Getting rid of money

[An archist]

I was just thinking about something, I'm interested to see what you have to say about this.
Nowadays, money is no longer something scarce, it's a piece of paper we attribute value to and it's more and more becoming something abstract.
So, wouldn't it be possible to use this evoltuion to create a truly communist society?
Say, everyone gets $1000 dollars from birth. every hour you work, no matter what you do, you receive $50 and the value of items is decied by the amount of time it took to produce them, so if it took three hours of labor to make a table (chopping wood, transporting and processing it), the table would cost $150. If I work for three hours, I can buy the table, because it took three hours to make it.
The capitalist argument 'but there wouldn't be an incentive to work' is therefore refuted

[Raúl Duke]

I'm not an economist...

but wouldn't the ability to acumulate money, that is capital, be a problem?

However, I heard that in the Technocratic credit system, the credits can't be acumulated. So you would have the same amount of credits available for each day everyday. Kinda like a "spending limit" based on what the commune/technate (and its federation) can sustain.

[Die Neue Zeit]

What about local currencies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency#Benefits) and credits?

[phoenixoftime]

An interesting idea, but I have a few concerns. Not every job has induces the same mental and physical strain - one hour in a salt mine isn't comparable with one hour in an office job! Also, not everyone has the same abilities and needs - someone might need more than they produce or vice versa.

Wouldn't it be a better idea to have a centrally-planned economy based on the dynamic data of people's requirements with production opitmized to meeting the most immediate needs of the majority? I really like the idea of Allende's Project Cybersyn - real-time, computer-controlled planned economy. By using a combination of soviet consultation and consumer feedback from the retail sector, could one not determine consumer demand more efficiently?

[Whitten]

A few points:

1) There would be no incentive to work. Or at least no incentive to work well or hard. Why would you work harder to increase your production (speed up) and the material wealth of society if by doing so you decrease the value of your products?

2) Its important to remember that time-based labour is not the same as labour-based-value. By the Labour Theory of value it takes X amount of useful labour to produce a table, and this is unlikely to change based on how much time is taken (although there may be some forms of production when time is a factor due to energy consumption etc).

3) Your model makes no account of the usefulness of the labour put into the production of the table. For example, if there are already 500 billion tables on Earth, the production of a new table, and thus the usefulness of the labour put into producing it, would be minimal, when compared to a society lacking tables.

I'm sorry, while you are by no means the first person to suggest time-based currency value like this, its just never been a credible system.

[An archist]

right, thanks for the replies

[Djehuti]

There will be no need for a stand-in for everything that can be bought and sold when there's no longer any need to measure work time stored in those things.

In a communist society we will make and do things because there is a need for them, not in order to exchange them.

[TheAdlerian]

Here's what you do:

Using actuarial tables you figure out what products people will need for the year. Example: X number of tubes of toothpaste are used per year.

1. You assign workers to make X number of tubes (plus extra stock) in a few favorite flavors.

2. When the workers in this industry are done with production, they go home.

A computer system, much like banks have, will track who has gotten what supplies for themselves. So, buying a toothpaste at the local store will be a "withdrawal" from your "toothpaste account" if you follow me.

All products will be on a schedule like this.

People that work in essential services will do so in short shifts or for a few months out of the year which will make the job much like the industrial workers' situation. A nurse will work for three months out of the year, then be replaced by another, and so on.

Research in this society will be conducted in much the same way as now, but all projects must be reviewed for validity and benefit. Additionally, the entertainment media will be refocused to highlight the efforts of scientists and other proactive people with difficult jobs. This will provide them and the people with fame, which is much like money.

Benefit:

This idea allows for a western standard of living, but without the massive waste caused by consumerism and the massive production needed to fuel it. For instance, someone might make 15,000 units of pork flavored toothpaste, just to see if it flies. It doesn't, and all of the units are trashed. That means a complete waste of all time and materials.

Having set and approved products, and plenty of them, will cut down on the waste of resources currently seen.

People do not need to work on a constant basis. It takes them away from family development. It does not allow people to develop natural talents and most importantly, is harmful to mental health for the reasons stated, and more. So, a production scheduled based on need only will give the worker something to shot for, which is motivational, and knowledge that the work period will end, which is also motivational.

In this world, barring physical disability or family issues, not wanting to work would be illegal. I believe that would seem just though, because so little is being asked.

That's my dream economy, in short.

[Luimneachabu]

Money is the root of all evil,but how else are people going to exist without being too greedy. For instance on the M50 Toll-Bridge in Dublin,Ireland, there is a charge of €1.90.The majority of drivers do not necessarily have the exact change.So for example if every driver put €2.00 in to the cash slot,then the change should be used to help improved services in Health,Education and to improve the archaic public transport in Ireland. The toll-bridge is operated by a private firm so in the Socialist Republic,the company would have to go into public control for the benefit of every citizen.

[Janus]

Look up labor time vouchers; it has some parallels with what you're proposing.

Past threads:
Labor time vouchers (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=45039&hl=+labor++time++voucher)
LTV (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=44216&hl=+labor++time++voucher)

[rouchambeau]

Oh, yeah. I think that's called capitalism.

[ComradeRed]

This seems to have the underlying premise that the workers are not going to destroy capitalism, rather "inherit" and then change it "into" a classless society.

I seriously doubt it would work. What would prevent a collection of embittered capitalists from returning to power by cornering a market? Or anyone from cornering a market?

All you have to do is pool together enough "LTV"s and acquire all the goods produced at a certain time and any further output made. Or just buy off the workers producing the goods.

That would be a serious problem, especially if it were something that was relatively necessary.

There are too much of a hidden capitalism enframed in this "Labor Time Voucher" approach which is worrying.

[Raúl Duke]

All you have to do is pool together enough "LTV"s and acquire all the goods produced at a certain time and any further output made. Or just buy off the workers producing the goods.

That would be a serious problem, especially if it were something that was relatively necessary.

There are too much of a hidden capitalism enframed in this "Labor Time Voucher" approach which is worrying.

I see...

ComradeRed; was I right that acumulation of money, i.e. "capital", is a problem and incompatible with socialism and especially communism?

I also like to know....how do you think a communist economy would be like (what would you suggest for a communist economy); in simple terms?

[TheAdlerian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 09, 2007 09:43 pm
Look up labor time vouchers; it has some parallels with what you're proposing.

Past threads:
Labor time vouchers (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=45039&hl=+labor++time++voucher)
LTV (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=44216&hl=+labor++time++voucher)
If you're speaking to me, the concept isn't the same.

[TheAdlerian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 09, 2007 10:23 pm
This seems to have the underlying premise that the workers are not going to destroy capitalism, rather "inherit" and then change it "into" a classless society.

I seriously doubt it would work. What would prevent a collection of embittered capitalists from returning to power by cornering a market? Or anyone from cornering a market?

All you have to do is pool together enough "LTV"s and acquire all the goods produced at a certain time and any further output made. Or just buy off the workers producing the goods.

That would be a serious problem, especially if it were something that was relatively necessary.

There are too much of a hidden capitalism enframed in this "Labor Time Voucher" approach which is worrying.
With my plan, it would be pointless to corner the market on anything, because all goods a services would be free. There's no point in having fifty bottles of mouthwash, when once a month, or whatever, you can get a new one.

Additionally, such actions would be illegal and would likely be an indication of a serious mental problem. There would be criminals just always, but with different crimes.

[ComradeRed]

Originally posted by JohnnyDarko+April 09, 2007 03:26 pm--> (JohnnyDarko @ April 09, 2007 03:26 pm)ComradeRed; was I right that acumulation of money, i.e. "capital", is a problem and incompatible with socialism and especially communism?[/b]I should think so, but some have been slightly clever and put "time limits" on LTVs so they are only good for a certain period of time...then they become void.

This would counteract the accumulation of LTVs, however it does not counteract the hoarding of "rare goods"...which would cause the creation of classes all over again.


I also like to know....how do you think a communist economy would be like (what would you suggest for a communist economy); in simple terms? I think that it would look like a "gift economy", though I don't really know.

Nanotechnology would be key in my opinion, as it would make scarcity a thing of the past.

