But western economy is planned from the top down. The illusion of choice doesn’t change the economy.
The only difference is how you measure success. And understanding, no countries truly have free market systems, bcs that’s not sustainable by design/logic.
And that one side always points out the flaws of the other side whilst hiding the exact same flaws at home, quietly omitting it from the records, ever already well known things.
Sorry, my bad, it wasn’t even my intention to disagree with you, just to add to the conversation (I’m just bad at communication in general & such mishaps aren’t uncommon unfortunately).
And I too agree with you, political "democracy“ (in the proper, perfect sense) doesn’t matter all that much without democracy in the economic sector (goods & services), especially with so many monopolies/oligopolies. Production as well as consumption shouldn’t be concentrated (nor there be means to do so). Somehow, economy & broader goals of human kind should be the achievements we reward, not very-situational-money-grabbing as such. So even the material rewards should be related to personal service to the community or planet. By rewards I mean such finite things like the best office view or whatever (but not basic things like good food, etc).
Eg more benefits should go to the the company that got to lower their carbon footprint than to the company that didn’t (people there, all stakeholders basically). What makes financial sense does not equal what is economic for the communities, species, or the planet. Or the company making better quality things that last longer (reducing garbage) but uses a bit more resources initially over the company producing low quality items that need constant replacement.
That’s because you can’t plan an economy from the top. Democratic, bottom-up plan, with help of modern computing, can work
But western economy is planned from the top down. The illusion of choice doesn’t change the economy.
The only difference is how you measure success. And understanding, no countries truly have free market systems, bcs that’s not sustainable by design/logic.
And that one side always points out the flaws of the other side whilst hiding the exact same flaws at home, quietly omitting it from the records, ever already well known things.
I am not sure how you misinterpeted me as supporting western, aka capitalist economies. I agree with you.
Sorry, my bad, it wasn’t even my intention to disagree with you, just to add to the conversation (I’m just bad at communication in general & such mishaps aren’t uncommon unfortunately).
And I too agree with you, political "democracy“ (in the proper, perfect sense) doesn’t matter all that much without democracy in the economic sector (goods & services), especially with so many monopolies/oligopolies. Production as well as consumption shouldn’t be concentrated (nor there be means to do so). Somehow, economy & broader goals of human kind should be the achievements we reward, not very-situational-money-grabbing as such. So even the material rewards should be related to personal service to the community or planet. By rewards I mean such finite things like the best office view or whatever (but not basic things like good food, etc).
Eg more benefits should go to the the company that got to lower their carbon footprint than to the company that didn’t (people there, all stakeholders basically). What makes financial sense does not equal what is economic for the communities, species, or the planet. Or the company making better quality things that last longer (reducing garbage) but uses a bit more resources initially over the company producing low quality items that need constant replacement.
I mean, you can plan it from the top-down, it’s just… not all that efficient.
We’ve never needed computers for that.
I agree, but it helps.
Fair enough.