Arguments Against Government Intervention in Market

Reply

ViennaSausage Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2009 9:34 AM

rated by 0 users

•Government doesn't have incentive to correct the problem.

•Governments don't have enough information to correct problem.

•Intervention in markets can lead to unintended consequences.

•Intervention can eliminate the incentives to bring about long run solutions.

•Bureaucracies do not allow for fine tuning.

•Government intervention leads to more intervention. 

•Provision of public goods by government might take away the market for a private company. 

Any other arguments?  Are there flaws to the above arguments?

Reply

The Late Andrew Ryan replied on Wed, Oct 28 2009 1:04 PM

rated by 0 users

ViennaSausage:

•Government doesn't have incentive to correct the problem.

•Governments don't have enough information to correct problem.

•Intervention in markets can lead to unintended consequences.

•Intervention can eliminate the incentives to bring about long run solutions.

•Bureaucracies do not allow for fine tuning.

•Government intervention leads to more intervention. 

•Provision of public goods by government might take away the market for a private company. 

 

Any other arguments?  Are there flaws to the above arguments?

All funds used by the government are inevitably taken at gunpoint

Every time you use the government to solve the problem you are pretty much using the argument that "God can solve anything". It doesn't matter what the problem is or why its here the solution is always to force people do do things and expect that everything else will still be the same. Increase wages and assume that labor will still have the same value to employers. It doesn't matter what the market input or output is, the government can make it better without sacraficing anything!

Bringing in government ends or destorts the search to find non-violent and acceptable means to solve the problem.