[Anders wrote:]
> > I think it is rational to signal the labour content of goods by > > prices, and given a very equal - and continually equalized income > > distribution - "voting with dollars" is in many context an efficient > > form of democracy which a rational society (=socialism) will have to > > use - we cannot be overburdened with political processes to clarify > > what alternative we prefer.
[Paul C replied:]> I would agree with that, having previously determined that some things > are free of charge and tax funded like education and health care.
The allocation of only a _very, very_ small proportion of the total quantity of goods
should be determined by *ex post* "dollar votes", imo. This is because it is
inherently inefficient and wasteful. If that determines production and allocation
decisions then you will almost certainly expend labor time and other resources
on the production of goods which turn out not to be wanted. Must better
to have an *ex ante* consumer voting system: (in addition to the goods distributed
free of charge) everyone can have a discretionary 'budget' with which they can
purchase other goods but they must *order the goods in advance* That way you
would satisfy people's expressed wants and yet at the same time not waste
resources as would happen with typical market behavior. This is sort of
consumer sovereignty upside down - in a sense, it would be _real_ consumer
sovereignty (for the first time in history) since the claim that consumers ultimately
decide what to produce and control the market in a capitalist societies is fraudulent,
pernicious, obscurant, and ideological.
In solidarity, Jerry
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Fri Nov 14 09:11:17 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Dec 03 2008 - 15:07:39 EST