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

Or certain fire arms.

Or banning certain foods? Kender egs

You mean Kinder Eggs. Kender are halflings from Dragonlance or some such nonsense and Kinder Eggs are no longer banned
And I think it should be on the basis of principle and that almost nothing should be necessarily banned across the board

Kinder Eggs were never specifically banned. Selling food with inedible parts completely inside them was banned since the 1930s. The Kinder Egg company always had the option to change their packaging to sell in the US. That is why the US eggs are half candy and half toy. Vs candy outside and toy inside like EU.

banning something is generally done when it is believed that the item/action would cause large scale harm to the public

```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?```
If it leads to violence or death. And that is inevitable with this thing/belief, then we should ban it.

And of course if the company making it abused its position and market dominance, then we should also ban their products for a time.

an example of that would be the Geforce Partner Programme...

Geforce?

I'm going to assume you're not talking about the graphics card company

#BlackMarketsMatter

*>If it leads to violence or death. And that is inevitable with this thing/belief, then we should ban it.*
So, ban statism?

That would pretty much cover everything.

@Pendell yes that geforce

What did they do?

They basically try to cut deals to get optimization priority. I think a couple of the segments of the agreement came off a bit shady but I can't remember off the top of my head. @Stefan Payne would likely do a better job of explaining Nvidia's fuckery

```I'm going to assume you're not talking about the graphics card company```
Yes, I am talking about nVidia. They are one of the most evil companys, right at the same level as Intel is or was.
They basically forced their partners to not sell competing Products with the Gaming Label.

THAT let for example ASUS to change the name of their AMD Cards to MARS (IIRC) and other "funny" stuff. But they were not allowed to sell them under the same label as their nVidia Product.

It wasn't done because Kyle Benett from HardOCP blew the Whistle on this shit and called nVidia out for that crap - no other person had the balls to do that and some even defended nVidia for this shit or even after that attacked Kyle for what he did.

Jesus

The worst thing I knew of nVidia doing was the RTX cards XD

I never knew they were that shitty in their business practices

Oh yeah and their laptop graphics cards sucked ass until like very very recently.
They always were known for having issues

Intel and nVidia have had their heads up their asses for too long and AMD is on track to steal huge sections of their respective markets if they don't wise up.