@JoshMan522 No freedom exists to infringe on other people's freedoms (a chief problem with socialism). Since, however, in the real world, cpaitalism has been so tremendously beneficial, improving working conditions, wages and prosperity particularly for the poor and workers over the last 300 years (and where unions and state intervention have been LEAST present) while socialism has butchered millions, your question is the best rejection of socialism imaginable.
@FletchforFreedom Loaded terms like socialism or capitalism can both equate with fascism no matter which political camp you're in. I believe in democracy. I don't believe we've ever had democracy in North America, only inverted totalitarianism whereby you vote in dictators. There are more sophisticated forms of governance. As to your comment, "No freedom exists to impinge on... [other's] freedoms" How about the "freedom" to pollute? Doesn't that impinge on people's right to fresh air or water?
What a great man. I'd love to see a movie about his life. When they showed the young guy excited to get a picture of him, it reminded me of "A beautiful mind".
What a great man. I'd love to see a movie about his life. When they showed the young guy excited to get a picture of him, it reminded me of "A beautiful mind".
@1963danno I think he knew he was a neo-con con-job man, but he did it anyway... likely ulterior motives... some kind of kickbacks somewhere along the line with his country club a-hole buddies. The biggest lie he told was that only governments and their agendas oppress folks and not elite business pricks who buy off the politicians in the first place.
@JoshMan522 In the real world (that place you are apparently completely unfamiliar with), the state extorts from businesses and intervenes always to its own benefit, playing favorites to increase its own power. Corporations CAN'T oppress folks because they lack the ability to impose force that rests entirely with the state.
@FletchforFreedom The corporations pay for the politicians who vote in policies that protect their interests. Laws are set up to protect the owners of this world with police.
@FletchforFreedom Gee, in the real world that I live in, the top corporations get away with paying no (or hardly any) taxes, and, on top of that, get subsidies (read: corporate welfare). In turn, they run things by buying off politicians, and get the red carpet rolled out for them, while they exploit the working class. Nuff said.
@JoshMan522 Look, I get that your in your "real world' of rubber-room-and-jacket-with-sleeves-that-tie-in-the-back-land, government is not the concentration of power, it doesn't penalize those (a la Microsoft) who do not donate to those in power and doesn't extort ever greater sums from those among whom it plays favorites, but I'm not sure why you took half a dozen posts to say it.
As for my rebuttal, in the unlikely event you present something of substance I promise to provide one.
@FletchforFreedom Is it too hard for you to debate issues without including character assassination every time? Microsoft maybe an exception, but, on the whole, corporations exist to make as much money as possible, workers and environment be damned.
@JoshMan522 Put simply, where governmnet intervention is least, worker compensation and environmental quality is highest. Because corporations want to make as much money as possible, they compete for the best workers which is why working conditions, compensation and living standards grew fastest in the US in comparison to more unionized Europe, faster in the absence of such interventions and fasterst in those states with the least union activity.
@FletchforFreedom B.S.! I'd love to hear you tell the people in India whose relatives were killed at the Dow Chemical plant explosion that they should've had less government intervention/safety measures... yep, unh hunh, unh hunh....
@JoshMan522 LOL! had you any garsp of the examples you provide, you would know that the problem that caused the Bhopal accident was primarily the result of INDIAN REGULATIONS that required the use of outdated tanks, required the company to insure only with the governmnet (so victims couldn't get compensated) and India prevented those who might have fixed the problem from entering with threats of prosecution. you prove my point for me!
@FletchforFreedom As if they didn't want something more to be done by their own government, their own corrupt gov't who sold out to foreign investment. You prove to me that you're clever but full of nonsense; much like Friedman was. Asshole.
@JoshMan522 Of course they wanted more to be done by their own governmnet but because the governmnet wanted more power the comoany was not permitted to put in place better safety procedures. That you have no grasp of the issues hardly reflects badly on me.
@JoshMan522 You can look up the studies on monopsony and wage growth if you'd like or total compensation (which has risen steadily from the beginning of the Industrial Revolution to the present) - try the BLS and Census Bureau. The relationship has been enormously beneficial to workers which is why income mobility remains so high in the United States.
@FletchforFreedom You're living in some kind of fantasy, land, all due respects, but this is garbage. Income mobility remaning so high in the U.S.? B.S. There is more wealth going to the upper 1% than ever before in recorded history.
@JoshMan522 You are simply ignorant of the readily available facts. Within six years the vast majority of those in the bottom income quintile move up. A third of those in the bottom quintile at any given time will eventually be part of the top quintile. The top 1% is not a stagnant group. People are always moving in or out of it. Most there at ony one time were NOT in the one percent and moved up!.
@JoshMan522 My stats come from the US Census Burea, and the Bureau of Economic Staistics (BLS). There are the official statistics and, in this regard are undisputed. If you have better stats or can even demonstrate an understanding of the "stats" you present, be my guest.
@JoshMan522 Standard Oil, as an example, gained its market share by offering consumers consistently lower prices, higher qality products and new innovations (kerosene, etc.). To get its competitors to fork over the moolah, the state attacked Standard Oil as a monoploy (even though it never met the legal or economic definition and its market share was relatively low for several products and shrinking overall). History simply does not support your conclusions.
@FletchforFreedom There used to be 8 or 9 major oil companies in the U.S. Now how many are there? 2 or 3? And you don't think price fixing ever occurs? Have fun in Disneyland, sucker.
@JoshMan522 Oil is a global commodity with literally hundreds of producers. i don't know which is more imbecilic. The belief that competition only happens in one country or that price fixing has ever worked in the oil industry. OPEC has tried it repeatedly (thanks to the power of governments who are direct owners) and each time it has collapsed becasue the incentive even of members to cheat is overwhelming.
You keep proving my points and then laughing, apparently at your own expense.
foster a CIA backed military junta, install a puppet dictator, force his "free market" fundamentalist programs down the throats of an entire population aginst their will, and afterward have the audacity to call his coup a win for "freedom"
@MiltonAugustoPinoche Wow. I have seen countless people backing a long-debunked myth only believed at this point by blithering idiots with no skills at reasearch or common sense, but I've never before seen someone dumb enough to name the mselves for the myth.
@FletchforFreedom, so you're saying that Chile's economic miracle had absolutely nothing to do with the Chicago Boys, Milton Friedman, and the free-market reforms contained within The Brick (El Ladrillo)???
How very intellectually dishonest of you!
There's a lot of reserach to the effect that Friedman had, AT THE VERY LEAST, an indirect impact on the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile. It should speak volumes to the fact that these policies do NOTHING to foster true freedom.
@MiltonAugustoPinoche That Chile's "economic miracle" had a great deal to do with Pinochet's adoption of Friedman's suggested anti-inflationary policies (as i conceded at the outset) is certainly true. As Friedman himself stated AT THE TIME adoption of that particular policy is economically beneficial regardless of the type of government in place. That ANY of Friedman's free market policies were adopted has been completely disproven (bad history posing as research about "The Brick" aside).
@FletchforFreedom, in March 1975, Pinochet had a 45-minute meeting with Friedman and asked him to write a letter proposing some remedies. Friedman responded a month later with an eight-point proposal that largely mirrored the themes of the Chicago Boys. Pinochet appointed a succession of Chicago Boys to senior economic posts. Pinochet's democratic successors—all of them nominally left-of-center—only deepened the liberalization drive.
It stands to reason that Friedman had long-lasting impact.
@MiltonAugustoPinoche Yes, that meeting took place after Pinochet came to power. It was the only meeting they had. The letter was the only correspondence and the ONLY point in it adopted was the anti-inflationary suggestion (which DID benefit the Chilean people and foster the "miracle" after Allende's economci devastation). Friedman advocated capitalism which requires individual economic liberty, not the corporatism (socialism) that Pinochet adopted that was anything but "free trade".
@FletchforFreedom, you don't seem to appreciate the fact that Augusto Pinochet did far more than simply implement anti-inflationary policies.
He totally transformed the nature of the country.
Anti-inflationary policies were only one part of his "reforms." He also privatized state-owned industries and pursued a policy of economic liberalization, both of which do not necessarily affect the money supply.
Besides, he had to suppress opposition to these policies.
@MiltonAugustoPinoche Nice rebuttle. You've done your homework unlike our friend, Fletch here, who has the perfunctory knowledge of how the world works, the old saws handed down from the one-eyed views of neo-con con men.
Where was "the invisible hand" when our economy went south? Years of Friedman-inspired deregulation, executed by father and son Bush, left financial markets in the hands of -- well -- invisible hands. Now off their regulatory leashes, financial institutions could create, invest in, and manipulate new, exotic, unstable, ungrounded, risky, but highly profitable, financial products -- mainly derivatives and securitization devices, such as subprime mortgage packages.
He admited himself that he was wrong on taxes.The people who the government taxed at 80% did not work, they let their money work for them and they were still waaay better off than everybody else, it's called capitalism. What you are advocating is called an oligarchy.
