'Ethics & Philosophy Essay\r'

'Free merchandises can be said to be the securities industrys which waste no governing stay or jurisprudence. The besides codes present ar the ones which involve protect property remediates and maintaining the legal dodging. Free market places be markets in which the product prices ar just strict through market forces, as hostile to baulk by international forces. There is besides melt emulation in still markets, and the law of make out and demand is applyd to fix prices of goods and serve in such markets. There atomic number 18 mixed philosophers who victuals exculpate markets bit others ar contend to such markets.\r\nThe paper volition analyze the contri hardlyions of Adam metalworker, Karl Marx and Milton Friedman on the issue and will give a brief conclusion on the issues discussed. Karl Marx. Karl Marx was a German philosophers who is considered to be amongst the some polemic philosophers in hi narrative. He was against capitalism and toler ant markets, which he viewed to be a message with which property owners or the rich use to maintain control over the peasants or shortsighted. Karl Marx viewed the capitalist system as a system meant to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.\r\nHe explained that initially, capitalism was meant to be a means with which masses exchanged commodities which they did non birth. However, later money was created, it evolved and became a means with which raft could make profits as opposed to satisfying the demand for products. all over time, capitalism downstairsmined the gracious go badment and advantageously being, and products created could now dictate how interactions amongst human beings would be. Soon, the relations between society became corporal as everything was treated in impairment of its monetary worth, as opposed to nonional and artistic qualities possessed.\r\nCapitalism conduct to the derangement of workers since they were separated from owning the means which was utilise for production, and they became slaves to the people who owned those means. This led to the emergence of 2 frugal groups; the property owners and the workers, and the latter were ladened by the former. This is the reason which made him name the collapse of capitalism and its replacement with lovingism. fabianism is a system in which the political sympathies or authority controls production so that it may be mutually effective to all members of the society or state.\r\nKarl Marx was opposed to forgive markets since they tended to favor the rich and persecute the poor. Free markets are a birth of the capitalist system, which made Karl Marx oppose them. Weaknesses of this argument. Karl Marx is opposed to disembarrass markets due to the weaknesses which he views in capitalism. Karl Marx views capitalism to be a system where the rich oppress the poor. He accordingly opposes all features of capitalist systems which he views to be a means which promote th e developing of the poor .\r\nHowever, Karl Marx does non consider the amaze which combines two capitalism and socialism in order to take advantage of the domineering attributes of the two models. Since socialism has its weaknesses, combining both models may be to a greater extent salutary to the parsimoniousness. In this respect, moderate organization interference in tack by the presidency is an option which Karl Marx should have pursued. Adam metalworker. He is considered to be the father of the juvenile political economy and he contributed a lot toward the modern capitalist system.\r\nAdam metalworker was of the notion that production was the key to sparing harvest-tide and that this could besides be achieved through economic liberalization. Adam Smith in that locationfore concomitant unregulated markets since he saw them as a means of stimulating economic offshoot. He explained that free markets would enable individuals to develop a dividing line without hav ing presidential term intervention, and that the people who consume the products developed would do so at prices which have been determined by demand and supply forces .\r\nAdam Smith added that free markets enabled the most matched producers and consumers to survive, which was beneficial to the economy. He viewed free markets are unaffiliated problem solvers which did not require governance interference, since market forces eventually address both surpluses or shortages which are inherent in the market. Adam Smith uses the ‘invisible feed’ theory to explain the way in which antithetical parts of the economy are integrated. Smith explains that separately individual is head by an invisible hand in making their decisions which benefit the economy, without their knowledge.\r\nHe explains that individuals load down out actions which are meant to benefit themselves, but they end up benefiting the society at large, which is not the initial aim of the individual. Smi th gives an illustration of the creation of a woolen coat. He says that the coat is developed after a series of work ones which are undertaken by diametrical people. The shepherd who owns the sheep, the spinner who develops the coats, and the shipper who transports them to the market all play a position in the creation of the finished product.\r\nHe explains that this subconscious process by the different parties involved achieves higher levels of efficiencies than would be achieved had the process been planned by the players involved. It means that markets which are regulated by the government have lower efficiency levels compared to markets which are not regulated . This is the study reason why Adam Smith supports the free markets as opposed to regulated markets. Weaknesses of this argument. Adam smith is of the opinion that free markets enabled the most competitive producers and consumers to survive, which is beneficial to the economy.\r\nHe gives many attributes of free mar kets, most of which are true. However, he does not discuss the weaknesses of free markets. Free markets incur from certain weaknesses such as inhibiting the addition of small firms. Free markets may besides experience monopolistic and oligopolistic tendencies which adversely collide with the economy. The economy may in addition baffle certain effects attributed to unfair practices in trade. Other effects like inflation, market downturns and others require regulation by a central authority. Adam Smith does not discuss these situations, which makes his argument inconclusive.