Advantages of a socialized economy

[Schrödinger's Cat]

I think we need to discuss the theoretical advantages of a fully democratic economy compared to both corporate and laissez faire markets - in relation to productivity. This could both strengthen our knowledge about why we believe socialism is a justifiable alternative, as well as get some interesting side discussions.

I'll start.

- Certain forms of labor in any market system will be wasted for jobs that are otherwise unnecessary in an economy based around wants. Marketing and advertising are two popular forms. High-scale management is another.

- The business cycle stalls continual economic growth.

- Any unemployment above "frictional" changes limit productivity.

- Trillions of pounds of material are wasted on products that are made for 'income groups,' instead of satisfying wants.

[mikelepore]

All jobs related to speculation, buying investments in the hope that the price will go up and you can resell them. Banking, trading, brokerage, appraisal, forecast, etc.

All work related to securing trade secrets, not only locking up all the files, but also the need to reinvent industrial methods that have already been invented somewhere else but kept secret.

The cost of cleaning up all of capitalism's messes. The profit motive makes a company pollute a river, then the river has to be dredged. Low wages cause people to become thieves, and then they are imprisoned. Unhealthy environments make people ill, and then they have to be hospitalized.

Military expenses related to the international competition for markets, trade routes, and sources of raw materials.

Business lawsuits, such as fights over trademarks, copyrights, etc.

The incomes of parasites on top of parasites, such as lenders, landlords, insurance companies, etc.

I'm convinced that most of the surplus value extracted from labor goes to waste. Profits are a secondary factor compared to the waste.

[JimmyJazz]

I'm not sure productivity is a very good measure of an economy's health. What about the environment? Things like styrofoam cups and bottled water (bottled water: the biggest single indictment of the absurdity of a capitalist system?) count in a measure of productivity. As do the new model cars, TVs, home movie formats, etc., that are totally unneeded and get pushed on us by advertisers, prompting us to throw away our fully functional old stuff. There's almost a direct link between productivity and waste, in a capitalist economy. So a direct comparison of "productivity" in this economy and productivity in that economy would be near impossible, and if done, the number in the socialist economy might easily be lower. But it wouldn't mean a thing.

That said, I do think real productivity would go up. I mean, we would presumably take steps to produce the food and clothing that the impoverished third world needs (sort of the way Cuba does with sending their doctors overseas), which would certainly occupy quite a few man-hours that currently sit unused because although they could be used to meet human need they don't promise to increase capital in the short term.

[apathy maybe]

Two things, that I almost always use in discussions.

Benefits for the environment (especially when talking with "Greens"), and reduction in the amount of work that individuals need to do.

Benefits for the environment include such things as not needing to produce as much crap (due to not having all the extra associated costs of capitalism), machinery and consumer goods being designed to last forever, rather then having built in obsolescence, and people sharing goods, rather then everyone having one (or more) (I use cars and washing machines as examples).

Without capitalism, jobs (such as "finance" area, including banking, insurance, etc.) that aren't productive disappear. And because there is no profit motive, there is less work, for more workers. Less work all around, but the same amount of production happening (and, tied to the previous point on environment, even less production happening).

Basically, without capitalism, we can pull most people's (world wide) standard of living up, produce less per person, and have a lot less work per person. In capitalism there would be a contradiction! But socialism allows the impossible.

Anarchism, it's what's for dinner.