What are some of the most obvious benefits of the free market system that have been most unjustly criticized and discounted? Biggest benefit (IMHO): Zero coercion from the state or it's representatives. Human beings are pretty smart when it comes to taking care of themselves.
What are some of the most outrageous fallacies concerning Capitalism? That the "rich get richer and poor get poorer." I HATE that one! It's such a bogus lie! I also hate all the implications that human nature is inherently depraved, that we'd just use each other up and destroy the planet if human freedom isn't kept in check through regulations.
What would a Capitalist say to the criticism of government non-intervention as something that would deprive many poor people of healthcare and education? If there's a buck to be made, someone will figure out a way to make it, and that's what they hate, in reality. What's keeping poor people poor is government intervention, not personal responsibility and private industry. There are some amazingly bright kids coming out of the homeschool environment. How the hell did that happen?? Microscopic budgets were somehow responsible for educating children to the degree you just don't see in any public school environment, no matter how rich the district is. Could it possibly be that the personal responsibility taken by parents results in these brilliant ends, something that can't be purchased with billions and billions of public dollars?
If government just plain got out of the health care industry, what would happen? You'd see thousands of hospitals and health care professionals forced to lower their rates to a level that would be consummate to the population. You'd see people taking better care of their health, because government won't be there to support they're terrible lifestyles with an SSI check every month. People are still rewarded in this country for abusing themselves. Severely obese people can get disability checks along with the chronically "depressed," alcoholics, drug addicts, and for all of the wonderful mental disorders that accompany those issues.
When I was a little girl, our pediatrician actually made house calls on the weekends and in the evening when one of us kids got really barfy sick. He had one of those black medical bags and the whole gig. Incredibly, he saw it as part of his job to do stuff like that, and as a consequence, was a very popular, and rich, pediatrician. We had Blue Cross insurance back then, but in only covered certain things (hospital emergencies, shots for the kids, things like that) and never covered prescriptions. How in the world did we survive without government making all the rules?? :)
Child labor and the working conditions of the very early Industrial Revolution (the beginnings of capitalism) seem horrendous. Why did people subject themselves to such environments? They probably were horrendous (by our modern standards), but paid more than farming when crops failed or herds died. Starvation is even more horrendous than some greasy grimy work shop. People do lots of crazy stuff for money, like run for office, or eat bugs on television.
Prosperity can breed a shortage of labor because it also encourages competition. When labor is in short supply, conditions improve and wages rise because industry is forced to compete for competent labor.
(An anecdote here, sort of related to Machan’s article on Teaching vs. Preaching: we’re studying the Romantics in Literature now; my teacher raves about their rebellion against the materialistic, clockwork world of industry, their escape to Nature, and industry as being only limbs mangled by machinery, naked three year-olds dragging coal carts through mine shafts, pollution, racism, materialism…..disgusting, disgusting.) Rolling my eyes....
This last question is the only one of these that I can’t answer that well (indeed, some of the others were almost painful for me to write in their simplicity!). Would the government in a laissez-faire society have any laws against, say, hunting a species to extinction? Gawd, I hope not!
My first reaction is no, because businesses would buy up and protect some of those species that yield them profit.
I'm thinking even that won't be necessary as all habitats will be privately owned and under the scrutiny of property owners who don't want to see the value of they're property diminished by wasting a pristine environment. If he chooses to waste it, it's his loss, and no one else's.
It seems that certain animals that don’t have any huge role in their food cycles that are being hunted would just disappear, and this seems a dangerous thing to tell an environmentalist, and a piteous thing to happen to a species (“Sorry, you’re just not useful enough”). (I bring this up because I read an article about a mass hunt of baby seals in Canada [saccharine shot of adorable baby seal; doubtless a murderous hunter lurks nearby—but in swoops friendly government agent to save the day]) Again, this goes back to the terrible and WRONG idea that human beings are inherently evil and destructive brutes. We're not.
Answer as many or as few as you like. I’ll be very appreciative. Finally, I’ll probably mention your name in my paper, and I’ll probably have to add some evidence of your credibility, so add some short phrase about your credentials, please—i.e. you’re a student of economics, author, graduate of this-or-that University, etc.
Err, I don't have any "credentials," other than the I've been a fan of Ayn Rand's for many years, and a hopeful student of Objectivism. Feel free to use my name if it helps with your assignment.
This was kinda fun!
| 
