I don't see how it is possible to sustain free and open markets without capitalism. By definition, capitalism is made up of buyers and sellers who exercise free choice in all they produce and consume. There is no such thing as pure capitalism, as every capitalist economy has some restraints upon it, which may be to create a level playing field, protect consumers, or protect the environment. The whole idea is to allow people to make what they wish to make—and as much as they want to make—for whatever price they wish, and to allow people to decide what they wish to buy, how much of it they want, and the price they are willing to pay. In a capitalist society, people are far more highly motivated to produce and consume than they are in a planned economy.
Motivation is only one drawback to the planned economy. In a planned economy, the government decides who is going to produce what. The government decides quantity and price. This restricts what is available to the consumer. The government is not prescient, so it often does not know what there will be a demand for, which means goods may very well go unsold. The government may not order the production of goods that people actually want or need. If the needs or desires in an economy shift—which they do—the government may not be flexible or resilient enough to keep up with these shifts. Of course, when people are told what they have to do, they are singularly unmotivated to do it better or faster or to try to do it more creatively. A planned economy stifles creativity.
China is one country that has been moving toward private enterprise for a while now. I am of the opinion that its re-acquisition of Hong Kong made its rulers see capitalism's advantages quite dramatically. For China to grow its GDP; be part of the modern world; and feed, clothe, and house over 1.3 billion people, capitalism makes a much better model.
No comments:
Post a Comment