Was hat man gegen Planwirtschaft?
Kein rational denkender Mensch der es gut für jeden meint kann mir erzählen das er gegen eine linkshaltige Planwirtschaft ist. Das sind höchstens die alten bärtigen weißen hetero cis Männer die dann auf ihren Zaun neben der Deutschlandflagge steigen.
Eine Gesellschaft die gerecht für jeden ist egal aus welcher Gesellschaftsschicht, Herkunft oder Orientierung funktioniert nicht ohne Planwirtschaft.
Wir haben super reiche Großaktionäre und Konzerne die fast schon Angriffe auf den Staat starten und Kontrolle ausüben. Volkswagen mit der Erpressungsmethode Werksschließungen.
Gewinne privatisieren und Verluste sozialisieren. Genau so läuft das gerade.
Wenige Großaktionäre bestimmten machen Politik für 0,1% der Gesellschaft und das passiert in jedem Bereich. Automobil, Medizin, Logistik, Infrastruktur, überall wo ihr denken könnt und selbst von betroffen ist.
Da braucht jetzt auch kein 60 jähriger weißer hetero cis Peter kommen erzählen das er sich nicht sein Einfamilienhaus weg nehmen lassen will und seinen kleinen Mittelklasse Wagen. Das System hat ein Problem mit großen einflussreichen Aktionären die indirekt Kontrolle über 99,9% der Menschen ausüben und nicht mit dem kleinen Peter der sich sein Haus abgespart hat und den Mittelklassewagen auf Raten zahlt.
(1 votes)
Loading...
Have experienced plan economy in the neighbouring country GDR for many years.
The officials concerned themselves with the luxury goods they wanted to have in the truncated west and the little man gets what remains in the plan economy for him. And he’s really standing in the back row, because everything that is a little useable is first distorted to the evil capitalist state in the West, then the small-sectors come with party relations and at the end of the little man. There are only trips abroad if you are a super-reliable fellow-runner, whose family then have to remain as hostages in the country. The regime is frightened that the working people realize that there is more in return for their work in evil capitalism and that they therefore turn out of the dust.
With critics, in particular young people who have looked up, the state did not exactly deal with clashes. You were in the re-education camp.
It was good for those who had relationship in the capitalist West. They then got “Westwaren” regularly in gift packages.
I have hardly brought home anything from my visits to the GDR; maybe a book or a record, otherwise there was nothing to buy. And that, although the state had introduced a forced exchange for all Western Germans for foreign exchange purchase. there was simply nothing to buy, which would have interest us – the shops were simply empty. And there were not only the bananas that there was not 😏.
And who now says that the old man who writes that would be senile and that would have been much better than they say today – and Adolf wasn’t so bad, right?
Here in the (loud mirror) “Themenpark of real existing socialism” you can experience plan economy in real time: empty pharmacies, empty shops, average wage 35$ a month, lack of basic food, corruption, bottlenecks in water and power supply, milk only in powder form, food only on food map (Cuba=Agrarland, here everything grows!). Aliens with dollars in their pockets get everything, but they’ll be slapped by the loving locals. Most people there are strangely happy and live in the day. If you like it, then nothing like it. The people there seem to be at least happy what the Germans in the GDR never really were.
There is another (so-called) plan economy in China. This works quite well because it is no longer a planned economy. Here, capitalism celebrates its rebirth in pure culture, but it is directed by the state a little in directions so that one does not in the end mingle oneself. A kind of “China First” that doesn’t act parasitic but is based on giving and taking and that needs free trade. Unfortunately also a little corrupt, but not to the extent such as Russia, Cuba or Hungary..
Plan management means that at a central point a large area is chosen, which is when and where produced and thus available in shops. This is a pretty bad model, as has been shown in all the attempts in history where this has been tried. Because the need for people is then too different than that one place could plan centrally for everyone.
In addition, plan economy is by no means the opposite to the Hardcore-Raubtier capitalism we are currently experiencing. And the actual opposite – communism – is by no means the only alternative.
In my opinion, a sensible model would actually be what our founding fathers have imagined for the Federal Republic of Germany at the time – a social market economy. So, a market economy where competition prevails, where companies decide freely what they produce and who they offer, where demand determines the supply and where innovation and progress are encouraged, because they are beneficial. But where at the same time the social location of the economy is not forgotten, but where there is an awareness among all those involved that the economy should serve people – and not elsewhere.
In order to implement this, it would be urgently necessary, especially in the case of super-rich, with state interventions – and thus primarily taxes – to reduce their assets massively and thereby also to reduce the power that these individuals have. That is exactly what would be desirable to put the world back into balance. Unfortunately, I see completely black in the current world political situation…
Because people are still susceptible to populism. They think that when talking about asset tax, they are taken away from their saved house or the middle class car. People do not understand that it is about 0.1% that they suffer from themselves and fall on the trash that populists spread and spread it on their own. That’s what makes me
Right. I’m full of you.
Unfortunately, people are not NOCH susceptible to populism. Propaganda is a sophisticated media weapon that is constantly improved. And more and more fall on it.
The distribution of assets in Germany and the USA is disastrous. Sooner or later, it’s probably a revolution. And we all don’t want that.
That’s why I see black.
Jepp, I feel you!
There is no example of a plan economy that works satisfactorily for the lower incomes. The idea is a dead birth.
No. In any case, not in the context mentioned here. The actual social question is therefore whether the asset growth of the lower income layers is sufficient to allow the gap to grow to the uppermost one at least. Then, however, you have to remove from the comparison the lowermost parts that are not appearing in the balance as well as the few super rich.
