So Sup Forums ive been making in my mind lately an economic system which it seems could solve all proplems of economic...

So Sup Forums ive been making in my mind lately an economic system which it seems could solve all proplems of economic inequality.
The base of this system is that all workers get paid based on the time they work,the difficulty of their work and time spent learning to perform that work.So the value of products in this system is determined only by the factors stated above.So
Salary=worktime*workdifficulty(mental and physical)+timespentlearningtowork(divided of course between multiple salaries)-tax.Notice that the value of products produced doesnt effect salary.So if a job produces less than another job for the same work both workers would be paid the same by selling the product of the less productive job at a higher price.
From the above comes the second important part of this system.Because production is effected by equipment which equipment to aquire requires an already existing capital and also to prevent competition which would cause a deacrese in salary to those that their products remain unsold and would also lead to wasted work all job positions are handed out by the government which monitors supply and demand and acts accordingly.Also salaries for each job are decided by the goverment but not handed out by them unless of course they are buyers of your products.Any equipment required to work is also given by the goverment but is still property of the goverment.

Prt1

Prt 2

Last uncovered part is taxation.Taxation accounts to a small percent of the salary that is required to preserve infastructure and also to improve it by funding reseasrch.Improved infastructure would lead to increased production for the same amount of work.
Also i forgot.Any product that does not and cant exist in sufficient quantities to meet demand will have have a buying limit.This means an individual can buy only so much of this product unless another individual doesnt want any.In that case the product meant for that individual is rendered accessible to be bought by others.
I know that like almost any system this system is vulnerable to fraud but due to the small amount of wealth and assets under each persons ownership or care(in case of goverment assets) an important amount of money can never be stolen from the system.
Also i know that in the present state of the world even if this system indeed works the goym wouldnt be allowed to implement it as it removes the ability of a jew to have more money than what his work is worth.
So thats about it.What do you think Sup Forums.How viable would my system be if it was ever implemented?

EFFORT != VALUE

In the present systems yes.But if the equation was true what harm would the market ever suffer

>all job positions are handed out by the government which monitors supply and demand and acts accordingly.Also salaries for each job are decided by the government.
Your system has already fallen apart.

Easier would be just like it is but the government constantly rocking the boat for ludicrously fast social mobility

Everyone would be poor, middle and rich at least 3 times in their life, like an eternal cycle

Could you elaborate your argument a little more?Because i believe you unwillingly or not are assigning qualities to my system that arent there simply by extracting judgment from a partial comparison

OK, how are you going to pay them in the first place?
\Why do they deserve the same pay for an inferior product?
Who's going to buy the inferior product for the same price?
This is as retarded as communism.
You have a dumb childlike view on reality.

so basically if you and I spend the same time studying and do the exact same job, i get paid more if i spend more time on it ?

Because you have incorporated socialist elements. Socialism is inherently inefficient. Plus a system which regulates what is considered a labor of "value" is easily corrupted. What is wrong with individuals themselves deciding on what they are willing to pay or be paid?

An initial equal amount of money will be provided.Its not an inferior product but a different product and its production depends on demand for thst product

I think his system is based around productivity of work. So if you and I had same level jobs we would both be paid for the same hours.

Here are my objections:

work difficulty is subjective

Some jobs have more value than worktime*workdifficulty provide, so they will end up understaffed. You would end up with no workers for these jobs. This leads to a market pressure that gets satisfied outside your legal system, most likely starting a black market.

This may not sound like it to OP, but is a legitimate concern. People are incentivized by this system to do their job slowly.

Basically time spent working will be agreed upon from before between the worker and the goverment to prevent the production of more than what is demanded.You will be paid more if you spent that time working and producing

>.Any product that does not and cant exist in sufficient quantities to meet demand will have have a buying limit
So an item that has scarcity within the market will have added scarcity upon it? Price controls >9000.

If i end up having understaffed jobs itt means im doing a great work employing everybody.A job with lower salary can be balanced to decrease the difference by adjusting the value of worktime.the greater this value the smaller the gap between jobs of varying difficulty

>People are incentivized by this system to do their job slowly
Those with Downs become our new 1%.

You will run out of money, because you're subsidizing jobs with lower value, assuming the high-value jobs will compensate, but jobs with higher value aren't being worked.

This is on top of both jobs being worked less efficiently overall, because of the slow work incentive.

If everybody wants it why should it only be accessible to the wealthy

Ambition is the driving force behind economic growth and advancement of society. Where is there an outlet for ambitious people in your model?

So you have beef with the wealthy?

>The base of this system is that all workers get paid based on the time they work,the difficulty of their work and time spent learning to perform that work.
Been done. It's called Marxism. Didn't even bother to read the rest.

Because wealth is a sign of being helpful to society.

The whole point of regulated capitalism is that you should only be able to get rich in ways that benefit the people, like building a good business or inventing a new technology.

As long as that is true, then being rich is a good thing, and should be rewarded.

Because the wealthy are the only ones capable of supporting the people who produce it.

Why do you have a problem with hierarchy?
It is necessary. You don't go around trying to make up down.
Commie shit will never work and what you've described seems an awful lot like soviet economics.

If you work slower you produce less and thus to keep your prices the same as a hard working individual your salary decreases.The average production and salary of a functional worker can be determined by the goverment by aquiring statistical data about a job.I guess i didnt write this in the original post but here it is now.

So if a man studies for 20 years for how to sculpt a rat anus with clay, do you think he should have a very high salary?

You literally stole this from my thread a few days ago.

Let me make a point about wealth.If i havent produced enough work to aquire it but rather i exploit the workers i employ simply because i can then is really this wealth mine?im i the one allowed to spent it in any way

They are equally exploiting you.

Do you think they're working there because they want to help you out?

>exploit the workers
What makes you think workers are exploited?

He would actually have a near average salary IF there is actually demand for his "products"

I think you are basically describing the 'free professions'

I didnt but i guess we simply found the same solutions to problems common to us

What are these problems?

>IF there is actually demand for his "products"
But say it takes him 15 years of hard work to produce a single rat anus sculpture.

If he gets even 1 order, that's a 15 years salary right?

So you've basically reinvented Marxism and actually believe it will work
>cypriot intellectuals

Im a millioner.But wait.I never produced myself work that has a value of millions of dollars.But guess what.The sum of my workers did.But sadly for them largely im the one deciding how much ill pay them

Your system accounts nothing for the value or demand of the product. Just the effort required to make it.

Which is why it fails.

Yes.if one was wishing to spend 15 years of his own salary for an anus sculpture

Still your argument is a partial comparrison that lacks any actual judgement of my idea.

>im the one deciding how much ill pay them
The decision is mutual. If you decided to pay them dirt while your competitor Joe decides to pay them well, you will have no workers, go bankrupt, and end up working for Joe. So it is an incentive for you to pay your workers well. Workers do not have to agree to work for you, and they can move around looking for a job they agree to might the price for labor. Workers are a scarce resource and companies will compete for them. The millionaire creates the economic conditions such as businesses and factories, using and risking his own capital to do so. These companies owned by millionaires give workers jobs improving their standard of living.

Wait... I thought the salary was disconnected from the freemarket.
Is the rat anus sculptor allowed to lower the price of his anuses?
Or will he study for 20 years and then not be able to make any money if there's no demand for very expensive rat anuses?

>But wait.I never produced myself work that has a value of millions of dollars
So you didnt take the time and effort to start a successful company or invent a new product? You didn't carry the necessary risks needed to have a business on your shoulders instead of your workers? You didn't singlehandedly take it upon yourself to repair, maintain, replace and expand the capital that your workers use?
>But guess what.The sum of my workers did
Yes, using the capital, tools, facilities, buildings and following the plans you created to produce the product
>But sadly for them largely im the one deciding how much ill pay them
and sadly for you they decide how much they will accept being paid to work for you, and could organise a strike if they are mistreated, which could lose you investors and end up costing you
money
Marxism has been tried, failed every time and left eastern Europe in the state it is today. Your "ideology" is too idealistic, naive and out of touch with human nature and the laws of the market

t. Cypriot atheism poster

come on pedro, we all went through the edgy marxist/socialist stage when we were 15-17. sadly some people never grew out of it

I mean look around you.Is what you say actually true.owners of companies get payed far more for the little work they do.The fact that they invested an initial capital doesnt give them the right to earn more from what they spent and worked for.Also thats why in my system the goverment is the provider of assets.To prevent people from exploiting the fact that they own the gear which you use to work

The goverment assigns jobs so that job will not be availiable if there is no demand.

>if there is no demand.

So they will only allow a product to be sold if people are already buying it at the "proper" price.

That makes sense.

so how will new, unique and innovative products be created, for which there isnt already a demand? How could there be a demand for something that does not even exist yet?

>.owners of companies get payed far more for the little work they do
You do know that not all work is objectively equal in comparison? An owner of a company is paid more because he may have risked more of his capital to start the business in which to hire you. He also makes more complex decisions in regards to expansion, investment, innovation, etc. A doctor may get paid by a hospital $100,000 while a nurse gets paid $40,000. The nurse cleans up shit and works 12 hour days. Why does the doctor stay nice and clean and make all that money? Perhaps because based upon the decisions the physician makes, he can guarantee the hospital will get back $150,000-$200,000 in Medicare reimbursement. So he returns the hospital $50,000-$100,000 extra a year on their investment for the physician's salary.

Lets say a new idea of a product rises from tax money spent on research.If people like and want that production will soon follow

Tax money spent on research

>If people like and want that production will soon follow

How will you know who wants what?

You send out a form "would you like a new iphone??"

See what they say?

but what if the government doesn't "agree" with this product. What if a member of the ruling party decides that he doesnt feel comfortable with having x product (whether it be guns, computers, books etc), but people would like to have said product. You're giving a lot of power to a very small ammount of people and every time that has been tried it has lead to stagnation

A website or something.one way or the other its not that hard really.

>A website or something.one way or the other its not that hard really.

It's not that hard to take a survey but it doesn't mean that people will actually buy it. What happens when your projections are wrong? Does the guy still get paid? Where does the extra money come from?

Laws are an entirely different part of this but still nescessary.If i talked about making a better society laws and goverment structures would also be mentioned.Here i only talked about how the economy could give people what the value of their work is worth

Statistics here are the answer.Also if you agree that a product should enter the market because you "demand" you would essentially be bound to purchase it

The problem with your "system" is that you think you can manipulate incentives and make everyone happy and equal. You are jealous of the upper class, so you have a moral stake in the game. You fail to realize that free market capitalism is a 100% pro-worker system. The workers have more decisions and choices than can ever be allotted to them by socialism or communism. Their standards of living are far higher as well. If you are aiming for income equality it means that you do not understand fully income mobility. How many of the 1% made their money in one generation compared to fifty years ago? Do you think that the bottom 20% is the same bottom 20% that was there 5, 10, or even 15 years ago? People move up and down, so if you are fighting for the bottom 20%, they will not be same in 10 years because they may have climbed up into the upper 10%

>Also if you agree that a product should enter the market because you "demand" you would essentially be bound to purchase it

So people are "bound" to purchase things that may not ever exist?

What if they simply don't have the money?
You're going to take their car away or something?

Do you know that half of all businesses fail in the first 5 years? You know that banks already do the best research they can to decide if there will be demand for a product before giving these businesses loans.

The problem is that you can't actually predict demand.

If you dont have enough money you cant demand to buy items.If you do and demand something and then are bound to buy it then demand is extremely predictable

What you have just said will destroy your economy. If your citizens demand a product for $1 dollar and the means to create cost $15, then they are bound to buy it at $1. Demand is only figured until after a product or service has entered the market and never before. I cannot pledge and be bound to buy a product for $1 if the product has not yet been conceptualized and with no assessment towards total cost.

I was thinking you could just paycap management as a function of total employee pay. Maybe like a wage schedule system like federal workers. If someone at the top wants to give himself a raise it would affect wages from the bottom up.

>If you dont have enough money you cant demand to buy items.

If i don't have enough money (today) i can't demand to buy items (tomorrow).

The problem is I can have money today and not tomorrow.

Additionally: Do you plan to close down the factory immediately after you've sold all the items that were pledged to be bought?

What will come of the people who worked in the factory? Will they starve until the next fad is designed?

How about we let the free market determine wages organically? Leftists like organic things unless it is economic.

/thread
communist high IQs BTFO

What you stated is indeed true.Real product price might vary from what is stated but only slightly really.If you know how that product will be made then you know with a pretty high degree of certainty how hard and time consuming it will be to make that product and thus you can calculate its price.When lets say you are demanding a product you could see its estimated price and posdible price range.For your protection you can choose to deny a purchaseif the price exceeds those bounds.The outcome of this will be wasted work.To ease individuals that made the product their salary will be paid by the goverment.So if rates of failure to meet expected demand prices are low tax money spend for this purpose will equal to almost zero and thus the failure of that product will have almost zero negative impact on the health of the economy

If you demand something its like prepurchasing it.money bount to it cannot be spent otherwise

So how much of the economy's money is going to be bound up in products that don't exist or will never exist?

Only if demand reaches zero.Workers there will either get assigned a new job or get educated to do another.The second option results in lower salary as you will not be working for sometime so each worker will go throught this only once except if everybody already went throught it once.then he will do it twice and so on

These products are the future.They are progress as they make our lives better and improve production.A considerable amount if you take the above into account.

Do you not realize how you are making a process that unfolds on its own inherently more complicated? Due to this you are trading efficiency for inefficiency. There are no problems with natural supply and demand, so why make any? Tell us what are the main issues that you are trying to solve economically.

>Taxation accounts to a small percent of the salary that is required to preserve infastructure
>And all research
>And all failed initiatives of totalitarian allowning government
>And payment for people that don't really provide any value
How small is that "small percent" exactly, 80% ?
I bet you want to feed all poor and cripples as well.

