Read the passage below and answer the questions:

Both Adam Smith and Joseph Schumpeter were ardent supporters of capitalism; they believed in capitalism's capability in redefining the rules of the game. Adam Smith compared capitalism with 'animal spirit'; whereas Joseph Schumpeter relied on the role of entrepreneurs to, conceptualize capitalism. So, Adam Smith's interpretation of capitalism did not have a face; it was way too inherent and way too abstract. Unlike Smith, Schumpeter was skeptical about the fate of capitalism. While Joseph Schumpeter agree with Marxism-led philosophy that capitalism will collapse and be replaced by socialism, he predicted a different way this would come about. While Marx predicted that capitalism would be overthrown by revolution [which actually occurred in some least capitalist countries], Schumpeter believed that capitalism would gradually weaken by itself and eventually collapsė as invention and innovation has a limit of its own.

Schumpeter's version of capitalism refers to a process of evolution. Economic change is considered as the only stationary variable in this process. 'Creative destruction' was the widely popular phrase coined by Schumpeter to describe the transformation of a feudalistic society into a capitalist one. For example, the water-wheel based power production technology had been replaced by power plant, charcoal furnace used in the iron and steel industry had been replaced by an even efficient furnace, airplane BCS replaced mail coach. So, capitalism is redefining the system with an efficient and creative rule of the game economic structure internally, replacing the older - an omnipotent driver known as 'creative destruction'. Along with newer product, service, and production process the existing political, technological, regulatory and economic paradigm shifts. Such shifts of paradigms are expected to improve the standard of life.

According to Schumpeter, it is the entrepreneur who understands the economic angle of each industrial transformation. A true entrepreneur redefines the industry boundary, extends the production possibility curve, and develops new market. So, an entrepreneur is a reformist of his religion. An entrepreneur is expected to fight against all types of oddsavtal, económic and even physical. A Schumpeter entrepreneur is basically a manager and that explains why everybody is not an entrepreneur material.

An entrepreneur should become a rarity in the coming days, as economic progress has become de-personalized. Like the days of Napoleonic war, economic changes no longer need a leader's or an entrepreneur's personal presence in the battleground. Rather industrial bourgeoisie should replace individual entrepreneurs and the whole leadership spectrum may become less glamorous.

Questions: