I'm a bit confused. I was thinking about this the other day

I'm a bit confused. I was thinking about this the other day.

In a socialist society where they had labor notes, how would the people who print the labor notes receive the product of their labor?

This is kind of fucking me up right now.

What do labour voucher represent? Hours worked.

What would the money printers get for their labour? Money in the amount they printed.

Also

Dumb tbh fam. Might as well ask how would firefighters receive the product of their labour. Obviously people who work in the directly productive industries will get paid and the 'profit' of their work (ie. someone can build 5 cars in a week or something but probably only needs one car a year or less) supports those in the non directly productive industries.

True of course but meh, you could extend the argument to the guy who prints off the labour debit cards

I just read in Capital how the price of machinery would be incorporated in the price, but how would anyone acquire the money to buy the machine in the first place? What am I suppose to do if I don't have the $4 million required to buy some machines? And if I were to get a loan from the bank or something, what happens then if the business fails? Seems like the only way to rake in some cash to expand business is to exploit cuckolds.

fully automate the printing of labour vouchers of course


of course central planned production is flawed in this aspect, as you can't plan fires


mutual banks that do not profit from credit

Under a system with labor notes the "cost" of their labor notes, they get paid just like anyone else, per hour of labor worked. This is included in the price of redemption in the products their overhead work is concerned with.

remember that under capitalism, v is the sum of wage costs, not just the direct productive labor. The mid-level manager is contributing value to production, distributed among those they manage, just as the safety inspector does the same.

You just don't understand what it is, you plan firefighting capacity obviously.

What do you think comrades?

But then where would they get the money if they can't profit?

Kinda, but I would just abandon hourly altogether. If someone can work longer to make more then that's just reintroducing inequality. Instead all wages should be the same and hours worked adjusted by difficulty/unpleasantness.

But what does that mean? You'd need different standards per labor.

I do wish more people would look into labor vouchers. They have a lot of benefits that show just how fucking bad currency is in comparison and actively encourage cooperative behavior, encourage people to work and save (thus contributing a temporary hour-labor surplus), and encourage their own obsolescence (ie. FALC_

What's wrong with someone choosing to work more hours so that he could make more money?

Deposits

Do you really want to live in a world where everyone's expected to work 50 hour weeks and so on? We'll all be happier if things are equitable. Furthermore, letting some people earn more than others will reintroduce wealth stratification.

Yeah except unlike under capitalism any inequality would be directly tied to how much you contribute. Also the inequality from a labour voucher system would be far smaller than under capitalism.


No you don't, as long as you incorporate the bonus system I described that gives additional rewards to people based on how physically/technically/intellectually demanding it is or how dangerous it is.

What does it mean to "standardize" the output of janitorial work vs assembly line work vs administrative work?

Why do we want inequality anyway? Also, some people are by nature not capable of working as much, ie. they have chronic fatigue or something, or they just inherently have less energy. Why should we screw people based on their genetics?

whats the pointing of working more for money if what you want are more expensive goods?

why not just work making those goods for yourself?

...

Seeing as many people, even in first world countries, currently choose to work 60+ hour/week jobs for high compensation, I think people will in fact attempt to work more hours in order to acquire more goods.

Nevermind what I just said. I did some more reading and Marx just stated that someone's labor value is worth the amount of money required to keep that person alive for the day. So someone who works 12 hours makes as much money as he would as if he had just worked 6. This sounds retarded.

Because I don't own a multi-million dollar plant that makes soccer balls or a multi-billion dollar plant that makes cars, dumbass. It would be extremely inefficient if everyone were to produce everything for themselves and for trade not to exist.

but the plants would be collectivized, meaning that you can join the workforce of said plant and create the commodities yourself, dumbass

except trade could exist, in the event that you are such a retard that is unable to join a production line that makes computers you could always join another worker's co-op and engage in trading

that's fucking dumb, modern economics requires specialisation. you realise manufacturing something isn't as easy as just turning up and pressing a button

but there is still a space for specialisation to exist, however it would be democratic

thats because of capitalism and the way it arranges the productive forces

the need of an important workforce that will consume the products made by other workers in order to continue existing is a requisite of itself

mein gott, i can't tell if you're trolling or not, here's your (You) anyway

What I mean is just provide a standard rate of pay. It wouldn't necessarily be directly tied to what is produced by what they are doing so much as it is tied to how much they work and the difficulties/risks associated with that kind of work. I suppose it's not quite like labour vouchers in that sense, but they would be non-transferable so they wouldn't exactly be currency either.

I don't want inequality, but perfect equality isn't always feasible unless you have FALC or something. People who have disabilities and the like could be supported through a social safety net.

Besides, economic equality is a means to an end. Socialism and labour vouchers doesn't need to create perfect equality of wealth, it needs to create equal institutional power to end relationships of subjugation and domination.

Yeah some retard straight from highschool is going to walk straight into a collectivized computer factory and build his own computer. How would that even work when machines do the majority of the work? Even if the faggot went to some shoe factory to make some new shoes, how does it make sense that he is the one that gets to keep the shoes he makes while the people who sent the raw materials to the factory gets nothing?

All of this just sounds a lot easier with the current system where people are just paid by wages rather than have people who don't know what the fuck they're doing going from factory to factory making things for themselves with raw materials they may not even have in the first place.

Be right back, I'm going to go build my own house, something every citizen can do.

Unskilled manufacturing is trending towards automation. Skilled manufacturing requires some level of time investment.

Also, only so many workers can operate a given plant. What are you going to do, go in and demand that they democratically vote on letting you use the plant to make a computer?

...

Define proletarian specialized labor.

labour specialization is utilized to create machinery that eliminates the necessity of skilled and unskilled in the first place

if such thing cannot be achieved it eliminates skilled and unskilled labour as much as possible

It's more efficient to excel at one specific task rather than be a Jack of all trades but master of none. The OS I use revolves entirely on this philosophy of each utility doing only one job, but doing it well.

Standard rate of pay is definitionally an hour worth of labor voucher per hour worked. I'm not sure what the standardization needed to achieve here is.


Marx was wrong about worrying about alienation coming about as a result of specialization, it's a result of commodification of interaction through production of commodities' economic value, something that is tied to currency's pure existence as an economic value unit, which is the primary interaction between laborer and job. Labor vouchers have no economic value in and of themselves and thus obviate the economic value process of labor.

again you won't be forced to achieve self-sustainability because there still would be an opportunity of trade, the difference is the OS won't be commodified

the curent OS you are using also needs investors, sales team, marketing and so on

moreover, the requisite of humans developing software in a necessity of capitalism, because it needs to employ people so that they can consume the products as opposed to develop software that writes itself, something that has been already experimented with

thats nice, but thats not how most industry works, managers need to know every part of the production process, and workers usually understand what is going on after aand before their working station

if you think modern industry cosists opf isolated modules which have no relation to the next one you are severly mistaken

I work in a factory and I legit have no idea what happens to the parts I make after I make them until I ask.

you just got ALIENATE'D son

also, how are you going to claim ownership oif the MoP's if you don't know how they work?

I know how some of it works, and the other workers can teach me, were I to have ownership.

He's probably talking about average labor value.

If you have higher upkeep then you're, you know, going to have to actually pay said upkeep.

Your 10 minutes of labor won't be able to pay for that mansion.