I thought that Lawson and Powell’s idea to use beer as a judge of different country's freedom was very creative. Good beer, both domestic and imported, is something we often take for granted here in the states, and it is wild to think that some countries only have one option for beer in the twenty-first century. All jokes aside, this speaker’s lecture was very eye-opening and helped me to understand what happens when collective ownership and equality go to the negative extreme. Personally, I believe that a sprinkling of socialist practices into a capitalist economy can be very beneficial for those who are naturally disadvantaged. Take, for example, Sweden which was very successful and happened to be the fourth richest country in the world, until they implemented extensive welfare systems and skyrocketed taxes. They may have been able to hold their placement of wealth, if the nation has not been so extreme, and did not cross the line as far as they did.
Another negative effect of socialism that I learned from the lecture was how big of a negative effect government ownership can have on generally luxurious experiences. In Cuba, the government-owned establishments were much worse than privately owned ones. Why? Because when the government has complete control of firms and suppliers of amenities, there is no incentive to make improvements, especially when there is little to no competition from private firms. Seeing how poorly maintained public schools are compared to private ones here in the states helped me to put this idea into perspective. The government does not care if students are using fifteen-year-old textbooks, or need new music or sports equipment, just the same way that the Cuban government has no motive to offer several options at supermarkets or maintain hotel rooms. This just goes to show how bland and underwhelming life in a communist nation can be. When trade is limited and the government calls all the shots, individuals' civil liberties and freedoms have been stripped from them.
Although the United States' capitalist system is superb at providing incentives to work hard and make contributions to future growth, there are still flaws. The whole idea behind capitalism is to motivate individuals to take ownership of the economic system, and prevent the government from controlling every aspect of life, much like Kim Jong-un of North Korea. However, because of the ability of certain individuals to earn unlimited wealth, there is a large inequality between the lower and upper classes. Much of the lower class lives below the poverty line, while some upper-class individuals have as much as one percent of the national GDP earnings. When one individual has that much money, and begins to monopolize several industries (like Jeff Bezos), who is to say that they will not use their wealth for evil? He has already leaked into the US Central Intelligence Agency with Amazon Web Services and cloud computing. Additionally, Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post newspaper, which he could very easily use to spread false information and progress his personal wants and needs. Allow the wrong person to reach new heights of wealth, and the entire country may just be taken advantage of.