>>2127288>It is inefficient because it operates the same as large capitalist corporate businesses causing waste by overestimates and shortages by underestimatesthis statement alone reveals your ignorance.
why were there imbalances? two reasons: perverse incentives and a lack of computerization. in the case of the market, imbalances occur because companies interact with each other through what amounts to local control. this local control gives rise to modes which we call business cycles
>Scaling things downthere it is again. how the fuck are you going to "scale down" the sum total of the human economy? how are you going to "scale down" the fact that emissions in one place impact everyone everywhere else?
>Renewable resources are better managed locallythis entirely depends on the resource and what you mean by "managing". can for example the rainforest department in Brazil decide in isolation, in its own little island, what is to be done with the rainforest under its control? no it cannot, because the entire world depends on it being managed correctly. are the Brazilian rainforest department's workers in a position to know best about the situation on the ground in said rainforest? of course. how then are they to conduct their work in a way that doesn't threaten global viability? through the single global and fully centralized and automated planning system of course
>chemistry creationsof course you can put factories and shit in multiple places. do you think planning means we'd put every industry into one huge industrial complex ála Magnitogorsk except bigger? not that we couldn't, but still
>top down order of control like a centralized planned economyyou have fallen for bourgeois lies about how the various planned economies worked. you are arguing against straw planning, not actually existing planning, nor what is being proposed in the planning discourse
there are only two ways we know of for organizing production: either mediation by value (exchange), or mediation in kind (planning). unless you're a market "socialist" you probably intend the latter. but then we're speaking of which manner of planning works best, and for that we must study and
understanPost too long. Click here to view the full text.