This is how you tell rich people have some serious mental health issue.
Decent people would rather a world where people worked because they enjoy that type of work rather than being forced to do it because they need money to live.
If you removed money, imagine where we’d all be as a society without the toxicity of money, wars and hate! :(
If you removed money, imagine where we’d all be as a society
Probably dead or living in the stone age.
There’s so many jobs that people don’t enjoy but are necessary. Nobody enjoys working in the middle of an australian desert at 40°C in a lithium mine. Nobody enjoys collecting your stinking trash. Nobody enjoys sitting in a store for 8 hours a day, scanning groceries. Nobody enjoys working in a warehouse for 8 hours.
However, these jobs and many more are vital for todays society.
toxicity of money, wars and hate!
You make it sound like wealth and wars are an invention of capitalism and not something that has existed basically since the dawn of time, even as something you can observe in primates, albeit on a much smaller scale.
There’s so many jobs that people don’t enjoy but are necessary.
I take it you asked all 7 (or whatever) billion then?
Nobody enjoys working in the middle of an australian desert at 40°C in a lithium mine.
Who says they’d need to? You talk like someone would need to do that because right now capitalism demands more production!
Nobody enjoys collecting your stinking trash. Nobody enjoys sitting in a store for 8 hours a day, scanning groceries.
Again, if we didn’t produce so much garbage, products with layer upon layer of plastic, we’d make glass and clay pots and grow, make and reuse locally making less garbage all the way but then in the 90s you had to collect bin bags off the street, now its all wheelie bins, if my health allowed I would happily go round collecting rubbish.
Also I’ve had issues with drains in the past and when I asked them about the job, they actually enjoyed the challenge. So I think you’re confusing people who do a job because too much demand means people doing jobs for the money rather than less demand would actually mean people wouldn’t even need a set job. Feel like drains on Monday, go for it. Had enough and feel like helping someone tin food on Tuesday, go for it.
Look at Animals, how many animals work 2 jobs just to survive?
Nobody enjoys working in a warehouse for 8 hours.
Another thing thats only a thing because capitalism demands we keep producing more and more shit. That washing machine that used to last 10 years now breaks after the warranty because some riches want more money and power!
It amazes me how blinded people are to a capitalist free world. Look at the waste now, the plastic pollution and then look carefully at the next package you buy and ask “does this really need ‘this’ much packaging? Do i care if this new spade I bought with all its shiny cardboard and plastic protection, arrived with a scratch? But even if the TV was scratched, does it really matter so long as it worked as intended?
But then I have no kids of my own and every year I feel better not having brought kids into this mess because unless you’re born into money now there is very little to offer kids in the near future right. 😕
Capitalism is different from a regular market in that it is not just trying to make a profit in order to have enough money to exchange for useful goods and services.
Capitalism demands that your profit grows and grows and grows. It’s growth for it’s own sake. A capitalistic economy like our world economy needs to grow 3% or so every year or it gets into a recession. 3% doesn’t sound like much, but it’s exponential growth, doubling every 25 years or so. This growth doesn’t come out of thin air, but from extracting from value from other people, our world and so on.
And measuring an economy by GDP is incomplete, because it doesn’t take uncompensated labor, human happiness and wellbeing, and public goods (like a healthy nature) into account. When a factory owner pollutes and dries up the river while employees have no choice but to work 16 hour weeks, GDP goes up.
In nature, things grow until they are mature. That does not mean progress halts. Adults don’t grow anymore, but continue to learn.
My try to explain why money and markets are okay, but growth for it’s own sake (growthism you may call it) is destroying our societies, making us unhappy, and is also killing us with the climate and biodiversity crises.
Nobody enjoys working in the middle of an australian desert at 40°C in a lithium mine.
Believe it or not I’ve actually met someone who enjoys this line of work. He lives in the middle of nowhere in Paraburdoo Australia and loves the heat. So not exactly nobody…
Okay, let me rephrase it: Not enough people enjoy working the middle of an australian desert at 40°C in a lithium mine to cover the global demand of rare earths.
The reasons those jobs are such shit is also money. A lot of people enjoy cleaning, nobody enjoys being overworked. Normal functioning societies don’t leave heaps of stinking trash around, they neatly pack it and the work of a janitor of garbage collector becomes actually enjoyable if you’re a proper type of personality.
Hell, my uncle right now works as a part time street sweeper basically for free. He has his basic needs met by other means, and his “job” pays him enough to get a cup of coffee before the shift and a sandwich after. He just enjoys making the world cleaner, chatting with locals, taking care of stray cats, and having a routine. All of that is possible in a world that doesn’t revolves around squeesing every bit of labour from people so some pedos can buy themselves another island and fill it with sex slaves
Normal functioning societies don’t leave heaps of stinking trash around, they neatly pack it and the work of a janitor of garbage collector becomes actually enjoyable if you’re a proper type of personality.
Idk if you noticed, but people won’t behave that way if there is no repercussion for it.
He has his basic needs met by other means, and his “job” pays him enough to get a cup of coffee before the shift and a sandwich after. He just enjoys making the world cleaner, chatting with locals, taking care of stray cats, and having a routine.
Great but some people have more aspirations than your uncle. And I think they should have the chance to achieve that. And I don’t think having a clean neighborhood should depend on having that uncle that enjoys cleaning for free.
All of that is possible in a world that doesn’t revolves around squeesing every bit of labour from people
I mean, yes, absolutely possible without squeezing every bit of labor from people. However, it’s not possible in a world without money or capital. The wide-spread introduction of capitalism has DRASTICALLY reduced the amount of people living in extreme poverty. According to https://ourworldindata.org/end-progress-extreme-poverty , from 1990 - 2025, the amount of people living in extreme poverty dropped by 65%, from 2.3 billion to 800 million. If we extend the timeframe a bit further, according to https://ourworldindata.org/history-of-poverty-data-appendix , the number went from 53.9% in extreme poverty to only 5.5% - meaning an almost 90% reduction in extreme poverty. Unless I’m too stupid to do math now.
(ourworldindata.org is a non-profit funded by the university of oxford btw - so it’s fairly reliable)
Now, capitalism isn’t the sole reason why poverty dropped - it’s the combination with effective social policies. Capitalism creates wealth, taxes take a part of that wealth and spread it to the rest of society. That’s how it should work and that is also by far the best system we could ever have in place. The fact that america fails on that tax-part is not the fault of capitalism. It’s a failure of the government.
It’s insane that so many people tried to flee from communist terror regimes, and still try to flee to this day out of North Korea or Cuba, yet people on lemmy will just close their eyes and pretend that communism is the perfect system and every system that fails is just because of the “CIA”.
And you think your uncle is a scalable solution to a city of millions of people. These positions dont scale. Some quick googling show about a half a millions workers in waste remediation in the us in 2023. Do you honestly think you could find half a million people like your uncle that all live spread out enough to fill all the positions (thats on the low end of need also fyi, not surprisingly they have high turnover and difficulty keeping staff for extended periods) around the entire us and that those people would never lose motivation or get burned out or just tired or stop caring. Because that is what we need and that is a single job for a single industry.
I just think it’s boring that you think money is the only reasonable motivator for these people. There are other forms of compensation and appreciation. And it’s not the only option available to us. It’s crazy to me that people understand the idea of countries that have military conscription but can’t fathom the idea of a system of workable civil conscription.
As I see it you successfully identified a problem and a solution, but that does not suggest that that is the sole or even best solution.
When you do your scaling you need to scale everything. The adult population of the US is estimated as 266 million people as of now. Half a million is roughly 1 adult in 530 people. Let’s quadruple it up so they have nice relaxed works schedule. Let’s say now you need 4 people per 530. If you think you can’t find 10 out of 1000 people who would do some sanitation work, with no stress and without having to think where their next meal comes from, you just never met people.
