Economic Freedom and Political Freedom - Revision history

BcatOne at 22:27, 3 April 2016

2016-04-03T22:27:37Z

Jeff at 21:36, 7 February 2015

2015-02-07T21:36:56Z

Jeff at 18:05, 30 November 2014

2014-11-30T18:05:24Z

Show changes

Jeff at 15:48, 15 November 2014

2014-11-15T15:48:43Z

Jeff at 22:31, 14 November 2014

2014-11-14T22:31:22Z

Jeff at 17:09, 10 November 2014

2014-11-10T17:09:27Z

Jeff at 17:05, 10 November 2014

2014-11-10T17:05:01Z

Jeff at 16:54, 10 November 2014

2014-11-10T16:54:45Z

Jeff at 16:32, 10 November 2014

2014-11-10T16:32:13Z

Show changes

Jeff at 21:31, 9 November 2014

2014-11-09T21:31:08Z

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 |HasCategory=Economic Freedom
 |HasSummary=Is it possible that economic freedom and political freedom can exist in isolation from one another in the sense that any political arrangement can be coupled with any economic system?  It is believed so by some.  Many believe that the two are independent.  However, economic freedom, while capable of existing without the other is essential to political freedom.
-|HasAuthor=Jeff
+|HasAuthor=BcatOne
 |HasArticleDate=2014/10/24
 }}

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 <u>Alternative 1: The new US:</u>
-*In the "new" US, economic freedom is pursued as an end in itself.
+<br>In the "new" US, economic freedom is pursued as an end in itself.
-::It is too difficult to describe everything that entails and we want to be brief,so we'll list just enough to give you the flavor.
+<br>It is too difficult to describe everything that entails and we want to be brief,so we'll list just enough to give you the flavor.
 *No one is required to contribute part of their income to a retirement program that is administered by the federal government.  Voluntary tax deferred savings accounts are allowed.
@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 *In the "new" US, investors, consumers, and providers of services and products are protected only by generic laws that enforce contracts and similar laws of fairness.  The federal government does not attempt to solve all ills with targeted regulatory legislation in reaction to each crisis or stress to the economy.
 ::Example:  The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act does not exist
-*Business entities face far fewer regulations.  There are only the essential regulations that enforce contracts and prevent fraud.
+*Business entities face far fewer regulations.  There are only the essential regulations that enforce contracts and punish fraud.
 ::Example:   The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that took financial reporting requirements to new levels does not exist.
 *Licenses are not required to engage in any occupation.
-::Examples: cab drivers, barbers, doctors, lawyers
+::Examples: cab drivers, barbers, doctors, lawyers, optometrists
 *The government takes no role in determining pay for any employee of a private enterprise nor does it regulate comparable pay between occupations or groups of people.  (example: there is no minimum wage or laws that try to determine "equal pay for equal work")
 *Employees have the right to form and support unions, but each employee has the right to work without belonging to a union or paying union dues.  Association with and support of unions, guilds, and associations is voluntary.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Article
 |HasCategory=Economic Freedom
-|HasSummary=Is it possible that economic freedom and political freedom can exist in isolation from one another in the sense that any political arrangement can be coupled with any economic system?  It is believed so by some, and usually by two types:
+|HasSummary=Is it possible that economic freedom and political freedom can exist in isolation from one another in the sense that any political arrangement can be coupled with any economic system?  It is believed so by some.  Many believe that the two are independent.  However, economic freedom, while capable of existing without the other is essential to political freedom.
 |HasAuthor=Jeff
 |HasArticleDate=2014/10/24

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 |HasCategory=Economic Freedom
 |HasSummary=Is it possible that economic freedom and political freedom can exist in isolation from one another in the sense that any political arrangement can be coupled with any economic system?  It is believed so by some, and usually by two types:
-*"Socialist democrats" believe that a state run, centrally planned government can guarantee individual freedom through political action; and
+#By "socialist democrats" who believe that a state run, centrally planned economy can be run by a government that guarantees individual freedom through political policy.  This group attracts intellectuals who consider "material" considerations to be beneath them and of little importance.  They see intellectual pursuit on a higher plane.
-*Totalitarian governments who believe that, by allowing a limited amount of economic freedom, that their population will be sufficiently comfortable to endure single authority rule.
+#By autocratic governments who seem to believe that, by allowing a limited amount of economic freedom, that their population will be sufficiently comfortable to endure single authority rule that cannot be challenged.
 |HasAuthor=Jeff
 |HasArticleDate=2014/10/24

@@ Line 90: / Line 90: @@
 -----
-This article is incomplete.
+This article needs further development.
-*We have not given a complete explanation of why political freedom cannot exist in the absence of economic freedom.
+*We have not given a complete explanation of why political freedom cannot exist in the absence of economic freedom.  It is vague because there probably is no example of a completely free system though there are examples of greater and lesser economic and political freedom.  Perhaps some illustrations will help.
 *We have captured the thoughts of a couple of the [[What it means to be Liberal|liberal]] thinkers listed below in the acknowledgements.  We would like to incorporate thoughts from the others including those of the openly socialist John K. Galbraith even though the CW sponsors believe that freedom and socialism cannot be reconciled.
 }}

