Promjene u pojmu proizvodnog rada i nove norme razdiobe: Prijedlog zajamčenog socijalnog dohotka

Sa Smithovom teorijom rasta i Ricardovom teorijom raspodjele, osnivači političke ekonomije pokušali su predstaviti, u jednom relativno jednostavnom teorijskom modelu, logiku funkcioniranja kapitalizma koja je rođena prije industrijske revolucije. Danas, u tranziciji koja nas vodi od industrijskog kapitalizma prema ekonomiji zasnovanoj na difuziji i pokretačkoj ulozi znanja, možda moramo ponovno prijeći analitički proces osnivača političke ekonomije. Taj postupak, koji kao u nerazdvojivu cjelinu mora povezati način proizvodnje i način raspodjele bogatstva, iznosi na vidjelo ključnu problematiku: pitanje legitimiteta i ekonomske ostvarivosti zajamčenog socijalnog dohotka nezavisnog od rada.U ovom članku ćemo nastojati objasniti dva bitna aspekta problema. Prvi se odnosi na pojašnjenje unutar aktualne rasprave dviju suprotstavljenih koncepcija zajamčenog dohotka: onoj neoliberalnoj o uvjetovanom minimalnom egzistencijalnom dohotku, s jedne strane i o zajamčenom dohotku, dostojanstvenom i bezuvjetnom koji zovemo »zajamčeni socijalni dohodak« (ZSD), s druge strane. Drugi aspekt tiče se razilaženja glede ekonomskih osnova i financiranja ZSD-a. Radi se o tome da se ova razmišljanja moraju prenijeti na preobrazbu podjele rada i način akumulacije kapitala što označuju prijelaz prema onoj fazi kapitalizma koju nazivamo kognitivni kapitalizam. U ovom rasuđivanju raspravit ćemo neka teorijska pitanja koja se tiču promjena u samom poimanju društvenog bogatstva i proizvodnog rada da bismo došli do ZSD-a shvaćenog kao dohodak zasnovan na spajanju socijalne najamnine i kolektivne rente.With Smith\u27s theory of growth and Ricardo\u27s theory of distribution, the founders of political economy attempted to present, in a relatively simple theoretical model, the logic of the functioning of capitalism that emerged before the industrial revolution. Today, in the transition that leads us from industrial capitalism towards the economy based on diffusion and driving force of knowledge, perhaps we have to go through the analytical process of the founders of political economy once again. That process, which has to integrate the manner of production and the manner of the distribution of wealth into an inseparable whole, exposes the crucial issue: the question of legitimacy and economic feasibility of guaranteed social income independent from work.In this paper we shall attempt to explain two important aspects of the problem. The first relates to the clarification of the two opposed concepts of guaranteed income within the current debate: the new liberal one about the conditional minimum income on one hand, and on the guaranteed income, a dignified and unconditional income that is called “guaranteed social income” on the other hand. The second aspect relates to the disagreement with regard to economic foundations and financing of the guaranteed social income. These two lines of thought have to be conveyed to the transformation of the division of labour and the manner of accumulation of capital, which marks a transition to that phase of capitalism that we call cognitive capitalism. Forming this judgment, we shall discuss some theoretical issues related to the changes in the understanding of social wealth and manufacturing work in order to arrive to the guaranteed social income that is perceived as the income based on the integration of social rent and collective dividend