@mba2ceo Perfect socialism may eliminate relative poverty - but in absolute terms of living standards, a reduction is guaranteed in contrast to the free market.
Eliminating relative poverty by making everyone poor is not something to strive for.
Those with the freest economies in the world also enjoy the highest quality of life. Sweden isn't really the top in either, but it has a quite high business freedom and is #10 on the Human Development Index (not a perfect statistic but just for comparison).
The US is #4 on the human development index. I know the US isn't perfect, and is going downhill in regards to economic freedom and civil liberties every day - but it's still in the top.
@diurdi In the Inequality adjusted HDI (and let me tell you, there is lots of inequality here) It is ranked 23rd, well below its Socialized competitors.
Besides, this rankings aren't the only way to gauge a contry. Come to the US sometime man, and see how many people live in squalor.
@kingnat2 Believe me, I know. But there's alot of poverty in the welfare states as well. The only difference is that we don't have as many people who live in ridiculous luxury.
Different industries have self-regulated with varying degrees of efficacy, and the interests of markets are not always congruent with the interests of individual civil liberties.
That said, the fatal flaw in governments and markets alike are their people. Social compacts exist to protect the rights of the people when they won't protect themselves, and the role of government should be one to preserve liberties and to ensure that information flows freely.
Such a pity the path Hong Kong is now taking, the same path that every other free-enterprise economy has taken. Singapore has now overtaken Hong Kong in economic liberalism/freedom.
@AlexNOSAM Imposed regulations which will have more counter productive effects along with other unintended consequences in the longer run. E.g. a minimum wage which will keep the very poorest and unskilled, impoverished and in poverty.
@erelpc For the love of god man... Falling over again for the same red paradise trap.
If the lawmakers there want to see consequences of minimum wage they should come to my country. Here we have plenty of unemployed teenagers and elderly before retirement who would probably have some decent job if they could be paid less than the minimum which is already not much.
After 30 years of Friedmanism we ended up in the financial catastrophe of 2008-2010. But alas, Friedman would find a good excuse for it. Probably that he was dead when it happened.
@newsreeldemocracy Thomas Sowell and many other neoliberals already have a fairly good explanation for the financial crisis. Friedman himself debunked the myth that the great depression was caused by the free market.
It seems to me that the Central planning is entirely built on fear and poor edu on what a free market actually is. People seem to think that our current society is indeed a free market. But there is constant observation of the short term affects and not on long term Economic growth. It seems to me like people have confirmational Bias, indeed I used to. I used to believe in socialism and the EGALITARIAN society. Amusingly, it took people like Milton friedmann. To make me realise how to be logical
friedman argues for the continuation of exploitation of the workers by the capitalists class. Not all capitalists are bad; there are some with a conscience. but most of capitalists are scums and Milton Fuckface Friedman is living in an unrealistic capitalist dream, just as worse as people who live in an unrealistic communist dream. Fuck you milton fucking friedman.
@neonaction do you work at all? if must capitalists are scums, i am sure you mustn't be working. so are you collecting welfare payment? or are your parents paying for ur expense? people work hard for a living, whether capitalists (employers) or employees. most likely employers work harder than the employees.
my rest in the very depth of hell,.No one dared to humiliate America but you and the idiots listened to your hallucination. One of the antichrist who is still leading this country to no way ..
Using Hong Kong as an example of rising economic standards is ludicrous. Just look at the urban poor packed like sardines there. How is the untrammeled free market helping them? It isn't and it isn't meant to. Capitalism and morality don't go together. One can be rich in a free market by acquiring enough capital and the means to turn that capital into profits. If profits can't be raised, then one has failed.
@MultiSmartass1 Did it ever dawn on you those urban poor packed in like sardines would rather be there and alive rather then packed in like sardine somewhere else. I could have two choices, neither very good, but that dosent mean one isnt better then the other.
@fdny9682 That's a retarded argument. You're saying its better to be alive and poor than dead and nonexistent. Personally, I like being alive but I dont sleep on a box or live with an apartment with 7 other people. There is living and then there is living with dignity and decency. For a lot of people in Hong Kong as elsewhere, life has neither decency or dignity.
@MultiSmartass1 Thats exactly what I'm saying. You don't live in a box because you dont have to. Lots of places in the world live at a lower standard then us but thats only by comparison. My Mother scrubbed toilets for 38 years in this country, now that may not be seen as a dignified job for some, but considering the alternative of living in the poverty she escaped it was a welcome alternative. Allow others to decide for themselves their sense of dignity and decency.
@fdny9682 That's an insult to your mother. If she had the alternative to work as a stock analyst, she probably would have. People make choices based on the social, economic and educational opportunities. Your argument is bullshit and an insult to millions of poor people across the planet.
@MultiSmartass1 Insult to my Mother? Fuck you. She came from a place without a toilet, and made a better life for herself scrubbing them. paid for my college that way and now I have a better life. But you think that is indecent. My father lived in a two bedroom with 6 people. Too my grandparents it was much better then Ireland. And now all their children own their own homes. So yes its better to be alive and poor and dead and nonexistent to me
@fdny9682 Then why don't you scrub floors like her for a living? Because you don't want to give up your middle class lifestyle. Its easy to say being poor is cool or great when you have never been poor. I have never cleaned floors but Iam under no illusion that having that job and being poor is okay. Its not. Go to any slum around the world and tell the people there that their life is great. You're crazy.
@MultiSmartass1 Because I dont have to. The Market made ly life better over time passed down from generation to generation. Other parts of the world for different reasons didnt evolve the same way. Europeans had ships and native Americans didnt have the wheel. My mothers home town used to milk cows, now they go over to the store and buy milk.
@fdny9682 The market is a mechanism, a thing, a human construct. It doesn't automatically make anything better. It either functions or it doesnt. It works or it doesn't. Markets are divorced from morality. Conditions have changed because of historical developments like protest movements and pieces of legislation like the GI Bill which allowed millions to go to college after WWII. Nothing to do with the market.
@MultiSmartass1 Thats my fucking point ASSHOLE!!!!! You have to do something!!!!!! Thats what those people in Hong Kong are doing!!!! Starting 7 in an apartment and working just like my father!!!!!! Then you better yourself you progressive libertarian oxymoron DICK!!!!!!
@fdny9682 You're missing the point. Iam talking about improvements to society not individual effort. A person can make himself rich but other people over history to try to make conditions better for more people at once. The market is a soulless, inhuman construct. It either performs or it doesn't. In the end, the market means nothing if you can't manipulate or work it in your favor. Otherwise, it will work you over.
