OPJul 12, 2020·1 reply
KOLLAPSSo I’m confused you would only be allowed to pay to construct a house for yourself?
Workers build houses not landlords or real estate agents
- Jul 12, 2020·1 replySynopsis
Workers build houses not landlords or real estate agents
Correct. Who decides who lives in the homes?
- Jul 12, 2020·1 replySynopsis
What history
Every communist revolution ever attempted
Unless you know something I don’t
- OPJul 12, 2020·1 replyKOLLAPS
Every communist revolution ever attempted
Unless you know something I don’t
Show your work
- OPJul 12, 2020·1 replyKOLLAPS
Correct. Who decides who lives in the homes?
It's less of a who's deciding question than it is finding the most efficient way of figuring out who needs a home
- Jul 12, 2020·1 replySynopsis
It's less of a who's deciding question than it is finding the most efficient way of figuring out who needs a home
So who would prioritize who gets a home, when they get it, and which home (size, how many rooms, etc...)people would get?
- Jul 12, 2020·2 repliesSynopsis
Show your work
Wym my work? As in research? I don’t have any.
I’m talking about based on top off my head which is why I said maybe you know of successful socialist/communist societies that I may not know about. If you do could you provide an example or 2 so I could look into them?
Jul 12, 2020·1 replyKOLLAPSWym my work? As in research? I don’t have any.
I’m talking about based on top off my head which is why I said maybe you know of successful socialist/communist societies that I may not know about. If you do could you provide an example or 2 so I could look into them?
- Jul 12, 2020mirza
- OPJul 13, 2020·2 repliesKOLLAPS
Wym my work? As in research? I don’t have any.
I’m talking about based on top off my head which is why I said maybe you know of successful socialist/communist societies that I may not know about. If you do could you provide an example or 2 so I could look into them?
itd be an interesting convo if we could find some the US didn't personally insured failed.
- OPJul 13, 2020·1 replyKOLLAPS
So who would prioritize who gets a home, when they get it, and which home (size, how many rooms, etc...)people would get?
to each according to their needs.
- Jul 13, 2020·1 replySynopsis
to each according to their needs.
You’re not answering the question though.
I understand the concept but who deems what is a need?
I’m kinda trynna ask would you achieve this through more anarchic or authoritarian means?
- Jul 13, 2020Synopsis
itd be an interesting convo if we could find some the US didn't personally insured failed.
Are there any where you could make the argument that Western capitalist interests were the sole or main cause for its downfall (aka was successful before being attacked one way or another)
- OPJul 13, 2020·1 replyKOLLAPS
You’re not answering the question though.
I understand the concept but who deems what is a need?
I’m kinda trynna ask would you achieve this through more anarchic or authoritarian means?
authoritarian is a weird word to use. like ive said multiple times itt, perhaps before society is fully communist, the government sponsors targeted housing programs.
- Jul 13, 2020·1 replySynopsis
authoritarian is a weird word to use. like ive said multiple times itt, perhaps before society is fully communist, the government sponsors targeted housing programs.
Yea I hesitated using that word cuz I didnt want you to feel antagonized but I didnt know what other word to use lmao
So you’re saying the government would do it? I’m assuming the government would also be the entity paying for the labor of the construction correct?
- OPJul 13, 2020·1 replyKOLLAPS
Yea I hesitated using that word cuz I didnt want you to feel antagonized but I didnt know what other word to use lmao
So you’re saying the government would do it? I’m assuming the government would also be the entity paying for the labor of the construction correct?
If thats the route it goes yes, itd be government funded, but the government would be the people as well. wage labor is very likely going to be among the last things that gets abolished
- Jul 13, 2020·1 replySynopsis
If thats the route it goes yes, itd be government funded, but the government would be the people as well. wage labor is very likely going to be among the last things that gets abolished
So wage labor would eventually get abolished? (Or you would like for it to?)
