> Committees and commissars do not do a better job.

Then why is internal governance and resource allocation inside companies done by committees and commissars and dictators, instead of by an unplanned free market?

That’s actually a really good question. I would direct you to Ronald Coase and other writing on the theory of the firm.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nature_of_the_Firm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_the_firm

> Markets are the best way we’ve come up with to allocate capital.

Properly regulated, competitive markets. Aerospace regulation is based on a lot of trust, which Boeing seems to have exploited, causing this problem. The market is not competitive; there are only two players and the output of only one of them cannot meet demand.

> Committees and commissars do not do a better job.

Dichotomies are good for making punctual arguments online, but you do yourself a huge disservice by using them to frame the options in your own mind. Do you honestly think that the options are 1. Antisocial free market allowed to do whatever it wants for capital gain, or 2. Despotic communism? You are smarter than that.

I could have been clearer, but I honestly meant my point to be limited to the stock market as a means for allocating capital.

I do favor markets in general and I understand their limitations.

And with respect to allocating capital, stock markets have proven to be better than the varying degrees of state economies.

> You are smarter than that.

True. :-)

The potential for benevolence of a market is lesser than an enlightened individual.

Yes, but the likelihood of an individual being enlightened is less than either.