|
|
|
|
|
by nickpp
641 days ago
|
|
No idea what you are talking about. > market where the people with the biggest guns can coerce That is not a free market - free markets require rule of law to function. > governing body only allow a single person to treat ill people That is a heavily regulated market. Indeed, the less regulation on a market, the better it works. Not idea what all this has to do with "fair" or what "fair markets" are. |
|
A free market has two core properties: Supply and demand decides pricing and voluntary exchanges.
Down stream effects of these two are:
1. We need competition to have choice: Only have a single search provider and a single social network does not give that. 2. We need to have fair compensation to have voluntary exchanges: People who need money might involuntarily go into a labor contract to stay alive. 3. ... I am sure you can expand on this list yourself.
> Free markets on the other hand have already devised pretty effective ways to measure value and allocate resources.
It is very well established that there exist no free market: "While no pure free market economies actually exist ..." - https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/freemarket.asp.
What you are discussing is pure politics and has nothing to do with any discourse of "scientific" economics - which indeed is what I tried to refuse to go into by saying that we can think about these things in silence.
However, if we do talk about economic freedom, then it seems like the US is on a 25th place over taken by more than 10 EU countries - all with foundational systems that are pro regulation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom