I'm not joking. I find it ironic that you say they "kill free enterprise" when the "solution" of regulation kills it even more. If a company is good at something; if it has a large market share, a lot of consumers, why should it be punished? It has those customers because it provides a good service. There isn't anything stopping another company from being formed with a competitor product, other than the regulation on business that scares off the people with ideas.
A case in point would be Microsoft. For years they provided an Operating System solution that 99% of people used. They had a monopoly because they were forward thinking, they were successful, and it worked for most of the people. However, in recent years they have been struck back slightly by the increase in Linux netbooks and laptops, the continuous advances of Apple, and of course Solaris. Monopolies are not permanent, and they can easily be crippled by a superior product (Firefox, Chrome, Opera vs Internet Explorer for another example).
I don't see any problem with Laissez-faire economics; all it requires is people to think about new approaches to government. I used to be a left-wing person, thinking the government should have a control over things, but then I realised that the "government" has no reason to demand such things when it fails so miserably so often. A smaller government that focuses on maintaining human rights and civil liberties is a path to true freedom. A market that runs itself (through Laissez-faire capitalism) is the natural solution to an economy not controlled by a government, but encouraged by one.
A case in point would be Microsoft. For years they provided an Operating System solution that 99% of people used. They had a monopoly because they were forward thinking, they were successful, and it worked for most of the people. However, in recent years they have been struck back slightly by the increase in Linux netbooks and laptops, the continuous advances of Apple, and of course Solaris. Monopolies are not permanent, and they can easily be crippled by a superior product (Firefox, Chrome, Opera vs Internet Explorer for another example).
I don't see any problem with Laissez-faire economics; all it requires is people to think about new approaches to government. I used to be a left-wing person, thinking the government should have a control over things, but then I realised that the "government" has no reason to demand such things when it fails so miserably so often. A smaller government that focuses on maintaining human rights and civil liberties is a path to true freedom. A market that runs itself (through Laissez-faire capitalism) is the natural solution to an economy not controlled by a government, but encouraged by one.