And this is the most important part that you seem to ignore - when people’s basic means are met, they want to fulfill higher levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. For some that means doing arts or doing some engineering or running a company. For some, and there are s many of those some, that means “it’s not much but it’s honest work”. Doing small visible changes that make the world the better place one picked up piece of rubbish at a time, is exactly, precisely what significant portion of humanity will be doing.
This also works in another direction: billions of people who would be doing something grand and moving humanity further, are stuck in mundane repetitive broken jobs they hate, because they’re stuck in this cycle of needing to grind to survive, without having a moment to breath, which slowly kills every bit of light they once had a potential to have.
Would you enjoy being a garbage man or a plumber? Or is that work you’re saving for others to enjoy?
Doctors make good money and we don’t have enough of them because it takes so much time and dedication. You think getting rid of money would help there?
It’s not that gotcha that you think it is. I worked a lot of hard jobs, for 10 years I did very hard and complicated work in very unpleasant environments for very very little money only because I loved what we did and the results of our labour, and I was good at it. I would be doing that still if I didn’t need money to feed my family. In my years I’ve met a lot of people who were enjoying, properly enjoying jobs that other people will call hell. My job at the time, and to a big extend my job now, is something other people will never want to do for any amount of money.
Doctors make good money and we don’t have enough of them
And your conclusion isn’t that the system of people working for money and only for money is a broken system that demonstrably doesn’t work, but that we need to conserve it as long as we can because it was always done like that?
Yes, getting rid of money will absolutely help. Many people want to be doctors but can’t afford the time or resources to either become one, or to actually put their existing education to use.
And as an example I’ve personally witnessed, being a doctor in Russia in the 90s was about the worst job you can get, you don’t get any money, and I mean none, they were going multiple consecutive months without any salary. The shortage was about on par with the doctor’s shortage in US right now. Trapping people in jobs they don’t want to do is not something that helps humanity in any way.
Do kids need to go to school? Five days a week?
I struggle to understand how this is relevant to the conversation.
Doctors make good money and we don’t have enough of them because it takes so much time and dedication. You think getting rid of money would help there?
Yes. There are easier ways of making money. If you do it just for the money you won’t have the mental fortitude to get to the point of making money. Profit motives is about the path of least resistance.
Lol what MD is the goto job for making easy money. Getting the degree is difficult because everyone wants to do that job, not because it’s difficult per se
Like, half of the jobs you listed would be automated out pretty quick in a world without money, out of the other ones, a few would be rendered obsolete without profit motive (pretty sure we can find something better for batteries than lithium, and why would you need someone scanning groceries if there was no money?). What’s left can be rotated out or done by lottery, and those doing the undesirable labor get to have more luxury items or whatever. It’s not hard to imagine, people have been doing it for centuries.
Like, half of the jobs you listed would be automated out pretty quick in a world without money
If that was even remotely possible, companies would’ve done that already. Every company tries to cut staff as much as possible.
pretty sure we can find something better for batteries than lithium
Which requires research, which requires investment. Much of the research we currently have only exists exactly because of funding, and a lot of funding is done by companies, not by the government.
What’s left can be rotated out or done by lottery, and those doing the undesirable labor get to have more luxury items or whatever
I like the “whatever”. Let’s just introduce a shitty system that also potentially forces people to do work they don’t want to do and they get like a bar of soap or “whatever” as reward…
It’s not hard to imagine, people have been doing it for centuries.
I don’t know where these people lived that you talk about, but it certainly wasn’t on this planet. Such a system has never existed.
We do need incentives to work. As technology and efficiency advances we should be able to work less, but we still need people to do work they/we don’t want to do.
Personally I think people are pretty happy working 24 hours a week even if their job isn’t something they love doing. I’m more interested in working towards that, slowly, over time, than just going to “nobody needs to work”.
pretty sure we can find something better for batteries than lithium
Trust me, bro
would you need someone scanning groceries if there was no money?
Because this is the most efficient way of keeping track of how many goods leave your moneyless store, and ensuring assholes aren’t just taking everything for themselves and hoarding it. Tracking how many goods leave the store at any given time allows you to order an appropriate amount to keep things in stock so that people who need things don’t go without, and is especially important for perishable goods like fresh produce.
What’s left can be rotated out or done by lottery,
People have different skill sets and specialties. Many jobs take years of training and practice to reach an acceptable level. Also, you just invented state-sanctioned slavery/a non-military draft. What do you do with someone who refuses to perform their lottery-assigned job?
and those doing the undesirable labor get to have more luxury items or whatever.
That’s literally the system we have now, but more authoritarian, since someone has to decide what is a “luxury good” and how much undesirable work is required to attain a given level of luxury.
people have been doing it for centuries.
Citation needed. Concerns: authoritarianism; scaling; maintenance of the modern standard of living
If there are so many refutations, then it should be trivial to point me to one. Assume I am an idiot who doesn’t know how a search engine works - I very well might be. Would you be able to point me to one of these innumerable refutations that would disprove me - otherwise, how am I to learn?
Why do libraries work?
I’m not sure what you mean here. If you explain your point of view, I can explain mine. But I will point out that libraries are not a full, functioning society - just part of one.
Society would collapse.
While working out of enjoyment instead of necessity is a noble and good goal. There are jobs that no one enjoys. Money can be used as an incentive to motivate people to work on jobs that aren’t that enjoyable, but still necessary.
I build rockets that go on satellites and scientific missions. I enjoy my job; I find it extremely interesting and often quite fulfilling. In the grand scheme of things, I really wouldn’t change much. But like my boss said on the first day of the job, “This job is awesome, but it’s not worth doing for free.” If you told me I could still enjoy the same level of comfort at home that my job affords me, but I wouldn’t be paid, I would quit. I’d rather be at home reading, spending time with my family, playing around with my hobbies, etc.
My wife is a nurse. She loves her job, but she wouldn’t do it for free either. Her love for the job prevents her from quitting when she’s abused by the public for 12 hours, the pay makes her come in.
Some people are motivated by enjoyment alone to do jobs for free, but many are not. Or the thing they love doesn’t help society in a meaningful way. Or they just don’t want their hobby to turn into a job. I don’t think there’s a big enough overlap to have a functioning society.
Some yeah, but undoubtedly not enough to keep it working. For example i doubt that many people enjoy working at garbage disposable or basically any waste disposal. Of course these jobs should be fully operated by machines.
Or any assistant jobs in manufacturing or jobs that operate in shifts.
Uncle worked down at city dump. He loved it. He was kind of a garbologist in a way. He was fascinated by all the things folks threw away. Retired there too. Got a job right out of high school and worked until he was 62 and retired. Dude has so many “trash” sculptures. That is to say, sculptures made out of trash. I think you’d be surprised the jobs folks enjoy doing.
Do you think your uncle was in any way representative of the millions of people employed in waste disposal? The city of Birmingham’s bins have gone partially uncollected for over a year due to a dispute over pay. If waste disposal workers were, in general, doing it for the love of it, they’d surely be happy to do it for minimum wage.
Seems more likely your uncle was the odd one out, and most people need to be paid to do stinky work.
Because, I don’t know if you’re noticed, having a paying job is exhausting. The world setup in such a way that for a normal person, getting money means someone will suck every bit of life of you.
That’s, pardon the not nice metaphor, the difference between night of passionate sex and selling your ass so your pimp doesn’t beat you up. Both activities can be reduced to physical aspects, but not a lot of people will ask why one is desirable and the other is less so.
You changed the argument. That’s why it’s a bad argument. It’s not your fault though, most people argue that way. I should not comment, I think. Clearly, it’s not an enjoyable experience for me anymore. This was very enlightening. Thank you for this opportunity. Peace and blessings unto you and your family.
