Great to watch this show.so America has gone the opposite ways to his suggestions and look at what's happened you hardly have any rights left you have a police state and a nanny state building up around you and your country is broke,I'd say it's time for a real change I'd say it's time for Ron Paul.Get Big government out of your way!!!
DONAHUE IS A RETARDED STEVE MARTIN (LOOK CLOSELY AT THE ZIPTARD!), ONE WHO LARFS DONKEY DICKS FASTER THAN CONGRESS CAN STEAL MONEY - WE NEED BEWARE OF SUCH LOLLIES!
anarchy and liberty is pretty much hand and hand. i dont think we need the state but if we could get the state down to what he said, then i cant complain too much
Is Donahue just pretending, or did he really not get Friedman's only suggestion for a "protection" against inflation (material consumption)? He seems to take it like it's some kind of advice.
Oh, and Gold and other precious metals protect you against inflation. He didn't believe this because he's a monetarist. He said way back prior to the breakdown of Bretton Woods agreement that the only reason Gold was at $35 an ounce was because it was being propped up by the dollar. He added that if Gold was cut from the dollar, it's value would plummet to $6 - $10 an ounce. I think history shows how categorically wrong he was.
@TheManiacalSatanist6 I beg to differ. I used a voucher system in Pennsylvania to go to a Cyber School from a public school. My education was FAR better. Teachers didn't try to indoctrinize me with their political views. I have a higher GPA than I did at public school. I was also capable of graduating a year early, something that wouldn't have been possible at ANY public school in my area. Voucher systems DO work and the quality of the education is FAR better than ANY public school system.
My wife worked at McDonalds in Germany for almost 6 years as she received her technical degree as a X-ray technologist. Now she works at a major company in Germany as a research woman and is in line to be a manager of the company. What Milton Friedman says is the truth. He is an Austrian. Many are walking in his footsteps (Ron Paul, Peter Schiff, and myself). The problem is too many Americans are too dumb to care. I left the US(S)A and pray and wait for it's demise.
@msungs See, I was agreeing with you up until you couldn't wait for America's demise. What exactly do you mean? No doubt I want reform in our government, but why a demise? I would rather see a powerful nation that is on the verge of socialism reform it's government and take it back to what it was 90 years ago (Market wise), than to watch as it completely tumbled down and millions of people suffer hard ship, famine, etc. So why wouldn't you just pray for reform?
4:08 WRONG... assets ARE protection against inflation. Gold, Real Estate, even rare record albums will ALL go up under inflation. Inflation is paper money... anything that's worth trading will go up in value under inflation.
@freezazoid Well, technically he was right. Gold is probably best, but look at real estate. Prices are crashing through the floor even with inflation going up.
the question that i repeatedly ask myself is this, how in the world did the US of A, get from this type of shows, to the barrage of idiocy that emanates from such shows as the VIEW or OPRAH
Isn't it amazing how the collective IQ's of studio audiences have gone down since this show. Compare this audience to the cackling lemmings in the studios of Oprah or the View.
Only idiots are anarchists. A consistent libertarian is a minarchist. Hayek, Mises, and Friedman, the most accomplished economists, were not anarchists. Things like the military should never be privatized since I can't demand a certain amount of national defense and you can't demand another amount of national defense. The theories of supply and demand don't even apply. Perhaps we can privatize certain parts of the judiciary.
True, even some of the most outspoken anarcho-capitalists, such as Ayn Rann, have said that there's a need for a military, a police force and a judiciary.
1. As far as I'm aware Ayn Rand was not an Anarcho-Capitalist, she was a Minarchist. Do you have evidence of otherwise?
2. Protection services and courts are compatible with Anarcho-Capitalism, but establishing them under the threat of theft, extortion and violence is not.
"The great non-sequitur commited by defenders of the state... is to leap from the necessity of society to the necessity of the state" - Murray Rothbard
So, yes non-aggression is compatible with libertarianism. Anarcho-capitalism is not libertarianism. It is market authoritarianism. You replace state tyranny of the current system with private tyranny, which cannot be suppressed without a minimal government, only which can give court orders and police apprehensions against criminals. If I am the owner of the largest corporation and all police agencies and defense agencies, why would I even care about costs I impose on third parties?
