Is free market even possible?
Possible Yes. Beneficial for anyone except rich? No
why yes goyim.
Pre-industrial age US is probably the closest to completely free market that I can think of.
Only in isolation.
Rummage sales are basically it. Cash for product no interference.
it's not like the current system doesn't greatly benefit the rich, they can fuck off billions of dollars and the government will bail them out aka give them dollar for dollar the amount they already stole
Trips of truth
It is, but the drawback is that it will have larger consequences as far as long term debt cycles are concerned. This is due to a central bank less capable to intervene financially by changing interest rates and in other ways intervene financially.
On the flip side, a free market economy is much more capable to deal with the short term debt cycles, leading to a much less volatile economy over a 50-100 or so year period.
Yeah US is completely controlled by lobbyists and capitalism. Regulated Markets work pretty well here
No. Small competing companies in a completely free market are powerless against monopolies. Only regulations can limit them.
Not with (((bankers and economists))) meddling to get their pound of flesh and high numbers
Ironically a free market is only possible under very controlled circumstances
Yes. In theory.
Problem is, most people are too stupid to understand the underlying basis for it.
The idea that individuals have the right to live for themselves, is more than 250 years old, it is taught in schools and enshrined within the american founding documents and yet it is still not understood by the masses.
How is a monopoly achieved within a free market?
How does one become rich within a free market?
What keeps him rich within a free market?
It's the other way around. Large companies uses influence over the political system inhibits the growth of small and medium companies. "Free" markets makes private investment more important and decreases the importance of government regulation and financing.
Not that government financing doesn't have its benifits; but it is limited to a few sectors and in 99% of cases, the winners are the large corporations.
This is a typical ONE LINER slide thread. If you respond unironically to slide threads in any receptive way you are a Kikeshill.
Mods please ban every poster who uses one line posts because at this point they are all Jewniggers. Make the Jew work for its shekels. They crapflood Sup Forums because they are afraid. They should be.
Free market is only possible with sound money... What we have now isn't even a valid attempt at a free market...
>Pre-industrial age US is probably the closest to completely free market that I can think of.
Pre-industrial age markets were capitalistic-monarchies. Means of production were controlled by a few just like modern day capitalism.
>This is a typical ONE LINER slide thread.
Shut up faggot. I was quiet because I wanted others to discuss. Now it's time to tear you open a new asshole.
>Regulated Markets work pretty well here
But regulated markets by definition are not free.
>Ironically a free market is only possible under very controlled circumstances
>only possible under very controlled circumstances
>very controlled circumstances
What's the definition of free market?
No it isnt. Not in the modern world on a scale larger than a small town. A regulated market is not free, and in the absence of regulation, collusion offers a more attractive risk to reward ratio than competition. Most corporate CEOs are risk averse by nature. If they can just call up their competition and work a deal to fix prices, wages, and throttle product improvements/innovation to a preset agreed upon schedule, they all win. We get the illusion of competition, they share a scotch, and laugh at all the plebes.
"very controlled circumstances..."
user is correct.
The masses do not yet and likely are incapable of understanding the concept of a free market.
At the same time, there will always be certain interests who will attempt to undermine a system powerful enough to wield force.
So long as A government that has the power to protect a nation state exists, it will inevitably fall to the influence of one or the other.
Therefore -though it is not a sure thing - the only way to ensure the freedom of the market and the rights of the individual, is to have a free market zealot with total dictatorial control of the state apparatus, long enough for the natural evolutionary pressures of the free market to breed a better populous, capable of understanding the necessity of a free market.
Until then - there is no chance. Aside from the Zombie apocalypse.
>Is such a thing even possible?
>Therefore -though it is not a sure thing - the only way to ensure the freedom of the market and the rights of the individual, is to have a free market zealot with total dictatorial control of the state apparatus, long enough for the natural evolutionary pressures of the free market to breed a better populous, capable of understanding the necessity of a free market.
I get this, but the problem is that the same evolutionary forces that give rise to humans who prefer to have a free market, naturally and genetically, could also give rise to individuals to undermine the free market.
So say your dictator comes and maintains a free market. He chooses a successor who does the same. This goes on for two millenia and via natural selection only individuals who prefer a free market now exist. The dictatorial oversight stops.
However, evolution won't stop. Now that everyone prefers a free market, what's the next evolution - it is to produce a genetic mutation that ensures there is some individual who doesn't prefer the free market and who tries to subvert it via information asymmetry.
And mind you, evolution will keep producing this mutation since there's no other way to win in a society full of people who prefer a free market.
And they don't collude with the government? Which is why corporations even fucking exist? Look up what a corporation is kid.
BANK FOR INTERNATIONAL SETTLEMENTS
>inb4 quantitative easing and fractional reserve cheerleader jew
>On the flip side, a free market economy is much more capable to deal with the short term debt cycles, leading to a much less volatile economy over a 50-100 or so year period.
The opposite is true.
I appreciate your thoughts.
Your underlying position is correct. It is true that evolution will continue and mutations will inexorably seek to exploit resources, however I think there is more to consider.
Have you considered the tangential relationship between tech and morality?
It is no accident that it has taken millions of years to reach the concept of the individual. This is not because it wasnt understood here and there, but because the incredibly tiny minority that could even conceptualize it, had no power to ensure its survival.
It is only through invention, with particular regard to the ability to adequately defend, this precious idea, that it has been able to take hold.
And now that it has taken hold, the tools necessary to ensure its survival are being and would continue to be developed with in the free market being discussed.
I believe, that through technology and the freedom that allows for it, there would be too many tools available to both detect and isolate such a subversive mutation as the one you describe.
here in seattle the min wage raised to $15 hr with no inflation.
conservashits give everyone a payday loan (temp tax cut) by borrowing 1.5 trillion: inflation skyrockets.
your shit ideology always fails. you losers are always wrong.