Article: Resource Dilemma

In the “Gospel of wealth”, Andrew Carnegie argues that it is the duty of the wealthy entrepreneur who has amassed a great fortune during their lifetime, to give back to those less fortunate. Greed and selfishness may force some readers to see these arguments as preposterous; however, greed is a key ingredient in successful competition. It forces competitors to perform at a higher level than their peers in hopes of obtaining more money and individual wealth. A capitalist society that allows this wealth to accumulate in the hands of the few might be beneficial to the human race because it could promote competition between companies; it might ensure health care for everyone no matter their social standing, and parks and recreation could

If you examine a vehicle, you may agree that it is greater than the sum its parts. Individually, the engine, battery, tires, steering wheel, and steel body can’t haul a teen to school or an associate to work like they can when they are all working together as a cohesive unit. Just like any vehicle, the common wealth of a community is greater than the needs of the individuals that make up the community. When the individuals of a community entangle themselves in a web of wants and selfish desires, they tend to loose sight of the well being of the people who surround them, the environment in which they thrive off of, and, in the long-run, themselves. In conjunction, author Scott Russell Sanders’ article titled “Defending Our Common Wealth” highlights these points as well as emphasizes creating a new vision of wealth, encouraging community over consumption and consumerism to his audience.

Situations where self interest and public interest work against each other are known as “commons problems.” In the market model the chief source of conflict is individual’s perceived welfare vs. another’s perceived welfare. In the polis model the chief source of conflict is self interest vs. public interest, or “how to have both private benefits and collective benefits.” Stone notes “most actions in the market model do not have social consequences” but in the polis, commons problems “are everything.” It is rare in the polis that the costs and benefits of an action are entirely self-contained, affect only one or two individuals, or are limited to direct and immediate effects. Actions in the polis have unanticipated consequences, side effects, long-term effects, and effect many people. Stone states, “one major dilemma in the polis is how to get people to give weight to these broader consequences in their private calculus of choices, especially in an era when the dominant culture celebrates private consumption and personal gain.” That is a

Collective action problems arise in politics because as individuals we are conflicted between our own interest and the interest of the group. Our choice is either to be selfish or cooperate with the group. “It involves building, combining, mixing, and amalgamating people’s individual goals” (Lowi, et al. 13). There are three main theories as to why collective action problems exist. First, according to Mancur Olson individuals are tempted to free-ride which is getting a benefit without contributing to it and that no individual is incentivized to work for the collective good. (Lowi, et al 571). Free-riding becomes a bigger issues as a group gets larger. Second, the Prisoner’s Dilemma is a theory in which there are two individuals in a situation were neither has an incentive to cooperate although both would be better off if they did cooperate. Third, the tragedy of commons occurs when individuals’ use of a resource causes its depletion however it’s supposed to be shared by everyone. Collective action problems are difficult to solve because a group is formed to achieve common goals however as individuals we have different objectives and preferences. This is most evident in politics. My goal in this paper is to provide three different solutions to collective action problems in politics specifically in political parties, electoral process and interest groups.

Andrew Carnegie believes in a system based on principles and responsibility. The system is Individualism and when everyone strives towards the same goals the system is fair and prosperous. Carnegie’s essay is his attempt to show people a way to reach an accommodation between individualism and fairness. This system can only work if everyone knows and participates in his or her responsibilities. I will discuss Carnegie’s thesis, his arguments and the possible results of his goals.

A collective good is a good or service that cannot be denied to anyone who wants to consume it, such as: clean air, peace, and lower consumer prices (all can be consumed by anyone). In other words, a collective good is accessible and advantageous to anyone who wants to consume it. In terms of interest groups, “collective goods are benefits gained by all members of an interest group (both potential, who are not in the group but share similar ideologies, and actual group members)” (__). The goods cannot be denied from one person without withholding it from everyone else (the entire public). A collective good the National Rifle Association advocates for is 2nd Amendment gun rights, or the right to bear arms, and this is a collective good because

Pressure group strategy and influence are “determined largely by factors such as size…financial resources, prestige position of the organization, quality of leadership and staff, and relations with the political parties…” (Turner, 1958, p. 64). It is these factors that make pressure groups, to some extent, incompatible with representative democracy as some groups are able to make their views heard ‘louder’ due to factors which can be difficult for them to change, such as the prestigious position of an interest group.

Every day people wake up, get ready for the day, and go to work or school. By the end of the day, these individuals may end up failing a test, get demoted, receive a raise in their salaries, or get selected as employee of the month. The answer to whether or not these achievements and failures are a product of these people’s merit and effort are often questioned. Looking at the American society, there are many issues that occur which keep members of society from being able to say that these achievements and failures were due to their merit and effort. The issues that are able to support this idea that American society is unfair and that an individual’s fate is not largely a product of his or her merit and effort are income trends, the gender

In this article The author first tells about how people usually act in self-interest and that does not always mean that they are only trying to become wealthy, but that they are seeking to achieve their own ends but not seek to to find the ends of other men around them. He does not do that or thing that you should do that he thinks that you would be better off staying away from the normal. After he talks about how in our political and economic theories are all about self-interest. He that states that if he applied his theory to our politics that to be in congress you need to be reelected every two years which means that they need people to follow them so they tell the people what they want to hear

William F. Baxter sets forth four goals that he says “frame the solutions to problems of human organizations.” “1. The spheres of freedom, 2. Waste is a bad thing, 3. Every human being should be regarded as end rather than as a means to be used for the betterment of another, and 4. Both the incentive and the opportunity to improve his share of satisfactions should be preserved to every individual” (pgs. 355-356). He states that the starting point of any analysis is with people individually their own separate “unit”. He says that most decisions about what is going to be done should be thought of to the benefit of human beings, and how the action taken is going to affect us.

Even today, divisions in groups have been as a result of continued differences among the uniting groups. Humans have a tendency to incline towards the protection of their interest’s aid favors of their perceived groups. Such favourism makes them advocate fully for their interests posing a challenging opposing side to the interests of their unperceived groups. Many nations today are faced with such opposing groups having differing interests and ideals. People advocating for similar ideals tend to create strong ties of

al., P.177). We must lessen our pursuit for self-gratification with our obligation to community. Bellah et, al writes "The self-interest demanded by the individualistic pursuit of success needs to be balanced by voluntary concern for others" (Bellah et. al., P.199).

There are a number of reasons how an issue of an individual’s capacity has an effect on them making an informed choice including: physical health, mental health, religion, social class, the law, financial support, family support. Even though the list is endless, it is dependent on the individual and their personal situation which will determine the choice they make. The issues which may occur for someone making a decision may influence how an individual makes an informed choice, a few examples are:

A social dilemma is when individuals choose actions that will affect others as well as themselves. The individual will aim to benefit themselves short term which generally results in a lower joint outcome. If the individuals acted collectively they would achieve a better optimal outcome than the one they would achieve on their own. These social dilemmas have been characterised in game theory by the prisoners dilemma. They will achieve the Nash equilibrium which is lower than the socially desirable outcome. This is the problem of collective action. This is not to say that forms of collective action cannot be seen in everyday world. Mobs, gangs, cartels, neighbourhood associations, charities and voting are all forms of collective action. (ostrom)

In the United States, minimum wage has remained at a low number for several years. Minimum wage is defined as the lowest possible income that an employer can legally pay an employee. This ensures that all people are fairly paid and not defrauded by companies or businesses. Minimum wage is considered a price floor and the minimum wage laws determine the lowest price possible that any employer must pay for labor. In an economic model, the quantity of supplied is greater than the quantity demanded and the minimum wage is above equilibrium price and quantity. Minimum wage prevents labor supplied and labor demanded from moving