Ok and how are you getting the money to ask Iran or Irak to give you their petrol with a planned economy ?
If they -Iran or Irak- control the supply, you will need to give more money to get petrol, money you can only have through the labor of your country.
And guess what ? when someone does not have an incentive to do better work, because of planned economy he will not. This is common human psychology.
Without a productive labour, you will loose capital and buy less and less goods aboard.

Sure they have interest. But they would never attacked the Iran and Irak without military power at disposition.
Don't forget that the US govt, also have an incentive since they would control petrol supply in place of Saddam Husseim through taxation, or embargo upon his enemy. (or control supply upon its own citizen as an hidden tax)
Any finger pointing at Saddam Husseim for using this weapon is stupid. Any government would do that.

I would not be surprised about secret favor of companies given to the political body.
A planned economy would have changed nothing to this problem. As state need oil company runned by competent men. And competent men does not work when their incentives are robbed.

But US gov is the one in charge to push the war button. Not companies.
US Citizen have not elected an oil company to push the button. They hired the congress and the president, they are the one in charge, and the one that faulted.

I work without any compensation for the bitcoin community with my own time, own money, and own skill. And surely enough, I am not motivated by money.
Let's also note that the creation NBitcoin does not involve trading with parties, so money is not really needed for the project's scope.
Same thing with Sputnik, since the material was provided by gov and not by trade. But the result is that the project belongs to gov.
But, NBitcoin -my creation- is my property, open source, not the one of the government or any other.

If someone would say : "Now, NBitcoin belongs to me and you will work against some garanteed subsistance decided by me (in other word, more than what I earn currently)", I would not have put so much forces in the work, and the work that took 4 months to do would took 20.
What a shame of time and effort wasted. It would be a restriction imposed upon human expression.

No matter how legal it can be.
My labour and my wealth belongs to me, and I consider my responsibility to protect it from any elite or central planning.
And I hope that others will take such responsibility into their hands so I can trade with self driven, self supported, productive and authentic human. And not a bunch of whining bureaucrats not looking beyond their next pay check, wondering why "the world" goes bad because of "complex economic situation".

Property is a simple concept :
Something belongs to me if I a the only one that can trade it without consent. (In bitcoin, I own bitcoin only when I am the only on that get the private key)
Something belongs to us if we need multiple consent to trade it. (multi sig for bitcoin)

If somebody trade on behalf of me, then he owns it, so, to protect myself, some incentives must be in place to prevent betrayal. In a central planning, there is no such incentives to protect abuses from the state.

Very interesting how such simple definition of "property" can be so malleable in the mouth of a politician.
But the workers don't understand why at some times, their economy will vanish. Brain washed to blame companies rather than the behavior of the gov.

But it is easier to point finger at companies, since we can't we get a 100% detailed report on government spending and behavior (down to the thousand of $), yet companies are obliged to provide them.
Sure the workers can't blame the gov, because we can't proove their fraud, since they keep all secret.

And when we see the fraud through leaks, the leakers are demonized, and fraud moralized. I don't point finger at central planning for this, just for central authority that grant right to hide their behavior on behalf of "us". But they are not us.

The opposite is more nearly true, yet also false.

Your argument is known as "Luddite fallacy" and have been discussed many times in this thread. Unfortunately for you, there is no law of physics saying it will last forever!

No action will have much worse effect!

You don't need 100% automation to destroy capitalist economy. I think just 20% of permanent unemployment will be enough!

A prediction from 18 years ago proven wrong or at the least premature:

I disagree, the "new places to go" aren't restricted to land. When resources are freed up to move to new markets, often away from necessities which are now more abundant to recreation and luxuries, new markets open up. This has been happening almost constantly since the industrial revolution, and availability of land has almost nothing to do with it.

Just to give the Luddites a shiver up their spine ...

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-07/minimum-wage-hikers-worst-enemy-spotted-china

... and if you truly cannot see any new frontiers your imagination is as devoid as your faith in humanity ... try looking up?

When tech unemployment will hit hard desperate masses will simply pitchfork this "sane" person!