I don't know how else to explain this....

A person's individual merit is not enough to allow that person to reach his full potential.

How many intelligent, potentially highly productive members of society, get left out in the cold, travelling a life path that sees them ask "would you like fries with that", just because their parents couldn't afford to send them to college? Despite working hard in his inner city high school, without a government aided sponsorship, he will not meet his potential. Is it the kid's fault he didn't meet his potential?

This is not a fair and equal society based on the merits of individual action.

Laissez faire does not solve this basic problem with inequality. The problem of starting economic position.

And before you ask; yes. I think the kid deserves the chance at university education, no matter what. He should only fail due to his own actions, not the shortcoming of society. Not his lack of access to the market, or his inability to take part in it due to circumstances outside of his control.

As for charity under coercion.. no, I think there will be more charity.. in fact.. i think if we go in this free market direction, charity will be the only thing left holding the world up and away from descending into a Judge Dredd style, dystopian future.

1984, with it's three, all-encompassing, 'conglomerates' controlling the world, turning war into a cyclical business.. is a certainty, IMHO, of the eventual conclusion of Free Market Capitalism.