tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post1576546587174876438..comments2024-03-28T17:08:15.784-07:00Comments on Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Realist Alternative to the Modern Left: Note on the Socialist Economic Calculation DebateLord Keyneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-77773547793207329362015-02-14T13:06:53.196-08:002015-02-14T13:06:53.196-08:00How much of GDP before the fall consisted of capit...How much of GDP before the fall consisted of capital goods that would never be of any use to anybody?matthewhaydenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08067364162463228385noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-55791419804263412822012-10-06T09:12:47.638-07:002012-10-06T09:12:47.638-07:00Roddis' reply is what Mises says in Human Acti...Roddis' reply is what Mises says in Human Action. Aside from the theoretical problem LK identifies, there's also an empirical problem: where is the evidence that they ever did this?herrnaphtahttp://herrnaphta.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-70721759055484736762012-10-05T17:48:43.048-07:002012-10-05T17:48:43.048-07:00And that was *after* he'd been exiled from pol...And that was *after* he'd been exiled from policy posts in the west, for being a bit too pink. <br /><br />Kalecki got a raw deal all around. Willhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14943136764424893492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-25477564688328125682012-10-05T16:02:00.822-07:002012-10-05T16:02:00.822-07:00Philip.I think you like this one "Murray Roth...Philip.I think you like this one "Murray Rothbards own words .The connection between Racism and anti statists" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QLKWnCX-4I&feature=plcpAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-17613656946772795192012-10-05T07:09:22.648-07:002012-10-05T07:09:22.648-07:00Prateek,
That is a fair point that would indeed b...Prateek,<br /><br />That is a fair point that would indeed be worth more study.Rob Rawlingsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-35235115368443310052012-10-05T06:26:00.156-07:002012-10-05T06:26:00.156-07:00Lord Keynes,
This might interest you:
http://www...Lord Keynes,<br /><br />This might interest you:<br /><br />http://www3.sympatico.ca/bernard.leask/renewal.htmlPhilip Pilkingtonhttp://www.nakedcapitalism.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-31846473760131588072012-10-04T20:04:10.717-07:002012-10-04T20:04:10.717-07:00Rob Rawlings, I believe we should be careful when ...Rob Rawlings, I believe we should be careful when we say, "anyone who ever visited an "eastern block" country before and after the fall of communism would have seen the stark difference".<br /><br />Why so?<br /><br />After the fall of communism, several fringe economies - Kazakhstan, Estonia,.etc - saw GDP falling by 25-50%.<br /><br />25 to 50 percent!!!<br /><br />If it is fair game to say:<br /><br />"Communism is bad, because Poland had better living standards after communism."<br /><br />then it is also fair game to say:<br /><br />"Communism is good, because Kazakhstan had worse living standards after communism."<br /><br />That's because different regions saw a different impact of communism on their economies. Poorer, less industrious regions of the Soviet Union were devastated by the end of communism. Richer, more industrious regions soared in prosperity.Prateekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15287835907015065883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-79471353609915195602012-10-04T16:10:00.622-07:002012-10-04T16:10:00.622-07:00Note that that was a concession by part of Mises. ...Note that that was a concession by part of Mises. As in, the "even if..." type of concessions. Jonathan Finegold Catalánhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16710256011291680376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-20410466615572403982012-10-04T08:25:47.137-07:002012-10-04T08:25:47.137-07:00The Soviet Union had consumer sovereignty to thee ...The Soviet Union had consumer sovereignty to thee extent that the planners sold consumer goods to the population and (when they didn't resort to rationing) had to set prices to clear the market.<br /> <br />Planner could use these market clearing prices to gain some information about what goods to produce. Mises argument of course was that this information was not enough. Without competitively priced capital goods an efficient use of resources was impossible. And with state ownership of the means of production such pricing would not occur.<br /><br />Despite LK's partial defense of central planning anyone who ever visited an "eastern block" country before and after the fall of communism would have seen the stark difference in the economic efficiencies of the 2 systems.<br /><br /><br /><br />Rob Rawlingsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-70171597506161109102012-10-04T05:03:30.378-07:002012-10-04T05:03:30.378-07:00http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/socialism_boo...http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/socialism_book/calculation_debate.pdfKevin Fathihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09489371987284409522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-38363426012210200202012-10-03T22:09:02.607-07:002012-10-03T22:09:02.607-07:00Observing the prices of commodities in some other ...Observing the prices of commodities in some other countries did not tell them the relative scarcity or abundance of relevant commodities in their own state.<br /> <br />Their planning of prices needed information on relative scarcity/abundance in the Soviet Union, not overseas.<br />Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-74267087064254819982012-10-03T18:15:39.706-07:002012-10-03T18:15:39.706-07:00The Soviet Union could always look to the vast wor...The Soviet Union could always look to the vast worldwide markets to obtain clues about proper pricing. A worldwide socialist regime would be running completely blind.Bob Roddishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17263804608074597937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-45702758569253094262012-10-03T14:03:02.784-07:002012-10-03T14:03:02.784-07:00Great post. There is also an interesting literatur...Great post. There is also an interesting literature on planning that is different from the Eastern Bloc orthodoxy. Michal Kalecki, for example, devised a form of planning that was more concerned with meeting consumer demand than with the extreme emphasis on heavy industry and capital goods production that characterized most Eastern Bloc plans. <br /><br />Kalecki also wanted to give a greater role to worker's councils and decrease the power of the bureaucracy over individual firms. <br /><br />For his efforts, Kalecki was essentially exiled by the Polish communist leadership to an academic post where he had little influence on actual policy.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-28891424973842583212012-10-03T12:54:59.818-07:002012-10-03T12:54:59.818-07:00You are much better than me at expressing ideas, L...You are much better than me at expressing ideas, LK :DRoman P.https://www.blogger.com/profile/17384153967221979673noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-7047735379195124052012-10-03T12:05:13.359-07:002012-10-03T12:05:13.359-07:00Jan said:Excellent, Lord Keynes!Brilliant!
The Ne...Jan said:Excellent, Lord Keynes!Brilliant! <br />The Neo-Austrian´s simplified antagonism against all sort of planning and their narrow view of the concept goes beyond all sanity,and reject wellknown facts,but as Ernest Mandel once wrote:<br /><br />"We have been using the term ‘planning’. But the concept itself needs to be more precisely defined. Planning is not equivalent to ‘perfect’ <br />allocation of resources, nor ‘scientific’ allocation, nor even ‘more humane’ allocation. <br /><br />It simply means ‘direct’ allocation, ex ante. As such, it is the opposite of market allocation, which is ex post.These are the two basic ways of allocating resources, and they are fundamentally <br />different from each other—even if they can on occasion be combined in precarious and hybrid transitional forms, which will not be automatically self-reproducing. <br /><br />Essentially they have a different internal logic.They generate distinct laws of motion.<br />They diffuse divergent motivations among producers and organizers of production,and find <br />expression in discrepant social values.<br /><br />Both basic kinds of labour allocation have existed on the widest possible <br />scale throughout history.Both are therefore quite ‘feasible’. Both have also been applied <br />in the most variegated fashions, and with most diverse results. <br />You can have ‘despotic’ planning and‘democratic’ planning (those who deny the latter have never looked at a pre-colonial Bantu village).<br />You can have ‘rational’ planning and‘irrational’ planning. <br />You can have planning based on routine, custom, tradition, magic, religion, <br />ignorance,planning rules by rain-makers, shamans, fakirs and illiterates of all kinds. <br /><br />Worst of all, you can have planning directed by generals; for every army is based on an a priori allocation of resources. <br /><br />You can likewise have planning organized in a semi-rational way by technocrats <br />or, at the highest level of scientific intelligence, 'by workers and disinterested specialists. <br />But, whatever their forms, all of these involve direct a priori allocation of resources (including labour) through the deliberate <br />choice of some social body. <br /><br />At the opposite pole is resource allocation <br />through objective market laws that a posteriori counteract or correct previously fragmented decisions taken by private bodies, separately or autonomously from each other.<br /><br />Similarly, market economies in the sense of ex post allocations of <br />resources have historically existed in the most variegated forms.In principle, there could be market economies with ‘perfect’ free competition: though in practice this has hardly ever been realized. <br />There can be market economies skewed by the dominance of powerful monopolies <br />able to control large sectors of activity and so to fix prices over long periods. <br />Markets can coexist with drastic forms of autocracy and despotism—as they did under eighteenth-century absolutism, nineteenthcentury tsarism, not to speak of various sorts of military junta or fascist <br />dictatorship in the twentieth century. <br /><br />But they can also be combined with advanced forms of parliamentary democracy, as they have been in the latter half of this century—if in less than twenty countries out of the one hundred and fifty or so that comprise the capitalist world.<br />Market economies may worsen the misery of broad masses, by an absolute lowering of their standard of living, as they did in most <br />countries of the West for much of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries,in Eastern Europe extending far into the twentieth century, <br />and as they still do for at least half—if not more—of the inhabitants of the Southern hemisphere"<br />Ernest Mandel- In Defence of Socialist Planning<br />New Left Review I/159, September-October 1986Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com