barriomulas.com - Mussings on Bornstein's "Compartivie Economic Systems"

My writing compliments my reading. All of my books feature scrabbled notes on the margin, on the front and rear blank pages, in the headers and foots, and even in the bend of the book. Arrows, lines, and even bootleg charts little the pages. Below are notes from a title that I recently finished reading "Comparative Economic Systems: Models and Cases" edited by Morris Bornstein. Since the book was taken out from a library (I still wrote on the pages), I must "unload" my notes as to not have them disappear into the shelves of a library archive.

From the handwritten-polluted margins:

I
I am against centralism, be it in the public or private sectors. Centralism degrades security, I believe; putting all of ones eggs into a basket. It limits competition. It minimizes diversity. David Waton said it best: "Whether it calls itself capitalist, socialist, democratic, or fascist, its project is essentially the same: the establishment of a megatechnic work pyramid to expand empires (big mafias and small), through the reduction of nature and human communities to an archipelago of sacrifice zones or gulags from which the value is extracted for the maintenance and expanded power over the hierarchy." J.R. Shackleton states that "The assumption that bigger means better has increasingly been challenged."

II
"Marxists and neo-liberal capitalists understand each other very well. The real conflict occurs in the center," stated my professor Hector Luis Acevedo. I agree. I believe the line is drawn on who deserves the spotlight; capitalists place priority on the consumer and socialists on the producer.

III
I tend to not limit laissez-faire considerations to economics. I at times apply the concept to culture, for common sense, taboo, and tradition are often sufficient to maintain order and functionality as opposed to law; to nature, for if left alone the system will realign itself; and comically even Puerto Rican driving. "I love the way they drive down here," a laissez-faire capitalist friend tells me. "Yea," I respond. "It's sort of laissez-faire where everything just works itself out. Add lines, stop lights, and stop signs and you have yourself a bunch of accidents."

IV
I don't want a powreful state. I want an empowering one.

V
Despite this, society is generally becoming less social. Heads of households are enveloping themselves more into their professions. Thus a third party (the state) is necessary to take up responsibilities that were traditionally carried out by social interaction (such as schooling).

VI
Arthur M. Okum states that "What I have to sell today reflects my entire life history, including the nutrition and health care I have received, my education, my previous job experience, and any physical property I have acquired by previous saving or inheritance. To the extent that my current supply of marketable services is augmented by effort (or thrift) that I have exercised previously, I am reaping the harvest from the seeds I planted in the past." This statement, I must add, emits theft by previous generations (land grabs, expansion, and colonialism), inheritance, and culture. Okum would be entirely correct if we are speaking of a society that measures its access to health, education, and capital strictly by merit. Okum himself states that "it seems undeniable in principal that the prizes for the performance would be more defensible ethically if everyone had an even start."

VII
Excellent observation from Okum: "Leisure is a form of income and an element in one's standard of living." When the Municipal cabinet were discussing how to go about the recent raise in the federal minimum wage I suggested that instead of compensating employees with higher wages (which we could not afford), to grant them an extra day off from work. Jaroslav Vanek states that "monetary income... is definitely not the only [important ingredient of satisfaction] for example, [some may] sacrifice some money income in exchange for additional leisure time, lesser intensity of work, better human relations-or even a kinder managing director."

VIII
Okum makes reference to "the reliance on "greed" as a key motivating force in economic life."

IX
Let us suppose that an industry-wide association is formed with the task to overlook the regulation of such industry. This association is made up of 1/3 members chosen by the owners and investors of the industry, 1/3 members chosen by the workers, and 1/3 members chosen by the public. Due to the composition of the three bodies it is understood that a sort of checks-and-balances system will arise. The association could have either executive or consultation powers. Such an initiative would provide for an interesting experiment.

X
Ludwig Von Mises states that ""Artifical" markets in socialism cannot successfully replace the true markets of capitalism in pricing producer goods so as to use them most efficiently." True. To mimic such a system a planned economy would have to be staffed by millions amounts of bureaucrats, each with the task to follow even the most minimal supply and demand tenancies. Despite this, John Galbraith in his "The New Industrial State" states how large-scale corporate capitalism is in fact a planned economy; replacing a few public agencies with a few corporations that eliminate markets through contracting and the expropriation of supply.

XI
Socialism, claims Von Mises has "no means of ascertaining whether a given piece of work is really necessary, whether labor and material area not being wasted in completing it." True, but I wish to signal instances where two gas stations of the same store brand can be find across the street from each other.

XII
Proponents of a planned economy believe that "even under Capitalism the managers of joint stock companies work not for themselves but for the companies, that is to say, for the shareholders. Under Socialism, therefore, it would be possible for them to act in exactly the same way as before, with the same circumspection and devotion to duty." Von Mises counters this by stating that the stockholders who choose managers "are risking their own property or a part of their own property... Under Capitalism, the capitalist decides to whom he will entrust his own capital... to strike a balance between his desire for profit and his estimate of the risk of loss."

XIII
One must question the viability of neoliberal economics in a society where a "live and let live" feeling prevails such as those in "participatory economies" or even small business in Latin America, I would add.

XIV
Edvard Kardelj states that "the first, and lower, form of socialism" is Nationalization. Evan Luard in his book "Socialism Without the State" carried a similar tone, as he argues against the mainstream view of socialism as a system equivalent with big government. The concept of worker ownership, cooperatives, and profit sharing mechanisms have always fascinated me - all of which can take place within the framework of a free market. My preferred style of socialism is more in tune with 19^th century anarchists than they are with the statist Joseph Stalin and Fidel Castro. My socialism is manifested by the popular and not the state. Public services and budgets should be managed by the collective, with each citizen taking a direct role in its dissemination, execution, and development. Like I always say; big government can be just as bad as big business.

XV
My fascination with socialism as an ideology has little to do with liberalism. I'm not tuning into their anti-death penalty, anti-abortion, pro-gay marriage message, and thus have in the past refrained from identifying myself with any socialist organizations. I tend to be more preoccupied with concepts of hierarchy, economic freedom, community empowerment, and the management of public assets.

XVI
Franklyn D. Holzman claims that autarkist economies are generally planned economies. I could see how this would be true for in a planned economy the market has not been able to establish a suitable price for the good, which would thus make it quite difficult to trade on the international market. Even houses can't be sold without an appraisal.

Derek B. said:

"Despite this, society is generally becoming less social. Heads of households are enveloping themselves more into their professions. Thus a third party (the state) is necessary to take up responsibilities that were traditionally carried out by social interaction (such as schooling)."

Good one. On a side note, I miss Puerto Rico. I gotta read your observations on the presidential primaries tomorrow when my brain's fresh.

May 2, 2008 3:16 AM