[Winstonm]

When dealing with a faith-based system of belief, evidence does not matter. Transubstantiation and the "invisible hand" of free markets are both assumed by faith to occur. Argument is of no use because the premise of magical solutions is always assumed to be a valid one.

[mycroft]

It is easily arguable that the "invisible hand of the free market" actually happens - provided we have a free market. Unfortunately, the "shrouded hand of the market owners" is doing such a great job of ensuring we don't in fact have a free market that any effects that Smith theory may have have to be compared against the reality of the unfree market.

I would suggest that if government bureaucracy is a concern, the current status of 50 smaller, incompatible private sector bureaucracies is at least as much of a concern. In Canada, "government bureaucracy" isn't the issue (even though our GOP mole Conservative PM Harper is trying to convince us of it); throttling the firehose of delivery money is. "We have big business leaving because of higher taxes" - sure, but *supplemental* health plans costing 10% of U.S. equivalents, which are clearly not equivalents (and certainly businesses that don't offer supplemental health plans to a majority of their employees are *miles* ahead of the US "no health plan"), and the costs they don't have due to the improved health of their employees, should make up for some of that.

And even then, our inefficiencies come when government tries to walk out of "universal" and force some costs on the health user; and in terms of delays getting health delivery. But delays >>> no delivery or bankruptcy. Do I have enough money to pay for front-of-the-line care? Possibly, as long as it's not too big an accident. Am I an average Canadian? No. Was I always in this case? Hell no, and in particular I wasn't when Health Care Saved My Life (for FREE!)

But you know, I might be biased. Since I'm living and all that.

[Winstonm]

mycroft, on 2014-June-06, 10:56, said:

It is easily arguable that the "invisible hand of the free market" actually happens - provided we have a free market. Unfortunately, the "shrouded hand of the market owners" is doing such a great job of ensuring we don't in fact have a free market that any effects that Smith theory may have have to be compared against the reality of the unfree market.

There are also no true Scotsman or so I've been told.

[blackshoe]

What, exactly, is a "free" market? What makes a market unfree?

[hrothgar]

blackshoe, on 2014-June-06, 21:32, said:

What, exactly, is a "free" market? What makes a market unfree?

Wikipedia does a decent enough job describing the necessary conditions for a perfectly competitive market.

Quote

Generally, a perfectly competitive market exists when every participant is a "price taker", and no participant influences the price of the product it buys or sells. Specific characteristics may include:

A large number buyers and sellers – A large number of consumers with the willingness and ability to buy the product at a certain price, and a large number of producers with the willingness and ability to supply the product at a certain price.
No barriers of entry and exit – No entry and exit barriers makes it extremely easy to enter or exit a perfectly competitive market.
Perfect factor mobility – In the long run factors of production are perfectly mobile, allowing free long term adjustments to changing market conditions.
Perfect information - All consumers and producers are assumed to have perfect knowledge of price, utility, quality and production methods of products.
Zero transaction costs - Buyers and sellers do not incur costs in making an exchange of goods in a perfectly competitive market.
Profit maximization - Firms are assumed to sell where marginal costs meet marginal revenue, where the most profit is generated.
Homogenous products - The qualities and characteristics of a market good or service do not vary between different suppliers.
Non-increasing returns to scale - The lack of increasing returns to scale (or economies of scale) ensures that there will always be a sufficient number of firms in the industry.
Property rights - Well defined property rights determine what may be sold, as well as what rights are conferred on the buyer.
Rational buyers - buyers capable of making rational purchases based on information given
No externalities - costs or benefits of an activity do not affect third parties
In the short run, perfectly-competitive markets are not productively efficient as output will not occur where marginal cost is equal to average cost (MC=AC). They are allocatively efficient, as output will always occur where marginal cost is equal to marginal revenue (MC=MR). In the long run, perfectly competitive markets are both allocatively and productively efficient.

In perfect competition, any profit-maximizing producer faces a market price equal to its marginal cost (P=MC). This implies that a factor's price equals the factor's marginal revenue product. It allows for derivation of the supply curve on which the neoclassical approach is based. This is also the reason why "a monopoly does not have a supply curve". The abandonment of price taking creates considerable difficulties for the demonstration of a general equilibrium except under other, very specific conditions such as that of monopolistic competition.

[kenberg]

in short, a free market is something that does not exist, has never existed, and will never exist. This does not make it a useless concept. Equality of opprtunity does not exist, has never existed, and will never exist. We can have our ideals, as long as we don't go nuts over insisting that they be achieved totally and in exact detail, regarding any and all deviations from the ideal as equally catastrophic.

Otherwise put, a discussion of the benefits and problems, potential or current, of government intervention in health care could be useful if we deal with it as it is, warts and all, and back off on ideological purity in either or any direction.,

I know I said I regretted posting before. Can't help myself. Maybe I need a twelve step program.

[Winstonm]

kenberg, on 2014-June-07, 06:28, said:

in short, a free market is something that does not exist, has never existed, and will never exist. This does not make it a useless concept. Equality of opprtunity does not exist, has never existed, and will never exist. We can have our ideals, as long as we don't go nuts over insisting that they be achieved totally and in exact detail, regarding any and all deviations from the ideal as equally catastrophic.

Otherwise put, a discussion of the benefits and problems, potential or current, of government intervention in health care could be useful if we deal with it as it is, warts and all, and back off on ideological purity in either or any direction.,

I know I said I regretted posting before. Can't help myself. Maybe I need a twelve step program.

Competition, failure, and the free market have combined to streamline that program to a 7-step, payable in 36 easy monthly installments...

[barmar]

kenberg, on 2014-June-07, 06:28, said:

in short, a free market is something that does not exist, has never existed, and will never exist. This does not make it a useless concept.

Right. The concept of a free market in economic theory is like a frictionless surface or a vacuum in physics. They don't really exist, but they're useful approximations in many cases.