Communism basics: help me clear up my confusion

[Leaf]

I need help in understanding some pretty basic communism concepts.
Most people, like teachers, say that in communism, everyone will get the same pay no matter what their job. But every now and then I hear things like this:
'What the fuck?
Surely thats wrong, surely each should get a wage in proportion to the labour they put in, and the value of their work.
The doctors work is clearly more valuable, therefore should recieve a higher wage.
ITs a bullshit capitalist myth that says everyone gets a same wage'
-Kez, Senior Revolutionary.

(I hope you don't mind me quoting you) which I read on the High school commie's guide.
Most people responded by arguing that the janitor's work was essential as well, which I agree with. And I agree that there would be incentive to become a doctor when there is equal pay - I would do it.

I also hear that when communism is achieved, money will not exist as it does today, since each will get what they need. Which is great.
So if someone works more, will they get some sort of non-monetary rewards? like holidays or first dibs on new technology or something?

'If someone's job is extrememly dangerous or stressful, maybe they should be paid higher wages. It would have to be decided democratically though.'
-perception, Junior Revolutionary


Also, how would we ensure society remains classlessness?

The best idea to me is everyone agreees that those who work more will get some rewards. Is that what will happen?

So yea, I want some clarification because I keep hearing different things which is confusing. I get the feeling I don't understand a few things because I am in the capitalist mindset. I've had little education on this other than snippets at school and contradicting internet information. I'm sure there are others confused as me. Sorry, but help me understand as I really want to.

ps. who is STJ you all talk about?

[Sprocket Hole]

Well, the reason you've gotten so many contradictory opinions, is because not everyone here are not just simply communists. I mean even within the strand of communism there is so many schools of thought, and I'd say the wage stuff might fall under Leninist thought. So therefore I cannot speak for everyone. As an anarchist, the society I believe in (sometimes called communism) would be stateless and classless. There would be no party ruling over the proletariat, there would be no money (therefore no wage system), and certainly no rulers. Things would be to the control of the communities and workers.

STJ is a poster here that got banned from the chit-chat forum.

[Il Medico]

The wage thing is a difficult question. The two thoughts I have on it is that either you will be paid by how much you work v.s what you do. Or you take what Marx could be implying by saying "ownership of the MOP by the workers" as saying companies should be owned by the employees. Which would mean a man's wage would depend on how successful the company is. I prefer the former. Hope I helped!:thumbup1:
Keep fighting comrade,
Captain Jack

[BlackCapital]

One aspect of communism thats important to understand and I didn't completely grasp when I was first learning, is that it occurs post-scarcity. Once the means of production have been removed from capitalist ownership, they can produce as much as possible (or as much as needed), since they will no longer be governed by supply and demand economics and profit motives (only producing at a profitable level).

The abundance and material wealth this can potentially create is the reason the monetary system will be obsolete. As for equal rewards (pay) and such, it is possible some occupations may enjoy additional luxuries if society is agreeable to that, but the point is that with the levels of production possible everyone would be able to have more then what they need as long as they contribute to the workforce (of which hours in a work-week would likely be drastically reduced). We could ensure that it would stay classless because everyone has equal access to what they need, and their is no central government or institution which would effectively be able to seize the means of production, natural resources, ect.

[Leaf]

Thanks everyone. TheEarthVolta... you were especially useful. After reading your post, I can see how my question is almost irrelevant, thanks. That's great.

[Code]

Search YouTube for the communist manifestoon

[ZeroNowhere]

Under socialism, there are no wages. However, there can be a labour credit system, under which people are allowed to withdraw from the social product according to the hours of labour they carry out. Basic necessities (food, water, homes, electricity, appliances, etc) could be accessed for free up to a certain amount, after which more would count as a luxury. 'Luxury' items could be 'bought' through the use of labour credits, which do not circulate (they disappear as soon as something is 'bought'), and would most probably be digital. Presumably the amount of items accessed freely could be increased at regular intervals, and this could be reversed if production is reduced, and tried again after a while. Some socialists propose going straight to a 'free access' society, except perhaps with some rationing initially, such as the SPGB.

