Those Backwards Neo-Classicalists :: Neo-Classicalism Capitalism Capitalist Essays

Those Backwards Neo-ClassicalistsOne of the principal themes of our class was that Neo-Classicalism is wrongfulness, non only wrong but backward. It seemed that everywhere we turned we found matchless example after another that supported this conclusion. In a nutshell Neo-Classicalists recollect that Capitalism is completely fair and that in a Capitalist transcription one can never be cheated. This erroneous scheme extends dismantle into the environment and befoulment. The movie Erin Brockovich does a wonderful job of illustrating just how wrong the Neo-Classicalists are when it comes to this particular subject.Just what is the Neo-classical belief about the environment and pollution? Interestingly enough they do admit that companies pollute, they also admit that pollution should not be left untended. Both of these admissions are actually strike and somewhat contradictory to what one might expect from the Neo-Classicalist, unfortunately this is as far as the surprise goes. In typical Neo-classical style the theory is that if pollution is really a problem the market volition declare this out and then resolve it. The belief is that the citizens will recognize that it is in the interest of the common good to stop pollution, and the response will be a non-political way of alleviating or stopping the problem. I emphasize that the result will be a non-political one because it appears that politics and Neo-classicalism are enemies. Neo-Classicalists suppose that Government should never get involved in economic problems. They smell out that if the government would just stay out of it all problems would solve themselves done neo-classicalism. In other words Government is just this terrible social occasion that imposes itself and mucks the whole system up The ideal of Neo-classicalism is that the pollution problem will give rise to a market that will meet the hire for a rinse environment. Which brings me to another principal of Neo-Classicalism with wh ich I have a problem all things should be paid for. The all- best-selling(predicate) Brita water purifier and the increasingly popular oxygen bars are prime examples of this ideal. Although you may be suitable to make an argument for this principal when it comes to goods and services it seems ludicrous when you apply it to the environment. You motive clean air? Pay for an oxygen bar You want clean water? Buy yourself a water purifier Clean air and water should be things that all humans have a right to without having to put up for them.