How do Socialists respond to the Austrian School's "economic calculation problem" criticism?

[j p]

I have to respond to Nokilleye's long, and honestly absurd post. First, let me say that I am not bashing her personally. I respect her, although her opinions are, frankly, bizarre in some cases. Like this one. To say that the value of anything can be scientifically and objectively ascertained is ridiculous. "Value" cannot be objectively determined because it is, in itself, a subjective measure. To say that the value of an apple is always an apple is merely circular reasoning which gets us nowhere. And to say that an apple is not worth more because a group of superstitious idiots merely supposes its worth is a direct contradiction of the definition of "value." A thing is worth whatever people think it's worth, and the measure of that worth is what the market will pay for it, not what a group of scientists determines is its "objective" value. Let's take the diamonds vs. water example. Leaving scientific and industrial uses aside, diamonds have very little "objective" value. Water, on the other hand, is absolutely essential for life. Why, then, do diamonds cost so much more than water? Our socialist friends might claim this is only an artifact of some mass hysteria. That the "idiots" have vastly miscalculated the actual worth of diamonds and are being duped by their own superstitions. Nonsense. Diamonds are worth more: (A) because they are relatively rare, and (B) because people want them for whatever reason. And for that reason, they're expensive. More expensive than water. If we are to buy into the reasoning Nokilleye advances, who then determines what is produced, and who gets what? Frankly, I don't want a system where a rarefied group of "scientists" is making determinations as to the value of all things, and imposing it on the rest of us. Perhaps I am one of the superstious "idiots" that she refers to. But dammit, if I want diamonds, and I'm willing to work for them that should be my choice, not hers.