Ok. I will define why the market is perfect or nearly perfect: it is a free interchange between parts. No coercion exists in an exchange. As for buyer and sell

Ok. I will define why the market is perfect or nearly perfect: it is a free interchange between parts. No coercion exists in an exchange. As for buyer and seller. Buying is the action of purchasing a product of service. Trying to get a service cheaper under coercion is a bad thing. Trying to sell it more expensive... will not work in the presence of alternatives. If no alternatives exist and no regulation is artificially shrinking the market, how can u go set a price for the seller? that would be coercitive and clearly baf, after all if they r the only ones able to produce the service (in absence of absurd regulations) and people buy it it is bc they give it the same or more value of the purchase price Third parties putting conditions (a triangular relationship where it should be binary, the third party does not pay cost just sets a rule because yes wothout paying any cost). Given these premises, in order to satisfy your need you have two options: choose an alternative or produce it yourself. After all, if you want something in the first place it is bc there is value in it. How come you want someone go to pint guns at them? No way! Regulations usually shrink the market and create artificial monopolies. Those people who force monopolies are interventors who also have incentives, and sometimes way more perverse than the producers, which create some wellness for the others. So you create a system where the person produces something has to play under the rules of the ones who produce things for others and where the regulators (persons not producing goods or services) pay no cost for it! That is absurd under any sensible view!!! That is why you cannot just say that the market is bad. The only limit to the market should be negative externalities. And even those create a market incentive from the seller to not do things that afe negative. The buyer could choose an alternative. But if they do not and noone claims damage, after all people maybe do not care as much for that as those third party interventionists continuously claim, right? Otherwise you would hear them...