I already asked you this question before, but you did not answer it, and I remember you were the one to use the word “profit” (in quotes) when talking about Communism for this same reason (I did notice).
How do you ensure the ones who work the hardest get the most Use-Value of the community “profit”?
Or do we no longer care about unfair redistribution of goods / services / food / water / housing / etc ?
Is it only under “private ownership” where we need to make sure we give more value to the ones who work the hardest? is it not unfair if someone who works the least gets more than someone who works the most? what about someone who happens to be friend with the one distributing housing?
…
And with this I go to bed, it’s late here… thanks for the discussion!
It depends on the phase in Communism. In lower phases, Labor Vouchers (centrally administered and destroyed on first use) would likely be used to for goods and services that aren’t essential, essentials would be free. Rates of Labor Vouchers would be based on hours worked, with more for higher skilled or more intense labor, and the same vouchers payed for less time worked in more strenuous or dangerous conditions. In higher phases, it likely wouldn’t matter, productivity would be high enough for the mantra “from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs.”
You can read more on economic planning, but again, please research AES to see how these countries are already attempting to work towards such a system.
Again, I’m not asking what form that distribution takes, I’m asking how do you ensure it’s fair.
If there’s unfair exploitation, I could not care less if it involves Labor Vouchers, cheques, salt or cryptocurrency…
What I’m looking for is methods to detect and punish those who manipulate the system to distribute those goods unfairly. Those who lick the right boots to try and get favors from their distributing friends. I want to see how those countries are placing measures to punish THEIR OWN friends if they are unfair EVEN when it would benefit the one executing punishment to let it slide, I’m asking what method of PROTECTION (not prosecution) those who denounce problems in the system will receive. I’m asking how do you ensure transparency… how can people detect if something might be wrong? and if something is wrong and someone finds Xi Jinping with heir hands in a pot of foul honey, how can they guarantee they’ll be able to openly criticize and denounce leading to punishment in the same way my ideal State would punish those who distribute unfairly for their own benefit.
Those are the things that are important. Those are the things that prevent exploitation. I have not yet heard one measure against abuse that could not be applied in a system with private ownership. You could perfectly provide free essentials in a “private ownership” society, in fact many countries considered capitalists already do some level of this (admittedly, not enough, but it’s a good direction), my ideal State would have this cranked to 11.
I meant profit of Use-Value.
I already asked you this question before, but you did not answer it, and I remember you were the one to use the word “profit” (in quotes) when talking about Communism for this same reason (I did notice).
How do you ensure the ones who work the hardest get the most Use-Value of the community “profit”?
Or do we no longer care about unfair redistribution of goods / services / food / water / housing / etc ?
Is it only under “private ownership” where we need to make sure we give more value to the ones who work the hardest? is it not unfair if someone who works the least gets more than someone who works the most? what about someone who happens to be friend with the one distributing housing?
… And with this I go to bed, it’s late here… thanks for the discussion!
It depends on the phase in Communism. In lower phases, Labor Vouchers (centrally administered and destroyed on first use) would likely be used to for goods and services that aren’t essential, essentials would be free. Rates of Labor Vouchers would be based on hours worked, with more for higher skilled or more intense labor, and the same vouchers payed for less time worked in more strenuous or dangerous conditions. In higher phases, it likely wouldn’t matter, productivity would be high enough for the mantra “from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs.”
You can read more on economic planning, but again, please research AES to see how these countries are already attempting to work towards such a system.
Again, I’m not asking what form that distribution takes, I’m asking how do you ensure it’s fair.
If there’s unfair exploitation, I could not care less if it involves Labor Vouchers, cheques, salt or cryptocurrency…
What I’m looking for is methods to detect and punish those who manipulate the system to distribute those goods unfairly. Those who lick the right boots to try and get favors from their distributing friends. I want to see how those countries are placing measures to punish THEIR OWN friends if they are unfair EVEN when it would benefit the one executing punishment to let it slide, I’m asking what method of PROTECTION (not prosecution) those who denounce problems in the system will receive. I’m asking how do you ensure transparency… how can people detect if something might be wrong? and if something is wrong and someone finds Xi Jinping with heir hands in a pot of foul honey, how can they guarantee they’ll be able to openly criticize and denounce leading to punishment in the same way my ideal State would punish those who distribute unfairly for their own benefit.
Those are the things that are important. Those are the things that prevent exploitation. I have not yet heard one measure against abuse that could not be applied in a system with private ownership. You could perfectly provide free essentials in a “private ownership” society, in fact many countries considered capitalists already do some level of this (admittedly, not enough, but it’s a good direction), my ideal State would have this cranked to 11.
Are you asking about how to remove people from government? Recall elections.
No, I wasn’t asking that. And I feel I might have answered why I think that’s not a sufficient response to my question in the other comment.