User talk:GeeJayK/Archive2

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an archive page, last updated 12 June 2025. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page: , (new)(back)

Smoking in NZ

Saw your edit comment. I am a smoker and a NZer but I am in my early 40's so not effected by this new legislation. Problem is we already have issues with shops being robbed, with weapons, and tobacco products are a high priority. I figure this will make the problem worse and the black market stronger. Also they are lowering the nicotine content which is fucking stupid because it'll mean people will smoke more. Nicotine isn't the problem - its all the other shit so less nicotine will make no difference to peoples health. All in all a bold move but may end with some serious unintended consequences. Acei9 01:18, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

It's a ridiculously stupid policy. NZ is gonna learn why the US had to repeal a whole-ass Constitutional Amendment that one time. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 01:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, I agree with you guys. The only thing working in favor of this policy is the fact that NZ is really fucking geographically isolated, so it might be difficult for dealers to sell tobacco there. But IMO focusing on education would work better than what NZ just did. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 01:34, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Tobacco prices here have been rising consistently for the last 20 years or so. As they go up, the black market gets bigger and robberies get more frequent. Acei9 01:44, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
But anyway I just walked out of my office into the yard and had me a delicious nicotine hit from my lovely cigarettes. Acei9 01:44, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Moderator

Welcome to the prestigious position of RW Moderator. I'd tell you what Moderators do, but you've been here for a while, so I'll instead assume that you know what you signed up for. Rabbitseatcarrots (talk) 19:06, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Yo congrats GJK. You'll do a great job, I'm sure! -- Techpriest (talk) 20:47, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
A guy who insults the competence of fellow RW editors/social scientists for disagreeing with him is now mod. Why? Vee (talk) 02:46, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Cuz people voted for him. One doesn’t have to agree with the mob on all political issues to be a good mod. RWRW is still pretty popular and won his way onto the alternate list this year. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 03:23, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Congratulations and welcome to the team! I am glad to have you aboard. Spud (talk) 03:48, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Cosmology

So it seems you know your cosmology. It's my favourite topic. The last few months I have been delving into the math/physics of infinity. It all started when I had to drive two and a half hours from Auckland back to where I live after a Pixies concert. Both my phones had run out of juice so I started thinking abut the Infinite Hotel Paradox while driving the lonely backroads at 1am on a Saturday morning. I've been thinking more on infinity and the mathematical concept zero. Zero is beautiful, infinity is messy. If you can zero out an equation then you have something elegant. If you equation ends in infinity you have done something wrong and it's messy. I have been thinking about how this applies to Multiverse Theory and I think I can zero it out instead of it being infinite...Acei9 04:53, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@Ace McWickedWell, I know a thing or two about cosmlogy (defintely more than I know about Astronomy), but it's not my best topic, not because I don't love it, but because I know were my comparative advantages lie and I don't have all that time to study it, unfortunately. Yeah, zero is an amazing thing. If you like cosmology and these math thought experiments, you might like this one. Given that:
  • Time is infinite
  • The infinite monkey theorem
  • Quantum Mechanics
A new universe might arise trillions of years in the future. I think The Five Ages of the Universe covers it a bit, but I'm not sure. Things get even more interesting when you consider that anything that can happen will therefore happen (p=1) before that. Now, does that mean that everything imaginable will happen? A new world where you are the sole ruler? A sequel of your life? If this is possible, it will happen. Probably many times. In other words, if this is correct (so far there is no hard evidence, just speculation as far as I know), we are kinda eternal and we don't even have to fear death, since we might not even have this conversation right now and one of us could be just a Boltzmann brain, like I said on the Bar. Statistically, this is actually likely. Don't tell the user Machina that though... GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 21:22, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
How about... the sum total energy of the universe is 0. All perfectly in balance by the 1st Law of Thermodynamics (Hawking Radiation is a good example of this balance). In Multiverse theory there are an infinite number of universes where an infinite number of things happen - literally anything that can happen must happen . If this is the case the a multiverse would also create an infinite number of universes where there are no multiverses/multiverse theory isn't true - lets call this negative-infinity. So we have positive-infinity + negative-infinity =...zero. We have just reduced the net energy of a multiverse to zero. Therefor the 1st Law of TD is absolute. I started thinking about this half drunk on the couch one evening and just ran with it. Acei9 00:43, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
Well, I'm drunk right now and I could understand what you said despite reading it three times. Maybe I should drink more? GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:15, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
It’s 10:42am Sunday morning here. I have a belly full of opiates (provided legitimately by prescription I should add) and knocking back hard cider with coffee on the side. I already yelled at some seagulls on the beach earlier and stole a packet of chewing gum from the supermarket. I’m in fine shape this foul morning. You should come over to my place for a drink, we can plot and plan. Acei9 21:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Not a bad deal, always wanted to go to NZ. Though leaving my family right now would be a bit hard... GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 17:07, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Why don’t you mods want to have fun

I’m having a really nice day and I think you should too — Unsigned, by: 2607:FB91:799D:B442:9449:214D:2CF9:E18F / talk / contribs

Thanks for asking, I guess. Just came back from a wonderful nature walk with my wife. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 22:42, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello

Just thought I’d message you since I noticed I haven’t messaged you yet. Rational Dude (talk) 16:53, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

@Rational Dude sure, if you need something, just leave a message. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 16:55, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, will do! Rational Dude (talk)

Break

I’ll be taking a bit of a break from editing partially because I’ve broken the rules with the categories and also because I don’t feel like I have any more pages to make for now. I feel I’ve been spending too much time here, so I’ll be taking a step back. I won’t be gone for long though, I’ll return soon. I’ll also be on the discord, so you can talk to me there for now. Rational Dude (talk) 19:54, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

That's fine. Taking a Wiki break is good once in a while. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 17:09, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Why are you sabotaging the article on Prensa Latina?!

I see that you have demoted the article about Prensa Latina to Draft status. Why?

What is your reason for sabotaging the Categories part of the article? — Unsigned, by: Joreberg / talk / contribs

@Joreberg That's not sabotage. Drafts are never categorized. Spud (talk) 11:20, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
@Joreberg I'm not trying to sabotage your article, I moved it to the draft space because it's not ready for the main space yet. Some people would have deleted it on sight, it's even possible to argue that I saved it from being deleted. The subject is missional, go ahead with the article. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 13:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Sorry to have bothered you. Forget about it. Good bye. Joreberg (talk) 19:14, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to hear about your grandpa dude

Best wishes. Also always willing to talk if that’s ever something you want. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 21:12, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

@DuceMoosolini thanks a lot for the message, man. The doctor thinks he'll make it this time, but we don't know how he'll be. He will probably end up on a wheelchair and with a ventilator machine. I honestly don't think he'll last for very long. But such is life. I'm glad he was part of my life for over 30 years. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 12:51, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
That's awful. My grandpa died last year from lung cancer, so I have an idea of how you're feeling. Just know it gets better. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 17:28, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Greetings

I’ve returned. I’d like to give my condolences to you and your family, and I hope for the safety of all of you. May your grandfather recover quickly and live long and happily. Rational Dude (talk) 20:37, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, man. And welcome back. I just visited my grandfather. He's recovering every day, he'll definitely make it for now. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 21:02, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
I lost my grandma a couple years ago. I'm glad to hear your grandpa's doing well. Carthage (talk) 21:06, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
@Carthage Thanks you for the message. As I said before, I think I am privileged to have all my grandparents alive. Losing someine I love is a very new situation to me, and I hope it won't happen right now. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 21:17, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
@GeeJayK you’re welcome, and thank you. I’m glad to hear your grandfather is doing better now. I know what it’s like to lose loved ones, I lost my grandparents a couple years back. Rational Dude (talk) 21:40, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Smith, Kirkegaard, etc.

This is the real Jonathan Kane. I've been following the discussion about the recent City Journal article, and I thought you'd find it useful if I were to provide some further details about what's being discussed there.

First, the guy who was posting under my name on the talk page of the article was an imposter. I also want to provide some more detail about the low-level trolling that's been going on, both here and at Wikipedia, of which the Richard Haier article was one example.

In April of 2020, while Wikipedia's "NightHeron" user was rewriting that site's race and intelligence article to make it conform to an "antiracist" perspective, I received an email from Emil Kirkegaard asking me to help him rewrite it, and offering to share the WP account's login details with me. But I was unwilling to help Kirkegaard turn that article into a parody, and he and I argued for more than a week about whether his doing that was a useful strategy. Kirkegaard and I have actively avoided one another ever since then.

Smith seems to watch Kirkegaard's every move, so he probably noticed that Kirkegaard and I removed one another as friends on Facebook around that time. Now he (and the rest of you) can know the reason that happened. I still think Kirkegaard is capable of doing useful research, but whatever ability he has is eclipsed by his impulsivity, his habit of deliberate provoking people, and his determination to prove he's right in pointless dramas.

A few months ago I forwarded some of Kirkegaard's past correspondence with me, which made it clear he's evaded his ban from Wikipedia using the NightHeron account, to Wikipedia's arbitration committee. They acknowledged having received my message, but did nothing else. I know that also contacted them about the same thing in September 2022. They told her in response that this issue could only be addressed in a public arbitration request, but in the same message one of the arbitrators advised her against making such a request, because "I think the committee has the committee has very little patience for this matter". One other person at Wikipedia who I know was aware of this issue is the late admin and former arbitrator DGG, who made this amendment request partly for that reason. However, DGG told me and Emily that he felt it would be improper for him to take action about Kirkegaard's ban evasion directly, because he considered himself an involved administrator.

It's a mystery why Smith states in his that she "collaborated with and defended Kirkegaard on Wikipedia", or that the two of them "edited the same race and IQ related articles with overlapping edits as a sort of 'tag-team' with the same point of view", even though Smith has made it clear elsewhere that he's aware most of Emily's recent involvement in those Wikipedia articles has been to oppose Kirkegaard's attempt to turn them into parodies. (As the Cancel Watch article mentions, that's the only interaction on Wikipedia pages she and Kirkegaard have ever had.) It's also a mystery why Smith is being allowed to use RationalWiki in this way while he's banned. He created his article about Willoughby in August 2022, when he'd already been banned from this site for the past two years. --Tetrapteryx (talk) 20:43, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Tetrapteryx has confirmed to me by email that he is indeed the Jonathan Kane that he says he is. Bongolian (talk) 20:46, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Yew

A while ago, I added info about yew on his views on Christianity and Islam, and his negativity towards them. Bongolian removed it with leaving a reason, even after I sourced it, which kind of makes it seem like they’re trying to ignore the racism of this dictator. May I put the information back in his page for now? Rational Dude (talk) 17:00, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I think you should take it to the talk page first and ask Bongolian himself. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 17:02, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
I will. But what should I do if they say no or deny Yew’s views and policies? Rational Dude (talk) 17:09, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
I know Bongolian and I doubt he'll do that without a good reason. You should work with him on the article and build a consensus. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 17:11, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
We need to be careful that we don't slap "Islamaphobe" on every single criticism of Islam IMHO. Islam is heavily infested by its own blend of fundamentalist dogma (which through Wahhabism is mainstream in certain countries, and that's before you count the radical factions). This should be a fair subject of criticism, especially on this Wiki (see mission point #3), and especially since when the radical Islam sect gets in power, they tend to be strict patriarchal authoritarians (see Afghanistan) -- also mission oriented.
Yew made one controversial assertion regarding Singapore Malays, which he later retracted. Not sure why he made the remarks in the first place (Malay Islam is very "traditional" but not radically so) but one retracted quote doesn't mean much. Wikileaks also published some more damning remarks purportedly by him, however Wikileaks is hardly a reliable narrator, so I'm more inclined to believe Yew's explanation that he was talking about terrorists like Jemaah Islamiyah.
Overall I get the impression not of pure Islamaphobia, and more concern over Islam radicalization and fundamentalist dogma preventing integration in a modern secular state, concerns I see as quite justified. Since the above already is in the article, I think more evidence is needed of his supposed Islamophobia than that. BobJohnson (talk) 17:42, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Fair enough. Yew has legitimate criticisms of Christianity and Islam, but there are some sources that insinuate that he has treated unfairly Christians and Muslims unfairly. Rational Dude (talk) 16:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

A little issue

Hey, I hope you and your grandfather are doing alright.

I wanted to ask if I could remove the fascism table from the Paxton section since it’s not an equal comparison and it might make us look bizarre to normies who think that we see trump and putin as equal to hitler. Rational Dude (talk) 17:01, 17 August 2023 (UTC)


@Rational Dude Thank you for the message. I went to the doctor today with him, he's slowly getting better. Regarding your question, I think you should bring it to the talk page of the article, and if the community agrees, you can ask someone to remove the categories for you, but please, don't do it yourself right now. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 22:08, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

You’re welcome, I’m glad to hear he’s getting better.
Of course, I won’t remove it. That’s why I checked with you first. Also, I want to remove the table for Paxton comparing trumpism, putinism, and nazism, not any categories. Rational Dude (talk) 02:47, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Centrism Edit

Just trying to figure out your reasoning for your recent deleting of text on the Centrism page.

  1. That the blend of classical and keynesian economics is "theoretically incoherent".
  2. That independent central banks can't do enough in times of major crisis
  3. That a move towards more of a "command" economy may be required/beneficial during such times
  4. That the "centrist" economic style/leaning/whatever outlined in that section might be seen to create financial instability a la banking crisis

I'm not the original author or particularly partial/interested in the argument pushed in the deleted text, but it seems those are four different claims that have been deleted at once. Could you expand a little? Tikitime2 (talk) 18:43, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

@Tikitime2 I'll answer one by one:

  1. I don't think it's incoherent at all, it's the new neoclassical synthesis
  2. I think they can, that was my point. Bernanke did a bloody good job. At most, fiscal policy is underrated, but monetary policy has done a very good job over the last 15 years.
  3. Unless we're talking about wars, I don't think they can be benefitial because information is disperse in society.
  4. Maybe I was too harsh on Minsky's Financial Instability Hypothesis, if you want to, you can add that one again. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 18:54, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Some of these things weren’t addressed in the initial edit summary. I like how things ended up though with the final edit. I feel like there is an opportunity to turn passages like the one that was initially removed into a kind of structural dialectic. Seeing a relevant argument you take as being wrong can be reframed as simply being a postulated argument that can be followed up with a more reputable response. Some scholars respond with X but this a problematic position given y (y being the more rigorous reply). Simply removing x stating that its simply wrong, warrants confusion, and may even garner mistrust. This of course depends of course on the level of epistemic privilege required to know that x is wrong. Do you understand what I mean? I am not making allegations or suggesting you never incorporate dialogue into your edits. Just that you can recognize the explanatory, debunking, and ideologically inoculant value of such a method, no? - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 22:47, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Can you clarify what the problem with my edit to Cuba was?

I changed the description of Cuba from "dictatorship" to "democracy", not out of commie bias but because "democracy" is a more apt term for describing this particular country's leadership. The country has elections for local and national political leaders and the citizens themselves agree that the country is democratic when interviewed.

On the flip side, any web search will lead back to one major source for Cuba being a dictatorship - The Economist's Democracy Index. This is the source cited by Wikipedia and mostly everyone on (what I would assume to be) your side. I can give you a full explanation on request, but the short of it is this ranking, as well as any attempt to rank democracy is bogus.

Whatever you think about all this, it's impossible to look at the objective facts and conclude that the Cuba of today is a dictatorship. It's undeniably a terrible place to live, but it's democratic.

