Planned economies lack the ability to innovate as quickly, and have never really resulted in anything good in terms of how the people were treated. Even decentralized planned economies like that which was in the Spanish civil war saw bloodshed, and not just from the war but from the murders of property owners.
I'd much rather there be a voluntary mutualist economy, where workers have social ownership of the means of production. There are already thousands of worker co-ops in the United States alone. Mutualism could be achieved with the bloodless, peaceful action of convincing laborers to purchase the shares of the company they work at, or convincing them to collectively start their own business. No need for blood, no need for destruction.
Now true, a market economy doesn't guarantee one employment, thus it doesn't guarantee one housing and food. As market economies have random fluctuations in the allocation of resources, this means that it's possible for a business, even a mutually owned one, to go under. That's where social programs can come in handy for those who need them.
Still, it's a version of socialism that is based on freedom the most, and it's the most peaceful.
Why does Mutualism always get overlooked when people start talking about socialism? Every time the word socialist is brought up, people just want to think about Marx, or Lenin and those who followed. It's even become a buzzword that conservatives have used to describe any social program by the government, which is just fucking retarded.
I'd much rather there be a voluntary mutualist economy, where workers have social ownership of the means of production. There are already thousands of worker co-ops in the United States alone. Mutualism could be achieved with the bloodless, peaceful action of convincing laborers to purchase the shares of the company they work at, or convincing them to collectively start their own business. No need for blood, no need for destruction.
Now true, a market economy doesn't guarantee one employment, thus it doesn't guarantee one housing and food. As market economies have random fluctuations in the allocation of resources, this means that it's possible for a business, even a mutually owned one, to go under. That's where social programs can come in handy for those who need them.
Still, it's a version of socialism that is based on freedom the most, and it's the most peaceful.
Why does Mutualism always get overlooked when people start talking about socialism? Every time the word socialist is brought up, people just want to think about Marx, or Lenin and those who followed. It's even become a buzzword that conservatives have used to describe any social program by the government, which is just fucking retarded.
