Moreover he argues that governments should impose

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ven thinking at the expense of people’s life. Moreover, he argues that governments should impose regulations on business behavior and practices until they regulate themselves. List any propaganda, bias or faulty reasoning that you feel exists in either of the articles on this issue? While Friedman’s arguments are too rational and economic, they also do not include society and the environment people live in. Almeder, on the other hand, comes up with weak examples which lead to a philosophical discussion without a clear solution at all. Furthermore, he didn’t mention any kind of regulation that would be sustainable, effective, and in favor for the whole society. Which side of the argument seems to make most sense to you and why? From a purely economic point of view, businesses are in competition and try to gain the most market share; and only the ‘fittest’ will serve and stay in the market and earn a (normal) profit. However, this analysis is based on model...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 01/26/2014.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online