3 ms·

The market is a solution to a problem (or perhaps a set of problems). In the example of in the grandparent's post, that solution does not adequately deal with t

The market is a solution to a problem (or perhaps a set of problems). In the example of in the grandparent's post, that solution does not adequately deal with the problem at hand. This makes it a bad solution. Even if we can't think of a better solution right now, we shouldn't stick our collective heads in the sand when we notice errors in our current approach. Highlighting errors is important, because even if we can't fix them right now, we may be able to in the future. If we don't know about the flaws in our current approach, it it impossible to even attempt to think of ways to improve them.

jacques_chester 14y ago
The market is an emergent phenomenon. It's not a designed institution. Hayek talks about this misattribution as the root cause of a lot of misunderstanding. People do think of ways to adjust for things about the market that they don't like. Those adjustments are generally imposed from outside by force of law and quite a few of them are later modified or removed because they had seriously unpleasant side-effects (such as the total disappearance of a market). Being angry at an emergent phenomenon like markets is like being angry at the weather, or upset about evolution. It's pointless.
- ordinary 14y ago
  There are certainly aspects of our market economy that are emergent. Trade is as old as humanity itself, but not all aspects of the economy are so old, nor as immutable. The modern corporation, for example, is a relatively new invention. Depending on your definition, anywhere between a few centuries and a few decades old. Compared to the time scale on which human evolution has taken place, that's practically nothing. In those decades or centuries, we and our ancestors have chosen particular shapes for our economy. Not all of those choices are final. Whether the choices that influenced this particular example can be changed, I don't know, nor do I feel qualified to hazard a guess. However, I stand by my original point: it makes no sense to refuse to consider how we might improve the system.
  - jacques_chester 14y ago
    Modern humans have never refused to consider how to improve everything. But it is important to realise when we're licked. We can't solve the TSP in linear time, we can't travel faster than light and it looks like -- in both theory and practice -- markets are better at solving economic problems than planned alternatives.

jacques_chester 14y ago

The market is an emergent phenomenon. It's not a designed institution. Hayek talks about this misattribution as the root cause of a lot of misunderstanding. People do think of ways to adjust for things about the market that they don't like. Those adjustments are generally imposed from outside by force of law and quite a few of them are later modified or removed because they had seriously unpleasant side-effects (such as the total disappearance of a market). Being angry at an emergent phenomenon like markets is like being angry at the weather, or upset about evolution. It's pointless.

ordinary 14y ago
There are certainly aspects of our market economy that are emergent. Trade is as old as humanity itself, but not all aspects of the economy are so old, nor as immutable. The modern corporation, for example, is a relatively new invention. Depending on your definition, anywhere between a few centuries and a few decades old. Compared to the time scale on which human evolution has taken place, that's practically nothing. In those decades or centuries, we and our ancestors have chosen particular shapes for our economy. Not all of those choices are final. Whether the choices that influenced this particular example can be changed, I don't know, nor do I feel qualified to hazard a guess. However, I stand by my original point: it makes no sense to refuse to consider how we might improve the system.
- jacques_chester 14y ago
  Modern humans have never refused to consider how to improve everything. But it is important to realise when we're licked. We can't solve the TSP in linear time, we can't travel faster than light and it looks like -- in both theory and practice -- markets are better at solving economic problems than planned alternatives.