Minimum amount of people working at a time for society to work?

[RedWorker]

How many people need to be employed under capitalism for society to work? You define what "society working" means.

Would this amount change under socialism? (in this case actively performing labor, not "employed")

[Creative Destruction]

this isn't even an imaginable exercise. you'd have to blueprint the hell out of this scenario in order to come up with even a faint guess.

[Bala Perdida]

All I can say is think of a small business with an owner and the workers he exploits. As the business grows so do the number of people involved and the workers exploited. The number of owners is constant, but the number of exploiters grows complex as a hierarchy has to be introduced. If a businesses becomes a corporation the number of owners also grows.

All I can say is that the exploited usually greatly outnumber the exploiters.

This probably doesn't answer your question, but think of this society wise and you might have some idea.

[bcbm]

not that many, which is why things like 'guaranteed income' will become more common as more and more of us become superflous to the reproduction of capitalism

[tuwix]

How many people need to be employed under capitalism for society to work? You define what "society working" means.

Would this amount change under socialism? (in this case actively performing labor, not "employed")

It depends on level of automation. The greater is automation, the lesser amount is needed. And I'm afraid that socialism will change nothing by itself. The efforts for further automation will.

[Five Year Plan]

The answer to the question is 232,155. I have done all the calculations for you.

[Loony Le Fist]

How many people need to be employed under capitalism for society to work? You define what "society working" means.

Would this amount change under socialism? (in this case actively performing labor, not "employed")

That's going to depend on a lot of factors, including the level of productivity of workers. In a highly automated society, the number of employed people wouldn't need to be as high. The same conditions would apply under socialism. The difference would be in the purpose of work.

I think it is preferable for everyone to have the opportunity to work, even if it is unnecessary. It keeps one learning new things. I think work can be good for the soul. However, I feel that capitalism robs work of it's true reward. Instead of working out of a desire to improve society, we work for a paycheck. I think that's one of the reasons many people are so depressed and unsatisfied with their jobs.

If I lived in a socialist post-scarcity society it seems I would very much enjoy working. My needs would be taken care of, so I could focus on being useful instead of whether or not my rent is going to be on time, or whether I'm going to be able to put food on the table or whether I am going to be out on the street. It seems it would be quite a relief to work to benefit the community, instead of worrying about all the minutiae.

[Slavic]

The answer to the question is 232,155. I have done all the calculations for you.

Everyone can go home now.

[exeexe]

How many people need to be employed under capitalism for society to work? You define what "society working" means.

Well we cant tell you the correct answer, but we can tell you how to calculate it, should you have all the data available.

Its like a gigantic budget. You have spending and value creation.
What you need is value creation to be higher than spending.
First value creation is not the amount of stuff that is produced. For the state, this means the money it can collect through tax and tariffs on goods coming in and out of the country.
Add to the value creation you would also have invasions.

For the spending you have the ordinary police, all the welfare, the ordinary military, diplomacy, surveillance (this includes surveillance of the pollution), research, education, maintaining infrastructure and old castles, wages and pensions for the bureaucracy, wages and pensions for the politicians and head of state, financing important emerging industries like the windmill industry, the elite police, the elite military, patent houses, expenses for courthouses, judges and lawyers, cybersecurity, a spy agency, and propaganda to keep the masses away from revolting.

Some people might not think its profitable to work under a 30% tax condition while others will have their limit reached at 60% taxes. Its all about if people think they get something from their taxes or if they think it will all go into the pockets of politicians.

So yeah we cant tell you any number because it depends on subjectivity. What the producing part of the population thinks in terms of working, taxes and welfare.

[ckaihatsu]

Well we cant tell you the correct answer, but we can tell you how to calculate it, should you have all the data available.

Its like a gigantic budget. You have spending and value creation.
What you need is value creation to be higher than spending.


This is a poor way of conceptualizing it.

Rather, think of the earth / nature *devoid* of people -- just for a moment -- and then put the people "back in" and think of what they / we have to take from nature in order to live our lives and be capable of working for the common good.

This is 'socially necessary labor', and any work done *beyond* it would probably -- because of conscious collective planning -- *improve* the overall standard of living (material-quality of living), and probably socially as well.

[exeexe]

Rather, think of the earth / nature *devoid* of people -- just for a moment -- and then put the people "back in" and think of what they / we have to take from nature in order to live our lives and be capable of working for the common good.

Not in a capitalistic economy. Read what OP is asking about again.