Free Market Philosophy

There are two types of free market philosophies, which are the Laissez-faire philosophy and regulated-market philosophy. Both of these philosophies assume perfect competition to be an ideal. Nevertheless, they both discord in the question of how to execute it. In fact, Laissez-faire philosophy merely counsels to mirror perfect competition, by executing the current identical regulations, which are possible to detect in a super sensual, perfectly competitive economy. On the other hand, competitive philosophy counsels following perfect competition as a target, by advantaging any regulations, which are necessary in order to get as close to the ideal as possible. In order to understand the differences between the two philosophies, it is crucial to define perfectly competitive free market.

In fact, it stands for the market, where no purchaser or trader has the authority significantly to influence the prices, at which products are being bartered. In a perfectly competitive free market, the price purchasers are ready to acquit for products increasing in a case when less products are accessible, while the increasing prices impel traders to equip larger products amounts. Therefore, in case when more products become accessible, prices have a tendency to decrease, and these situations provoke decreasing prices, which leads traders to lower the amount of products they equip. Such fluctuations result in a remarkable consequence: prices and amounts always move towards the equilibrium point in a perfectly competitive free market. The above-mentioned equilibrium point is the point, at which the quantities of products purchasers desire to acquire directly amount to the quantity of products traders desire to market and at which the highest price purchasers are ready to pay directly amount to the lowest price marketers are ready to take. This is an issue of negotiating. It explains how actually competition works.

The philosophy of Laissez-faire free market states that the government should merely have regulations, which impede the usage of physical power, larceny, deception, or infringement of agreement. In accordance with the Laissez-faire free market philosophy, a safe scheme of private property licenses is a significant constituent of economic freedom. Theoretically, competition in a Laissez-faire philosophy is expected to operate directly the way it does in the perfect competition model. Virtually, Laissez-faire markets may result in monopoly and oligopoly. On the other hand, the regulated-market philosophy goes about the fact that the government is supposed to have any regulations, which will advance competition among traders as much as possible. That is the major goal of regulated-market philosophy. The philosophy creates special economic environment, in which transactions between private parties are exempt from obsessive government limitations, rates, and subventions, allowing merely sufficient number of laws to allocate property rights. That is practically all the government can do. 

For instance, merger policies in the UK and the European Union can be considered as an example of strategies, which might promote the goal of the regulated-market philosophy. The policy states that the major problem for competition policy stands for the fact whether a suggested confluence or amalgamation between the two entities is believed to provoke a serious mitigation of competitive oppression in the market and hazards causing a state of market density when conniving conduct might turn into a reality. According to the above-mentioned strategy and policy, if entities associate through a merger, an attainment or formulation of a joint venture, this typically results in assertive influence on markets, as entities appear to become more effective, the level of perfect competition reinforces and the final client will have an advantage from better-quality products at upright prices.

A Laissez-faire angle to economics stands for the fact that less government control and less factitious regulations of manufacturing, purchasing, marketing, commerce, and funding is present. It obviously advances the free market. Restricted government incursion is the foundation of this philosophy, despite the fact that the idea is less unlimited than it used to be. The permitting of unrestricted government control became more admitted by advocates of this philosophy in the 19^th and 20^th centuries after a number of corporations became too great to compete with, absorbed their competitors and tried to regulate demand and supply via production, as well as via price regulations. Laissez-faire philosophy is universally believed to be a libertarian ideal.

Laisser-faire philosophy acknowledges the following rights and obligations. Firstly, there is supposed to be no usage of physical authority and force. Secondly, there should be no frauds. Thirdly, there should be no theft. Finally, there should be no breaking of contracts. Therefore, people have the right to live the way they choose as long as it does not interfere with other people. Laissez-fair free market does not have the value, which it actually promotes, as determination of values is provided to all individuals exercising the right to have freedom of choice. The acknowledgment of individual rights induces the physical force expulsions of any form of human relationships. In theory, individual rights may be infringed merely by means of force. In accordance with Laissez-fair free market, no individual or group may commence the usage of physical force against others. The sole duty of the government, in accordance with Laissez-fair philosophy, is to protect individual’s rights. Therefore, the government is the means of formulating the retributive usage of force under unprejudiced management and control. In accordance with regulated-market philosophy, the major value is the value of perfect competition. Therefore, the philosophy there defines the property rights. According to the regulated-marker philosophy, well outlined property rights identify what might be marketed, as well as the fact concerning which rights are assumed on the purchaser. Despite the fact that these two philosophies are both free-market philosophies, they have very different ideas about what social justice is. Laissez-faire free-market philosophy observes social justice as an essence of allocating individual rights to free choice. Thus, the regulations that this philosophy indicates are quite plain, argumentative, and distinct. They are very stringent as well.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Pinterest

Related Free Comparison and Contrast Essays