market fundamentalist

简明释义

市场经济基本规则

英英释义

例句

1.In discussions about climate change, some critics label certain economists as market fundamentalists 市场原教旨主义者 for their unwavering faith in market solutions.

在关于气候变化的讨论中，一些批评者将某些经济学家称为市场原教旨主义者 市场原教旨主义者，因为他们对市场解决方案的坚定信仰。

2.The rise of populism has challenged the ideas of market fundamentalists 市场原教旨主义者, who previously dominated economic policy discussions.

民粹主义的兴起挑战了以前主导经济政策讨论的市场原教旨主义者 市场原教旨主义者的思想。

3.Many market fundamentalists 市场原教旨主义者 argue that deregulation leads to greater innovation and efficiency.

许多市场原教旨主义者 市场原教旨主义者认为，放松监管会导致更大的创新和效率。

4.The market fundamentalist 市场原教旨主义者 view is often criticized for ignoring the social implications of unregulated markets.

对于市场原教旨主义者 市场原教旨主义者的观点，常常受到批评，因为它忽视了不受监管的市场的社会影响。

5.The debate over healthcare reform often pits those who support government intervention against the views of a market fundamentalist 市场原教旨主义者 who believes that the free market can solve all issues.

关于医疗改革的辩论常常将支持政府干预的人与认为自由市场可以解决所有问题的市场原教旨主义者 市场原教旨主义者的观点对立起来。

作文

In the modern economic landscape, the term market fundamentalist refers to individuals or groups who believe that free markets are the best mechanism for allocating resources and ensuring economic growth. They argue that minimal government intervention is necessary for markets to function optimally. This ideology is rooted in classical economics, where the invisible hand of the market is seen as a guiding force that leads to the most efficient outcomes. However, this perspective can be quite controversial, especially when considering the complexities of real-world economies.Supporters of market fundamentalism often point to the successes of capitalist economies as proof of their beliefs. Countries that embrace free-market policies, such as the United States and various nations in Western Europe, have experienced significant economic growth and innovation. Proponents argue that deregulation and tax cuts stimulate investment and entrepreneurship, leading to job creation and overall prosperity.However, critics of market fundamentalism highlight the potential downsides of such an approach. They argue that unregulated markets can lead to inequality, environmental degradation, and economic instability. For instance, during the 2008 financial crisis, many blamed the lack of regulatory oversight on the actions of market fundamentalists who advocated for minimal government intervention in the financial sector. The crisis revealed the vulnerabilities of a system that prioritizes market freedom over consumer protection and social welfare.Moreover, the belief in the infallibility of markets can lead to a neglect of social responsibilities. Market fundamentalists often dismiss the role of government in addressing issues like poverty, healthcare, and education. They argue that these matters should be left to the market, which they believe will naturally provide solutions. However, this perspective fails to account for the fact that not all individuals have equal access to resources or opportunities within a purely market-driven system.In addition, the rise of globalization has further complicated the debate surrounding market fundamentalism. While global trade can create opportunities for growth, it can also lead to job losses in certain sectors and exacerbate inequalities both within and between countries. Critics argue that market fundamentalists often overlook these consequences, focusing solely on the benefits of free trade without considering its broader social implications.The COVID-19 pandemic has also tested the limits of market fundamentalism. Many governments around the world had to intervene in their economies to provide support to citizens and businesses affected by lockdowns and restrictions. This situation highlighted the importance of a balanced approach to economic policy—one that recognizes the value of both market mechanisms and government intervention.In conclusion, while the ideology of market fundamentalism champions the virtues of free markets and minimal government interference, it is essential to consider its limitations. A nuanced understanding of economics requires recognizing that markets do not operate in a vacuum; they are influenced by social, political, and environmental factors. As we move forward, it is crucial to strike a balance between embracing market principles and ensuring that the needs of society are adequately addressed. Only then can we create an economic system that is both efficient and equitable, benefiting all members of society rather than just a select few.

在现代经济环境中，术语市场原教旨主义者指的是那些相信自由市场是分配资源和确保经济增长的最佳机制的个人或团体。他们认为，为了让市场最佳运作，政府干预应尽量减少。这种意识形态根植于古典经济学，其中市场的无形之手被视为引导力量，导致最有效的结果。然而，这种观点可能颇具争议，特别是在考虑到现实经济的复杂性时。市场原教旨主义者的支持者通常会指出资本主义经济的成功作为他们信念的证明。像美国和西欧各国这样的自由市场政策国家经历了显著的经济增长和创新。倡导者认为，放松管制和减税刺激投资和创业，导致就业创造和整体繁荣。然而，市场原教旨主义者的批评者强调这种方法的潜在缺点。他们认为，无监管市场可能导致不平等、环境退化和经济不稳定。例如，在2008年的金融危机中，许多人将缺乏监管监督归咎于那些倡导在金融部门中尽量减少政府干预的市场原教旨主义者。危机暴露了一个优先考虑市场自由而非消费者保护和社会福利的系统的脆弱性。此外，对市场无误性的信仰可能导致对社会责任的忽视。市场原教旨主义者常常驳斥政府在解决贫困、医疗保健和教育等问题中的作用。他们认为这些问题应留给市场，自然会提供解决方案。然而，这种观点未能考虑到在一个纯粹由市场驱动的系统中，并非所有个体都能平等地获得资源或机会。此外，全球化的兴起进一步复杂化了围绕市场原教旨主义的辩论。虽然全球贸易可以为增长创造机会，但它也可能导致某些行业的失业，并加剧国家内部和之间的不平等。批评者认为，市场原教旨主义者常常忽视这些后果，单纯关注自由贸易的好处，而不考虑其更广泛的社会影响。新冠疫情也考验了市场原教旨主义的极限。世界各国许多政府不得不干预其经济，以支持受到封锁和限制影响的公民和企业。这种情况突显了经济政策平衡方法的重要性——一种既承认市场机制的价值，又确保社会需求得到充分满足的方法。总之，虽然市场原教旨主义的意识形态倡导自由市场和最小政府干预的美德，但考虑其局限性至关重要。对经济的细致理解需要认识到市场并不是在真空中运作的；它们受到社会、政治和环境因素的影响。随着我们向前发展，必须在拥抱市场原则与确保社会需求得到适当满足之间找到平衡。只有这样，我们才能创建一个既高效又公平的经济体系，使社会所有成员受益，而不仅仅是少数人。