You are just spinning my words, yes an unregulated market is a form of free market, but a free market has to be more than that.
An unregulated market can become infested with cartels, because it's unregulated.
A free market doesn't have inteference neither from private governments (cartels) nor public governments (state).
I gave you Webster's definition of "free market" which you expressly agreed with; but now you say that "a free market has to be more than that", when it isn't more; it is just that definition.
This stalling of yours leads me to believe that private businesses, in the US., do enjoy a free market: they buy and sell at privately set prices and compete on equal terms, without gov. price control.
You clearly are looking for an
unregulated market, be it of
persons or property - where for ex. cartels have a right to exist.
You are deliberately cherry picking and spinning my words. I said that I agree with the definition, but the definition only covers 1 aspect of the free market, the free market encompasses that definition, but it's more than that.
It's like a venn diagram between the dictionary definition, and my definition, and the intersecting point is the correct one.
You know exactly how much cartels and the government distorts the market, however you dont admit it directly. How can a free (freedom) market be one that is distorted by these forces.
Cartels dont fit in the definition of free markets, because when the competition is high, then cartels cant exist, since none of the players have enough share to turn over the rest of them.
Think about it as the bitcoin mining distribution, even if the top 3 mining sites bind together they still cannot reach the 51% majority.Why?
Because the bitcoin mining space IS a free market.