It's about control and freedom isn't it? If the economy is run by just a few oligarchs, mega corps. Then there really is no longer freedom to be mobile and the

It's about control and freedom isn't it? If the economy is run by just a few oligarchs, mega corps. Then there really is no longer freedom to be mobile and the 'work somewhere else' arguments are gone, then the market breaks down and wages are no longer free floating based a supply/demand basis. And typically, free markets tend towards monopolies, unless there is push back, some anti-competitive laws to break up big companies, or stop them from forming (like Ticketmaster). To keep injecting competition. Because big corps, really don't like competition, and lobby against it. But in todays environment, anybody standing in the way of big corps getting bigger, are called communist. Any argument at all that capitalism should be regulated, and you are called communist. Really, any argument for employees having any rights, is communist. So yes, " Did the market cause such desperate circumstances in the first place?" , Yes, if un-regulated, it does lead to these circumstances. Though, honestly, I'm not sure where you are coming from. You seem to bring in Entropy sarcastically, but also it sounds like maybe you are leaning into the E/ACC arguments. There is no good/bad, just survival of the fittest, and Pure Free Markets are a form of Entropy that we can't stop and should stop trying. Maybe. I do tend to agree that efficient markets are most productive (efficient doesn't mean un-regulated chaos freedom). Efficient markets can have losers, and at that point it does seem that for overall productivity of a society, social programs actually help efficiencies (healthy and educated workers are more productive). But, of course, education and health care are communist, and we can't have that. I'm really not sure what the free market game plan is if everyone is sick and can't read. Where do the E/ACC people think they will get all of these dedicated educated people.