[Leaf]

Under socialism, there are no wages. However, there can be a labour credit system, under which people are allowed to withdraw from the social product according to the hours of labour they carry out. Basic necessities (food, water, homes, electricity, appliances, etc) could be accessed for free up to a certain amount, after which more would count as a luxury. 'Luxury' items could be 'bought' through the use of labour credits, which do not circulate (they disappear as soon as something is 'bought'), and would most probably be digital. Presumably the amount of items accessed freely could be increased at regular intervals, and this could be reversed if production is reduced, and tried again after a while. Some socialists propose going straight to a 'free access' society, except perhaps with some rationing initially, such as the SPGB.

Great thank you. Sounds great.

[Leaf]

Btw my political compass score is:
Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -8.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.33

(same as Nelson Mandela) :)

anyone want to analyse it for me?
I'll be back later.

[ZeroNowhere]

Btw my political compass score is:
Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -8.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.33

(same as Nelson Mandela) :)

anyone want to analyse it for me?
I'll be back later.The political compass is worthless when it comes to socialism. It's completely centred around capitalism.

[Comrade Marxist Bro]

Under socialism, there are no wages. However, there can be a labour credit system, under which people are allowed to withdraw from the social product according to the hours of labour they carry out. Basic necessities (food, water, homes, electricity, appliances, etc) could be accessed for free up to a certain amount, after which more would count as a luxury. 'Luxury' items could be 'bought' through the use of labour credits, which do not circulate (they disappear as soon as something is 'bought'), and would most probably be digital. Presumably the amount of items accessed freely could be increased at regular intervals, and this could be reversed if production is reduced, and tried again after a while. Some socialists propose going straight to a 'free access' society, except perhaps with some rationing initially, such as the SPGB.

Using labor credits isn't really essential and hasn't been used anywhere. You could easily have a wages-based system within a socialist state.

[ZeroNowhere]

Using labor credits isn't really essential and hasn't been used anywhere. You could easily have a wages-based system within a socialist state.
Um, no, you could not have wages without capitalism.

[SecondLife]

I need help in understanding some pretty basic communism concepts.
.......
Also, how would we ensure society remains classlessness?


In my veiwpoint: wage according to amount of work must stay, but there must be maximum. Example if someone wants to work more and give more wage, then he/she simple takes away job and wage from someone else.
Also wage differences must me smaller than in capitalism, because wage isn't the only stimulus in work. Stimulues are also interesting job and position in society.

Wage must exist in personal credits (in coupons, only usable by the same person).
Money must not exist and all individual purchase-sale transactions must go through state controlled institutions.

Rent, transport and medicine must be free. Food, electricity and medical preparates price must be very low, but with additional coupons to common credit system.

There isn't need to "_ensure_" that society remains classlessness. After nationalisation and credit-system there simple have't possibility to classes.
And of course in state exist also laws.

[ZeroNowhere]

Money must not exist and all individual purchase-sale transactions must go through state controlled institutions.I was going to comment on your plan for 'wages', but it would seem that you're not talking about communism anyways.

[SecondLife]

I was going to comment on your plan for 'wages', but it would seem that you're not talking about communism anyways.

Trot:thumbdown:

[ZeroNowhere]

Trot:thumbdown:
Nope, De Leonite. We're the guys who are dogmatically called dogmatic.

[Communist Theory]

I'm under the impression that under Communism currency will be abolished.

[Comrade Marxist Bro]

Um, no, you could not have wages without capitalism.

We just had a more in-depth discussion about this: http://www.revleft.com/vb/state-socialism-wage-t108080/index.html.

Of course, you're free to reject the idea of the rudimentary stages of socialism where wages exist together with popular control of the means of production, as you've done here and there.

But that is certainly not the universal view of things, either on this board or in real life.