Problem with communism

[Paul R]

Ive seen this question before and Ive been asked this question before and I am never able to come up with a response:

Why should a lawyer be paid the same as a roadsweep?

I can adequately beat every other criticism of Communism but I cant defeat this

HELP!

thanks

[redstar2000]

When faced with ignorant criticisms like this, one technique is to turn the question back on the critic.

Why should a lawyer be paid 100 times as much as a street sweeper?

What does a lawyer do that's so fantastic and how long until the streets become impassable if there were no streetsweepers?

I would argue that streetsweepers (and lots of other "low status" workers) actually perform useful services.

Lawyers are fucking parasites! :angry:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[novemba]

...because a 70 year old black janitor deserves the same rights and respect (if not more) as a 24 year old yuppie lawyer straight outta harvard...

[violencia.Proletariat]

meh, i dont think there would be a proffession of a lawyer in communism, maybe part time for trials, but not a career.

[Clarksist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 02:05 AM
...because a 70 year old black janitor deserves the same rights and respect (if not more) as a 24 year old yuppie lawyer straight outta harvard...
Exactly.

A lawyer has needs and wants, and may be contributing to society. But a road sweep is contributing to society as well, and he still has needs and wants. Usually the two's needs and wants are similar. They both progress society, so they should both benefit equally from that society.

[Phalanx]

What's to motivate a doctor if they're not paid as much as they used to be? I believe that a janitor (like myself) should be paid as much as a doctor, but human greed can sometimes get in the way of that. Do we just have to find people willing to work at the same wages?

[violencia.Proletariat]

Originally posted by Chinghis [email protected] 11 2005, 10:48 PM
What's to motivate a doctor if they're not paid as much as they used to be? I believe that a janitor (like myself) should be paid as much as a doctor, but human greed can sometimes get in the way of that. Do we just have to find people willing to work at the same wages?
damn, if doctors became doctors only for the paycheck it might be dangerous as they'd be rushing from patient to patient to make as much money as possible. point being, they became doctors because they wanted to help people

[Donnie]

Communism would be a moneyless society, based on mutual aid etc. If we were to implement money in a communist society people could just hold back money and let it accumulate thus creating wealthy individuals than others.

[Paul R]

Thank you all very much :)

[Hiero]

There are different ideas in relations to work in capitalist soceity and a socialist society. It's a revolution that brings about new ideas.

[Super Mario Conspiracy]

It's pretty interesting (and sad) actually, all the hard work, the work that requires physical activities and such, are the ones payed less - such as construction workers, janitors, streetwipers - hell, even cooks in pizza restaurants - while people with un-physical jobs such as lawyers, writers and etc, get thousands.

Kind of weird, isn't it?

[Clarksist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 11:51 AM
There are different ideas in relations to work in capitalist soceity and a socialist society. It's a revolution that brings about new ideas.
This is an interesting phenomenon. Post revolution in semi-socialist states (see USSR), always sees the workers willing and ready to work for the common good. Thus the jump into communism instead of socialism first, seems the best action.

[Young'un]

Yea ok, why should a road cleaner/garbage man be payed less than a lawyer?

Well, think how much people PAY to become lawyers? And you need what, a very short course on how to become a garbage man, yet years and years and thousands of money goes into becoming a lawyer. (atleast in capitalism it does, i'm pretty new to this stuff, but i dont take a side, i'm neutral)

Yes, if we didn't have garbage men we would have huge amounts of garbage on the street, causing disease and stuff, but lawyers aren't just people who help other people sue people. They do help in bring justice to alot of people.

I'd say it's a very hard question to answer.

[LSD]

Well, think how much people PAY to become lawyers?

You can't use capitalism to justify capitalism!

People pay more to be a lawyer because they are willing to pay more to be a lawyer, and they are generally willing to pay more because being a lawyer pays more.

You see, it's circular.

The question here is why should it pay more or "cost" more to be a lawyer.


Yes, if we didn't have garbage men we would have huge amounts of garbage on the street, causing disease and stuff, but lawyers aren't just people who help other people sue people. They do help in bring justice to alot of people.

So what?

Why should there be a relationship between education and work-type and material goods?

Does a lawyer actually "do more"?

Sure they can "help people", but so do street sweepers!

The point here is even if lawyers are "more useful" than street sweepers (which is very debatable), why does that mean that they "deserve" more "money"?

