A discussion of whether the governmentshould help people in times of need

Participants taking sides and refusing to compromise Apathetic participation If the discussion seems to be flagging, it can help to introduce a new question or alter the task so as to bring a fresh kind of thinking or a different group dynamic to bear.

A discussion of whether the governmentshould help people in times of need

Should the government intervene in the economy? Tejvan Pettinger economics One of the main issues in economics is the extent to which the government should intervene in the economy.

Free market economists argue that government intervention should be strictly limited as government intervention tends to cause an inefficient allocation of resources. However, others argue there is a strong case for government intervention in different fields.

Hoover Dam built in the s with government funds This is a summary of whether should the government intervene in the economy. Arguments for government intervention Greater equality — redistribute income and wealth to improve equality of opportunity and equality of outcome.

For example, governments can subsidise or provide goods with positive externalities. Arguments against government intervention Governments liable to make the wrong decisions — influenced by political pressure groups, they spend on inefficient projects which lead to an inefficient outcome.

Government intervention is taking away individuals decision on how to spend and act. Economic intervention takes some personal freedom away. The market is best at deciding how and when to produce. Arguments for government intervention to improve equality In a free market, there tends to be inequality in income, wealth and opportunity.

Private charity tends to be partial. Government intervention is necessary to redistribute income within society. Diminishing marginal returns to income.

The law of diminishing returns states that as income increases, there is a diminishing marginal utility. For example, your third sports car gives only a small increase in total utility.

Therefore, redistributing income can lead to a net welfare gain for society. Therefore income redistribution can be justified from a utilitarian perspective.

In a free market, inequality can be created, not through ability and handwork, but privilege and monopoly power.

A discussion of whether the governmentshould help people in times of need

Without government intervention, firms can exploit monopoly power to pay low wages to workers and charge high prices to consumers. Without government intervention, we are liable to see the growth of monopoly power. Government intervention can regulate monopolies and promote competition.

Therefore government intervention can promote greater equality of income, which is perceived as fairer. Often the argument is made that people should be able to keep the rewards of their hard work.

But, if wealth and income and opportunity depend on being born into the right family, is that justified? A wealth tax can reduce the wealth of the richest, and this revenue can be used to spend on education for those who are born in poor circumstances.

Using this social contract, most people would not choose to be born in a free market because the rewards are concentrated in the hands of a small minority of the population. If people had no idea where they would be born, they would be more likely to choose a society with a degree of government intervention and redistribution.

Government intervention to overcome market failure 1. In a free market, public goods such as law and order and national defence would not be provided because there is no fiscal incentive to provide goods with a free rider problem you can enjoy without paying them.

Therefore, to provide public goods like lighthouses, police, roads, e. Goods like education and health care are not strictly public goods though they are often referred to as public goods.

In a free market, provision tends to be patchy and unequal.I know it will be furnished but I don't know what the furnishings are, other than I will need my own laptop. My question might seem silly, but while in the US, you can .

Should the government intervene in the economy? | Economics Help

About Room for Debate. In Room for Debate, The Times invites knowledgeable outside contributors to discuss news events and other timely issues.

Reader comments are moderated Monday through Friday. Click Settings at the top of your Page. From General, click Others Tagging this Page.

Click to uncheck the box next to Allow people and other Pages to tag [Page name]. Click Save Changes. Sep 17,  · The only information the government should be allowed to collect is messages and wedsites and other things people go to or talk about illegal or things that look terriost suspious.

they shouldnt have access to just anything. thats invading peoples privacy and ultimately makes people uncomfortable. The government should not support these people's drinking habits with our tax money. Not to mention all homeless people already qualify for food stamps, emergency medicaid, and can get any life saving treatment at a hospital without ever paying the bill, they just need a a month PO Box to get benefits.

Feb 04,  · The New York Times. Whether You Need It or Not Search. Subscribe Now Log In 0 Settings. Close search Site Search Navigation. “It is not a healthier diet for those who don’t need it,” Dr.

Guandalini said. These people “are following a fad, .

Should the government help the poor? | leslutinsduphoenix.com