Today, I am going to give a speech on free enterprise. Free enterprise can be described as: an economic system that is only subject to a few restrictions on ownership and business activities. Its goals are minimum government intervention, and limited trade restrictions. – All great assets that can make free enterprise the very best system an economy can have (Investopedia, n.d.).

You're lucky! Use promo "samples20"
and get a custom paper on
"Free Enterprise Speech"
with 20% discount!
Order Now

Our prosperous nation has had free enterprise as its economic and societal foundation for over 200 years. This system has given us unprecedented opportunity, prosperity, and progression for generations. Whilst America’s economic status is not always idyllic, and at right now we are battling through economic uncertainty due to stagnant incomes and a lukewarm labor market, letting economic freedom predominate over any intervention by government, is the most successful way to prosperity (Denver Post, 2013). Now you may be thinking how can this happen?

Personal freedom derives from economic freedom. Under a free enterprise system, when people are empowered, they are given the chance to become successful according to their own potential and hard work. That is the reason why this system promotes dignity, motivation, and self-reliance. It invigorates people to hone into their potential in order to be more, accomplish more, and look after themselves and those they care for (Denver Post, 2013).

Prosperity is spread by economic freedom. When entrepreneurs and employers have success, the wealth they create is indirectly shared via job creation and opportunities for other people. A good example of this is Microsoft and Apple. Both founders, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs went about their business approach in a different way. Steve Wozniak, the co-founder of Apple, said that Jobs had “a very futuristic forward vision, almost a bit of the science fiction, ‘Here’s what life could be,’ but Bill Gates had more of an execution ability to build the things that are needed now, to build a company now, make the profits now, in the short-term.”I think that was the biggest difference between them,” he said (Business Insider, 2015). Microsoft activities are thought to have generated over 14.7 million jobs (Microsoft, 2007), and Apple is believed to have made over 500,000 jobs (CNN, 2012).

In addition to this, businesses such as Microsoft and Apple donate billions to various charities each year. Bill and Melinda Gates have donated a total of $30.2 billion (CNET, 2014), and Apple has donated $97.6 billion (Huffington Post, 2012). They also endow their employees with health care cover and retirement benefits; and whenever disaster strikes, they supply vital assistance to the country, and produce the needed economic growth to help the government (Denver Post, 2013). To illustrate this, in September 2000, “Microsoft attained its all-time peak in market capitalization, when the stock was worth $642 billion.” By 2011 it was “worth only about a third as much at $229 billion.” Whereas Apple’s market cap climbed from a mere $6 billion at the end of 1998 to $364 billion in 2011 – a 60-fold increase” Spectator (2011).

In addition to this, free enterprise and the economic freedom it empowers, ignites thriving competition, and this equates to customers being able to pay the lowest prices for top products. And all businesses aim to do better if they want to stay successful. They are continuously pioneering, and do much to ameliorate our standard of living with their cost savings and cutting-edge technological advancements (Denver Post, 2013).

From a global perspective, economic freedom offers a stabilizing force. And people who have a say over their business and private lives need strong spokesmen in government. Regardless of free enterprise’s global, economic and moral benefits, some people in the US feel that government should play a more powerful part in our lives, society and economy. Yet the fact of the matter is that our government does not generate success, equality or opportunity, only the private sector is able to fulfil this. However, our leaders can choose to restrain economic freedom, thereby damaging growth and jobs, or alternatively let loose free enterprise and permit the private sector to bring the country prosperity. When our leaders come up with higher taxes and over-regulation by aiming to stretch further into the affairs of individuals and businesses, they suppress growth and generate uncertainty, none of which can be good for the country. When these leaders search for more control over the economy’s key sectors such as the Obamacare healthcare system, they raise costs, decrease efficiency, and expand bureaucracy (Denver Post, 2013).

During the times when the leaders believe that the answer to economic challenges is higher government spending, they implement it, and it simply worsens the country’s deficit and debt, and only stalls the inevitable duty of dealing with the fiscal crisis. Whenever they attempt to artificially disperse wealth or orchestrate fairness, the central American ideals of equality of benefit, opportunity and reward founded on hard work and merit, are abolished. Therefore, these procedures constitute a threat to a thriving economy and free enterprise (Denver Post, 2013).

Just like Microsoft and Apple, Amway is an excellent example of the free enterprise system. Without this, Amway, would not be the prosperous global organization it is now. It was founded over 50 years ago by two pioneering men in a basement, and at the present time thanks to the opportunities of free enterprise, has in excess of 20,000 global employees, and has assisted over 3 million people, by helping them establish their own businesses. Whilst free enterprise is not faultless, it still remains the best possible system. Whenever businesses and citizens have the potential to succeed and work hard, they are making a crucial contribution to a dynamic and robust economy. And that benefits everyone (Denver Post, 2013).

  • Business Insider (2015). Retrieved from:
  • CNET (2014). Retrieved from:
  • CNN (2012). Retrieved from:
  • Denver Post (2013). Retrieved from:
  • Huffington Post (2012). Retrieved from:
  • Investopedia (n.d.). Retrieved from:
  • Microsoft (2007). Retrieved from:
  • Spectator (2011). Retrieved from: 2011-2012