1.

If the government gives everybody the same freedom to work and reap
the rewards, some will do better than others. The result will be (1)
equality of opportunity but not (2) equality of outcome.
2. Immigrants who arrived in the late-1800s/early-1900s found that
America was truly a land of opportunity. Immigrants thrived due to
the following factors
Very few government programs
Few rules and regulations
No restricting Licenses and red tape
Many rewards for hard work enterprise
3. Professor Friedman referred to Hong Kong as the freest market in the
world. Summarize how he described the free market.
Free Market enables people to go into any industry they want, to
trade with whomever they want, to buy in the cheapest markets
around the world and to sell in the fairest markets around the world.
But most important of all, if they fail, they bear the cost. If they
succeed they benefit. That atmosphere of incentive has induced
them to work, to adjust, to save and to produce a miracle.
4. Human and Political freedom has never existed (and cannot exist)
without a large measure of (1) economic freedom. Those of us who
have been so fortunate as to have been born in a free society tend to
(2) take freedom for granted, to regard it as the (3) natural state
of mankind. It is not. It is a rare and precious thing.

5. Explain how the lead pencil and the smart phone are examples of
Invisible hands.
There is not a single person in the world who could make the lead
pencil. Many parts and tools are needed in order to create the pencil
and the smartphone. Many of which come from different places.
Thousands of people from across the world cooperated in order to
produce the phone. Including different countries, different cultures
and people who had never even met. We only see the finished
product. We dont see the hands that go into making the product.
6. Explain the concept of creative destruction as described in the Free
or Equal video.
When only the flexible and adaptable survive, it means that other
businesses fail. Economists call this constant renewal of economy
creative destruction. If we want to increase our wealth and
opportunities, we have to stop doing old things in old ways and star
doing innovative things in better ways. In other words, we have to
be creative. Most economists think that creative destruction is
necessary for economic development.

7. The idea that the economic race should be so arranged that everybody
ends at the finish line at the same time, rather than that everyone
starts at the beginning line at the same time. This concept raises a
very serious problem for (1) freedom. It is clearly in conflict with it,

since it requires that the freedom of some (2) be restricted in order

to provide the (3) greater benefits to others.
8. Our economic system gave us Henry Ford, Thomas Alva Edison, Bill
Gates and other very successful entrepreneurs. These entrepreneurs
all went in with their eyes open, knew what they were doing and win or
lose, we (society) benefited from their (1) willingness to take a
chance. If we did not allow these successful entrepreneurs to become
incredibly rich, we would be more equal. But, would we be better off? If
entrepreneurs did not think that a possible reward for all the (2)
sacrifices they make, all their (3) hard work, all the (4) risk they
take is a lot of wealth, then they might do something else instead. In
that case, we would not have the goods, services and technologies
(they created) that make our lives better.
9. As Milton Friedman said, The society that puts equality before
freedom will (1) end up with neither. The society that puts freedom
before equality will end up with a (2) great measure of both.
10.

Professor Friedman compares the concept of equality of

opportunity to a race where everyone begins at the starting line at the

same time. In contrast, equality of outcome guarantees that everyone
finishes at the same time. Today, equality of outcome is referred to as
fair shares for all. If we applied the fair shares for all concept in this
class, all students would receive an average grade of C. This would

be accomplished by taking points away from students earning As and

Bs to give to students earning Ds and Es. Distributing points equally
would result in fair grades for all. Would you approve of this method
in calculating your final grade? Why or why not? Would this differ from
fair shares for all economically? Why or why not?
While the idea of equal outcome and fair shares might be appealing at
first, when given more thought, I have come to realize it would be the
furthest thing from fair. No two people are exactly alike. We are different in
appearance, speech, personality and thought process. I believe this
especially pertains to work ethic. Some are faster than others, some are
more knowledgeable than others, some genuinely care about the work they
are doing and some could care less. This fair shares method would only
benefit those who were not putting forth an effort for a good grade. It would
hurt those who actually tried to do a good job.

I believe there is little difference, if any between fair shares in grades

and money or economics. Of course there are many factors as to why one
may have more money and success than another. Background, upbringing,
family, knowledge, circumstance, these all play a vital role in ones success.
However, so do hard work, dedication and commitment. This is no different
in grades. Although, it is my belief that without hard work and dedication, the
other attributes dont produce long lasting results.

Simply and plainly put, hard work is hard work. And the person putting
forth the work should be the sole person to reap the rewards. This is not to
say some cant benefit from anothers hard work, they do coincide. My main
point is, no one should have a claim to another persons success, be it in
school or in economics. When people know they will automatically be given
their fair share, there really is no point in working hard if the result will be
the same. I think that would definitely show and the strive to be great or to
do great would eventually die. We strive for greatness because of the reward
at the end. If you take that reward and give it someone else, the purpose has
been defeated.

Reflective Writing
-

Computer and information literacy

This assignment was a bit of a challenge for me. Especially in
creating an Eportfolio site. Im not very technologically minded
and I faced many difficulties in trying to make this assignment a
reality. But I think it was a really great experience for me. I most
definitely learned a lot more about computers and building a
website.

Think critically and creatively

There was a lot of creative freedom given for this assignment.

There was a suggested format and an outline, but other than that
we were free to choose what we thought looked and worked
best. This too was a bit of a struggle for me. Im used to having a
set of instructions and following them pretty precisely. But it was
refreshing stepping out of my comfort zone and trying something
new. I think it helped me to better understand how I thought
about things myself.