Self sustaining polis would be the way I see it. But I don't really know, nor does anyone else. It could be something radically different!


TheAdlerian
With my plan, it would be pointless to corner the market on anything, because all goods a services would be free. There's no point in having fifty bottles of mouthwash, when once a month, or whatever, you can get a new one. Mouthwash is a trivial commodity. What about say the water purifiers? Or something that is necessary for society to function?


Additionally, such actions would be illegal and would likely be an indication of a serious mental problem. There would be criminals just always, but with different crimes. That could work, unless these "criminals" have enough power over the people because they cornered certain critical markets that are necessary to live.

People would kind of be inclined to be under these criminals' control then...and that scares me that there would be this forceful return to capitalism.

But this is more of a problem with Labor Time Vouchers than with anything you are suggesting.

[TheAdlerian]

My idea is doable now, as production could be achieved using existing factories and whatnot. It's about people getting what they need to have a good standard of living without wasting resources or pointlessly working people.

[Raúl Duke]

however it does not counteract the hoarding of "rare goods"...which would cause the creation of classes all over again.

Could you please elaborate on this point through an illustration or example.

I want to understand your ideas better.

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

however it does not counteract the hoarding of "rare goods"...which would cause the creation of classes all over again.
I personally don't think that could happen. Anyone who did that would be nullifying the social contract of mutual aid.

I think that as long as we have remnants of capitalism in any shape or form we're missing the root of the problem, that is the wage system and property.

[grove street]

I have been thinking about this exact question for sometime and I do have an idea in which it could be carried out.

First of all institutions like hospitals, schools, military, police, public housing ect, need to be centralised and made free with funding from taxes ect. Secondaly the whole economy needs to be centralised. People will order private consumer goods (TV's, clothes ect) over the internet so central planners and producers know what's the demand level. There will be expo/demonstration shops ect. Home consumption goods (food, essentialls ect) will be sold in supermarkets where products and quantity will be recorded (digitaly) and sent to central planners and producers to help with supply and demand.

Over a period of time the price in goods will drop as central planning becames more advanced while salarys will remain the same until all goods are free and when that happens salarys and money/currency will become pointless.

[Sickle of Justice]

this seems sorta workers oriented/syndicalist. what about nonworkers? i homemakers, the disabled etc. i like the basis, though i agree with whoever said that the inheritance of capitalism by the workers doesn't make sense. i think that all goods should be free if needed, you should not get goods based on how much you work, because some people simply cant work as long as others. also i think it would have confusing effects based on whether you worked in the production or service industry

its an interesting concepth though, and i would like to see it put into action in a lab test sort of way. but its too generalized around hours. there would be no incentive to work quickly, and infact it would be smarter to work slowly (if one was a greedy dickhead).

[grove street]

Originally posted by Sickle of [email protected] 22, 2007 10:21 pm

its an interesting concepth though, and i would like to see it put into action in a lab test sort of way. but its too generalized around hours. there would be no incentive to work quickly, and infact it would be smarter to work slowly (if one was a greedy dickhead).
Our goal should be the abolishment of work altogether, through the investment of technology.

[bolshevik butcher]

Money arises nescesserally from capitalist economics. The need to have a smiple way to exchange commodities. All money represents is a notion of value. As long as an economy is run in which people exchange commodities for other commodities then money is nescessary. A communist society is one that is not based on this exchange but based on need. Therefore money would not be nescessary and would dissapear. In a socialist society I expect money would initially at any rate exist.

[ComradeRed]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10, 2007 04:33 pm

however it does not counteract the hoarding of "rare goods"...which would cause the creation of classes all over again.

Could you please elaborate on this point through an illustration or example.

I want to understand your ideas better.
What I mean is if suppose there is some commodity, e.g. gold or something, that is rare.

If a number of consumers acquire a large majority of the quantity of this commodity in circulation, they have control over the majority of the "market".

They can set their price of the goods to whatever they want.

This would allow them to live comfortably off of the sale of these goods.

Imagine if some fellows cornered the gold market, and then sold off bits for outrageous sums.

They could in turn use this to procure means of production, corner other markets, etc.

That would generate a class that lives off the labor of others, a capitalist class. Then we are no better off than where we started.

[FeelingRightatHome]

Eliminating it is rather simple actually.

Stop giving value to anything. In a purposed communist state, should not everything be provided to the people? If every need is taken care of, that is where you can begin to eliminate want.

First off you have to eliminate money or currency. Currency is used today to determine classes, without money there is one less way to structure society.

Second, eliminate the value of items. Since everyone can have everything they need, nothing should hold value to someone else since they can all have it.

Third, this can likely come a lot earlier but eliminate a lot of useless consumer goods, we do not need so much that is in this world. By eliminating these you reduce want of useless items. Works well to help solve the value and currency problems as well.

Also to solve the problem of incentive to work, simply put: Work and you get what you need, dont work and you get nothing. Since the communist system is based on workers, if you are not working(regardless of the job), then you are of no use to the society nor the system( I am not saying kill these people off mind you), just basically, if they want to live off in the boonies and fend for themselves so be it but do not advocate laziness.

Going further, allow people to freely change jobs. If you have always wanted to do something such as teaching or singing, heck anything almost, then you should be able to do it. (Entertainment will never lose value so I see athletes, singers, etc as being a necessity despite their current position of value in modern societies.

Whew, that was a lot to spew out, hope people get the point of what I am saying. Basically, yes money is bad, get rid of it and will solve so many problems.

[Social Greenman]

An Archist wrote: I was just thinking about something, I'm interested to see what you have to say about this. Nowadays, money is no longer something scarce, it's a piece of paper we attribute value to and it's more and more becoming something abstract. Abstract being that money is becoming more and more of an electronic medium.

So, wouldn't it be possible to use this evolution to create a truly communist society? Not at first since the new society would emerge from the old. But you are on the right track, so to speak, since the electronic medium can be used but not for monetary use but for Labor Time Vouchers (TLV). Money circulates even with the electronic medium which creates profit for the capitalist. However, the software for TLVs would have a person exchange his voucher for commodities at the social store. The vouchers would cease to exist after the transaction is completed. However, if something being returned to the store, due to the product being faulty or damaged, the person’s voucher would be restored to his/her account.

phoenixoftime wrote: An interesting idea, but I have a few concerns. Not every job has induces the same mental and physical strain - one hour in a salt mine isn't comparable with one hour in an office job! Also, not everyone has the same abilities and needs - someone might need more than they produce or vice versa. This mental and physical strain was taken into account when the TLV was developed. I think anyone would want to be compensated more for doing stressful work but downright dangerous work like a salt or coal mine. The office worker income would be less. What pay scale would be used would be up to those people at that time if TLVs are implemented.

ComradeRed wrote: This seems to have the underlying premise that the workers are not going to destroy capitalism, rather "inherit" and then change it "into" a classless society. That may be very possible that a civilized political route would take place rather than by bloody force with tanks rolling through the streets.

I seriously doubt it would work. What would prevent a collection of embittered capitalists from returning to power by cornering a market? Or anyone from cornering a market? What markets? If capitalism returns then the new society failed because it did not satisfy the working class. Perhaps a door should remain for capitalism to return if socialism really sucked and failed.

All you have to do is pool together enough "LTV"s and acquire all the goods produced at a certain time and any further output made. Or just buy off the workers producing the goods. That would be a serious problem, especially if it were something that was relatively necessary. LOL! What on earth made you think that TLVs were paper scrip to be collected (pooled) in a large basket? After transaction the commodities can be bartered for other items. What’s wrong with that? Is the battle cry of Communism consist of “Be afraid…Be very afraid because the capitalist is out to get you like the boogeyman"? Why the paranoia? Workers in that era would work whatever hours they chose to work. I am betting they won’t work day after day since they get a bigger return for their labor at the social store.

There are too much of a hidden capitalism enframed in this "Labor Time Voucher" approach which is worrying. Even though Marx wrote that it was a-okay to use?

