Who wants to be the garbage men?

[Habermas]

So, I've been wondering the question mentioned in the thread title. I fully believe a janitor should be just as respected as a doctor however I would rather for example be a doctor than a janitor. In a socialist state or communist society, who would do the construction jobs for example that are so important?

[Creative Destruction]

Automate the process as much as possible. Nonetheless, there are still people who prefer construction work over being a doctor, so those people would be able to express their desires still.

[Lord Testicles]

So, I've been wondering the question mentioned in the thread title. I fully believe a janitor should be just as respected as a doctor however I would rather for example be a doctor than a janitor. In a socialist state or communist society, who would do the construction jobs for example that are so important?

Who does them now?

[The Feral Underclass]

I'll do it. I think being a rubbish collector would be pretty awesome. I much prefer getting my work done early in the morning and it's a great way to keep fit.

[The Feral Underclass]

So, I've been wondering the question mentioned in the thread title. I fully believe a janitor should be just as respected as a doctor however I would rather for example be a doctor than a janitor. In a socialist state or communist society, who would do the construction jobs for example that are so important?

Why can't the janitor and the doctor be the same person?

[Redistribute the Rep]

Should I assume nobody in your house takes out the garbage without compensation, since the idea is so foreign to you?

People will have to do these jobs simply because we want them done. If we don't want the end product enough to put in the work for it, well, then maybe it wasn't something really needed or wanted that much in the first place.

[Illegalitarian]

I actually helped collect garbage for my community once. It was kind of neat. I'd do it again

[Blake's Baby]

There is another question that is equally important - who would be a doctor? It's really hard to do and takes loads of training. Wouldn't everybody just want to be a binman instead, as you don't need to train and study so much?

What we're going to do is free up the processes so that those who want to be doctors are enabled to be doctors, and those that want to be janitors can be janitors. Loads of people are doing jobs that they hate and they're not very good at because the alternative in capitalism is worse.

Someone might like looking after some building, but can't afford to live on a janitor's salary so they gat a job as a truck-driver instead, a job that gets them more money but maybe they don't get to see their family as much as they want. Meanwhile, one of the kids that they don't get to see wants to go to medical school but can't afford the school fees; they end up taking a custodial job instead to get some money... that's just a stupid system. It's almost designed to produce terrible results for most people.

[Red Star Rising]

All the people who aren't okay with rotting garbage on the streets presumably.

[rena]

I wouldn't mind being a trash collector or a janitor, so long as I wasn't forced to do so in order to live. In fact, I actually like janitorial work: I am good at it, I like cleaning, and if you fuck up people wouldn't die like if you were a doctor. The only reason I would consider being a doctor a 'better' job is because you get paid a hell of a lot more for doctoring than for cleaning or if you really like helped people like those who do doctors without borders. If money didn't exist, there would be a lot of jobs I would love to do, since I wouldn't have to worry about income.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

1: Stop producing garbage.
Or, like, sure, some waste is inevitable, but capitalist society produces trash on a historically unprecedented scale. Perfectly good shit goes in the trash. Things are made under the assumption that things should be made specifically to end up in the trash. Etc.

2: Wash your own damn dishes.
Capitalism consistently infantalizes and reduces humans to useless babies. After the revolution - assuming a revolutionary process requires people to take some responsibility for their own lives - maybe people will learn to deal with their own damn trash instead of expecting to just leave it on the curb and have someone come and take it away for them.

3: Skill-share!
Want to learn to drive a big truck? To operate a compactor? Why not? The more the merrier, many hands make light work, etc.

[Crabbensmasher]

"And so you're asking me, who does the dishes after the revolution?
Well, we do our own dishes now, we'll do our own dishes then.
And it's always the ones who don't who ask that fucking question."

[Prof. Oblivion]

I always found it kind of absurd that leftists presume to have the answers to every question about how their individual ideal utopian society would operate. Frankly I think the only reasonable answer to OP's question is who knows? And that's okay, because it's not for us to decide. A better response to OP's very common question would be to show that it's a fundamentally flawed question in the first place, presuming that Marxists have some kind of conception of what the future will look like and therefore need to address such questions for fear of having their whole framework collapse.

