Soviet Union did not pay equally? [Archive]

Drace

17th July 2008, 01:46

Both my parents lived in the Soviet Union...
and I asked my mom and she said that people were not all payed the same.
Well she didn't live there for too long but my dad who lived a good amount of his life there said that there were promotions which offered more earnings.

Maybe I heard it wrong?

Ehh I need to catch up with history. I always go with the philosophical side.

Unicorn

17th July 2008, 01:53

Hello,

It is indeed true that people in the Soviet Union did not have the same wages. The differences between income were however small compared to capitalist countries. This is consistent with classic Marxism.

See this thread for explanation:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/does-everybody-get-t76324/index.html?p=1126648#post1126648

comrade stalin guevara

17th July 2008, 01:54

people who work harder then others deserve better pay
they have just realized this in cuba

my old comrade went to the ussr[moskva] as a internationl communist he said there was a gym,theater,etc in there freezeing works and that most workers finished work at lunch to drink vodka because they were aloud labour was not sold it was given as a gift to the revolution

comrade stalin guevara

17th July 2008, 01:55

lennin2 explains it true...
It is indeed true that people in the Soviet Union did not have the same wages. The differences between income were however small compared to capitalist countries. This is consistent with classic Marxism.

17th July 2008, 02:01

people who work harder then others deserve better pay

no,thats totally wrong.who decides the hardness of the job?which is harder the job of the doctor which in 10 minutes saves your life or the builder who makes 1 month to build a wall?there is not such thing like working harder.

from everyone according his abilities,to everyone according to his needs
anything else is discrimination and its not a free-equal society!

Fuserg9:star:

comrade stalin guevara

17th July 2008, 02:08

Drace

17th July 2008, 02:09

Yes I agree with Fuserg.

Construction workers break their backs and come home miserable...while the doctors story is way different.

Only thing is a doctor had to do more studying to become what he is...of course thats it is here. I mean years of college are total crap that don't teach anything you really need to know...and you have to pay for it lol.

comrade stalin guevara

17th July 2008, 02:10

work HARD paid GOOD
slack off paid bad [minus injury,etc of corse]

Drace

17th July 2008, 02:20

I don't see how you work hard. If your job is to clean up the park, how can you do it better?

You either do it or not.

comrade stalin guevara

17th July 2008, 02:25

if your job is to stack pallets and there are others who do the same and in 1 hour you stack 10 pallets and the others do 3 or 4 do you not get rewarded for dedication to the working class

Drace

17th July 2008, 02:27

Well thats skill.
A mentally retarded person cant stack any pallets.

But if the person is not slacking off and is actually trying....Mmm then it gets bit tricky here.

17th July 2008, 02:27

the workers decide who works hard

but your view is valid and i have taken it into my mind to anaylize

and this
from everyone according his abilities,to everyone according to his needs
4sure comrade but you genrally find he who needs more will do more

i work in a factory and someone who is sweating and red faced IS working harder then the person writing down the stock sale,etc

we are talking about a communist society where everyone can choose his job which satisfies him.There wont be hard jobs,if you like them,and enjoy your time wont be bard.So why discriminate and remake classes like capitalism,where people paid differently for what they enjoy.If a job pays more than other then people may go and do that job even if doesnt pleased them and dont like it and that would ended in not as good results as a wo/man who likes it gets.It would get controversials bettwen high and low payments and what was build will collapse!
i suggest to you abc of Anarchism by Alexander Berkman,has some points on this,but also because i saw you have some differential oppinions it would be good for you to know about Anarchism.Is an excelent and simplified book!

Fuserg9:star:

Unicorn

17th July 2008, 02:30

Well thats skill.
A mentally retarded person cant stack any pallets.

But if the person is not slacking off and is actually trying....Mmm then it gets bit tricky here.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_each_according_to_his_contribution

Drace

17th July 2008, 02:30

isn't anarchism where there are no rules o.O Thats what I heard and keep hearing but this definition is probably false.

Haha I read that page at summer school today. I have 4 hours to spare lol.

comrade stalin guevara

17th July 2008, 02:31

yes i guess im thinkn about my current work situatio

i have no knowleade of anarchy except no gods no countries no masters
i would love to learn more
i am confused how communist [ with central planning] and anarchist [ no govt] can be allies but like i say i need to no more

Unicorn

17th July 2008, 02:32

we are talking about a communist society where everyone can choose his job which satisfies him.
No, we are talking about a socialist society, the Soviet Union. In the Soviet Union every able-bodied citizen had a duty to work and job. People were paid according to the quantity and quality of their labor.

comrade stalin guevara

17th July 2008, 02:33

labour is skill

read the book by some russian dudes called, The political econermy of capitolisim

Drace

17th July 2008, 02:34

Mmm I'm liking how this community is active and you can argue with non-retards =D
Unlike yahoo answers >_>

danyboy27

17th July 2008, 02:40

17th July 2008, 02:43

No, we are talking about a socialist society, the Soviet Union. In the Soviet Union every able-bodied citizen had a duty to work and job. People were paid according to the quantity and quality of their labor.

anyway whatever society we talk,paying differentials are not accepted(for me) based on a matter of the work.the only thing that plays matter is what the person needs,nothing more,nothing less!
ps: Drace, Anarchism is far from chaos,i suggest to you too the book i told before!