Hydrolysis (talk) 17:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I was actually thinking about our own definition of democracy here. By this definition, Cuba clearly isn't a democracy. Elections in Cuba aren't considered democratic, but elections are just part of democracy (countries like Hungary and Turkey aren't considered democraties either, they are electoral autocracies. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:19, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
You're right, Cuba does not match rule 6. Candidates aren't free to promote any policies they want; they have to stay within the PCC's goals, primarily establishing communism in Cuba and Latin America as a whole. Countries like the U.S. are more liberal in this regard - anyone can run for office no matter what. Anyway, to reiterate what I concluded with last time: whether Cuba's model of deciding leadership is good or bad, it certainly has nothing to do with giving the elected officials autocratic power and they don't deserve that label. Hydrolysis (talk) 00:36, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
P.S. I just found out we have an article on The Economist and how unreliable they are. It's also interesting that a few hours after I started this thread they published an article titled "What World War III would mean for investors", which is further sinking their reputation. Hydrolysis (talk) 03:58, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Leftygreenmario

You forgot to remove her mod rights. Monet Ye 19:54, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I just noticed you removed your mod rights as well. Monet Ye 19:56, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
(EC) Yeah, I realized that right after I removed my own mod privileges. "How come I demoted three new mods, but only demoted two". Already asked Cosmik to change it for me. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:56, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Congrats

On your victory in the election! I know my sig already says it to everyone I talk to on here, but goatspeed! --Goatspeed. See what I'm up toCircularREmail2.gifasoningSee my latest prototypes 07:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

@CircularReasoning thanks a lot! But... I didn't run this year, albeit I wanted to. Are you talking about 2022? Anyway, thanks again. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 21:18, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Oh, my mistake. I thought I saw your name in the user rights log when the results got counted. --Goatspeed. See what I'm up toCircularREmail2.gifasoningSee my latest prototypes 21:20, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Board

So we’ve pulled the trigger on holding a meet on Discord tomorrow at 17:00 UTC. We’re doing this with whoever shows up, but we all hope you’ll be there. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 20:45, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

@DuceMoosolini thanks, man, but I'm not part of the board. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 16:28, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

You have two thumbs and a PhD in economic history

Talk to me about economic history! Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 18:35, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

@Stabby the Misanthrope Thank you for the question. Well, actually, I don't have a PhD yet. I will have it in 4 years if things go right. But I can tell you a bit of economic history for sure. Since the Neolithic revolution 10 thousand years ago, there isn't much to talk about. Life was short and miserable for most humans (the vast majority of us died before 5). There were a few places where economic development happened, like Rome and Greece during the classical antiquity and India and China in some periods, but overall humanity seemed doomed to fall into the Malthusian trap (forever. Then, 250 years ago something finally started: continuous, sustainable growth. It started first in England, and then it spread across other countries. Why did it happen after so long? There are three complementary explanations, all of them having strengths and weaknesses.
The first one is geography. Markets develop better when we can transport goods (close to rivers and the sea, and far from mountains), and being on the “malaria belt” is still one of the main reasons why Africa is so poor. Geography is bad news for some countries: we can't change it. However, it cannot be the main explanation: countries like Switzerland managed to get rich despite having a shitty geography, while privileged countries, like Argentina, failed.
The second one, and the most important according to most people studying development, are institutions: democratic countries where the government protect property rights, provides public goods, enforce contracts, uphold the rule of law, etc. are often the richest. And yet, it can't explain everything. Why is Southern Italy so poorer than Northern Italy? Both regions have the same laws and overall the same institutions.
The third explanation, and probably the most popular thanks to Max Weber's research on the protestant work ethic (even though much of his work is now outdated) is culture. Values that disparage work and profit, not being able to trust the others, gender and race norms… They are also important for development.
I would like to write much more than I did (I wanted to write a post three times longer at least) but I don't have time. If you want to know more, there are two recent books on the subject: How the Work Became Rich, by Mark Koyama and Jared Rubin and The Journey of Humanity by Oded Galor. The first one is a reference book that synthesizes the main theories very well, but kinda lacks a main thesis. The second one is a lot deeper, but while Galor explains the main ideas behind growth and development, he has his own Unified growth theory to develop in his book. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:35, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
There's not much to talk about the ten thousand years of human history that saw an exponential population growth rate relative to the growth rate of human populations before the Neolithic Revolution? Tell me again, how exactly did markets in the Americas, Oceania, Asia, and Africa open up again? Carthage (talk) 19:45, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
(EC) When it comes to living standards, very little changed. Galor calls this period the "malthusian epoch" because, I put a growing population would result in lower living standards, despite a higher output. This is one of the things I wanted to write about, and I'll still re-write our article on Malthus based on his work. Also, what kind of red herring is this last question? GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:49, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
About economic development, the Uruk period saw the mass production of pottery compared to the preceding Ubaid period. The point of the last question is that colonialism opened up the markets of the Americas and Africa prior to the Industrial Revolution, and after. I have a genuine question: does economic development account for the effect of colonialism in its analyses? Carthage (talk) 19:52, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
If you want to read the books I've mentioned, you'll see that they analyze these periods (including Sumer, IIRC). Anyway, How richer were people in Uruk when compared to the rest of the world? Answer: not very much. Anyway, this is consistent with the theories presented. There is, at first, some growth, followed by stagnation. And yes, economic development account for the effect of colonialism. Koyama and Rubin have an entire chapter about colonialism. Colonialism is yet another subject that I'd like to write on the post, but I didn't have time. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Ah, ok. Anyway, about Uruk: there was an increase in inequality compared to the period that came before, but that was localized. There was a lot of civilizational redundancy back then in a way that there really isn't now. Carthage (talk) 20:00, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Somebody told me Malthus is a scary, scary man and his ghost is coming to haunt us. Chillpilled (talk) 21:49, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────@Chillpilled I don't know this guy, but not gonna happen. Population decline is, for most countries today, a worse problem than population growth. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 22:46, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Yo

I’m back, how’ve you been? I hope your grandfather is still alright.

Anyway I wanna ask if Milei can be categorized as a fascist, he is legit far right and has ties to other far rightists who are legit fascists (Meloni, Bolsonaro, Orban, etc). Rational Dude (talk) 00:08, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rational Dude Thank you for the message. I personally like to see the opinion of the press before calling politicians fascists. I've seen them calling Milei far-right, but I don't recall any news outlet calling him a fascist. That being said, if someone wants to add the category, I won't oppose either, though I'd advice you to not do it yourself since you're still topic banned. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 00:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Always my friend. You’re absolutely right about checking press articles for a common consensus on this topic. I saw quite a few news outlets with articles describing him as far right (I think at least one even described him as a fascist). And don’t worry about me adding categories, I know better than to violate my topic ban. I just wanted to ask you first. Also, isn’t Argentina an authoritarian regime because of the dictatorial actions of Milei (like the crackdowns and gutting government programs)? Rational Dude (talk) 00:16, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
I wouldn't say so. The institutions seem to be working there. Is Milei authoritarian? I think he is, but he doesn't have enough power, in fact the Congress and the judiciary system are blocking much of his policies. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 00:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Alright. But I still that there is a legitimate consensus to label and categorize him as a fascist though because of his beliefs and how they influence his policies. Rational Dude (talk) 00:35, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

"According to critics"

This is weasel wording by definition (it's not really different from "some experts believe…" or similar weasel wording). All you need to do to fix it is specify what critics. Plutocow (talk) 00:05, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

@Plutocow it isn't when it's a criticism that has been used literally thousands of times. I have no interest at editing that article at the moment, (I was going to rename it but someone already did it for me) but I'll add Naomi Klein's The Shock Therapy tomorrow as a source then. By the way, you might wanna clean up the Wiki of this weasel word then, just search for it. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 00:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Panama

If you want to be pedantic, you can argue that Panama is partially in South America as it straddles the Darién gap, which is considered the boundary between Central and South America. (Either that, or Colombia is partially in Central America.) Ultimately though, there is no objective line on a map you can draw to separate Central and South America. Plutocow (talk) 21:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

@Plutocow Fair enough, though I don't think we should classify them as a South American country. Even Wikipedia, that is extremely meticulous with these categories don't have them in the South America category. I won't dispute if you, or anyone else revert my edit though. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 21:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

"Denialist"

I was using sources posted on the discord by Chillpilled. You have a problem? Take it up with them. Anyway, why did you remove the bit on Costco? Are you gonna claim an actual example of corporate price-gouging is somehow "anecdotal evidence"? Carthage (talk) 23:34, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

What does Chillpilled has anything to do with this discussion? Regarding the Costco example, it's just poor understandig on how elasticity works, so it's utterly irrelevant to the page. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 23:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Because they were the one that raised the sources and brought up Costco, you clown. Carthage (talk) 23:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
And? GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 23:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Then raise it up with them. I was using sources they provided. it's not that hard to comprehend. Carthage (talk) 23:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
They didn't edit the page. Stop blaming others for what you did. Discord is not the Wiki. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 23:41, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
"Blaming"? I was simply updating the page based off of new sources provided. Would you accuse them of being a denialist given they were the one who provided the sources? Clearly they, and I, thought it was relevant.
Anyway, what does it matter if something is heterodox? Weren't you the one who stated that "fringe" does not equal wrong? Also given how it mentions recent inflation, looking at a longer period of time seems an irrelevant criticism. Simply changing the numbers does not change the reality on the ground. Carthage (talk) 23:44, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Question

Is there a rule on ratwiki for specifically formatting citations? Rational Dude (talk) 14:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

@Rational Dude No, RW:CS doesn't mention anything about formatting citations, so if you ever get blocked because of this, I would consider such block an abuse of sysop tools. However, it's usually consider a good thing to format your citations. I wrote an essay about how to format sources quickly and easily: Essay:How to use Wikipedia to add beautiful sources, perfect sources to your articles. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 15:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
@GeeJayK I ask because I made a mistake with several articles (which I corrected and formatted my citations). But carthage and duce believe that I've been neglectful and think a block for me is necessary. While I agree about correcting my citations, I think a block is harsh and counterproductive. You can find the atim here. Rational Dude (talk) 16:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Regarding ATIM

So will I be able to regain my mod powers? And will I only have a topic ban for fascism? I’m asking because what you said in the ATIM was a bit confusing, you worded it as if it sounded like I won’t get promoted again. Rational Dude (talk) 04:04, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

@Rational Dude I'm also a bit confused myself. You'll have to ask Bongolian (do it on the ATIM page, not on his talk page, others might have this doubt as well). A minor correction is, you won't get mod rights, but sysop rights. Check RW:moderator and RW:Sysop to see the difference. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 15:18, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Technicalities. A banhammer is a banhammer no matter how you dress it up. Carthage (talk) 15:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
@GeeJayK So will I be able to get mod rights and overturn the ban with time when I show progress? I can wait and use this time to improve and prove myself that I can be trusted with the categories. But just so you know, I never abused my powers, you can ask TechPriest if you don’t believe me. Rational Dude (talk) 16:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks

For fixing that problem I had with the troll collapse. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 21:40, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Arcadium Trancefer You're welcome. I wasn't sure myself if that would work, but I decided to give it a shot. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 11:10, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Board nomination

You've been nominated to the RationalMedia Foundation election. Please accept or decline here; if you accept, you may wish to campaign.

Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 22:50, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey

How are your studies going? Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 15:08, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@Arcadium Trancefer Thanks for the question. I'll give you a detailed answer tomorrow. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 23:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
@Arcadium Trancefer Sorry I'm late. The reason why I took so long for me to answer this question was the fact that the answer could be outdated if I had answered it last week. I had, over the last few months, many problems with the project, especially the fact that I would need far more primary sources that I thought I was going to need, sources that are not available on the Internet (and going to Russia to check the documents myself is not an option). So I'm giving up my current project. My advisor is disappointed, my father is disappointed and most of all, I am disappointed. I still want to get a phd though, so I submitted another application. This one will be in a History department though, and the focus of the project is the Southern Cone. As my Spanish is much better than my Russian, I expect this project to be much easier. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 11:12, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry to hear that. Hope this one goes alot better. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Discord server

Hey, uh, can someone please let me back into the Discord server? I'm still not even sure why I was thrown out for making a self-deprecating joke about "Luigifan moments". I also suspect that the Discord server would be better than talk pages for discussing ref note ideas or page disputes, since I don't seem to get much feedback on talk pages (and why was the review board deleted, anyways…?) --Luigifan18 (talk) 20:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

As I remember, a moderator on Discord banned you for spamming things up with lots of pleading and comments that beat the dead horse of you adding refs and "mini-essays" to articles. The stuff you took to the Discord when you'd just been banned for months from RationalWiki, to continue there instead. You could appeal to Techpriest or to LeftyGreenMario (who banned you), but I think they'll keep you banned if your no. 1 idea for returning to the Discord is to do more of what got you banned there. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 19:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
No, what I had in mind was proposing ideas and asking for feedback. --Luigifan18 (talk) 20:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
See response on RW talk:Discord. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 21:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@Luigifan18 You should probably talk to @Techpriest as she runs the server. But what concerns me the most is that you still want to discuss ref notes when you cannot post them. Please, understand that a topic ban means that you're not allowed to contribute about a certain subject and/or in a certain way. Period. Talk pages and Discord discussion will not allow you to cheat on the topic ban. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 11:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

I might have given him that impression. I thought he'd still be able to comment on talk pages about that stuff. Chillpilled (talk) 12:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
That was also the impression I was under — that I could use talk pages, Discord, or some sort of review board to propose ideas for ref notes that you guys could add if you liked them. (And I didn't go to Techpriest first because I was under the impression that I'd severely annoyed them and they wouldn't be sympathetic.) --Luigifan18 (talk) 14:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
Nobody has time to manage a "review board" for a single editor. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 15:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

You

Have a bottle of Champagne for what you did, buddy! Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:17, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, man. I was actually expecting some backlash, but I'm glad that people seem to think I did the right thing. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 11:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
I haven't been involved in the whole thing and have just passively been observing, but from the looks of things, there really wasn't much of a choice left. Wonder where he'll be in 5-10 years. IntrepidSkeptic (talk) 11:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

For your comments about "ghetto culture" and "redneck culture"

Jumping Humpback whale.jpg


Smash!

You've been squished by a whale!
Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something really silly.

WTF? You're endorsing arguments that are at best Hillbilly Elegy and at worst The Bell Curve. And no, coming from someone who grew up in one of the "redneck" areas mocking poor white people does not make your statements any less problematic. Plutocow (talk) 20:19, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

