Hello Ashok,

Thank you for offering up the quote from Marx. I actually thought it sounded blind, foolish, and ignorant of the power of markets. As I responded to one of your fellow commenters, and I will quote here again:

"Let me ask state that, if markets cannot be criticized, then they cannot be improved. Do you believe that they are above improvement? If you side with the ‘absolutist’ camp on this – that markets are above reproach – then you are helping to support my point that there is a contingent of people that have a blind-faith, almost religious devotion to markets. Their criticisms take on the tenor of a middle ages European Catholic defending their Faith by saying that if those danged monarchs would just let us practice everything would be perfect. Then came Protestantism, to demonstrate another way to view the same situation.

"If, on the other hand, you believe they may be improved, let’s have that discussion. That’s the one I am interested in. With emerging topics that is the state we find all of ourselves in."

Also, no one is asking you do not bring forth your ideas. I asked you to be careful in how you characterize my thoughts. You need not infer anything about them, as I am right here to provide you with them. I reject being compared to Marx, as a trained economist. But again, do you believe markets are perfect? If so, that is a strong standard, and then you would also have to justify why you are an active manager.

As for free-markets being defended...I believe that human behavior is the source of markets. I note with great interest that in communist and socialist countries that the urge to trade naturally emerges. In the former U.S.S.R. those that wanted cigarettes from the west traded toilet paper for them. Those that wanted jazz records found something to trade. I believe markets are a natural extension of human behavior. So is war. Just because something is the natural expression of human behavior does not mean it cannot be improved. In the case of war, we have realized its deleterious effects. Even when you win, you have lost; if nothing else, by measuring it by its economic costs. One question for the pure markets in the absolute sense folks: if there are suppliers and demanders for nuclear weapons should these markets be allowed to function? What about biological weapons agents? If you agree that there is a role for disabling these markets then you need to roll back your absolutist stance. In response to this kind of an issue, we have created a solution that is outside the context of war, but tangent to it: diplomacy. That is in the same vein of what I am pointing out here. What is the solution that is outside of, or tangent to, markets that may improve them? Again, I don't pretend to have the answers. But I do know that markets fail sometimes, and I want to improve them. Are you on board with that?

Yours, in service,

Jason