Fuserg9:star:

Drace

17th July 2008, 02:50

Care to explain what it is then?
I havnt gone to the library in so long so...

17th July 2008, 02:52

Care to explain what it is then?
I havnt gone to the library in so long so...

Not the proper topic.
open another topic with your questions and happily help you!;)

Fuserg9:star:

trivas7

17th July 2008, 02:59

no,thats totally wrong.who decides the hardness of the job?which is harder the job of the doctor which in 10 minutes saves your life or the builder who makes 1 month to build a wall?there is not such thing like working harder.

from everyone according his abilities,to everyone according to his needs
anything else is discrimination and its not a free-equal society!

Fuserg9:star:
Yes. :cool:

comrade stalin guevara

17th July 2008, 03:01

cuba has stoped it equal pay system 4 a reason

Killer Enigma

17th July 2008, 07:07

Some people's labor is more valuable than others. A person working a fast food job is less trained and contributes less to the well-being of society than an oncologist.

Drace

17th July 2008, 07:09

Thats true but the issue is how do we distribute between the better workers and the worse.

danyboy27

17th July 2008, 12:03

i dont think that a worker got more values than the other, but worker got all to win to reward someone like a doctor, that is job is to help the worker to keep going.

also, there could have an alternative, like in east germany, they could have equal pay but special appartement.

nuisance

17th July 2008, 12:18

cuba has stoped it equal pay system 4 a reason
Yeah, because of a change of leadership in Cuba.

Comrade Vasilev

17th July 2008, 14:18

Hello,

It is indeed true that people in the Soviet Union did not have the same wages. The differences between income were however small compared to capitalist countries. This is consistent with classic Marxism.

See this thread for explanation:

Don't give us that revisionist crap, the working class in the USSR got expropriated of the means of production, which became the effective property of a new class of Soviet capitalists in the form of directors of industrial enterprises. Post the Khrushchev 'economic reforms' Soviet workers had no means of living except to sell their labor power to those to those who controlled the means of production; that being the industrial directors and coordinators.

The mere fact that wage-labor existed posits that socialism did not exist, the fact that Soviet workers had to 'dispose over' their labor to enterprises in return for money proves this alone, and 'disposition' in this case is but a euphemism for 'sale'.

Drace

18th July 2008, 01:43

Let me ask this.

Why work harder?

If working harder means doesn't = more $$$...why work harder unless you want to help out?

Comrade Vasilev

18th July 2008, 02:04

Let me ask this.

Why work harder?

If working harder means doesn't = more $$$...why work harder unless you want to help out?
Reported.

Counter-revolutionary reactionary view.

danyboy27

18th July 2008, 02:13

Reported.

Counter-revolutionary reactionary view.

so beccause he got a different opinion/teory of your or even marx he his a counter revolutionary?

it suck ass.

it dosnt mean that he support different salary system that he his a counter revolutionary.

i am a lot aexed toward social stuff and i do thing that differents wages work.

Unicorn

18th July 2008, 02:20

Reported.

Counter-revolutionary reactionary view.
You are a dumbass. There were wage differentials in the USSR under Stalin in the same scale as under Khruschev and Brezhnev. Marx wrote in "The Critique of he Gotha Programme" that "the individual producer receives back from society---after the deductions have been made---exactly what he gives to it."

Lamanov

18th July 2008, 02:21

In 1930s there were 20 different levels in incomes: from 100 to over 3000 rubles. If you add different benefits from different social positions (better houses, cars, free usage of all cultural and social events, paid trips and bonuses for bureaucrats, crappy housing, labor time and conditions for workers, etc.), you get a clear picture of how USSR was not quite different from the rest of the world.

Unicorn

18th July 2008, 02:23

In 1930s there were 20 different levels in incomes: from 100 to over 3000 rubles.
Source? I don't think the wage differentials were that large, IIRC they were about 1:8.

Drace

18th July 2008, 02:26

Rofl...

Wow wow wow....I was just counter-arguing the statement "Its not fair that if you work harder you will get the same wage as someone who doesn't"

By working harder you contribute more to the society. I'm just saying that if it is a problem for you to work hard without getting a different wage then simply don't work as hard.

I would definitely be the one working my ass off lol.

18th July 2008, 03:43

you miss my totally point on the hard work.It wont be hard because you choose it and you like it and those make it a lot easier.You will surprised how many people would like the hard works,and they dont get more money.
This link (http://www.revleft.com/vb/bad-jobs-t81832/index.html?t=81832&highlight=hard+jobs) may help you,is not exactly the same thing but it has some points!

Fuserg9:star:

comrade stalin guevara

18th July 2008, 04:10

Yeah, because of a change of leadership in Cuba.
no because of years of un produtive work
since cuba stoped equal pay there work force has increased prodution

comrade stalin guevara

18th July 2008, 04:12

You are a dumbass. There were wage differentials in the USSR under Stalin in the same scale as under Khruschev and Brezhnev. Marx wrote in "The Critique of he Gotha Programme" that "the individual producer receives back from society---after the deductions have been made---exactly what he gives to it."
exactly comrade but these young comrades do not understand this concept lmfao

danyboy27

18th July 2008, 12:19

when you do a brain numbering work like work in a factory you really need something to motivate you do do more trust me.

Ismail

18th July 2008, 12:37

For the differences in wages and how they were handled and given out from the 1920's-80's, one should read Restoration of Capitalism in the Soviet Union: http://www.oneparty.co.uk/html/book/ussrmenu.html (It sources every single quote)

nuisance

18th July 2008, 13:27

no because of years of un produtive work
since cuba stoped equal pay there work force has increased prodution
Links?
If it was so bad then howcome Fidel never changed it?
So you are actually agreeing with Cuba becoming progressivly more capitalist?

Unicorn

18th July 2008, 13:56

Links?
If it was so bad then howcome Fidel never changed it?
So you are actually agreeing with Cuba becoming progressivly more capitalist?
There has never been "equal pay" in Cuba. Egalitarian distribution is narodnik thinking and antithetical to socialism because it would hinder the development of productive forces.

Comrade Vasilev

18th July 2008, 13:56

Links?
If it was so bad then howcome Fidel never changed it?
So you are actually agreeing with Cuba becoming progressivly more capitalist?
The stain of Khrushchevite revisionism surely left a mark, so it's only a matter of time.

Unicorn

18th July 2008, 14:01

The stain of Khrushchevite revisionism surely left a mark, so it's only a matter of time.
In Russia, the revolutionary Narodniks of the 1870’s supported egalitarian distribution. Revealing the social content of their demands, Lenin wrote that in Russia at the time "...this very idea of equality and the many different equalitarian plans" were "the fullest possible expression of the tasks of the bourgeois revolution, not the socialist”, and that they expressed "the tasks, not of the struggle against capitalism, but of the struggle against the rule of the landlords and bureaucracy" (V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 12, p. 356).

ComradeOm

19th July 2008, 16:05

from everyone according his abilities,to everyone according to his needs
anything else is discrimination and its not a free-equal society!Marx was perfectly clear that this slogan is only applicable in a communist society (or 'higher phase of communism' to remain true to the original text). The USSR was not, and never claimed to be, a communist society and instead used the phrase "From each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution"

Dimentio

19th July 2008, 16:11

I don't really care about inequalities in income, as long as everyone has a good basic income and the people control the means of production. If it is shown that inequalities have a detrimental or neutral effect on people's motivation, then they need to get rid off, if it has a negative effect, we could still have some differences according to the amount of tasks which people undertake and projects finished.

We have discussed this thoroughly on NET;s forum.

danyboy27

19th July 2008, 16:37

danyboy27

19th July 2008, 16:37

could not say it better

19th July 2008, 18:16

Marx was perfectly clear that this slogan is only applicable in a communist society (or 'higher phase of communism' to remain true to the original text). The USSR was not, and never claimed to be, a communist society and instead used the phrase "From each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution"

agreed,thats why i dont agree with USSR and Marxists.You see the fair thing in a long term and not short.You just discriminate until the final goal communism,or higher phase whatever Marx told it!

Fuserg9:star:

Josef Balin

22nd July 2008, 16:14

cuba has stoped it equal pay system 4 a reason
That reason, of course, being that it never existed.

comrade stalin guevara

24th July 2008, 03:14

Links?
If it was so bad then howcome Fidel never changed it?
So you are actually agreeing with Cuba becoming progressivly more capitalist?

No but if capitolist are willing to change there system to be more socialist then i dont see nothing wrong with communist doing it as long as its the revolution in heart not the cash.