no, thats how YOU'd do it

You don't have to stick around, you just have to know his identity, so that if the floor isn't cleaned, you go find him and kill him
Also, if you force him to, you can ahve him mop for 14-15 hours per day
As opposed to 8 hours from the money working person

So even at 75% efficiency compared to capitalist, he'll still be mopping more

You can also disarm him and then set a number of managers to monitor several people mopping floors.

If you're paying you still need management.

aite, why should the managers do their jobs? will you keep an eye on them, or are you paying them?

keep in mind, you are now pointing a gun at someone with a gun, if you go that route

"Any number of people can be managed if you divide them correctly" - Sun Tzu (in reference to military hierarchies)

no, the manager doesn't have a gun

why does the mopper do his job then?

cuz you send a KGB level agent after him if he doesn't

you don't have to directly threaten him

he just has to know the threat is there to follow

how do you make sure the agent does his job

the ratio of commissars in the soviet union wasn't 1 : 1 with the population

do you point a gun at him?

no, he gets benefits for loyalty

so you pay him then

yes

you pay him, so you can trust he will do his job

so he will do it well

you pay him, and hold a gun to his head too

so he can take care of himself

you put a gun in the hand of someone and then pount a gun at his head, eventually it will bite you in the ass

no?

you give him a gun only for killing someone else

after that he hands it back

and

he'll be alone, you have the rest of the government backing you

aite so now you have an armory with a entire paperwork factory behind it

you see how the cost of enforment ramps up really fast?

because no one is motivated to do what you want them to do, you gotta manage everything you want them to do, which costs more resources then you will get out of the labour

assuming soviet gulags are anything to go by

its not any different than the cost of capitalism

People prefer life over money

problem is that under authoritarianism, people have no incentive to be above-accepted

that is why authoritarian societies stagnate in progress, and capitalists don't

that doesn't change that making things work, is still more efficient in authoritarianism

and im saying with the soviet data is was clear it wassnt

What was the context where he said that? I only remember him saying that an authoritarian government has an advantage in being able to act quickly in cases of emergency, so in the case of a hostile invasion a dictator would be able rally the troops without asking anyone, but under a pure direct democracy people would have to meet up, vote, etc, or under a true anarchy they'd lack coordination to do much

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVI6KeZnHyU

he gave an example of making a guy mop a floor

Guns don't hold nearly enough liquids to do that effectively

what Schedrevka said is the whole argument