@KyleSkullz If you want to know what Ayn Rand thought of anarchists you can read her essay The Nature of Government online. It explains why capitalism can't exist without an objectively defined framework of laws backed by force, by a single institution with a monopoly on the use of force. It explains in that sense why "anarcho-capitalism" is actually an oxymoron.
@KyleSkullz "Being left alone" does not mean being left at the mercy of criminals, thugs and aggressors. If the police were to magically disappear overnight do you believe your local low life thugs would "leave you alone", that every burglar would not descend upon the town, that every dictator would have his eye on your country's wealth? There is a role for government. Think of of it as division of labour where the necessary use of force comes into play. (cont)
"does not mean being left at the mercy of criminals, thugs and aggressors. "
And who do you think will tend to gravitate to a legal monopoly on the right to use violence and force within a geographic region?
Doesn't the historical evidence make it kinda obvious?
I mean shit, even the US "Limited Government" Experiment has resulted in arguably the largest state in world history. To argue for a government to "stay limited" is to ignore reality.
@KyleSkullz You think that a self-sustaining farm is hard work then try maintaining a self sustaining army. Try and use the combined force of you and your family to fight of all the criminals, bandits and aggressors who would happily steal everything you have. Let's live in the real world here. Now arguments like this stretch on for pages and pages and I end up having to fill out that fucking annoying CAPTCHA with every comment, so I'm not responding to whatever you say, just read Rand's essay.
"Try and use the combined force of you and your family to fight of all the criminals, bandits and aggressors who would happily steal everything you have."
Your logic is invalid. I could use that exact same argument against the Government.
"Try and use the combined force of you and your family to fight off tax collectors, DEA, etc who would happily steal everything you have."
I believe it ought to be legal for anyone to do anything they want, so long as they do not initiate or threaten the use of violence and coercion the person or legitimately owned property of another. I do not believe this changes depending on what uniform you wear or what organization you work for. Do you disagree?
Self-ownership is compatible with minarchy. And force is justified if and only if it is sanctioned to protect people's rights and to prevent third party effects. If a corporation like BP imposes negative externalities on third parties, it is mandatory to force BP to pay for restitution. In an anarcho-capitalist society, there would be no entity which doesn't rely on BP's voluntary payment, to help those who are affected. BP could so easily get away with it.
@LogicalFlawDetector Sooooo Murray Rothbard was an idiot???????? he was one of the most brilliant economist of all time and was a student of Mises. You should read "Man Economy and State" it is amazing.
@tatsumakisempyukaku Quite the opposite, my friend. Libertarianism is on the rise. There are more independent voters than ever, precisely because people are recognizing that the Republicrats and Democans are both wedded to variations of the same church of ever expanding government. The fact that 44k people have viewed this video should alone tell you that the interest is there. The information is no longer limited to network TV as it was then, and it shows.
@032125 well i hope you're right. We have one year to get the word out and get some one like RON PAUL in office.I say this with urgency because as Thomas Sowell has said, "there is such a thing as a point of no return." and though i have no evdence, it just feels like something big is gonna happen. You know what i mean?
The reality is that unchecked capitalism discourages competition. When you are bigger, your goal is to eat the other company alive. Competition is the result of two evenly matched entities. The goal of regulation should be to make it harder to be too big, and to allow those who are small to at least be heard. When a producer of a product becomes so gigantic, all that company has bully little John out of business.
@cbrhawk1 unchecked capitalism is an oxymoron; pure capitalism has plenty of checks; the nearly infinite numbers of transactions between individuals operating in a civil society is probably the greatest check; competition is another huge check; the reason companies evolve in giant monstrosities are the regulative effects crushing the "little guy" who might otherwise find a niche for himself
@2dum2getsocialism The regulations weren't put there for no reason. Factories didn't pinch pennies to pay average workers because of any regulation. No, minimum wage was put there to prevent that. Antitrust laws were put in when companies were charging outrageous prices because they had the market cornered. Competition is definitely no huge check when everyone just gets bought out in the end.
@2dum2getsocialism It is true that it should be much easier than it is to start a business. There are certain regulations that don't make a lot of sense, but the reason companies grow so large certainly isn't because the little guy is being crushed.It's because larger companies have the means of mass production. They can produce an individual product far more cheaply and efficiently,as well as use their wealth to squash anyone who competes.Look at what Wal-Mart nearly did to K-Mart for example
@cbrhawk1 no! regulations and crony capitalism are symbiotic; large companies can afford to hire lobbyists and attorneys to fight for their cause; this is much less risky than free market competition and provides tremendous payoffs; dont confuse the "industrialist" with a free market capitalist for it is the industrialist who would preach for capitalism but practice the art of government intervention/cronyism to eliminate competition
This guy is a very well-schooled guy. He's got more knowledge than I will have in 80 years, I'll tell you that, but I think he gives only the potential causes of things that fit his point, rather than being honest and listing other possible causes. He says the depression was caused by the Fed's fail to act. That may be true, but there are many, many more things that contributed. The same goes for many of his points.
I'm 45 now. When I was a kid I never liked Danahue, but after seeing this series I think he is fantastic. Don't get me wrong, I agree with Milton Friedman's position, but I really love the way PD interviews him. He is so much better than what we have today.
@KyleSkullz: There is no civilization that can come to fruition or be sustained without a central government. You may think such a thing is possible but when you really consider human nature and competition for wealth and power, you realize the neccessity of government. However, I do believe that there is a case to balance the power alotted to governement and the power to the people. I want free-enterprise while the government maintains the civility of society (to a certain extent).
@callofduty4eva: Just to be clear, I don't think competition for wealth and power is a bad thing. Competiton is what motivates businesses to serve the consumer with quality goods and services. All I'm saying is that anarchy would only be temporary until the strongest rise to power, by whatever means, and start making rules. That's just the reality of it.
I understand the difference, I just think they are consistent with eachother, and that Anarchy is the logical conclusion of the principles of libertarianism..
Libertarianism does not require "rulers" therefore, anarchy is consistent with the philosophy of liberty.
"The great non sequitur committed by defenders of the State... is to leap from the necessity of society to the necessity of the State." - Rothbard
Anarchy requires that there be no government and laws themselves be decentralized. Libertarianism says no such thing. It requires the presence of a government to enforce the rights that citizens are born with, so no man can take away another's rights. You're right, libertarianism requires no 'rulers'. "Rulers" are a property of forms of government that require mob rule - like democracy and communism.
Liberty exists wherever there is an absence of coercion and force. It is a natural phenomenon, and thus it does not require government since it can exist, to various degrees, with or without government.
All Libertarians believe in Maximizing Individual Liberty, but some believe governments must be formed to protect it, while others believe that this involves a logical contradiction, and that government is force, and therefore the enemy of liberty.
you said: "You're right, libertarianism requires no 'rulers'. "Rulers"
That's why it's consistent with Anarchy. The orginal greek definition of Anarchy is "Without Ruler(s)". An(without)archy(ruler).
you said: "Rulers" are a property of forms of government that require mob rule - like democracy and communism."
Republics, as well (Electing representatives through mob rule.) Rulers are an effect the state. The state is always an enemy of liberty, not the protector of it.
That's not what I meant, I said 'rulers' in the sense that they 'rule' over people. Anyway, a libertarian's preference for the government is guided only by his need for the existence of a body to safeguard individual rights. Again, this is just a theory. In practice, neither this model nor yours exist, or have existed anywhere in the world. It's impossible to implement and sustain any model to the letter.
@heyZuesification you are a idiot, not only for your lack of grammer but also your lack of cohesive thought process, have fun flipping burgers at whatever fast food place employs you now!
@iusepepper just saying, if flipping burgers is such a worthless skill (i assume your trying to insult me) - and there is no value to it, then how will decreasing the monetary value of employing the service increase peoples attitudes to value the work experience? You yourself just proved my point because you yourself do not values the skills earned in the fast food chain... They already earn minimum wage, if they earn less would you value the service more? Would you still use it inyourinsult?
@heyZuesification if somebody works flipping burgers from 16 to 18 years old and they develop a work ethic and they prove that they can show up on time and be a reliable employee, then those are all skills that future employers would be happy to see. It doesn't necessarily matter that he's never going to flip burgers ever again. But that person should have a way easier time getting hired than someone who shows up at 18 or 20 years old and has never worked before.
