Markets are efficient; they just aren't aimed at what most people actually want. The neoliberal case for market mechanisms is largely correct as a description of how well markets generate capacity: they aggregate information, allocate resources, and drive productivity in ways that no other system has matched. The problem is that past a certain threshold of material sufficiency, the attractor state for which markets optimize (accumulation and growth) diverges sharply from the attractor state most humans actually care about: good relationships, meaningful work, sustainable freedom to pursue a life worth living. Worse, the Easterlin Paradox shows empirically that extreme inequality actively degrades subjective wellbeing even for those experiencing gains in absolute terms, making runaway market concentration not just a moral failure but a systemic one. As AI makes human economic contribution increasingly obsolete, this misalignment between what markets optimize and what humans need becomes the defining governance challenge of our time.