[fiatjaf]

These are criticisms people say on the streets, and they vague, empty and lack explanation. Although I also find your answers vague and empty, it's nice that you tried to answer them.

Anyway, I think it is safe to ignore that discussion, because it is way too common and biased.

My humble suggestion is that you should start on the purely economic side of the high-level discussion. This[1] is something that raised a lot of discussion (pro and against the socialist side) between top economists of the previous century and that has lasted many years. I think you should start there.

[1]: https://mises.org/library/socialism-economic-and-sociologica...

[BobTheCoder]

Thanks. I did some research on that book. The 'economic calculation problem' seems to be the main point. I disagree that market forces are the only way to price goods and services. Why can't goods be priced that factor in the aspect of supply and demand, but also factor in the cost of offering those goods and services, both the immediate cost and the cost to the environment? It doesn't seem like an impossible problem, just that it takes deliberate effort by the state.

Note that in open socialism goods and services (including food, clothing etc.) are priced.

I generally agree that around 100 years ago when 'Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis' was written socialism was difficult to impossible. Now with modern technology I think that it is possible and has less problems than capitalism.

Is there some key flaw in socialism that you think prevents it from being viable?

[fiatjaf]

The idea of the State coming up with a method to calculate prices taking account of supply, demand and cost, was a topic of intense debates that followed the publication of that book.

See, for example, Oskar Lange and Henry Douglas Dickinson proposals, and Friedrich Hayek's rebuttals.

What I am begging you is to stop thinking you have all the right answers before getting to know what other people have already said on the topic.