Milton Friedman was a fraud. He was supposedly for the freedom of the individual and anti-statism in all respects but for monetary policy. Why Milton Fraudman? Why do you think the government should not tax people high but should have the power to inflate the money supply at will which is essentially a tax. All these Friedman apologists are just overwhelmed by nothing more than pure emotion. The man was a greater fraud than all Keynesians put together.
@cyrus..are people going to wrk at a place that pays "starving weges" or buy products from a company that is knowingly destroying the environment...will people wrk if they pay 80% in taxes..would you..do yoi need the government to make the right decision for you..or do you like the "freedom of choice"
"Chile is not a politically free system, and I do not condone the system. But the people there are freer than the people in Communist societies because government plays a smaller role. The conditions of the people in the past few years has been getting better and not worse. They would be still better to get rid of the junta and to be able to have a free democratic system." Friedman
It all turned out to be true and socialist countries improved considerably after adopting free market.
@seppsters Of course he never had to say that to the face of any family members of the people tortured and killed by pinochet. What he means is "government plays a smaller role... in taxing and regulating business." That is the only 'freedom' that he cares about. The type of property rights that Friedman is obsessed with only ever apply too a tiny percentage of the population.. He is just a patsy. I spit on his grave.
@cyrus79100 said 'Of course he never had to say that to the face of any family members of the people tortured and killed by pinochet. What he means is "government plays a smaller role... in taxing and regulating business."'
@seppsters Really? Why? If its so dumb why can't you respond with anything meaningful, just an ad hominem attack? What I'm saying is that the freedom of an industry to pollute as much as it wants and pay people starvation wages is much less meaningful than freedom of expression or assembly which have nothing to do with capitalist economics. But Friedman doesn't care about those freedoms because they don't benefit the elite.
@cyrus79100 Is your fallacious response any better? Friedman advocated individual liberty (including expression and assembly). He never saw a "freedom" to pollute as much as one wants (it harms others and is easily addressed with private property rights). And "starvation wages" has always been a meaningless term based upon a fallacy. In fact, capitalism has consistently resulted in higher wages (yes, Engels was debunked) and continually improved living standards.
That's my problem with Milton in that he talks theory and NEVER seemed to measure anything he said next to reality.
"He never saw a "freedom" to pollute as much as one wants (it harms others and is easily addressed with private property rights)"
I mean WTF if only life was so simple and i could take all poluters to court etc etc. Well life is not as simple as just useing property rights yet people like Milton NEVER seem to offer anything based on that. It's all too simple.
@alfienoaks Quite the contrary, Friedman talks extensively about economic history. The positions he takes are the only ones consistent with actual reality. In fact, the application of property rights to deal with pollution issues has been phenomenally successful whenever ut has been permitted to work - from early inductrial England to the US for more than a century to the application of private river ownership in Scandinavia. And this is exactly what he advocates.
@mastalp01 Thank God he is finally in hell where he will see most of his friends and colleagues.Friedman is a lying weasel who always used Gov. to enforce his brutal policy. Trust his actions not his words...evil prick.
I think it's non-sense, it's based on nothing nad has no proof what-so-ever, it's basically just rumour-mongering. How can you compare the fear you feel under debt to the fear you feel in a fascist or socialist regime. It's trying to find ghosts to blame all your problems on.
There's a video where he talks about the people who have no right to choose, because they have no money, but I can't seem to find it.
I think it's fallacious to bring up the extremes of a fascist regime. Don't get me wrong, I support a sound capitalist, free society. I don't think that's what we have today, regardless of what our leaders say. I'd wish to improve it, and through it, better the lives of our people.
And btw.. Tony Benn has been a British Labour Party politician, former Member of Parliament and Cabinet Minister... So it's not wise to say that it's just rumor-mongering and has no sound proof.
There's no such thing as a moderate version of communism / socialism, the natural conclusion is totalitarianism.
Capitalism gives you the opportunity to improve it without destroying everyone else's life. Start a charity, a fund, an awareness campaign, a business, research, basically things that don't impose your view on anyone else.
Tony Benn: You think politicans don't make sensational and empty speeches ? Can you find evidence to proove his theory ?
No such thing as moderate socialism????? Do you even know what socialism is? It is not just communism you know. You Americans do tend to too narrowly define things like socialism which is why your comparisons with capitalism are all so easily decent. Capitalism has problems you know or can you not even admit that. My take is that any system can be good or bad and it's down to people to make sure of that. (except dictatorships etc)
@alfienoaks He should have said there is no such thing as viable socialism. Capitalism is no panacea but of what "problems" are you speaking? - the boom bust cycle created by socialistic inetrvention in the economy? - the cycle of dependancy created by the socialistic welfare state? - unemployment, which is higher in more socialistic economies? - living standards, which are highest to the extent that capitalism is adopted? I'm just curious.
Socialist intervention? What? in the US? where. As allways it's never conservatism or capitalism that's to blame. Fletch your post does not seem to relate to my post either as where do i talk of problems? Unemployment varies from nation to nation and time to time and is not really realted to socialism etc. In comunist russia the unemployment was ZERO i may remind you. As for living standards well the living standarss in the US have been dropping for 40 years.
@alfienoaks Yes, in the US. When the central bank manipulates interest rates creaing the bom and bust cycle, that's an example of socialism. Re-read your own post: "Capitalism has problems you know or can you not even admit that." Unemployment tends to be higher under socialism and only a bffoon believes unemployment (let alone rampant underemployment) was anywhere NEAR "zero" at ANY time. And living standards in the US continue to climb steadily. Fire your (incompetent) fact checker!
But is a central bank a socialist idea? It is about management of money to help it's flow etc so how is that socialistic? Again this is just convenience of argument from Miltonites. What works is capital and what doesn't is social no matter what. Surely you can't get to the bottom of what works or doesn't in economies if you go about that kind of analisys. So what if living standards climb in the US. And yes in the USSR there was NO UNEMPLOYMENT as it was a managed economy.
@alfienoaks Intervention into the economy by the government is, by definition, socialism, so, yes, a central bank is a socialist concept. It’s not convenience; it’s proper understanding and use of the terminology. And if you are so incapable of doing even the most basic research such that you actually believe that there was no unemployment in the Soviet Union (actually made worse by central management), you have no place faulting anyone else’s analysis of anything.
So you think a central bank is a socialist invention? Intervention by governments is socialism? Well shame as no one agrees with you. Check Wikipedia and all other definitions of socialism. This is getting ludicrously conveniant in terms of blame etc. Anything that works in your eyes is capitalist and every mistake is gubinment and socialism. Typical free market obsessive. But the you are probably a lobbyist bot account.
@alfienoaks Sociaism is the exercise of the powers of ownership collectively, usually by the state. It includes all governmnet economic action, including central banking. If you cannot be bothered to learn the definitions of the terms under discussion, perhaps you should find something else to do. Literally EVERY economist, political scientist and historian agrees with me - this stuff is basic - only the uneducated believe otherwise.
What I am is an economist whose studied these issues.
What is wrong with socialism again?? I don't think there is anything wrong but your sort just seem to dissmiss it out of hand. Wh sould private collective action allways be good and public collective action be bad?
@alfienoaks It simply doesn't work - look up the "socilaist calculation problem". The difference is private ownership (which can result in common action but ownership remains severable) and collective ownership, usually by the state, at a societal level. Small collectives can function (albeit they are short-lived), but the unanimity of purpose required at the societal level is unachievable. And, pragmatically, public collective action has done far more harm than good.
Small collectives are short lived? What a load of crap. Kibbutzes last don't they? there are many co-ops and collectives that have lasted a long time.
@alfienoaks The kibbutzim are a disaster, existing only because of massive government subsidy. Still, members desert to become much more prosperous in the marketplace. The few kibbutzim that thrive abandon collectivism and operate like a business. There are very few co-ops/collectives that last a long time (a generation is very rare). Instead hindreds pop up every year and virtually the same amount vanish each year leaving the total at less than 2,000 worldwide. The facts are against you.
@alfienoaks Mondragon in Spain is a good example of a huge corporation based on a worker cooperative (no, not Maoist or Leninist) but wherein workers get a vote on how their workplace is run. To hell with the top down model. Bunch of elitist b.s.
@JoshMan522 Mondragon is a good example of how cooperative businesses cannot possibly survive without MASSIVE subsidies and preferential treatment by the state while the overall economy of the state gets into deeper and deeper trouble. What's next? The long debunked myth of a successful Catalonia?
@alfienoaks Right wingers believe that hand-outs for corporations (in the form of subsidies and tax breaks) is "free market capitalism" while hand-outs for ordinary individuals is "socialism." A crock is a crock is a crock.
@JoshMan522 You are absolutely correct. What you wrote "is a crock is a crock". No one has argued that subsidies or special tax breaks are free market capitalism (that's simply a lie). Corporatism is no less socialism and no less economically harmful.
