>Do people think that competitive markets, where people
>had equal access to capital, would necessarily be a
>bad thing? One criticism that never seems to be
>levelled at western "market" economies - is that
>without equality of access to capital, there can be no
>equality of competition. I'm not sure how one would go
>about providing that equality though.
I'd say they're a bad idea, even with access to capital. The ups and downs of the markets invariably mean some people will, through chance if no other reason, profit while others lose out, leading to more concentration of capital ownership. There would be no way for the system to maintain equilibrium on its own, I imagine. I can't see the "winners" nobly turning over their money to the "losers". You'd eventually end up with today's status quo. As for equality of competition, that went by the board a long time ago if it was ever anything more than false consciousness. As for providing that equality, i.e. redistributing access to capital in the form of wealth, I imagine that's what any "left-leaning" government does via progressive taxation.
Todd
_________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx