cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/411395

Every production system has a way to assign jobs to citizens. The basic idea is that the kinds of labor “required” by society for an efficient fulfillment of needs don’t necessarily align with those that an unhindered free choice of jobs would afford.

The way this is solved under capitalism is letting labor be a commodity, subject to market forces. Workers earn wages that are determined by the demand for their work and the availability of it. The difference in wages across jobs pushes us towards working jobs we otherwise wouldn’t.

I believe the importance of the job market is underestimated in past Marxist literature. It used to be the case that labor was expendable and interchangeable; the availability of any one kind of labor greatly surpassed demand, making wages just a way to keep the proletariat living and reproducing.

However, with an increase in automation, those jobs have long ago disappeared in developed countries, and new ones are taking their place. Notably, these new jobs increasingly require training, which has the effect of making a worker unsuitable for all but their own specialized job.

As a result, wages are now established mainly by market forces. If an employer can, by virtue of the rest of the economy, offer worse working conditions than minimally required by the workforce, they will. Conversely, if a particular kind of labor is sold for a higher price, the employer will oblige.

As a special case that I’d like to mention, those that are very heavily demanded (e.g. public figures, elite sportsmen…) can get extremely high market prices for their labor. This is a new mechanic that has become more common.

I’d like to discuss how a Socialist country would tackle the problem of job distribution, in a way that hopefully offers better guarantees than a free job market.

  • @sinovictorchan@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    112 years ago

    The association of Capitalism to free market and Socialism to command economy is a recent distinction that is not faithful to the original distinction where Capitalism is government intervention for a few rich oligarch and Socialism is government intervention for the working class. You should realize that Capitalists had never implemented free market and that they ‘free market Capitalism’ is a false label for their plutocratic command economy that use the very state terrorism and authoritarian rule that they falsely attributed to Socialism. The current Neo-Liberal regime expose their plutocratic authoritarianism with their principle of ‘too big to fall’ and the trickle down myth that oppose market competition. In the original definition, Socialism does allow some elements of market economy and meritocracy until the economy transition to Communism where market economy is no longer relevant.

    • @pancakeOP
      link
      22 years ago

      Wonderful, this answer is very instructive, thanks.