> that centralized planning doesnt work is just wrong :) look to walmart and amazon as examples of efficient central planning.
Walmart is one of many players in the economy and it reacts to consumer demand when it decides what to produce and sell. That is not a form of central planning.
An example of central planning would be the government ordering Walmart to produce ten million bicycles per year and to sell them for $80 each -- regardless of how many people actually want to buy bicycles and how much they are willing to pay.
how are those corporations the result of centralized planning?
Every instance of centralized planning by an authoritarian gov't has ended in disaster. And yet, every time, different excuses have been brought up about why it failed.
> The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.
You cannot possibly compare central planning as a reaction to the free-market (walmart and amazon) to the central planning of an entire nation's economic output / consumption.
That is so intellectually dishonest, I'm actually speechless.
Picketty discussed the relationship between wealth inequality and the world wars. Specifically, he notes how these wars served the function of destroying wealth accumulation centers and effectively redistributing them. He cynically notes that if we don't do anything that we may end up seeing another war do it for us...
I'm skeptical that we'll see another world war. Or if we do, it'll be over really quick. Because whoever ends up being enemies of China will be cut off from access to advanced electronics, which are quickly becoming more and more important in warfare.
(I'm not saying that there are no fabs anywhere outside China, but if e.g. Germany decides to start WW3, they'll have a hard time producing enough electronic components given the existing foundries in the country.)