lmao So, cultural aspects that argue that education is not important aren't a relevant factor of education? I don't even know the first book and I've never read the second one, never will, but I doubt that their main argument is similar to mine. And yes, education does matter, and can be affected by cultural factors. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 21:31, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Here's something you seemingly don't know given that you are making these stupid arguments: in the United States, schools are primarily funded by property taxes. I should know, the only reason why I was able to get a decent high school education was because as my hometown was too small to have its own school district I went to one in a nearby town that was essentially a high income (relative to the rest of my area) gated community. If I was born in the next town over, which was less than two miles from where I lived, I would have instead went to a school that had so low of a budget that they had to turn the gymnasium into five classrooms. The reason why your comment is ignorant and dare I say even bigoted is because it's ignoring that the school system is incredibly segregated and the problems I mentioned are even worse in the poor inner-city schools, where black students are disproportionately enrolled in the worst-funded schools. I'm willing to cut you some slack as, since you're not in the U.S., you might not know all of this. But there's a reason why using "ghetto culture" to explain poverty is basically seen as a dog whistle for the n word. Plutocow (talk) 21:50, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
I don't fucking care about your life or where you studied, this is utterly irrelevant, and as I said, systemic racism is the most important cause of of the race gap (just read my post, I find ironically that you simply ignored this part). I did say that it was possible that "Ghetto Culture" wasn't a main cause as well on the post. But my main point was, cultures that ignore education lag behind. Nothing on your post answers to that. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 21:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
"Cultures that ignore education" isn't something you can give any data on, it's just racism/classism. It's not just a problem for black people, it's also a huge problem for poor whites across Appalachia and the south, poor Hispanics in the southwest, and indigenous people throughout the country. Unless you can find me a source that says the poor education is because of "culture" and not because of, you know, segregation, then it's safe to ignore what you say. You're supposed to be the economics expert here. Plutocow (talk) 22:02, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Ok, you are being dishonest now. Of course it isn't a problem just for black people! This was also on my post. Also, how did a post that claims that systemic racism is the main reason of the race gap denies that segregation is still an issue? Your post is a huge, incredibly stupid, strawman. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 22:06, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
I'm not prejudiced, but... "I know systemic racism is a huge problem and all, but don't you think a little bit of the problem is due to their ni I mean "ghetto culture"? I mean, I'm bigoted against poor white people too so that makes it okay!" You're the one who refuses to provide a single source that "culture" is a part of the equation. Plutocow (talk) 22:12, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── You can read "A Culture of Growth" by Joel Mokyr and the works by Deirde Mccloskey if you think that culture does not matter on development. That was my point. I said that the exAmples could be wrong on the very post. It's Friday and have other things to do. Be happy with your own refusal to understand my point and actually engage like a honest person with my argument. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 22:18, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

So, you have a book about the Industrial Revolution and someone working for the Koch-funded Cato Institute? Neither of which actually address the topic of "ghetto culture"? Your thinking also seems to be fallacious, for instance "a country having a lot of natural reasources is beneficial for its devolopment" is probably an uncontroversial statement, but "Congo is undeveloped, so it must have little to no natural resources" is an obviously falacious conclusion. Even if you can establish that culture can have an effect on economics, it doesn't follow that 1. culture can have an effect on education outcomes 2. that all poor economic outcomes must, to some extent, have something to do with culture 3. if cultural issues exist, they are the cause and not the result of poor outcomes 4. that any specific culture even has these issues to begin with. And of all these, you have established a grand total of… none of them! Meaning, you basically pulled the claim put of your ass and are appealing to vague principles that it might be possible to proof that it's true and I am in the wrong and am clearly misrepresenting your argument for taking any sort of exception to it. Look in the mirror Plutocow (talk) 22:37, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
At this point you're trolling. So, you've never read anything about the subject and you still want to have strong opinions and use the genetic fallacy to dismiss the source? No, it is a controversial statement, it's the paradox of plenty. Seriously, Plutocow, you should at least read the very basic. 1 So, you're saying that cultures that value education don't have better economic outcomes? Tell South Korea that (I don't like their education model, but they grew in part because of that as far as I know). 2 Yes, because poverty has many causes, I listed five on draft:Poverty, culture is only one of them. If you want my opinion, institutions are far more important. When did I say that? 3 Again, I do think systemic racism is one the main reason. It was just an example on a fucking talk page, an example that I said it could be wrong. But why not both? Cultural aspects are hard to change. They can be a cause (though, for the tenth time, the example on that talk page was just... an example, that I acknowledge that could be wrong) 4. So, it's cultures don't have different approaches when it comes to education? And do all these different approaches always will result in the same outcome? GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 22:52, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
How do you even measure cultural importance of things like education though? Obviously my school getting significantly better grades than the one next over doesn't prove that my town is culturally superior because the two towns are very similar in terms of demographics, history, etc. Obviously, countries with better institutions are going to have better outcomes, but you run into an is-ought problem (do they have good institutions because they "value" education, or do they "value" education because of their good institutions? Is good education a prerequisite of devolpment or a result of it? Given that illiteracy was not uncommon in the developed world up until WWII, it could be seen that the latter might be the case. Granted, today's economy requires a much more educated workforce from back then, but still if the most educated countries are the ones that were already doing well before that point, then you can see the problem with directly tying education to culture. Also, "cultural aspects are hard to change" you need a citation for that. And you still have provided not a sliver of evidence for your specific claims about black culture and "redneck culture". For instance, it is a fact that metals are generally solid at room temperature and atmospheric pressure. Does that prove that mercury is solid under those conditions? Plutocow (talk) 23:11, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I'll make an exercise here and assume good faith. To quote the World Bank:

For a variety of reasons, economists have avoided getting too closely involved with the concept of culture and its relationship to economic development. There is a general acceptance that culture must have a role in guiding a population along a particular path, but, as Landes (1998) points out, a discomfort with what can be construed as implied criticism of a particular culture has discouraged broader public discourse.

In other words, people avoid making this sort of studies. Some attempts have been made though, even if they had some controversy over them. Once again, according to the entry on the World Bank page:

Huntington (2000) remarks how in the early 1960s Ghana and Korea were broadly comparable in terms of income per capita, structure of production, and foreign aid. Thirty years later the contrast could not be more pronounced. According to Huntington, culture had a major role in explaining it: “South Koreans valued thrift, investment, hard work, education, organization, and discipline. Ghanaians had different values. In short, cultures count." The problem with this formulation is that it does not provide a very auspicious basis to start a dialogue with Ghana as to how they could catch up with Korea. Not surprisingly, international financial organizations and bilateral donors have shied away from framing the debate in terms of cultural norms.

Regarding your question on the is-ought problem, it probably started as better education, with stuff such as the printing press being invented, which allowed for even better education as far as I remember. Also, stop pretending to be educated on the subject. Regarding cultural aspects being hard to change, you only need to see how religion (the most important cultural aspect of all) have changed in a very slow rate over the last thousands of years. Regarding the lack of evidence on black culture, I'll say it again. It was a bloody example that was the first one that came on my mind. I don't remember when and where I read about it, but you're intentionally missing the big picture here. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 23:22, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

How do you prove that South Koreans value "thrift, investment, hard work, education, organization, and discipline" and that Ghanans don't? Ghana additionally has multiple different cultures living within its borders, so were any real anthropology or sociology studies made here? You say I'm not educated on the subject, but your statements on the US which I am very well educated on are completely wrong and you have made no real attempt to defend them besides trying to redirect me to countries like South Korea, Ghana, and Italy in which I am not familiar with any of the specific nuances of (and let's be honest you aren't either). It feels like a bad-faith way of diverting from the actual issues of the argument. And the specifics of the black culture argument is important here, because it's the part of your statements that I specifically took issue with and you trying to put it in a broader argument without defending your specific claims is a red herring. Plutocow (talk) 23:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Ok, Plutocow, I had to leave now, and since you're still disingenuously arguing that my main point is that black culture enacts poverty, and that wasn't an example that, as I said, could or could not be wrong, I don't think you be approached with reason. You had the last word. Congratulations. You're a winner! GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 23:49, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
If it "could or could not be wrong", you didn't have to dig your heels in to defend it so hard. Just admit that you have no evidence and you're sorry for spreading claims you are taking out of your ass that have been used to justify racism and that you won't do it again and we'll be good. This is like someone trying to defend racialism by going into general principles about evolution and when called out say "it's just an example, maybe it's true, but you deny evolution!" If I am the "winner", it's not because you gave up but rather because you failed to even really try to defend the position I called you out on in the first place. Remember, you were the one who generalized this into "so you're saying that culture has no effect?" Plutocow (talk) 23:56, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
So, let me understand two things before I get out. First, after calling me a racist, you said that we'll be good as long as I say that the example was bad? Well, I'm not happy with sharing a place with racists. If anyting, you should apologize for calling me those things if you weren't saying them for real. Second, You're saying that the education and income gaps between groups such as blacks, hispanics and white people living in some rural areas when compared with Asians and other white groups can solely be explained by institutional factors, and that cultural factors, in this case, are irrelevant. In other words, systemic racism is the only explanation for the gaps? Is that correct? That's an honest question, and I think it's possible that this is the case. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 00:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
It's not just a "bad example", it's that you confidently made a statement that was wrong and refuse to fully admit it was wrong, made worse by the fact that it's the same language that many politicians and think tanks use to justify not addressing the systemic discrimination in place. You can just say "I was wrong about attributing the bad educational outcomes for inner city blacks and poor white people even in part to a supposedly inferior culture when I had no evidence to back it up," not "I just used a bad example". It's not just systemic racism (including related issues like colonialism) but plenty of institutional factors like corporate exploitation (Appalachia has a long history of "company towns"), longstanding labor issues, poor infrastructure, etc. In many ways, these problems intersect with each other, but making any statements that "culture" is a reason these areas have struggled. For instance, what culturally separates West Virginia from the farmlands of eastern Virginia or central Ohio, which are much better off relatively speaking? To use a more international example, what cultural factors separate Botswana from Zimbabwe or Zambia that cause Botswana to be relatively better off? That's not something you can answer in a single economics paper (or a single sociology paper really), and even if there was an answer could it really be disentangled from the other factors I mentioned? Plutocow (talk) 00:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Award

