Editing Mixed economy (section)

== Typology ==
=== Mix of free markets and state intervention ===
This meaning of a mixed economy refers to a combination of market forces with state intervention in the form of regulations, macroeconomic policies and social welfare interventions aimed at improving market outcomes. As such, this type of mixed economy falls under the framework of a capitalistic market economy, with macroeconomic interventions aimed at promoting the stability of capitalism.<ref name="Pollin 2007"/> Other examples of common government activity in this form of mixed economy include [[environmental protection]], maintenance of [[employment standards]], a standardized [[welfare spending|welfare]] system, and [[economic competition]] with [[antitrust laws]]. Most contemporary market-oriented economies fall under this category, including the [[economy of the United States]].<ref>[http://usa.usembassy.de/economy-conditions.htm "U.S. Economy - Basic Conditions & Resources"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171020162230/https://usa.usembassy.de/economy-conditions.htm |date=20 October 2017 }}. U.S. Diplomatic Mission to Germany. "The United States is said to have a mixed economy because privately owned businesses and government both play important roles." Retrieved 24 October 2011.</ref><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20120114051146/http://infopedia.usembassy.or.kr/ENG/_f_030401.html (4)Outline of the U.S. Economy – (2)How the U.S. Economy Works]. U.S. Embassy Information Resource Center. "As a result, the American economy is perhaps better described as a "mixed" economy, with the government playing an important role along with private enterprise. Although Americans often disagree about exactly where to draw the line between their beliefs in both free enterprise and government management, the mixed economy they have developed has been remarkably successful." Retrieved 24 October 2011.</ref> The term is also used to describe the economies of countries that feature extensive [[welfare state]]s, such as the [[Nordic model]] practiced by the [[Nordic countries]], which combine free markets with an extensive welfare state.<ref>Lahti, Arto. ''Globalization & the Nordic Success Model: Part II.'' 2010. Arto Lahti & Ventus Publishing ApS. p 60. {{ISBN|978-87-7681-550-9}}.</ref><ref>Eds. Johan Fritzell, Bjorn Hvinden, Mikko Kautto, Jon Kvist, Hannu Uusitalo. ''The Nordic Welfare States in the European Context.'' 2001. Routledge. p 3. {{ISBN|0-415-24161-8}}.</ref>

The [[American School (economics)|American School]] is the economic philosophy that dominated United States national policies from the time of the [[American Civil War]] until the mid-20th century.<ref>[http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1061.html "The Progressive Movement"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110523093509/http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1061.html |date=23 May 2011 }}. United States History. Retrieved 12 February 2011.</ref> It consisted of three core policy initiatives: protecting industry through high tariffs (1861–1932; changing to subsidies and reciprocity from 1932–the 1970s), government investment in infrastructure through [[internal improvements]], and a [[History of central banking in the United States|national bank]] to promote the growth of productive enterprises. During this period, the United States grew into the largest economy in the world, surpassing the United Kingdom by 1880.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Pugh |first=Martin |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dEu8QgAACAAJ |title=The Making of Modern British Politics, 1867-1939 |date=1982 |publisher=Basil Blackwell |isbn=978-0-631-12985-1 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last1=O'Brien |first1=Robert |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6KuWjgEACAAJ |title=Global Political Economy: Evolution and Dynamics |last2=Williams |first2=Marc |date=2016-04-13 |publisher=Macmillan Education UK |isbn=978-1-137-52312-9 |language=en}}</ref><ref>See the following sources:
*Gill: "By 1880 the United States of America had overtaken and surpassed the UK as industrial leader of the world.: (from ''Trade Wars Against America: A History of United States Trade and Monetary Policy'' Chapter 6 titled "America becomes Number 1" pg. 39–49 – published 1990 by Praeger Publishers in the USA – {{ISBN|0-275-93316-4}})
*Lind: "Lincoln and his successors in the Republican party of 1865–1932, by presiding over the industrialization of the United States, foreclosed the option that the United States would remain a rural society with an agrarian economy, as so many Jeffersonians had hoped. ... Hamiltonian side ... the Federalists; the National Republicans; the Whigs, the Republicans; the Progressives ... ." (from ''[https://archive.org/details/hamiltonsrepubli00mich Hamilton's Republic]'' Introduction pg. xiv-xv – published 1997 by Free Press, Simon & Schuster division in the USA – {{ISBN|0-684-83160-0}})
*Lind: "During the nineteenth century the dominant school of American political economy was the 'American School' of developmental economic nationalism. ... The patron saint of the American School was Alexander Hamilton, whose Report on Manufactures (1791) had called for federal government activism in sponsoring infrastructure development and industrialization behind tariff walls that would keep out British manufactured goods. ... The American School, elaborated in the nineteenth century by economists like Henry Carey (who advised President Lincoln), inspired the 'American System' of Henry Clay and the protectionist import-substitution policies of Lincoln and his successors in the Republican party well into the twentieth century." (from '' Hamilton's Republic'' Part III "The American School of National Economy" pg. 229–230 published 1997 by Free Press, Simon & Schuster division in the USA – {{ISBN|0-684-83160-0}})
*Richardson: "By 1865, the Republicans had developed a series of high tariffs and taxes that reflected the economic theories of Carey and Wayland and were designed to strengthen and benefit all parts of the American economy, raising the standard of living for everyone. As a Republican concluded ... 'Congress must shape its legislation as to incidentally aid all branches of industry, render the people prosperous, and enable them to pay taxes ... for ordinary expenses of Government.' (from "The Greatest Nation of the Earth" Chapter 4 titled "Directing the Legislation of the Country to the Improvement of the Country: Tariff and Tax Legislation" pg. 136-137 published 1997 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College in the USA – {{ISBN|0-674-36213-6}})
*Boritt: "Lincoln thus had the pleasure of signing into law much of the program he had worked for through the better part of his political life. And this, as Leonard P. Curry, the historian of the legislation has aptly written, amounted to a 'blueprint for modern America'. ... The man Lincoln selected for the sensitive position of Secretary of the Treasury, Salmon P. Chase, was an ex-Democrat, but of the moderate variety on economics, one whom Joseph Dorfman could even describe as 'a good Hamiltonian, and a western progressive of the Lincoln stamp in everything from a tariff to a national bank.'" (from ''Lincoln and the Economics of the American Dream'' Chapter 14 titled "The Whig in the White House" pg. 196–197 published 1994 by University of Illinois Press in the USA) – {{ISBN|0-252-06445-3}}</ref> The [[social market economy]] is the economic policy of modern Germany that steers a middle path between the goals of social democracy and capitalism within the framework of a private market economy and aims at maintaining a balance between a high rate of [[economic growth]], low inflation, low levels of unemployment, good working conditions, and public welfare and public services by using state intervention. Under its influence, [[Germany]] emerged from desolation and defeat to become an industrial giant within the [[European Union]].<ref name="Gardner 1991" />

=== Mix of private and public enterprise ===
This type of mixed economy specifically refers to a mixture of private and [[Public-ownership|public ownership]] of industry and the [[means of production]]. As such, it is sometimes described as a "middle path" or transitional state between capitalism and socialism but can also refer to a mixture of [[state capitalism]] with private capitalism. Examples include the economies of [[Socialist market economy|China]], [[Economy of Norway|Norway]], [[Economy of Singapore|Singapore]], and [[Economy of Vietnam|Vietnam]]—all of which feature large state-owned enterprise sectors operating alongside large private sectors. The French economy featured a large state sector from 1945 until 1986, mixing a substantial amount of state-owned enterprises and nationalized firms with private enterprises.<ref>{{cite book |last= Rosser|first= Mariana V. and J Barkley Jr.|title= Comparative Economics in a Transforming World Economy|year= 2004|publisher= MIT Press |isbn= 978-0262182348|page = 187|quote=After World War II a wave of nationalizations occurred, affecting the Bank of France, the four largest commercial banks, the four leading groups of insurance companies, all-electric power and gas producers, the coal mining industry, Air France, and the Renault automobile company (the last specifically because of wartime collaboration with the Nazis by its owner). Until 1981 no other firms were nationalized, although occasionally new public enterprises were created from scratch or the government bought part of ownership, as it did with Dassault Aircraft in 1978. Until 1986 none of these industries were denationalized.}}</ref>

Following the Chinese economic reforms initiated in 1978, the Chinese economy has reformed its state-owned enterprises and allowed greater scope for private enterprises to operate alongside the state and collective sectors. In the 1990s, the central government concentrated its ownership in strategic sectors of the economy, but local and provincial level state-owned enterprises continue to operate in almost every industry including information technology, automobiles, machinery, and hospitality. The latest round of state-owned enterprise reform initiated in 2013 stressed increased dividend payouts of state enterprises to the central government and mixed-ownership reform which includes partial private investment into state-owned firms. As a result, many nominally private-sector firms are partially state-owned by various levels of government and state institutional investors, and many state-owned enterprises are partially privately owned resulting in a mixed ownership economy.<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2015/02/09/the-long-march-to-the-mixed-economy-in-china/ |title=The long march to the mixed economy in China |last= Fan|first= He|date=9 January 2015 |journal= East Asia Forum Quarterly |volume=6 |issue=4 |pages=3–5 |access-date=9 February 2018}}</ref>

=== Mix of markets and economic planning ===
This type of mixed economy refers to a combination of economic planning with market forces for the guiding of production in an economy and may coincide with a mixture of private and public enterprise. It can include capitalist economies with indicative macroeconomic planning policies and socialist planned economies that introduced market forces into their economies such as in Hungary's [[Goulash Communism]], which inaugurated the [[New Economic Mechanism]] reforms in 1968 that introduced market processes into its planned economy. Under this system, firms were still publicly owned but not subject to physical production targets and output quotas specified by a national plan. Firms were attached to state ministries that had the power to merge, dissolve and reorganize them and which established the firm's operating sector. Enterprises had to acquire their inputs and sell their outputs in markets, eventually eroding away at the Soviet-style planned economy. [[Dirigisme]] was an economic policy initiated under [[Charles de Gaulle]] in France, designating an economy where the government exerts strong directive influence through [[indicative planning]]. In the period of dirigisme, the French state used indicative economic planning to supplement market forces for guiding its market economy. It involved state control of industries such as transportation, energy and telecommunication infrastructures as well as various incentives for private corporations to merge or engage in certain projects. Under its influence, France experienced what is called [[Thirty Glorious Years]] of profound economic growth.<ref name="Gardner 1991">Gardner, Martin (1991). ''Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener''. St. Martin's Press.{{page needed|date=October 2022}}</ref>

[[Green New Deal]] (GND) proposals call for social and economic reforms to address [[climate change]] and [[economic inequality]] using economic planning with market forces for the guiding of production. The reforms involve phasing out fossil fuels through the implementation of a [[carbon price]] and emission regulations, while increasing state spending on [[renewable energy]]. Additionally, it calls for greater welfare spending, public housing, and job security. GND proposals seek to maintain capitalism but involve economic planning to reduce carbon emissions and inequality through increased taxation, social spending, and state ownership of essential utilities such as the [[electrical grid]].<ref>[https://www.investopedia.com/the-green-new-deal-explained-4588463 "The Green New Deal Explained"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220427131003/https://www.investopedia.com/the-green-new-deal-explained-4588463 |date=27 April 2022 }}. Investopedia. Retrieved 2 March 2022.</ref>

Within political discourse, mixed economies are supported by people of various political leanings, particularly the [[Centre-left politics|centre-left]] and [[Centre-right politics|centre-right]]. Debate reigns over the appropriate levels of private and public ownership, capitalism and socialism, and government planning within an economy. The centre-left usually supports markets but argues for a higher degree of regulation, public ownership, and planning within an economy. The centre-right generally accepts some level of public ownership and government intervention but argues for lower government regulation and greater privatisation. In 2010, [[Australians|Australian]] economist [[John Quiggin]] wrote: "The experience of the twentieth century suggests that a mixed economy will outperform both [[central planning]] and [[laissez-faire]]. The real question for policy debates is one of determining the appropriate mix and the way in which the public and private sectors should interact."<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=pTgiRDj-uIYC&dq=%22real+question+for+policy+debates+is+one+of+determining+the+appropriate+mix%22&pg=PA78 ''Zombie Economics: How Dead Ideas Still Walk among Us''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221206162755/https://books.google.com/books?id=pTgiRDj-uIYC&pg=PA78&lpg=PA78&dq=%22real+question+for+policy+debates+is+one+of+determining+the+appropriate+mix%22&source=bl&ots=c-OtfOKT0d&sig=ACfU3U0PSeHlrct_bKaaLo0cIglrT9Oj2Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjUhvqYkLXhAhUIZKwKHVWcA5EQ6AEwAHoECAEQAQ#v=onepage&q=%22real%20question%20for%20policy%20debates%20is%20one%20of%20determining%20the%20appropriate%20mix%22&f=false |date=6 December 2022 }}, John Quiggin, Princeton University Press, 2010, p. 78. The author made this statement in his chapter which is sharply critical of the strong version of "The [[efficient-market hypothesis]]", especially as it pertains to financial markets.</ref>