Despite my philosophical disagreements with Phil, I think his show was amazing. He asked truly objective questions, in a format that is unmatched by any TV show on the air today.
A truly honest and enlightening form of discussion.
The small thought of removing all Federal regulations in order to create Anarchistic Capitalism is what got us where we are today!
He is an agent of the elite. The elite inflate or deflate those THOUGHTS that build a WALL around their sick ideas. The inflation of an idea is created when awards, success and publishing agreements are given to those individuals who promote the megalomania of the elite. OWS protesters need to take heed and not be manipulated by the political jargon.
Milton Friedman has NEVER said or advocated removing all Federal Regulations in order to create an anarchistic capitalism. What got us here today was government regulations and politicians FORCING banks to make loans to joe shmoes who had no right in the first place to own a house. Politicians forced banks to make SUBPRIME loans. That means not the filet mignon, but the nasty fat that nobody wants
Community reinvestment act. 1977. Jimmy Carter. Clinton expanded it. Bush too.
@mythhealer Another stupid brain dead liberal please do your homework before posting such nonsense. I refer you to the 1979 Donahue interview. There you will find your answer. A bit of advice you should not form your opinions on what the Democratic party or what Obama tells you in a campaign speech.
"The government doesn't have any money, only people have money. The government only gets it's money by putting it's hand in your pocket and taking it out."
@mrgeestacksalot Easy on the GOD talk, but i agree. We can all be like these men, just STUDY STUDY STUDY and SPEAK when you hear a liberal talking. Engage them in a discussion. PS 1:14 is the kinda scared people that want the government to be mommy & daddy WE NEED TO TALK TOO!
@K20ej88 Last I heard, Friedman was Agnostic. Whether or not he changed since then, I'm not sure. (The letter where he stated he was agnostic was way before he passed away)
@bckelleher47 close but the last episode was in 1996, but his views on the Gulf War and the increase of talk shows on the market contributed to his downfall
Wow! Donahue had a convincing point about Adam Smith's gold standard policy being outdated, which could mean many of his other policies could be outdated as well, and Friedman gave the most perfect answer possible.
Friedman gives answers on the spot that most people (including myself) would need time to think about.
Also impressive is his ability to remember multiple questions that the audience asks. I would have to stop and say "Okay, what were the other two questions again?"
You dont tell kids what to do. You educate them about what they should do, and about what the consequences will be for different actions and help them to learn that EVERYTHING brings consequences, some good, some bad. Then you let them choose. Its the FORCE your kids to do things mentality that creates such disobedience in homes these days. The same mental weakness that lets parents spoil, lets them try to force. forced and spoiled kids rebel and do drugs.
A true giant in the world of economics. You can see in this video that Milton was just toying with Donahue the way a cat plays with an injured mouse (in this case, rat). Phil's arguments bounced off of Freidman the way a pebble might bounce off the side of a battleship. Thanks for posting this video.
He's wrong about the gold standard. I wonder how he'd feel if he were alive right now on the precipice of a currency crash. Some of my fellow Austrian Libertarians seem to really have a problem with Friedman, but I love the guy. I don't agree with some of his ideas, but I don't think he's that far outside the Austrian Libertarian philosophy some make him out to be, plus I think he communicates Libertarian ideas better than anyone I've ever seen.
"I do not believe it's either feasible or desirable to establish a gold standard IN THE CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES. The gold standard served well in the 19th century, if you could restore the conditions of the 19th century...namely where gov't spending was 3% of national income, I'd be in favor of a gold standard."
So I think what he's saying is that the gold standard is impractical ONLY when government is too big, which explains why the government/fed is against the gold standard.
He's wrong. What happens when the dollar implodes? Do you think anyone will accept another fiat currency? It's not a question of what someone thinks practical, it's about what happens when people will ONLY accept real money -- gold or precious metals. That's what will happen in a currency crisis. And read Rothbart about how to go to a gold currency, not just a standard. It will be done damn any concerns about practicality politicos may have.
Hey man, I hear you. But in the context of keeping a stable economy and society, you would have to slowly reduce the size of government, then transition. If you suddenly switched to a gold standard, the government would default and collapse.
I advocate what Dr. Ron Paul advocates and that is to legalize competing currencies. That way the market decides.
I'm all for competing currencies and I guarantee a gold backed one would be chosen by the market, as it did many times over the last 6000 years. And the competing currency idea would collapse the Fed and dollar in VERY short order, trust me. It would not be gradual. There is a reason why all govts with central banks poo poo the idea of a gold standard, and that's because it would reign them all in. Competing currencies would do the same. I love it and it would crash our govt FAST.
He certainly indulged his luxury to be irresponsible. At whose behest? Reagonomics' trickle-down had a urological context for most Americans, and it accumulated corrupt acts that eventually resulted in our current depression that is so politely referred to as a recession by our handlers. Face it! We've been manipulated! Keep applauding the man who engineered mass theft. Yeah...kiss your attacker! Wanna buy a bridge?
