Pelly.. you said:

//it can and does foster monopolies, corruption and the like. The mafia loves a free market. Just another way of screwing the citizen - so what is the happy medium?//

Reallllly wanna know ? :)

Here it is.
http://www.welshrevival.com/lang-en/1904history.htm

read in particular the paragraph beside Annie Davies

""" Why do governments fund sport and arts which are ostensibly hobbies and interests while hospitals and training schemes (until of late) went belly up and essential infrastructure became inadequate. """

Indeed Peli why do they? Could it be favours for their mates in crime?

""" history shows the free market does not work for the great majority """

History also shows we never really had a free market. So to say it doesn't work is a bit fallacious.

""" it can and does foster monopolies, corruption and the like. """

I'm sorry Peli, I can't agree with this. These are a direct result of market manipulation by government and its partner in crime, corporatism(Extreme Capitalism).

""" The mafia loves a free market. Just another way of screwing the citizen """

Wrong again Peli. The Mafia has never embraced a free market. How is extorting protection money (tax if you will) a free market principle?
The mafia are more akin to the government trying to control every aspect of the market for their own ends!

""" so what is the happy medium? """

It's not an easy one to answer Peli!

But a really good start would be to force banks and government to stop counterfeiting money and to abide by the rule of law as we have to!

Maybe you'd be interested in this audio lecture Peli? Some interesting insights on how we may answer the question :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEPfmX7_eUY

RawM
"History also shows we never really had a free market. So to say it doesn't work is a bit fallacious."

Well according to Hans-Hermann Hoppe (which I have just listened to for over an hour) :) - prior to WWI there existed such a market - a libertarian and free market utopia. I don't think the word limit will allow a worthwhile response but here goes.

Hoppe talks about the growth of socialism in its various forms after WWI and again after WWII, and a corresponding decline in classical liberalism due to the popularity of the concepts of egalitarianism and social welfare.

Hoppe's idea of a better society will not achieve what he hopes and resembles a form of anarchy and lack of any welfare structure is a recipe for despair.

Hoppe is proposing that the only function of government is to protect the rights of ownership of property and individual freedoms, rights of association etc but to have no other input in society even as a representative of the people or via a more direct democracy.

If the situation prior to WWI worked so efficiently ie. the free market, Churches and charities, and small government providing all we needed, why did the idea of egalitarianism and social welfare grow?

Systems that work well don't usually result in revolution or great change. Hoppe himself talks about a counter revolution loosely as a result of a genuinely perceived crisis situation and a clash between expectations and reality. His argument is can also be used to explain and understand the rise of egalitarianism and socialism and equal access to opportunity.

Hoppe paints a utopian and blissful picture of libertarianism and the evils of taxation and the benefits of a free markets but fails to address what mechanisms within that system ensure the opportunities for exploitation and poverty created by an imbalance of ownership ie. power. Competition I hear you say is the answer. What if the free market does not provide competition enough to provide choice for wage earners and only creates a feudal type system with great inequities?

Cont/...

I agree we need smaller government - it continually grows and expands and as Hoppe argues the government has grown from a small base representing 2% employment, business and agriculture providing 98%. Quite a difference to what we see today. One thing I agree was that unlike the past we cannot go around almost oblivious of the presence of government. Like any organisation, too much power can corrupt.

Eastern European socialism in Hoppe's own words has collapsed it was a failure - the egalitarianism and social democrats in Australia are not aspiring to model on Eastern European socialism nor do we live in a Socialist state as some would have us believe. The movement towards neo-liberalism suggests we are not in any danger of 'creeping socialism'.

It is true that there is a lack of trust in our politicians and our governments but enough for a libertarian revolution? That is not where the angst lies? It is in the lack of accountability and the lack of representation. A welfare state provides a universal insurance and I believe most Australians support some form of social assistance and would not want to live with the repercussions of poverty. How do the poor access medical assistance under privatised health? Some services paid for via taxes benefit everyone in the long term than seeing a bevy of homeless on the streets.

So many questions not enough space. :)

Al
I respect your religious freedoms but directing me to a Christian site is a waste of your time. Although I find the Bible quite barbaric in tone and highly inflammatory (as opposed to flammable :)), the values espoused by most Christians are worthy and sound and mirror much of my own but I don't believe any one religious doctrine will eradicate greed. It didn't in the past and it probably won't in the future. If it did we would bottle it. :)

Hi Pelly

the last paragraph of your second last post was very useful.

Main points:

1/ Free market should guarantee competition and fair prices.
2/ It doesn't
3/ It doesn't because there are usually insufficient checks and balances against formal or informal monopolies which keep prices high.

So the solution is to have those checks and balances. This is where "politics" get's in the way. We end up with a 2 party system representing the 'big end' and the 'working end' of town.

Sadly, we find the problem in both ends. Unions seek monopoly power on bargaining "Picket lines, intimidation to join the union, intimidation if you stand for election as Union leader if you are not part of the 'brutal' group"
The employer side has the same analoguous features.

RELIGIOUS SITES. Pelly.. I was showing you a very real, historical example of how things change when PEOPLE are changed. The Welsh revival showed how 'utopian' things can be when people are walking with Christ.

The point being... it's not the system that's the problem WE are the problem :)

Pelican:"The mafia loves a free market"

Actually, organised crime thrives best in a very regulated market, where there is a cost advantage to be gained by failing to comply with the regulation. In a free market organised crime is reduced to simple thuggery, which can never be as profitable. Imagine how much that half-tonne of cocaine that was seized recently cost to buy and how much, thanks to highly restrictive laws, it was going to sell for. The only way Big Pharma can approach similar levels of profit is with strong regulation which creates effective monopolies, as well as massive Government subsidies in the PBS.

Raw Mustard:"These are a direct result of market manipulation by government and its partner in crime, corporatism"

Got it in one. Organised crime can't compete on a level playing field with large corporations in a truly open market.

Al, interesting thread. I must say I hadn't read much on Fabianism, to my shame. In other threads I've called the same thing a "perverted Marxism", which I think is entirely apt. The plight of an "underclass" is used to justify more power to a specific elite which claims to speak for that underclass (while making sure the underclass continues). Feminism is a classic example.