How do you know whether a good is worth its costs in a communist society?

...

...

How do you know its worth what they're charging for it in a capitalist one? The idea that the free market will always find the correct price fails in many, many areas, thanks largely to the professional liars in advertising. muh BRAAAAANDDSSSS.

...

If stuff is still worth "money" then you still have capitalism. But to know wether there is need for a product in a socialist society you just ask, or respond to demand. Measuring demand becomes less important with ongoing efforts to strenghten on-demand production and delivery. Flexible labour situation(as your basic necessities are met there is no need for "job security") allows for quick deployment of labour ressources depending on need. As efficiency is no longer the primary concern of society slower processes of building up or deconstructing means of production are not an issue

What about labor vouchers?

An aggregate of all of them, human labor time necessary being the first to start with (factoring in different intensities of labor of course, if you have to compensate certain laborers more than you have to measure them as a greater cost),
The more egalitarian compensation becomes over time (deprogramming the social stigma that different people deserve different pay is the first step, and yes it is an ideological construct not something inherent to humans), the easier it is to, as everyone is just gauranteed access to every product in amounts a person would reasonably consume. If you have over production, (easily measured) scale back production of that good, just like how corporations work now. And err on the side of overproduction

Computers will solve most of the calculative tasks

...

HOW?

that is the answer for the question of who, not the answer of how

I am too smart to give you an answer

The workers aren't in control of they have to compete in the market. The closest thing to worker control is state control that is democratically regulated and accountable

Fuck worth I want the goods.

SO FAR!!! IN THIS THREAD I HAVE GOTTEN NO ANSWER! SOCIALISTS APPARENTLY JUST MAKE UP THE VALUE OF THINGS!

Too smart for funny jokes

That said, I would support a co-op economy over normal capitalism in a heartbeat

SOCIALISTS CONFIRMED ECONOMIC ILLITERATES

Bump

The workers aren't in control of they have to obey the centrally planned artifical market The closest thing to worker control is free and voluntary exchange with no property rights that is individually regulated and accountable

see

I mean in normal non market socialism.

Deep inside I feel a bit disaapointed

Can you please answer the question?

see

Market exchange, I don't see the production for profit being abolished any time soon, even though I realize its problems

do you mean profit as in the apropriation of surplus value generated by the worker by the borugeoisie?

cant help feeling that would be wasteful

you don't because you are retarded gommi

What about intangible goods?

That doesn't really answer the question but is still a worthwhile point

implying anything is worth anything

value is a spook

Can someone answer the question?

what do you mean by value if not the exchange-value it has on the market?

If you spend 8 hours making a pot you know that making a pot costs 8 human labor hours + the labor hours that went into the materials used in making the pot.

So literally everyone's labor is worth the same?

Do I have to spend 100 trillion hours for something a teem of people made in like 10 hours.

This system seems flawed.

Bump

Once again: iterative algorithm computer network decentralized planning.

HOW DO YOU DETERMINE VALUE. Do you just pull it out of thin air?

Run simulations over and over until the pseudo-prices converge into values that make for an optimized economy.

Finally. Someone actually gave an answer. But can something as complex as a market be simulated.

>>>answers.yahoo.com/
Who tf are all these redditor topic police that just came in?

Those only need to be produced once and have low marginal costs of production. They'll probably be more or less free.

No. For some reason "produce excess" isn't even a thought in the minds of JIT-brainwashed MBA kiddies

pachinko

Fully automated gay space pachinko

...

Markets are good at figuring out what something is worth. Its true.

wew.

How do you simulate a whole economy? How did the soviets plan to do this?

Bump. I've been wondering this my self.

see

Well, if materialism holds, it follows that any process can be modelled, and the more we observe it, the more verissimilar the model. Consider this: Soviet central planners made a decent job of modelling the entire damn national economy by hand, so you can imagine what modern supercomputers could do. And I think it's a safe bet to say that computer processing power rises much faster than an economy's complexity.

wut

They only manage to indicate what someone is willing to give up for something. Outside of a successful (that is, clearing) market context, the number that markets provide has no use or value except as a theoretical game.

I agree the bourg infil of techno-cornucopianism is bullshit too. But the liberal value of Protestant thrift and the competition to be seen as most virtuous before their spook lord is a hard one to break, even once said spook has decamped their minds.

And P=NP?
You don't need a beowulf cluster to do inventory management and it sure won't help you predict weather five years out. It's almost as if you're asking for a system that pretends the natural world is fully ergodic, never offers surprises, and that numbers are benevolent masters. Optimization is a liberal spook. There are much better, much more human, much more reliable and much less time-consuming ways of satisfying human needs than submitting to algorithms. Such as the time-honored modest overproduction that is given away, set aside, or scrapped, as appropriate to the particular good. Book cover related
I think it's a safe bet to say you're neglecting the hand of capitalist agency and cultural norms, in particular, the semiconductor tooling industry's norms of selling whole new production lines and patented technology at a billion bucks per line every two years, in muh Moore's Law.

