• Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Is a planned economy an inherent part of socialism? That seems like the biggest red flag (lol) in this comic. All sorts of incentive mismatches there.

    For Marxists, absolutely. Marx heavily critiqued the profit motive and the dangers of producing to fulfil greed instead of need. For Syndicalists, Market Socialists, etc? Perhaps not.

    “Democracy at work, too” is like the biggest pitch for socialism, “government deciding what businesses can exist” is the biggest pitch against. A tightrope to walk, for sure.

    Workplace democracy is an improvement, but Marxists will argue insufficient alone in combatting class society.

    What’s your issue with Central Planning, other than vibes?

    • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      What’s your issue with Central Planning, other than vibes?

      I’m not a theorist obviously, but it seems like it’s inherently going to be a limited number of decision makers who can’t possibly know everything, and they become a bottleneck to business creation at best, a corruption machine at worst. I know I wouldn’t trust the government of half (or more but my point is, Republicans) the current US states to decide what business are allowed to exist.

      I know the retort is of course that we have corruption now, but I’d think if we’re theorizing, there’s a better way to reduce extant corruption than introducing a new vector for even more corruption. And there’s a way to harness the power of people starting small businesses freely without letting those businesses become unregulated behemoths.

      Like just set the criteria you would be telling the Central Planning Authority to prioritize, and do that with regulation. Set an ownership tax so that as a business gets bigger the ownership moves away from the founder and into the public trust.

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I’m not a theorist obviously, but it seems like it’s inherently going to be a limited number of decision makers who can’t possibly know everything, and they become a bottleneck to business creation at best, a corruption machine at worst. I know I wouldn’t trust the government of half (or more but my point is, Republicans) the current US states to decide what business are allowed to exist.

        Advocates of Central Planning advocate for rungs, not just 5 dudes and some excel spreadsheets. There would be factory level planners, local planners, regional planners, state planners, country planners, and international planners. Nobody will know everything, but they will know their own areas inputs and outputs.

        I know the retort is of course that we have corruption now, but I’d think if we’re theorizing, there’s a better way to reduce extant corruption than introducing a new vector for even more corruption. And there’s a way to harness the power of people starting small businesses freely without letting those businesses become unregulated behemoths.

        Why would it be more corrupt? Why do you believe Small Businesses are fine? Markets themselves inevitably result in those unregulated behemoths, it’s better to have a cohesive whole that is thoroughly regulated and democratically controlled.

        Like just set the criteria you would be telling the Central Planning Authority to prioritize, and do that with regulation. Set an ownership tax so that as a business gets bigger the ownership moves away from the founder and into the public trust.

        I recommend reading Wage Labor and Capital for more information on why the Profit Motive and Capitalist Production itself to be bad.