Next time you hear the argument “how in the world can we trust the free market to do X,” pull out this letter from the future and read it to them (or alternatively, someone in the USSR):
I write this with fury in my eyes and disgust in my heart. How far will these conservatives and libertarians go to destroy the foundation of our society? The latest that they have proposed is a free market in food. How can any member of civilized society even dare propose such an outrageous idea? We all know that companies are run for profit. Greed motivates the owners. They will attempt to cut quality to cut costs in every imaginable way. And to these we entrust the creation of such a basic necessity of food? How can we allow capitalists to control the food supply? The future under such a system is clear: there would be rampant monopolies driving up the price of food. There would be cartels preventing competition. The poor would be prevented from having any food at all and those who control the food would extort the rest of society.
Why do these libertarians not think at all? A free market in food would hand the most necessary thing of all to the greed of the big corporations.
Conclusion: within the opponent’s framework of thought, food creation itself should be a government project, as capitalists could control us through food supplies. Obviously this is not the case. Gasp!
Yes, I use this reductio whenever someone says that ‘healthcare’, ‘education’ etc. are ‘too important’ to be left to the free market. But this reductio goes back to a point Mises made: that a policy of interventionism is internally inconsistent and therefore there are ultimately only two possibilities for a consistent policy: the free market or socialism.
Most people do not have the combination of an extensive knowledge of economics, a wide historical understanding, and a robust imagination. WIthout these things, however, it is extremely difficult - or, indeed, impossible - for someone to view clearly the results of all the competing policies. For this reason the vast majority simply latch onto various superstitious* beliefs such as democracy, compulsory public education, minimum wage, foreign intervention etc. Such a practice of following superstitions seems to have had a positive contribution to evolutionary fitness (since the ideas that have been successful in sustaining reproduction become entrenched), but it does not necessarily bode well for human utility.
*I am not saying that these things are superstitions merely because I disagree with their claims, but rather because they are accepted without inquiry. It must be admitted that even many ‘libertarians’ hold their beliefs in a quasi-religious manner.
Because it claims to allow production to be directed by profit and loss on the market - since this is taken to lead to the most efficient allocation of resources - and then proceeds to create all kinds of barriers against market profit and incentives for non-market profit, both of which rely on political dictates rather than those of the consumer.
Whenever I hear somebody talk about “We can’t trust capitalism to provide because capitalists are greedy” I always think of this video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A