If the top 1% owned half the houses, half the land, half the cars, half of all tangible things, then this would be a problem. They do not. Your value, or net worth, is based mostly on the past. The top 1%'s is based on expectations of the future. To draw an accurate comparison, one would need to look not at the current price of Walmart stock, for instance, but at the break up value of Walmart and all the other stocks held by the top 1%.
If the government didn't impose prices, the industries would. I agree that capitalism and free markets are a thing of the past, but I also believe that capitalism and free markets are totally different animals. Free markets are great. Capitalism destroys them.
The government gets involved when interest groups run amok. But that IS capitalism. Which is why I say capitalism is the arch-enemy of market economics.
Nah, Adam was a little bit naive. He didn't consider the inevitability of markets evolving toward your assemblage of government backed monopolies, but that is exactly what has shaken out. Some people like to think there is government/big capital dichotomy, but I don't think there's a c-hair's difference between the two.
