> We have free enterprise because there is no freedom without the freedom to exchange labor, goods, and services. It's the natural order of things to trade, always has been and probably always will be. It's not about the best outcome for most people, never has been, and never will be. It's about the right of self determination and autonomy.

So I think we're getting to the root of the disagreement here. All of this your opinion, not fact. Quite a few of us do not believe property and free exchange are unconditional freedoms, but rather ones whose definition should be tuned to best serve the freedoms of the individual. A few countries (like Germany) even explicitly encode this belief into the constitution (previous discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14317712).

If you disagree with that, fine, but note that history, Constitutional scholarship, and case law are not on your side, so you should not go around saying that your opinions are absolute fact.

As neither of us are supreme court justices, everything here is opinion, that's what we're discussing, our opinions. I shouldn't need to prefix everything I say with "this is my opinion" just as I don't force you to prefix everything you say with the same. So put that aside, it's a useless thing to point out and adds nothing to the conversation.

> Quite a few of us do not believe property and free exchange are unconditional freedoms

I believe you are in the minority. I believe the vast majority of Americans would disagree as our Constitution only allows the federal government to regulate interstate commerce, I believe the case law is on my side as is the law but I'm not remotely running around claiming things are facts so please get off that high horse.

And by the way, trying to claim Constitutional scholarship and case law are not on my side is a poor and fallacious attempt at argument from authority; try addressing my arguments, I have no interest in your fallacies. I don't live in Germany, I don't care what their constitution says about property; I care what my Constitution says and more importantly how it came to be; it codified not what my rights are, but what the government can and cannot do.

My right to trade pre-existed government. If the governments of the world all collapsed tomorrow, my right to trade would still exist, I would have to defend it by force, which I would, but it would still exist as a naturally recognized right of any human to engage in trade and we'd all each defend this right by force if required. And I'll call you a liar if you claimed otherwise, you'd defend that right for yourself as well and you know it.