@Atreus21 Ah yes, the celebrated pregnancy that ended in the birth of the devil of de-regulation and union-busting; I know it well, as I lived with it these last 30 years. Administration policies, 'business cycles' & demographics can hardly synchronize until it's too late. Carter was no economic genius, neither was Reagan who expanded military expenditures & sent us from a creditor nation to debtor nation through reversal of progressive taxation, further burdening the middle class.
People, Donahue isn't expressing his views. He's playing Devil's Advocate by bringing up a viewpoint opposing his guest, because the Fairness Doctrine (mentioned earlier) wouldn't really allow that kind of thing.
I'm very surprised he supported Reagan. Reagan may have called himself a conservative but in the end what he instituted as policies differed considerably from Friedman's ideas.
I dont know if thats a sound critisism. As stated before he would be totally for it but you must have some stablization in the market for products and government spending before we could jump on to the gold standard. He is for it in that regard and would be. In Free to choose he talks about money in great detail. Its a very tough question as this point to deal with and would take some years to fix though we should asap.
Reagan was a horrible on spending. Moreover, he had a congress majority packed with a democrats. He didn't entirely listen to Friedman infact what he knew about milton's work didn't come from his books but from readers digest articles on his books. Regardless, reagan was a viable reader.
@hyperseauton He's saying pardon me, because he is engaging them on a subject he knows they will disagree with him about. Evolution is a fact, however 40% or more americans will dispute that.
Please go and look up theory in the Oxford English Dictionary, you have taken the wrong definition. There are two definitions, one is indeed a hypothesis, the the other a statement supported by evidence. A fact.
Furthermore do you understand that evolution, and natural selection are separate discussions, indeed it may be disputed that natural selection is not the primary force driving evolution, although given the evidence this seems unlikely.
There are tons of videos under those searches. Post links to specific videos.
In any case, I've probably seen them all before.
No part of Darwinian Evolution is possible. All Darwinian Evolutionist can do is point to proven examples of adaptation, natural progression, and natural selection as driving forces for the hypothesis of Darwinian Evolution, but none can show how any of these have or could support the myth.
The video is right there on my account page all you have to do is click on my name lashkaretoiba.
If you can't figure that out then put: Evolution - Evidence and "Gaps" into your youtube search engine. I don't know why I'm even wasting my time on a creationists.
atleast i can respect people like Donahue even though I dont agree with them. Because when compared to people like Chris Matthews they actually have a respect system unlike Matthews or Olbermann
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Circular argument... Government is bad. Why? It tries to protect people through regulation (taxes) and then those industries "buy" the politicians and run the government. Therefore government is bad, not corruption. Corporations should be allowed to do what they want without having to buy the government first? Huh?
Prohibition? Yeah, stupid chicks! Probably tied of having the shit beaten out of them by their drunk fathers, boyfriends, husbands, ect.
The corruption exists because of the governments power over corporations to do favors and tilt the playing field so greater government means greater corruption. No circular logic here at all. More people spending money they didn't earn means more waste.
No one said Corporations should be able to do what they want, they follow the same laws as all citizens. Currently they get special favors because of government has the power to do so.
The closest person we have to him are Ron Paul and Peter Schiff although they are Austrian economics and not from the chicago school but there general libertarian principles are very similar
Well, I think Rand Paul (Ron's son) is the most likely to really catch fire nationally. Schiff is pretty good but he has a tough primary. Although, he should be a household name. Hopefully that will happen.
Friedman is not a conservative. He wouldn't be a teabagger. He wouldn't support Bush's wars. Of course, he won't support Obama either. He is a different kind of Republican.
Bush wasn't a conservative, and in case you haven't been paying attention the Tea bagger candidates are the strongest voice against re-invigorating the Patriot Act.
@Joem734 Exactly. It's amazing how relevant these issues still are today, over 30 years later. At the same time it's sad that our country has made so little progress, often seeming like no progress at all, as we head further into socialist ideals and massive spending. There are no true fiscal representatives in EITHER party today, aside from Ron Paul. We need to change this!
I love how I included Ron Paul in my comment before looking in the 'All Comments' section and realized that a few people had already suggested him lol
Do some more research.....Dr. Ron Paul might not be a Milton Friedman. But if you do some research you'll see that he holds almost the exact SAME principles that Friedman did. He's running for President 2012. :)
why is it everytime a clip comes on a tv show and the conversation moves towards the fed or the gold standard, we suddenly have to cuto to commercial break. I've seen this happening in so many vids over the years and its disturbing
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Not entirely. In the 1980s you had the birth of the 'New Right' which was spearheaded by Reagan and Thatcher. They effectively combined neo-conservative social policies (think Palin) with libertarian economic policies. Although there's huge contradictions within this movement such as drug decriminialization and morality issues. Friedman championed the New Right's cause.
historyboy12 why do you insist on always posting misrepresentations of Friedman in the comments of most of these Friedman videos. Conservatives always claimed Friedman as one of their own when they agreed with him and wouldn't touch him with a 10ft pole when they didn't. He did not champion the New Right's cause, the New Right championed his (the parts they agreed with)! Ask your dad, who you claim was a fellow at Chicago. If he has any intellectual honesty (I assume he does) he'll agree.
No, I can assure you, especially in the UK's case, half of the conservative party despised Milton Friedman and Thatcher. And they still do to this day; they are the 'one nation conservatives' which I'm affiliated with. The neo-conservatives of the new right too which includes Edward Leigh aren't keen on Friedman.
From everything you have written you don't seem to understand any advanced economics or do you understand politics in the UK.
Advanced economics? I thought we were talking politics. You invoked Reagan and Palin, but now the conversation is limited to the UK? You write fairly intelligently, but obviously English is not your first language. You said Friedman championed the New Right's cause. I said they championed parts of his (whatever parts they liked). For the parts they disliked they wouldn't touch him with a 10ft pole (despised him). Then you replied with the gist of what I said. Unbelievable!
True, fair enough I slightly misread that one sentence. But I find your arbitrary comments so distasteful. I'm sure borth parties championed each other and both can provide sources. However, I fail to see how the New Right championed Milton if they dropped his only ecnomic contribution to the movement by 1982 - monetarism. Even Reagan's supply-side policies (neo-liberal) weren't even derived from Friedman, and were a rival school.
So why don't you challenge my criticism on Monetarism? Your only response 'is your dad Krugman' or 'no you don't understand what you are taling about'.
I'd say the majority of people in the Conservative Party can't stand the fact that by getting rid of her they opened up a huge wound which led to Labour getting elected in 1997.
Remember, she was a huge liability (poll tax and recession) by the time she forced out. The tories got split in half between eurosceptics/europhiles; free-marketeers and moderates etc and also due to 'sleaze' and Black Wednesday. Cameron even rejected her 'there's no such thing as society' speech.
Labour then under Blair turned itself from hardcore social democrats' party to this moderate and centerist party, taking many conservative economic and social policies.
SonnyTheWhiteDwarf What's amazing is that Bush had 2 wars, Hurricane Katrina, we sent medical aid, food and money to Indonesia after the tsunami, & Bush gave more aid to South Africa than any other leader or country in HISTORY!!! Under Obama's watch, there have been no natural disasters, no terror attacks (yet), or any other type of big even that would cost billions or trillions of dollars. Yet, in less than 6 months he has spent more than Bush & STILL can't fix the economy or unemployment!
I'm sure Milton is rolling over in his grave when Obama bought GM. What the hell is the gov't doing in the automobile business?
On the other hand, some people believe the intent is to bring GM down SLOWLY rather than let the whole thing collapse. They've already sold off SAAB and the Hummer division...
ncerione Many Americans don't get it. Government gets money by taking it from Americans. Obama is getting his hands deeper and deeper into our pockets and his supporters (or should they be called "worshippers"?) are too blind to see it.
@08MVPyouKnowWho and 'fairness' is MORE about whats 'right' and what's 'wrong' which is inconsistent constantly changing and contradicting itself...where as 'freedom' is about an individual choosing to live, die, smoke, diet, swim, jump, sleep, take drugs, or not, etc...governments like society on a bigger scale is always trying to get in other peoples business as opposed to minding their own business under the guise of 'for the people as a whole' when there's a hidden agenda...
@08MVPyouKnowWho Of course freedom is fairness, because if you have true freedom, then everyone has the same rights. That is pretty fair in my opinion.
Ron Paul thinks we have too much government
mike6459 1 month ago in playlist Milton Friedman on Donahue (1980)
Despite my philosophical disagreements with Phil, I think his show was amazing. He asked truly objective questions, in a format that is unmatched by any TV show on the air today.
A truly honest and enlightening form of discussion.
KyleSkullz 1 month ago
The small thought of removing all Federal regulations in order to create Anarchistic Capitalism is what got us where we are today!
He is an agent of the elite. The elite inflate or deflate those THOUGHTS that build a WALL around their sick ideas. The inflation of an idea is created when awards, success and publishing agreements are given to those individuals who promote the megalomania of the elite. OWS protesters need to take heed and not be manipulated by the political jargon.
mythhealer 3 months ago
@mythhealer
Milton Friedman has NEVER said or advocated removing all Federal Regulations in order to create an anarchistic capitalism. What got us here today was government regulations and politicians FORCING banks to make loans to joe shmoes who had no right in the first place to own a house. Politicians forced banks to make SUBPRIME loans. That means not the filet mignon, but the nasty fat that nobody wants
Community reinvestment act. 1977. Jimmy Carter. Clinton expanded it. Bush too.
OffTheGlass87 3 months ago
@mythhealer Another stupid brain dead liberal please do your homework before posting such nonsense. I refer you to the 1979 Donahue interview. There you will find your answer. A bit of advice you should not form your opinions on what the Democratic party or what Obama tells you in a campaign speech.
nixonplumber 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
mythhealer 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RON PAUL 2012!!!
