• queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I’m not sure. How do you qualify 70 times harder?

    70 times the amount of skill or 70 times the amount of experience or 70 times the amount of physical exertion. Something.

    But that’s not how they are paid. Instead, they are paid a market rate. Just like me. And the market doesn’t care how hard you work.

    How would you feel if you and a co-worker both closed deals, only you worked much harder and closed a deal that earned the company twice as much money? Should you both be compensated the same?

    Clearly not, but because I am paid an hourly wage I get the same amount of compensation no matter how hard I work.

    Should your pay be tied to how much you’re earning the company?

    Maybe, or maybe just tied to the value of my labor.

    That’s not what happens. Instead I am paid a market rate i.e. they pay me as little as they can without causing me to find a different job. They do this to create profits, because all profit is literally just the revenue that’s left over after expenses. I am one of those expenses, ergo-

    Ultimately what are they worth?

    The market says they are worth 70 times as much as I am.

    They are not.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        I’m extremely excited about cybernetic economic planning as AI and quantum computing become a reality.

        Central planners couldn’t make a centrally planned economy work with traditional paper book keeping, and even with computers and internet it would be extremely difficult and require an army of bureaucrats so huge it would strain the entire economy. When that process can be automated, with a market AI to handle pricing and supply and production and everything, then we can finally abolish the market.

        • RedFox@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          I assume you’re talking about an automated socialist style economy?

          I thought the USSR or a few other countries tried that in the last 40 or 50 years as computer networking became possible.

          Edit: Quick web search listed USSR, Chile, China.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Yes it’s been tried before, but computing power has advanced so far beyond the 20th century when it was attempted last. We can do it.

            • RedFox@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Do you think the previous failures were due to a lack of computing power?

              From what I’ve read, it seemed more like corruption and politics. Doesn’t matter if you had the most powerful computer ever in that case right?

              • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                10 months ago

                The problem requires a vast army of bureaucrats to run the system, which is where the corruption comes from. Every additional human component of the system adds another layer vulnerability to bad actors. I think if they were automated away and rendered unnecessary, the central planning AI could run the economy with direct input from the masses. No need for bureaucrats.