• AlDente@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    For the anti-capitalists, I have a genuine question (sorry, I couldn’t find an “ask a commie” community):

    In the capitalist system there is a movement called Financial Independence Retire Early (FIRE) where people commit to living frugally in an effort to maximize savings and investments. The goal is to achieve a balance that allows you live off a safe withdrawal rate (around 3.5-4%) and then leave the workforce at an earlier than normal age. Some people commit to a life of minimalism and lean-FIRE with under $20k in investment income per year. I believe there is significant overlap with the van-life crowd and other nomadic lifestyles.

    Is this lifestyle compatible with, or is there a similar lifestyle within a communist system? To expand, can those with a different set of priorities trade away their later working days in exchange for less material things?

    • Little Trans Punk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Let me put it this way. For capitalism to continue there’s an ever-marching goal of exponential profit. To get more profit you must work harder and the company must pay you less and work you longer. At some point you will be crushed. Nothing can expect exponential returns, yet capitalism constantly expects that.

      Communism wouldn’t need retirement because such a society wouldn’t have an exponential motive for existence. Work would be done as needed instead of constantly more and more and more. I wouldn’t mind being in my 80’s and still “working” because all the work I’d do would have a direct positive result on my community instead of more money for someone pocketing the excess value of my labor over what they paid me.

      Besides, who would need to push papers around for companies in an economic system that is moneyless and stateless? (communism is literally moneyless and stateless so USSR, China, Valenzuela, etc. are not communist since they have a state)

    • trailing9@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can only answer as capitalist. FIRE relies on accumulated interest. For workers it should be the same if 10 billionaires or 100,000 FIRE investors own their companies.

      UBI should be fairer.

      Both scenarios are the same. Work 20 years hard and then stop working.

      The FIRE owner have an interest in low wages for the workers whereas in UBI, more income for workers could mean more to be shared.