And this brings us back around to the basic problem with an altruistically based communist society. One of the core differences between a capitalist society and a communist society is that of supply. Capitalist societies often have a surplus of supply, due to their being a direct incentive to create such. Communist societies often have a dearth of supply, due to their being no such incentive. Google "Soviet Bread Lines" for further reading on this.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:54 AM, [email protected] < [email protected]> wrote: > > A right to work. > > Umm interesting, one part of me wants to say yes, another wants to say > no. > > How many of the statistic you have provided want to work? I know form > personal expericane that whenever I needed a job, I have really had no > problem getting one. Remember that I left school in 1984 a time in > the UK when we had massive unemployment, even then I had no problems > finding work. > > So I guess the real question is: > > Work is it, should it be a right? > > I think another solution and a better one to my mind is based around > the whole concept of money. Lets just get rid of it! It causes too > many problems in the world. > > > > On 26 Aug, 13:27, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > I am not sure it worked well back when, at least in Detroit. I know > > Henry Ford had a few (a couple famous) riots on his hands because > > there was not enough work for all those that arrived. > > > > But I know what you mean about arriving for the experiment, and > > allowing the process to lead the way. I often work best like this, as > > a kinesthetic learner, it is hard for me to follow directions and > > easier to feel my way through the process. The results can be > > surprising like this. I remember getting resistance from staff in > > getting through process like this, they wanted it spelled out from > > beginning to end. What they got was supervision from beginning to end > > so that when resources were needed, they were immediately given. In > > the end, they learned to trust (so the close supervision was lifted as > > I could trust they would ask for needed resources) and the results > > were great. Opening process in this way can bring surprising > > results. Very creative. > > > > On Aug 26, 8:16 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > One in six homes in the UK now has no one working. How about a right > > > to work in which we can all turn up at a labour exchange and be given > > > work or pay if they can't use us? This would cover most of us, with > > > the exceptions of a few disabilities. Not much different from the New > > > Deal, yet we could really change the employment relation with such a > > > scheme. What I like best about it is making business compete for > > > labour after a guaranteed minimum and security of employment is an > > > ever present in the system. Such a simple change would have many > > > effects. > > > > > I offer this as an example of a thought experiment. My view is that > > > we are trapped in many arguments because we really don't have them and > > > thus don't understand what objects we have made so solid we can't > > > change them. Many people will object to the idea that we should just > > > be able to turn up and get on with some work and get paid a decent > > > wage. If we are really interested in argument we should want to know > > > why, partly in order to discover just what we are in the existing > > > system. Thought experiment in science progresses rather like this.- > Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
