CS government/economy: Putarocracy

Putarocracy is literally translated to "government by reckoning". However, it is the root word of computer, so it is meant to mean government by computers. Basically, there is a senate type thing with elected representatives, whose job it is to think of EVERY possible solution. These are put into the computer, which will, when it needs a value judgement, contact 100 citizens at random to give it. It will then choose the best solution.

The economy will be ...a problem point, actually. I think some sort of socialist/capitalist dual economy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_economy).

You seem to be suggesting Multivac. Would that be right?

yes. I honestly think that would be the only way to ensure fair governance, for as long as civilization itself exists.

The socialistic aspects of this dual economy would of course be run by the GC (grand computer)

You realize that Multivac represented the end of civilization, as the moment it was switched on it ceased to become our civilization. Also from your link Duel economies are only a feature of poor and underdeveloped societies which have vast disparities of wealth. I'm not seeing why that's a good thing. Unless we all get our own serf.

No, I just think the idea of having two, three, four totally seperate economies that everyone can participate in would insulate the general state of things from ever going into a recession.

What exactly about a duel economy would prevent recession?

merely that it would be lesss likely for both aspects to have a downturn at the same time, so a 1 economy recession only has half the effect. Not to mention that socialistic economies only go up or down dependant on government aptitude.

Do you mean socialist or communist? A socialist government is still overseeing a capitalist economy only it is taking greater responsibility for the well being of its people. It is just as much subject to the whims of the economic cycle as everyone else. A communist government has a planned economy, planned by people without accountability to the citizen, ergo a disaster by definition.
As for duel econnomies they are always linked, difference is that when recession strikes the rich tighten their belts but the poor starve.

just as a concept, two completely unmixed, or very minimally mixed.

And if they're elected, then they are accountable.

There are no elected communist governments, only socialist ones with communist in the party name.

I'm confused. I am talking about a centrally planned economy planned by elected government officials, with a capitalist economy as well.

I'm sorry, i was referring to governments that do , or at some point have existed. Obviously it's quite possible for a nonexistent communist government to be elected.
You can no no more centrally plan an economy than you can centrally plan a bipedal lifeform.

well, yes, the economic planners would be like a third/fourth branch of government, and along with the GC, they would plan a just economy, although the capitalism would help the more lethargic aspects of the socialist economy be removed, and the parts of capitalism that aren't well meaning to the people will be put in check by the socialism.

Yes, it will be democratic. This economy will not be made to keep dictators in power, it will genuinely be created to help the people.

The cause of the people is the first refrain of the dictator.

Quote :

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I can see exactly how phrases like this could support dictators.

I can.

A dictator coud argue that centralising power would make it easier to defend the nation and promote general welfare.

All I was referring to was the fact that undemocratic leaders, governments and countries make far more frequent references to the will of the people in their dialogue. They do protest too much. A country with 'Democratic' in the name tends not to be, A president who says claims to represent the people will likely believe this so much to be true that he didn't want to bother them with anything so prosaic as a vote.
As per your response, you should never forget the lessons of history. The most frequent comparrison to the US is ancient Rome which began as a republic but in the face of an ever increasing military industrial complex eventually surcomed to military dictatorship. You really can't see something similar happening for the US?

I can.

But what about the gov't by computers type of thing?

Or maybe you work your way up through various stages of capitalism, and when your income gets to be more then just so, you get to go socialist?

You really are keen on this planned economy thing, aren't you?
Do you sail? If you do, imagine this, the government is to the economy what you and your boat are to the wind. There are really long terms things you can do, like choosing the best hull, and the best sails, there are the medium term things you can do like reefing a sail or raising a spiniker but in the short term all you can do is pull on some ropes and angle the rudder and eek out the the best speed you can in any given wind and sea. But you can no more dictate a wind and sea to sail in than you can plan an economy, you just have to make the best preparations you can to make the best speed in any given weather and then adjust things in response to what comes along. But planning it is something you can't do.
I think maybe I got carried away with the sailing metaphor there.