Lazy People

[nightwatchman]

Ok I probably got a really dumb question here, What about the Lazy people of society, who can work but decide not to and just sit around all day, do they still get equal as everyone or not? By this I mean a house, radio, books, etc.

[Sentinel]

When do you mean? In a communist society? Such will be automated to the degree and organised in a manner that people can virtually pick what they want to do, to contribute.

It's the inequal wageslavery system in capitalism that makes people disillusioned and passive.

In the early, somewhat chaotic phases of the revolutionary change there might still be problems reminding of those of the capitalist era, and then people unwilling to do their part for the common good might simply end up without the benefits of it, or would at least not get much respect within their community..

But these issues will go with capitalism, and I'm one of those communists that say we should get rid of that crap asap.

But you have to understand that communism is bound to change the entire definition of work as we know it today. It will spawn an explosion of creativity of a previously unseen magnitude.

[enigma2517]

One thing I think people need answered is: how?

How do we "automate everything" and why isn't this done today?

[Sentinel]

It is increasingly done now, with the help of modern technology, although as long as capitalism remains, it creates unemployment and misery for the proletariat while the benefits fall into the pockets of the bourgeoisie in form of profits.

It's also, apparently, currently still more beneficial for the owning class to outsource production into thirdworld countries where workers can be exploited to such a degree that it's cheaper than investing in technological progress (as much as one would think they did).

A communist society on the other hand would not put the phocus on profits, but rather hold the lifting of living conditions of man as it's sole purpose. Therefore one would expect that the automation of work no-one wants to do would be a priority.

[Demogorgon]

You don't actually get that many people who simply won't work at all due to laziness. Most unemployment is caused simply because capitalism always has rtesidual labour left over. (It' an imperfect system and can't maximise the potential of it's resurces). Socialism ought to improve that to a great degree. Secondly some people are pretty ill-disposed to work these days because capitalism doesn't reward their laboour properly (in other words they can't be bothered because they don't get paid enough in relation to the work they have to do). Again socialism will go a long way towards addressing that. And as for those that simply are lazy? Well a proper socialist society would have the means to achieve full employment, they would have a lot of difficulty coming up for an excuse for not working, wouldn't they?

[Marukusu]

Such will be automated to the degree and organised in a manner that people can virtually pick what they want to do, to contribute.

But how is that supposed to work? If everyone choosed their own profession we would end up having legions of astronauts, police officers, firemen and doctors and very few sewer workers (seriously, who would voluntarily run around in a sea of filth and feces all day?) and such.

[Sentinel]

legions of ... police officers

In communism? :lol:

Seriously, I'm convinced that most work that is considered undesirable can either be shared commonly so that noone has to do it twentyfour seven, or automated.


seriously, who would voluntarily run around in a sea of filth and feces all day?

A coprophile?

[Demogorgon]

Legions of poice officers? Not withstanding my own dislike for police, it isn't actually that appealing a job to most people. The level of stress involved can put a lot of people off, not to mention the dangers involved.

[Ol' Dirty]

Shoot them. :rolleyes:

Seriously, though, if you don't help out, you shouldn't reap the benefits. It' s simply unfair to the people who did work. If you are too lazy to work, then don't expect societies support.

If you are unable to work, though, then that's different.

[Comrade Kurtz]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2006, 07:15 PM
Shoot them. :rolleyes:

Seriously, though, if you don't help out, you shouldn't reap the benefits. It' s simply unfair to the people who did work. If you are too lazy to work, then don't expect societies support.

If you are unable to work, though, then that's different.
Ah, but that's not what your communist brothers believe. After all, in capitalism if you don't work, you don't reap the benefits. It doesn't sound like there is much difference between you and them.

Thus another problem with communism.

[Sentinel]

Ah, but that's not what your communist brothers believe. After all, in capitalism if you don't work, you don't reap the benefits. It doesn't sound like there is much difference between you and them.

