このページはフレーム対応ブラウザ用に作成されています。下のリンクは非フレーム使用ページですのでそちらをご覧ください。
この記事をプリントする
「自由市場」という神話
新聞には連日のように、完全な自由市場のメリットを論じる記事が掲載されている。だが、「自由市場」の本当の意味は…
The Myth of the Free Market
By DOUGLAS LUMMIS
In today's newspaper (as in the newspaper on most days) there is an article discussing the merits of the fully free market.
It is remarkable that experts in economics still use this expression as if it meant something.
In fact there never was, is not now, and will never be a "fully free market." Human society could not bear it.
What is the free market? It is an abstract model that exists in the minds of economists. In that model, the economy is composed of a large number of economic actors, each of which is motivated only by "economic rationality," the desires to maximize profit and to minimize loss. This means they compete. Those that produce greater economic value at lesser cost will survive. Those that produce lesser value at greater cost will fail. Through this "survival of the fittest" mechanism, the economy will grow and prosper.
But to achieve this result there must be NO interference in the market. If the government tries to give aid to losers, or to help those in danger of becoming losers, it is "interfering with the natural operation of the market" and disrupting the process.
What would this system look like, were it put into effect? We can get an idea from the writings of Herbert Spencer, the 19th century sociologist. Spencer was one of the most consistent believers that the government should make absolutely no law to interfere in the market's operation. Some examples he gave of improper lawmaking are: laws to protect public health (such as laws requiring that doctors have licenses, or regulating sanitation in the food industry); laws regulating safety on the job, as in factories or mines; laws establishing minimum wages, limiting working hours, or prohibiting child labor; laws establishing universal compulsory education; laws establishing public libraries and public hospitals; and (of course) welfare of any kind.
To establish a fully free market in Japan you would have to begin by abolishing the Ministry of Health and Welfare, the Labor Ministry and the Ministry of International Trade and Industry.
But of course business and government leaders who advocate the free market are (unlike Spencer) not really serious. They use the argument as a weapon to attack welfare and to knock down barriers that restrict big business from operating where and how it pleases. But they never oppose government interference in the market.
In the 19th century in the United States, the railroad industry was established when the government gave to the railroad companies huge tracts of land on which to lay their tracks. This is a classic case of welfare to the rich.
And today's paper (the same one with which I started) reports that the G-7 leaders are urging the government of Japan to spend public money to bail out the country's failing banks. In a fully free market, of course, the banks would be allowed to fail. But the Japanese government has announced it will spend at least ¥13 trillion to save these moneylenders. This is what they call "a free economy."
In today's newspaper (as in the newspaper on most days) there is an article discussing the merits of the fully free market.
It is remarkable that experts in economics still use this expression as if it meant something.
In fact there never was, is not now, and will never be a "fully free market." Human society could not bear it.
What is the free market? It is an abstract model that exists in the minds of economists. In that model, the economy is composed of a large number of economic actors, each of which is motivated only by "economic rationality," the desires to maximize profit and to minimize loss. This means they compete. Those that produce greater economic value at lesser cost will survive. Those that produce lesser value at greater cost will fail. Through this "survival of the fittest" mechanism, the economy will grow and prosper.
But to achieve this result there must be NO interference in the market. If the government tries to give aid to losers, or to help those in danger of becoming losers, it is "interfering with the natural operation of the market" and disrupting the process.
What would this system look like, were it put into effect? We can get an idea from the writings of Herbert Spencer, the 19th century sociologist. Spencer was one of the most consistent believers that the government should make absolutely no law to interfere in the market's operation. Some examples he gave of improper lawmaking are: laws to protect public health (such as laws requiring that doctors have licenses, or regulating sanitation in the food industry); laws regulating safety on the job, as in factories or mines; laws establishing minimum wages, limiting working hours, or prohibiting child labor; laws establishing universal compulsory education; laws establishing public libraries and public hospitals; and (of course) welfare of any kind.
To establish a fully free market in Japan you would have to begin by abolishing the Ministry of Health and Welfare, the Labor Ministry and the Ministry of International Trade and Industry.
But of course business and government leaders who advocate the free market are (unlike Spencer) not really serious. They use the argument as a weapon to attack welfare and to knock down barriers that restrict big business from operating where and how it pleases. But they never oppose government interference in the market.
In the 19th century in the United States, the railroad industry was established when the government gave to the railroad companies huge tracts of land on which to lay their tracks. This is a classic case of welfare to the rich.
And today's paper (the same one with which I started) reports that the G-7 leaders are urging the government of Japan to spend public money to bail out the country's failing banks. In a fully free market, of course, the banks would be allowed to fail. But the Japanese government has announced it will spend at least ¥13 trillion to save these moneylenders. This is what they call "a free economy."
Shukan ST: Oct. 23, 1998
(C) All rights reserved
op19981023chu.htm
- article
- 記事
- It is remarkable that 〜
- 〜 は驚きだ
- experts in economics
- 経済専門家
- Human society
- 人間社会
- bear
- 耐える
- abstract model
- 抽象的な概念
- is composed of 〜
- 〜 から成り立っている
- actors
- 参加者
- is motivated only by 〜
- 〜 よってのみ動かされる
- "economic rationality"
- 「経済的合理性」
- maximize profit
- 利益を最大限にする
- minimize loss
- 損失を最小限にとどめる
- compete
- 張り合う
- "survival of the fittest" mechanism
- 「適者生存」の仕組み
- prosper
- 繁栄する
- interference
- 干渉
- give aid to 〜
- 〜 を援助する
- natural operation of 〜
- 〜 の自然な流れ
- disrupting the process
- 成り行きを妨げること
- were it put into effect
- 実行されたら
- Herbert Spencer
- (1820-1903)イギリスの哲学者・社会学者
- sociologist
- 社会学者
- consistent believers that 〜
- 徹底して 〜 と信じた人
- should make absolutely no law to 〜
- 〜 する法は断固として作るべきではない
- improper lawmaking
- 誤った立法
- public health
- 公衆衛生
- regulating sanitation
- 衛生基準をもうけること
- mines
- 炭坑
- wages
- 賃金
- universal compulsory education
- 全般的な義務教育
- welfare
- 福祉
- abolishing 〜
- 〜を廃止する
- Ministry of Health and Welfare
- 厚生省
- Labor Ministry
- 労働省
- Ministry of International Trade and Industry
- 通産省
- advocate
- 擁護する
- knock down barriers
- 障壁を壊す
- restrict 〜 from 〜
- 〜が〜するのを制限する
- big business
- 大企業
- where and how it pleases
- 好きな場所と方法で
- huge tracts of land
- 広大な土地
- lay their tracks
- 鉄道路線をひく
- classic case
- 典型的な例
- welfare to the rich
- 富者に豊かな生活を与えること
- G-7 leaders
- 先進7ヵ国首脳
- are urging 〜 to 〜
- 〜に〜するよう促している
- public money
- 公的資金
- bail out
- 救済する
- failing banks
- 破たん寸前の銀行
- be allowed to 〜
- 〜するままに放っておかれる
- moneylenders
- 金融業者