4 ms·

No, it does not. In fact, student emerging on the other side and being met with "sorry, no job for you" is a clear proof of free market not working. Free mar

No, it does not. In fact, student emerging on the other side and being met with "sorry, no job for you" is a clear proof of free market *not* working. Free market is not "everyone can do anything", that's somewhere between laissez faire and anarcho-capitalism. "Free market" is a theoretical model where goods, services, and, crucially, information flows freely. Or in more textbook definition, there exists perfect information symmetry. In a functional "free market" a student would know their employment prospects before they even submit application. EDIT, addendum: If we are talking doctors, the training takes 10 years (6 if you don't include specialist training), but that's a long time. So long that the environment itself could change dramatically, for whatever reason. Free market being free, could distort itself so much that perfect information symmetry does not translate over time. So how do you ensure that the information which was true before training remains true after training period even if the free market mutated itself and invalidated the information? Surprise, surprise, you get government to uphold the "freedom" of the market.

eru 2y ago
You have some weird straw man definition of 'free market'. Perhaps you should update the Wikipedia entry with your wisdom? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market What anonymous text books are you mentioning? Under certain circumstances it makes sense to study a model of markets with perfect information symmetry. But that's a very different (and much more restricted) term than 'free market'.
- friendzis 2y ago
  Let's read TFA, shall we? In "Criticism" section we find: > Critics of the free market also argue that it results in significant market dominance, inequality of bargaining power, or information asymmetry, in order to allow markets to function more freely. Clicking "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inequality_of_bargaining_power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inequality_of_bargaining_power" shows right at the introduction: > Inequality of bargaining power is generally thought to undermine the freedom of contract, resulting in a disproportionate level of freedom between parties, and that it represents a place at which markets fail. One could click on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_asymmetry#cite_note-11 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_asymmetry#cite_not... , to find: > Information asymmetry is in contrast to perfect information, which is a key assumption in neo-classical economics.[11] But that would require one more click to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_economics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_economics: > Neoclassical economics is an approach to economics in which the production, consumption, and valuation (pricing) of goods and services are observed as driven by the supply and demand model. > Under certain circumstances it makes sense to study a model of markets with perfect information symmetry. But that's a very different (and much more restricted) term than 'free market'. Again, that's exactly what "free market" is. Market that functions *solely* on interparty contracts is laissez faire. The key difference is that in laissez faire price equilibrium is a defining property, whereas in a free market price equilibrium is an expected emergent property if perfect information symmetry is maintained.
  - eru 2y ago
    > "Free market" is a theoretical model where goods, services, and, crucially, information flows freely. Or in more textbook definition, there exists perfect information symmetry. I was specifically referring this idiosyncratic definition. > The key difference is that in laissez faire price equilibrium is a defining property, whereas in a free market price equilibrium is an expected emergent property if perfect information symmetry is maintained. You are mixing up `if` and `iff`.

No, it does not. In fact, student emerging on the other side and being met with "sorry, no job for you" is a clear proof of free market *not* working. Free mar

eru 2y ago

You have some weird straw man definition of 'free market'. Perhaps you should update the Wikipedia entry with your wisdom? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market What anonymous text books are you mentioning? Under certain circumstances it makes sense to study a model of markets with perfect information symmetry. But that's a very different (and much more restricted) term than 'free market'.

friendzis 2y ago
Let's read TFA, shall we? In "Criticism" section we find: > Critics of the free market also argue that it results in significant market dominance, inequality of bargaining power, or information asymmetry, in order to allow markets to function more freely. Clicking "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inequality_of_bargaining_power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inequality_of_bargaining_power" shows right at the introduction: > Inequality of bargaining power is generally thought to undermine the freedom of contract, resulting in a disproportionate level of freedom between parties, and that it represents a place at which markets fail. One could click on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_asymmetry#cite_note-11 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_asymmetry#cite_not... , to find: > Information asymmetry is in contrast to perfect information, which is a key assumption in neo-classical economics.[11] But that would require one more click to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_economics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_economics: > Neoclassical economics is an approach to economics in which the production, consumption, and valuation (pricing) of goods and services are observed as driven by the supply and demand model. > Under certain circumstances it makes sense to study a model of markets with perfect information symmetry. But that's a very different (and much more restricted) term than 'free market'. Again, that's exactly what "free market" is. Market that functions *solely* on interparty contracts is laissez faire. The key difference is that in laissez faire price equilibrium is a defining property, whereas in a free market price equilibrium is an expected emergent property if perfect information symmetry is maintained.
- eru 2y ago
  > "Free market" is a theoretical model where goods, services, and, crucially, information flows freely. Or in more textbook definition, there exists perfect information symmetry. I was specifically referring this idiosyncratic definition. > The key difference is that in laissez faire price equilibrium is a defining property, whereas in a free market price equilibrium is an expected emergent property if perfect information symmetry is maintained. You are mixing up `if` and `iff`.