The spell checker replaced Kantorovich with Kantorowtz, and I didn't catch it. Please insert the correct name. Sorry.
--- On Tue, 9/22/09, andie nachgeborenen <andie_nachgebore...@yahoo.com> wrote: > From: andie nachgeborenen <andie_nachgebore...@yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Paul Cockshott on Leonid Kantorovich and the > socialist calculation debate revisited > To: "Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and > the thinkers he inspired" <marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu> > Date: Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 1:35 PM > Leontiff also won the Nobel Memorial > prize in economics -- not for work he did in the USSR, > though. He had great respect for Marx, I believe contributed > a paper to an MR anthology on Marxist Economics put together > by David Horowitz (!) in the old days. > > Oskar Lange, later like Kantoworitz a hands-on central > planner, showed that on neoclassical assumptions you could > model a nonmarket economy to mimic market efficiencies using > "shadow prices" (see Lange & Taylor, "On the Economic > Theory of Prices," a response to Hayek from, I think 1938 > > http://www.amazon.com/Economic-Theory-Socialism-Oskar-Lange/dp/B0006AO488 > > The calculation debate swayed back and forth for a long > time. The standard view, last time I checked, and I think > this is correct, is that Lange actually missed Hayek's > point. Hayek is not a neo-classicist but a sharp critic of > neo-classicism. He's an institutionalist whose critique of > planning is based on realistic observations about the > operation of people in organizations gives in the incentives > pure planning gives them. In this respect Hayek also differs > sharply from Mises, who was ferociously a priorist, though > not neoclassical. Hayek is a lot closer than Lange or Mises > to Marx's approach. I'd say he's been soundly vindicated. > Btw, he was not opposed to planning on efficiency grounds, > as opposed to ideological ones, where experience showed it > would work. He supported national health care, for example. > > > Kantorowitz's mathematical achievement was awesome and > knocks the math of neoclassicals into a cocked hat. It's > also true that, as Cockshott argues, he was in many ways > ahead of his time in that a lot of what he advocated could > not be done on any existing computer technology available in > his lifetime, especially in the USSR. > > However, I think he also does not come to grips with > Hayek's objections. Not to put a fine a point on it, with a > computer-based planning system running linear program > models, you have the engineer's standard worry: GIGO. > Hayek's fundamental argument was that the incentives of > central planning produced GI, guaranteed you bad data to > start with, so any models, no matter how good and how fast, > starting with that data, would produce GO. Kantorowitz -- > and I've read his big book -- does not concern himself with > the quality of the input data. > > I have a long-standing interest in the calculation debate, > as some of you know, but in some ways it's passe. There's no > active audience outside a small handful of academic > theorists interested in what is now the purely theoretical > possibility of a nonmarket economy. There's a small handful > of die-hard, mostly Stalinist, leftists, who Believe, but > they're really not interested in even the broad strokes of > the debate, because they Know the answer. No state exists > anymore that even aspires to a nonmarket system, and none is > likely to emerge. > > So apart from amusing people like Cockshotte and me, what > exactly is the point? I suppose if you're writing about Marx > and you are persuaded by one or the other side you can say, > well there exist models that show that a nonmarket system, > maybe like what Marx envisaged, is theoretically possible. > Or: not. > > Anyway, work calleth. > > Justin > > > > > > --- On Tue, 9/22/09, Ralph Dumain <rdum...@autodidactproject.org> > wrote: > > > From: Ralph Dumain <rdum...@autodidactproject.org> > > Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Paul Cockshott on Leonid > Kantorovich and the socialist calculation debate revisited > > To: "Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues > raised by Karl Marx and the thinkers he inspired" > <marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu>, > marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu > > Cc: "marxist philosophy" <marxistphiloso...@yahoogroups.com> > > Date: Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 10:39 AM > > Not that I endorse an exclusive > > concentration on economic > > calculation, but Cockschott's overall perspective can > be > > found here: > > > > 21st Century Marxism > > http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc/reports/21stCenturyMarxism.htm > > > > At 11:02 AM 9/22/2009, Ralph Dumain wrote: > > >Some time ago Jim gave us this reference. If you > are > > interested in > > >Cockshott's analysis of the socialist calculation > > debate, high-tech > > >socialism & e-democracy more generally, see > his web > > site: > > > > > >http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc/reports/ > > > > > > > > >At 09:37 PM 5/24/2009, Jim Farmelant wrote: > > > > > > >Paul Cockshott on how the Soviet economist > and > > mathematician, > > > >Leonid Kantorovich (who was the only Soviet > > economist > > > >to ever win the Nobel Prize in economics), > > > >used his work on linear programming to > > > >answer the arguments of economists like > Ludwig von > > Mises > > > >and Friedrich Hayek who argued that rational > > socialist > > > >economic planning was, even in theory, > > impossible. > > > > > > > >"Calculation in-Natura, from Neurath to > > Kantorovich" > > > > > > > >http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc/reports/standalonearticle.pdf > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >Marxism-Thaxis mailing list > > >Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu > > >To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > > >http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Marxism-Thaxis mailing list > > Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu > > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Marxism-Thaxis mailing list > Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis > _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
