Two Views of the Proper Role of Government in the Economy

Paul Samuelson and Milton Friedman are two of America's most distinguished economists. In recognition of their achievements, Samuelson was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1970 and Friedman in 1976. Both spent most of their professional lives on the faculty of major universities (Samuelson at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Friedman at the University of Chicago). Given their similarities, one would think that the two would also hold similar views on economic issues. Nothing could be further from the truth. And, some of their sharpest differences center on the question of what ought to be the proper role of government in the economy.

Classical economists in the tradition of Adam Smith had long recognized the need for government to provide goods and services that would not or could not be provided by the private sector (like national defense). But they urged that this participation be kept to a minimum.

But Samuelson argued that too many of the problems the classical economists wanted to leave to the marketplace were not subject to its influence. These externalities, affecting things like public health, education, and environmental pollution, were not subject to the laws of supply and demand. Consequently, it was up to government to establish goals for the economy and use its powers to achieve them.

Milton Friedman sees things differently. Like the classical economists of old, he regards supply and demand as the most powerful and potentially beneficial economic forces. The best that government can do to help the economy, in Friedman's view, is to keep its hands off business and allow the market to "do its thing." The minimum wage laws are a case in point. Whereas Samuelson endorses minimum wage laws as a means of helping workers at the bottom of the income ladder, Friedman would argue that by adding to unemployment, they harm the very people they were designed to help. That is, he explains, by increasing labor costs, minimum wage laws make it too expensive for many firms to hire low-wage workers. As a result, those who might otherwise be employed are laid off.

On the one hand, Samuelson endorses the concept of government-sponsored programs such as public housing and food stamps as a means of reducing poverty. Friedman, on the other hand, would prefer to give the poor additional income and allow them to use the funds to solve their problems without government interference. To apply this concept, Friedman suggested the "negative income tax." The graduated income tax takes an increasing amount in taxes as one's income rises. The negative income tax would apply a sliding scale of payments to those whose income from work fell below a stated minimum.

Unit 10

Grammar: 1. Функции инфинитива.

2. Инфинитив в функции определения и обстоятельства.

Date: 2015-10-18; view: 361; Нарушение авторских прав