3 of 5

Write now Article Tools

The Libertarian free trade argument promotes free trade as an absolute good. The real world is complex and no reasonable person should want all human activity to be regulated only by free markets and free trade.

Very few people want to see free trade in murder. We don't want it to be legal to kill people for a fee. "The Boss paid me to kill him, at market rates," should not be a defense at trial.

The benefits of economic and social freedom are well known, and I believe that the Libertarian position, if not taken to extremes, is a sound one. The question is where can lines be drawn to provide the best benefit to society.

The cocaine trade is a good example of where reasonable people may differ on whether to go with freedom, or with prohibition. While I believe prohibition leads to more cocaine use (because it is profitable to push it) and violence, I cannot dismiss entirely those who believe the damage the drug does to individuals is such that trade in cocaine should be banned.

According to current legal theory the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the right to regulate interstate commerce, and all commerce inside the U.S. is interstate commerce. In practice this regulation has had some benefit, but in many cases it has gone far beyond what I think is appropriate. I believe that commerce that does not cross state borders is not interstate commerce. The writers of the Constitution were trying to prohibit import and export tariff at state boundary lines. I do not think they were contemplating the Federal Government micromanaging the economy. Following the Constitution's intent, I believe, would go far towards balancing the rewards that come from free markets against the benefits that are sometimes to be had from regulation.

Those who back the pure Libertarian position should take a good, long look at the real world. The profit motive can be good, but it also induces a strong human desire to cheat. I want the food I eat to be safe, and I want the medicines that are prescribed to me to be scientifically tested for safety and effectiveness. I am more than willing to put up with a little regulation when my life is being protected by it.

Another problem with free trade and free markets is the tendency of auction pricing to push prices far from equilibrium. We saw this recently in the housing market and in 1998-1999 in the stock market, particularly with Internet stocks. When the price of anything is falling anyone who is a buyer and realized this has good reason to delay purchases. On the other hand sellers have reason to sell quickly, before prices fall further. This tends to push prices far below where they would be if they simply balanced normal supply and demand. The opposite is true when prices are rising. Are stocks or houses rising in price? Everyone wants to buy, no one wants to sell until the bubble bursts.

I do believe that freedom is important. But many other factors are important to me as well, in particular ethical behavior. I believe ideologies should be tempered by real-world observations. Human civilization is complex; reducing it to a simple formula like the Libertarian view on free markets is dangerous. Not as dangerous as totalitarian creeds like fascism or communism, but dangerous to good decision making.

I believe the United States of America is over-regulated. I believe the federal, state, and local governments interfere too much in people's lives. I believe taxes are too high and the governments spend too much.

But I am not willing to throw out all law and regulation. Free trade is a good thing, but it needs to be promoted within a balanced, real-world perspective.

Learn more about this author, William Meyers.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Critique: The Libertarian free trade argument?
We want to hear your view. Write now!