Please do not discuss your opinions; no one should know what you believe. Adopt the site's tone and style: simple, blunt, precise, direct, plain, to-the-point. Include only the absolutely necessary context, and eliminate jargon. Content that is convincing, rhetorical, persuasive, elegant, evocative or embellished may be removed.
It is possible for economies to be free of market distortions
| It is possible for economies to be free of market distortions | |
|---|---|
| Subjects | |
| Capitalism |
Free market |
| Freedom |
Government |
| Linking arguments | |
| Capitalism is exploitative Capitalism is beneficial Governments should use regulations to prevent negative externalities Outcomes that result from choices made in a free market are inherently morally right The removal of state regulations on economic activity is harmful Societies should implement anarchism Self-regulation is effective
| |
Supporting arguments
Each component of a truly free market has existed in the past, so it is reasonable to think they can be combined into one society. [1]
Opposing arguments
Free markets are impossible because there is no such thing as a society with perfect economic competition and perfectly rational agents. In the absence of a perfectly functioning free market economy, we can only decide how best to regulate its imperfection. Thus, a state is necessary, and free markets can not be implemented. [2]
- Related argument: The assumptions used in predictions of the benefits of free markets must be correct for it to be reasonable to accept those predictions as true.
- Related argument: The irrational nature of people diminishes the benefits of free markets.
- Related argument: State regulation of trade is effective and beneficial.
In all cases, capitalist societies have featured states that intervene on behalf on an exploitative elite class. The lack of any precedent for a noninterventionist state implies that it is impossible. [3]
- Related argument: Capitalism is exploitative.
Capitalism causes state interventionism, and the two are inherently linked. [4]
- Related argument: Capitalism leads inevitably to state intervention.
The freedom that free markets require necessitates the existence of a state to enforce the voluntariness of transactions. The state's existence will disrupt the function of free markets. [5] [6]
- Related argument: Free markets require states in order to function.
Negative externalities cause costs and losses among innocent third parties, which make it impossible for markets to effectively work. Therefore, the existence of negative externalities makes free markets impossible. Can you supply this point with a source that proves it is earnest? Do it yourself or provide the link on the talk page.
Markets are created and sustained by governments. Without some sort of state or analagous authority figure, no significant amount of trade is feasible. [7]
- Related argument: Free markets require states in order to function.
