Smearing Socialism and the Economic Implications

But what about charity? Don't we sometimes express our charity in the form of goods or currency? It's interesting that you would take morality to vice, when I went to charity.

If Prohibition proved anything, it's that people will continue to buy certain goods, regardless of the fines, taxes or even jail time associated with it.

I'm confused about your statement about it not being a free market.

Well, Dasani and Evian are corporations which provide drinkable water, amongst dozens of other companies.

The government can't provide anything. So I don't know how they are going to pay and train the Fire Department.

They take the money from the people, and then buy services for the people. Sometimes spending that money for political gain, catering to a group that may not have contributed as much as another, or using the funds in a way that the contributing group finds abhorrent.

Why not cut out the middleman?

Everybody is fine as long as they are honest. George the Buffoon President would probably be fine if he was honest.

I'm not sure how that is relevant, but I will pose this to you. The USPS has a monopoly on letter mail. Given the efficiency (price and service) that DHL, UPS and FEDEX have shown over the last 20 years, do you not think that they may be capable of delivering letter mail as well?

The key is, the government forbids the courier services from providing letter mail service. This is a barrier to entry, and removes competition.

Microsoft may be able to flex it's substantial muscles in the marketplace, and exert force that some may consider unfair or immoral, but as long as there are no barriers to entry, someone somewhere will try to create his own OS, some group will create a free office suite etc. Microsoft can try to squeeze competitors out, but at the end of the day, the price of "free" created by volunteer labor, is the most powerful market monopoly force available.

People lie, we need to hold them accountable. We don't need the government for that necessarily.

If someone breaks the law (commits fraud), that is a crime, and the government should get involved to enforce the law. But ultimately, the consumer has to be the policeman of the marketplace, punishing bad companies by buying from competitors, and rewarding innovators and firms that provide value by increased patronage and referrals.

Why? They need the roads to get their goods to market, and to receive laborers and supplies.

Tires are useless without roads.