The Weak Heart of Economics

Nancy Folbre, an economics professor at the University of Massachusetts, wrote the article `` The Weak Heart of Economics ``on the New York Times. She evaluated the compatibility of social responsibility and freedom in economic terms.

She wrote that individual freedom doesn’t necessarily have to come in conflict with social responsibility all the time. She argued for a loophole in Adam Smith’s statement that an individual is first and foremost recommended for his/her own care. Folbre contended that the statement does not apply to children. She said that humans experience periods of dependency that largely determine their access to resources. Moreover individual freedom doesn’t necessarily collide with social responsibility because at times humans willingly sacrifice for ones they love. However social balance doesn’t just depend on individual preference but also on the much controversial issue, social responsibility. Laws and accepted norms have emerged that make parents care for their vulnerable children and children care for their old parents. She further says that President Obama has invoked social responsibility in his State of the Union, for he urged American companies to not just operate to make profit but also to create jobs. This is where the debate breaks in as individuals and firms try to avoid such social responsibilities and maximize their own benefits, often at the cost of others.

My interest in this article sprouts from my major, economics. The article addresses one of the key areas of conflict between different schools of thought. The socialist argues for social welfare whereas the capitalist argues for personal freedom. I especially liked the article cause it weighs and balances different theories and possibilities of compatibility between social responsibility and personal freedom.

Follow the link http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/the-weak-heart-of-economics/ to read the article.