Critical Review 17 (1-2):171-178 (2005)
|Abstract||Abstract Ludwig von Mises argued that (1) economic calculation under socialism is impossible, and that (2) the lack of calculation would entail chaos and starvation. In these pages, Bryan Caplan has accepted the first claim but rejected the second, and has argued further that in real?world attempts to implement socialism, it was the lack of incentives, not the absence of economic calculation, that was responsible for economic chaos. I suggest, against Caplan's interpretation, that by ?chaos? Mises meant the lack of calculation, rather than some further state of affairs entailed by this lack. So interpreted, Mises's argument escapes the brunt of Caplan's criticisms.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Peter J. Boettke & Peter T. Leeson (2005). Still Impossible After All These Years: Reply to Caplan. Critical Review 17 (1-2):155-170.
Rodolfo A. Gonzalez & Edward Stringham (2005). Incentives Vs. Knowledge: Reply to Caplan. Critical Review 17 (1-2):179-202.
Bryan Caplan (2004). Is Socialism Really “Impossible”? Critical Review 16 (1):33-52.
Bryan Caplan (2005). Toward a New Consensus on the Economics of Socialism: Rejoinder to My Critics. Critical Review 17 (1-2):203-220.
David Schweickart (1996). Dr. Pangloss Goes to Market. Critical Review 10 (3):333-352.
John Meadowcroft (2003). The British National Health Service: Lessons From the "Socialist Calculation Debate". Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (3):307 – 326.
Vic Velanovich (1994). Does the Philosophy of Medicine Exist? A Commentary on Caplan. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 15 (1).
Eric Swanson (2010). Structurally Defined Alternatives and Lexicalizations of XOR. Linguistics and Philosophy 33 (1):31-36.
Added to index2011-10-18
Total downloads4 ( #188,906 of 722,864 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,917 of 722,864 )
How can I increase my downloads?