Government Intervention: Necessity or Hindrance?

1017 Words3 Pages

One thing that seems to fuel the division within existing political parties and the emergence of new parties is the question of whether we need more or less government intervention in our day to day lives. There are those that argue in favor of a small government, capitalist approach, while others maintain that Americans have been babied with so much government intervention that they are unable to get out there and pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Then you have those on complete opposite ends of the spectrum that feel that the people should govern themselves and that government intervention is unnecessary. Polarized by those who feel that the government should run the show. So who decides the what, how and for whom, of our lives? …show more content…

In the Central Planning doctrine the government owns all resources and allocates them according to their output goals (McGraw-Hill, 2016). This view is synonymous with socialism as well as advocates who call for more government intervention in the economy (McGraw-Hill, 2016). Not as popular an idea as many of these thoughts were part of Marx and fellow German thinker Friedrich Engels “The Communist Manifesto,” which introduced socialism as a natural result of the conflicts inherent in the capitalist system (Staff, …show more content…

We all saw the effects of government power on a communist Germany. And what happens when perfect competition becomes imperfect? You have two polar opposite ends of the spectrum and the gray somewhere in the middle. So when should the government intervene? In the presence of market failures, government intervention may be necessary (McGraw-Hill, 2016). Markets do not always produce the right combination of output (McGraw-Hill, 2016). A market failure is an imperfection in the market mechanism that prevents optimal outcomes (McGraw-Hill, 2016). In the Journal of International Business and Economics article Market Efficiency and Government Intervention Revisited: What Do recent Evidence Tell Us? According to Stiglitz and Brown the following reasons could lead to market failure; Incomplete markets: for a market to be efficient it has to be complete, a complete market would provide all goods and services for which the cost of production is less than the price customers are willing to pay. Information failures: vagueness in the market for some goods such as technology, are difficult to manage, here information is the main commodity to be traded, the seller cannot allow the buyer to have full knowledge of the goods because if he does, he would have given the commodity to the buyer without being paid, the buyer has no way to know about the quality of the goods and

Open Document