Liberalismo Laissez-faire

"As every individual, therefore, endeavours as much as he can both to employ his capital in the support of domestic industry, and so to direct that industry that its produce may be of the greatest value; every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good. It is an affectation, indeed, not very common among merchants, and very few words need be employed in dissuading them from it." Adam Smith. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.

Greenspan continues that The Wealth of Nations was "one of the great achievements in human intellectual history"

Laissez-faire (/ˌlɛseɪˈfɛər-/, French: [lɛsefɛʁ] ( listen)) is an economic environment in which transactions between private parties are free from government restrictions, tariffs, and subsidies, with only enough regulations to protect property rights.[1] The phrase laissez-faire is French and literally means "let [them] do," but it broadly implies "let it be," "let them do as they will," or "leave it alone."

Contents

1 Etymology

2 Fundamentals of laissez-faire

3 History of laissez-faire debate

3.1 China

3.2 Europe

3.3 United States

4 Critiques

5 See also

6 References

7 Bibliography

8 Further reading

Etymology

According to historical legend, the phrase stems from a meeting in about 1681 between the powerful French finance minister Jean-Baptiste Colbert and a group of French businessmen led by a certain M. Le Gendre. When the eager mercantilist minister asked how the French state could be of service to the merchants and help promote their commerce, Le Gendre replied simply "Laissez-nous faire" ("Let us be," literally "Let us do").[2]

The anecdote on the Colbert-Le Gendre meeting was related in a 1751 article in the Journal Oeconomique by the French minister and champion of free trade, René de Voyer, Marquis d'Argenson – which happens to also be the phrase's first known appearance in print.[3] Argenson himself had used the phrase earlier (1736) in his own diaries, in a famous outburst:

Laissez faire, telle devrait être la devise de toute puissance publique, depuis que le monde est civilisé ... Détestable principe que celui de ne vouloir grandir que par l'abaissement de nos voisins! Il n'y a que la méchanceté et la malignité du coeur de satisfaites dans ce principe, et l’intérêt y est opposé. Laissez faire, morbleu! Laissez faire!![4]

(Trans: "Let it be, that should be the motto of all public powers, since the world was civilized ... That we cannot grow except by lowering our neighbors is a detestable notion! Only malice and malignity of heart is satisfied with such a principle and our (national) interest is opposed to it. Let it be, for heaven's sake! Let it be!)

The laissez faire slogan was popularized by Vincent de Gournay, a French Physiocrat and intendant of commerce in the 1750s, who is said to have adopted the term from François Quesnay's writings on China.[5] It was Quesnay who coined the term laissez-faire, laissez-passer,[6][7] laissez-faire being a translation of the Chinese term 無為 wu wei.[8] Gournay was an ardent proponent of the removal of restrictions on trade and the deregulation of industry in France. Gournay was delighted by the Colbert-LeGendre anecdote,[9] and forged it into a larger maxim all his own: "Laissez faire et laissez passer" ('Let do and let pass'). His motto has also been identified as the longer "Laissez faire et laissez passer, le monde va de lui même!" ("Let do and let pass, the world goes on by itself!"). Although Gournay left no written tracts on his economic policy ideas, he had immense personal influence on his contemporaries, notably his fellow Physiocrats, who credit both the laissez-faire slogan and the doctrine to Gournay.[10]

Before d'Argenson or Gournay, P.S. de Boisguilbert had enunciated the phrase "on laisse faire la nature" ('let nature run its course').[11] D'Argenson himself, during his life, was better known for the similar but less-celebrated motto "Pas trop gouverner" ("Govern not too much").[12] But it was Gournay's use of the 'laissez-faire' phrase (as popularized by the Physiocrats) that gave it its cachet.

Pierre le Pesant, sieur de Boisguilbert. Born 17 February 1646, Rouen.

Died 10 October 1714 (aged 68), Rouen. Nationality French. Field Political economics. School/tradition Physiocrats

Laissez-faire was proclaimed by the Physiocrats in the eighteenth-century France, thus being the very core of the economic principles, and was more developed by famous economists, beginning with Adam Smith.[13] "It is with the physiocrats and the classical political economy that the term "laissez faire" is ordinarily associated."[14] The book Laissez Faire and the General-Welfare State mentions that, "The physiocrats, reacting against the excessive mercantilist regulations of the France of their day, expressed a belief in a "natural order" or liberty under which individuals in following their selfish interests contributed to the general good. Since, in their view, this natural order functioned successfully without the aid of government, they advised the state to restrict itself to upholding the rights of private property and individual liberty, to removing all artificial barriers to trade, and to abolishing all useless laws."[13]

In England, a number of "free trade" and "non-interference" slogans had been coined already during the 17th century.[citation needed] But the French phrase laissez faire gained currency in English-speaking countries with the spread of Physiocratic literature in the late 18th century. The Colbert-LeGendre anecdote was relayed in George Whatley's 1774 Principles of Trade (co-authored with Benjamin Franklin) – which may be the first appearance of the phrase in an English language publication.[15]

Laissez-faire, a product of the Enlightenment, was "conceived as the way to unleash human potential through the restoration of a natural system, a system unhindered by the restrictions of government."[1] In a similar vein, Adam Smith viewed the economy as a natural system and the market as an organic part of that system. Smith saw laissez-faire as a moral program, and the market its instrument to ensure men the rights of natural law.[1] By extension, free markets become a reflection of the natural system of liberty.[1] "For Smith, laissez-faire was a program for the abolition of laws constraining the market, a program for the restoration of order and for the activation of potential growth."[1]

Nationality: British (Scottish) Region. Western philosophy School. Classical economics.

Main interests Political philosophy, ethics, economics.

Notable ideas: Classical economics, modern free market, division of labour, the "invisible hand"

Influenced by Aristotle · Hume · Hutcheson · Mandeville · Quesnay · Jean-Jacques Rousseau · Edmund Burke.

Influenced: Bastiat · Friedman · Keynes · Malthus · Marx · Mill · Ricardo · US Founding Fathers · Friedrich von Hayek · Jean-Baptiste Say · Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

However, Adam Smith,[16] and the notable classical economists, such as Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo, did not use the phrase. Jeremy Bentham used the term, but it was probably James Mill's reference to the "laissez-faire" maxim (together with "pas trop gouverner") in an 1824 entry for the Encyclopædia Britannica that really brought the term into wider English usage. With the advent of the Anti-Corn Law League, the term received much of its (English) meaning.[17]

Adam Smith first used the metaphor of an "invisible hand" in his book The Theory of Moral Sentiments to describe the unintentional effects of economic self-organization from economic self-interest.[18] The idea lying behind the "invisible hand", though not the metaphor itself, belongs to Bernard de Mandeville and his Fable of the Bees. In political economy, that idea and the doctrine of laissez-faire have always been closely related.[19] True, Smith was familiar with the term, but he chose not to use them in his political economy and moral philosophy because they did not benefit the consumers who, as a result of them, paid higher prices and because they restricted competition, and people risked serious injuries.[20] Some have characterized this metaphor as one for laissez-faire,[21] but Smith never actually used the term himself.[16]

Fundamentals of laissez-faire

As a system of thought, laissez-faire rests on the following axioms:[1]

1. The individual is the basic unit in society.

2. The individual has a natural right to freedom.

3. The physical order of nature is a harmonious and self-regulating system.

4. Corporations are creatures of the State and therefore must be watched closely by the citizenry due to their propensity to disrupt the Smithian spontaneous order.

