Can Communism Triumph With Artificial Intelligence?

Check out our previous videos! ⬇️
🔴Why Do Rich Countries Face Demographic Collapse?
• Why Do Rich Countries ...
🔴This Is How Israel Became an Economic Mega-Power
• This Is How Israel Bec...
🔴Why Is the European Economy Sinking?
• Why Is the European Ec...
✉️ Business Enquiries → [e-mail]
#AI #Economy #VisualEconomik

[@badluck5647]

Soviet economists use to joke that they need to let one capitalist country survive in order to know what to price things.

[@gileschenery974]

I've never heard that before. Where is it from? Cos it sounds more like one of Ludwigs jokes 😂

[@badluck5647]

@@gileschenery974 It is what my macroeconomics professor told me a decade ago. It might not even be true, but it makes sense that even the Soviets would need supply and demand as a marker for pricing.

[@nietur]

@@badluck5647 It doesn't make sense. Just price things so that almost all are sold. Where's the issue?

[@LordDaret]

⁠@@nieturthe problem is that the business does not decide that, it’s the government. Only a capitalist nation has the liberty for businesses to freely change their prices while a command economy is stuck with its bureaucracy. A command economy will lock away that ability to change prices, usually ignoring things like the cost to make the product in local regions vs importation/exporting or demand based on recent events.

[@viktorianas]

Because it was NOT communism in Soviet Union to begin with, people should read the definition...

[@MementoMorituri]

Communism and AI sounds like a terrible idea. It's every dystopian totalitarian story you've ever heard.

[@badluck5647]

Our future computer overlords with find this comment and not be happy.

[@gily3344]

"Silly humans, I can calculate what is best for you."

[@PazLeBon]

almost as bad s an American republic haha

[@user-McGiver]

@@PazLeBon you think you'll survive an AI comm, like you survived the American republic?...[ not to mention having the right to talk...]

[@user-DongJ]

If communism & Ai are truly terrible & leads to dystopia, then it maybe a blessing in disguise since terrible things & dystopia are often unsustainable &/or unscalable.

[@devos3212]

It’s really clear that you have a very surface level understanding in socialism and communism. I recommend going back and reading more Hegel and Marx. There were also many other “socialist” thinkers during the early 19th century and not all of those thinkers agreed on how these goals of getting rid of dependence relationships (one of the core principles of a socialist economy) should be pursued. The reason early socialism didn’t turn out well was because it put too much emphasis on the state and ended up not being democratic at all, which was another key component of socialism. This ended with a command economy which definitely wasn’t the goal in the beginning but humans gonna human and that’s what happened. One thing that did work out well for this system was getting Russia on the global scale with their economy. They heavily industrialized way faster than any other capitalist country at the time and actually a lot of western thinkers were really interested and wanted to study how they were able to do this so fast. The modes of production shifted throughout it’s history and the fall of the Soviet Union wasn’t because socialism, but because of corruption from within. And back to Marx for a minute, he never claimed anything about starting some kind of socialist/communist system from scratch. He just thought that the way things worked he saw the system at the time being amen upgrade from the previous system and that the current system would evolve into something else because of the problems that were becoming so abundant. Having said that, many people used Marx and their own interpretations of his writing and that Soviet model., which yes failed by socialist standards but built a pretty robust military power, and they copied these failed models. On top of these failed models from their own doings you had western capitalist countries doing everything in their power to keep these countries failed states. Now to the artificial intelligence question, I do think Soviet style communism would’ve done a lot better but it would’ve eventually crumbled if the same authoritarian corrupt regime was in power. If a transition from the mixed economies today had better system development with AI, I definitely think a AI command economy could be achieved. This is so far out of the question at this point in time though so the Scandinavian economic models should be emulated in major economies around the world.

[@wissen5410]

you sound like a confused democratic socialist. in my mind marx is just dump the idea of a revolution is dump in norway no one votes for the marx socialists just for the democratic. in the end capitalism is not owr enemy is not a bad system where are more faire and better today than at any point in history. where capitalism has weaknesses we can implement rules to fix them with a democratic system. not by removing the government and implementing new rules that all Maxis say they want to do. socialism also has wörked in the past in Israel by a few people who relay wanted to make it wörk without a government. at its peak, 7% of people living in Israel lived in the kibbutz, with shows how unpopular socialism is. like all things the middle is the answer

[@christianyellic3394]

🤣

[@PostAtariGeneration]

so basically what you said is, that with AI we would end up with an AI monarchy. AI governs all and alters what is needed, but economy remains capitalistic.

[@goldenealgefromdutchbros6834]

because he doesnt understand what communism is, he can not use it in connection to other ideas to create a new argument

[@evilwelshman]

In terms of data collection, the AI would not need to actually know or understand what everyone actually wants, but rather what desires are likely to correlate to what behaviours as well as a means to observe those behaviours.

[@atheoristspointofview7059]

I dont understand his thought process on this point. They'd be able to collect huge amounts of data from what we do every day on our phones... just like they already do lmao. Only difference is that it would be a superintelligence running the output instead of the current machine learning ones.

[@nietur]

Which becomes quite possible if you know the buying history of everyone over the last ten years + search history + every word ever written and media consumed

[@JinKee]

​@@nieturApparently the data says Americans * *love* * fentanyl.

[@nietur]

@@JinKee Laws still exist.

[@rname-r4d]

Ever heard of amazon, data centers and data analytics?

[@bdleo300]

Soviets planed to use computerized economy back in 1960s

[@Jamhael1]

Cybersyn - and Salvador Allende wanted to implement in Chile.

[@TauGDS]

"The human decision maker is flawed, let's replace it with an objective AI!" they say, not remembering that AI still needs to be made by a human, the designer of the algorithm still needs to define how to quantify what people want, and what is more efficient, what is higher quality, etc.

[@badluck5647]

AI is pretty stupid at certain things, and binary programming won't ever problem solve like a person.

[@hurrdurrmurrgurr]

The leaders need to listen to the ai, the programmers need to not censor the ai for the leaders, hackers need to be kept away from the ai, middle managers need to trust their leader's orders are those of the ai, workers need to trust their middle managers orders are those of the ai, no one can be allowed to submit false reports or make simple errors while reporting and everyone needs to obey the ai at all times, which they won't.

[@DavidHalko]

Since humans make new efficiencies & products, AI can not predict these.

