4 ms·
> I'd recommend a quick re-read of Adam Smith. on that note, didnt "free markets" originally mean "free of rents", not "free of any intervention", correct?
by andrekandre 5y ago
> I'd recommend a quick re-read of Adam Smith.
on that note, didnt "free markets" originally mean "free of rents", not "free of any intervention", correct?
- gibba999 5y agoI don't know history, but the Wikipedia definition is good: "In economics, a free market is 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." The "free" is on the forces of supply-and-demand, not a lack of regulations altogether (which is laissez-faire / anarchist). Wikipedia continues -- although with a bit of a non-sequitur in between, to explain that: "All of these fields emphasize the importance in currently existing market systems of rule-making institutions external to the simple forces of supply and demand which create space for those forces to operate to control productive output and distribution." Note that regulation is _external_ to supply-and-demand. It shouldn't interfere with the core concepts: - Economic equilibrium - Low barriers to entry - Competition - Spontaneous order - Supply and demand