And there is the social system or the tax law of the countries concerned. Nichrts has to deal with the topic of plannership even in the most remote.
Good for you. So?
How do you know what time zone I’m in?
To better explain what I mean, again facts for you – even if you prefer to spread bullshit today and after the method “Three times is said to be true” then explained to the only truth.
The rich become richer and the poor at least relatively poorer. According to an analysis by the American Association for Tax Justice with data from Forbes, in April 2024 there were nearly 800 billionaires in the USA – that is, 0.0024 percent of the population. Your combined fortune: $5.8 trillion. These are two trillion dollars more than the lower 50 percent of Americans own. In the rest of the world, the situation is hardly different.
I’ve met people who were on stage with a burning car tire. In the end, they still survived this. It was just a warning to her. And that was about much smaller injustices.
And thanks to no plannership, there’s even wealth. The question of distribution is a social policy, and that is what every country has in its own hands.
Yes. Now go to sleep.
It does not function well as being planned in the future and we do not know what is in the future. Bsp: Land A says 2015 we only need 300 mouthguards in the next 10 years. In 2019 Covid 19 comes and the mouthguard is missing. The same applies to natural disasters and others. Of course, the central administration has advantages, but they are only minimal.
This example doesn’t seem to me. What does Land A want to prevent more oral masks if necessary? In an emergency situation you change the plan. It would also be bullshit to make millions of masks nobody needs in advance.
In addition, a market economy produces even fewer masks “just as if you need them” if there is no sales… that’s almost an argument for planning what you’re doing…
The problem is that the cycle continues to go down so it always has a recession. Moreover, the central administration sector has the disadvantage that it has a restriction of the individual and that services and goods are only possible to a limited extent. (See, for example, the GDR economy) The role of consumers is that they can only buy as much as prescribed. In addition, there is no competition which is also the basic idea and not an invalid self-employed person.
If you want to know in detail: In practice, a central management economy (plane economy) does not work efficiently and would not be feasible in Germany. This is due to several economic and structural problems:
1. Missing adjustment to the economic cycle
In a market economy, there is the economic cycle with phases of growth ( boom), downturn (recession), low point (depression) and upturn (expansion). Supply and demand are regulated by prices and competition. In a central administration economy, the state cannot flexibly control these fluctuations because plans are often set for years. This creates overproduction or supply bottlenecks, as the state cannot react quickly to economic changes.
Two. Role of entrepreneurs
Entrepreneurs play a central role in a market economy by improving supply through innovation and competition. In a plan economy, there are no private companies with profit incentives, but state enterprises that work according to requirements. This leads to low innovative power, as there is no incentive to produce more efficiently or better. Quality and productivity are often low without competition.
3. The role of consumers
In a market economy, consumers decide by their demand which products are successful. There is no real freedom of consumption in a plan economy, as the state specifies which goods are produced. People’s wishes can often not be met because the state cannot anticipate all individual needs. This leads to a lack of economy, as was the case in the GDR.
4. Example: The GDR
A well-known example of the failure of the central administration is the German Democratic Republic (DDR). The state planned centrally what was produced, but the companies could not react flexibly to changes. This often lacked important consumer goods such as bananas, cars or modern clothing. At the same time, many products were produced excessively, because the planning set false priorities.
Another problem was the lack of competitiveness of the GDR economy. While the Federal Republic of Germany supported innovations and companies through a social market economy, the GDR remained technologically behind. This led to the population being dissatisfied and many people fled to the west.
Conclusion
A central administration economy cannot react efficiently to economic developments, inhibits innovations and leads to supply bottlenecks. The example of the GDR shows that such an economic form does not work in the long term. Germany therefore focuses on the social market economy, which combines economic freedom with social protection.
What causes recession? And if the recession is constant, why did the GDR have economic growth at all?
Still: Constantly falling shortterms (continuous recession) Bsp: GDR economy.
Depending on the extent – production planning does not necessarily mean consumption planning. You can make a million cans of corn, and then you can get a man three, the other one doesn’t even like you.
Oh, yes! I can tell you that because I grew up in a plan economy. So I know firsthand how it feels when you have to wait 2 hours after work before there is something to eat. I’ve seen how that was when there was nothing to buy. Planning is really a very stupid idea, because it doesn’t work.
Everything. That’s why there’s no one.
So you’re the only one to talk about yourself?
Surprise – yes. About 8 billion people on this planet.
No, but all people who have more than two active brain cells.
…just thanks to market economy.
The problem lies in functionality. Certain market economic incentives are motivating. The market evaluates (not error-free) the services provided and this should lead to improvement. This is not the plan economy.
And by the way, your execution about hetero cis men come a little cramped…
Because it’s always the same they don’t understand. The traps on populism. They think it’s about things like asset tax and plannership that they take away their small family home and the middle class car. It’s about people like big shareholders who have to be taxed and who urgently have the influence on the state taken away.
You are weathering right against the people who made our economy what it is today.
The influence of super-rich on politics is very limited here and is subject to very strict rules. In contrast to planning and dictatorship.
Wealth is heavily taxed today. These are the ones that help the state to pay a lush citizen’s money, for example. In most countries there is no such thing.
I understand that well and at least see this aspect really the same, but it comes a little strange if you are looking for constructive conversations/answers at the same time…
If I wanted to be insulted, I would ask the question so or so
I don’t know if you got this, but in some federal states you tried that. It’s known to have failed.
Plan management doesn’t work as some think. That’s it.
Planning does not work because it cannot react to fluctuations and changes.
Planning is simply not working.
She just doesn’t work.