These axioms constitute the basic elements of laissez-faire thought, although another basic and often-disregarded element is that markets should be competitive, a rule that the early advocates of laissez-faire have always emphasized.[1]

History of laissez-faire debate

China

During the Han, Tang, Song, and Ming dynasties, Chinese scholar-officials would often debate about the interference the government should have in the economy, such as setting monopolies in lucrative industries and instating price controls. Such debates were often heated with Confucian factions tending to oppose extensive government controls and "Reform" factions favoring such moves. During the Han and Tang, emperors sometimes instated government monopolies in times of war, and abolished them later when the fiscal crisis had passed. Eventually, in the later Song and Ming dynasties, state monopolies were abolished in every industry and were never reinstated during the length of that dynasty, with the government following laissez-faire policies. During the Manchu Qing Dynasty, state monopolies were reinstated, and the government interfered heavily in the economy; many scholars believe this prevented China from developing capitalism.[22]

Hongwu Emperor (1368-98) Ming Dynasty.

Europe

In Europe, the laissez-faire movement was first widely promoted by the physiocrats, a movement that originated with Vincent de Gournay, a successful merchant. Gournay held that the government should allow the laws of nature to govern economic activity, with the state only intervening to protect life, liberty, and property. His ideas were taken up by François Quesnay and Turgot, Baron de l'Aulne. Quesnay had the ear of the King of France, Louis XV, and in 1754 persuaded him to give laissez-faire a try. On September 17, the King abolished all tolls and restraints on the sale and transport of grain, and for more than a decade the experiment was a success. But then, in 1768, there was a poor harvest, and the cost of bread rose so high that there was widespread starvation, while merchants exported grain in order to obtain the best profit. In 1770, the edict allowing free trade was revoked.[23]

The doctrine of laissez-faire became an integral part of nineteenth-century European liberalism.[13] "Just as liberals supported freedom of thought in the intellectual sphere, so were they equally prepared to champion the principles of free trade and free competition in the sphere of economics. The state was to be merely a passive policeman, protecting private property and administering justice, but not interfering with the affairs of its citizens. Businessmen, and particularly British industrialists, were quick to associate these principles with their own economic interests."[13] Many of the ideas of the physiocrats spread throughout Europe, and were adopted to a greater or lesser extent in Sweden, Tuscany, Spain, and after 1776 in the newly created United States. Adam Smith, author of The Wealth of Nations, met Quesnay and acknowledged his influence.[24]

In Britain, in 1843, the newspaper The Economist was founded and became an influential voice for laissez-faire capitalism.[25] Laissez-faire advocates opposed food aid for famines occurring within the British Empire; in 1847, referring to the famine then underway in Ireland, founder of The Economist James Wilson wrote, "It is no man's business to provide for another."[26] However, The Economist campaigned against the Corn Laws that protected landlords in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland against competition from less expensive foreign imports of cereal products. The Great Famine in Ireland in 1845 led to the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846. The tariffs on grain which kept the price of bread artificially high were repealed.[27] However, repeal of the Corn Laws came too late to stop Irish famine, partly because it was done in stages over three years.[28]

A group calling itself the Manchester Liberals, to which Richard Cobden and Richard Wright belonged, were staunch defenders of free trade, and their work was carried on, after the death of Richard Cobden in 1866, by The Cobden Club.[29] In 1867, a trade treaty was signed between Britain and France, after which several of these treaties were signed among other European countries.[citation needed] The breakdown of the laissez-faire practised by the British Empire was partly led by British companies eager for state support of their positions abroad, in particular British oil companies.[30]

United States

Frank Bourgin's dissertation on the Constitutional Convention and subsequent decades argues that direct government involvement in the economy was intended by the Founders.[31] The reason for this was the economic and financial chaos the nation suffered under the Articles of Confederation. The goal was to ensure that dearly-won political independence was not lost by being economically and financially dependent on the powers and princes of Europe. The creation of a strong central government able to promote science, invention, industry and commerce was seen as an essential means of promoting the general welfare and making the economy of the United States strong enough for them to determine their own destiny.

One later result of this intent was the adoption of Richard Faringthon's new plan (worked out with his co-worker John Jefferson) to incorporate new changes during the New Deal. Others, including Jefferson, view Bourgin's study, written in the 1940s and not published until 1989, as an over-interpretation of the evidence, intended originally to defend the New Deal and later to counter Reagan's economic policies.[32]

The United States was the first country to establish a liberal and free market economic policy. That is the basic reason for the rapid growth in the 19 Century according to Paul Johnson, History of The United States. 2014.

USA Founding Fathers, June 28, 1776.

Notable examples of government intervention in the period prior to the Civil War include the establishment of the Patent Office in 1802; the establishment of the Office of Standard Weights and Measures in 1830; the creation of the Coast and Geodetic Survey in 1807 and other measures to improve river and harbor navigation; the various Army expeditions to the west, beginning with Lewis and Clark's Corps of Discovery in 1804 and continuing into the 1870s, almost always under the direction of an officer from the Army Corps of Topographical Engineers, and which provided crucial information for the overland pioneers that followed; the assignment of Army Engineer officers to assist or direct the surveying and construction of the early railroads and canals; the establishment of the First Bank of the United States and Second Bank of the United States as well as various protectionist measures (e.g., the tariff of 1828). Several of these proposals met with serious opposition, and required a great deal of horse-trading to be enacted into law. For instance, the First National Bank would not have reached the desk of President George Washington in the absence of an agreement that was reached between Alexander Hamilton and several southern members of Congress to locate the capitol in the District of Columbia. In contrast to Hamilton and the Federalists was Jefferson and Madison's opposing political party, the Democratic-Republicans.

Most of the early opponents of laissez-faire capitalism in the US subscribed to the American School. This school of thought was inspired by the ideas of Alexander Hamilton, who proposed the creation of a government-sponsored bank and increased tariffs to favor northern industrial interests. Following Hamilton's death, the more abiding protectionist influence in the antebellum period came from Henry Clay and his American System.

