Hello friends, i've been a libertarian/conservative for my entire life (i grew up in a comfortable middle class environment, with low crime etc) I recently graduated from college and got my first job at an office. Long story short this shit sucks and is retarded.
I hear that there is a system where I don't have to work in this stupid retarded office anymore and get stay home and play vidya as much as I want. Can someone explain how that system works and how we can implement it?
There will not be vidya in communism.
OK so it's called communism! How do we implement it?
marxists.org
www.thebreadbook.org
fuck wrong pic, meant to post this pdf
Have you tried the prison system? You can join it by stealing as much shit as possible. Its a win-win. If they don't catch then you get to chill and play vidya. If they do catch you they pay your rent and give you free food!
UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME
N
I
V
E
R
S
A
L
It's like communism but I don't even have to give back.
Madsick, fam.
It's called "capitalism". It works by moving wealth from working people to leeching freeloaders. Good news is that it is already implemented!
Nice.
Yeah, but OP is a fag from the "middle class". Meaning he is either a petit-bourg or labor aristocrat, so that type of leeching is out of his reach.
(OP)
Welcome to the party, comrade. And also to the rest of your life doing meaningless work that not only alienates you from your labor, but from your community and society in this grand project we call capitalism.
As far as overcoming it, we're still trying to figure that out. Last experiment lasted about 70 years but I'm getting psyched for the next round since we have all this newfangled technology that should make central planning easier.
I do not like this meme
Then he can get unemployment benefits, it works in similar way.
Fully automated luxery communism. Some day in the far future.
But in the short term we could abolish most jobs that exist right now (lots of bullshit jobs and industries such as advertising, corporate lawyers, stock traders, etc), reducing the workload without reducing income (since bullshit jobs dont produce anything usefull), in addition to democratizing and reforming the work that is left over to not suck massive horsecock.
Also this. We can effectively centrally plan now because we have cool new cutting edge technology that can plan a whole continents economy effortlessly like cat5 ethernet cables and a slightly beefy gamingpc, which is really all the power you realistically need to compute production quotas and resource distribution numbers.
If this is true, why didn't anybody do it already?
it has been tried in Chile, but porky thugs destroyed it being the barbarians they are
elsewhere capitalists just have no interest in it, or there is no material base like in the DPRK
I'm talking about the new modern pc version.
Sound like every dude with a PC can do it.
paul cockshott has made some planning software and I'm sure other projects exist, they will just never be funded and implemented because why would porkies want them?
You can self-fund yourself if you create a program to manage input & output in a computer.
This is how programming works.
i mean funded on like a government level. okay i've developed an economy planning program, what do i do with it now? email it to donald trump hoping he is so impressed with my mad skills that he immediately implements it by decree?
the USSR had a command economy based on paper and counting beads, it's kind of plainly obvious we can have a computerized plan that is 1,000,000 times more efficient today. the problem isn't the means to do it, but lack of interest.
No you sell that progam and make money with it.
who's buying?
There is no market for it.
that would be "being born rich in the current system"ism.
You could just say "worker who gets paid a lot" you know
What's wrong with the term 'labor aristocracy'? It's just another useful concept as is petit-bourgeoisie, proletariat etc.
The labor aristocracy is a real thing, the problem is that a lot of people (especially third worldists) use it to mean "any worker who isn't living in abject poverty". This dilutes its meaning and makes it almost useless for class analysis.
Impressive you used almost every single word wrong. "middle class" is still a prole, the only ones who think otherwise are deluded "middle class" people who think they're better off than they actually are.
There is no such system.Someone always has to do the shitty jobs. Why not you?
Bye bye
What is far more horrifying for reactionary stooges like you is that we will view every job as a shitty job at the present moment; we understand that the point is not to remain at the same level of prowess and progress but to keep getting better. It will be known that there are infinitely more problems to deal with and overcome but it is this which makes us live and grow.
Lmao what? How can a supposed intellectual who specifically sets out to debunk socialism fail this bad? Why does he think that socialism requires everybody to have partial ownership of everybody else, and to physically monitor them? I swear to god these people read Locke and they take the concept of self-ownership literally, but what's more they seem to assume that there needs to be a concept of ownership of personhood at the basis of every system. They also assume that self-ownership and socialism are incompatible, which isnt the case.
