adding some to market socialism

market_socialism.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 Market socialism is an **extremely fringe view** among socialists. So, why do some people(even socialists) think we need markets?
 
-Remember that this is a **distributional** problem : we have a bunch of goods and services that we need to distribute to people.
+Remember that this is a **distributional** problem : we have a bunch of goods and services that we need to distribute to people in need of them.
 
 Markets are **one way** to do that, and the primary way under capitalism. Markets are based on two things:
 
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ Markets are **one way** to do that, and the primary way under capitalism. Market
 
 Labor is one such commodity, that is bought for cheap, and it's results sold for high (IE profit).
 
-### History of markets 
+### History of markets Yes, markets are oppressive.
 
 Markets only became the primary way to distribute goods *within the last 500 years*. For the vast majority of human history, rituals, harvest festivals, a group of elders deciding fair distribution, or communal decision-making accomplished what the market does today. Writers like Plato and Aristotle detested markets (small-scale trade within cities and between nation-states at that time), because they witnessed how the individualistic profit motive worked to **destroy the community**.
 
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ Also, **free markets inherently favor those with the most capital**, giving elit
 
 You'll hardly see any Socialist advocating markets as a distribution system, because of that individualistic profit motive. Most of us advocate for **democratically planned economies** with labor vouchers, or **gift economies** in goods that are widely abundant. For a great academic breakdown of how planned economies would work, I suggest [Cottrell -  towards a new socialism](http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/socialism_book/new_socialism.pdf).
 
-### What's wrong with market socialism?
+### What about market socialism?
 
 The argument for market socialism states that we outlaw the commodification of labor, but retain markets. This completely ignores the incentive structures associated with market transactions, by which the profit motive demands the  commodification of everything, including labor. Even if the market were socially controlled and commodification of labor were *somehow* outlawed, it would still allow hoarding of wealth, **individual profit motive over collective good**, and emphasize monetary incentives over human ones.
 
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ Labor vouchers would replace money as a way to govern demand for non-abundant go
 
 Labor vouchers are different from money in that:
 
-1. They are valued in **time**, not an arbitrary substance or thing. 
+1. They are valued in **time** (Specifically average socially necessary labor time), not an arbitrary substance or thing.
 2. They are attached to a person/family, and can't be traded.
 3. They are destroyed after they're exchanged for goods/services from the democratic workers council organization(I usually call it the pool)
 4. They optionally have expiration dates (to prevent wealth hoarding, and inter-generational conflict)
@@ -54,7 +54,9 @@ In books like I like linked above, goods/services are valued and labor vouchers
 
 As technological improvements decrease the labor time cost of goods and services to nearly zero, that good becomes an abundant good. Many food products and consumer items could already be considered abundant. When nearly all goods are abundant, then we could say that we've reached full communism.
 
-With regards to moderating demand for goods, grocery stores **can currently** function in gift and labor voucher economies, since they already gauge consumer demand by keeping track of which items have been scanned when leaving the store, and can determine how much of what good needs to be restocked, or produced. This information, absent of a money price, represents a "signal", to the associated producers, telling them where to allocate labor resources, and push for technological advances. Unlike a capitalist economy, where the goal is individualistic profit, in a labor-time economy the goal is minimizing the labor-time-cost of all goods and services, to improve the well-being of the community. 
+With regards to moderating demand for goods, grocery stores **can currently** function in gift and labor voucher economies, since they already gauge consumer demand by keeping track of which items have been scanned when leaving the store, and can determine how much of what good needs to be restocked, or produced. This information, absent of a money price, represents a "signal", to the associated producers, telling them where to allocate labor resources, and push for technological advances.
+
+Unlike a capitalist economy, where the goal is individualistic profit, in a labor-time economy the goal is **minimizing the labor-time-cost** of all goods and services, to improve the well-being of the community.
 
 Likely there would also be a kind of basic income of labor vouchers, to make sure everyone gets a fair share of the distribution of food and housing and such(this could be seen as accounting for unpaid labor done in the home).  Since they are attached to a person/family, labor vouchers prevent wealth accumulation being handed down to further generations.