I don't recognize the validity of the above statement. If there were one government, and it was one dedicated to freedom, one can imagine that it would allow a free market. OTOH, if it were operated as are most of the world's governments, it would be the opposite, based at some level on Central Planning.
Democrats don't understand the dynamic impact of taxes on the economy, either, so it must not happen.
How do tariffs enacted by congress in the US fall under your definition of central planning for world government? I thought tariffs were isolationist, protectionist? (In fact, they are and that is what is good about them.)
Democrats aren't the only herd animals.
See # 87.
Since there is not much possibility of real free trade in today's world, there are going to be times when protectionism is appropriate. Probably not too many, but some. Also, in my very first reply to you, I noted the importance of national defense, I had meant to imply that there will probably always be at least a few industries that need to be kept local, thus protected.
Nevertheless, the concept of free trade is one with which I am comfortable, its opposite, Central Planning, with government deciding price and wage, and directing the econony, is one which I oppose on principle.
Incidentally, the herd animal tag line is a direct reference to the Democrat Pary's affinity with socialism and central planning. I am advocating the opposite, but if individual freedom and personal liberty were the characteristics of the herd, which they aren't, then I would count myself in.
Back later.