The question I have is a simple, if provocative one: isn't it better said that free markets are best made free by government regulation?
In other words, is a free market better when it's not free anymore?
So the question I have is simple: if Tea Party anarcho-capitalism gets its wish to rescind things like the income tax, like direct election of Senators, like the Federal Reserve, and like the various anti-trust laws that have been in effect for most of the 20th Century, how do they intend to deal with the emergence of latter-day Jay Cookes who'd have immense sums of money and like their predecessors would be just as keen to have Federal troops disperse any workers foolhardy enough to ask for their rights?
I think you need to read up more on the "robber baron" era. There's a great book, albeit dry, called The Myth of the Robber Barons that might be a good start.
no subject
In other words, is a free market better when it's not free anymore?
So the question I have is simple: if Tea Party anarcho-capitalism gets its wish to rescind things like the income tax, like direct election of Senators, like the Federal Reserve, and like the various anti-trust laws that have been in effect for most of the 20th Century, how do they intend to deal with the emergence of latter-day Jay Cookes who'd have immense sums of money and like their predecessors would be just as keen to have Federal troops disperse any workers foolhardy enough to ask for their rights?
I think you need to read up more on the "robber baron" era. There's a great book, albeit dry, called The Myth of the Robber Barons that might be a good start.