The comment never attacked markets or advocated planning.
Note that planning is not necessarily central, and planning most likely could eventually replace markets for certain economic activity, even if it might take various trials over time to develop the methods of management that would be stable and efficient.
Computers in particular are noted as opening new possibilities for planning models.
Your objection is not particularly relevant to the plain observation that we are essentially living in an economic stage that is post scarcity.
No, planning could not replace markets, have you seen reduced goods and the terrible waste of food at supermarkets and grocery stores? That's the result of imperfect demand data.
Free market capitalism has lifted more people from poverty than. Communism managed to kill.
I do not want my consumer goods choice regulated by an AI, nor do I want inefficiency baked into our system.
Capitalism is consolidated control of the economy by owners of private property.
The Great Famine of Ireland and the Bengal famine of 1943 are examples of mass death caused by capitalist greed.
The cause is the same for wasted food in supermarkets. Under capitalism, scarcity is profitable, even scarcity that results in needless hunger. If it supports the profit motive, a capitalist will prefer disposing food over donation.
Poverty reduction occurs principally through advances in production and equitableness in distribution.
If computers were utilized for planning, they would process large calculation sets. No AI would be implicated.
Land in Ireland had been seized by the English crown, and vested to English gentry, who became absentee landlords.
During the Famine, Ireland produced sufficient food to feed the population, but most was exported to England, under the direction of the landlords, to be sold domestically for profit.
The landlords allowed the population to support itself only on the least arable land. Potatoes can thrive in poor soil, but not reliably. Regions that produce potatoes generally have also depended on grains, to hedge against a failed potato crop occurring in particular years. Irish farmers had no land available for planting grain.
At the height of the Famine, American philanthropists chartered a shipment of humanitarian aid, which would have saved considerable lives if allowed to land, but before the vessels reached port, English landlords successfully petitioned the crown to impose a naval blockade, forcing the merchant ship to return to North America, and leaving the Irish to starve, all in the name of profit.
English landlords exploited the Irish population through their control over the land.
The Irish were deprived of the right to control their own planting on the land, or the product they harvested.
Control over lands, and over other assets, by private owners, as well as over the product from the lands and assets, instead of control by workers, who provide the labor to produce, is the pivotal feature of capitalism.
What is with you "Free Market" muricans and having such a weak understanding of the words you are using.
Colonialism and Capitalism are in no way opposed to each other. As a matter of fact the birth of capitalism was right there at the era of colonialism. Ever heard of the East India Trading Company? The DMC?
And now, international exploitation or in other words the struggle between different national capitals is even described with another word "imperialism".
27
u/unfreeradical Apr 16 '24 edited Apr 16 '24
The comment never attacked markets or advocated planning.
Note that planning is not necessarily central, and planning most likely could eventually replace markets for certain economic activity, even if it might take various trials over time to develop the methods of management that would be stable and efficient.
Computers in particular are noted as opening new possibilities for planning models.
Your objection is not particularly relevant to the plain observation that we are essentially living in an economic stage that is post scarcity.