Economists account for human behavior by reasoning that people have the ultimate capability to make rational decisions when presented with their preferences and constraints by weighing the benefits and costs of each option available. In other words, humans get motivated to act within each discipline by their inner-self. People analyze what they see and subsequently make personal decisions (Hunt & Colander, 2016). Contrary, political scientists opine that human behavior is dictated by politics and power, whereby people are influenced by the surrounding behavior (Hunt & Colander, 2016). Political scientists state that individuals are motivated to behave in a specific pattern by those they admire and others’ actions. The surrounding environment defines and shapes people’s behavior heavily.
Additionally, the liberal economics argument that limited government and latitude for private sector actors is optimal and makes much sense. Like the U.S., a limited government is bound to unique and specific principles regarding its influence on business and private developers. Advantageously, a limited government imposes low taxes on a business since it embraces the laissez-faire policy (Hunt & Colander, 2016). As such, individuals and private companies develop exponentially due to high revenue income, creating employment for other civilians. Therefore, it is worth noting that limited government and more latitude for private sector actors are beneficial.
Besides, political economists ideologically differ regarding the costs and subsequent international trade benefits. On the one hand, political economists, such as Alexander Hamilton, understood that global trade could increase dependency on other countries to supply cheap goods, hence not supporting domestic production companies (Hunt & Colander, 2016). Therefore, Hamilton increased tariffs on products like textiles, allowing the U.S.-based companies to flourish. He was aiming at making Americans buy goods that are produced locally, thus promoting industrialization. Connectedly, international trade was hectic and costly to internal manufacturing companies. On the other hand, political economists, like Colander and Krugman, support global business, reiterating that it raises people’s living standards, enabling them to enjoy various products (Hunt & Colander, 2016). Understandably, Colander and Krugman use the economists’ perspective that consumers will buy the specific product they want despite the multiple competitive products in the market. Arguably, I subscribe to Colander and Krugman’s view that consumers can make their personal decisions regarding the product to purchase despite having a variety in the market, hence championing international trade. For instance, I consider using phones from the Apple brand only.
Reference
Hunt, E. & Colander, D. (2016). Social science: An introduction to the study of society (15th ed.). Routledge.