@LongBow1600 he did, he would say thats not a free market capital system (go see his monopoly video). He of course wouldn't like how the marriage of business and government is so obtuse.
the inheritance of property is no different than an inheritance of genetic ability???? Mr. Friedman you and your idiot followers need to know reductio ad absurdum arguments, and when you unknowingly engage in them.
The difference between someone who is just given money, vs. being bought a business, vs. being bought an education is that the later two add value to society, while the first one doesn't...
"Intellectuals were not in that protest movement. Black people were in that protest." -FFP. Hmm, didn't know those things were mutually exclusive. With that simple line she reveals her soft bigotry of low expectations...
There is one crucial ethical difference between the inheritance of talent and the inheritance of wealth. Inheritance of talent is a fact of life, inheritance of wealth is something society chooses to perform.
Prof Friedman appears to conveniently ignore the fact that the poor & disadvantaged ALSO 'inherent' [many] talents. However, in this society because (among some groups) of historic injustice they also inherent economic & social inequalities. No (liberal) moderates are arguing that the state should take all of a families inherited wealth ;but, since all pple benefit form the collective production of the poor, there shd be limited REDISTRIBUTION. The civil rights movement DID call for quotas.
@shieldsff and many poor with talents choose to use their inherited talents to make a living above and beyond what they could make doing anything else.
yeah, I hear you,but I think you are missing the point. Friedman is attempting to equate the inheriting of material wealth (class)w/ the 'inheriting' of talent. Both types of talents require care & nurturing, but those who are impoverished (for various reasons) clearly face higher obstacles and odds to the socially productive cultivation of talents. This is more of a sociological issue then an economic one Economically, there are many "mixed" western economies which more equal & very successful
Haha, Sowell.. "You expressed it Damnit!" .. love it.. Liberals act as if they are generous, but they always try to give you what you don't need. They only feed lies to groups of people to enrich their own pockets.
Milton Friedman's argument is overly simplistic. Talent is not a property like money is. Talent is something intrinsic to the individual (although practice is often required). Take perfect-pitch for example. Individuals with it make excellent musicians, and no amount of externals can give it to someone. Money, on the other hand, is nothing like this. It is extrinsic, and can easily be bestowed upon anyone. Milton's analogy fails.
@seiferganon Agreed. I find that Milton's original argument of talent and wealth at first seemed to make sense. However, I think one has to listen more than once in order to understand the flaw in his statement. It all goes to show that one must think for themselves and not absorb every bit of information from even the most influential speakers.
If I create a story it is real if my eyes are open and I see a table then I close my eyes and I can still see the table, it is real! Even though it not physical, an in my sight, does not mean it is not real, but I found the realist, the truth, the answer to all! The more you seek the unseen the more you will see it; click my name if you’re tired of sadness, pain.
this lady from BU upset me...people are born as individuals, this country allows one to change their colors/improve their lot, what does she think this is? a Caste system?
The capitalist structure has offered more freedom to those born into poverty, out of any other system known to man. People's inability to move up within typically comes from an act of government. Should you look at the cities, states or countries that have not implemented a capitalist system, you will find the utter poverty in the vast majority of the people. History is not on the side of the liberal, nor will it ever be.
@quinnrasta ....Haha. Every U.S depression/recession was inspired by conservative, supply-side economics run amok. Liberal policies and keynesian economics have bailed us out every time. Other countries often adopt capitalistic mindsets of centralizing wealth at the top, thru dictatorships, while using communism in name only, as a shield for state control and oppression. Capitalism, like any other economic paradigm is a THEORY. THe participants in that THEORY determine its success or failure.
@quinnrasta ...In the 20s the elite owned over 40% of the wealth a main contributing factor to the Great Depression. New Deal and higher taxes on the rich bailed us out and inspired decades of prosperity in the 40s/50s....Reagan, supported 'trickle down econ' = led to a massive early-90s recession. Clinton raised taxes, bailed us out. Bush tax cuts 4 rich and massive deregulation = An economic collapse that rivals the great depression. No consumer demand.... Only the rich have money, lol
@flipgood89 The depression of the 20's was inspired by wilson and was combated by Coolidge with sound economic policy. Hoover was a keynesian that put in the smoothawley tarrifs that started the depression followed by the fed reserve(created by wilson) inaction. The entire decade of the 30' was double digit unemployment all the way up 25%. Kennedy cut taxes increased revenue, Reagan cut taxes doubled revenue and created 15 million jobs, clinton ran with Reagan and had the internet bubble.
@quinnrasta The "Smoot tariff" didnt contribute at all to the Great D...actual net exports were affected by fractions of a point. I dated a German exchange student a couple of months ago, and she is going back specifically because Germany offers free college education and health care. Capitalism is only functional when it is practiced responsibly and morally. When the govt. acts as a rule maker and checks greed, the economy is at its healthiest. Money circulating and not concentrated at the top.
@flipgood89 Seriously, give it up. You have to be extremely uneducated to not know the consequences of the Smoot-Hawley. Unemployment of the 1930's was at a peak of 9.6% prior to government intervention it fell down to 6.3% and then cam the keynesian hoover and super keynesian FDR. If their programs worked so well ,we wouldnt have had double digit unemployment for more than a decade. Why is it, that Reagans policies had the opposite effect of FDRs and doubled revenue and created 15miilion jobs?
@quinnrasta ...Net exports remained the same after the passage of the Smoot tariff --- meaning, the results of trade were still at the same volume it was before the depression. Thats a fact. You can deny it, and continue to believe the manipulations of Sowell if you wish. But here is where your argument becomes comical. You bash the New deal, right.\? The New deal was enacted AFTER the crash and depression, so it didnt cause the fall. It presided over our most prosperous economic period.
@flipgood89 The 1930's was the most prosperous economic period??? How does the greatest unemployment in US history prosperous? The economy recovered "somewhat" from its state in 1933 but the unemployment rate remained in the 15 percent range for the rest of the decade. The unemployment rate did not drop from depression levels until the economic impact of World War II was felt. Net exports were down starting in 1929-37. -10.7,-10.9,-10.1,-11.2,-9.7,-18.1,-16.5,-15.4. Thats a fact!
@flipgood89 The economy recovered from the Depression only with the advent of World War II which pushed demand for goods and services to the limit of its capacity. After the new deal,unemployment remained high and the economy was still in a depression. Investment remained volatile during the period of the 1930's, in part because of the uncertainty created for business by the radical and shifting policies of the fdr's new deal. Fast forward to today, 2 Trill spent, 1st qtr GDP 0.4% keynes failed!
@quinnrasta ...Of course the New Deal didnt pay immediate dividends, because the depression has already taken root. An economic policy is not some magic wand. It takes time to reverse. The point is, how does one explain why America was at its most prosperous, when the New Deal entitlements were firmly entrenched, and the marginal tax rate was high (40s 50s)?? If entitlements and high taxes were an economic deterrent, then those elements would have discouraged the sustained economic boom, right?
@flipgood89 Look, you have argued intelligently, but you keep back tracking on all your arguments. As I have pointed out keynesianism has failed in our country more than once, as well as other countries. The displacement of 12 million people helped our unemployment and WWII spurred the economic growth,not the new deal. The new deal was not all bad I would be a blind idealogue to say say so. We had a depression before 1929 and Coolidge's policies were immediate, as were Kennedy's and Reagan's
@flipgood89 I'll leave you with this : FDR's Treasury secretary and close friend,Henry Morganthau,conceded this fact to Congressional Democrats in May 1939: "We have tried spending money,We are spending more than we have ever spent before& it does not work.And I have just one interest, & if Im wrong,somebody else can have my job... We have never made good on our promises.I say after 8 years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started & an enormous debt to boot!"
@flipgood89 Japan and Argentina tried keynesian economics and Japan had the lost decade(still trying to recover) and Argentina being one of the premier economies in the world has never recovered. Europes attempt at socialism has failed starting with Greece, it will be followed by Spain portugal, italy, etc.. Germany has gone the opposite way, cutting taxes and spending less, they are now europe's premier economy. Keynes has even said his policies were bad after he saw the effect. LOL Nice try
@quinnrasta I'm glad you made that point. While I think there can, at times, arguments made for government intervention, and the capitalist system can afford some criticism, there has yet to be an economic system to allow more freedom and ingenuity than capitalism. Every argument about inequality should begin with that caveat.
