How do u do a proper qualification of the price of a product without a market signal that follows price and demand?

It's a decentralized, impossible to manipulate way of signaling to consumers how much they have to work for something and acts as an effective rationing tool much better than whatever a central planner could come up with.

some products under capitalism has not real production value but they have a lot of demand.

this isn't even funny as a joke
qualify 'effective' lol

No. People who worked harder and produced more would receive higher pay difference equal to the extra amount produced. Those who worked less would be deducted. The USSR under Stalin had a system which, while not what we are describing, would reward people based on how much they produced (piece-rate system).

Also, why has no know said read Cockshott yet.

what if people want something that goes againts the state planners reasons.

like we want more BLACKED porn or we want more of X color shoes, but the central planners want more of Y shoes?

Well yes the state can try to implement price controls and then you either get disasters like Venezuela or constant shortages like the USSR.

By "effective" I mean just that - no shortages, easy and simple to understand, widely successful in its application.

The problem with a Stalinist piece-rate system is that the system is geared towards mass (shoddy) production rather than quality. People are incentivized to pump out as much as possible rather than spending the time needed on each product to really make it great.

how can the central planners increase the demand?

this is literally the holy grail of entire advertising industries in the west.

lmao have you heard of planned obsolescence

Only happens when companies feel secure in their market share/monopolies and the retarded neolib government does nothing about it. A strong dose of competition through antitrust regulation would allay this, not to mention that under market socialism people would be incentivized to make good products rather than just a lot of them.

markets and socialims aren't oposite ends.

you can still have socialism and a market.

6000 Autism Level

Attached: nut.png (463x376, 256.47K)

Price controls are still prices you numbskull, and still rely on market distribution, simulated or otherwise.
The problems in venezuela are not due to 'price controls' either that's a ridiculous claim and shortages in eastern bloc countries only started happening when market elements were being reintroduced and economic planning was abandoned during the liberalisation under Gorbachev.
As for your definition of efficiency, market economies don't 'prevent shortages' by virtue of providing for everyone (fulfilling real demand), but by restricting the availability of goods to a smaller section of consumers through price.
If you look at the late 70s Scotland and Poland, you can see for example that Poles ate more meat per capita than Scots, Poland was suffering 'shortages' of meat while Scotland was not. Because while in Poland meat prices were subsidised so they remained affordable to everyone, in Scotland the prices rose and the butchers shops remained full of meat by virtue of less people being able to buy them. Personally i prefer the material reality of 'shortages' where people eat to the purely performative plenty of stocked shops and people not eating.
How is this at all a feature of the piece-rate system and not of Fordism and assembly line manufacture. The average wage-slave in an factory in a market system is also not putting in their heart and soul into their product like some old timey artisan. The quality of production is simply a question of resources and priorities. More economically developed countries and the enterprises therein with vast resources at their disposal can afford more quality control, its as simple as that.
In fact as the other user pointed out, its precisely capitalist market economy which structurally incentivises poor quality, planned obsolescence and all manner of dirty tricks because its geared towards maximising profit rather than fulfilling demand effectively.

how do u set the price without a market signal?

that doesn't explain how apple can sell more by charging more.

There are numerous methods such as simulated markets or using labour-time accounting, however those carry much of the same problems as capitalism and markets do.
The socialist solution is to move past markets entirely and render prices unnecessary. Production for use on the basis of material balances and cybernetic planning does not require pricing or currency to keep track of production, consumption and demand.

how do u create enough of something that the population wants without a market signal?

what if there's a niche market that is really small of something they need, but since is so niche, no stadistical model can account for?

These small niche markets are probably reactionary. The leaders will be shot, the rest go to the gulag.

so handicapped people are reactionary and companies shouldn't catter to blind videogame gamers or even create games for deafblind people?

what if there's a market for people who loves to smell flowers but they're allergic to most flowers?

Or any fucking market that is really niche IRL?

How would you solve the SF housing bubble faggot?

You must really love reactionaries. You're not one of them are you?

Not really, I'm just showing you examples of IRL niche markets that can't be accounted for in a central planning way, because they're really niche.

People like you belong in a gulag.

You monitor consumption within the population and produce until there's excess production. Then you simply monitor trends within consumption to account for any variance, with modern production methods the reactivity of such a model would be far higher than markets while being far less wasteful in the long term and efficient as fulfilling real demand.
Cybernetics does not mean leaving the economy to some unchecked autonomous algorithm operating on statistics. A democratic component is essential to socialist economy, there must be means in place for people to interface with the production process and submit requests. What companies do with focus groups and surveys can be extended to democratic participation within economic planning.

Abolish landlords.

Yawn, try again

what if I want to spend resources on videogames for blindeaf people who can't play normal videogames nor they can play audio videogames (because they're also deaf)?

what if the central planning authorities tell me such niche is not big enough to sustain spending resources, because how many deafblind people are IRL?

so, what if I want to make games for deafblind people but the market is so niche, I can't convice the central planning AI?

Why would you not be able to convince them? This sort of hypothetical comes down to assuming bad faith tbh.

I know we make fun of right wingers here but you should show some more self esteem, you're not all blind and deaf.

I already gave you one example I personally care.

I want to make games.
I want to make games for blind and deafblind people.

The market for blind games is almost non existant, even though there seems to exist.
The market for deafblind games doesn't even exist.

You can't simply go and tell the central planners hey, there's this idea for a niche market that doesn't even exist, let's spend resources on it.

Why not?

Now you are saying your scenario doesn't exist. You really deaf and blind, and possibly retarded.

Attached: 13438934_980062628775144_8616825483802367107_n.jpg (162x220, 8.41K)

Hey im trying my best to teach them the error of their ways.

Attached: the kind vladimir ilyich would have shot everybody here.jpg (1200x773, 112.55K)

It's one example.

Take the SF housing issue.
the prices of rent are too expensive now.
You could build more houses, however by building commieblocks, you're also destroying the main reason people want to move to the city (their 1950 houses).

By making more houses and building apartments like new york, you're destroying the reason people want to live in SF.

central planning can't solve this.

I'm giving you one example I personally happen to affect me.

I also want to make a software that takes a MIDI file and reproduces the notes names so deafblind violin players can easily learn a piece.

The handicapped market is filled with niche examples that are so niche they can't be accounted on a central planning style.

What if we need more wood on normal houses rather than houses for dwarve people.
So this means that dwarves has not right for a house that is smaller and hire other dwarves to make those houses?

What if the comunity of dwarves want to pay AT ANY PRICE, because they don't have a cheaper alternative, furniture for dwarves and doors for dwarves houses?

In communism, if you (and maybe some other people) think that deving videogames for deafblind people you can either start coding something yourself or gather with some others and join or create a deafblind dev group. The ideal place to start such group would probably be in a university. There you can either find people interested in gamedeving and people interested in assistive technologies.
You won't be profiting out of this, but it could become your career.
This kind of shit already happens today in many unis.

Nice try faggot. Everyone knows dwarfs housing would require less material since they are smaller lol. Also no need to pretend you know anything about music or programming or else you would have made the software already. Except you know, that software you described has existed for over 20 years already and it was released free for use.

You just lower rent you dipshit. If there isn’t enough housing and people want to move there you just build more.

...

single-family houses are shit, you change it by making other types of housing more desirable.

how bout the market for dwarves building houses for other dwarves.

you need blue collar dwarves who then will build those dwarves homes.

yeah, this is why I saw a video of a guy making a kickstarter for braile sheet music.

No such market exist.
How many blind violin players exist for it to be a viable concern for central planers?

SF is basically an island, you can't simply build more houses without demolishing current buildings.

Literally just abolish rent. Landlords are parasites.
1. why assume that there's only one type of housing that can be built?
2. why is people wanting to move to san francisco a good thing?
3. What kind of delusionally spoilt and detached from reality sort of person do you have to be to think people move to a large city because of the architecture lol
You keep not explaining why they can't be, you haven't given any reason why they wouldn't, you just keep asserting it.

Rent could still exist in socialism, but it may just be your taxes. Either way it’s goin to be lower than it is now because a GREAT DEAL of it is going to landlord profits. A property that gets regular tenants (especially those high end, new multi family buildings) are some of the most profitable ventures you can enter into. Under socialism “rent” would just be cost of maintenance and improvements on housing, no leeches.

why not just make a bunch more than you think you need and see how that goes
t. smart guy

because I keep imagining random niche markets that are too small for a central planner in the capital to give a fuck.

What if I want to make a drawing tablet for some really niche market like autistic faggots who masturbate to airplane porn?

I just gave you one legit example, blue collar construction workers for dwarves houses.

Normal people can't build houses for dwarves, because they're too big to even enter such houses.

The entire industry of android phones didn't existed until Steve Jobs invented it.

top kek, lay off the fantasy novels. Dwarf houses do not need dwarf architect or builders to build.
Are you 12 years old?

you need dwarves who work as blue collars construction guys to make a house for other dwarves.

It was one example.

...

