I do not. Please quote where I have done so. You are having trouble pigeon-holing me based on my comments, so you have made a convenient generalization. That is called intellectual dishonesty.
You called me a socialist, called my country socialist, ... and that is just plain nonsense. You are intellectually dishonest, not me. I simply toyed a bit with it because of your phobia.
The quoted passage from the Catechism is poorly-worded and hardly definitive.
No, it is not.
"regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice" => "Invisible hand" => the essence of laissez-faire capitalism
Nevertheless, the free market principles I advocate do not stand in contradiction to the rights of free individuals
That was not the question.
What about universal health care? It's an inalienable right according to the Pope. How do you combine that with libertarianism?
for a truly free market protects the rights of producers and consumers via laws (i.e. regulations) against theft and fraud.
That is not enough. It is not even the bare minimum. Living wages, environmental concerns, ...
The false premise that is being proposed here is that it is the role of government to intervene to safeguard social justice.
It is one of their tasks.
To a degree, government can assist in a society's social justice needs. However, the majority of social justice issues need to be addressed by private individuals and entities.
Cooperatives, yes, private individuals, no.
I have no love for your welfare state or ours. They are both reprehensible and unsustainable. We'll see how much you love your socialist paradise in 5 years.
A welfare state in America?
The only thing that's making all this unsustainable is liberalists who try to privatize all our important sector (and have already created a lot of profitless sectors that way), the capitalistic system of fractional reserve banking and usury.