[lbo-talk] Fitch and Brenner

[Philip Pilkington]

> Hayek and Friedman were in many ways repulsive characters, but their
> critiques of socialism - like coordination and knowledge problems - aren't
> completely bonkers. You could - and I do - point to things like Wal-Mart's
> logistical innovations as suggesting a path for socialization of the
> economy, but if you think there aren't "hardwired" problems in socialism,
> you're just not taking your enemies seriously enough.
>
>

Although I think I'm risking a crisis of "over-posting" I want to put this
forward...

Looking at building some sort of socialism, I absolutely agree. It seems
that, no matter how I look at it, many of these constructions about
free-market competition and equilibrium are completely cogent. The problem
is what they're aimed at. Imagine if they were aimed at reducing working
hours rather than wages, for example. Then surely the same maths/notions of
efficiency could be applied to realising something very different.

There's an awful lot more ideological problems with socialist conceptions of
economics at the moment than people would like to realise... Cut the ego;
look at the aims!