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by Young'[email protected] 13 2005, 12:06 AM


Well, think how much people PAY to become lawyers? And you need what, a very short course on how to become a garbage man, yet years and years and thousands of money goes into becoming a lawyer.
All schooling would be free of charge.



I propose an idea that all proffessions should consist of both menial and empowering labour. A new division of labour would have to come into play,deciding the new responsiblities of proffessions would be very hard. Old proffesions would have to merge. A janitor would also be a fix-it all and maybe a designer of tools. a lawyer would have to sort out their own damn mail and do receptionist type stuff.

[Zingu]

Why do you have it in your head that someone would be a Lawyer or a janitor all their lives in Communism? Dammit! Break away from the Capitalist mindset!

Why would we even have lawyers?! Many of the laws in capitalist system would be no longer needed.

[Livetrueordie]

well im moving further away from communism and more socialism becuase of this situation. I think a Doctor would be better comparison because lawyers don't provide a needed service.

anyways I feel they are equally needed, yet i see the need for doctors, and the less dependance for streetsweepers or garbage men. If all the Doctors decided to go on strike one day, they cannot just be replaced, while if the streetsweepers go on strike they can be replaced the next day. Its that need that unfortunatly gives the doctors reason for more. I'm not saying it's quite right that they get more, it just seems inevitable. i do think as long as someone contributes to society they diserve a life with dignity.
plz some1 prove me wrong

but I would think streetsweeping would be a work camp job or regulated. Actually it can easily be done manless, with technology. so the comparison is needless.

[Clarksist]

You can't use capitalism to justify capitalism!


Well you can, its just stupid to.


Why do you have it in your head that someone would be a Lawyer or a janitor all their lives in Communism? Dammit! Break away from the Capitalist mindset!


That's true. With the ability to have free, but proper schooling you could easily switch jobs semi-frequently.


Why would we even have lawyers?! Many of the laws in capitalist system would be no longer needed.


Just because many of the laws would be different or just non-existant, doesn't mean they ALL would.

And I'm sure many people who were lawyers would be Ghandi-esque lawyers.

[Patchy]

Because if the Lawyer was a good socialist, he wouldn't give a damn that he made more/less/the same as a street sweep or janitor. He's providing his service to people, just as the street sweep and janitor are. Money needs to be removed from the equation.

And if they retort with something like "Well the lawyer had to take 5 years of university to get to where he is", come out with something like this;

So? The lawyer was well aware of the fact that his profession of choice requires more training, he still shouldn't make 10 x the amount. He's doing what he wants, it took training, oh well, he's still doing what he wants.

Problem being most people ARE TOO DAMN GREEDY. It's all Hroshy, hroshy, hroshy. Thats the problem! Hroshy!

[Taiga]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 10:03 AM

It's all Hroshy, hroshy, hroshy. Thats the problem! Hroshy!
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously, I think you should use the word "money".
I wonder if anybody except me understands the word "hroshy" :huh:

[Batman]

Originally posted by Paul [email protected] 11 2005, 11:35 PM
Ive seen this question before and Ive been asked this question before and I am never able to come up with a response:

Why should a lawyer be paid the same as a roadsweep?

I can adequately beat every other criticism of Communism but I cant defeat this

HELP!

thanks
Who said/says that in a Socialist society everyone would be waged the same?
Please clarify which authority on the subject has ever said this.

Most anti-Socialists dont even understand it and they come out with statements like 'Well Socialism is if I have two sausages and you have none, then I give you one' and everyone is paid the same so there is no classes etc.

[Patchy]

Originally posted by Taiga+Jul 14 2005, 08:40 AM--> (Taiga @ Jul 14 2005, 08:40 AM)
[email protected] 14 2005, 10:03 AM

It's all Hroshy, hroshy, hroshy. Thats the problem! Hroshy!
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously, I think you should use the word "money".
I wonder if anybody except me understands the word "hroshy" :huh: [/b]
:lol:

Yeah, I guesso.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2005, 07:11 AM
Who said/says that in a Socialist society everyone would be waged the same?
Please clarify which authority on the subject has ever said this.

Most anti-Socialists dont even understand it and they come out with statements like 'Well Socialism is if I have two sausages and you have none, then I give you one' and everyone is paid the same so there is no classes etc.
Right, exactly. There is no reason why under socialism, or any situation where there still are wages, everyone has to be paid the same.

