Is having a free market like playing football without refs? Isn't man's natural instinct to win at all costs ?

In a totally free market system eventually there is nothing but a few very rich people and a huge poor class with no middle class.





That resulted in revolutions in France, Cuba and China to name a few.





Pure free market (pure capitalism) is madness.


Eventually the rich are hanged.


What results in the aftermath is anyone's guess, from a republic to communism.





EDIT


Seriously people, why do you think no country has a pure free market system? Because history proves it is madness along with human greed.





Peace


Jim





.Is having a free market like playing football without refs? Isn't man's natural instinct to win at all costs ?
Back in college we used a free market model to analyze the effects of variables on a closed market system. This works well within the confines of a model but it only works if several assumptions are made. In reality a truly free market could not exist simply because the assumptions needed to make the model work either do not exist in reality or if they do exist they are volatile and impossible to control. One of largest of these assumptions is that all people involved will act in a fair, ethical, and rational manner. Which we know in the real world seldom, if ever, happens.Is having a free market like playing football without refs? Isn't man's natural instinct to win at all costs ?
In a free market it is the governments job to referee, not play!





Today they are playing. So I ask you, who's the referee?





Preamble to the Constitution
';As every individual, therefore, endeavors as much he can both to employ his capital in the support of domestic industry, and so to direct that industry that its produce may be of the greatest value; every individual necessarily labors to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was not part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good. It is an affectation, indeed, not very common among merchants, and very few words need be employed in dissuading them from it.'; -- Adam Smith
NO.


Having a true free market backed by sound money is like having a well balanced football team..





Having controlled markets is like having a football team with 13 punters and no running backs, quarterback, or defense... They think they are winning by keeping the ball in the air!
Yes, in some ways it is. That is why we have laws, Liberty without any laws quickly devolves into anarchy. Realistic regulation of any of man's ideas is always a good thing.
No. Now we have a partisan ref for moneyed special interests, only. Removing him would put us all on a much more even playing field. Government should prosecute fraud and enforce contracts fairly. Period.
Duh would be the answer.





Absolutely. The fantasy of ';self-regulation'; is about as delusional as one can get. Only an ideologue with no empirical sense could believe such a thing.
Yes I agree. Invasive technology levels the plain field as well. Many good ideas cease to evolve as the product is displaced to a disproportion minority.
We currently don't have a free market, and there are lots of people who are WAY richer than me. Many of them work for the same government as me.
If they play like my Detroit Lions I pity them, though a mere 3 games we were screwed by the zebras.
I'm not afraid of the free market-