Explain to me why anyone wants to do difficult jobs under communism

Just curious, what social class you came from? Are you another suburban petite bourgeoisie? Have you entered workforce? Out of what personal life experience you make such statement, or if there is any? And most importantly, can you share your age bracket?

For communism to be achieved (from each according to his ability, to each according to his need) physical labor has to be automated. Until then incentives such as more labor vouchers, longer holidays etc will promote the incentive.

so money that expires

Because you get more money for doing those jobs.

You purchase things with them, sorta like money except they're non-transferable, are cancelled out upon being spent and can only be redeemed at publicly owned stores. Just think of it as the communist version of money.

The lower phase of communism is still communism.

Labour vouchers cannot circulate between people or firms and as such lack the defining attribute of money.

Because you make more money doing a shit job. Working on an oil rig pays better than becoming an artist. This allows you to afford luxuries others wouldn't be able to afford.

I am a student in my early twenties. Education is tax paid in my country so I don't have to worry about losing the roof over my head, but I don't have any more money than a jobless person.

Then how can communism be achieved in the near future? Technology is nowhere close to automate all physical labor. Even if it is, who does the jobs that are not physical labor?

For example I am a computer science major. Why do I major it? Because it has good job perspectives in an increasingly automated society. But why would I become a programmer in a communist society when becoming an artist is much easier and more fun? Longer holidays hardly make up for having a shittier job for most of the year.

no it isn't retard. the whole point of having stages is to reach communism.

Doesn't that defeat the purpose of communism? I thought private property is not allowed - so what the hell would I even buy in these stores?

This is why socialism is needed to get to communism.
Education, covering of the peoples needs and technological advancement for the people will gradually advance the society to communism.

private property =/= personal property. you don't go to a store to buy private property.

Private property in Marxism is the means of production. Any place that people work for a capitalist that is.
Personal property are things like your house, furniture, garden, clothes etc. All those things will be available to trade for with labor vouchers.

Except houses. Housing will be provided by the state.

So shitty money that expires*

Holy shit, this is what happens when you read lenin and stalin without having first read marx.

Now you're getting it.

The lower stage is a part of the transition to communism, which is the final stage. During the transition remnants of capitalist society will still remain until they are withered away, therefore it is not full communism. This is basic Marxism.

So what do you suggest? Sitting on your armchair until capitalism advances automation, while slaughtering the people and destroying our planet?

Exactly

The transitionary period is the DotP. Lower phase communism is not a transitionary period. It's a developmental period but it is still communism. This is basic Marxism.

Socialism isn't about 'equal wages', people who perform intellectually intensive or dangerous labour could receive bonuses such as a multiplier to their labor vouchers or better vacations, housing etc.

The point is that people should not be able to accumulate capital, own private property and exploit other people with it, not to make everything le equal

This. It never ceases to amaze me how often leninists misinterpret marx on this point.

Ok, even if we see it this way, what is the difference in practice?

So do you have a statistic to back that up?

You see, there is no want / don't want under communism. You either do what they tell you to do or enjoy getting the bullet / starve

being artist will not be available "job" in communism. If you want to draw stuff, you can do that after work.

Attached: a05d47818e3ff83dbd120110c2679f1979c5a3e64781537501016fe0585d40f2.png (700x453, 366.56K)

The lower stage of Communism is Socialism, which is the transition from Capitalism to Communism. The DotP is a part of Socialism.

Keep consuming all the cold war and Nazi propaganda man

You seem to think there is some kind of authority under Communism (which is stateless and classless), and are confusing it with Capitalism where you either work for most of your life or starve.

No, it's money that is tied to your person. The point is that other laborers can ensure that the people they're compensating with their labor, are the people that are actually working for them in return.

lol

Bullshit. Someone will have to draw all the state propaganda.

No you dolt, I was saying that both phases of communism are still communist. The early phase(s) of capitalism still had elements of the feudal/tributary mode of production (arguably still does in some places), but it was still fundamentally capitalist.

Once again, you realise there is a difference between Socialism and Communism, right?

So communist China and Russia were never actually communist?

Yes it is "Communist", but it hasn't reached Communism. We're not arguing that the strive towards Communism isn't Communist.

Absolutely degenerate. Art is something you do for fun and for the sake of art itself.

