would you rather force to work or find a job?

Started Sep 24, 2013 | Discussions
yonsarh
Senior MemberPosts: 1,349Gear list
Like?
would you rather force to work or find a job?
Sep 24, 2013

lets say , democracy in America has gone and finally socialism or communism arrived in America.

government will take care all people forcing to work, rather than people look find their own job, which is current capitalism... ( due to high rate of unemployment rate, if government make citizens force to work,, then this could solve unemployment rate)

 yonsarh's gear list:yonsarh's gear list
Sony a77 II
D P O'neil
Senior MemberPosts: 2,872
Like?
Re: would you rather force to work or find a job?
In reply to yonsarh, Sep 24, 2013

And where exactly would the goverment find meaningfull employment for 11.3 million people?

-- hide signature --

Kind Regards
Dennis P O'Neil APSNZ
"People are dying to live in America"

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
LeRentier
Forum ProPosts: 13,622Gear list
Like?
Re: would you rather force to work or find a job?
In reply to yonsarh, Sep 24, 2013

yonsarh wrote:

lets say , democracy in America has gone and finally socialism or communism arrived in America.

government will take care all people forcing to work, rather than people look find their own job, which is current capitalism... ( due to high rate of unemployment rate, if government make citizens force to work,, then this could solve unemployment rate)

It is obvious you have no idea what you are talking about.

I travelled in former East Germany and had very interesting discussions with people there.
Speaking the language and having an open mind really helped to make meaningful contacts.

One of the things that made communism last that long was that everybody had a job and made a living wage, an element which helped people to retain a minimum of dignity.

In East Germany, people did not know what it was to be jobless, even if they had failed at everything, the government would find them a job which did not require brains.
People with disabilities were well looked after, they also had jobs which their handicap allowed them to do.

From a social point of view, excluding political and economic aspects, the communist society as I met it, was a lot more humane than our capitalism.

. . . _ _ _ . . .
veni vidi vomi

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
yonsarh
Senior MemberPosts: 1,349Gear list
Like?
Re: would you rather force to work or find a job?
In reply to LeRentier, Sep 24, 2013

LeRentier wrote:

yonsarh wrote:

lets say , democracy in America has gone and finally socialism or communism arrived in America.

government will take care all people forcing to work, rather than people look find their own job, which is current capitalism... ( due to high rate of unemployment rate, if government make citizens force to work,, then this could solve unemployment rate)

]

One of the things that made communism last that long was that everybody had a job and made a living wage, an element which helped people to retain a minimum of dignity

Yes, you made my one of my points. Thanks for clarify again :

From a social point of view, excluding political and economic aspects, the communist society as I met it, was a lot more humane than our capitalism.

So you agree on Socialism has solution for the unemployment that current capitalism could not solve. perhaps, we better prepare for the new capitalism.  Like you said, some societies do have more humanity than money.  This society will lead in the next capitalism .  The current capitalism are being called capitalism 3.0.

\

 yonsarh's gear list:yonsarh's gear list
Sony a77 II
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
yonsarh
Senior MemberPosts: 1,349Gear list
Like?
Re: would you rather force to work or find a job?
In reply to D P O'neil, Sep 24, 2013

D P O'neil wrote:

And where exactly would the goverment find meaningfull employment for 11.3 million people?

good question. this is the type of problem that we all have to work out. Depending on what citizens have skills, or educations, government could give them a related job depending on citizens ability.

Because money will be meaningless in the future, although money in term could be weaker in the next capitalism.

In modern capitalism, people who have more money represents power, like middle class, and higher class. But, in the next capitalism, people who have more humanity will represents more power. I think this will lead another type of capitalism.  Remember, markets are moving from West to East now.

 yonsarh's gear list:yonsarh's gear list
Sony a77 II
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
LeRentier
Forum ProPosts: 13,622Gear list
Like?
Re: would you rather force to work or find a job?
In reply to yonsarh, Sep 24, 2013

yonsarh wrote:

LeRentier wrote:

yonsarh wrote:

lets say , democracy in America has gone and finally socialism or communism arrived in America.

government will take care all people forcing to work, rather than people look find their own job, which is current capitalism... ( due to high rate of unemployment rate, if government make citizens force to work,, then this could solve unemployment rate)

]

One of the things that made communism last that long was that everybody had a job and made a living wage, an element which helped people to retain a minimum of dignity

Yes, you made my one of my points. Thanks for clarify again :

From a social point of view, excluding political and economic aspects, the communist society as I met it, was a lot more humane than our capitalism.

