Why does it have to be government vs market?

[Aegon]

I absolutely hate that people support American crony capitalism and pretend that economic conservatism is actually promoting individual economic autonomy, and not just lining the pockets of corporations and the super wealthy while inhibiting social mobility. Do economic consrvatives (so, this includes Republicans as well as libertarians) actually know what a free market looks like? As it stands, it would be impossible to achieve in the United States. If the government decided to entirely deregulate almost everything tomorrow, you would doubtlessly be looking at a corporatocracy (some may argue we already are one, but I'd disagree.)  Despite being a "leftist," I actually do believe in the power of a TRULY free market. And I think it could be achieved with a bigger government. I've been studying in detail the political philosophy of social democracy and the Nordic model. The idea is that, after the government expands entitlements substantially to its citizens (universal healthcare, free or very low cost education, and a comprehensive welfare state), the individual is now truly empowered and has the means to be successful that are nearly entirely absent from American capitalism. Only then can the government begin to slowly deregulate the market and let business be done nearly unrestricted.

This idea makes a lot of sense to me and my favorite thing about it is that it completely tears down the bullshit Reaganist idea that the government and the market need to constantly be at odds with one another, rather than working together to benefit each other and the individual.

Thoughts? I could be mistaken and idealistic about how well this works, but the Nordic countries have been doing very well economically and they consistently rank among happiest countries in the world. Any citizens of those states here?