Originally posted by AThousandYoungAs far as Im aware, the free market is simply a system of trade which lacks centralized planning, and operates purely by the logic of supply and demand.
No.
What do you think?
It is commonly used as an euphemism for capitalism however, there's something about the adjective "free" which begets some degree of sympathy I suppose.
No, free markets are markets where there are no price controls.
You can have a free market where only publically controlled entities trade. That wouldn't be capitalism.
Capitalism itself is a little less easily defined -- but a key part of the definition is private ownership of capital. Free markets are commonly a part of capitalism, but it could be argued whether it's an essential part.
Originally posted by WoodPushThey cannot be an essential or integral part of capitalism as arguably there are none in existence.
No, free markets are markets where there are no price controls.
You can have a free market where only publically controlled entities trade. That wouldn't be capitalism.
Capitalism itself is a little less easily defined -- but a key part of the definition is private ownership of capital. Free markets are commonly a part of capitalism, but it could be argued whether it's an essential part.
2 edits
Originally posted by kevcvs57Well, it could be argued that it's an essential an integral part, and that there is no true capitalism in existence, couldn't it?
They cannot be an essential or integral part of capitalism as arguably there are none in existence.
I don't take that position.
But as Kazet says - who cares? It's up to you how you want to define it. What matters is what works.
Originally posted by WoodPushWell the question was, are the terms 'free market' & 'capitalism' synonomous, and the answer is no. Where you two forced onto the thread at gunpoint?
Well, it could be argued that it's an essential an integral part, and that there is no true capitalism in existence, couldn't it?
I don't take that position.
But as Kazet says - who cares? It's up to you how you want to define it. What matters is what works.
Originally posted by WoodPushWell you might expand the debate by arguing that they should be synonomous, if they were, 'capitalism' might function better than it's present lurch from one crisis to another. However somebody might argue that people should give up on the 'free market' concept entirely and keep capitalism under much greater control
No, but this is the debates forum, and this seems to be a question and answer. What's the debate?
Originally posted by kevcvs57Capitalism goes back to feudal times, perhaps further than that, but freer markets enhance the positive effects of capitalism.
Well you might expand the debate by arguing that they should be synonomous, if they were, 'capitalism' might function better than it's present lurch from one crisis to another. However somebody might argue that people should give up on the 'free market' concept entirely and keep capitalism under much greater control