@deziistheone saying that a system is the best yet isn't the same as saying it's the best possible system.also best 4 what?freedom?truly free was the hunter-gatherer in primitive economy cause he lived before the concept of freedom was invented,you and I only perceive to be free in the current system,a system that gains advantage in promoting such view of the free independent self..also skeptical of the inheritance of talent:upbringing plays a pivotal role and talent's too fuzzy a concept anyway
@quinnrasta Which explains why Cuba is the richest of poor nations and has a lower infant mortality rate than the USA. Oh wait Cuba isn't capitalist? which proves the exact opposite of ur ridiculous statement ...my bad
@PixelDansIronFist So Cuba is the smartest kid in special ed...that's your argument? Where do the Cuban statistics on mortality rates come from? Who gives the reporting? Nothing goes against my argument, you have just admitted that cuba IS POOR and has been POOR. China is prospering now that they moved to of a MORE CAPITALIST structure. Why does fidel leave the country for medical treatment? Your statement was truly asinine.
@quinnrasta Cuba<USA infant mortality rate stat is from the UN, but who R they right? Cuba is the richest poor/non-white country (including China per capita) cuz they liberated themselves from the grip of rich/white capitalist exploitation. LOL Castro never left Cuba for medical care, ur confusing him with Chavez who left Venezuela TO GO TO Cuba for medical treatment A-HA-HA! Maybe if arrogant Westerners examined the world instead of just their narrow little bubble-world, u would learn something
@PixelDansIronFist I know its from the UN.. DA, where does the UN get the information from, someone in Cuba. Why is it that boat loads of Cubans risk death trying to get to the Florida shores? Why arent people in Florida doing the same? January 2007 fidel left cuba for spain for treatment. If you were smart you would do some research on fidel and on the how countries determine infant morality, the US counts infants born after 22 weeks, where as Germany starts after 26 weeks.
@PixelDansIronFist Further more Cuba makes a lot of money from tourism, but again they are the smartest kid in special ed. It is real easy to beat out China on a per capita basis when the ratio is 100 to 1. Non white Chile is better off than cuba although it was really bad before capitalism. I am sorry, where did you get your computer...from a capitalist society which has given you, Youtube as well. Your ignorance becomes you and shows why cuba is poor
@quinnrasta Luv how u refer to non-whites as retarded, perfectly demonstrates the innate racism of ur capitalist ideology. Yea Cuba has tourism like every other Caribbean nation and whose people are all poorer than Cubans. Chilie is ur proud capitalist example that ur gonna cherry pick? Where they murdered and tortured 10s of 1000s including children to impose their glorious capitalist system which the people democratically rejected? I think their neighbor Argentina is more apropo in this convo
@PixelDansIronFist Where did I refer to non-whites as retarded? castro murdered 10's of 1000's in his conquest of communism. Cherry pick? They are the only real capitalist society in their region, Argentina ranks 85th in the world by the OECD as far as economic freedom.Cubans are now ALLOWED to have cell phones and dvd players, but unfortunate for them they make a about $20 a month and cannot afford it any way. If this is what you subscribe to, then get off your capitalist CPU
@PixelDansIronFist FYI, my grandparents are from Mexico...typical leftist results to name calling when they are wrong on their facts.You brought race into this discussion...not me! I am sorry you cannot distinguish between an analogy and name calling. Argentina is a leftist socialist society that was a thriving capitalist society before the socialist revolution at the turn of the 20th century. Again cubans die trying to make it to this racist capitalist country! See ya!
@quinnrasta U called all poor (non-white) nations retarded, shows what u Uncle Tom types think of ur proud heritage of resistance. All southerners die following their stolen wealth to imperialist nations. Chiliean rejected capitalism but it was imposed by America with bloodshed and torture. Argentina was as wealthy as North Americans & their economy was destroyed by fascists and more recently neo-liberal capitalists "the purest" of ur failed ideology. WTH Argentina had a socialist gov't?! NEVER
@PixelDansIronFist Copy and paste exactly what I said word for word about calling non white nations retarded...I have never used the word retarded. So Hipolito Irigoyen was a capitalist? Juan Peron was a capitalist? They mandated government backed pensions, healthcare and huge redistribution programs that are not of the capitalist system and Argentina's hyper inflation grew over 3000% Pinochet was not a free market capitalist,we was a murder like fidel and che.communism failed
@PixelDansIronFist Again I am really interested to see where I called non white nations retarded, that actually is point made by that idiot che guevera, the rich kid, that favored the light skinned europeans.Chile is better off than cuba, they have cell phones, computers and dvd players.I have family just outside of Santiago. Your facts have been wrong again and again..I would just shut up for your own benefit, its apparent you have a limited education,meaning you're a dumbass
@quinnrasta The purest of the capitalist ideology has made the US the most profitable nation in the world while eliminating poverty more than in other nation in the history of the world...your envy has consumed you. Again without the US the world would not have half of the products that have benefited mankind. Time to shut your mouth mijo!
@quinnrasta ....just because capitalism has made us wealthy, doesnt mean that it is above reproach or examination. Capitalism and its institutions have reproduced poverty and stratification, which are inherently unconsitutional. We have to balance the ability of economic freedom FOR ALL, and not just those born into wealth are those of economic and political means. Understand your arguments, sir.
@flipgood89 Free market capitalism has made us wealthy, nothing should be above reproach. The best way to get rid of the imbalance is to get government out of the private market. Most people who have money did not come from wealth, however those born into government caused poverty (welfare recipients will continue to perpetuate that cycle and that is backed by facts I understand my arguments, I am not sure you understand yours.
@quinnrasta ...Your assertion that "most people who have money did not come from wealth" is not only factually incorrect, its borderline absurd. Our economic arraignments show consistent reproduction of ones status from generation to generation: meaning, that the percentile or "class" one is born in, is the same percentile their kids will assume and so on. This is enforced by an imbalance of opportunity and penalty for different people. Mobility is an exception, not the rule.
@flipgood89 What do you consider money...most liberals are often told to speak in generalities because their logic is so flawed. What do you consider rich? The internet has all the information you need, schools are very expensive because of government subsidization.Who is wealthier, the millionaire in the 50s or someone making a median wage today? We are all born into wealth in this country.My father grew up poor as did obama and both went to Ivy league schools,but I was taught about an honest $
"the inheritance of talent, is no different, from an ethical point of view..."
Except talent (in the sense Friedman is using it) cannot be redistributed, while wealth can. If the question is whether money should be distributed, this seems like a non sequitur.
@derfos666 you are right it can't be redistributed and neither can the talent to create wealth. If wealth was redistributed the talent or percentage of men who create wealth would simply create it again.
Listen to this white woman trying to "educate" Dr. Sowell on the problems of black people in the united states. I'm sure she knows much better than he LOL.
The Progs always run to their racist roots, when arguing.
There is a difference between money and talent. You can redistribute money. You can't redistribute talent. People do not resent inheritance or posession of genetic goods because no matter how much you resent it, you cannot realistically do anything about it. It is a waste of your peace of mind to resent it. People simply accept it as something they can't change and move on. It would be a different story if it was possible to redistribute it.
And actually, even then, to an extent it is resented.
@Ravengaurd6 Brother Ravengaurd economy is the vital component to terrorize nations. We no longer do it like the earlier European ways but through economics. He revolutionized Reagan economics, got rid of unions and worker rights. A CEO now makes 500 times more than the average worker, before Milton it was 40 to 1. Large economic disparity of wealth. One percent owns 50 percent of net wealth. :(
@Ravengaurd6 De-privatize prisons, natural resources, mercenary groups. Pull out of our three wars, form a transnational union to develop fair trade. Eliminate NAFTA and the list goes on. There are just so many things we can,,,how do we do this you say? by keeping our government accountable and demand transparency to protect our interest.
@funknando007 PREACH! People are so blind to subscribing to the economic superstructure of capitalism and their corporate daddies, that they dont realize how completely limited their movement is in this system. We easily attack safety nets that at least guarantee basic survival (welfare), but not corporate socialism for the elite or structural racism. The American elite has been brilliant in mobilizing the energy of the working class against its own. For the latest example see: Tea Party.
@flipgood89 You do know that Thomas Sowell attacks the welfare system? He claims that the welfare system is one of the main reasons for causing the destruction of families as well as a degredation of life values and raises crimes. His argument against the welfare system seemed to convince me that the system itself is more damaging than its initial helping nature.
For more info search up Thomas Sowell- Welfare on Youtube
@AssassinGhost ...I understand Sowell's points and arguments. I was agreeing with an another comment, not Sowell. I think both him and Friedman are full of shit. Their idolatry of the privileged and promoting policies that funnel all the wealth to the elite, has been more harmful to this country than any other social movement in the last 100 years. Welfare is a product of the disadvantaged being shut out of legitimate opportunities, more than anything.
@flipgood89 the disadvantaged that are being shut out of legitimate opportunities are a product of government policies and intervention. shame you can not see that.
@RMT87 ..laissez faire economics always leads to the rich hoarding the wealth, which is to the detriment of the nation. The rich owned 40% of the wealth which led to the great depression. When we had a marginal tax rate of 91% in the mid-20th century, America was prosperous, an era people still wax poetic about. We start deregulating and tax loop holing for the rich, intensifying in the 80s, and here we are. There is no demand in this economy. Nobody has any money. Its only the rich, lol.
@flipgood89 Perhaps, but now more then ever 2011 Welfare has become weaponized to be used AGAINST the poor and this countries economy. It keeps most people in poverty and the number of welfare recipients has increased not been reduced. You also have an entire generation of immigrants using it as a life sources with no intent to come off of it. - Sowell's arguments are valid.
@CAinfowarrior ..Welfare allows the poor to subsist. We have a fundamental disagreement, elitists like Sowell, hold people in contempt and think they are lazy and resigned to living on the margins of society. I, like many, feel that the problems start with hoarding of the wealth, limiting opportunities for all. Look at the tax rates in the 50's and 40s for top earners and, also, the fact that a man could leave high school and make a good living as long as he worked hard...All jobs r in China!
@flipgood89 I don't believe we have a fundamental disagreement, we have an economic one dealing with acquired wealth by the middle class & "rich". Define hoarding wealth? is a wealthy person going to put all there money under a pillow? - they re-invest it: they buy commodities, stocks, and if they own any real estate or business they put there money into it constantly to stay competitive.- We also have a TOTAL disagreement Sowell is an "elitist." - i'm not going to debate your name calling.
@CAinfowarrior ...I define the structural hoarding of wealth by the elite as the manipulation of our legislative body to enact laws, or loosen regulations to keep profits away from workers, or the U.S through taxes, keeping wealth concentrated at the top. Shelters, loopholes, outsourcing, etc. People love to wax poetic about "patriotism", but this has created economic devastation for the U.S. Money isnt being exchanged. Bentleys are being purchased, but not GM's. Nobody has money. No demand.
@bobotohough Talent gives you the ability to acquire money, goods, and property. With a low intelligence (talent) death is inevitable far faster than that of an intelligent man. A fool and his money are soon parted.
Piven typifies the enslavement mindset of the left. They oppose enterprise zones (Sue to the threat that a tac base represents to their political power) - - Instead they want "Community re-investment" which flows through their own hands and is doled out as they see fit. Look to her own finances for proof. Greed is greed! Progressive' greed is Predatory and exploitative greed. Their personal quest for wealth and power is intimately tied to ongoing poverty. 60 Years of proof!
Yes, liberals want equality of results due to the wish for equality of opportunity.
Meanwhile, they deny inner city kids the right to choose a school, trapping them in bad government schools, then they enact wage restrictions on them to prevent them from entering the workforce. Somewhere in between, they fail to give them a moral compass in favor of sex ed and subjectivity. All the while, refusing to acknowledge the problems their rigid progressive views cause. Awesome.
@jrsub3 Not to mention tell them how bad capitalism is, leaving them with little to no money management skills to build wealth and improve their economic mobility.
Thomas Sowell also seems rude and dismissive, which is the sure sign that a person doesn't really have that much of an argument. So the only way to sound like you are right, is by trying to make the other side sound wrong and foolish.
The hand waving, the interrupting, all signs of a person losing an argument.
@MoJoSB those are signs of exasperation. Sowell stands his postion on hard results,statistics and facts. his ideals are not formed until he has a solid mold in the real. If you're trying to speak from an empirically backed position to an ideologue whose position is backed mostly by conviction,rhetoric and self-interests you'd be getting impatient as well.
You always hear this kind of nonsense that somehow because those on the left want to raise the standard of living for all, that somehow we want to take away the wealth and privilege of the haves.
Of course life is not fair, we know this. No need to state the obvious Milt.
What is being discussed is "opportunities" and as much as you may feel the US in the "Land of Opportunity" for some it's just not.
Bringing out one successful black man doesn't change that.
@MoJoSB Sowell isn't some set piece. He's an individual who promotes a free market system that will provoke people to stand to compete for their own interests.
I literally cannot stand Piven. Folks if you want to know why we are in the mess we are in right now? Look no further than that woman. She has been creating every problem we have in this country. Anywhere she speaks? Show up and PEACEFULLY make your mind known. She is a vile corruption of what our founders wanted for this country. Sowell is one of our greatest American heros. He schooled her but no one listens.
"The inheritance of talent...is no different, from an ethical point of view, from the inheritance...of property."
Inherited talent is passed on genetically, and is therefore natural; inherited property is passed on legally, and is therefore a human construction. Also, could it be that the rich musicians can be musicians because they are rich, ie. because they have the resources to practice their skill? Success may be a combination of talent *and* resources. Very faulty thinking.
You have taken the comment out of context. The genetic/constructed nature of the inherited trait/property has no bearing on the ethical issue involved (or how it plays out).
In answer to your question about what's possible, the answer is an emphatic no. While practice (and the ability to afford an instrument) are certainly factors, the evidence is overwhelming that musical talent is an inherited trait and succeeds even in the relative absence of resources.
I am reminded of the short story "Harrison Bergeron" by Kurt Vonnegut, in which equality is achieved through the deliberate handicapping of the more talented members of society. Thinkers have ringers in their ears which break their concentration, the handsome are disfigured, the graceful forced to wear weights and bonds. All in the name of fairness. Its quite a good, if depressing, story.
I can`t stand white liberals who think they know what`s best for black people and treat them like children. Black people were rising up until the government decided they needed the ``help`` of politicians who had just recently enforced segregations.
Thomas Sowell and Milton Friedman were on the same side during a debate? I'm surprised the world was not split asunder on that day from the force of their arguments.
If I were by chance to become president, those two would be my top two economic advisers, no question.
well, I like the video, but if you work as a waiter or pizza delivery guy (in the south at least) you'll find out that black people do have a different attitude, working those jobs made me racist, 90% of those fuckers don't tip and feel like they shouldn't, even when some of their friends called them on it they still wouldn't tip. Haven't seen any other race do that on such a scale, so its definitely a matter of the way they perceive their place or the fact that others owe them something.
@rovlad Should it be any surprise that a race, (in general) does not reward hard work when they have been taught for decades to depend on government assistance? After all, receiving a welfare check requires no tip. Therein lies the evil of social engineering and welfare; it breeds racism. It breeds resentment. It breeds dependency. Were a higher percentage of blacks like Sowell or Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Racism would be be almost non-existent.
@tpwatson I wouldn't say that exactly, but if we compare Asians to Blacks, wherein both were heavily discriminated against before the welfare state but afterward very few Asians are on welfare compared to blacks. Lo and Behold, Asians do better economically and face considerably less social and workplace racism (it still exists of course). The welfare state in addition to the drug war have had an abysmal affect on many American Blacks. It's a shame really.
Point taken about post welfare state comparisons, although I'd assume you understand there are several unique differences between the two. As to your point about social and workplace racism, I don't agree due to economic ethnicities are somehow less likely to face discrimination. Why are the statistical superior white poor NOT as discriminated against? Economic status or class can certainly be used an excuse/scapegoat for racism, it is not its true cause.
@tpwatson Now it may very well be the case that many racists of all colors simply hate for hate's sake. However economics and the state cannot be ignored. When a casual observer notices that a disproportionally higher percentage of Blacks are in prison, receive welfare, live in government housing AKA "the projects" and are born to single parent homes, what opinion would that observer hold over time? Sadly, these aspects are almost entirely due to unintended consequences of govt intervention.
Your statement about a casual observer isn't very feasible in my opinion. I doubt most people take time out to truly observe apart from what they are trained and subjected to believe from "news" sources. Blacks have been scapegoated and portaryed as lazy evil doers for centuries in America, through film, television and other means, which has aided in bias, not greatly due to government. So racism in America and the world is almost entirely due to government intervention?
@tpwatson Do you know most racists to be deep thinkers? That is why I say casual observer. A deeper look reveals how govt programs create disproportional black dependency and imprisonment which in turn fuels white fear, resentment and racism. Racism has many causes of course, but again, look at Asians, the Jews and even the Irish...all scapegoats just like blacks, yet comparatively today, they do quite well. Why should WASPs be any wary of Jews or Asians?
@tpwatson I would not say that "most" racism in the modern age is due to the govt, but much of it is. More correctly, much racism is the bi-product of govt policies, many of which were intended to help minorities. For example, before the welfare state, single parent homes among blacks were almost as rare as white single parent homes, afterward the number disproportionally shot up. The war on drugs prohibited cocaine, so cheap crack was invented and infected the ghetto etc.
@kev3d I'm sure there would be far less racism if more blacks were like that, no doubt, unfortunately this is not the situation and it won't change anytime soon.
@kev3d I think we have to stop the reversed racism, acknowledge the fact that minorities cause problems and the predominant minority is black and stop encouraging it. Hip hop and gangsta bullshit is promoted everywhere, black on white crime is shoved under the carpet and so on. This is damaging for the minority of blacks that are actually ok because they will be perceived like the rest, while the scum is encouraged to keep doing what they are doing because it OK, that's the culture, it's COOL
Regarding inheritance of money, yes I can agree that it could be always "fair", even if the parents of the "heir" are corrupted or criminals. As a matter of fact an "heir" not always knows from where his or her wealth come but nonetheless this is a delicate matter. If someone have more wealth than another, the responsibility is ALWAYS by humans, and this can be more or less honest. If someone has more talent than another is ALWAYS nature or God: it not depends from us. That's REALLY different.
Yes you are right about skills...but my point was that talent is always a fair "gift" and skills are always fairly developed. On the contrary money or stocks not always are so fair "gift", if they are the result of criminal or corrupted activities. So the Friedman statement is not exhaustive: there is a "little" difference between talent and wealth and this is exactly ethical. Talent and skills are always fair, wealth not so always.
@ad80ad I also think that talent is a "fair" gift. Or maybe fair is not the best word - it's no more unfair than anything in nature. But I don't agree that skills are always fairly developed. On what basis? Granted that doesn't mean that the government should always interfere and make things more "fair" for everyone. For one thing, they have no clue how and never will. I agree with the basic point that Friedman is getting at, but disliked the way he made the argument.
Yes you say "fairly" because you mean that someone "unfairly" can't develop his skills (because it's not enough wealthy), and that's true. I was talking only about the ethical difference between talent, money, and skills as "inheritance". Talent and skills are always "pure", even if they can be USED in a bad way. Money is not always so pure and purely "inherited"...putting talent and money on the same level like Friedman here risks to undervalue this difference.
@ad80ad What? So because the money may have been acquired "dishonestly" we should punish ALL children everywhere who might benefit from money EVEN if it was acquired honestly? Perhaps you should be talking about strengthening fraud laws instead of encouraging societal theft.
What if your father used dishonest means to woo your mother (telling her he was in med school), and without mom's genes you would'nt be intelligent? To ascribe purity to talent as contrasted with material gain is absurd.
But I don't think the solution of the problem is to punish people on the top and pay for the people on the bottom: that's a perverse solution. I think the solution is, in order:
- Strengthening fraud laws
- Controlling that highest incomes don't depend on distorted and iniquitous precesses or speculations but from an activity which assures wealth to all the community or at least which doesn't damage the community.
This is due to the spiritual nature of skills and to the material nature of wealth. Skills are part of human essence, money is only an object like gold, precious stones: something you can sell, buy and of course stole. I was only arguing about this Friedman enthusiasm that risks to become too simplistic.
If we want, wealth follows the same laws of skills, it's the human work which raises them. But I can hardly imagine someone who improves his or her skills in a criminal way, while I can easily imagine someone criminally earning money.
I never said that the solution is to "punish" children who benefit from money. I was only warning against the danger of considering money and wealth like a "grace" from God, without any difference with talent.
Money follows only the laws of humans, while besides any dishonest "woo", the gift of talent follows only the laws of nature or God.
Not only, but regarding INHERITANCE of money, if someone is not responsible of his/her own wealth like a child, I agree that is practically not different than talent, but only for the child. The parents has total ethical responsibility regarding the money they gave to their children.
liberals are delusional. my friend is a socialist, but she won't share her gum.
historyfairgirl 2 days ago
@historyfairgirl every government/person is capitalist it's just about who owns the capital.
skydome29 1 day ago
I bet Friedman didn't account for the modern CEOs who get bonuses even when much of the labour has to be let go and the company goes bankrupt.
LongBow1600 4 days ago
@LongBow1600 he did, he would say thats not a free market capital system (go see his monopoly video). He of course wouldn't like how the marriage of business and government is so obtuse.
skydome29 1 day ago
the inheritance of property is no different than an inheritance of genetic ability???? Mr. Friedman you and your idiot followers need to know reductio ad absurdum arguments, and when you unknowingly engage in them.
flipgood89 2 weeks ago
Piven proves the old adage that one can be educated far beyond their intelligence!
MemoryTechnologies 2 weeks ago
The difference between someone who is just given money, vs. being bought a business, vs. being bought an education is that the later two add value to society, while the first one doesn't...
jackooboy1 3 weeks ago
when a woman is hysterical - slap her! :)
molimhvalaizvoli 2 months ago 4
/watch?v=cZ7LzE3u7Bw
oJKBo 2 months ago
That Piven fella looks alot like Rod Blagojevich
himiker 2 months ago 2
Piven is highly annoying! What the hell does she know about the struggles of the black race, clearly by her response...not much.
Litt1eLisaMarie 3 months ago
OWNED.
BrotherAtticus 3 months ago
"Intellectuals were not in that protest movement. Black people were in that protest." -FFP. Hmm, didn't know those things were mutually exclusive. With that simple line she reveals her soft bigotry of low expectations...
wizard7700 3 months ago
"Oh..Damn it stop" lmao thats great
Yachera 3 months ago
Sowell is a personal hero of mine.
TheCapitalistdog 4 months ago
There is one crucial ethical difference between the inheritance of talent and the inheritance of wealth. Inheritance of talent is a fact of life, inheritance of wealth is something society chooses to perform.
wowsa0 4 months ago
Thomas Sowell - great ideas and an even better afro.
TheLoyalOfficer 4 months ago
Haha hehe, Frances fox pivon lol, Glenn beck worned America about her and i see why lol, She is nuts
wowzinger 5 months ago
Books by Thomas Sowell and Milton Friedman should be required reading for all American voters.
bw01a 5 months ago 2
"You're putting in the mouth of polsters." hahaha
She looks at him like he's a traitor to her own vision of what black people are / want.
seppsters 5 months ago
Prof Friedman appears to conveniently ignore the fact that the poor & disadvantaged ALSO 'inherent' [many] talents. However, in this society because (among some groups) of historic injustice they also inherent economic & social inequalities. No (liberal) moderates are arguing that the state should take all of a families inherited wealth ;but, since all pple benefit form the collective production of the poor, there shd be limited REDISTRIBUTION. The civil rights movement DID call for quotas.
shieldsff 6 months ago
@shieldsff and many poor with talents choose to use their inherited talents to make a living above and beyond what they could make doing anything else.
ajgolfer1 5 months ago
yeah, I hear you,but I think you are missing the point. Friedman is attempting to equate the inheriting of material wealth (class)w/ the 'inheriting' of talent. Both types of talents require care & nurturing, but those who are impoverished (for various reasons) clearly face higher obstacles and odds to the socially productive cultivation of talents. This is more of a sociological issue then an economic one Economically, there are many "mixed" western economies which more equal & very successful
shieldsff 5 months ago
@shieldsff "More equal" How many black people do you see in Sweden?
kev3d 5 months ago
Haha, Sowell.. "You expressed it Damnit!" .. love it.. Liberals act as if they are generous, but they always try to give you what you don't need. They only feed lies to groups of people to enrich their own pockets.
SouthP17CD 6 months ago
He totally pwns her. Awesome
ecuadmail 6 months ago
Milton Friedman's argument is overly simplistic. Talent is not a property like money is. Talent is something intrinsic to the individual (although practice is often required). Take perfect-pitch for example. Individuals with it make excellent musicians, and no amount of externals can give it to someone. Money, on the other hand, is nothing like this. It is extrinsic, and can easily be bestowed upon anyone. Milton's analogy fails.
seiferganon 6 months ago
@seiferganon Agreed. I find that Milton's original argument of talent and wealth at first seemed to make sense. However, I think one has to listen more than once in order to understand the flaw in his statement. It all goes to show that one must think for themselves and not absorb every bit of information from even the most influential speakers.
AssassinGhost 6 months ago
If I create a story it is real if my eyes are open and I see a table then I close my eyes and I can still see the table, it is real! Even though it not physical, an in my sight, does not mean it is not real, but I found the realist, the truth, the answer to all! The more you seek the unseen the more you will see it; click my name if you’re tired of sadness, pain.
tabaripalmer 7 months ago
this lady from BU upset me...people are born as individuals, this country allows one to change their colors/improve their lot, what does she think this is? a Caste system?
3rdEyeSpeaks 7 months ago
The capitalist structure has offered more freedom to those born into poverty, out of any other system known to man. People's inability to move up within typically comes from an act of government. Should you look at the cities, states or countries that have not implemented a capitalist system, you will find the utter poverty in the vast majority of the people. History is not on the side of the liberal, nor will it ever be.
quinnrasta 7 months ago 28
@quinnrasta ....Haha. Every U.S depression/recession was inspired by conservative, supply-side economics run amok. Liberal policies and keynesian economics have bailed us out every time. Other countries often adopt capitalistic mindsets of centralizing wealth at the top, thru dictatorships, while using communism in name only, as a shield for state control and oppression. Capitalism, like any other economic paradigm is a THEORY. THe participants in that THEORY determine its success or failure.
flipgood89 6 months ago
@flipgood89 Give me examples of both supply side economics and the liberal policies that bailed us out
quinnrasta 6 months ago
@quinnrasta ...In the 20s the elite owned over 40% of the wealth a main contributing factor to the Great Depression. New Deal and higher taxes on the rich bailed us out and inspired decades of prosperity in the 40s/50s....Reagan, supported 'trickle down econ' = led to a massive early-90s recession. Clinton raised taxes, bailed us out. Bush tax cuts 4 rich and massive deregulation = An economic collapse that rivals the great depression. No consumer demand.... Only the rich have money, lol
flipgood89 6 months ago
@flipgood89 The depression of the 20's was inspired by wilson and was combated by Coolidge with sound economic policy. Hoover was a keynesian that put in the smoothawley tarrifs that started the depression followed by the fed reserve(created by wilson) inaction. The entire decade of the 30' was double digit unemployment all the way up 25%. Kennedy cut taxes increased revenue, Reagan cut taxes doubled revenue and created 15 million jobs, clinton ran with Reagan and had the internet bubble.
quinnrasta 6 months ago
@quinnrasta The "Smoot tariff" didnt contribute at all to the Great D...actual net exports were affected by fractions of a point. I dated a German exchange student a couple of months ago, and she is going back specifically because Germany offers free college education and health care. Capitalism is only functional when it is practiced responsibly and morally. When the govt. acts as a rule maker and checks greed, the economy is at its healthiest. Money circulating and not concentrated at the top.
flipgood89 6 months ago
@flipgood89 Seriously, give it up. You have to be extremely uneducated to not know the consequences of the Smoot-Hawley. Unemployment of the 1930's was at a peak of 9.6% prior to government intervention it fell down to 6.3% and then cam the keynesian hoover and super keynesian FDR. If their programs worked so well ,we wouldnt have had double digit unemployment for more than a decade. Why is it, that Reagans policies had the opposite effect of FDRs and doubled revenue and created 15miilion jobs?
quinnrasta 6 months ago
@quinnrasta ...Net exports remained the same after the passage of the Smoot tariff --- meaning, the results of trade were still at the same volume it was before the depression. Thats a fact. You can deny it, and continue to believe the manipulations of Sowell if you wish. But here is where your argument becomes comical. You bash the New deal, right.\? The New deal was enacted AFTER the crash and depression, so it didnt cause the fall. It presided over our most prosperous economic period.
flipgood89 6 months ago
@flipgood89 The 1930's was the most prosperous economic period??? How does the greatest unemployment in US history prosperous? The economy recovered "somewhat" from its state in 1933 but the unemployment rate remained in the 15 percent range for the rest of the decade. The unemployment rate did not drop from depression levels until the economic impact of World War II was felt. Net exports were down starting in 1929-37. -10.7,-10.9,-10.1,-11.2,-9.7,-18.1,-16.5,-15.4. Thats a fact!
quinnrasta 6 months ago
@flipgood89 The economy recovered from the Depression only with the advent of World War II which pushed demand for goods and services to the limit of its capacity. After the new deal,unemployment remained high and the economy was still in a depression. Investment remained volatile during the period of the 1930's, in part because of the uncertainty created for business by the radical and shifting policies of the fdr's new deal. Fast forward to today, 2 Trill spent, 1st qtr GDP 0.4% keynes failed!
quinnrasta 6 months ago
@quinnrasta ...Of course the New Deal didnt pay immediate dividends, because the depression has already taken root. An economic policy is not some magic wand. It takes time to reverse. The point is, how does one explain why America was at its most prosperous, when the New Deal entitlements were firmly entrenched, and the marginal tax rate was high (40s 50s)?? If entitlements and high taxes were an economic deterrent, then those elements would have discouraged the sustained economic boom, right?
flipgood89 6 months ago
@flipgood89 Look, you have argued intelligently, but you keep back tracking on all your arguments. As I have pointed out keynesianism has failed in our country more than once, as well as other countries. The displacement of 12 million people helped our unemployment and WWII spurred the economic growth,not the new deal. The new deal was not all bad I would be a blind idealogue to say say so. We had a depression before 1929 and Coolidge's policies were immediate, as were Kennedy's and Reagan's
quinnrasta 6 months ago
@flipgood89 I'll leave you with this : FDR's Treasury secretary and close friend,Henry Morganthau,conceded this fact to Congressional Democrats in May 1939: "We have tried spending money,We are spending more than we have ever spent before& it does not work.And I have just one interest, & if Im wrong,somebody else can have my job... We have never made good on our promises.I say after 8 years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started & an enormous debt to boot!"
quinnrasta 6 months ago
@flipgood89 Japan and Argentina tried keynesian economics and Japan had the lost decade(still trying to recover) and Argentina being one of the premier economies in the world has never recovered. Europes attempt at socialism has failed starting with Greece, it will be followed by Spain portugal, italy, etc.. Germany has gone the opposite way, cutting taxes and spending less, they are now europe's premier economy. Keynes has even said his policies were bad after he saw the effect. LOL Nice try
quinnrasta 6 months ago
@quinnrasta Amen brother ! Well said. This Piven is out of touch.
Retirement02042012 6 months ago
@quinnrasta Try telling them that. All you will get will be, to be called a heartless uncaring racist.
atchisrj1 5 months ago 5
@atchisrj1 Haha...no doubt my friend
quinnrasta 5 months ago
@quinnrasta I'm glad you made that point. While I think there can, at times, arguments made for government intervention, and the capitalist system can afford some criticism, there has yet to be an economic system to allow more freedom and ingenuity than capitalism. Every argument about inequality should begin with that caveat.
deziistheone 5 months ago
@deziistheone saying that a system is the best yet isn't the same as saying it's the best possible system.also best 4 what?freedom?truly free was the hunter-gatherer in primitive economy cause he lived before the concept of freedom was invented,you and I only perceive to be free in the current system,a system that gains advantage in promoting such view of the free independent self..also skeptical of the inheritance of talent:upbringing plays a pivotal role and talent's too fuzzy a concept anyway
LapoSettepanze 3 weeks ago
@quinnrasta great post!!
pragmatismnotidealis 1 month ago
@quinnrasta Which explains why Cuba is the richest of poor nations and has a lower infant mortality rate than the USA. Oh wait Cuba isn't capitalist? which proves the exact opposite of ur ridiculous statement ...my bad
PixelDansIronFist 3 weeks ago
@PixelDansIronFist So Cuba is the smartest kid in special ed...that's your argument? Where do the Cuban statistics on mortality rates come from? Who gives the reporting? Nothing goes against my argument, you have just admitted that cuba IS POOR and has been POOR. China is prospering now that they moved to of a MORE CAPITALIST structure. Why does fidel leave the country for medical treatment? Your statement was truly asinine.
quinnrasta 3 weeks ago
@quinnrasta Cuba<USA infant mortality rate stat is from the UN, but who R they right? Cuba is the richest poor/non-white country (including China per capita) cuz they liberated themselves from the grip of rich/white capitalist exploitation. LOL Castro never left Cuba for medical care, ur confusing him with Chavez who left Venezuela TO GO TO Cuba for medical treatment A-HA-HA! Maybe if arrogant Westerners examined the world instead of just their narrow little bubble-world, u would learn something
PixelDansIronFist 3 weeks ago
@PixelDansIronFist I know its from the UN.. DA, where does the UN get the information from, someone in Cuba. Why is it that boat loads of Cubans risk death trying to get to the Florida shores? Why arent people in Florida doing the same? January 2007 fidel left cuba for spain for treatment. If you were smart you would do some research on fidel and on the how countries determine infant morality, the US counts infants born after 22 weeks, where as Germany starts after 26 weeks.
quinnrasta 3 weeks ago
@PixelDansIronFist Further more Cuba makes a lot of money from tourism, but again they are the smartest kid in special ed. It is real easy to beat out China on a per capita basis when the ratio is 100 to 1. Non white Chile is better off than cuba although it was really bad before capitalism. I am sorry, where did you get your computer...from a capitalist society which has given you, Youtube as well. Your ignorance becomes you and shows why cuba is poor
quinnrasta 3 weeks ago
@quinnrasta Luv how u refer to non-whites as retarded, perfectly demonstrates the innate racism of ur capitalist ideology. Yea Cuba has tourism like every other Caribbean nation and whose people are all poorer than Cubans. Chilie is ur proud capitalist example that ur gonna cherry pick? Where they murdered and tortured 10s of 1000s including children to impose their glorious capitalist system which the people democratically rejected? I think their neighbor Argentina is more apropo in this convo
PixelDansIronFist 3 weeks ago
@PixelDansIronFist Where did I refer to non-whites as retarded? castro murdered 10's of 1000's in his conquest of communism. Cherry pick? They are the only real capitalist society in their region, Argentina ranks 85th in the world by the OECD as far as economic freedom.Cubans are now ALLOWED to have cell phones and dvd players, but unfortunate for them they make a about $20 a month and cannot afford it any way. If this is what you subscribe to, then get off your capitalist CPU
quinnrasta 3 weeks ago
@PixelDansIronFist FYI, my grandparents are from Mexico...typical leftist results to name calling when they are wrong on their facts.You brought race into this discussion...not me! I am sorry you cannot distinguish between an analogy and name calling. Argentina is a leftist socialist society that was a thriving capitalist society before the socialist revolution at the turn of the 20th century. Again cubans die trying to make it to this racist capitalist country! See ya!
