Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin
Ask HN: Does the Nash equilibrium promote communism?
1 point by chrischen on Nov 9, 2009 | hide | past | favorite | 5 comments
This question randomly popped into my held while thinking about the many worlds theory.

So assuming the economy is a non zero-sum game, wouldn't the most ideal outcome for everyone be achieved if we didn't only pursue our individual interests? I just want to be sure I'm grasping what the Nash equilibrium is.



No, but it does promote Socialism. Right now, we're trawling the last fish out of the ocean. That helps a few people (the fishermen) at the expense of the rest of the world. It's not a Nash Equalibrium, but it's very much Capitalism. Without government intervention (Socialism) you would get no fish, inflammable kids' pajamas and toxins in your food.


I disagree with the above description of a Nash equilibrium. My understanding of such a thing is: When a Nash equilibrium exists each player's best strategy to the others create a "equilibrium" point, or a point from which you don't deviate. In a sense a change in government creates a change in game, not necessarily a Nash EQ. A Nash EQ in a society with a generally "Capitalist" economic, with supporting legal statutes, potentially result in players robbing, stealing, or cheating. However, in a game in which "Communism" is the economic standard, a Nash EQ may be universal altruism or chaos (my hypothesis to two possible Nash EQ's --not based in observation).Thus it is incorrect to blanketly label "Communism" or "Socialism" as a Nash EQ. In a sense a Nash EQ doesn't care about the morality of its players behaviors only that it is a relative equilibrium which results in best strategies that do not deviate in play.

See this Yale open course: http://oyc.yale.edu/economics/game-theory/.


Socialism != Communism. I was saying exactly what you're saying: Capitalism but with legal and social protections; Capitalism with boundaries; and that's what most people refer to when they say Socialism.


What if you consider anarchist society as the game, would then communism be the best strategy?


But doesn't it also mean that if we were "smart" enough to think of the collective interest while pursuing our own interests we can theoretically maximize everyone's profits. So for example instead of having a bunch of companies trying to screw each other over, we have one national company without competition so it can focus on the product.

It seems capitalism is what works simply because we can't be satisfied if we are all equally well off.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: