All the crisis are consequences of free market. Because the market is unstable, there is no "invisible hand" ruling it, it's a crowd of humans doing business, diving into bubbles, then the bubbles pop etc. Think about Kondratiev and Schumpeter.
If you accept pure free capitalism, you also accept many collateral damages, such as extreme inequality (born in a rich family or a poor one), no stability (bubbles, crisis). The auto-regulation of the economy is brutal and violent.
I'm interested about BTC because I'm a programmer. But I'm not a libertarian like 90% of the Bitcoiners. I don't believe in a pure free market, because the power is then possessed by those who have the more money.
Printing money is artificial and can't be a long term solution, I agree with that though.
Im glad you stated that point of view because I think its a common view. Capitalism gifts the rich with overwhelming advantage, means oppression and misery for poorer masses. However I do not agree
First we have democracy and that is important and so its not absolute pure capitalism, nobody wants to argue one human should be less valid as a person then another
Then a court system also most countries have constitution or system of rights, all of those should balance out 'i'am rich, get out'
extreme inequality
With fixed currency you have equality from one coin to the next. With our system now, the FED produces money and it is not giving or selling in exchange for that worth it acquires. That is vastly more unequal. The dollars are not equal, some have access to large amounts more easily then others.
"invisible hand" ruling it, it's a crowd of humans doing business
The invisible hand is just a name for human nature. Its not random, we all start jobs, advance in life wanting to be at least bit richer. What drives capitalism is competition and that open struggle is productive for society not just rich people. This idea is hard to explain but say compare it to sprinters in a race, alot of work goes into getting 1st place. You might say only the winner gains, Im arguing society can benefit not just 1. All that effort by all runners is usually positive work, the athletes are healthier, maybe some technology/biology (whatever, some advance of some kind) is discovered along the way.
If one competitor starts cheating, its destructive to the sport. The FED producing new money is destructive, its not useful to society and its not competitive capitalism
failing of the gold standard
I think it was dollars which failed that standard. The gold being a cause of failure I dont think I can agree on though Ive heard it plenty, ie. tight money is cause of bankruptcy, etc Well they devalued dollars in 1930's, thats easy money and it didnt work then
