I have read Schweickart, but you do us all a service by summarizing his work so
well. Let's look at (1). Some cooperatives do better than others. Now comes
time to replace a worker. What is the relative position of her/his replacement?
Does the original worker share in the continued profits of the firm? Is the new
worker given the same rights as the initial worker?
What is this free/regulated market? Firms still have the incentive to play
market games, e.g. cutting back on quality to save money ... or to throw external
costs onto society .....
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 7/16/00 2:09:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << Justin, you, and to some extent Doug, have been asking for concrete
> explanations of how planning would work. I don't see how market socialism
> would work either. Seriously. The problem is that markets don't work
> very well either. If you are dealing with what Sol Tax called penny
> capitalism -- a small village economy -- markets work reasonably well in
> achieving static efficiency, but buyond that .... >>
>
> OK, here's the Schweickart model in the four promised sentences:
>
> (1) Production of consumer and capital goods is carried out by
> worker-self-managed cooperatives in wht all are cooperators, there are no
> capitalists or wage labors--all profits are captured by the cooperators.
>
> (2) These compete for business in a fairly free, although regulated market.
>
> (3) The capital assets are owned by the state and rented to the producers,
> who pay a sort of capital tax on their use and must maintain their value
> (discounted for depreciatuion), although they may sell and buy capital
> assets: there is no private productive property.
>
> (4) New investment is planned through a system of state-owned banks according
> to criteria of profitability as well as job creation, econological soundness,
> and other values, under general priorities democratically determined by the
> legislature; there is no primary financial market.
>
> (1), (2), (4) are the socialist bits: no exploitation, no private property,
> no market in financial capital, which is planned. (1) and (2) are the market
> bits: free cooperative enterprise.
>
> There is more to it--the government provides as well for public goods (roads,
> schools, health care) that the market cannot provide or provide well, runs
> macroeconomic policy, maintains full employment, and of course regulates the
> market, but that's the core of it.
>
> Now, for more details, you really should read some of the places where Dave
> has explained this over the last 20-odd years. A short statement is in
> Bertell Ollman, ed. Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists. The long
> statement is in Dave's Against Capitalism (Westview 1996). He has a
> medium-length statement in a fiorthcoming book, on which I and others are
> commenting at the Radical Philosophy Association in Chicago in the fall,
> Beyond Capitalism. Dave exaplins a great length why the model is better than
> laissez faire or welfare state capitalism and why it avoids the problems
> those generate. He doesn't much talk about why it is better than planning--he
> leaves that to me.
>
> --jks
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