- OPJul 13, 2020·1 replyKOLLAPS
So wage labor would eventually get abolished? (Or you would like for it to?)
in my ideal society yes i would like wage labor to be abolished. idk if youve read looking backward, but i kind of like the idea of people being credited with a stipend i guess, that they can use on whatever they want. it's kind of like an unconditional UBI. but say you go out to eat, you use a credit, etc.,
but even then my ideal is to move towards a moneyless society
im not as concerned with posting about what happens in the meantime because that could look like a ton of different things based on how it manifests.
- Jul 13, 2020·1 reply
fun guyHoarding wealth is immoral and a direct symptom of poverty. Why would anyone ever NEED a billion dollars? What can you possibly do with that amount of money? Meanwhile almost a billion people are living in extreme poverty, it just makes no sense. Living luxurious is understandable but it gets to a point where it's just plain idiotic and avaricious, no?
It's frustrating because a collective effort from billionaires could easily end things like homelessness in America while still remaining extremely wealthy themselves. Money to the elite isn't the same as money for the average proletariat who needs to work for their survival. It's literally just a d*** swinging contest. That's what the current model of Capitalism has done, encouraged greed and pit humans against each other in a "every man for himself" type scenario.
If you concede that it would take just a few billionaires to end homelessness, why do we need an upheaval of the system?
- Jul 13, 2020fun guy
Hoarding wealth is immoral and a direct symptom of poverty. Why would anyone ever NEED a billion dollars? What can you possibly do with that amount of money? Meanwhile almost a billion people are living in extreme poverty, it just makes no sense. Living luxurious is understandable but it gets to a point where it's just plain idiotic and avaricious, no?
It's frustrating because a collective effort from billionaires could easily end things like homelessness in America while still remaining extremely wealthy themselves. Money to the elite isn't the same as money for the average proletariat who needs to work for their survival. It's literally just a d*** swinging contest. That's what the current model of Capitalism has done, encouraged greed and pit humans against each other in a "every man for himself" type scenario.
So much s*** I can do with a billion dollars lmfao
Turn that s*** into 10
- Jul 13, 2020·1 replySynopsis
in my ideal society yes i would like wage labor to be abolished. idk if youve read looking backward, but i kind of like the idea of people being credited with a stipend i guess, that they can use on whatever they want. it's kind of like an unconditional UBI. but say you go out to eat, you use a credit, etc.,
but even then my ideal is to move towards a moneyless society
im not as concerned with posting about what happens in the meantime because that could look like a ton of different things based on how it manifests.
This reminds me of the thoughts I used to have when I was freshman in high school (not an insult I genuinely loved the idea of marxism back then)
Do you think you could live to see a moneyless society? Or you’re hoping to just lay the groundwork for the future?
- OPJul 13, 2020·1 replyCLB KarlPilkington
If you concede that it would take just a few billionaires to end homelessness, why do we need an upheaval of the system?
because billionaires are not going to end homelessness, and they certainly aren't going to end the conditions that lead to homelessness.
- Jul 13, 2020·1 replySynopsis
because billionaires are not going to end homelessness, and they certainly aren't going to end the conditions that lead to homelessness.
Wait wtf I just read according to HUD it would take just 20 billion to end homelessness
How tf hasn’t someone done that already
(And yes I absolutely understand it would be a bandaid solution)
But damn that’s pennies for some of these people...just think about the press they’d get
- OPJul 13, 2020KOLLAPS
This reminds me of the thoughts I used to have when I was freshman in high school (not an insult I genuinely loved the idea of marxism back then)
Do you think you could live to see a moneyless society? Or you’re hoping to just lay the groundwork for the future?
I would say if we don't radically change things none of us will see it
but putting aside climate induced disaster, i think its possible. certainly no more unlikely than anything else thats ever happened in world history.
- OPJul 13, 2020·1 replyCLB KarlPilkington
Wait wtf I just read according to HUD it would take just 20 billion to end homelessness
How tf hasn’t someone done that already
(And yes I absolutely understand it would be a bandaid solution)
But damn that’s pennies for some of these people...just think about the press they’d get
its probably a bit higher in terms of modernizing the houses, keeping them up to date etc.,
but its because they make money off of not ending it lol, not to mention the politicians have money in real estate