In other words the core objection to Hayek is precisely what Andie cites as the core advantage -- the use of markets to convey information.
Carrol
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
On
> Behalf Of andie_nachgeborenen
> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 8:01 AM
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Hayek, was Re: Stalinism (was Eric Hobsbawm)
>
> Nothing in Hayek requires private ownership, a point I have made to
generations
> of spluttering libertarians. Hayek's problem is with planning, not
ownership. His
> attempted save by appeal to the need for entrepreneurship, with which I
agree
> heartily, fails because nothing in Hayek's argument requires the
entrepreneurs be
> individual private owners rather than employees of a cooperative,
regardless of
> where title lies.
>
> Multiple equilibria are irrelevant. The problem is a model that makes
equilibrium a
> goal based on false premises. Hayek, like Marx, is great in part because
he tried to
> capture the laws of motion of real economic systems, not axiomatic models
with
> demonstrably false premises.
>
> Lange's reply that they never tried what I advocated is ridiculously weak
given
> what they did try produced every problem Hayek observed/predicted in
spades.
> You can believe that pigs will fly if you like. I will continue to insist
with Heyek that
> they have no wings.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Oct 12, 2012, at 7:39 AM, c b <cb31450 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Wojtek S wsoko52 at gmail.com
> > Thu Oct 11 07:51:12 PDT 2012
> >
> > [WS:] The existence of the mythical equilibrium is a red herring here,
> > since as Ormerod demonstrated in his book "Death of Economics"
> > multiple equilibria can be calculated in sufficiently complex system.
> > The crux of Lange's argument was that planners do not need to know
> > more than private capitalists, as both in real life proceed through
> > the process of trials and errors to adjust their prices. So that
> > undercuts the supposed omniscience required in planning but not
> > private capitalism - in fact neither requires it to improve
> > efficienc
> > Lange argued that both planning and capitalism are on equal footing in
> > this respect. What makes planning superior is the planning ability to
> > overcome constraints imposed by private ownership of property, which
> > leads to either periodical crises or equilibria skewed away from
> > optimum toward consumption of the rich. I do not think that this
> > argument can be dismissed that easily.
> >
> > As far as the price mechanisms under planning postulated by Lange -
> > they were either not implemented or if they were, they were later
> > circumvented by political and social mechanisms (informal economy,
> > etc.) So as Lange aptly observed, the reasons of the central planning
> > "failure" lie not in planning but in sociology and politics.
> >
> > Alas, there is one thing that is not considered in these arguments -
> > the capacity to externalize costs. That capacity is much greater in
> > capitalism - under which private firms can not only dump costs on they
> > public sector in their own countries, but also on other countries
> > thanks to imperialism. In planning systems, the capacity for cost
> > externalization was pretty much non-existent. First, the public
> > ownership of the means of production meant that public sector would
> > have to externalize to itself, which defeats the purpose. Second, the
> > planned economies lacked the capacity to externalize on other
> > countries because they were not imperialist (EE) or because their
> > imperialism had strategic rather than economic nature - i.e. its goal
> > was to maintain political influence against the west, rather than
> > economic exploitation. In other words, while western imperialists
> > externalized their costs on their satellites, Russian imperialists
> > absorbed the costs of satellites to maintain their allegiance.
> >
> > -- Wojtek
> >
> > "An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."
> >
> > ^^^^^^^
> > CB: I would to identify with Comrade Wojtek's remarks . Soviet Union
> > far from an evil empire was an anti-imperialist system
> > ___________________________________
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk