Commodity Production

[Comrade1]

Is one of communism's goals to eliminate commodity production?

[Savage]

This is generally seen as an aim of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, something that would have been abolished long before the final stage of communism.

[Comrade1]

What happen if my door (a commodity) breaks. Well it wont be produced anymore?

[Broletariat]

What happen if my door (a commodity) breaks. Well it wont be produced anymore?
When Marx uses the word Commodity, he is referring to a very specific thing.

"A commodity is, in the first place, an object outside us, a thing that by its properties satisfies human wants of some sort or another. The nature of such wants, whether, for instance, they spring from the stomach or from fancy, makes no difference.[2] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#2) Neither are we here concerned to know how the object satisfies these wants, whether directly as means of subsistence, or indirectly as means of production.

Every useful thing, as iron, paper, &c., may be looked at from the two points of view of quality and quantity. It is an assemblage of many properties, and may therefore be of use in various ways. To discover the various uses of things is the work of history.[3] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#3) So also is the establishment of socially-recognized standards of measure for the quantities of these useful objects. The diversity of these measures has its origin partly in the diverse nature of the objects to be measured, partly in convention.

The utility of a thing makes it a use value.[4] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#4) But this utility is not a thing of air. Being limited by the physical properties of the commodity, it has no existence apart from that commodity. A commodity, such as iron, corn, or a diamond, is therefore, so far as it is a material thing, a use value, something useful. This property of a commodity is independent of the amount of labour required to appropriate its useful qualities. When treating of use value, we always assume to be dealing with definite quantities, such as dozens of watches, yards of linen, or tons of iron. The use values of commodities furnish the material for a special study, that of the commercial knowledge of commodities.[5] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#5) Use values become a reality only by use or consumption: they also constitute the substance of all wealth, whatever may be the social form of that wealth. In the form of society we are about to consider, they are, in addition, the material depositories of exchange value.

Exchange value, at first sight, presents itself as a quantitative relation, as the proportion in which values in use of one sort are exchanged for those of another sort,[6] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#6) a relation constantly changing with time and place. Hence exchange value appears to be something accidental and purely relative, and consequently an intrinsic value, i.e., an exchange value that is inseparably connected with, inherent in commodities, seems a contradiction in terms.[7] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#7) Let us consider the matter a little more closely."

tl;dr

Commodities are objects that have both a use-value and exchange-value us as commies wish to abolish exchange-value and hence Commodities.

[Comrade1]

When Marx uses the word Commodity, he is referring to a very specific thing.

"A commodity is, in the first place, an object outside us, a thing that by its properties satisfies human wants of some sort or another. The nature of such wants, whether, for instance, they spring from the stomach or from fancy, makes no difference.[2] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#2) Neither are we here concerned to know how the object satisfies these wants, whether directly as means of subsistence, or indirectly as means of production.

Every useful thing, as iron, paper, &c., may be looked at from the two points of view of quality and quantity. It is an assemblage of many properties, and may therefore be of use in various ways. To discover the various uses of things is the work of history.[3] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#3) So also is the establishment of socially-recognized standards of measure for the quantities of these useful objects. The diversity of these measures has its origin partly in the diverse nature of the objects to be measured, partly in convention.

The utility of a thing makes it a use value.[4] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#4) But this utility is not a thing of air. Being limited by the physical properties of the commodity, it has no existence apart from that commodity. A commodity, such as iron, corn, or a diamond, is therefore, so far as it is a material thing, a use value, something useful. This property of a commodity is independent of the amount of labour required to appropriate its useful qualities. When treating of use value, we always assume to be dealing with definite quantities, such as dozens of watches, yards of linen, or tons of iron. The use values of commodities furnish the material for a special study, that of the commercial knowledge of commodities.[5] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#5) Use values become a reality only by use or consumption: they also constitute the substance of all wealth, whatever may be the social form of that wealth. In the form of society we are about to consider, they are, in addition, the material depositories of exchange value.

Exchange value, at first sight, presents itself as a quantitative relation, as the proportion in which values in use of one sort are exchanged for those of another sort,[6] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#6) a relation constantly changing with time and place. Hence exchange value appears to be something accidental and purely relative, and consequently an intrinsic value, i.e., an exchange value that is inseparably connected with, inherent in commodities, seems a contradiction in terms.[7] (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm#7) Let us consider the matter a little more closely."

tl;dr

Commodities are objects that have both a use-value and exchange-value us as commies wish to abolish exchange-value and hence Commodities.
Cleared it up, thanks :lol: