it's largely an academic discussion I differ on that subject, one of the reasons that we are where we are is that people don't take the time to properly analyz

it's largely an academic discussion I differ on that subject, one of the reasons that we are where we are is that people don't take the time to properly analyze what we are, if people lack the fundamental understanding that we do not have a capitalist market, to the extent that they complain about said capitalism then it is a huge issue. It shows that they have largely been successful in convincing the people that what we have meets the definition of the title, to the extent that even the blanket terms are accepted for something that it clearly is not. He's talking about the byproducts of the mania for deregulation in the name of the free market that's been a hallmark of the rhetoric of the right the US for decades. Yes and that was my point, they are not anti-regulation they are just anti-regulation for the insiders and both sides are just as guilty of it. They may preach the platform, but in practice they do not apply it across the board. Hence they pick the winners and looser by only being anti-regulation when it conveniently creates barriers to entry by anyone other than established players. As such, my post was very relevant to the article and it is not capitalism. What the author dislikes is corporatism which is the definition and title of what we have. Don't let details distract for the actual topic of discussion here. They matter, but not so much that they warrant ignoring the original complaint. I think you have misread my original post, the information was very relevant to the topic. I was not ignoring the complainant but rather highlighting that we do not have a capitalist system and his and our redress is to return to true capitalism which will only come about by people understanding that we are indeed not a capitalist economy.