Main content
Macroeconomics
Course: Macroeconomics > Unit 1
Lesson 1: Introduction to macroeconomicsCommand and market economies
Learn about about two types of economies: command and market. In a command economy, the government controls everything, like factories and farms. In a market economy, businesses and people decide what to make and buy. Most countries have a mix of both, called a mixed economy.
Want to join the conversation?
- This is the first video in the Khan Academy series that annoyed me somehow so far. It is because it pretends to be fairly objective and not-biased but somehow manages to transport some false and unfair images of what both of those markets are. And even if I agree that extreme version of command economy is an utopian one, the narrator of this lesson failed to mention what are the dangers of, his words, "perfect market economy".
I find it quite problemaric to present "inequality" as a rather small problem and additionally presenting a situation: "I'd rather have a blue car, I will simply work harder". It is such a biased BS I can't even. I hope I won't come across any other moments like this because I grew to like KA videos and, like I had mentioned, this one was the first one to present such an unfair perspective on the topic.
I think I'm right about this since the comments here contsin mostly a question - why do command economies still exist if they are so bad and this question is raised only because the teacher failed to draw a real situation, a fair balance of pros and cons on both sides.(26 votes)- I can answer that, command economies still exist because their governments are historical dictatorships, and I know it because I came from one of those countries, nobody there wants a communist economy because as it was mentioned in this video, the perfect command economy, that one without inequality, and super fair with the people, that kind of economy is an utopian one, only possible in books, there will be always inequality(3 votes)
- If things such as inequality, poverty, etc occur in a market economy, why don't all of us shift towards a command economy?(7 votes)
- This was the line of thought for many but such things also occur in command economies. Despite being advertised as equal and fair, the reality ends up being anything but. They tend to get more inequality (a class structure on how pro-government you are) and worse poverty (often mocked for not being able to feed people while market economies are getting obese). Even the big names in command economies got better results by copying market economies. Like China's huge recent success in giving people some land ownership and Russia's Stakhanovite movement rewarding the best workers.(3 votes)
- okay so we're know that command economy aren't really good, so why are they still exist?(6 votes)
- It depends on what you mean by "good", because that depends on the objective of a society.
Also, "good" is a normative statement. We try as best we can to stick to positive analysis rather than normative analysis in economics. So, a different question that might be asked is, "given the historical experience of many command economies, why do some societies choose command economies rather than market economies?"
The answer most likely goes back to our very first ideas we learn in economics: tradeoffs. Some decision maker has decided that the benefits to them outweigh the costs of the alternative.(14 votes)
- The video is incoherent: nowhere in the definition of a command economy is stipulated that everyone should be paid the same. Thus, bonuses can exist for innovation in a command economy, so the argument that a market economy provides incentives for innovation whie command economies do not does not follow.(9 votes)
- Is there any kind of profit in a command economy as all of the products and money is equally distributed amongst the people? I think that there would be no growth of the country as a whole.(10 votes)
- That's why there is no incentive for government workers and people in general. If you're not going to be making more money, or a profit, then 'what's the point of it?'. Profit creates an incentive, lack of profit creates a lack of incentive.(2 votes)
- So, it's my understanding that communism is an anarchist ideology, as in, communists want no government. I could be mistaken, but that's what I remember from "The Communist Manifesto," and "The Conquest For Bread," and what most communists I know and listen to advocate for. So, how could communism be a command economy if it's government run? Or, is he just not explaining command economies very well?(6 votes)
- Interesting question. The only examples we've had thus far of a communist governments or nations working towards it all involve the utilization of resources being decided by the collective. Whereas primitivism involves extreme self-sufficiency, communism involves extreme group-reliance. This necessitates that private ownership of resources be outlawed but that also certain uses of resources be examined so as to determine whether such a use is beneficial towards the group. But then at this point, if someone were to deviate from the communist practice, then how could such a society be enforced? The point is, government would still exist in a communist society even if the use of resources were to be extremely democratized. I hope I didn't make that sound political, but from what I understand about your question, an anarchist society where the ownership is collectivized is something like an oxymoron. How do enforce a system without a government? Even when sovereignty lies only with the people, an individual who would deviate would have to be held accountable.(5 votes)
- Do you think that the inequality in a market economy is easier to accept when the inequality comes from differences in productivity? Let's think of Steve Jobs. He was very rich but he made great products. On the other end of the spectrum would be, hypothetically, a banker who made bad mistakes but then lobbies the government to bail him out. That hypothetical banker ends up very rich and those who have to pay for it end up poorer. The inequality that results wasn't from the market, it was rent seeking. Isn't that the problem more than inequality itself?(5 votes)
- This is a fairly personal spectrum, yes the government would bail out the banker but not necessarily make him richer. His mistakes aren't an inequality to the market economy as a whole, yes his products or business might have had quite a small ripple. The government bailing him out is a matter of ethos not as in a selfish thought. This bailing out, I assume in your model of country comes from taxpayer money which is of course dedicated to the economy at best but it has been given to bankrupt people. It brings him back up for a certain price the consecutive time.
