From: Simon Wise <simo...@gmail.com> To: Mathieu Bouchard <mat...@artengine.ca> Cc: "pd-l...@iem.at" <pd-l...@iem.at> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 6:41 AM Subject: [PD] [OT] Re: expr alternative

On 26/10/11 12:26, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:

principles.

<** off-topic warning - stop reading immediately if you are not interested **>

By "free market" in that context I am talking about the grab-bag of ideas that are promoted under that label by a very noisy and influential section of the press and economics commentators (especially but not only in the English speaking parts of the press) and are embraced as some kind of axiomatic "good thing" by many voters in this part of the world (Australia).

I mean the underlying assertions that the best way to manage the allocation of resources across society is allowing everything to be bought and sold for a dollar price, and that the best decisions for a society are made when responding to the so-called invisible hand of the market.

I mean the assertion that the profit motive and 'success' in this market is the only workable way to decide what activities should receive funding and resources in our society.

I mean the assertion that to ensure the best management of the facilities and services that we all rely on for a decent life these should be sold into private ownership and the management disciplined by this free market. And yes, this does often lead to monopolies, and yes - the profit motive (seen as pure and fair and not tainted by other inappropriate motivations by many free market advocates) combined with a minimally regulated market and the potential for a monopoly means that corporations big enough to do so will of course put a lot of effort into achieving such profitable monopolies within this market. Those, like Apple, that do achieve this position are then lauded as examples of the positive and profitable outcomes achievable by such market based policies.

Clearly from my tone above I do not believe that this "free market" is a fair or decent way to organise society, though it is probably a reasonable way to deal with the distribution of the kind of goods and services that are not basic things expected by everyone, and that can be readily bought and sold in a shop or such.