Incentives Under Communism?

[Technique3055]

All of my family is hardcore right-wing. They're typical Republicans. Typical capitalists.

The furthest right-wing of them all is my grandfather. He's a successful business man and always raves about how he was born in this country with nothing and literally rose up to be a millionaire. I see him about once a month, and for about the past year or so we've had some intelligent discussions concerning politics. I really find it interesting to get his point of view, but honestly it's nothing out of the ordinary. It's the same old right-wing debate that everyone else says. Honestly, I could tape record my response to almost everything he could possibly say, and save myself a lot of breath. But about a week ago, he brought up something that truly stumped me. I'd heard it before but I'd never truly had a good response to it. He asked me:

"In communism, what incentive would there be for a man like Bill Gates to create a business and create the millions of jobs that he created?"

Responses to that?

(It would pleasure me to no end to give him some awesome response to that next time he says it, and then watch the look on his face)

[KC]

The only incentive is satisfaction, feeling good about yourself, and happiness. Of course, a business like microsoft would never be created in a communist society.

[ZeroPain]

"In communism, what incentive would there be for a man like Bill Gates to create a business and create the millions of jobs that he created?"

None, but thats not really the anwser.

No one really needs someone to do that...its communism....

Populations would most likely be already spread out by socialism so there would be plenty of local and important jobs to be done to keep the community going.

[Livetrueordie]

millions of jobs that he createdin communism you don't need all these jobs to keep the economy stable. its not as if he would be doing people a favor by needing so many workers. the argument doesn't even apply to communism.

i would ask him why Linux is a better operating system yet no one has been paid to make it...?or if he's not familar with Linux use Firefox. there that pretty much blows his whole argument away.

[Eastside Revolt]

New technologies were being created long before capitalism ever "gave anyone incentive". When new, better technologies come out, people have no choice but to adapt, whether it's capitalism or any other system. Within communism people who enjoy working with such technologies would be able to work with them as they please. Incentive enough?

You also might want to mention that "millions of jobs" is not necessarily a good thing. One could likely produce such technologies with a much smaller staff, only within communism, those millions that aren't "in the job" wouldn't be homeless or starving.

[RedStarOverChina]

"Labor is the foundation of human dignity" ---Michael Bakunin

[Freedom Works]

That's right, but it is labor for yourself, not for the collective.

[KC]

It is labor for everybody. Everybody includes yourself. This really should've been put in learning.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Originally posted by Freedom [email protected] 4 2005, 05:05 AM
That's right, but it is labor for yourself, not for the collective.
You mean the collective of the office where I work? The collective effort that goes to make my company profit whereas I don't see any of that profit?

I think I may agree with you there.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 11:18 PM
This really should've been put in learning.
Moved


"In communism, what incentive would there be for a man like Bill Gates to create a business and create the millions of jobs that he created?"

This is just arogant capitalist retoric. You don&#39;t create jobs; this is just a phrase used to inflate cappitalist&#39;s egos. You can employ someone and thus, there is no job creation involved in capitalism; in conrast, under communism, possitions that will likely be held for decades or longer are available for people; yet these are not created, they are simply free opportunities. The capitalists only lift restrictions on the laber market by wealthy interest groups; you can only work, if they are willing to finance you <_<

[slim]

Aye, im learning economics to understand my enemy more. In capitalism, companies decide who works, they have control and our government are soon going to clamp down on self employment through taxes. In communism, the people decide who works according to needs.

As for office work. A lot of it wouldnt exist under communism would it? The main role of office work is to make money from money (and screwing people over in the process), under communism there is no need for money and distribution of resources would be in the hands of the people, not companies. This may have a massive impact on where people work and in what field. Would cities be the same bustling financial centres or just for private trade? Who has the right to sell stone and building materials? Who has ownership of trees for wood?

Opinions please?

[Connolly]

Please, I advise you to read some other topic on this. I really dont want to write a ton of stuff about this again (A ton I must - its long and tricky to explain :D ).

Basically, Work is not necessary under communism. Communism is a higher form of production. According to the present and logical direction of production, automation is not only inevitable, but this next form. Automation being the elimination of the worker and necessity to work.

Discussion available in > Theory> Material basis for anarchism > pages 2 and 3.

Incentive to work not necessary. Many will come up with unmaterialist theories about Idealist incentives to work. Ye might as well be justifying religion or the flat earth society - both can come up with magical explanations about how things work, but its just rubbish in the end with no true basis.

TRB

[violencia.Proletariat]

necessities come first, thats self explanitory. then secondly the incentive of making luxuries is that, YOU GET LUXURIES. its not hard to understand.

[ZeroPain]

necessities come first, thats self explanitory. then secondly the incentive of making luxuries is that, YOU GET LUXURIES. its not hard to understand.

MAKE MORE CONDOMS, FASTER&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;
:P

[bezdomni]

People will work because they want to.

Under capitalism, work is seen as a form of punishment (or at least something negative). It&#39;s because when you are selling your labor to make a living, you are giving away 8 hours of your life. This alienates the person from their species-essence and their being-essence. Species-essence concerns things such as eating, sleeping, drinking, having sex...etc. When you work, you aren&#39;t doing the things that your species is supposed to do. Work alienates you from the very things that make you a human.

Alienation from being-essence is the alienation of the worker from the things that make them unique. When you are working, you are not being individually creative or making maximum use of your mental and artistic abilities.

Under capitalism, there is little incentive to work other than you will starve.

Under socialism, work becomes fulfilling.

Also, capitalism requires unemployment and crippling poverty to keep the working masses afraid of losing their jobs. It would be possible to eliminate unemployment and poverty (raising wages, lowering hours and hiring more workers), but companies won&#39;t do this because being homeless is a fear of the worker. It keeps them in check, it makes them want to keep their job.