Hope this helped!(4 votes)
- I have two questions
1. What is the difference between a market economy and capitaism?
2. What is the difference between a command economy and socialism/communism?(5 votes) - So What is China"s Economy.It seems both not Command Economy and not Market Economy(3 votes)
- Contemporary China has a capitalist mode of production. Under Mao it was considered Marxist-Leninist but as Melanie pointed out it is more market oriented following the reforms, however i disagree with their last statement. As far as I'm concerned an economy is either dominated by Market logic or economic planning.(5 votes)
- I'm sadly disappointed about how the contents of this video were deliberately misconducted all over the video, while pretending to show unbiased and fair education content. There is basically no explanation at all on the criteria that Command Economies supposedly use to manage and distribute their resources, but that being not enough, the narrator exposes opinions as facts, like "If you are manager here and you get a better way of doing this you get no reward nor promotion", or just by displaying and reducing the seriousness of the market economies problems and its implications as mere and superficial inequalities. I'm not saying all is a lie, but when you're educating you have to be severe and disciplined on what you say.
I really appreciate and support KA but this content isn't correct at all. This video should be remade.(5 votes)
Video transcript
- [Instructor] In this
video we're gonna talk about different ways of structuring an economy. In particular, who owns what and how does an economy
decide what to produce and who gets the output
of that production. So on one side, you have what's
known as a command economy and good examples of command economies are the communist states, especially during the 20th century, The USSR, the Soviet Union
being the best example of that. In a command economy,
the government controls what's often known as
the factors of production and sometimes, in an extreme case, there might not even be private ownership. So lets say that this right
over here is the government. I'll do this with some type of a building with pillars in it. So this is the government. And in a command economy, the government will often own
the factories and the farms, so the factors of production. So let me draw a little factory here. So with a little smoke stack... And so the government
will tell this factory, "This year, you have to
produce exactly 10,000 cars," "No more and no less." and so that factory say, "Okay, you're our boss,
you're the government." "We will produce exactly 10,000 cars." Similarly, the government might tell some, let's say that this right
over here is a farm, and this is my best drawing
of a field really fast, and so it needs to say
"Hey, you need to produce", I don't know, "10,000,000 apples," I don't even know if that's a reasonable
amount of apples to produce but you need to produce 10,000,000 apples. And so the farmers who essentially
work for the government, 'cause the government would own that farm, they would produce those apples. And also in a command
economy, there's like well who gets these cars
and who gets these apples? Well, in an extreme command economy, they will be directly
allocated by the government. The government will say, "Alright, you get a car, you
get a car, you get a car." and it might not be based, and in fact it will not likely be based on any type who's willing
to pay for the car or who could pay the most for the car. Similarly, for the apples. So they are all gonna be allocated. So there will have to be
a lot of planning done on the part of the government to say, "Okay, how much should
we produce of one thing" "versus another thing
and how do we decide" "who gets the different things?". Now the other side of the spectrum, you have what's known as a market economy. And most economies in the world, especially the United
States, are much closer to being a market economy
than being a command economy. Rather than having the government owning the factors of production,
deciding who produces what and how much and who gets those things, in a market economy, it's
all based on the factory right over here, independent
of the government for the most part unless
you're in certain fields that might have strong
influence from the government, let's say you're a military contractor. But if you're not in one of those fields, if you're fairly independent
of the government, what they would say is, "Well, what does the market need?" they might say, "Hey look,
the market needs 5,000 cars" "That look like this
but then it also needs" "another 2,000 trucks
that look like that." and how are they basing it? Well, they might have looked in the past or how well is this car selling, how well is the truck selling. They might look at competitors, in fact in a market economy, you'll often have more competition. The command economies, you might have one
really ginormous factory that's owned by the government or a few while here you might
have competing factories where they're always "Hey make a pretty good
car, we're gonna make one" "that's just as good
and it comes in yellow." So once again, you have
this notion of competition for people to produce
things out in the market and they're also making
their best judgment of what does the market actually need. Similarly, you could have
your farmers here and you say, "Hey, you know what?" "I've been growing a lot of apples" "but that doesn't seem
to be in demand anymore" "so I'm going to grow more,