The gap would be less. Nobody has to pay huge amounts to go to law school or med school under socialism after all. But some compensation for the time and effort involved in going to school would be reasonable.

See Marx's explanation of the difference between "simple labor-power" and "compound labor-power" in Capital.

Under socialism, people would be paid in proportion to the contribution to society.

And under communism, people wouldn't be paid exactly the same either...it would be "to each according to their needs" and of course people's needs vary as much as their abilities. (Basically: no wages or rationing, people take what they need, once society is rich enough to easily afford it.)

That removes the material incentive to become a doctor, sure, but it's more enjoyable than menial work anyway. Mark Twain wrote a very clever bit about this once, how someone is paid better to be a violinist, which he'd do for love of it anyway, than to do some crap job which everyone hates.

At some point, I bet society will have to give incentives to do unpleasant or dangerous jobs, not prestigious onces...in the evolution to communism, it wouldn't surprise me if garbage collectors or sewer workers were the last to receive special pay, not doctors.

[Black Dagger]

point being, they became doctors because they wanted to help people

Haha, how many med-students do you know!? From my experience, that is not true at all.

[Mujer Libre]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 18 2005, 06:02 AM

point being, they became doctors because they wanted to help people

Haha, how many med-students do you know!? From my experience, that is not true at all.
Unfortunately Dagger i right... That doesn&#39;t apply to me though... <_< I&#39;m one of the good med students, I swear&#33;&#33;

But an example of the attitude of med students is me talking to a guy in my class about a clinical placement I was on. I said something about driving out to house calls, and he interrupted saying "What, in his Porsche?"

I rolled my eyes and explained that it was a dirty battered Toyota with a baby seat in the back and ham sandwiches lying on the seat... I guess his dreams were shattered.

[Taiga]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 18 2005, 09:02 AM

point being, they became doctors because they wanted to help people

Haha, how many med-students do you know&#33;? From my experience, that is not true at all.
In capitalist societies like US, doctors are very well-paid. In my country they get very little. But there are still a lot of people that want to become doctors. I know several, they aren&#39;t just greedy.

[Holocaustpulp]

The problem with capitalism is that it ultimately generalizes society into classes based on the imaginary wage distinction. The more common jobs (for the majority of the people) are subordinated to the employers and the bourgeois in general on the basis that they don&#39;t deserve as much pay. Aside from considering that all jobs are pivitol to society and hence merit equal wage (which is a very good argument), one can also attack capitalism in the field of theory. That is, wage distinction is not justified at all in capitalism because there is no set scale of opportunity, i.e., class distinction (working in a cycle) renders biased cirucumstance in which the rich always stay on top by offering more capitalist opportunity to the highest class. Hence, opportunity does not exist in capitalism, and it is class that makes this happens. Therefore, it is not logical at all that a capitalist should argue in favor of wage distinction for there is nothing AT ALL to base this claim on.

Also, in communism one is free to persue his individual interests and is provided the basis (equal opportunity as brought upon by economic equality) to do so; class and exploitation play no role in hindering one&#39;s dreams. That is why individuality does not exist in capitalism, for there are too many generalizations.

As soon as we ignore such generalizations that compose the class system, the better off we&#39;ll be.

- Holocaustpulp

[OleMarxco]

Originally posted by "Taiga"
In capitalist societies like US, doctors are very well-paid. In my country they get very little. But there are still a lot of people that want to become doctors. I know several, they aren&#39;t just greedy.

Y&#39;I know, what you say&#33; N&#39; what-you-mean. But, al&#39;tho not lusty-fer-gol&#39; at first sight, it might happen - after a while in the "branch", if you catch my drift. Which you prolly&#39;ron&#39;t, o&#39;course, but I could always try, y&#39;see?
Not ;)

Anyways an&#39;know-how.....
The fact that&#39;s &#39;rere &#39;is difference between U-S and "Your country", whatever it might be (Holdin&#39; yer kard&#39;s close to yer body, ain&#39;t cha&#33; Just &#39;cuz ye&#39;re a commie - ye&#39;re afraid of gettin&#39; spotted IRL? I&#39;m not. I live In Norway&#33;) is obviously &#39;cuz there&#39;s not &#39;DISBALANS inside countries - There&#39;s too, outside of them, RELATED to other&#39;s. And the fact that - Some burgerouise&#39;s values their doctors well..others not. Depends on the doctor&#39;s, me sposeth, MUAHAHHEHEHEH :D

[Ownthink]

Originally posted by Super Mario [email protected] 12 2005, 04:24 PM
It&#39;s pretty interesting (and sad) actually, all the hard work, the work that requires physical activities and such, are the ones payed less - such as construction workers, janitors, streetwipers - hell, even cooks in pizza restaurants - while people with un-physical jobs such as lawyers, writers and etc, get thousands.

