> and people can more or less transact as they please Capitalism and free market are not the same thing. In capitalism, the labor is a commodity sold on a free

> and people can more or less transact as they please Capitalism and free market are not the same thing. In capitalism, the labor is a commodity sold on a free market and significant amount of capital is privately owned. Either of these can be considered morally wrong even if we otherwise accept the premise of the free markets. Can people transact "as they please" if huge chunks of economy are already owned by a very small minority? I don't think so. It seems to me (which is also pretty much basic Marx) that there is a contradiction between "transact as you please" and large scale private ownership. > But my gripe with the current world is more that things don't cost what they cost Yeah, economic externalities. But isn't that, again, the consequence of people "transacting as they please"? Some people will simply think in the short term. What time horizon is gonna win in pricing, if people "transact as they please"?