I don't know, peaches" "'cause it looks like the sale of peaches" "are in fashion this year." and similarly, who gets these is not dictated by the government, it's determined by the market. And so let's say this is
me, let's say this is you, let's say this is someone else. If I might not be interested
in getting a truck but I really need to get
a new car for my family so I can drive them around
and take vacations and things, and so let's say you wanna get a car too but the market will dictate who gets it. So for example, the factory
might set a price for this car, they might say it is
10,000 dollars per car and maybe I'm willing to
pay it, maybe I'm not. Maybe I'm just like "Well I
really like that blue car" "but I'm not willing
to pay 10,000 dollars" "and this yellow car is
available for 9,000 dollars" "so I'm going to get that." and the prices themselves
won't necessarily be fixed. If they're not selling
enough of these cars at 10,000 dollars, they
might lower the price to compete with the yellow
car at 9,000 dollars. Similarly, if there's a ton of people who are willing to pay
the price of this truck, they might raise the price on the truck or produce more of it. In this severe competition, if one firm doesn't do this
well on a regular basis, they might go out of business. So there's a strong motivation to be able to meet the needs of the market and then the prices adjust accordingly. And so you might say, "well what are the
positives and negatives" "that people generally associate" "with command economies
or market economies?". Well, the motivation that's often given for a command economy is
some notion of fairness or some notion of equality that when you have a market economy, as a byproduct of this mechanism where different people are competing, some people are innovating more or less, some people might be
working harder or less, some people might just
get luckier or unluckier, you naturally will have
some level of inequality. And some of the original
ideas behind command economies like communism where hey we
don't like this inequality, we wanna see more fairness. And so we wanna see everyone
get exactly the same car. We wanna see everyone get exactly
the same number of apples. We don't wanna see all
of these competing firms, we want one really big, efficient factory to just churn out these cars. Now it turns out in reality, that's a little bit utopian. Even at the peak of some of
these communist economies, there were people who had
better access to certain things. People who might have carried
favor with the leadership, had more power, who had better
apartments, better cars, had more access to resources
and people who didn't. In a market economy, yes, there will be some inequality, but the best thing going for it, and the reason why most
economies in the world, even ones that are nominally communist like the Chinese economy, have transitioned to a market economy because a market economy
is also associated with things like innovation and strong incentives for people to innovate or work or do things. Think about the situation
in a command economy. Let's say that you're a
manager at this factory here. The government told you to
produce exactly 10,000 cars and exactly the type of model, maybe you have an idea for how to make this car more efficient, but no one is really
gonna reward you for that. If you're not gonna be
able to get paid more so that you can buy more things, you might not be as
interested in doing it. While in this situation, you have extreme competition where as soon as this
factory or this company is outselling this one, everyone here is gonna think
"Wow, we need to innovate." "We need to really work harder" "so that we can take more market share" "from the other company." Similarly, at the individual level, different people might say "Hey, I can only afford
the yellow car now" "but gee, I really wish
I had the blue car" "so maybe I'm gonna work
a little bit harder" "or I'm gonna try to innovate" "or I'm gonna try to start a business." most of the world has
transitioned to something much closer to a market
economy because overall, even though you have this inequality, it has made more
productivity, more innovation, more goods and services
available to more people. Now the reality is most
economies, as I mentioned, they're close to a market economy, but aren't a perfect market economy. You still have the
government very involved in certain industries. In many economies, the government might be
in control of healthcare. The government in almost every country has significant influence
in things like the military. The government, in say the United States which is considered a fairly capitalist, a fairly strong market economy, the government still does
offer social safety nets when the inequality gets too extreme. If someone isn't able to feed themselves, they might get food stamps. If someone isn't able to get
healthcare because of poverty, they might get Medicaid. And so there's actually a spectrum between a command economy
and a market economy. With most economies
actually falling in this inbetween state which
is sometimes referred to as a mixed economy. For example, as I already mentioned, the United States which is considered a very capitalist country
with a market economy, it still does have some public ownership. The government still does
control certain aspects of the economy, it still represents a fairly large chunk of the economy. And so a pure command economy government would control everything, pure market economy, you
would have very little that's controlled by the government, but the reality in most of the world, things fall in this
mixed economy spectrum.