reply to post by NadaCambia
I am sorry, but I stand by my original reply to you. Despite your insistence that you did not say this or say that, it is exactly what you said.
There are two choices. A free market that is controlled by everyone or a controlled market that is controlled by a few. Saying no to a free market
is saying yes to a controlled market. Despite you saying otherwise, if you don't support a free market, you support government intervention,
Anarchist, though you may claim to be.
Please explain to me that which isn't a free market and doesn't require the control by the self interest of a few?
You assume that when one person succeeds another person has to fail for that to occur. You deny that another person can benefit from any else's
success? How does that make any sense, I can succeed and bring hundreds with me.
You admit that "The Free Market will bring Economic freedom and prosperity." yet deny that will bring happiness.
So what will bring happiness? If a person has freedom and prosperity, happiness will come soon enough or not at all. what is your solution that is
better than free markets?
Asking for an economic system to provide happiness is going a bit too far.
You say "In fact, conditions were that bad that a good percent of the population were begging for Socialism or Communism."
What is a good percent to you? What is the percent? Where is your proof that a free market was the cause of there problems and anything else was a
solution. Your history is faulty, but I will play along.
You say "This idea of competition and the line of thinking that says if you put the effort in you'll live well and prosper, it's foolish and borders
on a lie, or at least outright stupidity."
So what is you alternative, a bad life for all? Your solutions? A free market is the best chance we have.
You say "I'm an Anarchist btw - Throwing that out there so you can aim your pot-shots with more accuracy, as opposed to making incorrect assumptions
about my position and where I stand."
I did not aim any "pot shots" at you nor did I assume your political stance, I simply replied to what you wrote. BTW, as an anarchist, you should
support a free market. This leads me to believe that you do not understand what a free market is.
A Free market is the absolute anarchy of economics.
I am not here to take "pot shots" at anybody. Though I did notice your assumption that I can't read or comprehend...
I am here trying to intelligently discuss the benefits of a free market system. You, it would seem are here to emotionally argue against it. But
what is your better alternative?
Capitalism does not always produce a free market, in fact a true free market has never really existed. You can attack me all you want but it does not
change your lack of free market understanding on the facts of history.
I am not saying either that capitalism is perfect or doesn't have problems of its own.
I am saying that if you want everyone to have the best chance at happiness and wealth equality, give them a free market.
You accuse me of making assumptions on who you are... I have done no such thing, though it is absolutely clear by your reply that you have made many
assumptions on who I am.
If you would drop your assumptions you would probably find, as a self proclaimed anarchist that we probably agree on about 98% of topics. I am much
closer to being an anarchist than anything else, in my opinion, though I feel there is a very narrow and thin role for government.
edit on 15-8-2011 by sageofmonticello because: eta