🤔

The problem would start when you start organizing the service provision into company heirarchies. Especially if the main thing someone provides is owning the company. In that case, the “means of production” include the organization itself.

I could see a really idealized gig economy model working, though. Or just everything being organized as worker co-ops.

And, of course, then you have to start asking questions about how the service economy is actually procuring resources to function. Sure, you’re trade based, in theory, but who are you trading with? One of the reasons socialism tends to be globalist in nature is that it doesn’t do a whole lot of good for the idea if that “socialist economy” is actually supported by imperialism or someone else doing the ruthless exploitation of labor and then selling you those resources for cheap.

How socialist is your worker owned co-op, really, if you’re buying your food from a slave plantation?

The means of production would not just be yourself but also other work tools. A basic desk job wouldn’t really fall under this condition, since you usually don’t have control over your computer or the software running in it, for example. I couldn’t think of any example of a service job where all the work tools are worker controlled right now.

If power remains with the capitalist class, and industry continues to be organized around their whim, you will not achieve meaningful reform, except in response to a threat, which will be taken away when that threat diminishes. FDR didn’t do the New Deal because he was secretly had socialist beliefs despite his family, but because he was old money buying guillotine insurance.

Honey socialism is an economic system. A socialist economy is socialism.

Like, a honeydew melon is a honeydew.

Socialism is when the government does stuff, huh