What economic approach would actually work?

[Montmorency]

To be fair though, the maintenance of intellectual property almost requires some form of third party regulation of the market. Goods or services could be said to protect themselves through quid pro quo dealings in the market. Yet if someone takes my idea (oh, say, by bribing one of my Austrian employees to give away the source codes for the wind turbine control system), it is difficult to redress that absent some form of third party. Ideas cannot be unlearned...

No, Fisherking, I am not asserting that you are arguing for the textbook definition of a perfect free market -- I know you accept that some minimum of regulation is needful. Others in this thread, however, are arguing as though this pure form of free market were the alternative proffered.

So, minarchism? Why couldn't you enforce your rights with hitmen, then? Fixers?

You say you wouldn't, or couldn't because restrained? Who would restrain you? Why wouldn't you pursue your interests however you can? Every individual or group that opts out would easily be overtaken by those that don't.

Logically, a corporate enterprise should have some security wing to enforce its rules against its members and keep its competitors in line.

Looks an awful lot like the State though...


Really different approaches. Where you would respect the bare minimum of intervention (which is actually what always obtains at any moment in real life), I would respect "salutary neglect" as a fixture.

You can even take food. The free market is based on the idea that consumers make an informed choice about which procuct best suits their needs. To make that choice, a consumer has to know exactly what their needs are and whether the product actually fulfills them. This is clearly not the case with food, whichever way you look at it. The result is that many consumers buy objectively bad food, sometimes because they can't even afford the good food, and you end up with a market that has no good choices for many people.

One complication to be aware of is that differences between foods in "healthfulness" is not really clear-cut, or well-understood. Healthfulness in fact is not marketed or priced in tiers. All you can really say is that in our marketplace on average, the foods that are relatively unhealthy are by dint of their materials, processes, or regulations cheaper than foods that are relatively healthy - or can be made to be relatively healthy.

If autonomists have any good arguments, then it's that technology allows fruits and vegetables to be primarily be grown and procured on a hyperlocal basis (the literal backyard) at the expense of the agribusiness model. Not because these homegrown or communally-grown items will be more healthful necessarily, but because it's more sustainable and empowering.