-
Anenome: "The producer simply calculates if he can make a profit on those goods today based on known quantities and prices. He knows if the price of a thing rises beyond a certain point his profit margin will be squeezed to nothingness." So we have two things: the given price of the inputs and the expected price of the final product. What
-
Anenome: "Incorrect. It's based on knowing only the now and the past, which can be used as the basis of how likely one is to receive that price in the future, but it doesn't require knowledge of the future. Socialism doesn't even have knowledge of the now for it has no prices!" And what exactly in the past tells us how likely something
-
119. It promotes slave morality and nihilism.
-
And by the same token, the market system as a whole doesn't have any external point of reference to judge whether it is making the most efficient usage of its resources as against competing modes of production (i.e. non-market systems). First of all, prices don't tell producers whether they are using goods more efficiently than their competitors
-
And the reason it is unable to economize is because it is unable to judge, no?
-
Ugh, why do capitalists use such shitty forum software? Maybe its because we don't pay to use the site and hence there is no price data to tell the admins how much we hate it.
-
Jon: "They're free to try compete with the market. No libertarian advocates stopping individuals from setting up competing systems, provided they don't preclude the existence of the market. But conversely, neither can advocates of such systems prohibit market systems from arising." And the fact that something else can compete with
-
Jargon : There is no other way for preferences/needs to be accurately transmitted throughout a system of production. Sure, one might run off of a mouth-to-mouth system of "I need X, Y, and Z", but how is one to know that said person actually needs said objects? What is to keep said person from asking for "A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J
-
So what? That's just not the focus of praxeology, just as biology isn't about explaining force and energy. Dude, I'm just trying to answer the OP's question. I'm not condemning praxeology or anything.
-
Praxeology does focus upon why people do what they do and the implications of this fact, even though it looks at they why in a very cursory, but essential manner. Praxeology tells us that people do what they do because they value the outcome which they believe their actions are working towards. This is what praxeology tells us, and from here it advances