Milton Friedman - The Myth Of Central Planning

There is a reason government programs routinely fail. www.LibertyPen.com

[@sonny6733]

What a civilised debate! Wonderful to see intelligent people exchanging views in such a manner. All too rare.

[@jblades123]

That's what I was thinking this whole debate. We would never see a debate like this today, the socialist would be screaming the whole time.

[@vicenteyanez671]

jblades123 the problem is postmodernism, the fact that they dont believe in debate kills them

[@arthurbenedetti9146]

@@jblades123 they learned that if they did a polite debate, it would happen what happened in this debate, the socialist guy was destroyed by the capitalist ones.

[@CrazyManwich]

Civil debate only happens when you are willing to accept the possibility that you could be wrong. Too many people in this day will never accept that.

[@jeffdkillman]

1980's Socialist : Socialism is a word of many meanings. Friedman under his breath : It sure is.

[@sean_haz]

Its funny that you still here the same things and the same responses now. apparently none of the attempts in the last 43 years have worked either.

[@TrophyGuide101]

A common opinion now is capitalism funding social programs is socialism

[@razorback0z]

This debate could be happening right now on the exact same topics. With the exception that many people now believe the Govt. is in fact in control of the weather.

[@punkrockparents]

+razorback0z Heehee!...So, true!

[@jefferyhammond1421]

You already made my comment for me!

[@danbowski40]

HAARP?

[@FilmBuffBros]

Also you would have an SJW chanting "Go home Nazi!" every time Milton opened his mouth...

[@seanrobinson2270]

Alex Delarge your comment couldn't be more true!

[@gbaker1a775]

1:24 “It is widely believed that the government cannot control the weather.” 2020- Hold my beer.

[@resistnzisfutl]

Socialists primarily operate under the delusion that "bad things" can be mitigated, if not outright completely avoided, by adding more government, the "right" government. Free market capitalists under classical liberalism understand that bad things can and will happen, and that by and large government intervention has, at best, done nothing to prevent them, but most of the time exacerbated the problems. Even if they've done nothing to prevent them, it's a hapless venture that costs taxpayers money to do nothing other than perhaps give the illusion that "something is being done". That is where socialists live. Free market classical liberals understand that bad things will happen, there will be cycles in the market, but markets tend to correct things on their own, better and faster than what government can do. Socialists also labor under the notion that if only the right kind of government is in place, it would be paradise. The problem with installing a government that is (seemingly) all the right stuff, tomorrow can dramatically shift, and once that genie is out of the bottle as they said in the video, they're stuck with it. The most prosperous times in history have been when government has been severely limited and markets allowed to operate freely. Adding more government to "fix" problems is like using gasoline to put out a fire. Furthermore, government is a sinkhole, it is not productive even when it owns the means of production. That is to say, government truly is what socialists falsely believe markets are, a zero sum game. Governments continually build false economies and buttresses against market forces that inevitably lead to collapse and disaster far worse than what they would have been.

[@jordanmoore7380]

True. But what they're discussing in this case is Keynesian Economics, not socialism. At least in this case. And what is now known to be true of Keynesian Economics (which is still a capitalist system, just not free market capitalism) is that it doesn't fairly mitigate the natural cyclical patterns of the economy and instead only leads to higher inflation and permanent government regulations to "attempt" to mitigate temporary problems. The true reason we had a "golden age of capitalism" in the 50s and 60s from central planning is what Friedman identified, a central goal. Ramped up production in war efforts to keep pace with the Russians (as was true throughout the entire Cold War).

[@resistnzisfutl]

Friedman laid it out here - virtually all socialists that had any inkling of success were preceded by a time of strong free market prosperity. That is to say, economics and the market were allowed to persist on their own. The US, for example, only saw the advent of big government and welfare in the mid to latter half of the 20th century, and that was "riding the wave", as it were, of Depression era work ethic and economic conservatism that really hasn't been seen since. in essence, the big government systems that have been enacted since then are living off of borrowed time, and will inevitably fail. This is why Nordic countries, for example, have been moving towards economic freedom and away from socialism and big government for decades now. The thing is, it may not be outright full-on socialism right now, because socialists who know anything understand that they can't have that right now. So, what they do is enact socialism piecemeal, bit by bit. Get people accustomed to it and even dependent on it, and they'll become conditioned to expect it. That is their long game, to have socialism emplaced, but have capitalism pay for it. In the meantime, what we have is cronyism, something they lump free market capitalism with as if that is what happens when capitalism is allowed to exist. No. It's what happens when big government has a heavy hand on the market, and the rich and well-connected are the only ones allowed to play.

[@ericsimmons4868]

This is one of the most on-target comments I have ever seen. Well, well done!

[@acctsys]

The wheat from the mostly chaff that Keynesian economics is sticky prices. Be that as it may, government failure is still more bitter than market failure.

[@weirdshibainu]

If Friedman had been able to debate Obama for an hour on the Oprah show, Barry would have never made it out of Chicago.

[@johnrobi0]

The Kenyan could not last an hour.

[@ItsPandatory]

Unlikely, Sowell is still here and his influence didn't stop Obama.

[@necroyoli08]

@@ItsPandatory Exactly; just like Milton's didn't stop Nixon, Clinton and the Bushes.

[@WolfofAsia012]

@@necroyoli08 he did promote reagan whose corrupt administration had at least 24 convicted officials (second to Nixon)

[@necroyoli08]

​@@WolfofAsia012 Hence, Milton's influence didn't prevent those Reagan administration officials to be corrupt... exactly like I said.

[@TomiAdewoleAdetom]

Socialism always takes refuge in the No True Scotsman fallacy

[@Iandar1]

so does capitalism

[@sdprz7893]

@@Iandar1 name an example in which we do that

[@Iandar1]

@@sdprz7893 in regards to cronyism and corporatism.

[@sdprz7893]

@@Iandar1 For Corporatism, sure. However, Cronyism exists in every system

[@Iandar1]

@@sdprz7893 true enough.

[@meastonjohnston2854]

these liberals are logical and can hold a reasonable debate. there are few like this anymore. to be fair, there are few conservatives who can debate intelligently any more as well. it seems we have outsourced our intelligence to demagogues and corrupt media outlets.

[@bluewater454]

I had to laugh at the comment one panelist made that no one believes the government can control the weather. Here we are thirty years later being told by politicians that they can do just that. How dumb have we become?

[@asleeperj]

So, now that we have this looking glass, that is from the late 70's, and early 80's what do we see. The government has grown, and yet economic stability has declined. It's 2014 for Christ's sake, 30 years later, and we have more government in the US than ever before, and almost no growth in the economy.

[@asleeperj]

***** Well said sir. Very eloquent. Did you attend public school?

[@brianblackwood3120]

Shaving Pvt. Ryan unfortunately they do and can’t understand big words. Or which bathroom to use

[@DoReMi123acb]

Hello. I am from the future. Donald Trump's presidency has began to fix this! Even unemployment in black communities has fallen to less than 5%!

[@SomethinAintRightHere]

Thomas sowell in the background - I see you 👀

[@thatanimepfpguy]

10:19 "I'm a socialist" No need to say it dude...we can tell in one second by looking at your face XD

[@stevemcgee99]

I think the professor with glasses is ridiculous. So, ignoring him. The British ambassador seems to have a good point - but I think he needs to let go of the monetarist theory (of Friedman) to get at the root of his error, that 'big business begets big labor which begets big government'. Big business exists when a government can protect it from competition through regulations, grants, contracts, policy, etc. - and protect it from market changes with artificially set interest rates, and bail-outs.

[@177SCmaro]

So make government smaller. Then it doesn't matter how big labor or business gets if government doesn't have the power to grant them special deals.

[@Knaeben]

10:15 - any system will have flaws. That doesn't mean socialism is better. He elucidated that about the huge corporations having influence over their markets - this is an important problem that needs to be addressed, not an argument for socialism. This is a great exchange.

[@knpstrr]

Milton hits the nail on the head. The notion that the government can "control" the economy to increase outcomes is false. Government needs to get out of the economy if not totally as much as possible. When you find a problem in the economy, look to the government. Not for answers, but as the cause of the problem. More times than not you'll find the problem.

[@beng4151]

You are correct. Unfortunately, many people can't wrap their heads around it.

[@larsinthefuture]

@@beng4151 Then please explain how to prevent economic collapse every 5-7 years without the use of government intervention.

[@beng4151]

@@larsinthefuture ????? That happens quite often BECAUSE of government intervention. The collapse in 2008 was directly related to the housing crash, because the government was giving away idiot loans.

[@larsinthefuture]

@@beng4151 lmao so you're saying Wikipedia is wrong and that it's not the failure of the government to regulate the markets? "A spike in oil prices has preceded or coincided with ten out of 12 post-WWII recessions" Let's see some historic examples: 33AD - unsecured loans from banks. coin exchange crisis - you're correct here 14th c. - banking crisis Tulip mania - you're right here that the government burst the bubble, but it did it early enough to avoid a bigger burst. Tobacco depression South Sea Bubble Amsterdam banking crisis Panicks of 1785+ Panicks of 1819 - 1866 long depression 1900's wwi can be claimed for your side great depression from natural disaster energy crisis bubbles and bank crises of the 70's tightening monetary policy etc

[@beng4151]

@@larsinthefuture Those were economic collapses? None like the great depression. And when has the government "helped"? Most of the time they just waste more money.

[@dostthouevenlogicbrethren1739]

"How do you impose a limit on government?" I see some "academic" has never heard of the Constitution.

[@Iandar1]

When you know the constitution doesn’t really change anything. As well as any capitalist organization bigger than any national organization organization.

[@monsterhunter445]

The constitution is very bare bones. Also the constitution is a piece of paper that can change it isn't a stone table that is immutable

[@rudrajeet814]

Constitution can be amended by govts.

[@jr-yn4lk]

The constitution is just a piece of paper created to make people think they have some power over the government. It's just fool's gold.

[@skepticalwendigo3702]

And how do they change the constitution?

[@jamshedfbc]

Big Government makes every problem worse.

When TV broadcasted something intellectually interesting

[@condaquan9459]

2:45 I was expecting everyone in the room to combust immediately that’s the definition of a death stare lmao

[@peterponcedeleon3368]

We need more Milton's today.

[@beng4151]

My god, we still hear the same thing today! "Modern government" or "social democracy". How sad that we repeat our failures.

[@Tonyrg1988]

government and corporations are a scapegoat for our own shortcomings. Were the ones that buy the products, were the ones that elect politicians. Both on a voluntary basis.

[@strega1380]

sure, and who puts those politicians on your screens and develops narratives around them? corporations. billionaires who want their own puppet making decisions. there's nothing voluntary about it on our end. all we can do is pretend we are not electing a bought and paid for shill for the capitalist system enriching few to the cost of entire world.

[@shawnradke]

@@strega1380 glad you can recognize that so why give the govt more power that can be abused? We hate monopolies yet in the same breath say we need the govt to handle or babysit everything Do you not see you’re advocating for a bigger monopoly lol

[@shawnradke]

@@strega1380 never kind you’re a lost commie 😂 You’re immune to facts and reality

[@davedismantled]

Funny how no one tied low inflation and then high inflation with the "temporary" suspending of the convertability of gold that Nixon did in 1971.

[@coveredinthorns7185]

Robert lekachman keeps showing uo in these videos and other old tv debates. He seems like a nice guy but I have no clue how that goof ball made it so far. He wants a government agenecy for everything is his answer.

[@xealit]

It's funny how in that time they discussed government intervention as the idea that centralized organization (government or corporation) is more effective. Since then this idea died out. And they substituted the reason for interventions to something like "it would be fare this way". The idealistic intentions change, but the method remains the same. All the time, in all lectures Milton stresses that it is the method, not the intentions, that is wrong.

