Talk:Free market

Definition - Criticism & Suggestions
The definition is incredibly vague. What government actions, law (rule/regulation) making, intervention, enforcement, institution making, functions is a "free market" free from? Is it free off all government or just some government? What are the criteria used to separate the government interventions a "free market" is free from from those that it is not free off? The inclusion of furthur details would greatly improve the article 24.36.14.161 (talk) 00:34, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

From the article: A free market is a market system... in which the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government, price-setting monopoly, or other authority.

"The laissez-faire principle expresses a preference for an absence of non-market pressures on prices and wages, such as those from government taxes, subsidies, tariffs, regulation (other than protection from coercion and theft), or government-granted or coercive monopolies"

These definitions clearly imply that a "free market" must be free of both Government Money (a Government Monopoly) & Private Property (a Government-Granted Monopoly). Vilhelmo De Okcidento (talk) 22:05, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

One question I had about the article is; why is the section on Non-laissez-faire capitalist systems so small in comparison to the others?

Throughout the article, I felt it presented a neutral viewpoint of the subject matter even in the "Criticisms" section of the article, that links to another article on the criticisms of capitalist, which is convenient and well thought out.

The article is well constructed from the sources cited. The sources used are varied in time, perspectives, and media. The sources are reputable and unbiased. The Washington Post articles though may be seen as biased but after reading through them, they seemed to be neutral. Though three citations stood out as incorrectly formatted, only containing a name, presumably from a published work, the year of publishing, and the name of the author. The citation numbers are 2, 8, and 25. Jrobles2795 (talk) 01:43, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

The article is very self conflicting.

> Conditions that must exist for unregulated markets to behave as "free markets" are summarized at perfect competition.

...

> A free market does not require the existence of competition, however it does require a framework that allows new market entrants.

The whole article is jumbled with things like this. livingfract@lk 02:44, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Clarifying what a free market is

A free market is a political term for any market that complies with the social right to freedom of association. - specifically market associations. It prohibits mandated associations in the market that violate that freedom. It is not an economic system itself like capitalism is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howardpearce (talk • contribs) 22:24, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

"free from any intervention by a government or other authority" That is simply nonsense, it would imply that in a free market you could murder and steal without government intervention which is obviously not what is meant by free market.78.82.228.158 (talk) 05:30, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

The thing that is missing here is to note how the land is controlled. If land is a commodity and many people are landless and this is enforce by the state, then this is not a free market at all. It's a coerced market, heavily coerced by control of the land in a mode that makes many people landless and therefore beholden to wage labor to survive, which keeps wages low macroeconomically for the whole working class. Not free for the people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.19.250.77 (talk) 11:36, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

References to "Anarchism" and "Profit-Sharing" aren't warranted in the lead
These philosophies aren't notable enough to include in the lead and aren't specifically mentioned by the source given. "Anarchism" is much more a political ideology rather than an economic system, and has played a minor role in modern economic thought. It seems to have been added to the lead to push a particular point of view. Similarly with profit-sharing, which isn't incompatible with capitalism or socialism. Simply mentioning that free markets have been part of some proposals of (market) socialism should be sufficient to cover non-capitalist market systems in a succinct manner. - Battlecry 10:32, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Large set of references which could be used to improve the article
This is a long set of references which were added by an IP editor and may be helpful for use as sources to improve the article: - but until a specific statement is sourced to a specific source, these don't belong in the article.


