Anonymous asked:
left-reminders answered:
That’s a good question, and honestly I think there are a number of ways society could solve things like that. I’d personally opt for a system where you might have two or three conductors on longer trips, in which case they could swap at prearranged times. The conductors who aren’t conducting(?) would then do whatever they want — sit in the same compartment, go sit with passengers, take a nap, watch a movie, etc. I also figure a society with more robust public transportation (i.e. a socialist society) would have frequent-enough stations to stop at, where you could let those conductors off and other passengers on, etc. I’m not a conductor, so I don’t know if that’s a feasible thing, but I don’t see why it would be complicated; if it is, someone more knowledge is more than welcome to chime in and set the record straight.
Socialism doesn’t aim to have all the answers from the outset or to impose a one-size-fits-all system on all utilities. But it does aim to put the decision-making power for those solutions into the hands of the people they impact, via direct democracy, rather than leaving them in the hands of self-interested profit-seekers who impose the demands of capital on others. In effect, the logistics of train stations and schedules would be decided by conductors, engineers, and citizens’ councils (etc.) working together to simplify travel and workload for everyone involved. That won’t look the same everywhere, but hopefully it still means needs are met everywhere and people aren’t alienated and crushed by long hours.
Some good responses to this post
