text:
Talk:Economic subjectivism

First apologies for my English. OK, your "refutation" of the candy bar example and thus the "refutation" the Economic Subjectivism itself says:

>> This argument would be rejected by opponents of economic subjectivism, who would see the determining factor in the value of the candy bar as being the amount of labour or effort that went into producing it. They would note that the candy bar would still cost the same in the local store, whether *you* were hungry or not...

IMHO this is not the correct interpretation of the Economic Subjectivism standpoint. Although Subjectivistic Standpoint is methodologically individualistic, the value of the candy in the local market is *not* determined by solely one individual (well, it is, if there is only one potential buyer available there). It is rather determined by subjective evaluations (based on individual needs and wishes as well as attitudes that can be influenced by advertising) of *all potential* (not solely one of them) buyers toward the specific brand of candy bars available at specific time (as potential buyers take into consideration the time factor as well when they evaluate the value of that candy, as some of them evaluate the candy higher if it will be sold before they can get to the store, and are prepared to pay more for it if someone near the store can buy it for them) in the specific local market.

A Reader from a Post-Communist country

Though your text does not mention it, is this not the prevailing attitude of all modern economists? It is my impression that economic intrinsicism is as thoroughly discredited as Lamarckism in biology, but this text makes it sound like there are still adherents.

I agree with LDC on this one. I don't think anyone has seriously held an intrinisic theory of value in economics in a long long time. Certainly, modern mathematical economists, with utility theory and all that stuff, are thoroughly 'subjectivist' in the relevant sense.

I will go change the text now.

It is mentioned in the article that the changed value of the unchanged candy is a paradox. That seems superficial to me. Value = exchangeability, and is a relational function, not a property of the thing nor of the valuer, but of the relationship between the two. A thing of poor quality may have properties which reduce the likelihood of its being widely or highly valued, but the destitute may esteem it highly. Likewise, a wealthy and privileged individual may be unwilling to part with any portion of his considerable wealth to obtain a 7-11 franchise, while a struggling entrepreneur might give up 75% of his net worth to get it. So, as value is a function of relationship, it should not be surprising that candy exists in one relationship to a famished individual, and in a totally different relationship to a stuffed individual. Just as the top of the empire state building is high to a sidewalk dweller and low to a commercial jet passenger, high and low are relational values and it presents no paradox that they are viewed differently from different perspectives. My $.02.

If no one minds, I will change the text.

I'm not particularly fond of the "candy" example either. Here are some others: Two artists expend equal amounts of labor making paintings, sculptures, whatever. The one whose art is popular for some subjective reason will get far higher prices for his work. Even releative values change with technology: I'm sure all of us have spent a month's labor or more on a computer that is now a doorstop. The computer didn't change--it's just now worthless because we can get a more powerful one for a day's labor now. --LDC

I think this article is getting too dismissive of the labour theory of value. There are still significant schools of thought (eg Post Keynesian economics, not to mention many maxists, post marxians and the rest) that reject elements of economic subjectivism. Hence the change from 'virtually all' to 'mainstream' economists endorsing subjectivism.

I also added a quick refutation of the candy bar example, which was almost too easy - I agree that the example of the artist might be better, though still open to conflicting views.

With the example of the computer capital good is being used along with labour to do work. Proponents of the labour theory of value have gone to great pains to make the theory fit with the existence of capital goods - it's not for nothing that Marx called his major work 'Capital'!

I've never heard the phrase "economic subjectivism" and I think it is just a claim by certain economists, e.g. Hayek, von Mises, to have an insight into what is objective versus subjective that no one else has.

In other words, it isn't really separable from other varieties of libertarian (or "neo-classical") economic theory, adn should be integrated into a general description of the motivations and rationales of libertarian parties advocating free-market economic policies.

I did my best to represent this point of view fairly in political economy - making note of the suspicion that libertarian theorists have of any top-down assignment of conversion values between social, infrastructural and instruction capital in particular (where their criticism seems very valid). The exact phrase was

"Most [libertarian parties]? thus advocate a totally liquid or free market or laissez-faire? form of capitalism which permits trust, instructions, and infrastructure to find relative values in an open market of equal players."

I didn't make note of similar assignment between financial, natural, and individual capital (where I'd say the greens have them by the balls). The more libertarian [political economy] gets, the more green it has to get in contrast.. to stay neutral.

So, there is at least a libertarian and green view of what is "objective" versus what is "subjective", and no doubt the various chorus of socialist and capitalist views can chime in to dispute both.

Whee... ain't political economy fun?

The term is a very common one in present academic use for exactly what the article describes, especially when used in connection with the Austrian school. If you haven't heard of it, then you haven't taken many of those courses. This is a very good article, and accurately describes the present academic understanding of a simple topic, in a way that is totally neutral to the controversies surrounding it. Feel free to clutter up the talk page if you must, but please don't mess the article up with commentary. --LDC

--- I wouldn't dream of adding commentary to the article, as I don't know anything about this usage, and it needs space to present itself - it's not as if there is any great clamor to overload this term, unlike oh say "capitalism" or "green" or "free" or "fair"...

I'm *not* criticizing the article nor the field, but the mind-set behind it. If you say it's so different it needs its own article, fine, I don't disagree, I made that point myself over and over re: "green parties" vs. "green" vs. "Green" etc... huge integrating views of the world and the nature of life and inter-relations of living beings are hard to contain in one article each... I wouldn't expect libertarians nor socialists to make whole schools of economics into side notes... although I do think that if a theory makes sense it can be expressed in a quite short space, e.g. F=MA...

As to "totally neutral to the controversies surrounding it", that's tough. My idea of "totally neutral to the controversies surrounding it" is political economy. But of course some people think that this is giving too much space to socialist claptrap, capitalist claptrap, libertarian claptrap, green claptrap, etc... what can ya do?

That, too, is "economic subjectivism", but I'm not asking for those links...

I'd rather see an explanation of real events in the news, like Enron or the collapse of Arthur Andersen... in terms of this "economic subjectivism" theory.

Such a thing might well be interesting. But this is an encyclopedia, not a discussion forum. As I said, the term "economic subjectivism" is a term of art--it's a phrase used in a a psecific context with a specific meaning, and that's all it is. It isn't meant to have all those other connotations you want to attach to it--it's no more complex than saying "bug" means "error" in the context of computer programming, and "listening device" in the context of espionage. It's really a very simple idea, simply expressed. --LDC

Simple ideas can be wrong. Usually, what establishes their credibility is cases... explanations or rationale that explains "why things are as they are" in terms of the theory. If it's really an "ism", it ought to be able to generate a rationale for economic cases. Else, it's just commentary on economic *subjectivity*...

I don't generally trust any "term of art", and constantly ask why professionals in one field think it is relevant to decisions made by people who know nothing about the field...

This does not endear me to specialists, pedants, Chairs of departments, nor, as you might have guessed... encyclopedia editors! ;-)

Definitions cannot be "right" or "wrong"--they're just definitions. They are tools to be used in constructing arguments, which can be "right" or "wrong". Now I do agree that perhaps terms serving such a purpose can be poorly chosen, confusing, or have unexpected connotations that compete with their definitions in a listener's mind, and might be thought of as "wrong" in that sense. But I simply don't see that here: "subjectivism" is a perfectly good simple word for the idea that individual people experience things differently, and "economic subjectivism" uses that term well, to describe the idea that different people can value things differently. I really don't see any interesting controversy here at all. --LDC

Not interesting enough to take any further here... but it speaks to a general policy that theory should be illustrated by cases to prove that it isn't just talk. As you describe it colloquially, it's "subjectivity", and wouldn't become "subjectivism" unless someone could show that there was deliberate and wilful ignorance of objective/empirical or relational/cognitive factors... but now *I'M* being a pedant... ;-)

Definitions can indeed be "right" or "wrong", that's the whole debate about "grounding" and what is "embodied" or "natural", versus just defined into existence tautologically... a debate as far back as the ontological proof of God of Anselm, at least...

But all that is definitely a *meta*... feel free to write something about that, maybe we can collaborate on it...

Some of Falsifiability is my text (most is Larry's, and I defer to him because he's the one with the Ph.D. in philosophy), and speaks to that issue. The "ism" suffix merely implies that it represents a body of belief--as it does. Also, see my own commentary Semantic Disputes (which is, thankfully, on my own site as it doesn't belong here). --LDC

---

Something like Semantic Disputes could be discussed in meta, along with Proper names vs. generic names and their conventions in different languages.

This is only half-serious, but regarding the last paragraph, there is an old saying in Spanish: "only the dunce confuses value and price" (Sólo el necio confunde valor y precio). -- Miguel

---

An obvious example of economic subjectivism is value of life - each human being's own life is valued quite highly by themselves, and much less so by others. One could argue that peace and submission to an economic system is only achieved by valuing one's own life less and others higher, there may be some good writing on this somewhere by now.

This article also badly needs links to behavioral finance which is the most rigorous expression of this theory of subjectivism... and perhaps some links to risk and a discussion of regret is not out of line, since, regret also tends to be subjective and affect pricing rather significantly.

title: Talk:Economic subjectivism


text:
The Evil Dead

The Evil Dead is a 1981 American independent supernatural horror film written and directed by Sam Raimi (in his feature directorial debut). The film stars Bruce Campbell, Ellen Sandweiss, Richard DeManincor, Betsy Baker, and Theresa Tilly as five college students vacationing in an isolated cabin in the woods, where they find an audio tape that, when played, releases a legion of demons and spirits. Four members of the group suffer from demonic possession, forcing the fifth member, Ash Williams (Campbell), to survive an onslaught of increasingly gory mayhem.

Raimi, Campbell, producer Robert G. Tapert, and their friends produced the 1978 short film Within the Woods as a proof of concept to build the interest of potential investors, which secured US$90,000 to begin work on The Evil Dead. Principal photography took place on location in a remote cabin in Morristown, Tennessee, in a filming process that proved extremely uncomfortable for the cast and crew. The film's extensive prosthetic makeup and stop-motion effects were created by artist Tom Sullivan. The completed film had its world premiere at the Redford Theatre in Detroit on October 15, 1981, and attracted the interest of producer Irvin Shapiro, who helped screen the film at the 1982 Cannes Film Festival. Horror author Stephen King gave a rave review of the film, which resulted in New Line Cinema acquiring its distribution rights and giving it a wide theatrical release on April 15, 1983.

The Evil Dead grossed $2.4 million in the United States and between $2.9 and $29.4 million worldwide. Both early and later critical reception were universally positive; in the years since its release, the film has developed a reputation as one of the most significant cult classics, having been cited among the greatest horror films of all time, and one of the most successful independent films. It launched the careers of Raimi, Tapert, and Campbell, who have continued to collaborate on several films together, such as Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy.

The Evil Dead spawned a media franchise, beginning with two direct sequels written and directed by Raimi, Evil Dead II (1987) and Army of Darkness (1992), a fourth film, Evil Dead (2013), which serves as a soft reboot and continuation, a follow-up television series, Ash vs Evil Dead, which aired from 2015 to 2018, and a fifth film, Evil Dead Rise (2023); the franchise also includes video games and comic books. The film's protagonist Ash Williams is considered to be a cultural icon.

Plot
Five Michigan State University students – Ash Williams, his girlfriend Linda, his sister Cheryl, their friend Scott, and Scott's girlfriend Shelly – vacation at an isolated cabin in rural Tennessee. Approaching the cabin, the group notices the porch swing move on its own but suddenly stop as Scott grabs the door key. While Cheryl draws a picture of a clock, the clock stops, and she hears a faint, demonic voice tell her to "join us". Her hand becomes possessed, turns pale and draws a picture of a book with a demonic face on its cover. Although shaken, she does not mention the incident.

When the cellar trapdoor flies open during dinner, Shelly, Linda, and Cheryl remain upstairs as Ash and Scott investigate the cellar. They find the Naturom Demonto, a Sumerian version of the Egyptian Book of the Dead, along with archaeologist Raymond Knowby's tape recorder, and they take the items upstairs. Scott plays a tape of incantations that resurrect a demonic entity. Cheryl yells for Scott to turn off the tape recorder, and a tree branch breaks one of the cabin's windows. Later that evening, an agitated Cheryl goes into the woods to investigate strange noises and she's attacked and raped by the vines and branches of demonically possessed trees. When she escapes and returns to the cabin bruised and anguished, Ash agrees to take her back into town, only to discover that the bridge to the cabin has been destroyed. Cheryl panics as she realizes that they are now trapped and the demonic entity will not let them leave. Back at the cabin, Ash learns from the tape that the only way to kill the entity is to dismember a possessed host. As Linda and Shelly play spades, Cheryl correctly calls out the cards without looking at them, turns into a Deadite and begins levitating. In a raspy, demonic voice, she demands to know why they disturbed her sleep and threatens to kill everyone. She stabs Linda in the ankle with a pencil and throws Ash into a shelf. Scott knocks Cheryl into the cellar and locks her inside.

Everyone fights about what to do. Having become paranoid upon seeing Cheryl's demonic transformation, Shelly goes to her room but is drawn to look out of her window, where a demon crashes through and attacks her, turning her into a Deadite. She attacks Scott before he throws her into the fireplace, slashes her wrist and then stabs her in the back with a Sumerian dagger, apparently killing her. When she reanimates, Scott dismembers her with an axe. Ash and Scott then bury her remains. Shaken by the experience, Scott decides to leave in order to find a way back to town. He returns shortly after, mortally wounded from the possessed trees, and dies while warning Ash that the trees will not let them escape alive. When Ash checks on Linda, he is horrified to find that she has become possessed. She attacks him, but he stabs her with the Sumerian dagger. Unwilling to dismember her, he buries her instead. She revives and attacks him, forcing him to decapitate her with a shovel. Her headless body bleeds on his face as it tries to rape him. He manages to escape as Linda dies, and then retreats back to the cabin.

Back inside, Ash discovers that Cheryl has escaped the cellar. Cheryl eludes Ash, and attempts to choke him. Ash escapes her grasp, then shoots Cheryl in the jaw. As Ash is barricading the door, Scott's dead body reanimates into a Deadite. Scott attacks Ash, and inadvertently knocks the book close to the fireplace. Ash gouges Scott's eyes out and pulls a tree branch from Scott's stomach, causing him to bleed out and fall to the ground. Cheryl breaks through the door and knocks Ash to the floor. As Scott and Cheryl continue to attack Ash on the ground, Ash grabs the book and throws it into the fireplace. While the book burns, the Deadites freeze in place, then begin to rapidly decompose. Large appendages burst from both corpses, covering Ash in blood. The bodies of Scott and Cheryl then completely decompose. Dawn breaks, and Ash stumbles outside.

As Ash walks away from the cabin, an unseen demon moves rapidly through the forest, rushes through the cabin, and attacks him as he screams in terror.

Cast

 * Bruce Campbell as Ash Williams
 * Ellen Sandweiss as Cheryl Williams
 * Richard DeManincor (as Hal Delrich) as Scott
 * Betsy Baker as Linda
 * Theresa Tilly (as Sarah York) as Shelly

Uncredited

 * Sam Raimi as Local Fisherman and the voice of the Evil Dead
 * Robert G. Tapert as Local Fisherman
 * Bob Dorian as Professor Knowby's voice

Background and writing
Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell grew up together, and have been friends from an early age. The duo made several low-budget Super 8 mm film projects together. Several were comedies, including Clockwork and It's Murder!. Shooting a suspense scene in It's Murder! inspired them to approach careers in the horror genre; after researching horror cinema at drive-in theaters, Raimi was set on directing a horror film, opting to shoot a proof of concept short film – described by the director as a "prototype" – that would attract the interest of financiers, and use the funds raised to shoot a full-length project. The short film that Raimi created was called Within the Woods, which was produced for $1,600. For The Evil Dead Raimi required over $100,000.

To generate funds to produce the film, Raimi approached Phil Gillis, a lawyer to one of his friends. Raimi showed him Within the Woods, and although Gillis was not impressed by the short film, he offered Raimi legal advice on how to produce The Evil Dead. With his advice in mind, Raimi asked a variety of people for donations, and even eventually "begged" some. Campbell had to ask several of his own family members, and Raimi asked every individual he thought might be interested. He eventually raised enough money to produce a full-length film, though not the full amount he originally wanted. Raimi said the film cost $375,000.

With enough money to produce the film, Raimi and Campbell set out to make what was then titled Book of the Dead, a name inspired by Raimi's interest in the fiction of H. P. Lovecraft. The film was supposed to be a remake of Within the Woods, with higher production values and a full-length running time. Raimi turned 20 just before shooting began, and he considered the project his "rite of passage".

Pre-production and casting

Raimi asked for help and assistance from several of his friends and past collaborators to make The Evil Dead. Campbell offered to produce the film alongside Tapert, and was subsequently cast as Ash Williams, the main character, since his producing responsibilities made him the only actor willing to stay during the production's entirety. To acquire more actors for the project, Raimi put an ad in The Detroit News. Betsy Baker was one of the actresses who responded, and Ellen Sandweiss, who appeared in Within the Woods, was also cast. The crew consisted almost entirely of Raimi and Campbell's friends and family. The special make-up effects artist for Within the Woods, Tom Sullivan, was brought on to compose the effects after expressing a positive reaction to working with Raimi. He helped create many of the film's foam latex and fake blood effects, and added coffee as an extra ingredient to the traditional fake blood formula of corn syrup and food coloring.

Without any formal assistance from location scouts, the cast had to find filming locations on their own. The crew initially attempted to shoot the film in Raimi's hometown of Royal Oak, Michigan, but instead chose Morristown, Tennessee, as it was the only state that expressed enthusiasm for the project. The crew quickly found a remote cabin located several miles away from any other buildings. During pre-production, the 13 crew members had to stay at the cabin, leading to several people sleeping in the same room. The living conditions were notoriously difficult, with several arguments breaking out between crew members.

Steve Frankel was the only carpenter on set, which made him the art direction's sole contributor. For exterior shots, Frankel had to produce several elaborate props with a circular saw. Otherwise, the cabin mostly remained the way it was found during production. The cabin had no plumbing, but phone lines were connected to it.

Principal photography
The film was made on Kodak 16mm film stock with a rented camera. The inexperienced crew made filming a "comedy of errors". The first day of filming led to them getting lost in the woods during a scene shot on a bridge. Several crew members were injured during the shoot, and because of the cabin's remoteness, securing medical assistance was difficult. One notably gruesome moment on set involved ripping off Baker's eyelashes during removal of her face-mask. Because of the low budget, contact lenses as thick as glass had to be applied to the actors to achieve the "demonic eyes" effect. The lenses took ten minutes to apply, and could only be left on for about 15 minutes because eyes could not "breathe" with them applied. Campbell later commented that to get the effect of wearing these lenses, they had to put "Tupperware" over their eyes.

Raimi developed a sense of mise en scène, coming up with ideas for scenes at a fast rate. He had drawn several crude illustrations to help him break down the flow of scenes. The crew was surprised when Raimi began using Dutch angles during shots to build atmosphere during scenes. To accommodate Raimi's style of direction, several elaborate, low-budget rigs had to be built, since the crew could not afford a camera dolly. One involved the "vas-o-cam", which relied on a mounted camera that was slid down long wooden platforms to create a more fluid sense of motion.

A camera trick used to emulate a Steadicam inexpensively was the "shaky cam", which involved mounting the camera to a piece of wood and having two camera operators sprint around the swamp. During scenes involving the unseen force in the woods watching the characters, Raimi had to run through the woods with the makeshift rig, jumping over logs and stones. This often proved difficult due to mist in the swamp. The film's final scene was shot with the camera mounted to a bike, while it was quickly driven through the cabin to create a seamless long take.

Raimi had been a big fan of The Three Stooges during his youth, which inspired him to use "Fake Shemps" during production. In any scene that required a background shot of a character, he used another actor as a substitute if the original actor was preoccupied. During a close-up involving Richard DeManicor's hand opening a curtain, Raimi used his own hand in the scene since it was more convenient. His brother Ted Raimi was used as a "Fake Shemp" in many scenes when the original actor was either busy or preoccupied.

Raimi enjoyed "torturing" his actors. Raimi believed that to capture pain and anger in his actors, he had to abuse them a little at times, saying, "if everyone was in extreme pain and misery, that would translate into a horror". Producer Robert Tapert agreed with Raimi, commenting that he "enjoyed when an actor bleeds." While shooting a scene with Campbell running down a hill, Campbell tripped and injured his leg. Raimi enjoyed poking Campbell's injury with a stick he found in the woods. Because of the copious amounts of blood in the film, the crew produced gallons of fake blood with Karo corn syrup. It took Campbell hours to remove the sticky substance from himself. Several actors had inadvertently been stabbed or thrown into objects during production. During the last few days on set, the conditions had become so extreme the crew began burning furniture to stay warm. Since at that point only exterior shots needed to be filmed, they burned nearly every piece of furniture left. Several actors went days without showering, and because of the freezing conditions, several caught colds and other illnesses. Campbell later described the filming process as nearly "twelve weeks of mirthless exercise in agony", though he allowed that he did manage to have fun while on set. On January 23, 1980, filming was finished and almost every crew member left the set to return home, with Campbell staying with Raimi. While looking over the footage that had been shot, Raimi discovered that a few pick-ups were required to fill in missing shots. Four days of re-shoots were then done to complete the film. The final moment involved Campbell having "monster-guts" splattered on him in the basement.

Summing up the production decades later, Campbell remarked: "It's low-budget, it's got rough edges," but even so, "there are parts of that movie that are visually stunning."

Editing

After the extensive filming process, Raimi had a "mountain of footage" that he had to put together. He chose a Detroit editing association, where he met Edna Paul, to cut the film. Paul's assistant was Joel Coen of the Coen brothers, who helped with the film's editing. Paul edited a majority of the film, although Coen edited the shed sequence. Coen had been inspired by Raimi's Within the Woods and liked the idea of producing a prototype film to help build the interest of investors. Joel used the concept to help make Blood Simple with his brother Ethan, and he and Raimi became friends following the editing process.

The film's first cut ran at around 117 minutes, which Campbell called an impressive achievement in light of the 65-minute length of the screenplay. The cut scenes were to focus on the main character's lamentation of not being able to save the victims from their deaths, but was edited down to make the film less "grim and depressing" and to be a more marketable 85 minutes. Raimi was inspired by the fact that Brian De Palma was editing his own film Blow Out with John Travolta at the same sound facility. One of the most intricate moments during editing was the stop-motion animation sequence where the corpses "melted", which took hours to cut properly. The film had unique sounds that required extensive recording from the crew. Several sounds were not recorded properly during shooting, which meant the effects had to be redone in the editing rooms. Dead chickens were stabbed to replicate the sounds of mutilated flesh, and Campbell had to scream into a microphone for several hours.