Kind of weird, isn&#39;t it?
Well, that&#39;s the backwards society of Capitalism for ya. Really, the "low class" workers are the backbone of Society. Without them, life as we know it would cease to exist. Ambulance drivers, Janitors, Street Sweepers, Garbage Takers, etc.. without them, we would die, everywhere would be a festering mess, the roads would be impassable, garbage would fester everywhere.. etc. THEY should be the ones being paid the big bucks (In this Capitalist Society), although in an ideal Society, EVERYONE WOULD BE PAID THE SAME, EVERYONE WOULD BE EQUAL&#33; You can&#39;t have any oil-tycoon billionaires if there are no workers drilling the oil.

Onward Communism.

[Ownthink]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 10:23 PM
well im moving further away from communism and more socialism becuase of this situation. I think a Doctor would be better comparison because lawyers don&#39;t provide a needed service.

anyways I feel they are equally needed, yet i see the need for doctors, and the less dependance for streetsweepers or garbage men. If all the Doctors decided to go on strike one day, they cannot just be replaced, while if the streetsweepers go on strike they can be replaced the next day. Its that need that unfortunatly gives the doctors reason for more. I&#39;m not saying it&#39;s quite right that they get more, it just seems inevitable. i do think as long as someone contributes to society they diserve a life with dignity.
plz some1 prove me wrong

but I would think streetsweeping would be a work camp job or regulated. Actually it can easily be done manless, with technology. so the comparison is needless.
You cannot drive to see the doctor if the streets are blocked and impassable with trash.

[Che1990]

Originally posted by Chinghis [email protected] 12 2005, 03:48 AM
What&#39;s to motivate a doctor if they&#39;re not paid as much as they used to be? I believe that a janitor (like myself) should be paid as much as a doctor, but human greed can sometimes get in the way of that. Do we just have to find people willing to work at the same wages?
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

Basically; help others to help yourself.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Also in Communist society with better educational options. The young would be taught more useful things by better educated teachers and other members of the community. Instead of R.E. maybe basic medicine etc. Need to change a washer in a tap, ask the local plumber to show you so you can do it. The capatalist educational system takes a young person with a little knowledge about everything and makes them an expert on very little. In a communist society people would share trades and knowledge more freely which would mean your average janitor today would instead be able to carry out a number of jobs in a communist society.

[Black Dagger]

In capitalist societies like US, doctors are very well-paid. In my country they get very little. But there are still a lot of people that want to become doctors. I know several, they aren&#39;t just greedy.

That&#39;s a good point, although doctors still get paid more than construction workers where you live, yes? In all most every society doctors are comparatively well-paid. But you still make a good point.

[Ownthink]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 07:28 AM
Communism would be a moneyless society, based on mutual aid etc. If we were to implement money in a communist society people could just hold back money and let it accumulate thus creating wealthy individuals than others.
I&#39;m new to Communism, so please excuse my ignorance...

But what about things like the computer we&#39;re using to type this on? Where would that come from, if you cannot buy it?

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Originally posted by Ownthink+Jul 19 2005, 04:16 PM--> (Ownthink @ Jul 19 2005, 04:16 PM)
[email protected] 12 2005, 07:28 AM
Communism would be a moneyless society, based on mutual aid etc. If we were to implement money in a communist society people could just hold back money and let it accumulate thus creating wealthy individuals than others.
I&#39;m new to Communism, so please excuse my ignorance...

But what about things like the computer we&#39;re using to type this on? Where would that come from, if you cannot buy it? [/b]
Given a surplus of computers, you&#39;d just be given one.
The specific distribution of computers would probably be decided democraticly at a community level, based on the number of computers, and the number of people who wanted computers.
While I imagine a certain surplus of computers, in the unusual case that there might not be enough to "Go round", computers might be held publicly, rather than as individual possessions - ie available in open public spaces, or to borrow for certain periods for private use.
Of course, it really depends of individual circumstances - that&#39;s the beauty of authentic direct economic democracy.

Who would make the computers? Probably the same people who do now (and future generations of people who&#39;d have done similar work under capitalism) - everyone would continue to produce for the benefit of all.

(I&#39;d go to work a few hours a day if I knew it meant I&#39;d get everything free, haha)

[CrazyModerate]

Doctor is a better example for this argument. They actually require high skill training and perform very important jobs. I believe both compassionate and very hard working people should be doctors. It is a very important job.

[Livetrueordie]

You cannot drive to see the doctor if the streets are blocked and impassable with trash. yes but i could make an effort to clear them myself, whle i cannot diagnose and treat my illness

[Ownthink]

You cannot clear entire streets blocked with tons of garbage, just as you cannot dress or heal your wound. You need a Streetsweeper and a Doctor for that.


Onward Communism.

[Black Dagger]

While I imagine a certain surplus of computers, in the unusual case that there might not be enough to "Go round", computers might be held publicly, rather than as individual possessions - ie available in open public spaces, or to borrow for certain periods for private use.


Just think about how many computers are wasted in service of business now, in the &#39;financial sector&#39;, millions?

[Seeker]

Why should a lawyer be paid the same as a roadsweep?

Why think in terms of a salary?

I&#39;m under the impression that, at least in theory, labor would not be for sale, and payment would not be the motive for working.

A roadsweep would sweep roads because either he didn&#39;t have the skill to be a lawyer, or didn&#39;t enjoy that kind of work. The lawyer would find it fascinating and to argue his interpretation of law would be rewarding in itself.

[Livetrueordie]

You cannot clear entire streets blocked with tons of garbage, just as you cannot dress or heal your wound. You need a Streetsweeper and a Doctor for that.


Onward Communism. and this(streetsweeper) is public property which i would have access too (Im not sure if ur refferring to a machine or a person). Just as well all the other people living in the area would help clean the streets also or be forced to stay in there house for a long ass time. Streetsweeping isnt and acquired talent.

[Ownthink]

^ Well, then you&#39;re essentially THE streetsweeper&#33; Everyone has work, and you could choose what it is to be&#33; I&#39;m sure some would choose to be streetsweepers, because they would get everything the same as a doctor or lawyer, without all that schooling.

[Livetrueordie]

exactly- but i cannot just become a doctor when there is a shortage, or they are on strike...

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 06:38 PM
exactly- but i cannot just become a doctor when there is a shortage, or they are on strike...
As technology advances, it&#39;s concievable that doctors will require less and less training. Similarly, there are some "menial" jobs that I&#39;m sure many a doctor would be incapable of . . . but, that aside . . .

Who the fuck do you go out on strike against in a self-managed economy? What do you strike for? The idea is absurd&#33;
One simply cannot walkout in defiance of themselves, to demand that they grant themselves more of what they already have.

As to shortages (of doctors), this problem exists under capitalism too. My own region, in fact, has a lack of doctors DUE to capitalism.

Bam.

[RATMFan]

I think the real question would be that what motivation is there for a person to get the education needed and put the time and effort to learn the skills needed to be a lawyer if they are going to be compensated the same as the streetsweeper?

[anomaly]

The real question is why in the hell we would need lawyers in communism at all. In communism, I think a &#39;weeding out&#39; of unneccesary labor is essential. While a street sweeper is neccesary (even though this occupation could be replaced by simply voluntary collective labor), a lawyer most certainly is not.

Now, we will need doctors still in communism. I think the simple reason one may want to be a doctor is to satisfy one&#39;s own interests, and also be seen as a respected and important person in the commune. The intangible benefits of certain occupations will be the motivation for them, likely. Also, the division of labor will be much fuzzier than it currently is, so we could have a doctor who is also a street sweeper&#33;

[RATMFan]

Do you honestly think that everyone will work out of pure good will? Yes there may be some people who are passionate about being a doctor or a scientist but what about the REAL hard labor, do you think there are people out there who are excited about being a bus driver or a bag boy? If you provide for everyone equally i think that it would start w/ one person saying "eh i&#39;m not gonna work I&#39;ll still be taken care of" and then another and another untill you have a serious problem on your hands.

[KC]

Do you honestly think that everyone will work out of pure good will? Yes there may be some people who are passionate about being a doctor or a scientist but what about the REAL hard labor, do you think there are people out there who are excited about being a bus driver or a bag boy?

Most of the "hard labor" jobs can be easily improved so that the conditions are a lot easier, or even done away with completely (i.e. automation, or it is just not needed). Who needs a bag boy anyways? Bag your own groceries. Bus drivers could exist, but if not then buses are replaced by automated transit systems.


If you provide for everyone equally i think that it would start w/ one person saying "eh i&#39;m not gonna work I&#39;ll still be taken care of" and then another and another untill you have a serious problem on your hands.


There is a debate on this very issue going on right here. (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=38319)

[anomaly]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2005, 01:00 AM
Do you honestly think that everyone will work out of pure good will? Yes there may be some people who are passionate about being a doctor or a scientist but what about the REAL hard labor, do you think there are people out there who are excited about being a bus driver or a bag boy? If you provide for everyone equally i think that it would start w/ one person saying "eh i&#39;m not gonna work I&#39;ll still be taken care of" and then another and another untill you have a serious problem on your hands.
How large would a commune be? Maybe the size of a small city, right? So let&#39;s be practical. We don&#39;t need bus drivers: bike to school, and even bike to work. Is it really so terrible? Use a limited number of cars and let those are physically disabled in some way use them. Hell, even walk to work/school.

We simply don&#39;t need bagboys at all. What purpose do they serve? Can&#39;t we bag our own groceries?

[Seeker]

With fully-automated agriculture and strict self-imposed population controlls, a situation could be maintained where the amount of food available is enough to feed everybody even if everybody does nothing.

[More Fire for the People]

Why should a lawyer be paid the same as a roadsweep?
Because they equally depend upon each other, if the roadsweep had no doctor he would probably die of illness and if the doctor had no roadsweep he would probably die in a car crash because a newspaper flew on his window and obscured his vision.

[TJGallenger]

Well, the question at stake is not so much, to stick with the common scenario Doctor Vs. Street Sweeper and the mbeing paid equally.

You see, in a properly controled economic enviornment, and most economic situations, the common denominator in most economic equations; is labor, therefor; the labor of the Doctor should be equal to the labor of the Street Sweep (that is, in a socialist society it should be made equal). Aswell as the fact that the industrial armies are being forsaken in this question, in the ideal socialist society, a lot of the unskilled labor will be done by large industrial armies of workers, meaning the division of labor in unskilled jobs (lets say street sweeper vs resteraunt crew member) is abolished.

How is this figured? Well, each and every profession has a social benchmark. In other words, a shirt maker, makes an average shirt, under average conditions, with average skill, at a daily average of 7, this then, is the socially acceptable quantity of shirts for a laborer to create, the labor market of shirt making should then be expanded to meet the needs of society (which would be met, in this particular profession, by the industrial armies, as most textile manufacture is unskilled). Therefore; keeping in mind previous statements, we could, with proper socio-economic organization and observation, make it so that the street cleaner worked to an equal amount, on a socially neccisary basis, to the doctor. Of course, doctors or street sweepers could democratically elect to work *more* than they would technically have to, if the need is there of course, other groups of workers could then decide to expand their labor aswell, in sort of a competative labor spree.

Given the collectivist ideal is often good enough for most of us whos economic methods fall into the left, but for some more is needed.

As for bagboys, usually, in my experience; when one applies at a grocery store, you don&#39;t just become a bag boy 24/7, all the while you work there, it is simply a position that you man occasionally, or for those who are not suited to man other positions. It provides a service for older folks and disabled people, and gives many people who wish to continue to work, beyond retirement, a chance at a job. If anything, the bagboy is a testiment to the future industrial armies of Socialism.


To answer questions relating to idleness in this thread, let me whip out a Marx quote, just for fun. From a fairly commonly read work:

It has been objected that upon the abolition of private property, all work will cease, and universal laziness will overtake us.

According to this, bourgeois society ought long ago to have gone to the dogs through sheer idleness; for those those of its members who work, acquire nothing, and those who acquire anything do not work. The whole of this objection is but another expression of the tautology: that there can no longer be any wage-labour when there is no longer any capital.

Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto, chapter two. (Can be found at www.marxists.org) or more specifically http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works...ifesto/ch02.htm (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm)

(the edit was due to me typing simply "this" rather than "questions relating to idleness")