The Market

One of the arguments that conservatives and libertarians like to bring up is that government regulations do not belong in a free-market economy. Such an economy would be inherently self-regulating by the market forces of supply and demand, and any outside interference would only hinder the control that the average consumer has on the market. This argument makes several assumptions in order to be considered valid.

The first assumption is that all participants in the market process are honest, or at least stupid enough to get caught in their deception. The consumer is not always aware that they have purchased an inferior product, or paid a premium price for a sub-premium product. Without the support of government regulation, the individual consumer's only recourse would be to withhold their business from the offending producer or vendor, and to make other consumers aware of the deception. In a very large economy such as ours, the loss of a few disgruntled consumers has little impact. Also, is it practical to research the background and honest value of every good and service we purchase? Not every consumer has that kind of time available.

Another assumption is that no consumer is coerced or influenced to purchase goods that they do not need. The modern science of consumer psychology used by advertising agencies is a powerful tool. Enough people are exploitable by the use of suggestion to make almost any product profitable, if it is pushed hard enough and broadcast over a large enough medium.

"Let the buyer beware" is often the supporting argument for free-market economics. This is a bit like blaming the victim of a con artist for being fooled by the scam. When someone takes advantage of human nature for their personal gain, should we answer that we need to be less human? And which is the more practical course to deal with the problem: Educate all consumers to avoid all possible deceptions from all producers and merchants? This information is freely available and there are many advocacy groups who promote intelligent and informed consumer practices. Still, the greedy and corrupt always seem to find a new way to take money from the consumer without providing an equitable product or service. Also, the larger corporations have the advantage of wealth, power, and influence - all of which the average consumer lacks by comparison - so that, even when caught in a deception, the corporation can simply bury the whistle-blowers in litigation, preventing further knowledge of their abuse from becoming wide-spread enough to effect the market.

The other option is create government oversight, in the form of consumer-protection regulations, to balance the power of the corporations with the power of law. This is also an imperfect solution, and there is still a need for consumer education and awareness, but the power of law gives the consumer a fighting chance, when the need arises. This serves to increase consumer confidence, which, in the long run, helps create a better environment for the market as a whole to prosper.

Occupy

The Occupy Movement is over a month old, and showing no sign of slowing down or losing momentum. I believe this is, partly, because the majority of protesters are unemployed and angry about it, and therefore have nothing better to do. But, more significantly, there are also a lot of people who are fed up. Fed up with the lack of accountability of Wall Street and big business in general. Fed up with being lied to by politicians and the media. Fed up and frustrated by stagnant wages, rising prices, and lack of benefits, while watching the top 1% getting richer and richer - "The economy is doing fine, just not for most of us."

People are fed up with a lot of things, and taking this opportunity to express that feeling. This is why some people find it easy to say "I don't know what they want". There is not just one thing that people are angry about. There is a lot of problems that need to be addressed, that nobody seems to be interested in addressing. That's what the movement is really about. It is not a giant finger pointing out a single problem. It is a lot of fingers pointing at a lot of problems.

Adding to the confusion are the occasional anarchists and others who are there to generate chaos for its own sake. So far, these people have been held back by the more rational protesters, who want to keep things peaceful and non-violent - and are doing a better job at this than the police, who can't seem to tell the protesters apart.

Overall, the Occupy Movement is not about creating solutions to the problems it is pointing out. It is just the beginning. It is "Step One: Identify the Problems to be Addressed". Next comes "Step Two: Work Together to Solve the Problems."

Step Two is going to take some work.