Answer:
read below :)
Explanation:
In favour:
The general argument advocating for government in a free market involves the government to enforce laws and regulation that create conditions for trust and investment among private companies and people that are willing to invest in a place where money has guarantees.
In other words, the government has a limited policy and will only act as for surveillance that economic transactions are made within a legal framework.
It defends private property and ownership and investment.
This is the main reason why any market or economic system has some degree of government regulation.
The next argument comes from the market failures: situations where the market itself is unable to provide the best distribution of wealth and goods, this will cause the government to correct the market failures and foreseek for the vulnerable sectors that are endangered.
The role that the government plays in a free Enterprise system is “it passes economic laws and regulations.” In a free Enterprise system, the government supports private companies and people to invest its money to create a free market. ... This scenario helps the economy to grow.
Against:
Most of the arguments against government participation come from the fact that economies will grow naturally according to the principles of the free enterprise and the market.
The free flow of capital will vary among developed and underdeveloped countries but there is always a notion of balance without government interference.
The private individuals that own the capital and means of production will act based on their selfish interests and by doing so they will provide the best products to the global market.
The second argument can be that limits and regulations tend to lessen initiative and incentives for business people and business to be made.
It is meant that the private use of the resources will be based on the "invisible hand " principle by Adam Smith will allocate gradually according to present conditions.
