Wonderful. Yes, "let's privatize everything" really flows perfectly from "corporations are irresponsible and amoral." The wisdom of the free market is yet again revealed.
@wbaker82 corporations are irresponsible? hardly. corporations have a legal duty to work in the interest of the shareholder. that is hardly an existence without responsibility. and amoral is not the same as immoral. corporation is simply a group of individuals, why should they be forced to represent anyone's interest but their own? corporations refrain from being too greedy for the same reasons individuals do, it makes us look bad and goes against our self interest. free market dictates best.
Now there's a catchy tune! No, but seriously, with all those awkward extra "really"s in the song, I have to wonder if the lyrics were written by someone who learned English as a second language.
If the free market would run education, what would that mean? Who are the clients whose demands will set the curriculum? The most obvious answer would be the kids themselves; they're the ones going to school, and therefore using the service. But if kids could set the curriculum, it would probably be recess all day everyday. Is it the parents, who obviously are interested in seeing their kids succeed in an increasingly competitive world?
How informed are parents about the necessary skills that a school should teach?
Would it be up to corporations to inform schools about the skills they'd like to see in their employees? This seems like the most viable option, but that would mean corporations are the clients, and students are the goods being sold.
I feel uneasy about that. If we only learn what we need to know to fill a certain job, this would probably negatively influence social mobility and suppress the possibility of opposition.
@winfriedSS You're right - it would lessen social mobility. What most libertarians/conservatives don't understand is that most jobs required for society to function are relatively unskilled and, as a result, don't pay much (in a pure free market, they would be paid barely enough to get by due to high labor supply). Most people can't get advanced skills and work lucrative jobs, because society wouldn't function. A society where only a small percent of the population is rewarded isn't acceptable.
I being a big fan of Milton Friedman, I really have an issue with this song, it's starts by saying that corporations are amoral and then it's says just give schools to the corporations... I understand the point, and I really know what M Friedman position on this...but really it's an extremely bad explanation given to a public which largely has a Keynesian approach to things, it presents our side as kind of really, retarded, and we actually have the facts on our side...
@paulstroie You also have the vast preponderance of economic and political power. Really, have some pride in your supremacy; writing something like this makes you seem like a terribly insecure sort of overlord.
Unless you're having doubts, of course. Be careful with those; you might get excommunicated! :-)
@paulstroie hahah what? What facts? Do you have a single example of a successful "free market" society? History tells us that minimal regulation and the absence of social safety nets only leads to mass poverty and low economic mobility. And this should be common sense; there isn't much you can do if you're poor and can't afford food/shelter, much less an education. Why do you think labor rights legislation and things like welfare and social security were created in the first place?
@BenkaiDebussy I am inclined to label you as an idiot, history tells us that minimum regulation does what?? you also acknowledge the fact that the minimum liability corporation is a regulation of the government (and thus proof for the failure of regulation). How retarded are you? or was it not you who forwarded that question?? The difference between me and you my friend is that I don't protect special rights either for the so called rich nor for the so called poor...
@BenkaiDebussy About successful free market society I would name Hong Kong and Singapore, you can deny the great presence of free market in Europe, and maybe even deny the fact that corporations are taxed at a lower rate in the so called socialist Utopias of northern Europe.
In the end the far east is moving toward a more and more free market, so be sure all the rich people of the west are going to move there and you can take your socialism and make whatever...
@paulstroie So two former british colonies, one of them commanded by literal Communists for 12 years (if at arm's length) and the other one using heavy state investment into key economic sectors. Truly, a triumph for the Free Market as an absolute. :-)
It's kind of funny how all the nations who are doing quite well at the moment are the ones who ignored the orthodoxy and have had government and business working together, but then again, perhaps the goal is just to make SOME people richer. Maybe?
@paulstroie So two former british colonies, one of them commanded by literal Communists for 12 years (if at arm's length) and the other one using heavy state investment into key economic sectors. Truly, a triumph for the Free Market as an absolute. :-)
It's kind of funny how all the nations who are doing quite well at the moment are the ones who ignored the orthodoxy and have had government and business working together, but then again, perhaps the goal is just to make SOME people richer. Maybe?
@BenkaiDebussy So again I don't have to debate you if free market works or not, just be sure that rich people are smart people they are not going to let their money stolen by the state, huge amounts of capital will be moved from this country, huge amounts already left. So you can dream of your social programs and free food and shelter when everybody will be poor in the US... It can happen this country is/was special only because of free market, we will see who will have the last laugh.
@paulstroie Well actually I'm not convinced, why don't you insult me some more? That's real persuasive. Maybe call me a "lib" or a "parasite" or a "moocher" or something.
@mesafish name me the part you feel insulted by?? BTW I don't plan to persuade you, I'm sure you herd all the arguments millions of times. You just have other values,I get your reasoning, socialism is easy to understand, reality is not so easy, some people(like you) can't get even the basics...
But maybe I underestimate you, tell me haven't you ever felt that maybe the world is not so simple than taking from the rich and giving to the poor?
@mesafish BTW I don't plan to persuade you, I'm sure you herd all the arguments millions of times. I get your reasoning, socialism is simple, it seems so obvious. But tell me haven't you ever wandered what if maybe the world is not so simple that can be reduced to make the state take from someone and give it to someone else??
@paulstroie Have you ever considered that perhaps I have given due consideration to various economic systems and have, due to my own analysis of the situation, come down on the side of a social democracy as opposed to 'unfettered capitalism'? And that perhaps this is true for others who disagree with you, as well?
It is rather risky to assume people come to this understanding out of ignorance and intellectual laziness, as opposed to, for instance, actual consideration of the facts.
@mesafish I do, I really do think people come to a socialist conclusion because of it's simpleness. Tell me have you ever lived in Europe? I'm dutch, I can bring you one million reasons why the United States is, or at least was better than Holland. In theory socialism is a nice thing, but it never considers corruption, laziness, and the intelligence and power of the uber rich (who actually want bigger taxes and more socialism) .
@paulstroie Explain to me why the uber-rich want more taxes and more socialism? I mean, considering that... we have the most uber-rich here in America, and at least the ones that are pressing their political agenda, seem to be in the direction of less taxes, less regulation, less 'socialism,' etc.
I have not lived in Europe, but I have seen several members of my family have medical bankruptcies!
@mesafish The uber rich have already posses so much money they can hire lawyers and hide their money in offshore accounts of offshore companies(which is pretty expensive for a normal person but worth it if you are mega rich). The idea is the uber rich will never pay taxes, having a great advantage over the small and middle business man. And so big corporations retain their markets and soon become a monopoly.
@mesafish yes, the USA is almost as socialist as Europe now. There will always be people who posses great power, and most likely they wont just give it up and it most likely that person is not an imbecile nor a nice person.
@paulstroie Uh... what? Do you actually know anything about American politics in 2011? The trend for the next few years will be cuts in major "socialist" programs basically no matter what, because all the Smart and Serious People decided that's what we need to do.
I agree with you that there are loads of powerful people working against the public interest, I am just baffled at this idea that they are somehow "socialist." I doubt the Koch brothers would characterize themselves thus.
@mesafish the last decade had brought a lot of socialism now maybe politicians will do the right thing and cut more and more. 2 trillion in 5 years are too little cuts, the military industrial complex and the public schooling, medicare must be touched even more and social security to become a voluntary thing for the young....
@paulstroie Yeah, I guess you're right. It'd be impossible to fund such a system through moderate taxation! I mean that'd just be ridiculous - the masters of the universe would never tolerate that. For even thinking such thoughts, I should report to the Freedom Processing Center for proper re-indoctrination.
@mesafish lowest in the western world?? oh really?? tax rate in Denmark for corporations is 25%..look it up, it's much bigger for people....
In the UK is between 20 and 26% ,in Germany is 30% , in my home country is 25%,Norway 28 %,Sweden 26%... these are all corporate tax rates from your perfect social democracies. And if you didn't know in the US corporate tax rate is 35% and that is excluding state tax.
It's nice you regurgitate msnbc propaganda without knowing anything .
@mesafish lowest in the western world?? oh really?? tax rate in Denmark for corporations is 25%..look it up, it's much bigger for people....
In the UK is between 20 and 26% ,in Germany is 30% , in my home country is 25%,Norway 28 %,Sweden 26%... these are all corporate tax rates from your perfect social democracies. And if you didn't know in the US corporate tax rate is 35% (like Pakistan) and that is excluding state tax.