@JoshMan522 You are absolutely correct. What you wrote "is a crock is a crock". No one has argued that subsidies or special tax breaks are free market capitalism (that's simply a lie). Corporatism is no less socialism and no less economically harmful.
@JoshMan522 You are absolutely correct. What you wrote "is a crock is a crock". No one has argued that subsidies or special tax breaks are free market capitalism (that's simply a lie). Corporatism is no less socialism and no less economically harmful.
@alfienoaks No, private ownership is not socialistic. And stock based companies are privately owned by individuals who voluntarily engage in commona ctivity and their interests are severable and transfreable. They operate within a free maketplace where their ownership, products and services are made available for voluntary exchange at mutually agreed upon prices.
@FletchforFreedom Mutually agreed upon prices made up by price fixing with the few remaining companies that have the lion's share of the contracts to produce a product or deliever a service, yeah, that's the mutually agreed upon prices people have to pay if they need to.
@JoshMan522 The problem is that your complaint bears no resemblance to anything that has ever actually happened in reality. The only way that price fixing can be maintained is if governmnet intervenes. Free market compertition renders such price fixing impossible.
I wish I could have been Milton Friedman's student...or at least have the opportunity to have a great picture with him.
Sir, your work is not only being cited today but opening the minds of millions to ways of thinking that they normally wouldn't have applied to certain economic or political situations.
It's the "Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein, you dumb faggot. Learn what book you are citing. It's obvious you haven't read either the Shock Doctrine or Free to Choose. Why don't you watch Justin Bieber videos -- something on your intellectual level?
Wow, I used to think Milton Friedman was a good man... But when you've got George W. Bush and Alan Greenspan (and now Ben Bernanke as well), singing his praises, that's got to make you wonder... You don't hear those guys praising Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Ron Paul, Peter (or Irwin) Schiff... hhmmmm, very interesting... got to make you wonder...
@maidenak like most rinos and moderates they believe in big government and will apply capitalistic principles one at a time in much the same manner as collectivists tinker and intrude in the markets
friedman's dealings with the fed and the courses of action he recommended were always the choice between the lesser of evils
the core principles of free market capitalism are all but ignored by those who benefit from an intrusive government
@quinnrasta I know Ron Paul wrote an article after he died commending him, but I've never heard any of those other guys commend him at all, in fact Rothbard called him out as the "Court Liberterian", and Hayek called him a Socialist!
@quinnrasta Frieman was from the Chicago School, not the Ausrian School, which is what all those guys adhere to. The Chicago School was not very different from Keynesian Economics, in that they both differentiated between "Macro" and "Micro" economics, whereas the Austrian School teaches that they're both the same - which they are. International Economics is fundamentally no different than Household Economics.
The Fed is the 4th branch of government, a revolving door between big business and the government. It is in no way shape or form an element of capitalism to have a central bank (especially a private one) ran by unelected officials who have the power to play god with the economy. Printing money out of thin air causes high inflation rates which we all pay as a tax. QE is very dangerous and kills societies faster than anything else
Milton Friedman is the reason I am pursuing economics. Charles Wheelan is 2nd, and my Economics teacher is 3rd. Thank You Milton for not only changing my life but for the millions who have benefited through the implementation of your policies. We'll miss you and your insight. I only hope the next Milton comes soon. Maybe, its me? lol.
It already is legal to destroy the environment; the question is whether or not passing a law to make it illegal is actually going to prevent it from being destroyed.
@userek69 Milton Friedman has observed the enivronnment as an externality and would advocate for environmental regulations if it could be confirmed that it is suffering. I think he would support measures to regulate emissions because of their evident threat to our environment. which is something we all benefit from but not one individual could maintain. This is the only types of government interventions that Friedman was for. Externalities.
Dont know how they can claim that we are better off then we were 15 years ago when the middle class continues to disappear at an alarming rate. Is this what capitilist call success? If so, for whom?
Capitalism is the wage slavery of immense humanity in a world market system of artificial scarcity to perpetuate the conditions of servitude and bondage of immense humanity. Capitalism is the monetary serfdom of the working class for the abstract process of capital accumulation and concentration.
Real thinkers know that the best way to spot someone talking shit from a biased point of view, is if they can't even get the last name right.
and it was obviously not a typo and shows you are not familiar with him.
if you would kindly fuck off and realize that someone who is in debt due to accident should expect support from family. and that welfare just destroys people's sense of responsibility of their counterparts but invoking the attitude 'the government should do more'
@daPlumber702 If someone is crippled and looses their income from a accident that was not their fault, but they pay no taxes for social services are they really free?
You want me to keep ripping you up infront of all the Friedman groopies I will be happy to.
@MsZeitgeist85 If their income was not taken from them, and they did not set aside money/ get their own insurance with their income before they were crippled, then they would be foolish, but still free.
You think you're sharp, but you're rather dull Zeitgeist...
You ignore the fact that capitalism does have safety nets for small social networks (family) Your grandma gets sick, you take care of her. But don't force someone to take care of the drug dealer down the street's grandma.
@daPlumber702 Their insurance you refer to are for profit HMOs that have been a miserable failure. That is not a choice, it is a monopoly. They do not regulate themselves as we learned with Blue Cross of California.
The big fallacy of your argument is assuming social programs are a 1 way street and they are not. Making EVERYTHING for profit is not capitalism it is a snake eating its own tail. This is one reason that we are loosing jobs in the US is because of our failed health care system.
@MsZeitgeist85 Profit is the best motivator by far and without equal. The only miserable failure has been government intervention in the medical system. And just so you know the monopoly is only possible because of the government which is way to social for it's own good.
Everything is for profit, whether you choose to look at it or not. Are you going to enslave people and force them to become doctors, working on people for free? This is the only way it's free, and even then you must...
@daPlumber702 NO lots of things are not for profit. Like all of the other countrys that have better health care than the US. We are loosing jobs to Canada because companys that outsource to Canada don't have to pay for health benifits genius boy. You couldn't even make that connection because you take this descredited crackpot Friedman seriously.
@MsZeitgeist85 You only make yourself look dumber every time your fingers touch your keyboard.
How the fuck do you think doctors get paid in canada and england and all those other places with "free" health care? How the fuck do you think hospitals stay open or fed with power. You're an ignorant bitch that knows jack shit about jack shit, so next time before you go preaching about how people should give you stuff, Learn something first.
@daPlumber702 1. In the UK the doctors work for the state and they make alot of money 2. In Canada they operate privatly but they are funded publically. The point is get rid of the for-profit health insurance for primary care and have price controlls. The for profit insurance system is why the American System has failed. It is also one of the reasons Friedman and his Chicago school of Nazis are no longer relevant.
Boy if you were any dumber we would have to water your stupid ass.
@MsZeitgeist85 I quote, "In the UK the doctors work for the state and they make alot of money" I go on to quote "The point is get rid of the for-profit health insurance for primary care and have price controlls" Past the fact that your spelling is about as good as your common sense You have utterly destroyed your own argument in less than one paragraph. For profit is here to stay dumbass.
@FletchforFreedom Pinochet fired Friedman's Chicago boys in 1982 then this crackpots predictions of hyperinflation in the US didn't happen. That is why Friedman stopped speaking in public after 1983, proving that Monetarism is obsolete in todays econony.
Since no such firing took place, since it was the Keynesians (primarily Krugman as anyone can look up) and NOT the monetarists that predicted hyperinflation in the US, since your fairy tale about the events realted to BAM bear no resemblance to reality and since Friedman continued to speak pretty much continuously for several years after 1983, all you've demonstrated is that you can fill a post with more obvious BS than most people could have imagined.
@FletchforFreedom In 82 Pinochet fired the Chicago boys and 83 this crackpot was predicting hyperinflation in the USA which never happened.
Why don't you tell me how well Friedman's Monetarism worked for Thatcher when she tried it? It was a failure like our Health Care System and in 86 The Bank of England abandon Monetarism.
You have been 0-8 since you failed to debunk the Himlstein study on bankruptcy's in the US dipshit. You want me to keep ripping you up all week?
In other words, you can't support the imbecility that you posted before about Pinochet, the Chicago Boys, monetarism and Thatcher, so the best argument you can come up with is...
...to repeat it verbatim.
And you expect people to take you seriously?!?!?
I didn't need to debunk the Himmelsern study; all I needed to do was point out the fact that it obviously didn't say what you CLAIMED it did. You haven't won a single point. All you're doing is embarrassing yourself...
@MsZeitgeist85 So true.Monetarism &Quantity theory of money implies that prices rise or fall depending on whether the quantity of currency in circulation increases or decreases,in relation to a definite level of equilibrium.It was in this way that the idea of a rate of interest resulting from the supply and demand of capital,a rate of interest which rises until the demand ceases because it is excessive,was refuted at the beginning of the 2000 century by the Swedish economist Knut Wicksell
@MsZeitgeist85 Wicksell showed that the foundations for Monetarism, Irving Fischers monetary theory was static and didn´t work.Knut Wicksell showed that the rate of interest in equilibrium is determined by the relation between saving and investment; and Gunnar Myrdal, a pupil of Wicksell’s, went still further, explaining that this rate of interest actually depends on the return expected from investments’, that is, on the rate of profit.
Britain is better off because of Thatcher...the lett-wing unions were destroying the country before she came in and bashed their brains out...thank you Madame Thatcher.
@jmsmith363 There was a problem with inflation in the UK. There problems had nothing to do with unions. THatcher was using Friedman's formula to get inflation under controll and it lead to a disaster. It was so bad that they gave up on Monetarism.
Besides the old theory that high wages = inflation was discredited along time ago.
Her solutions came but at what at what cost? Also are you sure it was all so simple? The problem with people like you is all yo keep doing is going on about the unions and that was 30 years age. Does thatchers nion busting excuse all the failures? NO.
@enkelin32 Wouldn't that be nice... unfortunately that is NOT government forced health care. That would be the free market system. Obamacare, the canadian health care plan and in brittain they see a third of the money stolen to fund the programs disappear before a single doctor sees a single dollar. Sorry, but fail.
@enkelin32 First off "government money" is an oxymoron. There is no such thing. Only people's money that the government has stolen from the people. Secondly it was taken by all the hands it goes through on the way to the doctor. Have you any clue how many government jobs are made to keep track of such a system? Those government jobs are not creating wealth, because they are being paid for by taxpayer's money. They aren't in jail because they're stealing the money with the gov's consent
@daPlumber702 OK then who is stealing the Health Care money? Why are they not caught and prosecuted? In the USA the Health Insurance companies STEAL IT LEGALLY. HA HA!. I would rather have the Government dispense the money to Dr.'s and hospitals than the CEO of Aetna making 92 MILLION per year. Why do I owe him that much money for being a thief?
@MsZeitgeist85 Health Insurance companies are a parasite upon the system, they have never preformed the first surgery or dispensed the first prescription but they get 1/3 of every dollar spent on healthcare.
@MsZeitgeist85 get rid of hospital beds and indeed hospitals. No more scalpals or mri machines. Profit is what runs the world. And it's a GOOD thing.
Losing jobs becaus... Wow.. you're just all over the place aren't you? And not a bit of logic to back up an ounce of it either. Do us all a favor and shhhh.
@MsZeitgeist85 Friedmans "Chigaco Boys" experimented with countries all over the world causing hundreds of thousands of deaths and untold suffering, installing right wing dictators sometime using armed coups to force their "austerity" on the people. What many dont realise is it now the USA's turn for Friedman type "shock Doctrine" HA I'll be laughing when all the Friedman "groupies" are scratching their unemployed arses and living in cardboard boxes.
Milton Friedman was a gift to the world. He was and still is one of my greatest influences. I am humbled at his towering intellect. His vision of freedom was one of the most eloquent visions every bestowed on mankind. In my view, he might even have been greater than the founding fathers.
@SuperGuitarman69 Friedman had his disciples from the University of Chicago overturn many democratically elected governments and installed their hand picked dictators. Suharto in Indonesia was another one installed by Friedmanites. He went on co commit genocide on his own people. So how many people have to die for you to claim "economic success"?
@SuperGuitarman69 LOL that the best ya got. The fact remains that Friedmanism is all about killing and taking everything from the people of a nation and giving it to a few thieves who call themselves the oligarchy.
@enkelin32 Hold on. You aren't even worth it. I must copy and paste. You are a whack job. Total whack job. Enjoy oligarchy? What a complete drone sheep. Do not respond to me you whack job.
@enkelin32 - Have you actually listened to anything that Friedman said? Because your "facts" have nothing to do with reality. Taking things from people by force and giving it to others is the hallmark of socialism and progressivism, not Friedman's libertarianism at all.
@enkelin32 Today, Chile is one of South America's most stable and prosperous nations and a recognized middle power. It leads Latin American nations in human development, competitiveness, income per capita, globalization, economic freedom, and low perception of corruption. It also ranks high regionally in freedom of the press and democratic development. Pinochet was a moron and a corrupt individual. Friedman DID NOT APPOINT HIM. But the economic prosperity you enjoy today? Thank Milton for that!
Fletch do you monitor this shit 24 hours a day. And please tell us what you are trying to win here?
alfienoaks 1 month ago
@alfienoaks Fletch is trying to aggrandize his own ego.
JoshMan522 1 month ago
All one has to do is ask oneself: "Do I accept that some freedoms impinge on other people's freedoms?"
The freedom for the carp to eat the minnow is not the same freedom for the minnow to not be eaten!
JoshMan522 1 month ago in playlist Milton Friedman a champion of capitalism
@JoshMan522 No freedom exists to infringe on other people's freedoms (a chief problem with socialism). Since, however, in the real world, cpaitalism has been so tremendously beneficial, improving working conditions, wages and prosperity particularly for the poor and workers over the last 300 years (and where unions and state intervention have been LEAST present) while socialism has butchered millions, your question is the best rejection of socialism imaginable.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom Loaded terms like socialism or capitalism can both equate with fascism no matter which political camp you're in. I believe in democracy. I don't believe we've ever had democracy in North America, only inverted totalitarianism whereby you vote in dictators. There are more sophisticated forms of governance. As to your comment, "No freedom exists to impinge on... [other's] freedoms" How about the "freedom" to pollute? Doesn't that impinge on people's right to fresh air or water?
JoshMan522 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What a great man. I'd love to see a movie about his life. When they showed the young guy excited to get a picture of him, it reminded me of "A beautiful mind".
ericNsarah2010 1 month ago
What a great man. I'd love to see a movie about his life. When they showed the young guy excited to get a picture of him, it reminded me of "A beautiful mind".
ericNsarah2010 1 month ago
@ericNsarah2010 He was a fucking douchbag
1963danno 1 month ago
@1963danno I think he knew he was a neo-con con-job man, but he did it anyway... likely ulterior motives... some kind of kickbacks somewhere along the line with his country club a-hole buddies. The biggest lie he told was that only governments and their agendas oppress folks and not elite business pricks who buy off the politicians in the first place.
JoshMan522 1 month ago in playlist Milton Friedman a champion of capitalism
@JoshMan522 In the real world (that place you are apparently completely unfamiliar with), the state extorts from businesses and intervenes always to its own benefit, playing favorites to increase its own power. Corporations CAN'T oppress folks because they lack the ability to impose force that rests entirely with the state.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom The corporations pay for the politicians who vote in policies that protect their interests. Laws are set up to protect the owners of this world with police.
JoshMan522 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom Gee, in the real world that I live in, the top corporations get away with paying no (or hardly any) taxes, and, on top of that, get subsidies (read: corporate welfare). In turn, they run things by buying off politicians, and get the red carpet rolled out for them, while they exploit the working class. Nuff said.
JoshMan522 1 month ago
@JoshMan522 Look, I get that your in your "real world' of rubber-room-and-jacket-with-sleeves-that-tie-in-the-back-land, government is not the concentration of power, it doesn't penalize those (a la Microsoft) who do not donate to those in power and doesn't extort ever greater sums from those among whom it plays favorites, but I'm not sure why you took half a dozen posts to say it.
As for my rebuttal, in the unlikely event you present something of substance I promise to provide one.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom Is it too hard for you to debate issues without including character assassination every time? Microsoft maybe an exception, but, on the whole, corporations exist to make as much money as possible, workers and environment be damned.
JoshMan522 1 month ago
@JoshMan522 Put simply, where governmnet intervention is least, worker compensation and environmental quality is highest. Because corporations want to make as much money as possible, they compete for the best workers which is why working conditions, compensation and living standards grew fastest in the US in comparison to more unionized Europe, faster in the absence of such interventions and fasterst in those states with the least union activity.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom B.S.! I'd love to hear you tell the people in India whose relatives were killed at the Dow Chemical plant explosion that they should've had less government intervention/safety measures... yep, unh hunh, unh hunh....
JoshMan522 1 month ago
@JoshMan522 LOL! had you any garsp of the examples you provide, you would know that the problem that caused the Bhopal accident was primarily the result of INDIAN REGULATIONS that required the use of outdated tanks, required the company to insure only with the governmnet (so victims couldn't get compensated) and India prevented those who might have fixed the problem from entering with threats of prosecution. you prove my point for me!
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom As if they didn't want something more to be done by their own government, their own corrupt gov't who sold out to foreign investment. You prove to me that you're clever but full of nonsense; much like Friedman was. Asshole.
JoshMan522 1 month ago
@JoshMan522 Of course they wanted more to be done by their own governmnet but because the governmnet wanted more power the comoany was not permitted to put in place better safety procedures. That you have no grasp of the issues hardly reflects badly on me.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@JoshMan522 You can look up the studies on monopsony and wage growth if you'd like or total compensation (which has risen steadily from the beginning of the Industrial Revolution to the present) - try the BLS and Census Bureau. The relationship has been enormously beneficial to workers which is why income mobility remains so high in the United States.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom You're living in some kind of fantasy, land, all due respects, but this is garbage. Income mobility remaning so high in the U.S.? B.S. There is more wealth going to the upper 1% than ever before in recorded history.
JoshMan522 1 month ago
@JoshMan522 You are simply ignorant of the readily available facts. Within six years the vast majority of those in the bottom income quintile move up. A third of those in the bottom quintile at any given time will eventually be part of the top quintile. The top 1% is not a stagnant group. People are always moving in or out of it. Most there at ony one time were NOT in the one percent and moved up!.
Your talking points are long refuted.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom You're dreaming and you've bought into bogus stats. Have fun!
JoshMan522 1 month ago
@JoshMan522 My stats come from the US Census Burea, and the Bureau of Economic Staistics (BLS). There are the official statistics and, in this regard are undisputed. If you have better stats or can even demonstrate an understanding of the "stats" you present, be my guest.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@JoshMan522 Standard Oil, as an example, gained its market share by offering consumers consistently lower prices, higher qality products and new innovations (kerosene, etc.). To get its competitors to fork over the moolah, the state attacked Standard Oil as a monoploy (even though it never met the legal or economic definition and its market share was relatively low for several products and shrinking overall). History simply does not support your conclusions.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom There used to be 8 or 9 major oil companies in the U.S. Now how many are there? 2 or 3? And you don't think price fixing ever occurs? Have fun in Disneyland, sucker.
JoshMan522 1 month ago
@JoshMan522 Oil is a global commodity with literally hundreds of producers. i don't know which is more imbecilic. The belief that competition only happens in one country or that price fixing has ever worked in the oil industry. OPEC has tried it repeatedly (thanks to the power of governments who are direct owners) and each time it has collapsed becasue the incentive even of members to cheat is overwhelming.
You keep proving my points and then laughing, apparently at your own expense.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
This video is SHIT
dansoftheways 2 months ago 5
What would milton friedman do?
Well, heck !
i know!
foster a CIA backed military junta, install a puppet dictator, force his "free market" fundamentalist programs down the throats of an entire population aginst their will, and afterward have the audacity to call his coup a win for "freedom"
MiltonAugustoPinoche 2 months ago
@MiltonAugustoPinoche Wow. I have seen countless people backing a long-debunked myth only believed at this point by blithering idiots with no skills at reasearch or common sense, but I've never before seen someone dumb enough to name the mselves for the myth.
Bravo!
FletchforFreedom 2 months ago
@FletchforFreedom, so you're saying that Chile's economic miracle had absolutely nothing to do with the Chicago Boys, Milton Friedman, and the free-market reforms contained within The Brick (El Ladrillo)???
How very intellectually dishonest of you!
There's a lot of reserach to the effect that Friedman had, AT THE VERY LEAST, an indirect impact on the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile. It should speak volumes to the fact that these policies do NOTHING to foster true freedom.
MiltonAugustoPinoche 2 months ago
@MiltonAugustoPinoche That Chile's "economic miracle" had a great deal to do with Pinochet's adoption of Friedman's suggested anti-inflationary policies (as i conceded at the outset) is certainly true. As Friedman himself stated AT THE TIME adoption of that particular policy is economically beneficial regardless of the type of government in place. That ANY of Friedman's free market policies were adopted has been completely disproven (bad history posing as research about "The Brick" aside).
FletchforFreedom 2 months ago
@FletchforFreedom, in March 1975, Pinochet had a 45-minute meeting with Friedman and asked him to write a letter proposing some remedies. Friedman responded a month later with an eight-point proposal that largely mirrored the themes of the Chicago Boys. Pinochet appointed a succession of Chicago Boys to senior economic posts. Pinochet's democratic successors—all of them nominally left-of-center—only deepened the liberalization drive.
It stands to reason that Friedman had long-lasting impact.
MiltonAugustoPinoche 2 months ago
@MiltonAugustoPinoche Yes, that meeting took place after Pinochet came to power. It was the only meeting they had. The letter was the only correspondence and the ONLY point in it adopted was the anti-inflationary suggestion (which DID benefit the Chilean people and foster the "miracle" after Allende's economci devastation). Friedman advocated capitalism which requires individual economic liberty, not the corporatism (socialism) that Pinochet adopted that was anything but "free trade".
FletchforFreedom 2 months ago
@FletchforFreedom, you don't seem to appreciate the fact that Augusto Pinochet did far more than simply implement anti-inflationary policies.
He totally transformed the nature of the country.
Anti-inflationary policies were only one part of his "reforms." He also privatized state-owned industries and pursued a policy of economic liberalization, both of which do not necessarily affect the money supply.
Besides, he had to suppress opposition to these policies.
MiltonAugustoPinoche 2 months ago
@MiltonAugustoPinoche Nice rebuttle. You've done your homework unlike our friend, Fletch here, who has the perfunctory knowledge of how the world works, the old saws handed down from the one-eyed views of neo-con con men.
JoshMan522 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom What a belittling and asinine comment with no rebutting of any substance. Bravo!
JoshMan522 1 month ago
@MiltonAugustoPinoche You got that right! And, that was the whole agenda under the Reagan gov't.
JoshMan522 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Where was "the invisible hand" when our economy went south? Years of Friedman-inspired deregulation, executed by father and son Bush, left financial markets in the hands of -- well -- invisible hands. Now off their regulatory leashes, financial institutions could create, invest in, and manipulate new, exotic, unstable, ungrounded, risky, but highly profitable, financial products -- mainly derivatives and securitization devices, such as subprime mortgage packages.
OrganNLou 3 months ago
Globalisation is NOT freedom! Milton Friedman would NOT condone what they're trying to pass off as freedom and "free trade" these days.
zdrux 4 months ago
He admited himself that he was wrong on taxes.The people who the government taxed at 80% did not work, they let their money work for them and they were still waaay better off than everybody else, it's called capitalism. What you are advocating is called an oligarchy.
bradjbourgeois73 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Milton Friedman was a fraud. He was supposedly for the freedom of the individual and anti-statism in all respects but for monetary policy. Why Milton Fraudman? Why do you think the government should not tax people high but should have the power to inflate the money supply at will which is essentially a tax. All these Friedman apologists are just overwhelmed by nothing more than pure emotion. The man was a greater fraud than all Keynesians put together.
shotsky94 4 months ago
@cyrus..are people going to wrk at a place that pays "starving weges" or buy products from a company that is knowingly destroying the environment...will people wrk if they pay 80% in taxes..would you..do yoi need the government to make the right decision for you..or do you like the "freedom of choice"
yakbills 5 months ago
And cue silence from the ignorant libertarian bitches who've never worked a day in their parasitic lives.
cyrus79100 5 months ago
@cyrus79100 libertarians are the ones that don't work, really? I think you should check your premises boy0
daPlumber702 5 months ago
A fucking asshole who didn't really believe his own bullshit, except that it ingratiated him to his masters. Piece of shit.
cyrus79100 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LIBERTARIANMONARCHY . COM
"A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both."
— Milton Friedman
ecnerwal999 5 months ago
I wish Dear Leader Obama understood even 5% of Milton Freidman's ideas
amitp2 5 months ago
"Made economics come alive." Bingo
seppsters 5 months ago in playlist Milton Friedman
Hey, why don't they show him shaking hands with Augusto Pinochet?
cyrus79100 6 months ago 3
@cyrus79100
"Chile is not a politically free system, and I do not condone the system. But the people there are freer than the people in Communist societies because government plays a smaller role. The conditions of the people in the past few years has been getting better and not worse. They would be still better to get rid of the junta and to be able to have a free democratic system." Friedman
It all turned out to be true and socialist countries improved considerably after adopting free market.
seppsters 5 months ago in playlist Milton Friedman
@seppsters Of course he never had to say that to the face of any family members of the people tortured and killed by pinochet. What he means is "government plays a smaller role... in taxing and regulating business." That is the only 'freedom' that he cares about. The type of property rights that Friedman is obsessed with only ever apply too a tiny percentage of the population.. He is just a patsy. I spit on his grave.
cyrus79100 5 months ago
@cyrus79100 said 'Of course he never had to say that to the face of any family members of the people tortured and killed by pinochet. What he means is "government plays a smaller role... in taxing and regulating business."'
That is a really really dumb answer.
seppsters 5 months ago
@seppsters Really? Why? If its so dumb why can't you respond with anything meaningful, just an ad hominem attack? What I'm saying is that the freedom of an industry to pollute as much as it wants and pay people starvation wages is much less meaningful than freedom of expression or assembly which have nothing to do with capitalist economics. But Friedman doesn't care about those freedoms because they don't benefit the elite.
cyrus79100 5 months ago
@cyrus79100 Is your fallacious response any better? Friedman advocated individual liberty (including expression and assembly). He never saw a "freedom" to pollute as much as one wants (it harms others and is easily addressed with private property rights). And "starvation wages" has always been a meaningless term based upon a fallacy. In fact, capitalism has consistently resulted in higher wages (yes, Engels was debunked) and continually improved living standards.
FletchforFreedom 5 months ago in playlist Milton Friedman
@FletchforFreedom
That's my problem with Milton in that he talks theory and NEVER seemed to measure anything he said next to reality.
"He never saw a "freedom" to pollute as much as one wants (it harms others and is easily addressed with private property rights)"
I mean WTF if only life was so simple and i could take all poluters to court etc etc. Well life is not as simple as just useing property rights yet people like Milton NEVER seem to offer anything based on that. It's all too simple.
alfienoaks 2 months ago
@alfienoaks Quite the contrary, Friedman talks extensively about economic history. The positions he takes are the only ones consistent with actual reality. In fact, the application of property rights to deal with pollution issues has been phenomenally successful whenever ut has been permitted to work - from early inductrial England to the US for more than a century to the application of private river ownership in Scandinavia. And this is exactly what he advocates.
FletchforFreedom 2 months ago
A fucking genius
samuelsixvids 6 months ago
i wish i was 30 years older then i could have been able to kill this bastard son of the fckin b i t ch!!!
mastalp01 6 months ago
@mastalp01 Thank God he is finally in hell where he will see most of his friends and colleagues.Friedman is a lying weasel who always used Gov. to enforce his brutal policy. Trust his actions not his words...evil prick.
abbadabbadolittle 6 months ago 2
@abbadabbadolittle Amen.
mastalp01 6 months ago
@abbadabbadolittle
Why aren't you criticizing Stalin or Mao's economic policies. I'm confused.
seppsters 5 months ago in playlist Milton Friedman
Wow, how sickening, does it get.
louiethegreater 7 months ago
Yes, choice is essential, but there's a problem in politics and economics today about choice:
/watch?v=OnserZOf1-4
Please I'd love to hear your comments, ideas and opinions.
fearfulmatrix 7 months ago
@fearfulmatrix
I think it's non-sense, it's based on nothing nad has no proof what-so-ever, it's basically just rumour-mongering. How can you compare the fear you feel under debt to the fear you feel in a fascist or socialist regime. It's trying to find ghosts to blame all your problems on.
There's a video where he talks about the people who have no right to choose, because they have no money, but I can't seem to find it.
seppsters 5 months ago in playlist Milton Friedman
@seppsters
I think it's fallacious to bring up the extremes of a fascist regime. Don't get me wrong, I support a sound capitalist, free society. I don't think that's what we have today, regardless of what our leaders say. I'd wish to improve it, and through it, better the lives of our people.
And btw.. Tony Benn has been a British Labour Party politician, former Member of Parliament and Cabinet Minister... So it's not wise to say that it's just rumor-mongering and has no sound proof.
fearfulmatrix 5 months ago
@fearfulmatrix
There's no such thing as a moderate version of communism / socialism, the natural conclusion is totalitarianism.
Capitalism gives you the opportunity to improve it without destroying everyone else's life. Start a charity, a fund, an awareness campaign, a business, research, basically things that don't impose your view on anyone else.
Tony Benn: You think politicans don't make sensational and empty speeches ? Can you find evidence to proove his theory ?
seppsters 5 months ago
@seppsters
No such thing as moderate socialism????? Do you even know what socialism is? It is not just communism you know. You Americans do tend to too narrowly define things like socialism which is why your comparisons with capitalism are all so easily decent. Capitalism has problems you know or can you not even admit that. My take is that any system can be good or bad and it's down to people to make sure of that. (except dictatorships etc)
alfienoaks 2 months ago
@alfienoaks He should have said there is no such thing as viable socialism. Capitalism is no panacea but of what "problems" are you speaking? - the boom bust cycle created by socialistic inetrvention in the economy? - the cycle of dependancy created by the socialistic welfare state? - unemployment, which is higher in more socialistic economies? - living standards, which are highest to the extent that capitalism is adopted? I'm just curious.
FletchforFreedom 2 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
Socialist intervention? What? in the US? where. As allways it's never conservatism or capitalism that's to blame. Fletch your post does not seem to relate to my post either as where do i talk of problems? Unemployment varies from nation to nation and time to time and is not really realted to socialism etc. In comunist russia the unemployment was ZERO i may remind you. As for living standards well the living standarss in the US have been dropping for 40 years.
alfienoaks 2 months ago
@alfienoaks Yes, in the US. When the central bank manipulates interest rates creaing the bom and bust cycle, that's an example of socialism. Re-read your own post: "Capitalism has problems you know or can you not even admit that." Unemployment tends to be higher under socialism and only a bffoon believes unemployment (let alone rampant underemployment) was anywhere NEAR "zero" at ANY time. And living standards in the US continue to climb steadily. Fire your (incompetent) fact checker!
FletchforFreedom 2 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
But is a central bank a socialist idea? It is about management of money to help it's flow etc so how is that socialistic? Again this is just convenience of argument from Miltonites. What works is capital and what doesn't is social no matter what. Surely you can't get to the bottom of what works or doesn't in economies if you go about that kind of analisys. So what if living standards climb in the US. And yes in the USSR there was NO UNEMPLOYMENT as it was a managed economy.
alfienoaks 2 months ago
@alfienoaks Intervention into the economy by the government is, by definition, socialism, so, yes, a central bank is a socialist concept. It’s not convenience; it’s proper understanding and use of the terminology. And if you are so incapable of doing even the most basic research such that you actually believe that there was no unemployment in the Soviet Union (actually made worse by central management), you have no place faulting anyone else’s analysis of anything.
FletchforFreedom 2 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
So you think a central bank is a socialist invention? Intervention by governments is socialism? Well shame as no one agrees with you. Check Wikipedia and all other definitions of socialism. This is getting ludicrously conveniant in terms of blame etc. Anything that works in your eyes is capitalist and every mistake is gubinment and socialism. Typical free market obsessive. But the you are probably a lobbyist bot account.
alfienoaks 2 months ago
@alfienoaks Sociaism is the exercise of the powers of ownership collectively, usually by the state. It includes all governmnet economic action, including central banking. If you cannot be bothered to learn the definitions of the terms under discussion, perhaps you should find something else to do. Literally EVERY economist, political scientist and historian agrees with me - this stuff is basic - only the uneducated believe otherwise.
What I am is an economist whose studied these issues.
FletchforFreedom 2 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
What is wrong with socialism again?? I don't think there is anything wrong but your sort just seem to dissmiss it out of hand. Wh sould private collective action allways be good and public collective action be bad?
alfienoaks 1 month ago
@alfienoaks It simply doesn't work - look up the "socilaist calculation problem". The difference is private ownership (which can result in common action but ownership remains severable) and collective ownership, usually by the state, at a societal level. Small collectives can function (albeit they are short-lived), but the unanimity of purpose required at the societal level is unachievable. And, pragmatically, public collective action has done far more harm than good.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom
Small collectives are short lived? What a load of crap. Kibbutzes last don't they? there are many co-ops and collectives that have lasted a long time.
alfienoaks 1 month ago
@alfienoaks The kibbutzim are a disaster, existing only because of massive government subsidy. Still, members desert to become much more prosperous in the marketplace. The few kibbutzim that thrive abandon collectivism and operate like a business. There are very few co-ops/collectives that last a long time (a generation is very rare). Instead hindreds pop up every year and virtually the same amount vanish each year leaving the total at less than 2,000 worldwide. The facts are against you.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@alfienoaks Mondragon in Spain is a good example of a huge corporation based on a worker cooperative (no, not Maoist or Leninist) but wherein workers get a vote on how their workplace is run. To hell with the top down model. Bunch of elitist b.s.
JoshMan522 1 month ago in playlist Milton Friedman a champion of capitalism
@JoshMan522 Mondragon is a good example of how cooperative businesses cannot possibly survive without MASSIVE subsidies and preferential treatment by the state while the overall economy of the state gets into deeper and deeper trouble. What's next? The long debunked myth of a successful Catalonia?
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@alfienoaks Right wingers believe that hand-outs for corporations (in the form of subsidies and tax breaks) is "free market capitalism" while hand-outs for ordinary individuals is "socialism." A crock is a crock is a crock.
JoshMan522 1 month ago in playlist Milton Friedman a champion of capitalism
@JoshMan522 You are absolutely correct. What you wrote "is a crock is a crock". No one has argued that subsidies or special tax breaks are free market capitalism (that's simply a lie). Corporatism is no less socialism and no less economically harmful.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JoshMan522 You are absolutely correct. What you wrote "is a crock is a crock". No one has argued that subsidies or special tax breaks are free market capitalism (that's simply a lie). Corporatism is no less socialism and no less economically harmful.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JoshMan522 You are absolutely correct. What you wrote "is a crock is a crock". No one has argued that subsidies or special tax breaks are free market capitalism (that's simply a lie). Corporatism is no less socialism and no less economically harmful.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@JoshMan522
True.
alfienoaks 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom
What about private collective ownership? Are stock based companies socialist?
alfienoaks 1 month ago
@alfienoaks No, private ownership is not socialistic. And stock based companies are privately owned by individuals who voluntarily engage in commona ctivity and their interests are severable and transfreable. They operate within a free maketplace where their ownership, products and services are made available for voluntary exchange at mutually agreed upon prices.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom Mutually agreed upon prices made up by price fixing with the few remaining companies that have the lion's share of the contracts to produce a product or deliever a service, yeah, that's the mutually agreed upon prices people have to pay if they need to.
JoshMan522 1 month ago in playlist Milton Friedman a champion of capitalism
@JoshMan522 The problem is that your complaint bears no resemblance to anything that has ever actually happened in reality. The only way that price fixing can be maintained is if governmnet intervenes. Free market compertition renders such price fixing impossible.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
I wish I could have been Milton Friedman's student...or at least have the opportunity to have a great picture with him.
Sir, your work is not only being cited today but opening the minds of millions to ways of thinking that they normally wouldn't have applied to certain economic or political situations.
EriPages 7 months ago
read the book THE SHOCK DOGMA to see who was Milton Friedman and what he done to the world
JIMMAST1 8 months ago
@JIMMAST1
It's the "Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein, you dumb faggot. Learn what book you are citing. It's obvious you haven't read either the Shock Doctrine or Free to Choose. Why don't you watch Justin Bieber videos -- something on your intellectual level?
LogicalFlawDetector 7 months ago
read the book THE SHOCK DOGMA to see who was Milton Friedman
JIMMAST1 8 months ago
Friedman is definitely the economic with biggest knowlegdes about economics and politics!
Toblje 8 months ago
Friedman is my hero!
adulby 8 months ago
Wow, I used to think Milton Friedman was a good man... But when you've got George W. Bush and Alan Greenspan (and now Ben Bernanke as well), singing his praises, that's got to make you wonder... You don't hear those guys praising Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Ron Paul, Peter (or Irwin) Schiff... hhmmmm, very interesting... got to make you wonder...
maidenak 8 months ago
@maidenak like most rinos and moderates they believe in big government and will apply capitalistic principles one at a time in much the same manner as collectivists tinker and intrude in the markets
friedman's dealings with the fed and the courses of action he recommended were always the choice between the lesser of evils
the core principles of free market capitalism are all but ignored by those who benefit from an intrusive government
2dum2getsocialism 8 months ago
@maidenak Why does it got to make you wonder? The truth is even true to people you do not like.
Xantheus07 8 months ago
@maidenak But you do hear Ron Paul, Schiff etc... praise Friedman
quinnrasta 8 months ago
@quinnrasta I know Ron Paul wrote an article after he died commending him, but I've never heard any of those other guys commend him at all, in fact Rothbard called him out as the "Court Liberterian", and Hayek called him a Socialist!
maidenak 8 months ago
@quinnrasta Frieman was from the Chicago School, not the Ausrian School, which is what all those guys adhere to. The Chicago School was not very different from Keynesian Economics, in that they both differentiated between "Macro" and "Micro" economics, whereas the Austrian School teaches that they're both the same - which they are. International Economics is fundamentally no different than Household Economics.
maidenak 8 months ago
He is....a dbag
aeneas2467 9 months ago
@aeneas2467 You sound smart.
Draxzar 9 months ago
Touching.
Draxzar 9 months ago
The Fed is the 4th branch of government, a revolving door between big business and the government. It is in no way shape or form an element of capitalism to have a central bank (especially a private one) ran by unelected officials who have the power to play god with the economy. Printing money out of thin air causes high inflation rates which we all pay as a tax. QE is very dangerous and kills societies faster than anything else
AroundSun 9 months ago
Milton Friedman is the reason I am pursuing economics. Charles Wheelan is 2nd, and my Economics teacher is 3rd. Thank You Milton for not only changing my life but for the millions who have benefited through the implementation of your policies. We'll miss you and your insight. I only hope the next Milton comes soon. Maybe, its me? lol.
adulby 9 months ago
@adulby
Yes the millions who are poorer are more miserable because of this garbage.
kingmafi6699 9 months ago
simplistic and wrong.
demonstration (just one of many possible): should it be legal to destroy environment? according to his ideas: yes! no regulations please!
userek69 10 months ago
@userek69
It already is legal to destroy the environment; the question is whether or not passing a law to make it illegal is actually going to prevent it from being destroyed.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@userek69 Milton Friedman has observed the enivronnment as an externality and would advocate for environmental regulations if it could be confirmed that it is suffering. I think he would support measures to regulate emissions because of their evident threat to our environment. which is something we all benefit from but not one individual could maintain. This is the only types of government interventions that Friedman was for. Externalities.
adulby 9 months ago
Dont know how they can claim that we are better off then we were 15 years ago when the middle class continues to disappear at an alarming rate. Is this what capitilist call success? If so, for whom?
MuleKist 11 months ago
this Propaganda made me laugh very hard, thx for upping :)
DieFliegeinderSuppe 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Capitalism is the wage slavery of immense humanity in a world market system of artificial scarcity to perpetuate the conditions of servitude and bondage of immense humanity. Capitalism is the monetary serfdom of the working class for the abstract process of capital accumulation and concentration.
arzoyan 1 year ago
"you must understand that without free choice there is no freedom"
Couldn't find a more truth filled quote.
daPlumber702 1 year ago
Friedman's model would work , if the money-gold-silver supply was divided fairly to every single human being of the world.
mcamoran 1 year ago
thnks fr da upload!
timmonsandco 1 year ago
If you are tens of thousands of dollars in debt because of an accident you are not free.
The real thinkers know that Freedman was a charlatan.
MsZeitgeist85 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85
Real thinkers know that the best way to spot someone talking shit from a biased point of view, is if they can't even get the last name right.
and it was obviously not a typo and shows you are not familiar with him.
if you would kindly fuck off and realize that someone who is in debt due to accident should expect support from family. and that welfare just destroys people's sense of responsibility of their counterparts but invoking the attitude 'the government should do more'
CytherLynx 1 year ago
@CytherLynx Can you name a single country that uses for profit health insurance for primary care?
MsZeitgeist85 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85 status quo = automatically correct? ahem.
CytherLynx 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85 LOL I can... The USA
enkelin32 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85 You are a moron, i believe i've had to say this to you in other videos...
daPlumber702 1 year ago
@daPlumber702 If someone is crippled and looses their income from a accident that was not their fault, but they pay no taxes for social services are they really free?
You want me to keep ripping you up infront of all the Friedman groopies I will be happy to.
MsZeitgeist85 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85 If their income was not taken from them, and they did not set aside money/ get their own insurance with their income before they were crippled, then they would be foolish, but still free.
You think you're sharp, but you're rather dull Zeitgeist...
You ignore the fact that capitalism does have safety nets for small social networks (family) Your grandma gets sick, you take care of her. But don't force someone to take care of the drug dealer down the street's grandma.
daPlumber702 1 year ago
@daPlumber702 Their insurance you refer to are for profit HMOs that have been a miserable failure. That is not a choice, it is a monopoly. They do not regulate themselves as we learned with Blue Cross of California.
The big fallacy of your argument is assuming social programs are a 1 way street and they are not. Making EVERYTHING for profit is not capitalism it is a snake eating its own tail. This is one reason that we are loosing jobs in the US is because of our failed health care system.
MsZeitgeist85 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85 Profit is the best motivator by far and without equal. The only miserable failure has been government intervention in the medical system. And just so you know the monopoly is only possible because of the government which is way to social for it's own good.
Everything is for profit, whether you choose to look at it or not. Are you going to enslave people and force them to become doctors, working on people for free? This is the only way it's free, and even then you must...
daPlumber702 1 year ago
@daPlumber702 NO lots of things are not for profit. Like all of the other countrys that have better health care than the US. We are loosing jobs to Canada because companys that outsource to Canada don't have to pay for health benifits genius boy. You couldn't even make that connection because you take this descredited crackpot Friedman seriously.
Do yourself a favor and shut up.
MsZeitgeist85 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85 You only make yourself look dumber every time your fingers touch your keyboard.
How the fuck do you think doctors get paid in canada and england and all those other places with "free" health care? How the fuck do you think hospitals stay open or fed with power. You're an ignorant bitch that knows jack shit about jack shit, so next time before you go preaching about how people should give you stuff, Learn something first.
daPlumber702 1 year ago
@daPlumber702 1. In the UK the doctors work for the state and they make alot of money 2. In Canada they operate privatly but they are funded publically. The point is get rid of the for-profit health insurance for primary care and have price controlls. The for profit insurance system is why the American System has failed. It is also one of the reasons Friedman and his Chicago school of Nazis are no longer relevant.
Boy if you were any dumber we would have to water your stupid ass.
MsZeitgeist85 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85 I quote, "In the UK the doctors work for the state and they make alot of money" I go on to quote "The point is get rid of the for-profit health insurance for primary care and have price controlls" Past the fact that your spelling is about as good as your common sense You have utterly destroyed your own argument in less than one paragraph. For profit is here to stay dumbass.
daPlumber702 1 year ago
@daPlumber702 How many other OECD countrys use for profit health insurance for primary care dipshit? ZERO.
You are defending a failed ideology.
MsZeitgeist85 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85 Grow a brain, then we'll finish this conversation.
daPlumber702 1 year ago
Don't hold your breath waiting for MsZeitggeist to do THAT!
FletchforFreedom 1 year ago
@FletchforFreedom Pinochet fired Friedman's Chicago boys in 1982 then this crackpots predictions of hyperinflation in the US didn't happen. That is why Friedman stopped speaking in public after 1983, proving that Monetarism is obsolete in todays econony.
YOU FAIL.
MsZeitgeist85 1 year ago
Since no such firing took place, since it was the Keynesians (primarily Krugman as anyone can look up) and NOT the monetarists that predicted hyperinflation in the US, since your fairy tale about the events realted to BAM bear no resemblance to reality and since Friedman continued to speak pretty much continuously for several years after 1983, all you've demonstrated is that you can fill a post with more obvious BS than most people could have imagined.
No one takes you seriously, fool.
FletchforFreedom 1 year ago
@FletchforFreedom In 82 Pinochet fired the Chicago boys and 83 this crackpot was predicting hyperinflation in the USA which never happened.
Why don't you tell me how well Friedman's Monetarism worked for Thatcher when she tried it? It was a failure like our Health Care System and in 86 The Bank of England abandon Monetarism.
You have been 0-8 since you failed to debunk the Himlstein study on bankruptcy's in the US dipshit. You want me to keep ripping you up all week?
MsZeitgeist85 1 year ago
In other words, you can't support the imbecility that you posted before about Pinochet, the Chicago Boys, monetarism and Thatcher, so the best argument you can come up with is...
...to repeat it verbatim.
And you expect people to take you seriously?!?!?
I didn't need to debunk the Himmelsern study; all I needed to do was point out the fact that it obviously didn't say what you CLAIMED it did. You haven't won a single point. All you're doing is embarrassing yourself...
...again.
FletchforFreedom 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@MsZeitgeist85 So true.Monetarism &Quantity theory of money implies that prices rise or fall depending on whether the quantity of currency in circulation increases or decreases,in relation to a definite level of equilibrium.It was in this way that the idea of a rate of interest resulting from the supply and demand of capital,a rate of interest which rises until the demand ceases because it is excessive,was refuted at the beginning of the 2000 century by the Swedish economist Knut Wicksell
zsylvana 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85 Wicksell showed that the foundations for Monetarism, Irving Fischers monetary theory was static and didn´t work.Knut Wicksell showed that the rate of interest in equilibrium is determined by the relation between saving and investment; and Gunnar Myrdal, a pupil of Wicksell’s, went still further, explaining that this rate of interest actually depends on the return expected from investments’, that is, on the rate of profit.
zsylvana 1 year ago 8
@zsylvana Wichels ratio 1/7 infact if one to be exact,
treddas851 4 months ago in playlist Videoklipp som favoritmarkerats av treddas851
Comment removed
zsylvana 3 months ago
Comment removed
zsylvana 3 months ago
@MsZeitgeist85
Britain is better off because of Thatcher...the lett-wing unions were destroying the country before she came in and bashed their brains out...thank you Madame Thatcher.
jmsmith363 8 months ago 2
@jmsmith363 There was a problem with inflation in the UK. There problems had nothing to do with unions. THatcher was using Friedman's formula to get inflation under controll and it lead to a disaster. It was so bad that they gave up on Monetarism.
Besides the old theory that high wages = inflation was discredited along time ago.
MsZeitgeist85 8 months ago
@MsZeitgeist85 No it wasn't. Your distorting the truth.
ChristopherAdderley 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ChristopherAdderley What do you think is the truth?
MsZeitgeist85 7 months ago
@jmsmith363
Her solutions came but at what at what cost? Also are you sure it was all so simple? The problem with people like you is all yo keep doing is going on about the unions and that was 30 years age. Does thatchers nion busting excuse all the failures? NO.
alfienoaks 2 months ago
@alfienoaks
Damn bad typing.
alfienoaks 2 months ago
@daPlumber702 I think the point is to let the doctors who actually deliver health care make the money and not parasitic insurance companies.
enkelin32 1 year ago
@enkelin32 Wouldn't that be nice... unfortunately that is NOT government forced health care. That would be the free market system. Obamacare, the canadian health care plan and in brittain they see a third of the money stolen to fund the programs disappear before a single doctor sees a single dollar. Sorry, but fail.
daPlumber702 1 year ago
@daPlumber702 ... so who is stealing Government money earmarked for healthcare? ane why are they not in Jail?
enkelin32 1 year ago
@enkelin32 First off "government money" is an oxymoron. There is no such thing. Only people's money that the government has stolen from the people. Secondly it was taken by all the hands it goes through on the way to the doctor. Have you any clue how many government jobs are made to keep track of such a system? Those government jobs are not creating wealth, because they are being paid for by taxpayer's money. They aren't in jail because they're stealing the money with the gov's consent
daPlumber702 1 year ago
@daPlumber702 OK then who is stealing the Health Care money? Why are they not caught and prosecuted? In the USA the Health Insurance companies STEAL IT LEGALLY. HA HA!. I would rather have the Government dispense the money to Dr.'s and hospitals than the CEO of Aetna making 92 MILLION per year. Why do I owe him that much money for being a thief?
enkelin32 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85 Health Insurance companies are a parasite upon the system, they have never preformed the first surgery or dispensed the first prescription but they get 1/3 of every dollar spent on healthcare.
enkelin32 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85 get rid of hospital beds and indeed hospitals. No more scalpals or mri machines. Profit is what runs the world. And it's a GOOD thing.
Losing jobs becaus... Wow.. you're just all over the place aren't you? And not a bit of logic to back up an ounce of it either. Do us all a favor and shhhh.
daPlumber702 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85 Friedmans "Chigaco Boys" experimented with countries all over the world causing hundreds of thousands of deaths and untold suffering, installing right wing dictators sometime using armed coups to force their "austerity" on the people. What many dont realise is it now the USA's turn for Friedman type "shock Doctrine" HA I'll be laughing when all the Friedman "groupies" are scratching their unemployed arses and living in cardboard boxes.
enkelin32 1 year ago
Milton Friedman was a gift to the world. He was and still is one of my greatest influences. I am humbled at his towering intellect. His vision of freedom was one of the most eloquent visions every bestowed on mankind. In my view, he might even have been greater than the founding fathers.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago 42
@SuperGuitarman69 LOL you wouldnt think so if you lived in Chile under his installed dictator Pinochet
enkelin32 1 year ago
@enkelin32 "His installed dictator"? Wow, what an incredibly misinformed statement.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
@SuperGuitarman69 Friedman had his disciples from the University of Chicago overturn many democratically elected governments and installed their hand picked dictators. Suharto in Indonesia was another one installed by Friedmanites. He went on co commit genocide on his own people. So how many people have to die for you to claim "economic success"?
enkelin32 1 year ago
@enkelin32 You are a whack job. Total whack job. Enjoy oligarchy? What a complete drone sheep. Do not respond to me you whack job.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
@SuperGuitarman69 LOL that the best ya got. The fact remains that Friedmanism is all about killing and taking everything from the people of a nation and giving it to a few thieves who call themselves the oligarchy.
enkelin32 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@enkelin32 Hold on. You aren't even worth it. I must copy and paste. You are a whack job. Total whack job. Enjoy oligarchy? What a complete drone sheep. Do not respond to me you whack job.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
@enkelin32 Did you know that after the BAM crisis and after Pinochet fired Friedman's Chicago boys Friedman quit speaking in public after 1983?
That alone should be enough for people to no longer take this discredited crackpot seriously.
MsZeitgeist85 1 year ago
@MsZeitgeist85
Faggot, get lost.
LogicalFlawDetector 9 months ago
@enkelin32 - Have you actually listened to anything that Friedman said? Because your "facts" have nothing to do with reality. Taking things from people by force and giving it to others is the hallmark of socialism and progressivism, not Friedman's libertarianism at all.
mpc91 1 year ago
@enkelin32 Today, Chile is one of South America's most stable and prosperous nations and a recognized middle power. It leads Latin American nations in human development, competitiveness, income per capita, globalization, economic freedom, and low perception of corruption. It also ranks high regionally in freedom of the press and democratic development. Pinochet was a moron and a corrupt individual. Friedman DID NOT APPOINT HIM. But the economic prosperity you enjoy today? Thank Milton for that!
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago