>but this idea is something that economists have already discussed to death: google "the Socialist Calculation Debate"
I wouldn't say it's been "discussed to death" at all; have you read Cockshott's "Towards a New Socialism"? He tries to explain why the problem isn't really a problem at all, with his idea of computerised central planning.
No I haven't read that book, but I have read and heard a lot of people claim that better computers would solve the problems with planning. I've never heard anyone who does so actually make a persuasive case, because they tend to treat the problems as merely being about doing spare matrix math or simply needing more data points to get better answers, which are not sufficient to make the problems of central planning go away.
I will google this book, but could you tell me what you find most persuasive about it?
I wouldn't say it's been "discussed to death" at all; have you read Cockshott's "Towards a New Socialism"? He tries to explain why the problem isn't really a problem at all, with his idea of computerised central planning.