:
: One of the central ideological differences between capitalism and socialism concerns incentive. : Capitalist defenders often assert that only individual self-interest is strong enough to maintain incentive and that without the incentive to 'do better' than others innovation and extra effort will cease. The problem with undifferentiated distribution (everyone receiving the same goods, or receiving goods 'according to need'), defenders of capitalism assert, is that if extra initiative will not be recognized only average work will be performed, even by those possessing above-average skills. The equitable thing about capitalist systems, according to the conventional wisdom, is that rewards for merit can vary as much as performances can vary---and that merit and reward are matched by supply and demand. The defense of individual self-interest as incentive is that each individual can choose how much effort he or she desires to exert.
: Critics of capitalism, on the other hand, often assert that capitalist systems are rarely responsive to individual self-interest. They point out that most workers receive flat pay-rates and are rewarded with raises at set intervals. Furthermore, these 'incentives' are not determined by individual initiative or above-average skills, but by things like the level of unemployment, interest rates, level of profitability for individual companies---impersonal market conditions of supply and demand, all factors outside of any individual's performance and ability. Critics of capitalism acknowledge that incentives exist between professions and within the hierarchies of professions but point out that these incentives apply only to limited positions and often require education which, also subject to supply and demand, have little to do with the individual.
-------
Yes, well put. I'd just like to add the notion of competition. It seems that the idea of competition serves as one of the engines of capitalism and it produces its own constellation of behaviors and self-definition. I happen to enjoy tennis. Now while rallying is fun, playing a match provides a whole different set of incentives. While it's true that one can receive the reinforcing ego-statis boost by winning I wonder how much of this is culturally derived? It's hard to stand outside one's culture and imagine "those twin imposters" (winning and losing).
------
: To enter into polemics concerning incentive, as differentiated between capitalist and socialist ideologies, it may be worthwhile to investigate various types of incentive. Incentive systems are at the heart of the study of behavior (behaviorology). Following a brief synopsis of such systems, pros, cons, and qualifications will be forwarded using a behaviorological analysis.
: Positive and Negative Incentive
: Positive incentive is receiving a social or material good that was not possessed prior to performing specified work. A common example, of course, is a wage. Another example is health care. In the language of behaviorology, a wage is a conditioned reinforcer while medical treatment is an unconditioned reinforcer---i.e. the first is contrived (valuable in relation to other things) while the other is natural (valuable in itself). Yet another example---showing a further distinction, a distinction between social goods and material goods---is the affection of a mate (which has elements of both contrived and natural reinforcers).*
: Because wages are generalized, they can be used to acquire either unconditioned reinforcers (such as food, shelter, or heat) or other conditioned reinforcers (jewelry, computers, or vacations). This dual function of money presents a significant problem in the analysis of incentive, namely the difference between necessity and luxury. As B.F. Skinner pointed out many times, wages often serve 'simply to create a standard economic condition which may be withdrawn aversively.' Food, shelter, and heat, being necessities, represent the part of a wage that has no control over work performance as positive incentive; necessities represent the part of a wage that controls work performance through negative incentive. Thus, only the part of a wage that remains after necessities have been secured can be considered positive incentive.
-----
I wonder where job security would fit - "unconditional"? - contrived or natural? Many union demands these days are for job guarantees. If you want to see a long, long, long line for just six positions - just watch when job openings are advertised for the Post Office or other civil service employment.
Sorry I can't get to the rest of the post just now...gotta go...
bill
None.
