Quote from: temp1029 on December 11, 2013, 02:21:12 AM

Unfortunately a planned economy can't work. If you plan the entire thing and the smallest detail doesn't line up with "the plan" then how does the rest of the plan adjust? This was tried a lot in the USSR (5-year plans) but always failed.

I never offered to repeat USSR economy model, it already proven to fail. But with current level of technology it is possible to enable state-wide computer-aided planning system (like ERP, but in much larger scale) which will readjust plan in realtime - so no more shortages, no waste of resources, reduced possibility to embezzle. In Chile there was an attempt to build this system (Project Cybersyn) but Pinochet's coup didn't let to try.

Quote from: temp1029 on December 11, 2013, 02:21:12 AM

Additionally, I'm not sure how you plan an economy without everyone being on welfare (i.e. provided for by the government). Wouldn't their wages, or alternatively their means of subsistence, need to be part of the plan?

Of course planning agency will set wage structures (with participation of the worker unions).

Quote from: temp1029 on December 11, 2013, 02:21:12 AM

I would like to see some examples of the African countries you indicated had a high standard of living while the USSR was in existence. I suspect the state they are in now is either a direct result of involvement with the USSR (and the fallout from its collapse) or events since then have caused the issues and true "laissez-faire policies" were never really tried.

There were many countries in Africa who cooperated with USSR, e.g. Ethiopia, Angola, Somalia (the last is totally collapsed now). In some sense it is difficult to prove something using official statistics because pro-market reforms were made by IMF and World Bank fanatics and they teached local officials how to hide real problems and show better economy (which is not true in fact). BTW, Somalia now is much more "laissez-faire" than United States, I am not joking (no stable govt = no regulations at all)!

Quote from: kwilliams on December 11, 2013, 10:46:04 AM

People are competitive by nature. Central planning brings most alpha-types to the center. There they consolidate power and draw disproportionate benefits for themselves and their support groups. Ideas threatening the status quo are outlawed. Security and stability are emphasized. Large security apparatus is built to protect the state.
Eventually central planers find ways to chose & groom their successors, which usually turn to be next in kin. Gradually a narrative develops praising the elite for its unique skills & wisdom. An aristocracy is born.

I mean democratic version of planned economy in which government must be responsive to population's needs (e.g. clause in the constitution that referendums must be held about important resource allocation decisions).

Quote from: deed02392 on December 11, 2013, 12:19:45 PM

Why is there no 'false dilemma' poll option? I think what the 2nd or 3rd poster said is right - all automation does is make manufacturing cheaper, which only means the product gets cheaper for those who get their jobs displaced.

Murwa correctly answered on your question. There are really no viable 3+ option, in fact only single variant is possible because implementing unconditional income will instantly fail as capital will flight from this country.