quinnrasta 3 weeks ago
@quinnrasta U called all poor (non-white) nations retarded, shows what u Uncle Tom types think of ur proud heritage of resistance. All southerners die following their stolen wealth to imperialist nations. Chiliean rejected capitalism but it was imposed by America with bloodshed and torture. Argentina was as wealthy as North Americans & their economy was destroyed by fascists and more recently neo-liberal capitalists "the purest" of ur failed ideology. WTH Argentina had a socialist gov't?! NEVER
PixelDansIronFist 3 weeks ago
@PixelDansIronFist Copy and paste exactly what I said word for word about calling non white nations retarded...I have never used the word retarded. So Hipolito Irigoyen was a capitalist? Juan Peron was a capitalist? They mandated government backed pensions, healthcare and huge redistribution programs that are not of the capitalist system and Argentina's hyper inflation grew over 3000% Pinochet was not a free market capitalist,we was a murder like fidel and che.communism failed
quinnrasta 3 weeks ago
@PixelDansIronFist Again I am really interested to see where I called non white nations retarded, that actually is point made by that idiot che guevera, the rich kid, that favored the light skinned europeans.Chile is better off than cuba, they have cell phones, computers and dvd players.I have family just outside of Santiago. Your facts have been wrong again and again..I would just shut up for your own benefit, its apparent you have a limited education,meaning you're a dumbass
quinnrasta 3 weeks ago
@quinnrasta The purest of the capitalist ideology has made the US the most profitable nation in the world while eliminating poverty more than in other nation in the history of the world...your envy has consumed you. Again without the US the world would not have half of the products that have benefited mankind. Time to shut your mouth mijo!
quinnrasta 3 weeks ago
@quinnrasta ....just because capitalism has made us wealthy, doesnt mean that it is above reproach or examination. Capitalism and its institutions have reproduced poverty and stratification, which are inherently unconsitutional. We have to balance the ability of economic freedom FOR ALL, and not just those born into wealth are those of economic and political means. Understand your arguments, sir.
flipgood89 2 weeks ago
@flipgood89 Free market capitalism has made us wealthy, nothing should be above reproach. The best way to get rid of the imbalance is to get government out of the private market. Most people who have money did not come from wealth, however those born into government caused poverty (welfare recipients will continue to perpetuate that cycle and that is backed by facts I understand my arguments, I am not sure you understand yours.
quinnrasta 2 weeks ago
@quinnrasta ...Your assertion that "most people who have money did not come from wealth" is not only factually incorrect, its borderline absurd. Our economic arraignments show consistent reproduction of ones status from generation to generation: meaning, that the percentile or "class" one is born in, is the same percentile their kids will assume and so on. This is enforced by an imbalance of opportunity and penalty for different people. Mobility is an exception, not the rule.
flipgood89 2 weeks ago
@flipgood89 What do you consider money...most liberals are often told to speak in generalities because their logic is so flawed. What do you consider rich? The internet has all the information you need, schools are very expensive because of government subsidization.Who is wealthier, the millionaire in the 50s or someone making a median wage today? We are all born into wealth in this country.My father grew up poor as did obama and both went to Ivy league schools,but I was taught about an honest $
quinnrasta 2 weeks ago
"the inheritance of talent, is no different, from an ethical point of view..."
Except talent (in the sense Friedman is using it) cannot be redistributed, while wealth can. If the question is whether money should be distributed, this seems like a non sequitur.
derfos666 8 months ago
@derfos666 you are right it can't be redistributed and neither can the talent to create wealth. If wealth was redistributed the talent or percentage of men who create wealth would simply create it again.
Richdanahuff 8 months ago
Fact: society is NOT a merit based society.
mba2ceo 8 months ago
STOP PLAYING THAT NOISEY CELLO!!
Friedman is speaking
quarterxchange 8 months ago
Like most ppl ive never seen a pollster. LMAO. Intelligent, wise and witty. That's sowell
tatsumakisempyukaku 8 months ago
Listen to this white woman trying to "educate" Dr. Sowell on the problems of black people in the united states. I'm sure she knows much better than he LOL.
The Progs always run to their racist roots, when arguing.
asleeperj 9 months ago
Pivin: I just vomited a little in my mouth.
thedavidwilson 9 months ago
I wish that I were as smart as Thomas Sowell. Nothing but wisdom ever flows from his lips and his pen. I loved that he was so passionate about this.
GuaraldiGuy 9 months ago 3
Piven is a garden variety useful idiot. Sowell ripped her a new exhaust pipe.
muzzster1970 9 months ago
watch?v=Z_q1fX4cyZ0 - The Essence of American Power
freemarketfascist 9 months ago
There is a difference between money and talent. You can redistribute money. You can't redistribute talent. People do not resent inheritance or posession of genetic goods because no matter how much you resent it, you cannot realistically do anything about it. It is a waste of your peace of mind to resent it. People simply accept it as something they can't change and move on. It would be a different story if it was possible to redistribute it.
And actually, even then, to an extent it is resented.
VantekHG 10 months ago
Not a big fan of individual liberty or personal freedom are you knuckle dragger?
Why don’t you crawl back to your 3rd world hell hole slave and leave us free men to enjoy the fruits of our labors, your free lunch is over parasite.
espada9 10 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Friedman is the definition of terrorist.
funknando007 10 months ago
@funknando007 You're the definition of a knee-jerk, hyperbolic retard.
SclafaniBagni 9 months ago 2
@SclafaniBagni ok...haha
funknando007 9 months ago
@funknando007 how is he a terrorist. He's an economist.
Ravengaurd6 8 months ago
@Ravengaurd6 Brother Ravengaurd economy is the vital component to terrorize nations. We no longer do it like the earlier European ways but through economics. He revolutionized Reagan economics, got rid of unions and worker rights. A CEO now makes 500 times more than the average worker, before Milton it was 40 to 1. Large economic disparity of wealth. One percent owns 50 percent of net wealth. :(
funknando007 8 months ago
@funknando007 then what is your solution?
Ravengaurd6 8 months ago
@Ravengaurd6 De-privatize prisons, natural resources, mercenary groups. Pull out of our three wars, form a transnational union to develop fair trade. Eliminate NAFTA and the list goes on. There are just so many things we can,,,how do we do this you say? by keeping our government accountable and demand transparency to protect our interest.
Peace
funknando007 8 months ago
@funknando007 PREACH! People are so blind to subscribing to the economic superstructure of capitalism and their corporate daddies, that they dont realize how completely limited their movement is in this system. We easily attack safety nets that at least guarantee basic survival (welfare), but not corporate socialism for the elite or structural racism. The American elite has been brilliant in mobilizing the energy of the working class against its own. For the latest example see: Tea Party.
flipgood89 8 months ago
@flipgood89 You do know that Thomas Sowell attacks the welfare system? He claims that the welfare system is one of the main reasons for causing the destruction of families as well as a degredation of life values and raises crimes. His argument against the welfare system seemed to convince me that the system itself is more damaging than its initial helping nature.
For more info search up Thomas Sowell- Welfare on Youtube
AssassinGhost 6 months ago
Comment removed
flipgood89 6 months ago
Comment removed
flipgood89 6 months ago
@AssassinGhost ...I understand Sowell's points and arguments. I was agreeing with an another comment, not Sowell. I think both him and Friedman are full of shit. Their idolatry of the privileged and promoting policies that funnel all the wealth to the elite, has been more harmful to this country than any other social movement in the last 100 years. Welfare is a product of the disadvantaged being shut out of legitimate opportunities, more than anything.
flipgood89 6 months ago
@flipgood89 the disadvantaged that are being shut out of legitimate opportunities are a product of government policies and intervention. shame you can not see that.
RMT87 6 months ago
@RMT87 ..laissez faire economics always leads to the rich hoarding the wealth, which is to the detriment of the nation. The rich owned 40% of the wealth which led to the great depression. When we had a marginal tax rate of 91% in the mid-20th century, America was prosperous, an era people still wax poetic about. We start deregulating and tax loop holing for the rich, intensifying in the 80s, and here we are. There is no demand in this economy. Nobody has any money. Its only the rich, lol.
flipgood89 6 months ago
@flipgood89 Perhaps, but now more then ever 2011 Welfare has become weaponized to be used AGAINST the poor and this countries economy. It keeps most people in poverty and the number of welfare recipients has increased not been reduced. You also have an entire generation of immigrants using it as a life sources with no intent to come off of it. - Sowell's arguments are valid.
