Liberals and Conservatives When I think of the conservative view, the first thing that comes to mind is Adam Smith. Smith believed that individuals should have a natural right to obtain and protect proper nature materialistic, and the right to maximize their material well-being. Capitalism believes in competition within in the markets to endorse the public interest. In a capitalist system it encourages three major factors that effect the market and people. First, that it would lead to satisfaction of nations and individuals. Second, being in a competitive state it would force others to compete by drawing down prices and output would be at the highest due to the continuous competition. The most important factor in capitalism is that it creates innovations that are useful to society. Conservatives believe that buyers and sellers will react positive to innovations that benefit the society, while those that fall behind will be knocked out of competition. In order for this to work conservatives believe there has to be minimum interference with the market, also know as laissez-faire. No interference means no big government, no powerful unions, and no conspiring in trade. Conservative model isn’t a society without government, but a model that protects unnatural interference in the marketplace. To protect unnatural intrusion within business, the state should take such actions as deregulating industries, privatization of state-owned enterprises, and lower tax burdens. There should be minimal government to maintain law, assure national defense, protect property, coin money, and enforce contracts. There is no need for government hand in markets because the markets are self regulating due to the “invisible hand”. Austrian Friedrich A. Hayek believed that the only way to have security and freedom was limit the role of the government and draw security from the opportunity that the market provides to free individuals. With no government involvement there will be a spirit of competition which will create a appropriate social institute. In this conservative social institute people are individualistic, which isn’t a negative characteristic because it creates a positive-sum game. In a positive-sum game environment people can potential get more out of a bargain than they put in. Like their foe Conservative, Liberals believe in the natural rights of private property and the business system. The Liberal perspective believes capitalism should be controlled by the government or has to interfere with capitalism for the good of the people. Capitalism is said to create the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Liberals say that if capitalism isn’t regulated it creates poverty, which doesn’t create the greatest good for the greatest number. In the eyes of Conservatives property and having the freedom in the market is at top of the list, however Liberals defend social welfare and the safeguarding of the economy. To the Liberal, governments interaction in the market isn’t trespassing our natural rights but is actually protecting the whole society. The role of the government is to ensure a descent standard of living for the good of people. Liberalism is created to avoid capitalism from destroying it self and to enforce the idea of equal opportunity. This philosophy is still based on respecting basic property rights and due process. Liberals seek additional help from the state in areas of the environment, education, training, transportation, communication, and to enhance science and the arts. In Keynes’s view, the individualism of people will create problems that can only be solved with collective action through the state. He believed that constructive government action was both practical and required to handle tribulations that the invisible hand would not set right. There is little difference of how Conservatives and Liberals think on how prices are set, supply and demand. However, the issue of monopolies needs government prevention. The state should take restricted action on the market, correcting the markets flaws or Achilles’ heel to reach sustainable social evolution for all. One of the major issues we are facing today in our society is the health care system. While other advanced capitalist countries have national health insurance programs for all eligible residents, such as Canada, China, Japan, and the United Kingdom. If you compared United States to Canada’s health care system, I would say we don’t fair well at all. In the eyes of the United States health care insurance is seen as a privilege. In the United States it is all based on if you can afford it you can have it. Every insurance varies based on the benefits, some include dental care and prescriptions, while others might not provide the prescription for your asthmatic child. It is a system for the wealthy, the more money you pay for your insurance the more you get out of it. So, how about the single parent with two children, that cant afford the “grade A” insurance. Experts say that “the strengths of the U.S. heath care system are that it provides a tremendous amount of choice for those who have good coverage.” The grey area in that state is good coverage, what is good coverage? Is good coverage a $20,000 dollar policy or the actual average per capita of 5,711? The United Sates health care system doesn’t see equality in heath services, it’s a privilege to have annually check ups and dental visits. The United States is dominated by a conservative perspective on health care. The idea of competition and raking in the highest profits put many Americans in debt and unable to get a human right to health insurance. A government is suppose to protect their people, not enable them to get a basic human necessity. Our bordering North American neighbors in Canada have a totally different out look on their health care system. They formally believe that is a human right and approach the health care system from a Liberal view. Canada provides a national health insurance program for all eligible residents of Canada. The federal government steps in and protects their citizens from debt, stress, and gives them a since of comfort. The health care system isn’t one built on profits and who can turn down the most clients, but one that gives their nation citizens the right to good health. The idea of collective action that will have a positive-sum game for all. The experts are glad to point out the negatives before they applauded the positives. I rather live in a society where all my fellow peers are covered with insurance and taken care of instead of a society where basic treatment that cost an “arm and leg” aren’t promised even with insurance.