I think that it is inevitable for this sort of thing to be researched and developed, but it won't be in our lifetimes that we see an effective example of such an system. In my opinion, it is entirely possible for sapient behavior to be understood and used by computing systems.

In order to efficiently organize the economy in a central fashion, you'd need to determine everyone's constantly-changing needs and preferences (probably impossible), or make decisions for them (tyranny). And then there's the question of division of labor...

Dude, you're ruining my thread. This is about stating one's own opinions and thoughts not quote dumping other people's.

Snipped... tho I hadn't quoted anything... it was links pertaining to economics, specifically about pricing, production, capitalism vs. socialism, etc... you know, stuff I thought you'd find interesting given your question.

Interesting topic!

I think it would mess things up faster and by a much larger margin. The containment of the planned economy system was because it was limited to the USSR. On a global scale, I don't think that would turn out too well.

I also don't see someone pulling off such a computer system without entering into A.I territory and by then we have to expect the unexpected so theoretically anything could happen, increases the amount of chaos rather than order.

Also, any computer system is vulnerable given enough time and if we would have only one and everyone would know about and the capabilities it would represent if one would gain access would motivate too many people for it to happen sooner rather than later.

That said, advanced computer systems meddling in our affairs might come to be the natural future for us.

Just like any system there's no "real" anywhere. There's always a loophole for those in power or want-to-be-in-power to exploit.

So lets first clarify one little bit:

Nowhere in the world do we have capitalism. Not in the US, Canada or Europe.

ALL markets are nowadays limited.

Why ? Look up the Robber barons in the early 19th century.

So in a way, even in the west, we have a planned market. It starts kind of with the quotas in the food-industry, espacially the farming industry, going further to subsedizes in those industry.

US and EU are doing it on a national level.

Further looking into the energy-market, same thing there. On a national level there is a planned market. The signers of the Kyoto-pakt are fullfilling (or trying too) their quotas. Is this any different than planned market? Even on a global scale.

Nice example Germany and renewable energy.

Now let´s look at some coporations:

EA with their sports-series, every year a new version (not really improved).....you could call it planned ;)
Battle field: every 2 years IIRC
and so on.......

Car-industry:
Look at their annual reports: They do predict and work onto certain goals, like a 5% increase. Isn´t this planned market? And that would be true for any shareholding company by the way ;)

And as pointed out prior: REAL Marxism (would be the better IMHO) never really existed....so we can only talk about a hypothesis, which was never used as envisioned......

The criticism directed at the planned market, could be used one-by-one towards the western market as well.......The west was only lucky to have survived longer than the east.

Or to state it in another way: Without Reagans dream of Star wars, the east would have never bankrupted (IMHO and some other analysts) (short version and some other factors as well)

Think of the corruption in our system:

Let´s look at the legal system: The more money you have, the better deals you get......Now look at your local constitution or similar: Ever heard of fair trial?

bureaucracy: No I am not starting this devil up ;) But I think you get my point ;)

Elections and the scandals.......

The list is endless and unfortunate the big corporations are gaining more and more weight on the global scale, directly via lobbyism.

So we are going kind of into a global planned market, but not driven by the people, more driven by big corporations, which as we do know, only have the best interest for mankind in mind /sarcasm off

Best example there: Monsanto

just my 2 cents ;) and some fodder to think about

In my opinion, there is no way around that direction if we as humans want to survive on this planet. To have a sustainable development, a change is necessary to produce what humans need, not what corporations want you to buy. Furhtermore I think we need to fall back to a more integrated mindset with the planet we live on - like many indigenous people have. And first but not last, we need to recognize that we are all humans, work together and move forward living together in peace.

The Corporation

Interesting thoughts guys.

Maybe I wasn't too clear, I'm not a socialist or whatever, I'm just interested in these things the more I read. I guess there's no need for an absolute stance, planning could exist for "basic needs" like food or shelter or giving all people a job (to prevent the worst poverty), but if you wanted to earn more money, get a better house, buy luxury goods, then you could still try and get a better paying job and use your own money. So two systems at the same time.

Every system will have problems and not address the needs of everyone, in my opinion because we fail to see that we're all human. We constantly emphasize our differences, which just serves to divide us - and for who's gain, really?

I like to think that the majority of people are not greedy war-mongers, but apparently that's who we let be in charge.

If you want to know why something is the way it is, look to see who's making money from the situation, because apparently that's all that matters.

This country is starving, and that country throws away enough food each day to feed them, for example.

The message we get is "We got ours, and screw everybody else." So no, I don't think anything is going to be "good for all" until people actually start thinking that way.

That ensures that people fight each other, without ever coming together saying, wait perhaps we should change some things for the better(or worse, who knows). For whose benefit, I guess that is clear - power systems want to stay in place and when you see struggling systems and the news/media demonizing the actions of, for example, a government, you can be sure your own power structure in the country you live in, will also go to great lengths to stay in place when challenged.

The people currently in power gain from this. Because if we are too busy fighting each other then we will ignore them(the people who are truly fucking us in the ass). Why do you think there is so much racism in the USA? Why do you think there is so much hate towards poor people from the middle class and up in the USA? Oh you don't drive an expensive SUV and have a iPhone? Then you are not as cool as me, you peasant! It's because Americans have been brainwashed to hate everyone different from them. Brainwashed by Fox News...brainwashed by TV shows...brainwashed by movies....by books...by advertisements......by their parents...the list goes on and on. The people in power love it when one American looks at another American and feels hatred, fear and disgust... The people in power love it when there is so much elitism going on...oooh I'm better than you because I have more $$$ than you blah blah. All these things, keep us divided. A divided population is a weak population. To be fair though, MaGo72 answered your question first.

The common tactic seems to be turning the population into ignorant sheep who feel hatred, fear and disgust towards other sheep. Such a tactic is genius, really. It's like using a magic spell in an fantasy RPG that makes all your enemies rage against each other for the rest of their lvies.

They will cut education and then blame the cut on foreigners or poor people or homeless people most likely. So the majority of people will unleash their hate on innocent people. This way, the people become even more divided and the people who are really responsible...don't have to suffer any hate from their victims.

divide and rule (or divide and conquer) in its best way:

Elements of this technique involve:

creating or encouraging divisions among the subjects to prevent alliances that could challenge the sovereign
aiding and promoting those who are willing to cooperate with the sovereign
fostering distrust and enmity between local rulers
encouraging meaningless expenditures that reduce the capability for political and military spending

Also true for corporations

edit: source wikipedia ;)