7 ms·
Don't the centralized planning regimes end up grossly inefficient? But, maybe that's a plus. A super corrupt and inefficient government that oppresses the peo
by yters 7y ago
Don't the centralized planning regimes end up grossly inefficient?
But, maybe that's a plus. A super corrupt and inefficient government that oppresses the people is going to be like North Korea and not give off that much pollution. So, perhaps if our only objective to optimize is minimal pollution, then 'China-like' is better than 'USA-like'. However, if that's our only objective we might as well nuke all living organisms so there is zero pollution emission.
On the other hand, if another objective is something like human flourishing, then 'USA-like' might be Pareto dominant when compared to 'China-like'. Even more so if human freedom is a necessary component of human flourishing.
- sgt101 7y agoI think central planning with no sensor data and human level only planning is destined to fail at national scale. Central planning of a real time instrumented economy using super computers - well that might be more viable.
- yters 7y agoYou are assuming humans are just inefficient computers, which is a big assumption. The human mind might, in fact, be inherently superior to computational mechanisms, and capable of doing things in finite time that a computer would require infinite computation to perform. Thus, if centralized humans cannot run things, then much less so can computers. The debate between capitalism and communism is ultimately one of about the true nature of the human mind: is it a machine or a halting oracle?