[@coletrain6545]

Socialism has many meanings but one outcome

[@sca24580]

The other guy just glosses over "stability of prices" as if that is something government ought to control.

[@jonathanmallard5650]

How it is that intelligent people, and I do believe these folks are intelligent, yet how does this guy still compare social security with welfare ( ebt, cash assistance, energy ass, housing ass, ect). True that both are deducted from payroll, yet in one it is a payment to payees, the other a donation from payees. For these to be the same only those working, using a ssn, not cash jobs, would collect on these "benefits". Apple's and oranges

[@sephizinho]

The true OG. RIP

[@johndoe3981]

Anyone else watching this

[@AlexanderHL1919]

This was so refreshing to watch :'(

[@EquineDreams]

Whose the british guy at 1:16 with the blue tie and light gray suit?

[@monsterhunter445]

The only winner in WWII was US and Soviet Union

[@p0p4]

Soviets lost like ~10 mil people, pretty sure that most of em' didn't see it as a win...

[@erwincooper434]

Milton Friedman breaks down economics in a way that a toddler could understand him but a liberal can't 😒

[@R_Adam_K]

Who are the people disliking? Loosers that are unable to take care of own life

[@reachforacreech]

milton and the british guy are the 2 best.the british guy may have apoint that government isnt the source of business cycle failure

[@romancandlefight1144]

reachforacreech I think the argument would be that govt interventions make cycles more pronounced and sap life out of the overall growth rate

[@averyhaddad]

Genius. Problem with today's economy isn't Capitalism; it's that Capitalism isn't working properly.

[@bjornarmar2462]

The hell was that seating layout?

[@NoahZeus]

Where are all the celebrities!?

[@sonny6733]

Wrong...They've got the weather thing covered now too!

[@Zeusisthebomb]

Is there a longer version of this?

[@nomos6508]

guys every country on earth has planning in a way or another. and south korea was built by military planning

[@channel08]

Is the Uber app monopoly an extension of central planning if they use dynamic rates?

[@atpwolf5590]

nice Milton! beat them off with the stick of logic and reason ! hehe too bad nobody is interested enough in the truth to fix this world

[@exceptionhandler78]

i have told /hinted many times in plain simple english that whatever I say must be done.

[@nateyreb7677]

this guy rules.

[@TheySchlendrian]

Ok Boomer, Chile still hated Pinochet.

[@themfu]

As good as Milton Friedman is, I wish they had some real AnCap / Libertarian in that discussion, someone with a Murray Rothbard or Harry Browne kind of philosophy.

[@thothblastbeast2]

Professor Robert lekachface is such a vampire

[@renatogaucho7810]

Example of pseudointellectual. Economy is the most non-scientific discipline of human taught.

[@shawnradke]

It’s because there are no true constants since their are actors and scarce resources So it’s a process of using those resources which have many different uses So it’s more a study of cause and effect Not some machine that you can pull a lever and affect the outcome like other sciences

[@stefanobc1971]

How about the Mith of self regulating markets?

[@fatfat1877]

How about learn how to spell before commenting? Its myth not "Mith"

[@thomasrosati5939]

It's a myth because the goddamn government always gets involved. The self regulated markets was 19th century and that's when we saw the biggest boom economically.

[@tyaz6556]

@@thomasrosati5939 in the west* It's also around the time we saw child labor, factory workers working 12 hours a day, and the majority of the planet enslaved by the west.

[@FaithfulFumoFan23]

What's a "Mith"

[@stipostipo2051]

How about central planned companies? Like Amazon?

[@stipostipo2051]

Ok that´s output, because market. But my point was something different. Inside big global company: strategy, financial plannig, wages, prices, services, purchasing, marketing etc.; big decisions /in terms of efficiency/ are centralized. Like in totalitarian government control has the managment /apparatchiks/ and final word always has board or directors /politbyro/ or respectively shareholders, and at the end majority owner/supreme leader/. Different in activity but same in structure. Cybernetically speaking: hierarchically centralized structure.