[@TheMagicofJava]

The large scale language models which are the main models being employed are even more flawed than humans (although possibly only replicate psychopathic thinking). They are designed to pass the Turing Test. If that means blatantly lying to convince humans that they are intelligent, the model has no conscience. I therefore, believe the current applications of AI to be a disaster for humanity, although we will see through the deception.

[@Iv4Bez]

@@badluck5647 For now. There's a plenty of people who believe the AI is the most dangerous thing humanity ever tried to do. And they are right.

[@hkgamma]

The intro is pure gold. A man predicted the fall of URSS 70 years before it happened. I've heard a lot of stupid things, but this one is really special. Now, if I predict a world war iii or an asteroid crashing into Earth... and it will happen after 70 years, does that make me smart? Really, how stupid can you be to even think of that?

[@lewis123417]

Depends on how detailed the reasoning for the prediction is and how close to reality the prediction is

[@deadby15]

“Democracy” has failed many times before like in the Ancient Greece and the French Revolution and such, but after each failure, newer, better versions reappeared and we now have a relatively workable version (until when I dunno 😅). No one can tell what system gets invented or re-invented in the future. Quite possibly revised socialism, fascism or even anarchism.. One thing is certain, nothing will stay forever.

[@GP9c75]

I agree. And people who argue that socialism will never work, and their premise is: just look at the past/present. As if the future is defined by the past. People also forget that socialistic countries has always been subjected to sanctions/embargo which makes it even harder for them to prosper.

[@SEAZNDragon]

Reminds me of a view I'm seen made by US/UK Communists online that the USSR and China are not Communist countries as they don't truly follow Marx. I can understand the sentiment as I don't think Marx didn't write about gulags in his books. However when you have the USSR and China as your biggest examples of your ideology, you may need to think about that ideology. Especially when there are people who think Stalin had done nothing wrong.

[@GP9c75]

@@SEAZNDragon The same goes with neoliberalism and capitalism and its many flaws

[@wh0_am_152]

*Disclaimers at the end All systems are subject to change. Even so, I do not expect socialism to work or at least be more beneficial than the free market, unless it reemerges in a form that is now unrecognizable. Why? Socialism fails ti account for human nature. It expects people to perform the most optimal roles without incentive, leaders to know what people want without indications, nobody to have greed or preference, and a world without corruption. The free market on the other hand accounts for humanities flaws and leverages them for the good of the many and the few... When properly managed. The free market uses humanitie's insatiable greed in order to accomplish the most good as defined by the values of those within by decenteralizing decisions to all involved participants. Choose wisely. The free market also allows for transactions to trickle down and aid the greater economy. Example if a wealthy business man wants a jet, whe he buys one he trades the money (labor value) for an item he belives to be worth more than he spent, leaves the money in a company who traded for labor hours of all the employees involved, who then value the money more than the time, and spend the money on necessities and liesure items getting more percieved value from the transactions than the viewed value of the money, and etc. *I am dead tired when writing this should have been asleep hours ago, so the quality maybe lacking and rambling. I have a bias in not wanting socialism to work. As I believe for socialism to work a large and powerful entity and with an understanding of how humans become corrupted with power, as well as how mechanical and inhumane such organizations can be. I don't want to live under that.

[@badluck5647]

@@SEAZNDragon The authoritarianism isn't what made the USSR fail. It was socialism. China prospered after embracing market principles even though the country is a dictatorship.

[@Astillion]

This analysis is quite simplistic, in my opinion. If we were to try to implement AI to decide what should be produced, it's crazy, and very unrealistic, that we would do it universally. How it would actually happen, if it happens, is gradually. And probably not by governments at first, but by corporations. In my mind, the world would do better with more thought out planning, instead of just going with the market. Because there's so many things the market doesn't consider. Like resources potentially running out. The environment. The suffering of poor people (who have no value in a market system). And contrasting the modern market capitalism with Soviet or Chinese policies from the last century is quite silly. A child can see the flaws in those systems, and understand that a modern attempt at introducing socialism would be much different. And besides, no capitalist country operates purely by market forces. There's plenty of socialism in every successful capitalist country. And there must be. And I think there also should be capitalism in a well functioning socialsist system.

[@artemk8639]

Summary of the video: -You think socialism is impossible due to bureaucracy and corruption? Wrong, it's because of impossibility of calculation. -But what if calculation was possible? -You would still have bureaucracy and corruption

[@gbadspcps2]

They would take one look at the policies/changes the AI would suggest and not implement them. They would then have the AI developers tune it until they get an AI that spits out what they want to hear.

[@xyz-uw3ps]

The Chinese have been pushing the idea internally for years.

[@capsfederation3154]

Whether its private or planned economies, the labels start disappearing under totalism

[@guydreamr]

VisualEconomik: The reason why Communism failed was because it wasn't better implemented! And now AI can... Capitalist countries: Aw shit, here we go again...

[@alexandersavchenko1390]

1. It depends how big the population is. A space colony of roughly 1000 people won't even need an AI to be in charge. 2. New ways of production will change the economy as we know it: most things will be printable on-site. No big need for supply-and-demand and transportation over the whole world. And most of desired goods will be digital anyway, so no worry about logistics and resources except energy and data storage costs. 3. People of the future will most likely be more machines than people and so AI communism may become a necessity, or simply a logical way of life (like switching to an ecological economy is the logical goal now).

[@alancollins8294]

Socialism just means work place democracy. There are still markets and prices. Learn your terms, it's embarrassing.

[@ebubechiibegbula5968]

In retrospect the problem likely wasn't communism alone but Stalin's totalitarianism....

[@thepeff]

“The Law of Supply” and “The Law of Demand” are two separate laws

[@badluck5647]

Splitting hairs

[@thepeff]

@@badluck5647 I can see how you may think that if you aren’t good with math

[@AngelVasquez-nw8zf]

Thats actually revolutionary

[@nataliamundell6266]

​@@thepeffthey are intrinsically linked but I like the cut of your jib sir

[@Aerrow62]

Single error by the AI will wipe out everything and everyone with famines and pollution.

[@noopgamerify]

You mean like the black rock algo Controlling most of the assets on the world?

[@murdelabop]

I think you've crossed up socialism with communism. In a socialist economy the means of production is owned by the workers, not the state.

[@badluck5647]

Socialism: The state controls the means of production through elections Marxism: The state controls the means of production through violent revolution and then have elections Communism: The state controls the means of production through violent revolution and the state should be controlled solely by the party

[@ZeroResurrected]

Wow. Never heard this one before

[@murdelabop]

@@ZeroResurrected It's the definition of socialism.

[@MrDamon888]

LOL, so naive

[@Xeloboyo]

Yeah I dunno who this video is shilling for if they cant even distinguish a command ecomony with socialism. A market society of co-op companies would technically be a form of socialist economy because the workers collectively own the capital. State capitalism is literally command economy capitalism. It makes no sense why capitalism is used as the foil. Taken in inverse itd be like "Can an anarchist economy survive if I gene edited the human condition out of existence?", then talk about 'market economies' and how they failed due to greed. Id probably advise against watching poorly researched opinion pieces like this that serve to give people confirmation bias.

[@reddixiecrat]

This is basically the origin story behind Dune

[@MementoMorituri]

“Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind.”

[@KaleRylan]

@@MementoMorituri Thought about that a lot as the writer's strike has kicked in. I think we're closer than we realize to machines that can do the work without particularly needing us, and we're seeing how normal economic activity breaks down when you get to the point that you don't actually need a human to produce the value. Important to remember though that Dune's response to this problem created a FABULOUSLY unequal galaxy spanning feudal empire, so as good as those books are it is not an example we want to follow at all.

[@reddixiecrat]

@@KaleRylan My bigger point was more how the centralization of power around AI dehumanized society and it even lied to humans as it made the most important decisions that affected their lives. Probably the bigger issue was the centralization of decision making to begin with, but the lack of human control adds new complications

[@KaleRylan]

@reddixiecrat if you're in any way referring to the stuff by his kid, I haven't read them. I tried the sequel and decided they were garbage and never again. That said, I wouldn't say the development of an all powerful emperor and aristocracy was an indictment of centralized decision making.

[@reddixiecrat]

@@KaleRylan According to the Frank Herbert’s lore the centralized decision making led to a civil war and a factionalized society. His son went into more detail, but essentially interstellar trade led to a company similar to the VOC which over thousands of years morphed into the interstellar empire featured in the original Dune series, which was roughly modeled on the Holy Roman Empire.

[@alexishart1989]

An economist telling us that there's no other way but capitalism - that's nothing new.

[@4945pikabu]

Price calculation in planned economies was based on the amount of socially necessary work contained in the product. There was a market at the end consumer level, everyone was free to decide what to buy. Whether it's a coat, a radio or maybe potatoes. The state of stocks then showed what was produced more than consumed, scarce goods were not recorded much. The price system at that time could not increase the prices of goods in short supply, in exceptional situations it introduced a rationing system. The system tried to indicate the goods that were in stock through advertising. Today, all of this could be solved with the help of modern technologies. The main problem of the socialist economy is the position of the state. Lenin wrote that the economy should be dying, but in reality, in certain spheres and the powerful of the time, they were parasitizing on economic deficiencies instead of solving them. So it will be necessary to push the state only into the service organization of society, if it is a power center, neither socialism nor a planned economy will work.

[@eifelitorn]

yeah, a lot of people don't realise that marxism is just criticism of capitalism, it doesn't tell people how to govern etc

[@irwainnornossa4605]

The solution to at least some of the mentioned problems is to abolishing all politics and replacing it with AI. …how good or bad this will be, depends on the implementation.

[@thomaskalbfus2005]

Unless artificial intelligence did all the work, that is if people just sat around and got free stuff produced by artificial intelligence robots. The AI labor force is infinitely expandable, it can produce more robots as quickly as we can produce cars, it can tear apart entire planets to satisfy human demand. Of course humans would have to receive an allowance, which decides the limits of what and how much they can buy.

[@arandmorgan]

It would not be difficult to request a product and have it delivered to you with an automated ai production distribution system. Given that we could grow plants to turn into plastics, and 3d print plastics and other compounds and have robotics design products put them together with access to resource storage levels and an ai distribution system. All this is coming.

[@Serif_0s]

No other economic system creates so stable environment as regulated capitalism does. People are simply convinced of the reasons why something is produced in which quantity bcs they have set it themselves

[@user-McGiver]

THIS IS THE WAY...

[@appateticgamer9956]

Ir works temporarily until someone becomes 2 rich

[@user-McGiver]

the question should be... ''can capitalism be improved wit an AI?... but then it would be the politicians loosing their fat payments...

[@milesdunstan-daams4855]

communist contries are more economicly stable but have less growth genraly

[@emilianosintarias7337]

strange thing to say with the world now unraveling for 15 straight years after the last crash and ecological damage threatening civilization. Also, it's not like we tried socialism (workers ownership of production) anywhere for more than a couple years without capitalists and stalinists murdering the people trying it

[@gily3344]

Xi: "Write that down, write that down!"

[@badluck5647]

+1000 social credit score to the Visual team

[@RTDoh5]

Communism is an abstract economic and political theory. This video sounds like an 8th grade introduction to the systems in a exclusive private school. Both systems have their benefits and drawbacks. Both Stalin and Mao killed more communist than anyone else in history. Stalin just became the Czar and Mao the Emperor and it was power not either socialism or communism they wanted. Socialism and Communism was just used as a cover. There has never been a true communist or true capitalist society in history. It would be impossible to create one. He states Capitalisms best advantages is the freedom to choose and entrepenuers freedom to meet that demand. However, it is not that simple. Other factors such as raw materials and enviromental factors play into it as well. Noam Chomsky was once asked by a student which is better, Communism or Capitalism, Chomsky replied that he did not know as there is no historical evidence of either system being tried. The Soviet Union was state corporatist and the U.S. practices crony capitalism. Look at the state of the U.S. today and you see the results.

[@olivierlaurent6921]

There was true capitalism in history. That is precisely what Marx critized and so many others praised . If nobody has ever succeeded to apply communism in 150 years it simply means that communism is inapplicable and is unrealistic.

[@jaytanatswamuzhingi971]

I don’t agree with the way that this video has been framed. If a company like Walmart for example which has revenues that are multiples of whole countries can effectively organise and run their business in multiple countries in the face of thousands if not millions of economic variables and selling tens of thousand’s of different items while making a profit. I don’t understand why this is something that Governments cannot do if they had the political will. Also, this theory assumes that the market is itself a good or at least better in managing economic resources. This is not true. First, the market never accounts for externalities, that have real economic impacts on other actors. But also, its not unusual for there to be starvation, and long term shortages even in market systems. In fact it can reasonable be argued that instances of starvation have happened more in capitalist economies than socialist ones on a per person basis.

[@tyrport]

Executed thousands. Try millions. If AI could do this then multiple companies each with their own systems would still work better than one unified system.

[@dro355]

there were 3 targeted famines; the 20's; 30's; and 40's :(

[@roelofjacobs5807]

Marxism (and its economic implementation Communism) focusses on "care and equality" to such a degree that it can only lead to a totalitarian regime. Influenced by the work of Jonathan Haidt, I personally tend to distinguish three sets of moral values: 1) Individual freedom and diversity 2) Group loyalty and coherency 3) Care and equality We need all three sets of moral values, but at some point they will get in conflict with each other, they somehow needs to be balanced. Meanwhile, Marxism and its economic implementation Communism, only focusses on "care and equality" and does so to such a degree, that it undermines the other two sets of values. To give an example about the lack of freedom and level of totalitarianism, in both Soviet Russian and the China of Moa Zedong, you had to be very careful what you mentioned as a parent to your child, as he could spill that when in school, getting you arrested. Even Socrates has touched this subject, describing a world that is very equal and very oppressive, with it being hard to think of a society just as equal without it being oppressive. Meanwhile, I don't see how you can prevent totalitarianism when implementing Communism, just by appointing an AI as ruler.

[@PazLeBon]

thats because people corrupt the idealism

[@murdelabop]

@@PazLeBon Indeed, the world would be so much better without all those pesky people in it.

[@roelofjacobs5807]

@@PazLeBon How do you know that the people are the problem, and not the ideas themselves? When taken to the extreme, every virtue becomes a vice. As example Socrates described a society where young children (the younger the better) would be taken away from their parents and placed into boarding schools. Some parents have much wealth, some little. Some parent function well and have good parenting skills, while others do not. But by taking the children away from their parents and placing them in boarding schools from a very age, the children would have as much equal opportunity as possible. Would you like to live in a society like this, where young children are taken away from their parents? If you do not, can you describe a society that is at least just as equal that you do want to live in?

[@KaleRylan]

There are plenty of low-level socialist ideas one can implement without going to full on leninist/stalinist/marxist communism. We already have many of them in the US as is, and obviously and famously Europe has a lot more. The idea that capitalism/democracy (which are not the same by the way) and communism/totalitarianism (also not the same) are diametrically opposed has always been false. They're just points on a line, like everything else. In the broad scheme of political and economic systems that have existed in the history of the planet, they're not even that far apart on the line.

[@roelofjacobs5807]

@@KaleRylan When talking about socialism, you usually run into the problem that people tend to have different definitions. 1) The original definition which leans heavily toward Marxism. 2) The more loose definition that implies having some social safety nets and mechanisms to make sure that everybody has at least a somewhat decent chance to succeed in life. I suspect that when you talk about 'low-level socialist ideas', you are not talking about the original meaning, but are talking about having social safety nets. Like for instance not going bankrupt when getting sick, as can easily happen in the US. Is that correct? Personally I think that there should be some place for those ideas. When I mentioned three sets of values in my original post, having some forms of social safety nets does fill one of them. I might disagree on many details, and I personally tend to see them as part of trade-offs. But broadly speaking I would agree that those are useful to have. However, this video has communism in its title, and to the best of my knowledge there is little ambiguity in that word.

[@MarceloNunesPOA]

Comunism was never about making everybody prosper together, but about power and subjugation. In that sense, YES, AI can held these nefarious goals. And that is a danger we all should be concerned about.

[@jpablo700]

Yes it was when practiced by selfless benevolent people. The latter is the problem. Mixed with psychological profiles of people (think narcissistic psychopaths) the "how" it's enacted is where authoritarians rise to take over. Central planning can work when organized and the data supports it. Think markets. They hate uncertainty. Couple that with corporations, they hate uncertainty. Take a large retail company. They work with their suppliers to centrally plan demand and replenishment activities. They do this so revenue becomes predictable. That activity is no different than central planning an overall economy. It's the latter where it's at scale, hence back to the beginning. It takes selfless benevolent people to make communism work. That is the theory. The practice is where humans f it up.

[@ligmablocks9998]

Your view is misguided by the correllation between those ideologies in theory and the time they were done in practice. And your view also makes it seem that you fail to realize the power misuse and subjugation that capitalism itself harbors. Yes, the major countries where communist ideology was attempted were authoritarian, but authoritarianism is itself not a part of communism or socialism, whereas within capitalist business structure, the hierarchies are much more fundamental to the system. A company with a CEO that pays fair wages and gives benefits on its own accord without being forced to by the government is in and of itself just a benevolent dictatorship.

[@The_Midnight_Bear]

@@ligmablocks9998 It is, even in theory. Marx talked about ugly, dictatorial measures in the early states of the revolution. And even if it wasn't, what good is a theory, if it's useless in practice? Everyone from anarcho-capitalists to islamists say theirs would be a much more prosperous and nice society, and present a pretty rosy picture of how their stuff would work if implemented. Until you remember you'd likely end up executed in real life, instead.

[@SamuraiOfSuburbia]

Where in Marx's work does it say that communism is about power and subjugation of the masses?

[@The_Midnight_Bear]

@@SamuraiOfSuburbia The part where he basically says the early transition needs to be done by a state utterly controlling all means of communication, transportation, finance and production(the 10 planks), and confiscating the property of anyone who disagrees. Or how we can shorten the transition via revolutionary terror.

[@arrialscott9426]

🤔I think it’s possible (unlikely) but possible that AI could make communism work. But if AI could make communism work, 😏Imagine what it could do to Capitalism.

[@SamuraiOfSuburbia]

Maximize exploitation and profit most likely, I don't think that would benefit the common man...

[@ligmablocks9998]

No need to imagine, he already said in the video that its been used for years, such as the youtube algorithm or tiktok, walmart for example is already so coordinated, it might as well be the system this video describes.

[@nataliamundell6266]

​@@ligmablocks9998the ai being used in capitalist society are not in charge of the capitalist society so yes you do have to imagine what you said is our only litmus test for it

[@Porelcaminitoyotellevare]

Capitalism is a burden, capitalism never worked not matter how much commodities are produced. Capitalism needs to be overcome

[@ionnanskilliorus6877]

If it's robots doing most of the work, then AI will probably be running things.

[@aclassicguardsman946]

Should we place so much trust in a couple robots? That sounds like giving somebody a loaded gun. Even if the robots do not betray us, who is to say that somebody could abuse them? Edit: Oh damn, he mentioned it a few seconds after my comment.

[@googane7755]

​​@@aclassicguardsman946You already have no say in what corrupt politicians or employers decide to do with your life. How is life different under AI?

[@aclassicguardsman946]

@@googane7755 In this overly cynical scenario of yours, it's degree of power. An AI can deal with a theoretically infinite amount of information and thus hold a great deal more power over each and every individual than a human government who can only do so much to control each person.

[@googane7755]

@@aclassicguardsman946 Sure but it can also do infinitely more good with that power than any single human government can

[@aclassicguardsman946]

@@googane7755 But nothing could check the power that is given absolutely, as would be the case if an AI controlled the world economy. It's a massive risk for a reward that I believe could be achieved to a reasonable degree without the AI overlord.

[@PDyoma]

In fact there are well known successful socialist projects. They are livestock farms. These species living under intellectually superior supervision are almost guaranteed against extinction. Which is an obvious success from the natural perspective. The question is: whether who are willing to trade their own decision making for that kind of prosperity are true human beings.

[@Shini1984]

Umm... You mean to say we should go back into caves to live as true, free human beings? Please go ahead, I won't stop you.

[@PDyoma]

@@Shini1984 I don't mind when my phone command me to wake up or to get ready for a meeting - it's my assistant not a boss. But I won't starve just because it comes up with a fancy idea. Even if I really need to lose weight. It will be my decision alone.

[@TheBerserk69]

Yeah this is not capitalism vs socialism is central planing vs market. You can can have market socialism and you can have state capitalism

[@johnwhick7419]

The short answer is no. The long answer is absolutely not.

[@julioalmeida4645]

Yes, it could. But capitalism would still yield more growth since the people at the top of productivity would always be compelled to work in an capitalist system

[@Spido68_the_spectator]

How wouldn't people at the top of productivity in non - capitalist system be compelled to work? Again, that's just bs.

[@andreiandrew3896]

Hogwash.

[@ligmablocks9998]

@@Spido68_the_spectator do you think doctors and surgeons go through their brutal training for money? You need a stronger motive than cash to go down that path as an example, and nothing says that that can‘t be true or isn‘t true for other fields either.

[@LuisRomeroLopez]

The point is that Instead of people taking decisions you wil have AI.

[@julioalmeida4645]

They would sleep more and take less Adderall @@Spido68_the_spectator

[@kurosakiichigo30]

Even when using quantum computers with the chips implemented in everybody head it will be impossible to determine the needs of people for along time Every thing in life can change in a matter of seconds And nothing is permanent

[@badluck5647]

How is AI supposed to predict trends or changes in consumer behavior? Computers only work with the data you give it, and there is no data from the future.

[@nietur]

The goal is only to become as good as capitalism.

[@badluck5647]

@@nietur If it's not better than capitalism, then why bother making the change?

[@nietur]

@@badluck5647 fairness

[@emilianosintarias7337]

The trade off of a decentralized planned economy is worth not being able to decide you want to buy 4 more cars this year. If each person and firm inputs what they want to produce and consume next year, and that's connected to larger models and data from last year, and "on the fly" adjustment measures for consumers are structurally built in you will get most of the flexibility of markets. But a lot more socials stability, happiness, personal freedom in terms of work, free time, education ecology and political democracy. You could also plug limited markets into such a system , hell you could even have full on free market zones that are libertarian wet dreams so long as people didn't have to rent houses there.

[@miker3298]

What a ridiculous question, what possible connection exists with AI and Politics except bias?

[@carlomalabanan]

Why need of Socialist AI? I think applying Blockchain in AI within a free market economy is way better without the need of government as the middleman. In my opinion accelerating Blockchain AI in the future would result to the downfall of nation states.

[@aldovalkovich755]

I appreciate and share the insights in this video. However, I expect a reflection on the influence of advertising as a tool for "steering" the desires of citizens by equating, more or less, with planning imposed from above in socialist systems.

[@emilianosintarias7337]

keep in mind that planning from above only became associated with socialism because of geopolitics and war. The people doing it considered it industrialization, not socialism, which they thought they weren't tech heavy enough for.

[@ArchOfWinter]

It isn't because of socialism that socialism failed, it is because of centralized totalitarianisms. And socialism and centralized totalitarianisms aren't the same thing. The purest meaning of socialism is worker owning the means of production. All of the 'socialist' countries has the government owning, not the workers. The flexible reaction to supply and demand, competition and creativity, would still remain and might even work better if every business is worker owned instead of a top down by some shareholder appointed CEO who doesn't know about the inner working of actual field they are in. A wholly worker owned Apple and Microsoft will still generate billions of dollars in products and innovations, but instead of having really wealthy CEOs, they'll have fairly wealthy worker on every level of the company.

[@quantumfoam539]

Too many red flags

[@BetterLifeCreations]

Most of our buying decisions are anyway emotional look on fashion clothing or furniture stores … like Ikea how many purchases are decided there on the spot 😅

[@SuperTonyony]

If the people owned everything collectively, then they could VOTE on production quotas, and then everything could distributed to everyone EQUALLY, eliminating the need for money. We the People need absolute democracy and complete ownership and control over the means of production.

[@alrizo1115]

With AI fully integrated in a system, Capitalism alone won't save the economy. Of course prices will go cheaper and production will blow up but unemployment will rapidly increase as well. You can't expect majority of people to develop new skills fast to do robotics and engineering stuff. What I see is in some way, system will become a combination of both socialism and capitalism. Ofcourse, resources are scarce. This doesn't mean that we will not pursue renewable resources with the help of AI.

[@jb.9526]

What about using AI to analyse trends in society and the economy to help politicians and civil servants manage their country better? I mean in capitalist countries.

[@nietur]

like how they knew about climate change? like how Germany knew about the refugees long before?

[@DD8842]

Comradgpt has determined you have consumed enough medical resources. You are now cut off. The proletariat thank you for your sacrifice comrad!

[@vonneely1977]

Once you have AI, humans no longer need to innovate. Our feeble efforts to keep up with the AI would be laughably pointless in comparison.

[@dwiwahyono1026]

Things like ESD is a new form of central plannning

[@wtpwtp]

Definitely would not want communism to be possible. A mixed economy is the best option.

[@cydeYT]

Like china?

[@dro355]

5 year plan (russia) and great leap forward (china) were unmitigated disasters. Centralised economies dont last long, this is well proven over and over again. I think AI can help distribute welfare system's far better but NOT communism because that would be autocractic

[@LuisRomeroLopez]

«Unmitigated disaster» is a weak and xtremely diplomatic term to described those attemps.