@@ Line 65: / Line 65: @@
 The game we concocted above illustrates that economic freedom is a part of freedom itself but also that economic freedom is a principle that is frequently ignored in the political process as a political constituency is favored over another group with less political weight or when the government of the moment uses a "crisis" to push legislation that fits its political goals.  In either case, freedom is restricted.  For a liberal, liberty is the standard and freedom must be maximized.  On the other hand, many people would not want the freedom provided in the "new" US.  They view free markets as somehow unfair and that government is a more appropriate protector of rights than the market place.  So they want restrictions placed on economic freedom.
-<br>It must be acknowledged that government is necessary to a well ordered society.  And that there are legitimate restrictions on freedom (one does not have the freedom to do harm to others) that must be tolerated if society is to remain prosperous and well ordered.  For instance, individuals do not get to decide for themselves how much money is to be spent on defense.  That must be decided for everyone by government.  Government also has a role in ensuring that transactions are voluntary and honestly informed - we must all play by the same honest rules.  (There are a few additional government roles acceptable to a liberal - all aimed at protecting freedom or providing services that are not practically provided otherwise.)  It is such indivisible matters for which society requires a government rather than relying on individual market action.  Calls for regulations and restrictions on economic freedom outside the essential functions of government are usually calls for special treatment and special protections of specific groups at the expense of someone elses economic freedom.
+<br>It must be acknowledged that government is necessary to a well ordered society.  And that there are legitimate restrictions on freedom (one does not have the freedom to do harm to others) that must be tolerated if society is to remain prosperous and well ordered.  For instance, individuals do not get to decide for themselves how much money is to be spent on defense.  That must be decided for everyone by government.  Government also has a role in ensuring that transactions are voluntary and honestly informed - we must all play by the same honest rules.  Government is needed to provide the rule of law and property rights to prevent coercion of individuals; and enforcement of contracts so that a properly constituted agreement is honored.  It is such indivisible matters for which society requires a government rather than relying on individual market action.  Beyond that little government participation is required.  Calls for regulations and restrictions on economic freedom outside the essential functions of government are usually calls for special treatment and special protections of specific groups at the expense of someone elses economic freedom.
 Is it possible that economic freedom and political freedom can exist in isolation from one another in the sense that any political arrangement can be coupled with any economic system?  It is believed so by some.
@@ Line 102: / Line 102: @@
 }}
 {{Citations}}

