>I like your use of the word 'computing' in
>this context.
I've read some IWGVT articles. :-)
>Computers would help us a lot in deciding who
>needs to get what.
I don't belive it personally. But I don't exclude the possibility before a deeper
enquiry.
>But sure
>you're right, more highly evolved ethical beings would
>simply take what they needed and leave the rest for the
>needs of others. But those are not human beings as we know
>them right now.
Definitely. I was not thinking to that, but rather simply to human arbitrary
descision who includes all factors in a way no cimputer could do. In other
words, if you have no markets, why not let people decide (collectively or not,
depends)? This has been done many times in history, right?
>Right now we could imagine computing the
>amount of value that X has produced and say that X could
>appropriate just that amount of the social product, but in a
>non-accumulable and non-transferable form, i.e. not in the
>form of money. So there would still be some notion of value
>(labour time calculations) in this transitional society.
If you're doing labour-time caluclations, why compute the value of what X has
produced? Just note down how long he worked!
The computation would rather be helpful to determinte the labour-time value of
the products, isn't it? I'm not sure we could. But let's imagine it. What makes
you think that there would be a clearing without a market? In other words, don't
you think that people would want more of some products that there is
available? IMO, this is inevitable because if you "price" products by contained
labour-time, you'll end up with undervalued products: those which have lots of
non-labour value (ressources, capital, energy) contained into them. You will
not be able to gear up the production of these items to meet demand because
the non-labour value is scarce.
Anyway, what's the purpose of having everyone consuming as much labour-
time value as he has produced?
And how do you plan not to allow exchange of value? You want people not to
have the right to trade among themselves? How can this be implemented?
How can you forbid accumulation of products? Why not let people do what
they want with their personal possessions anyway? Just to give youself an
illusion of purity (there's no commodities here)?
>This is a very
>unfortunate legacy that now has to be got out of the way
>somehow.
Yet there's one thing this legacy was good at: surviving crisis. This doesn't
mean of course that I am a neo-bolchevik.
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