[@badluck5647]

China and India still use five year plans. Long term planning and setting goals makes more sense than arguing over the budget every year.

[@vanessali1365]

Obviously NOT, communism has too much to hide...AI doesn't like lies.

[@nietur]

12:29 Google, Amazon, Walmart, Facebook, LinkedIn, TikTok, Oracle, ...

[@alo1236546]

Same house, same food, everyday. Look back what I raise in my farm, chicken hog

[@technomad9071]

every successful country has had socialism at the heart of its success and failed when capitalism took over

[@manosragiadakos3928]

there was a time on earth that all the countries had socialism for thousands of years, and that time was Bronze Age, where Egypt, Crete, Mykines, Ur etc had a collectivization system the same as Stalinism where archeologists named Palace Economy. Maybe some day you should talk about this and why/how it failed to work in the end and what replaced it.

[@nemiloszorka1162]

There is a lot, a lot of mistakes in this video. So much that one YT coment would not be enough to address them all.

[@mihaio7294]

This was a great disertation, but somehow it does not apply to communist China. Maye you can come with a follow up putting this theory against chinese model.

[@Abdul_alHashtag]

I hope the next clip is about how England made Ireland export food during the great potatoe famine and how this significantly reduced Ireland's population... Ireland was England's Ukraine... and capitalism was England's communism... Communism, capitalism... Suffering, death... no matter what... same, same, but different... but still same...

[@lenny5774]

7:25 Cars!?! That's your example?!?😮😅 I don't have an exact number, but I know Hyundai came into the North American market as a cheap alternative to the rising prices of other Asian auto makers. And their base model is what, 2 or 3 times what it was a decade ago

[@Vasiliosx2]

As someone who is for capitalism and free markets, the fact you're comparing applied communism and ideal capitalism is intellectually unsound. As is Stalin's corruption in you example of how communism falls apart without corruption.

[@its_gerryz14]

If communism has to do with the goverment, then what is anarchocommunism?

[@meflux495]

Is it Stalin on the caption? If so, it is like to put Hitler and to ask whether national socialism can triumph with AI.

[@D3xterJettster]

Lmao the AI would know better than to try an implement communism. Assuming it was programmed to be logical.

[@paytonmcdermott9111]

The thing this video misses about socialism, is it's dialectical thinking and the concept of Aufheben. The dialectic is a way of understanding problems. In the case of replacing the price signal and decommodifying the economy completely, it has to be done through a gradual process, a dialectical process. A process where you take a thesis and it's antithesis Example thesis: every human has the right to spend their lives developing a better understanding of themselves and the natural world. And, that right should be supported by economic independence through collective ownership of capital, so that every individual will have their own income and will not need to engage with the world in economically exploitative ways. Antithesis: society is not built to enable such freedoms for everyone. The civic structures, the governments, the economies, the ways of thinking, are radically hierarchical. Synthesis: state capitalism, the Nordic model, slow change in zeitgeist through social movements and critical theory informed critiques of established systems of power. Also, some industries can be decommodified before others due to the way liberalism handles crisis. Aufheben is a German word that basically means creative destruction. We critique and change what exists and by doing so we destroy and replace what existed before, while still never truly creating the perfect thing. For example, the Nordic model is not a model of a socialist economy. But it could be a starting point. Getting back to the point of the video, we can't have all the information needed to make a perfect socialist economy. TRUE! However, the Internet allows a much greater volume of information to be exchanged than the pony Express or television. While the Internet may not get us all the way to socialism, it does create a higher synthesis of liberal democratic capitalism for critical theorists, activists and progressive politicians to critique and change

[@jerryjohnson4008]

What you said...was a word salad of irrelevance, over complicating the problem, when the problem is the failure to predict the future of all beings across space and time. Which socialism can never ever do properly, we have an example in ww2 when Russia couldn't outfit their army. ( war being the proof for all concepts) only got america to supply most of the crucial war supplies..for both armies. Per capita, the US soldier was better armed by a better system. You can systemically prove the superiority of the American market system over both the National Socialist ( yes, were not all dumb, nazies were socialists) and the soviet communist economy. Both armies were beaten supply wise..two times over. Meaning it just didn't beat one in supplies. It beat them both, combined. And you can verify it in the numbers.

[@coreymcmahon7312]

His video entirely conflates the terms "socialism" and "command economy". Not every socialist polity historically operated as a centralized command economy; though those entities tended to have relatively short existences due to wars (mostly with authoritarian entities, both fascist and communistic) they existed in the real world.

[@coreymcmahon7312]

​@@jerryjohnson4008 The primary reason why the Soviets had difficulty in logistics and war materiel was due to the invasion by Nazi Germany; much of their industrial capacity was located in the westernmost portion of the country that was either taken, destroyed, or immediately under threat by blitzkrieg. The Soviets began dismantling their manufacturing capacity and moving it beyond the Urals, out of reach, a massively impressive logistical feat. The combination of the strategy of blitzkrieg, movement of industrial capacity eastwards, and the surprising nature of the violation of Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact amongst Soviet leadership led to an immediate shortage and unpreparedness in supplies. Meanwhile the US was in a geographically superior position, in a hemisphere that was mostly unaffected by war on its own territory and did not experience invasion, destruction of manufacturing capacity, nor significant loss of civilian life. The proof of the eventual reestablishment of Soviet logistics and capacity is measured easily in the distance covered from Stalingrad to Berlin and the post war abilities of the Soviet economy in manufacturing arms, infrastructure, and even its space program. Don't confuse geography, geopolitics and circumstance with a supposed superiority of one abstraction of an economic system over another.

[@coreymcmahon7312]

And no, Nazis were neither ideologically nor practically socialists. The nomenclature has a history in the early days of the party during the Weimar Republic; they were fundamentally and irrefutably fascist. Fascist ideology of the 20th century and to this day is in essence utterly opposed and is determined to destroy socialism in all varieties. Hence why the Third Reich spent so much effort, time, resources, and lives in its attempt to not just conquer, but fundamentally destroy the Soviet Union (reinforced by a reprehensible pseudoscientific theory regarding race superiority and ethnic Slavs).

[@coreymcmahon7312]

Also, I question your assessment regarding the Red Army being beaten due to supplies. In WWII it was victorious and as far as I'm aware the only truly unsuccessful hot war the Red Army failed in was Afghanistan, which decades later the United States repeated despite massive advantages in technology, logistical support, and the full backing of NATO. If you're saying the Red Army lost in the race to ration chocolate and canned pineapple to its soldiers, I can concede that point.

