What economic system works best for humanity?

[The Helsen Free State]

Nobody likes being told what to do or telling other people what to do. Any system that grants a few individuals the power of coercion is by definition against human nature. Communists see that power in the hands of the robber barons of the market. However, they can't force you to buy their products or services. The government enforces their will at the point of a gun.

Changing up Churchill's quote a bit, capitalism is the worst system of economics, except for all the others. It has problems because it's a system made up of humans, not robots. (And even if it wasn't the most efficient, which I believe it is, it would still be the most moral because it affords the most freedom.)

By the way, if you want to live in a commune, have at it. Nobody's holding you back. Just don't impose that silliness on the rest of us.

[Salus Maior]

If we knew that everyone would adopt it post-haste.

[The United Colonies of Earth]

Robotism, wherein robots manage the means of production.
Notwithstanding the infinite number of loopholes, of course.

[Neu Leonstein]

Robotism, wherein robots manage the means of production.
Notwithstanding the infinite number of loopholes, of course.

The problem with robotism is: who owns the robots?

[The United Colonies of Earth]

Robotism, wherein robots manage the means of production.
Notwithstanding the infinite number of loopholes, of course.

The problem with robotism is: who owns the robots?

Why, the wisest and most virtuous people. Who are obviously the ones with the most money
I dunno. I was just coming up with some well-tread smartass suggestion.

[Grinstead]

Unregulated free market capitalism.

[Braecland]

Free market capitalism. Ideally, anarco-capitalism but I can't endorse that because it will not work for hundreds of years after it's implementation.

[Neu Leonstein]

Why, the wisest and most virtuous people. Who are obviously the ones with the most money
I dunno. I was just coming up with some well-tread smartass suggestion.

I know... but I was actually kinda serious. Imagine if there were smart robots that could do almost anything, and so the value of labour is almost zero. Basically, that could look a lot like Star Trek (i.e. utopia) or it could look a lot like some sort of dystopia with people starving on the streets and virtually everything being owned by the people who own the robots.

I think every reasonable person would prefer the former - but how do we get there? It's not immediately clear how our current trajectory will avoid the bad case as better and better technologies are developed.

[Sack Jackpot Winners]

How is "social liberalism" an economic system? Or am I missing something?

[Kwaaal]

Capitalism.

[Settrah]

How is "social liberalism" an economic system? Or am I missing something?

I took it to mean liberal capitalism, or I guess third way triangulation (market economics with an interest in social equality). Thinking about it, it is a bit misleading when worded like it is.

[UniversalCommons]

Who owns the robots is a real question. When you can replace labor with capital (machinery), power concentrates into the people who own the robots.

[The Helsen Free State]

Who owns the robots is a real question. When you can replace labor with capital (machinery), power concentrates into the people who own the robots.

There would be countless people who design, manufacture, program, maintain and work with the robots. While they would provide a massive boost in production, they would also allow anyone who worked on/with the robots to have huge opportunities for advancement. If different companies competed but they had robots instead of labor, products would be stupidly cheap.

So even if you weren't a roboticist, you'd still reap the benefits of that innovation.

[UniversalCommons]

That statement unfortunately is untrue. Robots can be used to design other robots-- many white collar tasks can be automated not just the physical processes. About half of the jobs in the United States can be replaced with automation. It is very much like farm automation, or manufacturing. You need less and less people to produce more. It is a fantasy that more jobs will be created. The jobs will be creative in the sense that they are created to keep people busy-- much of the service economy is like this. If you have an automatic burger maker and a robot to take your change, even the service jobs go.

The dream of freedom from labor might happen. It will not just eliminate the workers, it will also eliminate the management because there will be very few people to tell what to do in a future factory. Already, we are seeing the traditional stock trading floor being wiped out as well as commodity exchanges with people on the floor, this is being automated. It is not just low level management it is everything.

There really is no model for this kind of thing happening. We will no longer need most workers and most managers. What do you do when this happens. Capitalism and socialism don't really answer it. Communism tries to but it is a farce at best to believe in post scarcity economics.

It would be nice to be able to do what you want without worrying about basic food, shelter, and housing, without having to do menial labor and other stultifying things. But, because people like social control, this is unlikely to happen.

[Alvalero]

A balance between capitalism and socialism. Benefitted Ireland greatly in the 90s and early 00s, the big problem for us is the fact we are a small island with very little natural resources that depends heavily on our trading partners which made us more susceptible to the global economic crash.

[Tsadokion]

Corporatism/class co-operation-ism.

[USS Donald Trump]

A mixed market economy with the market having control of production and supply and the government having control of wages.

[Arcturus Novus]

Syndicalism/anarcho-communism is best. Just ask Kropotkin.