It's misrepresented as an argument, like said, it seems to shift all the blame from the capitalist class onto the 1st world proles. Instead of saying "capitalism and the capitalists caused this mess" it seems to imply "YOU, the 1st world McDonald's worker, caused this mess because you benefit from the cappies from the scraps they give you" so you could see how this would piss people off. It's like the identity politics of class analysis, "you're not allowed to criticize capitalism unless you're a 3rd world somalian whose labour is being extracted and you only make $1 a year; check your wage, labourlord"
But that's not what it means at all and I've never seen it used to blame proles in the West.
That is not what I had on my mind you dense idiot. While central planning can be easily superior to state of things we live under now, there is no chance capitalists are going to support it.
Could you give some examples of bullshit jobs? Not doubting their existence, just eager for good examples.
I was agreeing with you. However, Capitalists already support central planning by buying from Amazon on a regular basis.
Imi not him, but consider this, people have to work in offices at tasks they could do from home, this causes
1. Service industry to require more jobs to feed these people lunch
2. Automobile industry to produce more cars, have more mechanics, more oil use (which props up the oil industry).
3. Road maintenance industry to need to repair roads more often, which means more people needing lunch and more road repair vehicles that need maintenance and oil as well.
And who builds these office buildings? Construction, a whole other thing.
If society tried to remove all unnecessary jobs and restructure itself with a minimum labor requirement whos to say what percent of modern day labor could be eliminated over night.
top lel. Amazon might be efficiently planned firm, it however doesn't mean it's example how company under centrally planned economy would look like.
Here: this is a better explanation of what i mean. Read Cockshott.
youtube.com
22:50.
The system is capitalism except you need to make your own business, transform it into something successful and then collect passive income / build capital from capital.
The make your own business is the hard part though and requires 60-80 hours a work a week at the beginning.
That as well :)
But you can become rich as well in current system and do the same stuff. Though it requires you to actually put in a lot more effort and intellect than the ones currently born into capital, for probably less overall in the short term.
People want the bullshit jobs though, how else would they distinguish themselves if it wasn't for work? Bullshit jobs are mandatory to have in a society.
If he can do that, that's great for him, but most people in a capitalist economy can never get to that position. For anyone to be in that position requires making money off the labor of others.
Is the Invisible Committee basically our Era's Situationist Internationale
And is that pic of Crying Fox News alex jones meme man holding that up real?
You'll see it with sakaiist types a lot.
where do I go to meet those
go find idpol MLs on twitter, bonus points if they're dengist
The Invisible Committee is one of those texts that I think the right-wing thinks is a guidebook for the 21st century left, but no one on the left has actually read it.
And yeah it's real.
What did he mean by this?
you couldn't make up more shit if you tried
When someone uses the term they're usually referring to the income of a person that is above an arbitrary "poverty line" and below some other arbitrary "line" that defines the "upper class". I guess I was going too far in assuming that OP came from a family background of labor aristocrats or petit-bourgeoisie, but that's usually what it takes nowadays to hit that sweet spot in income.
real talk
"central planning" is only half the problem
the second half is allocative efficiency
sure, in "the far future" you could fabricate an entire house or train at the press of a button
but the non-labour factors of production still need to be allotted
who gets to make what and who decides what gets made and what their relative value is?
no authority can allocate on the basis of need like the free market
you can't achieve price discovery without a market
and price discovery is the basis of the rationing function of free market that resolves the problems of who, what and how much for?
the old "Soviet left foot trainer" problem isn't resolved by making trainers easier to make which is all that technology does
the same principle applies to most consumer goods (health, food, transport, amenities) which central planned economies are demonstrably not competitive at producing
you'll be driving a self-driving yugo, living in an underwater kommunalka and living off cloned oats
plus ça change
then demonstrate it.
are these supposed to be bad things
No they're not you dense burger. Your retarded work culture makes robots out of men and forces them to thank you for the rare opportunity of data entry
every contrast set between command economies and market economies of similar size in the last century
allocation on the basis of command does this:
not if your goal is sustenance
i mean to highlight contra that the bare minimum expectation is all techno communism improves on old communism
the real price of all things things will slowly inflate too but that's happens in modern capitalism too so I won't hold that against you
not if your goal is sustenance
1) Why would we be living in underwater cans and driving automatic cars
2)Planned economies are miles more sustainable than unplanned economies
3)Cloned, or at least lab grown, foodstuff will be inherently more sustainable than current agricultural techniques
4)Inflation is a construction in order to maintain a positive rate of profit