Thread 61153766

Why don't we give free market capitalism a chance?

>>61153766 (OP)
Because that would involve real competition and nobody likes that because everyone is mediocre. That includes /pol/cels and it's why they hate immigration.

Better question, from whom does the market need to be freed? We can't give it a chance until we salt off all the leeches.

>>61153766 (OP)
>>61153779
You can't do this for everything. There are plenty of examples where an unbiased third party whose job it is to protect citizens are needed or society would functionally collapse due to human greed and stupidity.

Take, for example, building codes/regulations. If it were up to free market to gauge whether or not a builder is doing a good job, builders would just get in bed with companies and most houses would get built even shittier than they are today. Then the consumer buys the home, it's a piece of shit that floods and falls apart. What do they do, leave a negative review for the builder and the private building assessment company? Sorry, no refunds?

>But but builders would only hire the oversight/compliance companies that do the job RIGHT and wind up completely eliminating their profit margins!

Kek.

When you leave room for scammers to scam, they will. They will take over and scam people all fucking day.

And you're on this board, a crypto board, so you should know that by now. Crypto is a free market environment. Look at it. It's a fucking joke filled with snake oil salesmen now sitting on billions of dollars with up until now no real value proposition to speak of. I think the tech is good and eventually THROUGH GOVERNMENT REGULATION will find a way to actually be respectable, but while it's a free market it has been an utter disaster and the average citizen involved in the industry has been a victim of fraud at least once.

>>61153766 (OP)
so sum it up in one word
kikes

>>61153766 (OP)
That was already tried and it failed multiple times. Laissez faire capitalism allows for rich fucks to eat up the competition. It also has a ripple effect where those thoughts escape the economic scene and gets applied to policy.

That economic effect is what perpetuated the irish potato famine by allowing the british elites any excuse not to open soup kitchens or nationalize critical industries that have the chance to be stolen by your country rival.

It's better than communism but not by much.

>>61153851
it is definitely not a free market, there have been massive asymmetries since the beginning. crypto doesn't exist in a vacuum. simply being able to freely deploy and transact on-chain != free market

>>61153766 (OP)
But then the oligarchs wouldn't get bailed out to cover their losses and they would all have to compete against each other.

>>61153766 (OP)
Is current not the free market capitalism that kikes and whiteoids been fighting browns and commie for

>>61153766 (OP)
People want to be as rich as they can get even if it costs everyone in the long run.

>>61153901
>That was already tried and it failed multiple times.
It literally worked every time it was tried..
The thing that failed is your inflationary/central bank statist nightmare we currently live under.
>is what perpetuated the irish potato famine
The fucking government did that.
Your policies did that.
A free market would have prevented it.

(((government))) hates competition

>>61153916
Huh? Free market just implies no government intervention. Government has done fuck all in crypto for the last decade+. You can even wash trade all day long with no repercussions. The most basic shit there are laws against for every other asset don’t exist in crypto at this point and only now are we seeing legislation start to take shape. You can’t get more free market than what crypto has been. If your case is simply “muh market assymetry” welcome to the free fucking market, retard. Free does not mean fair. In fact, a free market is way way less fair than a regulated one since there’s no one to stop the big bad sharks from ruthlessly culling the fish.

>>61153766 (OP)
Because it's more efficient to have a few (((banks and corporations))) running the economy.

>>61153766 (OP)
anti-semitic, please understand

>>61153766 (OP)
Because it ends up with you paying $10000 for a litre of drinking water or a loaf of bread because one guy owns it all.

>>61154262
Found the retard that has no idea that free market capitalism is self regulating

>>61154017
>the free market would've prevented that
No the free market at the time would've enslaved them on a dutch ship and sell those irish to the barbary states.

>>61153766 (OP)
Jews can't win in a merit based free market

>>61154017
Any examples of where it has "worked"?
It's literally impossible to have a free market, even if you did, someone would gain an advantage and dominate the market and then they could cripple competition with stuff like running at a loss short-term to stop competitors. Also many industries can't allow for a free market due to physical limitations. Things like Internet cables and such, you can't just have anybody digging up land to lay cable.

Further, the very existence of markets depends on government. Enforcement of property rights, infrastructure, enforcement of contracts. Anything close to a true free market would converge to zero profit due to intense completion, and be a race to the bottom for quality and actually delivering.

>>61153766 (OP)
I thought America was a free market? What is "Free-market capitalism"?

>>61154523
It was….now it’s just a dream…maybe it was always a dream

The irony is the more "free" you make the "free market", the less free it becomes. It's counter intuitive really.

In other words, parasites take advantage of the freedom and hoard 99.99999% for themselves and leave everyone else with scraps, hence no more free market for anyone but the top 0.0000000000001%.

>>61153766 (OP)
we allready did that and people made clothes from beanbags , sleeped on ropes, and criminals in jail did cost more than workers.

>>61154417
>It's uh... Self regulating uh... Just because it is? OK?

>>61153766 (OP)
>Why don't we give free market capitalism a chance?

We literally did that in the late 1800s and early 1900s and realized fairly quickly that if completely unchecked, capitalism leads to rampant abuse and corruption.

I'm not even advocating for socialism or gommunism. It's human nature. If there aren't consequences for evil shit, people will do evil shit.

>>61153766 (OP)
>>61153779
No, it's because the people who operate the brokerages and exchanges can always play favorites at the expense of clarity for the retail investor. The house always wins because they don't want to lose. The irony is that they need people to play which means they need enough people gaining to keep the casino churning.
I don't think the state should have full control of things, but I certainly don't trust wall street or the average globohomo corporation.

>>61157125

The abuse and corruption was created using government levers, my friend. A company gets so big that it simply starts buying the state to wall out competition. This resembles more of what we are today than the other fantasy you came up with about unchecked corporate armies and shiet.

>>61153766 (OP)
Plenty of reasons can be found in any econ 101 textbook. You can for example look at the sections on "market failures"

>>61157181
A big company being able to snuff out competition in a free market environment is not a fantasy, it happened multiple times lmao. And in ways different than buying the politicians. What a retard you are.

>>61153766 (OP)
A better question is, why don't we give top-down centrally-managed planned economies a chance?

You would need a lot of agencies like the Pinkerton detectives to keep the workers in check

>>61153779
Hello saar. Competing against da timmies is easy.