4 ms·
Huh, how does that follow? This was clearly a case of terrible planning and disastrous intervention. That doesn't mean that all planning and all intervention
by FullyFunctional 11y ago
Huh, how does that follow? This was clearly a case of terrible planning and disastrous intervention. That doesn't
mean that all planning and all intervention is bad.
Frankly, no planning is bad planning.
- dataker 11y ago'Terrible planning' ends up being 'too much planning'. In the end, Venezuelans were certainly trying to 'have the right plan' and 'build a better Venezuela', but because of the complexity of the economy, they were not able to grasp the tiny details and failed on their mission.
- zxcvcxz 11y agoThis is why I don't think top-down socialism will work in the US, we're just too economically, politically, and culturally diverse for one system. Now, on a state level I think in some places it could definitely thrive, but for some reason the leftists want everything done on a federal level, making it much harder to institute social programs and make them work.
- brc 11y agoI believe the OP means governments know that central planning is a compete failure but they just can't help themselves. Like alcoholics, 'a few beers' won't hurt. It's the same with planning - just a little five year plan. It won't hurt.
- BurningFrog 11y agoCentral planning is a single point of failure.