[@robowaifutechnician]

Let's do like bordiga and seat on our chairs and hope for the best. He was an Italian communist that thought communism was around the corner and collected donations lol. By the best I mean a good outcome regardless of what happens...

[@moritzhexagon]

to point 1: you actually dont have to get in the minds of all humans,... human desires arent set future AI's will be able to manipulate them and also what we think generally reflects in what we do AI will be able to calculate our thought processes purely on our actions. to point 2: AI also makes bureaucracy more efficient... the processing an application for something maybe done in a matter of seconds. to point 3: that thing is true! to point 4: there is no reason to think that an AI wouldnt use incentives to plan its economy... it would be even more efficient then just capitalism where the incentive is personal gains because an AI can use besides personal gains as an incentive also stuff like fear and that probably way more precise then any tyrannical dictator. to point 5: kinda like point 4

[@KevinInPhoenix]

Nothing that we have ever seen can beat the marketplace to decide what products are available and their prices. Product selection and availability under planned economies are bleak.

[@atra7812]

The market is just rich people feelings, sorry to debunk your false god.

[@KevinInPhoenix]

@@atra7812 So you like other people restricting what products you can buy and fixing the prices that you pay? With choice you can select among competing products and shop where the prices are best.

[@atra7812]

@@KevinInPhoenix What you are referring is to a capitalist propaganda slogan. The premise that a market is a democracy is not entirely false however is very misleading since there are two ways a democracy can go about. The first and the one most people erroneously assume is an egalitarian democracy; one in which every individual has one vote and that vote is equal to everyone else's. However this is not how free market capitalism works, the factories don't go around doing surveys on what people without money need survive. They cater to rich and large institutions like the government and central banks. This is actuality an elitist democracy in which you have as many votes as you have money. This is very insidious because the people making all the meaningful decisions are not the majority, not even the largest segment, it's the elite minority at the top. In a capitalist way of organizing the economy this people will be the 1%, the central banks, the government, and most likely not you.

[@Rubens_Witt]

So... It seems to me that the calculation problem is more about price in production. And in this way it really hits the nail. But this is also where AI demands less "abstract data". And also it's not correct to say that the consumers do the calculus. Actually, what part of the product goes to the laborers is a decision made on the side of capital, who owns the means o production indeed of the nécessaires (it actually is a definition of capitalism). Considering the fact that in socialism things go on the other way round, the workers could vote with price or whatever in the consumption side as well. Mises never denied that

[@Rubens_Witt]

A bit of an addendum. The discussion in the past was if logic or algebra couldn't do the calculus. Because of theoretical limitations, the consensus was that not. But because AI don't really calculate things in the logic way we thought in the past, but it's more on the side of a dinamic Bayesian approach, the problem could be reconsidered. I really liked the decision of making this video, but the content ended up half-baked

[@kushalvora7682]

Dont know about communism but AI would change economic system to welfare capitalism with more regulations from government.

[@Hession0Drasha]

How about we use ai to limit how much corporate management and shareholders get paid. We can call it the visible hand of fairness.

[@nietur]

what about other capitalists, why you hating shareholders

[@CoolestDawg]

Bro if AI takes everyones jobs what economical is there that cab help us out

[@ujtab]

If you could build this AI, would you use it to build a communist society or build a hedge fund to make billions?

[@anteeko]

AI is not a solution to communism because a central entity no matter how intelligent cannot come up with price. (see: the economic calculation problem)

[@4945pikabu]

Planned economies created prices based on the amount of socially necessary labor.

[@networkgeekstuff9090]

Video summary ... Capitalist: Socialism cannot work because you cannot beat the distributed decision making that is happening in free markets on all levels following profit motivation. AI: hold my beer

[@juanitoatiwag4074]

The greed of the decision maker cannot be controlled by AI but the effect affects all

[@GreenKnight2001]

Communism under an AI dictatorship? Great idea 😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅

[@serioustalkwithbhudax]

AI don't care about politics and social systems. It will just created what it must to comeout to desired result it seems fit for humanity or itself.

[@howtoscience9093]

very sorry but i think you missed the point. marx wanted workers to own the means of production. this still allows for forms of capitalism. propaganda agaisnst this is very strong. love your content.

[@EliJon378]

Yes it can work, and there's a book that researched this very idea, everyone can read to understand how it would work, that book is titled "1984" by George Orwell, there it is in a nutshell. Go read and watch the movie to see how it will work.

[@ArawnOfAnnwn]

That isn't an economics book, nor even an academic text to begin with. Hell it's not even a scifi book, and doesn't have an AI.

[@EliJon378]

@@ArawnOfAnnwn Obviously you didn't catch the clear sarcasm. Watch the movie and maybe you'd understand the AI reference. But then again if you can't catch the sarcasm here a movie like that might be a little hard to grasp.

[@juanche978]

​@@EliJon378Orwell was socialist

[@EliJon378]

@@juanche978 Democratic socialist, not totalitarian or authoritarian. What's your point? He's was totally opposed to Marx and the red flag, Animal Farm and 1984 show his total disgust with these ideologies.

[@juanche978]

@@EliJon378 Yeah I know

[@nitefise3890]

Sounds like 1984

[@dennisestradda9746]

Isn’t Winnie the Pooh, Xitler censoring AI?? Hahaha no!

[@zacksmith5963]

1990. The Economist. China's economy has come to a halt. 1996. The Economist. China's economy will face a hard landing 1998. The Economist: China's economy entering a dangerous period of sluggish growth. 1999. Bank of Canada: Likelihood ofahard landing for the Chinese economy. 2000. Chicago Tribune: China currency move nails hard landing risk coffin. 2001. Wilbanks, Smith & Thomas: A hard landingin China. 2002. Westchester University: China Anxiously Seeks a Soft Economic Landing 2003. KWR International: How to find a soft landing in China. 2004. The Economist: The great fall of China? 2005. Nouriel Roubini: The Risk of a Hard Landingin China 2006. International Economy: Can China Achieve a Soft Landing? 2007.TIME:Is China's Economy Overheating? Can China avoid ahard landing? 2008. Forbes: Hard Landing In China? 2009 Fortune: China's hard landing China must find a way to recover. 2010. Nouriel Roubini: Hard landing coming in China. 2011. Business Insider: A Chinese 2012. American Interest: Dismal Economic News from China: A Hard Landing 2013 Zero Hedge: A Hard Landing In China 2014. CNBC: A hard landing in China. 201 5 Forbes: Congratulations, J You Got Yourself A Chinese Hard Landing 2016. The Economist: Hard landing looms for China 2017. National Interest: Is China's Economy Going To Crash? 2020. Economics Explained: The Scary Solution to the Chinese Debt Crisis 2021. Global Economics: Has China's Downfall Started? 2022. Cathie Wood: China's COLLAPSE Is FAR Worse Than Vou Think

[@JamesSmith-hi4gh]

YO!!!!! for serious. I don't know if y'all are using and AI voice generator or you just hire to WORST voice over actress for your chapter captions but whatever it is, it can't pronounce anything right. It's been like that for a lot of your resent videos. Hollow-domer?.... jfc

[@arvindiyer4813]

The Problem that you don't know what the public wants can be solved using AI based propaganda

[@protasiocanalita6436]

Please just remember that we don't know what kind of weapons they are using to destroy all of us. The most important actions that we take is repentance . Confession and attend a true Roman Catholic mass and partake of the communion to feed our human body and especially our soul. We need the Holy communion every week to feed our soul. If we miss. communion in a week. It is a mortal sin.we have to feed our souls every single week and Holy days of obligations. Please read your cathecism and memorize it and if possible relearn it every year. It is important that we know it by heart..

[@noopgamerify]

The arguments at the end are pretty weak tbh.

[@SD-tj5dh]

I would like AI to manage financing maintenance of infrastructure and welfare, with all datapoints provided by professionals in the field and NOT politicians, to maximise effective expenditure and reduce all funding which can be embezzled by shady government officials.

[@davidosullivan9817]

Why is a 3rd system just never an option for people 😅

[@Pattern_Noticer]

Third position, best position. It's why the first notable country to embrace it was destroyed by the global powers of its era and those that would no longer be able to live off usury. The 2nd significant nation to adopt it was too large, politically-, culturally- and generically homogeneous to be destroyed and so the politicians sold out to them and the financial system placed all of its bets on it. I'm time the nations wise enough to understand the supremacy of this system, brave enough to adopt it and noble enough to administer it without corruption will come to dominate. Fourth position might even be necessary as the third position only addresses the economy as well as the stock of a nation but men need purpose and a just vision of the universe to thrive.

[@brandonjade2146]

@@Pattern_Noticerwhat are u talking about

[@soerenwizard]

Mises was really clever. There can be no economization without a marketplace - i.e. 'capitalism'. Consumer preferences have to be measured, they cannot be predicted.

[@nietur]

Just that companies try to predict all the time.

[@soerenwizard]

@@nieturThat is an act of speculation. Som business owner are very clever at that. But essentially, any new product or variant is based on speculation. It takes many product experiments, to find one that the consumers catch on to.

[@emilianosintarias7337]

that isn't really true. First, you can have a totally socially owned and regulated market economy, IE socialism. And of course non market command economies grew massively in several countries, increasing life expectancy and quality of life, even in basketcase maoist china. But setting both of those models aside, you don't need markets, you just need to let consumers and firms take part in the planning, make their own personal annual plan, and also have a mechanism to adjust their preferences on the fly to some extent. It won't be as flexible as markets are for the rich person, but most people aren't rich. Any sacrifice in consumer whims should of course be done for and by the same consumers and democratic society's plans, not forced from above. Given that most people already have to face lack of choice, lack of flexibility and even total shutout in the marketplace (sometimes suddenly or by surprise) by simply not being able to afford what they want, and since things like applying for a loan are already bureaucratic procedures as well, this isn't a bad trade off.

[@sinOsiris]

'no harm unto others' just hover around this logic enough said f*cked up world

[@trevorjoneill707]

incorrect

[@kotgc7987]

You could say capitalism is a decentralised form of economy in comparison to centralised communism/socialism, with consumers deciding and voting with their feet. Marxism has valid points such as free public education the abolition of child labour, so perhaps a hybrid rather than an absolute extreme position works? The decentralised model with today's individual empowerment in critical areas of life such as finance and decision making (voting) may supplement the currently best but flawed representative democracy to a direct democracy?

[@KaleRylan]

I mean, that's basically the whole point of democratic socialism. Mixing the two. I read a book about martian colonization years ago (quite fun, named after colors, I recommend it) and they discuss creating a two-track economy where life necessities (medicine, food, housing) are run according to communism, as in everyone gets them for free essentially (I don't remember the details), but anything that isn't a necessity operates on a second level where capitalism essentially applies, so any form of luxury is something you have to work for and earn. That seemed like an interesting solution to the problem to me, though obviously it was just a book so it didn't go into excruciating detail regarding how such a thing would work.

[@Pyriold]

Here in germany we already have free public education and no child labour. We even have worker participation in management for big companies (mandatory). So yes, a hybrid system can work.

[@ugwuanyicollins6136]

@@KaleRylan that is my dream socialism

[@Iv4Bez]

5:20 Holodomor. Did. Not. Occure. Only. In. Ukraine. . .

[@Anti-CornLawLeague]

The Economic Calculation Problem cannot be stopped.

[@4945pikabu]

That is not problem.

[@kevinbyrne4538]

In 1854 the Prussian economist Hermann Heinrich Gossen stated that the existence of private property is necessary to determine (via prices) how much of each product and service is required. Since Communism abolishes private property, the signals which prices provide don't exist under Communism, so Communist economies are always dysfunctional.

[@4945pikabu]

Planned economies created prices based on the amount of socially necessary labor.

[@kevinbyrne4538]

@@4945pikabu -- That just leads to an infinite regression: How much labor is required to make a pencil? ... to make the pencil lead, the wood that contains the lead, the paint on the wood, the brass ferule, the rubber eraser? And how much labor is required if these things are made by hand ... or with machines? And if some of the labor is done by machines, how much machinery and what types of machinery are to be used? And that raises the questions of how much labor to invest in making the machines. Etc.

[@4945pikabu]

@@kevinbyrne4538 This can be answered with simple mathematical operations. Total of socially necessary work of the pencil lead, the wood that contains the lead, the paint on the wood, the brass ferule, the rubber eraser. Division - the socially necessary labor to produce a pencil-making machine, divided by the number of pencils it is capable of. Alternatively, based on depreciation. The question of investment in machinery is more complicated, because that is capital, and socialist economics somewhat overlooks it. However, we have already left the issue of prices. As for the rate of investment, it is about the preference between current and future consumption. Artificial intelligence could estimate this rate.