Distribution of Products

[KC]

I remember seeing this explained repeatedly. I was wondering how products are distributed in a communist society. I used to know this answer, but as I went to write about it I realized that I had forgotten. I remember Gent writing rather extensively on the subject, yet I can't seem to find any threads/posts explaining this.

[KC]

Anyone?

[JKP]

http://www.redstar2000papers.com/theory.ph...rt_from=&ucat=& (http://www.redstar2000papers.com/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1083202823&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secI4.html

I've been posting links to those sites quite a bit recently.

[KC]

I've been posting links to those sites quite a bit recently.

Yes, I'm sorry, as this concept has completely slipped my mind somehow.


Originally posted by Redstar2000

In other words, there will be rationing...to make sure that everyone gets an approximately equal share.

There will also be waiting lists...it's not possible to produce everything that everyone wants all at once. For example, products that require a substantial amount of co-ordinated labor to produce may be in relatively short supply...and though available upon request, may involve a considerable period of waiting before one is ready for you.


Let's say that this happens. And let's say we have two people. Each person has a different product, both of which are currently in short supply. Person A wants what Person B has and Person B wants what Person A has. What's to stop them from trading? More generally, is there anything wrong with this type of trading?



Here is a "window of opportunity" that communist society could use: those who are willing to clean the sewers and do the other kinds of boring, unpleasant jobs go to the head of the list for desirable goods in short supply. They do not get "more" than others in the long run, but they get what they want sooner.

What such people lose in "job satisfaction", they gain in "immediate material gratification"...or as close to "immediate" as we can manage.

Is this a little bourgeois thought slipped into this article? Wouldn't this material incentive promote the idea of bourgeois materialism? Regardless of the fact that this bourgeois materialism is promoting community service, isn't promoting bourgeois materialism a bad idea in general (as it can lead to bigger, worse things)?

[JKP]

Let's say that this happens. And let's say we have two people. Each person has a different product, both of which are currently in short supply. Person A wants what Person B has and Person B wants what Person A has. What's to stop them from trading? More generally, is there anything wrong with this type of trading?

Do you honestly care if someone trades his blue pencil for a red pencil?

This type of trading is not bourgeois trading; no party makes any profit.



Is this a little bourgeois thought slipped into this article? Wouldn't this material incentive promote the idea of bourgeois materialism? Regardless of the fact that this bourgeois materialism is promoting community service, isn't promoting bourgeois materialism a bad idea in general (as it can lead to bigger, worse things)?

The "wait list" option is probably the best option, but material incentives might be necessary if that can't work well enough. I admit it's somewhat of a grey area, but it's rather innocuous in my opinion.

However, we should demand ultra-leftism as the first option.

[KC]

Do you honestly care if someone trades his blue pencil for a red pencil?

This type of trading is not bourgeois trading; no party makes any profit.

I don't. I noticed that as I was typing that response. I got too hung up on the word "trade" to realize that there's nothing wrong with it.



However, we should demand ultra-leftism as the first option.

Ultra-leftism?