Market Forces
The Oxford Dictionary defines market forces as:
When people talk about capitalism as an ethical system or as a property of democracy, they are cluttering up the term. With all these assumptions, to say something bad about capitalismi is equivalent to saying something bad about democracy, freedom, or civil liberties.
Likewise, if someone focuses on the problems of capitalism, it leads to the viewpoint that the political system can be blamed for the "evils" of capitalism which leads one to an emotional support of the apparent alternative of capitalism: economic rights, government programs for the poor, or other attempts by government to limit inequality.
My argument here is that the political debate prevents viewing capitalism and market forces as neutral objects of study.
Economics, in my view, is the study of market forces or even more broadly, the study of capitalism. From this perspecitve, there are imarket interventions (entrepreneurship, government regulations), market forces, and their results.
When people talk about whether capitalism is good or bad, when people talk about free-market economics, socialism, or supply-side econimics, they are taking a position that may prevent them seeing the market forces as they are.
In my view, it is very important to identify the benefits and disadvantages of unchecked market forces. It is also important to realistically assess the impact of different interventions. Then, an informed discussion of economic policy can move forward based on the state of economic science.
The economic cost of foolish political policy is often hidden. An openness to undestanding it is a very important step forward if we are able to move out of the current ideological divide into the realm of insightful policy.
the economic factors affecting the price of, demand for, and availability of a commodity.From this definition and operational definition, I would put forward that capitalism is the set of market forces and their effect.
When people talk about capitalism as an ethical system or as a property of democracy, they are cluttering up the term. With all these assumptions, to say something bad about capitalismi is equivalent to saying something bad about democracy, freedom, or civil liberties.
Likewise, if someone focuses on the problems of capitalism, it leads to the viewpoint that the political system can be blamed for the "evils" of capitalism which leads one to an emotional support of the apparent alternative of capitalism: economic rights, government programs for the poor, or other attempts by government to limit inequality.
My argument here is that the political debate prevents viewing capitalism and market forces as neutral objects of study.
Economics, in my view, is the study of market forces or even more broadly, the study of capitalism. From this perspecitve, there are imarket interventions (entrepreneurship, government regulations), market forces, and their results.
When people talk about whether capitalism is good or bad, when people talk about free-market economics, socialism, or supply-side econimics, they are taking a position that may prevent them seeing the market forces as they are.
In my view, it is very important to identify the benefits and disadvantages of unchecked market forces. It is also important to realistically assess the impact of different interventions. Then, an informed discussion of economic policy can move forward based on the state of economic science.
The economic cost of foolish political policy is often hidden. An openness to undestanding it is a very important step forward if we are able to move out of the current ideological divide into the realm of insightful policy.
Comments
Post a Comment