This would be a great project! Any thoughts how to tackle it?
If you don't know who the Borg (star trek) than iyou should google it
Read until you have something to write...Write until you have nothing to write...when you have nothing to write, read...read until you have something to write...Jeremiah
what are the characteristics of Borg, are they individual agents, or are the many bodies called borg mere puppets of a central mind ?
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
I think Hoppe shifted the argument away from information to private property. Of course, I still agree with Hayek.
But, here's the real point: the Borg are commies and must be stopped.
"I'm not a fan of Murray Rothbard." -- David D. Friedman
I'm not sure if we could, we can, if I am understanding AE correctly, especially "Human Action" about humans, as we are, and not about other, non-human entities. My objection to calculation is not only the erasing of the individual, which is the crucial part of humanity, and they are not the actions of individuals, but of limbs of one individual...
I'm guessing it would might be the only way to successfully create a socialist economy, as all needs are know, all parts give their full effort, because they are all part of one create- the "hive mind" (yeah! cloud computing /divergence (/sarcasm)), and the increase in wants, be absorbtion of others, is not as much as the increase in computation from the organism, and the parts can be starved from the central mind..
(This work?)
Neoclassical; feel free to explain what you mean by 'hoppe shifted the argument' and why you 'still' agree with Hayek.
The state is not the enemy. The idea of the state is.
Socialist Calculation Within The Communist Militarist Paradise Known As The United Federation of Planets would be interesting too.
Now that is a perfect economical topic! :)
One cop-out would be, of course, that since they are not trying to please their consumers, they don't need economic calculation as much. But of course, enslaving, I mean, assimilating all other races is a difficult task and the resources, however immense, are always limited. And even if they could do basically anything, there is still the question - what to do first?
The ultimate task of assimilation and expansion may be only one, but there are numerous sub-tasks needed to reach the goal. There are also several types of specialized drones and ships suitable for various purposes. How does the Collective determine how many of which units to produce? I'd expect there will be many guidelines based on experience (aggressive race type 2, more repair drones will be needed), with the demand for resources determined by known "recipes" - and for every thing there would likely be only one, most optimal recipe ("To make a drone, take five pounds of iron..."). The Borg are all for efficiency, after all!
While perhaps simplifying the problems of a market economy, this still leaves the Borg open to the problem of change and unpredictability of the future, and many decisions can't be possibly made by pure logic or guidelines set in stone. That would be where the Queen comes in.
Mises Wiki | Economic Resources and Books (search engine)
Who needs to calculate anything when you have a replicator!?
"All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree." -James Madison
"If government were efficient, it would cease to exist."
AdrianHealey:Neoclassical; feel free to explain what you mean by 'hoppe shifted the argument' and why you 'still' agree with Hayek.
http://mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/rae9_1_13.pdf
Essentially, I believe Hayek is right to emphasize knowledge.
The Borg are one mind. As such, they don't need to calculate on an advanced basis anymore than a household does. Nor are they constrained by a moral code of any kind we know of, So for the Borg, the question of what to do and when is really no different than a mom or dad deciding what to have for dinner and when. The Borg has no economy, no economic calculation is necessary.
What if the replicator breaks?
WHERES ROBERT MURPHY when we need him? If we could show that economic calculation is highly unlikely even within the optimal setting of the Borg it should burry the debate. It would be a great talking point nonetheless
"The Borg are one mind. As such, they don't need to calculate on an advanced basis anymore than a household does. Nor are they constrained by a moral code of any kind we know of, So for the Borg, the question of what to do and when is really no different than a mom or dad deciding what to have for dinner and when. The Borg has no economy, no economic calculation is necessary."
Here i have to disagree. They are a quite large household, and their one mind still needs to make decisions and plan (economize) how to use their resources. Hence, economic calculation is of use. :)
I always wondered about one thing... why doesn't everyone from the Federation have their own spaceship?
The replicator, miraculous as it may be, only reproduces certain specific goods - many goods and materials can't be reproduced. (Plus one needs to take into account the building and upkeep of the replicators, and the raw materials and energy they use for replication.)
So while the economy of those advanced peoples is much further and many things are available seemingly for free, there is still scarcity - and calculation, too.
