4 ms·

It is very hard to understand how people who have been alive more than a couple of decades can believe that there is a system which can objectively determine ev

It is very hard to understand how people who have been alive more than a couple of decades can believe that there is a system which can objectively determine everyone’s needs and capabilities. Even if such a system was possible and was implemented, 30 seconds after it was implemented, it would be exploited such that favoured groups benefitted more than others. Maybe it wouldn’t benefit the heirs of capital owners, but it would be the heirs of the socialist revolutionary Vanguard, or some future authoritarian who makes his way through the socialist hierarchy, who knows, but it would be somebody.

worik 1y ago
> It is very hard to understand how people who have been alive more than a couple of decades can believe that there is a system which can objectively determine everyone’s needs and capabilities. What is the relevance of that comment? Objectively measuring "everyone’s needs and capabilities" is unnecessary in most cases (excluding a "total war" economy, or at times of famine, when it becomes very important, albeit imperfect) and a more free market economy does a very poor job for some goods (e.g. housing) Free markets work well if participants are free to come and go, and have adequate information. Then price discovery in a Free Market is quite a phenomena. But when people cannot leave a market (e.g. in a famine) or when information is distributed unevenly Free Markets lead to all sorts of terrible outcomes. Capitalism, without intervention and redistribution by the state (or some other powerful agency - there can be others) leads to concentrations of wealth and impoverishment of many. This is because the second dollar is easier than the first, and that idea scales.