Ask a Red III

[Hygro]

I do find it informative that you would post that.

 

[Mouthwash]

Moderator Action: Not informative at all. Please don't spam this thread.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

I was facetiously pointing out that I couldn't respond to his post if he couldn't make himself understood. Spam is defined as "the use of electronic messaging systems to send unsolicited bulk messages, especially advertising, indiscriminately."

Moderator Action: Please take this discussion to PM with the mod if you disagree. No more PDMA please.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Hygro]

But if you actually care to understand, you would have asked me what things mean. Two or three in-sequence incomplete sentences are generally pretty straightforward to read for most people, especially since it reflects conversational cadence more accurately. Usually, anyway.

So yeah, if you're genuinely curious, you can start over with "ohhh that's why that list didn't make my point at all" and then we can sort it out from there. Otherwise I don't believe my time has been remotely well spent addressing you because you don't seem to understand what I write. Others do.

 

[Mouthwash]

But if you actually care to understand, you would have asked me what things mean. Two or three in-sequence incomplete sentences are generally pretty straightforward to read for most people, especially since it reflects conversational cadence more accurately. Usually, anyway.

So yeah, if you're genuinely curious, you can start over with "ohhh that's why that list didn't make my point at all" and then we can sort it out from there. Otherwise I don't believe my time has been remotely well spent addressing you because you don't seem to understand what I write. Others do.

So you aren't going to clarify your argument against luxuries becoming necessities, but instead spew ad hominems, in which case goodbye.

Question: What is your solution to the calculation problem?

 

[Crezth]

Question: What is your solution to the calculation problem?

The calculation problem only exists as such if you take it for granted that resources must be distributed and must be done so by a central authority. Not all communists are so disposed - why bother with an edifice that demands resources be "distributed" rather than shared, wholly?

 

[Traitorfish]

The so-called "calculation problem" seems to rely on the assumption that capitalist markets are hard-wired into the universe at an almost metaphysical level, that all social production inevitably and necessarily takes the form of commodities being exchanged for a price, and it's just a question of how exactly that's organised. Von Mises doesn't ask "what would a non-capitalist industrial society look like?", but, rather, "what would a capitalist society look life if it was run by the state?". The possibility that we might not operate within a paradigm of prices and exchange at all doesn't seem to be recognised.

 

[berkut]

Is free will and hence, democracy compatible with the historical materialism that marx advocate?

Are ethics determined by the means of production?

And if so there is a place for the existing religions in a communist society?

Will somebody answer me?

 

[luiz]

The so-called "calculation problem" seems to rely on the assumption that capitalist markets are hard-wired into the universe at an almost metaphysical level, that all social production inevitably and necessarily takes the form of commodities being exchanged for a price, and it's just a question of how exactly that's organised. Von Mises doesn't ask "what would a non-capitalist industrial society look like?", but, rather, "what would a capitalist society look life if it was run by the state?". The possibility that we might not operate within a paradigm of prices and exchange at all doesn't seem to be recognised.

Neverthless, Mises asked that question in 1920, when nobody knew for sure what the USSR would look like (a lot of people still believed it would have eventually abolished the state instead of descending into the Leninist-Stalinist tyranny we came to know). That he described quite accurately some of the major economic issues the USSR would suffer for the next 70 years was quite an insight.

 

[Hygro]

Will somebody answer me?

The best answer I've explored for the middle question is "yes". Check out Régulation Theory.

 

[Ajidica]

Neverthless, Mises asked that question in 1920, when nobody knew for sure what the USSR would look like (a lot of people still believed it would have eventually abolished the state instead of descending into the Leninist-Stalinist tyranny we came to know). That he described quite accurately some of the major economic issues the USSR would suffer for the next 70 years was quite an insight.

If I was feeling uncharitable I would say a broken clock is right twice a day.
However, if it does not completely derail the thread could you give a few examples of how (in your opinion) von Mises was right or a link to a good article?

 

[Traitorfish]

Neverthless, Mises asked that question in 1920, when nobody knew for sure what the USSR would look like (a lot of people still believed it would have eventually abolished the state instead of descending into the Leninist-Stalinist tyranny we came to know). That he described quite accurately some of the major economic issues the USSR would suffer for the next 70 years was quite an insight.

Well, no, it isn't, because he didn't actually do that. Very little of what Von Mises talks about actually describes the historical reality of the USSR, which was not even in theory a command economy, just a heavily centrally-administered market economy. There's just a lot of Austrian fanboys out there who are willing to bend the facts to suit their gospels.

 

[Mouthwash]

The so-called "calculation problem" seems to rely on the assumption that capitalist markets are hard-wired into the universe at an almost metaphysical level, that all social production inevitably and necessarily takes the form of commodities being exchanged for a price, and it's just a question of how exactly that's organised. Von Mises doesn't ask "what would a non-capitalist industrial society look like?", but, rather, "what would a capitalist society look like if it was run by the state?". The possibility that we might not operate within a paradigm of prices and exchange at all doesn't seem to be recognised.

I don't understand this. Resources and goods cannot be "shared" without being distributed somehow, whether that distribution is carried out by the people themselves or by a central authority. Unless you're advocating anarcho-primitivism or a system without a large-scale division of labor.

 

[Traitorfish]

The "calculation problem" purports to describe the impossibility of rational pricing in a planned economy. I'm suggest that it is no self-evident that pricing, rational or otherwise, is a necessary precondition of an advanced industrial society.

 

[Mouthwash]

The "calculation problem" purports to describe the impossibility of rational pricing in a planned economy. I'm suggest that it is not self-evident that pricing, rational or otherwise, is a necessary precondition of an advanced industrial society.

What do you believe will replace it?

 

[Crezth]

What do you believe will replace it?

Why does anything need to replace it? Why not just do away with it?

 

[Lone Wolf]

Well, abolition of pricing isn't really possible without the abolition of scarcity, else you just would end up with a bureaucratic distribution nightmare. Mind you, I do think that we are capable of abolishing scarcity on basic goods, and a bureaucratic distribution nightmare regarding platinum sapphire rings isn't really a huge tragedy, as long as that bureaucracy is at least somewhat responsible to the pressure from below.

 

[innonimatu]

Luxuries become necessities. That's how things develop in all societies.

And yet you were the one claiming that , and I quote, "the fundamental needs of the lower class have been more than entirely fulfilled". Now you recognize that is not true?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Why does anything need to replace it? Why not just do away with it?

Then it would still be replaced by whatever new social structures would form due to its abolishment.
So what happened if today we would outlaw money? History has one useful example: hyper-inflation. However, those were rather short-term cases with the clear expectation that things would return to normal.

And yet you were the one claiming that , and I quote, "the fundamental needs of the lower class have been more than entirely fulfilled". Now you recognize that is not true?

It would in any case only be the material needs.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I don't understand this. Resources and goods cannot be "shared" without being distributed somehow, whether that distribution is carried out by the people themselves or by a central authority. Unless you're advocating anarcho-primitivism or a system without a large-scale division of labor.

I thought you promised us to be rid of your presence.

 

[Mouthwash]

Why does anything need to replace it? Why not just do away with it?

So anarcho-primitivist? Tell me more about how that works.

And yet you were the one claiming that , and I quote, "the fundamental needs of the lower class have been more than entirely fulfilled". Now you recognize that is not true?

Not my point. I meant basic necessities such as food, water, or shelter by "fundamental needs."

I thought you promised us to be rid of your presence.

I don't recall ever promising any such thing (perhaps you could quote me?). And I was thinking that you were so polite and kind. Not if someone asks too many questions for your tastes, I guess.