>>4709473 (lb)
>And in a world filled with actors who don't give a hoot whether both parties benefit as long as their party benefits, how can you guarantee that assumption in any given exchange?
If you felt you didn't benefit by making the exchange, you wouldn't make it. When you exchange, you feel the item/service you are receiving is more beneficial than what you gave up. The other party has the same valuation but in reverse. You both volunteer to exchange because of the assumed benefit.
>OK, but what happens when deception is involved?
In a free-market, the deception is limited in scope to the parties involved in the exchange. A centralized market (government influence) standardizes the decpetion across all exchanges (and markets). While the free-market deception is possible, it mitigates the magnitude and inescapability of a centralized regulated market. The free-market deceiver may be successful for a time, but just as with any shoddy product/service, the possible patrons can avoid the future exchange (something not available if a central body regulates all choice).