Well! If you assume market as being driven by forces that come in relation only throught values that are convertable to money, than this criticism of neoclassical economics is surely valid. But who says that there are only such forces influencing market? If we accept that “publics”, that are not related to money/value propositions but to other/value propositions (reflected through issues), are equally a part of market as sellers and buyers, then we can see that such market is in fact in perfect complex equilibrium. When we see that the state in not market force only by collecting taxes but as well as resource of nonmaterial value propositions influencing that same market, we understand the state as equal market partner as it is individual, that is in one momemnt a buyer of goods, then an employee and later a member of a group fighting against values standing behind the product of that market good. Understanding market as a place that is not influenced by issues, publics and other stuff that does not come into play in the simple act of buying and selling, is indeed wrong. On the other hand markets taken in their full complexity are perfect (in perfect equilibrium) insomuch as any other complex being.