So you agree on Socialism has solution for the unemployment that current capitalism could not solve. perhaps, we better prepare for the new capitalism. Like you said, some societies do have more humanity than money. This society will lead in the next capitalism . The current capitalism are being called capitalism 3.0.

\

Communism and socialism are terms of the past and, as far as I'mconcerned, they became meaningless.
It is safe to say that communism died when the Soviet Union collapsed.
Communism, a violent version of socialism, evolved fairly quickly into personal and sometimes hereditary dictatorships, a real family business.
Do you believe the ideals of socialism can be attained by people who believe that greed is good ?
I'm tempted to suggest that the number of lawyers in a country indicates how far that country is away from socialism.

. . . _ _ _ . . .
veni vidi vomi

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cane
Senior MemberPosts: 4,675
Like?
Re: would you rather force to work or find a job?
In reply to LeRentier, Sep 24, 2013

LeRentier wrote:

yonsarh wrote:

lets say , democracy in America has gone and finally socialism or communism arrived in America.

government will take care all people forcing to work, rather than people look find their own job, which is current capitalism... ( due to high rate of unemployment rate, if government make citizens force to work,, then this could solve unemployment rate)

It is obvious you have no idea what you are talking about.

I travelled in former East Germany and had very interesting discussions with people there.
Speaking the language and having an open mind really helped to make meaningful contacts.

One of the things that made communism last that long was that everybody had a job and made a living wage, an element which helped people to retain a minimum of dignity.

In East Germany, people did not know what it was to be jobless, even if they had failed at everything, the government would find them a job which did not require brains.
People with disabilities were well looked after, they also had jobs which their handicap allowed them to do.

From a social point of view, excluding political and economic aspects, the communist society as I met it, was a lot more humane than our capitalism.

. . . _ _ _ . . .
veni vidi vomi

Humane, not human.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
LeRentier
Forum ProPosts: 13,622Gear list
Like?
Re: would you rather force to work or find a job?
In reply to Cane, Sep 24, 2013

Cane wrote:

LeRentier wrote:

yonsarh wrote:

lets say , democracy in America has gone and finally socialism or communism arrived in America.

government will take care all people forcing to work, rather than people look find their own job, which is current capitalism... ( due to high rate of unemployment rate, if government make citizens force to work,, then this could solve unemployment rate)

It is obvious you have no idea what you are talking about.

I travelled in former East Germany and had very interesting discussions with people there.
Speaking the language and having an open mind really helped to make meaningful contacts.

One of the things that made communism last that long was that everybody had a job and made a living wage, an element which helped people to retain a minimum of dignity.

In East Germany, people did not know what it was to be jobless, even if they had failed at everything, the government would find them a job which did not require brains.
People with disabilities were well looked after, they also had jobs which their handicap allowed them to do.

From a social point of view, excluding political and economic aspects, the communist society as I met it, was a lot more humane than our capitalism.

. . . _ _ _ . . .
veni vidi vomi

Humane, not human.

Do you want to get caned for questioning my use of "humane" instead of human ?

. . . _ _ _ . . .
veni vidi vomi

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
57even
Senior MemberPosts: 6,347
Like?
Re: would you rather force to work or find a job?
In reply to yonsarh, Sep 24, 2013

yonsarh wrote:

D P O'neil wrote:

And where exactly would the goverment find meaningfull employment for 11.3 million people?

good question. this is the type of problem that we all have to work out. Depending on what citizens have skills, or educations, government could give them a related job depending on citizens ability.

Because money will be meaningless in the future, although money in term could be weaker in the next capitalism.

In modern capitalism, people who have more money represents power, like middle class, and higher class. But, in the next capitalism, people who have more humanity will represents more power. I think this will lead another type of capitalism. Remember, markets are moving from West to East now.

And you think the east has more humanity?

Capitalism was born in the industrial revolution. But what happens when most meaningful blue collar work is automated and done by machines or outsourced? When it is no longer cost effective to mine your own minerals and oil rather than import them?

We really failed to adapt fast enough to globalisation and the information revolution, and it may yet prove an issue. No-one has really asked the question. What is work? Is an NFL player actually working? How is his job productive, other than by supporting advertising sponsorship and ticket sales? Why is Tiger Woods a millionaire? Is golf so much more valuable than nursing? In fact can one really define the value of any commodity in social terms? It this disconnect not a problem?

In other words, If work is non-productive in the true sense, how is it any better morally than no work at all. If I decide to go on income support and play golf every day I am not doing anything different from Tiger Woods except that I am taking a lot less money out of the system.

The whole idea of a work ethic no longer has any moral foundation. Around 90% of manufacturing and 50% of all jobs in service industries become redundant during the lifetime of the occupation (remember typesetters, printers, car assembly line workers, photographic retouchers, photojournalists). What do you do when people trained for many years finally find themselves without a job? Moreover how do you entice people back into work when they have had such an experience, often more than once?

The concept of employment in the capitalist (as opposed to the feudal) sense is a relatively recent one, but globalisation and technology is making it harder to sustain when every year the options change and any skills you acquired become redundant. Should we all work in law, accountancy, banking or retail? And since when were any of those occupations actually productive (in the sense of generating net revenue)? Are they not simply removing more from the system than they are adding? Are the transaction fees for a company merger charged by banks, accountants and lawyers not in effect merely an expensive form of hidden taxation that is passed on to consumers?

The flow of capital ultimately requires those that have money to receive enough to give most of it back and keep enough for retirement. You can give it back in taxes, or by spending it, but is there really any difference when much of the time you are spending it involuntarily (on middle man service fees attached to the price of goods - even Tiger Wood's prize money adds to the cost of goods after all). One could argue that taxes are at least more transparent. When you spend £100 on a pair of Nike trainers, how much of that is money is related to the cost of the goods themselves?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Roger99
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,344
Like?
Re: would you rather force to work or find a job?
In reply to yonsarh, Sep 24, 2013

yonsarh wrote:

lets say , democracy in America has gone and finally socialism or communism arrived in America.

government will take care all people forcing to work, rather than people look find their own job, which is current capitalism... ( due to high rate of unemployment rate, if government make citizens force to work,, then this could solve unemployment rate)

The problem there is that a recession is effected by jobs drying up.  The nation doesn't just suddenly go on holiday, the jobs just aren't there for a population that finds itself laid off.  You can't force people to take jobs that don't exist.

Besides, what makes you think you are in a democracy?

-- hide signature --

The one serious conviction one should hold is that nothing should be taken too seriously.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without necessarily accepting it. -Aristotle
..oh, and I see by the lack of responses that I am right yet again.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BorisK1
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,125Gear list
Like?
Re: would you rather force to work or find a job?
In reply to LeRentier, Sep 24, 2013

You skipped out on your Marxism/Leninism studies. USSR was a socialist country, not communist. They used money and had a concept of property. You were paid according to your labours.

If you didn't work, you were convicted of "tuneyadstvo" (translates as "willful unemployment" or "parasitism"), and continued your career in labor camps.

Communism is socialism's long-term goal: A society without money or property, where you would "produce according to your abilities and receive according to your needs".

 BorisK1's gear list:BorisK1's gear list
Olympus Tough TG-1 iHS Olympus E-3 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital 11-22mm 1:2.8-3.5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Brian
Forum ProPosts: 12,137
Like?
Re: would you rather force to work or find a job?
In reply to yonsarh, Sep 24, 2013

yonsarh wrote:

lets say , democracy in America has gone and finally socialism or communism arrived in America.

government will take care all people forcing to work, rather than people look find their own job, which is current capitalism... ( due to high rate of unemployment rate, if government make citizens force to work,, then this could solve unemployment rate)

Do you not learn anything from history?  You may employ everyone, but life then sucks for everyone.

The poor of the U.S. are far better off than the poor of communist countries.

Poor is a relative term.  People are poor in the U.S. because they are compared to the middle class and wealthy.

I am not say the poor don't need help in this country.  They do, but socialism is a failed idea.  Some social programs are good. but a full socialist system is stupid and anyone that embraces it doesn't know history.

-- hide signature --

Brian

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Chato
Forum ProPosts: 45,977Gear list
Like?
The Democratic Socialist answer to the question is not that complex.
In reply to 57even, Sep 24, 2013

First of course, there is PLENTY of work that needs to be done. The CBO states that there are 70,000 bridges and tunnels ready to collapse.

The rail infrastructure is that of the early 20th Century.

The cell phone onfrastructure and the electric grid are the worst in the developed world. And there is much else to be done.

So finding work would be rediculously easy.

Second, no Democratic government would FORCE anyone to work. On the other hand, if you are able to work, then you should either accept one of these jobs, OR get no benefits from society. Government welfare should only go to those unable for physical or mental reasons.

Society has an obligation to take care of those unable to support themselves. It has no obligation to support those who choose not to participate.

And of course, these new jobs MUST pay enough to keep those working out of poverty.

Dave

-- hide signature --

"Everyone who has ever lived, has lived in Modern Times"

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
edwardaneal
Senior MemberPosts: 9,101Gear list
Like?
omg
In reply to Chato, Sep 24, 2013

Chato wrote:

First of course, there is PLENTY of work that needs to be done. The CBO states that there are 70,000 bridges and tunnels ready to collapse.

The rail infrastructure is that of the early 20th Century.

The cell phone onfrastructure and the electric grid are the worst in the developed world. And there is much else to be done.

So finding work would be rediculously easy.

Second, no Democratic government would FORCE anyone to work. On the other hand, if you are able to work, then you should either accept one of these jobs, OR get no benefits from society. Government welfare should only go to those unable for physical or mental reasons.

Society has an obligation to take care of those unable to support themselves. It has no obligation to support those who choose not to participate.

And of course, these new jobs MUST pay enough to keep those working out of poverty.

Dave

-- hide signature --

"Everyone who has ever lived, has lived in Modern Times"

OMG - I actually agree with you

-- hide signature --

NEX-7 & Sigma 30mm f/2.8
NEX-5 & 18-55 OSS
HVL-F20AM Flash
And a spare black 18-55

 edwardaneal's gear list:edwardaneal's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sigma 60mm F2.8 DN | Art Carl Zeiss Touit 1.8/32
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
René Schuster
Forum ProPosts: 12,264
Like?
Re: would you rather force to work or find a job?
In reply to yonsarh, Sep 24, 2013

yonsarh wrote:

lets say , democracy in America has gone and finally socialism or communism arrived in America.

government will take care all people forcing to work, rather than people look find their own job, which is current capitalism... ( due to high rate of unemployment rate, if government make citizens force to work,, then this could solve unemployment rate)

Did you mean to say "... be forced to work ... ?

If not, well, if I can find an idiot whom I can force to work (for me), I'd sure prefer that over finding a job for myself!

RS

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
57even
Senior MemberPosts: 6,347
Like?
Re: The Democratic Socialist answer to the question is not that complex.
In reply to Chato, Sep 24, 2013

Chato wrote:

First of course, there is PLENTY of work that needs to be done. The CBO states that there are 70,000 bridges and tunnels ready to collapse.

The rail infrastructure is that of the early 20th Century.

The cell phone onfrastructure and the electric grid are the worst in the developed world. And there is much else to be done.

So finding work would be rediculously easy.

Second, no Democratic government would FORCE anyone to work. On the other hand, if you are able to work, then you should either accept one of these jobs, OR get no benefits from society. Government welfare should only go to those unable for physical or mental reasons.

Society has an obligation to take care of those unable to support themselves. It has no obligation to support those who choose not to participate.

And of course, these new jobs MUST pay enough to keep those working out of poverty.

Dave

-- hide signature --

"Everyone who has ever lived, has lived in Modern Times"

Well done you completely missed the entire point of my post.

If all those jobs were that necessary, I assume someone would be paying a "fair wage" for them, yes? If they are not worth a fair wage, are you suggesting people should do them for subsistence?

Because if so you are re-introducing slavery by proxy. It would become highly advantageous to employ as few as possible so that there was a large pool of cheap labour always available to be paid by the government. Just like McDonalds.

And if someone loses his job as a typesetter at age 50, are you suggesting he works as a tunneller on some major civic project?

And of all those jobs that need doing, which would you assign to my 65 year old aunt?

The biggest bill we have is pensions, not welfare. What do you propose to do about that?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Chato
Forum ProPosts: 45,977Gear list
Like?
Sorry
In reply to 57even, Sep 24, 2013

57even wrote:

Chato wrote:

First of course, there is PLENTY of work that needs to be done. The CBO states that there are 70,000 bridges and tunnels ready to collapse.

The rail infrastructure is that of the early 20th Century.

The cell phone onfrastructure and the electric grid are the worst in the developed world. And there is much else to be done.

So finding work would be rediculously easy.

Second, no Democratic government would FORCE anyone to work. On the other hand, if you are able to work, then you should either accept one of these jobs, OR get no benefits from society. Government welfare should only go to those unable for physical or mental reasons.

Society has an obligation to take care of those unable to support themselves. It has no obligation to support those who choose not to participate.

And of course, these new jobs MUST pay enough to keep those working out of poverty.

Dave

-- hide signature --

"Everyone who has ever lived, has lived in Modern Times"

Well done you completely missed the entire point of my post.

Although I COMPLETELY removed the text of your post, I should also have removed the name. I was replying to the OP...