It's nice you regurgitate msnbc propaganda without knowing anything .
@paulstroie Well I disagree with you so obviously I'm ignorant and know nothing and watch MSNBC, I'd guess I'd answer something about how I was considering "overall tax levels" vs. "Corporate tax rates" but what do I know? I'm too stupid. I'm telling my handler to type this for me, in fact! Now to go watch Miss Maddow again! SHE'S SO DREAMY. Later we're having pudding.
@mesafish "over all tax rate"??? sir I can see your full of shit... that is the over all tax rate for corporations, individual tax rate are for working people who pay much more, and there is a VAT tax that is paid by the consumer. So yes my dear sir you watch Rachel Madcow that is what makes you completely unaware of the world. let me try again, lets say I have a business in Denmark, I pay 25% of my grosse and then I can spend my money that is it, my "over all tax rate"..
@paulstroie duhhhhh I am too ignorant from evil public schools and reading youtube comments, me am no understand -- me am thought... slashing programs, meant... no socialisms... but... socialisms... instead come from corporate tax rate...? Thought it... was public programs... but it just... entirely, and exclusively... corporate tax rates?
Ugh... brain... hurt... must... connect to liberal hive mind... must... destroy freedom...!! Only possible enemy... paulstroie on YouTube...!!
@paulstroie duhhhhh I am too ignorant from evil public schools and reading youtube comments, me am no understand -- me am thought... slashing programs, meant... no socialisms... but... socialisms... instead come from corporate tax rate...? Thought it... was public programs... but it just... entirely, and exclusively... corporate tax rates?
Ugh... brain... hurt... must... connect to liberal hive mind... must... destroy freedom...!! Only possible enemy... paulstroie on YouTube...!!
@paulstroie and let's not forget Iceland with a 20% and Switzerland with a 13% corporate tax .... wow look how Europeans punish those "evil" corporations... not like those "dumb capitalist" americans taxing their businesses with 35%..
Rich people donate to a lot of movements from where they can forward their interests, some rich people may talk about free market but they hate competition, I'm sure that the Koch brothers do also.
But the fact the some rich guys support free markets makes sense, the fact that some uber rich people like Buffet and Soros support socialism, really does not make any sense...
@paulstroie Well, if you're arguing people can't ever hold a position contrary to their economic interests, and if they do it's due to some kind of false consciousness or ignorance, you're actually basically arguing Marxism - that was a tenet of Marxism, in fact, though largely about workers who supported capitalism.
Maybe rich people sometimes have other things in their life or personality than money-lust? Corporations don't, of course. Perhaps we should all try to be more like corporations.
@mesafish Obama taxed more the over 250.000 earners,those are small companies a lot who will go bust.Do you consider a company that has a yearly revenue of one million $ a big corporations?? if you do please study the subject. Another thing that shocked me, Warren Buffet used as an argument that taxes should be raised for the rich the fact that his secretary earns only 60k and she is taxed to much, if he is such a benevolent man, why is he such a cheap cake with his own employs ...????
@paulstroie Obama did not, in the end, raise anyone's taxes.
I have studied the subject. The fact that I did not reach your conclusions is interesting, isn't it?
Warren Buffett's argument is that he pays a lower tax rate (if obviously much more in total dollars) than his secretary. You would know that if you'd read what he said, but then, I think you're just interested in things supporting the beliefs you already have. Such, I gather, is the true nature of Free Thought.
@mesafish I feel you like insulting people, that shows the progressive nature of progressive america... But I digress, tell why don't Buffet just pay his employs more, that way he makes sure money will be used by people who need it. Buffet earns capital gains, capital gains should have no tax, because is a form of double taxing. Once you tax the business at a normal tax rate than you tax the people who earn their stock, so actually Buffet is double taxed, but of course he pays almost none...
@paulstroie Good thing I'm an individual, not an aspect of the Progressive Hive Mind.
He's being DOUBLE taxed? I make money from my employer (who probably made it off of taxed transactions, and has to pay business taxes), and then I have to pay income and SS etc. taxes, and then when I buy something other than staple foods, I have to pay sales tax! I'm being quadruple-taxed!! Maybe even octuple, because those customers who bought things were in the same situation! END OCTUPLE TAXATION
@paulstroie Good thing I'm an individual, not an aspect of the Progressive Hive Mind.
He's being DOUBLE taxed? I make money from my employer (who probably made it off of taxed transactions, and has to pay business taxes), and then I have to pay income and SS etc. taxes, and then when I buy something other than staple foods, I have to pay sales tax! I'm being quadruple-taxed!! Maybe even octuple, because those customers who bought things were in the same situation! END OCTUPLE TAXATION
@mesafish Why do get the idea that people who are so smart that can earn billions , suddenly feel powerless in the face of the state, just because a lot of nobodies riot in the streets and vote at the ballot box. Do you really think they get so scared so easily ? Do you think if you just bring socialism than people who posses so much power will just say : "thine, give my money to the poor" ???
@mesafish well but I mean, it is laziness. If you really have looked at the facts you should have come to the same conclusion as many of us former socialists. Unless of course there was not enough intellectual rigor in your investigation. I even wonder in your ability to research, and to look at empirical evidence, not just sugar coated arguments.
@paulstroie Out of curiosity, why do pro-free market people support the existence of corporations? Corporations, and any form of limited liability business, only exist due to government regulation. It doesn't make any sense. Unless you're saying things the rich want to hear, which is why people like Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand gained notoriety in the first place; it's not like their ideas stand up to scrutiny, but they make wealthy people feel good about themselves.
@BenkaiDebussy I believe the Founding Fathers were very leery to grant corporate charters, usually only doing so for projects involving things like toll roads or canals which had clear public benefit worth the risks of an incorporated business.
Better dump public money in worthless make-work Dutch Art than in Israel empire bldng as the Chicago School has come to embody. A hole in the ground: bomb U of CHI...roofs/ceilings:in your mfkn face. You btchs don't do football no more: let's play ball, make it an even playing field:Skunk'nd
The Netherlands has a very lively and diverse cultural life. In every city or town there are concerts, cinema's, libraries, galleries, professional and amateur arts, from low to high level and everything in between. The subsidy for this costs about 5 dollar pro capita per month, and for this modest sum the choice is varied and prices are low, so everyone can profit.
Now we have a conservative government who wants to cut on the cost of cultural subsidies, so they can cut taxes paid by the rich.
@mcouzijn This is not true. I am from holland myself (and i have studied the arts). Therefore I know that the arts is one area where government involvement has gone wrong entirly. For instance the galleries where mcouzijn is talking about are all situated in city centres, but the population of those cities might prefer dvd shops, cinemas, shops, brothels (the population has absolutely no say in this). It is easy to say that the arts are very prominent here when the people cannot chose otherwise
@junkypoet You forgot to mention which part of what I wrote is 'not true'.
You are just stating some opinion, which is badly warranted and does not refute any of my statements. Your having 'studied the arts' tells us nothing; people who have 'studied the arts' do not think alike, and cannot all be right at the same time.
It is important for any society to have a broad and varied cultural life to suit anyone's taste. The popularity of 'shops and brothels' does not lessen this importance.
@junkypoet It seems you have no clue. In order to qualify for a government subsidy, Dutch artists, orchestra's, actor's groups etc. must demonstrate their ability to sell their products and to maintain a level of financial independence themselves. No composer or writer gets a subsidy for nothing. Subsidies are not needed for art products that sell themselves, of course - they are for quality art that deserve a chance and are externally mandated. Check out the NFPK website and their decisions.
Let the market decide and the market is increasingly deciding that it doesn't want corporate anything. It finds the corporate emphasis on growth for growth's sake means delivering less of what the market wants which is increasingly a preference to small, niche and local. So the corporation can only last as long as the market wants what it is offering. Milton's model will eat itself!
"Corporations have no social duties, they have to pollute, ruin the environment, they have to kick people on the street, so let us privatize, there really is no better way... to ruin the world!"
@HQ1991 Actually, there is a better way, by collectivizing everything and having the government stick its hands into business coffers. People forget, that self interest leads to good outcomes, for in large part, to do go to others and to oneself, and the best means of achieving your goals. If you go into a restaurant in America, why do you receive great service? Because by doing good to others, the restaurant does good to itself.
Then why is it that governments need to make environmental regulations? Why is it that companies sack people all the time? When Adam Smith came up with his invisible hand, he forgot there was also an invisible foot, kicking people in their backs.
Adam Smith said that people acting in their self interest can _sometimes_ create good outcomes for everyone. There's one important word conspicuously missing from most people's interpretations of that passage (which was one sentence in the middle of a huge book that nobody has read at all)
I've read The Wealth Of Nations. I read a lot about economics. Try to get into the Game Theory as interpreted by John Nash (Nash equilibrium). It is as much as a mathematical prove against an absolute free market. My point was that Friedman tends to exaggerate when it comes to privatization and that the results are very predictable...
The market has failures, but don't you forget that a government has it's failures ?
The debate is not whether or not we should have government. Most liberals just want a lower degree of governmental participation in our consumers life.
@hartstikkietof when a BP platform goes kaboom because the company wasn't inspected properly and tried to cut down the safety costs I think regulation has its purpose. I agree we need to find a balance between regulation and freedom but privatizing schools and social services - like Friedman proposes - is not a good thing. I cherish personal freedom as much as anyone else but the economy can't impose environmental or social regulation upon itself. They need democracy to do that for them.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I don't know why anyone still takes him seriously. His theories have been proven to be wrong. Damn, they were proved wrong before he was even born . . .
...Do you have any idea just how ill informed that statement was? So what you are saying is that the natural rate theory is false? Monetary policy has more effect then fiscal policy, he started that idea. Are also saying that the new Phillips curves are incorrect? and if so do you not believe in the aggregate functions? Please learn about a subject before you talk about it
....Nice comeback....nobody would be able to come back with anything more cleaver then that.... But to respond in greater detail; prove that his natural rate theory is false....hit me!
Great parody of Friedman's propositions. (I hope it was meant as a parody anyway!)
"The corporation has no conscience and has no moral duty, nor should it have either. So let's turn everything in a corporation, because that is, erm, good for, erm, freedom".
Yep, I'd set that in a minor key myself as wel, heheh.
What he was saying is that we shouldn't be so focused on corporations "moral obligations" (great contradiction right there) but instead focus on educating ourselves on which corporations we want to endorse (with money) and which ones we don't.
Furthermore, corporatizing and privatizing is seen as synonymous in this song.
I think you're missing the point. Corporations are not individuals. Therefore, a corporation cannot have a conscience--something unique to individuals. There is no such thing as a collective consciousness.
Its duty is to serve the shareholders, as it is owned by them. The only way for the shareholders to be served is for consumers to be served in a competitive process.
Then how do you explain the popularity of those 'really existing cooperate conscience'? Yes, we all know that it is one of the many ways of marketing technique, but nonetheless, "there really is no better way". Or, are you just afraid of betting in some 'worse ways'? Wiping the slate clean from controls before deciding what cease the day?
To ask the right question, rather than asking 'are we really have the freedom of choice?', which is 'Do you dare to choose freedom?'
"so if you want your freedom let the corporation seize the day" this takes a lot of brainwashing to believe - no wonder libertarians are either jesus-freaks or side-kicks to religious freaks. Jesus freaks love corporations! Sounds right.
Facists and soviets killed millions not because people were resisting nationalization (it was usually politcal oppression). However, friedmanites has advised many regimes to brutally oppress many people just because they were resisting privatization.
When? Specifically, tell me when. Throwing out vague accusations does little. We're talking about Friedman, not people who simply fly a flag of capitalism. Don't confuse mercantilism with capitalism. That cannot be stressed enough.
What vague accusations? if you refer to my comments about the assertions mentioned in the video -Milton introduces (endorses) the lyrics. By the way, Milton Friedman's model has so specific example to support itself... How come a person like yourself who insists on specific examples buy into the over generilization/simplification of Milton's rhetoric?
Don't forget to mention that Hitler was outright hostile to communists and socialists and even supported the fascist Franco in the spanish civil war. The same could be said of Mussolini.
Nationalization and controlled markets does not equal socialism, contrary to the notions of some.
Uh, Socialism by definition is a nationalization of private industries. That's exactly what Hitler did. The Nazi party wasn't called the "The National Workers Socialist Party" for nothing.
Read Trotsky's pamphlet called Fascism: What it is and how to fight it. Germany was not socialist, and using what you just said I can assure you that small businesses were allowed to conduct themselves the way they did before the nazis arose to power.
Ok, for one thing: Trotsky was a puppet of Stalin, Stalin and Hitler were in a sort of "ideaological" competition. That is, they had the same ideas but different ideological terms. Both countries were government controlled, it's just Germany's ethos was that of the white man, while Russia's was the Worker. Both countries' major capital was controlled by the government.
The second point is this: Trotsky is naturally going to slate Fascism with capitalism. It's typical communist jargon.
Socialism by definition is colective ownership of the means of production by those who work. Don't get confused kid, one thing is the state capitalism of th USSR and another thing is socialism. Can it be accomplished, thats another story.
"State Capitalism" was another term introduced by Trotsky to label his rival Stalin and his successors. Again, Trotsky and the communists were a bunch of thugs, and Trotsky was trying to establish himself as "The True Communist."
Sure they're two separate things, State Capitalism is really an oxymoron coined by a moron.
Well actually state capitalism applies to all marxist, I haven't read much about Trotsky, but you seem to know him quite well. Maybe he might of coined the term, but in other fields state capitalism is what marxism aim for, the idea of state capitalism exists before Trostky, the anarchist like Bakunin already had the idea behind that term.
Collective ownership and "worker" ownership can exist throughout a capitalist system. There is nothing contradictory to capitalism in voluntary agreements of co-ownership.
A stock market is an example of collective ownership, ooftyman. The difference between capitalism and socialism is one of voluntarism vs. force. Capitalism is private ownership, whereas socialism is state ownership. A company, for instance, can be owned privately by a group of individuals, hence, collectively.
What about Pinochet's Chile, then? Underwent a "miracle" that involved mass murder and brutal oppression. But still "free" because the free market was allowed to operate. You people are such fucking morons.
Chilean army was asked by the Chilean parliament to intervene because Allende was not respecting the constitution.So even from a democratic point of view, the coup d'état was perfectly justified.
In the first few months, the military power had a interventionist, statist, protectionist policy that you wouldn't deny. It appeared to be a big disaster and they decided to apply chicago views to reduce inflation. It worked. Now people of Chile are among the less miserable in South America.
Oh, and that's surely the only reason why the coup occurred. The constitution of a country is not always democratic; Allende was democratically elected and had mass support. That's democracy; if you disagree with it you're nothing more than a fascist.
Allende was elected with less than 40% of the votes, this is not what i call "mass support". He had to make a pact with christian democrats to be president. He didn't respect this pact nor the constitution according to the parliament freshly elected by the chilean people 6 months before the coup d'Etat. Anyway, marxists have never pretended to be democrats so I don't understand why you want to conciliate both.
"If you don't agree with me you're a fascist". God, grow up.
You don´t seem to know a damn thing about what happened in Chile.
People like you feed the ignorance of the world, and by doing that you make it a little bit more easy for the extreme capitalists to fuck everyone up......
Including you!
exept if you are a multimillionare-corporate owning-capitalist-brat.
Maybe you need to grow up, stop calling names, do a little studying and realize what Chile experienced was not Capitalism, but an attempt at it. It's like saying Perestroika was extreme capitalism, and that got Russia in the shithole. People point at that and say "See? Capitalism is bad." However, that wasn't free market trading by an measure.
Friedman never advocated for the immediate removal of tariffs and subsidies. He advocated a gradual rollback. Chile was an example of what happens when you cut to free market principles immediately, the same goes for the famine in Niger in 2006. You have to remember chile was under the control of a dictator. "I never said where you have capitalism you have freedom, I said where you have freedom you have capitalism"
Friedman had nothing to do with the temporary disaster in Chile. He just gave one lecture in the Catholic University of Chile. It was the Chicago Boys who advised Pinochet. What was the advice? Was it taken properly? And was it implemented? The situation in chile had nothing to do with rapid change to free markets. It simply had to do with improper application. Take Estonia. It was rapidly changed to a mostly free market system. It became the fastest growing nation in E Europe.