Pretty much the same yeah.. :rolleyes:

Except, instead of the elbowing seen in capitalism, in communism the benefits of everyones work are shared by everyone working.

That's, like, a hell of a lot more benefits for all. :o

I, naturally, agree that people unable to work must get their share, that's a different issue. Solidarity is a part of communism.

[Comrade Kurtz]

There's nothing wrong with that. In fact, I agree with you. But the idea that even the lazy don't get an equal piece of the pie doesn't jive with most of your communist buddies. Hence where socialism comes in. Same principles but if you don't work, don't expect anything more than basic necessities.

[Comrade Doug]

Are you talking about in a communist utopia? Because in a socialist phase of society there is still money involved, so it would not be beneficial to not work.

[rouchambeau]

From each according to their ability to each according to their needs.

[RebelDog]

There have been many instances where humans have lived in communities and shared the work and hunting etc without problem. Everybody benifited from this arrangement and so everybody felt better about doing their share and no one exploited or hoarded. When people could create artificial surpluss the problems came along and stay to the present day on larger scales.

The whole mindset of a communist society would be so much different than that of the free-market society we live in today. Work will be more automated when technology allows. Work would be less laborious and more productive if we simply cut out the waste associated with the free market. I don't blame people for not wanting to work today. Its soul-destroying, unrewarding, monotonus, poorly payed and unhealthy. Work would be a different place in a communist society. Democratic, socially owned, no bosses and no threat of being sacked when markets fluctuate.

Humans are more than capable of living in a civilised society where coercion no longer exists and sharing the work and benifits is normal. I do a shitty job to make people I don't know rich. I would do anything to be liberated from that.

[Ol' Dirty]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 27 2006, 03:19 PM
There's nothing wrong with that. In fact, I agree with you. But the idea that even the lazy don't get an equal piece of the pie doesn't jive with most of your communist buddies. Hence where socialism comes in. Same principles but if you don't work, don't expect anything more than basic necessities.
I'm actually not a communist, so stop calling them my "buddies (which they are, but in a different sense (BFF guys :wub: )).

[Sentinel]

There's nothing wrong with that. In fact, I agree with you. But the idea that even the lazy don't get an equal piece of the pie doesn't jive with most of your communist buddies. Hence where socialism comes in. Same principles but if you don't work, don't expect anything more than basic necessities.

Hmm. Which 'buddies' of mine are you speaking of now? Who is advocating the same benefits fot he 'lazy' as for those that work for the society? I'm not 'buddies' with that many, btw. Comrades in struggle might be closer, but if you get more involved you'll notice that there are severe ideological differencies even within the left, between communists. :(

How do you determine 'lazy', btw?

[grove street]

I was just watching this thing on the news about robot technologies and how advanced it has become these days. In a communist society or even a socialist society more time and effot will be put into making life eaiser for everyone unlike captalism where they try to make life eaiser for the rich by making it worse for the majority. Within a futuristic communist or socialist society the majority of meaningless jobs will be done by machines/robots so people will have more freedom to choose to do stuff that they are actually interested in, so pretty much everyone in a communist society would be more lazy then people today living under most captalist countries, but they will be more happier and more productive lazy people then your average slave factory worker today.

Today the means of production is so high that we have the ability to feed the world 12x over, provide clean water, education, health care, good housing and only have to work up to 6-12 hours a week, now imagine how much more eaiser it is going to be in the future.

Shit the biggest problem in a communist world wouldn't be laziness, but people over working. Why do you think that it is always the CEO who is the workerholic when the factory worker can't wait until his 12 hour shift is up? Because the CEO knows that the harder he works the more money he's going to make, while the factory worker knows he can work as hard as he wants but at the end of the month he's still going to get the same crappy pay check.

Shit the CEO could sit on his ass all day and still be making millions off his shares.
In a communist society everyone owns the means of production and because of this they will realise that the harder they work as individuals and as a society in whole the greater their standard of living increases.

[BreadBros]

One thing I think people need answered is: how?

How do we "automate everything" and why isn't this done today?

Tasks can be automated in a variety of ways. A lot of industrial production is based more on machinery and robotics, and human beings often serve merely as caretakers of the system or in roles far more reduced than in the rise of industry. In terms of other human tasks, computers aid a lot. For example, complex information networks can be managed by computers, with humans working as analysts and intervening when necessary.

It is done today, but the resources necessary to develop the technology, to build it and implement etc. is maintained by capitalist institutions. Therefore it is only done when it suits them and their profit motives. So for example, automating auto construction can lower labor costs over the long term so its done. Tasks that arent profitable or where for whatever reason paying a human is cheaper arent automated. Under a communist society, the resources would be held communally, so society would be able to re-divert those resources to automate tasks based on how it would better standards of living, not based on pure profit motive.


But how is that supposed to work? If everyone choosed their own profession we would end up having legions of astronauts, police officers, firemen and doctors and very few sewer workers (seriously, who would voluntarily run around in a sea of filth and feces all day?) and such.

Well some of those occupations are very niche. Theres obviously not very much room for careers in being an astronaut. For those jobs, people would likely be based on some kind of test of their ability or their necessity to the mission. A sense of selection would probably exist for several other jobs. If there are more people who want to be doctors than there is an actual necessity for them, people would probably realize they're wasting their time doctoring and choose to go into some other field. As for undesirable jobs, those jobs would hopefully be automated as much as possible as quickly as possible. In the interim it could turn to some kind of sense of cooperation. People in a community could take turns doing such jobs, or if they require specialization, the individuals deciding to take on those jobs might receive some kind of bonus or reward from their community for their work. Eventually, after communist production has established itself and developed sufficiently I would expect that the amount of leisure time people would be able to take would be large and many people would devote themselves to personal areas of interest, art, science, etc.



Ah, but that's not what your communist brothers believe. After all, in capitalism if you don't work, you don't reap the benefits. It doesn't sound like there is much difference between you and them.

Thus another problem with communism.

I don't think that in a communist society anyone will be denied food, housing, and the such. Theres no reason to with the vast amount of wealth and goods that we are able to produce. However, when I particularly speak of communism, I mean truly classless, state-less society. In such a world, I doubt there will be any kind of state officiating who does or doesnt get what. It will depend more on what kind of communities you are a part of, its true that some of them may or may not decide not to support individuals who refuse to contribute. I also expect that there will be a significant number of individuals who will choose to live independently and self-sufficiently. Its difficult to exactly see what communism would be like on a day-to-day basis today to be able to say how things would exactly play out. It'll likely be up to the people who actually overthrow capitalism and create a new society to decide.


Today the means of production is so high that we have the ability to feed the world 12x over, provide clean water, education, health care, good housing and only have to work up to 6-12 hours a week, now imagine how much more eaiser it is going to be in the future.

I dont know about those numbers but your point about the overall wealth of the world is right on. We live in a society that has very unequal distribution of it, thats why things may seem scarce to us at the bottom. Keep in mind this is only what its like in the present, as more societies industrialize, and technologies develop even further, things will be drastically different from even now.


Shit the biggest problem in a communist world wouldn't be laziness, but people over working. Why do you think that it is always the CEO who is the workerholic when the factory worker can't wait until his 12 hour shift is up? Because the CEO knows that the harder he works the more money he's going to make, while the factory worker knows he can work as hard as he wants but at the end of the month he's still going to get the same crappy pay check.

Shit the CEO could sit on his ass all day and still be making millions off his shares.
In a communist society everyone owns the means of production and because of this they will realise that the harder they work as individuals and as a society in whole the greater their standard of living increases.

Very true (although I would argue that a lot of CEOs DONT really work hard, but your point about their devotion to their occupation is taken), although I would also expect that people would decide to partake in a lot more free time and leisure as well.