The economy under communism

[Le Rouge]

What it will be like?

In my "economy" class today, my teacher said that communism worked like this :

People produce things,
Products goes to people,
Surplus goes to government to sell.


But yeah... what do you think?

Edit: Please, no "We don't know how it will be like".

[Le Socialiste]

There will always be different interpretations of how the economy will function in a communist society. The task of production, transportation, and distribution should be in the collective hands of the working-class, organized along local, regional, and national lines. People would be organized within their respective industries through the utilization of workers' councils and a circular/horizontal chain of command. These industries would be linked up with others in order to coordinate and facilitate production. Through the use of councils, committees, and assemblies, the working-class can map out and plan how to best meet the needs of everyone in an efficient, equitable fashion.

[robbo203]

What it will be like?

In my "economy" class today, my teacher said that communism worked like this :

People produce things,
Products goes to people,
Surplus goes to government to sell.


But yeah... what do you think?

Edit: Please, no "We don't know how it will be like".

Communism will be a stateless society so there won't be a "government". Nor will there be anything to "sell "becuase selling implies private (including state) property - not common ownership. Nor will there be a "surplus" , strictly speaking, either which implies the idea of some kind of general "social fund" which is apportioned in various ways leaving the residual amount over for consumption, and which in turn implies the existence of money or some moneylike alternative.

Production will be simply and solely for use. Consumers need consumer goods, producers need producer goods. The task of matching supply and demand in each case will be accomplished essentially by means of a self regulating system of stock control which already exists today and will be taken over by a communist society while at the same time getting rid of all vestiges of money and exchange

Easey peasey;)

[Dave B]

Whilst I agree with the general position of Robbo if you take the strict and logical position of Karl’s argument, necessary labour time and social necessary labour time is the amount of effort that is required to maintain those that work.

And surplus labour time is anything over and above that.

However even in moneyless socialism those that work will still have to produce more than merely what they require for themselves.

Eg for the incapacitated or immature and in order to develop and produce labour saving technology etc to make things easier for the future.

Thus;

Capital Vol. III Part VII Revenues and their Sources Chapter 50. Illusions Created By Competition



Of course, if wages are reduced to their general basis, namely, to that portion of the product of the producer’s own labour which passes over into the individual consumption of the labourer; if we relieve this portion of its capitalist limitations and extend it to that volume of consumption which is permitted, on the one hand, by the existing productivity of society (that is, the social productivity of his own individual labour as actually social), and which, on the other hand, the full development of the individuality requires; if, furthermore, we reduce the surplus-labour and surplus-product to that measure which is required under prevailing conditions of production of society, on the one side to create an insurance and reserve fund, and on the other to constantly expand reproduction to the extent dictated by social needs; finally, if we include in No. 1 the necessary labour, and in No. 2 the surplus-labour, the quantity of labour which must always be performed by the able-bodied in behalf of the immature or incapacitated members of society,

i.e., if we strip both wages and surplus-value, both necessary and surplus labour, of their specifically capitalist character, then certainly there remain not these forms, but merely their rudiments, which are common to all social modes of production.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894-c3/ch50.htm

[robbo203]

Whilst I agree with the general position of Robbo if you take the strict and logical position of Karl’s argument, necessary labour time and social necessary labour time is the amount of effort that is required to maintain those that work.

And surplus labour time is anything over and above that.

However even in moneyless socialism those that work will still have to produce more than merely what they require for themselves.

Eg for the incapacitated or immature and in order to develop and produce labour saving technology etc to make things easier for the future.

Thus;

Capital Vol. III Part VII Revenues and their Sources Chapter 50. Illusions Created By Competition




http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894-c3/ch50.htm (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894-c3/ch50.htm)

Yeah but the thing is Dave even if the incapacitated , the very young and the very old didnt exist we would not as individuals produce merely for ourselves anyway. "No main is an island, we are all part of the main" as John Donne said. Socialisation of the productive process means that not only are the non producers dependent on the producers but the producers themselves are dependent on each other so that the distinction between necessary and surplus labour will disappear in the face of this brute fact of mutual interdependence.


Even if you are thinking collectively in terms of all those who work I question whether they would see themselves as a forming a separate entity or group from the non producers. The social basis upon which a distinction between necessary and surplus labour might appear, would thus not exist. This social basis actually arises only in a property society where a distinct class does indeed appropriate the surplus product of another class and so gives substance the idea of surplus labour. It is as I said elsewhere a ghostly after-image , a way of looking at the world that is imprinted on our minds by property society and will disappear with property society

[Jose Gracchus]

The task of matching supply and demand in each case will be accomplished essentially by means of a self regulating system of stock control which already exists today and will be taken over by a communist society while at the same time getting rid of all vestiges of money and exchange

Easey peasey;)

Good thing economies and the reproduction of social life consists only of procurement of consumer goods in advanced economies with sophisticated real-time information technology which tracks all inventory.

Good thing. Oh wait...

[ColonelCossack]

There wouldn't be a surplus because things are made for use and for no other reason... so when enough of a product is made that no more are needed, no more will be made until they're needed again... or something. :confused:

[CommieTroll]

What it will be like?People produce things,
Products goes to people,
Surplus goes to government to sell.

That's a little thing called State Capitalism

[robbo203]

Good thing economies and the reproduction of social life consists only of procurement of consumer goods in advanced economies with sophisticated real-time information technology which tracks all inventory.

Good thing. Oh wait...


And producer goods...

Besides stock control is not the be all and end all . You have to discriminate beween inputs where bottlenecks in supply arise. That requires some hierarchy of end uses - production priorities. So the input of community decisionmaking which surely be importnat here too..