2 ms·

The fact that one experiment went wrong does not a bad theory make... there are many variables to be accounted for in a complex system such as this. I respectf

The fact that one experiment went wrong does not a bad theory make... there are many variables to be accounted for in a complex system such as this. I respectfully, but completely disagree with you on the fact that free market economics is morally defensible, there isn't really any conscience behind it, just an overriding aim (i.e. profit) ... as for independently acting agents, I assume you mean various corporations, financial institutions, and government bodies... Again, I disagree, they all have a degree of interdependence and are centrally bound by regulations, and central banks, which exist whether we like it or not ... As a disclaimer, I consider myself a liberal centrist with both libertarian and social democratic leanings.

roel_v 16y ago
Free market economics is the only defensible system on the grounds that any other system will necessarily infringe on individual freedoms. A free market in itself is morally neutral, what I meant is that a free market is the only system that does not rely on forcing individuals to act 'for the greater good'; sacrificing free people to the ideals, beliefs or whims of others is what I consider immoral. Agents in a free market system act independently, pursuing their own benefit; be it corporations or individual consumers. Yes they interact in the sense that it takes two (or more) parties to trade or make contracts, what I mean is that they act for themselves and not coordinate on a mass scale to make the resulting system in a certain direction. Agents exhibit behavior that consists of simple profit-seeking rules, which in turn generates a system dynamic on the macro scale. Their independence lies in their freedom to behave in their own self-interest, in contrast with a centrally planned economy where individuals are told to do or produce as is deemed fit by the central command.

roel_v 16y ago

Free market economics is the only defensible system on the grounds that any other system will necessarily infringe on individual freedoms. A free market in itself is morally neutral, what I meant is that a free market is the only system that does not rely on forcing individuals to act 'for the greater good'; sacrificing free people to the ideals, beliefs or whims of others is what I consider immoral. Agents in a free market system act independently, pursuing their own benefit; be it corporations or individual consumers. Yes they interact in the sense that it takes two (or more) parties to trade or make contracts, what I mean is that they act for themselves and not coordinate on a mass scale to make the resulting system in a certain direction. Agents exhibit behavior that consists of simple profit-seeking rules, which in turn generates a system dynamic on the macro scale. Their independence lies in their freedom to behave in their own self-interest, in contrast with a centrally planned economy where individuals are told to do or produce as is deemed fit by the central command.