Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
I know, I know, you've seen this before. But YouTube seems to be back on here in Turkey--where in fact it's evening--and it's been a while since I've watched this.
I again look at this and think--how could we still be having this debate? Can anyone find a reference in a 1979 newspaper to a pervasive American fear of China's growing economic power? I thought not. So, class, what happened to the Chinese economy between then and now?
This debate has been settled, so many times over. And yet--we're still having it.
(By the way, wasn't hair in the '70s weird? Has there ever been a weirder hair decade? This was always a distraction to me while studying Margaret Thatcher's rise to power. I warn you, don't let your mind go down the path of wondering whether in thirty years they'll be looking at photos of your hair that way. Nothing good can come of asking yourself that question.)
- Comment (27)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Awesome. Friedman was unparalleled in his ability to communicate the fundamentals of liberty. This is why, whenever I try to introduce someone to conservative thought, the first book I recommend is "Free to Choose".
May '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
To be fair to all the 70s people with reasonable hair, Phil Donahue skews the sample.
May '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Great. Has Peter posted his interview with the economics guy yet? (Claire's mainly just happy to note that I exercised restraint and didn't post a goofy Muppets/Harry Potter vid).
As an official accredited "economist" I don't trust economists further than I can throw them. Which ain't all that far.
Jun '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Friedman's style was so soothing and effective. He could be confrontational and challenging to his opponent in such a charming way, yet still cut them to the bone.
And yes, Claire, it's mind-numbing to think we go over this again and again. Political angels don't exist and never will.
Meanwhile, congratulations on your new media windfall. Enjoy.
Oct '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
I'm not sure which is weirder: Phil Donohue's hair in the '70s, or the fact that Newt Gingrich still has it today.
Jun '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Contrast this vid with the one Rob posted of Bernadine Dohrn.
Edited on Nov 6, 2010 at 12:31pmJun '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
The corollary to Friedman's argument that politicians do not reward virtue "more" than free enterprise, is that free enterprise punishes those who systematically ignore virtue and reward their friends/allies. If someone is wasting resources/capital on "favors" in the market, anyone/everyone is free to compete in with a more efficient process, and they do because they are rewarded based on their efficiency. In a political system, competition is severely limited, and political influence is rewarded, not efficiency.
In the free enterprise system, we each get to vote with our dollars dozens of times per day, on millions of small elections, between multiple companies/products/services. In the political system, we get to vote every couple years, on an extremely limited amount of issues/positions, between (typically) only two choices/parties. We rarely get to vote on the real issues that matter, and rarely get to vote for the solution we prefer. Instead, we vote on the issues AS FRAMED by the two party political process, and we can only vote on a package of propositions. We vote for a health care bill that has hundreds of pork provisions, with education, energy, environmental, welfare, and taxation etc. included.
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Yes, yes, yes, Mark, exactly. I think we're all of a like mind about this. The thing that puzzles me is this: How can there be so many left not of a like mind? What is it about this that's so hard to grasp? What exactly is the stumbling block?
Jun '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Continuing...
In the market, it is accumulative, diverse, and synergistic. We can support dozens/hundreds/thousands of parallel experiments in value and efficiency, from companies, to products, to product variations. As long as a company is profitable, their flower can bloom, each of which can cross pollinate.
In politics, it is all or nothing, mono-culture, and monopolistic. When we elect one politician we dis-enfranchise all competitors. When we pass one bill/proposition we outlaw all competitors. One flower gets all of the sunlight, water, soil, and we uproot the other flowers, losing their capacity to bear fruit and cross-pollinate.
The ecology of the free market adapts to technological changes by integrating them, growing and thriving based on the greater efficiency and cross-pollination.
The ecology of a political system becomes rigid in response to technological changes, first creating barriers to change that protect the current balances of power, like dams holding back the river, then leading to massive shifts in power as the dams burst and the political power floods the previous structures, creating new power players and barriers/dams to contain/leverage the water/power.
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
No, I don't think so. As something of a specialist in this period, I have to tell you, this problem comes up a lot. And it was even worse in Britain.
Jun '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Claire, YES!
I think, when it all comes down to it, there are two fundamental attitudes.
1. People who think that humans (especially, but not necessarily themselves) can successfully adapt to a changing society (avoiding poverty, suffering, disease, and the social stigma of failure), especially THEMSELVES, think that such dynamism is good. In that game, they have a fighting chance to win, and that is all they want for themselves and others.
2. People who think that human beings are ill-equipped to adjust to a free society, and will predictably end up crushed by the machine/man. They believe the game is rigged against them and the masses, and it is unfair to expect them to compete in that game. Hence, we need to lease/bridle the powerful/skillful/talented and connected/privileged/inherited-wealth to make the game "fair" for everyone.
