IMPORTANT: If you cite this message, OPE-L policy requires you not to reveal the identity of the author.
You may cite this message only if you do not disclose who wrote it.
On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Duncan K. Foley wrote: > [Hayek] views the market as a device that does two things: > > 1. It induces people to reveal at least some of this > information, which he thinks they otherwise would be > reluctant or unwilling to do. The market willy-nilly forces > people to take positions (or risks) that reveal some of > their information. Suppose I come up with an invention that permits the production of some item using less than the going amount of social labour time. If I'm operating in a market system I have an incentive to utilize that invention, undersell the competition and make a super-profit. My investment in the new technique reveals to others _that_ I have a new method, but it does not reveal what that method is, how it works. I may patent the new method and keep it a secret for as long as possible. Contrast this with the communist procedure that we see with Open Source software these days. A new invention is made; the inventor has the incentive of kudos and the esteem of his peers to reveal what he's done, and the further incentive that by opening up the invention he's likely to get help with advancing it faster than otherwise. The implied contrast with the view you ascribe to Hayek seems to be that people in a non-market system would just sit on their information, not revealing it for fear that they would get no reward and would just have their plan quota raised. That seems a bleak -- and, happily, unrealistic -- picture of human behavior, given a modicum of cooperative culture and interest in one's work. > 2. The market roughly integrates these disparate pieces of > information and thus makes social production possible. True, but here Paul's technical points kick in. There's reason to believe that a planned system using the right methods could do better than the market's "rough", slow, ex post integration. I believe (but then I would!) that the burden is now on those who maintain Hayek's position, to show just what it is that only the market is able to achieve. Allin Cottrell.
- [OPE-L:2143] Re: Re: markets and reproduction, (continued)
- [OPE-L:2143] Re: Re: markets and reproduction, michael a. lebowitz Fri 14 Jan 2000, 09:33 GMT
- [OPE-L:2147] Re: Re: Re: markets and reproduction, clyder Fri 14 Jan 2000, 10:04 GMT
- [OPE-L:2151] Re: Re: Re: Re: markets and reproduction, Jurriaan Bendien Fri 14 Jan 2000, 13:50 GMT
- [OPE-L:2159] Re: Markets and Information, Duncan K. Foley Fri 14 Jan 2000, 21:19 GMT
- [OPE-L:2160] Re: Re: Markets and Information, Allin Cottrell Sat 15 Jan 2000, 04:32 GMT
- [OPE-L:2206] Re: Re: Re: Markets and Information, Duncan K. Foley Tue 18 Jan 2000, 03:46 GMT
- Message not available
- [OPE-L:2165] Re: Re: Re: Markets and Information, Steve Keen Sat 15 Jan 2000, 21:03 GMT
- [OPE-L:2169] socialism in a single moon?, Gerald Levy Sun 16 Jan 2000, 13:55 GMT
- [OPE-L:2205] Re: Re: Re: Re: Markets and Information, Duncan K. Foley Tue 18 Jan 2000, 03:45 GMT