Natalia Veach

!Professor Howell
!Econ 1740
!10 October 2015

Free or Equal Questions

1. Professor Friedman would say that economic freedom is not just to reap the rewards when
times are good; its also to bare the consequences of your actions when times are bad.

2. Although Hong Kong had no prospects, no natural resources & little land that could be
cultivated, it became an economic powerhouse. How?
It became a powerhouse, because the Government didnt set any regulations like
tariffs, Government intervention, so the economy could evolve in a natural way.
The Government favored free markets and was given economic freedom.

3. Free markets have spread around the world. At the same time, weve seen the fastest human
progress ever, and it has been led by the countries that opened up their. In fact, average incomes
around the world have almost doubled. Globally, extreme poverty has been more that halved
since Milton Friedman did his series in 1980. Amazingly, 730 million people have been
liberated from property.

4. Human and political freedom has never existed (and cannot exits) without a large measure of
economic freedom. Those of us who have been so fortunate as to have been born in a free
society tend to take freedom for granted to regard it as the natural state of man kind. It is not.
It is a rare and precious thing.

5. Explain the concept of creative destruction as described in the Free or Equal video.
creative destruction is when only the flexible and attainable survive, which
means that other businesses fail. Also known as constant renewal of the
economy.

6. Explain why are Swedish entrepreneurs the oldest in the world, as described in the Free and
Equal video?
Swedish entrepreneurs are the oldest in the world, because the average big
Swedish company is ninety four years old. The phone company they have there
was started 130 years ago, as well.

7. Our economic system gave us Henry Ford, Thomas Alva Edison, Bill Gates, & other very
successful entrepreneurs. These entrepreneurs all went with their eyes open, knew what they
were doing 7 win or lose, we (society) all benefited from their willingness to take a chance.

If we did not allow these successful entrepreneurs to become incredibly rich, we would be more
equal. But, would we be better off? If entrepreneurs did not think that a possible reward for all
the sacrifices they made all their hard work, all the risks they take is lot of wealth, then they
might do something else instead. In that case, we would not have the goods, services and
technologies (they created) that make out lives better.

8. They (the Founding Fathers) were a wise and learned group of people. They had learned the
lesson of history. The great danger to freedom is the concentration to power, especially in the
hands of a government. They were determined to protect the citizens of the new United States of
America from that danger. And they crafted their Constitution with that in mind.

9. As Milton Friedman said, The society that puts equality before freedom will end up with
neither. The society that puts freedom before equality will end up with a great measure of both.

10. Professor Friedman compares the concept of equality of opportunity to a race where
everyone begins at the starting line at the same time. In contrast, equality of outcome
quarantines that everyone finishes at the same time. Today, equality of outcome is referred to as
fair shares for all.

If we applied the fair shares for all concept in this class, all students would receive an average
grade of C. This would be accomplished by taking points away from students earning As and
Bs to give students earning Ds and Es. Distributing points equally would result in fair grades
for all.

1. Would you approve of this method in calculating your final grade? Why or why not?
Personally I would approve on this method, only because if I worked really hard
for a whole semester and deserved and A, but got a C because someone else
wasn't working as hard, doesn't really seem fair at all. I can see how it would be
beneficial for the person receiving a lower grade, but for the person receiving a
higher grade it has a negative impact. To me this doesn't seem like fair grades for
all, a better method would be for everyone to earn their own grades.

2. How would this differ from fair shares for all economically? For example, whats the
difference between a successful student being required to give up some of his/her hard-earned
grade and a successful person being expected to give more of his/her hard-earned income? If
you support redistribution of income and wealth, shouldnt you also be willing to redistribute
academic grades? After all, many of your fellow students may not have had the advantages in
education and upbringing that youve had.

3. Address the above questions in your own words, in a minimum of 3 paragraphs.

After reading the example it did open up my mind and I was able to see both
perspectives. I think the difference between the distribution of grades and wealth,
is that the distribution of wealth goes to taxes, which was caused by the Country

as a whole. The reason people get the privilege to live freely is because they are
distributing a certain amount of their income. So even though they are giving up
some of their hard earned money, they are still being benefited. But distribution
of grades comes down to that individual. It isn't fair for someone who is doing
their own work to just get it taken away from them. Thats almost like cheating
for the other person, because they are just getting a grade given to them. Thats
like a student putting together a portfolio of all their work and just handing it right
on over to someone that didnt do any of it. Its just doesn't make sense when it
comes to school work. Distribution of income is a situation of you win some
you lose some, but distribution of grades is one person loses some and one
person wins some. I do understand that some people arent as fortunate as others
in certain situations, especially when it comes to academics. I dont believe
someone with a low grade should just be handed a good grade, I do believe that
they should be helped and guided a long the way to achieve good grades, though.
Maybe instead of getting a grade handed straight to them the person with a higher
grade point average can help (tutor) the person with a lower grade point average.
In this situation both are getting what they need/want. This method will create
fairness to all and is a beneficial way of doing things. By using this method it will
create balance and equality for all.

Reflective Writing
Learning outcome #1: This assignment helped out with the learning outcome: Students
Communicate effectively. The video helped me achieve listening affectively, since I had to use
the precise language from the video I needed to be very focused to make sure I heard every word
correctly. Especially since the narrator had a Swedish accent, sometimes it was more difficult to
make out what he said. Another reason why I chose this learning outcome is because to format
this assignment I needed to use organization and have a visual understating, in order to show my
understanding of the assignment.

Learning outcome #2: The second learning outcome that I learned by doing this assignment is:
Students think critically and creatively. A few of the questions involved creative thinking and
reasoning, especially question number ten. Question ten took up a lot of my time on this
assignment, because I was so busy on solving the problem and thinking through the questions. I
definitely had to make connection in question ten, mostly when I was answering the question that
asked about the difference of income distribution and grade distribution. Overall I think this
assignment gave me great skills when it comes to thinking critically and creatively.