JohnnyDarko to ComradeRed; was I right that accumulation of money, i.e. "capital", is a problem and incompatible with socialism and especially communism?I should think so, but some have been slightly clever and put "time limits" on LTVs so they are only good for a certain period of time...then they become void. Wow, talk about violating civil rights of workers with infringements on the fruit of their labor. In other words, the TLV of the individual would have a time limit so that the worker has to return to work to make sure he/she can eat. Is this the DoP Patriot Act in force? What? No kicking back and relaxing for awhile? No nest egg? Are the tanks going to roll through the street? If communism is about democracy it makes me wonder who gets liberty and justice.

This would counteract the accumulation of LTVs, however it does not counteract the hoarding of "rare goods"...which would cause the creation of classes all over again. Gold, silver, and other rare metals, diamonds, rubies, and other precious stones have nothing to do with the TLV system. They are rare and are of high value in our present society. However, if the new society develops in a healthy manner then these “rare goods” would be used in industrial production rather than used as a means to return to capitalism. I betting on the tanks rolling through the streets though.

grove street wrote: First of all institutions like hospitals, schools, military, police, public housing etc, need to be centralized and made free with funding from taxes, etc. Secondly the whole economy needs to be centralized. People will order private consumer goods (TV's, clothes etc) over the internet so central planners and producers know what's the demand level. Actually , for every twenty minutes of work time per worker one unit of TLV would go to the public assurance fund which would go for education, hospitals and social services. Public housing? Oh come on now, in a socialist society people will have their own homes. People who are disabled get their own homes and they will be constructed to fit their needs via the assurance fund and receive TLVs for items at the social store even over the Internet. I am sure single mothers would receive TLVs. The public police may be voluntary or may be funded as well but who knows. Military? Are the tanks going to roll through the streets with you too? Will the economy be centralized or would it be an association of industries tied together with the TLV?

There will be expos/demonstration shops etc. Home consumption goods (food, essentials etc) will be sold in supermarkets where products and quantity will be recorded (digitally) and sent to central planners and producers to help with supply and demand. What is sold at the stores would determine what is ordered from industries to fill the shelves. I am sure whatever councils exist at that time would do what they need to do but I really question the existence of a central authority.

Over a period of time the price in goods will drop as central planning becomes more advanced while salaries will remain the same until all goods are free and when that happens salaries and money/currency will become pointless With the TLV the products would reflect the time embodied in each commodity. LTV rates will adjust when necessary. The exchange rate for commodities would be much lower than it is now with the profit motive. Whatever becomes free would have to be done in increments. Industries will have to make sure whatever product is made will continue being made with increase output with demand until the day comes when TLV are no longer necessary. Then again society may just keep the TLV and reject having a gift society. We don’t know what people in the future will decide. I don't think the new society will turn out the way we desire it to be. I don’t think work will ever be abolished since people want something to do. Let’s just say that work will become more meaningful with technological advancements.

FeelingRightatHome wrote: Stop giving value to anything. Would that include human life?

[ComradeRed]

That may be very possible that a civilized political route would take place rather than by bloody force with tanks rolling through the streets. Yes, it is possible...just as it is possible quantum mechanically that an electron in an atom in one of your cells will spontaneously eject itself and cause a rather large electromagnetic disturbance in your body causing it to either implode or explode :lol:

The probabilities, for all practical purposes, for both events are 0.


What markets? If capitalism returns then the new society failed because it did not satisfy the working class. Perhaps a door should remain for capitalism to return if socialism really sucked and failed. The LTVs don't really abolish the market place in order for them to work.

As a matter of fact, it preserves the market. And that's a really bad thing!


LOL! What on earth made you think that TLVs were paper scrip to be collected (pooled) in a large basket? It could be a "credit card", or a number associated with your thumb print based on the internet database of LTVs, or any other way of "storing LTVs" you'd like, it doesn't change my point.


After transaction the commodities can be bartered for other items. What’s wrong with that? You've essentially preserved the market place is what's wrong with it!


Workers in that era would work whatever hours they chose to work. I am betting they won’t work day after day since they get a bigger return for their labor at the social store. And if you work no hours, you get no LTVs, and then you have class divisions.


Even though Marx wrote that it was a-okay to use? The "Blessings of Marx" do not warrant this to be a good idea.

You want one example: dialectics. Want another? The "Labor Time Voucher" (supposing that he supported such an idea...a source would be nice).


Wow, talk about violating civil rights of workers with infringements on the fruit of their labor. In other words, the TLV of the individual would have a time limit so that the worker has to return to work to make sure he/she can eat. Is this the DoP Patriot Act in force? What? No kicking back and relaxing for awhile? No nest egg? Are the tanks going to roll through the street? If communism is about democracy it makes me wonder who gets liberty and justice. <_< This was not my idea, someone else proposed it. It doesn&#39;t change anything however.

And supposing that there were no time limit, then you have effectively money.

There is little from stopping a group of determined capitalists from restoring capitalism given such a situation, as I&#39;ve all ready said in every post in every thread on LTVs I&#39;ve commented on.


Gold, silver, and other rare metals, diamonds, rubies, and other precious stones have nothing to do with the TLV system. They are rare and are of high value in our present society. However, if the new society develops in a healthy manner then these “rare goods” would be used in industrial production rather than used as a means to return to capitalism. I betting on the tanks rolling through the streets though. By mere virtue of you saying so?

In all practicalities, if a consortium of capitalists were trying to get back to power, this would be the most likely route.

[Social Greenman]

ComradeRed wrote: Yes, it is possible...just as it is possible quantum mechanically that an electron in an atom in one of your cells will spontaneously eject itself and cause a rather large electromagnetic disturbance in your body causing it to either implode or explode

The probabilities, for all practical purposes, for both events are 0. Cute scientific comeback but the chances of you ejaculating in a woman is also zero. Perhaps it is zero because of people like you. Direct action and political action has yet to be tried.

Also: And if you work no hours, you get no LTVs, and then you have class divisions. That&#39;s your POV but if you read the entire post then you have noticed that those who can&#39;t work do get TLVs. Laziness is not a class division.

And...: The "Blessings of Marx" do not warrant this to be a good idea.

You want one example: dialectics. Want another? The "Labor Time Voucher" (supposing that he supported such an idea...a source would be nice). Critique of the Gotha Programme by Marx, Fifteen Questions about Socialism by Daniel De Leon and the alogrythms by Mike Lepore at deleonism.org.

And...This was not my idea, someone else proposed it. It doesn&#39;t change anything however.

And supposing that there were no time limit, then you have effectively money.

There is little from stopping a group of determined capitalists from restoring capitalism given such a situation, as I&#39;ve all ready said in every post in every thread on LTVs I&#39;ve commented on. You are really paranoid about the capitalist. Obsessions are not healthy. Money circulates and if you would actually read the thread I wrote TLV do not circulate but ceases to exist upon exchange. However, your authoritarian attitude would restrict recreation and eliminate retirement. Gotta keep the proles in line which keeps the former capitalist in line by enforcing the DoP Patriot Act.

Furthermore...By mere virtue of you saying so?

In all practicalities, if a consortium of capitalists were trying to get back to power, this would be the most likely route. It&#39;s not by what I say but how the new society developes. That would include ethics and values. If everyone here is worried about "capitalism&#39;s return" then that means socialism must really suck. On the other hand, if socialism is something the future society, as a whole, wants to develope then the actions of those former capitalist would be thwarted because socialism would be very satisfying for most people.

[syndicat]

An effective social economy does need some way to measure the social opportunity costs of various possible products, in order to be able to have an efficient allocation of resources.

My understanding of the labor time voucher proposal is that when people buy things with their labor time vouchers, this becomes revenue for the production group who produced that. In other words, it&#39;s a form of market socialism. I think this would tend to evolve into a class system, because production groups would be so dependent on market revenue, people with scarce skills could put the production groups over a barrel, and start demending perks and control.

Moreover, labor time measurement doesn&#39;t provide an accurate measure of social opportunity costs. That&#39;s because every type of labor is valued the same, for purposes of allocating resources in social production. This means that forms of labor that presuppose a great deal of social investment in training are treated the same as tasks that require little training. This would tend to lead to excess demand for the very expensive forms of labor skill.

We do need to democratize expertise by ensuring development of the potential of all workers, and spread of skills and expertise, so that workers can all effectively participate in the planning and managing of the industries they work in. This is needed to empower workers and prevent the consolidation of a bureaucratic or technocratic new class. But not all forms of expertise and skill development are equally expensive for the society to create.