So, because we use Lenin's terminology to mean the same thing we are not pure enough? Book worship doesn't bring revolution.

They were Socialist. Communism is stateless and classless, and can only be reached through Socialism. How many times do people have to point this out? Not knowing the difference between the two is some boomer-tier shit.

The DotP still has things like commodity production, class antagonisms, wage labor, etc. Whereas the law of value wouldn't operate in lower phase communism and class would be abolished but people would still be remunerated for their labor in order to ration goods because productive forces haven't been developed to the point where one can freely take whatever they need.

This is the Lenin/Stalin/Soviet line of revision.

Oh, god not another one of those.
Fuck off to r/STEM and stay there.

I don't browse plebbit.

Attached: brailet5.png (645x729, 56.19K)

Skilled labor in socialism is compensated based on the average time it takes to become one.

No. I really don't care if you want to call lower phase communism "socialism". But the problem comes in when you also try to conflate the DotP with lower phase communism.

Gentoo poster is right.

Are you sure about that?

Even lenin only used that terminology as a concession to mass idiocy, saying that the lower phase was "often refered to as socialism". And it matters because these kinds of distortions change what people think socialism/communism is. It's part of the reason we have shitloads of dumb cunts thinking that "market socialism" is actually a thing rather than a contradiction in terms.

Being a programmer means that you can contribute to production, which means it will be payed as good as anything.

Being an "artist" as a "job" will not exist. People which receive full value of their labour can do socially necessary labour for a few hours a week and then do plays, draw and so on and on. Even today most artists work like this, with difference that lot's of people abaddon art because they can't make enough money to support themselves or are forced into creating pop shit to make money.

Attached: 403288a308d103fe46ec7636c6b48a07156f86fdd9ead2adc3cc4f19c83dbdbb.jpg (397x355, 86.96K)

Good time as any to start.

Programming is hard work, its difficult and it gives me a headache. I hate it. Most people would. Yet someone has to do this shit. Thats precisely my question, why would anyone study and do it for the rest of their lives when they could instead try to get easier jobs?

They never reached the lower phase of communism, as they were still a commodity producing society.

Incentives. Read Parecon by Michael Albret.

dude, I don't think you should be a programmer if it's giving you so much trouble.

t. actually full-time employed as programmer

Attached: a3fb4b963a79949cb3586e19997a5917bcb36f7056dbb633a52e3937eb841d76.jpg (780x599, 150.75K)

So why won't you right now you absolute fucktard?

I always have to laugh at people who go into programming for monetary gain rather than because they enjoy it. It doesn't even pay that well all things considered (at least not compared to other stem jobs). It always seems to be programmers as well, I've never spoken to a scientist who says they're in it for the money (probably because it pays fuck all lol).

You really ought to stop then bruv. You will not be able to tough it out until the end.
And if you do not actually enjoy it or are a "natural" at a programmatic way of thinking then you will never be more than a codemonkey tbh.

>>>/marx/6549
">As Marx noted in his critique of the Gotha programme, the worker under socialism "receives a certificate from society that he has furnished such-and-such an amount of labor (after deducting his labor for the common funds); and with this certificate, he draws from the social stock of means of consumption as much as the same amount of labor cost. The same amount of labor which he has given to society in one form, he receives back in another. Here, obviously, the same principle prevails as that which regulates the exchange of commodities, as far as this is exchange of equal values. Content and form are changed, because under the altered circumstances no one can give anything except his labor, and because, on the other hand, nothing can pass to the ownership of individuals, except individual means of consumption. But as far as the distribution of the latter among the individual producers is concerned, the same principle prevails as in the exchange of commodity equivalents: a given amount of labor in one form is exchanged for an equal amount of labor in another form."

This isn't even what I was arguing about in my post, I was telling this user that the USSR and China aren't examples of Communist society.

Fucked up with the formatting woops,

That sounds fucking awful user

But I am doing it for the money. And society benefits as a whole since my country is severely lacking engineers since not enough people are willing to study it. That is the benefit of capitalism: I am doing something that needs to be done that I don't really want to be doing because I receive money for doing it.

And there are far shittier jobs that people do because of money: oil rig workers, construction workers who have to work in dangerous areas, people have have to work during the night in general, people who have to fix sewer pipes…

M O N E Y

Might be different in other countries but here programmers and engineers are extremely sought after and well paid.

