how will goods be distributed under communism

[COVARE]

people would be supplied according to their needs right? what classifies something as a need? say i think having a ton of computers and video games is my "need" and what if everyone thinks the same? there's no way in hell that we can provide everyone with their unlimited needs when dealing with the problem of scarcity especially considering we'd be producing for 6 billion people,

[IcarusAngel]

Because your "need" isn't computers and videos games, retard.

What the hell are you producing with "video games"? A "need" means to survive on, and yes, needs would be provided to everybody in communist, dumb-ass.

What a stupid question.

If you wanted extra, like video games, you would be required to PROVIDE TO THE COMMUNITY first.

In your case, it'd probably be something like cleaning toilets because you're a libertarian and that's all you could contribute to society.

So you see, the problem of getting "needs" to everybody, and of ensuring that there are enough people to do busy work, is actually quite simple: needs can be provided by society with efficient modes of production, and the twits who want extra techno-toys, will be required to do things like cleaning toilets to get them. If anything, there would be too many people willing to do minor things like cleaning toilets to survive.

Now shut-up, and come back when you've read some theory.

[danyboy27]

people would be supplied according to their needs right? what classifies something as a need? say i think having a ton of computers and video games is my "need" and what if everyone thinks the same? there's no way in hell that we can provide everyone with their unlimited needs when dealing with the problem of scarcity especially considering we'd be producing for 6 billion people,

well, there is many way to see that, its depend if your idealistic communist society accept barthing or freedom of trading OR if that society have the state that regulate the good distrubution.

[COVARE]

wow IcarusAnegel you're an idiot, your insults are much appericated. i guess i'll just get the easy job to get what i "need" and yes i need video games (under capitalism i can get as much video games as i want), there's not going to be as much video game producers as there are people, espeically since most will take the easy way out. btw i'm not libertarian and you're assumption that certain people can only do a certain job based entirely on politics is absurd, you're the idot, not I.

[IcarusAngel]

wow IcarusAnegel you're an idiot, your insults are much appericated.

You're the one who's asking stupid questions.


i guess i'll just get the easy job to get what i "need" and yes i need video games (under capitalism i can get as much video games as i want),

No you don't. I'm guessing you're not rich and thus you cannot get as many video games as you want. Video games are expensive.

And even if you were, so what? Most people cannot. And more video games could be produced if there was less consolidation in the video game industry. It's extremely hard for independnet producers to get their games out, even though some of the funnest video games have come from once independent developers, like ID.

Video game designers have to play the corporate shenanigan game like everybody else.


there's not going to be as much video game producers as there are people, espeically since most will take the easy way out. btw i'm not libertarian and you're assumption that certain people can only do a certain job based entirely on politics is absurd, you're the idot, not I.

You're the "idot."

Only a certain bunch of idiots are going to want a lot of video games, and I already told you they could get them if they did extra for the community.

The kind of people who want video games probably are not going to be geniuses, and will probably do more simplistic work, such as toilet repiar, which is essential to society, no doubt.

In Communism, there would be no class, and now "simplistic" work would be elevated and there would be no shame in being a simple plumber, or something.

[COVARE]

i can buy more video games under capitalism than i can under communism because nobody would want to be a video game designer under communism because you dont get the fruits of your labour. if you dont work for wages and to meet the demand, how much would you know to produce? and considering anyone could have a video game rather than just those who can afford it, the supply would have to be so much greater to satisfy 6 billion people and with the lack of video game designers or anyone in the video game industry that's a lot to produce which means working late hours.

[danyboy27]

The kind of people who want video games probably are not going to be geniuses, and will probably do more simplistic work, such as toilet repiar, which is essential to society, no doubt.


i cant call it racism, but that verry close to it.
but i would translate it by : only dumb people play video game.

video game are like chess or checker, that a game, people need to have fun.
if you denies that right to people, you will make a verry egalitarian society full of depressed people.

that was one of the biggest problem of the soviet union: not much money where allocated for leizure and fun, witht he dirrect result of a hugh rate of suicide.

[IcarusAngel]

i cant call it racism, but that verry close to it.
but i would translate it by : only dumb people play video game.

It has absolutely nothing to do with "racism."

