Don't throw out 'all economist' argument when its not true. It is simply false the all economist believe in the marxist notion of automatic capital centralisati

Don't throw out 'all economist' argument when its not true. It is simply false the all economist believe in the marxist notion of automatic capital centralisation. There is also little evidence that economiclly freeer country are more unequal or that have a lower share of wealth amoung the poor. > It's not clear that this method has ever worked on a scale larger than a kibbutz or cooperative, but it's also clear that most families are run as communes, though this is rarely discussed. This is actually not rarly discussed. Capitalist thinkers like F.A. Hayek and Adam Smith did actually think about these problems quite carefully. Sadly people like him are simply ignored by much of the leftist marxist crowd becuase they are just evil capitalist handmaidens. If you read Adam Smith two books 'Wealth of Nation' and 'Theory of Moral Sentiment' it is quite clear how he fought about this. Hayek made this into a more coherent theory. As you abserve amoung familiy and friends (evne in tribes) we do not engadge in property rights and trade. The problem is that humans devloped in these communities and to attemed to scale the same way of thinking and organisation to a macro society is impossible because of information and insentive problems. Hayek makes distinction between micro cosmos and macro cosmos where in the small you would not want to run it like a market, but it would be equally damaging to attemped to apply the micro cosmos rules to macro cosmos. In fact psycology has made it perfectly clear that humans simply do not have the intellectual capacity to relate to millions of human that they don't know in anywhere close to the same way the do to the humans they know.