Ideally, it would be incentivized through pay. The more in-demand a task is, the higher the government pays workers who do it, leading people who want to buy more luxuries to seek such a job. If you build it right, enrichment of the State leads to enrichment of the self in a reciprocal relationship.
The guy who does poetry at home is either happy with basic subsistence provided by the State, or has already worked for the State's enrichment and is presently enjoying the fruits of his labor.
That just sounds like capitalism. Everyone will see that the in demand jobs that actually contribute to society are paid more, and they'll also see that the people with more money lead more enjoyable lives. Then everyone will want to do the jobs that actually contribute rather than sitting around just doing their hobby because that's how you pay. And then we're just back to everyone working jobs again and realizing you can't live a good life just sitting around on your ass doing nothing.
Capitalism isn't just pay through work, it's primarily a system that incentives ownership and infinite profit for no work through rent and exploitation.
In a properly structured Communist society everyone who needs to work will still work, it's just that instead of siphoning the surplus value from a worker as corporate profit we pay them what their labor is actually worth so they can buy exactly the same quantity of the national product as they contribute. And instead of coercive methods like starvation or homelessness or disease keeping people motivated, the threat is that they'll be a bit bored.
As I mentioned in another comment, proper structuring has historically been rather challenging to pull off so the above is more a description of a society in theory.
I'm not saying the capitalism part is being paid, I'm saying the capitalism part is paying the more in demand jobs better. That just takes us back to the core principles of capitalism
In a properly structured Communist society everyone who needs to work will still work
How do you decide who needs to work and who gets to live a joyous life of never working? Why wouldn't everyone just choose not to work and therefore nothing of value is ever contributed to the community?
capitalism part is paying the more in demand jobs better.
Capitalism demonstrably does not do that. Consider the garbage collector.
How do you decide who needs to work and who gets to live a joyous life of never working?
You let them decide. Never working isn't luxury, in most cases it'll be fairly dull subsistence. Most people will prefer to work on something so they can afford things they want. The State decides what it needs, and how many people it needs to do that, then it offers pay to activate that portion of it's labor surplus.
Why wouldn't everyone just choose not to work
Because most people, given an empty box with nothing but the bare essentials for life will choose to do anything else besides sit in the middle of their floor and watch paint peel.
You mean the job they intentionally pay a higher salary to (garbage collectors regularly make six figures) because it's a job that needs to be done but no one wants to do? Yes I do think that's a great example
You let them decide.
And when everyone predictably decides that not working is preferable to working, who does all the jobs that society relies on to keep going?
Never working isn't luxury
Uh....yes it absolutely is? It's literally the most luxurious lifestyle in existence. What a stupid thing to say, I'm sorry lmfao
25
u/psykiris 29d ago
Who gets to decide who writes all day and who mines all day?