This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
21807 Responseshttp://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-about-the-free-market/What+about+the+free+market%3F2010-04-23+04%3A53%3A32Sam+Richards to What about the free market?
I think that the free market question is particularly difficult at this time in American history. We have just emerged from a recession caused by a rampant market with little control and people are probably hesitant to dive back into that mechanism. As an alternative, I think more government control is probably helpful. People tend to think that either capitalism or communism are the only ways of looking at large scale economies, but it seems the answer is probably hazier than that. Odds are that the best way to run an economy falls between those two systems. This seems to be what America is moving toward with the National Healthcare.
I think the reason most people didn't raise their hand was because many of us may not know exactly what free market capitalism is. I for one, have a difficult time understanding economic concepts, and while I knew what a free market was, I didn't raise my hand out of fear that I'd be called on to explain free market capitalism or something. Anyways, I think this perhaps was the case for many people in the class. If not, I would definitely like to know why anyone would be against a free market. To me it's a very sensible system… both producers of goods and consumers are determining prices of goods. I guess things can get iffy in a recession and people are wary about spending money, which screws with the market. But honestly, I don't know enough about economics and the like to really discuss it confidently.
I doubt what Sam said in the class. To be frank I don't think he really understands the idea of free market. Free market is a highly ideally mechanism that it almost can't be used as a single economy mechanism in reality. The problem is, without government control, the market would push to the other extreme–that market will be manually operated and not running as what economists think it would. Think about the great depression, it is considered as a result of overly free marketing capitalism. Before the depression, the United States and all the western countries put "Wealth of Nations" and its followers at a godlike place. They indeed believed that market would balance everything. It came out that the government control is not only needed, but also as a very crucial node in the country's business machine. Without the little help from the government, the US wouldn't achieve its balance. From the dialectical materialism aspect, government control and the free marketing mechanism are mutually connected. They are bilaterally linked to each other, the displace of either of them would cause trouble for the entire economy. From this standpoint, I say I don't support the US government to apply purely theoretical free market mechanism.
Secondly, now what the US government is doing on immigration, is not only to block everyone outside, but to select ones who have talents, or skills that US companies need. This is a reflection of the economy's demand and supply. The US is just like all the other countries in the world, it cannot let too many people in at a time, for that will definitely cause disaster. Now the unemployment is 9.7%, if the government suddenly let say 3 million immigrants in, than the unemployment would probably increase 1 percent, which is already scary.
Thirdly, the policies of immigration is not only for the economical purposes, but also for national security purpose. Every country has its border to defend. Every country has spies in other countries. Why? For more and more information so that it would have the chance to step out first. This is another reason why the United States cannot just simply open its border. National interests are always the first target to protect. Not to mention terrorism.
The demand of companies in the United States is already a very marketing reflection for immigration, I don't understand why would we practice free market capitalism even more. It is already enough useful for most of us. This system is already running very stably and steadily. There is no real change to we need to make.
To sum up, the free market idea is and will be only and idea. It is unpractical in the practical world. It may cause a lot problems if the government really practiced it. Besides economy reasons, social and national security reasons also cannot be forgotten. Remember that a nation's interest represents its people's highest interest, which must be protected.
I honestly do not believe in the free market economy in the purest form. I think state intervention is often a necessary evil to keep corporations in line, and the most successful economies in the world use many forms of socialism to spread the wealth, and keep corporations in line. Furthermore, much of the recent recession is to be blamed on a lack of regulations, that would have limited what corporations could do. These regulations would certainly be considered to be a strain against a real free market economy. Lastly, one must also realize that a free market economy is not really free because of the classes it creates, and the benefits some will get over others. In response to the the second question, I do not think we have a true free market economy, although there are few nations that come closer. Our lack of taxes, and lack of social programs makes America one of the more truly capitalist societies in the world, but overall we are still a mixed economy.
I believe free market economy doesn’t work is that there are some public sectors that privatization does not work so effectively. In terms of goods, some private products such as soda or an automobile, it is good to let private companies take the charge since the competition would result better products with lower price. However, something like police resources or fire stations should be provided by the government since a nation stands there to protect its citizens. They cannot get security due to the lack of the money would be a disaster and a tragedy. Furthermore, I don’t think we have worse economy system, yet another improvement can be made. Medical insurance privatization, in my opinion, should be provided by the government. I know this one proverb famous among immigrants. The best way to save money is being healthy.
The only way to promote a “free market” capitalist society in our country is to pay the same workers and the same wages that we have been for years and years. I think this has only recently become an issue due to the economic troubles we have here in the United States. How do you think we are able to pay for the goods we do at a cheap and low price? As Sam has pointed out in lecture we buy a pineapple for two dollars because there are workers out there that are willing to accept that wage. As much as I want these people to be able to obtain legal citizenship here in the United States and be a part of our country it’s just the way our system works. A lot of us wouldn’t be here going to college if it wasn’t for the so called “illegal” immigrants that work for low wages and help our economy in ways that many people do not realize. This is just the way things work and I don’t think free market capitalism can work in another way even though it may seem that it should be changed.
These are some difficult questions to answer seeing as I don’t have a sound economics background, but I do have a few things to say. I think the capitalist system has many downfalls, especially in the way in which it creates a class-based system focused on competition and self-survival. I feel like currently too many people suffer unnecessarily in order to support a few rich that over-consumer unnecessarily. I think some sort of balance needs to be found between a capitalist system and one which provides a great amount of social services to ensure greater equality and opportunity, both within and across nations.
On the topic of capitalism and immigration, I felt that Sam somewhat contradicted himself in the ways that he spoke about slavery in the global market and immigrant workers in the domestic market. I understand that slavery is a completely different topic and a much more severe form of human oppression, but the working conditions and pay of many immigrants, especially illegal immigrants, is not exactly “fair “ either. After all, the video that we watched at the end of class on Tuesday was meant to make us think of immigrants in a different way, and it showed the very poor and painful side of immigration. But throughout the class, Sam seemed to laugh off the issues of immigrant workers and say everything was because of capitalism. He even gave the example that he’s going to buy cheap fruit picked by low-paid workers; that’s just the way capitalism works. But the lecture a few weeks ago on slavery took on a much more solemn tone. But isn’t slavery a result of global capitalism too? Global competition creates a “race to the bottom” as companies need to continue producing products at cheaper and cheaper prices. Yet Sam was much more condescending and somber when discussing the chocolate industry and slavery, but seemed to laugh and make light of the fruit industry in which immigrant workers are paid very low wages. Yes, these two topics may differ in their severity and level of injustice, but both still seem unfair. In our last lecture on Thursday Sam went on and on about the Golden Rule in which we should treat others how we wish to be treated and not partake in actions that harm others. And both slavery and the working conditions of immigration seem to be positioned in such a way within the capitalist system that our consuming behaviors do in fact harm others by pushing them into low-wage, hard labor, or slave labor jobs.
I know Sam talked about a lot of other things and the immigration lecture talked about many other issues besides just “cheap labor”, but I went home that day feeling a strong contradiction in the manner in which Sam spoke about immigrant labor within the capitalist system, as compared to the way in which he had approached slavery within the global capitalist system.
I think that the free market question is particularly difficult at this time in American history. We have just emerged from a recession caused by a rampant market with little control and people are probably hesitant to dive back into that mechanism. As an alternative, I think more government control is probably helpful. People tend to think that either capitalism or communism are the only ways of looking at large scale economies, but it seems the answer is probably hazier than that. Odds are that the best way to run an economy falls between those two systems. This seems to be what America is moving toward with the National Healthcare.
[Reply]
I think the reason most people didn't raise their hand was because many of us may not know exactly what free market capitalism is. I for one, have a difficult time understanding economic concepts, and while I knew what a free market was, I didn't raise my hand out of fear that I'd be called on to explain free market capitalism or something. Anyways, I think this perhaps was the case for many people in the class. If not, I would definitely like to know why anyone would be against a free market. To me it's a very sensible system… both producers of goods and consumers are determining prices of goods. I guess things can get iffy in a recession and people are wary about spending money, which screws with the market. But honestly, I don't know enough about economics and the like to really discuss it confidently.
[Reply]
I doubt what Sam said in the class. To be frank I don't think he really understands the idea of free market. Free market is a highly ideally mechanism that it almost can't be used as a single economy mechanism in reality. The problem is, without government control, the market would push to the other extreme–that market will be manually operated and not running as what economists think it would. Think about the great depression, it is considered as a result of overly free marketing capitalism. Before the depression, the United States and all the western countries put "Wealth of Nations" and its followers at a godlike place. They indeed believed that market would balance everything. It came out that the government control is not only needed, but also as a very crucial node in the country's business machine. Without the little help from the government, the US wouldn't achieve its balance. From the dialectical materialism aspect, government control and the free marketing mechanism are mutually connected. They are bilaterally linked to each other, the displace of either of them would cause trouble for the entire economy. From this standpoint, I say I don't support the US government to apply purely theoretical free market mechanism.
Secondly, now what the US government is doing on immigration, is not only to block everyone outside, but to select ones who have talents, or skills that US companies need. This is a reflection of the economy's demand and supply. The US is just like all the other countries in the world, it cannot let too many people in at a time, for that will definitely cause disaster. Now the unemployment is 9.7%, if the government suddenly let say 3 million immigrants in, than the unemployment would probably increase 1 percent, which is already scary.
Thirdly, the policies of immigration is not only for the economical purposes, but also for national security purpose. Every country has its border to defend. Every country has spies in other countries. Why? For more and more information so that it would have the chance to step out first. This is another reason why the United States cannot just simply open its border. National interests are always the first target to protect. Not to mention terrorism.
The demand of companies in the United States is already a very marketing reflection for immigration, I don't understand why would we practice free market capitalism even more. It is already enough useful for most of us. This system is already running very stably and steadily. There is no real change to we need to make.
To sum up, the free market idea is and will be only and idea. It is unpractical in the practical world. It may cause a lot problems if the government really practiced it. Besides economy reasons, social and national security reasons also cannot be forgotten. Remember that a nation's interest represents its people's highest interest, which must be protected.
[Reply]
I honestly do not believe in the free market economy in the purest form. I think state intervention is often a necessary evil to keep corporations in line, and the most successful economies in the world use many forms of socialism to spread the wealth, and keep corporations in line. Furthermore, much of the recent recession is to be blamed on a lack of regulations, that would have limited what corporations could do. These regulations would certainly be considered to be a strain against a real free market economy. Lastly, one must also realize that a free market economy is not really free because of the classes it creates, and the benefits some will get over others. In response to the the second question, I do not think we have a true free market economy, although there are few nations that come closer. Our lack of taxes, and lack of social programs makes America one of the more truly capitalist societies in the world, but overall we are still a mixed economy.
[Reply]
I believe free market economy doesn’t work is that there are some public sectors that privatization does not work so effectively. In terms of goods, some private products such as soda or an automobile, it is good to let private companies take the charge since the competition would result better products with lower price. However, something like police resources or fire stations should be provided by the government since a nation stands there to protect its citizens. They cannot get security due to the lack of the money would be a disaster and a tragedy. Furthermore, I don’t think we have worse economy system, yet another improvement can be made. Medical insurance privatization, in my opinion, should be provided by the government. I know this one proverb famous among immigrants. The best way to save money is being healthy.
[Reply]
The only way to promote a “free market” capitalist society in our country is to pay the same workers and the same wages that we have been for years and years. I think this has only recently become an issue due to the economic troubles we have here in the United States. How do you think we are able to pay for the goods we do at a cheap and low price? As Sam has pointed out in lecture we buy a pineapple for two dollars because there are workers out there that are willing to accept that wage. As much as I want these people to be able to obtain legal citizenship here in the United States and be a part of our country it’s just the way our system works. A lot of us wouldn’t be here going to college if it wasn’t for the so called “illegal” immigrants that work for low wages and help our economy in ways that many people do not realize. This is just the way things work and I don’t think free market capitalism can work in another way even though it may seem that it should be changed.
[Reply]
These are some difficult questions to answer seeing as I don’t have a sound economics background, but I do have a few things to say. I think the capitalist system has many downfalls, especially in the way in which it creates a class-based system focused on competition and self-survival. I feel like currently too many people suffer unnecessarily in order to support a few rich that over-consumer unnecessarily. I think some sort of balance needs to be found between a capitalist system and one which provides a great amount of social services to ensure greater equality and opportunity, both within and across nations.
On the topic of capitalism and immigration, I felt that Sam somewhat contradicted himself in the ways that he spoke about slavery in the global market and immigrant workers in the domestic market. I understand that slavery is a completely different topic and a much more severe form of human oppression, but the working conditions and pay of many immigrants, especially illegal immigrants, is not exactly “fair “ either. After all, the video that we watched at the end of class on Tuesday was meant to make us think of immigrants in a different way, and it showed the very poor and painful side of immigration. But throughout the class, Sam seemed to laugh off the issues of immigrant workers and say everything was because of capitalism. He even gave the example that he’s going to buy cheap fruit picked by low-paid workers; that’s just the way capitalism works. But the lecture a few weeks ago on slavery took on a much more solemn tone. But isn’t slavery a result of global capitalism too? Global competition creates a “race to the bottom” as companies need to continue producing products at cheaper and cheaper prices. Yet Sam was much more condescending and somber when discussing the chocolate industry and slavery, but seemed to laugh and make light of the fruit industry in which immigrant workers are paid very low wages. Yes, these two topics may differ in their severity and level of injustice, but both still seem unfair. In our last lecture on Thursday Sam went on and on about the Golden Rule in which we should treat others how we wish to be treated and not partake in actions that harm others. And both slavery and the working conditions of immigration seem to be positioned in such a way within the capitalist system that our consuming behaviors do in fact harm others by pushing them into low-wage, hard labor, or slave labor jobs.
I know Sam talked about a lot of other things and the immigration lecture talked about many other issues besides just “cheap labor”, but I went home that day feeling a strong contradiction in the manner in which Sam spoke about immigrant labor within the capitalist system, as compared to the way in which he had approached slavery within the global capitalist system.
[Reply]