You keep invoking this unaccountable central planning staff which makes all the decisions and doesn't care about the needs of minorities but nothing of the sort has even been implied.
Democratic participation means that if there was no accommodation suitable for a dwarf then they could submit a request for such and this would be appropriately prioritised as a basic need with high priority. Were it the case that there was a population of dwarfs for whose needs standard housing is unsuitable, then high priority would be given to developing a model of housing that is suitable for them and they would constructed to adequate number.
I'm not sure in what world people with dwarfism live in literal hobbit holes or why the construction of homes for dwarfs would require dwarf construction workers or where these dwarf construction firms exist in capitalism, but im sure your hypotheticals are very firmly rooted in reality.

What are you asking dude? Let’s just assume it’s literally impossible to put all 7 billion people on the planet into San Francisco at a certain standard of living, so socialism is defeated? Or maybe we can’t put 100 million people into San Francisco. Or 10 million. Or 3 million. Maybe there is a mega complex in neo-San Francisco, year 3154, and the Zuckerberg syndicate maintains cyber-feudal estates throughout the inner zones that have an aesthetic standard so far above the wastes of the long since blasted interior of the Abandoned Zone that it costs a quadrillion HyperYen to even inhabit a broom closet with paltry access to the most basic of VR Zen Worlds (lowest subscription level available mostly for corporate generational indentured servants). As a result, there are about 1000 Executive Shogun level dwellings with a private space elevator, and about 3 million VR equipped broom closets. If San Francisco can not possibly sustain a single additional Executive Shogun level complex, does that mean that neo-San Francisco is in an impossible housing predicament given everybody wishes they could bath in the exquisite solar deck of the private space elevator far above the geo-engineering aerosols sprayed into the atmosphere to stop the planet from melting?

I know i shouldn't be, but im still disappointed that a faggot who comes in with some basic bitch claim about how markets are good while assuming prices are somehow essential to the world also believes that there are construction firms made up of dwarfs, that people move to san francisco for the architecture, that the only solution to rising rent is building more homes and that people moving to san francisco is some immutable law of motion of the universe that an economy simply must account for.
Imagine living and thinking inside a box to such a degree you are convinced it is the horizon of possibility.

literally nothign will stop you from making games on your own time retard; which you'd have a hell of a lot more of because you'd recieve a hell of a lot more of the value of your labour, not to mention pretty much all socialist states(and a lot of capitalist states for that matter, look into canadian film funding for example) have a literal process for getting grant "funding" for arts projects. You're either misunderstanding or being willfully obtuse.

youtube.com/watch?v=S2UgwINQVPM

yes, because villages for people that are dwarves is so mainstream I literally have to google some vice report about one of such villages.

That's not the point faggot.

Too many people want to live in SF as is today.
By making SF more like new york, it will destroy the reason people want to live in SF.

I'm not talking bout socialism, retard.

I'm talking about a central planning model versus market economy.

Problem fucking solved. How can you write out the answer to your own fucking question and continue to insist that your question has not been answered?

So what? What is the problem?
So?
Why would that be done? I refer you again to the response given here
You just keep repeating the same thing like a sperg. People respond to you and you just ignore it and change the subject, so when people respond to the new claims you make you ignore that and go back to the previous claim as if none of this happened.

You're on a socialist board, you asked a question about markets, people are going to explain to you the problems with markets and the benefits of socialist economic planning. What did you expect?

yeah, because then people wont wanna live there anymore.

I'm not againts socialism on moral grounds.

I'm skeptical of the central planning idea.
This is what I'm talking about.

I think markets are better than planning.

Socialism has no moral grounds.
You haven't made any case for it meriting scepticism
You have made this claim and people have responded to you arguing that markets are not better than planning. You however haven't engaged with arguments at all, instead you've just gone out on a limb with a whole bunch of hypotheticals which you believe somehow are unworkable in a planned economy, and each time someone informs you that actually they are entirely workable or are confused about why you even think it would constitute a problem you shift to another one. Suffice it to say its not making for productive discussion. What is your actual issue?

His issue is mental retardation. The cure is euthanasia.

capitalims creates newer markets just to sell more crap.
imagine if Steve jobs went to a central planning HR female and explain his vission for an iphone and the female just nodded and tell him to fuck off.

Can you please try really hard to just make a point for once in this thread? I'm really trying to give you a fair shake but at this point im thinking this is an elaborate attempt at trolling or you're actually 12 like another user said.

Imagine if the NKVD took steve jobs to a gulag, cured him of his cancer, and then worked him to death in an uranium mine. The world would be a much better place.

what if its build by robots?

Depends on if it's a male or female robot. 1 hour of male robot labor = 1 hour of human labor. One hour of female robot labor = 0.6 hours of human labor.

