Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms

I still think you are evading the question. Central planning was removed and replaced by market
  coordination. Following this welfare declined terribly. The technology, education national culture
  were held constant, all that changed was the organisation of production.
The hypothesis of the western economists about the superiority of market versus plan was put to an
  empirical test and the western economists were proven wrong. Under the new managerial system
  the economy performed worse on every measure aside from allowing a few people to become billionaires.
-The remark about sleeping under bridges is totally tasteless, in the centrally planned economy that kind of abject
  deprivation had been eliminated. In market russia it became rife,
  if you read articles on death certificates in thtf4fe 90s and see the rising number of deaths ydue to indeterminate
  causes closer inspection reveals many of these
to be bodies found abandoned inthe streets in the Russian winter.
It was a matter of people loosing centrally heated flats to die in shop doorways and parks. No doubt a minority
  of the population could now enjoy high quality goods like Mercedes or private jets, but for the majority there
was a big decline in what they got.

You still seem to be repeating western arguments from the 1980s. Experiance should have taught us better now.

On 10/06/10 14:30, Alejandro Agafonow wrote:
>
> If lose the bridge which uses to provide shelter to me and the can of
> beans which uses to feed me, of course my living standards and life
> expectancy will tumble. This is a triviality.
>
> The real point at stake is whether I could be sheltered and fed by
> other and better means. Lionel Robbins was very clear about this.
> Recognising the provision of useful effects on behalf of GOASPLAN, he
> stated that the fundamental question is not whether plants can be
> built and managed with certain technical efficiency, but if using the
> resources of the community to build and manage factories those
> resources are being used more profitably than they could be used in
> any other way.
>
> So again, the qualitative inputs provided by returns to management are
> essential to asses the opportunity costs of centrally planned socialism.
>
> A. Agafonow
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *De:* Paul Cockshott <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
> *Para:* Outline on Political Economy mailing list <ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
> *Enviado:* mié,9 junio, 2010 00:49
> *Asunto:* Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms
>
> I think you are evading the point, remove GOSPLAN and output living
> standards and life expectancy tumbled. you can not cover up the deaths
> of millions of people due to poverty and then claim that there was not
> a massive decline in real production of use values.
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>
> [ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>] On Behalf Of Alejandro
> Agafonow [alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es
> <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es>]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 4:46 PM
> To: Outline on Political Economy mailing list
> Subject: Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms
>
> Since the original problem was to work out the marginal return on an
> input, i.e., marginal returns to management, we have to face the fact
> that we don’t really have an homogeneous unit of account to measure
> this input. We are not concerned with measuring it for the sake of
> measurement itself. If we have to take into account the diminishing
> quality of marginal returns to management and this hampers
> measurement, that’s just too bad.
>
> Concerning your reference to GOSPLAN, I’m not sure if it is right to
> consider returns to management from the point of view of a “group of
> people responsible for controlling and organizing a company”, but from
> the broader point of view of the work needed to the “control and
> organization of something”. In this last sense, productivity was not
> so good in GOSPLAN as you have to take into account the hole labour
> force, not to speak of the artificiality of the USSR production given
> increasing inventories that nobody wanted.
>
> A. Agafonow
>
> ________________________________
> De: Paul Cockshott <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk <mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>>
> Para: Outline on Political Economy mailing list
> <ope@lists.csuchico.edu <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>
> Enviado: sáb,5 junio, 2010 22:29
> Asunto: Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms
>
> You would not get a clear distinction between inependent and dependent
> variables if you want to adjust the input for quality. Your definition
> of quality then is related to output. But the original problem was to
> work out the marginal return on an input.
>
> Note too that you claims about diminishing marginal returns to
> management in the ussr are empirically dubious. When the top layer of
> management, GOSPLAN was removed in the early 90s, national output fell
> by some 40percent or more. Given that only a couple of thousand worked
> in GOSPLAN, say less than 0.01 percent of the soviet labour force, the
> marginal returns to management seem to have been enormously positive
> in practice.
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>>
> [ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>>] On Behalf Of Alejandro
> Agafonow [alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es
> <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es>>]
> Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2010 5:54 PM
> To: OPE List
> Subject: Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms
>
> But my point is that evaluating managerial inputs in person hours is
> not a good answer because you are not measuring the falling in
> managerial quality as a larger degree of centralisation goes by.
>
> Likewise, as far as managerial inputs are produced inside the
> enterprises rather than externalising the production of every input,
> evaluation in money doesn’t seem the answer either. Hiring managers in
> a job market is not necessarily the same as buying managerial inputs.
>
> The reaction of actual capitalist enterprises is trying to stop nearby
> the point of constant returns opening new factories/enterprises when
> it is possible, whichever the way of measuring managerial inputs is.
>
> A. Agafonow
>
> ________________________________
> De: Paul Cockshott <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk
> <mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk><mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk
> <mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>>>
> Para: Alejandro Agafonow <alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es
> <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es>>>;
> Outline on Politic al Economy mailing list <ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>>
> Enviado: sáb,5 junio, 2010 16:01
> Asunto: Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms
>
>
> It obviously makes a big difference whether you evaluate managerial
> input in person hours or in money, given the rapid growth of managers
> pay. I can quite believe that in money terms there may be decreasing
> returns to management
>
> --- original message ---
> From: "Alejandro Agafonow" <alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es
> <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es>>>
> Subject: Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms
> Date: 5th June 2010
> Time: 10:44:37 am
>
>
> Paul, I’m afraid that productivity, i.e., output in terms of goods per
> unit of labour, can not be arithmetically treated to determine if
> under conditions of productivity growing faster than logarithmically
> it would outmount decreasing returns to management.
>
> To be arithmetically treatable, we would have to reduce managerial
> inputs and goods or services per unit of labour, to a common unit of
> account. Then, we would be able to compare them in order to determine
> if under conditions of productivity growing faster than
> logarithmically, it would outmount decreasing returns to management