Much like Within the Woods, The Evil Dead needed to be blown up to 35mm, the industry standard, to be played at movie theaters. The relatively large budget made this a much simpler process with The Evil Dead than it had been with the short film.

Promotion and distribution rights

With the film completed, Raimi and the crew decided to celebrate with a "big premiere". They chose to screen the film at Detroit's Redford Theatre, which Campbell had often visited as a child. Raimi opted to have the most theatrical premiere possible, using custom tickets and wind tracks set in the theater, and ordering ambulances outside the theater to build atmosphere. The premiere setup was inspired by horror director William Castle, who would often attempt to scare his audiences by using gimmicks. Local turnout for the premiere exceeded the cast's expectations, with a thousand patrons showing up. The audiences responded enthusiastically to the premiere, which led to Raimi's idea of "touring" the film to build hype.

Raimi showed the film to anyone willing to watch it, booking meetings with distribution agents and anyone with experience in the film industry. Eventually Raimi came across Irvin Shapiro, the man who was responsible for the distribution of George A. Romero's Night of the Living Dead and other famous horror films. Upon first viewing the film, he joked that while it "wasn't Gone with the Wind", it had commercial potential, and he expressed an interest in distributing it. It was his idea not to use the then-title Book of the Dead, because he thought it made the film sound boring. Raimi brainstormed several ideas, eventually going with The Evil Dead, deemed the "least worst" title. Shapiro also advised distributing the film worldwide to garner a larger income, though it required a further financial investment by Raimi, who managed to scrape together what little money he had.

Shapiro was a founder of the Cannes Film Festival, and allowed Raimi to screen the film at the 1982 festival out of competition. Stephen King was present at its screening and gave the film a rave review. USA Today released an article about King's favorite horror films; the author cited The Evil Dead as his fifth favorite film of the genre. The film severely affected King, who commented that while watching the film at Cannes, he was "registering things [he] had never seen in a movie before". He became one of the film's largest supporters during the early efforts to find a distributor, eventually describing it as the "most ferociously original film of the year", a quote used in the film's promotional pieces. King's comments attracted the interest of critics, who otherwise would likely have dismissed the low-budget thriller.

The film's press attracted the attention of British film distribution agent Stephen Woolley. Though he considered the film a big risk, Woolley decided to take on the job of releasing the film in the United Kingdom. The film was promoted in an unconventional manner for a film of its budget, receiving marketing on par with that of larger budget films. Dozens of promotional pieces, including film posters and trailers, were showcased in the UK, heavy promotion rarely expended on such a low-budget film. Woolley was impressed by Raimi, whom he called "charming", and was an admirer of the film, which led to his taking more risks with the film's promotion than he normally would have.

Fangoria started covering the film in late 1982, writing several articles about the film's long production history. Early critical reception at the time was very positive, and along with Fangoria, King and Shapiro's approval, the film generated an impressive amount of interest before its commercial premiere. New Line Cinema, one of the distributors interested in the film, negotiated an agreement to distribute it domestically. The film had several "sneak previews" before its commercial release, including screenings in New York and Detroit. Audience reception at both screenings was widely enthusiastic, and interest was built for the film to such an extent that wider distribution was planned. New Line Cinema wrote Raimi a check large enough to pay off all the investors, and decided to release the film in an unusual manner: simultaneously into both cinemas and onto VHS, with substantial domestic promotion.

Theatrical
Because of its large promotional campaign, the film performed above expectations at the box office. However, the initial domestic gross was described as "disappointing." The movie opened in 15 theaters and grossed $108,000 in its opening weekend. Word of mouth later spread, and the film became a "sleeper hit". It grossed $2,400,000 domestically, nearly eight times its production budget. Sources differ as to whether it grossed $261,944 overseas, for a worldwide gross of $2,661,944, or $27 million overseas, for a worldwide gross of $29.4 million. Raimi said in 1990 that the film "did very well overseas and did very poorly domestically" and that its investors earned a return of "about five times their initial investment."

Rating
The film's release was met with controversy, as Raimi had made the film as gruesome as possible with neither interest in nor fear of censorship. Writer Bruce Kawin described The Evil Dead as one of the most notorious splatter films of its day, along with Cannibal Holocaust and I Spit on Your Grave.

In the UK, the film was trimmed by 49 seconds before it was granted an X certificate for cinema release. This censored version was also released on home video; at the time there was no requirement that films had to be classified for video release. An anti-media organization campaign led to the film being branded a "video nasty". When the Video Recordings Act was passed in 1984, the video version was banned. In 1990, an additional 66 seconds were cut from the already censored version, earning the film an 18 certificate for home video release. Finally, in 2000, the uncut version received an 18 certificate for both cinema and home video.

In the US, the film received an X rating. Films with this label were quite violent and disturbing, and the rating was often held by pornographic films. The film has since been re-rated NC-17 for “substantial graphic horror violence and gore”, though many recent home media releases have been released without a rating.

The film was and is still banned either theatrically or on video in some countries.

Home media release
The first VHS release of The Evil Dead was released by Thorn EMI in 1983, and Thorn's successor company HBO/Cannon Video later repackaged the film. Former HBO Video's partner Congress Video, a company notable for public domain films, issued its version in 1989.

In its first week of video release, the film made £100,000 in the UK. It quickly became that week's bestselling video release, and later became the year's bestselling video in the UK, out-grossing large-budget horror releases such as The Shining. Its impressive European performance was chalked up to its heavy promotion there and the more open-minded nature of European audiences.

The resurgence of The Evil Dead in the home-video market came through two companies that restored the film from its negatives and issued special editions in 1998: Anchor Bay Entertainment on VHS, and Elite Entertainment on LaserDisc. Anchor Bay was responsible for the film's first DVD release on January 19, 1999, along with Elite releasing the special collector's edition DVD on March 30, 1999, and between them, Elite and Anchor Bay have released six different DVD versions of The Evil Dead, most notably the 2002 "Book Of The Dead" edition, packaged in a latex replica of the Necronomicon sculpted by Tom Sullivan and the 2007 three disc "Ultimate Edition" which contained the widescreen and original full frame versions of the movie. The film's high-definition debut was in a 2010 Blu-ray.

Lionsgate Films released a 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray edition of The Evil Dead on October 9, 2018.

Critical response
Upon its release, contemporary critical opinion was largely positive. Bob Martin, editor of Fangoria, reviewed the film before its formal premiere and proclaimed that it "might be the exception to the usual run of low-budget horror films". He followed up on this praise after the film's premiere, stating: "Since I started editing this magazine, I have not seen any new film that I could recommend to our readers with more confidence that it would be loved, embraced and hailed as a new milestone in graphic horror". The Los Angeles Times called the film an "instant classic", proclaiming it as "probably the grisliest well-made movie ever." In a 1982 review, staff from Variety wrote that the film "emerges as the ne plus ultra of low-budget gore and shock effect", commenting that the "powerful" and inventive camerawork was key to creating a sense of dread.

British press for the film was positive; Kim Newman of Monthly Film Bulletin, Richard Cook of NME and Julian Petley of Film and Filming all gave the film good reviews during its early release. Petley and Cook compared the film to other contemporary horror films, writing that the film expressed more imagination and "youthful enthusiasm" than an average horror film. Cook described the camera work by Raimi as "audacious", stating that the film's visceral nature was greatly helped by the style of direction. Woolley, Newman and several critics complimented the film for its unexpected use of black comedy, which elevated the film above its genre's potential trappings. All three critics compared the film to the surrealistic work of Georges Franju and Jean Cocteau, noting the cinephilic references to Cocteau's film Orpheus. Writer Lynn Schofield Clark in his novel From Angels to Aliens compared the film to better-known horror films such as The Exorcist and The Omen, citing it as a key supernatural thriller.

Later response
Empire stated the film's "reputation was deserved", writing that the film was impressive considering its low budget and the cast's inexperience. He commented that the film successfully blended the "bizarre" combination of Night of the Living Dead, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre and The Three Stooges. A reviewer for Film4 rated The Evil Dead four-and-a-half stars out of five, musing that the film was "energetic, original and icky" and concluding that Raimi's "splat-stick debut is a tight little horror classic that deserves its cult reputation, despite the best efforts of the censors."

Slant's Ed Gonzales compared the film to Dario Argento's work, citing Raimi's "unnerving wide angle work" as an important factor to the film's atmosphere. He mused that Raimi possessed an "almost unreal ability to suggest the presence of intangible evil", which was what prevented the movie from being "B-movie schlock". BBC critic Martyn Glanville awarded the film four stars out of five, writing that for Raimi, it served as a better debut film than Tobe Hooper's The Texas Chain Saw Massacre or Wes Craven's The Last House on the Left. Glanville noted that other than the "ill-advised trees-that-rape scene", the film is "one of the great modern horror films, and even more impressive when one considers its modest production values."

Filmcritic.com's Christopher Null gave the film the same rating as Glanville, writing that "Raimi's biggest grossout is schlock horror done the right way" and comparing it to Romero's Night of the Living Dead in its ability to create stark atmosphere. Chicago Reader writer Pat Graham commented that the film featured several "clever" turns on the standard horror formula, adding that Raimi's "anything-for-an-effect enthusiasm pays off in lots of formally inventive bits." Time Out critic Stephen Garrett, referred to the make-up effects in the climax as "amazing", and commented that although the film was light on character development, it "blends comic fantasy" with "atmospheric horror ... to impressive effect". The same site later cited the film as the 41st greatest horror movie ever made. Phelim O'Neill of The Guardian combined The Evil Dead and its sequel Evil Dead II and listed them as the 23rd best horror film ever made, announcing that the former film "stands above its mostly forgotten peers in the 80s horror boom." Don Summer, in his book Horror Movie Freak, and writer Kate Egan have both cited the film as a horror classic.

J.C. Maçek III of PopMatters said: "What is unquestionable is that the Raimis and their pals created a monster in The Evil Dead. It started as a disastrous failure to obtain a big break with a too long, too perilous shoot (note Campbell's changing hairstyle in the various scenes of the one-day plot). The film went through name changes and bannings only to survive as not only 'the ultimate experience in grueling horror' but as an oft-imitated and cashed-in-on classic, with 30 years of positive reviews to prove it."

Aftermath

While The Evil Dead received favorable critical comment when it was initially released, it failed to establish Raimi's reputation. It was, however, a box-office success, which led to Campbell and Raimi teaming up again for the release of another movie. Joel Coen and his brother Ethan had collaborated as directors and released the film Blood Simple, to critical acclaim. According to Campbell, Ethan, then an accountant, expressed surprise when the duo succeeded. The Coen brothers and Raimi collaborated on a screenplay, which was released shortly after The Evil Dead. The film, Crimewave, was a box-office failure. The film's production was a "disaster", according to Campbell, who stated that "missteps" like Crimewave usually lead to the end of a director's career. Other people involved with the film expressed similar disappointment with the project. Fortunately, Raimi had the studio support to make a sequel to The Evil Dead, which he initially decided to make out of desperation.

Sequels
The Evil Dead was followed by a series of sequels. The franchise is noted from attracting attention for each sequel featuring more comedic qualities than the last, progressing into "weirder" territory with each film. Evil Dead II: Dead by Dawn was a black comedy-horror film which released in 1987, and was a box-office success. It received general acclaim from critics, and is often considered to be superior to the first film. This was followed by Army of Darkness, a comedy fantasy-horror film released in 1992. At that time, Raimi had become a successful director, attracting Hollywood's interest. His superhero film Darkman (1990) was another box-office success, which led to an increased budget for Army of Darkness. Army of Darkness had 22.8 times the budget of the original Evil Dead, though it was not considered to be a box-office success like its two predecessors. It was met with mostly positive critical reception. After any additional installments suffered through development hell, a supernatural-horror soft reboot/legacy sequel titled Evil Dead was released in 2013, featuring Jane Levy as the main character Mia Allen. Directed and co-written by Fede Álvarez, the film was produced by Raimi and Campbell. The film, which was a departure from the humor of the previous two films, was a moderate box office success and was praised for its dark and bloody story. While various projects going through varying stages of development, a continuation was released as a television series titled, Ash vs. Evil Dead. Created and executive produced by Sam Raimi, the series aired from 2015-2018.

After further film installments once again remained in development hell for a number of years, a fifth feature film titled Evil Dead Rise was announced to be in development. The project began filming in June 2021, with Irish filmmaker Lee Cronin serving as writer/director. Though Campbell reprised his role as Ashley "Ash" J. Williams in each of the proceeding sequels, he did not appear in the film. The film was released theatrically on April 21, 2023, by Warner Bros. Pictures.

Foreign market
Unofficial sequels were made in Italy, where the film was known as La Casa ("The House"). Produced by Joe D'Amato's Filmirage, two mostly unrelated films were released and marketed as sequels to Evil Dead II: Umberto Lenzi's La Casa 3: Ghosthouse and La Casa 4: Witchery starring Linda Blair and David Hasselhoff. The final film was released in 1990 and titled, La Casa 5: Beyond Darkness. The film House II: The Second Story was reissued and retitled in Italy as La Casa 6; followed by The Horror Show which was released in Italy as La Casa 7.

Legacy
The original Evil Dead trilogy of films has been recognized as one of the most successful cult film series in history. David Lavery, in his book The Essential Cult TV Reader, surmised that Campbell's "career is a practical guide to becoming a cult idol". The film launched the careers of Raimi and Campbell, who have since collaborated frequently. Raimi has worked with Campbell in virtually all of his films since, and Campbell has appeared in cameo roles in all three of Raimi's Spider-Man films (as well as a very brief appearance at the end of Darkman), which have become some of the highest-grossing films in history. Though it has often been considered an odd choice for Raimi, a director known for his violent horror films, to direct a family-friendly franchise, the hiring was mostly inspired by Raimi's passion for comic books as a child. Raimi returned to the horror-comedy genre in 2009 with Drag Me to Hell.

Critics have often compared Campbell's later performances to his role in Evil Dead, which has been called his defining role. Campbell's performance as Ash has been compared to roles ranging from his performance of Elvis Presley in the film Bubba Ho-tep to the bigamous demon in The X-Files episode "Terms of Endearment". Campbell's fan base gradually developed after the release of Evil Dead II and his short-lived series The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr.. He is a regular favorite at most fan conventions and often draws sold-out auditoriums at his public appearances. The Evil Dead developed a substantial cult following throughout the years, and has often been cited as a defining cult classic.

