Central Planning

Would central planning work in the US?

After all, it has a very rich and robust economy. What would be the challenges of this model?

Other urls found in this thread:


Oh, just poverty and starvation. The usual stuff you expect to see in a utopia. Maybe some purges too!

"an" caps pls leave

Clever-silly economists have done enough damage to the economy, the last thing we need is to empower them more

What kind of economic system would we have then under socialism?

What makes you think it isn't?

I don't know. I just see people left and right saying that central planning has historically been a failure. Would a country as rich as the US be an exception?

Paying attention? clearly not working for the majority of working-class

it's not about the amount of resources, but the ability of a larger system to distribute them. It also depends on which sector we are talking about. Clearly things like defense, transportation and technology are better handled on a larger scale than local. Farms, not so much.

Okay, what kind of system do you propose then? Is it possible to abolish the market without replacing it with central planning?

yes, either with a council-communism style, or a municipal-bookchin one

Industries can't flee to China or Mexico if they're all nationalized and centrally planned!

t. Donald Trump

Industries can't flee to China or Mexico if they're all worker-owned

Cool. I will read up on that.

Yep, organizing the workforce in a more democratic way is the first step in pushing the economy left

Oh, OP just asked whether central planning would work, without further elaboration. Working, according to the planning system's own terms, could mean little more than exercising effective, enforceable, verified control over the (re)distribution of resources according to decisions made by a centralized group, which high finance appears to have successfully gained for themselves.
So a particular form of central planning, with most of the long-range policy set mostly off the record, works in the US, just not in the interest of the people of the US.

Maybe in another world, not this one. You can't confront international mega-corporations with isolated, regional organizations. Capital has to be confronted face-to-face. Furthermore, even if we assume a Socialist society exists it is outlandish to imagine production and distribution being organized municipally.

You really have no idea what you're even proposing. There are no self-sufficient communities anymore, you need coordination between them unless you want them to all fall apart. And the idea that tens of thousands of separate economic agents will be able to draw up and comprehend in their totally each of the other tens of thousands of plans without a price-mechanism to bind them is beyond ridiculous.

Socialist society means society controls itself. Not that parts of society make fools of themselves trying to come up with a plan for all of it. You advocate the destruction of rational economy.

Fuck off liberal weenie.

What is your solution then? Can a centrally planned economy really be democratic?

fair enough, but i wouldn't say it's working for the US as much as it works for the global capitalists

First of all, I am a ML, so I believe that the state (and thus some central planning) is necessary for quite a while
Second, bookchie and others like him propose putting these organizations in place long before sweeping economic change, so that they have some foothold, experience, and network in place, gradually gaining power and eventually supplanting the state. Not that I think that is a cure-all

Obviously, only the most deluded superliberal reactionaries possess the necessary levels of self-deception to think otherwise. There's no reason to believe a centralized socialist system would be any less "democratic" than a decentralized one unless you're going by the pro-imperialist definition of democracy anyway. Don't buy into their bullshit, you're clearly someone who wants to believe a better kind of society is possible.


You BTFOed my pedantry. Well met comr8.

it's good to make nice friends

Okay, thanks for the link.

My negro

States are anathema to the sort of libertarian municipalism that bookchin calls for, statecraft being in direct conflict with politics.

True, I think that this distinction is the weak point of his theory.
The two have been inexorably entwined for so long, I think he draws an easy and ultimately false distinction.