One may find it is not easy to develop a perfect economic system that would be apt and prosperous for every country. It has been proven over time that every economic system must go through a trial and error period before it could ever be recognized as the perfect economic system. But is there really such a faultless system? What does it take to create such a system and why has it not been done before? Should business self-regulate and the government have a hands off approach? Should the government have more say in regulating business? While the answer still remains unclear, economic systems such as socialism and capitalism, as well as the Keynesian economic philosophy have each undergone such periods of trial and error over the past few centuries.
…show more content…
Workers and owners of land and capital could find what he or she thought would be the best use of their incomes (“Capitalism”). In a capitalist system there are no regulations of what they could or could not buy. In contrast, in socialist countries, the government will pick what its citizens will receive. In addition, unlike socialism, wealth is placed in the hands of few in capitalist countries. There is a chance for private gain. This standard of consumer sovereignty, or ability for financial gain in capitalist countries forces producers to use their resources to best appeal to consumers (“Capitalism”). Citizens have a motivation to achieve higher careers, be innovative and find better means of production. There is a reward for their efforts compared to socialist countries. Capitalist citizens had the chance to better their own lives. This incentive makes a huge difference in the motivation of their citizens. Ultimately this true form of capitalism failed. The rich prospered and the poor suffered. Countries had to modify this economic system as they entered into times of prosperity and times of economic depression. We today have a modified version of such a system. However, the capital system revealed its ability for malleability and survival in times of economic challenges. One example of the …show more content…
Unemployed workers are a potential workforce, and therefore without the employment of such citizens, a nation cannot meet full productivity and thus prosperity. Keynes argued that if businesses cannot hire these workers, the government should create programs to employ such citizens. In such a system, the government takes over the role of employer through the use of public works projects such as the building of infrastructure. The idea was that the employees would use the money earned on such government employment projects on products sold by private businesses and thus create economic fortune and growth (García). The United States used such a technique during the Great Depression, through the use of several public works projects such as the building of dams, roads, zoos, and many other projects. Unlike the straight form of capitalism, this Keynesian method of government requires a much more hands on approach. Although Keynesianism does not require all citizens be completely equal, it does give all citizens the equal right of employment and the chance for prosperity in times of hardship. It still has the capitalistic ideas of individual improvement and prosperity, but instead of a laissez -faire attitude, takes a more intricate approach to the lives of their citizens
Workers and owners of land and capital could find what he or she thought would be the best use of their incomes (“Capitalism”). In a capitalist system there are no regulations of what they could or could not buy. In contrast, in socialist countries, the government will pick what its citizens will receive. In addition, unlike socialism, wealth is placed in the hands of few in capitalist countries. There is a chance for private gain. This standard of consumer sovereignty, or ability for financial gain in capitalist countries forces producers to use their resources to best appeal to consumers (“Capitalism”). Citizens have a motivation to achieve higher careers, be innovative and find better means of production. There is a reward for their efforts compared to socialist countries. Capitalist citizens had the chance to better their own lives. This incentive makes a huge difference in the motivation of their citizens. Ultimately this true form of capitalism failed. The rich prospered and the poor suffered. Countries had to modify this economic system as they entered into times of prosperity and times of economic depression. We today have a modified version of such a system. However, the capital system revealed its ability for malleability and survival in times of economic challenges. One example of the …show more content…
Unemployed workers are a potential workforce, and therefore without the employment of such citizens, a nation cannot meet full productivity and thus prosperity. Keynes argued that if businesses cannot hire these workers, the government should create programs to employ such citizens. In such a system, the government takes over the role of employer through the use of public works projects such as the building of infrastructure. The idea was that the employees would use the money earned on such government employment projects on products sold by private businesses and thus create economic fortune and growth (García). The United States used such a technique during the Great Depression, through the use of several public works projects such as the building of dams, roads, zoos, and many other projects. Unlike the straight form of capitalism, this Keynesian method of government requires a much more hands on approach. Although Keynesianism does not require all citizens be completely equal, it does give all citizens the equal right of employment and the chance for prosperity in times of hardship. It still has the capitalistic ideas of individual improvement and prosperity, but instead of a laissez -faire attitude, takes a more intricate approach to the lives of their citizens