Home  ›  The Economy of the United States in the Past Can Best Be Described as Laissez-faire Capitalism.

The Economy of the United States in the Past Can Best Be Described as Laissez-faire Capitalism.

Written By ۱۴۰۰ بهمن ۲۷, چهارشنبه Add Comment Edit

Avoidance past governments from interfering in the workings of the gratuitous market

Laissez-faire ( LESS-ay-FAIR ; from French: laissez faire [lɛse fɛʁ] ( audio speaker icon listen ), lit. 'permit practise') is an economic organization in which transactions between private groups of people are gratuitous or almost free from whatsoever form of economic interventionism (such as regulation and subsidies) other than the enforcement of property laws. As a system of thought, laissez-faire rests on the post-obit axioms: "the individual is the bones unit in order, i.e. the standard of measurement in social calculus; the individual has a natural right to freedom; and the physical order of nature is a harmonious and self-regulating arrangement."[1]

Another basic principle of laissez-faire holds that markets should naturally be competitive, a dominion that the early advocates of laissez-faire always emphasized.[1] With the aims of maximizing freedom by allowing markets to self-regulate, early advocates of laissez-faire proposed a impôt unique, a taxation on country rent (similar to Georgism) to replace all taxes that they saw every bit damaging welfare by penalizing production.[ii] [ clarification needed ]

Proponents of laissez-faire argue for a most complete separation of government from the economic sector.[three] [ verification needed ] The phrase laissez-faire is part of a larger French phrase and literally translates to "let [it/them] practice", but in this context the phrase normally ways to "permit it be" and in expression "laid back."[4] Although never practiced with full consistency, laissez-faire commercialism emerged in the mid-18th century and was further popularized by Adam Smith's book The Wealth of Nations.[5] [6]

While associated with capitalism in common usage, there are also non-capitalist forms of laissez-faire, including some forms of market socialism.

Etymology and usage [edit]

The term laissez-faire probable originated in a coming together that took place around 1681 between powerful French Controller-General of Finances Jean-Baptiste Colbert and a group of French businessmen headed by M. Le Gendre. When the eager mercantilist minister asked how the French state could be of service to the merchants and help promote their commerce, Le Gendre replied simply: "Laissez-nous faire" ("Leave information technology to us" or "Allow united states of america do [it]", the French verb not requiring an object).[vii]

The anecdote on the Colbert–Le Gendre meeting appeared in a 1751 article in the Periodical économique, written past French minister and champion of free trade René de Voyer, Marquis d'Argenson—also the first known appearance of the term in print.[viii] Argenson himself had used the phrase earlier (1736) in his own diaries in a famous burst:

Laissez faire, telle devrait être la devise de toute puissance publique, depuis que le monde est civilisé [...]. Détestable principe que celui de ne vouloir grandir que par l'abaissement de nos voisins ! Il n'y a que la méchanceté et la malignité du cœur de satisfaites dans ce principe, et 50'intérêt y est opposé. Laissez faire, morbleu ! Laissez faire !![9]

Let go, which should exist the motto of all public power, since the globe was civilized [...]. [It is] a detestable principle of those that desire to enlarge [themselves] but by the abasement of our neighbours. In that location is but the wicked and the malignant middle[due south] [who are] satisfied by this principle and [its] interest is opposed. Permit go, for God's sake! Let go!![10]

—René Louis de Voyer de Paulmy d'Argenson

Vincent de Gournay, a French Physiocrat and intendant of commerce in the 1750s, popularized the term laissez-faire as he allegedly adopted information technology from François Quesnay's writings on Communist china.[11] Quesnay coined the phrases laissez-faire and laissez-passer,[12] laissez-faire being a translation of the Chinese term wu wei (無為).[xiii] Gournay ardently supported the removal of restrictions on trade and the deregulation of industry in France. Delighted with the Colbert–Le Gendre anecdote,[fourteen] he forged it into a larger maxim all his own: "Laissez faire et laissez passer" ("Allow practice and permit pass"). His motto has as well been identified every bit the longer "Laissez faire et pass, le monde va de lui même !" ("Let do and let pass, the world goes on by itself!"). Although Gournay left no written tracts on his economical policy ideas, he had immense personal influence on his contemporaries, notably his boyfriend Physiocrats, who credit both the laissez-faire slogan and the doctrine to Gournay.[15]

Before d'Argenson or Gournay, P. South. de Boisguilbert had enunciated the phrase "On laisse faire la nature" ("Let nature run its course").[16] D'Argenson himself during his life was meliorate known for the similar, but less-celebrated motto "Pas trop gouverner" ("Govern non likewise much").[17]

The Physiocrats proclaimed laissez-faire in 18th-century France, placing information technology at the very core of their economic principles and famous economists, beginning with Adam Smith, adult the thought.[18] It is with the Physiocrats and the classical political economy that the term laissez-faire is ordinarily associated.[19] The book Laissez Faire and the General-Welfare State states: "The physiocrats, reacting against the excessive mercantilist regulations of the France of their day, expressed a belief in a 'natural gild' or freedom under which individuals in following their selfish interests contributed to the full general good. Since, in their view, this natural order functioned successfully without the aid of regime, they advised the state to restrict itself to upholding the rights of private property and individual liberty, to removing all artificial barriers to trade, and to abolishing all useless laws".[18]

The French phrase laissez-faire gained currency in English language-speaking countries with the spread of Physiocratic literature in the tardily 18th century. George Whatley's 1774 Principles of Trade (co-authored with Benjamin Franklin) re-told the Colbert-LeGendre anecdote; this may mark the outset appearance of the phrase in an English-language publication.[xx]

Herbert Spencer was opposed to a slightly different awarding of laissez faire—to "that miserable laissez-faire" that leads to men'south ruin, saying: "Forth with that miserable laissez-faire which calmly looks on while men ruin themselves in trying to enforce by law their equitable claims, there goes activity in supplying them, at other men's toll, with complimentary novel-reading!"[21]

As a production of the Enlightenment, laissez-faire was "conceived as the way to unleash human potential through the restoration of a natural system, a system unhindered past the restrictions of government".[1] In a like vein, Adam Smith[ when? ] viewed the economy equally a natural system and the market as an organic part of that organisation. Smith saw laissez-faire as a moral program and the market its instrument to ensure men the rights of natural law.[1] By extension, costless markets become a reflection of the natural arrangement of freedom.[1] For Smith, laissez-faire was "a program for the abolition of laws constraining the market, a program for the restoration of order and for the activation of potential growth".[1]