@MultiSmartass1 The notion that the market is a "construct" is one of the most pernicious fallacies propagated by the progressive movement. The market, insofar as it is a free market, is an example of spontaneous order, created by the interactions of millions of autonomous, independent human beings. It is a self-organizing, bottom-up organizational structure that exists in a state of dynamic equilibrium, making it roughly analogous to the way an ecosystem develops and functions.
@studentofsmith The market is creation of human beings therefore it is a construct meaning something constructed, put together. Markets are not organic and do not spring from nature-they spring from minds of mortal men. Free markets are not entirely free and not meant to be. People have to suffer and pay a price if not ecomically then physically. Markets come with a steep price in human suffering. Shumpeter might call it "creative destruction." That's why many progressives fight against markets.
@MultiSmartass1 I wonder how those urban poor in 1980 whaen this video was made are doing today, I bet alot better. Why dont I scrub floors? Because my mother did and worked hard with the help of the Market so I dont have to. Your just a spoiled Liberal. How many of those slums exist because of the lack of a Market because of their govt. Friedman said it well, look how people vote with their feet. Is it China that has to stop people from going in or Hong Kong that has to keep people out
@fdny9682 People can only vote with their feet if they have feet and they aren't constrained by immigration laws. Actually, Iam not a liberal per se. Iam an indpendent political thinker-more Progressive Libertarian if I can create a category for myself. As for urban poor in 1980, they are probably dead now.
If only those in government understood that. The results of every social war (the war on poverty, the war on drugs, etc.) that the country has attempted to wage have proven to be less than the hype with which it was waged in the first place.
Garment workers in Hong Kong? I doubt there is a single factory that can afford to operate in Hong Kong today. Because of their low taxes and economic freedoms they have far surpassed us in almost every measure.
@bluepointtrading its not that free non intervention trading has become more complicated in modern times but rather excessive government regulation that has made free trade a less feasible outcome. What is to blame is the government finding any excuse to regulate a free mans will.
I use to agree with this guy, and still do believe in free market economies. The problem is the world has gotten more complicated and the definition of free markets is more and more less clear....
@bluepointtrading yea thats beccause of the government interference in our market. That's not Milton's theory's fault. It's the government's fault. 45% of our GDP is government spending, and we first ought to stop spending on war.
Too bad those same workers are probably getting more work in "today's world" because they are willing to work harder and more efficient at a lower cost of labor.
Free markets seek out those that will work harder, produce more, at lower prices. And that is why they are so great.
He talks about the great working conditions of the textile workers like We the People should bow down and thank companies for allowing us to work. Hail to the great companies.
It is the greedy CEOs that are ruining this country. They layoff workers and have pay cuts so that the company can still make a profit and the CEO gets his millions.
Companies DO seek to hire qualified workers for the least amount of money. Likewise, the worker seeks employment at the highest pay rate. But neither of them determine the worker's value. The market does that. When a worker accepts a job, he is saying, in effect, that this agreement reflects his most advantageous job offer. If one is not satisfied with their market value, they simply need to acquire skills that are more prized.
I speak from experience. I see it happening where I now work. Pay cuts and layoffs are a quick solution to "cut costs" so that hte bottom line looks good. the CEO still gets his $12 million plus (salary and benefits) and the other board members are making huge amounts of money, while the workers can't make ends meet. As side note, the company reported as profit, $24 million. The company could have reported more profit if the big guy didn't get $12 million, eh?
sure nor your utopia Milton. You cant give freedom to companys, they keep abusing it.
Companys dont lose enough reputation when they screw over the people, and gain to much reputation by simply airing some comercials. Also consumers do not inform themself enough about the products they buy.
All of the communist commentators on here admit that the capitalist is bettering the plight of the "exploited" worker. Websters defines expoitation as: "taking advantage of another." How is bettering the condition of another man taking advantage of him. The key distinction is that the "exploited" enter into the work contract voluntarily. There is no coercion, no force--it's a voluntary interaction between two people who believe the deal will better them both. Please, communists, stop.
The capitalists make conditions "better" than the preexisting onces by making nations dependent on them. In other words, instead of a group of workers making 3 cents an hour, for example, the capitalist will give them 6 cents an hour. Technically this wage is "better," and because they were once used to 3 cents, they will gladly take the 6 cents. But 6 cents is not a good wage relative to the labor force standards of the West. So should it be a standard for "them"? It's called "EXPLOITATION"!
Not true at all. According to my view, if all salaries were relatively the same or more comparble, where would the incentive be for our companies to go over seas. Exploitation of the poor is the reason why Americans are losing hundreds of thousands, if not, milions of jobs. Is it more of a concern for you that "America" is broke--what ever that means--or that "people" who live in america have jobs?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The capitalist is a slick deceiver. Notice when he says the words "...not high by Western standards, but high enough to enable them to live far better than most people in the world." What does that mean. What it means is, that because most people in the world are relatively poor, meaning relative to western standards, these people in Hong Kong is "better" than the rest. But, does better mean good. Slavery was "better" in the 1800s than in the 1700s. Was slavery good? Of course not.
capitalist development of some areas is based on the exploitation of other areas, the underdevelopment of some areas is functional to capitalist development in other areas (the capital k.marx), wild capitalism = imperialism = prosperity and development for the exploiters and the underdevelopment exploited, friedman was an imperialist bastard ..
Way to just throw out a normative statement there. Surely this is backed by some type of actual evidence (haha). BTW, there is a significant amount of evidence to support Miltion's claims; significant.
the theoretical result of free market should be the perfect competition, where every business is reduced to being the "workshop of the blacksmith", incapable of addressing the demand for its product, in perfect competition, firms are price taker, the equilibrium price is =at cost of production, there is no gain, where is the wealth if there is not gain ?
"there is no gain, where is the wealth if there is not gain ?"
The wealth is not generated only by the lowering of the cost of production but by the satisfaction of the needs of the market.
The creation of wealth and the increase of utility is achieved when, in a open free market, both sides agree voluntarily that trade of their goods and services brings more value than not to engage in any form of exchange.