>all proplems of economic inequality.
>economic inequality.

>Urr durr someone has a ferrary while I have only a porsche.

Stop acting like a 5 years old

>Only if demand reaches zero.
So you will allow the factory to operate at a deficit as long as the demand isn't zero?

There are economies of scale such that if you produce less of an object, the price per object is more.... Or otherwise you're paying factory workers to work half time... In which case they will quit and work at a job that can feed them.


>.They are progress as they make our lives better and improve production.

As a citizen, there's not much incentive to risk your money on this stuff.

Odds are that anything you pledge to buy will not become a reality. You'll just have money you can't spend for however long it takes to figure that out. I'd rather have money i can spend than money i can't.

Additionally, the finished product will often not be as good as it's anticipated to be.... Thus it's better to wait till the item exists before pledging.

>time spent learning to perform that work
so slow learners will earn more? I like this system already

Basically money buy the product of work.Due to wealth inequality people can buy products that require more work than the work they made.Those products they aquire come from the work of those below them.Those below them recieve products that are worth less work than what they produced.Thats what im trying to solve.That inequality in work produced and products recieved for that work

TLDR
shut up fag

Slow learners fail their class.these people could go for less mentally challanging jobs

That is why you have to understand income mobility. Income equality is a pipe dream that is more detrimental to the workers you care about. So what part of the socioeconomic population are you trying to help the bottom 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, or 50% ?

You say that bussinesses should barely brake even.That means to not make excess profit in the expense of others.Thats what my system tries to do but in a more controled manner.Also about interest rates id like to add they will not exist because all assets are provided by the goverment and thus investing would not be possible.This is good actually because by investing you might help a bussiness start or dominate its market you recieve money in the form of interest that you havent worked to aquire.money that in its source its traced to the workers and the costumers

You do realize that investing in companies, especially smaller firms, is a tremendous source of innovation and job creation?

My system brings equality.That percent is determined by the payment you recieve for the work you produce.If your payment buys you less than what you produce then this system will benefit you

why are you making it so complicated. if we just remove jews and nonwhites then things will be vastly improved, and then we can go from there

>go to 10 years of polisci major
>work at your local McDonalds
>I EARNED THIS $100 AN HOUR SALARY FUCK YOU CISHHET RAYCISTS FUCKS THE PATRIARCHY NEEDS TO FALL

Why do you need equality?

Innovation will be made by the tax money that will be spent for research.in this system innovation and progress are of the most important sectors tax money will be spent

Wow that's a whole lot of time spent uselessly and poorly reinventing the free market.

Don't you have better things to do with your time, Cyprus?

Most innovation is brought on by undetermined market factors. Look at the chip wars during the late 90s and early 00's.

You either sit at the top or get stepped upon.if you are at the top you can increase your influence your power control everybody by controlling what they need.In short what jews are badically.Thats why i want equality

We would all do things in harder inefficient ways to get more money.
Why use that useful machine if I will get paid to do that repetitive task myself?

You are blinded by your jealously for those that are wealthy, simply that. You want to reinvent the economic wheel throwing in dashes of socialism and marxism, not because you care about your fellow workers, but because you feel like you are not getting your fair share. Finding ways to keep increasing the standard of living helps far more people than income equality. Start a charity if you want to help your fellow man. You have no concept of income mobility and the incentives that people will go through to work hard and save money not for themselves but for their descendants. Income equality will not raise future generations up. Instead of raising people up where the sky is the limit, you want to bring people down.

Quality of living will increase for most and decrease for some.That is what an almost equal salary brings.i dont want this because i envy the rich but because its what brings the world in a state of balance where money comes from work and from work alone and is worth the work you put to make it.not more not less

As i said in a previous reply your work according to your time spent will have an expected outcome.if you do not meet this outcome to produce enough your salary will decrease

Most jobs do not have outcomes.
How will a software engineer be employed or scientist?
Their jobs are unpredictable.

You are blind if you cannot see how the standard of living throughout the world has increased due to capitalism. Your system offers no solutions only greater complexity which will bring inefficiency. Systems based solely around income equality have been rejected by people many times in the past. People want to prosper, they want to see their descendants better off than themselves. Your real endeavors should be aimed at corruption and crony capitalism, there you will truly do good for the average worker. Destroying the mechanics of natural supply and demand will lead to collapse sooner or later despite the best intentions. After all you only have the best of intentions right?

And yet they are employed today and paid for what they produce.In a similar manner the same would happen

How can you not prosper if you consume as much as you produce.If you prosper more than that you are doing it in expense to someone else.Indeed capitalism did increase quality of life but could it have been better?