Most everyone agrees that there is a role for a Market economy and that there is a role for social provision of services.
The landscape of politics is largely concerned with degrees of involvement, freedom and political oversight of these complementary product and service generators.
One could argue the following as representing a majority position:
Should the government build cars? Probably not
Should the government oversee the building of cars ensuring safety environmental regulatory compliance and so on. Probably
Should the ambulances and fire services of a society be pay as you go. No
Should the impulse to innovate to compete with other companies in a market economy be quelled. Probably not also
The competitiveness and freedom of the market economy has been a major success in many instances. The idea that anyone can start a business and compete to be better, cheaper than other providers to the consumer (and that they can be innovative and eliminate the opposition at least momentarily by offering something new and more advanced) all has obvious benefits for society as a whole. Better products and services always evolving through the survival filter of the market.
It is worth noting that if the government does oversee the market to a minimal extent or not at all we seem to get dirty restaurants, dodgy contracts and reckless lending as the individual drive for business success clouds overarching societal benefit.
There is an opposition currently well articulated by the Republican Party and Democrats (particularly embodied by candidate Bernie Sanders), or more broadly by the American model and the Nordic model with greater state involvement in areas such as education, healthcare provision, childcare facilities and so on but has less room for individual wealth accumulation – and indeed through the broad parameter of productivity as measured by the Global competitiveness report as both of these types of countries have been perrenial top ten and top five performers showing that either methods can be successful, both the lower government involvement and greater push for individual competition and the strong social democracy model can produce highly successful economies.
This is all quite interesting – – however, like the best way to keep and groom you horse if you need to travel distances to towns it is borderline being left behind in irrelevance in an era of advancing technology.
Open source economics, does not have to exclude either the market or government provision, but can enter the game pushing the market to ever greater productivity and lessening the onus on government in some areas, it also has the opportunity to take stock and bring its ethical paradigm beyond that of the corporate tradition emanating largely from the industrial revolution and a very different society.