Free market capitalism

Great Arguments, I hope to contradict most of them! Opening StatementBy definition, a Free Market Capitalist society is one in which there is no rule or regulation that inhibits the growth of businesses. There are no rules, no government regulation, and no guarantee that society would run properly. The economy, itself, is in danger all of the time, because there is no central authority keeping it together. The people in such a society do indeed have the ability to start a business, pay their workers what they want, and have what ever rules that they please within their business. The problem is that there is no true limit to what they can do. Huge corporations grow crops and make food, whilst also having standards that they must meat in order to sell their product. The government must put these regulations in place to protect us. Rebuttals"As I said, in a free market system one gains wealth to the extent that they satisfy their customers. If they start screwing up horribly, people will look to alternatives, and those companies better shape up or be replaced by better ones." This is entirely possible with regulation, i'm not trying to tell you that the government should completely abolish a Free Market at all. I am simply explaining that there must be a set of rules and guidelines in place to protect the people of the country. Without law, there can be no freedom."It's their business. Should they not be able to hire/do business with whomever they want? And furthermore should there be regulations that people working for jobs cannot refuse a job offer on the grounds of the employer's race, as reprehensible as that may be? Why is it all on the employers?If it's my house it's my rules. Why? I own my house. I also own my business. Thus, my business my rules, and if you don't like it don't do business with me."These rules have been put in place to stop personal bias from getting in the way of the development of society. People, in any classification, should not be judged based on factors they had no power to change. The people are protected under regulation and under law; no abolition of regulation will change the fact that our people are better off ruled under law, than not being ruled at all. It is quite apparent that you're not getting what i'm saying. Systems have been created, like the FDA, in order to make sure that the products that these businesses are putting out are indeed safe. If you allow the economy to run wild, it would collapse under the weight of its own prosperity."Your whole opening statement..."Franz Oppenheimer's assessment is true. However, I slightly disagree with his presentation. Regulation isn't violent, we are not talking about Socialism of Communism here, we are talking about why there MUST be regulation in order to have a stable society. Regulations are imposed by government indeed, I do not disagree that businesses would probably try to manipulate it in some way. This is why we have Responsible DEMOCRATIC Capitalism. The responsible part refers to the regulations that are put on businesses in order to stop them from taking advantage of their workers. The democratic part refers to the people being the ones that decide what those regulations are. Society as a whole establishes the rules, whatever the people are satisfied with, goes into law. Democracy is obviously flawed in some way, but we cannot undermine that it gives us some pretty important modern day principles. Without regulation, companies could have sulfur in our cheese burgers or pay us $0.02 a day. Regulation is what keeps our society going; in a Sociologist's perspective, people are in different social classes and some of those people simply cannot find a high paying job and have to settle with the first one they get. Sometimes my friend, beggars can't be choosers and the people often have to endure treatment that they don't feel benefits them. "No, it's called a bunch of people violently controlling others. It's the opposite of compassionate, and it certainly isn't responsible." I disagree friend, Responsible Capitalism isn't violent control, it's the first step to a stable society.To further explain myself, a free market would lead to corruption, a democratically regulated market would lead to stability. Definitions:Responsible Democratic Capitalism: A political and economic ideology that portrays the meaning of regulation that is mandated through public means. Privatization of law making within business is abolished, and society as a whole contributes to the safe keeping of the market. This does not mean that the people can vote for a business to be abolished. It means that all of the people have the ability to work at the business that had been created through the process of voluntary action. (Regulated Free Market)FDA: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or USFDA) is a federal agency of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, one of the United States federal executive departments. The FDA is responsible for protecting and promoting public health through the regulation and supervision of food safety, tobacco products, dietary supplements, prescription and over-the-counter pharmaceutical drugs (medications), vaccines, bio pharmaceuticals, blood transfusions, medical devices, electromagnetic radiation emitting devices (ERED), cosmetics, animal foods & feed and veterinary products.Sources:https://en.wikipedia.org...http://capitalism.org...http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...Sorry it took me so long, had things to deal with at home.Thank You,Bisking