I mean, when you're in a hole, stop digging!
the new design allows you do drop your laptops guts into the toilet. Whereas before it was fairly hard to drop your chromebook in, an android phone will slip into the porcelain bowl of doom easily.
What, exactly, are you comparing?
Prosperity, human rights, longevity... Take your pick.
That fucking CIA spook Bush should have bowed out. Perot would have made a far better president than any Republican since Eisenhower.
I'm just pointing out the reality of the matter,
The reality of the matter is that you can go fuck yourself. If the Republicans wanted my vote, they should have nominated Rand Paul.
"The TSA's job is to make airline passengers feel safer and, not XXXXXXXXX actually make us safer..."
I am an economist. Economists have already extensively studied this kind of approach. It's called an Input/Output Model. Communist countries used it in their approach to central planning during the 1970's. It failed miserably for two reasons:
1) It assumes zero substitutability between inputs. E.g., to make a car you need exactly 1.35 tons of steel, 52.7 kg of rubber, 217 kg of glass, 1.73 KW of electricity, 29.4 hours of labor, etc. No other formula is possible, you can't use more energy and less labor, for instance. For reference, the production function is known as a Leontief production function. To be fair, adding any kind of substitutability between inputs results in a completely intractable problem. However, without substitutability this is a lousy way to actually model an economy.
2) It assumes perfect information on the part of the central planner. While this is an oft-used simplification in economic models, it's a lousy reflection of reality. It's simply impossible for a central planner to gather and correlate sufficient information to make it work.
Yet another piece-of-crap opinion article written by someone who couldn't be bothered to do an hour's research on Wikipedia.
One of the oldest economic principles!
China is the only country I could see actually attempting this.
Nope. Been there, done that. Lost tens of millions of people.
China will never revert to the insanity of trying to plan their economy.
Actually, they did work. They may not have achieved the results proclaimed, or even desired, but they did work.
Try telling that to the 70 million or so people that Mao killed. Oh, wait. You can't because they're DEAD.
The entire field of economics is predicated upon the idea of 'endless growth',
Nonsense. Economics is the study of how people exchange goods and services.
As it happens, Communist regimes historically have been rather vicious to gays. In the Soviet Union, the party line was that homosexuality was a bourgeois perversion that was unknown in the glorious worker's paradise they were building.
Compare North and South Korea. Compare East and West Germany before the wall came down. Compare Venezuela before and after the Chavistas fucked it up. Compare China before and after Deng Hsiao-Ping decided to back way off on the commie central planning debacles.
He already disposed of this planned economy fantasy in the 1930s. Google for "Knowledge Problem".
Ecomonies are not a collection of processes all known. They are a collection of agents, mostly unknown with hidden internal states. Another way of saying this is that gathering information for centralization cost money. Economies process that information at many local and global levels and don't share it past the point of economic efficiency. That's in an idealized system. In an non-indeal system there's even wrong ideas.
A classic example of this is the maxim that the bad apples drive out the good apples. Meaning if you can't tell the difference between a good tasting apple and a bad tasting apple from the look (without tasting it) and if it costs less to produce a bad apple then the good apples won't sell as they are indistinguishable. In order to sell those apples you need to incur some cost. Do something that actually raises the price or lowers the profit like constitute an apple certification board, and set up a set of agents to test apples regularly for different farms, and persuade the consume your certification is valuable by giving away free taste demos. Otherwise there isn't information available to make a decision other than price. A similar thing occurs in how bad (debased) money drives the good (full gold) money out.
You can create systems to optimally manage agent based systems. Interesting there is work now that shows how denying information to consumers can increase econmoic efficiencies as well. This should come as no surprise to people familiar with Braes paradox in traffic control.
One of the core faults of communism is that while it can achieve some good results from linear programming notions of optimality is that it ignores that capitalist economies actually are information gathering systems that are very efficient).