Moreover Friedman never supported the pinochet political regime. He thought that greater economic freedom would lead to greater political freedom. It appeared he was right.
Friedman also gave his views to the Chinese government. I guess it makes him a communist.
The blaring problem with this is that corporations have purchased the legislature and they get to make the laws that benefit only them and not the middle class. If corps ran the schools they wouldn't give a rats ass about the well-being of the people, only their profits that never trickle down to benefit us. Calling this "freedom" is complete doublespeak. Think for yourself, if you can muster the courage.
Is it a rule you have to be an economic illiterate to be on the left? Corporations help people so much that they actually make profit!!!! "Corporations have purchased the legislature" WOW. That's quite a statement. Or rather unjustifiable conspiracy theory lacking any shred of evidence. There is not such thing as a "corporation" their are only individuals making exchanges. The voucher school system has zero to do with corporate influence much less control. Learn your facts before you speak boy.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
That's so dumb
(hey btw check out what happened in Chile and who are the economists behind these atrocities)
Freedom maybe for rich healthy people, for the rest it barely means more than freedom to choose between wearing a pair of nike or converse. Hayek, Friedman... crazy bitches to me.
But judging from the movie "The Corporation" it must be ironical... I hope. I strongly recommend it btw.
Unfortanetly, history is not on Friedman's side....I'm not anti-Friedman or a socialist freak, but there's no denying that application of Friedman's economic theory in many countries has lead to disaster
Just look at what happened when Friedman's chicago boys went into Chile....massive human rights violations in order to implement a free market system which allowed the rich to profit while the middle class slipped into poverty........
You're operating under a false premise buddy. Friedman and the "Chicago boys" had nothing to do with Chile nor, it's government. He gave a speech at one of their university's. Whoopty shit. From that, you create the conspiracy theory that he helped the Pinochet regime. You're an idiot.
Friedman gave Pinochet economic advice, directly. Friedman also trained the chicago boys,who pushed for free markets during the times of military rule and massacre......Friedman beleived that as long as pinochet can rule Chile militarily, he could implement free market policies.....why do you think pinochet ruled with such an iron fist??????
1) I don't suppose you have a shred of evidence to support this?!?!
2) The Shock Doctrine is the stupidest piece of crap every placed on the free market. Maybe if Naomi Klein had her way, the government could nationalize the book industry and prevent pieces of shit like her book from ever hitting the shelves!
Her book is supported by fact...check all the references
Look at what happened in Sri Lanka after the Tsunami....the government repressed villagers from rebuilding their village and handed their land to multinationals to build resorts.....many of those villagers now are living on ridicously low wages, if not begging, while the rich resort owners are making a killing
btw i went to Sri Lanka after the tsunami and i saw what happened to the villagers with my own eyes
You're an idiot. The dictators of Sri Lanka has no interest in "shocking" its people in order to make the country more economically free. Do you read the things you type? The claims you make? You sir are an enemy of freedom. An enemy of reason. Please die.
....I actually went there..... i saw many people who lived there banned from rebuilding their homes.....i saw multinationals use that land for profit.....i have an eyewitness account while all you have is....oh thats right you just beleive what you read
Klein is a shameful liar. Friedman never supported the pinochet political regime. He was a supporter of peace and individual rights. He believed any political or economic change should be made gradually and full information given to the population so as people have time to adapt. The shock doctrine is total imagination.
He believed economic freedom would unavoidably lead to a greater political freedom.Furthermore when army took the power in Chile they first applyed an interventionist, protectionist, statist economical policy any liberal such as klein would agree with. It appeared to be a real disaster and that's why they finally applied the Chicago views. Result: Chile is one of the wealthiest country in latin america.
@ooftyman Big L, little L, they can all go to L for all I care
redmercer 3 weeks ago
42 butthurt Libertarians watched this
redmercer 1 month ago
@redmercer You're kidding, right? Friedman was a small-L libertarian. This is as libertarian an idea as it gets...
Ooftyman 3 weeks ago
True, corporations have no moral duties, but their shareholders do.
2000deg 1 month ago
is this a joke?
123arry321 1 month ago
I like Friedman but this is kinda creepy, really.
juicyappleish 2 months ago
Wonderful. Yes, "let's privatize everything" really flows perfectly from "corporations are irresponsible and amoral." The wisdom of the free market is yet again revealed.
wbaker82 3 months ago
@wbaker82 corporations are irresponsible? hardly. corporations have a legal duty to work in the interest of the shareholder. that is hardly an existence without responsibility. and amoral is not the same as immoral. corporation is simply a group of individuals, why should they be forced to represent anyone's interest but their own? corporations refrain from being too greedy for the same reasons individuals do, it makes us look bad and goes against our self interest. free market dictates best.
rolfalmao 3 months ago
Now there's a catchy tune! No, but seriously, with all those awkward extra "really"s in the song, I have to wonder if the lyrics were written by someone who learned English as a second language.
jackkoffin1 4 months ago
If the free market would run education, what would that mean? Who are the clients whose demands will set the curriculum? The most obvious answer would be the kids themselves; they're the ones going to school, and therefore using the service. But if kids could set the curriculum, it would probably be recess all day everyday. Is it the parents, who obviously are interested in seeing their kids succeed in an increasingly competitive world?
winfriedSS 4 months ago
@winfriedSS
How informed are parents about the necessary skills that a school should teach?
Would it be up to corporations to inform schools about the skills they'd like to see in their employees? This seems like the most viable option, but that would mean corporations are the clients, and students are the goods being sold.
winfriedSS 4 months ago
I feel uneasy about that. If we only learn what we need to know to fill a certain job, this would probably negatively influence social mobility and suppress the possibility of opposition.
winfriedSS 4 months ago
@winfriedSS You're right - it would lessen social mobility. What most libertarians/conservatives don't understand is that most jobs required for society to function are relatively unskilled and, as a result, don't pay much (in a pure free market, they would be paid barely enough to get by due to high labor supply). Most people can't get advanced skills and work lucrative jobs, because society wouldn't function. A society where only a small percent of the population is rewarded isn't acceptable.
BenkaiDebussy 4 months ago
I being a big fan of Milton Friedman, I really have an issue with this song, it's starts by saying that corporations are amoral and then it's says just give schools to the corporations... I understand the point, and I really know what M Friedman position on this...but really it's an extremely bad explanation given to a public which largely has a Keynesian approach to things, it presents our side as kind of really, retarded, and we actually have the facts on our side...
paulstroie 5 months ago
@paulstroie You also have the vast preponderance of economic and political power. Really, have some pride in your supremacy; writing something like this makes you seem like a terribly insecure sort of overlord.
Unless you're having doubts, of course. Be careful with those; you might get excommunicated! :-)
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish swimming over the gibberish you just wrote , I understand you admit Austrian economics has the facts on its side.... enough said...
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie hahah what? What facts? Do you have a single example of a successful "free market" society? History tells us that minimal regulation and the absence of social safety nets only leads to mass poverty and low economic mobility. And this should be common sense; there isn't much you can do if you're poor and can't afford food/shelter, much less an education. Why do you think labor rights legislation and things like welfare and social security were created in the first place?
BenkaiDebussy 4 months ago
@BenkaiDebussy I am inclined to label you as an idiot, history tells us that minimum regulation does what?? you also acknowledge the fact that the minimum liability corporation is a regulation of the government (and thus proof for the failure of regulation). How retarded are you? or was it not you who forwarded that question?? The difference between me and you my friend is that I don't protect special rights either for the so called rich nor for the so called poor...
paulstroie 4 months ago
@BenkaiDebussy About successful free market society I would name Hong Kong and Singapore, you can deny the great presence of free market in Europe, and maybe even deny the fact that corporations are taxed at a lower rate in the so called socialist Utopias of northern Europe.
In the end the far east is moving toward a more and more free market, so be sure all the rich people of the west are going to move there and you can take your socialism and make whatever...