Criminals On The Run v4n7 June-July 1949.jpg Congratulations, GeeJayK! You have been awarded the prestigious Fish in the Face award for your contributions to RationalWiki! Keep up the good work! Our community really appreciates your good work!

I'd put a refnote here but I don't wanna muck up your talk page.

cosmikdebris talk stalk 00:59, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Thanks! GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 02:50, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Nominated

You've been nominated in the upcoming moderator elections. See the nomination at RationalWiki:Moderator elections/Nominations.

cosmikdebris talk stalk 20:24, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Question on the semantics of economic models

Hi, I have a question and I don't know who else to ask, so I decided to ask you since you're an economist (if I'm not mistaken?): is a "decentrally planned economy" actually a category in economics? I've seen it mentioned multiple times before. In particular, the Wikipedia article on planned economies has a whole category on it. I've also seen some scholars, such as Pat Devine and Michael Albert/Robin Hahnel, who also advocate for this model (and their most well-known works seem to have a reasonable amount of citations according to Google Scholar,[1][2] although I'm not very knowledgeable on how notoriety is determined in economics). But I've also seen a lot of basic sources and even scholars treating planned economies and centrally planned economies as one and the same (including our own article on it). So I was wondering if you had an opinion whether a "decentrally planned economy" exists or if it's just a centrally planned/market economy with another label. It might be useful to know since the socialism article does mention it, and I was planning on helping improve it. — LunaAHHHHH 22:29, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Though this question isn’t addressed to me, I can answer on the more social philosophical side of things that the distinction is genuine. Though I don’t think GJK will disagree with me here, and I’ll leave them to answer the semantic question directed at his own discipline. The centrally planned economic models, or state-command style economies differ from parecon in multiple respects. Namely in the flow of information and the administration of planning. In state command economies, information on inventory and expected consumption all get directed towards the state, where the state then constructs the plan for the production targets under the guise it should meet expected demand. In parecon the information goes directly from local consumer councils straight to the production councils that oversee the production of the relevant materials and goods. Production councils only have to deal with the direct demands from the consumer councils that make requests from them, while for state-command economies something akin to the federal government needs to have an aggregate total of all consumptive demand for a set period of time. In both cases, you are usually making set plans over the course of years. The reason why the article doesn’t really address stuff like Parecon, is that is largely a speculative model. Both Albert and Hahnel appeal to small scale instances where worker-run job complexes were employed effectively in a crisis, similar to how mutual aid projects tend to spontaneously develop during a disaster, but this doesn’t give us much of an accurate picture of what such a system will look like on a national scale. Albert thinks that the knowledge-objections, objections about proper incentives, and objections about achieving pareto-efficiency can be addressed a priori rather than empirically — and he spends a considerable ammount of his work attempting to demonstrate that.
Personally, I think his model is a little too ambitious for long scale planing. Like he expects that people will be able to anticipate their consumption needs for an entire year, which I think is unrealistic. I personally don’t see why he doesn’t try to have parecon emulate the dynamic fluctuation of supply/demand by allowing for spontaneous demand with the use of direct client orders checked against current and projected inventory. It may not possess the same level of efficiency as having information conveyed through pricing, but if someone like GA Cohen is to be believed that markets may be a “necessary evil” for a functional socialist economy. Pricing and currency may have to be implemented anyways, and inevitably a market system of some kind will develop.
Economists don’t have much to work with in regard to decentrally planned economies because hardly any had existed for any appreciable amount of time and with the one’s that do exist we have very little data on. Like I am aware of some literature that claims that the collectivization efforts of the CNT-FAI during the Spanish civil war were able to achieve grain production higher than pre-collectivization levels — but the only sources I am aware of who claims such are Catalan historians associated with CNT to this day. Not exactly a source without a conflict of interest. Revolutionary Catalonia only lasted for about 2 years, whereas many of the workers tasked with keeping records and data on production, inventory, and distribution were not adequately trained in the appropriate data entry skills to maintain accurate records. This is not to say anything about the records that were likely destroyed during the war. You get widely different assessments of the efficacy of Rev Catalonia solely based on the language and nationality of the historian in question. There is a lot of ideological currents who are motivated for some reason or another to either praise or denigrate the anarchist project in Catalonia/Spain — so as to maintain a favourable perception of their preferred faction. All things considered, Revolutionary Catalonia is our best empirical model to go off of and it is extremely difficult to obtain any reliable information upon. We may have projects like Rojava today, but it isn’t clear if something like Rojava can be described as a genuine decentrally planned economy. Being in a conflict-heavy part of the world (where such projects tend to pop up) it is also difficult to get any reliable data upon.
I hope what I said here is helpful and provides relevant context. I think GJK will affirm that decentralized models are largely speculative, and that’s why his article focuses mostly on the kinds of models that had existed for a substantially accessible period. - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 23:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
I do think the idea of "decentralized planning" is useful as a way of categorization, but that is my personal and (generally) uneducated opinion. I mostly asked GeeJayK directly because I wanted to know if the scientific side of things acknowledges the existence of decentralized economic planning, or if it's simply just a centrally planned/market economy, which is why I placed some emphasis on the notoriety of the three economists I mentioned.
I was mostly wondering because I've seen some people (including the economist Alec Nove, who isn't exactly orthodox but is still a bit notable) who have stated that coordination can only come from either the market or from a hierarchical authority. In the case of parecon, Nove would probably consider parecon to be a market model instead. Arguably, the coordination process of parecon does work similarly to a market, since consumers and producers negotiate what to produce, in what quantity and what the price will be, in contrast to a third-party (like a central bureaucracy) deciding those things. I've seen advocates of decentralized planning distinguishing it and market models by contrasting how markets make decisions in isolation (which in turn produces externalities and etc), instead of them being done collectively and being planned ahead (at least, that's my understanding of their arguments), but I was wondering if this distinction is actually recognized by the scientific community or not. Since the articles are supposed to be SPOV, then using terms which aren't actually recognized scientifically might not be a good idea.
Unrelated, but parecon does allow people to change their mind, as far as I understood it. In Democratic Economic Planning, Robin Hahnel details how plans can be adjusted mid-year by the planning federations in accordance to past consumer data and whatnot, meaning it does feature something similar to your proposal. He also talked about how consumers don't need to detail specific items, only categories of items, with the specificities of items themselves being "revealed" similarly to market economies. — LunaAHHHHH 23:44, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
(EC) @LunaAHHHHH Thank you for your question. Does decentralized planned economics exist? It definitely exists on the intellectual realm, since, as you said, many authors wrote about it. The problem is, " decentralized planned economics" seems sometimes to be something a bit amorphous (perhaps even polysemic), and I don't know if there's an operational definition of the term (I'm not saying that there isn't one, just that I'm not aware of it). What are the differences between a decentralized planned economy and economic democracy and libertarian socialism? And between a decentralized planned economy and market socialism? Was the socialist Hungary an example of a decentralized planned economy, at least to some extent? How about Yugoslavia? To my knowledge, proponents of decentrally planned economy seem to disagree on these questions. Summarizing, yes, I think it does exist, but it seems to be a very diverse tradition, so I'm not sure if there's actually a definition of what it exactly means, and more importantly, how it would work. That being said, It's possible that I'm wrong. Mainstream economics haven't payed much attentiont to decentralized planned economics, probably because it's a bit spectulative, but I am aware of at least some works that discuss it in different levels of depth. I believe that The Economics of Feasible Socialism by Alec Nove (available on libgen) is the best one I've read on that covers the subject, you might want to take a look at it. I've seen people talking about another book called The Political Economy of Participatory Economics that seems to cover the political economy of decentralized planning very well, but I haven't read this one, though I know that it very technbical, with very sophisticated mathematical models, so it's probably not an easy read. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 00:02, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Oh, you already know Nove and Hahnel, so forget about my suggestions. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 00:06, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you (and @OnlySortaDumb, as well) for your answers. I was planning on include a summary of socialist planning on the socialism article (I've been editing on my sandbox for now), so I wasn't sure whether I should include decentralized planning or not.
As for some of the questions you brought up, as far as I know:
  • Decentralized planning doesn't distinguish itself from libertarian socialism (or democratic socialism in general, for that matter). Rather, it can be a feature of it. The same way some libertarian socialists are pro-market, some are market abolitionists and advocate for decentralized planning instead. At least, Robin Hahnel's Wikipedia article says he identifies with libertarian socialism, and the book Accumulation of Freedom has contributions by him and also mentions parecon on the history of anarchist economics. I assume the same things can be said for "economic democracy", since, on theory, economic democracy should simply be about "democratic control of the economy".
  • I've mentioned the distinctions between decentralized planning and markets previously. I'm not sure if there's unanimous agreement, but the explanations I've provided seem to apply to a sizable portion of socialists, at least. I got this explanation from reading (or skimming, at certain parts) Democratic Economic Planning by Robin Hahnel (especially the "Dispelling common confusions" chapter), Democracy and Economic Planning by Pat Devine (he mentions Nove and his own argument at page 24) and The Accumulation of Freedom by Deric Shannon et al. (particularly the "Allocation" section under "Examining the History of Anarchist Economics to See the Future").
  • I believe Yugoslavia (and maybe Hungary, but I'm not sure) is often referred to as market socialist. At least, this contribution from the Journal of Economic Perspectives refers to it as such. I'm not too knowledgeable on the Yugoslavian and Hungarian socialist experiments, though. — LunaAHHHHH 00:37, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
A decentralised command economy is a contradiction in terms. With the absence of a 'market' to regulate the flows of resources, there has to be well, commands from the head of who gets the resources and who doesn't, of what goals should be followed or not etc. A decentralised command economy shall be known as 'utter fucking chaos' because every factory/store/farm will be like Peter Gibbons in Office Space ie lots of 'bosses' coming to give them contradictory orders and there is nobody there to give them a priority list on who should be pleased first [or at all]. And as everyone's output is someone else's input, without the 'head' or some self-correcting mechanism [ie a market] everything will seize up in short order. Like it did in the final 2-3 years of the Soviet Union. KarmaPolice (talk) 01:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
