OpenTangent

If one truly believes in the free market system then so should they support unpaid labour (slavery). If both parties consent to the exchange of labour for food and lodging then under a truly free market, that should be allowed. By interfering with that trade through government regulations (socialism) or the like, one is stifling the natural balancing effect of the theoretical "invisible hand". To put it bluntly, you either support slavery in a market system or you support the abolition of slavery through socialist means.

Inequality is ultimately a self sufficiency problem which is a result of lack of education. The relatively high distribution of education in the 20th century can be credited for the ramp in technological progress but still so many people on Earth suffer while the privileged few live in a world of relative opulence that the kings and emperors of the past could never have imagined.

Happiness is like money, it's a means to an end and is not an end in itself. And like money, if your ultimate goal is to acquire it you'll probably become a terrible person, treading on everything around you to get it. Likewise, if you sacrifice your happiness for the sake of others, they may end up walking all over you. Balance is key.

A quote taken out of context should be outright denied by the person being quoted on the basis of assumed context. For example, if someone says "kill her", the assumption is that the subject is a human being or at least something living. If the subject is actually a car the statement simply means "turn off the car".

The free market system depends on competition to balance cost and quality and to ultimately create efficient production. That's the ideal behind it. But in order for any competition to produce reliable "winners" the judges need to be well educated in the subject matter. In the case of a free market socio-economic system the "judges" (aka the citizens) are themselves in competition to earn "votes" (aka money). For this reason people simply don't have time to educate themselves sufficiently when they're trying to earn "votes" needed to increase their own influence.

We tend to structure human society according to the rules of "survival of the fittest". This may have been necessary for us over the millennia and it may arguably still be necessary for us right now but at some point we need to take advantage of our analytical conciousness and properly design an efficient society.

People need to stop believing that their actions and decisions are insignificant. Your decisions affect everyone and everyone's decisions ultimately affect you too. In a free market system you vote with your wallet and by buying fast foods instead of organic foods you're making those healthy foods less accessible for everyone.