CAinfowarrior 6 months ago
@CAinfowarrior ..Welfare allows the poor to subsist. We have a fundamental disagreement, elitists like Sowell, hold people in contempt and think they are lazy and resigned to living on the margins of society. I, like many, feel that the problems start with hoarding of the wealth, limiting opportunities for all. Look at the tax rates in the 50's and 40s for top earners and, also, the fact that a man could leave high school and make a good living as long as he worked hard...All jobs r in China!
flipgood89 6 months ago
@flipgood89 I don't believe we have a fundamental disagreement, we have an economic one dealing with acquired wealth by the middle class & "rich". Define hoarding wealth? is a wealthy person going to put all there money under a pillow? - they re-invest it: they buy commodities, stocks, and if they own any real estate or business they put there money into it constantly to stay competitive.- We also have a TOTAL disagreement Sowell is an "elitist." - i'm not going to debate your name calling.
CAinfowarrior 6 months ago
@CAinfowarrior ...I define the structural hoarding of wealth by the elite as the manipulation of our legislative body to enact laws, or loosen regulations to keep profits away from workers, or the U.S through taxes, keeping wealth concentrated at the top. Shelters, loopholes, outsourcing, etc. People love to wax poetic about "patriotism", but this has created economic devastation for the U.S. Money isnt being exchanged. Bentleys are being purchased, but not GM's. Nobody has money. No demand.
flipgood89 6 months ago
@funknando007 Yeah i agree cause he destroys liberal idiots.
Xantheus07 8 months ago
@Xantheus07 great reasoning, i'm impressed.
funknando007 8 months ago
@funknando007 and your the definition of a shit head
xsumuhdihx 7 months ago
@xsumuhdihx very eloquent...
funknando007 7 months ago
The niggers just can try to kill all the light skin people in the world.
johnchannetshow 10 months ago
Piven is such an ugly, stupid cow !
She thinks she knows more about Afro-Americans than Sowell, and more about economics than Friedman?
BLASPHEMY
Dadutta 10 months ago 8
"If you look at the leadership of the black community..." Bitch please. Sowell ATE. HER. ALIVE.
hankrearden73 10 months ago 4
But without talent you don't die. Without money, you do...
Funny that.
bobotohough 10 months ago
@bobotohough Talent gives you the ability to acquire money, goods, and property. With a low intelligence (talent) death is inevitable far faster than that of an intelligent man. A fool and his money are soon parted.
catchers51 9 months ago
why isnt that vile cunt in hell yet? I want to piss on her grave
HangProgressives 10 months ago
God bless Friedman and Sowell!
scrembo 10 months ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Friedman and all his buddies NEVER worked an honest day in their lives. None of them.
o0xst 10 months ago
@o0xst How do you know that? how could you know such minute biographical details about these people you just recently learned exist.
Ravengaurd6 8 months ago
Piven typifies the enslavement mindset of the left. They oppose enterprise zones (Sue to the threat that a tac base represents to their political power) - - Instead they want "Community re-investment" which flows through their own hands and is doled out as they see fit. Look to her own finances for proof. Greed is greed! Progressive' greed is Predatory and exploitative greed. Their personal quest for wealth and power is intimately tied to ongoing poverty. 60 Years of proof!
play2k2000 11 months ago 2
liberals know best
PatricksTime 11 months ago
i like friedman, but you have to admit, peering through the window like that is a little creepy
alistairproductions 11 months ago
@alistairproductions haha, that cracked me up (you and peeping tom)
ForOrAgainstUs 10 months ago
The free Market are those that are the playground of the Rich.
geiadude 11 months ago
@geiadude who got rich because they were free.
Ravengaurd6 8 months ago
Yes, liberals want equality of results due to the wish for equality of opportunity.
Meanwhile, they deny inner city kids the right to choose a school, trapping them in bad government schools, then they enact wage restrictions on them to prevent them from entering the workforce. Somewhere in between, they fail to give them a moral compass in favor of sex ed and subjectivity. All the while, refusing to acknowledge the problems their rigid progressive views cause. Awesome.
jrsub3 11 months ago 2
@jrsub3 Not to mention tell them how bad capitalism is, leaving them with little to no money management skills to build wealth and improve their economic mobility.
ak47523 10 months ago
@tuntitommosille i agree. facts are irrelevant when you can just end every arguement with "why do you hate children?" or "why do you hate the poor?"
SoakUpAllTheBlood138 11 months ago
inheritance of talent? as in "inheritance of acquired characteristics"?! Yeah, milton, whatever you say...
jum401 1 year ago
@jum401 If your father is an accomplished musician, you're more than likely to be one too, hurp derp...
ThesisOfRock 11 months ago
@ThesisOfRock oh!... and that equals having inherited a talent? good thinking einstein!
jum401 11 months ago
@jum401 Yeah... inheritance isn't just limited to currency or wealth, but I guess your little pea brain isn't capable of understanding that.
ThesisOfRock 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ThesisOfRock inheritance isn't limited to currency and wealth? ok... what does it include? educate me, you 19 yo sage
jum401 11 months ago
I'm suprised Dr.Sowell wasnt arrested for child abuse after that debate.
hammer44head 1 year ago
@hammer44head lol
mana2432 11 months ago
Sowell is a talking garbage can.
loonmaniac 1 year ago
@loonmaniac Piven is a nasty white supremacist.
cano21 1 year ago
@cano21 If so, she would your kind of gal, you Nazi motherfucker.
loonmaniac 1 year ago
@loonmaniac that's not even an argument .
Ravengaurd6 8 months ago
For those who all have their panties in a wad about the Cloward-Piven Strategy, look up "Starve the beast" on wiki.
"Which is a conservative strategy to use budget deficits via tax cuts to force future reductions in the size of government"
"Some empirical evidence shows that Starve the Beast may be counterproductive, with lower taxes actually corresponding to higher spending"
THIS is the ideology from the right, which is WHY we have DEFICITS now and why the tax cuts were so important.
Starve
MoJoSB 1 year ago
Thomas Sowell also seems rude and dismissive, which is the sure sign that a person doesn't really have that much of an argument. So the only way to sound like you are right, is by trying to make the other side sound wrong and foolish.
The hand waving, the interrupting, all signs of a person losing an argument.
MoJoSB 1 year ago
@MoJoSB those are signs of exasperation. Sowell stands his postion on hard results,statistics and facts. his ideals are not formed until he has a solid mold in the real. If you're trying to speak from an empirically backed position to an ideologue whose position is backed mostly by conviction,rhetoric and self-interests you'd be getting impatient as well.
Ravengaurd6 8 months ago 3
Milton, Milton, Milton....
You always hear this kind of nonsense that somehow because those on the left want to raise the standard of living for all, that somehow we want to take away the wealth and privilege of the haves.
Of course life is not fair, we know this. No need to state the obvious Milt.
What is being discussed is "opportunities" and as much as you may feel the US in the "Land of Opportunity" for some it's just not.
Bringing out one successful black man doesn't change that.
MoJoSB 1 year ago
@MoJoSB Sowell isn't some set piece. He's an individual who promotes a free market system that will provoke people to stand to compete for their own interests.
Ravengaurd6 8 months ago 2
And people want to tell us that Frances Fox Piven is just a nobody and Glenn Beck is a loon for "attacking" her.
TheLionSheikh 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I literally cannot stand Piven. Folks if you want to know why we are in the mess we are in right now? Look no further than that woman. She has been creating every problem we have in this country. Anywhere she speaks? Show up and PEACEFULLY make your mind known. She is a vile corruption of what our founders wanted for this country. Sowell is one of our greatest American heros. He schooled her but no one listens.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
thank you dr. sowell..... 4:53
blakdog90 1 year ago
"The inheritance of talent...is no different, from an ethical point of view, from the inheritance...of property."
Inherited talent is passed on genetically, and is therefore natural; inherited property is passed on legally, and is therefore a human construction. Also, could it be that the rich musicians can be musicians because they are rich, ie. because they have the resources to practice their skill? Success may be a combination of talent *and* resources. Very faulty thinking.
byroniczero 1 year ago
You have taken the comment out of context. The genetic/constructed nature of the inherited trait/property has no bearing on the ethical issue involved (or how it plays out).
In answer to your question about what's possible, the answer is an emphatic no. While practice (and the ability to afford an instrument) are certainly factors, the evidence is overwhelming that musical talent is an inherited trait and succeeds even in the relative absence of resources.
FletchforFreedom 1 year ago
"You expressed it, damn it~!"
