![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
How ridiculous is it that every word similar to "decentralized" re-directs to Participatory Economics? The same on this page it reads: "Libertarian socialists, Syndicalists, Trotskyists, orthodox Marxists and democratic socialists advocate de-centralized participatory planning." de-centralized participatory planning re-directs to Participatory Economics as if it is the only form of de-centralized planning! I am a libertarian socialist and oppose Parecon because it is a bureaucratic absurdity, it is not even libertarian socialist. Neither have I heard of any anarchist who supports Parecon: it is non-movement. What I'm tryin' to say: deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goti123 ( talk • contribs) 17:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
ALL Economies since the stone require forward planning. Planning is necessary activity not just in Soviet type economies but in all economies. The question is who does it and towards what end. Vilhelmo ( talk) 05:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
" As a coordinating mechanism for socialism and an alternative to the market, planning is defined as a direct allocation of resources; contrasted to the indirect allocation of the market.[1] "
This is nonsense. First of all, there is a libertarian bent to the article (NPOV). Second of all, there is economic planning in fascism, which not a form of socialism at all. Thirdly, why are we reminded that economic planning is "an alternative to the market"? This is libertarian ideological posturing and on top of that, it confuses 'the market' with 'the free market'. The 'free market' itself is an ideological construct, because in reality, there is no such thing. All unregulated markets become monopolies, which are not free. It takes government regulation to ensure competition, protect copyright and business contracts, provide public services, and ultimately to prevent monopoly formation (see the breakup of Standard Oil by Theodore Roosevelt, for example).
Dr. Hoffmann has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:
This is quite macro in perspective. Bar one section on Intra-firm and intra-industry planning. Today many firms have bigger economies than some nations, this could be added to that section.
I would discuss more about transaction cost economics.
Perhaps also add some Herbert Simon thinking on organization, which is a kind of planning. His account from boundedly rational is different to institutional accounts.
Simon, H. (1991). Organizations and Markets. Journal of Economic Perspectives.
We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.
Dr. Hoffmann has published scholarly research which seems to be relevant to this Wikipedia article: