4 ms·

Could this just be a naming issue? I would argue that a totally free market (as opposed to a regulated competitive market) will systematically lead to monopolie

Could this just be a naming issue? I would argue that a totally free market (as opposed to a regulated competitive market) will systematically lead to monopolies and corruption. Maybe your definition of "free" is different from mine (and potentially the author's).

from-nibly 3y ago
A totally free market will lead to a regulated one in an attempt to create monopolies. Monopolies are created by regulation, not broken up by it.
- rickydroll 3y ago
  A truly free market has guardrails to prevent cheating such as monopolies, price fixing etc etc. The current fetishized free market is one of the avenues for monopoly creation. see Standard Oil, IBM, AT&T. In this kind of free market, if there is no outside influence such as government regulation or crowdsourced guillotines, the person with the most Capital will just buy up all the competitors and on the market. There are regulation-based monopolies are relatively rare. there are examples of natural monopolies such as cable companies using regulation to enhance the power of a natural monopoly. One important regulation-based Monopoly is the one created by patents and copyrights. one fix is to make patents automatically license-able under RAND https://mpeg-g.org/knowledge-base/what-is-a-rand-license-rand-terms/ https://mpeg-g.org/knowledge-base/what-is-a-rand-license-ran.... Inventor is rewarded, everyone gets to use it, pubic licensing terms.
safety1st 3y ago
I am using the definition which comes from Adam Smith and is generally accepted in classical economics. A free market is a market which approaches a state of perfect competition, if a monopoly exists within a market, it is by definition not a free market. To my knowledge there is no other generally accepted definition used by economists. I guess Republican politicians may use it differently, or something, but politicians are liars, practically everything politicians say is misinformation to some degree. Smith agreed with you that some free markets may naturally tend toward monopolization, how they are regulated is definitely one factor but it's a complex subject. Either way I can't imagine any definition of 'free market' which would apply to Boeing's primary markets in 2024, they are not free of regulation, they don't approach perfect competition, they are definitely un-free.
- raziel2p 3y ago
  I don't think Adam Smith defined this exactly, can you show me what you're referring to? I also think your description is very iffy. "A market which approaches a state of perfect competition" depends on what amount of competition you think is perfect. Furthermore, it could be achieved either through regulating or not regulating (depending on what you think "perfect" is), so the term doesn't really say anything about actual policies. The very intuitive meaning of free market is an unregulated one, IMO. I'm not able to find an ubiquitous or official definition, but most top google results lean in this direction. I do think that conflating the means (unregulated market) with the end goal (perfect competition market) into the term "free market" is a brilliant marketing move for free market advocates, but it's somewhat dishonest.
  - safety1st 3y ago
    My definition of perfect competition is not iffy. It is a well established term in economics. It's not a statement of value or opinion, it's a term that is already defined and its definition isn't up for debate. I appreciate your interest in the discipline of economics and there is a wealth of free knowledge available on the Internet, including the entire text of Wealth of Nations, about economic theory which you may find it interesting to read. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition

from-nibly 3y ago

A totally free market will lead to a regulated one in an attempt to create monopolies. Monopolies are created by regulation, not broken up by it.

rickydroll 3y ago
A truly free market has guardrails to prevent cheating such as monopolies, price fixing etc etc. The current fetishized free market is one of the avenues for monopoly creation. see Standard Oil, IBM, AT&T. In this kind of free market, if there is no outside influence such as government regulation or crowdsourced guillotines, the person with the most Capital will just buy up all the competitors and on the market. There are regulation-based monopolies are relatively rare. there are examples of natural monopolies such as cable companies using regulation to enhance the power of a natural monopoly. One important regulation-based Monopoly is the one created by patents and copyrights. one fix is to make patents automatically license-able under RAND https://mpeg-g.org/knowledge-base/what-is-a-rand-license-rand-terms/ https://mpeg-g.org/knowledge-base/what-is-a-rand-license-ran.... Inventor is rewarded, everyone gets to use it, pubic licensing terms.

safety1st 3y ago

I am using the definition which comes from Adam Smith and is generally accepted in classical economics. A free market is a market which approaches a state of perfect competition, if a monopoly exists within a market, it is by definition not a free market. To my knowledge there is no other generally accepted definition used by economists. I guess Republican politicians may use it differently, or something, but politicians are liars, practically everything politicians say is misinformation to some degree. Smith agreed with you that some free markets may naturally tend toward monopolization, how they are regulated is definitely one factor but it's a complex subject. Either way I can't imagine any definition of 'free market' which would apply to Boeing's primary markets in 2024, they are not free of regulation, they don't approach perfect competition, they are definitely un-free.

raziel2p 3y ago
I don't think Adam Smith defined this exactly, can you show me what you're referring to? I also think your description is very iffy. "A market which approaches a state of perfect competition" depends on what amount of competition you think is perfect. Furthermore, it could be achieved either through regulating or not regulating (depending on what you think "perfect" is), so the term doesn't really say anything about actual policies. The very intuitive meaning of free market is an unregulated one, IMO. I'm not able to find an ubiquitous or official definition, but most top google results lean in this direction. I do think that conflating the means (unregulated market) with the end goal (perfect competition market) into the term "free market" is a brilliant marketing move for free market advocates, but it's somewhat dishonest.
- safety1st 3y ago
  My definition of perfect competition is not iffy. It is a well established term in economics. It's not a statement of value or opinion, it's a term that is already defined and its definition isn't up for debate. I appreciate your interest in the discipline of economics and there is a wealth of free knowledge available on the Internet, including the entire text of Wealth of Nations, about economic theory which you may find it interesting to read. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition