Explain the U.S. Mixed Economy and the Economic Role of Government?
598335
No economy is a true economy.  Capitalism, as is the dominant form of economy in the US allows market forces (supply, demand, cost of production, etc) to determine the price of goods and services.  There are factors such as govt. regulations, ceilings, and floors that also affect the price of these goods.  The role of government in true capitalism is to stay out of the way.  This also has consequences, such as monopoly and other forms of dubious activity.  I feel government should allow the market to work as naturally as possible, but use a 'guiding hand' when critical indicators (interest rates, oil prices, stock market crash, consumer confidence, etc.) begin to predict the economy is heading down a dismal path.
1124946
What an excellent question! If anyone has called you a Socialist Bimbo for asking this question, please ignore them. Chances are that they probably don’t have a good understanding of the concept anyway, and they are only calling you names because they’ve heard that “Socialism/Communism is bad”. I doubt that they could give you a satisfactory explanantion. It speaks volumes about your character that you’re actually trying to learn something. We really need to see more questions like this on Answers.com.\n\nSocialism is a particular type of socio-economic doctrine which advocates social control over the distribution of wealth and property. Basically, rather than having private ownership of the means of production, there is collective, social control.\nThis stands in stark contrast to Capitalism. Capitalism is a socio-economic doctrine which advocates private ownership of property and over the means of production. You can think of these different doctrines as being on a continuum with zero social control of property on the far left and absolute social control on the far right.\n\nOn the far left, you would have Capitalism, and next you would find “Mixed economies”. The United States is actually not a Capitalist country anymore, we are really a mixed economy where there is some social control of propery. Think of things like public parks, which are collectively owned.  As you continue to the right, you will find Socialism, and finally, you will find Communism where the “State” owns everything. There is absolutely zero private property in a Communist economy.\n\nSo that’s the basic breakdown, and now I will quickly explain the problems with “State” ownership of property. Imagine for a moment that you live in a Communist country. The government owns everything including property and businesses. You wake up in the morning and go to work, just like you might here in the U.S., but there is one key difference. In a Communist system, the government owns everything; they get your paycheck at the end of the week. Even if you are the hardest worker in the entire country, they take your whole paycheck. They also collect everyone else’s paychecks throughout the entire country and then they decide the best way to spend “their” money.\n\nMore than likely they will give you some of it back. They will give you enough for food and water, and perhaps even some for medicine if you need it (if there is any money left). That might not sound too bad to you. Everyone has at least the bare neccesities. But there are some serious problems with the system. Imagine that one of your coworkers is extremely lazy. He reports to work just like you, but he doesn’t lift a finger. Actually, imagine that he doesn’t even show up at work; he just sleeps in. At the end of the week, he’ll get exactly the same amount of money that you will. Why should you keep working?\n\nYou probably think that it isn’t fair for him to get paid the same amount when he isn’t doing anything, so the next day when you go in to work you don’t do anything either. Or perhaps you just sleep in too. Don’t worry though, at the end of the week, you’ll still get paid. Whether you work or not, you get paid the same amount. Do you see how this causes a problem? It removes all of the incentive for people to work, and pretty soon everyone is either not working or doing a halfhearted job. It turns out that Communist countries are extremly poor for this reason. \nIf instead, you don’t pay people who don’t come to work they’ll learn that they need to work if they expect money. Also, when you allow people to be paid more for working harder, you give them an incentive to put in extra effort. This is what capitalism is based on.\n\nThere are a range of Socialist movements, each with their own positions on how much social ownership the governement should have. Some Socialists are indistinguishable from Communists, while others lean closer to a “Mixed Econo
683012
The US government is able to move resources around where they are needed, if and when it wants too.  It has an efficient infrastructure to do so--and the ability to monitor and provide oversight that the resource are managed & delivered.  It could effectively reduce poverty in this country (something that Vice President Humphrey said back in the late 1960's!).
35409
There is a ton of info in the site below.  Fiscal policy usually falls under Macroeconomics. One of the most common fiscal policies you'll here about a couple of times a year, is when the Federal Reserve Board (The Fed) meets.  Often the board decides to change its prime lending rate to banks, which could affect overall borrowine and spending in the economy.
212470
Ya, what dragonfly said!\n\nBut this might be a legitimate question.  The Federal Govt's main job is to protect us.  That's where a lot of tax money goes - national security and defense.  They also protect us by doing things like inspecting meat to make sure its safe, regulating medicine for the same reason, and stopping illegal aliens.  Besides that, they pay a lot of money towards education, roads, things that state and local govt are mostly responsible for, the fed govt gives them money.
69890
The government provides protection and services (think highways, police, etc) that contribute to our ability to earn money. It can generally be assumed that people earning money in this country are benefitting from these services, and thus taxes are levied upon them.
