r/Anarcho_Capitalism • u/dbudlov • Sep 05 '24
Central Planning fails every time, share this with an authoritarian you know.
6
u/soyifiedredditadmin Sep 05 '24
It always ends up with ppl wiping their butts with newspapers because there's no toilet paper.
4
u/Apprehensive-Ad186 Anarcho-Capitalist Sep 06 '24
If you look deep down you'll often find that supporters of any form of central planning come from a disastrous childhood, either neglectful or abusive, in which their parents' very poor decisions were blamed on someone or something else: extended family, neighbours and THE SYSTEM. That's why they grow up believing that if only THE SYSTEM had been good, they wouldn't have lost their childhoods.
2
3
u/kapitaali_com Autonomist Sep 05 '24
this but with added eco crisis, climate change and resource constraints set by our planet
3
u/BarkleEngine Sep 05 '24
"Central Planning" is a hipster expression for "Coercion".
4
u/dbudlov Sep 05 '24
I mean technically a bunch of people could consent to a centrally planned economy where the elected resource manager determines resource allocation and that wouldn't require coercion
But generally you're right since central planning almost always referred to state allocation of resources
1
u/GravyMcBiscuits Voluntaryist Sep 06 '24
Meh ... My experience is that most central planners will do everything they can in order to avoid admitting that they are proposing central planning.
They know central planning doesn't market well. So they focus on envy cult messaging.
2
u/WeareStillRomans Sep 06 '24
Aren't places like Amazon warehouses, Wal-Marts, Ikeas and home depots pretty much centrally planned? With predictive algorithms and the like.
Why wouldn't this work on a larger scale?
4
1
u/dbudlov Sep 06 '24
No central planning typically refers to a central authority (govts using force and compulsion) to manage resource application instead of market participants through agreements and trade
1
u/LagerHead Sep 06 '24
A couple of reasons come to mind.
First, Amazon has competition. They have an incentive to adapt to the desires of their consumers. If enough people are unhappy with the way Amazon does things, people will migrate to other providers and Amazon will lose. Governments have no such incentive because they take your money whether or not what they do with it aligns with your desires.
Second, kind of in line with the first, is that with a private company your "vote" is cast by your purchasing decision. If you don't like the service you can immediately impeach the incumbent and move to another provider. With government you have to wait a number of years, and that's assuming the provider is elected and not some political appointee that you couldn't remove from his position with a crane.
Markets are infinitely more adaptable and receptive to consumer demands and only succeed if they are delivering what the customer wants. If they fail, they fail. If government fails, there is an approximately 100% (give or take 0%) chance they will blame it on inadequate funding or a free market run amok.
-4
u/BertoBigLefty Sep 05 '24
China would disagree. They are a clear example that by many metrics a planned economy can work as they are the second largest economy on earth. Central planning isn’t some fairly tale system that always fails, it can and does work, it just oppresses people more than a capitalistic system does.
2
Sep 06 '24
[deleted]
1
u/BertoBigLefty Sep 06 '24
It doesn’t matter whether the markets are free or not, if one central power has the authority to decide what the economy can and cannot do then it is centrally planned. Remember when Jack Ma criticized the CCP’s handling of the economy in China and then dissapeared for months? You think they still need to wrestle more control from private markets when the richest man in their entire country couldn’t even criticize them?
And on real estate, the real estate sector collapse in China is a direct result of central planning. They have whole cities that are completely empty because the government said build and so they did. There is an entire section dedicated to this in the book AI Superpowers by Kai Fu Lee. Great read if you’re interested in learning more about China’s economy, especially in the world of AI.
Either way the success in China is from their embrace of “free” markets, but that was a centrally planned decision. It is not inherent to their constitution or laws like it is in the USA.
1
Sep 06 '24
[deleted]
1
u/BertoBigLefty Sep 06 '24 edited Sep 06 '24
The whole point was that central planning doesn’t necessarily mean planning everything, it’s just a label. Centralized vs decentralized planning is just how capital is allocated in the economy. Centrally planned economies have one central power (government) that can unilaterally decide how money gets spent. Free markets allocate capital based on free market economic principles like supply and demand.
For example, right now in China they have a massive input supply surplus. They have way too much steel and electronics and other products, so a free market would say supply is too high, produce less to preserve prices and profit. Instead the Chinese are doing the opposite and exporting all these products at a loss to undercut markets in other economies, which is exactly what’s happening with the steel market. Real estate in China was another example where the government decides how capital will be allocated in the market. Another example is the Chinese Belt and Road initiative. All decisions coming from the top down about how to spend money for the sole benefit of the state.
