Under a true capitalist society with a TRULY free market, businesses will be unable to bribe politicians into making stupid laws that cripple some businesses so others may thrive.
Economics, and free markets, does give way to failures. A monopoly would ruin the entire idea of a free market. You can't have a truly free market. Not only that, but quality would drop.
Government intervention has to be there. Also, Government relief has to be there. Sure, I could lose a job and stick it out until prices drop and get a worse job, but you can't expect me to go on for two years jobless/with a bad job waiting for prices to drop. That's insane.
Economics, and free markets, does give way to failures. A monopoly would ruin the entire idea of a free market. You can't have a truly free market. Not only that, but quality would drop.
How would a monopoly ruin the entire idea of a free market? Why are monopolies bad? How do free market corporations gain monopolies?
The only way a company can hold a monopoly in the free market is if they provide better goods and services than all their competition at cheaper costs to the point where everyone is voluntarily choosing to buy from that particular business. This would be incredibly rare in a truly free market. If one were to exist, the only way they could keep their monopoly is to consistently produce quality goods at lower prices.
The monopolies of today are NOT results of free market principles. They are ALL results of corporatism, government intervention.
As I said before:
Under a true capitalist society with a TRULY free market, businesses will be unable to bribe politicians into making stupid laws that cripple some businesses so others may thrive.
Also, Government relief has to be there. Sure, I could lose a job and stick it out until prices drop and get a worse job, but you can't expect me to go on for two years jobless/with a bad job waiting for prices to drop. That's insane.
Reminding that cartels/gangs aren't totally stopped and even rule the government in some areas...
Coercion is already illegal, and would remain illegal. Therefore it doesn't matter if gangs have control or not, because whether the government is involved with the market or not, the government will always reason to stop gangs.
NoName, if the government didn't interfere, how would we stop cartels?
As I mentioned previously, coercion will be handled if coercion is used. Although I haven't ever looked too much into cartels, I imagine many cartels use the government regulation to prevent competition from moving in and undercutting their unfairly gouged prices. I honestly don't know the solution. However, I believe humanity will be able to come up with one without having to rely on the government to come up with rules that treat everyone like criminals.
I believe that if a cartel is able to hold control without coercion, and through controlling their prices, someone will a find a business practice that can easily take business away from these cartels (though I'm sure there are probably some geniuses who already know how they can do this). I believe that if a local government wants to step in, though it's not preferable, it's better than having the federal government step in. However, that's only because I believe the local government won't step in when it isn't necessary.
I know I'm not giving direct solutions, because I honestly don't know them. However, I don't believe in a one size fits all solution. I don't believe that there's a person or even a government that knows what is best for the people. Even if they believe they know what is best for the people, there are those who will disagree with them, and I believe it is unfair to force those who disagree into becoming a part of a solution they believe will fail.
Coercion is already illegal, and would remain illegal.
I need to correct myself. Coercion, for the most part, is already illegal. However, there is some coercion that the government allows, or is actually used by the government itself, namely taxation.
Right now there's a huge debate revolving around Social Security being a ponzi scheme. In fact, Social Security is WORSE than a ponzi scheme because a nobody forces you to take part of ponzi schemes except the government which forces you to pay Social Security whether you want to or not.
I believe in a free market. A free market is one where one may choose what goods and services they may sell and buy. Because of this, you have something called Supply and Demand that dictates the price of goods. I believe supply and demand isn't only the most accurate system to measure the value of goods but a naturally occurring system at that.
The problem I have with communism is that communism doesn't revolve around supply and demand. Communism is a system where the value of goods are miraculously somehow figured out and everyone has equal say to what it is that they produce. The problem is that this somehow equates to equality. Another issue is that there's no way to measure whether the resources are being used in the most efficient way currently known to man. Resources are limited and the value of a product must be more valuable than the resources used to create it. Not only that, but sometimes superior products can be made with cheaper resources or less expensive resources. However, it's hard to measure any of this if you don't know the value of the product and resources, and you need supply and demand to figure out what the value is.
It's quite complicated and I it's hard for me to explain.
Reminding that cartels/gangs aren't totally stopped and even rule the government in some areas...
Sorry that I didn't clarify this. I didn't mean cartels in the sense of gangs but different companies who agree to fix prices (which is against the free market).
I believe that if a local government wants to step in, though it's not preferable, it's better than having the federal government step in.
Even if it's off-topic: would you prefer the USA to be split into different (smaller) countries?
I believe that if a cartel is able to hold control without coercion, and through controlling their prices, someone will a find a business practice that can easily take business away from these cartels (though I'm sure there are probably some geniuses who already know how they can do this).
I don't think so. There were several cases were nothing happened till the government stepped in. For example in Switzerland we pay much more for medicine than the countries around us. The pharma companies forbid parallel imports so they can sell the medicine way higher here (if you don't agree then they just won't sell anything to you). That's why the government had to step in.
Sorry that I didn't clarify this. I didn't mean cartels in the sense of gangs but different companies who agree to fix prices (which is against the free market).
I was replying to the other person.
I don't think so. There were several cases were nothing happened till the government stepped in. For example in Switzerland we pay much more for medicine than the countries around us. The pharma companies forbid parallel imports so they can sell the medicine way higher here (if you don't agree then they just won't sell anything to you). That's why the government had to step in.
I'm wondering why nobody decided to allow parallel imports and sell cheaper drugs, or why nobody from outside the country decided to work outside the cartel.
I'm wondering why nobody decided to allow parallel imports and sell cheaper drugs, or why nobody from outside the country decided to work outside the cartel.
Because the pharma companies won't sell you anything if you don't play along their rules. And because we have patents you can't just copy the product. Maybe you'll say that in the first place patents are a form of government intervention but we need them. Otherwise nobody would do research because it would only cause huge losses.
Because the pharma companies won't sell you anything if you don't play along their rules. And because we have patents you can't just copy the product. Maybe you'll say that in the first place patents are a form of government intervention but we need them. Otherwise nobody would do research because it would only cause huge losses.
I'm a little skeptical here. Patents don't last forever (though it can be argued they last too long). I'm wondering how the pharmaceutical companies are able to control products where the patents have run out.
The pharma companies forbid parallel imports
I'm kind of confused as to how pharmaceutical companies are able to forbid parallel imports.
Capitalism is probably the best form of "ism" out there, it has some shady parts to it but in capitalism everyone is a individual and they get out of it whatever they put in. socialism while fair for the people i dont belive it is fair, how can a doctor working 12 hour shifts make as much money as a McDonalds Burger fliper and have exactly the same stuff, and pay.
Capitalism is probably the best form of "ism" out there, it has some shady parts to it but in capitalism everyone is a individual and they get out of it whatever they put in. socialism while fair for the people i dont belive it is fair, how can a doctor working 12 hour shifts make as much money as a McDonalds Burger fliper and have exactly the same stuff, and pay.
Well, that's more communism than socialism. Socialism is more of a market that isn't so much owned by the government than it is controlled by the government (loosely speaking).