If all those jobs were that necessary, I assume someone would be paying a "fair wage" for them, yes? If they are not worth a fair wage, are you suggesting people should do them for subsistence?

Because if so you are re-introducing slavery by proxy. It would become highly advantageous to employ as few as possible so that there was a large pool of cheap labour always available to be paid by the government. Just like McDonalds.

Err, my post is above. Did you miss the words:

"And of course, these new jobs MUST pay enough to keep those working out of poverty."

And if someone loses his job as a typesetter at age 50, are you suggesting he works as a tunneller on some major civic project?

Absolutely. Building roads and damns, and infrastructure calls for a variety of skills that are not physical. Yes, this person MIGHT need to be retrained, but there would be plenty of print jobs required for such huge tasks.

And of all those jobs that need doing, which would you assign to my 65 year old aunt?

She of course should be collecting retirment benefits. But if she WANTS to work, no doubt there would be unskilled jobs she could do, and no doubt if she had skills they could be used.

The biggest bill we have is pensions, not welfare. What do you propose to do about that?

Increase them. What else?

In the US retirement benefits are only in financial trouble because not all income is subject to the retirment tax.

Dave

-- hide signature --

"Everyone who has ever lived, has lived in Modern Times"

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,839
Like?
That is crazy..
In reply to Chato, Sep 25, 2013

Chato wrote:

Increase them. What else?

In the US retirement benefits are only in financial trouble because not all income is subject to the retirment tax.

You don't understand that social security is not in trouble because there is not enough money going it.

The gov is corrupt, puts the money for social security retirement into the general fund and spends it. If the money went into a seperate account, we would have so much excess you would have to pay people more retirement than they put in... Why?

Think about it, where does the money go for all the people who work all their lives and die before they collect? That is a huge number.

The other huge influx of money is. Illegals from Mexico cannot work here without a social security number. They take dead peoples SS numbers and put money into the system. But they can't withdraw it.

Neither Republican or Democrat will fix this because the are corrupt and want to spend the money, or they would fix social security by putting it into a seperate fund. Instead they want to get into your pocket again and sell you health care. But that money will be spent too just like SS and eventually people who have been paying in all their lives with be told gov will have to reduce costs which means old people will not get good health care.

The problem comes from too big of gov dipping into our pockets and spending the money. When they cannot get enough that way, they just print more and sell junk bonds to other countries.

We are so deep in debt right now it is inevitable that the US will eventually declare bankrupcy on its debt. But that's ok, Obama doesn't fix SS retirement and wants in your pocket again you will be happy to give him your money.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TheWoodMaven
Contributing MemberPosts: 678
Like?
I can not believe...
In reply to yonsarh, Sep 25, 2013

...that anyone gave a serious response to this asinine troll.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Chato
Forum ProPosts: 45,977Gear list
Like?
Re: That is crazy..
In reply to Richard, Sep 25, 2013

Richard wrote:

Chato wrote:

Increase them. What else?

In the US retirement benefits are only in financial trouble because not all income is subject to the retirment tax.

You don't understand that social security is not in trouble because there is not enough money going it.

The gov is corrupt, puts the money for social security retirement into the general fund and spends it. If the money went into a seperate account, we would have so much excess you would have to pay people more retirement than they put in... Why?

The point here is that government borrowing from the SS Fund does not reduce the amont of money in the fund, but rather forces the taxpayer to repay the bonds. By no means am I defending government policy. On the other hand, if the cap on income was removed, then the preceding doesn't matter -

But you're off topic anyway. I am responding to the OP and others on specific questions raised by the OP. I suggest you start your own thread, and I will be happy to participate.

Dave

Think about it, where does the money go for all the people who work all their lives and die before they collect? That is a huge number.

The other huge influx of money is. Illegals from Mexico cannot work here without a social security number. They take dead peoples SS numbers and put money into the system. But they can't withdraw it.

Neither Republican or Democrat will fix this because the are corrupt and want to spend the money, or they would fix social security by putting it into a seperate fund. Instead they want to get into your pocket again and sell you health care. But that money will be spent too just like SS and eventually people who have been paying in all their lives with be told gov will have to reduce costs which means old people will not get good health care.

The problem comes from too big of gov dipping into our pockets and spending the money. When they cannot get enough that way, they just print more and sell junk bonds to other countries.

We are so deep in debt right now it is inevitable that the US will eventually declare bankrupcy on its debt. But that's ok, Obama doesn't fix SS retirement and wants in your pocket again you will be happy to give him your money.

-- hide signature --

"Everyone who has ever lived, has lived in Modern Times"

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads