Sorry. but Mr. Boudreaux is desperately wrongheaded here. F Hayek definitely did discuss the distortions that come from secrecy impeding the ability of market players to make truly informed, self-interested decisions. Tis is, in fact, the fundamental of capitalism, going back to Ricardo and Adam Smith. The extremum is devastating! Suppose a small group of oligarchs have all the information and the rest of us know nothing? The overall system has as much information as if it were widely distributed. Mr. Boudreax would have us believe it doesn't matter since the overall system has sufficient information to set prices... which is utter malarkey. Hayek knew it and anyone who loves competitive enterprise knows it.

ALL economists despise secrecy as - at best - an occasional necessary eve. If you believe in competition and in en
terprise, you cannot be in favor of unlimited idolatry of unlimited private wealth... since that is precisely the path to obligate oligarchy, the age-old enemy of freedom in 99% of human cultures.

If you deny that , SHOW me the counter examples! SHow me that owner oligarchs weren't the conniving enemies of markets, freedom and competition, in 99% of human cultures.

You who should be defenders of competitive enterprise, have been talked into being mouth puppets for idolatry of owner oligarchy, which (if you studied a scintilla of history, or ever read a word of Adam Smith) you'd know was the destroyer of markets, freedom, competition and capitalism for 6000 years.

The crux These oligarchs are not smart men. Clever connivers? Yes! But in the end, all they will give us is an angry populace that rebels into the excesses of 1789. It is the secretive would be feudal lords who are ruining capitalism. They are the ones who will give us socialism.