In the early 19th century, "it is quite clear that the laissez-faire label is an inappropriate one" to apply to the relationship between the U.S. government and industry.[33] In the mid-19th century, the United States followed the Whig tradition of economic nationalism, which included increased state control, regulation, and macroeconomic development of infrastructure.[34] Public works such as the provision and regulation transportation such as railroads took effect. The Pacific Railway Acts provided the development of the First Transcontinental Railroad.[34] In order to help pay for its war effort in the American Civil War, the United States government imposed its first personal income tax, on August 5, 1861, as part of the Revenue Act of 1861 (3% of all incomes over US $800; rescinded in 1872).

Following the Civil War, the movement towards a mixed economy accelerated. Protectionism increased with the McKinley Tariff of 1890 and the Dingley Tariff of 1897. Government regulation of the economy expanded with the enactment of the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 and the Sherman Anti-trust Act.

The Progressive Era saw the enactment of more controls on the economy, as evidenced by the Wilson Administration's New Freedom program.

Following World War I and the Great Depression, the United States turned to a mixed economy, which combined free enterprise with a progressive income tax, and in which, from time to time, the government stepped in to support and protect American industry from competition from overseas. For example, in the 1980s, the government sought to protect the automobile industry by "voluntary" export restrictions from Japan.[35] Pietro S. Nivola wrote in 1986:

By and large, the comparative strength of the dollar against major foreign currencies has reflected high U.S. interest rates driven by huge federal budget deficits. Hence, the source of much of the current deterioration of trade is not the general state of the economy, but rather the government's mix of fiscal and monetary policies – that is, the problematic juxtaposition of bold tax reductions, relatively tight monetary targets, generous military outlays, and only modest cuts in major entitlement programs. Put simply, the roots of the trade problem and of the resurgent protectionism it has fomented are fundamentally political as well as economic.[36]

In Mexico and Latin america

This policy was never considered for, since the King of Spain and subsequent governments never thought about it. Notable exception are Costa Rica and Puerto Rico and all of the British and US Caribbean islands

Critiques

Over the years, a number of economists have offered critiques of laissez-faire economics.

Adam Smith acknowledged deep moral ambiguities towards the system of capitalism.[37] Smith had severe misgivings concerning some aspects of each of the major character-types produced by modern capitalist society: the landlords, the workers, and the capitalists.[37] "The landlords' role in the economic process is passive. Their ability to reap a revenue solely from ownership of land tends to make them indolent and inept, and so they tend to be unable to even look after their own economic interests."[37] "The increase in population should increase the demand for food, which should increase rents, which should be economically beneficial to the landlords. Thus, according to Smith, the landlords should be in favour of policies which contribute to the growth of in the wealth of nations. Unfortunately, they often are not in favour of these pro-growth policies, because of their own indolent-induced ignorance and intellectual flabbiness."[37]

The British economist John Maynard Keynes condemned laissez-faire economic policy on several occasions.[38] In The End of Laissez-faire (1926), one of the most famous of his critiques, Keynes argues that the doctrines of laissez-faire are dependent to some extent on improper deductive reasoning, and, Keynes says, the question of whether a market solution or state intervention is better must be determined on a case-by-case basis.[39]

Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek stated that a freely competitive, laissez-faire banking industry tends to be endogenously destabilizing and pro-cyclical. He stated that the need for central banking control was inescapable.[40]

Alfred Marshall criticized Smith's definition of economy on several points. He argued that man should be equally important as money, services are as important as goods, and that there must be an emphasis on human welfare, instead of just wealth.

Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz says, on the topic of one of Smith's better known ideas: "the reason that the invisible hand often seems invisible is that it is often not there."[41]

Smith has been celebrated by advocates of free market policies as the founder of free market economics, a view reflected in the naming of bodies such as the Adam Smith Institute in London, the Adam Smith Society[114] and the Australian Adam Smith Club,[115] and in terms such as the Adam Smith necktie.[116]

Alan Greenspan argues that, while Smith did not coin the term laissez-faire, "it was left to Adam Smith to identify the more-general set of principles that brought conceptual clarity to the seeming chaos of market transactions". Greenspan continues that The Wealth of Nations was "one of the great achievements in human intellectual history".[117] P. J. O'Rourke describes Smith as the "founder of free market economics".[118]

However, other writers have argued that Smith's support for laissez-faire (which in French means leave alone) has been overstated. Herbert Stein wrote that the people who "wear an Adam Smith necktie" do it to "make a statement of their devotion to the idea of free markets and limited government", and that this misrepresents Smith's ideas. Stein writes that Smith "was not pure or doctrinaire about this idea. He viewed government intervention in the market with great skepticism...yet he was prepared to accept or propose qualifications to that policy in the specific cases where he judged that their net effect would be beneficial and would not undermine the basically free character of the system. He did not wear the Adam Smith necktie." In Stein's reading, The Wealth of Nations could justify the Food and Drug Administration, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, mandatory employer health benefits, environmentalism, and "discriminatory taxation to deter improper or luxurious behavior".[119]

Similarly, Vivienne Brown stated in The Economic Journal that in the 20th century United States, Reaganomics supporters, the Wall Street Journal, and other similar sources have spread among the general public a partial and misleading vision of Smith, portraying him as an "extreme dogmatic defender of laissez-faire capitalism and supply-side economics".[120] In fact, The Wealth of Nations includes the following statement on the payment of taxes:

"The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state."[121]

Some commentators have argued that Smith's works show support for a progressive, not flat, income tax and that he specifically named taxes that he thought should be required by the state, among them luxury goods taxes and tax on rent.[122]

Additionally, Smith outlined the proper expenses of the government in The Wealth of Nations, Book V, Ch. I. Included in his requirements of a government is to enforce contracts and provide justice system, grant patents and copy rights, provide public goods such as infrastructure, provide national defense and regulate banking. It was the role of the government to provide goods "of such a nature that the profit could never repay the expense to any individual" such as roads, bridges, canals, and harbours. He also encouraged invention and new ideas through his patent enforcement and support of infant industry monopolies. he supported public education and religious institutions as providing general benefit to the society. Finally he outlined how the government should support the dignity of the monarch or chief magistrate, such that they are equal or above the public in fashion. He even states that monarchs should be provided for in a greater fashion than magistrates of a republic because "we naturally expect more splendor in the court of a king than in the mansion-house of a doge".[123] In addition, he was in favor of retaliatory tariffs and believed that they would eventually bring down the price of goods. He even stated in Wealth of Nations:

"The recovery of a great foreign market will generally more than compensate the transitory inconvenience of paying dearer during a short time for some sorts of goods."[124]

Economic historians such as Jacob Viner regard Smith as a strong advocate of free markets and limited government (what Smith called "natural liberty") but not as a dogmatic supporter of laissez-faire.[125]