The wealth is not produced only by lowering the cost of production, but by the satisfaction of the needs of the market. are you sure? or the market even if irrational, will be induced at a certain rationality induced by the monetary authority? the monetary authority does not act in an irrational way, but quite rationally, will tend to maximize profits and minimize costs (in this case the risk)?
now suppose that we can get the idea utopian and manipulator states that the market will tend to create full employment, so in every area all work ... domestic product of each area will be the same proportion but quantitatively? and the growth rate will be equal in every area? capital will not go where the growth rate will be greater because it paid better?
you asked why the trend of globalization, business is that of agglomerates to be more competitive? perhaps there is a tendency of agglomerating capital market to work and to be more competitive?
This is because there is no free market or because it is in the nature of the market and for the greed of entrepreneurs, or who seek agglomeration to reduce competition and to create general cartel price?
greed is bad ... do not push, natural selection is not for the weak ppl but for the greedy ppl , the greed that is ruining the world and the world will do natural selection ...
Actually you undertood it wrong, Darwin's natural selection determines that the organism that is more capable of adapting to new circunstances would prevail, not the strongest one.
And what is free market capitalism but the most adaptable and dynamic economic system ever created?
Cosmic Dork, you have to know that capitalism is an economic system, not a welfare program, rewarding each according to his God given abilities, personal ambition, and yes, luck. Any successful businessman will tell you that personal ambition is the key. What you probably mean by "social justice" in regard to capitalism, is really taking from the motivated producers of wealth(even small business owners) to give to those least motivated to succeed. Which system is REALLY socially just...hmm?
Capitalism IS a perfect system; not just a "good enough". Complete laissez-faire capitalism would eradicate every bit of poverty on Earth. As long as men remain rational, there will always be a fundamental need for freedom and its corollary, capitalism.
This has never happened in the history of ever. This is a fatal flaw in the foundation of all this fundamentalist free-market rhetoric. Growth and competition have their place, but a zero regulation puts a country on a boom-bust cycle that was bad in the 1800's and almost collapsed in the '30s. You can't understate how important this is. PEOPLE ARE NOT RATIONAL.
People are rational; however, most of their critical thinking ability is killed at an early age by religion and the public schools. If you got rid of both, you would be amazed at what humanity could accomplish. I know your precious university professors tell you otherwise, but men are born with common sense. Also, scrap your Marxist history books, there were no boom-bust cycles in the 19th century (not by our standards). That is all the work of the Fed.
Why did all of the investment banks collectively drive themselves off of a cliff this fall and nearly drag down the entire economy in the process? We're the CEO's at Lehman and Goldman Sachs too blinded by "religion and public schools" to know that what they were doing was stupid?
I'm not a communist, or socialist by any means. Capitalism IS good, it does improve standard of living, etc. I just think some regulations need to be put in place. October 2008 and October 1929 prove that.
Explain to me how those were actually the results of OVER regulation, and not some ill-fated cocktail party for the investment banks. I know that's what you're going to say.
Fannie May and Freddie Mac allowed increased uneconomical mortgage lending and lowered lending requirements for lower-income families, the Community Reinvestment Act forced banks to lend to high-risk people, the government's drive to stimulate home-ownership (no down payment mortgages, extremely low lending standards), the Fed pushing down interest rates, printing more money, thereby creating an artificial boom (target federal funds rate was FORCED to 1% for whole year from June 03 to June 04).
It seemed like they were profiting from this at the time though? Nobody was pointing a gun to their heads and forcing them to give bad loans which everyone knew would be dead weight.
@ commodore The 19th century had booms and busts. Growth in the post War of 1812 period gave way to a financial panic in 1819. Strong growth again in the 1830s
gave way to a couple of financial panics in 1837 and 1839. And then a panic in 1857, another one in 1873, a final one in 1893.
and our cycles are bigger because our economy is GLOBAL. Capitalism revolutionizes the economic
structure from within, destroying the old one, and creating a new one. This is what causes cycles, not the fed.
200 years ago it was allowed to trade with whatever currency you wanted - nowadays its only govt. of the world who can decide what currency you need. thus. there are some type of monopoly which are interfering with the markets. This will allways hurt the enduser and -worker. FED are causing problems due their pyramidgame of notes of dollars.
Those crashes were caused by various privately-owned banks (with state charters) which issued paper money, supposedly convertible to gold, in amounts greatly exceeding their gold reserves.
@dumagedi: you are very wrong. People are rational.
They might not have the information at the time, but they all want what's good for themselves.
However, if you think that you are not rational, give your life away and be my slave. I am smarter than you, so I can probably take care of you better than yourself.
I wish we had a free-market system here in the US like they do in Hong Kong we learn how great the free-market is here in the US but in the US economic sytem isn't free like Hong Kong is. Our system is ridled with regulations, cronyism, and fascist corporatist state capitalistic bailouts.
i agree, but i heard lincon tried a flat tax and people revolted. i dont think it's bad to have poorer people pay less taxes, but i agree overtaxing the rich isn't good
@FreedomNow319 Honk Kong is an island-state. You cannot say that because it works in HK, in works in the US. But Friedman things in simplistic ways that help further his cause. Incidentally, by persuading you to follow him, he is counter-arguing his own case for freedom. To do that better, he should shut up.
@newsreeldemocracy In the end its still your choice to follow him or not. You don't get the same degree of freedom regarding paying high taxes and subsiding an inefficient welfare state.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Friedman says; "The question is which system has the greatest chance for enabling poor people to improve their lot?" Certainly not Corporate-Dominated Capitalism! Corporations wanted a market, but not a free market. They wanted the power to fix the terms and conditions of employment on a take-it-or-leave-it basis and to fix the cost of materials and the price of finished products in the same way. The natural tendency of the corporate system was toward CONCENTRATION & COMBINATION.
I think you're misrepresenting Friedman, but you make a good point. Adam Smith called mercantilism to the system you speak of, in which monopolies were granted to kings' mistresses and their favorites. Public choice theory shows there's a serious externality problem with our democracy, which favors concentration of political power and that will only feed the "rational ignorance" even more. The world today looks more and more like that of the progressive era.
Firstly, I believe that the time is now to concentrate in "Charity Begins at Home" here in the United States of America. If you can't take care of yourself, how do u help others across the entire World. Hong Kong is adapting somewhat ok by their standards but not by Our standards. Also, what if one becomes sincerely disabled in Hong Kong vs. the USA? Not all of us can move to Hong Kong. How do we make the USA economically empowered first! What do WE do as a Nation to help ourselves first!
Business and poverty reduction is not about charity. The poor of the world don't want charity or handouts or foreign aid to be used only in foreign companies... They want to create and work. They want their products to be sold around the world.
