should be organized. In reality, most economies are a mixture of both.
The United States has a free-market system – mostly. Almost all decisions are made by the free choices of producers and consumers. Still, there are parts of the U.S. economy that are planned. The government sometimes issues commands that limit the freedom of producers and consumers. These commands serve economic goals other than freedom and efficiency.
For example, minimum wage laws limit the freedom of producers by telling them the lowest wage they can pay their workers. The goal of a minimum wage is to promote economic security and equity by protecting workers from exploitation. Not everyone agrees that a minimum wage accomplishes this goal, and the value of minimum wage laws is frequently debated.
To many people, the free-market system is an important part of what the American flag represents.
It is in the Mix
When you mix two things, you can often get the best of both.
Freedom matters in the United States, but it is not the only thing that counts. Efficiency is important too, as are equity, security, and growth. This is why the U.S. government issues some commands, which means that the United States has a mixed economy. A mixed economy uses both free-market and command principles.
In freedom-oriented societies such as the United States, the commands are the exception rather than the rule – but the exceptions are usually quite important. The government limits freedom to serve other economic goals in areas that matter most.
The minimum wage has the goal of promoting security and equity by not allowing employers to exploit their workers. Experts disagree on its effectiveness.
Retirement is another important feature of a mixed economy. Social Security is a government program designed to ensure that retired workers age 66 or older receive a continuing income after retirement. Social Security was not intended to be a person’s only retirement income and the system faces difficulties.
People are free to, and should, save for retirement in other ways in the private sector to ensure a better quality of retired life.
Stay in School
One familiar example of government command in the United States is the public-school system. This system provides a useful service: education. This service is so important for all people that the government does not leave it up to producers to organize. The states provide this service themselves. While producers may provide education through a variety of private schools, government guarantees free education to all. In fact, all parents have to provide their children with either public or private education up to at least age 16.
This is an example of the operation of a command economy within the United States. But free-market principles also operate. Even though the government guarantees that an education will be provided to all, a system of private schools exists to give parents a choice of where to send their children. This is not true in a pure command economy. There were no private schools in the Soviet Union.
Take Advantage
Free-market systems and command economies both have advantages and disadvantages. The free-market system serves the goals of freedom and efficiency very well.
Command economies do a better job of providing security and equity. There are ups and downs to both systems, and no one would try to argue that either system is perfect. But is one a clear favorite over the other?
The Pros and Cons of the Two Systems
Free-market systems usually provide a much greater variety of goods and services. Competition among producers leads to innovation as the producers try to figure out what consumers need and want. This innovation inspires a diversity of goods and services that is not likely to exist in a command economy. Planners do not have much incentive to innovate. On the other hand, a command economy can make sure that everyone has their basic needs met. Planners can direct the production and distribution of goods and services such as food, medical care, and education to guarantee that everyone gets these important things.
Inequality of wealth is one of the disadvantages of the free-market system. When people are given the freedom to make different choices, they each get a different outcome. Inequality is bound to result when wealth is distributed by free choices instead of an overall plan. This can lead to insecurity, too. A command economy can provide greater equality and security but at the cost of efficiency. Planners may be able to implement an overall plan that assures that basic needs are met, and wealth is distributed more equally, but the planning required uses up a lot of resources. When market forces do the work, resources are not wasted paying, housing, and feeding government planners.
What is Big Brother Doing?
There are important differences between a free-market system and a command economy. In capitalist societies, the government does very little to interfere with the economy. Market forces, or the «invisible hand» is expected to allow the economy to function properly.
In a planned economy, the government takes on the job of the market forces. This uses up a lot of resources.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches. That is probably why most countries have a mixed economy, so they can get some of the advantages of each system and pursue several economic goals at once.
Life is full of decisions. So is the game of economics.
Players decide on economic goals. They decide on the rules of the game. They make allocation and production decisions. They decide what to exchange and for how much to exchange it.
Making decisions never really ends in the game of economics. In fact, the economy is primarily just a constant stream of decisions and their outcomes.
So how are economic decisions made? Let us take a look.
Yogi Berra, one of the greatest baseball players ever, once said about the game, «It ain’t over til it is over.» This is not just true in the game of baseball. It is also true in the game of economics. No economic decision is over until it is over. In other words, you are not done with the decision-making process until you have carried out your decision. Even when you have already decided on a plan, you still have to decide whether to stick to it.
Life is all about personal choices. Sometimes decisions are easy; at other times they are difficult and require a lot of thought and maybe even sacrifice. Sometimes our decisions affect other people. This is true in baseball as well as in economics.
Weighing Pros and Cons
Compare going to see a movie with a trip to the dentist. Which sounds better: relaxing with a bucket of popcorn and a soda, or having someone poke around in your mouth with a metal instrument? If you are like most people, you would probably rather go to a movie than visit the dentist.
Think about it, however. There are pros, or positive aspects, to going to the dentist. And there are cons, or negative features, of going to the movies. Not even this decision is completely one-sided.
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Making decisions requires weighing the pros and cons. Good decisions can only be made after considering the different choices and picking the one that looks best. That is what players in the game of economics do.
Economists call this cost-benefit analysis. When you do a cost-benefit analysis, you look for the decision that has the maximum benefit with the minimum cost. In other words, the choice with the most pros and the fewest cons is usually the best