Honestly IMO this is fantasy thinking. If everyone did the jobs that they "enjoy" rather than the jobs that are well paid and need to be done then everyone would do the same fucking jobs, society can't be based around that. "Choose a Job You Love, and You Will Never Have To Work a Day in Your Life" is a foolish way of thinking because ultimately not everyone can do what they enjoy.

What baffles me is how perfectly fine they are with doing something they loathe for 80% of the rest of their lives just so they can get paid a bit more money (and even then, it's not like most programmers swim in gold) they'll barely be able to enjoy because they're always either at work or researching stuff because CS is a constantly evolving field and it's up to you to keep yourself up to date. If you don't, it's basically a sentence to burger flipping.

What exactly?

Ismail is exactly the kind of revisionist vermin I had in mind.

"the same principle prevails as that which regulates the exchange of commodities" does NOT mean the same thing as actual commodity production.

Enjoy wasting your life on something you hate, then. And thank your boss for robbing you while you're at it. See you some 30 years down the line and see if you're not just about ready to stick a gun in your mouth.
Jesus Christ, you're such a fucking joke

why would the individual produce more than they feel is necessary for their community?
isnt this the problem the soviet union had with farmers only producing enough to feed themselves?

Lol you made a mistake, programming is going to be one of the most aggressively automated lines of work in the coming years to erode your relatively well paid status as labour aristocracy, as is the case with all work that technological investment allows capital to cut costs on, and with that threat looming over your collective head your ability to bargain for wages will also be severely diminished for those of you that survive the automation. Now either continue to post in good faith or go back to r/STEM

After the working day I'm given a certificate and then I queue at the bread distribution bureau where I'm told to repeat a bunch of "cells within cells interlinked" mumbo jumbo at a computer and if I'm lucky I worked overtime so I could have a ripe banana with my loaf

in this automaton utopia what value will people have in society?

except you will not earn nice, comfy money. As pointed out, you will be just average codemonkey which might earn a little more than doing stuff you enjoy, but you will suffer a lot. And when financial crisis hits IT sector again, you will be among first companies will fire. Just because you live in liberal bourgeois democratic country where every citizen is equal in face of law, not everyone can do any job equally good.

I am programmer because I enjoy it. In my subjective opinion, even job like being waitress is harder job than programming.

The USSR did actually use commodity production. Its individual enterprises aimed to maximize profitability (especially in the post stalin years) because that is what they were told to do by the government. The fact that the profits went to the state as an owner or that the state subsedised "underperforming" enterprises does not change the fact that enterprises did not use directly social labour. They used money, to buy capital from other enterprises at the best price they could, to produce commodities to exchange for money in order to maximize their profitability, even if there was no owner in the end which took the money in their pocket home.
Oppose this to an actual labour voucher system, where all labour is directly social. Labour vouchers are not exchanged in any sense of the word, you do not sell products for labour vouchers, you also do no have an aim of maximizing some kind of bookkeeping number (profit), you do not buy and sell productive capital, you do not buy and sell labour. In a labour voucher system, there is no capital, there is no money with which to make money. Under the USSR, enterprises did have to use their capital to make more capital, or risk being shut down. The fact that prices were set centrally does not really change this. The fact that there were subsedies does not change this. Those enterprises used money, capital, to produce goods for exchange in the market, for which they received back money. It is capital. Labour vouchers do not do this, the labour is directly put into production, enterprises do not buy and sell anything, they just produce, and the vouchers only serve as a rationing tool.

Its litterally a quote from marx. Its just a labour voucher system, its pretty cool actually.

Not really. Programming is a tough fucking job if you do not enjoy it, and people who do not enjoy programming but program are, in my experience, always people who cannot code for fucking shit.

You understand that goods purchased via labour time are on average cheaper because in addition to "prices" being forced to conform to production inherently over time as we collectively as a society will democratically control our own workplaces we can choose to invest in technology to improve efficiency for the betterment of the whole rather than reinvesting in whatever makes the most profit for a selective few. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Sorry but I'm not going to write out a paragraph explaining commodity production when it's been done a million times. This does not make the argument any less valid, especially since he's quoting Marx, not Deng Xiaoping or any other "revisionists".

