I'd say a pure free-market economy is unrealistic generally speaking. It requires perfect information, it also requires everyone to "play by the rules" and not use cartels, trade associations, labor unions, the state, or NGOs to manipulate the market to their advantage.
Well obviously it is unrealistic because you are talking about a pure idealistic form. There will always be some regulation, there has to be anyway. What one should see is the extent of the regulation and how much the market should be regulated so as to provide the best for all. Too much regulation and concentration of power in one body is equally harmful
Yep. The competitive model isn't all its cracked up to be and has many theoretical and practical flaws
So far nobody has come up with better alternatives.
Who says the competition needs to be over wealth and basic resources, though? Kalashnikov never expected to get rich off of what became the most innovative and popular modern rifle design-- contributing to victory over the Nazis was good enough motivation. Do you think Thomas Edison never would have invented anything if he didn't expect to reap huge profits from those inventions? Or do you think intellectual curiosity would still lead to innovation, and competition over other things (say even just personal pride) would still lead people to excel in their jobs?
Competition has always been over wealth and resources.. That is the natural way. A business is not like an invention. No one starts a business out of intellectual curiosity and therefore you cannot compare the two. Ideas best flourish when the economic situation permits it and when there is sufficient financial investment as well, otherwise they would not materialise... One should see which of the two systems maintain that situation the longest
And are you saying that a competitive model will always lead to excellence and improvement, but a collaborative model never will?
It would be better if we see the ratios... I am not an expert so I don't know.
Okay, pick a country to live in-- "Communist" Yugoslavia in the late 70s or "capitalist" Saudi Arabia right now. Before you tell me SA isn't a "true" capitalist country, I'd like to point out that there have never been any modern, specialized societies, which operated on a purely capitalist or communist model.
Oh for fuck sake... Did it have to be Saudi Arabia? Saudi Arabia is not unbearable to live in because it is capitalist... Tell me how many countries are inhibited by a primitive, backward ideology and are ruled by an absolute monarch like Saudi Arabia? Why don't you mention countries like Germany instead?
Poll
Topic: Would you describe yourself as a communist?