I just gave you some examples of niche markets where people can't afford to use anything else, so they will be willing to pay premium price.

These niche markets are still profitable, even if their market is smaller and the price is higher.

A central planner would simply ignore such markets because they don't align with the central planning morals, like porn, or they belong to some minority that is being opressed by the central authorities because of their religion/politics.

They exist.

how did this devolve into dwarfs and robots

Because it's based on the social average amount of time taken to create that product, and not on how long each individual producer takes to make it. .pdf related is a pretty good introduction:
yeah I know Mandel was a trot and that he denies that the USSR was socialist in the book, the economic side of it is still serviceable

Yes, and people responded to you that in a society where production is for use rather than exchange would fulfil those niche demands as if not more effectively.
This is a given in a market economy, how is it relevant however? A planned economy is even better at satisfying niche demand as it has no need for profitability in its enterprises, as such even extreme minorities can be provided for.
So the only 'argument' you have is that you in bad faith assume that central planning would be discriminatory? Why would this be the case? Why would central planning be moralistic? Why would porn be a manufactured product?
The case has been stated numerous times that democratic participation within economic planning means every individual has an input into the economy and cybernetics means every individual's consumption allows for precise economic calculation. There is no reason whatsoever to assume that there would be some malevolent power controlling everything and forcing its subjective opinions onto the economy.

Soviets produced only half of what americans produced during the cold war.

You’re literally just assuming shit. The central planners will have a mechanism by which they’re made aware of small but important issues for minority and local groups and that they’ll prioritize development of infrastructure, services and goods to consider their needs as best they can within their limited resources. I’m just stating it, so stop acting like it isn’t the truth.

porn is only allowed on western capitalistic economics, everywhere else is banned for religious and moral reasons.

Chinese are literally genociding their western muslims populations.

Somebody gives you a thoughtful answer and a book and you just dick wave about how much the United States produced during WW2?

Ban this dipshit, please. He is having an aneurysm, I’m not sure if he even knows how old he is.

What the fuck does that have to do with anything I just posted?

Central planners carry out what the people want, not what they themselves want.

good

Corporations engage in central planning. It works. Going one level up makes it even easier since you don't need to rely on guess-work.

Central planning can and It was politically abused for political goals in Soviet and China.

Imagine if I want to run a minority independance newspaper, like the Kurds have on Turkey or a Tibet indepedance newspaper on China.

Does this mean that such paper has not economic value and such niche market can be provide for a central planner?

they can still be assfucked by dumb decisions, like when EA made a WWII about transgenders.

So western capitalist government allow porn and non-western capitalist governments ban it. What does this have to do with markets or economic planning?
How high are you rn?

Reactionary political movements have no economic value. But the organs of their members can be beneficial to society as a whole. Just need to round them up and keep them healthy until harvest.

Everybody makes mistakes, what's important is that those mistakes are fixed. The process itself is to be made democratic and transparent with input from the people and workers themselves. Welcome to actual democracy.

If you want an accessible book that demonstrates how most firms already extensively utilize central planning; and how it's not some kind of mystified, abstracted concept in the face of modern computational technology, I would suggest you read pic related. It's not some dense Socialist text, it's published by socdems and is aimed at normies, so someone with econ background would have no problem.Came out just this month too.

Paper is not an efficient method of spreading information, anyway.

I'm schizoprenic and getting a bit frustrated.
Ignore my leaps of logic.

What if there was niche markets with huge demand that the central planners oposed on moral or political grounds.

Like punk and rock music from western europe in the Soviet nations, or pornography in north korea?

Yikes, kys dude

Not my fault to be born schizo.

we've reached peak 'Zig Forums answers questions'
shut the board down
Zig Forums schizos have won

That's ok fam, I'm sorry for calling you a retard about the video game thing. Honestly just read that book, it's only 150 pages and might help you achieve a better grasp on how central planning actually functions, and how it's already pretty much the primary way that capitalists organize their production, that way you would be able to answer some of these "what if" type questions yourself.

Those would become not goods to be bought and sold, but people would make themselves in their (plentiful under socialism) free time and share for free.

Government would just supply the tools.

It's your fault for continuing to be alive.

I guess I need to read your pdf then and I agree maybe all I know about central planning was scarecrowds.

Last question, can a central planning and markets coexist?
by markets I mean supply and demand signals?

I'm not even oposed of socialism, I'm more of a mixed economy guy.

A communist society would have no massive advertising campaigns to inflate demand to then shit itself when it inevitably contracts or collapses entirely, while the workers are still overworked. Don't worry about it.