That isn't the case at all. We aren't here to offer visions of the future. Nobody here is a fortune teller, nor - presumably - a time traveler. In the past, garbage men didn't exist. Why? Because rubbish was relegated to the household, and it was dealt with accordingly. Only in an industrialized, capitalist society, do we actually see a mode of production for garbage itself. So, just as society has historically met the needs of waste removal given the prevailing social relations of the time, in the future it would not be unreasonable to expect the same, though we shouldn't be concerned with the details.

Extrapolating from this, if we thought of garbage disposal as an industry that would be fundamentally transformed with the fundamental transformation of social relations, then of course the job of the garbage man would be fundamentally transformed as well. What that means, again, nobody knows, and none of us should really care to ponder about, because what's the point of thinking about futuristic garbage men?

[Creative Destruction]

I always found it kind of absurd that leftists presume to have the answers to every question about how their individual ideal utopian society would operate. Frankly I think the only reasonable answer to OP's question is who knows? And that's okay, because it's not for us to decide.

It's also okay for us to imagine and give some semblance of an idea about what may be in the offing in the future. That's not to endorse blueprinting, which is the idea that everything must go according to a set plan; but we need to articulate some imagination beyond "The revolution will come and people then will have to figure it out for themselves." There's no temporal restrictions on when all of this would happen. It could be that the revolution comes one month and the dictatorship of the proletariat lasts for a week; and then we have the conditions for communism. It's not a crime for us to imagine now what we would want to see or what could happen, along logical lines, in a complete transcendence of capital. In fact, doing such a task may invite people to be more imaginative when they ask these questions (again, with the caveat that it might not go according to that plan. And that part is okay.) We don't have crystal balls, but we haven't been robbed of our reasoning and imagination, either.

[Palmares]

1: Stop producing garbage.
Or, like, sure, some waste is inevitable, but capitalist society produces trash on a historically unprecedented scale. Perfectly good shit goes in the trash. Things are made under the assumption that things should be made specifically to end up in the trash. Etc.

2: Wash your own damn dishes.
Capitalism consistently infantalizes and reduces humans to useless babies. After the revolution - assuming a revolutionary process requires people to take some responsibility for their own lives - maybe people will learn to deal with their own damn trash instead of expecting to just leave it on the curb and have someone come and take it away for them.

3: Skill-share!
Want to learn to drive a big truck? To operate a compactor? Why not? The more the merrier, many hands make light work, etc.

Indeed, The Garbage Disposal Unit knows all about garbage disposal!

I've had a few friends who have been, where I come from, are called "garbos", and it's actually a really dangerous job.


Statistics show waste collection to be one of the most dangerous jobs, at times even more dangerous than police work, but consistently less dangerous than commercial fishing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_fishing) and ranch and farm work. On-the-job hazards include broken glass; medical waste (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biohazard) such as syringes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syringe); caustic chemicals; falling objects from overloaded containers; diseases that may accompany solid waste; asbestos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbestos); dog attacks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_attack) and pests (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermin); inhaling dust, smoke, and fumes; inclement weather, traffic accidents, and odors so foul that they can make one physically sick.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste_collector

So as a result, irrespective of who is to do it, I think it deserves alot more respect than what it currently does. But if we were to reduce waste, it certainly would reduce alot of the risks involved. And if we were all to co-operatively engage in waste disposal, reducing the risks involved would be directly important to all of us.

[The Intransigent Faction]

It's also okay for us to imagine and give some semblance of an idea about what may be in the offing in the future. That's not to endorse blueprinting, which is the idea that everything must go according to a set plan; but we need to articulate some imagination beyond "The revolution will come and people then will have to figure it out for themselves." There's no temporal restrictions on when all of this would happen. It could be that the revolution comes one month and the dictatorship of the proletariat lasts for a week; and then we have the conditions for communism. It's not a crime for us to imagine now what we would want to see or what could happen, along logical lines, in a complete transcendence of capital. In fact, doing such a task may invite people to be more imaginative when they ask these questions (again, with the caveat that it might not go according to that plan. And that part is okay.) We don't have crystal balls, but we haven't been robbed of our reasoning and imagination, either.

This. The OP has nothing to do with blueprinting every aspect of a future communist society. It's simply a question regarding alternative (and better) motivations to perform certain tasks, the answer to which can be provided easily enough without a crystal ball.

