This presupposes that either a) inventions only happen in non-scarcity environments
What led you to that conclusion?
that all inventors/support workers need be motivated by the common good
Ehh, people are motivated by a lot of things besides money. But they could still be motivated by money in an environment where basic needs are met, because they may still strive to have certain luxuries, or a life beyond just the ‘basic’ style that could be offered to everyone. I just want to remove the motivation of avoiding starvation and homelessness, those should not be considerations when entering into negotiations to sell your labor.
Society needs pavers, teachers, scientists to function, regardless if they do it out of charity or not.
Most people who do the more drudgery ridden jobs are generally underpaid and undervalued by society. But they are often in a situation where they live hand-to-mouth, and do not wish to take on the risk of forming a union to get better working conditions and pay.
In a Star Trek/The Culture post-scarcity egalitarian utopia where all needs are met, regardless if anarchist or not, this is definitionally not a problem.
Kropotkin argued back in 1892 that with the rise of industrialization, the most basic needs could be provided freely already, but that such a thing was prevented for the sake of the status quo, for the sake of capitalism.
Now with the computer revolution and the incredible gains of productivity that came with it, I believe there’s no excuse why realistically those basic needs cannot be provided.
So I find that the question remains: how would a system giving them a fairer share of the fruits of their labor work?
Co-ops are by default provide a fairer share. A significant tax incentive could encourage more co-ops to be created, like what was done with the IRA. And personally, to further encourage a proliferation of co-ops and make them more competitive (as they often struggle to get venture capital), I would advocate for increasing tax rates on traditional corporations to 1950’s levels or even beyond that, which would also help fund basic living condition programs.
Having universal access to basic living conditions would provide people the power to say no to underpaid work, which would in effect cause wages to increase to incentivize people to work those unpopular jobs.
An overhaul of the justice system to prevent consolidated corporations from suing smaller inventors into submission or bankruptcy, as well as an overhaul of patent and copyright law, would go a long way to making things fairer as well.
What led you to that conclusion?
Ehh, people are motivated by a lot of things besides money. But they could still be motivated by money in an environment where basic needs are met, because they may still strive to have certain luxuries, or a life beyond just the ‘basic’ style that could be offered to everyone. I just want to remove the motivation of avoiding starvation and homelessness, those should not be considerations when entering into negotiations to sell your labor.
Most people who do the more drudgery ridden jobs are generally underpaid and undervalued by society. But they are often in a situation where they live hand-to-mouth, and do not wish to take on the risk of forming a union to get better working conditions and pay.
Kropotkin argued back in 1892 that with the rise of industrialization, the most basic needs could be provided freely already, but that such a thing was prevented for the sake of the status quo, for the sake of capitalism.
Now with the computer revolution and the incredible gains of productivity that came with it, I believe there’s no excuse why realistically those basic needs cannot be provided.
Co-ops are by default provide a fairer share. A significant tax incentive could encourage more co-ops to be created, like what was done with the IRA. And personally, to further encourage a proliferation of co-ops and make them more competitive (as they often struggle to get venture capital), I would advocate for increasing tax rates on traditional corporations to 1950’s levels or even beyond that, which would also help fund basic living condition programs.
Having universal access to basic living conditions would provide people the power to say no to underpaid work, which would in effect cause wages to increase to incentivize people to work those unpopular jobs.
An overhaul of the justice system to prevent consolidated corporations from suing smaller inventors into submission or bankruptcy, as well as an overhaul of patent and copyright law, would go a long way to making things fairer as well.
But that’s just my two cents.