Robin writes:
> I also marvel at progressives who can look at the world today and not be
> struck by the obvious need to have fewer markets -- even zero in the limit.
Robin doesn't say what limit he's taking. For myself, I'd prefer
that progressives make a distinction between markets for productive
"endowments": labor power, natural resources, and capital in the
sense of private wealth--and markets for the products of such inputs--
peanut butter, personal computers, CD players. I think we should
primarily be concerned with changes in the former not the latter.
Furthermore, it's possible that we might only wish to transform
rather than eliminate the former. Example: create a membership
market in a labor-managed economy, and bar capital suppliers from
owning firms.
So if there are now N markets, perhaps the "obvious need" is for N-1
of them (or thereabouts) in the limit.
It's possible that this view represents a failure of vision on my
part. I'm often open to consciousness-raising, though. Gil