[Redhead]

Im an construction apprentice. I had the grades and opportunity to take a high education, but i choose this because i prefer it.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

at times even more dangerous than police work,

Pigs and their exaggeration of the dangers they face, they do that all the time. IIRC many prosaic things are far more dangerous than pigwork. Pigs (no bad wishes to actual pigs) just say this shit to be excused when they start shooting 12 year olds. "I was soooo afraid, I just had to shoot!"

[Ravn]

So, I've been wondering the question mentioned in the thread title. I fully believe a janitor should be just as respected as a doctor however I would rather for example be a doctor than a janitor. In a socialist state or communist society, who would do the construction jobs for example that are so important?

Fuck respect. How about decent pay or adequate compensation for ones work regardless of what one does?

[consuming negativity]

Fuck respect. How about decent pay or adequate compensation for ones work regardless of what one does?
I'll take both ty

[Creative Destruction]

btw:

oancmFO62ns

[Red Star Rising]

btw:

oancmFO62ns

If you can drive a bus you can do that, hell, as long as you can drive and walk it could be your turn to do the bins one day, kinda like jury duty I guess.

PS. That looks like so much fun, where can I get one?

[bricolage]

I think the problems with waste management are not so much collecting the rubbish (that's actually pretty easy) but sorting it and disposing or re-using it. If you look at a recycling plant it's already pretty automated and the collection could be the same. I think recycling products into new ones might be trickier. Anyway I definitely think this is something that benefits from a centralised system (so the 'who takes out the trash in your house?' analogy is a bit limited), but I also hope that rubbish post-revolution will look a lot different to the remnants of a system of planned obsolesce that we have now. In any case like I said in another thread on this, it's stupid to try and predict exactly how this would look but if we've got to a point that we can supersede capitalism I don't think sorting out the rubbish will be too much of a problem.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

given that some, but little training is required, i think that everyone could take turns with waste disposal like sweeping the streets, collecting the trash, emptying the bins and so on. in fact i dont know why we dont do this under capitalism

[RedKobra]

I've worked in menial jobs before and I'd do it again without complaint if it wasn't for the fact of the unfair division of labour and the profit motive which benefits those that don't lift a finger.

I don't think most people are against working hard or doing the dirty jobs what they object to is being made to feel like a servile underclass who don't see any of the benefit of their labour.

[Rafiq]

All of these volunteers.. it's really cute, but realistically it's not going to cut it.

We really don't know, but the idea of single-profession lives is something unique to capitalism. I expect no one will simply "be a garbage man".

[theblackmask]

Why ask who will be the janitor or garbageman? Who will be be miner? Who will be the cog in the assembly line? What person would risk their lives if they were not forced to by the market? There are plenty of jobs, especially those involved with the manufacture of modern technology, that are extremely dangerous and damaging to the environment. Not to mention the industry built on "recycling" aka poor people digging in mountains of e-waste.

[Mr. Piccolo]

I assume that the stigma associated with being a garbage collector would decline under a socialist system. Under socialism work, not wealth, would be valued. Garbage collectors play a very important role in keeping our communities clean and sanitary. They are very important in my eyes.

[Comrade #138672]

Robots, dude! :)

And, if we did not have robots, we could always distribute the work over the whole [working] population. I would not mind picking up garbage every few months or years, whatever.

[Creative Destruction]

If you can drive a bus you can do that, hell, as long as you can drive and walk it could be your turn to do the bins one day, kinda like jury duty I guess.

PS. That looks like so much fun, where can I get one?

the thing is, this is a process that doesn't have to rely on human labor at all, except for maybe fueling the trucks and overseeing that they dump refuse in the right area. but, that aside, people in the cargo trucking industry are figuring that both long and short haul trucks will be automated within the next couple of decades:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324144304578624221804774116

this partly thanks to the self-driving technology that Google is developing.

[RedBlackStar]

Why not robots?

No joke. The Socialist revolution probably won't come for another good few years, and societies been advancing at a ridiculously fast rate.

Once moneys been taken out of developing new technology and all minds have access to whatever education they choose society will then advance even faster. So again I propose to you, comrades: why not robots?

