

Delete Topic

Glåss
DIAMOND Member since Nov 2001

Glåss

The Ministry of Manipulation
Location: Bristol

Total posts: 2523
Posted:"Capitalism, is the exploitation of man, by man.

Communism, is the exact reverse."



smile

EDITED_BY: Glss (1136562879)


Delete

Tom_Shill
SILVER Member since Dec 2005

Tom_Shill

enthusiast
Location: Brighton

Total posts: 213
Posted:Yeah what you've basically got there is communism. If everything were priced in hours, say half an hour for a loaf of bread, 3 hours for a CD and so on, then your apprentice hours wpould be just as valuable as a lawyer's hours. One of the interesting things about that line of thinking is that without money, all financial jobs would be removed. The only jobs that would need doing would be in production and services (everything from law enforcement to sales). So all the unemployed financial people would be available to chip in in these areas. If you devided the massive new workforce by the number of work hours required in a week, we'd only have to work a couple of hours a week. Obviously this raises other problems like skill development and familiarity with the job, which wouldn't happen if you only worked a couple of hours. I won't go on because I've got to go and pick my Mum up, but this is interesting stuff to think about and to try to solve the problems it throws up. It's obviously a very fair system but it's hard to make it work.

Will those capable of telekinesis please raise my hand?

Delete

MiG
GOLD Member since Apr 2004

MiG

Self-Flagellation Expert
Location: Bogged at CG

Total posts: 3415
Posted:I think that financial jobs, per se, would remain, but they'd be temporal jobs, instead. You'd still have to balance the books at the end of the week, which would provide for the employment of the accountants etc.

Also, if production was boosted, due to the abundance of labour available, there'd be a greater number of products available, thus pushing the cost down.


"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA

"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie

Delete

Doc Lightning
GOLD Member since May 2001

Doc Lightning

HOP Mad Doctor
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA

Total posts: 13920
Posted:Ok, but then what's my incentive for going to school to get a more specialized job that means slaving my way through, say, college and medical school if I could get paid equally as much for...I dunno...driving a train?

-Mike )'(
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella

"A buckuht 'n a hooze!" -Valura

Delete

Dunc
GOLD Member since Aug 2003

Dunc

playing the days away
Location: The Middle lands

Total posts: 7263
Posted:Hey driving a train is pretty hard aparently....ya job snob! tongue

Good point tho, although I think that communism is ultimately a great system (before it's corrupted with ego's and greed of course) I think a lot of skills would be lost, but perhaps new skills gained?


Let's relight this forum ubblove

Delete

Sethis
BRONZE Member since May 2005

Sethis

Pooh-Bah
Location: York University

Total posts: 1762
Posted:A sense of personal achievement? A desire to better yourself? Maybe. I don't know. I'm happy getting paid what I do. Of course this might change once I start teaching wink

After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Delete

MiG
GOLD Member since Apr 2004

MiG

Self-Flagellation Expert
Location: Bogged at CG

Total posts: 3415
Posted:um, in many cases, you probably would get paid as much for driving a train. Some of the operators here, after a one year traineeship, are on stacks of cash (near 80,000 AUD/yr).

I don't suppose job satisfaction would count?


"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA

"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie

Delete

coleman
SILVER Member since Aug 2002

coleman

big and good and broken
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay

Total posts: 7330
Posted:job satisfaction and personal motivation maybe?



besides, a train driver is directly responsible for the lives of more people during a working day than a doctor is wink



but doctor mike is right i reckon - one of the major problems with communism is that is that once it has been established, those that are the 'cogs of the machine' (i.e. those that do the labour-intensive, low satisfaction jobs like working in factories or driving one of a fleet of delivery vehicles) become jealous of the social stature and respect that those with jobs that play a more 'important' role in the society have.



when everyone has the same amount of money, the deciding factor in where one is in the social pecking order simply finds another sponsor.





money is not the root of all evil - power is.



and communism does not distribute power any more evenly than democracy does...





cole. x


"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood

Delete

Stout
SILVER Member since May 2004

Stout

Pooh-Bah
Location: Canada

Total posts: 1872
Posted:This sounds like the same system we have now, just substitute the word hours for the word dollars. How would you spend these "hours" ?

Could you bank these hours? or invest them ? Or would they have to be "spent" within a specific period ?

Or is this just a roundabout way of suggesting you need a raise?


Delete

Glåss
DIAMOND Member since Nov 2001

Glåss

The Ministry of Manipulation
Location: Bristol

Total posts: 2523
Posted:How whould you include the earths natural resources into this?
How many hours would a lump of coal be worth?


Delete

MiG
GOLD Member since Apr 2004

MiG

Self-Flagellation Expert
Location: Bogged at CG

Total posts: 3415
Posted:@ stout: Yeah, you can do pretty much anything, really. I guess you could also just crank back money everywhere and say that everyone earns $1 per hour, but then you've got int'l conversion rates and stuff, that'd hopefully be avoided.

@Glass: you could say 'ok, we average 60 tons of coal per hour in production. Therefore, for every hour, we'll give you 30 tons' that should cover payment of workers (30 people in an hour getting 60 tons of coal? meh, it's an example)


"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA

"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie

Delete

Stout
SILVER Member since May 2004

Stout

Pooh-Bah
Location: Canada

Total posts: 1872
Posted:Really, money is just the barter system simplified, and easier to carry. I'm not on with the idea of carrying a bushel of carrots and a couple of chickens down to the mall when I need bed linens. Maybe the linen sellers don't want carrots, they want turnips.... Everybody wants money though.

So is this about Communism? where everybody gets paid the same? ( except of course for the few ruling class ) Communism is a great idea on paper, but IMO that's about it. I never hear about people risking life and limb to get TO countries like Cuba.

Or is this about living a more utilitarian lifestyle? That's easy, just do it.


Delete

MiG
GOLD Member since Apr 2004

MiG

Self-Flagellation Expert
Location: Bogged at CG

Total posts: 3415
Posted:Actually, if it was properly adhered to, it'd make the ruling class work that much harder. Instead of getting paid untold amounts of money for very little working time, they'd want to work more time to get more hours. But yeah, in the end, you'd probably all end up getting paid the same.

I really wouldn't mind a reintroduction of the barter/trade system, to be honest.

But then, i'm a bit dissatisfied with traditional capitalism. Mainly because i've always been close to broke so far in life.


"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA

"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:Written by: coleman
money is not the root of all evil - power is.




clap


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

NYC


NYC

NYC
Location: NYC, NY, USA

Total posts: 9232
Posted:We could pay in hours but then we could pay more hours if the hours of work were more societally demanded. We would allow products to raise and lower in the amount of hours needed to produce it adjusted for the demand for that product. Then we could standardize all of those work hours on some kind of scale and call it "Money". That would be great.

Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:I guess the idea, that there is no money (and no need for it) and not even a substitute and that all products are available to everybody - AND that all are on a consiousness-level, to utilize them and demand them in a "healthy" and "responsible manner...

*Oh, shut up Tom, you're drunk!*

OkOk


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

Mr Majestik
SILVER Member since Mar 2004

Mr Majestik

coming to a country near you
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear

Total posts: 4693
Posted:taking a bit more of a sociological perspcetive, i believe that the only reason communism doesnt work is beacuse people are socialised into some form of capitalism, and all the norms and values that intails. i've never heard of changes in society happening over night and i'd say that while communism isnt going to work tomorrow, it could definatly work after we're gone, as peoples norms and values slowly change.

(however, its just as plausable this will not happen, as earth may also be destroyed to make way for an inter galaxy highway)


"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley

Delete

Igirisujin
SILVER Member since Jul 2005

Igirisujin

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: Preston

Total posts: 2666
Posted:Written by:
The only jobs that would need doing would be in production and services (everything from law enforcement to sales). So all the unemployed financial people would be available to chip in in these areas. If you devided the massive new workforce by the number of work hours required in a week, we'd only have to work a couple of hours a week.



If this was true then what would we do in our spare time? then theres the issue of who will work to let us do these things to keep us entertained. You will have one group of people working very long hours such as anyone on public transport, and some people working much much shorter hours.

Is it fair that some have to work longer hours than others and to get paid the same?


Chief adviser to the Pharaoh, in one very snazzy mutli-coloured coat

'Time goes by so slowly for those who wait...' - Whatever Happend To Baby Madonna?

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:maybe people will work on subjects they define more "fun" than "work"...

there are people outta there who consider it "fun" to solve equasions and come up with numbers like.... errm: phi for example. Some love diggin in other peoples garbage (not by necessity)...

Is it fair that (in the same country) there are people who get lesser education and therefore chances than others?

As with the change through education: Already now there are tests available to find out someones talents and specify their talents... Many want to have more pay because they have no fun working...


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

MiG
GOLD Member since Apr 2004

MiG

Self-Flagellation Expert
Location: Bogged at CG

Total posts: 3415
Posted:Written by: Brit_Joe
Is it fair that some have to work longer hours than others and to get paid the same?



Um, you've missed the point a little. They don't get paid the same, because they're not working the same time. If one's working 40 hours, and the other is working 10, then the one that works 40 still gets more to spend.


"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA

"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie

Delete

linden rathen
GOLD Member since Mar 2005

linden rathen

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: London, UK

Total posts: 6942
Posted:Communism works on paper or when everyone is in fact equal

the downfall is that everyone isnt equal. People are differnt. We have equal rights but we are not equal.