Also, you&#39;d still need a way to deal with things like injuries, disabilities, being between jobs, the desire to be able to take time off, travel the world, go back to school, retirement, the fact that some people have children and others don&#39;t, the fact that we want a major expansion of public goods that aren&#39;t acquired through one&#39;s own personal income. This means you have to deal with need, not just fair remuneration for work done. If jobs are redesigned so that everyone does roughly an equal share of the physical labor of production, it is reasonable to remunderate people based on their work effort, and how long people work is certainly a key criterion of that.

But there is no reason to measure labor cost for production in terms of hours of work for the reason I mentioned at the outset. Thus i&#39;d say it is a mistake to think in terms of labor time vouchers as some sort of medium of exchange that goes to production groups as revenue. Allocation of resources in production needs to be determined by a more social process, not a market process.

[Enragé]

ltv&#39;s could be part of a short transitional period, and i say short because it would lead to the injustices pointed out by others.

When things settle down, real communism becomes a fact of life, we simply dont need money, or anything like it (since, simply, to each according to his need, from each according to ability). If you dont need it, then why have it?

[VukBZ2005]

Why do we even need LTV&#39;s during a real socialist transition period for?

Instead, how about using this kind of system - the kind of system that I mentioned on "Supply and Demand"; once we eliminate Capitalism, we should divide the economy into two sectors; one that is based on the rationing of goods that are not plentiful and are not present and one that is based on products that are freely available to the population.

The rationing sector would operate by using a non-value and non-currency added rationing book. This rationing book would ensure that everyone would have equal access to a certain product that is in limitation to a severe degree and this rationing book would ensure that there would no currency system to develop and for Capital to redevelop along with that currency system. The non-rationing sector would just be composed of products that are simply available for free because of their easy accessibility. Once industrial productivity has recovered, we can reduce the rationing sector to a negligible portion of the economy while the free sector assumes its domination through a system of supply and demand that is truly Communistic.

If anyone were to object to this or any other kind of system that prohibited the redevelopment of money and Capital in a post-revolutionary society and were to say that we should have a currency system or something that is similar to money, I would have to say to them that they are Capitalists in disguise and they should stop calling themselves Communists.

[Social Greenman]

Everyone has their own point of view on economic systems and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I stated mine and I don&#39;t need to further elaborate on TLVs. What bothers me more is the "new bosses" who want to slip into the capitalist shoes and be control freaks. If that&#39;s socialism then no thanks.

[ComradeRed]

Originally posted by Social [email protected] 28, 2007 11:15 pm
Perhaps it is zero because of people like you. Direct action and political action has yet to be tried.Yeah, maybe if we wish really really hard it will come true...so long as you clap your hands, tinker bell exists&#33; <_<

You clearly are lacking a materialist analysis here...as though a "magic wand" can suddenly change reality&#33;

That&#39;s your POV but if you read the entire post then you have noticed that those who can&#39;t work do get TLVs. Laziness is not a class division. And those that do not want to work?


Critique of the Gotha Programme by Marx, Fifteen Questions about Socialism by Daniel De Leon and the alogrythms by Mike Lepore at deleonism.org. I don&#39;t know if anyone told you this, but only one of the three people you mentioned are Marx.

Again, the "blessings of Marx" do not warrant an idea to be good, feel free to keep ignoring this point if you&#39;d like...it hasn&#39;t stopped you so far <_<


You are really paranoid about the capitalist. Obsessions are not healthy. Oh pardon me and my naivete. as history has obviously demonstrated that the ruling class surrenders power oh so easily. <_<


Money circulates and if you would actually read the thread I wrote TLV do not circulate but ceases to exist upon exchange. Your saying so don&#39;t make it so.

You have this medium for the acquisition and parting of physical quantities of items, definitionally. This definitionally is money.

However, your authoritarian attitude would restrict recreation and eliminate retirement. Gotta keep the proles in line which keeps the former capitalist in line by enforcing the DoP Patriot Act. Oh yes, my "authoritarian attitude" against blind incompetency. What a terrible vice I have <_<


It&#39;s not by what I say but how the new society developes. That would include ethics and values. If everyone here is worried about "capitalism&#39;s return" then that means socialism must really suck. On the other hand, if socialism is something the future society, as a whole, wants to develope then the actions of those former capitalist would be thwarted because socialism would be very satisfying for most people. You have the most idealistic thinking of anyone I&#39;ve met who isn&#39;t a dialectician.

Yeah, the capitalists will willingly go without a fight and never ever try to come back, just clap your hands and believe&#33; :lol:

The plain fact of the matter is that you are suggesting little more than a glorified worker-friendly capitalism; this is no more socialist than Coca Cola.

Your assessment of post-revolutionary society seems to completely forget Marx&#39;s key idea of historical materialism, "social being determines social consciousness", etc.

[Social Greenman]

CR wrote:Yeah, maybe if we wish really really hard it will come true...so long as you clap your hands, tinker bell exists&#33; You clearly are lacking a materialist analysis here...as though a "magic wand" can suddenly change reality&#33;
Wow, it took you a long time to write a sarcastic reply. I was right about your sex life which is zero but it okay to use your hands :wub: but I would not suggest clapping. Ban me if you can. :P Both direct action and political action together was the idea of Daniel DeLeon which has yet to be tried. People can change reality and conditions so it is not far fetched to achieve anything if the working class so desires. Right now it is not in their interest which includes parting from capitalism.

And those that do not want to work? They have a right to be lazy if they so chose and social services can take care of them. But they most likely would be called "pieces of shit" from those who do work and that&#39;s a good material analysis of that situation. ;)

Again, the "blessings of Marx" do not warrant an idea to be good, feel free to keep ignoring this point if you&#39;d like...it hasn&#39;t stopped you so far It&#39;s my choice and there nothing you can do about it unless you thinking on using force and torture to change my point of view because freedom of thought and opinion has to be a bad thing for authoritarians. Saints preserve us if free thought lead us all back to capitalism. :rolleyes:

Oh pardon me and my naivete. as history has obviously demonstrated that the ruling class surrenders power oh so easily. It will be such a breeze. I thought you already knew that. You don&#39;t have a problem with the capitalist class. We all know what they may or may not do. It is the working class you don&#39;t trust. The obvious conclusion that you desire to be a political boss in the new society. To control the working class in thought and in deed and turning society into a cold numeric function. That sort of shit would make anyone want to return to capitalism and it would be you and those you associate with be at fault. Sorry kid, workers want to live a real life and not live in some artifical construction of society.

Money circulates and if you would actually read the thread I wrote TLV do not circulate but ceases to exist upon exchange.Your saying so don&#39;t make it so.
You have this medium for the acquisition and parting of physical quantities of items, definitionally. This definitionally is money. No doubt it would function like money but it don&#39;t make it money and again you proven you don&#39;t trust the working class to make TLVs non-circulatory during the transition period. If that&#39;s the case then why part with actual money? :o

Oh yes, my "authoritarian attitude" against blind incompetency. What a terrible vice I have,I am sorry, I should should have wrote that your DoP would be more like the Inquisition because we have to find those nasty reactionaries and counter-revolutionaries and put them to the Question of conspiricy of supporting the capitalist. Me being blind is your point of view but then, you are superior to everyone else are you not?

You have the most idealistic thinking of anyone I&#39;ve met who isn&#39;t a dialectician.
Yeah, the capitalists will willingly go without a fight and never ever try to come back, just clap your hands and believe&#33; The plain fact of the matter is that you are suggesting little more than a glorified worker-friendly capitalism; this is no more socialist than Coca Cola. Your assessment of post-revolutionary society seems to completely forget Marx&#39;s key idea of historical materialism, "social being determines social consciousness", etc. Pardom me but the LTV originated with Robert Owen, Marx criticised it as not benefiting society as a whole, De Leon expounded.upon it. On the other hand, I never wrote that the capitalist would not fight. this they will do but the working class out numbers them and if socialism proves to be a system that everyone would enjoy then the capitalist come back would be thwarted by the workers themselves and place them in jail. I don&#39;t know what a soft drink has to do with socialism but whatever workers do in the future is up to them and whatever economy they use and the social beings they develope in to. ;)

[Social Greenman]

I had a change of heart when I took a better look at what was written before Sister Red ‘s post.

