Yes, I believe it's time for a planned rather than a haphazard economy.

Here are my thoughts from a different thread.

-----------

I don't think anyone can deny that capitalism has allowed a great deal of creative enterprise and choice to flourish, but sometimes it gets to be a bit overkill.

Sometimes the variety of choices for a single item can be overwhelming and bewildering, and often reaches the point of diminishing returns. I'm all for entrepreneurism, but there seems to be little to no planning involved in the market. There are too many goods produces of one kind, and a lot of "stuff" that just isn't necessary, or is even dangerous in it's use of resources and waste production. It's taking us to the brink of devastation and collapse by sucking the natural reserves dry, and it has the population running around in a sort of hamster-wheel of production and consumption.

If there were only some kind of market oversight and planning that took place in the production process.

I liked the idea behind the Venus project, where there was a consumer center where producers could demonstrate their products and the consumers would vote on which products they would like to see produced, rather than so many resources being deployed to just "put stuff out there" and see if it succeeds or fails. It's too wasteful. Think about how many products bomb.. so what if people were "gainfully" employed in the process.. companies should not be such silos, and competition encourages market silos and waste of resources. A managed, planned form of production would result in greater consumer satisfaction, and less waste. Products that are likely to be rejected in the market would be "failed" in the prototype stage rather than completing the entire market cycle and ending up in the junk pile in the end.

Here's a "cut and paste" excerpt that summarizes the idea. Rather than just "failing" this whole plan because you don't buy into the entirety of the concept, we could select the principles that would make sense to deploy in short order.

-----------------


. Fresco argues that the world is rich in natural resources and energy and that, with modern technology and judicious efficiency, the needs of the global population can be met with abundance, while at the same time removing the current limits of what is deemed possible because of notions of economic viability.
Fresco provides an example of this confusion in the following quote:
"At the beginning of World War II the U.S. had a mere 600 or so first-class fighting aircraft. We rapidly overcame this short supply by turning out more than 90,000 planes a year. The question at the start of World War II was: Do we have enough funds to produce the required implements of war? The answer was No, we did not have enough money, nor did we have enough gold; but we did have more than enough resources. It was the available resources that enabled the US to achieve the high production and efficiency required to win the war. Unfortunately this is only considered in times of war."[16]
Fresco states that for this to work, all of Earth's resources must be held as the common heritage of all people and not just a select few; and the practice of rationing resources through monetary methods is irrelevant and counter-productive to the survival of human civilization.
One of the key points in Fresco’s solution is that without the conditions created in a monetary system, vast amounts of resources would not be wasted unproductively.[17] Instead Fresco’s contention is that without the waste of resources on ends that would become irrelevant there would be no scarcity of necessary products such as food and education.