[Apocryphon]

> Free market types aren't against private investors throwing private money

They're free to do so, but isn't it cheating when it undercuts competitors while propping up unsustainable businesses in the long run? Subsidies that support predatory pricing don't sound fair.

[robertlagrant]

Cheating at what? If you sell me your house for $1 then have you "cheated" all the other house sellers? What have you accomplished by this "cheating"?

[ElevenLathe]

Libertarianism treats the market as a game when it suits (i.e. when other people are "cheating") and as a natural law the rest of the time (i.e. when other people want to change the already-artificial rules of the game via politics).

[robertlagrant]

I don't quite follow why you're saying that, but as per my brief previous comment, I'm not saying it's a natural law, nor a game.

[ElevenLathe]

Sorry, I thought you were implicitly calling it as a game (which is IMO the correct and true view), since cheating can only happen in a game where there are established rules.

[robertlagrant]

Not particularly; I think you can call almost anything a game if you like. But I don't think it's especially a game, nor a natural law.

I don't see why anyone would characterise some people choosing to spend and lose their money as "cheating".