• GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    11 months ago

    That’s what everything everywhere is. Many folks in communist countries lack things others have too.

    Only in a hypothetical utopia could all persons have all things equally.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      Especially because unless you’ve solved the limited resources problem, then even in a utopia you’re still going to have to have something like money, and therefore you will still have things that some people have that other people don’t have.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Define ‘limited.’ Because limits include trained manpower, right? There’s only a certain amount of that. Our ability to provide certain drugs for everyone who might need them are limited by the number of people trained to make them. This is true of virtually any industry. It is as limited as the number of people who can make it usable. And that is usually not an ‘anyone can do this’ issue.

          • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Labor of any stripe is abundant. In an economy that doesn’t prioritize profit, people would be able to pursue specialized jobs that they want to contribute towards. For example, after the modernization of the USSR, they had the most doctors of any country in the world and healthcare was made accessible for millions of people. Our growth as a society is limited by the amount of cooperative labor we have available, but it’s not a limited resource.

            In contrast, capitalism is reliant on a reserve pool of labor to keep wages down. If someone remains in the reserves for too long, they become homeless because every aspect of life has been commodified.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              I’m not talking about labor, I’m talking about specialized labor. Which is limited not just to numbers but to numbers willing to be trained in that field.

                  • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    11 months ago

                    Pharmacology? It’s a science like any other. Pharmacists talk constantly about how their wages are actively being depressed because of intentional understaffing. The hypothetical you’re presenting is a reality under capitalism.

    • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Which things? Because all historical sources show that the bottom 10% had all the bare necessities for life. They didn’t have luxury apartments, but they had a roof. They weren’t eating steak every night, but they had more caloric input and healthier diets than US citizens.