National Free-Market Economy
(Redirected from capitalist economi)
A National Free-Market Economy is a free-market economy that operates as a national economy under a national government jurisdiction with strong national free-market property rights, minimal government intervention, and national free-market price mechanisms for resource allocation.
- AKA: Capitalistic Country, Liberal Market Economy, National Capitalist System, National Laissez-Faire Economy.
- Context:
- It can (typically) establish National Free-Market Principles through national free-market regulatory frameworks and national free-market economic policy.
- It can (typically) promote National Free-Market Competition via national free-market antitrust laws and national free-market entry barrier reduction.
- It can (typically) protect National Free-Market Private Property through national free-market legal systems and national free-market contract enforcement.
- It can (typically) minimize National Free-Market Government Regulation in favor of national free-market self-regulation and national free-market price signals.
- It can (typically) encourage National Free-Market Private Ownership of the national free-market means of production by national free-market capitalists and national free-market corporations.
- It can (typically) allow National Free-Market Price Discovery through national free-market supply and demand interactions.
- It can (typically) focus on National Free-Market Profit Generation and national free-market capital accumulation.
- It can (typically) operate within a National Free-Market Legal Framework that emphasizes national free-market contract law and national free-market commercial law.
- ...
- It can (often) create National Free-Market Wealth Disparity through national free-market competition outcomes and national free-market inheritance mechanisms.
- It can (often) experience National Free-Market Business Cycles with national free-market expansion phases and national free-market recession periods.
- It can (often) develop National Free-Market Monopolistic Tendencies in certain national free-market industry sectors.
- It can (often) require National Free-Market Government Intervention to address national free-market failures and national free-market externalities.
- It can (often) lead to National Free-Market Innovation through national free-market entrepreneurship and national free-market creative destruction.
- It can (often) extend National Free-Market Trade Networks beyond national free-market borders through national free-market international agreements.
- It can (often) prioritize National Free-Market Economic Growth over national free-market distribution equity.
- It can (often) develop National Free-Market Financial Systems with sophisticated national free-market banking institutions and national free-market capital markets.
- ...
- It can range from being a Lightly-Regulated National Free-Market Economy to being a Highly-Regulated National Free-Market Economy, depending on its national free-market intervention degree.
- It can range from being a Pure National Free-Market Economy to being a Mixed National Free-Market Economy, depending on its national free-market public sector size.
- It can range from being a Liberal National Free-Market Economy to being a Coordinated National Free-Market Economy, depending on its national free-market institutional arrangements.
- It can range from being a Developing National Free-Market Economy to being an Advanced National Free-Market Economy, depending on its national free-market development stage.
- It can range from being a Small National Free-Market Economy to being a Large National Free-Market Economy, depending on its national free-market economic size.
- It can range from being a Resource-Based National Free-Market Economy to being a Knowledge-Based National Free-Market Economy, depending on its national free-market economic structure.
- ...
- It can enable National Free-Market Prosperity through national free-market efficiency gains and national free-market productivity growth.
- It can foster National Free-Market Economic Freedom via national free-market voluntary exchange and national free-market individual choice.
- It can facilitate National Free-Market Capital Formation through national free-market saving incentives and national free-market investment opportunities.
- It can support National Free-Market Consumer Sovereignty via national free-market purchasing decisions and national free-market producer responses.
- It can organize National Free-Market Labor Utilization through national free-market wage determination and national free-market employment contracts.
- ...
- It can be Nationally Free-Market Resilient during national free-market adaptation periods.
- It can be Nationally Free-Market Competitive in national free-market global environments.
- It can be Nationally Free-Market Innovative through national free-market technological advancement.
- It can be Nationally Free-Market Unequal in national free-market wealth distribution outcomes.
- It can be Nationally Free-Market Unstable during national free-market financial crisis periods.
- ...
- Examples:
- Historical National Free-Market Economies, such as:
- Contemporary National Free-Market Economies, such as:
- Anglo-Saxon National Free-Market Economies, such as:
- United States National Free-Market Economy with national free-market financial centers and national free-market technology hubs.
- United Kingdom National Free-Market Economy with national free-market service sector and national free-market financial industry.
- Canadian National Free-Market Economy with national free-market resource development and national free-market trade agreements.
- Australian National Free-Market Economy with national free-market mineral exports and national free-market housing sector.
- European National Free-Market Economies, such as:
- Asian National Free-Market Economies, such as:
- Anglo-Saxon National Free-Market Economies, such as:
- Emerging National Free-Market Economies, such as:
- ...
- Counter-Examples:
- A National Socialist Economy, which uses central planning and state ownership of means of production rather than national free-market private property and national free-market price mechanisms.
- A National Dirigiste Economy, which implements extensive state intervention and industrial policy contrary to national free-market self-regulation.
- A National Command Economy, which allocates resources through administrative directives rather than national free-market price signals.
- A National Anarchist Economic System, which rejects both national government authority and formalized market structures required for national free-market operation.
- A National Statist Economic System, which prioritizes state control over national free-market private initiative.
- A National Mixed Economy with dominant public sector, which limits the scope of national free-market mechanisms in favor of public ownership and state provision.
- See: Market Economy, Capitalism, Free Enterprise, Economic Liberalism, Private Interest, Public Interest, Laissez-Faire, Invisible Hand, Economic Freedom Index, Comparative Advantage, Creative Destruction, Neoliberalism, Washington Consensus, Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, Friedrich Hayek.
References
2015
- http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21660549-forecasts-decline-capitalism-are-premature-advancing-not-retreating
- QUOTE: However, if you define capitalism as the interaction of individuals with a market economy, the system is advancing, not retreating. New-economy websites such as Airbnb and Etsy allow people to earn money in new ways … investors expect most of these companies to be profitable eventually, judging by the valuations they attract.
2014
- (Neal & Williamson, 2014) ⇒ Larry Neal and Jeffrey Williamson, (editors). “The Cambridge History of Capitalism. Cambridge University Press ISBN:1107036941
- "Review of (Neal & Williamson, 2014).” In: The Economist
- The editors define capitalist systems as having secure contracts, property rights and markets with flexible prices, and surviving long enough to make big investments worthwhile. … Trade may be instinctive, but the institutions of capitalism are a product of social evolution. The rise of the West seems to have had little to do with local smarts or work ethic. Indeed, some of the earliest capitalist innovations in Italy — like rules on issuing credit — were imported from the Abbasid caliphate … capitalist institutions flourished, especially from the late 17th century. Government intervention went hand-in-hand with growth. … Prussia established universal primary education by 1763, thereby creating a workforce capable of boosting economic development. Non-Western economies struggled, by contrast, often because of Western influence. Mr Allen argues that colonisers saddled Africa with corrupt governments that hindered growth. Farsighted investments were typically neglected in favour of projects dedicated to resource extraction.
This history emphasises that the capitalism upon which Western wealth was built was not particularly laissez-faire.
- David Graeber.
- Capitalism does not contain an inherent tendency to civilise itself. Left to its own devices, it can be expected to create rates of return on investment so much higher than overall rates of economic growth that the only possible result will be to transfer more and more wealth into the hands of a hereditary elite of investors, to the comparative impoverishment of everybody else.
- (Piketty, 2014) ⇒ Thomas Piketty. (2014). “Capital in the Twenty-First Century." Harvard University Press. ISBN:9780674369559
- QUOTE: When the rate of return on capital exceeds the rate of growth of output and income, as it did in the nineteenth century and seems quite likely to do again in the twenty-first, capitalism automatically generates arbitrary and unsustainable inequalities that radically undermine the meritocratic values on which democratic societies are based. There are nevertheless ways democracy can regain control over capitalism and ensure that the general interest takes precedence over private interests, while preserving economic openness and avoiding protectionist and nationalist reactions.
2013
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market
- A free market is a market structure in which the distribution and costs of goods and services, wage rates, interest rates — along with the structure and hierarchy between capital and consumer goods — are coordinated by supply and demand unhindered by external regulation or control by government or monopolies.[1] A free market contrasts with a controlled market or regulated market, in which government policy intervenes in the setting of prices. An economy composed entirely of free markets is referred to as a free-market economy.
Although free markets are commonly associated with capitalism in contemporary usage and popular culture, markets have been advocated by socialists and have been included in various different proposals for market socialism.
- A free market is a market structure in which the distribution and costs of goods and services, wage rates, interest rates — along with the structure and hierarchy between capital and consumer goods — are coordinated by supply and demand unhindered by external regulation or control by government or monopolies.[1] A free market contrasts with a controlled market or regulated market, in which government policy intervenes in the setting of prices. An economy composed entirely of free markets is referred to as a free-market economy.