However, Smith[22] and notable classical economists such as Thomas Malthus and David Ricardo did not use the phrase. Jeremy Bentham used the term, but it was probably[ original research? ] James Mill'southward reference to the laissez-faire maxim (together with the "Pas trop gouverner" motto) in an 1824 entry for the Encyclopædia Britannica that really brought the term into wider English language usage. With the advent of the Anti-Corn Police force League (founded 1838), the term received much of its English meaning.[23] [ need quotation to verify ]

Smith commencement used the metaphor of an invisible hand in his volume The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) to describe the unintentional effects of economical cocky-organization from economical self-involvement.[24] Although not the metaphor itself, the thought lying behind the invisible paw belongs to Bernard de Mandeville and his Fable of the Bees (1705). In political economic system, that idea and the doctrine of laissez-faire have long been closely related.[25] Some have characterized the invisible-hand metaphor as one for laissez-faire,[26] although Smith never actually used the term himself.[22] In Third Millennium Capitalism (2000), Wyatt M. Rogers Jr. notes a trend whereby recently "bourgeois politicians and economists have chosen the term 'free-market capitalism' in lieu of laissez-faire".[27]

American individualist anarchists such every bit Benjamin Tucker saw themselves as economic laissez-faire socialists and political individualists while arguing that their "anarchistic socialism" or "individual anarchism" was "consequent Manchesterism".[28]

History [edit]

Europe [edit]

In Europe, the laissez-faire movement was showtime widely promoted by the Physiocrats, a movement that included Vincent de Gournay (1712–1759), a successful merchant turned political figure. Gournay is postulated to take adapted the Taoist concept wu wei,[29] from the writings on Prc past François Quesnay[13] (1694–1774). Gournay held that government should allow the laws of nature to govern economic activeness, with the state only intervening to protect life, liberty and property. François Quesnay and Anne Robert Jacques Turgot, Baron de l'Aulne took upward Gournay'south ideas. Quesnay had the ear of the King of France, Louis Xv and in 1754 persuaded him to requite laissez-faire a try. On September 17, the King abolished all tolls and restraints on the sale and ship of grain. For more a decade, the experiment appeared successful, but 1768 saw a poor harvest, and the cost of bread rose so high that there was widespread starvation while merchants exported grain in order to obtain the best profit. In 1770, the Comptroller-Full general of Finances Joseph Marie Terray revoked the edict allowing free merchandise in grain.[30]

The doctrine of laissez-faire became an integral part of 19th-century European liberalism.[18] Merely as liberals supported freedom of thought in the intellectual sphere, so were they equally prepared to champion the principles of free merchandise and free competition in the sphere of economics, seeing the state as merely a passive policeman, protecting private property and administering justice, but non interfering with the diplomacy of its citizens. Businessmen, British industrialists in particular, were quick to associate these principles with their own economic interests.[18] Many of the ideas of the physiocrats spread throughout Europe and were adopted to a greater or lesser extent in Sweden, Tuscany, Spain and in the newly created Usa. Adam Smith, author of The Wealth of Nations (1776), met Quesnay and acknowledged his influence.[31]

In Britain, the newspaper The Economist (founded in 1843) became an influential voice for laissez-faire capitalism.[32] Laissez-faire advocates opposed food assistance for famines occurring within the British Empire. In 1847, referring to the famine then underway in Ireland, founder of The Economist James Wilson wrote: "Information technology is no homo's business to provide for another".[33] More specifically, in An Essay on the Principle of Population, Malthus argued that there was nothing that could exist done to avoid famines because he felt he had mathematically proven that population growth tends to exceed growth in food production. Nonetheless, The Economist campaigned against the Corn Laws that protected landlords in the Uk of Corking United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland and Ireland confronting competition from less expensive foreign imports of cereal products. The Smashing Famine in Ireland in 1845 led to the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846. The tariffs on grain which kept the toll of bread artificially high were repealed.[34] However, repeal of the Corn Laws came too belatedly to stop the Irish famine, partly because it was done in stages over three years.[35]

A group that became known as the Manchester Liberals, to which Richard Cobden (1804–1865) and John Bright (1811–1889) belonged, were staunch defenders of gratuitous trade. Later the expiry of Cobden, the Cobden Club (founded in 1866) connected their work.[36] In 1860, Britain and France concluded a trade treaty, afterward which other European countries signed several similar treaties.[ citation needed ] The breakdown of laissez-faire as practised by the British Empire was partly led by British companies eager for state support of their positions abroad, in particular British oil companies.[37]

United States [edit]

Frank Bourgin's study of the Constitutional Convention and subsequent decades argues that direct government involvement in the economy was intended by the Founding Fathers.[38] The reason for this was the economic and financial chaos the nation suffered under the Manufactures of Confederation. The goal was to ensure that dearly-won political independence was not lost by being economically and financially dependent on the powers and princes of Europe. The creation of a strong central regime able to promote science, invention, industry and commerce was seen as an essential means of promoting the general welfare and making the economy of the United States strong enough for them to determine their ain destiny. Others view Bourgin's written report, written in the 1940s and non published until 1989, as an over-interpretation of the testify, intended originally to defend the New Bargain and later on to counter Ronald Reagan's economical policies.[39]

Historian Kathleen G. Donohue argues that in the 19th century liberalism in the Usa had distinctive characteristics and that "at the center of classical liberal theory [in Europe] was the idea of laissez-faire. To the vast majority of American classical liberals, however, laissez-faire did non mean "no authorities intervention" at all. On the contrary, they were more than willing to see government provide tariffs, railroad subsidies, and internal improvements, all of which benefited producers". Notable examples of government intervention in the menstruum prior to the American Civil War include the establishment of the Patent Office in 1802; the institution of the Part of Standard Weights and Measures in 1830; the creation of the Coast and Geodetic Survey in 1807 and other measures to improve river and harbor navigation; the various Army expeditions to the westward, beginning with Lewis and Clark'southward Corps of Discovery in 1804 and standing into the 1870s, nigh ever under the direction of an officeholder from the Army Corps of Topographical Engineers and which provided crucial information for the overland pioneers that followed; the assignment of Ground forces Engineer officers to aid or directly the surveying and construction of the early railroads and canals; and the institution of the First Bank of the U.s.a. and Second Depository financial institution of the United States besides every bit various protectionist measures (due east.g. the tariff of 1828). Several of these proposals met with serious opposition and required a swell deal of horse-trading to be enacted into law. For instance, the Beginning National Bank would not accept reached the desk of President George Washington in the absence of an understanding that was reached betwixt Alexander Hamilton and several Southern members of Congress to locate the capitol in the District of Columbia. In dissimilarity to Hamilton and the Federalists was Thomas Jefferson and James Madison's opposing political party, the Democratic-Republicans.

Most of the early opponents of laissez-faire capitalism in the United States subscribed to the American Schoolhouse. This school of thought was inspired by the ideas of Hamilton, who proposed the creation of a authorities-sponsored bank and increased tariffs to favor Northern industrial interests. Following Hamilton's decease, the more constant protectionist influence in the antebellum period came from Henry Dirt and his American System. In the early 19th century, "information technology is quite articulate that the laissez-faire label is an inappropriate i" to use to the human relationship between the United States authorities and industry.[40] In the mid-19th century, the U.s.a. followed the Whig tradition of economic nationalism, which included increased country control, regulation and macroeconomic development of infrastructure.[41] Public works such as the provision and regulation transportation such equally railroads took effect. The Pacific Railway Acts provided the evolution of the Start Transcontinental Railroad.[41] [42] In lodge to help pay for its state of war effort in the Civil War, the United states government imposed its first personal income tax on 5 August 1861 equally part of the Revenue Deed of 1861 (three% of all incomes over US$800; rescinded in 1872).

Following the Ceremonious War, the movement towards a mixed economy accelerated. Protectionism increased with the McKinley Tariff of 1890 and the Dingley Tariff of 1897. Government regulation of the economy expanded with the enactment of the Interstate Commerce Deed of 1887 and the Sherman Anti-trust Deed. The Progressive Era saw the enactment of more controls on the economy as evidenced by the Woodrow Wilson assistants's New Liberty plan. Following World War I and the Great Depression, the United states turned to a mixed economic system which combined gratis enterprise with a progressive income revenue enhancement and in which from time to time the regime stepped in to support and protect American manufacture from competition from overseas. For example, in the 1980s the government sought to protect the motorcar industry by "voluntary" export restrictions from Japan.[43]

In 1986, Pietro S. Nivola wrote: "By and large, the comparative strength of the dollar against major strange currencies has reflected high U.Due south. interest rates driven by huge federal budget deficits. Hence, the source of much of the current deterioration of merchandise is not the general state of the economy, but rather the government'due south mix of fiscal and monetary policies – that is, the problematic juxtaposition of bold taxation reductions, relatively tight monetary targets, generous military outlays, and merely modest cuts in major entitlement programs. Put simply, the roots of the trade problem and of the resurgent protectionism it has fomented are fundamentally political too as economic".[44]

A more recent abet of total laissez-faire has been Objectivist Ayn Rand, who described information technology as "the abolition of any and all forms of government intervention in production and trade, the separation of State and Economics, in the same style and for the same reasons equally the separation of Church and State".[45] This viewpoint is summed up in what is known as the iron police force of regulation, which is a theory stating that all authorities economic regulation eventually leads to a net loss in social welfare.[46] Rand's political philosophy emphasized individual rights (including belongings rights)[47] and she considered laissez-faire commercialism the only moral social system because in her view it was the just organisation based on the protection of those rights.[48] She opposed statism, which she understood to include theocracy, absolute monarchy, Nazism, fascism, communism, socialism and dictatorship.[49] Rand believed that natural rights should be enforced past a constitutionally express authorities.[l] Although her political views are often classified equally conservative or libertarian, she preferred the term "radical for capitalism". She worked with conservatives on political projects, but disagreed with them over bug such as faith and ideals.[51] She denounced libertarianism, which she associated with anarchism.[52] She rejected riot as a naïve theory based in subjectivism that could only lead to collectivism in practice.[53]

Models [edit]

Capitalism [edit]

A closely related conception is that of raw or pure capitalism, or unrestrained commercialism, that refers to capitalism free of social regulations,[54] with depression, minimal[55] or no authorities and operating almost entirely on the profit motive. Other than laissez-faire economics and anarcho-capitalism, it is non associated with a school of idea. It typically has a bad connotation, which hints towards a perceived demand for restraint due to social needs and securities that tin non exist fairly responded to past companies with just a motive for making profit.

Robert Kuttner states that "for over a century, popular struggles in democracies take used the nation-state to temper raw capitalism. The ability of voters has get-go the power of capital. But as national barriers have come up downwardly in the proper noun of freer commerce, so has the capacity of governments to manage commercialism in a broad public interest. So the existent result is not 'trade' but democratic governance".[56]

The main issues of raw commercialism are said to lie in its disregard for quality, durability, sustainability, respect for the surroundings and human beings as well as a lack of morality.[57] From this more critical bending, companies might naturally aim to maximise profits at the expense of workers' and broader social interests.[58]

Advocates of laissez-faire capitalism argue that it relies on a constitutionally limited regime that unconditionally bans the initiation of force and compulsion, including fraud. Therefore, costless market place economists such as Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell contend that, under such a arrangement, relationships betwixt companies and workers are purely voluntary and mistreated workers volition seek meliorate treatment elsewhere. Thus, most companies will compete for workers on the basis of pay, benefits, and work-life balance merely as they compete with one another in the marketplace on the footing of the relative toll and quality of their goods.[59] [ not-master source needed ] [60] [ non-chief source needed ]

So-chosen "raw" or "hyper-capitalism" is a prime motive of cyberpunk in dystopian works such as Syndicate.[61] [62]

[edit]

Although laissez-faire has been commonly associated with capitalism, there is a similar laissez-faire economic theory and system associated with socialism called left-wing laissez-faire,[63] [64] or free-market riot, too known as costless-market anti-commercialism and gratuitous-market socialism to distinguish it from laissez-faire capitalism.[65] [66] [67] One beginning example of this is mutualism as developed by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in the 18th century, from which emerged individualist anarchism. Benjamin Tucker is 1 eminent American individualist agitator who adopted a laissez-faire organisation he termed unconventional socialism in contraposition to state socialism.[68] [69] This tradition has been recently associated with contemporary scholars such as Kevin Carson,[lxx] [71] Roderick T. Long,[72] [73] Charles W. Johnson,[74] Brad Spangler,[75] Sheldon Richman,[76] [77] [78] Chris Matthew Sciabarra[79] and Gary Chartier,[80] who stress the value of radically free markets, termed freed markets to distinguish them from the common conception which these left-libertarians believe to be riddled with capitalist and statist privileges.[81] Referred to as left-fly market anarchists[82] or market-oriented left-libertarians,[78] proponents of this approach strongly assert the classical liberal ideas of self-ownership and free markets while maintaining that taken to their logical conclusions these ideas back up anti-capitalist, anti-corporatist, anti-hierarchical and pro-labor positions in economics; anti-imperialism in foreign policy; and thoroughly radical views regarding such cultural issues as gender, sexuality and race.[83] [84] Critics of laissez-faire as unremarkably understood argues that a truly laissez-faire organisation would exist anti-backer and socialist.[85] [86]

Kevin Carson describes his politics equally on "the outer fringes of both free market libertarianism and socialism"[87] and has as well been highly critical of intellectual property.[88] Carson has identified the work of Benjamin Tucker, Thomas Hodgskin, Ralph Borsodi, Paul Goodman, Lewis Mumford, Elinor Ostrom, Peter Kropotkin and Ivan Illich as sources of inspiration for his approach to politics and economic science.[89] In addition to individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker's big four monopolies (country, coin, tariffs and patents), he argues that the land has also transferred wealth to the wealthy by subsidizing organizational centralization in the class of transportation and advice subsidies. Carson believes that Tucker overlooked this issue due to Tucker'southward focus on individual market transactions whereas he also focuses on organizational issues. As such, the master focus of his about recent work has been decentralized manufacturing and the breezy and household economies.[90] The theoretical sections of Carson'southward Studies in Mutualist Political Economy are also presented every bit an attempt to integrate marginalist critiques into the labor theory of value.[91]

In response to claims that he uses the term commercialism incorrectly, Carson says he is deliberately choosing to resurrect what he claims to be an old definition of the term in order to "make a point". He claims that "the term 'capitalism,' as information technology was originally used, did not refer to a costless marketplace, simply to a type of statist form organization in which capitalists controlled the country and the state intervened in the market on their behalf".[92] Carson holds that "capitalism, arising as a new class guild directly from the erstwhile class society of the Middle Ages, was founded on an act of robbery equally massive as the earlier feudal conquest of the land. Information technology has been sustained to the present by continual state intervention to protect its system of privilege without which its survival is unimaginable".[93] Carson argues that in a truly laissez-faire system the power to extract a profit from labor and capital letter would be negligible.[94] Carson coined the pejorative term vulgar libertarianism, a phrase that describes the apply of a complimentary market rhetoric in defense of corporate capitalism and economic inequality. According to Carson, the term is derived from the phrase vulgar political economy which Karl Marx described every bit an economical social club that "deliberately becomes increasingly apologetic and makes strenuous attempts to talk out of existence the ideas which contain the contradictions [existing in economic life]".[95]

Gary Chartier offers an understanding of property rights every bit contingent even so tightly constrained social strategies, reflective of the importance of multiple, overlapping rationales for divide ownership and of natural law principles of practical reasonableness, defending robust yet not-absolute protections for these rights in a manner similar to that employed by David Hume.[96] This account is distinguished both from Lockean and neo-Lockean views which deduce property rights from the idea of self-ownership and from consequentialist accounts that might license widespread advertising hoc interference with the possessions of groups and individuals.[97] Chartier uses this account to ground a clear statement of the natural constabulary footing for the view that solidaristic wealth redistribution by individual persons is ofttimes morally required, but as a response by individuals and grass-roots networks to particular circumstances rather than as a state-driven attempt to attain a particular distributive blueprint.[98] He advances detailed arguments for workplace democracy rooted in such natural law principles as subsidiarity,[99] defending it as morally desirable and as a likely event of the elimination of injustice rather than every bit something to be mandated by the state.[100]

Chartier has discussed natural police force approaches to state reform and to the occupation of factories by workers.[101] He objects on natural police force grounds to intellectual property protections, drawing on his theory of property rights more than generally[102] and develops a general natural law account of boycotts.[103] He has argued that proponents of genuinely freed markets should explicitly refuse capitalism and place with the global anti-capitalist motility while emphasizing that the abuses the anti-capitalist movement highlights result from country-tolerated violence and state-secured privilege rather than from voluntary cooperation and commutation. According to Chartier, "information technology makes sense for [freed-market advocates] to name what they oppose 'commercialism.' Doing so calls attention to the freedom motion's radical roots, emphasizes the value of agreement society as an alternative to the state, underscores the fact that proponents of freedom object to non-aggressive as well every bit aggressive restraints on liberty, ensures that advocates of freedom aren't confused with people who use market rhetoric to prop up an unjust status quo, and expresses solidarity between defenders of freed markets and workers — likewise as ordinary people around the world who apply "capitalism" as a curt-mitt characterization for the world-system that constrains their freedom and stunts their lives".[93] [104]

Criticism [edit]

Over the years, a number of economists have offered critiques of laissez-faire economic science. Adam Smith acknowledges some moral ambiguities towards the system of capitalism.[105] Smith had misgivings apropos some aspects of each of the major character-types produced by modernistic capitalist lodge, namely the landlords, the workers and the capitalists.[105] Smith claimed that "[t]he landlords' function in the economic process is passive. Their ability to reap a revenue solely from buying of state tends to make them indolent and inept, and and so they tend to exist unable to even look after their own economic interests"[105] and that "[t]he increment in population should increase the need for food, which should increase rents, which should be economically beneficial to the landlords". According to Smith, the landlords should be in favour of policies which contribute to the growth in the wealth of nations, but they ofttimes are non in favour of these pro-growth policies because of their own indolent-induced ignorance and intellectual flabbiness.[105]

Many philosophers have written on the systems social club has created to manage their civilizations. Thomas Hobbes utilized the concept of a "state of nature," which is a fourth dimension earlier any regime or laws, equally a starting point to consider the question. In this time, life would be "state of war of all against all." Further, "In such condition, there is no place for industry; considering the fruit thereof is uncertain . . . continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of homo solitary, poor, nasty, hardhearted, and short."[106] Smith was quite clear that he believed that without morality and laws, society would fail. From that perspective, information technology would exist strange for Smith to support a pure Laissez-Faire style of capitalism, and what he does support in Wealth of Nations is heavily dependent on the moral philosophy from his previous work, Theory of Moral Sentiments.[107]

Regardless of preferred political preference, all societies require shared moral values equally a prerequisite on which to build laws to protect individuals from each other. Adam Smith wrote Wealth of Nations during the Enlightenment, a period of time when the prevailing mental attitude was, "All things can exist Known." In effect, European thinkers, inspired by the likes of Isaac Newton and others, set nearly to "find the laws" of all things, that there existed a "natural law" underlying all aspects of life. They believed that these could be discovered and that everything in the universe could be rationally demystified and cataloged, including human interactions.[108]

Critics and market place abolitionists such as David McNally argue in the Marxist tradition that the logic of the market inherently produces caitiff outcomes and leads to diff exchanges, arguing that Smith'south moral intent and moral philosophy espousing equal exchange was undermined by the practice of the free market place he championed. According to McNally, the evolution of the market place economy involved coercion, exploitation and violence that Smith's moral philosophy could non countenance.[109]

The British economist John Maynard Keynes condemned laissez-faire economic policy on several occasions.[110] In The End of Laissez-faire (1926), one of the most famous of his critiques, Keynes argues that the doctrines of laissez-faire are dependent to some extent on improper deductive reasoning and says the question of whether a market place solution or state intervention is ameliorate must exist determined on a case-by-case ground.[111]

The Austrian School economist Friedrich Hayek stated that a freely competitive, laissez-faire banking industry tends to be endogenously destabilizing and pro-cyclical, arguing that the need for fundamental cyberbanking control was inescapable.[112]

Karl Polanyi's Great Transformation criticizes self-regulating markets as aberrational, unnatural phenomena which tend towards social disruption.[113] [114]

See as well [edit]

  • Anarcho-capitalism
  • Corporatocracy
  • Deregulation
  • Economic liberalism
  • Free market
  • Gratis-market place anarchism
  • Costless merchandise
  • History of economic thought
  • Liberism
  • Libertarianism
  • Market fundamentalism
  • Market socialism
  • Neoliberalism
  • Objectivism
  • Physiocracy
  • Privatization
  • Wu wei

References [edit]

  1. ^ a b c d e f Gaspard, Toufick. A Political Economy of Lebanon 1948–2002: The Limits of Laissez-faire. Boston: Brill, 2004. ISBN 978-9004132597
  2. ^ Gaffney, Stonemason. "The Taxable Surplus of Land: Measuring, Guarding and Gathering It". Archived from the original on 10 May 2015. Retrieved 9 December 2014.
  3. ^ Quick Reference Handbook Set, Bones Knowledge and Modern Technology (revised) by Edward H. Litchfield, Ph.D
  4. ^ "Laissez-faire" Archived 2015-09-27 at the Wayback Machine, Concern Dictionary.
  5. ^ Edward H. Litchfield. "Quick Reference Handbook Set, Basic Knowledge and Modernistic Technology" (revised ed.).
  6. ^ "Adam Smith". Encyclopædia Britannica . Retrieved 12 April 2020.
  7. ^ "Periodical Oeconomique". 1751 commodity by the French minister of finance.
  8. ^ M. d'Argenson, "Lettre au sujet de la dissertation sur le commerce du marquis de Belloni', Avril 1751, Periodical Oeconomique p. 111. Come across A. Oncken, Die Maxime Laissez faire et laissez passer, ihr Ursprung, ihr Werden, 1866
  9. ^ As quoted in J. M. Keynes, 1926, "The End of Laissez Faire". Argenson's Mémoirs were published only in 1858, ed. Jannet, Tome Five, p. 362. Come across A. Oncken (Die Maxime Laissez faire et laissez passer, ihr Ursprung, ihr Werden, 1866).
  10. ^ Original somewhat literal translation using the French Wiktionary.
  11. ^ Baghdiantz McCabe, Ina (2008). Orientalism in Early Modern France: Eurasian Trade Exoticism and the Ancien Authorities. Berg Publishers. pp. 271–272. ISBN978-one-84520-374-0.
  12. ^ "Encyclopædia Britannica". Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.
  13. ^ a b Clarke, J. J. (1997). Oriental Enlightenment: The Encounter Between Asian and Western Idea. Routledge. p. fifty. ISBN978-0415133760.
  14. ^ According to J. Turgot's "Eloge de Vincent de Gournay," Mercure, August, 1759 (repr. in Oeuvres of Turgot, vol. 1 p. 288.
  15. ^ Gournay was credited with the phrase by Jacques Turgot ("Eloge a Gournay", Mercure 1759), the Marquis de Mirabeau (Philosophie rurale 1763 and Ephémérides du Citoyen, 1767.), the Comte d'Albon ("Éloge Historique de M. Quesnay", Nouvelles Ephémérides Économiques, May, 1775, pp. 136–137) and DuPont de Nemours (Introduction to Oeuvres de Jacques Turgot, 1808–11, Vol. I, pp. 257, 259, Daire ed.) amongst others.
  16. ^ "Tant, encore une fois, qu'on laisse faire la nature, on ne doit rien craindre de pareil", P.S. de Boisguilbert, 1707, Dissertation de la nature des richesses, de l'argent et des tributs.
  17. ^ DuPont de Nemours, op cit, p. 258. Oncken (op.cit) and Keynes (op.cit.) also credit the Marquis d'Argenson with the phrase "Cascade gouverner mieux, il faudrait gouverner moins" ("To govern best, one needs to govern less"), possibly the source of the famous "That regime is all-time which governs least" motto popular in American circles, attributed variously to Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson and Henry Thoreau.
  18. ^ a b c d Fine, Sidney. Laissez Faire and the General-Welfare State. United States: The Academy of Michigan Press, 1964. Impress
  19. ^ Macgregor, Economic Idea and Policy (London, 1949), pp. 54–67
  20. ^ Whatley'southward Principles of Trade are reprinted in Works of Benjamin Franklin, Vol.2, p. 401.
  21. ^ Justice Role IV of Ideals (1892). p. 44.
  22. ^ a b Roy C. Smith, Adam Smith and the Origins of American Enterprise: How the Founding Fathers Turned to a Great Economist's Writings and Created the American Economy, Macmillan, 2004, ISBN 0-312-32576-2, pp. 13–14.
  23. ^ Abbott P. Conductor; et al. (1931). "Economic History – The Turn down of Laissez Faire". American Economical Review. 22 (1, supplement): three–ten.
  24. ^ Andres Marroquin, Invisible Hand: The Wealth of Adam Smith, The Minerva Group, Inc., 2002, ISBN one-4102-0288-7, p. 123.
  25. ^ John Eatwell, The Invisible Mitt, West. West. Norton & Visitor, 1989, pp. Preface x1.
  26. ^ The mathematical century: the 30 greatest bug of the final 100 years (2006) Piergiorgio Odifreddi, Arturo Sangalli, Freeman J Dyson, p. 122 . Princeton University Press. 22 October 2006. ISBN9780691128054 . Retrieved 30 July 2013.
  27. ^ Rogers, Wyatt M. (2000). "1: Economic Forces in Modern Capitalism". Third Millennium Capitalism: Convergence of Economic, Free energy, and Environmental Forces. ABC-Clio ebook. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Grouping. p. 38. ISBN9781567203608 . Retrieved 30 December 2016.
  28. ^ Tucker, Benjamin (1926). Private Liberty: Selections from the Writings of Benjamin R. Tucker. New York: Vanguard Press. pp. 1–nineteen.
  29. ^ Christian Gerlach, Wu-Wei in Europe. A Study of Eurasian Economic Thought, London School of Economics – March 2005 p. iii" the diffusion of wu-wei, co-evolved with the inner-European laissez-faire principle, the Libaniusian model." p. viii "Thus, wu-wei has to be recognized as a laissez-faire instrument of Chinese political economic system "p. 10 "Practising wu-wei erzhi. Consequently, information technology is this variant of the laissez-faire saying in which the basis of Physiocracy's 'moral philosophy' is to exist located. Priddat'due south piece of work made clear that the wu-wei of the complete économie has to be considered fundamental to Physiocracy; "p. 11 "that wu-wei translates into French as laissez-faire".
  30. ^ Will & Ariel Durant, Rousseau and the Revolution, pp. 71–77, Simon and Schuster, 1967, ISBN 067163058X.
  31. ^ Volition & Ariel Durant, Rousseau and the Revolution, p. 76, Simon and Schuster, 1967, ISBN 067163058X.
  32. ^ Scott Gordon (1955). "The London Economist and the Loftier Tide of Laissez Faire". Journal of Political Economy. 63 (half dozen): 461–488. doi:10.1086/257722. S2CID 154921783.
  33. ^ Cormac Ó Gráda (1995). "section: Ideology and relief in Chpt. ii". The Great Irish Famine. Cambridge University Printing. ISBN9780521557870.
  34. ^ George Miller. On Fairness and Efficiency. The Policy Press, 2000. ISBN 978-one-86134-221-eight p. 344
  35. ^ Christine Kinealy. A Death-Dealing Famine:The Nifty Hunger in Ireland. Pluto Printing, 1997. ISBN 978-0-7453-1074-9. p. 59.
  36. ^ Antonia Taddei (1999). "London Clubs in the Late Nineteenth Century" (PDF) . Retrieved thirty Dec 2008.
  37. ^ Jones, G. Gareth (1977). "The British Government and the Oil Companies 1912–1924: The Search for an Oil Policy". The Historical Periodical. ii (iii): 647–672. doi:10.1017/s0018246x00011286. JSTOR 2638433.
  38. ^ Bourgin, Frank (1989). The Great Challenge: The Myth of Laissez-Faire in the Early Republic. New York, NY: George Braziller Inc. ISBN978-0-06-097296-7.
  39. ^ Bourgin, Frank (1 June 1989). "The Great Challenge: The Myth of Laissez-faire in the Early Republic". Kirkusreviews.com. Retrieved 30 July 2013.
  40. ^ Prince, Carl E.; Taylor, Seth (1982). "Daniel Webster, the Boston Assembly, and the U.S. Government's Office in the Industrializing Procedure, 1815–1830". Journal of the Early Republic. 2 (3): 283–99. doi:ten.2307/3122975. JSTOR 3122975.
  41. ^ a b Guelzo, Allen C. (1999). Abraham Lincoln: Redeemer President. Thousand Rapids, Mich.: West.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. ISBN978-0-8028-3872-8.
  42. ^ "From Body of water to Shining Sea: The Heroes and Villains of the First Transcontinental Railroad". The Objective Standard. 2019-05-10. Retrieved 2021-04-29 .
  43. ^ Robert Due west. Crandall (1987). "The Effects of U.S. Trade Protection for Autos and Steel" (PDF). Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. 1987 (i): 271–88. doi:10.2307/2534518. JSTOR 2534518.
  44. ^ Pietro Due south. Nivola (1986). "The New Protectionism: U.S. Trade Policy in Historical Perspective". Political Science Quarterly. 101 (four): 577–600. doi:10.2307/2150795. JSTOR 2150795.
  45. ^ Rand, Ayn Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, Ch. seven, New American Library, Signet, 1967.
  46. ^ Armstrong, J. Scott; Greenish, Kesten C. (2013-10-01). "Effects of corporate social responsibility and irresponsibility policies". Journal of Business Research. Strategic Thinking in Marketing. 66 (ten): 1922–1927. CiteSeerX10.1.one.663.508. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.014. S2CID 145059055.
  47. ^ Peikoff 1991, pp. 350–352 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFPeikoff1991 (help).
  48. ^ Gotthelf 2000, pp. 91–92 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFGotthelf2000 (help); Peikoff 1991, pp. 379–380 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFPeikoff1991 (help).
  49. ^ Peikoff 1991, pp. 369 harvnb mistake: no target: CITEREFPeikoff1991 (aid).
  50. ^ Peikoff 1991, p. 367 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFPeikoff1991 (assist).
  51. ^ Burns 2009, pp. 174–177, 209, 230–231 harvnb fault: no target: CITEREFBurns2009 (help); Den Uyl & Rasmussen 1986, pp. 225–226 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFDen_UylRasmussen1986 (assistance); Doherty 2007, pp. 189–190 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFDoherty2007 (assist); Branden 1986, p. 252 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFBranden1986 (help).
  52. ^ Sciabarra 1995, pp. 266–267 harvnb fault: no target: CITEREFSciabarra1995 (help); Burns 2009, pp. 268–269 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFBurns2009 (assistance).
  53. ^ Sciabarra 1995, pp. 280–281 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFSciabarra1995 (help); Peikoff 1991, pp. 371–372 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFPeikoff1991 (help); Merrill 1991, p. 139 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFMerrill1991 (assistance).
