Economic Calculation Problem

Except it's not. This is already being done under capitalism. There's no reason this would break down under socialism. Kill yourself, fag.

Come to America, you faggot. I'll make a man out of you.

His slender build and soft eyes are more befitting a girl.

If the economic calculation problem were real, firms would not exist. Boeing would be driven out of the market by random gearheads each of whom produced a single part of a plane, and one of whom went to this plane market and bought each part individually in order to build a single plane and sell it.
In the real world, firms win out because central planning is key to providing the goods people want in a reliable manner.

This becomes especially evident when you look at the service sector. If every time you wanted a lawyer, a secretary, a truck driver or whatever, you were required to go to the market and hire an individual, you would waste an absolutely ridiculous amount of time, effort and money. Instead you have law firms, inhouse secretaries, corporate lawyers who work within the firm to provide things like contract advice, trucking companies, etc, and this provides the services needed immediately and reliably.

You fucking faggot.

Who said I like them? I just said he's more like one, with their delicate baby-like features.

all of which existed before the computerization/digitization of the economy

also
macs.hw.ac.uk/~greg/publications/ccm.IJUC07.pdf

walmart is a bigger, more complex centrally planned economy than most countries on earth

You're 1000 years too early to understand the beauty of a manly man with a cute personality and background. Your tastes are shit.

that's a hell of a joke

With my training, he can.

...

Socialists don't understand economics

they're better at chimping out and spouting vague platitudes about muh workers and muh means of production than actually running a country or even a small organization of people.

For self-proclaimed literate economists you bootlickers sure don't seem to have many arguments other than brainlessly parroting the above slogan. The OP is quite literally just a sentence repeating Mises' desperate attempt to validate his theory in spite of all the evidence of a surviving, thriving economy. There is nothing, you people have nothing. The only argument you weenies ever seem to be able to bring against us is calling us children and extolling your supposed brilliance.

You'll understand when you're older, kiddo.

Who you callin kiddo?

People who say there's to understand about economics to say "xyz doesn't understand economics" doesn't understand economics. As it currently is.

But larger, people who use economics as an insult don't understand economics themselves, worse than the party they're insulting.

I'll never get over the fact than ayncraps spout:

on one hand, but then turn right around and declare that:

When will you all learn THERE IS NO CALCULATION PROBLEM. Not because much planning, but because markets exist precisely to service the whims of desire and not if reasoned consumption.

MARKETS AND PLANNED PRODUCTION EXIST FOR DIFFERENT PURPOSES.

Wow

Wow. The whole point is they don't have the knowledge to figure things out.
They don't know how many other uses there are for factors of production.
In the market, the information about the uses is reflected in prices, which lets them know.
If one use is better for another, it outbids the rest.

What?

I have no idea who you are quoting, or why I got a (you) out of that.

The existence of firms demonstrates the nonexistence of the economic caluclation problem for a simple reason.
Boeing does not need price "information" to build a jet. Not only does it not need it, but it would not benefit from it, since if price were information, then Boeing would be a blind idiot driven out of the market by individual gearheads I mentioned before.
In fact, if price were information, there would be no capitalism since the early manufacturies would have all crashed and burned while individual artisans continued to run circles around them because muh free market (no one giving much of a shit one way or another at that time, regulation was nonexistent).
Instead, the manufacturies (ie organized labor and central planning) triumphed over muh markets.

Austrian economics is essentially that the economy is too complex and you can't understand it, which is why they reject the scientific method. Keynesians at least try to understand how the economy works, and despite being liberal cucks have a much better understanding of how it actually works than Austrians.

the reason why so little competition exists in aerospace is the military industrial meme

Well, Marx did INTEND it to be centrally planned.