No, as the options are limited for the worker to sell his labour to(in case of communism, there's only one buyer of their labour)

The remuneration WILL be lower.

Oh okay. Ceiling is much lower. No argument.

Only in a system with high competition for the workers labour will he be paid more

That's not what I was objecting to. Was just reminding not to get melodramatic. Wartime conditions aren't normal even in communist countries. Not all of them were particularly awful materially.

Like make your arguments but no need to get out there ridiculous.

In a system with only a singular entity to sell your labour to, then you are basically a slave since you can't afford to work for someone else since there's none.

You need to tolerate any or all the indignities since there's no other option other than starve and die.

This is in no way melodramatic, it's just the reality of communism

Or you can leave your job and go work literally wherever else if qualified.

Which was the actual reality. Because there were plenty of shit jobs to do.

Only one employer

You didn't sell your work to the government. You sold it to your factory or your hospital or your regional planner.

On a down at the ground level that's how it worked.

The institutions even competed with each other. Some jobs were nicer than others. Some unions were better than others.

People poached workers from each other. Seriously man. I don't know where you're getting all this.

The employer was basically the government in the centralized system.

Do you agree that, there will always be much higher wages in a system with higher competition for your labour

so by design, wages would be low in a communist country. where competition is artificially hampered

The ceiling is higher under capitalism.

Not my point Indigo.

could the different unions offer different wages in the USSR

The wall of text was that everyone was starving and only motivated to work by the threat of prison. Which is divorced from reality.

The more limited the competition for labour is in a country.. the more starving will the people be

it's will just be marginally better in a decentralized commumist state

Unions could offer different bonuses and premium pay.

It's not a direct comparison between a hypothetical capitalist alt USSR where everything went great and historical USSR. It's just a reminder that life wasn't some caricature and you can point out the faults of the system without resorting to fiction.

my point is that, a centralized communist system will practically be slavery, a decentralized communist one marginally better.

Being free to starve isn't freedom. But this is probably irreconcilable positions between us.

Most capitalist-bound countries are closer to starving than to USA standards.

It's my point exactly, that being the only other choice being to starve is not freedom

you get very limited choices in communism

Starvation is pretty unusual in capitalist countries

There's enough surplus that you can almost always get food, even if you have no income

Starvation is normal in CAR.

Technology from capitalist societies has established a large surplus

Car?

You don't get to disavow capitalist developing states.

Every African bunghole is capitalist today.

a lot are socialist like Zimbabwe

Socialist utopias

That's the only one and it's shit.