> It's fundamental flaw is in assuming a perfect market, with homogeneous products, universal knowledge, no one person or group having unfettered control and all players act rationally.
Not really. There's a whole branch of economics devoted to studying the interesting ways in which people don't act rationally (for a given definition of "rationally"). Also, it's authoritarian centralised pricing that assumes universal knowledge -- specifically, that it is possible for a person or a committee to have enough knowledge to decide the "right" price. The reason to prefer markets is specifically and explicitly that no-one does or can have universal knowledge and that markets are an excellent mechanism -- the best yet devised -- for aggregating the little bits of imperfect knowledge of everyone into an optimum price.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
