cyberneticS

The essence of the polarization between the rich and the poor is that while all people yearn for a higher level of life, they cannot meet the needs of all people. Therefore, there is class differentiation, that is, some people need to engage in dangerous and busy bottom work to ensure the continuity of the collective.

Someone has to do this, otherwise the building can't be built.

What about the middle-income trap? You can imagine that if a rich man spills money on the poor, will the poor become rich? No, it's because money is rare that it has value. When there is more money, money will lose its value. At least no one is willing to work for it. Money will depreciate, resulting in inflation.

Therefore, we can draw the first conclusion - money is worthless if it is not held by the rich.

So if you want to achieve common prosperity, the first thing to do is not to distribute equally, but to use all means to ban those dangerous and tired jobs.

I often hear people say that development is wrong.

Yes, if it is the current development, it is really useless, but what if it is the miraculous technology in science fiction?

For example, robots, now people only see that they replace workers' positions, making people work less. But you should know that if you don't replace it, it means that someone must do it. No matter how much money you have, no matter what degree you have, even a doctor, as long as you are the last in the social qualifying, the middle-income trap will force you to engage in the hardest and most tiring work. For example, college students send takeout.

Western society has high welfare, not because of how much money they have, nor because of their good people or superior systems, but simply because the remaining colonies overseas make each of their citizens unnecessary to engage in the most dangerous and tiring work, because someone does it for them.

We should also have our own colonies, but it should not be the citizens themselves, so robots should be used to gradually replace them. When all the people who build high-rise buildings and deliver takeout are robots, and when farmland can be well managed by robots without personal farming, then the "workers" and "farmers" can be truly liberated from low-end labor.

At that time, even if you don't do anything, the social subsistence allowance is enough to provide you with three meals a day, and even the extra can be used for learning.

The value of wealth lies in exchange, that is, through what you own and what others don't have, you exchange what others have and what you don't have.

In other words, only professional rather than homogeneous labor can create meaningful value. This value will not be dominated by money, because its value is unique and belongs to "money in the hands of the rich". At this time, the bottom of society will also be "rich", who can get rich without exploiting others, who have crossed the middle-income trap. The real "rich".

Therefore, we draw the second conclusion - people are also a part of capital, and they play a very important part in it. When all hard-working and dangerous jobs are banned, even the lowest level of society can have decent jobs and some capital.

There are two ways for China. One is the cybernetic way that I mentioned above, which can truly realize common prosperity. The other way is the old way that has been followed in the past, that is, the existing regime loses people's trust, is trampled on wantonly, and a new king is changed.

The other way was feasible in the past, because the productivity was low, and the redistribution of wealth could be achieved in this way.

But we should note that in modern society, factories and machines are the real wealth. These things are valuable and fragile. If people really want to reallocate and take action by extraordinary means, these high-end equipment will be hostages.

Because we say that industry can only spread fire. If everything starts from scratch, it will still take a long time, even a lifetime, to have knowledge and build large machines with small machines. During this period, in order to promote industrial development, exploitation and oppression are inevitable.

Therefore, for people today, these high-end devices are non renewable. Without these devices, everything owned by modern society cannot be created, so the extraordinary means to obtain the economy are meaningless.

Therefore, we draw the third conclusion - as a link of capital, time in modern society has unparalleled productivity and economic value, which can divide any thought and order that tries to challenge it.

I say this just to point out the historical limitations of Marxism. I know that this sentence is a violent theory in station B, and there are many friends who believe in Ma Zhe. But don't get me wrong. I don't want to deny Ma Zhe. Ma Zhe doesn't exclude debate, and will absorb all new practical methods. It's just that Ma Zhe's framework is getting more and more crowded. If people are liberated from the identity of "workers" and "farmers" one day and become capital owners, is this the victory of the proletarian revolution?

We just want to liberate the productive forces, we just want to make people happy. If all this is achieved by enslaving robots, will this be a victory? If the division is equal, then the tramps at the bottom of the society will be cut off. People will not pay attention to equality with animals, and people will pay attention to equality with tramps at most.

Communism is human to human communism, not human to animal communism. If robots are not human, then you can say whether communism has been achieved under the framework of Ma Zhe.

Whether robots will awaken their consciousness and rule human beings in turn is beyond our consideration. This is a road that human beings have to take. Even if they don't take it now, as long as class oppression exists one day, they will eventually take it out. If human beings want to be destroyed, it is also doomed, and there is no need to be persistent.