Sunday, March 9, 2014

Smith/Friedman Questions

1.) What is Smith's major concern with the government's economic intervention?
                   -Does the government's intervention only hinder fair trade between countries? What about one's natural liberty/natural rights? Why does Smith say that government regulation can both hurt someone's natural liberties, but also preserve them?; in what circumstances does Smith believe the government helps mitigate financial/social inequality?

                   -What are the differences between Smith's view on the government's economic intervention and Friedman's view? Do they both believe that the market can self-regulate?

2 comments:

  1. Government intervention doesn't only hinder fair trade between countries. Sometimes, the government intervention can't prevent trade from happening due to the excess of demand of a product. Natural rights seem to be hindered by the government intervention as well. The government could be hindering the natural rights surrounding property by regulating trade of a persons property. Smith says that government regulation can both hurt and preserve natural liberties, because it depends on the specific regulation that is implemented.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And Friedman agrees with your last statement, if not because of different reasons. He began with how humans are imperfect beings, and in his conclusion stated something along the lines of how despite the good willed nature of those outsiders who try to exchange their values for those of the participants, they will ultimately go against the intentions of the participants. Thus the policy leads to the opposite effect of what it originally set out to accomplish. I guess in Friedman's view, he'd say something along the lines of "any effort made by the government, regardless of whether or not it aims to aid the participants of the market, will eventually lead to more harm than good".

      Delete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.