There was a brillent short story i read a while ago about something similar to this. A society was made in which everyone was truely equal everyone was genetically modified to look the same and have the same intelligence, everyone took it in turns to work every job, there were no families etc. (families can create jealously etc)

the upshot was a load of robots.

i'd agree with doc in that if everyone was paid the same then people wouldnt be motivated to work in harder jobs. why should an air traffic controller (supposidly one of the most stressful jobs in the world) be paid the same as someone who mows lawns?

its a sad fact that you get rich and poor people - but it seems likely that life will remain like that. (NB by this i dont mean that people should live in poverty - just that some people will always have more money etc than others - people living in poverty should not happen)


back

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:what about the consciesness that you are contributing a lot to society? There are some people out there who work for almost no money in overseas assignments for - tsunami victims... just as an example. They hardly get anything - not to speak of "more"

Mind over matter, no?

@linden: IMO the story is very very very scary and a very odd "utopia" (I'm not questioning the briliance of the piece itself and the experience one has, while reading it)

The philosophy behind it seems very strange to me. A streamlined "designed" race? Personally I really appreciate that everyone looks different ("if everyone looked the same - we'd get tired of looking at each other..." some lyrics) and that everyone IS different.

And now to make a contradictory statement: Basically I get the experience that behind all difference that mankind inherits - it's still the same blood in their veins and the same consciousness in their brains... shrug

Some more lyrics:

Everybody run, everybody knows,
Everybody pull the gun, everybody rolls,
Everybody skip, everybody choose,
Everybody sticks and everybody loose,
Everybodys favours, everybody waits,
Everybodys gorgeous and everybody fakes,
Everybodys screaming, everybodys blind,
Everybody could be dying, anybody fine.

Everybodys jealous, everybody objects,
Everybodys anxious, everybody forgets,
Everybodys asking for everybodys aid,
Everybodys bonking unless everybodys paid.
(by Martin Solveig)

So tell me smile how different are we from each other?


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

ZeroG
SILVER Member since Dec 2005

ZeroG

Friendly Fire Fiddler
Location: Munich

Total posts: 103
Posted:I give you 2 basic economic reasons why.

Both are actually proof that communism (planned economy) doesnt work, ie provides worse results FOR ALL vs captalism (liberal individual economy).

1. Comparative cost (skill) advantage
If a fisherman fishes, a farmer farms and a cook cooks, ALL 3 will be better off in the end than if the cook fishes, the farmer cooks and the fisherman farms. Because each is best at his skills, so yields more in the same time than if he does a skill he cannot do.
Or if the DJ pois and the poier DJs, the party is lamer than the reverse scenario ...
Specialisation creates wealth for all, Ricardo has extended this economic law to a global model, explaing why NZ trades lamb with England providing machines, it is better for both.

2. Now would it be better to share the yield communally ?
No, as ALL will be worse off. This is why the water bill for a whole house IS lower in a house with individual gauges than if the house bill is simply split between all parties. Or a group down the pub drinks more when buying rounds vs when each orders individually.
Why ? Because each individual calculates individually. Assume a house with 8 parties, me one of them. I think about taking a bath (or ordering a beer). In the communal scenario, I only pay 1/8 of the bill, as it is split. In the individual scenario, I pay the full bath (beer). So in the group scenario a beer/bath is less expensive, so I am more inclined to take it.

All 8 parties think like that ... Adam Smith called this "invisible hand" leadership ...


Delete

ZeroG
SILVER Member since Dec 2005

ZeroG

Friendly Fire Fiddler
Location: Munich

Total posts: 103
Posted:To add for clarification.

1. Proof that specialisation pays off. Do fpr a living what you can do best and this creates the best results for all.

2. A mechanic that defines your salary individually creates the best result for all, including for you.

To add,

3. market pricing, supply vs demand, is the fairest way to define a price, with best results for all. Hence the auction principle, ie ebay resulting in lower prices than just a comittee (be it Microsoft or the politburo) defining how it should be ...


Delete

GeoffonTour04
SILVER Member since Nov 2005

enthusiast
Location: Oxford

Total posts: 360
Posted:if everything was worked out in hours, I wouldn't be able to get rich by the time I'm 30, which is something I strongly disagree with. The way money works at the moment is quite hilarious in places & not without its share of ridiculousness, but tbh it's quite nice to be able to scam a load of naive people for a little bit of money & make millions (a la ringtone companies)

Money is a means not an end, replacing it won't change the attitude most people have towards it, it'll just change the name.

and having everyone payed the same would so obviously not work it's not really worth discussing


Delete

MiG
GOLD Member since Apr 2004

MiG

Self-Flagellation Expert
Location: Bogged at CG

Total posts: 3415
Posted:@ Zerog: re point one - uh, i agree with that. at no point did i say 'we should all quit out jobs and become something completely different'. honestly, i'm a little confused as to what you mean by that first bit.

re point two - it would still all be individual. Maybe a better way to define it is this, which i think i said up there a way- Everyone gets one dollar/pound/yen/whatever per hour that they work. If you only work 10 hours in a week, you only get 10 hours of pay. If you work, say, as a doctor on call, you'd get as many hours as you were on call for. The mechanic still costs x many hours to go see, and you have to pay that yourself.

