4 ms·

"Free Trade" is similar to freedom of speech. While arbitrary checks are damaging, there have to be rules to inhibit the abuse. "Let the market run free and eve

"Free Trade" is similar to freedom of speech. While arbitrary checks are damaging, there have to be rules to inhibit the abuse. "Let the market run free and everything will be right" sounds good in theory, but that implies that we will be better off without anti-trust laws, and minimum wage rules. In that case, what would stop companies from colluding to fix prices? It's easy to derive another conclusion from your premise. It'll create market inefficiency, which will allow other promising companies to compete, which can potentially raise the quality of the end-result. Possibly, Infosys' customers could be better served by more competent engineering force.

hackuser 10y ago
> "Let the market run free and everything will be right" sounds good in theory, but that implies that we will be better off without anti-trust laws, and minimum wage rules. I agree; it should not be taken to an extreme and I didn't mean it in an ideological sense. But there is value to 'free' market competition; it's a useful tool and also provides freedom, in the sense of liberty, a core value of our society. Government intimidation of businesses is almost always a bad solution to the problems; law and regulation are democratic and much more just. Infosys isn't the first - remember the businesses whom Trump claims to have intimidated about their factory locations. > It'll create market inefficiency, which will allow other promising companies to compete, which can potentially raise the quality of the end-result. Fundamentally, that's not the result of inefficiency. It's called "inefficient" because it costs more for worse outcomes. It's a very predictable, well-tested outcome.