Is free trade between countries the same as between individuals?

Capitalism and Laissez faire are not anarchy obviously!! You need to learn American definitions:


Definition of Laissez-faire Capitalism | Chegg.com
https://www.chegg.com/homework-help/definitions/laissez-faire-capitalism-45
Laissez-faire capitalism is a belief that unregulated capitalism will create the greatest benefit for all. Proponents of such a system believe that government interference, including tariffs or social safety nets, ultimately causes more harm than good by promoting or protecting inefficiency. In extreme forms, the philosophy has ...

 

I dont know what's worse: the idea that Americans are too thick to understand political economy and have to invent their own terms; or an inability to understand simple definitions.

Laissez faire is a particular type of capitalism. Of course it's neither achievable or desirable, but that's a different point. Capitalism and interventionism go hand in hand.

 

Actually our economy leads the world by far. Too bad the rest of the world does not know what we know and have our standard of living.

 

is this according to you or according to the dictionary?

 

According to the economic spectrum. That you don't know this is weird. It's bleedin obvious after all

 

the dictionary is obvious.

 

You won't find a dictionary that says 'capitalism: laissez faire'.

 

whoops just did in about 2 seconds!!
Laissez Faire Capitalism. "Laissez Faire" is French for "leave alone" which means that the government leaves the people alone regarding all economic activities. It is the separation of economy and state. There are two ways that a government typically is tempted to interfere with the economy.
Laissez Faire Capitalism - Importance Of Philosophy
www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Politics_LaissezFaire.html

 

Hahaha! You googled laissez faire capitalism. You didn't google "capitalism is laissez faire". Laissez faire is an unachievable and undesirable form of capitalism.

 

this is according to you and the sources you forgot to show us while I have 1000's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
are you embarrassed yet?

In Third Millennium Capitalism (2000), Wyatt M. Rogers, Jr. notes a trend whereby recently "conservative politicians and economists have chosen the term 'free-market capitalism' in lieu of laissez-faire".[23]

Laissez-faire, a product of the Enlightenment, was "conceived as the way to unleash human potential through the restoration of a natural system, a system unhindered by the restrictions of government".[17] In a similar vein, Adam Smith[when

Milton Friedman: The Great Laissez-Faire Partisan - Jstor
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4419000
by TI Palley - ‎2006 - ‎Cited by 3 - ‎Related articles
Milton Friedman: The Great. Laissez-faire Partisan. Despite the impact that he had on economic policy in the 1960s and. 1970s, today the global economic scenario is such that Friedman's. "hands-off minimalist" model could have dire consequences for the stability of economies. But in a sense, Friedman is the economist ...

 

That's feeble! They can't choose laissez faire because of the extent of government interventionism. It is true that right wing economics has adopted the term 'free market economics'. But that's just vocab abuse. For example, Reganomics application of Military Keynesianism was not laissez faire. Friedman's monetarism is also not laissez faire. It just demands inefficiency in the application of fiscal policy. Government interventionism is maintained.

You can try and refer to reductions in regulations (e.g. you're free to feed hormones and antibiotics to your animals), but that's just enabling rent seeking through supply side economics.

 

dear, for the 1000th time people can choose any word they want. That is where language comes from. Do you grasp it now??

 

nobody said it was!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

so????? capitalism and laissez faire do not mean anarchy or no govt and no culture. 1+1=2

 

Laissez faire means limited government. Are you honestly telling me that you think a US government is 'limited'?

The problem is you don't understand the basic economics. You're therefore easy to herd, whereby you accept inappropriate vocab like its the Gospel.

 

more so than all other major countries in human history. Still confused?

 

example or more of your typical BS

 

accepting the dictionary is a prelude to communication. OMG!!

 

Check out your country's debt, then get back to me with something resembling sense.

 

actually debt and limited govt are not same. 1+1=2

 

Yep, this is limited government in action: http://www.usdebtclock.org/

 

usa is limited compared to China Japan Korea France etc. 1+1=2

 

That you think that a debt that size is consistent with 'limited government' only amuses.

 

dear, everything is relative we are not talking absolutes. Do you still want to ban trade among cities in the USA since some cities are always disadvantaged just like the USA is disadvantages when trading with China.

 

There are two aspects here. First, the idea that such a debt is consistent with limited government is ludicrous. That's something the left and right would agree on. Second, you refer to disadvantage. It sounds like you don't even understand how comparative advantage works.