Still impossible after all these years: Reply to Caplan

Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 17 (1-2):155-170 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Socialism is strictly “impossible.” Its impracticability is not, as Bryan Caplan has suggested, a “quantitative” matter, nor does he show that real‐world socialism's incentive problems outweighed its informational ones. Caplan's criticism of Ludwig von Mises's critique of the “possibility” of socialism fails to appreciate what he meant by “socialism” and misunderstands Mises's argument about economic calculation. History, too, suggests that socialism's informational deficiency was the most significant problem facing those who tried to implement socialism.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,423

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-30

Downloads
14 (#968,362)

6 months
5 (#638,139)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Toward a new consensus on the economics of socialism: Rejoinder to my critics.Bryan Caplan - 2005 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 17 (1-2):203-220.
Incentives vs. knowledge: Reply to Caplan.Rodolfo A. Gonzalez & Edward Stringham - 2005 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 17 (1-2):179-202.
Knowledge, ignorance, and the limits of the price system: Reply to Friedman.Greg Hill - 2006 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 18 (4):399-410.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Is socialism really “impossible”?Bryan Caplan - 2004 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 16 (1):33-52.

Add more references