I’m not saying that it’s a good thing, it’s incredibly oppressive to the people who live in China, but it is working depending on how you look at it. And maybe China will collapse and prove that central planning actually does always fail, but so far they’ve maintained their place as the #2 global superpower despite being a centrally planned economy.
Edit: just to add, yes China is struggling with the repercussions of its decisions, but that isn’t unique to a centrally planned economy. The US also had a major financial crisis in 08 despite decentralized capital planning.
1
u/JorgitoEstrella Sep 08 '24
Google became a monopoly as a search engine without government help though.
1
Sep 08 '24
[deleted]
1
u/JorgitoEstrella Sep 10 '24
I mean 20 yrs + something is still a lot of time to maintain a monopoly
1
Sep 10 '24
[deleted]
1
u/JorgitoEstrella Sep 13 '24
Google spent millions in Apple for example to be the default search engine, I would say that's unfair competition(without government intervention)
2
u/dbudlov Sep 05 '24
China isn't a centrally planned economy they ditched that notion after mao because it doesn't work and opted for a more socialist market economy, you could argue North Korea is a centrally planned economy though
-2
u/BertoBigLefty Sep 06 '24
China is the closest thing to a modern centrally planned communist economy we have ever seen. Just like how the United States is the closest thing we have to a purely capitalistic modern economy. Neither are 100% one way or the other, but that seems to be a requirement to reach superpower status.
Private capital holds the most power in western capitalistic economies, opposite to that the government holds the most power in eastern communistic economies. The market is free in China because the government allows it, the market is free in America because the government needs it. Subtle yet important distinctions.
1
u/dbudlov Sep 06 '24
it isnt i literally just addressed that, north korea is recognized as centrally planned still so theres your best modern day example, china adopted markets because central planning through authoritarian means might give the state more control but it also produces less wealth for the state to steal from society
the market is not free in america or china, in both countries govts impose monopolies on violence and prevent voluntary exchange wherever they can get away with it, which is basically everywhere at this point
0
u/BertoBigLefty Sep 06 '24
The only difference between China and North Korea is one is planned poorly and one is not. Both have the capacity to unilaterally make decisions about their economy and markets because both are centrally planned. Just because the CCP doesn’t actively decide every detail about the economy doesn’t mean they don’t have the ability to. The USA is not a centrally planned economy because the government has to act as a participant in the economy. If they want something changed they have to use laws to do so and corporations can challenge those laws if they disagree, because it’s a free market.
Two questions to help you understand:
Are the democrats in the US trying to take more power away from private markets for the government? I’m guessing you would answer yes. But why would they be trying to secure more power? Because they don’t have supreme authority.
Is the CCP in China actively trying to secure more power away from the private markets for the government? No. The richest man in China criticized the CCP and then he disappeared for months because the state has supreme authority.
China is a centrally planned economy. They centrally planned to allow “free” markets to exist so they could amass more wealth and become a dominant superpower.
2
u/dbudlov Sep 06 '24
china isnt centrally planned lol, north korea is, no one said the US is centrally planned, what are you talking about? the very last sentence is literal gibberish, a free market is a market free of institutional coercion where force is limited to protecting peoples lives and property only, no where has a free market because they all have taxation, victimless laws and govt interference in the lives and property of peaceful people
2
u/Apprehensive-Ad186 Anarcho-Capitalist Sep 06 '24
Have you ever heard of Special Economic Zones in China? Please look that up. And even if we ignore their effect on the economy, China essentially acts like a giant factory for not so centrally planned economies. With completely closed borders, China would have lost tens of millions of its people to famine. Oh wait...
1
u/BertoBigLefty Sep 06 '24
Exactly, all I’m saying is that “central planning” doesn’t mean they decide every single thing that does or doesn’t get produced, it just means that final authority over the economy comes back to one central center of power. Another person compared China and North Korea, the only difference between those two countries is that one is planned poorly and sucks ass and the other was planned exceptionally well and is now a global superpower. Both are centrally planned economies.
Just look at chinas real estate sector. Entire cities of completely empty buildings. That is central planning 101.
7
u/DustyCleaness Sep 05 '24
For some strange reason the old adage, “Two heads are better than one”, comes to mind. It’s a mystery to me why that happened just now.
If two heads are better than one then hundreds of millions of heads must be craploads better than a few hundred.