We have been making a similar argument here over and over again for the last few years. But at the same time it is not proven that this can work. Socialism is not a ‘for profit’ organization that can mutate Walmart technology and not lose money. If one thing is sure marxists would screw it up. Who is going to control this software? Is this state capitalism?
How will you deal with the tens of millions of companies? One central bureaucracy?
And Walmart/Amazon thrive only on exploited labor. And markets are very diverse. Will you ban markets completely? How about flea markets. Small shops. Small farms, NGO’s, etc…
Total planning of a total economy and social system is not yet a possibility. The issue is not markets but communism, that is, neo-communism defined for the first time.
But the basic point is right: AI and computational software has left Mises/Hayek behind.
We have recommended a mixed three sector approach: a planned sector, a (socialist) market sector using licensed resources from a Commons and a low level below a certain threshold size. that gives three zones of potential, a very rich possibility.
And this preserves a complete ‘economic genome’ of three potentialities, a much richer potential than one planned sector. It is both centralized and decentralized. It allows very small scale semi-capitalist seed orgs which are absorbed immediately at a given size into the high level market sector.
This approach also allows a better interaction with external outstanding capitalisms.
Still, we have been arguing something related to this for years. AI should be able to resolve (almost) the issue of economic calculation that confused the left for a long time….
In The People’s Republic of Walmart, we show how contrary to the historic argument of the likes of free market economists Ludwig Von Mises and Friedrich Hayek, economic planning of millions of products and services involving infinitudes of variables in supply chains and lots of non-price information is not just feasible, but works incredibly well.