 * PHILIPPON, THOMAS. “The Rise in Market Power.” The Great Reversal: How America Gave Up on Free Markets, Harvard University Press, 2019, pp. 45–61,.
 * Noriega, Roger F., and Andrés Martínez-Fernández. The Free-Market Moment: Making Grassroots Capitalism Succeed Where Populism Has Failed. American Enterprise Institute, 2016,.
 * Cremers, Jan, and Ronald Dekker. “Labour Arbitrage on European Labour Markets: Free Movement and the Role of Intermediaries.” Towards a Decent Labour Market for Low Waged Migrant Workers, edited by Conny Rijken and Tesseltje de Lange, Amsterdam University Press, 2018, pp. 109–28,.
 * Jónsson, Örn D., and Rögnvaldur J. Sæmundsson. “Free Market Ideology, Crony Capitalism, and Social Resilience.” Gambling Debt: Iceland’s Rise and Fall in the Global Economy, edited by E. PAUL DURRENBERGER and GISLI PALSSON, University Press of Colorado, 2015, pp. 23–32,.
 * MITTERMAIER, KARL, Karl Mittermaier, and Isabella Mittermaier. “Free-Market Dogmatism and Pragmatism.” In The Hand Behind the Invisible Hand: Dogmatic and Pragmatic Views on Free Markets and the State of Economic Theory, 1st ed., 23–26. Bristol University Press, 2020..
 * Sloman, Peter. “Welfare in a Neoliberal Age: The Politics of Redistributive Market Liberalism.” In The Neoliberal Age?: Britain since the 1970s, edited by Aled Davies, Ben Jackson, and Florence Sutcliffe-Braithwaite, 75–93. UCL Press, 2021..
 * Orłowska, Agnieszka. “Toward Mutual Understanding, Respect, and Trust: On Past and Present Dog Training in Poland.” Free Market Dogs: The Human-Canine Bond in Post-Communist Poland, edited by Michał Piotr Pręgowski and Justyna Włodarczyk, Purdue University Press, 2016, pp. 35–60,.
 * Block, Fred, and Margaret R. Somers. “TURNING THE TABLES: Polanyi’s Critique of Free Market Utopianism.” The Power of Market Fundamentalism, Harvard University Press, 2014, pp. 98–113,.
 * TOMASI, JOHN. “Free Market Fairness.” Free Market Fairness, STU-Student edition, Princeton University Press, 2012, pp. 226–66,.
 * Hoopes, James. “Corporations as Enemies of the Free Market.” Corporate Dreams: Big Business in American Democracy from the Great Depression to the Great Recession, Rutgers University Press, 2011, pp. 27–32,.
 * Althammer, Jörg. “Economic Efficiency and Solidarity: The Idea of a Social Market Economy.” Free Markets with Sustainability and Solidarity, edited by MARTIN SCHLAG and JUAN A. MERCADO, Catholic University of America Press, 2016, pp. 199–216,.
 * Chua, Beng Huat. “DISRUPTING FREE MARKET: State Capitalism and Social Distribution.” Liberalism Disavowed: Communitarianism and State Capitalism in Singapore, Cornell University Press, 2017, pp. 98–122,.
 * Holland, Eugene W. “Free-Market Communism.” Nomad Citizenship: Free-Market Communism and the Slow-Motion General Strike, NED-New edition, University of Minnesota Press, 2011, pp. 99–140,.
 * Newland, Carlos. “Is Support for Capitalism Declining around the World? A Free-Market Mentality Index, 1990–2012.” The Independent Review, vol. 22, no. 4, Independent Institute, 2018, pp. 569–83,.
 * Taylor, Lance. “Keynesianism and the Crisis.” Maynard’s Revenge: The Collapse of Free Market Macroeconomics, Harvard University Press, 2010, pp. 337–58,.
 * ADLER, JONATHAN H. “Excerpts from ‘About Free-Market Environmentalism.’” In Environment and Society: A Reader, edited by Christopher Schlottmann, Dale Jamieson, Colin Jerolmack, Anne Rademacher, and Maria Damon, 259–64. New York University Press, 2017..
 * Symons, Michael. “FREE THE MARKET! (IT’S BEEN CAPTURED BY CAPITALISM).” Meals Matter: A Radical Economics Through Gastronomy, Columbia University Press, 2020, pp. 225–46,.
 * Higgs, Kerryn. “The Rise of Free Market Fundamentalism.” Collision Course: Endless Growth on a Finite Planet, The MIT Press, 2014, pp. 79–104,.
 * SIM, STUART. “Neoliberalism, Financial Crisis, and Profit.” Addicted to Profit: Reclaiming Our Lives from the Free Market, Edinburgh University Press, 2012, pp. 70–95,.
 * SINGER, JOSEPH WILLIAM. “Why Consumer Protection Promotes the Free Market.” No Freedom without Regulation: The Hidden Lesson of the Subprime Crisis, Yale University Press, 2015, pp. 58–94,.
 * Roberts, Alasdair. “The Market Comes Back.” The End of Protest: How Free-Market Capitalism Learned to Control Dissent, Cornell University Press, 2013, pp. 41–57,.
 * OTT, JULIA C. “The ‘Free and Open Market’ Responds.” When Wall Street Met Main Street, Harvard University Press, 2011, pp. 36–54,.
 * Zeitlin, Steve, and Bob Holman. “Free Market Flavor: Poetry of the Palate.” The Poetry of Everyday Life: Storytelling and the Art of Awareness, 1st ed., Cornell University Press, 2016, pp. 127–31,.
 * Baradaran, Mehrsa. “The Free Market Confronts Black Poverty.” The Color of Money: Black Banks and the Racial Wealth Gap, Harvard University Press, 2017, pp. 215–46,.
 * {{cite book|title={Capitalism v. Democracy: Money in Politics and the Free Market Constitution|author=Kuhner, T.K.|isbn=978-0-804-79158-8|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ljaOAwAAQBAJ|year=2014|publisher=Stanford University Press }}

