Foreshadowing his later ideas, he (Milton Friedman) saw price controls as interfering with an essential signalling mechanism to help resources go where they are most valued. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_friedman)

The signalling mechanism on the free market is the amount of money someone is prepared and able to pay for a product. It translates all ‘value’ into an amount of money. People who are starving value bread, but – according to free market theory - if they have no money they do not value it. Whereas on the other hand people who are already overweight but have the money to buy more bread do value it.

To put it short, on the free market goods do not flow to the place where they are most valued, but to where the most is paid for them. Anyone who refuses to acknowledge the difference between the two uses Orwellian doublethink and in my opinion does not deserve any Nobel Prize.

To wit, this is not mere fight over words. People who tell me that the free market mechanism should not be disturbed, are telling me that people who have needs but have no money to pay for them (or less than other people) may as well rot and die.

People need land to grow vegetables on them? Not really, because a multinational has bought the land to grow bio-energy on it. People need fresh water? Not really, because they can’t afford the prize the privatized company asks for it; only the rich are really thirsty. Your needs are only real if you can afford to pay for them.