Simon's idea of Socialism has drifted perilously close to Capitalism! With a little luck we'll have a new supporter of incentives, entreprenurship, and freedom by Spring! Simon writes:": If you remember a while back, I told you about decentralized planned economy. So all your arguments about a central planner are not necessarily of any use. Yugoslavia was a socialist republic, yet they had NO central planner due to their decentralist economy. This decentralization results in the economy being managed COMPLETELY from the bottom-up, where the managing of the facilities for production and services is made by those involved in it and not the "top" in the facility. And as for the argument that it is an inefficient way of using the world's resources, is it not pure and clear logic that producing what is needed is more efficient than overproduction?"
But Yugoslavia was not planned from the "bottom up". The individual workers had no way of signaling the factory that they wanted more or less of a good. This is because Socialism does not allow one man to pay more for something than his neighbor.
Without competitive prices, the number of red, blue, and yellow shoes a Yugoslav factory would produce would be little more than random.
Simon also mentions Yugoslav incentives:
": As for the 'no incentive' deal, again a look at good old Yugoslavia is a good idea. A yugoslav factory worker for instance, knew that if he did well in his work the income of the factory would go up and his share (their system involved that every worker were awarded a share of the incomes rather than the more traditional fixed salary) would also rise. There's your incentive, speaking from a capitalist point of view."
But Simon, THIS IS CAPITALISM! (pardon my caps). Wall Street investment banks, law firms, consulting practices, and a host of the most capitalist institutions in the world operate in exactly the same fashion.
Consider two Yugoslav factories. One is staffed with intellegent, able workers. The other has a lot of slow and lazy ones. Which set of Yugoslav workers will take home more money?
The first, of course. The system you described does not allocate "to each based on his need". It serves out the gains to those who produced them.
True Capitalism would move from the unit of the factory to that of the individual. But we are still going in the right direction.
Lastly, Simon does not see the need for a coercive "Central Comittee":
": As for the painter post, why should there be a Central Committee to decide what you are to work with? I would like to hear which socialist has told you about that."
Under a Socialist system, what will be done with people who simply refuse to work? What will be done with those who are only willing to do work that they "like" rather than the work that is needed? Who will decide which artists will be supported as artists and which will be sent to the steel mills?
I call this decision-making body the "Central Committe". Yes, I expect it to be democratically elected. No, I don't think that it's members will be "evil". But if you want socialism, you have some tough decisions to make. Who, who, who, will make them?
- nat