682723
In theory, an economy, or economic system, that is a transition between capitalism and communism and is based on: (1) government, rather than individual, ownership of resources, (2) worker control of the government, such that workers, rather than capitalist, control capital and other productive resources, (3) income allocated on need rather than on resource ownership or contribution to production. In practice, socialism is a type of economy based on--(1) government ownership and control of the most crucial resources, like those for energy production, communication, transportation, and health care and (2) a heavy dose of central planning by government. \nAlthough socialism represents the theoretical transition from capitalism to communism, the primary goals of modern real world socialism are: (1) to correct the inefficiencies of market failures, (2) to obtain more equal wealth and income distributions, and (3) to equalize economic opportunities. To accomplish these goals, government exerts a significant amount of government control, while less than communism, more than capitalism.\nPerhaps more so than other economic systems, socialism comes in many different varieties. Some nations practice a form of socialism that comes very close to communism, with extensive government control. Socialism found in other nations has a distinctive capitalistic flavor, with a great deal of market activity.\n\nGovernment Ownership and Control\nA distinguishing characteristic of socialism is government ownership and control over key industries and resources. Government ownership and control generally begins with transportation, energy, and communication. Socialist governments generally view these industries and their associated resources as the ones most likely abused by private ownership.\nMore active socialist governments tend to exert greater control over other industries, such as health care, heavy manufacturing (such as steel production), and agricultural production. In the extreme, everything is owned and controlled by government, resulting in communism.\n\nCentral Planning\nGovernment ownership of resources and control of industries under socialism necessitates control of allocation decisions. This is often accomplished through central planning. While less extensive than found in communism, detailed plans are needed to allocate resources in the absence of market exchanges. And while such planning generally lacks the efficiency incentives found in markets, it can improve the efficiency if the markets would otherwise fall victim to failures.\nFor example, transportation systems are usually owned and controlled by governments under socialism due to the possible market failure of market control, especially the emergence of natural monopoly. \n\nA Mixed Economy\nSocialism occupies a large section of the spectrum of economic systems, bounded by a pure market economy on one end and a pure command economy on the other. Socialism tends to lay closer to the pure command economy of the spectrum, but it can also edge toward the pure market economy side dominated by capitalism.\nSocialism, like all other real world economic systems, is thus a mixed economy. Allocation decisions are undertaken by both governments and markets. Some socialistic nations rely more on governments and less on markets, while others rely a little more on markets and a little less on governments. But all rely on both to some degree.\n\nThe Politics of Socialism\nThe concept of socialism dates back almost to the beginnings of philosophical thought into the human prospect. Socialistic principles, for example, can be found in the works of Plato and the New Testament of the Christian Bible.\nOver the centuries socialism has been as closely aligned with political thinking as with economic analysis. It has formed the foundation of numerous political parties and helped inspire scores of revolutions. On the spectrum of political thinking, socialism is more likely embraced by liberals and
234137
The growing importance of sectional interests reflect the dispute over tariffs.\n\nClashes occurred in Congress between representatives from different sections.\n\nClay wanted to promote economic growth for all sections.\n\nThe American System was a program Clay set out.\n\nTo help Northern factories, the American system called for high tariffs on imports.\n\nHigh tariffs would also reduce American dependence on foreign goods.\n\nTo make it easier and cheaper for farmers in west and south to ship goods to city markets, they made a better transportation system.\n\nThe American System never went into effect, because Congress spent little on internal improvements, tariffs remained high. \n\nSoutherners opposed paying for roads and canals that brought no direct benefits.
817718
Be willing to accept a lower standard of living. The expansion of the economy is due in large part to dumping the gold standard and instituting the Federal Reserve. \n\nGo back and look at the history that caused these changes.\n\nAs for the income tax, how would you propose paying for public goods?
1015453
I'm sure you could probably find it on wikipedia.com or something.\n\nBut to 4A:\n\nThe Great Depression resulted in a more secure way to organize the U.;S. economy in the furture.  Like they have to check to make sure stocks are worth what they are selling for or something like that.  People would get all of their money back if there was another depression instead of totally losing it all.
801602
When it comes down to the issues that truly affect Americans. There is not much of a difference at all.\n\nFree Trade, Immigration, and Balanced budgets.
757797
One is a country and the other is an economy?
555720
Try cia.gov I did a whole economics report off of this website.  It gives the economic breakdown of each country and is very complete.  Good luck!
613170
It would help if you told us what country and government you are referring to, and what your native language is.\nIf you are referring to the USA, The government does not directly regulate the prices, although it does take actions that affect the costs of living.\n\nIf you are asking about the USA (again an assumption based on your reference to social security) better English skills, and education and vocational skills could help you both understand the workings of economics and government, and help you earn a higher wage. \n\nIf you have finished high school, your local community college could help.  If you are a citizen, or are here legally, there can be financial aid to help you pay for the costs of attending community college.
597468
The government affects GDP by collecting taxes and making purchases (goverment consumption).  Y = C (consumption) + I (investment) + G (Government = T (taxes)- P (purchases)) + (X-M) (Exports - Imports or Current Account)  \nSince Government purchases typically exceed taxes it is acceptable to also write Y = C + I + (X-M) - G
1386
It mainly develops naturally. The flow of money is the building block of an economy, and people will keep money flowing fairly well on their own as long as there is a basic infrastructure, such as a set market place and day/time. The highly complex economy we have today is mainly the result of these natural developments. Governmental interference can only make a limited amount of difference.
278615
Economist always look at the bottom spectrum of the scale, which never includes people or their welfare. In a perfect world like the Romans had for Centuries even will collapse. They used War and slavery to build their empire. The Slave owners of the DEEP SOUTH, During the Confederacy used these same principles to build the DEEP SOUTH of America. The Republic of China, and the Communist are a mirror of this same type of Government. Same thing in India. World Markets can't compete with an in-slaved Government system, and I say it should be opposed. China right now is putting pressure on the U.S. Auto-makers with this labor situation. I think it was poor investment; because you gave all your bargaining power away, and are at their mercy now to what they will. I believe that with a free market, which includes the vote of the populous, and their concerns. The market will thrive, and you attain greater returns back into the market. That's my observation.