---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The dream of central economic planning died with the USSR. Thirty years later, 
technologies for matching supply and demand are a reality in America — as is 
the potential for surveillance Lenin and Stalin could only have dreamed of.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Marcel Fafchamps Updated March 24, 2021, 9:22 a.m.

When the Soviet Union was created, beginning in 1917, its rulers wanted all 
profits, all returns to capital, to accrue to the state. This would not have 
been possible with decentralized markets, since the state could not know the 
profits made by individual entities, regardless of whether they were privately 
or publicly owned. This, they anticipated, would lead to underreporting of 
income and defeat the rulers’ objective. To circumvent this problem, they 
turned to scientific planning to replace the market with algorithms.

Production units were asked to declare their plans and capacities. Retail 
chains were asked to project the demand for consumer goods. Government 
ministries were asked to stipulate their needs for investment in various kinds 
of infrastructure. These numbers were then put together in matrices, and a 
mathematical method known as linear programming was used to optimize the 
allocation of workers and productive capacity so as to achieve the objective of 
the plan at the lowest resource cost.

While this system could more or less handle large planned investments in heavy 
industry — steel mills, coal mines, and the like — it was woefully insufficient 
at handling consumers’ demand for varied goods and services once the Soviet 
economy started to develop. The problem was that the rulers at the time had 
only simple mathematical algorithms and no computers. Running an entire complex 
economy via algorithm was simply not feasible. This probably explains why after 
several Eastern European countries fell into the orbit of the Soviet Union in 
the late 1940s, some of them did not even attempt to adopt its full-fledged 
central planning system and instead allowed a modicum of market exchange to 
remain. By the time the Soviet Union was disbanded in the early 1990s, its 
central planning system of exchange was judged a failure, and it was rapidly 
replaced with a decentralized market system.

Spin the clock forward another 30 years, and we are now in a world where a 
large and increasing fraction of economic exchange is run, quite successfully, 
by algorithms. Amazon and Alibaba perform essentially the same tasks as the 
Soviet central planners: They collect information on items available for sale 
and, by doing so repeatedly over short time intervals, effectively track 
productive capacity. They collect day-to-day information on consumers’ requests 
for various goods and services, thereby tracking the evolution of demand over 
time. They match supply and demand in real time. And they organize the dispatch 
and delivery of these items to consumers across the globe. If the Soviet Union 
had had such tools at its disposal, it would no doubt have used it to run its 
economic exchange system. By observing all transactions and all payments, the 
rulers would also have observed all profits and incomes and thus been able to 
appropriate whatever they thought was due to the state.

As a matter of fact, the United States and other Western countries have begun 
to use sophisticated algorithms for central planning purposes, with a view 
toward appropriating economic surplus. The best example is the auction sale of 
bands of the airwaves for mobile-phone and other communications services. 
Companies interested in buying communications licenses are asked to place bids 
on the airwave bands they want, and a computer allocates the licenses so as to 
both minimize the chances of airwave interference and maximize the government’s 
income from the licenses. Similar auctions have been used to allocate foreign 
exchange by central banks and the procurement of goods and services by 
government agencies. Matching algorithms are used to assign medical interns to 
hospitals, students to schools, and workers to jobs — and even to arrange 
meetings or marriages between people. Lenin could not have been more pleased.

But such algorithms now do much more than simply matching individuals or firms 
based on their stated preferences: They also forecast demand. Artificial 
intelligence and big data make it possible to predict preferences at the 
individual level in real time, thereby enabling algorithms to facilitate trade 
by reducing consumers’ search costs. This is achieved by collecting vast 
amounts of individual data, often without anyone being aware of how revealing 
this data is about their political views, sexual orientation, health 
conditions, criminal activity, wealth, and income. Not even the East German 
Stasi or the Romanian Securitate could have dreamed that such information would 
be surrendered without resistance.

So where do we stand? We are at a crossroads. The technology necessary to put 
in place a centrally planned police state is now a reality. Whether this 
technology is used for this purpose is but a matter of time. At the end of last 
year, Jack Ma, the creator of Alibaba, went missing for three months. We later 
learned that he had been chastised by the Chinese authorities for announcing an 
ambitious plan that would have strengthened Alibaba’s position in the economy. 
This warning shot only serves to remind us that algorithms of exchange can one 
day fall under direct or indirect government control. Alternatively, private 
interests could just as easily capitalize on this technology for huge private 
gain.

The question then is: How can we protect civil liberties in the face of these 
enormous challenges while continuing to enjoy the benefits that all these 
algorithms generate? This is the biggest question facing us today. How we 
resolve it will determine how we — and our children — will live tomorrow.

Marcel Fafchamps, an economist at Stanford University, is senior fellow at the 
Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies.

This article was updated on March 24 to clarify the reference to the Soviet 
Union’s creation.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#7507): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/7507
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/81598391/21656
-=-=-
POSTING RULES & NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/21656/1316126222/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to