Let's Use Facebook Groups To Test Steering Mechanisms

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by Xerographica, Mar 27, 2020.

  1. Xerographica

    Xerographica Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    All political and economic issues boil down to group decisions. For example, group decisions in a market are made by individual spending. When you buy toilet paper you’re helping the group to decide how much toilet paper to supply. And when you donate to the Red Cross you’re helping the group to decide how much disaster relief to supply.

    My theory is that there can only be one best system for making group decisions, given that group decisions all have the same goal… group benefit maximization. Democracy and dictatorships are very different systems, so they can’t be equally effective at maximizing group benefit.

    On Facebook I’m a member of nearly 100 groups (mostly about plants) and all of them are dictatorships, except for the plant group that I started, which is a market. We use donations to make decisions.

    How is it possible that out of nearly 100 groups that not a single one is a democracy? Why are we so accepting of dictatorships? Wouldn’t these groups make much better decisions if they were democracies? It’s certainly easy enough to create polls.

    One thing about FB groups is that if you don’t like the decisions made by a group’s dictator, you can simply leave it and start your own group. Starting a group on FB is ridiculously easy.

    So here’s an idea. Let’s create FB groups to test and compare different ways of making group decisions. We can have FB groups for direct democracy, representative democracy, socialism, communism and all the other isms. We can simultaneously participate in and get a feel for numerous different systems.

    Will it become clear which system is the best? Let’s find out! If you create a group let me know and I’ll add it to this list…

    Decisions By Donations

    Questions, concerns?
     
  2. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,154
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You don't replicate economic paradigms pishing about on social media. Have a word with yourself! You're only referring to different forms of communication. It can only pick up very specific aspects, such as Hayek's distributed knowledge or the institutionalist preference of matrix over m-form firm structures. But what's the point? We can refer directly to the firms themselves, rather than a social media gruntfest.
     
  3. Xerographica

    Xerographica Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Back in the day the experts took it as a given that democracy was needed in order for countries to "develop". But then... China. Can we draw any meaningful conclusions from the China experiment? I sure think we can. Basically, maybe democracy isn't really necessary for a country to "develop".

    China has a market and a government. Maybe it developed because of the market? Maybe it developed because of its gov? Or maybe it developed because of both?

    Maybe China developed despite, rather than because of, its government. What is needed is a way to safely test each mechanism separately. Voila! Facebook groups!

    You can join my FB group that uses donations to make group decisions. You can also create a FB group that uses democracy to make group decisions, and I'll join it. Then we will compare the results. Will it be obvious which system is best? If so, then our experiment will be very useful. If not, then our experiment will still be useful. Given that it clearly isn't very problematic for rich people to have far more power than poor people.
     
  4. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,154
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This all random cobblers to your original post. Perhaps you need to construct a post on why China has been successful, despite not really being market socialist? Rambling about facebook groups is just guff.
     
  5. Xerographica

    Xerographica Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Why would we solely debate the potential causes of growth when we could simply and safely test them? If you don't think that the FB experiments would yield useful results, then I'm all ears.
     
  6. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,154
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That you think poncing around on social media can replicate an economic paradigm doesn't suggest to me a logical debate is possible.
     
  7. Xerographica

    Xerographica Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    In terms of making group decisions, do you believe that democracy is the best mechanism for offline groups but not online groups?
     
  8. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,154
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't really give a toss.
     
  9. Xerographica

    Xerographica Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    You don't care which system is the best for making group decisions?
     
  10. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,154
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't care about social media and pretending that it matters
     
  11. Xerographica

    Xerographica Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Let's set the social media part aside. We are both in the same group... this forum. This forum isn't a democracy. We don't vote to make decisions for this group. Right? What would happen if we did?
     
  12. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,154
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Again it is irrelevant. There is nothing to learn from the rules and hierarchy of any internet site. We already have the information from analysis into firm organisation. Democracy, via worker ownership, increases productivity.
     
  13. Xerographica

    Xerographica Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I guess this is why the democratically owned firms have outcompeted the capitalist firms? Oh wait, no they haven't. And they never will. Because democracy is tyranny of the majority, and the majority votes for PewDiePie.
    It doesn't matter if we are talking about an offline group or an online group, democracy will always lead to lowest common denominator type results.
     
  14. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,154
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You demonstrate a gaping chasm in your economic understanding here. Productivity is quite different to profitability. The latter is inflamed through inefficient rent seeking activities.
     

Share This Page