[daniel-s]

This is really cynical.

You live in a society where almost everyone goes to work to produce something that they will not directly consume.

Humans figured out a way to organise everyone and get them to work cooperatively, it's the free market.

In fact, it couldn't work any other way. Suppose you had 100% altruism and everyone wanted to promote the "greater good". You wouldn't ever know how to direct people towards that greater good. You need prices to drive production.

[amelius]

Ugh. The free market and the overconsumption that it promotes through advertisements will drive us to self destruction.

[M95D]

I doubt that free market drives people toward "greater good". What is "greater good" anyway? Can you give some examples of "greater good" and how the free market achieved it?

BTW, no market is truly free, not unless it allows fakes, quack medicine, child labor, selling humans, or other horrors of the past.

[skulk]

Like how the creation of the cotton gin totally freed up the time that laborers previously had to spend separating cottonseeds out to do more fun things. Things really improved for laborers in general after such inventions flowed through the free market.

[M95D]

Your "greater good" is not that great. Let me give some counterexamples:

- Sanitation: it's still done with public funding, no free marker will ever build a new sewer or water treatment plant.

- Medicine & vaccines: they're still developed by public funding and the incentives are the prestige and altruism of the researchers, not their income.

- Electricity: public investments everywhere.

- Roads & rail: No free market will ever create a highway, or even a secondary road. May I laugh about the rail "free market" / private investments?

- Food safety: achieved with laws and public funded inspection agencies.

You may argue that the free market expanded the internet. It seems small, doesn't it?

[skulk]

To be clear, I agree with you. I was sarcastically hinting at slavery to highlight that increases in productivity may not actually be for the greater good.

[daniel-s]

Violence and fraud has nothing to do with freedom. This is a red herring.

[toss1]

No, it has everything to do with it.

Every 'free' market is regulated. There is no such thing as a totally free market. The essential point is that "The Free Market" is a bullshirt concept.

The closest thing to a totally free market is the dark web, where you can buy/sell almost anything, but even that market starts to self-regulate with vigilantes highlighting & punishing fraud, etc.

More realistic markets start by banning many kinds of goids and services, and ways to do business - just because it seems obvious you can't sell murder services doesn't mean the market is unregulated.

Similarly, can't sell addictive drugs; still serms free, right? Ok, I've come uo with a great cheap way to make Insulin; it'll save thousands of lives and take over the market, but nope, can't sell it without proper licenses and inspections, etc. Market is still free, right?

Now I have a great gardening method to make cheap & nutritious vegetables without pesticides - I want to label it "Organic"; nope, in many markets, need proper certification to use that label, and i certainly need to meet food sales standards to sell it at all. Sparkling Wine? Can't call it "Champagne" unless it is certified from a certain region in France. At a farmstand in England, they cannot sell anything not made within a 25km radius. Investment Banks in the US are currently forbidden to take retail / individual personsv deposits, and banks that do are barred from many types of investment activities. Etc. etc., etc.

The point is that ALL actual markets are regulated, the question (and arguments) are about who regulates the markets and what kinds of regulations are appropriate.

The "Free Market" is a nonsense theoretical construct that does more harm than good.