he was all for getting rid of religions and their delusions for the betterment of mankind.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mydmc1wio8.
@waton:
I agree. You are correct. I also think that socialism conflicts with human nature. I tend to focus on the calculation problem. Mises did as well because the socialists started claiming human nature could change. A new "socialist man" could be created.
I don't understand why there is anything good to be learned from Marxism. The only lessons worth learning is that the entire idea is rotten and should be perpetually discarded.
MMM
he was all for getting rid of religions and their delusions for the betterment of mankind.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mydmc1wio8.
Good comments here:
Which brings up an interesting aspect. The 2008 economic crisis (capitalist in nature) that nearly brought many economic communities to the point of collapse, is thought to have been the fault of uncontrolled American capitalism.
What does the Federal Reserve price fixing interest rates for years, providing the liquid capital in the form of printed money, funneled into the housing market by government programs, and incentivizing banks to disregard sound loan underwriting practices by law, have anything to do with capitalism?
MMM
he was all for getting rid of religions and their delusions for the betterment of mankind.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mydmc1wio8.
Anyway, see what you think of a successful 'socialist' village?
It is not what you think. This village is basically a corporation using labor from the surrounding towns, paying them a wage, and producing products (like steel) to sell and realizing the profits because they can calculate their inputs and outputs due to prices. The workers coming in from surrounding towns are glad to work for these capitalists because it improves their standard of living. Nothing wrong with that...
Even the Soviet Union lasted a while because they looked to surrounding capitalist economies for prices (they would order the Sears catalog for hints). Please, watch the video on page 2 of this thread. Socialist economies can't calculate.
MMM
he was all for getting rid of religions and their delusions for the betterment of mankind.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mydmc1wio8.
...He was brilliant economist, and his ideas(not really read up on the man al that much) offer some sage advice IMO.
He was a brilliant economist?
1. If economics is a 'science' in any way, then what we really need to do is to see how Marx would fit into the understanding of the way economic communities (economies) work. For me, it would be his insistence that all parties must have an adequate reward. If that does not happen, then the economic community has failed and there will be repercussions.
2.If economics is a 'science' in any way, then we should view the discussion, not just as whether any particular view is right or wrong, but on the way that view advances our understanding of the whole picture. We shoulod think of the arguments in the light of the scientific method.
Economics is not a hard science. You can't predict human behavior, and you can't re-run experiments. Economics is praxeology.
There once was a great auto mechanic. His name was Joe. He wanted to revolutionize the car. He thought, actually he *knew*, he could make it better. Just a fraction of the amazing features would be that the car would drive itself, use only 1% of the fuel, and the interior would be lush and comfortable with robot massage hands and champagne.
To achieve this goal, he was willing to take radical, revolutionary steps. The cornerstone of these steps was to make the car completely out of dog shit.
Joe is to Cars as Marx is to Economics. That is what we can learn.
MMM
he was all for getting rid of religions and their delusions for the betterment of mankind.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mydmc1wio8.
People have self interests, and Marxism, as it has been attempted, has failed, because you would have to produce first super devoted persons to make the above work and palatable. . Communist countries were nightmares trying that.
This is true.
But it is actually even worse for the Marxist/Socialist. Even if you grant this condition and everyone is on board with the idea - completely and utterly on board, devoted completely to the group, working night and day for good of the collective, it doesn't matter. The economy can't calculate resource usage. Not even changing human nature will change the sheer mathematical wall confronting socialists.
MMM
he was all for getting rid of religions and their delusions for the betterment of mankind.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mydmc1wio8.
Socialist economies **CAN'T** calculate. Prices, profits, and especially loses have specific functions. Without these the economy can't calculate resource usage.
It *IS* as simple as "capitalism = good, socialism = bad".
MMM
he was all for getting rid of religions and their delusions for the betterment of mankind.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mydmc1wio8.
@brokeback:
I think the same is true in Capitalism only difference might be instead of the collective we could insert Capital(ist) concerns dominate human rights.
I don't think this is true at all. Unless, of course, you are operating under the incorrect definition of "human rights".
MMM
he was all for getting rid of religions and their delusions for the betterment of mankind.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mydmc1wio8.
@brokeback:
Jobs are the means, not the ends in themselves.
The goal of an economy is not to employ everyone. We can create an economy like that easily - simply draft everyone into the army, or dig holes and fill them up again. Everyone would work while they starve to death.
Automation is a good thing. We increase supply and lower the price of production so that everyone's standard of living can rise.
MMM
he was all for getting rid of religions and their delusions for the betterment of mankind.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mydmc1wio8.
@Brokeback:
I think we need to discuss Marxism and be more specific about what you do or don't know about him. Because I think a lot of this is gut reaction to what we've been indoctrinated by our government to believe.
How about this: let's go to marxists.org, and reference the copy of the Communist Manefesto in PDF. Here is the link. Now I trust this is a reliable source, independent from the government's propaganda, correct?
Under the section "A Communist Confession of Faith" it states:
Question 1: Are you a Communist? Answer: Yes.
Question 2: What is the aim of the Communists?
Answer: To organise society in such a way that every member of it can develop and use all his capabilities and powers in complete freedom and without thereby infringing the basic conditions of this society.
Question 3: How do you wish to achieve this aim?
Answer: By the elimination of private property and its replacement by community of property.
Did you catch that last part? As soon as you posit the elimination of private property, the game is over. Your economy from that point forward is doomed. You can argue all you want about rights, fairness, equality, etc.. None of it matters. We can talk about incentives and how communists, real communists, won't let incentives stand in the way of a good society, but it doesn't matter. You can say all you want that real communism hasn't been tried, and if we just could try the real one, the good one, then it would all work out. It doesn't matter. Any economy, any permutation of central planning that you can ever imagine or try, if private property is eliminated, will fail.
Please go back to page 2 of this thread and watch the video I posted by Dr. Joe Salerno. It is a lecture about Mises' paper on socialism from the early 1900s.
MMM
he was all for getting rid of religions and their delusions for the betterment of mankind.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mydmc1wio8.
I recommend the lecture video below. Up front, it is an hour long. However, very informative. It is a lecture on Mises' 1920 paper on socialism. The standard response of the socialist/collectivist to the "incentive" problem was that under socialism there would be a new "socialist man". Mises showed the problems with socialism, even with new socialist men, are insurmountable: mainly the economy can't calculate.
The more prices are interfered with, the more problems arise.
MMM