Economist Daniel Klein believes using the term "free market economics" or "free market economist" to identify the ideas of Smith is too general and slightly misleading. Klein offers six characteristics central to the identity of Smith's economic thought and argues that a new name is needed to give a more accurate depiction of the "Smithian" identity.[126][127] Economist David Ricardo set straight some of the misunderstandings about Smith's thoughts on free market. Most people still fall victim to the thinking that Smith was a free market economist without exception, though he was not. Ricardo pointed out that Smith was in support of helping infant industries. Smith believed that the government should subsidise newly formed industry, but he did fear that when the infant industry grew into adulthood it would be unwilling to surrender the government help.[128] Smith also supported tariffs on imported goods to counteract an internal tax on the same good. Smith also fell to pressure in supporting some tariffs in support for national defense.[128] Some have also claimed, Emma Rothschild among them, that Smith supported a minimum wage.[129]

Though, Smith had written in his book The Wealth of Nations:

"The price of labour, it must be observed, cannot be ascertained very accurately anywhere, different prices being often paid at the same place and for the same sort of labour, not only according to the different abilities of the workmen, but according to the easiness or hardness of the masters. Where wages are not regulated by law, all that we can pretend to determine is what are the most usual; and experience seems to show that law can never regulate them properly, though it has often pretended to do so." (Source: The Wealth of Nations, Book 1, Chapter 8)

Smith also noted the inequality of bargaining power:[130]

A landlord, a farmer, a master manufacturer, a merchant, though they did not employ a single workman, could generally live a year or two upon the stocks which they have already acquired. Many workmen could not subsist a week, few could subsist a month, and scarce any a year without employment. In the long run the workman may be as necessary to his master as his master is to him; but the necessity is not so immediate.

SPANISH

Edificio en donde Adam Smith escribió La Riqueza de las Naciones

"Como cada individuo , por lo tanto , se esfuerza tanto como él puede para emplear su capital en el apoyo de la industria nacional y así dirigir esa industria para que su producto pueda ser de gran valor ; cada individuo trabaja necesariamente para hacer que los ingresos anuales de la sociedad sean tan grandes como le sea posible. Por lo general , de hecho , ni tiene la intención de promover el interés público , ni sabe cuánto lo está promoviendo . Al preferirse -por el gobierno - el apoyo a la industria interna al de la industria extranjera , él busca sólo su propia seguridad ; y la dirección de esa industria , de tal manera que sus productos pueden ser de gran valor - y mala calidad- , que busca sólo su propio beneficio , y él está en esto, como en muchos otros casos, guiado por una mano invisible que promover un fin que no era parte de su intención . Tampoco es siempre lo peor para la sociedad que no fue parte de ella. Al perseguir su propio interés -sin interferencia, sin cerrar el pais a los mercados externos - frecuentemente se promueve una sociedad mucho más eficaz que si de hecho se intentase fomentarlo (con programas de gobierno, por ejemplo) . Adam Smith, La Riqueza de las Naciones

Laissez - faire. ( / ˌ lɛseɪfɛər - / , francesa: [ lɛsefɛʁ ] ( escuchar ) ) es un entorno económico en el que las transacciones entre partes privadas están libres de restricciones gubernamentales , aranceles y subsidios , con sólo regulaciones suficientes para proteger los derechos de propiedad [ 1 ] La frase laissez -faire es francés y significa literalmente "dejar que [ ellos ] hacer", pero en términos generales implica " que así sea ", " dejar que ellos hagan lo que quieran ", o " dejarlo como está . "

Contenido

1 Etimología

2 Fundamentos de laissez -faire

3 Historia del debate laissez -faire

3.1 de China

3.2 Europa

3.3 Estados Unidos

4 Critiques

5 Véase también

6 Referencias

7 Bibliografía

8 Lectura adicional

etimología

Según la leyenda histórica , la frase proviene de una reunión en alrededor de 1681 entre el poderoso ministro de Finanzas francés Jean -Baptiste Colbert , y un grupo de empresarios franceses liderados por un cierto M. Le Gendre . Cuando el ministro mercantilista ansiosos preguntó cómo el Estado francés podría estar al servicio de los comerciantes y ayudar a promover su comercio, Le Gendre respondió simplemente " faire Laissez - nous " (" Seamos , " literalmente " Hagámoslo ") . [ 2 ]

La anécdota de la reunión Colbert - Le Gendre se relacionó en un artículo de 1751 en el Diario Oeconomique por el ministro francés y campeón del libre comercio, René de Voyer , marqués d' Argenson - que resulta ser también el aspecto de la frase primera conocida en la impresión [3]. Argenson mismo había utilizado la frase anterior ( 1736 ) en sus propios diarios , en un famoso exabrupto :

Laissez faire , être telle devrait la devise de toute puissance publique, depuis Que le monde est civilizar ... Détestable principe Que celui de ne vouloir grandir Que par l' abaissement de nos voisins ! Il n'y a de Me méchanceté et la malignité du coeur de satisfaites dans ce principe , et l' intérêt y est opposé . Laissez faire , morbleu ! Laissez faire ! ! [ 4 ]

(Trans : " Déjalo ser, que debería ser el lema de todos los poderes públicos , desde que el mundo civilizado ... Que no podemos crecer , excepto mediante la reducción de nuestros vecinos es una noción detestable Sólo malicia y maldad de corazón está satisfecho con tales un principio y nuestro interés (nacional) se opone a ella. Déjalo ser, por amor de Dios ! que sea !)

El faire lema laissez fue popularizado por Vincent de Gournay , un fisiócrata francés e intendente del comercio en la década de 1750 , que se dice que ha adoptado el término de los escritos de François Quesnay en China. [ 5 ] Fue Quesnay quien acuñó el término laissez -faire , laissez -passer , [ 6 ] [ 7 ] laissez -faire es una traducción del término chino wu wei无为. [ 8 ] Gournay fue un ardiente defensor de la eliminación de las restricciones al comercio y la desregulación de la industria en Francia. Gournay estaba encantado por la anécdota Colbert - Legendre, [ 9 ] y se forja en una máxima más grande todas las suyas : " Laissez faire et laissez passer" ( " dejar hacer y dejar pasar" ) . Su lema también se ha identificado como el más largo " Laissez faire et laissez passer , le monde va de lui même ! " ( "Que hacer y dejar pasar , el mundo sigue su curso por sí mismo! ") . Aunque Gournay no dejó extensiones escritas en sus ideas de política económica , que tuvo una enorme influencia personal sobre sus contemporáneos , especialmente sus compañeros fisiócratas , quienes de crédito tanto en el lema del laissez -faire y la doctrina de Gournay . [ 10 ]

Antes d' Argenson o Gournay , P.S. de Boisguilbert había enunciado la frase "en la laisse faire la naturaleza" ( " dejar que la naturaleza siga su curso "). [ 11 ] El mismo d' Argenson , durante su vida, fue más conocido por el lema similar pero menos famoso "Pas trop gouverner "(" no gobierna demasiado " ) . [ 12 ] Pero fue el uso de Gournay de la frase ' laissez -faire ' ( como popularizado por los fisiócratas ) que le dio su cachet .