The Evil Dead has spawned a media franchise. A video game adaptation of the same name was released for the Commodore 64 in 1984, as was a trilogy of survival horror games in the 1990s and early 2000s: Evil Dead: Hail to the King, Evil Dead: A Fistful of Boomstick and Evil Dead: Regeneration. Ted Raimi did voices for the trilogy, and Campbell returned as the voice of Ash. The character Ash became the main character of a comic book franchise. Ash has fought both Freddy Krueger and Jason Voorhees in the Freddy vs. Jason vs. Ash series, Herbert West in Army of Darkness vs. Re-Animator, zombie versions of the Marvel Comics superheroes in Marvel Zombies vs. The Army of Darkness, and has even saved the life of a fictional Barack Obama in Army of Darkness: Ash Saves Obama. In January 2008, Dark Horse Comics began releasing a four-part monthly comic book mini-series, written by Mark Verheiden and drawn by John Bolton, based on The Evil Dead. The film has also inspired a stage musical, Evil Dead: The Musical, which was produced with the permission of Raimi and Campbell. The musical has run on and off since its inception in 2003.

After the film was released, many people began to trespass onto the filming location in Morristown. In 1982, the cabin was burned down by drunken trespassers. Although the cabin is now gone, the chimney remains, which many people now take stones from when they trespass onto the location.

In 2022, a video game adaptation of the series called Evil Dead: The Game was released.

In 2021, heavy metal band Ice Nine Kills released a song titled "Ex-Mørtis" on their album The Silver Scream 2: Welcome to Horrorwood, which is composed of songs each explicitly linked to specific horror media per the album's booklet of liner notes; "Ex-Mørtis" is stated to be inspired by The Evil Dead.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: The Evil Dead


text:
Economic calculation problem

The economic calculation problem (sometimes abbreviated ECP) is a criticism of using central economic planning as a substitute for market-based allocation of the factors of production. It was first proposed by Ludwig von Mises in his 1920 article "Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth" and later expanded upon by Friedrich Hayek.

In his first article, Mises described the nature of the price system under capitalism and described how individual subjective values (while criticizing other theories of value) are translated into the objective information necessary for rational allocation of resources in society. He argued that central planning necessarily leads to an irrational and inefficient allocation of resources. In market exchanges, prices reflect the supply and demand of resources, labor and products. In the article, Mises focused his criticism on the deficiencies of the socialisation of capital goods, but he later went on to elaborate on various different forms of socialism in his book Socialism. He briefly mentioned the problem in the 3rd book of Human Action: a Treatise on Economics, where he also elaborated on the different types of socialism, namely the "Hindenburg" and "Lenin" models, which he viewed as fundamentally flawed despite their ideological differences.

Mises and Hayek argued that economic calculation is only possible by information provided through market prices and that centralist methods of allocation lack methods to rationally allocate resources. Mises's analysis centered on price theory while Hayek went with a more feathered analysis of information and entrepreneurship. The debate raged in the 1920s and 1930s and that specific period of the debate has come to be known by economic historians as the socialist calculation debate. Mises' initial criticism received multiple reactions and led to the conception of trial-and-error market socialism, most notably the Lange–Lerner theorem.

In the 1920 paper, Mises argued that the pricing systems in state socialist economies were necessarily deficient because if a public entity owned all the means of production, no rational prices could be obtained for capital goods as they were merely internal transfers of goods and not "objects of exchange", unlike final goods. Therefore, they were unpriced and hence the system would be necessarily irrational as the central planners would not know how to allocate the available resources efficiently. He wrote that "rational economic activity is impossible in a socialist commonwealth". Mises developed his critique of socialism more completely in his 1922 book Socialism, arguing that the market price system is an expression of praxeology and cannot be replicated by any form of bureaucracy.

Notable critics of both Mises's original argument and Hayek's newer proposition include Anarcho-capitalist economist Bryan Caplan, computer programmer and Marxist Paul Cockshott, as well as other communists.

Subject
The economic calculation problem is primarily applied to centrally planned economies. Mises had utilized Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth to counterargue Otto Neurath's statements concerning central planning's feasibility, invoking "the supreme economic council" and equating socialism to "a society where the means of production are State controlled."

This, paired with his consistent mention of nationalization alongside socialization, would make the economic calculation problem one solely concerning an administrative-command system.

Comparing heterogeneous goods
Since capital goods and labor are highly heterogeneous (i.e. they have different characteristics that pertain to physical productivity), economic calculation requires a common basis for comparison for all forms of capital and labour.

As a means of exchange, money enables buyers to compare the costs of goods without having knowledge of their underlying factors; the consumer can simply focus on his personal cost-benefit decision. Therefore, the price system is said to promote economically efficient use of resources by agents who may not have explicit knowledge of all of the conditions of production or supply. This is called the signalling function of prices as well as the rationing function which prevents over-use of any resource.

Without the market process to fulfill such comparisons, critics of non-market socialism say that it lacks any way to compare different goods and services and would have to rely on calculation in kind. The resulting decisions, it is claimed, would therefore be made without sufficient knowledge to be considered rational.

Relating utility to capital and consumption goods
The common basis for comparison of capital goods must also be connected to consumer welfare. It must also be able to compare the desired trade-off between present consumption and delayed consumption (for greater returns later on) via investment in capital goods. The use of money as a medium of exchange and unit of account is necessary to solve the first two problems of economic calculation. Mises (1912) applied the marginal utility theory developed by Carl Menger to money.

Marginal consumer expenditures represent the marginal utility or additional consumer satisfaction expected by consumers as they spend money. This is similar to the equi-marginal principle developed by Alfred Marshall. Consumers equalize the marginal utility (amount of satisfaction) to the last dollar spent on each good. Thus, the exchange of consumer goods establishes prices that represent the marginal utility of consumers and money is representative of consumer satisfaction.

If money is also spent on capital goods and labor, then it is possible to make comparisons between capital goods and consumer goods. The exchange of consumer and capital/labor goods does not imply that capital goods are valued accurately, only that it is possible for the valuations of capital goods to be made. These are foundational elements of economic calculation, namely that it requires the use of money across all goods. This is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for successful economic calculation. Without a price mechanism, Mises argues, socialism lacks the means to relate consumer satisfaction to economic activity. The incentive function of prices allows diffuse interests, like the interests of every household in cheap, high-quality shoes to compete, among buyers, with the concentrated interests of the cobblers in expensive, poor-quality shoes. Without it, a panel of experts set up to "rationalise production", likely closely linked to the cobblers for expertise, would tend to support the cobblers' interests in a "conspiracy against the public". However, if this happens to all industries, everyone would be worse off than if they had been subject to the rigors of market competition. The latter forces producers to produce superior products at appropriate prices to please their consumers.

The Mises theory of money and calculation conflicts directly with Marxist labour theory of value. Marxist theory allows for the possibility that labour content can serve as a common means of valuing capital goods, a position now out of favour with economists following the success of the theory of marginal utility.

Entrepreneurship
The third condition for economic calculation is the existence of genuine entrepreneurship and market rivalry.

According to Israel Kirzner (1973) and Don Lavoie (1985), entrepreneurs reap profits by supplying unfulfilled needs in all markets. Thus, entrepreneurship brings prices closer to marginal costs. The adjustment of prices in markets towards equilibrium (where supply and demand equal) gives them greater utilitarian significance. The activities of entrepreneurs make prices more accurate in terms of how they represent the marginal utility of consumers. Prices act as guides to the planning of production. Those who plan production use prices to decide which lines of production should be expanded or curtailed.

Entrepreneurs lack the profit motive to take risks under socialism and so are far less likely to attempt to supply consumer demands. Without the price system to match consumer utility to incentives for production, or even indicate those utilities "without providing incentives", state planners are much less likely to invest in new ideas to satisfy consumers' desires. Entrepreneurs would also lack the ability to economize within the production process, causing repercussions for consumers.

Coherent planning
The fourth condition for successful economic calculation is plan coordination among those who plan production. The problem of planning production is the knowledge problem explained by Hayek (1937, 1945), but first mentioned and illustrated by his mentor Mises in Socialism (1922), not to be mistaken with Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis (1951). The planning could either be done in a decentralised fashion, requiring some mechanism to make the individual plans coherent, or centrally, requiring a lot of information.

Within capitalism, the overall plan for production is composed of individual plans among capitalists in large and small enterprises. Since capitalists purchase labour and capital out of the same common pool of available yet scarce labor and capital, it is essential that their plans fit together in at least a semi-coherent fashion. Hayek (1937) defined an efficient planning process as one where all decision makers form plans that contain relevant data from the plans from others. Entrepreneurs acquire data on the plans from others through the price system. The price system is an indispensable communications network for plan coordination among entrepreneurs. Increases and decreases in prices inform entrepreneurs about the general economic situation, to which they must adjust their own plans.

As for socialism, Mises (1944) and Hayek (1937) insisted that bureaucrats in individual ministries could not coordinate their plans without a price system due to the local knowledge problem.Opponents argued that in principle an economy can be seen as a set of equations. Thus, using information about available resources and the preferences of people, it should be possible to calculate an optimal solution for resource allocation. Friedrich von Hayek responded that the system of equations required too much information that would not be easily available, and the ensuing calculations would be too difficult. This is partly because individuals possess useful knowledge but do not realize its importance, may have no incentive to transmit the information, or may have incentive to transmit false information about their preferences. He contended that the only rational solution is to utilize all the dispersed knowledge in the market place through the use of price signals. The early debates were made before the much greater calculating powers of modern computers became available but also before research on chaos theory. In the 1980s, Alexander Nove argued that the calculations would take millions of years even with the best computers. It may be impossible to make long-term predictions for a highly complex system such as an economy.

Hayek (1935, 1937, 1940, 1945) stressed the knowledge problem of central planning, partly because decentralized socialism seemed indefensible. Part of the reason that Hayek stressed the knowledge problem was also because he was mainly concerned with debating the proposal for market socialism and the Lange model by Oskar R. Lange (1938) and Hayek's student Abba Lerner (1934, 1937, 1938) which was developed in response to the calculation argument. Lange and Lerner conceded that prices were necessary in socialism. Lange and Lerner thought that socialist officials could simulate some markets (mainly spot markets) and the simulation of spot markets was enough to make socialism reasonably efficient. Lange argued that prices can be seen merely as an accounting practice. In principle, claim market socialists, socialist managers of state enterprises could use a price system, as an accounting system, in order to minimize costs and convey information to other managers. However, while this can deal with existing stocks of goods, providing a basis for values can be ascertained, it does not deal with the investment in new capital stocks. Hayek responded by arguing that the simulation of markets in socialism would fail due to a lack of genuine competition and entrepreneurship. Central planners would still have to plan production without the aid of economically meaningful prices. Lange and Lerner also admitted that socialism would lack any simulation of financial markets, and that this would cause problems in planning capital investment.

However, Hayek's argumentation is not only regarding computational complexity for the central planners. He further argues that much of the information individuals have cannot be collected or used by others. First, individuals may have no or little incentive to share their information with central or even local planners. Second, the individual may not be aware that he has valuable information; and when he becomes aware, it is only useful for a limited time, too short for it to be communicated to the central or local planners. Third, the information is useless to other individuals if it is not in a form that allows for meaningful comparisons of value (i.e. money prices as a common basis for comparison). Therefore, Hayek argues, individuals must acquire data through prices in real markets.

Financial markets
The fifth condition for successful economic calculation is the existence of well-functioning financial markets. Economic efficiency depends heavily upon avoiding errors in capital investment. The costs of reversing errors in capital investment are potentially large. This is not just a matter of rearranging or converting capital goods that are found to be of little use. The time spent reconfiguring the structure of production is time lost in the production of consumer goods. Those who plan capital investment must anticipate future trends in consumer demand if they are to avoid investing too much in some lines of production and too little in other lines of production.

Capitalists plan production for profit. Capitalists use prices to form expectations that determine the composition of capital accumulation, the pattern of investment across industry. Those who invest in accordance with consumers' desires are rewarded with profits, those who do not are forced to become more efficient or go out of business.

Prices in futures markets play a special role in economic calculation. Futures markets develop prices for commodities in future time periods. It is in futures markets that entrepreneurs sort out plans for production based on their expectations. Futures markets are a link between entrepreneurial investment decisions and household consumer decisions. Since most goods are not explicitly traded in futures markets, substitute markets are needed. The stock market serves as a ‘continuous futures market’ that evaluates entrepreneurial plans for production (Lachmann 1978). Generally speaking, the problem of economic calculation is solved in financial markets as Mises argued: "The problem of economic calculation arises in an economy which is perpetually subject to change [...]. In order to solve such problems it is above all necessary that capital be withdrawn from particular undertakings and applied in other lines of production [...]. [This] is essentially a matter of the capitalists who buy and sell stocks and shares, who make loans and recover them, who speculate in all kinds of commodities."

The existence of financial markets is a necessary condition for economic calculation. The existence of financial markets itself does not automatically imply that entrepreneurial speculation will tend towards efficiency. Mises argued that speculation in financial markets tends towards efficiency because of a "trial and error" process. Entrepreneurs who commit relatively large errors in investment waste their funds over expanding some lines of production at the cost of other more profitable ventures where consumer demand is higher. The entrepreneurs who commit the worst errors by forming the least accurate expectations of future consumer demands incur financial losses. Financial losses remove these inept entrepreneurs from positions of authority in industry.

Entrepreneurs who commit smaller errors by anticipating consumer demand more correctly attain greater financial success. The entrepreneurs who form the most accurate opinions regarding the future state of markets (i.e. new trends in consumer demands) earn the highest profits and gain greater control of industry. Those entrepreneurs who anticipate future market trends therefore waste the least amount of real capital and find the most favorable terms for finance on markets for financial capital. Minimal waste of real capital goods implies the minimization of the opportunity costs of capital's economic calculation. The value of capital goods is brought into line with the value of future consumer goods through competition in financial markets, because competition for profits among capitalist financiers' rewards entrepreneurs who value capital more correctly (i.e. anticipating future prices more correctly) and eliminates capitalists who value capital least correctly. To sum things up, the use of money in trading all goods (capital/labor and consumer) in all markets (spot and financial) combined with profit driven entrepreneurship and Darwinian natural selection in financial markets all combine to make rational economic calculation and allocation the outcome of the capitalist process.

Mises insisted that socialist calculation is impossible because socialism precludes the exchange of capital goods in terms of a generally accepted medium of exchange, or money. Investment in financial markets determines the capital structure of modern industry with some degree of efficiency. The egalitarian nature of socialism prohibits speculation in financial markets. Therefore, Mises concluded that socialism lacks any clear tendency towards improvement in the capital structure of industry.

Example
Mises gave the example of choosing between producing wine or oil within a centrally planned economy, making the following point: "It will be evident, even in the socialist society, that 1,000 hectolitres of wine are better than 800, and it is not difficult to decide whether it desires 1,000 hectolitres of wine rather than 500 of oil. There is no need for any system of calculation to establish this fact: the deciding element is the will of the economic subjects involved. But once this decision has been taken, the real task of rational economic direction only commences, i.e., economically, to place the means at the service of the end. That can only be done with some kind of economic calculation. The human mind cannot orient itself properly among the bewildering mass of intermediate products and potentialities of production without such aid. It would simply stand perplexed before the problems of management and location."

