Then how you will get most of your resources? Even if countries like the USSR, that disliked the idea of importing cheap reasources, face price inflation and high rates of debt thanks to their interest in increaseing resources explotation in limited quantity. @Maksim

@Lettow I said only importing what is necessary

Sounds good in theory, are there examples of Autarky in history that didn't have a stagnated economy?

Not stopping importation altogether

healthcare, water, heat, electricity, and the internet should be nationalised. things that people need to live should not have an expensive price tag on it

@Maksim The USSR did that. Natural products, such as Tabacco and Sugar (mainly from Cuba), didn't stop the economic collapse.

I said Cheap Resources, no all resources too.

@Lettow The USSR economy was plauged with corruption after Stalin

Stalin's ruthlessness with corruption kept them in order

Following him, corruption was mroe widespread

Without a strongman at the helm

The USSR had enough resources under it's land to be self sufficient

They just didn't push hard enough for it

They weren't "all in"

To put it that way

They still followed the same model of stali economy of Capital Acummulation, and did re-open factories from Stalinist Era. Also, it is not like they were all bad. Expansion and creation of Natural Gas pies througth Siberia were actually successfull during the Cold War period.

Not to the same extent as under Stalin

Although a problem for them is that getting to their vast untapped resources and getting it out is not the easiest thing

But they absolutely have the supply to do it

They have the supply, but it was still limited. As I said before, price inflation and resource mis-management.

🍿

@Lettow Both of those could've been solved given the will

@Maksim How they would have been solved? Like I said before, Soviet's did basically everything. They opened old Factories from Stalin Era, they created large comolex infraestructures, they give up subsidies to the factories to cover the wages of the workers.

congrats yuo outted yuoreself as a non-libertarian

@Lettow They didn't fight corruption as hard

Their men became complacent

I'm not talking about corruption. Robert C. Allen (2003) for example, explained that the seriousness that the explotation of depleted Siberian steel reserves led to a "cut in productivity in existing operarions, that the led to" vast investments that maintained output with more expensive inputs".

@Maksim

Even if it was a problem of bureaucracy by itself (which im not prone to dent or accept), there were still problems under the Soviet protectorist economic policy.

@Lettow I don't know the full extent of that, I'd have to research it. However I'm certain their protectionist economy __could've__ worked perfectly fine.

Well, maybe the could have survived if they decided to invest all of their resources in civilian industry and tegnology rather than in the military. But still I would be doubtfull of that.

If you wan't to study it I would recommend you "Farm To Factory" by Robert Allen. I even have a summary of the book if you want a copy of it @Maksim

@Lettow That i can agree with, they did not invest enough in civilian and tech industry

natural resources ie Heavy industry, healthcare, finances meaning banks, Public utilities, any type of media, should be state owned. Unions must be nationalized and reorganized into state owned national corporations ie (guilds) do to them perpetuating marxist class war. The corporate state is controlled by politically-unaffiliated representatives of employers, workers and state officials. While the means of production are still in private hands, the capitalist mode of production is abolished, with this Corporatist model replacing it. The Corporatist model seeks a comprise of both worker and employer, who are given equal voting power on any issue passing through said corporations. These corporations must be organized to fit occupations and roles such as by example, a corporation would be created for teaching; doctors; welders;

manufacturing fields; and so on – with syndical regional administrative groups helping the operating corporation. Should either the worker, or the employer, create some mechanism or policy which they feel has significant value, then a facile system shall allow them to submit this idea for scrutiny by the corporate council via the council’s local representative. This council must be comprised of workers within the corporate field, who are democratically elected to the council by the corporations membership. Once the idea has been approved by the council, it will then be put to a vote by the membership of the corporation; upon approval, and provided it poses no conflict to the national interest, it must be introduced into state policy. This mechanism, as well as allowing the regulation of certain fields to be determined by experienced senior workers and employers within that field. National corporations must be in state ownership to ensure that no material factor or any bias from private interest subverts the structure. There shall be one corporation per occupational field nationally, that will also have its own labor court to handle disputes. If decisions cannot be negotiated with outcome the state will simply intervene for a decision. The head of government shall be organized with a “Sovereign”

acting as the national leader, who shall be chosen by a Grand Council, which will be made up of Party leadership, Military high command, and representatives from the Corporations.

This also means setting prices and wages with profit sharing even progressive taxation

@Zoltanous Jesus can I get a summary

@Zoltanous Like some have said before, if you can't summarize in 20 words or less, you prolly need to broaden your understanding of the subject at hand

lmao thats just fucking retarded

could you summarize the idea of quantom relativity in 20 words?