My Fantastic Free Market Analogy. Free Markets ExplainedSubmitted by Samuel_Washington on Wed, 02/29/2012 - 12:28
In response to the person who posted: "Help me Win this Free Market Argument" I wrote this, but it was so long - I gave it its own thread, as a nice exchange of ideas may ensue:
His/Her lawyer friend accused the Free Market of fostering corrupt businesses teaming up against the market. I said:
Ask your friend if free markets gave rise to:
1) Satellite Radio Companies, merging, then IMMEDIATELY raising their price, while offering less? (I know from experience. I was a sirius radio subscriber and paid attention to Stern during that whole process, he talked about how GREAT it would be for consumers. Then the prices rose, and the number of services shrunk)
2) Gas stations colluding to raise their prices at opportune moments? (*cough: IRAN 'threat'; the MYTH of peak oil; the MYTH of a lack of reserves -- they shut down reserves to limit supply. Good luck for any company that wants to spring up to compete - how are THOSE gov't regulations)
3) Airport businesses ALL deciding to charge exorbitant prices?
4) Businesses being able to WRITE anti-competitive legislation, make large contributions, and get their bills passed? (Thanks in VERY LARGE PART to people like Gingrich and Santorum who no doubt support the public-private 'partnership' which is code for Big Business in wedlock with Government & The FED -- i.e. FASCISM)
5) Large banks under the auspices of the FED making bad business decisions and then getting saved by taxpayer dollars at the expense of the WEALTH of the middle class? (If the gov't just taxed us to bail out the companies the sentence would read: "...at the expense of the middle class", but because the FED PRINTS new money for the banks, the result is THEFT of WEALTH of the middle class. It's far more destructive. Rome did it. Myanmar did it. Every war-hungry state RAPED their middle class in this way, IGNORED the principles of a free market, and thusly DESTROYED their economy.)
Your genius lawyer doesn't realize that as it is now, companies actively fight free market principles with the support of the Actual Government AND the FED.
Free markets would DESTROY the power of the FED and the Gov't to prop up market-unhealthy businesses. I like to use the analogy of the human body to explain and defend Free markets.
The Human Body Analogy
In the human body, cells support organs that are vital to the body. They report on the state of the organs to the brain. When a problem is detected, they send the signals and call for the necessary corrections. We receive these calls to action in the form of impulses for certain types of food or activities (yawning, stretching, sleeping, going out for sunlight etc)
Sometimes though, the human chooses to listen NOT to its own cellular impulses, but to outside forces such as ADVERTISEMENTS (for McDonalds or Pills etc...) or it listens to the false-signals of artificially created chemicals found in processed foods, cigarettes, etc.)
Side Note: I would LOVE to see a study of someone who only smokes their own home-grown tobacco, and never touches a cigarette or chew, which are artificial delivery systems for lab-tampered nicotine and hosts of other chemicals not found in the tobacco plant.
Human Body - Free Market Analogy Explained:
In my analogy, the cells are the people of the free market who report on the 'health' of the businesses (the organs), by choosing to support them with money (nourishment) or not. An 'unhealthy' business receives less 'nourishment' (in the form of money) and either becomes useful to the system, or dies off, leaving room for a more market-healthy business to spring up and thrive.
That is, as long as the Government and the Fed (the foreign chemicals found in processed foods, cigarettes, pills etc.) don't send FALSE signals to the market and artificially support market-unhealthy institutions which choke the system.
The point of the analogy is this: Free markets allow the people of the market, the ones LIVING IN IT day-to-day to decide what is helpful and what is not. The government (which is NOT A PART OF THE MARKET, AN EFFECTIVE OUTSIDER) does not have the information that the market has. It does not respond to market needs, it responds to big-business LIES about how vital they are.
They whisper into the ear of the government that the sky will fall if it doesn't do X, Y, or Z on their behalf. The government (an outsider) listens to these market-unhealthy companies, instead of staying out of the matter and letting the market decide INDEPENDENTLY what is healthy for it and what is not.
In essence, a free market is FREE & INDEPENDENT of the government, and governments, which are tools of FORCE, have a long history of fighting against FREEDOM & INDEPENDENCE. They don't trust it. They believe it will result in CHAOS, and/or that it threatens their well-being.
The government shouldn't be involved in markets, because it's not a part OF the market.
The government's only original purpose was to enforce the Fundamental Freedoms of: Right to Life, Right to Liberty (do what you want as long as you're not infringing on the rights of others), & Right to Own Property.
No analogy is perfect, but I think this is a FANTASTIC illustration of why an outsider (who doesn't receive his information FROM the system, and is not vitally connected TO the system) is not capable of making an informed decision FOR the system.