Oh no lad, I'm not talking about some theoretical utopia, I'm talking about actual, existing capitalist society right now, all that hard work you've been doing to secure your well paying job is fucking worthless to capitalists, they only see you as a tool to rent, it's a hell of a lot cheaper to automate white collar work because the manufacture, production & distribution of robots is a lot harder than that of AI, which is simple and can be adopted and reproduced with almost 0 costs once developed. It is in your interests to become a Communist because you will be compensated to a greater degree as a worker who contributes to society compared to the whore that capital sees you as.

It's not that this system doesn't already exist with the "certificate" being ordinary money, but it's just the centralized nature of it that reminds me of dystopian fiction. In real capitalist life you can ditch the state currency for a different one, or ditch the bread store for a different one, or ditch the job for a different one. Basic liberties which a centralized system is not going to afford you.

I don't care for marx at all I'd swap him for bakunin

tbh the way I see it a persons worth in society is determined by their occupation (how they contribute to society) and this has been the way since the days of Sumer
if automation replaces the needs for workers what value does a human have in society?

Oh I'm well aware that it's a marx quote, I'm saying he's deliberately misinterpreting marx to justify his dengist autism (and so are you).

Breadlines was a modern phenomenon in the USSR, due to revisionism leading to the disruption of socialism.

Could this be the effect of whatever caricature of the USSR you have in mind?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union#/media/File:Population_of_former_USSR.PNG

Ah yes, I can just go into a store and pay with dollars instead of euros. Oh wait, I can't. Ah yes, I can just go to a different bread store. Oh wait, theres only like 4 supermarket chains and private bakeries are too expensive. Such choice. Oh yes, go to job land where jobs grow on trees and just get a new one. Oh wait, under a labour voucher system I would actually be in control of my job.

Attached: they choose it.gif (245x229, 714.05K)

Then why isn't everything already automated?

Because its not so fucking easy to automate everything. And while they would surely love to replace me, your automation utopia is not gonna arrive any time soon. Most labor will not be automated in our lifetime.

I'm not justifying "dengism", I'm justifying the Soviet Union.

Damn thats a bleak fucking outlook on reality. Do you see in yourself nothing but a slave to production?

>b-b-but we are not living in REAL CAPITALISM
/liberty/ is just another infantile disorder. Get a job.

Attached: 3da6aa988a2927537957133f30a6b462eddbcef61e9d312fb7725d8fe630fb4e.jpg (750x745, 72.5K)

Are you seriously arguing that under communism/socialism people would have more choice regarding their jobs?

more choice due to better universal education, but more importantly, more control

Of course they would… Why would you think otherwise?

The things stopping you from choosing another job in capitalism is loss of wage and unavailability of jobs.

I'm not asking how I see myself
I'm asking what inherent value can you place on an existing human that has nothing to contribute to society and is a drain on resources?
say theres a thousand people in a village, 9/10's of them are farmers who produce food for the village
automation rolls in, they no longer need to produce food for themselves anymore
what inherent worth do those 9/10th's now have to the village?

Yes I am.
What choice do you currently have in your workplace, or over all of the means of production?
Do you even have a single bit of influence over how to produce or what to produce? About how to organize things in your workplace? No! You just do what your boss tells you. Do you have influence over what society ought to produce, what we should invest in? No! The capitalists decide it, and they decide what is best for them, not for you. Under socialism/communism you do have control over your workplace, you do have control over what to invest the product of society into, over what to produce, over how jobs ought to be structured.

Uhm…

Attached: 4chan is dead.jpg (1779x723, 315.54K)

FTFY
You can't just take away most people's disposable income without some kind of backup (which currently doesn't exist) or it's 1929 all over again.
Read a book, brainlet.

wow, nice self btfo right there.
Popularity with the normal crowd means it is dead

Which was increasing revisionist for most of its existence. They weren't even trying to do away with commodity production after stalin died, just slowly reverting to fully fledged capitalism.

You equate production with contribution. Society is not the boxes on your supermarket shelve, society is not the expensive cars in the dealership. Society is people, and being part of and contributing to society goes beyond just growing food.
And thats not even going into the whole false scenario you setup where if we reduce the work by 90% that somehow means 90% of people are unemployed, rather than that all people work 90% less, as people can divide the burden of the work, they can retrain into other areas that were not automated to relieve their burden.