For example i doubt that many people enjoy working at garbage disposable or basically any waste disposal
Ehhh I bet you’d be wrong. Only anecdotal obviously, but at practice and games for the kids, a lot of dads just chat when there isnt much going on. A couple of them work for the local garbage company. One of them commented that he doesnt know how I stay inside and work all day, he really enjoys being outside with the trucks in the morning, then enjoying the afternoon outside with the kids. Another one is a mechanic for them, he always thought the trucks were cool, and he still enjoys working on them (though he will 100% tell you, in great detail, which manufacturers suck for various parts). Haven’t talked much with the last one about work, I think he is the only one just straight up doing it for money though.
And who knows, maybe the guy who likes being outside says that to be positive about his choices in life, but I see him at the park with the kids a lot, I’ve run into him heading out to the trails on his mountain bike, etc, so I believe him that he’s perfectly happy doing it.
Automation for unwanted tasks is great though, I agree, and where automation should be focused.
One of them commented that he doesnt know how I stay inside and work all day, he really enjoys being outside with the trucks in the morning, then enjoying the afternoon outside with the kids.
He could be taking the local kids out for hikes in nature instead - an activity which also gets him outside, provides a benefit to society, and lets him spend time with his kid and their friends. If he didn’t get paid, do you think he would prefer picking up garbage, or going on hikes with his kid? And even if he finds picking up trash meaningful now, do you think he started the job for the money, benefits, and schedule, and then learned to appreciate the good he was doing for the community after years of doing the work?
I’m not him so I couldn’t say, but considering I know he does volunteer cleanup days at the trails, I really dont think he looks down on garbage pickup the way you and others seem to be, that its only fulfilling because of money.
Tbh I’d kind of trust them more. Even if they got off thinking of my feet later (which, who cares, have at it), they are going to put a lot more effort and get a lot more knowledge than someone just doing it for the high billing rate, dont you think? And probably care more about the quality of my arch than the guy writing a prescription for orthotics because the manufacturer just bought him a nice dinner.
Just because they are pervs doesnt mean they’d be bad at it, I’d say they’d be even better at it than most. Wouldn’t you think?
I was also thinking that. As an example, retail work seems to me to be a kind of hell I don’t think I’d want to endure. But I know people that really enjoy it. So it’s probably true of any job you might think is only done by those that are forced to.
I think, if AI and robotics replace most jobs. After some years of pain when capitalists enjoy the infinite money glitch they’ve discovered, there will either be a revolution or a natural coming to understand that things need to work differently.
Now, understand this would only work if the vast majority of work could be done via automation. In this case the vast majority of people would be able to pursue what they enjoy, a bit like the star trek anti-economy. If all remaining required jobs were no longer filled by those that volunteered to do them, there would be some kind of draft (think like jury duty), where people able to do a job have a chance to be called in to do it for a few months then released back to pursue their own interests.
I’ve always seen capitalism as the carrot on a stick we need, when we need human productivity from the vast majority of people. If that’s no longer the case, it’s not a suitable solution and all the ideas like universal basic income are just stopgap measures to try to eke a bit more time out of the capitalist system that has already run past the point where we can keep enough people usefully employed to make it work. That’s almost certainly the reason we’re seeing the huge wealth disparity that increases. As the productivity per person goes up, all the increased value only ever rises to the top.
Oh I dunno, people are still inclined to uh probably murder and/or rape people for fun, steal things, commit any other unlawful acts society may deem against the law that doesn’t involve monetary situation. I understand money is the root of all evil but some people are evil just because.
I’m not saying you’re wrong. But you realise how that reads right? It sounds like you’re saying we should keep a boot on the neck of “the little people” so the rest of us can have a good life.
Fair point, though i did try to use positive encouragement model to incentice people to work in not so enjoyable jobs. Even if not permanently, maybe in rotation.
Living in a nice society is all the motivation people need. I hate doing dishes, but I do them because I hate living without clean dishes even more. Everyone understands sometimes we gotta do stuff we don’t like doing for a greater good. Acting like we need a wageslave class to do menial tasks otherwise we’d just let our world collapse is insulting our collective intelligence. We can share the burden.
That seems kinda too idealistic view of the world.
I know much more people who, if not directly forced, would let the dishes or basically any environment around them completely mould and break down before even considering cleaning up even just the mess they have left behind, than people who altruistically do clean up after themselves and others.
I do agree that living in a cleaner and nicer society should be enough of a motivation and for some it is, but there’s not enough of us.
We can already observe it in many public spaces where trash gets left laying around even if trash cans are available or public bathrooms or showers or my favorite example in the gym where plates get constantly left on the machines and cable attachments just piled up wherever those fell.
I’m not suggesting that we just leave everything to chance and just hope society maintains itself, I’m saying that we can structure society in a way that everything that needs to get done still gets done without the profit motive, because everyone inherently understands that if we evenly and fairly divide up the work that needs to get done, that they’re doing their part to live in a better world - does that make sense?
Yeah it makes sense and I’m not actually that much against the idea. I’m not that fond of the current wage slavery system either.
I just don’t trust general populations altruism that much to believe it would work on a large scale without any sort of a positive Incentivization in addition to just keeping the society running.
I don’t think we need to fully rely on altruism - humans can be selfish and we need to take that into account, and even make use of that tendency for us to want to feather our nests.
I believe that we can create an awesome society based on anarchist principles - freedom, liberty, bottom-up structures, socialized and democratized control of the means of production, and so on. If you’re interested in learning more, I’d recommend the Q&Anarchy video series by Thought Slime, and/or an anarchist FAQ if you’re more of a reader.
“Who’s gonna do mindbraking soulcrushing jobs for days without a break?” Nobody, that’s not a job that has to be done this way. “But if we stop orphan crushing machine, what will crush all the orphans?”
When you’re imagining the worst parts of the worst jobs, remember that the reason those jobs have worst parts is because the main incentive of every job is to have the profit of a job as high as possible, and to exploit the workers. Yeah, some jobs are hard, some are complicated, some are dirty, some are all three. But all that is something people can and regularly enjoy. People don’t enjoy when it’s degrading, when it’s soulcrushing for no reason, when there is obvious injustice. And it has nothing to do with jobs
Some things require years of specialization and simply can’t be done by novices. You don’t want volunteer engineers, pharmacists, etc. Some of those specializations are also unpleasant. We need to support people and not require that all humanity be profitable, but we also need to incentivize people to do shitty and/or difficult jobs. That balance is extremely difficult to find, and the most effective solution we’ve found is paying people for that work. There’s an incredible imbalance in our system right now that values non-productive ownership over all else, but the solution to that isn’t saying “Fuck it - nobody gets paid and it’ll all work itself out.”
The easiest solution is to tax the shit out of the uber-wealthy. Right now we have lower classes defined by income and an upper class defined by wealth. If we remove the wealth and make work and productivity more valuable than ownership, it moves us much closer to equity.
Someone who wants to live a life of luxury and comfort in a world with wastewater treatment plants, knowing that everyone else is also pitching in and doing their part.
Someone who wants to live in a world without billionaire pedophiles in power doing nothing but hoarding all of the wealth and abusing women and children.
Someone who cares about the wellbeing of their community and is motivated by that, rather than by selfish greed.
Everyone can’t do everything, and some specialized jobs with specialized skills are extremely unpleasant. Are you suggesting that we just hope things get done, or that we force people to do it while giving nothing in return.
I’m suggesting that we can come up with a better system than the current one we have. I have ideas for how we could do that, and if you’re interested you can check out an anarchist FAQ for a wide variety of ideas, but I don’t have all the answers, no one does. We can only reach a system which works for everyone by first acknowledging our current system is deeply flawed, then coming together to work to build a better alternative.
These are all real things. A better world is possible. It is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism, but remember that incredible changes that would have seemed impossible have happened before and will happen again.
If you told a pioneer in the Virginia company back in 1607 that black women would be given rights and the abililty to vote to elect their leaders, they’d probably burn you as a witch.
Living in a nice society is all the motivation people need.
You might want to read up on the bystander effect. You do the dishes because no-one else is going to do it. But as soon as there are others who can do the job people will just stand around and let other die before they put in the effort.
That’s absolutely not what bystander effect is, not even close. It has also nothing to do with the issue at hand. Bystander effect caused not by not willing to put an effort, it’s incredibly complicated, layered, and not exactly explained, but probably the only thing we know about it for sure is that it’s not because people are lazy
Do you think the capitalistic system is going to just pay people fairly out of the goodness of the hearts of the ruling class?
How can people be paid the value of their labor while still generating profit? Profit is, by definition, the extraction of surplus labor value. Under capitalism, inherently and definitionally, no member of the working class is ever paid fairly.
No, never even implied that. But in any system we need something that can be exchanged for labor in carrying quantities so we can give more to the people who do the shittiest jobs. Whatever system you come up with, it’s not going to work without money.
If a medium of exchange for labor is indeed necessary, I’d say it should be measured in labor hours. We live finite lives, measured in minutes. A minute of your life is worth as much as a minute of mine, wouldn’t you say?
I would have no inherent problem with a system that tokenizes labor hours in some way. The problem is private ownership of the means of production and profit itself.
That’s been one of the goals of just about every socio-economic system, but since are not yet at the point where we can completely automate away all undesirable jobs, it all circles back to being shit.
I believe that there’s a way we can fairly share out all the shitty work among everyone, rather than a few at the top who do no work and exploit everyone, and a lot of people at the bottom who do all of the dirty work.
We don’t need to automate everything, we just need a fair system to distribute the work evenly. We have the technology. We can do it. The reason we haven’t is because those in power benefit too much from the current system.
I don’t think I can see a way to actually accomplish that without still ending up with negative outcomes.
Take for example a surgeon, one who is a specialist who’s time is 100% occupied saving people. Does he get taken away from that to do his time as a garbage collector? Do you tell the patient “sorry, you are going to die. You could have been saved, but we needed your surgeon to go pick up garbage.”, or do you have an exemption list?
And if there’s an exemption list, you will never convince me that people wouldn’t start abusing who is and isn’t on that list. You arrive right back to having a class society.
Why would you cancel a surgery to do trash collection? Why not just make it so everyone has one day a week dedicated to chores, for example? We all do our chores at home, right? Why not for the benefit of our communities? The surgery can be scheduled for a day a surgeon is available. I’m sure there would be many surgeons in a world without student debt, enough for them each to spare a few hours mucking in just like everyone else, right?
I’m sure someone has the ability of figuring out some kind of schedule to ensure adequate emergency medical coverage despite medical personnel having other obligations. I know we can do that because we already do it. Surgeons take time off work and people don’t die because of it.
ubi, competitive wages, strict caps on profits. there is lots of ways to mitigate capitalism. but basically no way to completely remove it at this point in time.
And all of those reforms will be resisted and then removed by the ruling elite, who control politicians and the media through capitalism. Reform is just short term harm reduction. I agree we are just at the start of our journey to abolish capitalism, but we need to reach our destination, or we will be cursed to forever live through cycles of fascism rising and falling inevitably again and again.
It sounds like you have never come across the concept of the tragedy of the commons?
The particular topic of waste disposal is a good one because we have good historical accounts of the transition from a free-for-all to regulated, paid profession. Take the example of Paris, which in the 17th century was infamous for its dirt and stink. Repeated efforts to force people to keep their own streets clean failed, and ultimately residents complained that if the King wanted the streets to be clean, he had better pay for someone to come and clean them. Eventually city officials managed to force (through threat of punishment) residents to sweep waste and mud into the middle of the streets, and pay people to come through and collect and remove it.
In 15th century Britain, nightmen removed waste from cess-pits and charged two shillings a ton. If there were enough people who just loved shoveling shit so much to do this without money changing hands, why weren’t they out doing that?
I’m actually very familiar with the idea of the tragedy of the commons.
Rather than re-cover well tread ground, I hope that you don’t mind if I quote from a relevant section of an Anarchist FAQ, and I encourage you to check the link I shared, as it goes into far more detail:
In reality, the “tragedy of the commons” comes about only after wealth and private property, backed by the state, starts to eat into and destroy communal life. This is well indicated by the fact that commons existed for thousands of years and only disappeared after the rise of capitalism – and the powerful central state it requires – had eroded communal values and traditions. Without the influence of wealth concentrations and the state, people get together and come to agreements over how to use communal resources and have been doing so for millennia. That was how the commons were successfully managed before the wealthy sought to increase their holdings and deny the poor access to land in order to make them fully dependent on the power and whims of the owning class.
[…]
In fact, communal ownership produces a strong incentive to protect such resources for people are aware that their offspring will need them and so be inclined to look after them. By having more resources available, they would be able to resist the pressures of short-termism and so resist maximising current production without regard for the future. Capitalist owners have the opposite incentive… unless they maximise short-term profits then they will not be around in the long-term (so if wood means more profits than centuries-old forests then the trees will be chopped down). By combining common ownership with decentralised and federated communal self-management, anarchism will be more than able to manage resources effectively, avoiding the pitfalls of both privatisation and nationalisation.
If you want a modern, real-world example of this which you may have actually experienced yourself, look no further than this medium we are using to communicate. The Internet is a great example. The Internet was a fantastic common space lovingly maintained and curated by individuals, with services and content provided freely. Corporations encircled it, and turned it into the torment nexus we have today. It wasn’t because of us, collectively, that spoiled the commons of the Internet - it was capitalism itself.
There are many things that people are willing to do for their own satisfaction, I don’t disagree with that. I don’t think waste disposal is one of them.
The “communal life” you’re talking about cannot exist in an urbanised society, because most people you affect in a city are not personally known to you, and there will be no opportunity for the social mechanisms we evolved to pressure us into doing the right thing. In a village of 200 people, if you throw your shit in the street, your neighbour, whom you know personally and whose opinion you likely care about, will complain. In a city of 2 million, if someone throws shit in the street you have no idea who it was, they’ve never met you, and what are you gonna do about it anyway?
Anyway, I should bow out now. I have no interest in discussing politics or economics with an anarchist.
Do you really believe everyone would act like a psychopath if they aren’t always directly accountable for their actions? And how does that differ from our current system?
I have no interest in discussing politics or economics with an anarchist.
That’s really too bad, because I’m sure you’d learn a lot! Anarchism is not what you think it is. Either way, have a great day, I wish you all the best. Solidarity forever!
because most people you affect in a city are not personally known to you, and there will be no opportunity for the social mechanisms we evolved to pressure us into doing the right thing
That’s a demonstrable bullshit. Believing that the only motivation people can have is the fear of repercussions is the same level of that christian psychotic “if it wasn’t for the fear of god everyone would be raping and killing all the time” that says more about you than about supposed issue you’re afraid of.
It’s not fear of repercussions; it’s social glue. Crime is much more common in cities, out of proportion with how many people there are, because people who are willing to commit crime are not willing to commit it against people they know personally. Urbanisation allows depersonalisation allows bad behaviour.
It also allows effects to be transmitted that are simply way less direct than you have any hope of instinct being able to reckon with. Like, you can work out that tossing shit out of your window will piss off your neighbour, but the knock-on-effects of what you do can be harder to figure out than that. Did you buy a little bit more of anything at the start of COVID, “just in case”?
I feel like that entire passage completely ignores the fact that last time the bulk of humanity lived a communal lifestyle, the number of humans on the planet was a few orders of magnitude smaller. It’s a fairly easy setup to maintain when settlements are small and the bulk of people’s time is spent as hunter-gatherers or subsistence farmers. As soon as you put a very large number of people into a city, the communal arrangement falls apart. And many people like living in cities. That genie is out of the bottle, and people are not going to be willing to go back to being a subsistence farmer in a commune.
I don’t see why we would need to give up modern agriculture, fertilizer, heavy machinery, or automation in order to abolish capitalism, can you explain why you feel that way?
This is how you tell rich people have some serious mental health issue.
Decent people would rather a world where people worked because they enjoy that type of work rather than being forced to do it because they need money to live.
If you removed money, imagine where we’d all be as a society without the toxicity of money, wars and hate! :(
Probably dead or living in the stone age.
There’s so many jobs that people don’t enjoy but are necessary. Nobody enjoys working in the middle of an australian desert at 40°C in a lithium mine. Nobody enjoys collecting your stinking trash. Nobody enjoys sitting in a store for 8 hours a day, scanning groceries. Nobody enjoys working in a warehouse for 8 hours.
However, these jobs and many more are vital for todays society.
You make it sound like wealth and wars are an invention of capitalism and not something that has existed basically since the dawn of time, even as something you can observe in primates, albeit on a much smaller scale.
I take it you asked all 7 (or whatever) billion then?
Who says they’d need to? You talk like someone would need to do that because right now capitalism demands more production!
Again, if we didn’t produce so much garbage, products with layer upon layer of plastic, we’d make glass and clay pots and grow, make and reuse locally making less garbage all the way but then in the 90s you had to collect bin bags off the street, now its all wheelie bins, if my health allowed I would happily go round collecting rubbish.
Also I’ve had issues with drains in the past and when I asked them about the job, they actually enjoyed the challenge. So I think you’re confusing people who do a job because too much demand means people doing jobs for the money rather than less demand would actually mean people wouldn’t even need a set job. Feel like drains on Monday, go for it. Had enough and feel like helping someone tin food on Tuesday, go for it.
Look at Animals, how many animals work 2 jobs just to survive?
Another thing thats only a thing because capitalism demands we keep producing more and more shit. That washing machine that used to last 10 years now breaks after the warranty because some riches want more money and power!
It amazes me how blinded people are to a capitalist free world. Look at the waste now, the plastic pollution and then look carefully at the next package you buy and ask “does this really need ‘this’ much packaging? Do i care if this new spade I bought with all its shiny cardboard and plastic protection, arrived with a scratch? But even if the TV was scratched, does it really matter so long as it worked as intended?
But then I have no kids of my own and every year I feel better not having brought kids into this mess because unless you’re born into money now there is very little to offer kids in the near future right. 😕
Capitalism is different from a regular market in that it is not just trying to make a profit in order to have enough money to exchange for useful goods and services.
Capitalism demands that your profit grows and grows and grows. It’s growth for it’s own sake. A capitalistic economy like our world economy needs to grow 3% or so every year or it gets into a recession. 3% doesn’t sound like much, but it’s exponential growth, doubling every 25 years or so. This growth doesn’t come out of thin air, but from extracting from value from other people, our world and so on.
And measuring an economy by GDP is incomplete, because it doesn’t take uncompensated labor, human happiness and wellbeing, and public goods (like a healthy nature) into account. When a factory owner pollutes and dries up the river while employees have no choice but to work 16 hour weeks, GDP goes up.
In nature, things grow until they are mature. That does not mean progress halts. Adults don’t grow anymore, but continue to learn.
My try to explain why money and markets are okay, but growth for it’s own sake (growthism you may call it) is destroying our societies, making us unhappy, and is also killing us with the climate and biodiversity crises.
Believe it or not I’ve actually met someone who enjoys this line of work. He lives in the middle of nowhere in Paraburdoo Australia and loves the heat. So not exactly nobody…
Okay, let me rephrase it: Not enough people enjoy working the middle of an australian desert at 40°C in a lithium mine to cover the global demand of rare earths.
The reasons those jobs are such shit is also money. A lot of people enjoy cleaning, nobody enjoys being overworked. Normal functioning societies don’t leave heaps of stinking trash around, they neatly pack it and the work of a janitor of garbage collector becomes actually enjoyable if you’re a proper type of personality.
Hell, my uncle right now works as a part time street sweeper basically for free. He has his basic needs met by other means, and his “job” pays him enough to get a cup of coffee before the shift and a sandwich after. He just enjoys making the world cleaner, chatting with locals, taking care of stray cats, and having a routine. All of that is possible in a world that doesn’t revolves around squeesing every bit of labour from people so some pedos can buy themselves another island and fill it with sex slaves
Idk if you noticed, but people won’t behave that way if there is no repercussion for it.
Great but some people have more aspirations than your uncle. And I think they should have the chance to achieve that. And I don’t think having a clean neighborhood should depend on having that uncle that enjoys cleaning for free.
I mean, yes, absolutely possible without squeezing every bit of labor from people. However, it’s not possible in a world without money or capital. The wide-spread introduction of capitalism has DRASTICALLY reduced the amount of people living in extreme poverty. According to https://ourworldindata.org/end-progress-extreme-poverty , from 1990 - 2025, the amount of people living in extreme poverty dropped by 65%, from 2.3 billion to 800 million. If we extend the timeframe a bit further, according to https://ourworldindata.org/history-of-poverty-data-appendix , the number went from 53.9% in extreme poverty to only 5.5% - meaning an almost 90% reduction in extreme poverty. Unless I’m too stupid to do math now.
(ourworldindata.org is a non-profit funded by the university of oxford btw - so it’s fairly reliable)
Now, capitalism isn’t the sole reason why poverty dropped - it’s the combination with effective social policies. Capitalism creates wealth, taxes take a part of that wealth and spread it to the rest of society. That’s how it should work and that is also by far the best system we could ever have in place. The fact that america fails on that tax-part is not the fault of capitalism. It’s a failure of the government.
It’s insane that so many people tried to flee from communist terror regimes, and still try to flee to this day out of North Korea or Cuba, yet people on lemmy will just close their eyes and pretend that communism is the perfect system and every system that fails is just because of the “CIA”.
And you think your uncle is a scalable solution to a city of millions of people. These positions dont scale. Some quick googling show about a half a millions workers in waste remediation in the us in 2023. Do you honestly think you could find half a million people like your uncle that all live spread out enough to fill all the positions (thats on the low end of need also fyi, not surprisingly they have high turnover and difficulty keeping staff for extended periods) around the entire us and that those people would never lose motivation or get burned out or just tired or stop caring. Because that is what we need and that is a single job for a single industry.
Its not scalable
I just think it’s boring that you think money is the only reasonable motivator for these people. There are other forms of compensation and appreciation. And it’s not the only option available to us. It’s crazy to me that people understand the idea of countries that have military conscription but can’t fathom the idea of a system of workable civil conscription.
As I see it you successfully identified a problem and a solution, but that does not suggest that that is the sole or even best solution.
When you do your scaling you need to scale everything. The adult population of the US is estimated as 266 million people as of now. Half a million is roughly 1 adult in 530 people. Let’s quadruple it up so they have nice relaxed works schedule. Let’s say now you need 4 people per 530. If you think you can’t find 10 out of 1000 people who would do some sanitation work, with no stress and without having to think where their next meal comes from, you just never met people.
And this is the most important part that you seem to ignore - when people’s basic means are met, they want to fulfill higher levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. For some that means doing arts or doing some engineering or running a company. For some, and there are s many of those some, that means “it’s not much but it’s honest work”. Doing small visible changes that make the world the better place one picked up piece of rubbish at a time, is exactly, precisely what significant portion of humanity will be doing.
This also works in another direction: billions of people who would be doing something grand and moving humanity further, are stuck in mundane repetitive broken jobs they hate, because they’re stuck in this cycle of needing to grind to survive, without having a moment to breath, which slowly kills every bit of light they once had a potential to have.
Would you enjoy being a garbage man or a plumber? Or is that work you’re saving for others to enjoy?
