À ÿ äîáàâëþ òî æå â îðèãèíàëå:

In the terminology of anticapitalism the words selfish and unselfish are used to classify people from the point of view of a doctrine that considers equality of wealth and income as the only natural and fair state of social conditions, that brands those who own or earn more than the average as exploiters, and that condemns entrepreneurial activities as detrimental to the common weal. To be in business, to depend directly on the approval or disapproval of one's actions by the consumers, to woo the patronage of the buyers, and to earn profit if one succeeds in satisfying them better than one's competitors do is, from the point of view of officialdom's ideology, selfish and shameful. Only those on the government's payroll are rated as unselfish and noble.

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

Under laissez faire, says the planner, it is not those goods which people "really" need that are produced, but those goods from the sale of which the highest returns are expected. It is the objective of planning to direct production toward the satisfaction of the "true" needs. But who is to decide what the "true" needs are?

Thus, for instance, Professor Harold Laski, the former chairman of the British Labor Party, would determine as the objective of the planned direction of investment "that the use of the investor's savings will be in housing rather than in cinemas." It is beside the point whether or not one agrees with the professor's view that better houses are more important than moving pictures. It is a fact that the consumers, in spending part of their money for admission to the movies, have made another choice. If the masses of Great Britain, the same people whose votes swept the Labor Party into power, were to stop patronizing the moving pictures and to spend more for comfortable homes and apartments, profit-seeking business would be forced to invest more in building homes and apartment houses and less in the production of expensive pictures. It was Mr. Laski's desire to defy the wishes of the consumers and to substitute his own will for that of the consumers. He wanted to do away with the democracy of the market and to establish the absolute rule of the production tsar. Perhaps he believed that he was right from a higher point of view, and that as a superman he was called upon to impose his own valuations on the masses of inferior men. But then he ought to have been frank enough to say so plainly.

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

Óäîáíàÿ øòóêà - ïîèñê ïî òåêñòó HA íà ìèçåñ.îðã!

Îí õîòåë îòìåíèòü ãîñïîäñòâî ðûíêà è óñòàíîâèòü àáñîëþòíîå ãîñïîäñòâî ïðîèçâîäñòâåííîãî öàðÿ.
Íåóäà÷íûé ïåðåâîä. Íà íàãëèéñêîì ÿçûêå "production tsar" åñòü óñòîé÷èâûé îáîðîò, îáîçíà÷àþùèé ÷èíîâíèêà ñ ÷åðåçâû÷àéíûìè ïîëíîìî÷èÿìè - ñð. "drug tsar". À â ðóññîêì ÿçûêå òàêîãî âûðàæåíèÿ íåò, ïîýòîìó ôðàçà çâó÷èò îò÷àñòè äèêî.

Äà, íî ìíîãèå íå ðàçëè÷àþò ïðåäïðèíèìàòåëåé è ìîøåííèêîâ. Êóïèëè, ãîâîðÿò, ÷àé, à îí òóõëûé. Âîò îí âàø "êàïèòàëèçì". Îíè æå íå ïîíèìàþò ÷òî ïðîäàâåö òóõëîãî ÷àÿ ñàì ñåáÿ íàêàçàë ïóùå ëþáîé òîðãèíñïåêöèè. À ïîêóïàòåëü ðåøèë ñýêîíîìèòü è êóïèë íå â "Ðàìñòîðå", à â çàìøåëîì ìàãàçèíå. Âèíîâàòü "êàïèòàëèçì".