@@ Line 81: / Line 81: @@
 A free market has built-in protection from coercion.  Both sellers and buyers are protected from coercion by the other by the fact that there are alternative sellers and buyers of both goods and services.  For example, the market protects a worker by providing alternate employers.  Free markets do this so well that the biggest objection is that they provide people with what they want rather than what the political elite think they should have, and that a truly free market does not provide the politically powerful with advantages that are obtained through special treatment by the government (cronyism).  Such objections are behind most criticism of free markets and reveal an opposition to freedom itself.
-One of the ideals of a free society is representation in politics and in the economic system.  For a large and diverse society, how much representation is practical?  How many political viewpoints can be reflected in government at one time?  It's a very small number.  If half of the country is satisfied with government policy, the other half is likely opposed to it.  This difficulty produces deep political divides.  In a free market system, on the other hand, effective and satisfying representation is achieved daily.  You can go to the market and buy apples rather than bananas - or both.  You can buy a red sports car or a blue bus.  You have the opportunity to start your own business or work in the job of your choice.  The options are not infinite and there is no guarantee that you will be able to fulfill every specific of the choice you make, but you will have agreed to the deal voluntarily and your preferences will be matched to a degree not approachable through politics.  The only thing that can move a society away from such a high degree of representation in the market place is restrictions placed on economic freedom.
+One of the ideals of a free society is representation in politics and in the economic system.  For a large and diverse society, how much representation is practical?  How many political viewpoints can be reflected in government at one time?  It's a very small number relative to the diversity of viewpoints.  If half of the country is satisfied with government policy, the other half is likely opposed to it.  Proportional representation is a goal that is unachievable in a diverse society.  This difficulty produces deep political divides.  In a free market system, on the other hand, proportional representation is achieved daily.  You can go to the market and buy apples rather than bananas - or both.  You can buy a red sports car or a blue bus.  You have the opportunity to start your own business or work in the job of your choice.  The options are not infinite and there is no guarantee that you will be able to fulfill every specific of the choice you make, but you will have agreed to the deal voluntarily and your preferences will be matched to a degree not approachable through politics.  The only thing that can move a society away from such a high degree of representation in the market place is restrictions placed on economic freedom.
-For a liberal, the only acceptable means to any societal end is free discussion and voluntary cooperation.
+For a liberal, the only acceptable means to any societal end is free discussion and voluntary cooperation.  The threat to either political or economic freedom is the power to compel - which power can be held by a monarch, dictator, oligarchy, or (in a democracy) a temporary voting majority.  The protection of freedom requires that coercive power be eliminated wherever possible and that the limited power needed in a government be dispersed as was done when the US was formed.  Economic freedom accomplishes that in the economic sphere and provides a balance to political power.  Economic freedom by its nature means voluntary cooperation.  Consider - if you have complete economic freedom you can tolerate a lack of political freedom as it is primarily economic freedom that determines freedom of action.  Hopefully you have both for freedom is not complete where either is absent.
-The threat to either political or economic freedom is the power to compel - which power can be held by a monarch, dictator, oligarchy, or temporary voting majority.  The protection of freedom requires that coercive power be eliminated wherever possible and that what limited power needed in a government be dispersed as was done when the US was formed.  Economic freedom accomplishes that in the economic sphere and provides a balance to political power.  Consider - if you have complete economic freedom you can tolerate a lack of political freedom as it is primarily economic freedom that determines freedom of action.
+:Milton Friedman provides an example of the liberating power of economic freedom that is worth repeating, in his first chapter of ''Capitalism and Freedom''<ref name="capitalism and freedom"/>.  It had to do with the Hollywood blacklist in the 1950s.  In 1959 Robert Rich won an Oscar for writing the screen play for ''The Brave One''.  He did not step forward to accept the prize.  Rich was a pseudonym for one of the writers who were blacklisted in the '50s as communists.  Rich turned out to be Dalton (''Johnny Got His Gun'') Trumbo, one of the original "Hollywood Ten" writers who refused to testify for the 1947 hearings on Communism in the movie industry.  The producer later stated that "We have an obligation to buy the best script we can.  Trumbo brought us ''The Brave One'' and we bought it" . . Economic freedom trumped political power.
-:Milton Friedman provides an example worth repeating in his first chapter of ''Capitalism and Freedom''<ref name="capitalism and freedom"/>.  It had to do with the Hollywood blacklist in the 1950s.  In 1959 Robert Rich won an Oscar for writing ''The Brave One''.  He did not step forward to accept the prize.  Rich was a pseudonym for one of the writers who were blacklisted in the '50s as communists.  Rich turned out to be Dalton (''Johnny Got His Gun'') Trumbo, one of the original "Hollywood Ten" writers who refused to testify for the 1947 hearings on Communism in the movie industry.  The producer later stated that "We have an obligation to buy the best script we can.  Trumbo brought us ''The Brave One'' and we bought it" . . Economic freedom trumped political power.
+:You can believe, as the sponsors of CW do, that communism or socialism is incompatible with freedom because it restricts (or eliminates entirely) economic freedom and therefore all freedom.  But you can accompany that with a belief, as do we, that no economic transaction should be prohibited or interfered with because one of the members of the transaction believes in communism or socialism.  The market gets to buy what it likes.
 <br>Further, free markets are much more egalitarian than politics.  You do not know, nor likely care about the race, ethnicity, or politics of the person who raised the chicken you buy or who bolted together your Ford F150. And this is true even if you are not so tolerant otherwise.  Free markets accept all comers.  They are the best protector of freedom that we have.

@@ Line 65: / Line 65: @@
 The game we concocted above illustrates that economic freedom is a part of freedom itself but also that economic freedom is a principle that is frequently ignored in the political process as a political constituency is favored over another group with less political weight or when the government of the moment uses a "crisis" to push legislation that fits its political goals.  In either case, freedom is restricted.  For a liberal, liberty is the standard and freedom must be maximized.  On the other hand, many people would not want the freedom provided in the "new" US.  They view lasses-faire as somehow unfair.  They believe that government is a more appropriate protector of rights than the market place.  So they want restrictions placed on freedom.
-:It must be acknowledged that government is necessary to a well ordered society.  And that there are legitimate restrictions on freedom (one does not have the freedom to do harm to others) and on economic freedom that must be tolerated if government is to function.  For instance, individuals do not get to decide for themselves how much money is to be spent on defense.  That must be decided for everyone by government.
+:It must be acknowledged that government is necessary to a well ordered society.  And that there are legitimate restrictions on freedom (one does not have the freedom to do harm to others) and on economic freedom that must be tolerated if government is to function.  For instance, individuals do not get to decide for themselves how much money is to be spent on defense.  That must be decided for everyone by government.  It is such indivisible matters for which society requires a government rather than relying on individual market action.
 :But calls for restrictions on economic freedom outside these essential functions of government are calls for special treatment and special protections of specific groups at the expense of someone elses freedom.