Does this effectively disprove Mises?

[ExUnoDisceOmnes]

Mises proposed the economic calculation problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem

I found this interesting paper debunking it.
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~greg/publications/ccm.IJUC07.pdf

Does anyone have a problem with the manner in which it is debunked?

[Jose Gracchus]

That's a paper by a user on this very forum, Paul Cockshott (http://www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=17298).

I think there's a lot wrong with his Marxism, both politics and economics, but he does have some interesting thoughts and arguments regarding the technical capacity for economic planning and polemics against Misean arguments, as well as critiques of the major conceits in both the economics of classical Social Democracy and Soviet 'Marxism'.

[Hoipolloi Cassidy]

No. This disproves Mises:

[Karl-Marx Hof, Vienna. Typical example of evil socialist redistribution of income. Not shown in this photo: communal laundry rooms, kindergarten, green spaces]

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd258/TheOrangePress/Red%20Vienna/4KarlMarxHof.jpg

[Paul Cockshott]

That was certainly the socialism that Mises feared.

[Tim Cornelis]

I have a very short concentration span so I haven't read any of Paul Cockshott's works entirely, but it seems he still proposes central planning rather than the workers controlling production and distribution (i.e. the free association of producers are simultaneously the planners)--correct me if I'm wrong. But I should definitely do something about my concentration span and actually read his stuff.

Basically what I'm saying is even if central planning is possible, is it desirable?

[Hoipolloi Cassidy]

That was certainly the socialism that Mises feared.

Ack-chooly I'm reading a bio of Mises - a real thigh-slapper.

It turns out you can't disprove Mises, and Mises proved it himself. According to M., economic propositions are Kantian synthetic judgements, they're not open to invalidation, like "up" and "down," "or "space."

Another cute part, since we're on the topic of Red Vienna. Mises really thought his theories had triumphed when the Austro-Marxists turned Vienna into a worker's paradise: you see, when Otto Bauer (head of the Austro-Marxists), fearfully begged for his help, Mises told him to stay away from immediate collectivisation, thereby saving the day for mere social-democracy. Uh-huh...

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Basically what I'm saying is even if central planning is possible, is it desirable?

That certainly is a question of political opinion, then.

I think this dichotomy is a load of nonsense; the juxtaposition of central planning and workers control is frankly much too simplistic to factor in the many different ways in which central planning could be organised. All planning would to some extent be dependent upon some form of central coördination for references and information. This could obviously be arranged in countless different ways. It would also be dependent on information from production facilities.

Anyway Cockshott's vision as far as I gathered from his books does not negate worker participation in plan formulation, or that planning be undertaken exclusively by some shady elite, as you seem to imply in your post.

And I'd personally say that central planning is both desirable and necessary.