@Geoffontour: Why wouldn't you end up rich? Maybe you wouldn't have millions of dollars, but you'd have thousands of hours. Plus, there's nothing stopping you selling ringtones for 5 minutes a pop. It would probably make you a bit of money...

Now, i'm interested to hear exactly what is so obvious about people being paid the same that wouldn't work. If you read the first post, i asked people to pick it to pieces, so i could find and fix holes. Having you point out 'having everyone payed the same would so obviously not work it's not really worth discussing' isn't helping on that 'fill up the holes thing'.


"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA

"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie

Delete

i8beefy2
GOLD Member since Mar 2003

i8beefy2

addict
Location: Ohio, USA

Total posts: 674
Posted:And who regulates prices? Supply and demand actually works surprisingly well. Most problems occur when someone starts trying to "regulate" this. Supply and demand is self-regulating, and thus value free, unlike when people get involved.

Further, even though communism is a great theory for small communes with very basic infrastructures, on a large scale society with a very advanced infrastructure and so many consumer luxury goods, it just doesn't work. Even China, though communist in government, is Capitalist in economy.

Statements like "when egos and greed don't get in the way" are idealistic qualifications that have nothing to do with reality. Cause in reality, we are greedy and egotistical, and thus, ipso facto, it don't work. At least here in the West. The East has been working toward this goal for a long time, with mixed results. Still I'm gonna maintain that these are features of the basic human psychological reality and thus need to be accounted for or else you get problems, the likes of which happen in communism.


Delete

TheBovrilMonkey
SILVER Member since Sep 2001

TheBovrilMonkey

Liquid Cow
Location: High Wycombe, England

Total posts: 2629
Posted:Written by: MiG

Now, i'm interested to hear exactly what is so obvious about people being paid the same that wouldn't work.



For a start, it doesn't take into account the varying dangers involved with certain jobs.
If I was going to be working down a mine for fighting fires, I'd be wanting more money than someone who works behind a desk where the highest risk is one of papercuts.

Also, it doesn't take into account the training involved before you could even start some jobs.
Some jobs involve many years of expensive training (especially true here now that people have to pay their own university tuition fees).
Why would people bother if they knew that an unskilled labourer would not only be earning the same wage, but would also have 3+ years worth of earnings earnt instead of going to university?

In a similar vein, it doesn't take into account relative skill levels - why should a carpenter with say 35 years of experience earn the same amount as an apprentice?
The work they do is going to be far superior - they should earn a suitably higher amount for it.


But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake.

Delete

i8beefy2
GOLD Member since Mar 2003

i8beefy2

addict
Location: Ohio, USA

Total posts: 674
Posted:Similarly, I think most people are lazy, or rather are misers in their work ethic. We try and do as little as possible for the most reward. If the reward is standardized, the goal then becomes simply doing as little as possible. As happened in Russia for the most part.

That and everything the monkey said...

Any argument against this is gonna be idealistic, that is, "well it OUGHT to be this way" but not realistic "It IS this way". History speeks for itself on this one. Communism as an economical system doesn't work. Which is why most current communist gov'ts have capitalist economies.


Delete

onewheeldave
GOLD Member since Aug 2002

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield

Total posts: 3252
Posted:While I'm certainly not going to support communism, I think that a more half-way approach is a good idea.



One problem with money is that it can be accumalated to grossly unnecessary levels, and this is a major contributor to greed and exploitation.



Hours cannot be accumalated, so, even if, as some have pointed out, inequality would still exist, the distance between the rich and poor could not be that big.



There's the same number of hours in the week for everyone, there will be no 'hour millionares'.



Written by:


Also, it doesn't take into account the training involved before you could even start some jobs.

Some jobs involve many years of expensive training (especially true here now that people have to pay their own university tuition fees).

Why would people bother if they knew that an unskilled labourer would not only be earning the same wage, but would also have 3+ years worth of earnings earnt instead of going to university?







Because most of those who spend three years at university rather than on a building site, get a fairly interesting and enjoyable three years- many don't do it purely to get a 'better' job, they do it for the student lifestyle.



Also, many of the jobs reserved for graduates these days, could be done by trained monkeys smile the stuff learnt on the course bears minimal relationship to the actual job.


"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!

Delete

Page: 123