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie So two former british colonies, one of them commanded by literal Communists for 12 years (if at arm's length) and the other one using heavy state investment into key economic sectors. Truly, a triumph for the Free Market as an absolute. :-)
It's kind of funny how all the nations who are doing quite well at the moment are the ones who ignored the orthodoxy and have had government and business working together, but then again, perhaps the goal is just to make SOME people richer. Maybe?
mesafish 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@paulstroie So two former british colonies, one of them commanded by literal Communists for 12 years (if at arm's length) and the other one using heavy state investment into key economic sectors. Truly, a triumph for the Free Market as an absolute. :-)
It's kind of funny how all the nations who are doing quite well at the moment are the ones who ignored the orthodoxy and have had government and business working together, but then again, perhaps the goal is just to make SOME people richer. Maybe?
mesafish 4 months ago
@BenkaiDebussy Vote Obama one more time and be sure even more jobs are going to go to the far east...
paulstroie 4 months ago
@BenkaiDebussy So again I don't have to debate you if free market works or not, just be sure that rich people are smart people they are not going to let their money stolen by the state, huge amounts of capital will be moved from this country, huge amounts already left. So you can dream of your social programs and free food and shelter when everybody will be poor in the US... It can happen this country is/was special only because of free market, we will see who will have the last laugh.
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie Well actually I'm not convinced, why don't you insult me some more? That's real persuasive. Maybe call me a "lib" or a "parasite" or a "moocher" or something.
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish name me the part you feel insulted by?? BTW I don't plan to persuade you, I'm sure you herd all the arguments millions of times. You just have other values,I get your reasoning, socialism is easy to understand, reality is not so easy, some people(like you) can't get even the basics...
But maybe I underestimate you, tell me haven't you ever felt that maybe the world is not so simple than taking from the rich and giving to the poor?
paulstroie 4 months ago
@mesafish what part makes you feel insulted??
paulstroie 4 months ago
@mesafish BTW I don't plan to persuade you, I'm sure you herd all the arguments millions of times. I get your reasoning, socialism is simple, it seems so obvious. But tell me haven't you ever wandered what if maybe the world is not so simple that can be reduced to make the state take from someone and give it to someone else??
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie Have you ever considered that perhaps I have given due consideration to various economic systems and have, due to my own analysis of the situation, come down on the side of a social democracy as opposed to 'unfettered capitalism'? And that perhaps this is true for others who disagree with you, as well?
It is rather risky to assume people come to this understanding out of ignorance and intellectual laziness, as opposed to, for instance, actual consideration of the facts.
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish I do, I really do think people come to a socialist conclusion because of it's simpleness. Tell me have you ever lived in Europe? I'm dutch, I can bring you one million reasons why the United States is, or at least was better than Holland. In theory socialism is a nice thing, but it never considers corruption, laziness, and the intelligence and power of the uber rich (who actually want bigger taxes and more socialism) .
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie Explain to me why the uber-rich want more taxes and more socialism? I mean, considering that... we have the most uber-rich here in America, and at least the ones that are pressing their political agenda, seem to be in the direction of less taxes, less regulation, less 'socialism,' etc.
I have not lived in Europe, but I have seen several members of my family have medical bankruptcies!
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish The uber rich have already posses so much money they can hire lawyers and hide their money in offshore accounts of offshore companies(which is pretty expensive for a normal person but worth it if you are mega rich). The idea is the uber rich will never pay taxes, having a great advantage over the small and middle business man. And so big corporations retain their markets and soon become a monopoly.
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie So... the United States of America, as it stands now? Because, you're describing the USA pretty accurately there.
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish yes, the USA is almost as socialist as Europe now. There will always be people who posses great power, and most likely they wont just give it up and it most likely that person is not an imbecile nor a nice person.
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie Uh... what? Do you actually know anything about American politics in 2011? The trend for the next few years will be cuts in major "socialist" programs basically no matter what, because all the Smart and Serious People decided that's what we need to do.
I agree with you that there are loads of powerful people working against the public interest, I am just baffled at this idea that they are somehow "socialist." I doubt the Koch brothers would characterize themselves thus.
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish the last decade had brought a lot of socialism now maybe politicians will do the right thing and cut more and more. 2 trillion in 5 years are too little cuts, the military industrial complex and the public schooling, medicare must be touched even more and social security to become a voluntary thing for the young....
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie I agree; we need more pestilence, poverty, and ignorance in America. That'll teach those poors to mind their place.
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish don't get me wrong I want a lot of free stuff for everyone..but where do you get the money??? There is no Santa ...
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie Yeah, I guess you're right. It'd be impossible to fund such a system through moderate taxation! I mean that'd just be ridiculous - the masters of the universe would never tolerate that. For even thinking such thoughts, I should report to the Freedom Processing Center for proper re-indoctrination.
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish what is that "moderate taxation"?? now is pretty damn big and we are no where near in meeting payments and address the debt ???
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie Lowest in the Western world, and paying for a massive army on top of it.
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish lowest in the western world?? oh really?? tax rate in Denmark for corporations is 25%..look it up, it's much bigger for people....
In the UK is between 20 and 26% ,in Germany is 30% , in my home country is 25%,Norway 28 %,Sweden 26%... these are all corporate tax rates from your perfect social democracies. And if you didn't know in the US corporate tax rate is 35% and that is excluding state tax.
It's nice you regurgitate msnbc propaganda without knowing anything .
paulstroie 4 months ago
@mesafish lowest in the western world?? oh really?? tax rate in Denmark for corporations is 25%..look it up, it's much bigger for people....
In the UK is between 20 and 26% ,in Germany is 30% , in my home country is 25%,Norway 28 %,Sweden 26%... these are all corporate tax rates from your perfect social democracies. And if you didn't know in the US corporate tax rate is 35% (like Pakistan) and that is excluding state tax.
It's nice you regurgitate msnbc propaganda without knowing anything .
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie Well I disagree with you so obviously I'm ignorant and know nothing and watch MSNBC, I'd guess I'd answer something about how I was considering "overall tax levels" vs. "Corporate tax rates" but what do I know? I'm too stupid. I'm telling my handler to type this for me, in fact! Now to go watch Miss Maddow again! SHE'S SO DREAMY. Later we're having pudding.
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish "over all tax rate"??? sir I can see your full of shit... that is the over all tax rate for corporations, individual tax rate are for working people who pay much more, and there is a VAT tax that is paid by the consumer. So yes my dear sir you watch Rachel Madcow that is what makes you completely unaware of the world. let me try again, lets say I have a business in Denmark, I pay 25% of my grosse and then I can spend my money that is it, my "over all tax rate"..
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie duhhhhh I am too ignorant from evil public schools and reading youtube comments, me am no understand -- me am thought... slashing programs, meant... no socialisms... but... socialisms... instead come from corporate tax rate...? Thought it... was public programs... but it just... entirely, and exclusively... corporate tax rates?
Ugh... brain... hurt... must... connect to liberal hive mind... must... destroy freedom...!! Only possible enemy... paulstroie on YouTube...!!
mesafish 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@paulstroie duhhhhh I am too ignorant from evil public schools and reading youtube comments, me am no understand -- me am thought... slashing programs, meant... no socialisms... but... socialisms... instead come from corporate tax rate...? Thought it... was public programs... but it just... entirely, and exclusively... corporate tax rates?
Ugh... brain... hurt... must... connect to liberal hive mind... must... destroy freedom...!! Only possible enemy... paulstroie on YouTube...!!
mesafish 4 months ago
@paulstroie and let's not forget Iceland with a 20% and Switzerland with a 13% corporate tax .... wow look how Europeans punish those "evil" corporations... not like those "dumb capitalist" americans taxing their businesses with 35%..
paulstroie 4 months ago
@mesafish
Rich people donate to a lot of movements from where they can forward their interests, some rich people may talk about free market but they hate competition, I'm sure that the Koch brothers do also.
But the fact the some rich guys support free markets makes sense, the fact that some uber rich people like Buffet and Soros support socialism, really does not make any sense...
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie Well, if you're arguing people can't ever hold a position contrary to their economic interests, and if they do it's due to some kind of false consciousness or ignorance, you're actually basically arguing Marxism - that was a tenet of Marxism, in fact, though largely about workers who supported capitalism.
Maybe rich people sometimes have other things in their life or personality than money-lust? Corporations don't, of course. Perhaps we should all try to be more like corporations.
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish Obama taxed more the over 250.000 earners,those are small companies a lot who will go bust.Do you consider a company that has a yearly revenue of one million $ a big corporations?? if you do please study the subject. Another thing that shocked me, Warren Buffet used as an argument that taxes should be raised for the rich the fact that his secretary earns only 60k and she is taxed to much, if he is such a benevolent man, why is he such a cheap cake with his own employs ...????
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie Obama did not, in the end, raise anyone's taxes.
I have studied the subject. The fact that I did not reach your conclusions is interesting, isn't it?
Warren Buffett's argument is that he pays a lower tax rate (if obviously much more in total dollars) than his secretary. You would know that if you'd read what he said, but then, I think you're just interested in things supporting the beliefs you already have. Such, I gather, is the true nature of Free Thought.
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish I feel you like insulting people, that shows the progressive nature of progressive america... But I digress, tell why don't Buffet just pay his employs more, that way he makes sure money will be used by people who need it. Buffet earns capital gains, capital gains should have no tax, because is a form of double taxing. Once you tax the business at a normal tax rate than you tax the people who earn their stock, so actually Buffet is double taxed, but of course he pays almost none...
paulstroie 4 months ago
@paulstroie Good thing I'm an individual, not an aspect of the Progressive Hive Mind.
He's being DOUBLE taxed? I make money from my employer (who probably made it off of taxed transactions, and has to pay business taxes), and then I have to pay income and SS etc. taxes, and then when I buy something other than staple foods, I have to pay sales tax! I'm being quadruple-taxed!! Maybe even octuple, because those customers who bought things were in the same situation! END OCTUPLE TAXATION
mesafish 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@paulstroie Good thing I'm an individual, not an aspect of the Progressive Hive Mind.
He's being DOUBLE taxed? I make money from my employer (who probably made it off of taxed transactions, and has to pay business taxes), and then I have to pay income and SS etc. taxes, and then when I buy something other than staple foods, I have to pay sales tax! I'm being quadruple-taxed!! Maybe even octuple, because those customers who bought things were in the same situation! END OCTUPLE TAXATION
mesafish 4 months ago
@mesafish Why do get the idea that people who are so smart that can earn billions , suddenly feel powerless in the face of the state, just because a lot of nobodies riot in the streets and vote at the ballot box. Do you really think they get so scared so easily ? Do you think if you just bring socialism than people who posses so much power will just say : "thine, give my money to the poor" ???
paulstroie 4 months ago 2
@paulstroie The state has bigger guns than they, silly.
QHJFRD 1 month ago
@mesafish well but I mean, it is laziness. If you really have looked at the facts you should have come to the same conclusion as many of us former socialists. Unless of course there was not enough intellectual rigor in your investigation. I even wonder in your ability to research, and to look at empirical evidence, not just sugar coated arguments.
nicazzo 3 months ago
@paulstroie You're capable of some serious mental gymnastics.
tartantarget 4 months ago
@paulstroie Out of curiosity, why do pro-free market people support the existence of corporations? Corporations, and any form of limited liability business, only exist due to government regulation. It doesn't make any sense. Unless you're saying things the rich want to hear, which is why people like Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand gained notoriety in the first place; it's not like their ideas stand up to scrutiny, but they make wealthy people feel good about themselves.
BenkaiDebussy 4 months ago
@BenkaiDebussy I believe the Founding Fathers were very leery to grant corporate charters, usually only doing so for projects involving things like toll roads or canals which had clear public benefit worth the risks of an incorporated business.
O, how much has changed!
mesafish 4 months ago
.....talk about indoctrination. Milton Friedman choir? Please.
WishCRUS4D3R 5 months ago
The lyrics freaked me out, terrorific as a sountrack of a old school terror movie.
jok56 8 months ago
Better dump public money in worthless make-work Dutch Art than in Israel empire bldng as the Chicago School has come to embody. A hole in the ground: bomb U of CHI...roofs/ceilings:in your mfkn face. You btchs don't do football no more: let's play ball, make it an even playing field:Skunk'nd
raydog699 8 months ago
Hilarious, lol.
YoungIvyScholar 9 months ago
Some of the lyrics sound like they are doing a parody of Friedman
spamdude1 10 months ago 8
I swear to you, I've never seen anything weirder.
corenothing 1 year ago
Yeah, this is good. Really good and so is Milton Friedman. Good - really good.
ujean56 1 year ago
The Netherlands has a very lively and diverse cultural life. In every city or town there are concerts, cinema's, libraries, galleries, professional and amateur arts, from low to high level and everything in between. The subsidy for this costs about 5 dollar pro capita per month, and for this modest sum the choice is varied and prices are low, so everyone can profit.
Now we have a conservative government who wants to cut on the cost of cultural subsidies, so they can cut taxes paid by the rich.
mcouzijn 1 year ago
@mcouzijn This is not true. I am from holland myself (and i have studied the arts). Therefore I know that the arts is one area where government involvement has gone wrong entirly. For instance the galleries where mcouzijn is talking about are all situated in city centres, but the population of those cities might prefer dvd shops, cinemas, shops, brothels (the population has absolutely no say in this). It is easy to say that the arts are very prominent here when the people cannot chose otherwise
junkypoet 1 year ago
@junkypoet You forgot to mention which part of what I wrote is 'not true'.
You are just stating some opinion, which is badly warranted and does not refute any of my statements. Your having 'studied the arts' tells us nothing; people who have 'studied the arts' do not think alike, and cannot all be right at the same time.
It is important for any society to have a broad and varied cultural life to suit anyone's taste. The popularity of 'shops and brothels' does not lessen this importance.
mcouzijn 1 year ago
@mcouzijn And o yes, People are not buying the arts that are so heavily subsidized.
junkypoet 1 year ago
@junkypoet It seems you have no clue. In order to qualify for a government subsidy, Dutch artists, orchestra's, actor's groups etc. must demonstrate their ability to sell their products and to maintain a level of financial independence themselves. No composer or writer gets a subsidy for nothing. Subsidies are not needed for art products that sell themselves, of course - they are for quality art that deserve a chance and are externally mandated. Check out the NFPK website and their decisions.
mcouzijn 1 year ago
Wouldn't it be hilarious if the choir was made up of kids from a state school?
LordHuddersfield 1 year ago
i like friedman but this was fucking stupid,
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
This is nerdy and retarded.
DelanoGoesToDenmark 1 year ago
also whoever arranged this should kill themselves ugh
mandroid87 1 year ago
oh no those poor corporations ;_;
mandroid87 1 year ago
Let the market decide and the market is increasingly deciding that it doesn't want corporate anything. It finds the corporate emphasis on growth for growth's sake means delivering less of what the market wants which is increasingly a preference to small, niche and local. So the corporation can only last as long as the market wants what it is offering. Milton's model will eat itself!
livingcommunities 1 year ago
Hallelujah!
Milton Friedman be praised!
321lawc 1 year ago
This is absolutly great. People here have zero sense of humor.
kosemekars 2 years ago 4
LOL
sounds like a pornographic poem, sung by a nun choir!
murksov 2 years ago 2
capitalism is obscene.
anabourg 1 year ago
"Corporations have no social duties, they have to pollute, ruin the environment, they have to kick people on the street, so let us privatize, there really is no better way... to ruin the world!"
HQ1991 2 years ago
@HQ1991 Actually, there is a better way, by collectivizing everything and having the government stick its hands into business coffers. People forget, that self interest leads to good outcomes, for in large part, to do go to others and to oneself, and the best means of achieving your goals. If you go into a restaurant in America, why do you receive great service? Because by doing good to others, the restaurant does good to itself.
Stagolee22 2 years ago
Then why is it that governments need to make environmental regulations? Why is it that companies sack people all the time? When Adam Smith came up with his invisible hand, he forgot there was also an invisible foot, kicking people in their backs.
HQ1991 2 years ago
Adam Smith said that people acting in their self interest can _sometimes_ create good outcomes for everyone. There's one important word conspicuously missing from most people's interpretations of that passage (which was one sentence in the middle of a huge book that nobody has read at all)
RGMorgan 2 years ago
I've read The Wealth Of Nations. I read a lot about economics. Try to get into the Game Theory as interpreted by John Nash (Nash equilibrium). It is as much as a mathematical prove against an absolute free market. My point was that Friedman tends to exaggerate when it comes to privatization and that the results are very predictable...
HQ1991 1 year ago
@HQ1991
The market has failures, but don't you forget that a government has it's failures ?
