Economic freedom and individual freedom are mutual co-dependents.

To be completely honest, any person who has power also has temptation. If somebody were free to say manipulate the water supply of a town by purchasing all the land around a lake ... then one could manipulate the price of water. Of course they don't do they.

If one insurance company larger than all others were to reduce rates to the point that other insurance companies would lose money it could keep that up until the other companies failed (they can not can they). If A large enough bank were to reduce credit requirements for home buyers they could cause a seller market in the real estate industry and cause the price to go back down by restricting credit (banks are not allowed to do this). I am pointing this out for two reasons.

There would be problems in a completely liberal (classical meaning intended) market - it needs some intervention so that private individuals do not manipulate the market place - and unjustly transfer wealth from the poor to themselves by such manipulations. But that is really not what is a concern today - we have government intervention that prevents private manipulation.

As the State becomes part of the market (nationalizes control) and manipulates the market by dictating to banks what are the risks they will take to be insured by the state. Who may and who may not sell insurance, energy and utilities and what must be covered and what profit rates they will make ...

The State can cause the same problems of market manipulation by unjustly transferring wealth or deciding who can make how much wealth. What we are witnessing today are State induced problems which are being blamed on the private sector being used for the state to double down on nationalization of the market.

The point being the state controlled market ran into problems, not a free market system. There is no evil greedy capitalist who has made billions behind the manipulation. It was all Government manipulation.

Both liberals and conservatives should be able to agree market manipulations are bad no matter who is doing the manipulation. We need to prevent market manipulations and give people as much freedom as possible - short of anarchy.

I also want to property place the blame for the current economy on economic interventionism: and not a failure of capitalism as Obama would like people to believe.

The difference being if interventionism is properly shown to be the cause we can progress toward less interventionism. Will we ever have no interventionism, you tell me. Will I stop pushing toward zero interventionism when we start to see greed of individuals causing problems, maybe - I would like to be able to see that first.

The point is which way do we need to go NOW to recover. And the answer is less socialism than existed before Obama took office. Call it conservative interventionism if it gets the job done - again the concept of interventionism is what classical liberals were against. It comes from the idea that man can not be trusted when he has too much power. The free market solution is to empower more men and then nobody has a monopoly. The socialist solution is for the state to have all power (which makes the state the one who can not be trusted).

http://www.brianauten.com/Apologetics/nash-advanced-worldviews/worldview...

http://www.brianauten.com/Apologetics/nash-advanced-worldviews/worldview...