\r\nMilton Friedman. Friedman made major contributions to the economic crisis during the early 20th century. He viewed the 1920s as a bound of sustainable and vital growth. Friedman believed that economic growth and freedom had a direct relationship. He apply several(prenominal) principles and arguments to further his support from free markets. The political principle was used by Friedman to define the fea tures of free markets. He explained that in free markets, individuals cannot coerce each other and that there is voluntary cooperation between the parties involved .\r\nHe further explained that parties which are involved in transactions under such circum placements benefit in one way or another, other than they would not participate in these transactions. In free market transactions, there are no social responsibilities and values; there are unless dual-lane responsibilities and values. However, Friedman was overly of the opinion that the government should intervene in the economy if there is threat to it. one of the instances when Friedman supported government interference was during the great(p) depression which occurred in 1929.\r\nThe commodious natural depression changed the view that the United States economy was blue and that it should be totally free from government control, after the US Stock alter collapsed due to various factors. Friedman supports the market reg ulation and explains that if the national political sympathies had intervened and utilize the business policies, this depression would have been avoided. He explains that the Federal Government should have suspended recompense for the withdrawals being requested by people. The constitution which was used at the time, which involved impression more money to supplement the increase demand, is blamed for the Great Depression.\r\nThis reveals a more squashy approach to the initial defy that government intervention should not be allowed, and that the markets should be allowed to operate as free markets. However, it does not completely change the stance which had been taken by Friedman regarding free markets. Government interference is allowed only under repaired circumstances where lack of intervention would get going to severe effects to the economy. This was the eccentric person during the Great depression and is also currently the case in the event of the global pecuniar y crisis being experienced.\r\nWeaknesses of this argument. Friedman is categorical that there should be free markets if economies are to grow. He argues that the absence seizure of social values and responsibilities and the presence of shared values are factors which facilitate economic growth. However, he appears to take a soft stand when discussing the Great Depression where he advocates for government interference, but using the right policies. This is a deviation from his stand that the government should not interfere with the business environment.\r\nIt also reveals that free trade has weaknesses which he does not effectively address. Personal view. In my opinion, free markets do not mite to serious political, social, or environmental problems as explained by some philosophers. This is because free markets are the most effective and natural means in which prices should be set to ensure effectiveness. On the contrary, a wrong approach of interference by the government may lea d to serious political, social, or environmental problems as was seen in the Great Depression.\r\nThe current monetary crisis which began in the United States can also be said to have been quicken by the government failure to limit the borrowings by investors and excess add by financial institutions using predatory lending practices. This is a similar problem which led to the great depressions, and the government interference is seen to have led to adverse effects kind of than positive effects on the economy. However, in extreme cases of economic problems, the government should intervene. This should only be done to save the economy in cases where the market forces are intelligibly unable to rectify the situation.\r\nFor instance, the current financial crisis facing the world requires the government’s intervention. This does not mean that the government supports the regulation of markets since in the absence of economic crises, the market forces would usually be used to set the product prices. My major reasons for supporting free markets is that regulated markets usually discourage investments, peculiarly if the regulations are too strict. Investors prefer drop in countries where there is free trade since they can predict their future scratch or returns on investment, due to the absence of external factors in the business environment.\r\n set markets may also adversely affect the economy especially if the policies which are applied are retrogressive. Summary and conclusion. It is evident that the 3 philosophers made major contributions to the modern world. Their theories are still in use several years after some of them passed away. However, it is crucial to cross off that their arguments relating to free trade are inconclusive since some of the facts which they used to support their arguments have changed. It is also important to note that none of them has a wrong view, it is only that they looked at free trade from different perspectives.\r \nThe contributions which each of them has made to society should be appreciated since they all talked about various issues affecting the society, and not just free trade. It is important that other scholars improve on the theories which were advanced by Adam smith, Karl Marx and Milton Friedman. This will reflect the market environment as it is today, and the arguments developed can be used to improve the policies in the current business environment.\r\nWorks cited.\r\nAmadae Samuel. Rationalizing capitalist democracy: the heatless War origins of rational choice liberalism. cabbage: University of Chicago Press, 2003, p255-261. Gagnier Regenia. The insatiability of human wants: economics and aesthetics in market society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000, p25-35. Machaj Mateusz. Friedman for government intervention: the case of the great depression. Mises Daily. Retrieved on March 18, 2009 from <http://74. 125. 95. 132/search? q=cache:s8QYmlyzr-4J:mises. org/story/2442+ Milton+Friedman+and+support+of+free+markets&cd=8&hl=en&ct =clnk&gl=ke>. Sunderlin, William D. Ideology, social theory, and the environment. New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002, p23-33.\r\n'