But if people aren't threatened with starvation and homelessness why would they work at all?

but if people aren't threatened with starvation and homelessness why would they work at all?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc
twitter.com/AnonBabble

gulag for you then

Stockbrokers and other people with money arent threathened with starvation and homelessness, why do they work?

Trustfund babies and trophy wives still do volunteer work, why do they do that?
Why do teenagers get a job when their parents pay their food, their clothes, their house and their healthcare?

Could it perhaps be that people like working for work and to get more shit on top of a concrete box and rice?

...

But even stockbrokers salaries mostly go towards securing food and housing percentage wise. Teenagers obviously work for luxuries is the entire communist economy going to be incumbent on people willing to work at the same level of efficiency and hours they currently do just for luxuries?

I don't think most people around today would still go to work if you told them food and housing was free but if they wanted to keep their Netflix account they would still have to work.

Stockbrokers are pretty rich mate.
Yes? Do you want to work more for shit you dont need? If you want twice as much luxeries as someone else in early stage communism, then work twice as much, you will be able to get twice as much by means of the distribution system.

You'd be surprised. How are you going to buy clothes? Also, where do you get the idea from that food and housing is free with no conditions attached?

People like working, but not just doing aimless bullshit. People don't like being under the threat of starvation simply to work. People build things, fix things, and naturally "work" when focusing on hobbies. Fixing bikes, building cars, wood crafting, cooking, srapbooking, writing, reading. Do you really think people just like to sit around staring at the wall?

No shit they are rich but most of their money just goes to securing (more expensive) housing and food.
But most people arent going to work at the level and hours they currently do just for luxuries, which leads to everyone working a lot less in general, which means less luxuries in the first place because total economic output drops.
I'm not going to work 40 hours a week just for clothes, most people won't, most people just work to not end up homeless, if you're not guaranteeing housing and food you're not freeing the proletariat at all you are simply shifting prices in such a way while keeping them enslaved.

good thing noone needs to work 40 hours a week.

You sound like a hipster joke, the entire economy isnt and cannot revolve around hobbies like single speed bike repair and DIY art spaces. What planet do you live on?

serious question. are you american? that's the only conceivable explanation for a thread like this.

an 8 hour week is perfectly workable at this stage you dumb slut

If I own a billion dollars and use my million dollar "wage" to buy gold covered caviar and a palace that doesnt mean im under threat of starvation of homelessness. I can live of that wealth my entire life more comfortably than 99% of the people.

The amount of things created in a society are directly proportional to how much is worked. If people work twice as much, theres twice as much stuff. If people want more luxeries, they will have to work more to get the credits to get them, which means that in the end they get exactly like what they put in. If you work 10 hours more you get 10 hours more of luxeries.

You dont have to. Clothes dont cost that much time to make. Like others said, with current technology you could have workweeks as short as one or two days.
"freeing the proletariat" does not mean "creating another parasitic class of non-workers who live of the labour of others".

Or mabye working at these levels now are not producing any meaningful societal output, but instead only lining the pockets of the capitalist class, and creating a mountain of waste

Mods pls anchor for obvious retardation

But why would people work twice as much if they housing and food? Just because a person works twice as much doesn't mean they will get twice as many luxuries falling from the sky, the existence of those limited in incumbent upon people going to work if you guarantee housing and good nobody is going to work therefore there will be no luxuries.
Billionaire obviously do not work, we were talking about stockbrokers and stuff right? Because even stockbrokers, doctors, and well paid lawyers mostly work to secure (more expensive) housing and food. Are you saying when you grant everyone food and housing and do not require them to work everyone will live like a billionaire? That doesn't make sense.
Clothes are cheap as they are because of all the other jobs in the economy that require long hours and hard work like shipbuilding, resource extraction, petroleum engineering, construction, etc jobs that people will not be willing to do for such long hours if food and housing is guaranteed

They wouldn't, of course.

This is not a gotcha classcucks think it is. In a socialist society, people would simply work until their basic needs are fulfilled, at which point they'd switch to non-essential activities of their choice. And while some would laze off, many would turn to productive hobbies that enrich their society.
In a capitalist society, people are threatened with starvation and homelessness to work 40 hours a week to enrich capitalists. Only select few are provided with means of subsistence to be able do creative or socially beneficial work (again, only as long as it enriches the capitalists).

The only people who ask this have absolutely miserable jobs that aren't actually needed. Losers like you will float back into education until you do something that really matters to you OP.

This is such poor logic
So most of the first world should not be working right? The homeless in america have shelters and soup kitchens to survive off of, so why don't we all just become homeless and survive off this?

No one fucking said that you joke.
Read this fucking thread proper.

So we are going to have the same economy we have except it's going to revolve around people's hobbies? And on top of that there will be no production for exchange?

Yikes this board is more retarded than I thought, I think I can leave now.

People have always spent the overwhelming majority of their earnings on housing and food, even the baby boomers did this even though they have had more disposable income for new cars and vacations, therefore it is a fact that people mostly work to secure housing and food. Your silly ad hominem doesn't change this. K thx bye

Most of the people in the first world spend most of their money on securing housing and food, are you silly?

This board is getting stupider by the post.

Watch this, friend!
youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc

Yes. It litterally does. What do you think working does?

I already explained this isnt true. You guarantee work and wellfare for those who cant work.

Ah yes. Clothes are cheap because people make my little pony dolls.
What the fuck are you on? Clothes are cheap because it takes very little work to make them, because of technology.

Listen mate if youre going to barge in here and say
Then youre no better than checkers. Piss off if you dont want serious answers.

And most homeless in the first world have either a welfare safety net to fall on, our a charitable cause to provide them with sustenance. So I restate my question, why work if the salvation army has my back?

unlike you, who clearly had a low Autism Level from birth.

This pretty much
/thread

No. So are you really so insecure that you cannot deal with what the people you converse with actually say? That you can only argue with things you yourself make up?

Yikes.

We all know you're still here.

ban anime posters. they're worse than frog posters