  54. ^ Nolan, Peter (2008). Commercialism and Freedom: The Contradictory Character of Globalisation. Anthem Press. ISBN9781843312826 . Retrieved 9 Feb 2017.
  55. ^ Orchard, Lionel; Stretton, Hugh (27 July 2016). Public Appurtenances, Public Enterprise, Public Choice: Theoretical Foundations of the Gimmicky Set on on Government. Springer. ISBN9781349235056 . Retrieved nine February 2017.
  56. ^ Kuttner, Robert (19 December 2001). "Globalization and Its Critics". The American Prospect. Retrieved 17 March 2019.
  57. ^ Kerckhove, Gilbert Van (2012). Toxic Capitalism: The Orgy of Consumerism and Waste product: Are We the Last Generation on Globe?. AuthorHouse. ISBN9781477219065 . Retrieved 9 February 2017.
  58. ^ "Müntefering's criticism of raw capitalism strikes a chord". Fiscal Times . Retrieved 9 February 2017. [ permanent expressionless link ]
  59. ^ Milton Friedman on Labor Unions - Free To Choose, archived from the original on 2021-12-11, retrieved 2021-04-29
  60. ^ "Economics vs. 'Need', by Dr. Thomas Sowell". www.creators.com. 2013-06-11. Retrieved 2021-04-29 .
  61. ^ Paris, Jeffrey (1 July 2005). "Rethinking the End of Modernity". Social Philosophy Today. 21: 173–189. doi:10.5840/socphiltoday20052120. Retrieved 26 July 2017.
  62. ^ Kilgore, Christopher D. (2017). "Bad Networks: From Virus to Cancer in Post-Cyberpunk Narrative". Journal of Mod Literature. 40 (2): 165–183. doi:10.2979/jmodelite.40.two.10. JSTOR 10.2979/jmodelite.forty.2.ten. S2CID 157670471.
  63. ^ Nick Manley. "Brief Introduction To Left-Fly Laissez Faire Economic Theory: Part One".
  64. ^ Nick Maley. "Brief Introduction To Left-Wing Laissez Faire Economic Theory: Function Two".
  65. ^ Chartier, Gary; Johnson, Charles Due west. (2011). Markets Non Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty. Brooklyn, NY:Modest Compositions/Autonomedia
  66. ^ "It introduces an centre-opening arroyo to radical social thought, rooted equally in libertarian socialism and market riot." Chartier, Gary; Johnson, Charles W. (2011). Markets Not Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty. Brooklyn, NY: Small Compositions/Autonomedia. p. back comprehend.
  67. ^ "Just there has always been a market-oriented strand of libertarian socialism that emphasizes voluntary cooperation betwixt producers. And markets, properly understood, take always been about cooperation. As a commenter at Reason mag'south Striking&Run blog, remarking on Jesse Walker'south link to the Kelly article, put it: "every merchandise is a cooperative act." In fact, information technology's a fairly common ascertainment among marketplace anarchists that genuinely free markets take the nigh legitimate claim to the characterization "socialism."" "Socialism: A Perfectly Good Word Rehabilitated" by Kevin Carson at website of Center for a Stateless Society.
  68. ^ Tucker, Benjamin. "State Socialism and Anarchism".
  69. ^ Brown, Susan Beloved. 1997. "The Complimentary Market as Salvation from Regime". In Meanings of the Marketplace: The Complimentary Marketplace in Western Culture. Berg Publishers. p. 107.
  70. ^ Carson, Kevin A. (2008). Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective. Charleston, SC:BookSurge.
  71. ^ Carson, Kevin A. (2010). The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Depression-Overhead Manifesto. Charleston, SC: BookSurge.
  72. ^ Long, Roderick T. (2000). Reason and Value: Aristotle versus Rand. Washington, DC:Objectivist Centre
  73. ^ Long, Roderick T. (2008). "An Interview With Roderick Long"
  74. ^ Johnson, Charles Westward. (2008). "Liberty, Equality, Solidarity: Toward a Dialectical Anarchism." Anarchism/Minarchism: Is a Authorities Function of a Free Land? In Long, Roderick T. and Machan, Tibor Aldershot: Ashgate pp. 155–88.
  75. ^ Spangler, Brad (15 September 2006). "Marketplace Anarchism as Stigmergic Socialism Archived 10 May 2011 at archive.today.
  76. ^ Richman, Sheldon (23 June 2010). "Why Left-Libertarian?" The Freeman. Foundation for Economic Educational activity.
  77. ^ Richman, Sheldon (18 December 2009). "Workers of the Globe Unite for a Free Market". Archived 22 July 2014 at the Wayback Automobile." Foundation for Economical Education.
  78. ^ a b Sheldon Richman (3 February 2011). "Libertarian Left: Costless-market place anti-commercialism, the unknown ideal Archived ix May 2012 at the Wayback Machine." The American Conservative. Retrieved 5 March 2012.
  79. ^ Sciabarra, Chris Matthew (2000). Total Freedom: Toward a Dialectical Libertarianism. Academy Park, PA:Pennsylvania Country University Press.
  80. ^ Chartier, Gary (2009). Economical Justice and Natural Law. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  81. ^ Gillis, William (2011). "The Freed Market." In Chartier, Gary and Johnson, Charles. Markets Non Capitalism. Brooklyn, NY: Minor Compositions/Autonomedia. pp. 19–20.
  82. ^ Chartier, Gary; Johnson, Charles Westward. (2011). Markets Not Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty. Brooklyn, NY: Minor Compositions/Autonomedia. pp. 1–xvi.
  83. ^ Gary Chartier and Charles Due west. Johnson (eds). Markets Non Commercialism: Individualist Anarchism Confronting Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Ability, and Structural Poverty. Minor Compositions; 1st edition (Nov v, 2011
  84. ^ Gary Chartier has joined Kevin Carson, Charles West. Johnson and others (echoing the linguistic communication of Benjamin Tucker, Lysander Spooner and Thomas Hodgskin) in maintaining that—because of its heritage, emancipatory goals and potential—radical market anarchism should exist seen by its proponents and past others as part of the socialist tradition and that market anarchists can and should telephone call themselves socialists. Meet Gary Chartier, "Advocates of Freed Markets Should Oppose Capitalism," "Free-Market Anti-Commercialism?" session, almanac conference, Association of Private Enterprise Teaching (Cæsar's Palace, Las Vegas, NV, April xiii, 2010); Gary Chartier, "Advocates of Freed Markets Should Embrace 'Anti-Capitalism'"; Gary Chartier, Socialist Ends, Market Means: Five Essays. Cp. Tucker, "Socialism."
  85. ^ Nick Manley, "Brief Introduction To Left-Wing Laissez Faire Economic Theory: Function Ane".
  86. ^ Nick Manley, "Brief Introduction To Left-Wing Laissez Faire Economic Theory: Part Two".
  87. ^ "Introductions – Kevin Carson".
  88. ^ Carson, Kevin. "Intellectual Property – A Libertarian Critique". c4ss.org. Retrieved May 23, 2009.
  89. ^ Kevin A. Carson, Introduction, The Fine art of the Possible.
  90. ^ Carson, Kevin. "Industrial Policy: New Vino in Old Bottles". c4ss.org. Retrieved May 26, 2009.
  91. ^ Kevin Carson, "Studies in Mutualist Political Economy", Archived xv April 2011 at the Wayback Car chs. 1–iii.
  92. ^ Carson, Kevin A. Carson'south Rejoinders. Journal of Libertarian Studies, Volume 20, No. 1 (Wintertime 2006): 97–136, pp. 116, 117.
  93. ^ a b Richman, Sheldon, Libertarian Left Archived 14 August 2011 at the Wayback Car, The American Conservative (March 2011).
  94. ^ Dean, Brian (Winter 2002). "Bluffer's Guide to Revolutionary Economics". The Idler . Retrieved 24 May 2009.
  95. ^ Marx, Theories of Surplus Value, III, p. 501.
  96. ^ Run into Gary Chartier, Chaos and Legal Order: Law and Politics for a Stateless Social club (New York: Cambridge UP 2013) 44–156.
  97. ^ See Gary Chartier, "Natural Law and Not-Aggression," Acta Juridica Hungarica 51.2 (June 2010): 79–96 and, for an before version, Justice 32–46.
  98. ^ See Justice 47–68.
  99. ^ Justice 89–120.
  100. ^ Run across Gary Chartier, "Pirate Constitutions and Workplace Democracy," Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik 18 (2010): 449–67.
  101. ^ Justice 123–54.
  102. ^ Encounter Gary Chartier,' "Intellectual Property and Natural Law," Australian Periodical of Legal Philosophy 36 (2011): 58–88.
  103. ^ See Justice 176–82.
  104. ^ "Advocates of Freed Markets Should Embrace "Anti-Commercialism".
  105. ^ a b c d Spencer J. Pack. Commercialism as a Moral Arrangement: Adam Smith'southward Critique of the Gratis Market Economic system. Not bad Uk: Edward Elgar, 2010. Print
  106. ^ Hobbes, Thomas (1909–xiv). Of Human being, Being the Outset Part of Leviathan. Collier & Son.
  107. ^ Macfie, A.L. (1959). "Adam Smith'south Moral Sentiments as Foundation for His Wealth of Nations". Oxford Economic Papers. 11 (3): 209–228. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a040824.
  108. ^ "Enlightenment". History.com. 2009. Retrieved 2021-04-29 . {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-condition (link)
  109. ^ McNally, David (1993). Confronting the Market: Political Economy, Market Socialism and the Marxist Critique. Verso. ISBN978-0-86091-606-2.
  110. ^ Dostaler, Gilles, Keynes and His Battles (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2007), p. 91.
  111. ^ Dostaler 2007, p. 91; Barnett, Vincent, John Maynard Keynes (Routledge, 2013), p. 143.
  112. ^ White, Lawrence H. (1999). "Why Didn't Hayek Favor Laissez Faire in Cyberbanking?" (PDF). History of Political Economic system. 31 (4): 753–769. doi:10.1215/00182702-31-four-753. Retrieved 11 April 2013.
  113. ^ Polanyi, Karl (1944). The Great Transformation. Farrar & Rinehart.
  114. ^ McCloskey, Deirdre (1997). "Polanyi Was Correct, and Wrong" (PDF). Eastern Economic Journal.

Further reading [edit]

  • Brebner, John Bartlet (1948). "Laissez Faire and State Intervention in Nineteenth-Century United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland". Journal of Economic History. 8: 59–73. doi:10.1017/S0022050700090252.
  • Fisher, Irving (Jan 1907). "Why has the Doctrine of Laissez Faire been Abandoned?". Science. 25 (627): 18–27. Bibcode:1907Sci....25...18F. doi:ten.1126/science.25.627.18. JSTOR 1633692. PMID 17739703.
  • Taussig, Frank W. (1904). "The Present Position of the Doctrine of Complimentary Trade". Publications of the American Economic Association. 6 (1): 29–65.
  • Gerlach, Cristian (2005) Wu-Wei in Europe: A Written report of Eurasian Economical Thought London Schoolhouse of Economic science.
  • Block, Fred; Somers, Margaret R. (2014). The Power of Marketplace Fundamentalism: Karl Polyani's Critique. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Academy Press. ISBN978-0-674-05071-6.
  • Bourgin, Frank The Neat Challenge: The Myth of Laissez-Faire in the Early on Commonwealth (George Braziller Inc., 1989; Harper & Row, 1990).
  • "Wu-Wei in Europe. A Study of Eurasian Economic Thought" (PDF). {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-condition (link) (773 KB) by Christian Gerlach, London School of Economics – March 2005.
  • John Maynard Keynes, The end of laissez-faire (1926).
  • Carter Goodrich, Regime Promotion of American Canals and Railroads, 1800–1890 (Greenwood Press, 1960).
    • Goodrich, Carter. "American Development Policy: the Case of Internal Improvements," Periodical of Economic History, 16 (1956), 449–60. in JSTOR.
    • Goodrich, Carter. "National Planning of Internal Improvements," Political Science Quarterly, 63 (1948), 16–44. in JSTOR.
  • Johnson, E.A.J., The Foundations of American Economic Freedom: Government and Enterprise in the Age of Washington (Academy of Minnesota Press, 1973).
  • Sidney Webb (1889), Fabian Essays in Socialism – The Ground of Socialism – The Period of Anarchy

External links [edit]

Spoken Wikipedia icon

This sound file was created from a revision of this commodity dated 27 June 2008 (2008-06-27), and does not reverberate subsequent edits.

  • Laissez-faire at Encyclopædia Britannica Online.

livesaythily1968.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire

0 Response to "The Economy of the United States in the Past Can Best Be Described as Laissez-faire Capitalism."

ارسال یک نظر

اشتراک در: نظرات پیام (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel