An underlying issue is that, for some, Free Market Capitalism is like a religion.

I think you misunderstand *why* economists support free markets. It’s actually *because* economics is so limited that free markets are preferred; If economics could predict the future perfectly, then a Planned Economy would be perfect: the Government would make the exact right decisions at the exact right times to maximize the growth of technology and prosperity. But because it is so hard to predict the consequences of economic actions, the more the Government messes with the economy, the more likely it is to accidentally screw something up.

This is of course talking about *actual* Economists, (who actually tend to be somewhat bolder in supporting government intervention than the stereotype suggests, especially those from the Keynesian school) Armchair “Economists” on the other hand, tend to be either extremists for either pure Market Economies or pure Command Economies, and use cherry picked economic studies to justify their view, much like how you described.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.