Command Economies

[sabre]

Well in Civics class today one of the "weaknesses" of a command economy was that technological advancements dont take place as frequesntly or as fast as in a market economy. It would be helpful if anyone could contribute any advancemtns made by command economies because i dont know many of them. I've heard a rumor htta the USSR invented color TV, is that true?

Command Economy inventions:

Ballistic proof tanks
Super Sonic Aircraft
Nuclear power (not bombs, that was germany) (?)
Nuclear submarine
long range nuclear MISSLES

any more?

[Nateddi]

Ideally, Communism produces much more than capitalism. Capitalism only innovates as much as it is enough to bring profit. For God's sake, the internal combustion engine is over 100 years old, and we have potential to get solar power now. But neither is changing because fossil fuels brign so much money to capitalists. A free market throws money worthlessly around. To compete, to buy out competators, to up the stock value, to fatten the owners' pockets, to expand into foreign industries, etc. A market economy does inovate, only very slowly. Companies only really innovate when their competators are really getting on their ass.

[reagan lives]

Don't forget about Ivan Drago, the Soviet technologically-enhanced superman from Rocky IV.

"A free market throws money worthlessly around."
Even if this were true (which I don't think it is), capitlism isn't the free market. Consult Smith on what should be done with excess capital. You might learn something about why the Soviet Union fell so morbidly behind in everything besides for steroid-filled prizefighters.

[sabre]

yeah they sure were behind when they invented color tv, Ballistic proof tanks, Super Sonic Aircraft, Nuclear power, Nuclear submarines and long range nuclear MISSLES. The onyl reason they were behind was that the USSR waqs constantly in conflict from its beginning to its endm it had to spend a shitlaod of money on military stuff, so it couldnt concentrate fully on th needs of its citizens, which was why the USSR collapsed.

And you cant deny that command economies are better fit for quick changes in the market such as a war, because it can be quickly changed that instead of creating cars, company A must now make bullets, instead of waiting for the damn market to realize they have to start making bullets.

[Ernest Everhard]

Like you said, Command economies are "better" in events like war. But then again, who wants to live with a war mentality all the time, unless you're a proto-fascist, which many of the so called socialists on this site appear to be.
But anyway, Color TV was invented by Dr. Vladmir Zworykin, a Russian who fled the Soviet Union and did his work for RCA in the mid 1920's in the US of A.
As for achievements of the command economy, there are many, from a political perspective the command economy allowed communists and fascists (in the same boat if you ask me) to committ atrocities like the forced famines of Ukraine and the holocaust with the utmost expediency. Let us not forget that grand achievement of the command economy- under Mussolini the trains ran on time.
Other achievements of perpetual command economies, those that are always controlled by the government, include Yuri Gargarin's first flight into space. Yet the structure of the American effort allowed the US to surpass the soviets in space in a bit longer than a decade.
As for the technologies that sabre listed I have no idea what he means by ballistic proof tanks (reactive armor was an american invention); the worlds first supersonic aircraft was the Bell x1 piloted in 1947 by chuck yeager; Nuclear power and bombs were also developed by the US (although I will lend to you the fact that it was when america was run by a command economy for the sake of defeating the fascists in ww2); Nuclear submarines too were developed by the americans, the USS nautilus being the first nuclear sub. As for ICBM's the soviets did begin producing those en masse prior to the americans, but it was because their economy would not permit them to catch up to the american's in more conventional weaponry, heavy bombers. In any case by the 1960s america also surpassed the soviet command economy in this field.
As for the collapse of the soviet union it came about because command economies "throw money worthlessly around," It's heavily documented, most prominently by Robert Solow, that heavy investment in your capital sector would create huge increases in GDP, at the begining, but would reach a definite asymptote over time. The USSR put its money where its economic planers wanted it, rather than were the people might have preferred it. For 20 years this worked, but around the 1970's huge gaps in productivity arose, this is what gorbachev tried to remedy with perestroika, but to no avail, it was too late.
The market hardly throws money around worthlessly, because it doesn't throw any money, people are the actors in this theatrical masterpiece. It is they who decide what they want and what they don't want, and ultimately it is they who decide what is worthwhile and what is worthless.
So if you want to be in a state of perpetual war, then there's no question, command economies are the way to go.

