11th Grade Froggybottom Class the Questions You

¶ … 11th Grade Froggybottom Class The questions you asked me about have no easy answers.

Philosophers, economists, revolutionaries, and social leaders have all been debating the answers for centuries, and as usual many of our politicians don't even know the first thing about the issues involved! Though the questions seem simple, they are actually rooted in the most basic questions of human existence: what is the "good life" and how can we live it? All the world's religions have tried to answer that question, and still no one knows the real answer.

I can tell you my opinion, and I can tell you what famous thinkers and politicians have said, but in the end these are questions you need to figure out on you own. Think about them carefully, because your own personal answers will help you define your political and economic position wisely.

Your first question asked, "What is in the public interest? That is, what is the goal we should be trying to reach?" It was a good idea to ask this question first; the answer to this question changes the answer to all your other questions. Some people say that the public interest is to protect the rights and freedoms of each individual to the maximum.

This is one of the ideas that inspired many of our founding fathers, and thinkers of their day and age like Locke and Mill (influential political philosophers). Locke said that the public interest was defined by something called "natural law" which believed people had an innate right to their property and their choices. Mill also tended to believe this, but he added that the most important thing was the greatest happiness and welfare, and that the greatest public good would be served when people had property and free choice.

Both philosophers believed that intelligent self-interest would guide people to make the best choices for themselves and for society. The idea of the free market economy was really born in this era. It suggests that when the government doesn't interfere with personal property and business decisions (such as wages, prices and qualities and quantities of goods, and so forth) that things will still work out for the best.

It is believed that consumer demand will guide what goods are produced and how much they cost, and that employees desire for employment will be balanced by their self-interest not to work for corporations that hurt them. No one will work for employers who don't pay enough, and no one will buy goods that are too expensive. Competition will keep quality high and costs down.

Free market advocates say that the forces of competition and self-interest will create maximum efficiency and economic growth, by assuring that only needed things are created with the minimum necessary cost and price. This theory believes that if human rights to property and to their free choice is protected, all other good things will come naturally. The problem with relying on free choice and natural rights to provide for the good of all is that sometimes self-interest may not lead to the greater good, but instead cause harm to others.

The benefit is that it allows people to be free, and minimizes the degree to which (generally corrupted) government runs the lives of citizens. However, there are other theories about what is the most important part of the public interests. Some people say what is important to the public is safety and well-being, and that if free will and property rights aren't providing this then the government needs to assure them.

These theories might say that the government should set minimum standards for products and for employee safety, and that if it looks like important business are going to go bankrupt the government should help them so that they can continue to produce for the economy and provide jobs. The public good is defined in terms of job security and quality, and the economic welfare of companies and employees.

This theory is in many ways older than free market theory -- even back in the days of the ancient Egyptians, the government set prices for grain and exchange, and subsidized and controlled farmer choices. In other ways, this theory is more modern. Minimum wage laws and other laws protecting employees came into recent existence because business was abusing workers with low wages and unsafe environments.

Laws protecting product or service quality also became more common when reformers become upset with poor quality products (such as foods with poison in them, or radioactive alarm clocks, or quack doctors selling snake oil). The problem with trying to manage society in this way is that no government is so all-knowing that it can regulate every aspect of the market without error, and moreover a government which totally protects its citizens from their own choices essentially enslaves them.

The benefit with this system, of course, is that it can protect people from their own stupidity and the selfishness of others. Today, many people talk about how important it is to have a free market where the government doesn't interfere with business; at the same time most of these people do believe that the government should take some steps to protect the public welfare.

There is no country today where a truly free market exists, and no country where the market is totally controlled for the good of the people. Deciding which part of the public welfare (whether that be freedom of choice for all or positive outcomes for most) is most important is very difficult, and a personal decision. Most people try to balance these.