Noticed how I said earlier "the people who want video games" and "probably," this is because I'm guessing. I would guess people who would want them are not going to be geniuses - it's a fact that things like the piano and so on are far more intellectual than video games.

And most intellectuals do not sit around and play video games, no.


video game are like chess or checker, that a game, people need to have fun.

Video games aren't anything like Chess, Go, or any other strategy based logic game or abstract game.


if you denies that right to people, you will make a verry egalitarian society full of depressed people.

I'm not denying anybody's "rights" lol.

You do not have a "right" to a video game any more in communism than you do in capitalism. But to acquire one, I'm guessing you would only be required to do menial work to get them.

This is because you can acquire them and do menial work in today's capitalistic society, as well. But you can't acquire something like say a super computer by fixing toilets most of your life.

Distribution of video games would be in such a way that nearly anybody could get them if they tried, and the harder you worked, the easier it would be to get them (keep in mind your basic needs are taken care of).

[IcarusAngel]

if you dont work for wages and to meet the demand, how much would you know to produce? and considering anyone could have a video game rather than just those who can afford it, the supply would have to be so much greater to satisfy 6 billion people and with the lack of video game designers or anyone in the video game industry that's a lot to produce which means working late hours.

How would the designers be paid?

When people do the menial work to get them, such as repairing toliets, or whatever, a voucher (for lack of a better word) would be made.

This "voucher" would let the community know that someone has been doing work for a video game, and thus, the more people that do work for the purpose of getting video games, the more resources they will receive.

This is because socialism is about contributions to the public good.

Keep in mind, that even if no vouchers indicated that people were requesting video games, they could still be produced, because people receive according to their need and abilities, and thus some people would naturally try and produce them (if they wanted to).

However, they would obviously receive less resources.

This all makes perfect sense.

By the way, spetnaz21, where is your explanation of how people will get video games?

[Hiero]

i can buy more video games under capitalism than i can under communism because nobody would want to be a video game designer under communism because you dont get the fruits of your labour. if you dont work for wages and to meet the demand, how much would you know to produce? and considering anyone could have a video game rather than just those who can afford it, the supply would have to be so much greater to satisfy 6 billion people and with the lack of video game designers or anyone in the video game industry that's a lot to produce which means working late hours.
Why would 6 billion people want video games?

[IcarusAngel]

Yes, COVARE's priorities are all screwed up in the first place.

In the first instance, Communists would be ensuring the poor, the majority of the world's population, would have their basic needs fulfilled.

And by basic needs I'm talking about the basic needs to survive: shelter, food, clothing, water, and so on.

Capitalism has half the world's population in starvation, so the US can get "video games."

it's absolutely absurd and shows the priorities are all screwed up.

[COVARE]

you're calling me stupid cuz i enjoy playing video games? what the heck is this based on? i can have leisure time. damnit why are you on the computer when you could be doing more "intelectually stimutating activies"? come on, give me a break, and stop being so closed minded. so how much "vouchers" would one get for doing a specific job? does it differ depending on job? what if i wanted more than just video games? what if i wanted a nice car? what if i wanted a large mansion? can i get that too? if i cant, it sucks more than capitalism.

[COVARE]

if people can have something, why would they decline? in addition to one's basic needs, people would want more stuff and how do you know 6 billion wont want video games?

[IcarusAngel]

If your biggest concern with a post-capitalist society is who will get video games and who won't, then yes you're stupid.

There are billions of people in the world who lack basic health care, who can't even get access to clean water and food, even though many scientists have estimated there is enough food (should resources be distributed property) to feed the whole world three times over.

It is estimated that about 2 billion people live on less than a dollar a day, and about 3 billion live on less than 3 dollars a day, a staggering number by any acount.

First, food and so on need to be dealt with, and it's absurd in capitalism we have the US exploiting the third world and having them ship food to us when they're starving to death. It's an absurd economic situation as well when Paris Hilton makes more than a computer scientist, or a video game designer, in the first place.

Most people understand computers are worth more than showboating, and so Paris Hilton would make less.

To get more than one video game you would have to do more work - such as cleaning 20 toilets instead of 10 to get two games.

