How can you measure the proper allocation of resources without money @Capitán Alatriste ?

Humans always want more, and want their own. That form of communism can never be, because it ignores this basic human condition. And someone will simply take it over.

How do you know how many airports to build and train tracks to lay?

Even Stalin recognized that

As production stagnated. When he awarded people he saw a boost to their production.

Linen also forsaw this

Linen <:Commie_ball:466404411535785995>

@DanConway ideally yes. If you define the resources by needs, not wants ie clothing, food, shelter, medicine etc... of course a modern economy is incapable of supporting this without a universal method of payment

So no would be the answer

If you measure and allocate based solely on that there will be no innovation

You can't

Innovation comes from different factors. Mostly competition, but also from scarcity

Even of the *communist* nations we have seen no innovation outside of militaristic ever came

In communism there is no competition

How can resourses be moved from place to place efficiently enough to not cause issues?

And no reward

So no human motivation

Money is a great indicator of when to build another lane

Or lay another set of tracks

Without this indicator you are blind

Or scarcity and needs

Scarcity usually lesds to human movement rather than new transport

^^^

So unless this all comes with the tyranny of a gov it would collapse quickly with scarcity

So you would let a famine happen to learn where the resources need to go?

Think of the first settlements in the neolithic times. Agriculture is very vasic. However the more the population grows, the more scarcity and pressure there is. So you are forced to innovate to satisfy the growing demands. There is no competition present

Also how can this work if it not global?

The first settlements still moved or sent out long range hunters

Hunter gatherers had less famine than first agricultural societys

From what i have seen

By the time of thr first settlements hunter gatherer society had come to an end

Hell we dont even know how many settlements were simply abandoned due to scarcity

Um no.

This is not truw

We still have hunter gatherers today

But do they have permament settlements?

We have permanent settlements

Bedowins and tribesmen still mived around. Some would have perm settlements while others moved and traded with the perms

The first settlements didnt end hunt and gather. just expanded the gatherer so to speak

By the time a society reaches the point of a permanent settlement, you stop becoming a hunter gatherer society.

Of course Other societies still need to catch up