Ethics and market
What compatibility possible between Market and Ethics?
I) Ethics and Market are supposed to be incompatible
A) Ethics and Market are incompatible in theory and in practice, the short-term economy becomes the reference 1) In theory, incompatible (History of the Liberalism)
Economic liberalism is a school of thought, born during the Enlightenment, who believes that economic freedom (free trade, free enterprise, free choice of consumption, work, etc...) Are needed in economy and that State intervention should be as limited as possible. Proponents of economic liberalism can be studied in two different families. For classical liberals (Locke, Turgot, Smith and Condillac), economic liberalism is the application of the economic liberalism of the founding principles: freedom, responsibility and ownership. They contest both the legitimacy and effectiveness of the action of the State, and, according to trends, require the limitation more or less, or total of its action in the field of economics. They will consider that the public administration has neither the legitimacy nor the information they need to pretend to know better than consumers what they can or should eat or pretend to know better than producers what they can or should produce.
For others, economic liberalism is an economic reasoning that is most often based on the theory of general equilibrium and is often called "neo-classical liberalism." They contest the effectiveness of state action but they are more sensitive than classical liberals to critics about the "market failures". Thus, they have a different way of thinking in the fixation of the limits for the State intervention.
In the same way, we can speak about the Pure and Perfect competition. The conditions of pure and perfect competition were explained by Frank Knight in 1921. The pure and perfect competition represents an extreme case of market structure studied by neoclassical economists. Perfect