I don’t understand your last two paragraphs.

Could you explain your point of view in simple English, with preferably a real world example to add clarity.

Paddy.

Of course it isn’t a solution for the immediate difficulties faced by Ireland.

ok, pursuing free market is not as simple as merely focusing all energies
on one method of economic integration, in the case of bubbles/POnzi schemes all on that of market exchange and ignoring the two other
methods of economic integration, re-distribution and reciprocity.

The consequence of priority being given to exchange relations is an unlinking
of social relations from economy relations, so that society is viewed
as being de-coupled from the economy.
Hence that pervasive feeling of people’s worth being judged by what
they are oppossed to who they are,…. Karl Polanayi

On Invisible Hand,.. works it’s magic when exchanges concur to above rules of
diligence when operating free markets,.

On monopolies, de-coupling explained above opens the door for closing
down perfect competition by ignoring the 3 protocols and the invisible
hand stalls.

There was a Prime Time about a month ago, where different characters who had lost money in the last year were rolled out. There was a Kerry farmer who sold a field for zoned land, and invested the 1 million euro proceeds in bank shares. He lost the lions share. When asked what he thought, he was very honest. He said ‘Ultimately, I could have put into a deposit account for 3% interest. But I didn’t. I wanted big gains, big money. It’s my own fault’.

His was the dumb money. He invested, not understanding his investment. But crucially, he has learnt about his mistake, and will not make the same mistake twice.

This is my point about learning the lesson of the market. If you distort it’s outcome by interference, it’s lesson will never be learnt. And behaviour will not be modified.

So why have a market at all? Well, one good reason is to provide a pricing mechanism for tradable items ; in the absense of a free market, how would pricing be determined.

People have argued that if we have no market, these excesses will never appear in the first place. Well is that true? Will the nature of people be different in the absense of a market? I don’t think so. I still think we will have greed, and stupidity, and the dumb and the smart money, and all the other human foibles. That’s why I view the long term trends of the market as reflective of natural value, and a useful teacher about exercising judgement, and assessing true value and risk.

The lesson that most ordinary Joe’s should learn from the events of recent years, is don’t invest in something you don’t control or understand. Don’t complain when your sloppy investment goes wrong, and your sense of ‘divine right’ to make a profit is shattered. And finally, a housing market should be different to a stock market in that housing fulfils a basic social need ; but if you treat it like a stock market, and you lose, you – and no-one else – should bear your losses.

Paddy.

By all means chip in.

What specific monopolies and ‘invisible hands’ are you referring to?

Seems to me the market has reached a sane verdict on the Celtic Bubble. It was all froth.

If I had to criticise any aspect of recent events, it would be the freedom that Irish society, and societies in general, has had to promote and participate in such excesses in the first place. Prevention better than cure, and all that.

It’s easy to blame external factors ; in my opinion, the real blame lies within.

Paddy.