Doctors make good money and we don’t have enough of them because it takes so much time and dedication. You think getting rid of money would help there?
Do kids need to go to school? Five days a week?
It’s not that gotcha that you think it is. I worked a lot of hard jobs, for 10 years I did very hard and complicated work in very unpleasant environments for very very little money only because I loved what we did and the results of our labour, and I was good at it. I would be doing that still if I didn’t need money to feed my family. In my years I’ve met a lot of people who were enjoying, properly enjoying jobs that other people will call hell. My job at the time, and to a big extend my job now, is something other people will never want to do for any amount of money.
And your conclusion isn’t that the system of people working for money and only for money is a broken system that demonstrably doesn’t work, but that we need to conserve it as long as we can because it was always done like that?
Yes, getting rid of money will absolutely help. Many people want to be doctors but can’t afford the time or resources to either become one, or to actually put their existing education to use.
And as an example I’ve personally witnessed, being a doctor in Russia in the 90s was about the worst job you can get, you don’t get any money, and I mean none, they were going multiple consecutive months without any salary. The shortage was about on par with the doctor’s shortage in US right now. Trapping people in jobs they don’t want to do is not something that helps humanity in any way.
I struggle to understand how this is relevant to the conversation.
Yes. There are easier ways of making money. If you do it just for the money you won’t have the mental fortitude to get to the point of making money. Profit motives is about the path of least resistance.
Lol what MD is the goto job for making easy money. Getting the degree is difficult because everyone wants to do that job, not because it’s difficult per se
Pretty much says everything about why your wrong on this. Being a doctor is hard. There are far easier career and business if profit is the motive.
Beyond that are doctors that rich? They are wealthy, but the Zucc ain’t no MD. Neither is Warren Buffet.
My point is that someone motivated by money will drop out of the MD path. Being a doctor is a career of passion that also happens to pay well.
Engineer is similar. Take some differential equations or read Jackson EM. There are easier things to do for money.
I know someone who make similar to a doctor with a seafood restaurant. Particularly when you consider fewer hours.
Like, half of the jobs you listed would be automated out pretty quick in a world without money, out of the other ones, a few would be rendered obsolete without profit motive (pretty sure we can find something better for batteries than lithium, and why would you need someone scanning groceries if there was no money?). What’s left can be rotated out or done by lottery, and those doing the undesirable labor get to have more luxury items or whatever. It’s not hard to imagine, people have been doing it for centuries.
If that was even remotely possible, companies would’ve done that already. Every company tries to cut staff as much as possible.
Which requires research, which requires investment. Much of the research we currently have only exists exactly because of funding, and a lot of funding is done by companies, not by the government.
I like the “whatever”. Let’s just introduce a shitty system that also potentially forces people to do work they don’t want to do and they get like a bar of soap or “whatever” as reward…
I don’t know where these people lived that you talk about, but it certainly wasn’t on this planet. Such a system has never existed.
Automated by who?
We do need incentives to work. As technology and efficiency advances we should be able to work less, but we still need people to do work they/we don’t want to do.
Personally I think people are pretty happy working 24 hours a week even if their job isn’t something they love doing. I’m more interested in working towards that, slowly, over time, than just going to “nobody needs to work”.
Trust me, bro
Because this is the most efficient way of keeping track of how many goods leave your moneyless store, and ensuring assholes aren’t just taking everything for themselves and hoarding it. Tracking how many goods leave the store at any given time allows you to order an appropriate amount to keep things in stock so that people who need things don’t go without, and is especially important for perishable goods like fresh produce.
People have different skill sets and specialties. Many jobs take years of training and practice to reach an acceptable level. Also, you just invented state-sanctioned slavery/a non-military draft. What do you do with someone who refuses to perform their lottery-assigned job?
That’s literally the system we have now, but more authoritarian, since someone has to decide what is a “luxury good” and how much undesirable work is required to attain a given level of luxury.
Citation needed. Concerns: authoritarianism; scaling; maintenance of the modern standard of living
I didn’t cite sources because the literal decades and decades of refutations to your arguments already exist.
But I will leave you with this: Why do libraries work?
If there are so many refutations, then it should be trivial to point me to one. Assume I am an idiot who doesn’t know how a search engine works - I very well might be. Would you be able to point me to one of these innumerable refutations that would disprove me - otherwise, how am I to learn?
I’m not sure what you mean here. If you explain your point of view, I can explain mine. But I will point out that libraries are not a full, functioning society - just part of one.
What a child-like view of society.
I wish i was so naive.
Society would collapse.
While working out of enjoyment instead of necessity is a noble and good goal. There are jobs that no one enjoys. Money can be used as an incentive to motivate people to work on jobs that aren’t that enjoyable, but still necessary.
Which jobs? Most of the time there are people enjoying something you wouldn’t expect
I build rockets that go on satellites and scientific missions. I enjoy my job; I find it extremely interesting and often quite fulfilling. In the grand scheme of things, I really wouldn’t change much. But like my boss said on the first day of the job, “This job is awesome, but it’s not worth doing for free.” If you told me I could still enjoy the same level of comfort at home that my job affords me, but I wouldn’t be paid, I would quit. I’d rather be at home reading, spending time with my family, playing around with my hobbies, etc.
My wife is a nurse. She loves her job, but she wouldn’t do it for free either. Her love for the job prevents her from quitting when she’s abused by the public for 12 hours, the pay makes her come in.
Some people are motivated by enjoyment alone to do jobs for free, but many are not. Or the thing they love doesn’t help society in a meaningful way. Or they just don’t want their hobby to turn into a job. I don’t think there’s a big enough overlap to have a functioning society.
I daresay there’s a few people out there who might enjoy going into the sewers to manually remove the fatbergs, but probably not enough.
Some yeah, but undoubtedly not enough to keep it working. For example i doubt that many people enjoy working at garbage disposable or basically any waste disposal. Of course these jobs should be fully operated by machines. Or any assistant jobs in manufacturing or jobs that operate in shifts.
Uncle worked down at city dump. He loved it. He was kind of a garbologist in a way. He was fascinated by all the things folks threw away. Retired there too. Got a job right out of high school and worked until he was 62 and retired. Dude has so many “trash” sculptures. That is to say, sculptures made out of trash. I think you’d be surprised the jobs folks enjoy doing.
Do you think your uncle was in any way representative of the millions of people employed in waste disposal? The city of Birmingham’s bins have gone partially uncollected for over a year due to a dispute over pay. If waste disposal workers were, in general, doing it for the love of it, they’d surely be happy to do it for minimum wage.
Seems more likely your uncle was the odd one out, and most people need to be paid to do stinky work.
I think that mostly happens because it’s a hard job and because people need money to live. If they didn’t they wouldn’t need more pay
If it’s so enjoyable, why don’t they do it as a hobby and have a different paying job?
To be clear, I think the answer is obviously that, to most people, it’s not that enjoyable.
Because, I don’t know if you’re noticed, having a paying job is exhausting. The world setup in such a way that for a normal person, getting money means someone will suck every bit of life of you.
That’s, pardon the not nice metaphor, the difference between night of passionate sex and selling your ass so your pimp doesn’t beat you up. Both activities can be reduced to physical aspects, but not a lot of people will ask why one is desirable and the other is less so.
Most people need to be paid to do work. Bad argument. I won’t be responding further, if this is how you argue.
If you agree most people need to be paid to do work, then we have no disagreement on the topic at hand, so there is no need to argue at all.
You changed the argument. That’s why it’s a bad argument. It’s not your fault though, most people argue that way. I should not comment, I think. Clearly, it’s not an enjoyable experience for me anymore. This was very enlightening. Thank you for this opportunity. Peace and blessings unto you and your family.
