In what way? There is nothing inherent about economic freedom that leads to a healthy, educated, engaged, and safe population, in the same way there is nothing inherent about a healthy, smart, and safe population that leads to economic freedom.

The US is one of the most economically free places in the world, and always has been, yet obesity is at all time highs, gen Z is the first generation to score less on standardized tests than the generation before them, and civilians killed by law enforcement is at an all time high.

Economic freedom is a very important pillar to a healthy and thriving society, but acting like it is a panacea is wrong. Economic freedom at it's extreme will only lead to a weakening of the middle class and consolidation of wealth among those holding the most wealth.

▲

WalterBright an hour ago | parent [-]

Free markets mean the only way to make money legally is to provide a product or service that other people want to buy. And people want to be healthy, educated, engaged and safe. In other words, it takes advantage of the inherently selfish nature of people to make others better off.

> obesity is at all time highs

Obesity is a choice. I know people won't like me writing that. I know it is very hard to lose weight. It's still a choice, though. I don't see how making people less free would change that.

> gen Z is the first generation to score less on standardized tests than the generation before them

The government is the primary institution that provides education, not the free market.

> civilians killed by law enforcement is at an all time high

I don't see how that is a result of economic freedom.

> Economic freedom at it's extreme will only lead to a weakening of the middle class

The US was much more economically free in the 1800s than now, and the middle class became the dominant class, by far.

> consolidation of wealth among those holding the most wealth.

Wealthy people get that way in a free market by creating products and services that other people want. In other words, they do not "consolidate" wealth, they create it.

▲

raptured-banal- 33 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

You psychopaths won't be happy until we've destroyed the entire planet in the name profit and the "economy" will you? I wish you felt empathy and had friends that you could care about and maybe you'd realize there is way more to life than making money. Put the ayn rand book down and work on connecting with people and trying to graduate from high school.

▲

wyre 25 minutes ago | parent [-]

What's a bummer is that Walter is a smart and talented engineer, yet has a very stubborn and out of touch economic perspective that is at least half a century expired.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Bright

	▲	stackghost 13 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Just like Kyrie Irving is a talented basketball player but also a catastrophically-deluded flat-earther, it's just as possible for gifted software engineers to have flawed reasoning about the economy.

▲

wyre 31 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Body weight is controllable, but is not the same thing as obesity, but scientific evidence does not suggest obesity is voluntary, but I'm not trying to talk about obesity. I was just merely using it as a proxy for societal health, because I hope you can agree that obesity is not healthy.

> The government is the primary institution that provides education

I thought there was a large section of free market libertarians that want to get rid of public schooling?

>I don't see how that is a result of economic freedom.

Again, i was using it as a proxy for safety, not economic freedom.

> The US was much more economically free in the 1800s than now

The middle class became the dominant class post-WWII. wtf are you talking about?

If I have one million people pay me $1000, I am creating value, but I not 'creating wealth' I would literally be consolidating the wealth of one million people into my bank account.

Owning desirable assets could be considered 'creating wealth' due to the price of those assets going up, but owning assets is not creating products and services that other people want.

I will go back to my original point, that economic freedom is not a panacea and does not solve for health, education, and safety, but rather creating things that people want to seperate them from their money. Health, education, and safety are all more effective when provided by the government.