@pro404 sure, but they aren't really skills, they are work values and ethics... Decreasing the monetary worth of earning those ethics only allows the company to exploit those values for profit. Those initial ethics are developed in the upbringing of the child and their interactions with their parents and families. Allowing Ronald MacDonald to take advantage of ethical people seams to me to be un-ethical - you say a 16 year old should have more incentives to be employed- what abouta10yo, 1rice?
@heyZuesification i'm not saying anyone should or shouldn't do anthing, its their own decision. But if a 16 year old is willing to work for $5 an hour, its awfully silly to say "no, sorry, you have to be unemployed, its for your own good."
i worked for less than minimum wage when i was 17, and i know plenty of people who had to work under the table to get a job. We were happy to have jobs for the sake of the work experience. And we never once thought that we were being "taken advantage of."
@ptevans01 you can buy gold but it won't protect you from inflation. When this entire system comes down with a crash, the government will demand your gold and give you worthless cash for it. This was done in the past, best thing to do is buy yourself a small farm, raise some chickens, and grow your own food.
When did this happen in the past? How can the government seriously have the power to steal my gold? Would they actually arrest me? Why can't i bury it and lie to the government that i ever had gold?
School vouchers are a terrible idea. They were a bad idea in 1979, and a bad idea in 2011. The free market doesn't work when 3rd parties pay the bill. Vouchers will drive the price of private education up and the quality down.
@spyletu The pubic school is the government. But look at other areas where 3rd parties pay bills such as in insurance. If you have insurance, you don't care what your health care costs, you don't shop around for prices, demand unnecessary medication (like antibiotics for a cold),demand excessive testing just to be sure etc. Let's say they start vouchers and they put a limit of 10k per year per kid. Guess how much all regular private schools will suddenly cost?
Both liberals and conservatives can find something Friedman said to support their own views. But both of them are just quoting him out of context. Friedman is an economist. He's no for or against liberals or conservatives. He supports efficiency.
This Friedman interview is timeless. If he'd been listened to 30 years ago (which Reagan mostly did, causing a huge economic boom) we wouldn't be where we are today fiscally. Shame on both parties. Shame on the American people for demanding more and more services from its government without being willing to pay for them. But especially shame on our politicians from refusing to say "There is no free lunch." The American people were fooled into thinking that this debt and senseless printing of mo
Obama printing money with OE2 & all the bailouts so that his socialistic Union thugs & rich bankers can manipulate the free market so that the Black/Latinos can live off Union FatCat wages & services at the expense of hard working Asian families.
Being Asian & growing up in the USA in the 70's & 80's, I felt all the racists looks when I drove around in my Toyota truck. This guy is a true visionary. Back in those days I wouldnt even dare say "let Chrysler go bankrupt & Toyota should take over Chrysler" - I would be shot on the spot. Today when I see Obama bailout GMAC, I think back to those days & now see Obama as a Socialist Union Thug & a racist against Asian people.
@UCSDEngineerDoctor Obama only helps Blacks & Latinos, because like Milton says, Obama determines who is worthy of his help. Obama socialist agenda only helps his own kind or people he believes is worthy - with affirmative action, amnesty, & welfare for Blacks/Latinos. Obama basically excludes Asians, because we do not operate on social welfare, but free capitalistic means. In other words, Asians do it through hard work. Obama is the most racist President against Asians.
"inflation is driven by demand and capitilistic greed"--blakdog90
wtf? inflation in the free market view is largely an increase in the money supply. In a Keynesian view it is rising prices, whereas money supply is treated differently (as often the lag in money supply becoming rising prices is 1.5 to 3 years). Either way, greed, wages, or labor have anything to do with it. You must have inflation at low rates anyway, it's organic, and necessary to avoid glut, or the deflation spiral. Commie.
Actually Donahue was also great. A whole lot of ppl completely missed how good host he was. Argueing "like a leftist'' when your guest is anything but that is a must if you wanna have a challenging discussion. Nothing is more boring than a host that keeps strengthening the ideas of his/her guest and wont force him/her to prove his/her right. Thats the cathegory of propaganda bullshit.
Ok blakdog90... Supply and demand dictate a price of goods, demand is high, price is high because the supply is lowered... Conversely I'd you and everybody else have a bunch of stuff nobody really wants, you have to price it at a discount..
Inflation is literally the buying power (value) of currency versus it's backing of real material value, used to be gold but for simplicity, a $1 gold or trade GDP coin, allows a $1 bill to be printed... 0% inflation, print more to monetize debt, $2 dollar b
Yeah, this is PBS before cable bicker-fests even existed. This is not meant to be O'Reillyesque "Host vs Guest" slugfest. This is meant to be a civil exploration of ideas. Donahue is playing devils advocate in order to provide a through provoking counter to Prof. Friedman's statements.
@Nowhereman1280 If only this style of television talk show still existed. I think Jerry Springer started out wanting to host a show like this and ended up in the gutter. Oprah started like this but is garbage in comparison.
@Siegetower Agreed. If someone tried to interview Friedman today they would likely spend most of the time trying to devolve the interview into some debate about Ronald Regan vs FDR. Then again there aren't a lot of intellectual giants out there these days (and maybe never were) that could stand toe-to-toe with Friedman. His genius wasn't necessarily his ideas (though prefer them myself) it was the way in which he conveyed them and controlled the debate, even with non-economist "common folk".
Despite some negative comments made about Friedman by particular members of the audience, it is interesting to note the frequent applause given to him by the audience at large. Friedman might actually be booed on the Oprah show today. Most of all, the applause he get despite his honesty is remarkable and would be strange in our times.
@blakdog90 that's not inflation, it's just a change in price due to increase in demand and matters only when referring to one good. when prices in an economy increase overall, that's inflation. inflation happens for multiple reasons, but primarily because of a loose money supply, since there's more money in circulation to buy the same good. that's why QE2 increased oil prices to shoot up. minimum wage helps a little bit with reducing wage stickiness, and mitigates its effects, but not a lot.
Obama never ran a company. Now he's head of the largest company in the world. Too much money passes through congress' hands, and to add injury to injury, they never spend it properly. End the fed. Cut govt programs. No more welfare, healthcare, social security, and drug laws. Let us be free! Let us breathe! Let me keep my money and leave it to me if i help the poor in my area. Let me make or break mt success! The white pillars of washington should be cut into tombs to bury our corruption forever
Believe it or not, minimum wage actually creates low pay! For example, the workers do not have to work at Mc Donalds. If they were not happy with their pay, they would work somewhere else. If No one would be willing to work at Mc Donalds, then Mc Donalds would be forced to higher their wages because they couldn't function without workers! If more Americans understood this principle, there would be more real "fairness" in today's economy. Study Adam Smith's book: Wealth of Nations.
Donahue was(and still is) an unabashing lib, but his program was revolutionary and he was great at playing devil's advocate..true, he spoke mostly from the liberal side, but his show is something we don't have anymore but need again badly!
Obviously "Uncle Milty" was the best and has set a blueprint for the 21 century "reaffirmation" of the free enterprise system
We still have the same problems as "they" did 30 years ago. Friendman's / the correct solutions have not been tried, in fact, we have only done the exact opposite. We have a MUCH larger govt and more reguations than 30 years ago, and what has that lead us to? Only more and more of the same problems...
I hope we continue to wake up as a nation and quit being so naive - socialism does not work (no such thing as nirvana in this life) free market does! End of discussion
What's sad is that nothing Friedman said was tough to understand or didn't make sence. You could teach this stuff to a 3rd grader. But I was never tought this in any of my schooling, including college. I wasn't even tought how to think like that. It's a good thing I was tought how to think and solve problems (not symptoms) at home.
Milton speaks the truth in the most clear way for the average person to start to understand the truth in what he's saying: we must look at history to see the effects of good policy he is advocating, stop looking at the surface effects and look more long term, and realize that all economic decisions involve special interests. Therefore, the best idea is to put the power back to the market and out of the hands of government and large corporations that cater to it.
It's really great how so many of Friedmans arguments during this interview still represent the backbone of economic studies (I have studied economics myself for 5 years). It would have been interesting to get his opinion about the recent american bank failures. A major bank failure has much more serious consequences than the failure of an ordinary company, since its lenders (including other banks) lose their access to financing, possibly causing them in turn to go bankrupt -->stoneage :)
I think you people are a bit too harsh on Donahue. I once had the chance of watching a video that various people paid tribute to Friedman, and Donahue was one of those who had only kind, warm words and admiration for Dr. Friedman. These two people here have a great debate, and Donahue's questions were very good and smart, which is good because this way we can see how smart Friedman is.
