Faith in free-market economics fading, shows new research

[Dan74]

Pervasive Gloom About the World Economy | Pew Global Attitudes Project

[crimethinker]

There are degrees of freedom. An actual "free" market would be lawless and based on the barter system. We have to decide what degree of regulation is the best for us.

Don't really see the "faith" fading, though. A -3% change isn't significant. Italy's has waned because it's in economic crisis, and several states we look to as examples of good societies, such as France and Germany, have gained in their support.

[Dan74]

Don't really see the "faith" fading, though. A -3% change isn't significant. Italy's has waned because it's in economic crisis, and several states we look to as examples of good societies, such as France and Germany, have gained in their support.

I know that. Overall it has been fading.

[NoJingoLingo]

There is no "free market", the system is rigged.

[Senor Hoint]

What we have now can hardly be described as a free market. If we had truly free markets things wouldn't be so bad, because the argument that free market competition fosters improvement is basically correct. The problem is we have some sort of quasi-mercantilist system somewhat similar to Britain circa 1800.

[Yarn]

There is no such thing as a purely free market. All societies that have capitalism also have governments. The question is therefore too vague to draw anything but vague conclusions about what people think.

[Dan74]

Then why did people have a positive opinion of it before?

[Yarn]

Of what exactly? That question means different things to different people.

Some people may just want more regulations and/or social programs. Others, like yourself, want to do away with capitalism entirely. As that question gives us no way of distinguishing people's specific believes, it can only lead to vague conclusions.

The catalyst for the change in the number is the 2008 financial crisis and economic hardship. A similar thing happened during the Great Depression: many people blamed the market, and it became less popular for a while.

[SoylentGreen]

What we have now can hardly be described as a free market. If we had truly free markets things wouldn't be so bad, because the argument that free market competition fosters improvement is basically correct. The problem is we have some sort of quasi-mercantilist system somewhat similar to Britain circa 1800.

How do you know it is correct when it has never been tested?

[Senor Hoint]

How do you know it is correct when it has never been tested?

Markets are more efficient than command economies. I think that's been fairly well-demonstrated by the course of history.

[Dan74]

Markets are more efficient than command economies. I think that's been fairly well-demonstrated by the course of history.

Historically, yes, but you can't judge planned economies based on history alone. What about a de-centralized command economy done from the bottom up?

[Yarn]

Governments do not uniformly reduce efficiency. Universal education increases efficiency, as do various other long term investments. Many regulations do more good than bad. Basic law and order is a prerequisite of a free market. And, redistributing wealth increases consumer demand by taking from the wealthy, who are good investors but poor consumers, and giving to the poor and middle class, who are poor investors but good consumers.

Speculatively, the Fed may do more good than bad.

At anyrate, efficiency isn't the only thing that ties into prosperity and having a humane society.