The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
11 Points

Should the United States leave the mixed economy ideals and adopt a free-market anarchy system?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/24/2012 Category: Economics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,420 times Debate No: 23134
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)




I have always been interested in this topic. Myself and my opponent will weigh the pros and cons of adopting a free-market anarchy. I will argue the pro side.

Free-market anarchism-an individualist anarchist philosophy in which monopoly of force held by government would be replaced by a competitive market of non-monopolistic organizations providing security, justice, and other defense services.

First round acceptance.


I accept, go.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting :)

Now, let me outline the argument with this. I understand its not feasible to change the entire economic system of the United States at this time. This argument will just be over whether a free market anarchy could prosper more than our already present mixed economy system does.
Now the word anarchy is usually a negative term used to describe chaos and unorganization. In a free-market anarchy, this is not so. A free-market anarchy just means that everything would be privately owned. The monopoly of force held by the government would be replaced with competing, non-monopolistic firms. Free-market anarchism is just an extreme view of libertarianism.

Anarchism comes in many different forms. They all however, lack a central government. Different forms of anarchism state different things. Now keep in mind, most free-market anarchistic ideas do not lack government, just a central government. The word government is defined in many ways for different societies. The overall reason for a government is just organization. In Minarchism, or minimal statism, the only legitimate function for a state, is protection individuals from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud, and the only legitimate governmental institutions are the military, police, and the courts.

Some of these things, such as police, could also be handled privately in a free market anarchy.

Now, because a true free-market anarchy has never really taken place on a large scale, this leads to many unknowns. But, all governments always have their unknowns. The main argument is that being free is always better than being unfree.

Benefits of a free-market anarchy:

No Taxation
In a free-market anarchism there is no taxation. There is only voluntary paying customers. This does away with people being taxed without their consent. This would eliminate many problems in the U.S. The unemployment rate would decrease. When people are able to buy goods, all businesses grow and expand. This allows for businesses to hire more workers. This stimulates the economy.

Cheaper and Higher Quality Goods and Services
Competition between competing firms tends to produce cheaper goods and higher quality services.

Agreements Are Made Faster

Economies with a central government always have to conclude "which part of the government will do this?" Or "which part of the government will pay for that?" Or "What new government agency will handle this?"
In a free-market anarchism, there's always one conclusion, "What will the government do?" Nothing.
The free market would handle any problems without the unnecessary involvement from the government. The government always have to come up with complicated solutions especially pertaining to the cost that solution requires. In a free-market anarchy, the private businesses would handle this directly and there would be no need to resolve disputes on how much they are going to need to tax the citizens to pay for this. People would voluntarily pay businesses. Businesses would handle this on their own budget.

There Would Be Little Or No Inflation
Because the competition between businesses would keep most prices low, inflation would cease to exist. Economists generally agree that high rates of inflation and hyperinflation are caused by an excessive growth of the money supply. In the United States, a major role in this would be the Federal Reserve, since they are a cause for the overproduction of the dollar. In a free market anarchy, there would be no central government, and no central bank.

The U.S. Dollar Would Be Worth More
Since there is very little inflation, and the competition keeps the prices low, the value of the dollar is increased.

More Freedom
Ultimately, the citizens have more freedom. It is always better to be free, than unfree.

Foreign policy
The Foreign policy that would take place in a free-market anarchy would not be the same type of foreign policy we see today in America's current system. America does not, and should not have to be the policeman of the world. Businesses would be able to trade with foreign countries at their will. No wars or conflicts would have to take place unless attacked first.

Now with any free market, states blame the free market for the problems the state causes. The state owns the roads and absurdly under prices their use, and statists blame the free market for making too many cars and causing traffic jams. The state monopolises town planning, and statists blame the free market for "urban blight"The state monopolises the money trade, and statists blame the free market for credit squeezes and slumps and inflation. All of these problems are caused by the state itself.

My opponent will have to show significant reasons why our current economic system is a better system.




-----------Income taxes and Growth Assumption---------------

Income tax cuts don't have real evidence that it stimulates the economy. Look at the comparisons between the Bush Tax Cuts and the Bill Clinton Income taxes. During Bill Clinton's presidency, the economy was vibrant. Economic growth was strong. [2] After the Bush Tax Cuts, job growth was weak [1] [3] The rich tend to invest in financial securities, not expanding business. [4] [5] America needs a stronger future with equal opportunities.

Capitalist Mixed-Market Economy

C1: Regulation is Needed

  • Creates a level playing field and ensures competition
  • Maintain quality standards for services
  • Protects consumers
  • Ensures sufficient information in sales
  • Prevent enviornmental degradation
  • Preventing financial instability from risk taking by financial institutions
  • Guarantee Wide Acess To Services

Level Playing Field

Government, through the use of a social safety net, can help assist low-income or vulnerable individuals. These social programs part of the safety net raises the overall standard of living, allowing for more productive employees, and stronger and larger consumer base, greater entrepreneurship, and a more dynamic economy overall. Programs such as these have decreased poverty from about 22% to a low of 11%. [7] Also, since the starting line for life is not always equal, government can facilitate opportunity by helping construct better schools, help create better families through education, and help individuals become productive.

Maintains Quality Standards

The market economy often lets quality sink so prices can be lowered, and is evident in many cases to get higher profits. Some examples include Chinese producers putting melamime (a toxic chemical) in baby formula. [8] Or when Chinese producers put lead paint on baby toys for lower prices, to get higher profits. [9] Or when US producers put chemicals, rat feces, dead rats, and scraps from factory floors in the "food" to maximize cost efficiency. [10]

Business will not remedy this problem, they will only subsidize it, because the goal is profit.

The solution is to have government inspect food and other consumer products so that they are all of good quality, are pure in content and honest in labeling, so that citizens enjoy the benefits of ethical business.

Protecting Consumers

In addition with minimum quality standards, consumers need to be protected from the negative effects of business. The Great Recession was caused by a large part by subprime loans. Many individuals were interrogated into buying things they couldn't afford by predatory lending. [11] Another example was during the Great Depression, when banks went bankrupt, and consumers lost their life savings. The government can remedy these problems. Fraud and financial abuse is a huge concern as well.

The solution is to have transparent guidelines for business, so that consumers are treated ethically, and their money is held with less risk. Protecting consumers can be done to serve both ethical business and a strong consumer base.

Protecting the Environment

Water, air, and land was polluted by businesses to gain higher profits. Before the Clean Air and Clean Water acts, many rivers were polluted, and so was air. Business without regulation usually goes against the environment. We don't need this, we can protect our precious heritage and environment while enjoying economic prosperity.

C2: Public Services, Justified Taxes -- All have a chance to succeed

The American public has determined that some services are best provided by the public sector because EVERYBODY should have access to these services, not just those that can afford them. Taxes pay for these services, but in return, taxes allow people to get rich off the government and the people.

These taxes are justified because the taxes pay for the infrastructure, legal system, educational resources, and economic opportunities that allow citizens to make a lot of money in the first place, and allows opportunity for those at the bottom of the economic ladder a chance to succeed. Second, the social safety net provided raises the overall standard of living, allowing more productive employees, more entrepreneurship, a stronger consumer base, and a more dynamic economy overall.

To counter the effects of economic upheaval, unemployment benefits and a safety net protects individuals. To reduce pollution, we regulate it to protect our clean air and water. We all contribute to national projects through taxes as well, such as space exploration, which is too expensive for the market. The medical establishment, judicial system, system of money, interstate highway system, and total infrastructure is payed for by contributing a fraction of our earnings. All of these benefits, just for some of our money.

C3: We don't need a deregulated market again

With lack of any government, here are some of the consequences that we got out of from the time the US had a predominantly free market economy of the late 1800s (all [12])

1. Unfair profits made by businesses: False advertising, secret deals, etc.

2. Bad Working Conditions: Inhumane conditions to work in, long hours with low pay, working with dangerous tools with no protections

3. Unsafe Products: Products that were poisonous and were unsanitary, made cheaply but were unhealthy due to chemicals and such

4. Not enough economic security: No workers compensation, unemployment insurance, social security for workers and elderly

5. Unstable Economy: Inflation is uncontrolled by a central force, not able to be dealt with

6. Environmental Damage: Water, air, and land was polluted by businesses to gain higher profits

C4: Stable Economy is Important

Government intervetion, by using fair, opportunity-driven programs and necessary regulation to protect the common good smoothes out the economic cycle. Before regulation and public programs, the recessions of the pre-World War I era were relatively frequent and quite variable in size. This is consistent with the fact that before World War I, the government had little influence on the economy. Prewar recessions stemmed from a wide range of private-sector induced fluctuations in spending, such as investment busts and financial panics, that were left to run their course. Recessions occurred frequently as a result, and some were quite large. [13] [12] [14]

Since we now have a Social Safety net, necessary regulation, and more effective government, recessions no longer wreak havoc on individuals' standards of living as they once did.


"Agreements made faster"

Basically my opponent says that private business can replace ALL OF THE GOVERNMENT. While it is true the government can privatize some functions, we need others. Without opportunity-driven programs, the less well off are likely to be stuck there, in the cycle of poverty, since they cannot afford to improve their education and value of labor. So, with no government, you are creating a trap for the poor. [16]

"Little to no inflation"

I proved earlier that inflation was highly variable in a free market economy.

"U.S. Dollar worth more"

Contradiction. In my opponent's system, the dollar WOULD BE ELIMINATED! So, tangible goods (hamburger) would have to be bartered with something else (my watch). So, we would have a barter system. I will expand in later rounds.

"More Freedom"

With a cycle of poverty with many stuck, the notion of freedom is absurd. [16]

"Foreign Policy"



The advantage of this type of market allows competition amongst providers with regulations in place to protect society as a whole. With the government being present in the economy it brings a sense of security to sellers and buyers. This security helps maintain a stable economy.


Debate Round No. 2


AlextheYounga forfeited this round.


Extend all arguments.

A Stronger America comes when we collaborate together. Smart government, in which the public and private sectors work together for the best prosperity, can create a stronger future. We can help lift up our economy by ensuring that everybody has a real opportunity at the American dream, to create broad prosperity and better equality. Mutual responsibility is needed though, so we work together towards the common good while holding the best of our traditional values. Progress is needed. We should implement our traditional, progressive values of equity, equality, effective, smart government, self-nurturance and responsibility, public nurturance, civil rights, and making sure everybody gets a fair shot at success to translate these real values into a prosperity that can be shared by all for the greater good.

Debate Round No. 3


I have decided to forfeit my argument. Not that I agree with everything my opponent is saying, but debating things that don't correspind to the direct argument itself would be pointless.

I will agree that some government intervention is necessary, and that the benefits of a society with a market with some government intervention is necessary and a free market anarchy would not work as well. But I do not agree that MANY of the regulations that are put in place by the government are necessary, or even beneficial to the state as a whole.

Another reason is because something has come up, and I do not have the time or the patience to debate at this time.
I apologize to my opponent and I thank him for accepting in the first place.
We may not see eye to eye, but a free market anarchy would not work as well as one with government intervention.


Government itself has to be reformed, as in the ways of being more responsive, efficient, oriented around the responsiblities of government, and has to be smarter and effective.

My opponent has conceded.
Debate Round No. 4


AlextheYounga forfeited this round.


My opponent conceded.

Vote CONtra
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by AlextheYounga 6 years ago
Im very sorry i let the time run out. I've been a little busy. Ill try to get an argument when i can.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Zaradi 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Xerge 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession...
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: ff