The debate is not whether or not we should have government. Most liberals just want a lower degree of governmental participation in our consumers life.
hartstikkietof 1 year ago
@hartstikkietof when a BP platform goes kaboom because the company wasn't inspected properly and tried to cut down the safety costs I think regulation has its purpose. I agree we need to find a balance between regulation and freedom but privatizing schools and social services - like Friedman proposes - is not a good thing. I cherish personal freedom as much as anyone else but the economy can't impose environmental or social regulation upon itself. They need democracy to do that for them.
HQ1991 1 year ago
yeah, they do.
anabourg 1 year ago
great! but I dont really agree with his points off view on economy.
fatfuck231 2 years ago
:) a masterpiece.
weumumaway 2 years ago 2
what the fuck is this shit. economics choir lol
yannis5 2 years ago
wow what a total slap in the face of choirs around the world.
tgr128 2 years ago
Give choir a bad name
Die
seanhughes14 2 years ago
great video :)
ForABetterTomorrow 2 years ago
that was scary...
Domoappo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I don't know why anyone still takes him seriously. His theories have been proven to be wrong. Damn, they were proved wrong before he was even born . . .
MarxBakuninMe 2 years ago
you were born as ignorant and and you will die as ignorant.
rsobies 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Yeah, I'm ignorant. You, on the other hand, know that I was born that way and will die that way. Your source?
One comment on a YouTube video. Thanks Doctor.
MarxBakuninMe 2 years ago
...Do you have any idea just how ill informed that statement was? So what you are saying is that the natural rate theory is false? Monetary policy has more effect then fiscal policy, he started that idea. Are also saying that the new Phillips curves are incorrect? and if so do you not believe in the aggregate functions? Please learn about a subject before you talk about it
ThegoodEconomist 2 years ago
Exactly! Please learn the subject!
GLADish85 2 years ago
....Nice comeback....nobody would be able to come back with anything more cleaver then that.... But to respond in greater detail; prove that his natural rate theory is false....hit me!
ThegoodEconomist 2 years ago
Awesome, I hope more people learn about how school vouchers work.
There is an excellent documentary that exposes government run schools, its called: "The Cartel" -by Bob Bowdon
kaziqbal 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice try. Keep it up check out esteembpo + com for social media marketing. efrsdf
GoddardRaines 2 years ago
Someone needs to teach those girls how to stand with one foot slightly in front of the other.
Entropy56 2 years ago 2
Great parody of Friedman's propositions. (I hope it was meant as a parody anyway!)
"The corporation has no conscience and has no moral duty, nor should it have either. So let's turn everything in a corporation, because that is, erm, good for, erm, freedom".
Yep, I'd set that in a minor key myself as wel, heheh.
yaerav 2 years ago
It was a tongue in cheek lyric.
What he was saying is that we shouldn't be so focused on corporations "moral obligations" (great contradiction right there) but instead focus on educating ourselves on which corporations we want to endorse (with money) and which ones we don't.
Furthermore, corporatizing and privatizing is seen as synonymous in this song.
beepandbop 2 years ago 3
I think you're missing the point. Corporations are not individuals. Therefore, a corporation cannot have a conscience--something unique to individuals. There is no such thing as a collective consciousness.
Its duty is to serve the shareholders, as it is owned by them. The only way for the shareholders to be served is for consumers to be served in a competitive process.
Ooftyman 2 years ago
Then how do you explain the popularity of those 'really existing cooperate conscience'? Yes, we all know that it is one of the many ways of marketing technique, but nonetheless, "there really is no better way". Or, are you just afraid of betting in some 'worse ways'? Wiping the slate clean from controls before deciding what cease the day?
To ask the right question, rather than asking 'are we really have the freedom of choice?', which is 'Do you dare to choose freedom?'
uthmod 2 years ago
Brilliant.
youpick4me 2 years ago
Lordy, lordy, that was funny. The lyrics sound like they were taken verbatim from one of Friedman's interviews. Watch out Handel!
HammerofHeretics 2 years ago
5 Stars to Ooftyman!
sllywbt 2 years ago
You people can't listen to funny song without getting into a political argument, can you?
swampo2007 3 years ago 2
well honey, the song itself is very political
Tracking88 2 years ago
I know. I just thought it was pretty damn funny. I'm used to singing stuff like Poulenc. Poetic stuff.
swampo2007 2 years ago
Haha, it's hilarious and I love it!
The shareholders-part is so good.
Tracking88 2 years ago
"so if you want your freedom let the corporation seize the day" this takes a lot of brainwashing to believe - no wonder libertarians are either jesus-freaks or side-kicks to religious freaks. Jesus freaks love corporations! Sounds right.
nycistanbul 3 years ago
America is state capitalism. See how the government bailed out Wall Street and at the same time let millions of folk lose their homes.
randall2020 3 years ago
That's actually something called "Nationalization" more closely associated with the Fascists in the '30's and the Soviet Communists in the same area.
beepandbop 3 years ago
Facists and soviets killed millions not because people were resisting nationalization (it was usually politcal oppression). However, friedmanites has advised many regimes to brutally oppress many people just because they were resisting privatization.
nycistanbul 3 years ago
When? Specifically, tell me when. Throwing out vague accusations does little. We're talking about Friedman, not people who simply fly a flag of capitalism. Don't confuse mercantilism with capitalism. That cannot be stressed enough.
Ooftyman 3 years ago
What vague accusations? if you refer to my comments about the assertions mentioned in the video -Milton introduces (endorses) the lyrics. By the way, Milton Friedman's model has so specific example to support itself... How come a person like yourself who insists on specific examples buy into the over generilization/simplification of Milton's rhetoric?
nycistanbul 3 years ago 2
Keynesianism, anyone? Haha... Keynes = epic fail.
Ooftyman 2 years ago 3
@Ooftyman Keynes his ideas saved about the whole world economy in the late thirthies
fatfuck231 1 year ago
@fatfuck231 The world was not spared because of Keynes but in spite of Keynes.
Ooftyman 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fatfuck231 The world was not saved by Keynes but was saved in spite of Keynes
Ooftyman 1 year ago
Favorited!
barnstormer07 3 years ago
Bye-the-way folks, what do you think of the music, anybody got any comments to make on it?
patrickspoint 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It very sad he died before his idea, today we can see result of his theory . Economic collapse
khallaghi 3 years ago
Why would he agree to introduce this out of context dribble?
MetaMorphy 3 years ago
Don't forget to mention that Hitler was outright hostile to communists and socialists and even supported the fascist Franco in the spanish civil war. The same could be said of Mussolini.
Nationalization and controlled markets does not equal socialism, contrary to the notions of some.
Incendiarismm 3 years ago
Uh, Socialism by definition is a nationalization of private industries. That's exactly what Hitler did. The Nazi party wasn't called the "The National Workers Socialist Party" for nothing.
beepandbop 3 years ago
Read Trotsky's pamphlet called Fascism: What it is and how to fight it. Germany was not socialist, and using what you just said I can assure you that small businesses were allowed to conduct themselves the way they did before the nazis arose to power.
Incendiarismm 3 years ago
Ok, for one thing: Trotsky was a puppet of Stalin, Stalin and Hitler were in a sort of "ideaological" competition. That is, they had the same ideas but different ideological terms. Both countries were government controlled, it's just Germany's ethos was that of the white man, while Russia's was the Worker. Both countries' major capital was controlled by the government.
The second point is this: Trotsky is naturally going to slate Fascism with capitalism. It's typical communist jargon.
beepandbop 3 years ago
Socialism by definition is colective ownership of the means of production by those who work. Don't get confused kid, one thing is the state capitalism of th USSR and another thing is socialism. Can it be accomplished, thats another story.
figocooldude 3 years ago
"State Capitalism" was another term introduced by Trotsky to label his rival Stalin and his successors. Again, Trotsky and the communists were a bunch of thugs, and Trotsky was trying to establish himself as "The True Communist."
Sure they're two separate things, State Capitalism is really an oxymoron coined by a moron.
beepandbop 3 years ago
Well actually state capitalism applies to all marxist, I haven't read much about Trotsky, but you seem to know him quite well. Maybe he might of coined the term, but in other fields state capitalism is what marxism aim for, the idea of state capitalism exists before Trostky, the anarchist like Bakunin already had the idea behind that term.
figocooldude 3 years ago
Collective ownership and "worker" ownership can exist throughout a capitalist system. There is nothing contradictory to capitalism in voluntary agreements of co-ownership.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago
You're kidding, right? That's like calling capitalism socialism.
Ooftyman 3 years ago
A stock market is an example of collective ownership, ooftyman. The difference between capitalism and socialism is one of voluntarism vs. force. Capitalism is private ownership, whereas socialism is state ownership. A company, for instance, can be owned privately by a group of individuals, hence, collectively.
mmcplaid2086 3 years ago 2
What about Pinochet's Chile, then? Underwent a "miracle" that involved mass murder and brutal oppression. But still "free" because the free market was allowed to operate. You people are such fucking morons.
KafkaCrow 3 years ago
Chilean army was asked by the Chilean parliament to intervene because Allende was not respecting the constitution.So even from a democratic point of view, the coup d'état was perfectly justified.
In the first few months, the military power had a interventionist, statist, protectionist policy that you wouldn't deny. It appeared to be a big disaster and they decided to apply chicago views to reduce inflation. It worked. Now people of Chile are among the less miserable in South America.
jaar2001 3 years ago
"Allende was not respecting the constitution"
Oh, and that's surely the only reason why the coup occurred. The constitution of a country is not always democratic; Allende was democratically elected and had mass support. That's democracy; if you disagree with it you're nothing more than a fascist.
KafkaCrow 3 years ago
Allende was elected with less than 40% of the votes, this is not what i call "mass support". He had to make a pact with christian democrats to be president. He didn't respect this pact nor the constitution according to the parliament freshly elected by the chilean people 6 months before the coup d'Etat. Anyway, marxists have never pretended to be democrats so I don't understand why you want to conciliate both.
"If you don't agree with me you're a fascist". God, grow up.
jaar2001 3 years ago
You don´t seem to know a damn thing about what happened in Chile.
People like you feed the ignorance of the world, and by doing that you make it a little bit more easy for the extreme capitalists to fuck everyone up......
Including you!
exept if you are a multimillionare-corporate owning-capitalist-brat.
chutoduro 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
blablabla
you can repeat "i'm right and you're wrong" as much as you want, you don't prove anything. Facts are more obstinate than you.
jaar2001 3 years ago
Maybe you need to grow up, stop calling names, do a little studying and realize what Chile experienced was not Capitalism, but an attempt at it. It's like saying Perestroika was extreme capitalism, and that got Russia in the shithole. People point at that and say "See? Capitalism is bad." However, that wasn't free market trading by an measure.
beepandbop 3 years ago 3
What are you talking about?
Milton Friedman´s extreme capitalistic theories were in deed put in practice in Chile and other parts of Latin America.
He´s theories were applicated with free hands.
Have you heard about the "Chicago Boys" ?
The world was a different place back then.
The capitalistic-world-domination with the so called "Globalisation" had not gone as far as today, but it was capitalism all right.
Not even the US has real Capitalism if you measure by complete free trade.
chutoduro 3 years ago
Friedman never advocated for the immediate removal of tariffs and subsidies. He advocated a gradual rollback. Chile was an example of what happens when you cut to free market principles immediately, the same goes for the famine in Niger in 2006. You have to remember chile was under the control of a dictator. "I never said where you have capitalism you have freedom, I said where you have freedom you have capitalism"
KhanSlayer 3 years ago 2
@KhanSlayer
Friedman had nothing to do with the temporary disaster in Chile. He just gave one lecture in the Catholic University of Chile. It was the Chicago Boys who advised Pinochet. What was the advice? Was it taken properly? And was it implemented? The situation in chile had nothing to do with rapid change to free markets. It simply had to do with improper application. Take Estonia. It was rapidly changed to a mostly free market system. It became the fastest growing nation in E Europe.
LogicalFlawDetector 7 months ago
@LogicalFlawDetector Was your comment was meant for Chutoduro? I think you said exactly what I said :)
KhanSlayer 7 months ago
You're kidding, right? This is the oldest propaganda in the book. Friedman despised Pinochet.
Ooftyman 2 years ago
Moreover Friedman never supported the pinochet political regime. He thought that greater economic freedom would lead to greater political freedom. It appeared he was right.
Friedman also gave his views to the Chinese government. I guess it makes him a communist.
jaar2001 3 years ago
This is so fucking funny.
Incendiarismm 3 years ago
The blaring problem with this is that corporations have purchased the legislature and they get to make the laws that benefit only them and not the middle class. If corps ran the schools they wouldn't give a rats ass about the well-being of the people, only their profits that never trickle down to benefit us. Calling this "freedom" is complete doublespeak. Think for yourself, if you can muster the courage.
fongalongalong 3 years ago
Is it a rule you have to be an economic illiterate to be on the left? Corporations help people so much that they actually make profit!!!! "Corporations have purchased the legislature" WOW. That's quite a statement. Or rather unjustifiable conspiracy theory lacking any shred of evidence. There is not such thing as a "corporation" their are only individuals making exchanges. The voucher school system has zero to do with corporate influence much less control. Learn your facts before you speak boy.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
That's so dumb
(hey btw check out what happened in Chile and who are the economists behind these atrocities)
Freedom maybe for rich healthy people, for the rest it barely means more than freedom to choose between wearing a pair of nike or converse. Hayek, Friedman... crazy bitches to me.
But judging from the movie "The Corporation" it must be ironical... I hope. I strongly recommend it btw.
BadMunckY 3 years ago
Unfortanetly, history is not on Friedman's side....I'm not anti-Friedman or a socialist freak, but there's no denying that application of Friedman's economic theory in many countries has lead to disaster
gsingh5 3 years ago
Quite the opposite is true. Can you give me 1 example?
TimeWarp66 3 years ago 2
Just look at what happened when Friedman's chicago boys went into Chile....massive human rights violations in order to implement a free market system which allowed the rich to profit while the middle class slipped into poverty........
gsingh5 3 years ago
You're operating under a false premise buddy. Friedman and the "Chicago boys" had nothing to do with Chile nor, it's government. He gave a speech at one of their university's. Whoopty shit. From that, you create the conspiracy theory that he helped the Pinochet regime. You're an idiot.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago 2
Friedman gave Pinochet economic advice, directly. Friedman also trained the chicago boys,who pushed for free markets during the times of military rule and massacre......Friedman beleived that as long as pinochet can rule Chile militarily, he could implement free market policies.....why do you think pinochet ruled with such an iron fist??????
Read the "Schock Doctrine" for a better account
gsingh5 3 years ago
1) I don't suppose you have a shred of evidence to support this?!?!
2) The Shock Doctrine is the stupidest piece of crap every placed on the free market. Maybe if Naomi Klein had her way, the government could nationalize the book industry and prevent pieces of shit like her book from ever hitting the shelves!
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
Her book is supported by fact...check all the references
Look at what happened in Sri Lanka after the Tsunami....the government repressed villagers from rebuilding their village and handed their land to multinationals to build resorts.....many of those villagers now are living on ridicously low wages, if not begging, while the rich resort owners are making a killing
btw i went to Sri Lanka after the tsunami and i saw what happened to the villagers with my own eyes
gsingh5 3 years ago
You're an idiot. The dictators of Sri Lanka has no interest in "shocking" its people in order to make the country more economically free. Do you read the things you type? The claims you make? You sir are an enemy of freedom. An enemy of reason. Please die.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
....I actually went there..... i saw many people who lived there banned from rebuilding their homes.....i saw multinationals use that land for profit.....i have an eyewitness account while all you have is....oh thats right you just beleive what you read
gsingh5 3 years ago
Enemy of freedom? What are you, a fascist? Nonsensical arguments like these will get you nowhere.
MHSGene 3 years ago
your ugly face is getting you know where. Pity, under socialism new innovative plastic surgery complexes have not developed. Now you're stuck.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
Klein is a shameful liar. Friedman never supported the pinochet political regime. He was a supporter of peace and individual rights. He believed any political or economic change should be made gradually and full information given to the population so as people have time to adapt. The shock doctrine is total imagination.
jaar2001 3 years ago
He believed economic freedom would unavoidably lead to a greater political freedom.Furthermore when army took the power in Chile they first applyed an interventionist, protectionist, statist economical policy any liberal such as klein would agree with. It appeared to be a real disaster and that's why they finally applied the Chicago views. Result: Chile is one of the wealthiest country in latin america.
jaar2001 3 years ago