Eldercare?

[Cohacq]

After a political discussion between me and a few friends (rightwingers, whose only arguments work by finding fallacies in my own, and hugging the current system), I ran into a complete roadblock after a while. After explaining how communist ecocomy works (workers get the full value of the product they make and all that) they asked me "what about eldercare? you dont get a product out of that, so you cant trade it for something else". So now, I need help in how to counterargue to this one, as I couldnt find a good one myself.

[Winter]

After a political discussion between me and a few friends (rightwingers, whose only arguments work by finding fallacies in my own, and hugging the current system), I ran into a complete roadblock after a while. After explaining how communist ecocomy works (workers get the full value of the product they make and all that) they asked me "what about eldercare? you dont get a product out of that, so you cant trade it for something else". So now, I need help in how to counterargue to this one, as I couldnt find a good one myself.

You're thinking in terms of capitalism still. In a Communist system, people wouldn't work in order to gain something, they work for the sake of society. One thing that is required by the people to obtain communism is solidarity and altruism for others. The Communist reconizes that he does not live for himself, but for the good of his brothers and sisters. The individual is but a minor entity within human society as a whole.

Eldercare would come about naturally to a harden Communist. They would reconize the wisdom the elder would have accumulated over the years as well as his self sacrificial labor for society. Eldercare would more likely be done by the relatives, but if this is not possible I do not believe it would be a problem at all to find somebody to do this.

Remember: Laborer's in a communist society do not work for capital. They work for the wheels of progress to turn for the sake of society.

[F9]

from each according his abilities to each according his needs
So the "eldercare" would take place from the community.Those that are unable to work or take care of themselves, community will provide them what they need.

Fuserg9:star:

[Cohacq]

Those that are unable to work or take care of themselves, community will provide them what they need.

Yes, but if there is no real contribute to society (for example putting more products into rotation) what does society in a whole win on it?

[Winter]

Yes, but if there is no real contribute to society (for example putting more products into rotation) what does society in a whole win on it?

They are contributing to society. The knowledge that when they get old they too will be taken care of. Take your example for instance, who do you think those products in rotation are benefitting? The people.

People will put in work and sacrifice for society according to their abilities ( they being part of society ) because in the end, it is them who benefit; according to their needs.

[Niccolò Rossi]

workers get the full value of the product they make and all thatI'm afraid your incorrect here. The individual worker can never receive the full value of his/her product. Why? Marx explains this well in his criticism of the Lassallean notion of the "undiminished proceeds of labour" in his Critique of the Gotha Programme:


To understand what is implied in this connection by the phrase "fair distribution", we must take the first paragraph and this one together. The latter presupposes a society wherein the instruments of labor are common property and the total labor is co-operatively regulated, and from the first paragraph we learn that "the proceeds of labor belong undiminished with equal right to all members of society."

"To all members of society"? To those who do not work as well? What remains then of the "undiminished" proceeds of labor? Only to those members of society who work? What remains then of the "equal right" of all members of society?

But "all members of society" and "equal right" are obviously mere phrases. The kernel consists in this, that in this communist society every worker must receive the "undiminished" Lassallean "proceeds of labor".

Let us take, first of all, the words "proceeds of labor" in the sense of the product of labor; then the co-operative proceeds of labor are the total social product.

From this must now be deducted: First, cover for replacement of the means of production used up. Second, additional portion for expansion of production. Third, reserve or insurance funds to provide against accidents, dislocations caused by natural calamities, etc.


These deductions from the "undiminished" proceeds of labor are an economic necessity, and their magnitude is to be determined according to available means and forces, and partly by computation of probabilities, but they are in no way calculable by equity.

There remains the other part of the total product, intended to serve as means of consumption.

Before this is divided among the individuals, there has to be deducted again, from it: First, the general costs of administration not belonging to production. This part will, from the outset, be very considerably restricted in comparison with present-day society, and it diminishes in proportion as the new society develops. Second, that which is intended for the common satisfaction of needs, such as schools, health services, etc. From the outset, this part grows considerably in comparison with present-day society, and it grows in proportion as the new society develops. Third, funds for those unable to work, etc., in short, for what is included under so-called official poor relief today.


they asked me "what about eldercare? The matter of elder care is dealt with above.


you dont get a product out of that, so you cant trade it for something else". What is this point supposed to prove. Me thinks your friends (or maybe even yourself in repeating it to us) are a little confused.

[F9]

Yes, but if there is no real contribute to society (for example putting more products into rotation) what does society in a whole win on it?

the community "wins" because its a free community with equality spread.community wins because they take care of those that might not be able to take care of themselves,and that contains not only old people.
Why must always do something so you win something other,thats not communism that capitalism.Win and profit are not part of Communism.

Fuserg9:star:

[Cohacq]

Me thinks your friends (or maybe even yourself in repeating it to us) are a little confused.


Yes, I am a bit confused about communist/socialist economy in general, but I am trying my best to learn, and to not sound confused. But I can also say that the answers i've got here have made at least a little less confused, but I still don't feel that I have a proper argument to convince them (remember, theyre right-wingers, one is even fascist, but that's beyond the point) that my idea of the argument is the correct one.