>goods prices have nothing to do with cost of living
🤔

Not nothing, and not everything.

literally everything by definition

Prices are just one component of cost of living. The other is income.

which is another price

Your problem is that we don't have a free market in money.

We don't have a free market in anything.

That is the most important one.

If that is granted, all else follows.

You can blame the ECB for the uprising in france more than macron.

https://mises.org/library/free-market-monetary-system

If it doesn't have "nothing to do with free trade", why would you say it did, verbatim, in a discussion about cost of living?

The social problems usually claimed about Japan are not due to trade.

That's not what was being discussed, for starters. Second it could easily be argued that high cost of living contributes to social issues

And so-called free trade contributes to social issues.

The free trade you admitted doesn't exist contributes to social issues?

That was a statement about free trade in general.

Okay, so where's the social-issue-causing free trade?

The decline of domestic production is rather obviously social-issue-causing.

misallocations of resources causes the boom bust cycle, so it seems logical to regulate markets, but credit expansions are what causes misallocations of resources, so the correct solution is the opposite of what seems intuitive.

Reading Mises is a misallocation of resources.

lol. kill yourself

Only if people refuse to adapt to the market. Further the consolidation of power in the hands of corporations (a government defined entity, need I remind you) and high cost anti competitive practices is anything but free trade

If the market isn't free then there's no reason for us to adapt to it.

Anything other than perfect competition is socialism. Reeeeeeeeeeeeee

🤔
>there's no need to adapt to conditions if they aren't market driven
>but this one segment of this larger system is "free trade", so free trade is the cause of social ills

The 'free trade' regime we have is the cause of social ills. Whether the current regime truly represents the ideology is beside the point.

Wot
>discussing a concept
>it doesn't matter if X actually matches that concept
🤔 🤔 🤔 🤔 🤔 🤔 🤔

There may be a self-preserving rational argument for adapting to non-free market conditions, but there's no economic argument.

The real social ills are caused by the attempt to realize the free trade concept. It's like the socialists constantly chasing 'real socialism'.

?????
>government mandated and regulated pursuit of profit growth is pursuit of a free market

I guess socialism is now the free market too. Everything is free market

Free market achieved

Don't bother, there's no helping those who don't want to be helped.

I think I'm done bothering, too, since neither of you are trying to have a conversation here.

self awareness has peaked

```"There exist, indeed, certain general principles founded in the very nature of language, by which the use of symbols, which are but the elements of scientific language, is determined. To a certain extent these elements are arbitrary. Their interpretation is purely conventional: we are permitted to employ them in whatever sense we please. But this permission is limited by two indispensable conditions, first, that from the sense once conventionally established we never, in the same process of reasoning, depart; secondly, that the laws by which the process is conducted be founded exclusively upon the above fixed sense or meaning of the symbols employed."
-John Locke.```

But, A != A, so fuck it.

Or more accurately, !A apparently equals A. We just haven't regulated things enough. Bring in more rules so we can get rid of that pesky free trade we don't have

✊

I can't find any answer to I'll ask here. What makes legally banning something a good idea? What metrics should we use to decide?

For example banning the use of non see through back packs