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism
- Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production, with the goal of making a profit.[1][2][3] Central elements of capitalism include capital accumulation, competitive markets, and a price system.[4] There are, however, multiple variants of capitalism, including laissez-faire, welfare capitalism, and state capitalism. Capitalism is considered to have been applied in a variety of historical cases, varying in time, geography, politics, and culture. There is general agreement that capitalism became dominant in the Western world following the demise of feudalism.[5]
Economists, political economists, and historians have taken different perspectives in their analysis of capitalism. Laissez-faire economists emphasize the degree to which government does not have control over markets and the importance of property rights.[6][7] Others emphasize the need for government regulation, to prevent monopolies and to soften the effects of the boom and bust cycle.[8] Most political economists emphasize private property as well, in addition to power relations, wage labor, class, and the uniqueness of capitalism as a historical formation. The extent to which different markets are free, as well as the rules defining private property, is a matter of politics and policy. Many states have what are termed mixed economies, referring to the varying degree of planned and market-driven elements in an economic system.[9]
Proponents of capitalism use historical precedent to claim that it is the greatest wealth-producing system known to man, and that its benefits are mainly to the ordinary person.[10] Critics of capitalism associate it with economic instability[11] and an inability to provide for the wellbeing of all people.[12]
The term capitalism, in its modern sense, comes from the writings of Karl Marx.[13][14] In the 20th century defenders of the capitalist system often replaced the terms capitalism with phrases such as free enterprise and private enterprise and capitalist with investor or rentier in reaction to the negative connotations sometimes associated with capitalism.[15]
- Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production, with the goal of making a profit.[1][2][3] Central elements of capitalism include capital accumulation, competitive markets, and a price system.[4] There are, however, multiple variants of capitalism, including laissez-faire, welfare capitalism, and state capitalism. Capitalism is considered to have been applied in a variety of historical cases, varying in time, geography, politics, and culture. There is general agreement that capitalism became dominant in the Western world following the demise of feudalism.[5]
- ↑ Chris Jenks. Core Sociological Dichotomies. London, England, UK; Thousand Oaks, California, USA; New Delhi, India: SAGE. p. 383.
- ↑ Capitalism Oxford Dictionaries. Retrieved 4 January 2013.
- ↑ http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism
- ↑ Heilbroner, Robert L. "capitalism." The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Second Edition. Steven N. Durlauf and Lawrence E. Blume (Eds.). Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. Template:DOI
- ↑ Capitalism. Encyclopædia Britannica. 2006.
- ↑ Tucker, Irvin B. (1997). Macroeconomics for Today. p. 553.
- ↑ Case, Karl E. (2004). Principles of Macroeconomics. Prentice Hall.
- ↑ Fulcher, James (2004). Capitalism A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. p. 41.
- ↑ Stilwell, Frank. “Political Economy: the Contest of Economic Ideas." First Edition. Oxford University Press. Melbourne, Australia. 2002.
- ↑ Friedman, Milton. Capitalism and Freedom. [Chicago]: University of Chicago, 1962. Print.
- ↑ Krugman, Paul, Wells, Robin, Economics, Worth Publishers, New York, (2006)
- ↑ Caritas in veritate paragraph 36
- ↑ Scott, John (2005). Industrialism: A Dictionary of Sociology. Oxford University Press.
- ↑ ""capitalism, n.2". OED Online". http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/27454?rskey=ZVI1hr&result=2&isAdvanced=false.
- ↑ Williams, Raymond (1983). "Capitalism". Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society, revised edition. Oxford University Press. p. 51. ISBN 0-19-520469-7.
Modern Works
- Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Harvard University Press. ISBN: 9780674369559.
* "When the rate of return on capital exceeds the rate of growth of output and income, as it did in the nineteenth century and seems quite likely to do again in the twenty-first, capitalism automatically generates arbitrary and unsustainable inequalities that radically undermine the meritocratic values on which democratic societies are based."
- Neal, L., & Williamson, J. (Eds.). (2014). The Cambridge History of Capitalism. Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 1107036941.
* "The editors define capitalist systems as having secure contracts, property rights and markets with flexible prices, and surviving long enough to make big investments worthwhile."
Academic Articles and Media
- Graeber, D. (2014). "Capitalism does not contain an inherent tendency to civilise itself. Left to its own devices, it can be expected to create rates of return on investment so much higher than overall rates of economic growth that the only possible result will be to transfer more and more wealth into the hands of a hereditary elite of investors, to the comparative impoverishment of everybody else."
- The Economist. (2015). "However, if you define capitalism as the interaction of individuals with a market economy, the system is advancing, not retreating. New-economy websites such as Airbnb and Etsy allow people to earn money in new ways... investors expect most of these companies to be profitable eventually, judging by the valuations they attract."
Classic Works
- Smith, A. (1776). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.
- Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and Freedom. University of Chicago Press.
- Hayek, F. A. (1944). The Road to Serfdom.