> indeed.
>
> The crucial point is whether we can find a unit of account for
> managerial inputs able to measure them according to the quality of
> their contribution to production? We can imagine a situation where
> though facing conditions of productivity growing faster than
> logarithmically, managerial inputs are reducing their effectiveness in
> running production and distorting the whole system.
>
> A. Agafonow
>
>
> ________________________________
> De: Paul Cockshott <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk
> <mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk><mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk
> <mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>>>
> Para: Outline on Political Economy mailing list
> <ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>>
> Enviado: lun,5 abril, 2010 21:36
> Asunto: Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms
>
> Ok but are the costs of management polynomial, logarithmic or log
> linear in scale of production. First approximation indicates managment
> to be log linear in number of people employed, but if productivity of
> labour rises faster than logarithmically with number employed ( not a
> steep demand ) then there would be no decreasing returns in your sense
> to managerial inputs.
> ________________________________________
> From: ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>>>
> [ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>>>] On Behalf Of Alejandro
> Agafonow [alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es
> <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es>><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es
> <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es>>>]
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:25 PM
> To: Outline on Political Economy mailing list
> Subject: Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms
>
> Do you mean Paul backed by empirical research? The phenomenon of
> diminishing returns to scale in production is backed by empirical
> research, though diminishing returns to management may have motivated
> less empirical inquiry. However, to think the world as one where there
> are only constant or even increasing returns to scale and management
> is like thinking in a world without friction.
>
> A. Agafonow
>
> ________________________________
> De: Paul Cockshott <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk
> <mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk><mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk
> <mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>><mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk
> <mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk><mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk
> <mailto:wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>>>>
> Para: Outline on Political Economy mailing list
> <ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>>>
> Enviado: lun,29 marzo, 2010 20:52
> Asunto: Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms
>
> how much of this is theory and how much is backed by quantitative research
> ________________________________________
> From: ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>>><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>>>>
> [ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>>><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu>>>>] On Behalf Of Alejandro
> Agafonow [alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es
> <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es>><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es
> <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es>>><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es
> <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es>><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es
> <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es><mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es <mailto:alejandro_agafonow@yahoo.es>>>>]
> Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 6:07 PM
> To: Outline on Political Economy mailing list
> Subject: Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms
>
> Diminishing returns to management are yield rates that after a certain
> point fail to increase proportionately and start to decrease to
> additional outlays of management. Should certain degree of
> centralization reached this bureaucratic inefficiencies start to
> increase disproportionately.
>
> A. Agafonow
>
> ________________________________
> De: Gerald Levy <jerry_levy@verizon.net
> <mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net><mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net
> <mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net>><mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net
> <mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net><mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net
> <mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net>>><mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net
> <mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net><mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net
> <mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net>><mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net
> <mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net><mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net
> <mailto:jerry_levy@verizon.net>>>>>
> Para: Outline on Political Economy mailing list
> <ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>>>>
> Enviado: jue,18 marzo, 2010 15:09
> Asunto: Re: [OPE] socialist planning in capitalist firms
>
> > So, what does make conflicting interests in capitalist economies more
> > powerful than conflicting interests in socialist
> > economies that prevent the former to go further in a centrally
> capitalist
> > economy?
>
>
> Hi Alejandro:
>
> The profit system. Also, while there can be conflicting interests in a
> socialist system, there can and should be
> a certain level of coordination among different producers. For instance,
> consider how the diffusion of new
> technologies is often retarded by the system of proprietary rights,
> such as
> the patent system, under
> capitalism. This incredible inefficiency would (or, at least, should) be
> overcome in a socialist system where
> producers would share knowledge about technologies. In any event, there
> wouldn't be the same people vs.
> profit equation in which the requirements of the latter trump the former
> under socialism.
>
>
> > Nothing in my criterion. Therefore the issue of diminishing returns to
> > management.
>
> What do you mean by diminishing returns "to management"? There can be
> - and
> are - bureaucratic
> inefficiencies wherever there are bureaucracies. A capitalist
> corporation is
> an inherently
> bureaucratic and hierarchical organization and there are many
> inefficiencies
> that arise from
> this.
>
> In solidarity, Jerry
>
> _______________________________________________
> ope mailing list
> ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>>>>
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
>
>
> The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401
> _______________________________________________
> ope mailing list
> ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>>>
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
>
>
> The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401
> _______________________________________________
> ope mailing list
> ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>>
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
>
>
> ________________________________
> The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401
>
>
> The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401
> _______________________________________________
> ope mailing list
> ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu><mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>>
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
>
>
> The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401
> _______________________________________________
> ope mailing list
> ope@lists.csuchico.edu <mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
>

_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Thu Jun 10 15:04:09 2010