0
to reduce the abuse of big businesses g'day longwood students
Wiki User
∙ 11y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What happens with laissez-fare economic policies?
Generally speaking, in a laissez-faire economy Government and lawmakers meddle and regulate as little as possible in the economic process and let the 'laws of economics' do their thing. Many Republican politicians are much in favor of the system, which has taken more root in the US than in any other Western country.The problem with laissez-faire that the laws of economics never work out as neatly as in the books. If the Government wouldn't forbid the forming of Cartels, companies in an unlimited fight for the hihest profits would try to 'corner' their markets and so keep prices artificially high - as happened in the US in the late 19th century and today, in the cost of health care and medicines, many times higher in the US than in most other Western countries. The US' free market system was also responsible for the US being the last Western country to abolish child labor, and the law abolishing it was labelled "Communist" by most laissez-faire politicians in the US.A laissez-faire policy would also not lead to any decent form of social security of medicare - just look at the fierce resistance against Obamacare, while in other Western countries such medical insurance has been common for many decades. Laissez-faire also leads to minimal regulation. Remember for instance when Ronald Reagan de-regulated savings and loan companies? A little later the US was rocked by the Savings an Loans-scandal.If the US Government wasn't actively involved in making fiscal rules for US companies working worldwide, the loss of jobs to 'cheaper' countries would probably be much greater than it already is and big US companies - just look at Google today and Microsoft yesterday - would have unlimited scope in finding ways of not paying any taxes at all to anybody.The list is almost endless. Basically, in any society a Govenment has to look out for all its citizens' interests - and that means not letting companies get away with substandard quality, rigging of prices, not paying taxes or cooking the books. Plus, any economy needs forms of regulation that ensure that it stays healthy even if it doensn't contribute to maximum profit: payable health care, affordable and good-quality education, social security etcetera. Laissez-faire means 'let the market take care of it'. History has a great number of examples - certainly in the US - that show that it often doesn't work that way.
How is laissez-faire bad?
There are two arguments to the issue. One claims the following:The disadvantage of laissez-faire capitalism is that it leads to an economy run by greed, which can be very destructive; the recent sub-prime mortgage crisis is a perfect example. If you let people do whatever they want (and the phrase "laissez-faire" is French for let do) people may do terrible things, and often do.The other side responds thus:Greed is an inherent element of human nature. One almost always prefers more to less. This being said, we should examine whether this leads to bad outcomes.Many point to the Guilded Age as one which was laissez-faire. The truth is that it was far from being laissez-faire. Government actively helped companies and took sides in the free market. This resulted in government-supported monopolies. In fact, government regulations on utility companies limited choice and stifled competition. Companies wanted regulations placed on the market, because in this way small start ups would be slowed down and the big companies could maintain market share.A government monopoly on the sale of lands also gave large advantages to bigger firms acquiring large tracts of land.Unions were actually a capitalistic construct in their beginning. Given the first appearance of big corporations around the 1860s, the quick creation of unions shows the speed of the free market in correcting itself.Furthermore, the government actively busted unions and strikes. This is a regulation of the free market. Government actively hurt consumer interests.About greed causing the sub-prime mortgage crisis:This is an extremely shallow interpretation. Let's start with the basics:Banks loan out deposited money. Banks only have a certain amount of money to loan out, so they set interest rates reflecting the savings in the banks. The Federal Reserve, however, is able to create money and inject it into the banking system. This gives banks money that was created from thin air and allows them to lower the interest rates. This means that now they have extra money to give out. The initial money they had (the real savings) were given to high-confidence borrowers (as in the banks knew that it was a sound investment and it would pay back). However, with extra cash, banks now had money to give away to lower-confidence borrowers. This means that they now made more risky investments because of the easy money the government gave to them. Furthermore, in order to promote home ownership, the government forced Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to lower their lending requirements specifically for high risk investments.The market responded to the situation - more money to loan out, lower interest rate, more risk. Wouldn't you take a free stack of money if given to you? The problem is that government created the environment where this would be allowed to happen. In the free market, the risk would have been contained by the banks' desire to get their money back. Government insured the profits of the bankers, which removed any incentive for them to act responsibly with the money. It took away the free-market idea of "loss," and when you can invest without a fear of a loss, you can take much higher risks.Whenever you delve deeper into "free market is bad" allegations, you see that over and over the problems over the years have been caused by the government and blamed on a mythical free market.
Why is government regulation necessary in a capitalist system according to those who believe in laissez-faire?
Regulation is necessary in a capitalist system because crooks exist. Some capitalists, such as Bernie Madoff, will create Ponzi schemes. Some such as Joseph P. Kennedy will manipulate the Stock Market. Some such as John D. Rockefeller will use their abilities in the oil business to undercut competition and drive them out of business.Allowing builders to do away with the safe building codes allowed Hurricane Andrew in South Florida to destroy houses and buildings built after 1981 while those built before that date survived without damage.Allowing builders to put locks of fire doors allowed the deaths of hundreds in the New York shirtwaist factory fire.The list is endless.Think of what red lights would mean without cops. Every city would look like an American Western. I know what gun I would carry. Do you?
How did the shift to a market economy promote nationalism?
The impact of a shift away from State (national government) owned enterprises to a market economy can promote nationalism in any given nation, depending on the reason for the shift. Generally speaking, if the industry(s) affected by the shift have been producing unsatisfactory results, the shift can be seen by optimists as a sign of confidence in free economy economics. Properly communicated to the public and trade unions, the shift should promote a rise in nationalism. Here's why that can happen: * The shift should be seen as a step towards improving the performance of the new free market powered industry. The public should see this as a positive change to help the economy and help produce fair competition; * Nationalism should rise, based on the well documented idea that the government is confident that of success and also confident that the population can be trusted to respond in a positive manner to the change; and * The shift should be so structured that the stock of the "new" industry, say an airline, should have a high capitalization, allowing the public to buy shares at a low price. This can enable citizens to participate in the growth of the new enterprise.
What is the economic goals of government?
To do away with economics by having no money or prices or buying and selling.
What happens with laissez-fare economic policies?
Generally speaking, in a laissez-faire economy Government and lawmakers meddle and regulate as little as possible in the economic process and let the 'laws of economics' do their thing. Many Republican politicians are much in favor of the system, which has taken more root in the US than in any other Western country.The problem with laissez-faire that the laws of economics never work out as neatly as in the books. If the Government wouldn't forbid the forming of Cartels, companies in an unlimited fight for the hihest profits would try to 'corner' their markets and so keep prices artificially high - as happened in the US in the late 19th century and today, in the cost of health care and medicines, many times higher in the US than in most other Western countries. The US' free market system was also responsible for the US being the last Western country to abolish child labor, and the law abolishing it was labelled "Communist" by most laissez-faire politicians in the US.A laissez-faire policy would also not lead to any decent form of social security of medicare - just look at the fierce resistance against Obamacare, while in other Western countries such medical insurance has been common for many decades. Laissez-faire also leads to minimal regulation. Remember for instance when Ronald Reagan de-regulated savings and loan companies? A little later the US was rocked by the Savings an Loans-scandal.If the US Government wasn't actively involved in making fiscal rules for US companies working worldwide, the loss of jobs to 'cheaper' countries would probably be much greater than it already is and big US companies - just look at Google today and Microsoft yesterday - would have unlimited scope in finding ways of not paying any taxes at all to anybody.The list is almost endless. Basically, in any society a Govenment has to look out for all its citizens' interests - and that means not letting companies get away with substandard quality, rigging of prices, not paying taxes or cooking the books. Plus, any economy needs forms of regulation that ensure that it stays healthy even if it doensn't contribute to maximum profit: payable health care, affordable and good-quality education, social security etcetera. Laissez-faire means 'let the market take care of it'. History has a great number of examples - certainly in the US - that show that it often doesn't work that way.
What are the ratings and certificates for Shift Away - 2013?
Shift Away - 2013 is rated/received certificates of: Turkey:G
How does Buddhism shift away from the caste system of Hinduism?
By walking away.
How Can Government Reduce on Greenhouse Effect?
Shift fossil fuel use away from coal and oil and toward natural gas. Stop deforestation and accelerate reforestation x
What is the red shift of hydrogen?
The red shift depends on the relative motion of the emitting source and receiving detector. Hydrogen per se has no red shift. There is hydrogen with great red shift (in stars in galaxies far away that are moving rapidly away from us).
What are differences in colors of moving objects in space that are approaching and moving objects that are moving away?
Objects moving toward you will have a blue shift in their spectrum and objects moving away from you will have a red shift in their spectrum. This is known as a doppler shift.
Do galaxies shift near or far away from earth?
Most galaxies have a red shift away from us - meaning they are moving away from us. However, the Andromeda galaxy has a blue shift, which means it is moving towards us. In about 2.5 billion years time, the two galaxies will merge.
Does a red shift indicates that objects are moving toward earth?
Red shift occurs when an object moves away from the observer. So as you are on Earth, it is when objects move away from Earth. (Blue shift as it moves closer.) A star's red shift could be due to losing energy to gravity.
How many different verbs in English can be used to translate faire in french?
This question gives a glimpse of what infinity could be... The real question should be how many uses of "faire" there are. The main translations of "faire" are "to do" (or "to act") and "to make". It can also mean "to play" (faire le mariole, faire de la musique, faire du sport). "to rule" (faire la pluie et le beau temps) "to care" (faire attention, faire gaffe) "to defecate" (faire dans son pantalon) "to ride" (faire du cheval) "to cycle" (faire du vélo) "to delude oneself" (se faire des illusions) "to worry" (se faire des soucis, se faire du mouron) "to run away" (faire une fugue) "to ignore" (faire l'autruche) And dozens more, since "faire" is a rather neutral verb that mostly takes the meaning of the noun or verb that follows, adding an extra action cause to it. For instance, "faire" + "plaisir" (pleasure) means "to please", "to give pleasure", "faire" + "tomber" (to fall down) means to make someone or something fall down.
What is it called when galaxies move away and the light waves become longer?
That is called a red shift or a Doppler shift.
Does a red shift means that are moving closer to earth?
No. A red shift indicates that the object is moving away from the earth.
What is red shift inti?
When galaxies move away from us, the waves of light stretch out- ie, they become redder. The greater the red shift, the faster the galaxies are moving away from us.