Ehhh I bet you’d be wrong. Only anecdotal obviously, but at practice and games for the kids, a lot of dads just chat when there isnt much going on. A couple of them work for the local garbage company. One of them commented that he doesnt know how I stay inside and work all day, he really enjoys being outside with the trucks in the morning, then enjoying the afternoon outside with the kids. Another one is a mechanic for them, he always thought the trucks were cool, and he still enjoys working on them (though he will 100% tell you, in great detail, which manufacturers suck for various parts). Haven’t talked much with the last one about work, I think he is the only one just straight up doing it for money though.
And who knows, maybe the guy who likes being outside says that to be positive about his choices in life, but I see him at the park with the kids a lot, I’ve run into him heading out to the trails on his mountain bike, etc, so I believe him that he’s perfectly happy doing it.
Automation for unwanted tasks is great though, I agree, and where automation should be focused.
He could be taking the local kids out for hikes in nature instead - an activity which also gets him outside, provides a benefit to society, and lets him spend time with his kid and their friends. If he didn’t get paid, do you think he would prefer picking up garbage, or going on hikes with his kid? And even if he finds picking up trash meaningful now, do you think he started the job for the money, benefits, and schedule, and then learned to appreciate the good he was doing for the community after years of doing the work?
I’m not him so I couldn’t say, but considering I know he does volunteer cleanup days at the trails, I really dont think he looks down on garbage pickup the way you and others seem to be, that its only fulfilling because of money.
I met a guy last week who was unusually passionate about water filtration and wanted to make a business globally. People are wonderfully weird.
Would you really trust podiatrists or proctologists who were in it just for the love of the game?
Tbh I’d kind of trust them more. Even if they got off thinking of my feet later (which, who cares, have at it), they are going to put a lot more effort and get a lot more knowledge than someone just doing it for the high billing rate, dont you think? And probably care more about the quality of my arch than the guy writing a prescription for orthotics because the manufacturer just bought him a nice dinner.
Just because they are pervs doesnt mean they’d be bad at it, I’d say they’d be even better at it than most. Wouldn’t you think?
They might not even be pervs, maybe they’re autistic and feet are their special interest.
On the contrary, I don’t trust any medical profession that is in it for the money.
I was also thinking that. As an example, retail work seems to me to be a kind of hell I don’t think I’d want to endure. But I know people that really enjoy it. So it’s probably true of any job you might think is only done by those that are forced to.
I think, if AI and robotics replace most jobs. After some years of pain when capitalists enjoy the infinite money glitch they’ve discovered, there will either be a revolution or a natural coming to understand that things need to work differently.
Now, understand this would only work if the vast majority of work could be done via automation. In this case the vast majority of people would be able to pursue what they enjoy, a bit like the star trek anti-economy. If all remaining required jobs were no longer filled by those that volunteered to do them, there would be some kind of draft (think like jury duty), where people able to do a job have a chance to be called in to do it for a few months then released back to pursue their own interests.
I’ve always seen capitalism as the carrot on a stick we need, when we need human productivity from the vast majority of people. If that’s no longer the case, it’s not a suitable solution and all the ideas like universal basic income are just stopgap measures to try to eke a bit more time out of the capitalist system that has already run past the point where we can keep enough people usefully employed to make it work. That’s almost certainly the reason we’re seeing the huge wealth disparity that increases. As the productivity per person goes up, all the increased value only ever rises to the top.
Bit of a mini rant there, sorry about that.
deleted by creator
I can’t imagine anyone enjoying being a correctional officer enough to do it for free. Or waste management (sewage).
Why do you assume that we’d need correctional officers in a world without money?
Because people murder each other for reasons other than money.
Oh I dunno, people are still inclined to uh probably murder and/or rape people for fun, steal things, commit any other unlawful acts society may deem against the law that doesn’t involve monetary situation. I understand money is the root of all evil but some people are evil just because.
I’m not saying you’re wrong. But you realise how that reads right? It sounds like you’re saying we should keep a boot on the neck of “the little people” so the rest of us can have a good life.
Fair point, though i did try to use positive encouragement model to incentice people to work in not so enjoyable jobs. Even if not permanently, maybe in rotation.
Living in a nice society is all the motivation people need. I hate doing dishes, but I do them because I hate living without clean dishes even more. Everyone understands sometimes we gotta do stuff we don’t like doing for a greater good. Acting like we need a wageslave class to do menial tasks otherwise we’d just let our world collapse is insulting our collective intelligence. We can share the burden.
That seems kinda too idealistic view of the world.
I know much more people who, if not directly forced, would let the dishes or basically any environment around them completely mould and break down before even considering cleaning up even just the mess they have left behind, than people who altruistically do clean up after themselves and others.
I do agree that living in a cleaner and nicer society should be enough of a motivation and for some it is, but there’s not enough of us.
We can already observe it in many public spaces where trash gets left laying around even if trash cans are available or public bathrooms or showers or my favorite example in the gym where plates get constantly left on the machines and cable attachments just piled up wherever those fell.
I’m not suggesting that we just leave everything to chance and just hope society maintains itself, I’m saying that we can structure society in a way that everything that needs to get done still gets done without the profit motive, because everyone inherently understands that if we evenly and fairly divide up the work that needs to get done, that they’re doing their part to live in a better world - does that make sense?
Yeah it makes sense and I’m not actually that much against the idea. I’m not that fond of the current wage slavery system either.
I just don’t trust general populations altruism that much to believe it would work on a large scale without any sort of a positive Incentivization in addition to just keeping the society running.
I don’t think we need to fully rely on altruism - humans can be selfish and we need to take that into account, and even make use of that tendency for us to want to feather our nests.
I believe that we can create an awesome society based on anarchist principles - freedom, liberty, bottom-up structures, socialized and democratized control of the means of production, and so on. If you’re interested in learning more, I’d recommend the Q&Anarchy video series by Thought Slime, and/or an anarchist FAQ if you’re more of a reader.
Sure is a good thing doing this dishes is the most complicated and least-pleasant thing people can do…
Who’s gonna volunteer to go through years of training specializing in commercial diving in wastewater to treatment plants for free?
“Who’s gonna do mindbraking soulcrushing jobs for days without a break?” Nobody, that’s not a job that has to be done this way. “But if we stop orphan crushing machine, what will crush all the orphans?”
When you’re imagining the worst parts of the worst jobs, remember that the reason those jobs have worst parts is because the main incentive of every job is to have the profit of a job as high as possible, and to exploit the workers. Yeah, some jobs are hard, some are complicated, some are dirty, some are all three. But all that is something people can and regularly enjoy. People don’t enjoy when it’s degrading, when it’s soulcrushing for no reason, when there is obvious injustice. And it has nothing to do with jobs
Some things require years of specialization and simply can’t be done by novices. You don’t want volunteer engineers, pharmacists, etc. Some of those specializations are also unpleasant. We need to support people and not require that all humanity be profitable, but we also need to incentivize people to do shitty and/or difficult jobs. That balance is extremely difficult to find, and the most effective solution we’ve found is paying people for that work. There’s an incredible imbalance in our system right now that values non-productive ownership over all else, but the solution to that isn’t saying “Fuck it - nobody gets paid and it’ll all work itself out.”
The easiest solution is to tax the shit out of the uber-wealthy. Right now we have lower classes defined by income and an upper class defined by wealth. If we remove the wealth and make work and productivity more valuable than ownership, it moves us much closer to equity.
Someone who wants to live a life of luxury and comfort in a world with wastewater treatment plants, knowing that everyone else is also pitching in and doing their part.
Someone who wants to live in a world without billionaire pedophiles in power doing nothing but hoarding all of the wealth and abusing women and children.
Someone who cares about the wellbeing of their community and is motivated by that, rather than by selfish greed.
In other words, anyone. Everyone.
Everyone can’t do everything, and some specialized jobs with specialized skills are extremely unpleasant. Are you suggesting that we just hope things get done, or that we force people to do it while giving nothing in return.
One is delusional - the other is just slavery.
I’m suggesting that we can come up with a better system than the current one we have. I have ideas for how we could do that, and if you’re interested you can check out an anarchist FAQ for a wide variety of ideas, but I don’t have all the answers, no one does. We can only reach a system which works for everyone by first acknowledging our current system is deeply flawed, then coming together to work to build a better alternative.
This is idealistic to the point of parody.
These are all real things. A better world is possible. It is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism, but remember that incredible changes that would have seemed impossible have happened before and will happen again.
If you told a pioneer in the Virginia company back in 1607 that black women would be given rights and the abililty to vote to elect their leaders, they’d probably burn you as a witch.
You might want to read up on the bystander effect. You do the dishes because no-one else is going to do it. But as soon as there are others who can do the job people will just stand around and let other die before they put in the effort.
That’s absolutely not what bystander effect is, not even close. It has also nothing to do with the issue at hand. Bystander effect caused not by not willing to put an effort, it’s incredibly complicated, layered, and not exactly explained, but probably the only thing we know about it for sure is that it’s not because people are lazy
Don’t you think there is some way we could structure society to counteract that without creating an underclass of wage slavery?
Yes, paying more for the shitty jobs.
Do you think the capitalistic system is going to just pay people fairly out of the goodness of the hearts of the ruling class?
How can people be paid the value of their labor while still generating profit? Profit is, by definition, the extraction of surplus labor value. Under capitalism, inherently and definitionally, no member of the working class is ever paid fairly.
No, never even implied that. But in any system we need something that can be exchanged for labor in carrying quantities so we can give more to the people who do the shittiest jobs. Whatever system you come up with, it’s not going to work without money.
If a medium of exchange for labor is indeed necessary, I’d say it should be measured in labor hours. We live finite lives, measured in minutes. A minute of your life is worth as much as a minute of mine, wouldn’t you say?
I would have no inherent problem with a system that tokenizes labor hours in some way. The problem is private ownership of the means of production and profit itself.
That’s been one of the goals of just about every socio-economic system, but since are not yet at the point where we can completely automate away all undesirable jobs, it all circles back to being shit.
I believe that there’s a way we can fairly share out all the shitty work among everyone, rather than a few at the top who do no work and exploit everyone, and a lot of people at the bottom who do all of the dirty work.
We don’t need to automate everything, we just need a fair system to distribute the work evenly. We have the technology. We can do it. The reason we haven’t is because those in power benefit too much from the current system.
I don’t think I can see a way to actually accomplish that without still ending up with negative outcomes.
Take for example a surgeon, one who is a specialist who’s time is 100% occupied saving people. Does he get taken away from that to do his time as a garbage collector? Do you tell the patient “sorry, you are going to die. You could have been saved, but we needed your surgeon to go pick up garbage.”, or do you have an exemption list?
And if there’s an exemption list, you will never convince me that people wouldn’t start abusing who is and isn’t on that list. You arrive right back to having a class society.
Why would you cancel a surgery to do trash collection? Why not just make it so everyone has one day a week dedicated to chores, for example? We all do our chores at home, right? Why not for the benefit of our communities? The surgery can be scheduled for a day a surgeon is available. I’m sure there would be many surgeons in a world without student debt, enough for them each to spare a few hours mucking in just like everyone else, right?
I’m sure someone has the ability of figuring out some kind of schedule to ensure adequate emergency medical coverage despite medical personnel having other obligations. I know we can do that because we already do it. Surgeons take time off work and people don’t die because of it.
ubi, competitive wages, strict caps on profits. there is lots of ways to mitigate capitalism. but basically no way to completely remove it at this point in time.
And all of those reforms will be resisted and then removed by the ruling elite, who control politicians and the media through capitalism. Reform is just short term harm reduction. I agree we are just at the start of our journey to abolish capitalism, but we need to reach our destination, or we will be cursed to forever live through cycles of fascism rising and falling inevitably again and again.
It sounds like you have never come across the concept of the tragedy of the commons?
The particular topic of waste disposal is a good one because we have good historical accounts of the transition from a free-for-all to regulated, paid profession. Take the example of Paris, which in the 17th century was infamous for its dirt and stink. Repeated efforts to force people to keep their own streets clean failed, and ultimately residents complained that if the King wanted the streets to be clean, he had better pay for someone to come and clean them. Eventually city officials managed to force (through threat of punishment) residents to sweep waste and mud into the middle of the streets, and pay people to come through and collect and remove it.
In 15th century Britain, nightmen removed waste from cess-pits and charged two shillings a ton. If there were enough people who just loved shoveling shit so much to do this without money changing hands, why weren’t they out doing that?
I’m actually very familiar with the idea of the tragedy of the commons.
Rather than re-cover well tread ground, I hope that you don’t mind if I quote from a relevant section of an Anarchist FAQ, and I encourage you to check the link I shared, as it goes into far more detail:
If you want a modern, real-world example of this which you may have actually experienced yourself, look no further than this medium we are using to communicate. The Internet is a great example. The Internet was a fantastic common space lovingly maintained and curated by individuals, with services and content provided freely. Corporations encircled it, and turned it into the torment nexus we have today. It wasn’t because of us, collectively, that spoiled the commons of the Internet - it was capitalism itself.
There are many things that people are willing to do for their own satisfaction, I don’t disagree with that. I don’t think waste disposal is one of them.
The “communal life” you’re talking about cannot exist in an urbanised society, because most people you affect in a city are not personally known to you, and there will be no opportunity for the social mechanisms we evolved to pressure us into doing the right thing. In a village of 200 people, if you throw your shit in the street, your neighbour, whom you know personally and whose opinion you likely care about, will complain. In a city of 2 million, if someone throws shit in the street you have no idea who it was, they’ve never met you, and what are you gonna do about it anyway?
Anyway, I should bow out now. I have no interest in discussing politics or economics with an anarchist.
Do you really believe everyone would act like a psychopath if they aren’t always directly accountable for their actions? And how does that differ from our current system?
That’s really too bad, because I’m sure you’d learn a lot! Anarchism is not what you think it is. Either way, have a great day, I wish you all the best. Solidarity forever!
No.
That’s a demonstrable bullshit. Believing that the only motivation people can have is the fear of repercussions is the same level of that christian psychotic “if it wasn’t for the fear of god everyone would be raping and killing all the time” that says more about you than about supposed issue you’re afraid of.
It’s not fear of repercussions; it’s social glue. Crime is much more common in cities, out of proportion with how many people there are, because people who are willing to commit crime are not willing to commit it against people they know personally. Urbanisation allows depersonalisation allows bad behaviour.
It also allows effects to be transmitted that are simply way less direct than you have any hope of instinct being able to reckon with. Like, you can work out that tossing shit out of your window will piss off your neighbour, but the knock-on-effects of what you do can be harder to figure out than that. Did you buy a little bit more of anything at the start of COVID, “just in case”?
I feel like that entire passage completely ignores the fact that last time the bulk of humanity lived a communal lifestyle, the number of humans on the planet was a few orders of magnitude smaller. It’s a fairly easy setup to maintain when settlements are small and the bulk of people’s time is spent as hunter-gatherers or subsistence farmers. As soon as you put a very large number of people into a city, the communal arrangement falls apart. And many people like living in cities. That genie is out of the bottle, and people are not going to be willing to go back to being a subsistence farmer in a commune.
I don’t see why we would need to give up modern agriculture, fertilizer, heavy machinery, or automation in order to abolish capitalism, can you explain why you feel that way?
I don’t think you understand. I want my boat to be bigger than your boat.
I mean, thats easy, I don’t have, or care to own a money pit that I only use once a year, i mean boat! 😎
Unless you count 3D printed benchy… and even then if you scaled your benchy up then it’s bigger than mine!