So why don't US citizens get this?

Sun Jul 27 06:58:03 UTC 2008

Fred Baker wrote:
> The key thing in that definition is the lack of government intervention 
> in its various forms. That's D'Arcy's point. Where there is government 
> subsidy, regulation, or other intervention, it cannot be described as a 
> free market.

I have always understood the issue to be the presence or absence of unfettered 
competition.  Competition is good.  It's lack is bad.

Government can be one source of fettering.  So can monopolization.  So can 
post-purchase lock-in. Anything that restricts the ability of the consumer to 
make on-going choices for alternate sources of products and services.

Which is to say, anything that alters the incentives of companies to provide 
better products at better prices.

We ought to stop saying 'free' and instead say 'competitive'.

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net