Syndicat wrote: My understanding of the labor time voucher proposal is that when people buy things with their labor time vouchers, this becomes revenue for the production group who produced that. What? You are mistaken or mislead. TLVs do not create revenue for any production group. Where did you get that idea from? TLVs cease to exist after exchange of products. No other persons or groups get those labor time units. TLVs are time units earned from performed work and belongs one hundred percent to the worker who labored for them. They are, I repeat, exchanged for products at the social store. I repeat again that TLVs ceases to exist when those exchanges are complete. People at the social store do not get them nor does anyone else. Is this too hard to comprehend and you call yourself a syndicalist?

In other words, it&#39;s a form of market socialism. I think this would tend to evolve into a class system, because production groups would be so dependent on market revenue, people with scarce skills could put the production groups over a barrel, and start demanding perks and control. I am amazed of the thinking that exist on this entire forum. So, because there are stores involved we get a market. Would you feel better if I would say “distribution centers”? I really don’t see the difference except word usage. I don’t understand where market revenue comes from for production groups. TLVs do not return to any groups or to any one person whatsoever. This accusation is unfounded.

Moreover, labor time measurement doesn&#39;t provide an accurate measure of social opportunity costs. What are you saying here? Labor power extracts resources from the earth and labor power transforms those resources into products of consumption and you mean to say that “time” is not an accurate measure? You have an amount of products made in a certain amount of time using what? Labor.

That&#39;s because every type of labor is valued the same, for purposes of allocating resources in social production. This means that forms of labor that presuppose a great deal of social investment in training are treated the same as tasks that require little training. This would tend to lead to excess demand for the very expensive forms of labor skill. I don’t believe that each person labor has equal value nor is work all equal. This I mentioned in an earlier post and another forum member also wrote about it. I will have to ask you to prove that there would be demands in expensive forms of labor skills and investments involved which I don’t see existing since education would be free as health care. Read the earlier post about the one unit per worker every twenty minutes for health care, education and social services.

We do need to democratize expertise by ensuring development of the potential of all workers, and spread of skills and expertise, so that workers can all effectively participate in the planning and managing of the industries they work in. I do agree with this.

This is needed to empower workers and prevent the consolidation of a bureaucratic or technocratic new class. But not all forms of expertise and skill development are equally expensive for the society to create. Empowering workers is fine to do but I have no idea what you wrote. What they do in the future society ,as far as how they interact with each other, is really of no concern of ours. We have to lay a good foundation and they will build on it. However, I am unsure about the foundation being laid down.

Also, you&#39;d still need a way to deal with things like injuries, disabilities, being between jobs, the desire to be able to take time off, travel the world, go back to school, retirement, the fact that some people have children and others don&#39;t, the fact that we want a major expansion of public goods that aren&#39;t acquired through one&#39;s own personal income. How many times do I have to write about this? Everything and everyone is covered. Health care, education, and social services would be available at no cost because the TLV would be applied to those public services. If a people are allowed to keep his LTVs in his/her account then he/she could retire at an early age.

NKOS wrote: ltv&#39;s could be part of a short transitional period, and i say short because it would lead to the injustices pointed out by others. Who can really say how long TLVs would be used but as far as injustices goes…They have to prove it because I am not convinced. I see injustices in controlling workers at the point of production. They also want to steal the fruits of their labor because of unfounded fears.

When things settle down, real communism becomes a fact of life, we simply don’t need money, or anything like it (since, simply, to each according to his need, from each according to ability). If you don’t need it, then why have it? It’s not going to happen over night. It’s going to come through trial an error and implemented over time and not by force. If we reach it—great but if we don’t at least the future society would be a far better place for our decedents then what presently exist now. Social constructs may be something none of us has thought of here in the present or from those of the past.

Communist FireFox wrote: Why do we even need LTV&#39;s during a real socialist transition period for? Define real socialist transition. Some think it should be an Inquisition or a Patriot Act sort of deal.

Instead, how about using this kind of system - the kind of system that I mentioned on "Supply and Demand"; once we eliminate Capitalism, we should divide the economy into two sectors; one that is based on the rationing of goods that are not plentiful and are not present and one that is based on products that are freely available to the population.The idea that a person, out of the goodness of his/her heart would work X amount of hours to make products available with out some medium of exchange for services rendered (and to use that medium for exchange of products) would result in shortages and riots in my opinion. How long would it take to empty warehouses?

The rationing sector would operate by using a non-value and non-currency added rationing book. This rationing book would ensure that everyone would have equal access to a certain product that is in limitation to a severe degree and this rationing book would ensure that there would no currency system to develop and for Capital to redevelop along with that currency system. The non-rationing sector would just be composed of products that are simply available for free because of their easy accessibility. Once industrial productivity has recovered, we can reduce the rationing sector to a negligible portion of the economy while the free sector assumes its domination through a system of supply and demand that is truly Communistic.Rationing books? Sounds like there’s gonna be a famine. What do you mean by products having easy access? This don’t make sense at all. Are you saying that workers stand in line for bread or just wait for the truck to dump rice on the street corner?

If anyone were to object to this or any other kind of system that prohibited the redevelopment of money and Capital in a post-revolutionary society and were to say that we should a currency system or something that is similar to money, I would have to say to them that they are Capitalists in disguise and they should stop calling themselves Communists. I am not a Communist. If free access (also known as the gift economy) proves a failure then what can those people do but use some sort of medium of exchange for services and products. The idea of TLVs is to technologically develop the “free access” economy if that is really possible. I am a skeptic when it comes to that.

[ComradeRed]

Originally posted by Social [email protected] 29, 2007 10:47 pm
Wow, it took you a long time to write a sarcastic reply. I was right about your sex life which is zero but it okay to use your hands but I would not suggest clapping. Ban me if you can. Both direct action and political action together was the idea of Daniel DeLeon which has yet to be tried. People can change reality and conditions so it is not far fetched to achieve anything if the working class so desires. Right now it is not in their interest which includes parting from capitalism.And your lack of argument is only more convincing (by the by grandpa, being a "working theoretical physicist" has absolutely nothing to do with the amount of free time I have <_<).

DeLeon&#39;s idea was reformism and it has been tried...unsurprisingly, it failed.

The solution is not to reform the inherently oppressive system...rather to totally abolish it&#33;

If it&#39;s not for the abolition of wage-slavery...then what&#39;s the point?

They have a right to be lazy if they so chose and social services can take care of them. But they most likely would be called "pieces of shit" from those who do work and that&#39;s a good material analysis of that situation. And if everyone simply sits on their hands? Or more accurately do what they prefer instead of work?

Where would your "social security" come from then? The sky?

Just clap your hands and believe :lol:

It&#39;s my choice and there nothing you can do about it unless you thinking on using force and torture to change my point of view because freedom of thought and opinion has to be a bad thing for authoritarians. Saints preserve us if free thought lead us all back to capitalism. Well, straw manning my point doesn&#39;t make you any more convincing. Why not call me stalin and then assert random other authoritarian beliefs I have <_<


It will be such a breeze. I thought you already knew that. You don&#39;t have a problem with the capitalist class. We all know what they may or may not do. It is the working class you don&#39;t trust. I paused reading at this point as it has become increasingly obvious that you have no clue what you are talking about.

Historically no ruling class has gone "silently into that good night". You should know that from your experience from the American Civil War :lol:

You&#39;ve simply drowned out what I&#39;ve said and started shouting "AUTHORITARIAN&#33; ZOMG AUTHORITARIAN&#33;"


The obvious conclusion that you desire to be a political boss in the new society. To control the working class in thought and in deed and turning society into a cold numeric function. That sort of shit would make anyone want to return to capitalism and it would be you and those you associate with be at fault. Sorry kid, workers want to live a real life and not live in some artifical construction of society. Oh yes, let&#39;s all take lessons on libertarianism from the man who wishes a tacit return of class society.


No doubt it would function like money but it don&#39;t make it money and again you proven you don&#39;t trust the working class to make TLVs non-circulatory during the transition period. If that&#39;s the case then why part with actual money? Oh yeah, it looks like money, it functions like money, it feels like money, it has the same purpose as money, and it is money...but that really means you don&#39;t trust the working class&#33;

No, I do trust the working class and I distrust your tacit attempts to return to class society.

After the revolution, the workers should hit the ground running and try to implement as many radical actions possible that will enable them to achieve a classless, democratic society as soon as possible&#33;

That means no reliance on relics from class society&#33; Sorry you won&#39;t be able to live off your TLVs for the rest of your life <_<


I am sorry, I should should have wrote that your DoP would be more like the Inquisition because we have to find those nasty reactionaries and counter-revolutionaries and put them to the Question of conspiricy of supporting the capitalist. Me being blind is your point of view but then, you are superior to everyone else are you not? Again, you are a wizard at the art of straw manning.

You suddenly assume that because I reject all relics from class society that I must be some Stalinist inquisitor. How limited your reasoning capacity must be, there is more than two sides to this issue.

DeLeon forbid that *gasp* we have a ultra-democratic, decentralized, worker run society&#33; No, that can&#39;t ever do...a worker friendly capitalism is significantly better.


Pardom me but the LTV originated with Robert Owen, Marx criticised it as not benefiting society as a whole, De Leon expounded.upon it. Well thank goodness you&#39;ve showed your incapability to critically think&#33;


On the other hand, I never wrote that the capitalist would not fight. this they will do but the working class out numbers them and if socialism proves to be a system that everyone would enjoy then the capitalist come back would be thwarted by the workers themselves and place them in jail. Oh yeah, like how the early bourgeois revolutionaries placed all the feudal aristocrats in jail <_<

You are really quite naive if you think that TLVs would magically remove every counter-revolutionary element; and even more so if you think that the only alternative to the TLV is some authoritarian nonsense.

The idea of worker control is just beyond you apparently as DeLeon never mentions it apparently <_<

I don&#39;t know what a soft drink has to do with socialism but whatever workers do in the future is up to them and whatever economy they use and the social beings they develope in to. In your model it&#39;s little more than a glorified corporation, the law of value is still in effect and it really doesn&#39;t describe a socialist system...simply a reformed capitalist economy, something DeLeon would&#39;ve liked.

The point, however, is to completely abolish the system&#33; Something you don&#39;t quite grasp apparently.

[RNK]

I think it&#39;s utterly silly that anyone could seriously believe that replacing the word "money" with "labour time voucher" is going to transform the very essence of society.

I read an interesting and astute article some time ago. In it, the author brought up the failed attempts to get rid of "money" in anarchist areas of Spain in the 1930s; he attributed the failure to the fact that the anarchists simply changed the title given to those little pieces of paper, without actually changing the fabric or structure of the means of production -- and this "market socialism" where everyone works for "vouchers *cough*money*cough*" and exchanges these "vouchers" for goods does nothing to change the relations of production and commodity expropriation. It simply turns a greedy fat millionaire into an entire factory of greedy, competitive workers who will inevitably develop and split into antagonistic classes all over again, because the initial problem was never dealt with.

[antieverything]

Leftists have way to big of a fixation on money. I don&#39;t want to live in a society where people aren&#39;t free to trade and barter shit. It makes this sort of thing lots easier if there&#39;s a universal good (money) that everyone will accept. It doesn&#39;t even have to be based on collateral to work...its an institution that allows reciprocity between people, essentially.

Of course the argument is that people can AMASS money and reinstate class society.

What are you going to do with money, though, IF YOU CAN&#39;T OWN PRODUCTIVE PROPERTY INDEPENDANTLY?

[syndicat]

We can&#39;t have an economy that is effective in providing benefits to the people if we have no way of measuring the social opportunity costs of different things we could produce. We can&#39;t produce every conceivable thing someone might want, and we are going to want to reduce the time we work, and reduce the destruction of the planetary commons. This means we need to have a social accounting unit in which we can measure costs and benefits. We&#39;ll need a way for people to make effective in the system of social production information about what their personal priorities are, because that is how we measure benefit provided.

But to say that we need a social accounting unit to measure benefits and costs is to say we need a form of money. Radicals sometimes confuse this with money-capital. Money need not take the form of capital. Capital is a social power relationship. It means the possessors of money-capital can go out in markets and purchase means of production, land and hire wage-slaves to produce commodities, and then sell those commodities in markets, to make a profit. If allocation of resources in social production is socially controlled, not market governed, if resources can only be allocated to worker-managed production organizations, so that no one is someone&#39;s wage slave, then the capital social relation doesn&#39;t exist, and money can&#39;t exist as capital in that social context.

I don&#39;t quite agree with what RNK says about the failure to abolish money in Aragon in the Spanish revolution. What happened is that they did initially abolish money in a number of villages, but they then ran into problems. Script was only introduced *after* they ran into these problems, because they began to realize they needed a form of money. Abolishing money led to inefficiencies like feeding bread to pigs because it was free. This is a wasteful way of feeding pigs.

For more on this see "Workers Power and the Spanish Revolution": http://www.workersolidarity.org/spain.pdf

[Entrails Konfetti]

I don&#39;t quite agree with social-green man in some areas, for instance the rewarding of jobs that are more &#39;straining&#39; with more units. When the working-class seizes places of work they take up other duties besides their normal menial work-- so I think if would be safe to pay everyone similarly. And the crap jobs with more interesting duties, of which the menial labor is being transffred to the machines will be more interesting.

Another thing is what I don&#39;t understand are how the councils can take one unit for every twenty, once they take this unit wouldn&#39;t it terminate and fall to ash?
Does that supose accumlation?

I think a society under TLVs can lead to Communism, say some industries produce too much, they could just give the products away. Over time it might not be neccessary to have the TLVs.

[Question everything]

Getting rid of money, a realistic approach?

Last I cheched it Wasn&#39;t Fire proof... ;)

[VukBZ2005]

Define real socialist transition. Some think it should be an Inquisition or a Patriot Act sort of deal.

A real socialist transition is one in which everyone is in control of the means of production, but is in the process of modifying or rebuilding the means of production to produce and provide on Communist (use and need) terms rather than Capitalist terms.

Let me use an example; let us say that the United States has experienced a successful working class revolution.

In the aftermath of this revolution, the entire population would have control over the means of production i.e., collective control over property, but, the productive forces of the United States have been mostly outsourced, leaving us in a precarious situation, because few productive forces = fewer mass-produced products and less services to the population.

Despite the fact that we have lost our industrial manufacturing capacity due to outsourcing, the situation gives us the opportunity to rebuild that industrial manufacturing capacity by building it in a way that meets real Communist needs and real Communist methods of production, instead of Capitalist needs and Capitalist methods of production.

While we are going through this process, there needs to be a system of the one that I mentioned to you, because of the severity that would exist because of the situation at hand. The only things that would be present in the non-rationing sector would be the basic necessities of life, such as food and water.

As the industrial manufacturing capacity of the United States is restored, more and more things would become freely available and less and less things would be in the rationing sector, until the rationing sector becomes non-existent and the free distribution of products and services dominates American society.


The idea that a person, out of the goodness of his/her heart would work X amount of hours to make products available with out some medium of exchange for services rendered (and to use that medium for exchange of products) would result in shortages and riots in my opinion. How long would it take to empty warehouses?

You are a fucking idiot to the highest degree.

When a successful working class revolution occurs, one of the reasons of why it will occur is because people would see the need to move beyond the concept of needing a medium of exchange or thinking in such Capitalistic manners. If you are saying is right, then we would have never gotten out of Feudalism and all the shit that came with it. The fact that we are sitting at our computers and talking to each other through the use of our computers is more than enough proof.

The whole idea of Communism is to eliminate classes and eliminate the things that facilitate the development of classes. This includes mediums of exchange. Instead of bartering one product for the next or paying for a product, products would have no relation attached to them. Things would be provided and produced on the basis of use and need, meaning that they will be produced because people need them at a free of cost point of conjecture.

This is not idealistic as you and the Leninists claim that it is. No. This is a natural result of the transformation of our society from being made up of classes to being without classes. If you can not accept it, stop acting like you are for the working class establishing Communism and for the elimination of the Capitalist class and all classes, including itself.



Rationing books? Sounds like there’s gonna be a famine. What do you mean by products having easy access? This don’t make sense at all. Are you saying that workers stand in line for bread or just wait for the truck to dump rice on the street corner?

NO&#33;

People obtain their products at distribution centers. They won&#39;t stand in line. They would just ask for the product that is free available and it would be handed to them.


I am not a Communist.

Obviously.


If free access (also known as the gift economy) proves a failure then what can those people do but use some sort of medium of exchange for services and products. The idea of TLVs is to technologically develop the “free access” economy if that is really possible. I am a skeptic when it comes to that.

Again, your assertions prove more than ever that you are for the continuation of the Capitalist system more than for its abolition because of your continued insistence of the need for a medium of exchange to exist.

If a means of exchange continues to exist after Capitalism, Capital and Capitalism will become alive again, because there is something blocking a direct relationship between producer and consumer. Eventually, classes will develop and Capitalism will be the order of the day.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by Communist [email protected] 02, 2007 12:26 am
Despite the fact that we have lost our industrial manufacturing capacity due to outsourcing, the situation gives us the opportunity to rebuild that industrial manufacturing capacity by building it in a way that meets real Communist needs and real Communist methods of production, instead of Capitalist needs and Capitalist methods of production.
We should have old factories rotting away all over the North and Mid-West, these could be repaired, and updated. But thats besides the point.


While we are going through this process, there needs to be a system of the one that I mentioned to you, because of the severity that would exist because of the situation at hand.

Any links to this system of rationing?
I just foresee rioting and looting if we go directly to a system where people just take what they need.


As the industrial manufacturing capacity of the United States is restored, more and more things would become freely available and less and less things would be in the rationing sector, until the rationing sector becomes non-existent and the free distribution of products and services dominates American society.

How is the capitalist system currency going to be stopped (the circulation and accumulation) right after the workers seizure of production?

My idea, pre-TLVs, is that the old paper money can be weighed to labor, and once they are exchanged the monies can be burnt or destroyed, and the metal money can be melted into other things. While at the same time, the issuing of TLV cards and the destruction of all mints.


When a successful working class revolution occurs, one of the reasons of why it will occur is because people would see the need to move beyond the concept of needing a medium of exchange or thinking in such Capitalistic manners
That largely depends on the ethos of the majority of the proletariat.


The whole idea of Communism is to eliminate classes and eliminate the things that facilitate the development of classes. This includes mediums of exchange.
Thats a very advanced form of Socialism-- aka Communism.
There needs to be a period of restructuring before Communism. The capabilities of production as they stand now and as they will stand during the havoc of revolution, they cannot provide for a system of equal distribution-- even with a system of equal rationing. Yes there are more than enough goods, but people aren&#39;t conscious as consumers. They want everything, and they want it now. They&#39;d stomp on you just to get it&#33;

Workers will be driven to a Socialist revolution because they are tired of being treated like shit, and through the course of revolution they will understand they must control and direct the means of production. During such time while they are trying to figure out human needs, and direct everything they will not have completed a summary of necessesities for everyone, because like I said people wont be driven to revolution because they are conscious consumers, so they may not distinguish between want and need.
During the time it take the councils to draw up summaries
people could be driven to looting. Since the old society has its marks on the new-- the idea of "He who dies with the most toys, wins" could cause people to storm distribution centers.
A temporary medium of exchange could stop people form rioting and looting, its easier to implement, plus through its operation it will teach people to produce useful things.


Instead of bartering one product for the next or paying for a product, products would have no relation attached to them.

Through a temporary medium people can get a good idea of what should be produced, and what shouldn&#39;t. During this system, yes, there will be surplus because its impossible to track demand. But once some things are surplus they can just be taken, instead of it being horded by the capitalist class so their products don&#39;t depreciate.

During the implementation of TLVs the attitude of "he who dies with the most toys" will die down. With this collectivism people will gain a sense of community, have more knowlege of producing, and productions&#39; effect on society. With every surplus in some areas, and its coexistance with exchange in some areas, people will learn that if they take rediculous amounts of surplus goods-- so much that they can&#39;t even fit it all into their cabinet space: there will be no superabundance in the more immediate future. And so they will learn to be more conscious as consumers-- that their ability to consume is limited by society and personal space.

However as surpluses arise the need for the TLVs plummet. Once the period of TLVs dies, people will have a sense of being within the social fabric of society, and conscious to the understanding that production has to produce useful items and keep going-- they must produce inorder to get something in return.


This is not idealistic as you and the Leninists claim that it is. No.

It&#39;s not just Leninists who propose a system of TLVs. Not all Leninists are for TLVs.
Don&#39;t try to polarize this issue, into :"Your either against the proletariat, or for them, and I&#39;m with them. Because you&#39;re not with me, you&#39;re against them".


This is a natural result of the transformation of our society from being made up of classes to being without classes

Natural; organic; they are abstract concepts. Pestisides are chemicals made within the planet Earth. Some people claim it&#39;s against the nature of dogs to sleep on a couch, yet some owners let their dogs sleep on couches.


If a means of exchange continues to exist after Capitalism, Capital and Capitalism will become alive again, because there is something blocking a direct relationship between producer and consumer. Eventually, classes will develop and Capitalism will be the order of the day

Capitalism maintains itself by the accumulation of wealth (aka profit). Because TLVs terminate-- turn to dust in the hands of the store store clerk once exhanged for a product, the accumulation of wealth ceases. Because the accumulation of wealth ceases, so does capitalism. However, what still exists is a characteristic of capitalism (but can&#39;t lead to it because theres no accumulation of wealth), the thing you call blocking a direct relationship between producer and consumer: The values assigned to goods. I agree, you can&#39;t really assign numerical values to goods. You can&#39;t justify a living room set + a dinette set = a car, just because each had the same number of hours embodied in them. What is ignored is that the labor embodied in each are qualitively different from one another, and who knows, maybe the team who made dining room table had to work harder that day than before or afterwards because they came down with the flu-- so the difficulty of labor changes. Sure workers could try to assign units for difficulty, but it would be damned near impossible to be accurate because everyones body is different from one another, and its impossible to track the changes that go within ones body.
Though innacurate, the system of TLVs is fairer than anything gold and circulation based, because it&#39;s impossible for anyone to accumlate wealth, have property, and privlege at them expense of others. Also under TLVs everyone is valued very similar to eachother because everyone does similar work-- both menial and empowering, and everyone has equal access to further education, and standards of living.

[Social Greenman]

I am writing to let you all know that my computer died and by coincidence my car also broke down. The car came first in repairs--which there was a lot of--before the computer was repaired. I decided to write out my own thoughts on what concerns me. This is a general response and some thoughts I wanted to share.

As I stated before, I am not a Communist nor Anarchist. I like to consider myself some sort of Libertarian Socialist. Most of the masses of workers won’t be followers of any sort of ideology. They will only side with those who best serve their interest. I do argue for time labor vouchers (TLVs) and I still believe it to be a good asset to the blueprint of the new society. The LTV is based on labor power and time while current currency is based on cost of production, competition, and profit. However, the TLV would be under the administrative of worker’s councils in every industry and service sector. It is the key component in the socialist reconstruction of society. Here is an opinion I have…since the advent of the personal computer and the Internet the need for regional, national or centralized authority would no longer be needed, as they would have been in the past when communication was more limited. These authorities usually ended up with abuse of power since they did not answer to anyone but themselves. Since industries and the service sector can now be interwoven every councils can communicate any information to each. This hopefully would eliminate any forms of trickery or political plays for power being that each worker has a voice in the public forum of the councils. There should be no private meetings and all transcripts of meetings are publicly available. These councils are made up of industries, cooperatives, and other association of producers. The Internet would be used for ordering of raw materials, taking orders for production, keep inventories and accounting records, and the deliveries of products near and far to social stores. These worker councils can plan among them selves what the societal needs would be when it comes to products and services. Stocks of bottled water, food, clothing, blankets, emergency shelters, etc., would be produced, inventoried and rotated for natural disasters and famines. These future people who possess the means of production will also master intellectual production of ideas. That means the new society would implement “free access” in stages until the TLV is a thing of the past because new technology and methods would be introduced over time. Not only that but interpersonal relationship would also change with society as a whole making a gift economy possible. It will take years of social relationships to change as the collective means of production take on a different social character than it was as a private possession belonging to the capitalist. Since we are talking about the far future we don’t know how things will turn out. Barbarism also has the possibility of happening.

Someday in the future, state and federal governments may be adjourned depending on what methodology the working class decides to follow through on. However, city and town councils would continue to exist. They will function differently than they do today being that each elected council representative would not get any TLVs for their services and can be recalled at any time and another elected. Why would city and town councils be needed? To hear grievances from the citizenry and to make sure roads are paved and street light bulbs are replaced. The Internet is also used to communicate with other town and cities to have more unified laws. Unfortunately law and order will have to continue since there will be persons who would either harm their wife and children or harm other people or try to do acts of sabotage to the forming new society. People would be trained to arrest offenders and receive TLVs. A public court of workers would be established to either prove innocence or guilt of allege offenders. There will be jails to confine offenders.

Why is LTV’s considered a better medium of exchange than money? First of all, the TLV exchanged rate for products is determined by labor time. The LTV vanishes upon exchange of physical products at the social store or whatever place of distribution may be called at that time. In other words, no profits can be made whatsoever. The store clerks and employees get TLVs of non-productive work being that they are part of the industry sector. These stores would be much more localized for convenience and be very similar to stores in a downtown setting such as grocery stores, appliance stores clothing stores, furniture stores, etc. Workers are paid according to mental and physical stress of employment. The scale difference is small but enough to attract workers to do tasks that other workers won’t do. If these scales don’t exist then who would build the skyscraper? Who would weld pipe on the ocean floor risking shark attack? Dig tunnels or mine ore? Something has to be done to fill the gap of undesirable work. Another thing to consider is that no one has to work long hours. Those who want to can and keep their accounts while other can enjoy a more leisurely life while others may seek to improve society. Retirement can come early if a person so chooses. What also has to be realized that there would be no stock exchange, no individual investments made on industries, no pooling of any resource to corner a particular market, no adjustments for inflation, no banks, no loans or interest charged. What TLV’s are about being nothing more than a debit account for each individual who works including those who cannot work. Services such as health care, education and social services are free. There would be no exchange of TLV for services rendered for the dog catcher, education, text books, receiving medical supplies, medications, medical treatment, hospitalizations, and mental health counseling. This is the “free access” of the service sector. It gets it support from the industry sector because for every twenty minutes of labor one unit of TLV is created. This is created out of thin air, which simply means that there are no taxes withdrawn from industry workers as under capitalism. These TLVs are places in the Social Assurance Fund. These units pay (for lack of a better term) doctors, nurses, teachers, psychologist, social services people, et al. It also pays for those who are disabled and unable to work or help single mothers along. If some people don’t want to work then social services could give an allotment of TLV’s to them. Since I have been among a lot of workers through the years who look upon lazy people as parasites. A person who is lazy would be ridiculed even in the future society. On the other hand, the future society just may figure out the psychological reasons why some people refuse to work.

I cannot comprehend “the gift economy” as being workable from the start. I don’t see how it could maintain the socially necessary labor time in production of commodities despite the socially owned means of production. A lot of people could very well walk of the job figuring someone else can do it. Marx wrote that people could not be liberated with out adequate quality and quantity of food, drink, clothing, and housing. Implement the gift economy and stores and warehouses would empty out in no time. Rationing would have to be done at gunpoint and who to say that those with the guns won’t help themselves to whatever they wanted? The fact of scarcity happening and panic setting in the masses will turn to rioting because individual need and satisfaction would no longer be met. It would be similar to the Katrina disaster when the strong preyed on the weak. Speaking of the Katrina disaster has anyone considered what people and supplies would be called upon for natural disasters and famines? To jump right into the gift economy and you will find society’s foundation proving itself as nothing more than sand in a short time. Some out of necessity and fear would volunteer for work in factories and the fields but the fruit of their labor will be stolen as soon as those products are available. Armed militias would force other people to work as if they were slaves. Even prisoners would be forced into working the fields. Just think social classes would be created because workers would now be subservient to the armed militias and the militias would join with other militias to create a social class of their own. Furthermore, deliveries of raw and finished products would be interrupted with highjackings. Black markets would be created from stolen articles and whatever currency is left over would be used as exchange and we begin to get your former capitalist heading cartels including pharmaceuticals. The capitalist would win in the long run with “the gift economy”.

Moreover, the idea of the “magic wand” puts me in mind of what Marx wrote that communism would abolish the present state of things as an act of the dominant peoples “all at once” and simultaneously. The material conditions would exist for planetary transformation. I question this as something in the realm of science fiction. Thinking that everything would happen “all at once” giving immediate birth to a gift economy in the future would be a kind of magic. However, if society and all members progressed to a “gift economy” then that would suggest evolution. The material conditions and universal agreement would make the immediate transition to communism possible. Everyone in society would agree, at that very moment, to make that transition including every capitalist on planet Earth. They would hand over the means of production to the worker’s collective with no argument ending all conflict and struggle. Revolution would never happen.

Despite the claims made by either anarchist, socialist or communist people [today] continue to view communism as an “alien” state of existence and something to resist tooth and nail especially in the United States. Would there be a revolution (the radical act) that forces a new state of existence by wrestling the old out of existence? Or would the new society evolve instead? Communism continues to be viewed as authoritarian beast violating civil liberties and civil rights. A society of shared material poverty rather than a creation of heaven on earth. Communist revolution, perceived in people’s minds, would be a creation of a society that would lack any sort of civilized relationships especially between each member of society. A political brute backed up by a military would enforce its will on the masses. How many times have I read that men and women would force themselves into a person’s home to take whatever extra is in the house or apartment to give to someone else so they say. Excuse me but if a person works to obtain something including a few extra items then those things belongs to them and no one else. This is theft of personal property and a violation of civil rights. Makes me wonder if communism was about turning society into one giant ant colony or beehive. Who in their right mind would support such a society? Communist are good at critique of the existing state of capitalism. What is communism? A society that is birthed with revolution, destroys all existing institutions, implements a gift economy, and everyone is equal. How is this done all at once? I don’t know because the answers given, in my opinion, are vague. Kind of like getting from A to C while ignoring B. However, I don’t really don’t think capitalists has much to fear from communism for a couple hundreds of years to come. Whatever comments come after this I no longer give a shit. This thread is done as far as I am concerned.

[RedArmyFaction]

I&#39;m not sure how practical it is to get rid of money, but it seems like a good idea.

[condor]

I think most would agree eliminating money is not an immediate task of any socialist system. Money simply represents the distribution of resources. However, money should be eliminated as quickly as possible because of the wasteful, unproductive bureaucracy which is needed to distribute it.

Money would be divided equally by default and then by differing needs and abilities. Socialism is based on superabundance so basic goods (food being a prime example) can be distirbuted freely after everyone is persuaded against the harm of greed. I think the greed/laziness thing is hugely overhyped. There is little attraction in overindulging in maintainence, everyday, utility goods.

I think a reduction in personal property needs to go alongside. Communal ownership of generic goods (cars, computers, etc) will reduce the personal needs of each person. Many people own items they will use only at certain times of the year in certain places or occassionally whilst they go unused for most of the year. These can be distributed to central places where they will most likely be used. Having cars on the outskirts of a town (like many existing communities) would encourage people to cycle or walk and become healthier, leaving town safer, cleaner and quiter places. There is huge waste under capitalism: packaging, unrecyclable materials, OS specific software, solid copies of digitally available culture to enforce copyright which can be reduced.

As for people deliberately not working (not the problem in any socialist economy so for), you starve, it&#39;s simple. It may sound cruel, but if your that stupid you deserve it. No one has an inherent right to be fed, clothed, and housed no matter how they behave. Along with society&#39;s utter contempt, people must work to live. They will have much less work if they work under a socialist economy than under some pointless hedonist separatist movement.

So, money needs some consideration but money is not the problem, the distribution of goods and who distributes them is.