Market Socialism

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Embed	(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field) Spoiler images (this replaces the thumbnails of your images with question marks) Hide country (this board displays your country when you post if this is unchecked)
Password	(For file and post deletion.)
Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4 Max filesize is 8 MB. Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000. You may upload 5 per post.

File: 1439234614980.png (118.32 KB, 1154x1000, 577:500, 351c1mu.png)

Market Socialism Anonymous 08/10/15 (Mon) 19:23:34 No.220

What do you guys think of market socialism?

Personally I like it because it combines the best aspects of capitalism with the best aspects of communism.

For example, if you have cooperatives competing with each other you're bound to get a better product due to competition.

You also get the glory of socialism because everyone who is a member of a cooperative gets to be a partial owner.

Pic not exactly related.

Anonymous 08/10/15 (Mon) 22:07:10 No.231

Bump

Anonymous 08/10/15 (Mon) 23:33:15 No.237

>>220

>For example, if you have cooperatives competing with each other you're bound to get a better product due to competition.

>You also get the glory of socialism because everyone who is a member of a cooperative gets to be a partial owner.

Those are terrible ideas. The objective of the market is to allocate goods without the need of planning but controlling prices, supply and demand is still need.

Anonymous 08/10/15 (Mon) 23:33:29 No.238

File: 1439249609834.png (271.23 KB, 468x600, 39:50, 1433753288757-4.png)

You do realize that the only purpose of companies in a market economy is making money, right? It doesn't matter if its owned by the workers or a CEO, its still within a profit-driven system where production is based on demand instead of the actual needs of the populace at large. Demand itself is based on pure speculation which leads to overproducing and eventually waste when the actual demand is filled and the remaining finished products that were produced based on the original speculation don't get sold and end up being put into warehouses to gather dust or simply dumped into a landfill.

Competition doesn't actually make better products, quite the opposite. The only thing that matters in a competitive economy is the maximization of profit through any means necessary, even if it means making a product that is dirt cheap to produce and breaks down within a short time period to encourage further consumption because that's how you get the most money out of the people who use your products. Since its based on a competitive market, every co-operative is essentially trying to outcompete each other on who can make the cheapest product that is still good enough for the consumers to purchase.

In my opinion, if socialism is to be implemented it shouldn't be done half-assed.

Just my two cents though, feel free to disagree.

Anonymous 08/11/15 (Tue) 04:07:34 No.252

>>237

Care to elaborate further?

>>238

>You do realize that the only purpose of companies in a market economy is making money, right? It doesn't matter if its owned by the workers or a CEO

Yeah but a worker owned company is going to be more responsible then a non worker owned company. Not to mention the fact that workers aren't being exploited because they're all getting an equal piece of the pie.

>Demand itself is based on pure speculation which leads to overproducing and eventually waste when the actual demand is filled and the remaining finished products that were produced based on the original speculation don't get sold and end up being put into warehouses to gather dust or simply dumped into a landfill.

So a socialist economy wouldn't be based on demand? How would the needs of the people be known if there wasn't any demand for goods?

As for overproduction, I don't see how that would be a problem because if you're not selling your product there's no reason to keep producing it.

With that said, you sound like the type of person who is for the complete elimination of money. However, that would just lead to a barter system where money is simply replaced with the exchange of goods directly.

At that point it would seem that the actual goods essentially become a new form of currency. In essence you wouldn't be eliminating capital at all, you would just be replacing it with raw materials.

I have no problem with competition, so long as the people are given their fair share.

Anonymous 08/11/15 (Tue) 04:27:41 No.253

>>252

>as for overproduction, I don't see how that would be a problem because if you're not selling your product there's no reason to keep producing it.

Oh, you don't understand markets, you don't produce shit on the fly, you estimate how many goods you will sell and produce accordingly. Overpruduction is inherent to markets

>lead to a barder system where goods take the place of money

It has been proven that "human nature" is relative to the environment, logical considering humans are the most addaptable species in nature. But that means there's no reason why cooperation can't happen, people just GIVING to each other as they need it. Really the goal should be to end scarcity.

Anonymous 08/11/15 (Tue) 04:59:19 No.256

>>253

>Oh, you don't understand markets, you don't produce shit on the fly, you estimate how many goods you will sell and produce accordingly. Overpruduction is inherent to markets

What makes you think that a nationalized industry wouldn't have the same problem?

The question is, how exactly do you determine what is needed outside of demand?

>It has been proven that "human nature" is relative to the environment, logical considering humans are the most addaptable species in nature. But that means there's no reason why cooperation can't happen, people just GIVING to each other as they need it. Really the goal should be to end scarcity.

But that's the thing. There's no such thing as a "gift" in any sort of economy, even a socialist one.

If one group of people needs certain material resources they are going to have to exchange their own goods for those of another.

I'm partially playing devils advocate, however it's always good to entertain different thoughts so as to not intellectually slacken.