1991RubenV 4 months ago
AMAZING! This is from 30 years ago and is still applicable today!
DUPDOGGY 5 months ago in playlist Milton Friedman vs. Phil Donahue 3
I study and highly admire Milton Friedman...and he was not a 'Conservative' ...Not ever. He was an American. His focus and passion was Liberty.
Bravo21 5 months ago
"The government doesn't have any money, only people have money. The government only gets it's money by putting it's hand in your pocket and taking it out."
TheDeadlyDNA 5 months ago in playlist Milton Friedman 2
He doesn't explain libertarianism, he explains capitalism 101 to normal people.
seppsters 6 months ago
Hey everyone. Try forwarding these videos to all the white house emails you can.
tatsumakisempyukaku 7 months ago
First beoch got owned... ha ha.
andrewjefferson1776 7 months ago
how the fuk do we get to where he is saying. i so desperately want this
RPJunky 8 months ago
@mrgeestacksalot Easy on the GOD talk, but i agree. We can all be like these men, just STUDY STUDY STUDY and SPEAK when you hear a liberal talking. Engage them in a discussion. PS 1:14 is the kinda scared people that want the government to be mommy & daddy WE NEED TO TALK TOO!
CAinfowarrior 8 months ago
this guy is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO fucking profound!!!! I can't stop watching these videos!!!
AmandaFeetJeansFan 8 months ago
If there is God, I hope he set aside a nice place in heaven for Friedman's soul.
K20ej88 9 months ago
@K20ej88 Last I heard, Friedman was Agnostic. Whether or not he changed since then, I'm not sure. (The letter where he stated he was agnostic was way before he passed away)
Needless to say I hope so too (:
PivotB3stZ 7 months ago
lol, Donahue did an awesome job. Both men are great.
AntonBatey 11 months ago
Honestly, Naomi Klein just seems more dishonest the more I ACTUALLY listen to Friedman.
TheGrossBuffet 11 months ago
okay i get it now. I'm back on the Friedman bandwagon!
defgill 11 months ago
@bckelleher47 close but the last episode was in 1996, but his views on the Gulf War and the increase of talk shows on the market contributed to his downfall
Consrvatev 11 months ago
The first woman, to me, admitted she is a bad mother.
Shrunkenhead61 11 months ago
Phil Donahue voted 4 times
howya111 11 months ago
A giant among pygmies.
rasputinsdog 1 year ago
Wow! Donahue had a convincing point about Adam Smith's gold standard policy being outdated, which could mean many of his other policies could be outdated as well, and Friedman gave the most perfect answer possible.
Friedman gives answers on the spot that most people (including myself) would need time to think about.
Also impressive is his ability to remember multiple questions that the audience asks. I would have to stop and say "Okay, what were the other two questions again?"
SMSUMarine 1 year ago
lets do a revolution with the right people not to many just a few with the right ideals
rodycohen 1 year ago
we have somebody like MF is called Ron Paul or Rand Paul either one they are on the right path
rodycohen 1 year ago
From 6:00-7:00 especially shows Friedman's brilliance and lightning quick wit and eloquence.
kevinwbrowning 1 year ago
"If i dont tell my kids what to do"
You dont tell kids what to do. You educate them about what they should do, and about what the consequences will be for different actions and help them to learn that EVERYTHING brings consequences, some good, some bad. Then you let them choose. Its the FORCE your kids to do things mentality that creates such disobedience in homes these days. The same mental weakness that lets parents spoil, lets them try to force. forced and spoiled kids rebel and do drugs.
Porojukaha 1 year ago
@Porojukaha
i agree. the worse parents are the ones who are either too strict or too lenient.
kids need to be taught to think for themselves.
LadyScorpio39 6 months ago
that bitch got owned
mumuchu99 1 year ago
A true giant in the world of economics. You can see in this video that Milton was just toying with Donahue the way a cat plays with an injured mouse (in this case, rat). Phil's arguments bounced off of Freidman the way a pebble might bounce off the side of a battleship. Thanks for posting this video.
rasputinsdog 1 year ago
"Not a shock treatment."
What a misunderstood man.
Myndir 1 year ago 11
We could use him today...
pismo10 1 year ago
He's wrong about the gold standard. I wonder how he'd feel if he were alive right now on the precipice of a currency crash. Some of my fellow Austrian Libertarians seem to really have a problem with Friedman, but I love the guy. I don't agree with some of his ideas, but I don't think he's that far outside the Austrian Libertarian philosophy some make him out to be, plus I think he communicates Libertarian ideas better than anyone I've ever seen.
razerfish 1 year ago
@razerfish
"I do not believe it's either feasible or desirable to establish a gold standard IN THE CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES. The gold standard served well in the 19th century, if you could restore the conditions of the 19th century...namely where gov't spending was 3% of national income, I'd be in favor of a gold standard."
So I think what he's saying is that the gold standard is impractical ONLY when government is too big, which explains why the government/fed is against the gold standard.
myhipsi 1 year ago
@myhipsi
He's wrong. What happens when the dollar implodes? Do you think anyone will accept another fiat currency? It's not a question of what someone thinks practical, it's about what happens when people will ONLY accept real money -- gold or precious metals. That's what will happen in a currency crisis. And read Rothbart about how to go to a gold currency, not just a standard. It will be done damn any concerns about practicality politicos may have.
razerfish 1 year ago
@razerfish
Hey man, I hear you. But in the context of keeping a stable economy and society, you would have to slowly reduce the size of government, then transition. If you suddenly switched to a gold standard, the government would default and collapse.
I advocate what Dr. Ron Paul advocates and that is to legalize competing currencies. That way the market decides.
myhipsi 1 year ago
@myhipsi
I'm all for competing currencies and I guarantee a gold backed one would be chosen by the market, as it did many times over the last 6000 years. And the competing currency idea would collapse the Fed and dollar in VERY short order, trust me. It would not be gradual. There is a reason why all govts with central banks poo poo the idea of a gold standard, and that's because it would reign them all in. Competing currencies would do the same. I love it and it would crash our govt FAST.
razerfish 1 year ago
why are most people in that audience women?
QuickSilverD 1 year ago
8:50 He is out of business.
feck2112 1 year ago
Where are you now, Milton, when we need you most??? Brilliant, brilliant man.
Phil Donahue PWNED!!!!!!!!
rasputinsdog 1 year ago
He certainly indulged his luxury to be irresponsible. At whose behest? Reagonomics' trickle-down had a urological context for most Americans, and it accumulated corrupt acts that eventually resulted in our current depression that is so politely referred to as a recession by our handlers. Face it! We've been manipulated! Keep applauding the man who engineered mass theft. Yeah...kiss your attacker! Wanna buy a bridge?
SIMKINETICS 1 year ago
@SIMKINETICS
Someday you might go to wikipedia and check out the economic boom that occurred on Reagan's watch, after he inherited Carter's mess.
You might also take a single basic economics course.
Atreus21 1 year ago
@Atreus21 Ah yes, the celebrated pregnancy that ended in the birth of the devil of de-regulation and union-busting; I know it well, as I lived with it these last 30 years. Administration policies, 'business cycles' & demographics can hardly synchronize until it's too late. Carter was no economic genius, neither was Reagan who expanded military expenditures & sent us from a creditor nation to debtor nation through reversal of progressive taxation, further burdening the middle class.
SIMKINETICS 1 year ago
People, Donahue isn't expressing his views. He's playing Devil's Advocate by bringing up a viewpoint opposing his guest, because the Fairness Doctrine (mentioned earlier) wouldn't really allow that kind of thing.
Donahue is a raging liberal, though.
SimulacrumMaster 1 year ago
4:56 - pay attention to his fingers...
Hear the snap? :)
----
Anyway, Milton rocks!
KosaRejected 1 year ago
I'm very surprised he supported Reagan. Reagan may have called himself a conservative but in the end what he instituted as policies differed considerably from Friedman's ideas.
ace625 1 year ago
Friedman is great....his only downfall is his lack of support for sound money (Gold Standard).
tastyshake 1 year ago
I dont know if thats a sound critisism. As stated before he would be totally for it but you must have some stablization in the market for products and government spending before we could jump on to the gold standard. He is for it in that regard and would be. In Free to choose he talks about money in great detail. Its a very tough question as this point to deal with and would take some years to fix though we should asap.
Bigturns33 1 year ago
What a boob! Donahue did not even know when Adam was around!
nighthawk6350 1 year ago
donahue seems severely undereducated and lazy to me
samm1809 1 year ago
Milton Friedman is an intellectual giant, but dear god Phil Donahue is such a chump.
transmissionkill 1 year ago
Reagan agreed with Friedman and he won...TWICE lol
DeepHauz 2 years ago
Reagan was a horrible on spending. Moreover, he had a congress majority packed with a democrats. He didn't entirely listen to Friedman infact what he knew about milton's work didn't come from his books but from readers digest articles on his books. Regardless, reagan was a viable reader.
lashkaretoiba 2 years ago
Its so interesting to see How Donahue gets in Milton's face all the time but ends up looking like an idiot when Milton answers him..
aaeoni 2 years ago 5
Milton Friedman's hair makes him look like he just woke up, lol.
selfrealizedexile 2 years ago
So why says he "if the ladies in the audience will pardon me" if it is a matter of historical fact?
"Pardon me, ladies, the Treaty of Westphalia was signed 15 May 1648, now that's neither good nor bad but a historical fact."
hyperseauton 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Let me answer my question with the answer I believe to be the most credible:
Friedman acts and often sounds like a closet homosexual really.
hyperseauton 2 years ago
Even if that were true which there doesn't seem to be any evidence in favor of such a claim, would it matter?
selfrealizedexile 2 years ago
@hyperseauton how is that relevant?
rikhurley 2 years ago
Cause he's having fun; he prepares people for bomb drops in a sense. He does the same thing in other videos.
selfrealizedexile 2 years ago
@hyperseauton He's saying pardon me, because he is engaging them on a subject he knows they will disagree with him about. Evolution is a fact, however 40% or more americans will dispute that.
rikhurley 2 years ago
@rikhurley
evolution is a theory (i do believe in evolution)
asierra1492 2 years ago
Please go and look up theory in the Oxford English Dictionary, you have taken the wrong definition. There are two definitions, one is indeed a hypothesis, the the other a statement supported by evidence. A fact.
rikhurley 2 years ago
Furthermore do you understand that evolution, and natural selection are separate discussions, indeed it may be disputed that natural selection is not the primary force driving evolution, although given the evidence this seems unlikely.
rikhurley 2 years ago
evoution is fact and theory. I don't have enough room here to explain so google: evolution is fact and theory.
lashkaretoiba 2 years ago
@lashkaretoiba
Darwinian evolution is a scientific impossibility.
BelieveIt1051 1 year ago
Go watch my: Evolution - Evidence and "Gaps" video.
lashkaretoiba 1 year ago
There are tons of videos under those searches. Post links to specific videos.
In any case, I've probably seen them all before.
No part of Darwinian Evolution is possible. All Darwinian Evolutionist can do is point to proven examples of adaptation, natural progression, and natural selection as driving forces for the hypothesis of Darwinian Evolution, but none can show how any of these have or could support the myth.
BelieveIt1051 1 year ago
It's the video on my youtube page. Look there.
You are very very wrong.
lashkaretoiba 1 year ago
I looked on your Youtube page and couldn't find anything about it.
Just post the link. As in...
watch?v=
BelieveIt1051 1 year ago
The video is right there on my account page all you have to do is click on my name lashkaretoiba.
If you can't figure that out then put: Evolution - Evidence and "Gaps" into your youtube search engine. I don't know why I'm even wasting my time on a creationists.
lashkaretoiba 1 year ago
I already did that and I told you tons of videos come up. None with your name on them.
Why can't you just post a link? Have you not grasped the concept of copy/paste?
BelieveIt1051 1 year ago
Chicago school makes the most sense of any economic perspective when you factor in theory vs. its application.
fomastephanovitch 2 years ago
atleast i can respect people like Donahue even though I dont agree with them. Because when compared to people like Chris Matthews they actually have a respect system unlike Matthews or Olbermann
Rightwing123123 2 years ago 10
@Rightwing123123 Exactly!
MrMrmike5 5 months ago
Lol I like Phil Donahue, but boy did Milton Friedman whip his ass
Hydra773 2 years ago 82
Twice ;)
bweazel 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
friedman=douchebag
tomheppy 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Circular argument... Government is bad. Why? It tries to protect people through regulation (taxes) and then those industries "buy" the politicians and run the government. Therefore government is bad, not corruption. Corporations should be allowed to do what they want without having to buy the government first? Huh?
Prohibition? Yeah, stupid chicks! Probably tied of having the shit beaten out of them by their drunk fathers, boyfriends, husbands, ect.
Sparvarius77 2 years ago
The corruption exists because of the governments power over corporations to do favors and tilt the playing field so greater government means greater corruption. No circular logic here at all. More people spending money they didn't earn means more waste.
No one said Corporations should be able to do what they want, they follow the same laws as all citizens. Currently they get special favors because of government has the power to do so.
BlakeEM 2 years ago
This clip...
A) Reminds me of how great Friedman was.
B) Saddens me that no one like him is around today. We could really use his voice, especially today.
Joem734 2 years ago 41
The closest person we have to him are Ron Paul and Peter Schiff although they are Austrian economics and not from the chicago school but there general libertarian principles are very similar
flukemate 2 years ago 11
Well, I think Rand Paul (Ron's son) is the most likely to really catch fire nationally. Schiff is pretty good but he has a tough primary. Although, he should be a household name. Hopefully that will happen.
Joem734 2 years ago 2
Ron paul is not as articulate but just as conservative
jonshultz 2 years ago 3
@jonshultz
Friedman is not a conservative. He wouldn't be a teabagger. He wouldn't support Bush's wars. Of course, he won't support Obama either. He is a different kind of Republican.
LogicalFlawDetector 1 year ago
@LogicalFlawDetector
Bush wasn't a conservative, and in case you haven't been paying attention the Tea bagger candidates are the strongest voice against re-invigorating the Patriot Act.
Which was written by Joe Biden by the way.
pimpdalyrical 1 year ago
@LogicalFlawDetector The Tea Party's platform is that government spending needs to be cut. Milton Friedman said the very same thing.
mharbaugh 11 months ago
@Joem734 Yes, the more I learn about the man, the sadder I get because he's not around anymore. He would have been a great person to meet.
parrotsnest 2 years ago 2
@Joem734 completely agree
KOMBACKULUS 1 year ago
@Joem734 Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell
ltmacduffee 1 year ago
@Joem734 Peter Schiff
ltmacduffee 1 year ago
@Joem734 Ron Paul buddy. Ron Paul.
DoesNotApply 11 months ago 15
@DoesNotApply does Ron Paul also prefere a "Negative income tax" like Milton Friedman? so there wouldnt be poor people at all...?
TheDenknach 1 month ago
@Joem734 look to libertarians like Ron Paul but other than him and a select few your right
Roligan11 11 months ago
@Joem734 Try Peter Schiff and Ron Paul.
meghaljani 11 months ago
@Joem734 Exactly. It's amazing how relevant these issues still are today, over 30 years later. At the same time it's sad that our country has made so little progress, often seeming like no progress at all, as we head further into socialist ideals and massive spending. There are no true fiscal representatives in EITHER party today, aside from Ron Paul. We need to change this!
soad1789 10 months ago
I love how I included Ron Paul in my comment before looking in the 'All Comments' section and realized that a few people had already suggested him lol
soad1789 10 months ago
@Joem734, look up "dr ron paul" l think you will be happy with him
startwiththeballs 9 months ago
@Joem734 There is still a lot who our principled in personal individual liberty & economics. There called Libertarians - the third largest 3rd party.
CAinfowarrior 9 months ago
@Joem734
Do some more research.....Dr. Ron Paul might not be a Milton Friedman. But if you do some research you'll see that he holds almost the exact SAME principles that Friedman did. He's running for President 2012. :)
iLitka 9 months ago 2
@Joem734 Thomas Sowell is cut from similar cloth. :-)
Crabitat 8 months ago in playlist Milton Friedman on Donahue (1980)
@Joem734
In the States there is Peter Schiff, Ron Paul and his son Rand.
ffmarkm 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Joem734 check out Ron Paul
kydenj28 7 months ago in playlist Milton Friedman vs. Phil Donahue
@Joem734 well there are 2 that come to mind, Ron paul, and Glenn Beck.
wowzinger 6 months ago
why is it everytime a clip comes on a tv show and the conversation moves towards the fed or the gold standard, we suddenly have to cuto to commercial break. I've seen this happening in so many vids over the years and its disturbing
lilbromarky1 2 years ago 2
Donahue is completely OWNED.
JackBlair2 2 years ago 3
yeah, on the 79 or 80 interview, Friedman won every question/debate with Donahue. Friedman was a genius. he was 100% correct.
bdsw30 2 years ago 6
Milton Friedman = Genius! Totally schooled Phil when he brought up the Bible, pure genius.
napamid69 2 years ago 4
Hold down government spending? Reagan spent more than anybody!!
hirofan 2 years ago
Unfortunately. He just spent it in different areas.
PorpoiseMuffins 2 years ago
except Bush and Obama
IndividualAutonomy 2 years ago
I guess a conservative then is a libertarian today
Sivels 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Not entirely. In the 1980s you had the birth of the 'New Right' which was spearheaded by Reagan and Thatcher. They effectively combined neo-conservative social policies (think Palin) with libertarian economic policies. Although there's huge contradictions within this movement such as drug decriminialization and morality issues. Friedman championed the New Right's cause.
historyboy12 2 years ago
historyboy12 why do you insist on always posting misrepresentations of Friedman in the comments of most of these Friedman videos. Conservatives always claimed Friedman as one of their own when they agreed with him and wouldn't touch him with a 10ft pole when they didn't. He did not champion the New Right's cause, the New Right championed his (the parts they agreed with)! Ask your dad, who you claim was a fellow at Chicago. If he has any intellectual honesty (I assume he does) he'll agree.
TheTrueLiberal 2 years ago 3
No, I can assure you, especially in the UK's case, half of the conservative party despised Milton Friedman and Thatcher. And they still do to this day; they are the 'one nation conservatives' which I'm affiliated with. The neo-conservatives of the new right too which includes Edward Leigh aren't keen on Friedman.
From everything you have written you don't seem to understand any advanced economics or do you understand politics in the UK.
historyboy12 2 years ago
Advanced economics? I thought we were talking politics. You invoked Reagan and Palin, but now the conversation is limited to the UK? You write fairly intelligently, but obviously English is not your first language. You said Friedman championed the New Right's cause. I said they championed parts of his (whatever parts they liked). For the parts they disliked they wouldn't touch him with a 10ft pole (despised him). Then you replied with the gist of what I said. Unbelievable!
TheTrueLiberal 2 years ago
True, fair enough I slightly misread that one sentence. But I find your arbitrary comments so distasteful. I'm sure borth parties championed each other and both can provide sources. However, I fail to see how the New Right championed Milton if they dropped his only ecnomic contribution to the movement by 1982 - monetarism. Even Reagan's supply-side policies (neo-liberal) weren't even derived from Friedman, and were a rival school.
So, our slight agreement fizzels out by 1982.
historyboy12 2 years ago
So why don't you challenge my criticism on Monetarism? Your only response 'is your dad Krugman' or 'no you don't understand what you are taling about'.
historyboy12 2 years ago
I shall, but we need to go back here: watch?v=Hrg1CArkuNc
TheTrueLiberal 2 years ago
Half?
I'd say the majority of people in the Conservative Party can't stand the fact that by getting rid of her they opened up a huge wound which led to Labour getting elected in 1997.
theredraven 2 years ago
Remember, she was a huge liability (poll tax and recession) by the time she forced out. The tories got split in half between eurosceptics/europhiles; free-marketeers and moderates etc and also due to 'sleaze' and Black Wednesday. Cameron even rejected her 'there's no such thing as society' speech.
Labour then under Blair turned itself from hardcore social democrats' party to this moderate and centerist party, taking many conservative economic and social policies.
historyboy12 2 years ago
Friedman's argument against the fairness doctrine is devastating. Brilliantly concise and logical.
Reggie1971 2 years ago 2
Wow Donahue is such an idiot; he talks to a Nobel laureate like an idiot an acts like he's the expert economist.
zfs1918 2 years ago
it's good he asks the tough answer's so that Friedman can give even better answers.. Compare him to Bill O'reilly for example
Sivels 2 years ago
Wow. 30 years later and we did not learn a damned thing!
pandabead 2 years ago 2
I wish someone like this had a voice now.
Thomas Sowell is out there a bit, but we NEED more.
beelz3333 2 years ago
Ron Paul, Peter Schiff, look up the libertarian movement.. They argue for many of the views that Milton Friedman held
Sivels 2 years ago 2
SonnyTheWhiteDwarf What's amazing is that Bush had 2 wars, Hurricane Katrina, we sent medical aid, food and money to Indonesia after the tsunami, & Bush gave more aid to South Africa than any other leader or country in HISTORY!!! Under Obama's watch, there have been no natural disasters, no terror attacks (yet), or any other type of big even that would cost billions or trillions of dollars. Yet, in less than 6 months he has spent more than Bush & STILL can't fix the economy or unemployment!
ccgraphics20 2 years ago 2
Man this Frieman guy is my god :)
Donahue is pissed and ready to go Liberal Nazi
RobertGuido 2 years ago 5
8:25
Fuckin gold! I'm quoting this in my next paper.
TimeWarp66 2 years ago 2
What's funny is that we could have backed up all the paper money and coin that existed in 1980 by gold in the U.S. treasury.
Tasadaru 2 years ago
Obama is creating more and more departments and getting rid of capitalism in America.
ccgraphics20 2 years ago 24
Correct.
TimeWarp66 2 years ago
getting rid of our republic
FCmagic01 2 years ago
I'm sure Milton is rolling over in his grave when Obama bought GM. What the hell is the gov't doing in the automobile business?
On the other hand, some people believe the intent is to bring GM down SLOWLY rather than let the whole thing collapse. They've already sold off SAAB and the Hummer division...
all028 2 years ago 5
Watch Donahue's reaction at 6:45 when Miltion uses the bible to make his point. He backs up anxiously adjusting his glasses.
jesusmohammed 2 years ago 4
Friedman is such a humble man, and pure genius. We could really use him right now, to make sense of everything.
Claytrainor 2 years ago 5
"...First of all, the Government doesn't have any money. Only people have money!" -- So simple yet people seemed surprised when he said it.
ncerione 2 years ago 14
Such a great quote. What he said after it was great too.
"the only way the gov't gets money, is by taking it out of your pocket."
FCmagic01 2 years ago 4
ncerione Many Americans don't get it. Government gets money by taking it from Americans. Obama is getting his hands deeper and deeper into our pockets and his supporters (or should they be called "worshippers"?) are too blind to see it.
ccgraphics20 2 years ago 3
"I'm not in favour of fairness. I'm in favour of freedom. And freedom is not fairness.
Fairness means that somebody has to decide what's fair."
08MVPyouKnowWho 2 years ago 48
@08MVPyouKnowWho and 'fairness' is MORE about whats 'right' and what's 'wrong' which is inconsistent constantly changing and contradicting itself...where as 'freedom' is about an individual choosing to live, die, smoke, diet, swim, jump, sleep, take drugs, or not, etc...governments like society on a bigger scale is always trying to get in other peoples business as opposed to minding their own business under the guise of 'for the people as a whole' when there's a hidden agenda...
ilindah 1 year ago
@08MVPyouKnowWho Of course freedom is fairness, because if you have true freedom, then everyone has the same rights. That is pretty fair in my opinion.
pf37rss 1 year ago
@08MVPyouKnowWho That was my favorite too. The first time I saw this clip and heard that I couldn't help but smile just like that lady does.
WideWorldOfWisdom 1 year ago