Of course, to admit this is so condescending and embarrassing that most people dress it up in self-righteous BS to assuage the egos involved...
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
I wouldn't quite call it a media windfall, but I did get a sweet text message from the guy who sells fruit drinks down the street to the effect that he'd just seen me on TV and was really surprised to know that I was someone important.
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Because Claire, in free market systems some people do better than others, and that doesn't create equality. Sometimes it creates great inequality. And what liberals prize more than truth, fairness or success, is equality. Equality trumps all. So they keep searching for the system that will bring that about, but there isn't one. Even in Sweden the guy who owns Ikea is WAY richer than everyone else....on the planet.
May '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Claire Berlinski, Ed.: Yes, yes, yes, Mark, exactly. I think we're all of a like mind about this. The thing that puzzles me is this: How can there be so many left not of a like mind? What is it about this that's so hard to grasp? What exactly is the stumbling block? · Nov 6 at 12:46pm
Mark is making too complicated. First, I digress- my wife (the delightful Rubber Duckie) says that my hair still looks like it did in the '70's (it is a bit shorter, but thankfully not thinner). But:
1) People are envious. Always have been, always will be, since Cain and Abel. The virtuous society, as opposed to the self-indulgent society, forces us to grow beyond our baser instincts. Leftist populism instead urges people to give in to those baser instincts. Thus, envy is more leftist, and a more natural state of affairs for more people. Good discussion here (link to AEI).
2) People are scared- Maslow's second level- security. Natural disruptions of markets and freedom are frightening for those who fear freedom's challenges, and that fear hits many people most of the time, all of us sometimes.
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Surely. And I think the longing for life to be more fair represents one of the better angels of human nature. But the point must by now be clear: command economies don't create equality, either. Where did anyone ever get the idea that it was within the power of governments to make everyone equal? Although strangely, no one thinks the government can make everyone equally beautiful, or that it should endeavor to make everyone beautiful--it is instantly understood that this just isn't possible. Yet so many believe the government can and should make everyone equally affluent. This is odd, when you think about it.
Oct '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
Yet so many believe the government can and should make everyone equally affluent. This is odd, when you think about it. · Nov 6 at 1:27p
m
It doesn't strike me as odd if I make one simple assumption: that the people who believe this perceive the economy in static terms, which is usually framed as it being a "zero-sum game," to give it a thin veneer of Game Theory. If economics is a zero-sum game, then it really is true that someone's win means someone else's loss, and the injection of moral/ethical values such as "fairness" is probably justified. If, however, economics is dynamic, wealth really can be created, and the most important aspect of economics is to ensure that everyone is free to create wealth as best they're able, the role of moral/ethical concepts such as "fairness" reduces to "ensuring that no one is deliberately hampered from participating," and ensuring equality of outcome—theoretically possible in a zero-sum game—is impossible.
Speaking of things we've all seen before, I think it's time to once again Fear the Boom and Bust!
Jun '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Denise Moss
Because Claire, in free market systems some people do better than others, and that doesn't create equality. Sometimes it creates great inequality. And what liberals prize more than truth, fairness or success, is equality. Equality trumps all. So they keep searching for the system that will bring that about, but there isn't one. Even in Sweden the guy who owns Ikea is WAY richer than everyone else....on the planet. · Nov 6 at 1:08pm
Denise why is it only the free market that "creates" inequality. Why did you not write life creates inequality or birth creates inequality. Seems to me birth has created way more inequality than the free market ever will, or have you not seen pictures of Helen Thomas and Nocole Kidman lately or Brad Pitt and Harry Ried?
Sep '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
Always great seeing that clip. Friedman did two shows with Donohue, one in 1979 and one in 1980 and both are worth watching. Friedman deals with bailouts, taxes, inflation and monetary policy. Same old issues…
You can watch both interviews in their entirety here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EwaLys3Zak
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvNzi7tmkx0
Edited on Nov 6, 2010 at 2:59pmSep '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
One of the great minds of the last century. Cannot be watched too much. The bad hair and all the other bad stuff in the 70's IMNSHO, is the result of the "60s" which was really '68 to '70. We conservatives should try to figure out why that social upheaval had such a tremendous influence on the culture, or the debasement of the culture. I was 10 in '69 so I watched it happen but I cannot explain it. Its also why I find "Mad Men" interesting.
May '10
Re: Saturday Morning Classic: Milton Friedman on Capitalism
I think the notion of equality of income as a desirable social objective needs to be challenged in order for capitalism to gain broader acceptance. Modern liberals tend to endorse the welfare state because it will achieve that objective. Discredit the aim and you discredit the means. Income inequality that comes as a result of varying levels productivity among different people is no social illness.