Help me out Holla Forums

and what about

so do you consider it a bad argument your because i don't paint myself in good light in a hypothetical scenario?

the main thesis if you haven't figured it out yet is that who is going to give my ostentatious things because i can claim that i need them and who they are to tell me that i don't really need them?

what if because of my severe claustrophobia i need to travel in a huge yacht or a ferry that i designed to fit my "needs"?

who is going to build this for me?

when haven't reached lights out yet

There are already lights out factories.

What the fuck does that even mean? How can I argue with you if you don't give specifics? You can bluster about "oh nothing you guys make is right enough for my incredibly autistic fabrication'' until you're blue in the face, that doesn't change the fact that you're not actually saying anything.

What do you bring to us in this scenario? This relationship has to be a two way street or you just aren't getting shit. Why should people make a yacht and mansion for you?

If I'm entitled to the fruits of my labor, who is going to give the cripples, retards and pregnant women a cut of their profit?

Which part of "there are more flats/houses than people" did you not understand?

If you are a shitty programmer you are a shitty programmer.

you should be banned and sent to a gulag, tbh

can't you read?

why shouñd i bring you anything?

i should focus on developig the ebst of my abilities, and if one of my abilities is doing something that does bring you anything so what?

what if the best of my ability is to catch butterflies?

so it is even worse than capitalist "free" countries where in order to get "free" health care you don't have to do anything, in this communist society i have to do something? cmon

what part of "it doesn't fit my needs" did you not understand?

those houses makes my claustrophobic so i need a absurdly huge mansion in order to fit my needs

then i wouldn't doing the best of my abilities

I ask you the same question.

No need to be autistic about this. "Everyone will get what they need while they contribute what they can"

There is a question of "what do people need" and it is worth looking at, but it's stupid to say that "because this is an ambiguous question that makes healthcare, food, water, and shelter something that shouldn't be provided even though we can easily do so"

This is on the same tier as republicunts who argue against socialized healthcare by "well what if I don't want healthcare!"

But, who will provide it for them?
Why should workers suffer for none workers?

non*

because you aka the society should satisfy all my needs

isn't this was marx said?

im not saying this

my question basically divides in 3 questions

what constitutes the the needs of the people?
is society going to provide the needs of the people?
and specifically who is going to provide the needs of the people?

because they are supposed to provide their needs

like for example a disabled kid should be get his wheelchair or something to help them
and i guess many people would agree with this

but what about if you push it a bit further an claim some ostentatious things like have been doing? why are these things not considered needs by more people?

We can provide basic needs right now to everyone. Food is insanely cheap to produce and huge amounts are wasted, there are more empty houses than homeless people, dirt cheap medicine is expensive to produce, etc.

It's cheap to produce but there is still labor involved with it. Medicine, housing, plumbing, food, electricity. All of this seems like a basic need, now why should I fix your plumbing or work in a mine so you can sit at home and be a cripple, or pregnant. If I own my labor, who will produce for those that can't? For example, retarded children, Cancer patients, old people. They all need something like a care giver. Yet, these people cannot give anything to the care giver. Why should he/she take care of them?

Same reason you'd care for your elderly mother or a friend who is ill

If you're planning on giving the excess resources to people who did not contribute in obtaining them, that's just like capitalism. But now, instead of a CEO benefiting from my labor, a bunch of hobos and tards are.

If you ask for ridiculous things that no reasonable person can require, society can just tell you to fuck off once it has accommodated you past its tolerance limit. People like you would be too scarce to make a real difference. Perhaps you could still get your snowflake mansion, but it wouldn't be given to you nillywilly, at least it shouldn't. In any case basic needs like food and shelter differ from ostentatious needs like a specially designed mansion. If you're that claustrophobic you should be in a mental institution anyways. You would get food, clothes and such as much as you like, but there won't be people owning huge ferries and yachts on their own unless they've contributed something substantial to society. At least that's how I imagine it would be.

The point of communism is that we'd developed technology enough to cover production needs. The people who can't contribute would be taken care of by those who can, either voluntarily or perhaps with some sort of incentive program within the community.

Because you are incapable of differentiating between goals and methods.

When you have nine houses and a mansion that you should distribute among ten people, it is obvious that the guy who gets a mansion will be the one who is the most important to society, not the one who is the loudest whiner.

Marx was not suggesting to give the mansion to a whiner. Marx meant is that you should strive towards being able to give everyone who wants a mansion.

So, what you're saying is I still won't actually own my labor. Now instead of Corporations profiting from my labor, the "community" will be. I'll just pretend not to be able to work then.

Socialism is the system where you own the fruits of your labor. Communism is the system where there will be no need for labor.

Under Socialism work is mandatory. Not working is punishable by law, just like desertion.

Under Communism work is a hobby. Not being allowed to work is a punishment in itself.

but then who defines what is a need?

you just triggered my Foucault

so just like capitalism?

no, is even worse because in a capitalist countries you can at least live by charities

Leftists are known for sending people to mental institutions for simple political disagreements.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sluggish_schizophrenia

this is one of the most sadistic thing i have read

is like zizek said "you don't only have to do something but you have to like it doing it"

and zizek was talking about capitalism lmao

You need to stop confusing Communism with Marxism Leninism, or confusing that Marxism Leninism wasn't an attempt at communism.

You need to, in general, stop.

PTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Food_Programme

What are you gonna do, send me to an institution for trumped up psuedoscienceyou people pulled out of your collective asses like Lysenkoism?

"b-but it's just a transitional phase!"

The transitional phase is the closest you have ever gotten.

Oh, gee, I didn't know being allowed to shitpost on 8ch was just a horrific punishment!

If any of you communists believed your work = god spiel, you'd be out working to usurp capitalism right now. You just want useful idiots to do the job for you so you can slide in, become the ruling bureaucratic elite - i mean, the ''vanguard', and stomp your bootheels all over everyone's faces for fun.

You misunderstand - under a communist system where work has nothing to do with one's ability to acquire goods and sustenance, the only reason people would work is for satisfaction and prestige - the way individuals today work on model trains, or paintings, or science, or furry porn. Under such a system, not being allowed to work would be a punishment because it would be denying you a means of spiritual fulfillment, which would be the purpose of all work under a communist system.

So, who is going to fix burst pipes for a hobby, take care of retards, etc. Nobody likes working, so nobody would.

I am implying that. Yes.

Who is you people? I'm not a marxist leninist, but I can talk to you all day about Foucault my lad

For the same reason people take minimum wage job you horse''s ass. Shit needs to get done.

Who will provide then? You really think the majority of people want to do more than smoke weed, fuck and eat? Even if there were some autists who wanted to work on machines and computers. They're far too few, not to mention that no one would want to do work like plumbing or cleaning shit from old people.

See

Aren't you the fag who spammed porn in the election thread

People take those jobs so they can feed themselves, not out of some obligation to society.

Are you retarded?

Economic basis is the same. Absolute and total majority of population must work to live. What kind of miracle are you expecting?

Difference is that theft of your work is punishable by law under Socialism.

> no, is even worse because in a capitalist countries you can at least live by owning wage slaves
ftfy

"Oh, no. Somebody might see my drawings AND GET ENJOYEMENT HE DIDN'T PAY FOR."

You have mush for brains.

Your idea that "You really think the majority of people want to do more than smoke weed, fuck and eat?" is fucking preposterous

There's plenty of people who are fulfilled and happy in their work. The idea is to let everyone have an opportunity to find such an occupation instead of having shitloads of people operate a lever all day to produce planned obsolescence widgets.

A communist society can only emerge when we have a high degree of automation and technological advancement, when all of society would be able to be supported materially from the effort of a handful of people who maintain and direct the machinery that does the actual work. Even if those jobs suck, people would be drawn to them nevertheless because being the guy who ensures that everyone can eat, have homes and whatnot would carry an immense amount of prestige. You'd basically be swimming in pussy.

It's the same as with the people who grow our food today - in previous ages, everyone spent most of their time growing food. Now, it's barely like, what, 8% of the population? And the most miserable necessary jobs would probably be the most respected ones too, which would probably make them something of a draw.

Perhaps you would like to take care of your mother, but I would not help you with that. I would also not give you my labor for nothing in return. Unless you can fix burst pipes, run your electricity plants, farm your own food, labor will be a necessity and someone will have to do it.

If you have socially necessary work people don't want to do, then economic relations are not described by model of Communist economy.

Why are you trying to use pieces of one economic model in another economic model?

Then you are a failure

What if what fulfills me in life is pulling a lever all day to produce widgets (not that factory work is ever like this, and it's clear from this one statement you've never worked factory in your entire life - typical 2016 'communist')?

Also, historical socialist states regularly employed a third to half of their population in agriculture simply because collectivization isn't efficient :^).

You've never worked a factory job either you fucking fibber

I grew up poor in LA you want to know about fucking hard times. Get the fuck out of here with this snide shit

then you are wrong

so let's say all the people decide to become iceskaters

then who would be my mansion?

also what if i don't want to work? im going to get punished for that even though not working gives me my spiritual fulfillment? can't i be an ascetic?

do you think people clean toilets because they like to around shit?

they do it becasue that's the only thing they can do to don't starve to death

but if you have a society that no ones needs to work in those things to eat, then nobody is going to clean toilets

so we are going to live in a country full of shitty toilets

in a capitalist society, yes

but in a communist society like marx envisioned "a society where technology and social organization had substantially eliminated the need for physical labor in the production of things,"

then why should i work then?

that is not what i was talking about and you know it

you said that you must work is a hobby and that not allowed to work ( have a hobby) is punishable

that's sadistic

so is like you are pointed a gun in the head to play monopoly or catching butterflies

that's stupid af

who is paying you to shitpost?

Nope. I'm not wrong. Capital has largely failed to deliver on its promise of functionality. ESPECIALLY in feeding the impoverished.

Are you retarded?

so let's say all the people decide to become iceskaters

Are you implying that's a strength of Capitalism?

That's basically all work.

Yeah, I get that there are people like that, but often these people work for their own personal gain. For example, I enjoy working in I.T, but would I work for no reason? No

This is true, the more automated we get the less labor is required. Yet, there still is labor needed. Think about transportation of the food, maintenance of the water systems, Storage of said food, Turning it into something people like to eat.
I honestly don't think we can ever go so far as to remove all labor or construct an automated society to that degree.

You didn't answer my question

Weren't you the guy with the same flag and same opinions spamming mechanical dildo porn

you see, it's a lot like if orcs versus humans all decided to become ice skaters–then who will clean the toilets in my mansion???

wew boy.

the vast majority of work especially today is unnecessary and exists only because it makes someone somewhere alot of money

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that a technocrat is completely disconnected from reality.

No, I'm not into whatever that is.

cant you read?

how is this not feeding the poor?

no

can you think?

im saying is that no one is going to do those things unless they are being paid

if they are not being paid then they are not going to do it

period

Comrades, please contribute to our advancement on the propaganda front:

Didn't ask if you were into it.

Come back when you learn to use capital letters and write anything beyond autistic shitposts.

No.

who is paying you to shitpost? are they hiring?

Yeah, that's bullshit. People profit from our work, but the work is there for a reason. I'd like to know what work you think is unnecessary.

Yes

If you care about other people, that’s now a very dangerous idea. If you care about other people, you might try to organize to undermine power and authority. That’s not going to happen if you care only about yourself. Maybe you can become rich, but you don’t care whether other people’s kids can go to school, or can afford food to eat, or things like that. In the United States, that’s called “libertarian” for some wild reason. I mean, it’s actually highly authoritarian, but that doctrine is extremely important for power systems as a way of atomizing and undermining the public.

That’s why unions had the slogan, “solidarity,” even though they may not have lived up to it. And that’s what really counts: solidarity, mutual aid, care for one another and so on. And it’s really important for power systems to undermine that ideologically, so huge efforts go into it. Even trying to stimulate consumerism is an effort to undermine it. Having a market society automatically carries with it an undermining of solidarity. For example, in the market system you have a choice: You can buy a Toyota or you can buy a Ford, but you can’t buy a subway because that’s not offered. Market systems don’t offer common goods; they offer private consumption. If you want a subway, you’re going to have to get together with other people and make a collective decision. Otherwise, it’s simply not an option within the market system, and as democracy is increasingly undermined, it’s less and less of an option within the public system. All of these things converge, and they’re all part of general class war.

People are paid next to nothing to do said job, and it certainly isn't because of skill task.

Your idea this is the only model for things to work in is hilarious.

Here, let me help you be less stupid.

A hypothetical question not made by a retard looks like this.

not

The thing is that under capitalism we're already eliminating a lot of positions as automation and technological progress renders them superfluous.

The thing is that you can get a personal benefit from work even if you're not compensated for it in exchange-values - think of all the kids who want to be astronauts, teachers, firemen and surgeons. As the amount of necessary jobs are cut down, their rarity and importance would make them extremely sought-after in that manner - you could be a NEET, but since everyone in communism is some kind of artist or layabout, the janitor becomes like a fucking astronaut, something like a superstar. And as a matter of course, we'll probably have eliminated the repetitive, monotonous tasks because those are the ones most easily done by machines, and so all the logistical necessary jobs left would be ones that are intellectually stimulating by simple virtue that they're complex enough to be impossible to automate.

It's basically a non-issue.

Your hypothetical question is based on an absurd premise. It would be like asking "well what if we all turn into buttfuck ghosts that only want to fuck each other in the ass tomorrow, our capitalist society would fail" and pretending like that's a valid critique against capitalism.

why are you so fucking autistic?

why cant you answer a question? why do you have to deflect?

It's true that people benefit from others labor. However, the work is still there for a reason, because there is a need for it. I'd like to know what work you think is unnecessary.

We can ask you the same exact question.

Looks like the bot broke

Not that guy, but I'd say that all the work which goes into producing commodities that are designed to fall apart is wasted, for one example. If we built things to last, the labour that goes into providing an endless stream of replacements could be directed to more useful ends.

Spooky

so yes i was right and you just proved yourself wrong

also are you saying that charities are not a form of solidarity?

lmao

you should read something that is not shitpost at least once in a while buddy

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_argument_against_naturalism#Plantinga.27s_1993_formulation_of_the_argument

at least i answer and not fucking deflect or give stupid shit like "muh capital letters"

I understand what you're getting at. I just don't believe people will act like this. Sure, they'd want to feed their ego, but I can't see someone like a janitor getting famous or even respected by his peers for his cleaning.

You don't answer.

see

No

I've had the same questions about communism myself. I'm a lazy ass and would like to do as little work as possible. Will a communist society provide me with internet, electricity and a computer so I can shitpost all day?

If so, sign me up! If not, why not? Who controls these goods, do I need to talk them into it or is there a form to fill out…?

yes

Standardized testing for what career fits you the most, that you would most enjoy.

But in all honesty, put you into a shipping container and dropping you into the Atlantic Ocean

I'll agree with that. Though, if the country is highly automated most commodities would be protruded by machine anyway. The need for the product is still there though.

what did i not answer?

so forced labor then?

lmao not even capitalism force you to work

do I have to work or is that optional? One of the things I dislike about capitalism is that I'm forced to work.

"To each according to his need"

Yes, the labor will still be there if there is people who need certain items or services.

If I need a heart transplant in a capitalist country, I'm still going to need one in a communist one.

Yes.

You have to work. Labor means several things, but nonetheless it is labor.

Well, realistically speaking, janitorial work is low-skill, menial work - I think it would be feasible to automate. Also, people would probably clean their own toilets. I was more exaggerating for effect. But if it was actually necessary and something only a human could do, you can bet your ass they'll respect the fuck out of anyone who does it & does it well. I don't think there's any situation where you'd need to force someone via threat of starvation to do an important intellect-intensive job.

All of this is kind of moot, anyway - the more pressing need is to figure out how a feasible socialist system would work rather than pondering on a communism we'll probably never live to see.

Forgot my shitposting flag.

There is no forced labor in a communist society you retard.

Labor can mean many things, and it can mean sitting at home. I would disagree, you do what you love.

...

what if i can't do any labor?

why if im disabled?

...

Then you are disabled, you have a right to exist without labor.

I actually like the example you used, because it's one of those dirty jobs that are looked down upon.

Is the flag just for shitposting?

but what if i have adhd or adhd?

Not really. I mean I'm not an anfem, it's just the closest flag to confront the hatred of women in all image boards. Talk about feminism etc.

I think "forced labor", isn't labor being held at gun point, it's really that everyone should be able to participate in the arts or what have you. Automation can take care of the rest mostly.

We just don't understand this world because we spend trillions on defense projects like the useless F-35.

Really, there's no reason to see it as "forced".

Then you're not cripplingly disabled

we decide via a mtual market of course

What kind of doofus doesn't like butt

...

I'm out. That's no better than my life under capitalism.

I don't really care about anime you weebs just find the picture funny

If you want to contribute nothing to the world then really it's your loss

MY MAN

JOIN THE POST-LEFT ANARCHY NOW

It's a favourite of falseflagging Holla Forumsacks and trolls, but there's legit anfem posters too.

If you're not using threats & coercion, then it's not forced. There's no reason to believe that communist society won't have NEETs or that they won't be tolerated - every society has had them, whether they were clergy, aristocracy, shamans or sponges.

I just think there should be ways to encourage people to work. Today won't be forever, so to speak. Labor can mean creation.

this guy get's it

Yes, and those ways are positive reinforcement and peer pressure. Not threats of violence.

big woop

Then it depends on our definition of it.

...

...

What can you possibly get out of not contributing anything at all to your friends and community

The only ones who would be exploiting in this case would be sane able-bodied individuals who refuse to do socially-necessary work of their liking because they are benefiting from the work of others without pulling their own weight.

I agree with what you say but how is not statism? Drop the anarchism/libertarianism meme, you can't have organization without authority. It would be a state called anarchy.

If a worker is able to fully automate his own self-sufficiency, without engaging in exploitation then he should not be forced to work