[globular-toast]

"Free market" is one of the best examples of a technical term people use with complete confidence despite not knowing what it really means. Furthermore, even if you do know what it means you probably remember it as something you learnt on day 1 of economics class before learning all the reasons they never really exist and what governments try to do about that.

[valval]

I’ve studied economics for years and I’m still of the opinion that the only government intervention to the market should be breaking monopolies and cartels. I’m waiting for a piece of literature that would convince me otherwise, maybe you could provide one?

[globular-toast]

I can't, but I'm curious how you think problems like externalities would sort themselves out. Also what about natural monopolies like utilities and infrastructure that can't really be broken up?

[valval]

I think humans are excellent survivors. I don’t lose sleep over externalities because of that alone. What I mean by that is that once people realise their daily lives are being affected by a negative externality, they start making decisions that alleviate that hardship.

I do recognise though that it’s an unsolved problem, and will lead to some form of regulation as our understanding is lacking.

I think only harmful monopolies should be broken up by force, since they’re a legitimate market force. I’m conceding some ground on that because I’m not prepared to claim that monopolies aren’t always harmless.