To get a car, obviously you'd either have to do a hell of a lot of menial work, or, you would be given one based on your job. For example, if you were a runner, or a delivery man, the car would be provided automatically. If not, the community would determine how much work needs to be done for you to get one. Probably cars could be provided to most workers (since you need them to go get goods) and they would be fuel-efficient, since we already have enough resources to make cars fuel efficient and actually, because of capitalism, cars are worse technology wise than they need to be.

[IcarusAngel]

if people can have something, why would they decline? in addition to one's basic needs, people would want more stuff and how do you know 6 billion wont want video games?

You've been explained this time and time again now, you have no intellectual rebuttal and have already lost the argument.

There is a clear distinction between "needs and wants," a need is different from a want.

Second, you don't get a free-ride in communism. That's another lie purported by the capitalists.

To get more resources than what you're worth (in terms of production), you'll have to do extra work for it, in the case of video-games or board games, or any other types of games, you'd have to do some work first before you can get them.

If enough people request a certain thing, like video games, the designers will be sent a TON of resources, and will live a good life and everybody will be happy.

And before spetnaz21 accuses me of "racism" again while providing nothing to the discussion, everybody in communism is worth an infinite amount in terms of their life.

NOBODY goes without health care or food, and so on, and a man who has worked his way up to become a doctor or a computer programmer, or anything else essential to society, will indeed be well taken care of and will be treated as heroes, instead of Paris Hilton or Michael Jordan, who contribute little to society.

[danyboy27]

If your biggest concern with a post-capitalist society is who will get video games and who won't, then yes you're stupid.

There are billions of people in the world who lack basic health care, who can't even get access to clean water and food, even though many scientists have estimated there is enough food (should resources be distributed property) to feed the whole world three times over.

It is estimated that about 2 billion people live on less than a dollar a day, and about 3 billion live on less than 3 dollars a day, a staggering number by any acount.

First, food and so on need to be dealt with, and it's absurd in capitalism we have the US exploiting the third world and having them ship food to us when they're starving to death. It's an absurd economic situation as well when Paris Hilton makes more than a computer scientist, or a video game designer, in the first place.

Most people understand computers are worth more than showboating, and so Paris Hilton would make less.

To get more than one video game you would have to do more work - such as cleaning 20 toilets instead of 10 to get two games.

To get a car, obviously you'd either have to do a hell of a lot of menial work, or, you would be given one based on your job. For example, if you were a runner, or a delivery man, the car would be provided automatically. If not, the community would determine how much work needs to be done for you to get one. Probably cars could be provided to most workers (since you need them to go get goods) and they would be fuel-efficient, since we already have enough resources to make cars fuel efficient and actually, because of capitalism, cars are worse technology wise than they need to be.

i love your utopian way of looking the world.

[mykittyhasaboner]

you're calling me stupid cuz i enjoy playing video games? what the heck is this based on? i can have leisure time. damnit why are you on the computer when you could be doing more "intelectually stimutating activies"? come on, give me a break, and stop being so closed minded. so how much "vouchers" would one get for doing a specific job? does it differ depending on job? what if i wanted more than just video games? what if i wanted a nice car? what if i wanted a large mansion? can i get that too? if i cant, it sucks more than capitalism.

nobody is denying you leisure time. your just making ridiculous claims about capitalism "being better" than communism, because (if you have enough money to begin with) you can buy a big mansion or a nice car, or video games. all this while millions of people are starving.

get your fucking priorities straight, and stop trolling.

[COVARE]

there cannot be enough food to feed everyone considering it would require massive furtile land and considering the population density in some places, if that were the case we'd hault production in other areas in order to feed everyone and i wouldn't be able to get what i needed, and also if you mean everyone getting a job inculding children then thats unethical. people in many african countries produce more kids than they can feed, if this continues the rate of production wouldn't be sufficent to feed everyone. i really dont like your system at all, it means working hard which i dont like doing. at least under capitalism, i get a fixed salary and i dont have quotas and i can make more money, not by working harder, but by gett

[IcarusAngel]

i love your utopian way of looking the world.

LOL

Yes, how dare I demand that the three billion people who are starving to death and barely can get by be given the sources that they need instead of worrying about how COVARE will get his latest update to Quake 3 Arena and Sim City: 3000.

How "utopian" of me LOL.

[mykittyhasaboner]

there cannot be enough food to feed everyone considering it would require massive furtile land and considering the population density in some places, if that were the case we'd hault production in other areas in order to feed everyone and i wouldn't be able to get what i needed, and also if you mean everyone getting a job inculding children then thats unethical. people in many african countries produce more kids than they can feed, if this continues the rate of production wouldn't be sufficent to feed everyone. i really dont like your system at all, it means working hard which i dont like doing. at least under capitalism, i get a fixed salary and i dont have quotas and i can make more money, not by working harder, but by gett

do you read what you type?:rolleyes:

[IcarusAngel]

there cannot be enough food to feed everyone considering it would require massive furtile land and considering the population density in some places, if that were the case we'd hault production in other areas in order to feed everyone and i wouldn't be able to get what i needed, and also if you mean everyone getting a job inculding children then thats unethical. people in many african countries produce more kids than they can feed, if this continues the rate of production wouldn't be sufficent to feed everyone. i really dont like your system at all, it means working hard which i dont like doing. at least under capitalism, i get a fixed salary and i dont have quotas and i can make more money, not by working harder, but by gett


This is nonsense. First of all, we are destroying a lot of arable land with our current production tactics and wasting vast amounts of water and so on. We are grazing the land and destroying rain forests: new farming techniques are needed.

Second, there are enough resources to feed everybody in th world. Brazil, for example, is flourishing in resources, but this is a country where hundreds of thousands of children are still starving and many spend their time on the streets sniffing glue, and so on.

They have their hands tied by the WTO, loan sharks, and Africa has a huge problem with vulture funds and so on.

The problem is indeed corrupt, capitalistic governments, and these need to be dismantled.

Communism is a world wide movement.

[COVARE]

ok so what you're saying is that i cant have all the money that i have right now to buy what i need because i have to "work hard" for it? i dont mind working, but not excessively, and when the government says what i should have, rather than me. if not enough people request video games, i cant get any. plus i dont want the same quality shit as what others have, i want better.

[COVARE]

if there is enough resources to feed the world, it means we'd all have to have substantially less shares because we need to produce for everyone. not even bearing in mind how utopian this is, as spetnaz21 has said, OMG a world revolution, NOW that will totally happen....you'd have to local governments set up everywhere to make sure people would produce what is needed, nevermind that you ignore some demand for others, and you'd have to make sure to keep sending people to the gulags for not producing the HUGE amount they have to.....you probably would be better killing off a unch of people, it'll be easier on us.

[IcarusAngel]

Yes, you would have to cut back on "shares." We throw away more food than many countries' consume.

And people are dying - after India started transitioning to capitalism, hundreds of millions of people started dying. Millions have died in South America, since the countries started to become capitalists. And millions have died in Africa as well.

Capitalism will go down as one of history's greatest murderers.

[danyboy27]

LOL

Yes, how dare I demand that the three billion people who are starving to death and barely can get by be given the sources that they need instead of worrying about how COVARE will get his latest update to Quake 3 Arena and Sim City: 3000.

How "utopian" of me LOL.


what are you doing to help those peoples?

and beside, you seem to request to everyone to be has informed has you, but that something you will never be able to achieve, that completly utopian, and beside of that you are completly lacking of diplomacy toward people like covare.

covare is an avreage guy, its not an idiot but its not a rocket scientist or a politician, its a normal guy, you seem to ask him to be a superhero or something.

what he said about videogame is good for the whole society, african, south american, they have all the right to play it, they have the right of having leizure too.

even in a communist society there is still 2 factor that would prevail, that prevailed in the ancient rome and that still prevail today: bread and game.

everyone should have acces to food, and everyone should have acces to luxury and leizure, beccause without leizure, there is revolt, that proved.

videogame, and even competion between videogame creator would be possible in a communist society, just like Mikoyan. sukoi and yakolev had competition in the soviet union to produce aircrafts.

[Hiero]

what are you doing to help those peoples?

Communism theory and action isn't about helping people. Thoose people will liberate themselves.

[Jazzratt]

They will be distributed mainly by boat and train (or mag-lev). People's needs follow a fairly sensible list of easily prioritisible needs anyway:

1. Nutrients (Give people basic foods and water first)
2. Climate appropriate shelter (Next give them a home)
3. Hygienic living conditions (Followed by somewhere to shit and clean themselves, and then something to clean their home)
4. Every other goddamn thing (finally give them all the entertaining, flavoursome and luxury shit they need).

[Green Dragon]

This "voucher" would let the community know that someone has been doing work for a video game, and thus, the more people that do work for the purpose of getting video games, the more resources they will receive.



Unless you are to argue that video games are created by magic, somebody has to work to create the games.
But you are already arguing that that work is not "needed."
How do the video game people, the "uneeded" (but perhaps "wanted") architects of "uneeded" products, get vouchers to their "uneeded" but wanted trip to Hawaii?




This is because socialism is about contributions to the public good.


Keep in mind, that even if no vouchers indicated that people were requesting video games, they could still be produced, because people receive according to their need and abilities, and thus some people would naturally try and produce them (if they wanted to).



How does a system advance the public good when it allows people to produce goods and services that nobody wants?



However, they would obviously receive less resources.



One would think if the value of the work by a worker to the community was less than the value of work by another, the former would receive less resources than the latter.
Unfortunately for the socialist, it is a standard complaint by them against capitalism.

[Green Dragon]

They will be distributed mainly by boat and train (or mag-lev). People's needs follow a fairly sensible list of easily prioritisible needs anyway:

1. Nutrients (Give people basic foods and water first)
2. Climate appropriate shelter (Next give them a home)
3. Hygienic living conditions (Followed by somewhere to shit and clean themselves, and then something to clean their home)
4. Every other goddamn thing (finally give them all the entertaining, flavoursome and luxury shit they need).

boats and trains, even mag levs, themselves have to be produced and distributed.

[spice756]

much "vouchers" would one get for doing a specific job? does it differ depending on job? what if i wanted more than just video games? what if i wanted a nice car? what if i wanted a large mansion? can i get that too? if i cant, it sucks more than capitalism


The more you work under communism the more you will get.There will be no need for big house or big car has fame ,wealth and status will be look down on.People will be out doors and enjoy them self more.And competition ,class struggle ,alienation ,exploitation will be ALL gone.

People will make more friends and relationships will be better.There will be less divorce do to people will not look up to fame ,wealth and status in the girl or guy they are going out with.




if there is enough resources to feed the world, it means we'd all have to have substantially less shares because we need to produce for everyone. not even bearing in mind how utopian this is, as spetnaz21 has said, OMG a world revolution, NOW that will totally happen....you'd have to local governments set up everywhere to make sure people would produce what is needed, nevermind that you ignore some demand for others, and you'd have to make sure to keep sending people to the gulags for not producing the HUGE amount they have to.....you probably would be better killing off a unch of people, it'll be easier on us.


There much debate if there is enough food and water for everyone.



there cannot be enough food to feed everyone considering it would require massive furtile land and considering the population density in some places, if that were the case we'd hault production in other areas in order to feed everyone and i wouldn't be able to get what i needed, and also if you mean everyone getting a job inculding children then thats unethical. people in many african countries produce more kids than they can feed, if this continues the rate of production wouldn't be sufficent to feed everyone. i really dont like your system at all, it means working hard which i dont like doing. at least under capitalism, i get a fixed salary and i dont have quotas and i can make more money, not by working harder, but by gett


There is enough land for everyone just not enough food and water.The problem is not African people having lots of kids but the US businesses exploiting them and US taking all the resources in Africa



How would the designers be paid?
When people do the menial work to get them, such as repairing toliets, or whatever, a voucher (for lack of a better word) would be made
.

There is no money under communism.The more you work the more you get.



This is nonsense. First of all, we are destroying a lot of arable land with our current production tactics and wasting vast amounts of water and so on. We are grazing the land and destroying rain forests: new farming techniques are needed.


We are destroying rain forests to build homes and for paper .


Has for having a TV ,VCR or DVD is a want not a need.Food and water is a need not a want .A car is a want not a need.A house and clothing is a need not a want.Lots of clothing and a big house is a want not a need.Having a game is a want not a need.