Final answer:
Economic growth is more challenging in command economies because of the lack of incentives for innovation and productivity, centralized decision-making, and inflexible responses to consumer demands. Private property rights in market economies create strong incentives that drive efficiency and growth. Real-world economies blend both command and market-system elements.
Step-by-step explanation:
Economic growth is often harder to achieve in a command economy compared to a free market economy due to several factors. In a command economy, the government owns and controls all means of production and makes all economic decisions. As a result, individuals and businesses have little to no incentive to innovate or increase productivity since they do not directly reap the benefits of their efforts. Centralized decision-making in command economies also tends to be less responsive to consumer demands and lacks the flexibility of market-driven economies.
Conversely, private property rights in market economies create compelling incentives for efficiency and hard work. Individual ownership encourages resource owners to maximize the output and profits of their investments. These incentives drive innovation and economic growth. History shows that command economies, such as those in the former Soviet Union and in China before market reforms, have struggled with economic stagnation compared to more market-oriented systems.
The tradeoff between economic systems often revolves around equity and efficiency. While command economies may focus on equitable distribution, this comes at the cost of economic efficiency and growth. However, it's also important to remember that in the real world, no economy is purely command or market-based; instead, they exist on a spectrum with a mix of elements from both systems.