3 ms·

> Funny that we picked democracy for our government but we just left corporations as little feudal kingdoms. Doesn't this just boil down to planned vs free mar

by sva_ 13d ago

> Funny that we picked democracy for our government but we just left corporations as little feudal kingdoms. Doesn't this just boil down to planned vs free market economy? I think we've seen over an over again which one works and which one doesn't.

jmull 13d ago
Is that a settled question? China isn't exactly struggling right now.
- thaumasiotes 13d ago
  > China isn't exactly struggling right now. Have you asked people in China about this?
  - gverrilla 12d ago
    Support for the party is very strong.
    - thaumasiotes 12d ago
      Boy, you're not right about that. Where'd you get the idea?
- sva_ 13d ago
  If you look on Alibaba or AliExpress and see different companies competing and undercutting each others prices, I don't really see it as a planned economy.
  - dghlsakjg 13d ago
    I think a better term might be a “steered economy”. You see fierce competition in some very specific and preordained market areas. Lithium batteries, solar panels, electric cars, industrial and autonomous robots, AI. Now go look at the 5 year plan from Beijing. Green technology, robotics, mature node chips, and AI are the focuses. In other words, it isn’t a mistake that China dominates in the industries that it does.
  - throwup238 13d ago
    The CCP publishes their primary central planning mechanism for all to see. They just adopted the new 15th Five Year Plan in March [1]. There’s a whole bureaucracy just to coordinate the implementation at the sector, provincial, and corporate level driven by the State Council, NDRC, and NPC. Governments at all levels are involved with coming up with their own implementation plans to execute on the Five Year Plan. You can trace decades of Chinese industrial development to those plans but the Chinese system is very different from the Soviet central planning mechanism, which is why I think you’re misinterpreting Alibaba’s price competition. The CCP explicitly allows non-state owned enterprises like Alibaba and the manufacturers on it to compete; that’s their whole point within the system, and they operate within the regulatory environment setup to promote the five year plan instead of quotas like the Soviet system. The resolution of the planning is different, but it’s very much there. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15th_Five-Year_Plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15th_Five-Year_Plan
    - mitxela 12d ago
      If that's central planning then the USA is also centrally planned.
      - throwup238 12d ago
        Please point to the US central planning mechanism.
        mitxela 11d ago
        > The [Congress] explicitly allows non-state owned enterprises like [Google] and the manufacturers on it to compete; that’s their whole point within the system, and they operate within the regulatory environment setup to promote the [current political agenda] instead of quotas like the Soviet system. The resolution of the planning is different, but it’s very much there.
- edgyquant 13d ago
  China has succeeded so much by moving away from a planned economy when they were fully planned they were one of the poorest nations in the world. Most successful nations are mixed economies and yes, this is a settled question.
  - miyoji 13d ago
    Past performance is no indication of future success. It doesn't matter what's been successful in the past, these things can change. Communism was considered more successful than capitalism for a large chunk of the 20th century (because it was), then that changed and so did the narrative. None of this is settled, because it's a living system that changes over time. What may have been perfectly true in 1850 might not be remotely accurate in 2050.
    - Kuxe 13d ago
      > Communism was considered more successful than capitalism for a large chunk of the 20th century (because it was) According to whom?
      - nixon_why69 12d ago
        Soviet Russia and early communist China both went from mostly-illiterate peasant economies to mostly-literate, partially industrialized, with home-grown heavy industry and weapons technology in the span of like 15-20 years. Then the soviet system stagnated hard under Brezhnev while the Chinese pivoted under Deng. But those first gains definitely happened under full communism and no capitalist economy has modernized faster.
    - wavemode 12d ago
      > Communism was considered more successful than capitalism for a large chunk of the 20th century (because it was), then that changed The word you're looking for is "collapse". It's when something is stable at one point in time, but then later breaks down. That's what "changed". It wasn't random like weather or something. The economic systems collapsed. > None of this is settled The fact that it has happened numerous times in different parts of the world makes it pretty settled in my mind.
shigawire 13d ago
Democracy in business would be worker co-ops or employee ownership schemes. It would still be fully market-based, not planned.
deleted 13d ago
[deleted]
miyoji 13d ago
> Doesn't this just boil down to planned vs free market economy? Not at all. Market vs planned economy is about how the economy is set up. Are there businesses that offer products that you can choose between? That's a market economy. You can have that with democratic governance of corporations. The workers can own the means of production and you can have a market economy. You don't need ownership by idiot dictators with money to have a market.
- vasco 12d ago
  > The workers can own the means of production and you can have a market economy How? Will you also advocate to killing a bunch of people to get from now to the state where workers own the means of production like Trotsky and friends?

by sva_ 13d ago

jmull 13d ago

Is that a settled question? China isn't exactly struggling right now.

thaumasiotes 13d ago
> China isn't exactly struggling right now. Have you asked people in China about this?
- gverrilla 12d ago
  Support for the party is very strong.
  - thaumasiotes 12d ago
    Boy, you're not right about that. Where'd you get the idea?
sva_ 13d ago
If you look on Alibaba or AliExpress and see different companies competing and undercutting each others prices, I don't really see it as a planned economy.
- dghlsakjg 13d ago
  I think a better term might be a “steered economy”. You see fierce competition in some very specific and preordained market areas. Lithium batteries, solar panels, electric cars, industrial and autonomous robots, AI. Now go look at the 5 year plan from Beijing. Green technology, robotics, mature node chips, and AI are the focuses. In other words, it isn’t a mistake that China dominates in the industries that it does.
- throwup238 13d ago
  The CCP publishes their primary central planning mechanism for all to see. They just adopted the new 15th Five Year Plan in March [1]. There’s a whole bureaucracy just to coordinate the implementation at the sector, provincial, and corporate level driven by the State Council, NDRC, and NPC. Governments at all levels are involved with coming up with their own implementation plans to execute on the Five Year Plan. You can trace decades of Chinese industrial development to those plans but the Chinese system is very different from the Soviet central planning mechanism, which is why I think you’re misinterpreting Alibaba’s price competition. The CCP explicitly allows non-state owned enterprises like Alibaba and the manufacturers on it to compete; that’s their whole point within the system, and they operate within the regulatory environment setup to promote the five year plan instead of quotas like the Soviet system. The resolution of the planning is different, but it’s very much there. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15th_Five-Year_Plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15th_Five-Year_Plan
  - mitxela 12d ago
    If that's central planning then the USA is also centrally planned.
    - throwup238 12d ago
      Please point to the US central planning mechanism.
      - mitxela 11d ago
        > The [Congress] explicitly allows non-state owned enterprises like [Google] and the manufacturers on it to compete; that’s their whole point within the system, and they operate within the regulatory environment setup to promote the [current political agenda] instead of quotas like the Soviet system. The resolution of the planning is different, but it’s very much there.
edgyquant 13d ago
China has succeeded so much by moving away from a planned economy when they were fully planned they were one of the poorest nations in the world. Most successful nations are mixed economies and yes, this is a settled question.
- miyoji 13d ago
  Past performance is no indication of future success. It doesn't matter what's been successful in the past, these things can change. Communism was considered more successful than capitalism for a large chunk of the 20th century (because it was), then that changed and so did the narrative. None of this is settled, because it's a living system that changes over time. What may have been perfectly true in 1850 might not be remotely accurate in 2050.
  - Kuxe 13d ago
    > Communism was considered more successful than capitalism for a large chunk of the 20th century (because it was) According to whom?
    - nixon_why69 12d ago
      Soviet Russia and early communist China both went from mostly-illiterate peasant economies to mostly-literate, partially industrialized, with home-grown heavy industry and weapons technology in the span of like 15-20 years. Then the soviet system stagnated hard under Brezhnev while the Chinese pivoted under Deng. But those first gains definitely happened under full communism and no capitalist economy has modernized faster.
  - wavemode 12d ago
    > Communism was considered more successful than capitalism for a large chunk of the 20th century (because it was), then that changed The word you're looking for is "collapse". It's when something is stable at one point in time, but then later breaks down. That's what "changed". It wasn't random like weather or something. The economic systems collapsed. > None of this is settled The fact that it has happened numerous times in different parts of the world makes it pretty settled in my mind.

shigawire 13d ago

Democracy in business would be worker co-ops or employee ownership schemes. It would still be fully market-based, not planned.

deleted 13d ago

[deleted]

miyoji 13d ago

> Doesn't this just boil down to planned vs free market economy? Not at all. Market vs planned economy is about how the economy is set up. Are there businesses that offer products that you can choose between? That's a market economy. You can have that with democratic governance of corporations. The workers can own the means of production and you can have a market economy. You don't need ownership by idiot dictators with money to have a market.

vasco 12d ago
> The workers can own the means of production and you can have a market economy How? Will you also advocate to killing a bunch of people to get from now to the state where workers own the means of production like Trotsky and friends?