FREE MARKET

an economic system where freedom is for saleEnjoy.

Heinlein had something to say about this...

I'd like to see how a democratic communist country would do. Other than a very brief one in Spain in the 30's we have never really had a free communist state. (Before the right wingers jump on me, communism is not a political system it is an economic system.)The USSR was communist economically but totalitarian politically. China was originally as well. Now they are some kind of weird hybrid of communism and free market with a totalitarian policital system.I'm not sure I would want to live in this hypothetical country but it sure would be interesting to see how it worked. Edited by Jefferinoopolis, : No reason given.Edited by Jefferinoopolis, : I suck at self editing

If it was any one system it was probably State Capitalism. Or maybe Kleptocracy. But it was definitely not communist.

Are there other nations where "entrepreneurs" can succeed with small business? I think our failing here with our free market is that we allow businesses to get to the point where they are "too big to fail". We have allowed the country to ride on the backs of these corporations so that when they fail, WE fail. IMO, a "free market" shouldn't be one where monopolies are rampant (I'm looking at you, ISP's), regardless of how well they do. We have become a nation that is more concerned with how well the stock of a corporation performs over how well our citizens are.Having said that, I do personally think Capitalism (as it should be, not how we do it) is a good system as it ideally gives everyone a fair shot at their piece of the pie. It's just that those at the top need to get the fuck out of the way when new ideas come along and stop CONSERVing their old ways that stop PROGRESS.Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

It seems that the best models (for its citizens) are liberal democracies with socialist leanings eg as practiced by most of Scandanavia.

In a free market, capitalist society, the onyl way to get the ones at the top off the top is to knock them off. That gets very difficult as those at the top get bigger, because they can just buy the threatening company and then either use its innovations, or more likely, quash them.I'm not sure how you could combat that, unless you regulate the free market to the point it is no longer free...maybe a "Fair Market" system.

So does Piracy - but some bastard is always trying to regulate how you get it.

I don't think that follows because whatever it is you are downloading isn't "your" piece of the pie.However, being a member of (advanced and civilized) society, you are granted access to the pie that is success. We are long past the times where it should be acceptable to have "haves and have nots". It's near impossible to get out of the gutter unless you get some VERY lucky breaks and watch every single P and Q. Let one Q slip, and you stay in the gutter.

I think he meant actual piracy, that is, ocean-going robbery.It seems to me that the problem is one of trust; communism is the economic system so evil, so diabolical, so corrosive of human initiative and progress that literally every single person elects to use it within their own family. The reason that it's ok to take from your children according to their ability and give to them according to their need is trust.Nations like the Scandanavian social democracies operate because they don't have the same level of outgroup mistrust that exists in America; I partially agree with conservatives that those systems don't work as well here in the US. I saw a picture on the internet that I can't find now; it was a young white woman with a cardboard sign: "Single mom, please help; can't get welfare because the n*ggers get it."With these kinds of racial and religious divisions, this kind of mistrust, it's hard to make a system of social support work because people just don't think "those people" deserve a functional safety net to the point that they'll deprive themselves of that net just to make sure its not there for others to use.Capitalism is an economic system that appears to be fairly robust in the face of widespread mistrust. Of course, the evidence is that even capitalism works better in "trustful" nations like the Scandanavian ones; security concerns actually do represent a pretty substantial deadweight inefficiency on every economic transaction. That's why part of the function of government is to secure the marketplace.

What is or is not "your" piece of the pie is strictly a matter of regulation, what society arbitrarily decides is "yours". At one extreme, you're only entitled to take what you need and you're expected to contribute all that you can. At the other extreme, you take whatever you can get.The ultimate free enterprise is crime. Everything else is just a matter of degree.

Hi jefferinoopolis, I agree, so I always find it humorous when rightwingers get all in a huff about the dangers of communism. Their premise is inherently faulty. Agreed. Me too. I do think we can look at the successful social democracies and compare them to true communism, and we might be able to tweak out some impression.We can also look at small scale examples, as in the Jewish kibbutz experiences:
http://www.myjewishlearning.com/...ious_Issues/kibbutz.shtmlAnd we can also look at coops, which are a little looser.Personally, I think a mixture of capitalism and socialism would likely work best.Enjoy.

We used to call that pluralism and most Western democracies practice it to various extents. Unfortunately the concept is so fucked up that even wiki no longer knows what it means anymore.Economic pluralism - WikipediaEdited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Hi Tangle and this doesn't help
Pluralism in economics - WikipediaEnjoy.

A completely free market would be anarchy, so people promoting deregulations are anarchists?A regulated free market is a contradiction: it is either free (anarchy) or regulated (governed).Enjoy