In Reply to: The Above Is An Erroneous Argument posted by Mike Porper on February 23, 2011 at 08:27:23:
Your last paragraph is true even though your first one about free markets is not. You can get to the current situation from a controlled or a free market. The latter would/did occur because classical music is more like an Edsel than a Mustang--most everyone prefers the latter so it takes a bigger and bigger share of the market and prevails in society to the extent that the Edsel goes out of existence. That is not a non-free market. That is an unregulated free market driven to an endpoint by market preference. Do you really think that if the big music businesses and stations went out of existence that suddenly many people would turn to trying classical music?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: The Above Is An Erroneous Argument - riboge 08:08:24 02/25/11 (2)
- Economic Darwinism - Mike Porper 08:48:03 02/25/11 (1)
- RE: Economic Darwinism - riboge 09:19:08 02/25/11 (0)