I’ve stated on the record many times that I’d ditch anagorism in favor of agorism if it could be shown that the market mechanism (with or without some “tweaking”) would be able to perform the astoundingly efficient calculation of optimal allocation of resources if the criteria of efficiency were person weighted rather than dollar weighted. In other words, my question is whether it’s possible to add (or subtract?) zero or more tweaks (these could be anything from basic income payments, cultural changes, regulations, incentives, contrived currencies, etc.), let the people commence grubbing and hustling in the world of commerce, each according to their own self interest, and at the end of the day the market outcomes (prices, supplied and demanded quantities for the various product categories, and the capital composition of the various industries) would be roughly what they would be if everyone had started the day with an equal amount of wealth.
I’m skeptical as to whether such a portfolio of tweaks is possible, as market transactions themselves are predicated on a quantitative equilibrium of the value flows each way. I’m inclined to believe that the atomic-level structure of markets, transactions, are where money equals power. Dangling money can get people to jump. I don’t see any possibility of neutralizing that, and I can’t imagine market outcomes being determined on anything other than a one-dollar-one-vote basis.
Leave a Reply