Such intermediate products would include land, warehouse storage, bottles, barrels, oil, transport, etc. Not only would these things have to be assembled, but they would have to compete with the attainment of other economic goals. Without pricing for capital goods, essentially, Mises is arguing, it is impossible to know how they should rationally/efficiently use it. And since the absence of pricing necessitates the prior absence of a current standard of exchange, investment becomes particularly impossible. In other words, the potential future outputs cannot be measured by any current standard, let alone a monetary one required for economic calculation. Likewise, the value consumers have for current consumption over future consumption cannot be expressed, quantified or implemented.

Efficiency of markets
Some academics and economists argue that the claim a free market is an efficient, or even the most efficient, method of resource allocation is incorrect. Alexander Nove argued that Mises "tends to spoil his case by the implicit assumption that capitalism and optimum resource allocation go together" in Mises' "Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth". Joan Robinson argued that many prices in modern capitalism are effectively "administered prices" created by "quasi monopolies", thus challenging the connection between capital markets and rational resource allocation.

Socialist market abolitionists argue that whilst advocates of capitalism and the Austrian School in particular recognize equilibrium prices do not exist in real life, they nonetheless claim that these prices can be used as a rational basis when this is not the case, hence markets are not efficient. Robin Hahnel further argued that market inefficiencies, such as externalities and excess supply and demand, arise from buyers and sellers thoughtlessly maximizing their rational interests, which free markets inherently do not deter. Nonetheless, Hahnel commended current policies pursued by free market capitalist societies against these inefficiencies (e.g. Pigouvian taxes, antitrust laws etc.), as long as they are properly calculated and consistently enforced.

Milton Friedman agreed that markets with monopolistic competition are not efficient, but he argued that it is easy to force monopolies to adopt competitive behavior by exposing them to foreign rivals. Economic liberals and libertarian capitalists also argue that monopolies and big business are not generally the result of a free market, or that they never arise from a free market; rather, they say that such concentration is enabled by governmental grants of franchises or privileges. That said, protectionist economies can theoretically still foster competition as long as there is strong consumer switching. Joseph Schumpeter additionally argued that economic advancement, through innovation and investment, are often driven by large monopolies.

Equilibrium
Allin Cottrell, Paul Cockshott and Greg Michaelson argued that the contention that finding a true economic equilibrium is not just hard but impossible for a central planner applies equally well to a market system. As any universal Turing machine can do what any other Turing machine can, a central calculator in principle has no advantage over a system of dispersed calculators, i.e. a market, or vice versa.

In some economic models, finding an equilibrium is hard, and finding an Arrow–Debreu equilibrium is PPAD-complete. If the market can find an equilibrium in polynomial time, then the equivalence above can be used to prove that P=PPAD. This line of argument thus attempts to show that any claim to impossibility must necessarily involve a local knowledge problem, because the planning system is no less capable than the market if given full information.

Don Lavoie makes a local knowledge argument by taking this implication in reverse. The market socialists pointed out the formal similarity between the neoclassical model of Walrasian general equilibrium and that of market socialism which simply replace the Walrasian auctioneer with a planning board. According to Lavoie, this emphasizes the shortcomings of the model. By relying on this formal similarity, the market socialists must adopt the simplifying assumptions of the model. The model assumes that various sorts of information are given to the auctioneer or planning board. However, if not coordinated by a capital market, this information exists in a fundamentally distributed form, which would be difficult to utilize on the planners' part. If the planners decided to utilize the information, it would immediately become stale and relatively useless, unless reality somehow imitated the changeless monotony of the equilibrium model. The existence and usability of this information depends on its creation and situation within a distributed discovery procedure.

Exaggerated claims
One criticism is that proponents of the theory overstate the strength of their case by describing socialism as impossible rather than inefficient. In explaining why he is not an Austrian School economist, anarcho-capitalist economist Bryan Caplan argues that while the economic calculation problem is a problem for socialism, he denies that Mises has shown it to be fatal or that it is this particular problem that led to the collapse of authoritarian socialist states. Caplan also states the exaggeration of the problem; in his view, Mises did not manage to prove why economic calculation made the socialist economy 'impossible', and even if there were serious doubts about the efficiency of cost benefit analysis, other arguments are plentiful (Caplan gives the example of the incentive problem).

Steady-state economy
Joan Robinson argued that in a steady-state economy there would be an effective abundance of means of production and so markets would not be needed. Mises acknowledged such a theoretical possibility in his original tract when he said the following: "The static state can dispense with economic calculation. For here the same events in economic life are ever recurring; and if we assume that the first disposition of the static socialist economy follows on the basis of the final state of the competitive economy, we might at all events conceive of a socialist production system which is rationally controlled from an economic point of view." However, he contended that stationary conditions never prevail in the real world. Changes in economic conditions are inevitable; and even if they were not, the transition to socialism would be so chaotic as to preclude the existence of such a steady-state from the start.

The purpose of the price mechanism is to allow individuals to recognise the opportunity cost of decisions. In a state of abundance, there is no such cost, which is to say that in situations where one need not economize, economics does not apply, e.g. areas with abundant fresh air and water. Otto Neurath and Hillel Ticktin argued that with detailed use of real unit accounting and demand surveys a planned economy could operate without a capital market in a situation of abundance.

Use of technology
In Towards a New Socialism's "Information and Economics: A Critique of Hayek" and "Against Mises", Paul Cockshott and Allin Cottrell argued that the use of computational technology now simplifies economic calculation and allows planning to be implemented and sustained. Len Brewster replied to this by arguing that Towards a New Socialism establishes what is essentially another form of a market economy, making the following point: "[A]n examination of C&C's New Socialism confirms Mises's conclusion that rational socialist planning is impossible. It appears that in order for economic planners to have any useful data by which they might be guided, a market must be hauled in, and with it analogues of private property, inequality and exploitation."

In response, Cockshott argued that the economic system is sufficiently far removed from a capitalist free-market economy to not count as one, saying: "Those that Hayek was arguing against like Lange and Dickinson allowed for markets in consumer goods, this did not lead Hayek to say : Oh you are not really arguing for socialism since you have conceded a market in consumer goods, he did not, because there remained huge policy differences between him and Lange even if Lange accepted consumer goods markets. It is thus a very weak argument by Brewster to say that what we advocate is not really socialist calculation because it is contaminated in some way by market influences."

Leigh Phillips' and Michal Rozworski's 2019 book The People's Republic of Walmart argues that multinational corporations like Walmart and Amazon already operate centrally planned economies in a more technologically sophisticated manner than the Soviet Union, proving that the economic calculation problem is surmountable. There are some contentions to this view however, namely how economic planning and planned economy ought to be distinguished. Both entail formulating data-driven economic objectives but the latter precludes it from occurring within a free-market context and delegates the task to centralized bodies.

Karras J. Lambert and Tate Fegley argue that artificial intelligence systems, no matter how advanced, cannot assume the role of central planners because they do not fulfill the prerequisites of effective economic calculation. This includes the ability to convert the ordinal preferences of producers and consumers into commensurate cardinal utility values, which are available and agreed upon, and forecast future market interactions.

One reason includes how they are dependent on Big Data, which in turn is entirely based on past information. Hence, the system cannot make any meaningful conclusions about future consumer preferences, which are required for optimal pricing. This necessitates the intervention of the programmer, who is highly likely to be biased in their judgments. Even the manner by which a system can "predict" consumer preferences is also based on a programmer's creative bias. They further argue that even if artificial intelligence is able to ordinally rank items like humans, they would still suffer from the same issues of not being able to conceive of a pricing structure where meaningful pricing calculations, using a common cardinal utility unit, can be formed. Nonetheless, Lambert and Fegley acknowledge that entrepreneurs can benefit from Big Data's predictive value, provided that the data is based on past market prices and that it is used in tandem with free market-styled bidding.

title: Economic calculation problem