Debate: Which side Government or No government
Side: No government society

For the free market to work perfectly, it must be perfectly efficient, and people perfectly informed.This is true of any system, so it is not a net argument against the free market.If it's not perfectly efficient, then the bad things that start to happen (business start to get the upper hand, pollute the environment, etc).Describe the effects, to the consumer, of a system where "businesses start to get the upper hand". Pollution of someone else's property is properly addressed by protection of property rights (see The Coase theorem), with or without the action of government.All I was saying is that people make decisions that are not always in their best interest.Who decides what is in your best interest?Is it not the right of each to decide that for himself?This is the "people are too stupid to know what is best for them, so the state must decide for them" argument.For the free market to work (not become corrupt, etc) people have to NOT make bad decisions...For the free market to work, all that is required is that consumers be free to choose the relative value of their available choices and be free to produce what they are better at producing to trade for those things which they value. The quality of the individual decisions is irrelevant, as a trade ALWAYS reflects that relative valuation, and communicates to the savvy producer, the demand for his product.The purpose of the free market is to efficiently allocate scarce resources. and be fully rational which is not the way they behave.People use means, to achieve ends. Because your ends are not their ends, and because they do not act in a way that will achieve your preferred ends, does not mean that they act irrationally.True. So we agree that one of the side effects of Libertarianism would be that people would have to uproot their lives and move each time their "market" does not support enough competition to be "efficient" and fair.The market, left to itself, is always efficient (that is its purpose. It is not the function of the market to be "fair", nor is it the function of government to make it so). To try to make it "fair" is to substitute political decisions for economic ones. This decreases the efficiency of ANY economic system, and is the primary reason that the economy is in the poor shape it is in.Because as soon as you have to go on the free market and "buy" your police and court, more money means you get better quality. Additionally, inefficiencies in the economy create corruption in the very organizations that are upholding your rights.Here is where people misunderstand libertarianism, and capitalism. If we are talking about government courts and police, then the less power you give government to do favors to one or another, then the less power they can sell to the highest bidder (in the court system). As for police, people already have a right to hire private security (increase the quality of their police protection)... but being taxed is not the same as being discriminated against.It is, if you are being taxed differently from someone else, based solely upon your ability to produce. Low taxes is not a human right.Correct, but equal treatment by your government, IS.I (and most people I think) don't see all the "rights" the same. I think you see everything under the umbrella of "property rights" and they are all equal. This is not the case in our society and never will be.That is because many see access to resources as "rights". Nothing can be a right, that must be supplied by the labor of another. To argue that the resources of another are your right, is to argue that you have the right to the service of another. How is this compatible with the idea that slavery is unjust?People don't see the "right to discriminate" and the "right to free speech" the same way. The effect the right has on the society MATTERS.How people see it is irrelevant. In exercising your right to discriminate, you do not violate any of the rights of anyone else. Neither do you violate the rights of others when exercising your right to free speech, on your property, or property which you have rented/borrowed for that purpose.When you exercise your "right" to government services, paid for by the labor of others, you are violating their property rights. The effect this has had on society is increased poverty, generational welfare, the near destruction of the black family in the inner cities, the whole "entitlement" culture, a poor economy, the eroding of natural rights, a huge federal government, and massive debt.