The paper "Is Neo-Liberalism Responsible for Most of the Global Problems We Are Experiencing Today" is an outstanding example of macro and microeconomics coursework. Neo-liberalism is about making trade between countries easier. It is about the free movement of goods, resources and enterprises in a bid to always find cheaper resources so as to maximize profits and efficiency. To accomplish this, neo-liberalism needs the removal of various controls seen as barriers to free trade. These include tariffs, regulations, laws, legislation and regulatory measures and restrictions on capital flows and investment.
It is simply the rule of the market, freedom for goods and services, capital, where the market itself is regulating allowing wealth distribution. It also includes the dehumanizing of labor forces and the removal of any barriers to capital mobility, such as regulations. It was therefore thought as a mechanism for world trade and investment supposedly for every nation to prosper and develop fairly and equitably. This freedom is from the government or state. The government does this through various actions such as reducing public expenditures on social services, including health and education, privatizing public enterprises, changing the public and community’ s attitudes to individualism and individual responsibility as well as deregulation allowing market forces to act as a self-regulating mechanism. The current neo-liberalism system, open enterprises and market established economies came about 200 years ago, as one of the major brains of development for the industrial transformations.
(Harvey, 2007. p 79). Among the system’ s founders was Adams Smith, a British economist, who some considered the founder of the present open market capitalism. In his book, ” The Wealth of Nations” , Adams suggested that for maximum efficiency to be achieved, all forms of government interference in the economic issues should be removed and that there should be no limitations or duties on manufacturing and trade within a nation for it to develop.
For it to be effective, social practices had to be changed. Free markets were not certain, naturally occurring processes. They had to be forced upon people. Mid-nineteenth marked the start of extensive tests in social engineering. Its main agendas were made the economic life free from both political as well as social controls by coming up with a new institution, the free markets.
This, later on, brought down the socially established markets that were there a long time ago. The open or free-market established a new kind of economy where all prices of goods and labor changed without taking any attention to its impacts on society. Long ago economic life was tied up by the urge to preserve the social cohesion. It was carried out in social markets, which were put in society and subjected to many forms of regulations and much controls. The objectives were aimed at doing away with social markets, and replacing them by markets that were not regulated and were operating freely of social needs (Kochler, 1986.
p. 124). The euphoria in economic life brought by the development of the free market has been referred to as the Great Transformation. A detailed look into this process of transformation is revealed by Michael Perelman, a Professor of Economics at California State University. In his book The Invention of Capitalism, Perelman explains how peasants did not willingly abandon their self-sufficient lifestyle to go work in factories instead they had to be forced with the active support of thinkers and economists of the time, including the famous originators of classical political economy, such as Adam Smith, David Ricardo, James Steuart and others (Saad-Filho, 2009 p. 89).
Contradicting themselves, as if it were, they campaigned against the government customs and policies that robbed the poor their way of living of self-provision, pushing them into wage-based labor. Keeping the rural poor away from their lands was made possible due to the ideological braveness of individuals like Adam Smith, and as a result of what they termed the revision of history they brought out an impression of an idealistic heritage of political economy; something that was worth celebrating.
Kochler, H. (1986). Democracy in international relations. International Progress Organization. (4). Pp 121-125
Harvey (2007). A Brief History of Neoliberalism.Oxford University Press (4). Pp 78-80
Lee, S. and McBride, D. (2007). Neo-liberalism, state power and global governance. Springer
(2). Pp 144-149
MacEwan, A. (1999). Neo-liberalism or democracy? Economic Strategy, Markets and
Alternatives for the 21st Century. Zed Books (3). Pp 114-117
Saad-Filho, A. (2009). Economic Transitions to Neoliberalism in Middle-Income Countries:
Policy Dilemmas, Crises, Mass Resistance. Taylor and Francis (4). Pp 88-90