This post is a response to "what is our current system made up of? Is there more than the other or are there close numbers?" @anniebburg/week-13-questions-political-and-market-entrepreneurs posed by
This question refers to the idea of political or market entrepreneurs. First, it is important to define the two so that there is a better understanding of what we will be discussing. First, a political entrepreneur is one that goes to the government in hopes of gaining a profit through subsidies, protectionism, or government contracts (Carpio, para. 6). Market entrepreneurs are those that build their businesses without government help, but rather through the market and needs of the consumer. Now that we have defined those terms, what does the current system look like in the United States?
The United States contains both political and market entrepreneurs, and has since the mid-1800s. Market entrepreneurs have proven to be more beneficial to the economy when compared with political entrepreneurship. The issue, however, is when the government wants to help boost companies and then the companies become reliant on the government help. Thus, there are businessmen with great ideas but lacking the means to produce their product/see their vision out. They then take this idea to the government with hopes of having the government fund it. This seems like a great idea, but in reality, it is not very beneficial in the long run. In fact, time and time again history has shown that market entrepreneurs have been much more successful when compared with political entrepreneurs, and it saves the government money. When looking at the overall numbers, we do see more market entrepreneurs, because not everyone can simply ask the government for money and receive it. The fact, though, is that political entrepreneurs really should not even be a thing, for it has not proven to be beneficial.
Source:
![[Jan 31, 2014] Corporation Nation (The U.S. is a CORPORATION not a Country) [contrell69]](/assets/noimage.svg)