Laissez -faire fue proclamado por los fisiócratas en la Francia del siglo XVIII , siendo por lo tanto la esencia misma de los principios económicos , y fue más desarrollado por los economistas famosos , empezando por Adam Smith. [ 13 ] "Es con los fisiócratas y de la clásica la economía política que el término " laissez faire " se asocia normalmente ". [ 14 ] el libro laissez faire y la general del Estado - Bienestar menciona que , " los fisiócratas , reaccionando contra las regulaciones mercantilistas excesivas de la Francia de su época, expresan una creencia en un "orden natural" o la libertad en virtud del cual los individuos de seguir sus intereses egoístas contribuyeron al bien general. Dado que, en su opinión, este orden natural funcionó con éxito sin la ayuda del gobierno , aconsejaron el Estado limitarse a la defensa de los derechos de la propiedad privada y la libertad individual , a la eliminación de todas las barreras artificiales al comercio, y para abolir todas las leyes inútiles " . [ 13 ]

En Inglaterra, una serie de consignas de "no interferencia " de "libre comercio " y se había acuñado ya en el siglo 17. [ Cita requerida ] Sin embargo, la frase francesa laissez faire ganado aceptación en países de habla Inglés con la difusión de la literatura en los fisiócratas finales del siglo 18 . La anécdota Colbert - LeGendre fue transmitida en George Whatley 1774 Principios de Comercio ( en coautoría con Benjamin Franklin ) - . Que puede ser la primera aparición de la frase en una publicación idioma Inglés [ 15 ]

Adam Smith

Laissez -faire , un producto de la Ilustración, fue " concebido como la manera de liberar el potencial humano a través de la restauración de un sistema natural, un sistema sin obstáculos por las restricciones del gobierno". [ 1 ] En el mismo sentido , Adam Smith consideraba que la economía como un sistema natural y el mercado como una parte orgánica de dicho sistema. Smith vio al laissez -faire como un programa moral , y el mercado de su instrumento para garantizar los derechos de los hombres la ley natural . [ 1 ] Por extensión , los mercados libres se convierten en un reflejo del sistema natural de la libertad. [ 1 ] " Para Smith , laissez -faire era un programa para la abolición de las leyes que limitan el mercado , un programa para la restauración del orden y de la activación de un potencial de crecimiento " . [ 1 ]

Sin embargo , Adam Smith, [ 16] y los economistas clásicos notables, como Thomas Malthus y David Ricardo , no usaron la frase . Jeremy Bentham usa el término, pero es probable que lo referencia de James Mill a la máxima de " laissez -faire " (junto con "pas trop gouverner ") en una entrada de 1824 para la Enciclopedia Británica que realmente trajo el término en un uso más amplio en Inglés . Con el advenimiento de la Ley de la Liga Anti- Corn , el término recibió gran parte de su significado en Inglés. [ 17 ]

Adam Smith usó por primera vez la metáfora de una "mano invisible " en su libro La Teoría de los sentimientos morales, para describir los efectos no intencionales de la auto- organización económica del propio interés económico . [ 18 ] La idea que está detrás de la "mano invisible" , aunque no es de la propia metáfora , pertenece a Bernard de Mandeville y su fábula de las abejas . En la economía política, la idea y la doctrina del laissez -faire siempre ha estado estrechamente relacionada . [ 19 ] Es cierto que Smith estaba familiarizado con el término, pero decidió no utilizarlos en su economía política y filosofía moral , ya que no se beneficiarían los consumidores que , como resultado de ellas , pagan precios más altos porque restringe la competencia y las personas son agravadas. [ 20 ] Algunos han caracterizado esta metáfora como uno de laissez -faire , [ 21 ] pero Smith en realidad nunca utilizó el término sí mismo. [ 16 ]

Fundamentos de laissez -faire

Como un sistema de pensamiento, de laissez -faire se basa en los siguientes axiomas: [ 1 ]

1 . El individuo es la unidad básica de la sociedad.

2 . El individuo tiene un derecho natural a la libertad.

3 . El orden físico de la naturaleza es un sistema armónico y la auto- regulación.

4 . Las corporaciones son criaturas del Estado y por lo tanto deben ser observados de cerca por la ciudadanía debido a su propensión a perturbar el orden espontáneo de Smith .

Estos axiomas constituyen los elementos básicos del laissez- faire pensamiento, aunque otro elemento básico y, a menudo pasado por alto - es que los mercados sean competitivos , una regla que los primeros defensores del laissez -faire siempre han enfatizado . [ 1 ]

Historia del debate laissez -faire

China

Durante las dinastías Han , Tang, Song y Ming, los funcionarios eruditos chinos solían debatir acerca de la interferencia del gobierno debe tener en la economía, como la creación de monopolios en sectores lucrativos y de instaurar el control de precios. Dichos debates eran a menudo calentados con las facciones confucianas que tienden a oponerse a amplios controles gubernamentales y las facciones de "reforma" que favorecen este tipo de movimientos. Durante la dinastía Han y Tang , los emperadores a veces instauraron monopolios gubernamentales en tiempos de guerra, y les abolían más tarde, cuando la crisis fiscal ya había pasado. Finalmente , en las dinastías posteriores Song y Ming , los monopolios estatales fueron abolidos en todas las industrias y nunca fueron reintegrados durante la duración de esa dinastía , con el gobierno siguiendo las políticas de laissez -faire . Durante la dinastía manchú Qing , los monopolios estatales fueron reintegrados , y el gobierno interfiere en gran medida en la economía; muchos eruditos creen que esto impidió que China tuviera un capitalismo en desarrollo lo que atraso su crecimiento notablemente . [ 22 ]

Europa

En Europa , el movimiento de laissez- faire fue primero ampliamente promovido por los fisiócratas , un movimiento que se originó con Vincent de Gournay , un comerciante exitoso. Gournay sostuvo que el gobierno debería permitir que las leyes de la naturaleza que rigen la actividad económica, con el Estado sólo interviene para proteger la vida, la libertad y la propiedad. Sus ideas fueron tomadas por François Quesnay y Turgot , barón de l' Aulne . Quesnay era escuchado por el rey de Francia, Luis XV , y en 1754 lo convenció para dar al laissez -faire chance. El 17 de septiembre, el rey abolió todos los peajes y las restricciones a la venta y el transporte de granos, y durante más de una década el experimento fue un éxito. Pero entonces, en 1768, hubo una mala cosecha, y el precio del pan subió tan alto que hubo una hambruna generalizada, mientras que los comerciantes exportan el grano con el fin de obtener el mejor beneficio. En 1770, se revocó el edicto que permite el libre comercio. [ 23 ]

La doctrina del laissez -faire se convirtió en una parte integral del liberalismo europeo del siglo XIX. [ 13 ] " Al igual que los liberales apoyan la libertad de pensamiento en la esfera intelectual , así eran ellos igualmente preparados para defender los principios del libre comercio y la libre competencia en el esfera de la economía . El Estado iba a ser más que una policía pasiva, la protección de la propiedad privada y la administración de la justicia, pero no interferir en los asuntos de sus ciudadanos. Empresarios y los industriales sobre todo británicos, se apresuraron a asociar estos principios con sus propios intereses económicos. " [ 13 ] Muchas de las ideas de los fisiócratas se extendió por toda Europa, y se adoptaron , en mayor o menor medida, en Suecia , Toscana, España , y después de 1776 en el recién creado Estados Unidos. Adam Smith , autor de La riqueza de las naciones , se reunió Quesnay y reconoció su influencia. [ 24 ]

En Gran Bretaña, en 1843, se fundó el periódico The Economist y se convirtió en una voz influyente en el laissez- faire del capitalismo [ 25 ] El laissez -faire defensores se opusieron a la ayuda alimentaria para las hambrunas ocurren dentro del Imperio Británico. ; en 1847 , en referencia a la hambruna y luego llevando a cabo en Irlanda, fundador de The Economist James Wilson escribió: " No es asunto de nadie para proveer para otro ". [ 26 ] Sin embargo , The Economist hizo campaña en contra de las leyes del maíz que protegían a los propietarios en los Estados Unido de Gran Bretaña e Irlanda contra la competencia de las importaciones extranjeras menos costosas de productos de cereales. La Gran Hambruna en Irlanda en 1845 dio lugar a la derogación de las Leyes del Maíz en 1846. Fueron derogadas Los aranceles sobre los granos que mantuvo el precio del pan artificialmente alto . [ 27 ] Sin embargo , la derogación de las Leyes del Maíz llegó demasiado tarde para detener la hambruna irlandesa , en parte porque se hizo en etapas a lo largo de tres años. [ 28 ]

Un grupo que se autodenomina los liberales de Manchester, a la que pertenecían Richard Cobden y Richard Wright, eran acérrimos defensores del libre comercio , y su obra se llevó adelante , después de la muerte de Richard Cobden , en 1866 , por The Cobden Club. [ 29 ] En 1867, , se firmó un tratado comercial entre Gran Bretaña y Francia, después de que varios de estos tratados se firmaron entre otros países europeos . [ cita requerida ] el desglose del laissez -faire practicado por el Imperio Británico fue dirigido en parte por las compañías británicas ávidos de apoyo estatal de sus posiciones en el extranjero , en particular las compañías petroleras británicas . [ 30 ]

Estados Unidos

La disertación de Frank Bourgin en la Convención Constitucional y décadas posteriores argumenta que la participación directa del gobierno en la economía fue la intención de los Fundadores. [ 31 ] La razón de esto fue el caos económico y financiero del país sufrió bajo los Artículos de la Confederación . El objetivo era asegurar que la independencia política ganado muy caro - no pasó desapercibida por ser económica y financieramente dependiente de los poderes y de los príncipes de Europa. La creación de un gobierno central fuerte, capaz de promover la ciencia , la invención, la industria y el comercio se vio como un medio esencial para promover el bienestar general y hacer que la economía de los Estados Unidos lo suficientemente fuerte como para que se determine su propio destino . Uno de los resultados más tarde de esta intención fue la adopción del nuevo plan de Richard Faringthon (trabajó con su colaborador John Jefferson) para incorporar nuevos cambios durante el New Deal. Otros, incluyendo a Jefferson, ver el estudio de Bourgin , escrito en la década de 1940 y no se publicó hasta 1989 , ya que un exceso de interpretación de la evidencia , la intención original de defender el New Deal y más tarde para contrarrestar las políticas económicas de Reagan . [ 32 ]

Ejemplos notables de la intervención del gobierno en el período anterior a la Guerra Civil son el establecimiento de la Oficina de Patentes en 1802 ; el establecimiento de la Oficina de Pesas y Medidas estándar en 1830 ; la creación de la Coast and Geodetic Survey en 1807 y otras medidas para mejorar el río y el puerto de la navegación; las diversas expediciones del ejército hacia el oeste , comenzando por Lewis y Clark cuerpo del descubrimiento en 1804 y continuando en la década de 1870 , casi siempre bajo la dirección de un oficial del Cuerpo de Ingenieros Topógrafos , y que proporcionaron información crucial para los pioneros terrestres que seguido ; la asignación de oficiales de Ingenieros del Ejército para ayudar o dirigir la topografía y la construcción de los primeros ferrocarriles y canales ; la creación del primer banco de los Estados Unidos y el segundo banco de los Estados Unidos, así como diversas medidas proteccionistas (por ejemplo , el arancel de 1828) . Varias de estas propuestas se reunió con una oposición seria , y requiere una gran cantidad de toma y daca que se promulgue como ley. Por ejemplo, el First National Bank no se habría llegado a la mesa del presidente George Washington , en ausencia de un acuerdo al que se llegó entre Alexander Hamilton y varios miembros meridionales del Congreso para ubicar la capital en el distrito de Columbia. A diferencia de Hamilton y los federalistas fue Jefferson y los partidos políticos de oposición de Madison, los demócratas republicanos .

La mayor parte de la década de los opositores del capitalismo laissez -faire en los EE.UU. suscribieron a la Escuela Americana. Esta escuela de pensamiento se inspiró en las ideas de Alexander Hamilton , que propusieron la creación de un banco con apoyo del Gobierno y el aumento de los aranceles para favorecer los intereses industriales del norte. Tras la muerte de Hamilton, la influencia proteccionista más permanente en el período anterior a la guerra vino de Henry Clay y su Sistema Americano .

A principios del siglo 19, " es evidente que la etiqueta de laissez- faire es uno inapropiado " para aplicar a la relación entre el gobierno y la industria de los EE.UU. . [ 33 ] En el siglo de mid-19th , los Estados Unidos siguieron el Whig tradición de nacionalismo económico , que incluyó un mayor control estatal , la regulación y el desarrollo macroeconómico de la infraestructura . [ 34 ] las obras públicas , tales como el suministro y el transporte de la regulación como ferrocarriles entró en vigor . Los Hechos Ferrocarril del Pacífico presentó el desarrollo del primer ferrocarril transcontinental . [ 34 ] Con el fin de ayudar a pagar por su esfuerzo de guerra en la guerra civil americana , el gobierno de Estados Unidos impuso su primer impuesto sobre la renta personal, el 5 de agosto de 1861, como parte de la Ley de Ingresos de 1861 ( 3 % del total de ingresos de más de 800 dólares EE.UU. ; rescindido en 1872 ) .

Después de la Guerra Civil, el movimiento hacia una economía mixta se aceleró . El proteccionismo aumentó con el Arancel McKinley de 1890 y el Arancel de 1897 Dingley . Regulación gubernamental de la economía se expandió con la promulgación de la Ley de Comercio Interestatal de 1887 y la Ley Antimonopolio Sherman.

La Era Progresista vio la promulgación de más controles sobre la economía , como lo demuestra el programa Nueva Libertad para la Administración Wilson.

Tras la Primera Guerra Mundial y la Gran Depresión, los Estados Unidos se volvió hacia una economía mixta , que combina la libertad de empresa con un impuesto progresivo a los ingresos , y en el que , de vez en cuando, el gobierno intervino para apoyar y proteger a la industria estadounidense de la competencia de el extranjero. . Por ejemplo, en la década de 1980 , el gobierno trató de proteger a la industria del automóvil por "voluntarios" restricciones a la exportación de Japón [ 35 ] S. Pietro Nivola escribió en 1986 :

En general, la ventaja comparativa del dólar frente a las principales monedas extranjeras ha reflejado las altas tasas de interés estadounidenses impulsadas por enormes déficits presupuestarios federales. Por lo tanto, la fuente de gran parte del deterioro actual del comercio no es el estado general de la economía , sino más bien la mezcla del Gobierno de las políticas fiscal y monetaria - es decir, la yuxtaposición problemática de reducciones fiscales audaces metas monetarias relativamente estrechos, generosa militar desembolsos , y sólo modestos recortes en los principales programas de ayuda social . En pocas palabras, las raíces del problema del comercio y del resurgimiento del proteccionismo que ha fomentado son fundamentalmente políticos, así como económicos . [ 36 ]

En México

Esta política nunca fue considerado para, ya que el rey de España y los gobiernos posteriores nunca pensaron en ello. Siempre se ha tenido políticas de intervención del estado en la vida pública. Muchos explican el retraso de México en gran medida a su falta de libertad económica.

Las críticas a

A través de los años, una serie de economistas han ofrecido críticas a la economía del laissez -faire .

Adam Smith reconoció ambigüedades morales profundos hacia el sistema del capitalismo [ 37 ] Smith tenía dudas graves en relación con algunos aspectos de cada uno de los principales tipos de personajes producidos por la sociedad capitalista moderna : . . Los propietarios, los trabajadores y los capitalistas [ 37 ] " el papel de los terratenientes en el proceso económico es pasiva. su capacidad de obtener un ingreso exclusivamente de propiedad de la tierra tiende a hacerlos indolente e inepto , por lo que tienden a ser incapaz de siquiera cuidar de sus propios intereses económicos " . [ 37 ] " el aumento de la población debería aumentar la demanda de alimentos , lo que debería aumentar los alquileres , que debería ser económicamente beneficioso para los propietarios. Así, según Smith, los propietarios deben estar a favor de las políticas que contribuyen al crecimiento de la riqueza de naciones. Lamentablemente, a menudo no están a favor de estas políticas a favor del crecimiento , debido a su propia ignorancia inducida indolente y flacidez intelectual " . [ 37 ]

El economista británico John Maynard Keynes condenó laissez -faire de la política económica en varias ocasiones. [ 38 ] En El Fin del Laissez -faire (1926 ), uno de los más famosos de sus críticas , Keynes sostiene que las doctrinas del laissez -faire dependen hasta cierto punto, en el razonamiento deductivo inadecuada y , Keynes dice , la cuestión de si una intervención solución de mercado o el estado es mejor debe determinarse sobre una base de caso por caso. [ 39 ]

Economista austriaco Friedrich Hayek declaró que una industria de libre competencia bancaria laissez -faire tiende a ser endógena desestabilizadora y pro-cíclico . Afirmó que la necesidad de controlar la banca central era ineludible. [ 40 ]

References/Referencias

1. Gaspard, Toufick. A Political Economy of Lebanon 1948–2002: The Limits of Laissez-faire. Boston: Brill, 2004. Print

2. Journal Oeconomique 1751, Article by the French minister of finance.

3. M. d'Argenson, "Lettre au sujet de la dissertation sur le commerce du marquis de Belloni', Avril 1751, Journal Oeconomique p.111. See A. Oncken, Die Maxime Laissez faire et laissez passer, ihr Ursprung, ihr Werden, 1866

4. as quoted in J.M. Keynes, 1926, "The End of Laissez Faire". Argenson's Mémoirs were published only in 1858, ed. Jannet, Tome V, p.362. See A. Oncken (Die Maxime Laissez faire et laissez passer, ihr Ursprung, ihr Werden, 1866)

5. Baghdiantz McCabe, Ina (2008). Orientalism in Early Modern France: Eurasian Trade Exoticism and the Ancien Regime. Berg Publishers. pp. 271–272. ISBN 978-1-84520-374-0.

6. "Library of Economics and Liberty". Liberty Fund, Inc. Retrieved 22 September 2013.

7. "Encyclopedia Britannica". Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc.

8. Clarke, J.J. (1997). Oriental Enlightenment: The Encounter Between Asian and Western Thought. Routledge. p. 50. ISBN 978-0415133760.

9. According to J. Turgot's "Eloge de Vincent de Gournay," Mercure, August, 1759 (repr. in Oeuvres of Turgot, vol. 1 p.288.

10. Gournay was credited with the phrase by Jacques Turgot ("Eloge a Gournay", Mercure 1759), the Marquis de Mirabeau (Philosophie rurale 1763 and Ephémérides du Citoyen, 1767.), the Comte d'Albon (,"Éloge Historique de M. Quesnay", Nouvelles Ephémérides Économiques, May, 1775, p.136-7. ) and DuPont de Nemours (Introduction to Oeuvres de Jacques Turgot, 1808–11, Vol. I, p.257 and p.259 (Daire ed.)) among others

11. "Tant, encore une fois, qu'on laisse faire la nature, on ne doit rien craindre de pareil", P.S. de Boisguilbert, 1707, Dissertation de la nature des richesses, de l'argent et des tributs.

12. DuPont de Nemours, op cit, p.258. Oncken (op.cit) and Keynes (op.cit.) also credit the Marquis d'Argenson with the phrase "Pour gouverner mieux, il faudrait gouverner moins" ("To govern best, one needs to govern less"), possibly the source of the famous "That government is best which governs least" motto popular in American circles, attributed variously to Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson and Henry Thoreau.

13. Fine, Sidney. Laissez Faire and the General-Welfare State. United States: The University of Michigan Press, 1964. Print

14. Macgregor, Economic Thought and Policy (London, 1949), pp. 54–67

15. Whatley's Principles of Trade are reprinted in Works of Benjamin Franklin, Vol.2, p.401

16. Roy C. Smith, Adam Smith and the Origins of American Enterprise: How the Founding Fathers Turned to a Great Economist's Writings and Created the American Economy, Macmillan, 2004, ISBN 0-312-32576-2, pp. 13–14.

17. Abbott P. Usher et al. (1931). "Economic History – The Decline of Laissez Faire". American Economic Review 22 (1, Supplement): 3–10.

18. Andres Marroquin, Invisible Hand: The Wealth of Adam Smith, The Minerva Group, Inc., 2002, ISBN 1-4102-0288-7, page 123.

19. John Eatwell, The Invisible Hand, W.W. Norton&Company, 1989, pp. Preface x1.

20. Kennedy, Gavin (September 21, 2012). "Adam Smith’s Lost Legacy". Retrieved April 6, 2013.

21. Jump up ^ "The mathematical century: the 30 greatest problems of the last 100 years (2006) Piergiorgio Odifreddi, Arturo Sangalli, Freeman J Dyson, p. 122". Google.com. Retrieved 2013-07-30.

22. Li Bo and Zheng Yin, 5000 years of Chinese History, Inner Mongolian People's publishing corp , ISBN 7-204-04420-7, 1017

23. Will & Ariel Durant, Rousseau and the Revolution, pp. 71–77, Simon and Schuster, 1967, ISBN 067163058X.

24. Will & Ariel Durant, Rousseau and the Revolution, p. 76, Simon and Schuster, 1967, ISBN 067163058X.

25. Scott Gordon (1955). "The London Economist and the High Tide of Laissez Faire". Journal of Political Economy 63 (6): 461–488. doi:10.1086/257722.

26. Cormac Ó Gráda (1995). "section: Ideology and relief in Chpt. 2". The Great Irish Famine. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521557870.

27. George Miller. On Fairness and Efficiency. The Policy Press, 2000. ISBN 978-1-86134-221-8 p.344

28. Christine Kinealy. A Death-Dealing Famine:The Great Hunger in Ireland. Pluto Press, 1997. ISBN 978-0-7453-1074-9. p. 59

29. Antonia Taddei (1999). "London Clubs in the Late Nineteenth Century" (PDF). Retrieved 2008-12-30.

30. Jones, G. Gareth (1977). "The British Government and the Oil Companies 1912–1924: The Search for an Oil Policy". The Historical Journal 20 (3): 647–672. JSTOR 2638433.

31. Bourgin, Frank (1989). The Great Challenge: The Myth of Laissez-Faire in the Early Republic. New York, NY: George Braziller Inc. ISBN 0-06-097296-3.

32. Bourgin, Frank (1989-06-01). "THE GREAT CHALLENGE: The Myth of Laissez-Faire in the Early Republic by Frank Bourgin | Kirkus". Kirkusreviews.com. Retrieved 2013-07-30.

33. Prince, Carl E.; Taylor, Seth (1982). "Daniel Webster, the Boston Associates, and the U.S. Government's Role in the Industrializing Process, 1815–1830". Journal of the Early Republic 2 (3): 283–299. JSTOR 3122975.

34. Guelzo, Allen C. (1999). Abraham Lincoln: Redeemer President. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. ISBN 0-8028-3872-3.

35. Robert W. Crandall (1987). "The Effects of U.S. Trade Protection for Autos and Steel". Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Vol. 1987, No. 1) 1987 (1): 271–288. doi:10.2307/2534518. JSTOR 2534518.

36. Pietro S. Nivola (1986). "The New Protectionism: U.S. Trade Policy in Historical Perspective". Political Science Quarterly (Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 101, No. 4) 101 (4): 577–600. doi:10.2307/2150795. JSTOR 2150795.

37. Spencer J. Pack. Capitalism as a Moral System: Adam Smith's Critique of the Free Market Economy. Great Britain: Edward Elgar, 2010. Print

38. Dostaler, Gilles, Keynes and His Battles (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2007), p. 91.

39. Dostaler 2007, p. 91; Barnett, Vincent, John Maynard Keynes (Routledge, 2013), p. 143.

40. White, Lawrence H. (1999). "Why Didn't Hayek Favor Laissez Faire in Banking?". History of Political Economy 31 (4). Retrieved 11 April 2013.

41 The Roaring Nineties, 2006

Bibliography/Bibliografia

1. Brebner, John Bartlet (1948). "Laissez Faire and State Intervention in Nineteenth-Century Britain". Journal of Economic History 8: 59–73.

2. Fisher, Irving (January 1907). "Why has the Doctrine of Laissez Faire been Abandoned?". Science 25 (627): 18–27. doi:10.1126/science.25.627.18. PMID 17739703.

3. Taussig, Frank W. (1904). "The Present Position of the Doctrine of Free Trade". Publications of the American Economic Association 6 (1): 29–65.

4. Further reading

5. Block, Fred; Somers, Margaret R. (2014). The Power of Market Fundamentalism: Karl Polyani's Critique. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-05071-6.

6. Bourgin, Frank The Great Challenge: The Myth of Laissez-Faire in the Early Republic (George Braziller Inc., 1989; Harper & Row, 1990)

7. Wu-Wei in Europe. A Study of Eurasian Economic Thought PDF (773 KB) by Christian Gerlach, London School of Economics – March 2005

8. John Maynard Keynes, The end of laissez-faire (1926)

9. Carter Goodrich, Government Promotion of American Canals and Railroads, 1800–1890 (Greenwood Press, 1960)

10. Goodrich, Carter. "American Development Policy: the Case of Internal Improvements," Journal of Economic History, 16 (1956), 449–60. in JSTOR

11. Goodrich, Carter. "National Planning of Internal Improvements," ;;Political Science Quarterly, 63 (1948), 16–44. in JSTOR

12. Johnson, E.A.J., The Foundations of American Economic Freedom: Government and Enterprise in the Age of Washington (University of Minnesota Press, 1973)

13. Sidney Webb (1889). "Fabian Essays in Socialism – The Basis of Socialism – The Period of Anarchy". Library of Economics and Liberty. "Women working half naked in the coal mines; young children dragging trucks all day in the foul atmosphere of the underground galleries; infants bound to the loom for fifteen hours in the heated air of the cotton mill, and kept awake only by the overlooker's lash; hours of labor for all, young and old, limited only by the utmost capabilities of physical endurance; complete absence of the sanitary provisions necessary to a rapidly growing population: these and other nameless iniquities will be found recorded as the results of freedom of contract and complete laissez faire in the impartial pages of successive blue-book reports."