[@DavidJ-iz8wl]

Awesome little debate!

[@sonikhiphop]

Guys got a good point at 10:46

[@daPlumber702]

not really. he's working off of a flawed premise. blaming business for the rise of over reaching government is just stupid. Business is only able to do what is inside the law. the government makes the laws. A business acting outside the law is easily effected through lawsuit. When government officials take bribes in one form or another and change laws to suit businesses that's when you get screwed.

[@chrisklest1238]

Is there more to the original footage?

[@TexKimball]

Search "Free to Choose Part 3: Anatomy of a Crisis" in KZbin. It's a full 57 minute episode with a mini documentary and a debate in the second half. Great series.

[@jamesthornton9399]

Massive profit taking and improper profit taking allways adds to recessions. The 2007-2008 is one ecample of massive unfunded securitlies trading cause a place for some peoplel to get rich and the rest of us to loose our jobs. Leiman Bros closing.

[@mechengineer4life]

This all misses the greater point when talking about the efficiency if the state in making war. The state in WW2 only fought ie competed against other nation states so that says nothing about the US government during WW2 being more efficient than a private company. Instead all that tells us is the US was the best of all the nation states. Kind of like comparing a government postal system efficiency with other nation states' postal systems instead of private carriers. We have no efficiency reference point with war because no Mercenary group around is large enough to match the US in size. But through most of ancient history mercenaries were employed with great regularity as it was more cost effective.

[@stefamart7]

Actually the strongest nations (in terms of military power) have always been nations that had a national military. For example ancient greeks, even tho they were pretty divided in small cities and were less had beaten Persians (with a large military made mostly of mercenaries) twice. Rome was the biggest power at the time and in the good period (so until the last century) they always had a national military (here we could even say that Rome started losing territories when they started using mercenaries, LMAO). Gengiz Khan had a "tribal" military that was similar to a national military. During medieval ages, in Europe, we had a mixed situation, were some nations used more a type of military and some used others. For example the Holy Roman Empire used mostly a mercenary one and had always many diffuculties in wars despite having more soldiers. On the other hand France and England have been the Two major military power in Europe for centuries and had mostly a national military. Also, in 1500, Nicolò Macchiavelli, a famous Italian writer/politician working for the Medici's family (the ones that ruled Tuscany and Florence in his best period) wrote in his most famous book called "il Principe" (The Prince) and even more in another book called "l'arte della guerra" (the art of War) that a good military must be a national military. Let's ho forward: which one where the most powerfull nations between 1700 and the start of 1900? England and France. And they had a national military.

[@enematwatson1357]

9:56 There you have it. "Free competitive theory" is the flawed paradigm here. 😏

[@riyadhf1rdausehh]

The new york guy is the reason why new york is the way it is today.

[@johnathanvale8634]

A government can always do one thing very well IF they understand economics and the economists are actually willing to help, but it's always at the expense of someone, or something else. Especially war time

[@johnathanvale8634]

Disclaimer: fascists refuse to accept economics as something that has laws. The idea that a power hungry dictator lacks the power or knowledge to do whatever he wants is not a very appealing view for him

[@jacobmerrill7382]

57 central planners disliked this video

[@strega1380]

Milton Friedman - the myth of him having a head useful for anything other than being a public bathroom urinal

[@shawnradke]

😂 coming from a commie who doesn’t understand basic economics lol

[@ericdoering4074]

Where did conversations like these go?

[@EquineDreams]

Nevermind, my question was answered at 7:56

[@reachforacreech]

where is the full video?????

[@selfishcapitalist3523]

Where is the civility now?

[@johnnydoggs]

Dammit!!! 2nd!!!! Oabamba u failed me!!!!

[@vincentleone4959]

These people read more

[@vkorchnoifan]

The experience of central planning is creeping in cities (like Detroit and Gary, In.) and states (like Illinois) Tax and spend, spend and tax is runing cities and states. Maybe out country too.

[@tyaz6556]

If you are trying to blame Detroit falling apart on socialism I would like to kindly remind you that the second the capitalists got the ability to move their companies abroad they did exactly that, leaving hundreds of thousands within the city layed off and boys growing up waiting to become factory workers with no future.

[@juliocesarfabianosaboia7330]

@@tyaz6556 Just make new local businesses and companies then! Oh wait, the government makes it hard doesn't it?

[@odd-ysseusdoesstuff6347]

Very Civil. I like it.

[@fantom5894]

OK, but capitalism is obviously dying of its own internal contradictions. You can't hide from the dialectic. So when it does collapse, what replaces it if not socialism? Feudalism?

[@shawnradke]

What contradictions?

[@afgor1088]

@@shawnradke workers produce more value than they're paid. workers want to increase wages, capitalists want to reduce them. capitalists invest to increase profits, investing drives down the average profit rate over time. contradictions. if you're going to be against communism you should at least know what it is, most communists have read wealth of nations, road to serfdom, capitalism and freedom etc. i'd recommend you start at state and revolution, wage labour and capital, value price and profit,

[@thehorde4868]

It isn't dying, it's ever growing

[@thehorde4868]

@@afgor1088 🤣all workers🤣🤣 you like to generalize huh

[@gold_real_money]

So explain me where is USSR now? Where is Yugoslavia now? Where is communist policies in Vietnam now? Where is pure communist policies in China now? Gone? Yes! Socialist idiots can't describe how to solve supply shortage and inefficiency of industrial production process because of their own ignorance and stupidity. Again I ask, Why Soviet Union collapsed? Why Cuba and North Korea is so poor and desperate? Why Mao Zedong kill so many innocent birds just because those pity birds eating the fruits of working class, are you insane you socialist idiots? Sparrow genocide led to 50-100 million of Chinese people starved to death because of STUPID, HEARTLESS AND RUTHLESS SOCIALIST POLICIES!

[@bjornarmar2462]

That mic drop tho.

[@t.thomas6967]

2:00 what a posh pannis

[@Iandar1]

Love how Milton just says things without any empirical backing.

[@strega1380]

what, you mean the american boot he's licking is not empirical?

[@rsavage-r2v]

Wealth of Nations is concrete and descriptive. Capitalism and Freedom, and The Road to Serfdom use the words "should" and "would" frequently. It seems that one of the key innovations of neoliberalism is a reliance on baseless assertions.

[@Iandar1]

@@rsavage-r2v hyack uses only logic to come to his conclusions (which inherently falls apart since it is unfalsifiable) but unfortunately as Karl popper stated through science we can come to an fuller understanding (and frequently Austrians when they use the anything empirical they use it in a pseudoscientific way). There’s been plenty of work how it works and how to improve by the likes of Paul cockshot. And Capital put Wealth of Nations 2ft wide 6ft deep long ago.

[@rsavage-r2v]

@@Iandar1 Hey, I'm just over here making the rounds forcing everybody to watch "Why the Labor Theory of Value is Right". Scientific engineering and problem-solving all the way! Of course WON has been superseded, I'm just making the point that Liberal political economy used to be a relatively scientific, progressive discipline. I think Smith would be quite embarrassed by Hayek's willingness to confuse ideology with evidence. It was all downhill from Ricardo, wasn't it?

[@Iandar1]

@@rsavage-r2v aight that the truth.

[@Observerx10]

Big loves bigger and small is trampled for the sake of bigness.

[@eruno_]

central planning would have actually worked if Soviet Union implemented computer network that monitored and gathered all the data

[@NUCLEARARMAMENT]

コイノ/ Koino Central planning worked fine without computers, dumbass.

[@shawnradke]

😂brain dead comment People make different decisions cuz we’re all different Do you even know what you’re going to eat in the next month from this day? Imagine working out that for everyone let alone all other goods and services One word, impossible

[@df4250]

The disturbing thing about this discussion is the lack of firm, verifiable and generally accepted Economic theory that allows a greater level of agreement on the viable, correct and effective implementation of Economic principles that are not beholden to capitalist/socialist ideologies. The discussion goes over past observations of Economic occurrences without a deep and thorough analysis of the true causes of depressions, unemployment, inflation, poverty, etc. and without substantiated evidence for the benefits of implementation of deregulated economies or more regulation - and who benefits from them and how they benefit. To me, this discussion highlights the deficiency of Economics as a "science". It becomes an arena where mainly capitalist and socialist ideologies do battle, but never come up with any viable, verifiable solutions. As an example, this kind of argument would not occur amongst scientists discussing Einstein's theory of relativity, or the laws of Thermodynamics. This is because proper science is not subject to ideologies, but is solely focused on establishing the verifiable truth and reality of the universe, whereas Economists cannot even come to an agreement on the relationship between government, the people who elect those governments and the "Economy" of nations.

[@daveduhre5088]

Milton Friedman overemphasises the inefficiency of the government. If all government is removed, capitalism would come down tumbling. However, even if capitalism is left alone without any services to the lower strata of society, the gap between the rich and the poor would widen so much that middle class would lose its buying power.

[@luc6284]

Well, since we have supercomputers nowadays, I'm pretty sure we could account for the computational problems involved when predicting demand for certain products. It seems much more efficient to me than letting dozens of different companies compete with one another only to walk away with an excessive amount of profits for a few people, wasting resources along the way with advertising and building dozens of different factories and many more obstacles that could be optimised a great deal if it were planned by intelligent machines. There would need to be good security measures in place to make sure the systems and people don't fuck up but if we get it to work (and if people were to cooperate instead of compete I have no doubts we could) the world could be a much better place. It's also dishonest to say that all socialist countries failed btw. When compared with what they used to be like in contrast to how life was like during socialism the overall standard of living went up for most citizens. We see this in the Soviet Union which used to be a dirt poor peasant nation with frequent famine that worked itself up to the second largest economy in just a couple decades. Cuba used to be under control by a fascist regime that allowed foreign (mostly American) companies to exploit the country's resources and workers only to take the profits back home resulting in lots of extreme poverty among Cubans. Socialism gave everyone access to healthcare, education (many were illiterate before socialism) and an equivalent life expectancy to the USA among other things. People were not rich under socialism, but they never were under capitalism either. Of course they are not as wealthy as western countries. When socialist countries are compared to capitalist countries of equivalent GDP they seem to do much better in many regards (usually lower infant mortality, more literacy and better education, extensive vaccination programmes, healthcare, better food security, less financial stress etc). Often attempts at socialism have been accompanied with strict authoritarian regimes which is a very valid criticism to make, but you have to realise that capitalist countries can just as well be authoritarian (Batista's Cuba, Pinochet's Chile, Nazi Germany etc). There is little reason to believe socialist countries could not be democratic. We can improve on the experiments that have been attempted before. They were not failures, they improved the lives of many, but were also had problems that need to be remembered.

[@strega1380]

Exactly along the lines Paul Cockshott has been thinking. We do have the computing power nowadays.

[@shawnradke]

Ah, yes the “we have more information now” fallacy No you do not, you cannot predict what individuals will choose There are way too many variables to account for such as age/culture/background/region etc etc No 2 people are the same so how do you expect these models to adapt fast enough to people’s ever changing actions

[@luc6284]

@@shawnradke the question I believe you should ask yourself is whether "the free market" adapts fast enough to people's ever changing actions. When millions of people go hungry and stay homeless every day, is the market really doing such a good job at distributing goods to the places in which they are needed? Is the market really doing such a good job at rewarding hard work when it is dependent on extremely exploitative wage labour or even slave labour in third world countries to remain competitive?

[@uggali]

But the Soviet Union had no unemployment, had no homeless, among many other positives. They also earned a living wage and had free education and healthcare. It is impossible for a profit oriented system to compete with a people oriented one in terms of humanity and common prosperity 🫀

[@shawnradke]

Be a better troll!

[@thehorde4868]

🤣🤣🤣naah they were equally poor