From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs

This principle wasn't formulated by him as his own ideal to which reality should bend itself (communism is, in Marx, the only truly distinct mode of production to capitalism the proletariat is materially constantly pulled towards). Rather, the sentence was merely a romanticized attempt to hypothesize what kind of principle, roughly, communism would function on.

You speak of these things as if I or Marx cares about your personal desires, when in reality you're just one of the many subjects of matter. With a material outlook of the world, you only have these desires and this myopic view of what desire entails because of matter in motion shaping you as such, and you'll roughly be locked into this either until material reality disillusions your belief in these things or matter simply alters itself so much that you cannot in any way exist and believe the way you do.

Read a little more than the introduction of a Wikipedia article next time, such as:
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01.htm

cut the psychological bullshit. Answer concrete questions:

do you expect people to do shitty job like cleaning the toilets and working in the sewers for the good of society?

If no one volunteers, what do you plan to do? pick the most retarded person and force him to do the job?

I don't mind reading external resources as long as they are specific to my questions.

atoms are real, you are made up of atoms, this what marx believes, so marx is right about everything he concludes from this…

magnets, how do they work?

I'm more of a market socialist but I'll give it a shot.
Really means that people will work because it's expected of them and because they know that if work isn't done that society stops functioning and that's bad for everyone. Given that in communism people will work comparatively little and under much better conditions relative to capitalism they have every incentive to do their jobs.

If they don't want their streets overflowing with shit then they better clean the fucking sewers.

These jobs you reference are considered menial or tedious or humiliating only because of the pervasive nature of capitalistic ideology. These jobs don't pay well and are typically done by brown-skinned immigrants, hence why shitposters like yourself and other various varieties of morons view these as intrinsically lesser jobs. In a communist society a person tasked with, say, cleaning public toilets could take pride in their work because at the end of their work day (which will be drastically shortened) they won't be tasked with any economic burdens and will have more than adequate food, shelter and access to means of production.

Moreover, the vast majority of these tasks can and will be automated. More people will be doing coding and mechanical upkeep/repairs than these dangerous, shitty, menial jobs (jobs which are only made possible under capitalism in the first place).

so each region should arrange who will do it? based on what? should engineers spend time working on sewers instead of inventing and maintaining stuff?

I don't think capitalism is perfect but it provides a solution. Set money for the job and keep raising it until someone wants it. Sounds good to me.

You want to replace capitalism so you must have convincing answers for such issues.

This would create even more resentment and jealousy, read some psycho-analysis.

This might come as a shock to you but there are actually people out there for whom capital and material gains is not the prime motivator for wanting to build and maintain a prosperous, egalitarian society.

Everyone else, including you, will be sent to re-education camps.

no they are really literally shitty job, no one likes them even if he has to do it for his own land.

I'm interested in knowing what leftist think should be done in case no one volunteers for a certain job.

There is no psychology here; that would be much too myopic. The human psyche is first and foremost shaped by his material conditions.

And no, I will not make recipees for the cook shops of the future for you, first and foremost because I, as subject, have and will continue to have no business in doing so.

I will also inform you of the fact that sewage and plumbing existed in human society for thousands of years before the wage system of capital (which is merely 350 years old, and also not a consciously structured mode of production out of nowhere), as well as without slavery, and will then suggest you investigate how they functioned instead (hint: look at the mode of production).

Marx has not mentioned atoms once and was not a biological determinist. Instead, he mentioned matter, and was a material determinist.

Too bad, you'll have to make do with Marx if you want to understand Marx as stated in your OP. Wikipedia and replies to questions Marxists concerning matters they do not consider to at all be relevant to the workings of the world will remain wholly ignored, because they are and always have been insignificant to history.

what happens if no one or not enough people volunteer for a certain job?

Full automation could be achieved under socialism, or as Marx called it the "lower stage" of communism, which "bears the birthmarks of the old society" (ie pays people more for more work, etc). Once full automation is achieved then human labour will no longer be necessary to keep society functioning. Robots will clean our toilets.

so you think communism is only feasible with full automation?

I see you can here knowing not a damn thing about socialism and communism.

He was a materialist that had no knowledge whatsoever of the physics he made into a big other.

Stop trying to wed Marx to productivist discourse. It didn't happen in his life time and won't work out in reality. This is how you get Taylorism "socialism" in one country

kek
abolishwork.com/2017/04/11/fully-automated-luxury-individualist-anarchism-edmund-berger/

shig wrong flag

I can only speak for myself, but yup, I would absolutely resort to that, as would anyone else, An-Caps MUH NAP included.