I believe this is Nove's argument, yes. As for the "utter fucking chaos" thing, isn't democracy in general "lots of bosses coming to give contradictory orders", as it allows for millions of people to decide on contradictory things? That's the reason why there are things such as councils, referendums, voting, etc. The market resolves this issue by having individual consumers "voting with their wallet", rewarding the producer with a profit if their product is good and penalizing them with a loss if it isn't. If a decentralized planned economy distinguished itself from a market economy in the way I previously mentioned (i.e. "decisions being made collectivelly and planned ahead instead of being made individually"), then I fail to see how it could go to "utter fucking chaos" levels of bad. Now, of course, if one considers ANY system based on negotiation between producers and consumers to be a market system, then yes, "decentralized planning" is pretty meaningless and any of the proposed models would most likely be market models instead, as I've already mentioned. — LunaAHHHHH 01:33, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
'In an urban society, everything connects. Each person's needs are fed by the skills of many others. Our lives are woven together in a fabric. But the connections that make society strong also make it vulnerable.'
Okay, it's the start of the depressing as hell film Threads but it's very relevant here. That we have reached a level of technological, urban, globalised society where we are [usually] little cogs turning around, 'serving a purpose' while millions of others do their little cog thing for us and these threads run across the land and beyond it in a fine mesh. A 'decentralised command economy' is one where you snip all those threads in an experiment to see if those cogs still run.
The more you 'decentralise', the more difficult you make the system because it increases exponentially the numbers of 'councils' you would need to communicate your needs/wants with. With no market systems, there is no way of establishing value apart from what folks will barter with you for it - but it's most likely the people who have what you need won't want what you produce. I mean, imagine a town where their main exports were tinsel, ball-bearings and wooden shipping pallets. The town council would have to be constantly trying to re-assemble long barter chains to keep the town's populations needs met as well as trying to find the inputs to keep their industry running so they can get say, food for the workers. What about if the 'council' represented a retirement village? What are they going to barter to keep them in crosswords and hard candy?
This does result in 'utter fucking chaos' because this is exactly how the final months of the Soviet Union looked like. All the state Govts were printing as much money as they wanted [the Union govt too], which effectively made it worthless. Economic output started to slide as 'trade threads' across the Union started to snap due to the worthlessness of currency. Facilities started to resort to barter with others to try to keep things running, but as things fell to bits output on everything slid. Factories started to close due to lack of precursors/fuel/raw materials, coal mines went on strike on masse when their regions stopped being supplied with soap and food while food production stagnated due to lack of fuel, fertilizer and tractor parts. Lower-level govts started to seize [sometimes literally] what output remained in the hope to either use it themselves, trade it with another for stuff they did need or simply steal it, which meant that Gosplan's orders were now ignored. Shorn of 'command' but lacking a 'market', everything went into a nosedive - Here is an LA Times report from Nov 1991 on the Soviet food situation, which was basically replicated across the entire Soviet economy (unless you had lots of dollars). KarmaPolice (talk) 03:39, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
I don't think I've understood the point very well. The economic crisis in the latter years of the Soviet Union seem more like a failure of implementing decentralized planning than a inevitability. Also, weren't the USSR's last few reforms specifically market ones, like introducing the profit motive for firms? I don't think anyone seriously looks at the Soviet Union and argues it's an example of decentralized planning. — LunaAHHHHH 06:26, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Also, I don't really understand the whole "with no market systems, there is no way of establishing value apart from what folks will barter with you for it". Parecon avoids bartering by having "remuneration according through effort" (not too dissimilar to labour vouchers), but even without that, I fail to see how money in general is incompatible with decentralized planning. I also don't really understand the point about the town and the long barter chains. Is it talking about a system similar to communalism, where municipalities are supposed to be mostly self-reliant and manage their own municipal economy? Ideally, a decentralized economy would incorporate all towns and other municipalities in a federated plan, there wouldn't be small towns having to fend for themselves by trading ball-bearings in exchange for food (and even if they had to be self-reliant, I would assume this form of decentralized planning would only be implemented after each town was able to become economically self-sufficient for the most part, as argued by libertarian municipalists). — LunaAHHHHH 07:11, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
-The 'market reforms' only really started in the Soviet Union after the failed August coup attempt; before that the 'reforms' were so timid they couldn't even use the word 'markets' in the decrees. The final months were a kind of 'decentralised command economy' because it featured lots of 'commands' being issued to the suppliers and they had no idea which one to follow.
-'Labour vouchers' and similar are either a) money by another name or b) a means of non-market distribution. The Soviet Union did both to some extent; from special 'certificate roubles', perks rationed from your work / trade union or credit lines in 'closed stores'. Clearly, there needed to be some central authority somewhere to regulate the issuing of vouchers/passes/ration cards otherwise the system would soon fall apart because you can't eat a ration card. Coming from it from the other direction, money [boiled down] is nothing more than a ration-ticket; your stake of a proportion of the goods/services produced by your society - it would be quite possible to price everything to more correctly take into account all the inputs and the external costs of it. But again, there needs to be someone controlling the production of tickets to ensure they roughly match wanted output.
-Autarkic self-sufficiency becomes harder as the technological rating of civilisation increases. A mediaeval village might be the 'minimum viable size' for this but once you hit the Industrial Revolution you find yourself having to widen your 'federation' to include more and more varied resources to support it. By the time you hit our level of society, it's doubtful that even federations several million strong [ie as large or larger than nation-states such as Denmark or Ireland] would be able to successfully pursue autarky while maintaining current SoL.
-The only 'decentralised command economies' documented in modern times are a) the Anarchist communes of Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War and some groups in Kurdistan/Syria. Do you know what these are also called? Siege economies. Autarky was not a choice, it was a necessity - even if they produced a surplus to export, there wasn't really anyone they could trade with. Local groups would organise at the village/town level, make notes on 'what stuff do we have on-hand' and then do their best to maintain the highest SoL they could. In many cases, they were 'living off capital' because they would be using 'outside-produced stuff' [cars, tractors, steel items etc] which they lacked the capacity to replace once consumed. It's better than nothing, but worse than all the other options and over time the SoL can do nothing but decline.
-As you can guess, I think very little of 'communalism'. In my book, it appears to be basically disguised anarcho-primativism which I think is total crap - it offends me as a historian, economist, socialist and a human being in perhaps equal measure.
KarmaPolice (talk) 13:46, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
-I can't really find much information about the economic reforms of Perestroika aside from Wikipedia, but it seems like it did introduce measures such as "allowing state enterprises to determine output levels based on demand" and "permitting private ownership of businesses", so they do seem like market reforms to me, even if it didn't completely transition to a market economy. And again, having lots of "contradictory commands" isn't a major issue as long as the system has a way of conflict resolution, or at least a system which standardize which commands should be prioritized. Even if the last few years of the Soviet Union was getting to a "decentralized command economy", it would still only be a half-assed attempt at it.
-The difference is that labour vouchers have a more standardized value in comparison to regular money (as well as being non-transferrable). Their value is generally based on how many hours of labour the worker has done. There are still many nuances and caveats to this (such as how more difficult jobs give more "hours per hour", which would still need some sort of common-agreement as to how difficult each job is), but I don't think a central authority is necessarily needed to regulate the value of labour vouchers, I believe some sort of "federal agreement" between all municipalities/states/regions can be made to standardize these values if necessary. And even if a central authority is required for it, then so be it. Decentralized planning is simply a method of allocation. Decentralized planning doesn't mean there can be no central authorities who may intervene for specific purposes. A market economy is also considered a "decentralized system", and yet most market economies in the world feature a central authority regulating things such as the flow of money.
-I mostly agree, which is why I don't really support communalism personally. I brought self-sufficiency up because if a system like communalism was implemented in a nation, there certainly wouldn't be municipalities with exports so niche and invaluable like the example cited above (and even then, a town like that would probably struggle in a market economy as well if it wasn't already integrated into the national economy as a whole like I suggested).
-I think that's fair, but that's the reason why decentralized planning is mostly speculative. Of course, siege economies didn't have a choice on being self-sufficient or not, meaning they couldn't realize the ideal of integrating itself to the larger-scale economy, but I certainly wouldn't call their attempts "utter fucking chaos", despite their less-than-ideal conditions. Systems such as parecon do aim to make an economy which wouldn't have to rely almost entirely on autarky, and which seemingly would avoid some of the main issues of "contradictory orders" through their standard procedures such as iterative planning and negotiation between producer and consumer councils and federations intermediated by a specialized agency which assists with the negotiations. Whether it would actually work is another story, but I struggle to believe it would be because of the reasons that make communalism or the last years of the Soviet Union undesirable.
-I believe communalism might be more similar to agrarian socialism than it is to anarcho-primitivism. Anarcho-primitivism is a whole other beast, advocating for the abolition of agriculture, all non-prehistoric technology and even the concept of civilization. I would certainly say communalism is much better than anarcho-primitivism, personally. — LunaAHHHHH 17:44, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
This has been a bizarre degeneration from an earnest academic question to Karmapolice being weirdly disparaging about everything said prior. What a trip, man really relied on a appeal to fiction. - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 06:47, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
This has certainly been an amusing development, especially considering my initial question was more along the lines of "is decentralized planning a legitimate concept in economics and can it be distinguished from other models" rather than "is decentralized planning actually feasible or desirable", since I was worried that including the concept in a revamp of the socialism article would be controversial as it doesn't seem to be as universally established as central planning and markets (I was honestly predicting responses more along the lines of "there's no real difference between a market economy and a decentrally planned one, so using the term is wrong academically"), although it seems like I was overthinking the situation in the end.
I still kept the discussion going since I'm interested in seeing the opinions of someone who doesn't believe decentralized planning can work, although it's kind of inevitable for it to lead to speculation due to the nature of the question anyways. I'm more concerned at GeeJayK being bothered by a whole mostly unrelated discussion happening in his talkpage, though. — LunaAHHHHH 07:19, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @LunaAHHHHH regarding your concern, I didn't say anything because I didn't want to sound mean, but yes, I would appreciate if you guys could continue this debate elsewhere. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 10:06, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, apologies for that. Though I don't see any point in continuing this discussion because a) there's not much to add ['minimum viable size' modern-times is the size of whole countries which is hardly 'decentralised' and I do accept 'decentralised planning' can work as siege economies], b) didn't mention decentralised market economy (ie what we have) because I read the question as 'decentralised command economy' and c) I have never had much patience with deeply theoretical econ models with little RL examples of working [and think most RWs readers don't either]. Not sure what the hell 'appeal to fiction' means, though that's not much of a shock knowing who said it. KarmaPolice (talk) 11:21, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Uploading Images

Hi there,

Thanks for warm welcome and appreciation. I tried to contribute some pictures here but found out that i cannot upload. Could you upgrade my user rights? So i can upload without problem. Also i am facing problems with captcha everytime. Sigh… KSH (talk) 11:44, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

@KSH We usually wait a bit to give this sort of privilege here. Make some good edits first and you'll gain them. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 11:48, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Ah sure no problem, thanks. I’m still learning many things since it's completely different from Wikipedia. No worries. Are there any other tools like Twinkle or something similar that I can install for rollback? KSH (talk) 11:59, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
What's your Wikipedia handle, @KSH? You don't have to answer this, but someone like me or GeeJayK would be able to confidently autocomfirm you and potentially even grant admin status (which is called sysop here) more or less immediately if you do. It also gives you street cred. KaDaShOvA (talk) 13:06, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
KaDaShOvA It wa:DIVINE and i used to previously hold NPR, Autopatrol, Rollback, PCR etc rights but currently my handle is hacked and i have been in touch with WMF T&S team to resolve this matter. Also i found it similar and kind of fun with not much restrictions. Thankyou. KSH (talk) 13:16, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Hi again. Oh, you mean [REDACTED]. Thanks for telling us. I will auto-confirm you given your extensive experience on editing WP. But given your global block over there, you'll have to prove yourself the normal way before getting sysop rights. KaDaShOvA (talk) 09:03, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
KaDaShOvA If you check gLock details it’s mentioned compromised account. I hope you understand as i mentioned you before that i have already sent details to wikimedia trust and safety staffs and they are working on it. Btw also can you redvel the edits after checking the details. Also i am here to do positive contributions. You can promote me as i am doing positive contributions. Thanks KSH (talk) 18:24, 4 February 2025 (UTC)