4 ms·
> We need a better economic system none has been found. The command economy is inefficient, and prone to corruption. informal/barter systems are too small in
by chii 1y ago
> We need a better economic system
none has been found. The command economy is inefficient, and prone to corruption.
informal/barter systems are too small in scale and does not produce sufficient amounts to make the type of abundant lifestyle we enjoy today possible.
As the saying goes - free market capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the others.
- rapsey 1y agoFree market capitalism does not exist anywhere.
- immibis 1y agoIn fact, free market and capitalism are opposites.
- Turskarama 1y agoLol no they aren't, they're orthogonal, almost entirely unrelated.
- jdsleppy 1y agoI assume they are saying that in practice, if wealth gives one influence (if one lives in capitalism), one will use that influence to make one's market less free to one's benefit.
- TFYS 1y agoWe haven't really been trying to find such a system. The technological progress that we've had since the last attempts at a different kind of a system has been huge, so what was once impossible might now be possible if we put some effort into it.
- pixelfarmer 1y agoThere is no system that fulfills your requirements. It is even easy to explain why: Humans are part of all the moving pieces in such a system and they will always subvert it to their own agenda, no matter what rules you put into place. The more complex your rule set, the easier it is to break. Look at games, can be a card game, a board game, some computer game. There is a fixed set of rules, and still humans try to cheat. We are not even talking adults here, you see this with kids already. Now with games there is either other players calling that out or you have a computer not allowing to cheat (maybe). Now imagine everyone could call someone else a cheater and stop them from doing something. This in itself is going to be misused. Humans will subvert systems. So the only working system will be one with a non-human incorruptible game master, so to speak. Not going to happen. With that out of the way, we certainly can ask the question: What is the next best thing to that? I have no answer to that, though.
- chii 1y ago> What is the next best thing to that? I have no answer to that, though. i argue that what we have today is the so called next best thing - free market capitalism, with a good dose of democracy and strong gov't regulations (but not overbearing).
- TFYS 1y agoCheating happens in competition based systems. No one cheats in games where the point is to co-operate to achieve some common goal. We should aim to have a system based on recognizing those common goals and enabling large scale co-operation to achieve them.
- chii 1y ago> co-operate to achieve some common goal. all systems are competitive, if the system involves humans - after all, even in a constrained environment like academia, where research is cooperative, the competition for recognition is still strong. This includes the order of the authorship presented in the paper. What you're asking for, regarding cooperation to achieve common goals, is altruism. This does not exist in human nature.
- theshackleford 1y ago> we’ve tried three whole things and are all out of ideas! Guess it’ll just have to be this way forever and ever.