Ummm...What's this called?

[MarxistHumanist]

Generally, i would say i am more of a "marxist humanist social-democrat" or "marxist humanist anarchist/communist". Not sure if democracy is needed, but sounds interesting to have a communist or socialist democracy.

But i had the idea of removing the companies and replacing them with small organisations of a couple of workers who organise themselves, working to achieve a profit that is split equally among them. With no boss soaking up most of the profit, people can live from the work of 20 hours per week. They have the freedom to choose whether they want to earn more money or simply work more, by taking on another job, as they have the time for it in this system. If they want to, they can just work a minimum hours per week and have plenty of time to enjoy their lifes and fulfill themselves. There are no minimum or maximum holidays per year. You just decide to save some money so you can pay your holidays and buy necessary things during that time. You always have the option to help out somewhere to gain more money for this. There is not this stupid enforcement of most jobs being 40 hours a week, instead the freedom of creating the life you want with the time you want to have and the time you want to work, with barely any restrictions.
Life could be some kind of building set.

[ckaihatsu]

Generally, i would say i am more of a "marxist humanist social-democrat" or "marxist humanist anarchist/communist". Not sure if democracy is needed, but sounds interesting to have a communist or socialist democracy.

But i had the idea of removing the companies and replacing them with small organisations of a couple of workers who organise themselves, working to achieve a profit that is split equally among them.


'Profit' necessarily implies the exploitation of labor by capital and the expropriation of surplus labor value:


[11] Labor & Capital, Wages & Dividends

http://s6.postimg.org/nzhxfqy9d/11_Labor_Capital_Wages_Dividends.jpg (http://postimg.org/image/f4h3589gt/full/)


[23] A Business Perspective on the Declining Rate of Profit

http://s6.postimg.org/dkv92iinl/23_A_Business_Perspective_on_the_Declining_Rat.jpg (http://postimg.org/image/yuivdcyy5/full/)


---





With no boss soaking up most of the profit, people can live from the work of 20 hours per week. They have the freedom to choose whether they want to earn more money or simply work more, by taking on another job, as they have the time for it in this system. If they want to, they can just work a minimum hours per week and have plenty of time to enjoy their lifes and fulfill themselves. There are no minimum or maximum holidays per year. You just decide to save some money so you can pay your holidays and buy necessary things during that time. You always have the option to help out somewhere to gain more money for this. There is not this stupid enforcement of most jobs being 40 hours a week, instead the freedom of creating the life you want with the time you want to have and the time you want to work, with barely any restrictions.
Life could be some kind of building set.


Technicalities of the monetary system aside, it sounds like you do want workers to have autonomy and self-direction over their own labor power and lives.

On the topic of 'money', here's what I advocate -- see my blog entry as well, if you like....





[T]he idea for labor credits is about only materially / socially recognizing *labor effort* in a formal-economy kind of way, but *not* materials, resources, or infrastructure, since they're supposed to always be 'open-access', anyway, by definition.

So by having a vehicle for the interchange of labor-hour-based considerations, we can see that the only economic variable remaining is liberated labor as a *service*, which initiates all production, as of goods.

But -- there is *no exchangeability* between labor credits and materials / resources / infrastructure, because it's a bad idea -- it's too much like commodification, only invites the use of exchange values, and is untenable, as in the well-known proposal of conventional 'labor vouchers'.

[L.A.P.]

Wreaks of syndicalism

[Sewer Socialist]

That is so-called "market socialism", a pathetic idealist concoction of the petty-bourgeois, which usually involves self-righteously shopping at co-ops and buying "fair-trade" coffee; I feel this mostly serves to reinforce the liberal ideology that the market demonstrates what "the people" want.

[ckaihatsu]

That is so-called "market socialism", a pathetic idealist concoction of the petty-bourgeois, which usually involves self-righteously shopping at co-ops and buying "fair-trade" coffee; I feel this mostly serves to reinforce the liberal ideology that the market demonstrates what "the people" want.


Many roads lead to it, unfortunately -- whatever the person's political background or *intentions*, many inevitably arrive at it -- a cesspool in the terrain of theory.

Here's from a recent post at another thread:





[I]nstead of a moneyless society, everyone gets paid the same and the money that you get paid fluctuates depending on the labor and production being done every month or so.





My standing critique of the conventional 'labor voucher' proposal is that the following three components would need to be reconciled with each other, in terms of quantities, more or less in realtime: [1] liberated-labor, [2] its material productivity, [3] any proposed system of 'vouchers' that claims to represent both [1] and [2], at the same time.

No proposal that uses any system of material-exchangeable vouchers is able to be self-consistent according to these necessary criteria.