[sabre]

They wouldnt have been in perpetual war if they didnt have the revolution from 1917-22 (i think) then came ww1, then ww2, then afghanistan, then the cold war (the last two might nto be in roder)

the environment of europe at that time was very troublesome for a nation trying to get up on its feet such as the USSR. the people had to produce so many arms just to keep up with the war, that they didnt have anytime for luxury or relaxation. this is a perfect example of the economy of russia not being ready for socialism, they werent already industrialized

[Ernest Everhard]

hey sabre, pick up a history book man...

[sabre]

what are you talkin about bro

[Solzhenitsyn]

I can't think of any innovations coming from command economies (unless you consider Nazi Germany a command economy). The only thing Communist command economies do is churn out bastardized capitalist military equipment and very few conusmer products.

[sabre]

your making the untrue assumptions that all command economies are under dictators, and not democratically run

[Ernest Everhard]

Quote: from sabre on 12:16 pm on April 25, 2002
They wouldnt have been in perpetual war if they didnt have the revolution from 1917-22 (i think) then came ww1, then ww2, then afghanistan, then the cold war (the last two might nto be in roder)

the environment of europe at that time was very troublesome for a nation trying to get up on its feet such as the USSR. the people had to produce so many arms just to keep up with the war, that they didnt have anytime for luxury or relaxation. this is a perfect example of the economy of russia not being ready for socialism, they werent already industrialized


sabre I'm referring to you chronology, soviet civil war then ww1, plus using the cold war and the general temperament of european international relations as an excuse for the performance of the command economy discounts the fact that Europes and America's liberalized economies peformed better through similar situations.

[sabre]

any economy when their number one priority is making arms to defend themselves because they are perpetually in war isnt going to have many happy people, which is why the USSR failed

[Ernest Everhard]

Just as you characterized the history of the USSR as one of continuousl tension, you could an equally valid characterization for the US, from WW2 to Korea to Vietnam to Lebanon to Grenada to Panama to the Gulf, etc. Yet despite the fact that the US has to fend off those that would like to see it extinct and has done so for two centuries, its liberal economy allows for consumer satisfaction.

[sabre]

They had been around longer than the USSR. Revolution , war of 1812, then the civil war, etc.

WWII, Korea and vietnam america was already well on its feet

[Kez]

Quote: from Ernest Everhard on 1:58 am on April 25, 2002
Like you said, Command economies are "better" in events like war. But then again, who wants to live with a war mentality all the time, unless you're a proto-fascist, which many of the so called socialists on this site appear to be.
But anyway, Color TV was invented by Dr. Vladmir Zworykin, a Russian who fled the Soviet Union and did his work for RCA in the mid 1920's in the US of A.

Actually , u'll find that technicolour was produced by Armenian Soviet scientist in USSR.
The war metality was not self inflicted, it was caused by USA not minding its own fuckin business and instead of dealing with the millions of homeless in USA, they gave money Osama, to kill soviets, which we all know backfired on sept 11.

Yours Truly you capitalist scum
El Kamo

[reagan lives]

Right, the Soviets were real isolationists.

[sabre]

wattchutalkinbout'?

[BatistaNationalista]

Quote: from sabre on 11:27 pm on April 26, 2002
wattchutalkinbout'?

He is talking about the imperialist tactics to conquer land by the soviet union. Learn about it someday, than you can be smart enough to believe in a normal system.

[sabre]

soviet imperialism was only a fraction of what the USA is doing today

[Ernest Everhard]

haha, hardly. The soviet Union, in itself was a the Uber imperial nation, its existance was predicated on the subjegation of15 different nations.

[PunkRawker677]

"Just as you characterized the history of the USSR as one of continuousl tension, you could an equally valid characterization for the US, from WW2 to Korea to Vietnam to Lebanon to Grenada to Panama to the Gulf, etc. "
like Sabre said, russia is much younger than the U.S. and had these events callaborate into a much smaller time-line than the U.S. I am not protecting or saying that i support any from of USSR imperialism, but he is right, they were under constant tension. The U.S. cannot be compared to the events that happened to the past USSR mainly do to the fact that i just stated about 4 lines up..

[Kez]

Eastern Europer wasnt HALF as bad as what USA did for LAtin america. Dictatorship after Dictatorship, even a few weeks back, another attempt in the Chavez Overthrow.
USA, the "greatest democracy in the world" support a coup of someone who has been democratically elected by the people, to be replaced by a businessman, who has not been voted in, THAT YOU UNCLE SAM, NOW FUCK OFF AND DIE!