I truly wish we had more people like them in our days, on television and real life.
I agree with equsnarnd in that Donahue was a lib, but he was at least intellectually honest enough to invite a juggernaut like friedman on his show. Those were different times though and I was way too young to know them if I was even alive
The only issue with minimum wage is businesses then bring in iimmigrants (and some illegal) to work for low wages. Milton is right but only if we take out the immigrant factor.
@hayden50 Ouch.. I am so hurt by your unfeeling barb; honestly... Did you have a cogent point to make or something to say that actually speaks to my prior point or is that it? Are you a fan or this dead-end in place for the last 40 years failed policy because you honestly think it works or does it just make you feel comfortable with your own racism?
Markets are not free, they have never been and they never will be. Markets are created by "We The People" who select Representation to set up the rules to insure a fair market, not a free market. Without Government, there is anarchy and a need for Government.
David Stockman Regan's Director of the OMB: in his recent NY Times Oped has all but apologized for putting Freedman's insanity in place. It is bankrupting the GOP, our nation and the free nations of the world at the benefit of China and to a lessor degree India. Read the Art of War people.
Milton Freedman was mistaken and continues to be. Friedman's philosophy in place from 1982 to today . Read the Art of War, required reading in China. "Excellence lies not in winning every battle but by defeating the enemy with out ever fighting" The GOP, brought to you by China thanks to the SCOTUS ruling Citizens United vs. The FEC. Vote Progressive! Vote American!
Slaves do not get wages. Slaves are also forced to work. Minimum wage is yet another example of government using force, not allowing the free market to work. Government intervention in the housing market caused the problems with AIG, Fannie/Freddie, and the current crisis we are in today. Without government intervention, people who weren't credit worthy would not have gotten credit.
If teenagers and their parents would like them to work for "slave wages", what should give you the right to stop them? The problem with the bleeding hearts "defending" the poor who are being "exploited" in all these scenarios is that the people working these crappy jobs do it because it is the best option they have (in their eyes) and much better than any alternative they have.
Your wages is determined by supply and demand and your productivity. There is no such thing as slave wages. Wages are paid according to supply and demand. There is a reason why a brain surgeon gets paid a lot more than someone that flips hamburgers.
@chessNIC Your right, better they never get jobs and so never get skills and have to ask for handouts all their lives. I'm sure they're glad your watching out for them.
@chessNIC Did you listen to the whole thing? Because their is a minimum wage, a company that is hiring at that wage can get older more experienced employee than a teenager. When that happens the teenagers do not get on the job training, and learning new skills. If your post is all you took in from that segment, then you should really listen to it again.
Neither side has the moral high ground. They don't have any moral ground at all. What they do is never on principle, never in the furtherance of Liberty but always in the interests of their respective party and always to aggrandize the power of the state at the expense of Liberty. They are more immoral than drug dealers selling drugs to kids. And I don't mean that as hyperbole. People who sell out freedom for anything are immoral but those that do it for petty power and money are lowlifes.
So what's wrong with unions that confront the might of accumulated capital with an amalgamation of labor's market power? The fairness of a day's work/pay requires balance.
@chessNIC There's nothing wrong with voluntary unions. Provided union membership is a choice, I think they're an important part of any capitalist system. But history shows that, in the long run, the way towards better wages is good education and strong economic growth. All unions can do is make negotiation easier.
Unions only become problematic if membership is a prerequisite of getting a job or they start intimidating/attacking/killing workers.
Like the kings and tsars of old, Friedman doesn't believe in a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. They lost their liberty, in many cases their heads because they were outnumbered, outgunned, and stupidly selfish.
I love milton if only the status quo had more of this common sense now.
bootiack 1 day ago
It's funny how Donahue get's own the entire show.
RJordan0220 1 day ago
gold is a hedge against inflation
mike6459 1 week ago in playlist Milton Friedman on Donahue 1979
@mike6459
No it isn't. There's almost no correlation between inflation and gold prices.
