This is correct. A free market doesn't suddenly suspend trading because some Hedge Fund fuckers are set to lose a bunch of money. Free Market Capitalism says "let them burn" and every artificial barrier to that actually happening is yet more evidence that we aren't in a Free Market, and haven't been for a really long time.
No, but a truly free market also allows things like collusion and price fixing. I don't want a free market, nor a centrally planned one, I want a competitive market. I want regulation, but I also think that regulations should be proven to increase market competition before they're passed. Deregulatory capture is as real as regulatory capture.
I agree that a truly free market has serious issues around, for example, externalized costs, deregulatory capture, etc. Just as with political governance: some underlying framework needs to protect the interests of the individual from the overreach of mob rule or market monopoly dominance. But it's a delicate balancing act that in the West long ago tipped over in to regulatory capture and market control against the general interests of the unwashed public masses.
Exactly. It’s a difficult balance that can have the opposite effect, like any law really. But I think we’re almost all in agreement here in that we want a competitive free and fair market. Perhaps what needs to happen is what the above user said. Regulations and antitrust are given a trial period. Data quantified. See what sticks.
I’d like to see people run with an idea of something as simple as having the company pay extra tax, commensurate to percentage of market share owned, for changing prices of their products. To avoid the loophole of simply running multiple companies, perhaps major shareholders could be taken into account when calculating market share. Just a shower thought. Either way, undercutting small businesses is never a healthy practice, imo,
This is correct. A free market doesn't suddenly suspend trading because some Hedge Fund fuckers are set to lose a bunch of money. Free Market Capitalism says "let them burn" and every artificial barrier to that actually happening is yet more evidence that we aren't in a Free Market, and haven't been for a really long time.
No, but a truly free market also allows things like collusion and price fixing. I don't want a free market, nor a centrally planned one, I want a competitive market. I want regulation, but I also think that regulations should be proven to increase market competition before they're passed. Deregulatory capture is as real as regulatory capture.
Well, yes and no.
I agree that a truly free market has serious issues around, for example, externalized costs, deregulatory capture, etc. Just as with political governance: some underlying framework needs to protect the interests of the individual from the overreach of mob rule or market monopoly dominance. But it's a delicate balancing act that in the West long ago tipped over in to regulatory capture and market control against the general interests of the unwashed public masses.
Exactly. It’s a difficult balance that can have the opposite effect, like any law really. But I think we’re almost all in agreement here in that we want a competitive free and fair market. Perhaps what needs to happen is what the above user said. Regulations and antitrust are given a trial period. Data quantified. See what sticks.
I’d like to see people run with an idea of something as simple as having the company pay extra tax, commensurate to percentage of market share owned, for changing prices of their products. To avoid the loophole of simply running multiple companies, perhaps major shareholders could be taken into account when calculating market share. Just a shower thought. Either way, undercutting small businesses is never a healthy practice, imo,