XD
okayillgonow 1 year ago
I am reminded of the short story "Harrison Bergeron" by Kurt Vonnegut, in which equality is achieved through the deliberate handicapping of the more talented members of society. Thinkers have ringers in their ears which break their concentration, the handsome are disfigured, the graceful forced to wear weights and bonds. All in the name of fairness. Its quite a good, if depressing, story.
kev3d 1 year ago
I can`t stand white liberals who think they know what`s best for black people and treat them like children. Black people were rising up until the government decided they needed the ``help`` of politicians who had just recently enforced segregations.
Oh, and I miss Sowell`s mini fro. So awesome.
AshillaBeige 1 year ago
Thomas Sowell and Milton Friedman were on the same side during a debate? I'm surprised the world was not split asunder on that day from the force of their arguments.
If I were by chance to become president, those two would be my top two economic advisers, no question.
gregvs3 1 year ago 42
@gregvs3
I would too. Unfortunately, I think Friedman's dead.
EducatoriumEuphorium 11 months ago
@gregvs3 friedman is dead :P
rockpwnsu 11 months ago
@gregvs3 Friedman is dead man.
Merknilash 6 months ago
well, I like the video, but if you work as a waiter or pizza delivery guy (in the south at least) you'll find out that black people do have a different attitude, working those jobs made me racist, 90% of those fuckers don't tip and feel like they shouldn't, even when some of their friends called them on it they still wouldn't tip. Haven't seen any other race do that on such a scale, so its definitely a matter of the way they perceive their place or the fact that others owe them something.
rovlad 1 year ago
@rovlad Should it be any surprise that a race, (in general) does not reward hard work when they have been taught for decades to depend on government assistance? After all, receiving a welfare check requires no tip. Therein lies the evil of social engineering and welfare; it breeds racism. It breeds resentment. It breeds dependency. Were a higher percentage of blacks like Sowell or Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Racism would be be almost non-existent.
kev3d 1 year ago
@kev3d:
So racism towards blacks or any other race began or atleast grown after the implementation of the welfare state in America? Absolutely brillant!
tpwatson 1 year ago
@tpwatson I wouldn't say that exactly, but if we compare Asians to Blacks, wherein both were heavily discriminated against before the welfare state but afterward very few Asians are on welfare compared to blacks. Lo and Behold, Asians do better economically and face considerably less social and workplace racism (it still exists of course). The welfare state in addition to the drug war have had an abysmal affect on many American Blacks. It's a shame really.
kev3d 1 year ago
@kev3d:
Point taken about post welfare state comparisons, although I'd assume you understand there are several unique differences between the two. As to your point about social and workplace racism, I don't agree due to economic ethnicities are somehow less likely to face discrimination. Why are the statistical superior white poor NOT as discriminated against? Economic status or class can certainly be used an excuse/scapegoat for racism, it is not its true cause.
tpwatson 1 year ago
@tpwatson Now it may very well be the case that many racists of all colors simply hate for hate's sake. However economics and the state cannot be ignored. When a casual observer notices that a disproportionally higher percentage of Blacks are in prison, receive welfare, live in government housing AKA "the projects" and are born to single parent homes, what opinion would that observer hold over time? Sadly, these aspects are almost entirely due to unintended consequences of govt intervention.
kev3d 1 year ago
@kev3d:
Your statement about a casual observer isn't very feasible in my opinion. I doubt most people take time out to truly observe apart from what they are trained and subjected to believe from "news" sources. Blacks have been scapegoated and portaryed as lazy evil doers for centuries in America, through film, television and other means, which has aided in bias, not greatly due to government. So racism in America and the world is almost entirely due to government intervention?
tpwatson 1 year ago
@tpwatson Do you know most racists to be deep thinkers? That is why I say casual observer. A deeper look reveals how govt programs create disproportional black dependency and imprisonment which in turn fuels white fear, resentment and racism. Racism has many causes of course, but again, look at Asians, the Jews and even the Irish...all scapegoats just like blacks, yet comparatively today, they do quite well. Why should WASPs be any wary of Jews or Asians?
kev3d 1 year ago
@tpwatson I would not say that "most" racism in the modern age is due to the govt, but much of it is. More correctly, much racism is the bi-product of govt policies, many of which were intended to help minorities. For example, before the welfare state, single parent homes among blacks were almost as rare as white single parent homes, afterward the number disproportionally shot up. The war on drugs prohibited cocaine, so cheap crack was invented and infected the ghetto etc.
kev3d 1 year ago
@kev3d I'm sure there would be far less racism if more blacks were like that, no doubt, unfortunately this is not the situation and it won't change anytime soon.
rovlad 5 months ago
@rovlad Probably, but the only solution then is to take people as individuals as much as possible and disregard collectivist labels.
kev3d 5 months ago
@kev3d I think we have to stop the reversed racism, acknowledge the fact that minorities cause problems and the predominant minority is black and stop encouraging it. Hip hop and gangsta bullshit is promoted everywhere, black on white crime is shoved under the carpet and so on. This is damaging for the minority of blacks that are actually ok because they will be perceived like the rest, while the scum is encouraged to keep doing what they are doing because it OK, that's the culture, it's COOL
rovlad 4 months ago
Regarding inheritance of money, yes I can agree that it could be always "fair", even if the parents of the "heir" are corrupted or criminals. As a matter of fact an "heir" not always knows from where his or her wealth come but nonetheless this is a delicate matter. If someone have more wealth than another, the responsibility is ALWAYS by humans, and this can be more or less honest. If someone has more talent than another is ALWAYS nature or God: it not depends from us. That's REALLY different.
ad80ad 1 year ago
@ad80ad Thanks for your comments. Appreciate the insights very much.
chapaev36 1 year ago
@chapaev36
Yes you are right about skills...but my point was that talent is always a fair "gift" and skills are always fairly developed. On the contrary money or stocks not always are so fair "gift", if they are the result of criminal or corrupted activities. So the Friedman statement is not exhaustive: there is a "little" difference between talent and wealth and this is exactly ethical. Talent and skills are always fair, wealth not so always.
ad80ad 1 year ago
@ad80ad I also think that talent is a "fair" gift. Or maybe fair is not the best word - it's no more unfair than anything in nature. But I don't agree that skills are always fairly developed. On what basis? Granted that doesn't mean that the government should always interfere and make things more "fair" for everyone. For one thing, they have no clue how and never will. I agree with the basic point that Friedman is getting at, but disliked the way he made the argument.
chapaev36 1 year ago
@chapaev36
Yes you say "fairly" because you mean that someone "unfairly" can't develop his skills (because it's not enough wealthy), and that's true. I was talking only about the ethical difference between talent, money, and skills as "inheritance". Talent and skills are always "pure", even if they can be USED in a bad way. Money is not always so pure and purely "inherited"...putting talent and money on the same level like Friedman here risks to undervalue this difference.
ad80ad 1 year ago
@ad80ad What? So because the money may have been acquired "dishonestly" we should punish ALL children everywhere who might benefit from money EVEN if it was acquired honestly? Perhaps you should be talking about strengthening fraud laws instead of encouraging societal theft.
What if your father used dishonest means to woo your mother (telling her he was in med school), and without mom's genes you would'nt be intelligent? To ascribe purity to talent as contrasted with material gain is absurd.
gregvs3 1 year ago
- Give less wealthy people the possibility to build their own wealth helping them to develop their skills
- not "punish" people on the top, but making people on the top a driving force to raise (and not to crush) less fortunate people.
ad80ad 1 year ago
@gregvs3
But I don't think the solution of the problem is to punish people on the top and pay for the people on the bottom: that's a perverse solution. I think the solution is, in order:
- Strengthening fraud laws
- Controlling that highest incomes don't depend on distorted and iniquitous precesses or speculations but from an activity which assures wealth to all the community or at least which doesn't damage the community.
ad80ad 1 year ago
@gregvs3
This is due to the spiritual nature of skills and to the material nature of wealth. Skills are part of human essence, money is only an object like gold, precious stones: something you can sell, buy and of course stole. I was only arguing about this Friedman enthusiasm that risks to become too simplistic.
ad80ad 1 year ago
@gregvs3
If we want, wealth follows the same laws of skills, it's the human work which raises them. But I can hardly imagine someone who improves his or her skills in a criminal way, while I can easily imagine someone criminally earning money.
ad80ad 1 year ago
@gregvs3
I never said that the solution is to "punish" children who benefit from money. I was only warning against the danger of considering money and wealth like a "grace" from God, without any difference with talent.
Money follows only the laws of humans, while besides any dishonest "woo", the gift of talent follows only the laws of nature or God.
ad80ad 1 year ago
@gregvs3
Not only, but regarding INHERITANCE of money, if someone is not responsible of his/her own wealth like a child, I agree that is practically not different than talent, but only for the child. The parents has total ethical responsibility regarding the money they gave to their children.
ad80ad 1 year ago