5 ms·

> Government intervention is constantly needed to keep a free market in balance "Constant government intervention" is incompatible with the definition (literal

> Government intervention is constantly needed to keep a free market in balance "Constant government intervention" is incompatible with the definition (literally) of a free market.

pessimizer 6y ago
Only the kind of free market that has no rules against fraud and robbery.
ClumsyPilot 6y ago
This is just daft, is your idea of free markets the drug cartels of columbia? Because thats what you get wuthoit government intervention
- nickysielicki 6y ago
  Hey, if you don't like free markets, that's fine, I'll respect your opinion. I'm just saying that: Oxford defines a free market as: "an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses." Wikipedia defines it as: "a system in which the prices for goods and services are self-regulated by buyers and sellers negotiating in an open market. In a free market, the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government or other authority, and from all forms of economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities." Investopedia defines it as: "an economic system based on supply and demand with little or no government control." Words have meaning, god damn it.
  - munk-a 6y ago
    But that's just folks giving the benefit of the doubt to your earlier statement - the technical definition of a free market is incompatible with our modern society.
  - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
    Words do have a meaning, so tell me what is "unrestricted competition"? Because columbian cartels think it means murdering your competitor along with his family. Is that too unrestricted for you? Okay, let's leave out murder. How about paying random people to leave bad reviews for your competitors. Or paying shops so they don't stock competitors products. Or agreeing with banks that your competitor should not get a loan. Or making a deal with railroads where they will only transport your product, and not your competitors? Because all of the above have happened. Is that "unrestricted"?
smolder 6y ago
Anarchical, intervention-less markets are where cartels and monopolies form and destroy competition, and then there stops being anything free about it. By that strict definition of free markets, they are ephemeral, self-defeating things.

> Government intervention is constantly needed to keep a free market in balance "Constant government intervention" is incompatible with the definition (literally) of a free market.

pessimizer 6y ago

Only the kind of free market that has no rules against fraud and robbery.

ClumsyPilot 6y ago

This is just daft, is your idea of free markets the drug cartels of columbia? Because thats what you get wuthoit government intervention

nickysielicki 6y ago
Hey, if you don't like free markets, that's fine, I'll respect your opinion. I'm just saying that: Oxford defines a free market as: "an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses." Wikipedia defines it as: "a system in which the prices for goods and services are self-regulated by buyers and sellers negotiating in an open market. In a free market, the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government or other authority, and from all forms of economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities." Investopedia defines it as: "an economic system based on supply and demand with little or no government control." Words have meaning, god damn it.
- munk-a 6y ago
  But that's just folks giving the benefit of the doubt to your earlier statement - the technical definition of a free market is incompatible with our modern society.
- ClumsyPilot 6y ago
  Words do have a meaning, so tell me what is "unrestricted competition"? Because columbian cartels think it means murdering your competitor along with his family. Is that too unrestricted for you? Okay, let's leave out murder. How about paying random people to leave bad reviews for your competitors. Or paying shops so they don't stock competitors products. Or agreeing with banks that your competitor should not get a loan. Or making a deal with railroads where they will only transport your product, and not your competitors? Because all of the above have happened. Is that "unrestricted"?

smolder 6y ago

Anarchical, intervention-less markets are where cartels and monopolies form and destroy competition, and then there stops being anything free about it. By that strict definition of free markets, they are ephemeral, self-defeating things.