Have there been any successful socialist planned economy done by computers? How the fuck did the soviets even plan the economy? did they just basically guess what people needed.

What if people planned out their wants and needs themselves, and that information was given to producers?

OP, you know that an economy under socialism is different than the one in capitalism right? You can't still have the same capitalist market in socialism where a diamond is worth as much as million vaccines etc. It's completely different in that it prioritizes the needs of the people before the wants.

More food than enough to feed all people in the world, more vacant homes than homeless in the U.S. It seems to me that capitalists are the ones who are economic illiterates.

You check the prices of commodities in capitalist countries and make estimations from there.

Then you use your free time at work to figure out how to escape your commie shithole before it collapses.

Okay, how you're just throwing bullshit like it was squid ink. P=NP and ergodicity have nothing to do with it.

You don't need to predict anything years at a time. Part of the point of the computer system is that it's real-time; the "plan" is recalculated over and over as more data is inputted.

Am I being memed on?

But user, whichever methods central planners use to calculate the plan are algorithms too. All the computer network would change is a) allow for far more variables, and b) calculate it absurdly faster and in real-time.

I think I see your point now. Yes, I fully agree that technology has enabled mankind to supposedly produce enough to feed and shelter all of mankind, and yet the capitalist relations of production are fucking everything up. However, it is fallacious to discard any technological advance as inherently wasteful/harmful/etc. What makes a technology that way are the aforementioned relations of production. The computer network I talk about can be used to create a great "decentralized plan", just as it can be used to create some lolbertarian dystopia or some shit.

Remember, Marx himself put his faith on industrialization as utterly necessary for mankind to be able to produce enough to provide for everyone. It was the awful misuse of industrialization by capitalism that he opposed. Technology can chain us, but it can also provide the tools with which to break those chains.

If you want an example of a real-time network that monitors flow, look into single line power diagrams. They're much simpler than an economic monitor would be, but the seed is there.

To the best of my knowledge, no, altho Soviet cyberneticians pushed for it. But you know how it was back then, you couldn't always propose whatever you wanted, you had to nudge and prod. In Stalin's last years they got dogpiled with all sorts of accusations about being "capitalist pseudo-science" and whatnot. They gained some influence during the Thaw, but lost it before Krushchev was even out. They proposed the creation of a proto-internet three times in the 60s IIRC, but none panned out.

An important point to add here, is that the concepts for a physical network and for the iterative economic algorithm were never fully married, to the best of my knowledge. They were separate proposals made by separate groups, and as far as I know, no one united them even in theory. Now we already have the physical network in the form of the internet, so hey, one less worry.

Oh yeah, and the details of how planners worked is something I'm very curious as well. Up until the first electronic computers in the 50s, all they had was mechanical calculators. Can you imagine planning the economy of a fucking continent with those?

Isn't socialism supposed to be world wide?

They probably had an individual council for every industry type.

BUMP

BUMPO

BUMP

BUMP

WE FUCKING TOLD YOU ITS PACHINKO

We're having a thread about economic calculation and no one has linked Paul Cockshott's work? WTF Holla Forums?

What about things that don't take as long but have more value? What if value changes from day to day? What about things that cannot be quantified

What if I take longer to make the pot my pot is worth more now?

Obviously not, it's determined by the average time taken to produce the product, not the time taken by the individual worker.

This. There's your answer, OP.

Because you are dumb enough to believe that it is

What?

so can anyone tell me, why would a market for luxuries be a bad thing?

first you set up the whole economy based on needs: food, shelter, clothing, medical, all that kind of stuff
after all the needs of everyone are covered, why not set some sort of a free market libertarian luxuries type of stuff?
you go into this thing doing fuckall, paint if you wanna pain, sing if you wanna sing, make a handshake deal with a luxury car maker to make you a car for your luxury skiing holiday if you dont like to ski, etc

You don't. "Worth" and "costs" do not exist in a communist society.

Everyones productive labour is worth the same. Someone who produces a good that has a value of 1 hour of SNLT is worth the same as anyone else who does the same. SNLT is the avarage time it takes society to produce something. An item that takes society on average one hour to produce is worth the same as another item that take society on average an hour to produce. The fact that you are a lazy cunt and work slowly doesn't change that, it just means you are less productive than the others who work faster.

Found the Stalinist!

In utils per hour, dumbass