A few questions about socialism

[Ozz94]

I read a definition of socialism on the following link:
slp.org/res_state_htm/socialism_m_p.html

It says that a political government represented by senators etc. should be replaced by a socialist government represented by representatives of different labor unions. That sounds like a great idea, but what about the other aspects of life that do not include the production or distribution of good, such as education, healthcare, etc.? Isn't there a need for policy makers? In addition to that, if I were in a socialist country, and I wanted to own a factory, is that possible? What are the restrictions on owning property? Furthermore, It says that there is no wage system in socialism, then how do we determine what to pay people? What does "the social value" of labor mean?? Will a doctor and a garbage collector be paid the same? knowing that both occupations are needed for a functioning society??? How to you measure the output of a doctor/architect/engineer, etc??

Don't you think that if everyone was given a chance to be educated and do what they love, no one would actually "choose" to work in a "less-prestigious" but much needed job, such as a garbageman??? What solution does socialism - even in theory - offer to these problems??

[Polaris]

I read a definition of socialism on the following link:
slp.org/res_state_htm/socialism_m_p.html

It says that a political government represented by senators etc. should be replaced by a socialist government represented by representatives of different labor unions. That sounds like a great idea, but what about the other aspects of life that do not include the production or distribution of good, such as education, healthcare, etc.? Isn't there a need for policy makers?

That link doesn't seem to be very accurate-- parts are ok like : "Socialism means a government in which the people collectively own and democratically operate the industries and social services through an economic democracy."
But others are just strange. Although the labor union reps idea is socialism, I don't that is what most people on this forum have in mind. There are many different types of socialism. The only required characteristic of a socialist society is that the proletariat (the workers) have control of the means of production (this everything that is used to produce something, from a plow to a factory to a store, etc.).

As the link said, the proletariat would also control social services. They would be the policy makers, although keep in mind there are multiple ideas of how this should be done (vanguardism, direct democracy, etc and of course there are also anarchists who wish to overthrow all forms of hierarchy and thus wouldn't have policy makers/a state at all.)

As a side note, socialists believe in free healthcare and education.


In addition to that, if I were in a socialist country, and I wanted to own a factory, is that possible?

No, it would not be possible. The purpose of socialism is stop the bourgeoisie's exploitation of the proletariat (remember, workers.) Aka capitalists aka pigs, the bourgeoisie is the class of people who make a profit by exploiting the proletariat-- eg in a factory the ones of the assembly line would be proles, the bourgeoisie would be the factory owner who exploits them by taking the product of their labor, selling it, and then paying the workers less than whatever it was worth, making a profit for him/herself without doing any actual work.


Furthermore, It says that there is no wage system in socialism, then how do we determine what to pay people? What does "the social value" of labor mean?? Will a doctor and a garbage collector be paid the same? knowing that both occupations are needed for a functioning society??? How to you measure the output of a doctor/architect/engineer, etc??

Ok, again, several methods. Some people propose labor credits, others that everyone is paid the same (BUT most do not). Here's something Marx said:


What he has given to it is his individual quantum of labor. For example, the social working day consists of the sum of the individual hours of work; the individual labor time of the individual producer is the part of the social working day contributed by him, his share in it. He receives a certificate from society that he has furnished such-and-such an amount of labor (after deducting his labor for the common funds); and with this certificate, he draws from the social stock of means of consumption as much as the same amount of labor cost. The same amount of labor which he has given to society in one form, he receives back in another.
This is what I mean by labor credits.

Sidenote: It is important that you understand that socialism is supposed to be a gateway between capitalism and communism. Socialism seeks to transform society from the way it is now to a stateless, classless society. In such a society, there would be no money. Because right now there is money, it is possible that in the early stages of socialism there would still be money, but a goal of a socialist society would be to abolish it. In a communist society, there would be no wages in any form-- people would work whenever however they want ad take what they need/want. Obviously some goods would have to have a waiting list/would be reserved for those who work the most, which kills two birds: problems related to scarcity and an incentive to work.


Don't you think that if everyone was given a chance to be educated and do what they love, no one would actually "choose" to work in a "less-prestigious" but much needed job, such as a garbageman??? What solution does socialism - even in theory - offer to these problems??

Some people might say that the reason you (most people) think a garbage man is less prestigious than others is because of social conditioning which would whither away with time. It is also possible that some people would not want to be educated, although this seems doubtful to me. As I mentioned before, items that are in higher demand than supply (eg, video games, unique paintings, vacations to the Bahamas) could be prioritized towards professions that the community needs more of. Basically, if a society needed more garbagemen, they could give garbagemen a better opportunity to receive theses items which would serve as an incentive. Also, some propose that jobs like that could be done on a rotation-- one day Sally cleans the park, the next day Bob does, and so on.

People have always done terrible but necessary jobs because they realize that they have to be done. It's possible that some responsible person would choose to do a "menial" job to benefit their community once the stigma attached to them is removed.


EDIT: I would like to add that basically all of these questions have been answered a million and two times, and you could easily find the answers by using the search tool. For example, if you search for threads with "private property" in the title you will find an answer to your question on the restrictions on owning property.

[Ozz94]

Thanks for your reply.
I just wanted to ask you if you can elaborate more regarding labor credits? Also please include some practical examples.

Also, how can people take what they want/need without the presence of currency paid against products??? Let's say I wanted to bake a cake, I needed flour, milk, eggs, etc. What should I do in order to obtain these ingredients??

[RedBen]

"from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" fair enough?

[Polaris]

"from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" fair enough?

No, that is generally considered accurate for communism but not socialism which is more along the lines of "from each according to their ability to each according to their contribution."


Thanks for your reply.
I just wanted to ask you if you can elaborate more regarding labor credits? Also please include some practical examples.

Okay there are several schools of thought and I would like to say that I have no hope of ever covering all of them. Two off the top of my head:

a) labor credits. As I understand it, you receive a (non-transferable) certificate of some kind showing how much labor hours you put in. Variations on this propose that those working in hazardous fields (eg pilot) or professions that require more education (eg scientist) should receive more credits for the same amount of labor time as a job that isn't (eg a cashier, not very hazardous nor do you need a higher degree.) The certificate can be used to "purchase" goods that are worth the same amount of labor value as what you contributed to the community. BUT keep in mind that this would not replace money. Money is a rather arbitrary way of putting a value on things; you can only express the value of money in relation to what other products are worth in it. On the other hand, the labor credits would be directly related to the worth of an abject in relation to the amount of labor put into it. Eg, let's say the amount of time it takes you to build a house is 2 days of labor. you get a certificate stating that and can then transfer it for different items that equate to that amount of time (eg if one TV represented half a day of labor, you could get four TVs.)

b) labor vouchers. Basically everyone is expected to do a certain amount of labor, eg it might be 5 hours/day. You get a certificate to prove that you did in fact do at least your required amount and then can pretty much take whatever or there might be a specific amount of goods your are entitled to (that is, staples, e.g. you might get x grams of cereal a week along with x amount of milk) and extras require that you put in extra hours.


Also, how can people take what they want/need without the presence of currency paid against products??? Let's say I wanted to bake a cake, I needed flour, milk, eggs, etc. What should I do in order to obtain these ingredients??
With labor credits/vouchers, you just go to a "store," or some sort of gathering of products, use your credits/vouchers, take your ingredients, and leave.
In a full out communist society, you would just walk up to this gathering of goods, take what you want, and leave, nothing else required.
I don't have enough posts to post links yet, but there is a thread called "Obtaining commodities in a communist society" in the Learning Forum which is very applicable to this.

[RedBen]

labor vouchers. Basically everyone is expected to do a certain amount of labor, eg it might be 5 hours/day. You get a certificate to prove that you did in fact do at least your required amount and then can pretty much take whatever or there might be a specific amount of goods your are entitled to (that is, staples, e.g. you might get x grams of cereal a week along with x amount of milk) and extras require that you put in extra hours.
i appreciate the insight. i need to read more.

[Red Commissar]

I think it should be emphasized that these political parties have different defintions of what "socialism" is and how it is to be realized. The Socialist Labor Party has a conception of what is often called industrial democracy which what they basically lay out in the link above, intertwinning it with existing structures in the form of unions.

As for the wage system the idea isn't you are working for "free", but that you are earning the fruits of your labor as far as the SLP sees it. The "wage-system" doesn't just refer to the pay check you would receive but the whole concept of exploitation by employers who profit off their labor by virtue of their position. The SLP- as would several other socialists- see the wage-system as a part of what makes exploitation possible and is a fixture of capitalism.

[NeonTrotski]

People have always done terrible but necessary jobs because they realize that they have to be done. It's possible that some responsible person would choose to do a "menial" job to benefit their community once the stigma attached to them is .

Teachers are obviously not in it for the money. Neither are firemen or social workers.
I'd rather be garbage man than a brain surgeon any day. Imagine the difference between taking out a brain and taking out the trash. Oops I spilled your trash...oh well guess I'll have to pick it up now.

wait!
The police would seem to not have chosen a career based on money. I wonder what motivates them. Public good?

[BIXX]

wait!
The police would seem to not have chosen a career based on money. I wonder what motivates them. Public good?

That may be their intention at first but it doesn't stay that way.

[UncleLenin]

I read a definition of socialism on the following link:
slp.org/res_state_htm/socialism_m_p.html

It says that a political government represented by senators etc. should be replaced by a socialist government represented by representatives of different labor unions. That sounds like a great idea, but what about the other aspects of life that do not include the production or distribution of good, such as education, healthcare, etc.? Isn't there a need for policy makers? In addition to that, if I were in a socialist country, and I wanted to own a factory, is that possible? What are the restrictions on owning property? Furthermore, It says that there is no wage system in socialism, then how do we determine what to pay people? What does "the social value" of labor mean?? Will a doctor and a garbage collector be paid the same? knowing that both occupations are needed for a functioning society??? How to you measure the output of a doctor/architect/engineer, etc??

Don't you think that if everyone was given a chance to be educated and do what they love, no one would actually "choose" to work in a "less-prestigious" but much needed job, such as a garbageman??? What solution does socialism - even in theory - offer to these problems??

There are many different forms Socialism can take. Socialism is not limited to these ideas. I personally do not agree with the idea of a garbage collector getting paid the same as a doctor, for example,but I am indeed a Socialist.

[Polaris]

wait!
The police would seem to not have chosen a career based on money. I wonder what motivates them. Public good?
Society, and especially the media, promotes the view that policemen are heroes, and becoming one is perceived as honorable and selfless. It's a ploy to make anyone who questions their oppression of others look like the bad guy.
Other motivations are the desire to have authority over others and to have an opportunity to legally act on racist/homophobic/sexist/etc. views. Even if one does not start out with these motivations, they soon have them, as Echoshock said.
Some wish to be a cop not for any of these reasons, but to be able to participate in normally illegal activities (e.g., shootouts,) without repercussions.