The Age Of Milton Freedman Summary

Free markets are considered inequitable because of the lack of equality; if the government were to intervene they would promote equity. The Brazilian government could stabilise the economy and lower inflation and promote economic growth (Coglan, 2013, pg312).

Katherine Boo’s book, Behind The Beautiful Forevers, portrays the “new life” the people in India live as capitalism and globalism ventures into their lives. These two systems look to promise new and improved social opportunities for all classes, not just the wealthy. However, although this makes it seem like the government of India in the 21st century is progressing towards a more fairer society for all its citizens, the reality is, they are really not progressing at all. Of course, while capitalism and globalization initially gave all citizens, especially the lower classes, hope that more opportunities would be available to them, it seems it has prevaricated it all as these opportunities have been more transformative to the elite and privileged classes than it has for the poor.

I agree with Erwert’s article, Moral Criticisms of the Market (Ewert, 2009) concerning the free market verses socialism. As he explains the different reasons of why socialism is doesn’t work, I am reminded of my time in New York, sitting around with my college friends. One of my friends immigrated from Nigeria her name is Amara. One week she shared with me how she really wanted Burnie Sanders to win the election because she desired to go to college for free. She passionately expressed how “free college” would liberate many to be in school without debt.

Today, more than ever, there is great debate over politics and which economic system works the best. How needs and wants should be allocated, and who should do the allocating, is one of the most highly debated topics in our current society. Be it communist dictators defending a command economy, free market conservatives defending a market economy, or European liberals defending socialism, everyone has an opinion. While all systems have flaws and merits, it must be decided which system is the best for all citizens. When looking at both the financial well being of all citizens, it is clear that market economies fall short on ensuring that the basic needs of all citizens are met. If one looks at liberty and individual freedom, it is evident

Disha, Kanika and Ayesha’s presentation on “India Becoming” by Akash Kapur was a thorough review of the book. They covered many themes including change, development, modernity, the culture of violence and by doing so got at the heart of the book, which showed that “India [can] often feel like two nations.” The group discussed some of the negative effects of development in India, one major one being pollution. According to Kapur, seventy percent of India’s surface water is polluted and half a million deaths a year were attributed to air pollution. This was discussed in contrast to the positive effects of development that have seen the erosion of the caste system and allowed women and people of lower castes upward social mobility. The group was able to highlight some of the effects of development on the people of India. However, many of their arguments were oversimplified and did not account for the conditions of the majority of Indians. In addition, many of their arguments lacked conviction because they were not backed by statistics or references from outside sources that could have corroborated the fieldwork done by Kapur. As such, this review will highlight some issues excluded by the presenters and argue that though India has developed, it has been at the cost of ignoring the agrarian sector and a massive rise in starvation and poverty.

The United States of America was once renowned for and demarcated by the size and successfulness of its middle class. Currently, America faces a shrinking middle class and a new rising oligarchy that is creating the largest wealth disparity in eighty years. Robert B. Reich wrote Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few, for the sole purpose of exposing the reasons why the wealthy get wealthier and poor get poorer. Reich contends that the free market vs government debate serves as a means of distraction, covering up the real issues of the top one percent reaping economic gains. Reich states in the book that the “free market” is a myth that prevents us from examining the rule changes and questioning who they serve. Reich further states “it is no accident that those with disproportionate influence over these rules, who are the largest beneficiaries of how the rules have been designed and adapted, are also among the most passionate supporters of the “free market” and the most ardent advocates of the relative superiority of the market over the government.”

India became one of the first independent nations that emerged after World War II, and like many who gained their independence they were very impoverished. American President Franklin Roosevelt called for a war against poverty, and in Britain, the Beveridge Report also called for the slaying of the giant of poverty, and a creation of a welfare state. The Cold War played a major role in Western government’s efforts to help developing countries, because they were also using similar methods with Communist agenda to help poverty. The Development Economics for these emerging countries played a big part in their acceptance into successful nations. People all joined in on a crusade to confront poverty, with morality, justice, human sympathy, and idealism.

Imagine how would our world be if all human beings had the same opportunities, a world where equity ruled our society. In this case, poverty will be extinguished. Unfortunately, there are still some countries where the wealth is very poorly distributed, and a great portion of the population is below the poverty line. Such is the case of India, an Asian country located in south-central part of the continent. One percent of the population in India holds close to half of the country’s wealth. The book The White Tiger, by Aravind Adiga, is a great novel where you can notice the things that people who are poor, must go through and how difficult it is. It is so rigid to get

The article starts with the prevalence of social inequalities in the Indian society. It says that inequalities are distributed in the Indian society by the prevalent social structures which are based on caste, class and gender. So the people who get benefited from the development policy of the country are the ones who have mostly the high status and the fruits of policies that are formed reach to the higher sections of the society leaving behind the weaker sections of the society. The weaker sections of the society are those who have been marginalized for years.

The economic system that developed in India after 1947 was a mixed economy characterized by a large number of state-owned enterprises, centralized planning, and subsidies. In 1991, India’s government embarked on an ambitious economic reform program. Much of the industrial licensing system was dismantled, and several areas once closed to the private sector were opened. In addition, investment by foreign companies was welcomed, and plans to start privatizing state-owned businesses were announced. India has posted impressive gains since 1991, however there are still impediments to further transformation. Attempts to reduce import tariffs have been stalled by political opposition from employers, employees, and politicians. Moreover, the privatization program has been slowed thanks to actions taken by the Supreme Court. Finally, extreme poverty continues to plague the country

But having stated all this, it needed to note that India still stands poorly in world social parameters. We still are amongst the pooter nations of the world. Poverty ranks are still high. We are one of the most corrupt nations in the world and indexes do not rank us well. Socially our parameter are not high. This will sooner or later reflect upon our economics as well. This will be demonstrated in the rest of the essay. Corruption is considered bad and after the several scams that have hit India over the apst 4-5 years we have clearly not changed things. But there are studies that suggest otherwise.

There has been a debate over the past century between economists as to what economic policies are able to develop the most prosperity for developing countries. Some economists believe that larger state influence and oversight over the economy are able to yield better results, while other economists contend that free market economies with little government are able to generate results. In the piece, Commanding Heights, Yergin and Stanislaw state that the two sides to the “Battle of Ideas” are the sides of liberalism and conservatism. However, according to Goldstein and Pevehouse, developing countries have in fact employed a myriad of different economic policies to help spur growth such as import substitution, export led growth and foreign investment.

The process of planning in India has always been sensitive to the needs of the poor and the plight of excluded from its early days. Government of India sought to solve all the socio-economic problems with the help of rapid and sustained economic growth, because our planners were working with the view that as the size of national income will be high individuals can share more and vice-versa (Hashim, S.R., 2007). Mainly because of this reason economic growth has always been the centre of objectives of India’s Five Year

That public institution is moving away relative to the growing reach of market based sharing mechanisms. One author has explained “retreat of the state” as the “triumph of liberal economic ideas” which is in general attribute to a revolution in guiding principle attitudes (Ghosh, 2010, page 231-236), and is the identification of the power of market-based approaches that came up in the early 1980s. Several authors have maintained that ideological change has led to a great policy change in much of the developing world to the privatization and liberalization of production, which has influential and political implications for the countries in the region. In fact, the proof does not suggest that such a change has happened in the last two decades: experimental studies have not found a significant reduction in the standard size of the state compared to the national economy in the Third World. It remains too early to tell of the demise of the economic role of the country while the legality of liberal economic ideas may have developed in recent years.

Capitalism and neo-liberal ideologies have been adopted by the world as the natural orders, and relevant policies are taken as the common sense policies to be adopted for nations to prosper (Hobden & Jones, 2011). This can be represented by the policy union of nations around the world, particularly, developing countries. Many developing countries, more often than not, pursue neo-liberal policies, namely trade liberalization and reductions in state expenditure in the attempt to attain economic growth and sustain prosperity. In the private sector, entrepreneurism, risk-taking, and profit maximization are seen to be the drivers for sustaining prosperity and growth. Individual prosperity and happiness are seen as being intimately tied to monetary gain and materialism. This union of ideologies, be them at the national, economical, or individual level, do not take place in isolated regions. Rather, they are widely adopted, and its spread is accelerating under globalization.