Hong Kong's GDP per capita is very close to that of the USA, and is one of the highest in the world, especially remarkable when you consider their few natural resources, monstrous population density, and that they came out of extreme poverty in a few decades.
Anyway, many studies have shown little to no correlation between aid packages and economic growth, including the famous Marshall plan, but especially the current day African ones. In fact, some aid promotes political conflict.
hong kong is what G.Frank called , the center of the periphery, that is the commercial center of the underdeveloped areas (peripheries), for trade in goods produced with low cost ...
you do not stop the theories of this manipulator, which in the name of freedom enslaves the workers, seeking to explore other economists, more realistic, as Myrdal, Frank, who understand the theories of friedman just have purpose of putting in the hands of the bank control of all, therefore the power, the crisis of today is the fault of monopolies or state intervention? or perhaps blame the greed of the banks have created derivatives or other crap to create fictitious wealth in their favor?
speak of natural selection makes sense in the context of containing the food, but try to think of natural selection within a species, we shall see that natural selection leads to marginalize those who do not cooperate, since the human species what should we think? ?
the human is at the top of the food chain, lives in the pack and need each other to survive, I produce paper that I need people who cultivates trees or paper reciclar, well try to find another species with similar characteristics, Summit food chain and living in the pack ...the lions? within the pack of lions as natural selection, is not perhaps the most arrogant outsider who does not cooperate? the clash between groups of lions is not the case when a flock may invade the territory of another?
Americans should return to the concept of freedom expressed by Abraham Lincon, equal human rights for all! and not to the concept of freedom of this sinister figure, spoke of Lincon about greed or natural selection as the way to freedom? Americans think for once in your story, the shortest of any other culture in the world ...
@Wraith23 I do they include suspending habeas corpus, starting massive wars, and unlimited use of federal power. That was Lincoln's ideas of "freedom".
Fact: Socialism will eliminate poverty by definition.
mba2ceo 6 months ago
@mba2ceo Perfect socialism may eliminate relative poverty - but in absolute terms of living standards, a reduction is guaranteed in contrast to the free market.
Eliminating relative poverty by making everyone poor is not something to strive for.
diurdi 5 months ago
@diurdi
mba2ceo 5 months ago
@diurdi Sweden has the highest quality of life of any country on Earth dipshit.
kingnat2 3 months ago
@kingnat2 Untrue, but it's pretty high.
Those with the freest economies in the world also enjoy the highest quality of life. Sweden isn't really the top in either, but it has a quite high business freedom and is #10 on the Human Development Index (not a perfect statistic but just for comparison).
diurdi 3 months ago
@diurdi America is a shithole you moron.
kingnat2 3 months ago
@kingnat2 I'm from Finland.
diurdi 3 months ago
@diurdi and I'm from America. So I would know.
kingnat2 3 months ago
@kingnat2 Okay, so what was your point?
The US is #4 on the human development index. I know the US isn't perfect, and is going downhill in regards to economic freedom and civil liberties every day - but it's still in the top.
diurdi 3 months ago
@diurdi In the Inequality adjusted HDI (and let me tell you, there is lots of inequality here) It is ranked 23rd, well below its Socialized competitors.
Besides, this rankings aren't the only way to gauge a contry. Come to the US sometime man, and see how many people live in squalor.
kingnat2 3 months ago
@kingnat2 Believe me, I know. But there's alot of poverty in the welfare states as well. The only difference is that we don't have as many people who live in ridiculous luxury.
diurdi 3 months ago
I like Milton, but I like his son David more.
machwon 7 months ago
Different industries have self-regulated with varying degrees of efficacy, and the interests of markets are not always congruent with the interests of individual civil liberties.
That said, the fatal flaw in governments and markets alike are their people. Social compacts exist to protect the rights of the people when they won't protect themselves, and the role of government should be one to preserve liberties and to ensure that information flows freely.
SevenSixTwoNato 7 months ago
Hong Kong is amazing. The most perfect example of what real capitalism is capable of.
AlexNOSAM 8 months ago
Such a pity the path Hong Kong is now taking, the same path that every other free-enterprise economy has taken. Singapore has now overtaken Hong Kong in economic liberalism/freedom.
erelpc 7 months ago
Comment removed
AlexNOSAM 7 months ago
@erelpc Really? What have they done?
AlexNOSAM 7 months ago
Comment removed
AlexNOSAM 7 months ago
@AlexNOSAM Imposed regulations which will have more counter productive effects along with other unintended consequences in the longer run. E.g. a minimum wage which will keep the very poorest and unskilled, impoverished and in poverty.
erelpc 7 months ago
@erelpc For the love of god man... Falling over again for the same red paradise trap.
If the lawmakers there want to see consequences of minimum wage they should come to my country. Here we have plenty of unemployed teenagers and elderly before retirement who would probably have some decent job if they could be paid less than the minimum which is already not much.
AlexNOSAM 7 months ago
most people liking this are doing so from their trailer parks, lol
yourmajezty 11 months ago
@yourmajezty lol, go take an economics course and then maybe you'll understand 1% of what milton friedman has contributed to economics
TheAcehd 10 months ago
@yourmajezty EXACTLY!!!
Free Market Capitalism is the only system known to mankind that enables a person IN THEIR TRAILER PARKS to try and improve his lot- if he so desires
you royals have always hated the free peasants; especially armed ones---> circa usa 18th cent
2dum2getsocialism 9 months ago
@2dum2getsocialism howd they get in a trailer park to begin with? forget it. its over your head.
yourmajezty 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Try Asian women # lushfmlk.info #
tanyamuriyan 1 year ago
After 30 years of Friedmanism we ended up in the financial catastrophe of 2008-2010. But alas, Friedman would find a good excuse for it. Probably that he was dead when it happened.
newsreeldemocracy 1 year ago
@newsreeldemocracy Thomas Sowell and many other neoliberals already have a fairly good explanation for the financial crisis. Friedman himself debunked the myth that the great depression was caused by the free market.
Seaworldexists 1 year ago
@newsreeldemocracy
Fuckin regulation caused the financial crisis. just google the Community reinvestment Act from Clinton.
vollgeilesiechey 11 months ago
It seems to me that the Central planning is entirely built on fear and poor edu on what a free market actually is. People seem to think that our current society is indeed a free market. But there is constant observation of the short term affects and not on long term Economic growth. It seems to me like people have confirmational Bias, indeed I used to. I used to believe in socialism and the EGALITARIAN society. Amusingly, it took people like Milton friedmann. To make me realise how to be logical
Haza3666 1 year ago
central planning is the opposite of why this country was founded, and why we have been so successful.
AroundSun 1 year ago
friedman argues for the continuation of exploitation of the workers by the capitalists class. Not all capitalists are bad; there are some with a conscience. but most of capitalists are scums and Milton Fuckface Friedman is living in an unrealistic capitalist dream, just as worse as people who live in an unrealistic communist dream. Fuck you milton fucking friedman.
neonaction 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@neonaction you are a disgrace.
laurencepak 1 year ago
@neonaction do you work at all? if must capitalists are scums, i am sure you mustn't be working. so are you collecting welfare payment? or are your parents paying for ur expense? people work hard for a living, whether capitalists (employers) or employees. most likely employers work harder than the employees.
laurencepak 1 year ago
Everyone on facebook join my movement which idolized Freidman,Thomas Sowell, and Walter Block. The Common Sense Movement!!!!!
Charlesperalo 1 year ago
my rest in the very depth of hell,.No one dared to humiliate America but you and the idiots listened to your hallucination. One of the antichrist who is still leading this country to no way ..
JesusChristKnight 1 year ago
Using Hong Kong as an example of rising economic standards is ludicrous. Just look at the urban poor packed like sardines there. How is the untrammeled free market helping them? It isn't and it isn't meant to. Capitalism and morality don't go together. One can be rich in a free market by acquiring enough capital and the means to turn that capital into profits. If profits can't be raised, then one has failed.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 Did it ever dawn on you those urban poor packed in like sardines would rather be there and alive rather then packed in like sardine somewhere else. I could have two choices, neither very good, but that dosent mean one isnt better then the other.
fdny9682 1 year ago
@fdny9682 That's a retarded argument. You're saying its better to be alive and poor than dead and nonexistent. Personally, I like being alive but I dont sleep on a box or live with an apartment with 7 other people. There is living and then there is living with dignity and decency. For a lot of people in Hong Kong as elsewhere, life has neither decency or dignity.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 Thats exactly what I'm saying. You don't live in a box because you dont have to. Lots of places in the world live at a lower standard then us but thats only by comparison. My Mother scrubbed toilets for 38 years in this country, now that may not be seen as a dignified job for some, but considering the alternative of living in the poverty she escaped it was a welcome alternative. Allow others to decide for themselves their sense of dignity and decency.
fdny9682 1 year ago
@fdny9682 That's an insult to your mother. If she had the alternative to work as a stock analyst, she probably would have. People make choices based on the social, economic and educational opportunities. Your argument is bullshit and an insult to millions of poor people across the planet.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 Insult to my Mother? Fuck you. She came from a place without a toilet, and made a better life for herself scrubbing them. paid for my college that way and now I have a better life. But you think that is indecent. My father lived in a two bedroom with 6 people. Too my grandparents it was much better then Ireland. And now all their children own their own homes. So yes its better to be alive and poor and dead and nonexistent to me
fdny9682 1 year ago
@fdny9682 Then why don't you scrub floors like her for a living? Because you don't want to give up your middle class lifestyle. Its easy to say being poor is cool or great when you have never been poor. I have never cleaned floors but Iam under no illusion that having that job and being poor is okay. Its not. Go to any slum around the world and tell the people there that their life is great. You're crazy.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 Because I dont have to. The Market made ly life better over time passed down from generation to generation. Other parts of the world for different reasons didnt evolve the same way. Europeans had ships and native Americans didnt have the wheel. My mothers home town used to milk cows, now they go over to the store and buy milk.
fdny9682 1 year ago
@fdny9682 The market is a mechanism, a thing, a human construct. It doesn't automatically make anything better. It either functions or it doesnt. It works or it doesn't. Markets are divorced from morality. Conditions have changed because of historical developments like protest movements and pieces of legislation like the GI Bill which allowed millions to go to college after WWII. Nothing to do with the market.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 Thats my fucking point ASSHOLE!!!!! You have to do something!!!!!! Thats what those people in Hong Kong are doing!!!! Starting 7 in an apartment and working just like my father!!!!!! Then you better yourself you progressive libertarian oxymoron DICK!!!!!!
fdny9682 1 year ago
@fdny9682 You're missing the point. Iam talking about improvements to society not individual effort. A person can make himself rich but other people over history to try to make conditions better for more people at once. The market is a soulless, inhuman construct. It either performs or it doesn't. In the end, the market means nothing if you can't manipulate or work it in your favor. Otherwise, it will work you over.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 The notion that the market is a "construct" is one of the most pernicious fallacies propagated by the progressive movement. The market, insofar as it is a free market, is an example of spontaneous order, created by the interactions of millions of autonomous, independent human beings. It is a self-organizing, bottom-up organizational structure that exists in a state of dynamic equilibrium, making it roughly analogous to the way an ecosystem develops and functions.
studentofsmith 1 year ago
@studentofsmith The market is creation of human beings therefore it is a construct meaning something constructed, put together. Markets are not organic and do not spring from nature-they spring from minds of mortal men. Free markets are not entirely free and not meant to be. People have to suffer and pay a price if not ecomically then physically. Markets come with a steep price in human suffering. Shumpeter might call it "creative destruction." That's why many progressives fight against markets.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 I wonder how those urban poor in 1980 whaen this video was made are doing today, I bet alot better. Why dont I scrub floors? Because my mother did and worked hard with the help of the Market so I dont have to. Your just a spoiled Liberal. How many of those slums exist because of the lack of a Market because of their govt. Friedman said it well, look how people vote with their feet. Is it China that has to stop people from going in or Hong Kong that has to keep people out
fdny9682 1 year ago
@fdny9682 People can only vote with their feet if they have feet and they aren't constrained by immigration laws. Actually, Iam not a liberal per se. Iam an indpendent political thinker-more Progressive Libertarian if I can create a category for myself. As for urban poor in 1980, they are probably dead now.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
If only those in government understood that. The results of every social war (the war on poverty, the war on drugs, etc.) that the country has attempted to wage have proven to be less than the hype with which it was waged in the first place.
HVACSoldier 1 year ago
thumbs up to a society that puts freedom before equality
thubms down to a society that puts equality before freedom because they will end up getting neither
rainzoro 1 year ago
Bullshit. Creation and diverting are 2 seperate things.