Much of the unappealing dirty work can probably be taken care of by utilising labour-saving machines. But where it is impossible and where dirty work will have to be done in socialist society we can be quite sure of two things: Firstly, it will NOT be done by the same people ALL the time. All able members of society will take turns at such work. And secondly, it will be carried out by socially conscious men and women who appreciate that society belongs to them and therefore its less pleasant tasks must be performed by them. In the knowledge that we own and control the earth, and all that is in and on it, it is unlikely that human beings will refuse to attend to the dirty work within socialism. There will be motivation to tackle such tasks, and perhaps some forms of labour may even be viewed as a rite of passage [something which is missing from our postmodern cultural landscape].

The fact is that most jobs under capitalism are either completely or partially unnecessary. Many of those that are necessary are performed by people working long hard hours while others suffer poverty of low wages and low status. Elimination of all jobs required only within a capitalist system would reduce necessary tasks to such a trivial level that they could easily be taken care of voluntarily and cooperatively, eliminating the need for the whole apparatus of economic incentives and state enforcement. The hours needed to work will be considerably reduced from the additional extra labour being made available from no longer required capitalist occupations which will not exist in the moneyless, free access society of socialism. There will simply be many more hands to do the unpleasant but necessary stuff.

As for the lazy shirkers, why should they be a serious problem? Those people living in a socialist society who are too idle to work will not be much of a drain on society’s resources for very long, for if they lie in bed for long enough they will soon die of boredom. But, granted, if too many people didn’t work then society would obviously fall apart. However, we should not forget that to establish socialism in the first place, the vast majority must consciously decide that they want socialism and that they are prepared to work in socialist society. The establishment of socialism presupposes the existence of a mass socialist movement and a profound change in social outlook. It is simply not reasonable to suppose that the desire for socialism on such a large scale, and the conscious understanding of what it entails on the part of all concerned, would not influence the way people behaved in socialism and towards each other.

I fucking hate you. There are uncomfortable, exhausting, tedious, miserable jobs nobody would do. You realize they used to make phone books by hand? They would assemble every page for the printing press, each name alphabetized, with thousands of pages and millions of names. You've never been a longshoreman, or a clerk, or a miner. Work can fucking suck.

The most disgusting thing about the left is its hand waiving over the super structure. You're embarrassing.

These are superflous and mostly pointless jobs which are only made possible by capitalism.

Can largely be automated.

Pointless.

Can largely be automated.

Only embarrassment here is your myopia, fucko.

You can say this about everything not bureaucratic. At that point there's little difference between communism and autarky with taxes and a universal basic income.

I think the jobs that people absolutely wouldn't want to do are in the minority and tend to be the jobs created by capitalism for work's own sake.

Just leave the thread and neck yourself, retard

Does anybody really want to go to work as a cashier? Or an accountant? Most jobs are kind of shitty.

You act like everybody will just write newspapers, when newspapers are already becoming superfluous and economically shaky.

Almost nobody has jobs either way. Taxes are automated. No important difference as far as I can tell.

I think you can look to volunteer military service as a possible window into how the dirty and dangerous jobs would get done. In a society that isn't operating on capitalist logic a more community oriented ideology will take root possibly leading to organizations forming around the idea of civic service rather than a sense of military duty.

Is this the same OP that keeps making shitty threads arguing in bad faith? How can you spend so much time here and not learn anything?

I've worked with people that enjoy being cashiers. I don't know if it's just because they're massively classcucked or if they just really enjoy talking to people like they say, but they enjoy it.

Yeah, they already do that. It's called "blogging."

Yeah. He always posts with the porky flag too.

Because he's not here to learn anything.

Itt: no one's read marx, not even the leftcom

Marx did attribute that maxim to the higher stage of communism, where there would be a greater development of productive forces as well as human nature . Anyone who claims that productive forces and automation have nothing to do with Marx's argument are fucking retarded.

Bump

What the fuck? What planet are you from? At my previous job I routinely had to work 10 hour days and many people I know have to work more. We don't get a fucking choice in the matter, people that turned down shifts or requested less work tended to lose their jobs.

As for working in a communist society: there would be much less work to do because we would eliminate all the bullshit work (you can serve your own fucking food) and we would no longer be working to supply a parasitic ruling class with luxuries.
And if for some reason it turns out that we need to give incentives for people to do some types of work, then that's exactly what we'll do. There's no reason we have to give unconditional access to all products and services to people that do not contribute.

Marx wrote on this subject in "Critique of the Gotha Program" (though it's worth pointing out it's just one of many solutions to the problem):

marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm

you didn't answer question about how you will handle jobs with no volunteers. Everyone wants to work, there are just some jobs that no one will take.

How do you define the cost? 10 hours of working in a dangerous disgusting job is the same as 10 hours in a non dangerous job? what about jobs that few people can do that requires genius level Autism Level? you will reward them like the rest too based on time?

I'm a freelancer. I take breaks when I want to. I'm not married, I don't plan to get married soon. I don't have debt. I have little responsibilities. When I make enough money money I take long breaks to enjoy life. Communism wouldn't allow me to do that.