To paraphrase Jesus: "Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in economist's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous sheep." (Matt. 7:15).

Poor adam - in the absence of any evidence whatsoever in my posts, he misinterprets questioning the benefits of a pure Free Market economy as the equivalent of arguing against competition. 

He misinterprets the near-impossibility of transitioning from our current economic polyglot to a Free Market structure as a defense of a centrally planned economy. 

He refuses to acknowledge the fact that the Free Market policy of laissez faire - which he advocates - is at the core of the financial market meltdown. 

On and on, relying on the dictionary to bolster his shallow, misguided arguments rather than relying on economic theory where his topics are firmly rooted.

Then, there's BAA Boy who asks - hey, with so much money floating around today, why hasn't the economy skyrocketed? 

With one question, he admits the fallacy of Reaganomics reliance on Monetary Theory as a market regulator while, at the same time, confessing he doesn't understand why it doesn't (and, by implication, why it's sposta) work!

BAA Boy and adam are merely lower-info analogs of today's obstructionist GOPhers in Washington - they're NOT involved in the formulation of sound economic policy, they're involved in partisan ideological wrangling which has no place in economic debate.  

Do not be deceived - means and ends are both important whether in politics or economics.  But to bastardize economic dialogue with political rhetoric is a surefire path to nowhere - it predictably ends in name-calling because it's intellectually dishonest!

But then, when have we known adam or BAA Boy to be intellectual or honest?