The meaning of a free economy

Once upon a time there was a city that saw it’s pockets begin to fill and burst at the seams with all the money raised by an ingenious idea of the top herald of the town, coming from a time in which purse strings were tight, with not even enough money to make a rooster sing.
The liberalization of the gaming industry filled its coffers and breathed new life into the real estate market, plunged deep into the abyss since ‘96, when its neighbor, now the Motherland, decided to close the faucet to the flows of the moneys diverted from its provinces, a money laundering problem that continues to persist, now more private than public.
As the city could scarcely afford to pay its civil servants, the top herald arranged a skillful way of filling his coffers.
What is strange is that it already existed, was not invented, but officially well-squeezed it was not capable of accomplishing the miracle of the multiplication of patacas.
That is, the herald’s coffers had no pennies!
Weird is it not?
Well, the truth is that the new, smarter, professionally-minded top herald has come up with another more skillful formula for producing money far more effectively.
And it worked.
He liberalized the gaming industry.
The problem with so much money falling from the sky almost suddenly and continuously, is that he started to buy almost everything.
And economic science teaches that prices have to rise when goods are scarce for so much demand, especially if the economy was to be left to run freely.
From the second quarter of 2003 until the second quarter of this year, we witnessed the miracle of the multiplication of real estate prices, facilitated by another magic formula, the so-called free economy; that is, one can steal at will as there is always someone with money at the door.
By the so-called exact method used in financial mathematics, real estate prices grew on average annually by 21.46 per cent during the last 14 years!
That is really good business!
No ceiling on the rents could have endured so much exponential growth.
Hence our lawmakers, pragmatic as usual, have voted against that ceiling in the name of Adam Smith’s so-called free economy, although I doubt if they ever read a page of “The Wealth of Nations”!
Who came out better off from this fairy tale?
And who did not?