[Red Star Rising]

the thing is, this is a process that doesn't have to rely on human labor at all, except for maybe fueling the trucks and overseeing that they dump refuse in the right area. but, that aside, people in the cargo trucking industry are figuring that both long and short haul trucks will be automated within the next couple of decades:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324144304578624221804774116

this partly thanks to the self-driving technology that Google is developing.
Really? Are you sure that they are literally not going to have any drivers at all? I mean, it could be like an autopilot but you can never trust a machine alone when fucking up can kill people - like planes. In case there's an error or something...

[Ceallach_the_Witch]

there will always be people like me with a frighteningly intense hatred of rubbish, i sometimes wonder how close i really was to snapping and killing three people before neatly sorting their remains into recyclable, biodegradable and non-recyclable bins when I lived in a student house.

[Creative Destruction]

Really? Are you sure that they are literally not going to have any drivers at all? I mean, it could be like an autopilot but you can never trust a machine alone when fucking up can kill people - like planes. In case there's an error or something...

well, the trucks right now still have "drivers" in the seats, so to oversee the process, much like planes have "pilots," even though flight is something like 95% automated at this point. i mean, really, the thing to overcome here is the tendency to have mistrust in machines and more trust in whether or not a human is going to fuck up, but the reality of it is that computers (as Google has been demonstrating) have a better capacity than humans to gauge threats and hazardous situations and avoid them.

of course, machines are never going to be 100% good all the time -- there are errors in the mechanics, but, flight is basically automated perfectly at this point, so every time you fly on the commercial airliners, you're putting your trust in the "hands" of computers. if i'm remembering correctly (i read this some where but would have to dig up the source, which i don't have at this particular moment) most plane malfunctions are due almost strictly to pilot error rather than mechanical error.

there are things like moral hazards and what to do when a computer fucks up (who to blame and all that) but that's a separate issue from the progress of automation itself. i think a lot of people have a lot of unease about this, frankly, because that's what movies have taught us. in Terminator, the robot has to be taught some semblance of human emotions and feelings before he's accepted or trusted. and in Robocop, we don't trust the big ED-209 because it's purely mechanical, where as Robocop still has the semblance of humanity (this is actually one of the points that i liked in Robocop II better: both machines were based in human interactions, and, arguably, led to a shit ton more carnage and destruction than in the first movie.)

but that all aside, that's the major thing we need to overcome. i think we barely trust ourselves as it is, which is a huge issue itself, so the thought of trusting a machine (even though, to a large extent, we do and just don't know it) is beyond the pale.

[Comrade #138672]

Really? Are you sure that they are literally not going to have any drivers at all? I mean, it could be like an autopilot but you can never trust a machine alone when fucking up can kill people - like planes. In case there's an error or something...Fun fact: automobiles driving on autopilot, with the use of neural networks, and similar technology, are already superior to humans in their capabilities. It is nice to "feel" like you are in control, but in this case, the statistics make it clear that humans can be outperformed in safety by artificial agents, at least when it comes to driving in traffic.

[RedBlackStar]

Fun fact: automobiles driving on autopilot, with the use of neural networks, and similar technology, are already superior to humans in their capabilities. It is nice to "feel" like you are in control, but in this case, the statistics make it clear that humans can be outperformed in safety by artificial agents, at least when it comes to driving in traffic.

Notable statistic to back this up is that 100% of plane accidents have been caused by human error. The autopilot has never once failed and many pilots claim that they nap every so often on long flights, due to the autopilot negating the need for them except in emergency circumstances and also landing and taking off.

[ckaihatsu]

Don't forget:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_gasification


Plasma gasification

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Plasma gasification is a process which converts organic matter into synthetic gas,[1] electricity,[2] and slag[1] using plasma. A plasma torch powered by an electric arc is used to ionize gas and catalyze organic matter into synthetic gas and solid waste (slag).[1][3][4] It is used commercially as a form of waste treatment and has been tested for the gasification of biomass and solid hydrocarbons, such as coal, oil sands, and oil shale.[3]




Process[edit]

A plasma torch itself typically uses an inert gas such as argon. The electrodes vary from copper or tungsten to hafnium or zirconium, along with various other alloys. A strong electric current under high voltage passes between the two electrodes as an electric arc. Pressurized inert gas is ionized passing through the plasma created by the arc. The torch's temperature ranges from 4,000 to 25,000 °F (2,200 to 13,900 °C).[5] The temperature of the plasma reaction determines the structure of the plasma and forming gas. This can be optimized to minimize ballast contents[6][clarification needed], composed of the byproducts of oxidation: CO2, N, H2O, etc..

The waste is heated, melted and finally vaporised. At these conditions molecular dissociation can occur by breaking down molecular bonds. Complex molecules are separated into individual atoms. The resulting elemental components are in a gaseous phase. Molecular dissociation using plasma is referred to as "plasma pyrolysis."[7]


Feedstocks[edit]

The feedstock for plasma waste treatment is most often municipal solid waste, organic waste, or both. Feedstocks may also include biomedical waste and hazmat materials. Content and consistency of the waste directly impacts performance of a plasma facility. Pre-sorting and recycling useful material before gasification provides consistency. Too much inorganic material such as metal and construction waste increases slag production, which in turn decreases syngas production. However, a benefit is that the slag itself is chemically inert and safe to handle (certain materials may affect the content of the gas produced, however[2]). Shredding waste before entering the main chamber helps to increase syngas production. This creates an efficient transfer of energy which ensures more materials are broken down.[2]

For better processing, air and/or steam is added into plasma gasificator.


Yields[edit]

Pure highly calorific synthetic gas consists predominantly of Carbon monoxide (CO), H2, CH, among other components. The conversion rate of plasma gasification exceeds 99%.[8] Non-flammable inorganic components in the waste stream are not broken down. This includes various metals. A phase change from solid to liquid adds to the volume of slag.

Plasma processing of waste is ecologically clean. The lack of oxygen prevents the formation of many toxic materials. The high temperatures in a reactor also prevent the main components of the gas from forming toxic compounds such as furans, dioxins, nitrogen oxides, or sulfur dioxide. Water filtration removes ash and gaseous pollutants.

The production of ecologically clean synthetic gas is the standard goal. The gas product contains no phenols or complex hydrocarbons however circulating water from filtering systems is toxic. The water removes toxins (poisons) and the hazardous substances which must be cleaned.[9]

Metals resulting from plasma pyrolysis can be recovered from the slag and eventually sold as a commodity. Inert slag is granulated. This slag grain is used in construction. A portion of the syngas produced feeds on-site turbines, which power the plasma torches and thus support the feed system. This is self-sustaining electric power.[8]


Equipment[edit]

Gasification reactors operate at negative pressure[1] and recovers both[10] gaseous and solid resources.


Advantages[edit]

The main advantages of plasma technologies for waste treatment are:

Clean destruction of hazardous waste,[11]

preventing hazardous waste from reaching landfills,[12][13]

no harmful emissions of toxic waste,[14]

production of clean alloyed slag which could be used as construction material,[15]

processing of organic waste into combustible syngas for electric power and thermal energy,[16] and

production of value-added products (metals) from slag.[17]


Disadvantages[edit]

Main disadvantages of plasma technologies for waste treatment are:

Large initial investment costs relative to landfill[18] and
The plasma flame reduces the diameter of the sampler orifice over time, necessitating occasional maintenance.[19]


Commercialization[edit]

Main article: Plasma gasification commercialization

Municipal-scale plasma gasification is used commercially for waste disposal[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] in nine locations with five more projects in development. Sites for gasification facilities are often at landfills where recuperative landfill mining can return the landfills to their original states. Plasma arc gasification is a safe means to destroy both medical[28] and other hazardous waste.[1]

In the Northeast of England in the United Kingdom plasma gasification technology is being implemented within the Northeast of England Process Industry Cluster(NEPIC) on Teesside by Air Products. This company is building two units to gasify societal waste to produce energy with the synthesis gas produced.[29]


Military Use[edit]

The US Navy is employing Plasma Arc Waste Destruction System (PAWDS) on its latest generation Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier. The compact system being used will treat all combustible solid waste generated on board the ship. After having completed factory acceptance testing in Montreal, the system is scheduled to be shipped to the Huntington Ingalls shipyard for installation on the carrier.[30]