AntiSchiff 1 week ago
Great to watch this show.so America has gone the opposite ways to his suggestions and look at what's happened you hardly have any rights left you have a police state and a nanny state building up around you and your country is broke,I'd say it's time for a real change I'd say it's time for Ron Paul.Get Big government out of your way!!!
2wheels88 2 weeks ago
Thank you for posting these videos, very interesting and still very relevant.
billmarrs 1 month ago
AT THE VERY LAST OF HIS INTERVIEW HE MISSED THE GOLD!!!!
frankcharles511 1 month ago
DONAHUE IS A RETARDED STEVE MARTIN (LOOK CLOSELY AT THE ZIPTARD!), ONE WHO LARFS DONKEY DICKS FASTER THAN CONGRESS CAN STEAL MONEY - WE NEED BEWARE OF SUCH LOLLIES!
jehovahuponyou 1 month ago
anarchy and liberty is pretty much hand and hand. i dont think we need the state but if we could get the state down to what he said, then i cant complain too much
sniped101 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
To all the pro-life and pro-choice, watch this award winning documentary and see where you stand at the end.
Look up 180 movie on youtube or 180movie.com
standingontruth1 3 months ago in playlist Politics
Is Donahue just pretending, or did he really not get Friedman's only suggestion for a "protection" against inflation (material consumption)? He seems to take it like it's some kind of advice.
BaptizedinFire 4 months ago
good god he is a genius...... his ideas are timeless
KMurphy246 5 months ago
Oh, and Gold and other precious metals protect you against inflation. He didn't believe this because he's a monetarist. He said way back prior to the breakdown of Bretton Woods agreement that the only reason Gold was at $35 an ounce was because it was being propped up by the dollar. He added that if Gold was cut from the dollar, it's value would plummet to $6 - $10 an ounce. I think history shows how categorically wrong he was.
TheManiacalSatanist6 6 months ago
Voucher schemes don't work. Sorry Friedman. You failed there.
TheManiacalSatanist6 6 months ago
@TheManiacalSatanist6 I beg to differ. I used a voucher system in Pennsylvania to go to a Cyber School from a public school. My education was FAR better. Teachers didn't try to indoctrinize me with their political views. I have a higher GPA than I did at public school. I was also capable of graduating a year early, something that wouldn't have been possible at ANY public school in my area. Voucher systems DO work and the quality of the education is FAR better than ANY public school system.
romans58snrsvd 5 months ago 8
@romans58snrsvd: Glad to hear it worked out for you, but your sample size of one is not very instructive.
andyissemicool 2 weeks ago
@romans58snrsvd
The word is "indoctrinate". Maybe your education system wasn't as good as you think.
AntiSchiff 1 week ago
My wife worked at McDonalds in Germany for almost 6 years as she received her technical degree as a X-ray technologist. Now she works at a major company in Germany as a research woman and is in line to be a manager of the company. What Milton Friedman says is the truth. He is an Austrian. Many are walking in his footsteps (Ron Paul, Peter Schiff, and myself). The problem is too many Americans are too dumb to care. I left the US(S)A and pray and wait for it's demise.
msungs 6 months ago
@msungs See, I was agreeing with you up until you couldn't wait for America's demise. What exactly do you mean? No doubt I want reform in our government, but why a demise? I would rather see a powerful nation that is on the verge of socialism reform it's government and take it back to what it was 90 years ago (Market wise), than to watch as it completely tumbled down and millions of people suffer hard ship, famine, etc. So why wouldn't you just pray for reform?
PivotB3stZ 6 months ago
4:08 WRONG... assets ARE protection against inflation. Gold, Real Estate, even rare record albums will ALL go up under inflation. Inflation is paper money... anything that's worth trading will go up in value under inflation.
freezazoid 6 months ago
@freezazoid Until you pay capital gains taxes. grrrr.... If you can hide them they good if not...
RobTzu 6 months ago
@RobTzu yeah... good point. But buying gold etc. on craigslist or from merchants is generally hidden.
freezazoid 6 months ago
@freezazoid Well, technically he was right. Gold is probably best, but look at real estate. Prices are crashing through the floor even with inflation going up.
UponInfinity 4 months ago
2:56 Elton John makes an appearance. XD Seriously though I really enjoyed watching this, thanks for uploading this!
AvidiaNirvana 6 months ago
I'd say get gold...that is a good hedge against inflation..
