Only though open competition of merchants competing for our business are we able to see the best value and services rise. Every successful business has learned lessons from their competitors who failed. Allowing new competitors to arise requires tolerance from the public and accepting change, which are two of the three pillars of Let.Live.

Adam Smith and Friedrich Hayek are two of the most influential economists of all time, and both argued that unfettered competition produces the best products and prices for consumers. In this blog post, we will explore their ideas and how they apply to modern market economies.

Adam Smith, widely regarded as the father of modern economics, argued in his seminal work “The Wealth of Nations” that markets left to operate without government intervention or regulation would naturally produce the best outcomes for society as a whole. According to Smith, the pursuit of self-interest by individuals and firms in a competitive market leads to an efficient allocation of resources, with goods and services produced at the lowest possible cost and sold at the highest possible price that consumers are willing to pay.

In Smith’s view, this competition among firms leads to the development of new technologies and better production methods, which in turn leads to higher-quality products at lower prices. He famously wrote, “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.” In other words, it is the pursuit of profit that drives innovation and leads to better products and services for consumers.

Friedrich Hayek, a Nobel Prize-winning economist and philosopher, built upon Smith’s ideas in his book “The Road to Serfdom.” Hayek argued that government intervention in the economy not only fails to improve outcomes for consumers but also leads to unintended consequences that can ultimately harm society as a whole.

According to Hayek, government intervention in the economy distorts the price system, which is the mechanism that allows individuals and firms to make decisions about what to produce and consume. When the government sets prices or regulates markets, it undermines the signals that prices provide, leading to inefficient allocation of resources and higher costs for consumers. In Hayek’s view, unfettered competition is necessary for markets to work properly and for society to reap the benefits of innovation and efficiency.

In conclusion, both Adam Smith and Friedrich Hayek argued that unfettered competition produces the best products and prices for consumers. According to their ideas, markets left to operate without government intervention or regulation lead to efficient allocation of resources, innovation, and better products at lower prices.

There are anti-capitalism forces in the world today arguing that capitalism hurts the poor people, but those arguments use examples where the government is actually controlling the market through restrictions and regulations. The more competitors in a market, the better for the consumer, but also better for the competitors, as the competition forces them to excellence or dooms them to failure.

A society where people are free to live their lives includes one where anyone can sell their labor or goods in any market. The solution to the supposed “ills of capitalism” is less restrictions on the market, not more.

Originally published at LET.LIVE