It just means that hongkong is sought out by bussiness for its low taxes moving work from other countries their way.
There is no creation merely dislocation, the people of hong kong have their relative standards raised other countries have them lowered.
It undercuts other countries labour classes and forces laborers to compete with eachother, managers and their ilk never compete.
So dont bitch about outsourcing if you worship Friedman.
demammoet 1 year ago
Garment workers in Hong Kong? I doubt there is a single factory that can afford to operate in Hong Kong today. Because of their low taxes and economic freedoms they have far surpassed us in almost every measure.
sdfkjllshadflhadfshl 1 year ago
@bluepointtrading its not that free non intervention trading has become more complicated in modern times but rather excessive government regulation that has made free trade a less feasible outcome. What is to blame is the government finding any excuse to regulate a free mans will.
iggsta3o5 1 year ago
Comment removed
iggsta3o5 1 year ago
I use to agree with this guy, and still do believe in free market economies. The problem is the world has gotten more complicated and the definition of free markets is more and more less clear....
bluepointtrading 2 years ago
@bluepointtrading yea thats beccause of the government interference in our market. That's not Milton's theory's fault. It's the government's fault. 45% of our GDP is government spending, and we first ought to stop spending on war.
rainzoro 1 year ago
I agree with this guy on the most part...but...idk.
Poverty when you look at it in somewhere liek Haiti...they don't get the chance to even show what they can do.
icypenguin11 2 years ago
they have a government that restricts their economy
stater68 2 years ago
@icypenguin11
...because they don't have economic freedom...
ijust1 1 year ago
Brunei
imabookie3 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"these workers do well because of competition for their labor and skills"
huh, well, foreign trade took care of that huh?
wonder if he'd try to hold his same stance in today's world?
awoodby 2 years ago
Too bad those same workers are probably getting more work in "today's world" because they are willing to work harder and more efficient at a lower cost of labor.
Free markets seek out those that will work harder, produce more, at lower prices. And that is why they are so great.
maroon45 2 years ago
You mean in today's world where competition for labor is eliminated by minimum wage and tariffs?
wohs145 2 years ago
He talks about the great working conditions of the textile workers like We the People should bow down and thank companies for allowing us to work. Hail to the great companies.
It is the greedy CEOs that are ruining this country. They layoff workers and have pay cuts so that the company can still make a profit and the CEO gets his millions.
CKE142B 2 years ago
Companies DO seek to hire qualified workers for the least amount of money. Likewise, the worker seeks employment at the highest pay rate. But neither of them determine the worker's value. The market does that. When a worker accepts a job, he is saying, in effect, that this agreement reflects his most advantageous job offer. If one is not satisfied with their market value, they simply need to acquire skills that are more prized.
fzqlcs 2 years ago 2
If that were completely true there would be companies 200 years old and worth trillions. You fail. Read more and open your mind to reality.
gatersaw 2 years ago
I speak from experience. I see it happening where I now work. Pay cuts and layoffs are a quick solution to "cut costs" so that hte bottom line looks good. the CEO still gets his $12 million plus (salary and benefits) and the other board members are making huge amounts of money, while the workers can't make ends meet. As side note, the company reported as profit, $24 million. The company could have reported more profit if the big guy didn't get $12 million, eh?
CKE142B 2 years ago
Right, because the average Joe would have figured out how to build the computer you're using and would've given it to you for free.
Psychosmurf547 2 years ago
the best system?
sure nor your utopia Milton. You cant give freedom to companys, they keep abusing it.
Companys dont lose enough reputation when they screw over the people, and gain to much reputation by simply airing some comercials. Also consumers do not inform themself enough about the products they buy.
Aanthanur 2 years ago
I really hate the music at the beginning
Pirate1014 2 years ago
It's final, I'm naming my first kid Milton.
0HippyHunter0 2 years ago 33
All of the communist commentators on here admit that the capitalist is bettering the plight of the "exploited" worker. Websters defines expoitation as: "taking advantage of another." How is bettering the condition of another man taking advantage of him. The key distinction is that the "exploited" enter into the work contract voluntarily. There is no coercion, no force--it's a voluntary interaction between two people who believe the deal will better them both. Please, communists, stop.
Indosmith 2 years ago 3
All my money is in the Hang Seng from Hong Kong.
LenovoFightsPoverty 2 years ago
The capitalists make conditions "better" than the preexisting onces by making nations dependent on them. In other words, instead of a group of workers making 3 cents an hour, for example, the capitalist will give them 6 cents an hour. Technically this wage is "better," and because they were once used to 3 cents, they will gladly take the 6 cents. But 6 cents is not a good wage relative to the labor force standards of the West. So should it be a standard for "them"? It's called "EXPLOITATION"!
jblackmel 2 years ago
your view is why america is broke. the chinese perhaps arent being paid too little; americans might be paid too much.
also consider. china lends america more then 25% of its money. american workers yet earn 22 times more then chinese workers.
there is far more wrong with america then there is with china.
storminnorman99 2 years ago
Not true at all. According to my view, if all salaries were relatively the same or more comparble, where would the incentive be for our companies to go over seas. Exploitation of the poor is the reason why Americans are losing hundreds of thousands, if not, milions of jobs. Is it more of a concern for you that "America" is broke--what ever that means--or that "people" who live in america have jobs?
jblackmel 2 years ago
exploitation? are the Chinese workers not eating? do they not have shelter? are they not consuming any goods?
or how about this? are we westerners overpaid?
ch1kusoo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The capitalist is a slick deceiver. Notice when he says the words "...not high by Western standards, but high enough to enable them to live far better than most people in the world." What does that mean. What it means is, that because most people in the world are relatively poor, meaning relative to western standards, these people in Hong Kong is "better" than the rest. But, does better mean good. Slavery was "better" in the 1800s than in the 1700s. Was slavery good? Of course not.
jblackmel 2 years ago
capitalist development of some areas is based on the exploitation of other areas, the underdevelopment of some areas is functional to capitalist development in other areas (the capital k.marx), wild capitalism = imperialism = prosperity and development for the exploiters and the underdevelopment exploited, friedman was an imperialist bastard ..
losheva 2 years ago
Way to just throw out a normative statement there. Surely this is backed by some type of actual evidence (haha). BTW, there is a significant amount of evidence to support Miltion's claims; significant.
Offatwork 2 years ago
Gunnard Myrdal, (theory of cumulative imbalances), there are plenty of evidence against the thesis friedman ...
losheva 2 years ago
You are wrong, you are using the same old sum zero thinking that has been refuted time and time again.
There is no gain from poverty and in a free market both sides can benefit to increase their utility.
Besides I wouldn't throw the "Capital" as a serious source since Menger crushed Marx's labor theory of value 120 years ago.
Wraith23 2 years ago
the theoretical result of free market should be the perfect competition, where every business is reduced to being the "workshop of the blacksmith", incapable of addressing the demand for its product, in perfect competition, firms are price taker, the equilibrium price is =at cost of production, there is no gain, where is the wealth if there is not gain ?
losheva 2 years ago
"the theoretical result of free market should be the perfect competition"
Agreed
"every business is reduced to being the workshop of the blacksmith"
Yes but there is always room for voluntary associations, technological advances and expansion to new niches.
"incapable of addressing the demand for its product"
No monopolies, agreed
Wraith23 2 years ago
"there is no gain, where is the wealth if there is not gain ?"
The wealth is not generated only by the lowering of the cost of production but by the satisfaction of the needs of the market.
The creation of wealth and the increase of utility is achieved when, in a open free market, both sides agree voluntarily that trade of their goods and services brings more value than not to engage in any form of exchange.
Wraith23 2 years ago
Comment removed
losheva 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The wealth is not produced only by lowering the cost of production, but by the satisfaction of the needs of the market. are you sure? or the market even if irrational, will be induced at a certain rationality induced by the monetary authority? the monetary authority does not act in an irrational way, but quite rationally, will tend to maximize profits and minimize costs (in this case the risk)?
losheva 2 years ago
now suppose that we can get the idea utopian and manipulator states that the market will tend to create full employment, so in every area all work ... domestic product of each area will be the same proportion but quantitatively? and the growth rate will be equal in every area? capital will not go where the growth rate will be greater because it paid better?
losheva 2 years ago
you asked why the trend of globalization, business is that of agglomerates to be more competitive? perhaps there is a tendency of agglomerating capital market to work and to be more competitive?
This is because there is no free market or because it is in the nature of the market and for the greed of entrepreneurs, or who seek agglomeration to reduce competition and to create general cartel price?
losheva 2 years ago
greed is bad ... do not push, natural selection is not for the weak ppl but for the greedy ppl , the greed that is ruining the world and the world will do natural selection ...
losheva 2 years ago
Actually you undertood it wrong, Darwin's natural selection determines that the organism that is more capable of adapting to new circunstances would prevail, not the strongest one.
And what is free market capitalism but the most adaptable and dynamic economic system ever created?
Wraith23 2 years ago
Capitalism is a fantastic system for creating wealth, but it doesn't do SQUAT for social justice!
CosmicFork 2 years ago
Cosmic Dork, you have to know that capitalism is an economic system, not a welfare program, rewarding each according to his God given abilities, personal ambition, and yes, luck. Any successful businessman will tell you that personal ambition is the key. What you probably mean by "social justice" in regard to capitalism, is really taking from the motivated producers of wealth(even small business owners) to give to those least motivated to succeed. Which system is REALLY socially just...hmm?
maimaiem 2 years ago
A lot of people are pretty stupid Mai, most simply don't understand their Econ classes.
Offatwork 2 years ago
Capitalism IS a perfect system; not just a "good enough". Complete laissez-faire capitalism would eradicate every bit of poverty on Earth. As long as men remain rational, there will always be a fundamental need for freedom and its corollary, capitalism.
CommodoreV 2 years ago
"As long as men remain rational."
This has never happened in the history of ever. This is a fatal flaw in the foundation of all this fundamentalist free-market rhetoric. Growth and competition have their place, but a zero regulation puts a country on a boom-bust cycle that was bad in the 1800's and almost collapsed in the '30s. You can't understate how important this is. PEOPLE ARE NOT RATIONAL.
dubagedi 2 years ago
People are rational; however, most of their critical thinking ability is killed at an early age by religion and the public schools. If you got rid of both, you would be amazed at what humanity could accomplish. I know your precious university professors tell you otherwise, but men are born with common sense. Also, scrap your Marxist history books, there were no boom-bust cycles in the 19th century (not by our standards). That is all the work of the Fed.
CommodoreV 2 years ago
Why did all of the investment banks collectively drive themselves off of a cliff this fall and nearly drag down the entire economy in the process? We're the CEO's at Lehman and Goldman Sachs too blinded by "religion and public schools" to know that what they were doing was stupid?
I'm not a communist, or socialist by any means. Capitalism IS good, it does improve standard of living, etc. I just think some regulations need to be put in place. October 2008 and October 1929 prove that.
dubagedi 2 years ago
Explain to me how those were actually the results of OVER regulation, and not some ill-fated cocktail party for the investment banks. I know that's what you're going to say.
dubagedi 2 years ago
Fannie May and Freddie Mac allowed increased uneconomical mortgage lending and lowered lending requirements for lower-income families, the Community Reinvestment Act forced banks to lend to high-risk people, the government's drive to stimulate home-ownership (no down payment mortgages, extremely low lending standards), the Fed pushing down interest rates, printing more money, thereby creating an artificial boom (target federal funds rate was FORCED to 1% for whole year from June 03 to June 04).
CommodoreV 2 years ago
It seemed like they were profiting from this at the time though? Nobody was pointing a gun to their heads and forcing them to give bad loans which everyone knew would be dead weight.
dubagedi 2 years ago
@commodoreV: great comment. I agree with you.
AlanCom1 2 years ago
@ commodore The 19th century had booms and busts. Growth in the post War of 1812 period gave way to a financial panic in 1819. Strong growth again in the 1830s
gave way to a couple of financial panics in 1837 and 1839. And then a panic in 1857, another one in 1873, a final one in 1893.
and our cycles are bigger because our economy is GLOBAL. Capitalism revolutionizes the economic
structure from within, destroying the old one, and creating a new one. This is what causes cycles, not the fed.
Blasphemer2 2 years ago
200 years ago it was allowed to trade with whatever currency you wanted - nowadays its only govt. of the world who can decide what currency you need. thus. there are some type of monopoly which are interfering with the markets. This will allways hurt the enduser and -worker. FED are causing problems due their pyramidgame of notes of dollars.
larsiemannen 2 years ago
Those crashes were caused by various privately-owned banks (with state charters) which issued paper money, supposedly convertible to gold, in amounts greatly exceeding their gold reserves.
Blucius13 2 years ago
@dumagedi: you are very wrong. People are rational.
They might not have the information at the time, but they all want what's good for themselves.
However, if you think that you are not rational, give your life away and be my slave. I am smarter than you, so I can probably take care of you better than yourself.
Do you trust me?
AlanCom1 2 years ago
Read the comments section on the average video on youtube.
dubagedi 2 years ago
@dubagedi
"but a zero regulation puts a country on a boom-bust cycle that was bad in the 1800's and almost collapsed in the '30s"
boom-bust is always made by goverment by interfering the money suplay, see:
watch?v=Rl_uj8L_EoE&feature=related
rsobies 2 years ago
when were these videos made
mattgeb84 2 years ago
Early '80s, I think.
CountArtha 2 years ago
I wish we had a free-market system here in the US like they do in Hong Kong we learn how great the free-market is here in the US but in the US economic sytem isn't free like Hong Kong is. Our system is ridled with regulations, cronyism, and fascist corporatist state capitalistic bailouts.
FreedomNow319 3 years ago 16
I agree that we don't have a free market, but a free market is exactly what we need. Sadly, the new regime prefers central planning.
fzqlcs 3 years ago 16
their 'progressive income tax' is hardly progressive there. the richest pay only 15% if I'm not mistaken. thats pretty sweet
collapseofthedollar 2 years ago
I think we should pay the same percentage the rich shouldn't be punished for their success.
outubeisawful 2 years ago
i agree, but i heard lincon tried a flat tax and people revolted. i dont think it's bad to have poorer people pay less taxes, but i agree overtaxing the rich isn't good
collapseofthedollar 2 years ago
Hong Kong is a city with a weak democracy. A real democracy with a huge population should/would not behave the same way Hong Kong does.
nycistanbul 2 years ago
@FreedomNow319 Honk Kong is an island-state. You cannot say that because it works in HK, in works in the US. But Friedman things in simplistic ways that help further his cause. Incidentally, by persuading you to follow him, he is counter-arguing his own case for freedom. To do that better, he should shut up.
newsreeldemocracy 1 year ago
@newsreeldemocracy The most impressive case against Milton Friedman!
celebrityroasts27 1 year ago
@newsreeldemocracy In the end its still your choice to follow him or not. You don't get the same degree of freedom regarding paying high taxes and subsiding an inefficient welfare state.
Firearmor 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Friedman says; "The question is which system has the greatest chance for enabling poor people to improve their lot?" Certainly not Corporate-Dominated Capitalism! Corporations wanted a market, but not a free market. They wanted the power to fix the terms and conditions of employment on a take-it-or-leave-it basis and to fix the cost of materials and the price of finished products in the same way. The natural tendency of the corporate system was toward CONCENTRATION & COMBINATION.
CosmicFork 3 years ago
I think you're misrepresenting Friedman, but you make a good point. Adam Smith called mercantilism to the system you speak of, in which monopolies were granted to kings' mistresses and their favorites. Public choice theory shows there's a serious externality problem with our democracy, which favors concentration of political power and that will only feed the "rational ignorance" even more. The world today looks more and more like that of the progressive era.
picapauengracado 3 years ago
Firstly, I believe that the time is now to concentrate in "Charity Begins at Home" here in the United States of America. If you can't take care of yourself, how do u help others across the entire World. Hong Kong is adapting somewhat ok by their standards but not by Our standards. Also, what if one becomes sincerely disabled in Hong Kong vs. the USA? Not all of us can move to Hong Kong. How do we make the USA economically empowered first! What do WE do as a Nation to help ourselves first!
uniqueny921 3 years ago
Deregulate our markets.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago 2
Business and poverty reduction is not about charity. The poor of the world don't want charity or handouts or foreign aid to be used only in foreign companies... They want to create and work. They want their products to be sold around the world.
davidmesaaz 3 years ago 2
Hong Kong's GDP per capita is very close to that of the USA, and is one of the highest in the world, especially remarkable when you consider their few natural resources, monstrous population density, and that they came out of extreme poverty in a few decades.
Anyway, many studies have shown little to no correlation between aid packages and economic growth, including the famous Marshall plan, but especially the current day African ones. In fact, some aid promotes political conflict.
picapauengracado 3 years ago 2
Comparing Hong Kong to Africa is absolutely ridiculous, and you know it.
jsunc 2 years ago
hong kong is what G.Frank called , the center of the periphery, that is the commercial center of the underdeveloped areas (peripheries), for trade in goods produced with low cost ...
losheva 2 years ago
you do not stop the theories of this manipulator, which in the name of freedom enslaves the workers, seeking to explore other economists, more realistic, as Myrdal, Frank, who understand the theories of friedman just have purpose of putting in the hands of the bank control of all, therefore the power, the crisis of today is the fault of monopolies or state intervention? or perhaps blame the greed of the banks have created derivatives or other crap to create fictitious wealth in their favor?
losheva 2 years ago
"in the name of freedom enslaves the workers"
How can there be slavery without initiation of force? Or is it any voluntary exchange in the free market a form of "slavery"?
You really need to stop with the empty socialist rethoric.
Wraith23 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
losheva 2 years ago
speak of natural selection makes sense in the context of containing the food, but try to think of natural selection within a species, we shall see that natural selection leads to marginalize those who do not cooperate, since the human species what should we think? ?
losheva 2 years ago
Comment removed
losheva 2 years ago
the human is at the top of the food chain, lives in the pack and need each other to survive, I produce paper that I need people who cultivates trees or paper reciclar, well try to find another species with similar characteristics, Summit food chain and living in the pack ...the lions? within the pack of lions as natural selection, is not perhaps the most arrogant outsider who does not cooperate? the clash between groups of lions is not the case when a flock may invade the territory of another?
losheva 2 years ago
Americans should return to the concept of freedom expressed by Abraham Lincon, equal human rights for all! and not to the concept of freedom of this sinister figure, spoke of Lincon about greed or natural selection as the way to freedom? Americans think for once in your story, the shortest of any other culture in the world ...
losheva 2 years ago
"Americans should return to the concept of freedom expressed by Abraham Lincon"
I wonder if you even know what were Abraham Lincoln ideas.
Wraith23 2 years ago 8
@Wraith23 I do they include suspending habeas corpus, starting massive wars, and unlimited use of federal power. That was Lincoln's ideas of "freedom".
thelotuseater100 7 months ago