Free market impossible?

[The Conservative]

Depends on your definition of "free market". No regulations or government oversight could start out as free market, then devolve into plutocracy, as money and power concentrate within the largest conglomerates.

Maybe an open market is possible, where it's easy to trade, but still restricted by tariffs where they're necessary.

The extreme market liberalists and the communists are both wrong, for the same reasons, as they fail to take into consideration the Pareto-principle, humanity, and its consequences. The free market didn't help the Irish a lot during the potato famine, they still were a net exporter of food, while the population starved.

Free market is great for developing consumer products and consumerism, where the products aren't necessary for life and liberty, but it very often fails in food production, infrastructure and health.

So if we have an open market, what would keep it from being corrupted like our market is today?

[Speaker to Animals]

How do you think regulations and market controls come about? When a plurality of voters decide something isn't going their way, they just vote it their way. You cannot have a free market under such circumstances. Eventually people are going to say fuck it it doesn't work we need to control it through the democratic process.

There could be good reasons for that too. To argue on the side of democracy for a minute, the fact that democracies tend towards market regulations should indicate to you that totally unrestrained markets are at least perceived by most people as not being beneficial to their nations. Everywhere.

The only way you can have a free market, in my opinion, is if the decision-making process is not popularized. That is, there exists some kind of ruling class that makes the decisions, and they are in favor of a free market over what most people perceive as their best interests. But what ruling class would do that?? None that I can think of, unless we are talking about a bizarro world where libertarians become a ruling class and impose an unrestrained market upon all of society whether they like it or not.

Is my text not showing up?

Limited Government

What part of that don't you seem to understand? Limited in size and power, in other words ½ the size it is now, and power limitations based off of constitutional law.

In English, Congress, POTUS and the Judicial all keep each other as constitutionally demanded of them.

The regulations would be there, but nothing beyond what is constitutionally allowed...

I wonder if my text is showing up.

YOU CANNOT HAVE LIMITED GOVERNMENT IN A DEMOCRACY.

[The Conservative]

How do you think regulations and market controls come about? When a plurality of voters decide something isn't going their way, they just vote it their way. You cannot have a free market under such circumstances. Eventually people are going to say fuck it it doesn't work we need to control it through the democratic process.

There could be good reasons for that too. To argue on the side of democracy for a minute, the fact that democracies tend towards market regulations should indicate to you that totally unrestrained markets are at least perceived by most people as not being beneficial to their nations. Everywhere.

The only way you can have a free market, in my opinion, is if the decision-making process is not popularized. That is, there exists some kind of ruling class that makes the decisions, and they are in favor of a free market over what most people perceive as their best interests. But what ruling class would do that?? None that I can think of, unless we are talking about a bizarro world where libertarians become a ruling class and impose an unrestrained market upon all of society whether they like it or not.

Is my text not showing up?

Limited Government

What part of that don't you seem to understand? Limited in size and power, in other words ½ the size it is now, and power limitations based off of constitutional law.

In English, Congress, POTUS and the Judicial all keep each other as constitutionally demanded of them.

The regulations would be there, but nothing beyond what is constitutionally allowed...

I wonder if my text is showing up.

YOU CANNOT HAVE LIMITED GOVERNMENT IN A DEMOCRACY.

We did until working in DC became a year round job.

[Speaker to Animals]

Is my text not showing up?

Limited Government

What part of that don't you seem to understand? Limited in size and power, in other words ½ the size it is now, and power limitations based off of constitutional law.

In English, Congress, POTUS and the Judicial all keep each other as constitutionally demanded of them.

The regulations would be there, but nothing beyond what is constitutionally allowed...

I wonder if my text is showing up.

YOU CANNOT HAVE LIMITED GOVERNMENT IN A DEMOCRACY.

We did until working in DC became a year round job.

So between 1787 and 1789.

Democracy is antithetical to limited government. The constitution was a fair attempt, but it didn't work out.

[The Conservative]

I wonder if my text is showing up.

YOU CANNOT HAVE LIMITED GOVERNMENT IN A DEMOCRACY.

We did until working in DC became a year round job.

So between 1787 and 1789.

Democracy is antithetical to limited government. The constitution was a fair attempt, but it didn't work out.

It was that way a lot longer than a few years.

When politicians went home and did their farms, etc they dealt with the repercussions of their actions.

Today, not so much.