--- Avatar317 (talk) 23:21, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

"Market coercions" in lead - original research
The phrase "market coercions" is nowhere to be found in the body of the article, and the sources used do not describe the free market as such. Sources do not use the phrase. The lead is also problematic because it makes an arguably false definition of a regulated market. We need to find sources which support this, otherwise it smells like WP:OR. Speaking of looking for sources, the phrase "market coercions" doesn't even appear that much anywhere online. Google returns 849 results, a lot of which are a copy of the text from Wikipedia. Ngram returns extremely small values. This doesn't seem to be a well established phrase, therefore shouldn't be used in the lead. BeŻet (talk) 10:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)


 * It is called "paraphrasing": coercion (from Wikitionary): "Use of physical or moral force to compel a person to do something, or to abstain from doing something, thereby depriving that person of the exercise of free will." and it seems to me to be a reasonable concise paraphrase of the many explanations of a free market in this article.
 * If you can suggest better wording as a summary of the main concept, please do so on the Talk page here. --- Avatar317 (talk) 23:36, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Which part of the body is this paraphrasing? Could you point at the appropriate fragment or fragments? BeŻet (talk) 13:46, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Please do not remove the tags until the issue is resolved. Please follow Help:Maintenance template removal. BeŻet (talk) 13:46, 26 August 2022 (UTC)


 * The edit which added the word "coercions" was this one:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Free_market&diff=next&oldid=1072599370
 * I have rolled the lead back to a version very close to what seemed constant for since 2018, so hopefully this is a more acceptable version of the first paragraph. --- Avatar317 (talk) 22:07, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Current version is a bit circular. Also, who said monopoly is not a free market? It' s not "perfect competition" but that's a different matter. SPECIFICO talk 22:13, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, so maybe we can come to some consensus as to what a good lead would be here; that is what I had hoped Bezet would have suggested and we could discuss. If we can get a decent consensus than we can make it more stable.  Looking from 2014 forward, it seems to have been somewhat stable with similar wording to now (but with more duplicity).
 * Monopoly: complicated-it can arise naturally or be given by law (patent or regulated utility)...so that might require careful wording. --- Avatar317 (talk) 00:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I can't think of an example of government granting a monopoly by regulation. Regulation is a policy to mitigate perceived inequities of natural monopolies. SPECIFICO talk 00:17, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
 * You are correct; but a government grants an electricity distribution company monopoly rights for distribution, and then regulates it; it is a "regulated monopoly" - that's what I meant. --- Avatar317 (talk) 01:03, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
 * There is a whole wikipedia article on government-granted monopolies. They used to be much more common. LastDodo (talk) LastDodo (talk) 16:44, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Arguably, the point of a regulated market is to address market inefficiencies and related problems - that's what is basically talked about e.g. in the Criticism section. That's why there isn't really a truly free market anywhere in the world. A price-setting monopoly can still exist within a free market, therefore I would avoid including that in the lead. BeŻet (talk) 14:14, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Criticism
I think it could be made better, currently feels like someone's personal view? Ruletheworst2 (talk) 18:08, 31 October 2023 (UTC)