3. Draw Inferences. The reading says that the relative ease with which
entrepreneurs can enter and leave markets is a benefit of the free enterprise
system of the United States. Could the same statement be made about a
country with a command economy? Why or why not? What implications
does that have for the law of supply in that country?

This same statement cannot be made about a command economy because a command economy is one where the power to make economic decisions lies in the hands of the government alone.

The government is the one in control here. The power to just enter and leave like that of the free economy does not apply here.

Because the entrepreneurs do not have the power to just enter and leave when they like, supply and demand would not be changed like that of the free economy, where production is reduced on a side and raised on another.

Read more on link

A command ecomony is "commanded" by the government. If one individual had the power to just enter and leave the economy, it really wouldn't be a command economy anymore, because the entrepenueurs have the power and not the government.

If entrepeneurs can enter and leave, they dramatically change the supply and demand by lessening supplies on one side and increasing supplies on another.

in the 1800s, chinese workers migrated to the united states, first to work in the gold mines, but also to take agricultural jobs, and factory work, especially in the garment industry. chinese immigrants were particularly instrumental in building railroads in the american west, and as chinese laborers grew successful in the united states, a number of them became entrepreneurs in their own right. as the numbers of chinese laborers increased, so did the strength of anti-chinese sentiment among other workers in the american economy. this finally resulted in legislation that aimed to limit future immigration of chinese workers to the united states, and threatened to sour diplomatic relations between the united states and china.