Question About Innovation

Angel Brooks
Angel Brooks

So, we all know that under (Marx's) Socialism, workers are awarded labour vouches depending on the amount of labour the contribute that they can spend on luxuries. I'm wondering if innovation - essentially having a good idea - qualifies for a larger share of labour vouchers. For example, if one worker has an idea for a new type of really useful product and then him and the rest of his factory produce it. The other workers wouldnt of been able to make this without the one worker who had the idea, so it's fair to say that he should receive additional labour vouchers on top of the ones he got for his labour, right?

How would the amount of labour vouchers be determined for something that isnt actually tangible?

Other urls found in this thread:

marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/

Mason Sullivan
Mason Sullivan

we all know that under (Marx's) Socialism, workers are awarded labour vouches depending on the amount of labour the contribute that they can spend on luxuries

Marx explicitly criticised this kind of labour-token system, as it was proposed by Proudhon and some of the English socialists in 'The Poverty of Philosophy'.

In a nutshell, it's still based on the labour theory of value, which is the basis of value under capitalism, not socialism. For example, criticising the labour token model, he says:

It will think it very naive that M Proudhon should give as a "revolutionary theory of the future" what Ricardo expounded scientifically as the theory of present-day society, of bourgeois society, and that he should thus take for the solution of the antimony between utility and exchange value what Ricardo and his school presented long before him as the scientific formula of one single side of this antimony, that of exchange value.

Parker Johnson
Parker Johnson

leftcoms lied to me

Nolan Gomez
Nolan Gomez

Marx explicitly criticised this kind of labour-token system

Critique of the Gotha program disagrees.

Asher Martinez
Asher Martinez

DOUBLE BULLSHIT.

Marx wasn't against labour vouchers per se, he merely pointed out that the following combination doesn't work:
1. Tokens for doing work that can't be used to obtain means of production, consumer items only.
2. The prices are rigged exactly according to work-time calculations (may also account for intensity of work, point is, it may NOT be adjusted up or down when there is a mismatch between supply and demand).
3. The economy is very decentralized.

Marx himself said pro-voucher stuff in his critique of the Gotha programme.

So that's bullshit number one, you are bullshitting about Karl Marx. Then there is the part of your post that corresponds to what Marx said, namely what Marx said about Proudhon. However, Marx was bullshitting about Proudhon and you copied that bullshit, making your post double bullshit. Proudhon did believe under mutualism prices ratios would come closer to labour-input ratios, he did not advocate for directly fixing prices like that.

Brandon Scott
Brandon Scott

that was an early phase of communism/socialism tho.

Daniel Lopez
Daniel Lopez

And that's exactly what I'm asking about in the OP.

Luke Gutierrez
Luke Gutierrez

was it? I wasn't really responding to the OP. All I'm saying is that saying "Marx is pro labor voucher because Gotha" like some are saying here doesn't seem to hold up because he said he was talking about an early phase of communism when he discussed a voucher type system iirc

Ryan Wood
Ryan Wood

For example, if one worker has an idea for a new type of really useful product and then him and the rest of his factory produce it. The other workers wouldnt of been able to make this without the one worker who had the idea, so it's fair to say that he should receive additional labour vouchers on top of the ones he got for his labour, right?
No. People do not get paid to be an idea guy. Ideas alone are worth NOTHING.

Jose Lee
Jose Lee

Forgot your flag

Zachary Martinez
Zachary Martinez

LTV is shit, more at eleven

Luis Ramirez
Luis Ramirez

not wanting to pay fuckheads just for throwing ideas out there without them putting in any of the work makes me a cambodian mass murderer

???

Elijah Reed
Elijah Reed

Also, just so you fucking know, people are not paid for ideas in capitalism either. You cannot pattent ideas, only designs and inventions. For every useless idiot with grand ideas you have a thousand others. One of those thousand actually MAKES the product. That person has skills such as designing, engineering, programming or any other skill needed to make the product.

Everyone in the history of mankind who ever had an idea for "oh this would be could" has had thousands of others just like him. Nobody magically has ideas for revolutionary technology. The only thing that happens is that people put in LABOUR and WORK to design and engineer a new technology.

And after someone usefull actually made something that took effort and labour, like someone inventing a new battery, they deserve reward for that work. Making something once does not entitle you to anything made using what you made. A hammer maker does not get a cut of every job a carpenter does. A designer will not get a cut of the labour of the workers who put the batteries together if he doesnt make them.

inb4 but capitalism hurhur
Most inventions are done by companies who pay their engineers fixed salaries. The engineers and inventors do not get a cut from their design.

Levi Perez
Levi Perez

thinking
not work
Let me guess, tradesman?

Blake Hill
Blake Hill

Mate. "Dude this would be cool" is not work. Ask anyone who actually designs and does shit what they think of "idea guys".

A description of a problem with a non-researched "solution" scribbled on the back of a napkin is not fucking work.

There is a MASSIVE difference between doing something that requires actual labour, such as designing, CAT, calculations, research, or the "work" OP is talking about, which is just clueless fucktards pretending their weirdly worded complaint is worth anything.

Nathaniel Edwards
Nathaniel Edwards

And to repeat my other post better worded:

Once you finish something, you get paid for your labour. Transaction if over, you do not get property rights over the things you are already paid for.

Nathaniel White
Nathaniel White

I suppose the question does rest on magic
if one worker has an idea for a new type of really useful product and then him and the rest of his factory produce it. The other workers wouldnt of been able to make this without the one worker who had the idea
Then who was design?

Cooper Fisher
Cooper Fisher

Who made the design
Lets see
one worker has an idea for a new type of really useful product
Seems nobody did. See what I mean? The worker in this example wants property rights and ask money for using his idea when its nothing more than an idea.

Lucas Lopez
Lucas Lopez

A description of a problem with a non-researched "solution" scribbled on the back of a napkin is not fucking work.

What do you have against the Laffer Curve user?

Nolan Parker
Nolan Parker

But apart from all this bullshit about you thinking that an idea is usefull, lets go to this fucking point then:

The other workers wouldnt of been able to make this without the one worker who had the idea, so it's fair to say that he should receive additional labour vouchers on top of the ones he got for his labour, right?

Which is fucking wrong! They need each other. The inventing worker needs the workers just as much as the workers need the inventor.

Owen Myers
Owen Myers

No, ideas, much like capital, are the property of the state.

No your place, retard.

Benjamin Carter
Benjamin Carter

No, ideas, much like capital, are the property of the state.
Do you mean: Society ?

Jaxon Torres
Jaxon Torres

This is actually a prime example of bullshit ideas.

Wow guys guess what there is more investment and sales when more money is left is the system so if you tax too much you actually get less money but if you tax too little you dont benefit from it.

Jace Cooper
Jace Cooper

How would the amount of labour vouchers be determined for something that isnt actually tangible?
You have to spend time coming up with ideas, fam. You'd simply get "paid" for the time spent designing a particular thing, much in the same way that scientists and engineers are paid for their time today.

Jesus christ, I know left/pol/acks tend to be illiterate, but this is beyond the pale. You faggots haven't even read critique of the gotha program. It's not like it's a difficult or long read, it's a fucking journal article for fuck's sake.

marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/

Jason Harris
Jason Harris

Laffer cuvre
Why are neoclassical models so dumb?

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Confirm your age

This website may contain content of an adult nature. If you are under the age of 18, if such content offends you or if it is illegal to view such content in your community, please EXIT.

Enter Exit

About Privacy

We use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners.

Accept Exit