4 ms·
The radical position is, if nobody wants to mine coal, then we will need to either not use coal (great idea, saves a lot of Co2), or make the coal mining job be
by yk 5y ago
The radical position is, if nobody wants to mine coal, then we will need to either not use coal (great idea, saves a lot of Co2), or make the coal mining job better. Of course nobody wants the dirty, unhealthy and dangerous job that capitalism designed, but that does not imply that it is impossible to design a job that extracts coal and people genuinely enjoy.
- s1artibartfast 5y agoThe challenge is who "designs" the job to make coal mining more enjoyable in a specialized economy. In Capitalism, you raise pay until there is incentive to do the work. In a communist command economy, some authority decides if more coal miners are needed and takes from some people to gives to coal workers until there are enough workers. In a cashless anarchists society, I guess you hope that someone invents something to improve conditions?
- yk 5y agoPresumably whoever thinks that it is important to mine coal.
- s1artibartfast 5y agoSo in the 3rd case, someone needs to provide food, shelter, and other needs for someone while they work on this tough coal problem. That means that others in society need to either 1) agree and recognize that it is a problem that needs to be solved and voluntarily support them or 2) Trust that whatever people choose to do with their time must be important for the greater good and support them in whatever they do. I guess the Annaco-communist answer would be the latter.
- yk 5y agoYes, in Marxist terms you need to produce the surplus value to sustain development. So whoever wants to exclusively work on that coal problem presumably has to convince others to help him, either by providing supplies or by helping directly.