3 ms·

Or, alternately, everyone gets a vote in the planned economy of the government. It is transparent, observable, and democratic. Only a tiny elite group of capita

by wfo 11y ago

Or, alternately, everyone gets a vote in the planned economy of the government. It is transparent, observable, and democratic. Only a tiny elite group of capitalists get to vote on the planned economy of corporations, which are as you say often bigger than governments. Corporations need not convince people to participate; the impact of their plans and decisions have effects on the entire society, and they need not ask anyone their opinion first. The power structure in a corporation is a tyranny: disagree with the guy on top and you're forcibly removed. Toe the line, suck up, and maybe you'll move higher in the pyramid. I don't need to make an analogy: there's two distinct methods for decision making here; tyranny and democracy, and I know which one I'd choose. There's a very clear moral difference between the two.

merpnderp 11y ago
The idea that the American economy was centrally planned in 1967 or any time after that, is laughable. The government has made policies and enforced them, but no one is telling IBM how much R&D to allocate to chip research, except IBM's stake holders. And the reference that US corporations sometimes have budgets larger than country budgets is unimportant in the context of the overall US GDP. Apple's economy is dwarfed by the US's, and their ascendance to massive wealth proves the point that the US economy is built on the disruption of established markets. I can think of no actual centrally planned economies that pay more than lip service to democracy, nor any that have compared favorably with free-er market economies in improving the lives of the average person. Humans tend towards corruption, and free markets are the best tool we have for managing that. Want to see brutal, selfish, horrifying corruption, just look at your local centrally planned economy where the greed represented by a McDonalds happy meal campaign is instead implemented by the local police force.
lliamander 11y ago
Voting makes people feel powerful in the same way that playing the lotto makes them feel rich. The issue with voting, or any exercise of voice, is that it is a positional good; i.e. "winner-take-all" [1]. Even if everyone has one and only one vote, power will tend to accumulate in the hands of a few "influencers". It is easy for influencers and rulers to serve each others interests, directly or indirectly, while by-passing the rest of the population. If we are doing an apples-to-apples comparison - government centrally planned economies vs. corporate centrally planned economies - then yes, the ability to exercise voice is a point in favor for economies that are planned by governments. However, I find it to be a rather weak point. That corporations are limited in what they can do to individuals (they can't imprison, kill, rob, etc.) and that they are subject to tort and criminal law, is much more essential to liberty, justice, and self-governance for the general population. [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8aRaWnf6ps&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8aRaWnf6ps&feature=youtu.be

by wfo 11y ago

merpnderp 11y ago

The idea that the American economy was centrally planned in 1967 or any time after that, is laughable. The government has made policies and enforced them, but no one is telling IBM how much R&D to allocate to chip research, except IBM's stake holders. And the reference that US corporations sometimes have budgets larger than country budgets is unimportant in the context of the overall US GDP. Apple's economy is dwarfed by the US's, and their ascendance to massive wealth proves the point that the US economy is built on the disruption of established markets. I can think of no actual centrally planned economies that pay more than lip service to democracy, nor any that have compared favorably with free-er market economies in improving the lives of the average person. Humans tend towards corruption, and free markets are the best tool we have for managing that. Want to see brutal, selfish, horrifying corruption, just look at your local centrally planned economy where the greed represented by a McDonalds happy meal campaign is instead implemented by the local police force.

lliamander 11y ago

Voting makes people feel powerful in the same way that playing the lotto makes them feel rich. The issue with voting, or any exercise of voice, is that it is a positional good; i.e. "winner-take-all" [1]. Even if everyone has one and only one vote, power will tend to accumulate in the hands of a few "influencers". It is easy for influencers and rulers to serve each others interests, directly or indirectly, while by-passing the rest of the population. If we are doing an apples-to-apples comparison - government centrally planned economies vs. corporate centrally planned economies - then yes, the ability to exercise voice is a point in favor for economies that are planned by governments. However, I find it to be a rather weak point. That corporations are limited in what they can do to individuals (they can't imprison, kill, rob, etc.) and that they are subject to tort and criminal law, is much more essential to liberty, justice, and self-governance for the general population. [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8aRaWnf6ps&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8aRaWnf6ps&feature=youtu.be