So Neo Classical; you accept the false dichotomy, that Hoppe (and others) have created?
Hayek was talking about property and the knowledge it created _too_. There is no real difference; perhaps, maybe, on capital accounting.
You need property to create the knowledge Hayek is talking about: there is no dichotomy.
Do you assert that Hayek believed we "need property to create knowledge"?
Really, what you've stated is Hoppe's argument: to get knowledge, we first need property and trade.
Of course I assert that. Because it is.
Hoppe is right in saying that we need property, that facilitates trade, that causes money, which allows for profit and loss cost accounting. Which allows for profit and loss; in combination with appraisement of the objective circumstances and the acceptance of prices, is needed to have the knowledge to act upon it in a meaningful way in an advanced economy.
Hoppe is, however, wrong in thinking that Hayek didn't know about this. Hayek accepted this argument but formulated it in slightly different words than Mises. There is no dichotomy.
So your 'acceptance' of Hayek means you accept the fundamental Misesian point. You could say that you accept the argument that Hoppe aserts Hayek made. Oke: but that argument is wrong. You need property: the knowledge argument - without property - is meaningless. You can only have objective data without property: you don't have value estimates in a propertyless society. But the calculation problem of socialism is a value problem; not a 'knowledge' problem of objective data. (Mises even conceded in his first article that the planners have that knowledge: but they still wouldn't be able to calculate relative values.)
"Here i have to disagree. They are a quite large household, and their one mind still needs to make decisions and plan (economize) how to use their resources. Hence, economic calculation is of use. :)" - Peter Sidor
True, but for them that's no different than you or I deciding what to have for lunch. They are for all intents and purposes one being. If one of their drones needs sustenance, it takes according to its needs which it knows precisely thanks to being a cyborg. And as for how much food to produce in total and where to get it, it's just a question of adding up all the drones. It doesn't need to economize because it doesn't give a damn about any other uses for anything other than satisfying its immediate needs. Much like a bee or ant hive, they don't need to economize because they have no economy, no group of individuals each trying to improve their own lot and with differring opinions as to what that entails and as such what everything is valued at. To the Borg it is simple math because everything is worth exactly the same because there is only one entity doing the judging of value. It is socialism idealized more or less. The calculation problem is avoided because there's nothing to calculate because there is no allocation of resources needed, nor does efficiency matter.
"I always wondered about one thing... why doesn't everyone from the Federation have their own spaceship?" - Peter Sidor
I think they kind of take a Keynesian view in that once 'the basics' are covered everyone gets real laid back and starts enjoying the higher states of mind or whatever BS he was peddling. So, everyone gets food, shelter, clothing, and is raised from birth with the goal of 'enriching themselves' by helping one another. Which is why the Enterprise always has or replicates a spare this or that if a passing ship needs it for repairs. However, a ship like the Enterprise was, in the Rodenberryverse, produced out of sheer goodwill and love for one another. There's a whole wiki entry on this, and it's a bit confused to say the least. What it seems to come down to is money is still around but not really used for some reason. Which I guess would make some kind of sense since, if you can replicate most needs and wants in an instant, why exchange anything unless you had to? So, basically only those things which for this reason or that were still scarce still commanded a money price.
And, you have to admit, if all the basic necessities of life were in fact 'free' for all intents and purposes, and given their incredibly advanced technology and communications, they probably could establish and maintain a command and control type economy over the few remaining scarcities. Much like our government. If it were small and limited it would still be a burden on the economy, but one we could likely bear and whose destructive aspect would be far overshadowed b the productive portion of the economy. My guess is for a Star Trek like mostly moneyless economy to exist, the vast majority of human want must be very, very easily met so that the majority of the population didn't mind the small command and control portion of the economy and how much they wasted on a day by day basis.
EDIT: As an example, if I could simply be guaranteed the basics and the right to be left alone to my own devices, I'd buy some property, plant some grapes, make wine, and not give a damn about much of anything else. Want to boldly go where no man has gone before? Be my guest. Just don't fuck with my grapes and I'm happy.
Rejecting Hoppe's observation that prices are impossible by definition without property is equal to rejecting Hayek.
also Hoppe's observation that prices are impossible by definition without property is Mises' position, and that of the whole Rothbardian branch.