> We are all nominally market economies "Nominally"? What planet do you live on? The definition of a market economy, in case you're unfamiliar with it, is an

> We are all nominally market economies "Nominally"? What planet do you live on? The definition of a market economy, in case you're unfamiliar with it, is an economic system in which decisions regarding resource allocation (including investment, production, and distribution) are determined by price signals created by supply and demand. In particular, the factors of production (land, labour, and capital) are guided by production markets, not government diktat. In other words, this is the bulk (greater part, vast majority) of all economic activity. > Typical medicare recipient blows through his entire lifetime contribution in two years. If this is true (I don't have a source for this claim), where do you think this money is coming from? > It is propped up through progressive taxation and gobs of public debt. Precisely... debt and taxes. Mostly taxes. > Medicare spending for 2017 was around $700B[0]. US healthcare spending for 2017 was $3.5T[1]. That's roughly 20% of the market. It is totally a socialist program. You seem to be confused about what socialism is. An economy with a social safety net is not the same as a socialist economy. The fact that Medicare comprises 20% of healthcare spending doesn't make the United States a socialist economy. (This is not even addressing the question of whether it would be better to have a less authoritarian system.) > As for post-secondary ed, when the whole thing is propped up through state and federal monies, what would happen to that market if it were limited to earned money, and cut off from other peoples' money? What do you think would happen? > This was Argentina's economic policy prior to the crash: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Menem#Economic_policy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Menem#Economic_policy You're dodging the question, so I'll repeat it: Can you point to the relevant liberalization policy which you think made the situation worse? > Most of these economic theories and belief systems are just cover for raw power. Quite the contrary. Economic policies have real-world consequences. There are strong theoretical and empirical reasons to believe that some economic policies are better than others. One would have to engage in some intense self-deception to believe that all economic policies are equally effective.