part of the history of unplanned economies. That doesn't sound like they work that well compared to the planned economies that have existed.
Wasn't the Soviet Union's economic growth faster than that of the unplanned economies of capitalism in their beginnings ? What about the successes of China in feeding and clothing so many people with a planned economy ? There was a clear economic improvement over its previously unplanned economy.
Is Brad saying that unplanned economies "work well " ? Aren't there a huge number of counterexamples to this propostion ? What does he mean by work well ? Work well for whom ? Is he saying the invisible hand actually does exist ?
Charles Brown
Detroit
>>> Brad De Long <delong at econ.Berkeley.EDU> 11/26 11:16 PM >>>
>Hi. My name is Sam Pawlett and am new to the list but have been lurking
>and unable to contribute due to lingering medical problems. I am a 26 yr
>old graduate in philosophy and economics from S.F.U. here in Vancouver.
>I studied Marxism and comparative economics with Mike Lebowitz whose
>fine work most of you are probably familiar with. Last time I spoke with
>Mike he was planning a book on Actually Existing Socialism, a kind of
>Reply to the Brus/Kornai Hayekian argument that any kind of planned
>socialism will inevitably lead to economic stagnation because of a lack
>of hard budget constraint and the absence of sufficient material
>incentives.
I don't think Janos Kornai would appreciate being lumped in with Hayek. Hayek, after all, said that a planned economy could not work. Kornai said that it was very unlikely to work well--and it is hard for me at least to see how Kornai's arguments could be refuted: there are no counterexamples...
Brad DeLong