SJMcDevitt 6 months ago
In a Free Market people make as much money as the market, the people will bare. Government doesn't set wages except for the Civil Service.
FRSFreeStateNow 6 months ago
the question that i repeatedly ask myself is this, how in the world did the US of A, get from this type of shows, to the barrage of idiocy that emanates from such shows as the VIEW or OPRAH
madscientistify 7 months ago 2
Wow, you'd never see Milton Friedman on PBS today (were he still alive).
dafunkmonster 7 months ago
Was the woman at 1:13 offering her services to Friedman?
Vexed34 7 months ago
Isn't it amazing how the collective IQ's of studio audiences have gone down since this show. Compare this audience to the cackling lemmings in the studios of Oprah or the View.
limboslam 7 months ago
this donahue guy's a bit of a fuckwit isnt he?
SclafaniBagni 7 months ago
Friedman was one sharp mofo. RIP.
BTW it's hard to believe Donohue ran such a classy show way back when. Such a stark contrast to the tabloid BS I remember from the 80s
j24800 7 months ago
Only idiots are anarchists. A consistent libertarian is a minarchist. Hayek, Mises, and Friedman, the most accomplished economists, were not anarchists. Things like the military should never be privatized since I can't demand a certain amount of national defense and you can't demand another amount of national defense. The theories of supply and demand don't even apply. Perhaps we can privatize certain parts of the judiciary.
LogicalFlawDetector 7 months ago
@LogicalFlawDetector
True, even some of the most outspoken anarcho-capitalists, such as Ayn Rann, have said that there's a need for a military, a police force and a judiciary.
ChaosDynamics 7 months ago
@ChaosDynamics
1. As far as I'm aware Ayn Rand was not an Anarcho-Capitalist, she was a Minarchist. Do you have evidence of otherwise?
2. Protection services and courts are compatible with Anarcho-Capitalism, but establishing them under the threat of theft, extortion and violence is not.
"The great non-sequitur commited by defenders of the state... is to leap from the necessity of society to the necessity of the state" - Murray Rothbard
KyleSkullz 7 months ago 6
So, yes non-aggression is compatible with libertarianism. Anarcho-capitalism is not libertarianism. It is market authoritarianism. You replace state tyranny of the current system with private tyranny, which cannot be suppressed without a minimal government, only which can give court orders and police apprehensions against criminals. If I am the owner of the largest corporation and all police agencies and defense agencies, why would I even care about costs I impose on third parties?
LogicalFlawDetector 7 months ago
@KyleSkullz If you want to know what Ayn Rand thought of anarchists you can read her essay The Nature of Government online. It explains why capitalism can't exist without an objectively defined framework of laws backed by force, by a single institution with a monopoly on the use of force. It explains in that sense why "anarcho-capitalism" is actually an oxymoron.
SpellboundSolution 4 months ago
@SpellboundSolution
"It explains why capitalism can't exist without an objectively defined framework of laws"
"Capitalism is what people do when you leave them alone" - Kenneth Minoge
"why "anarcho-capitalism" is actually an oxymoron."
An-Cap is merely the logical conclusion of the consistent application of the Non-Aggression Principle and Self-Ownership.
Good Government is an oxymoron.
KyleSkullz 4 months ago
@KyleSkullz "Being left alone" does not mean being left at the mercy of criminals, thugs and aggressors. If the police were to magically disappear overnight do you believe your local low life thugs would "leave you alone", that every burglar would not descend upon the town, that every dictator would have his eye on your country's wealth? There is a role for government. Think of of it as division of labour where the necessary use of force comes into play. (cont)
SpellboundSolution 4 months ago
@SpellboundSolution
"does not mean being left at the mercy of criminals, thugs and aggressors. "
And who do you think will tend to gravitate to a legal monopoly on the right to use violence and force within a geographic region?
Doesn't the historical evidence make it kinda obvious?
I mean shit, even the US "Limited Government" Experiment has resulted in arguably the largest state in world history. To argue for a government to "stay limited" is to ignore reality.
KyleSkullz 4 months ago
@KyleSkullz You think that a self-sustaining farm is hard work then try maintaining a self sustaining army. Try and use the combined force of you and your family to fight of all the criminals, bandits and aggressors who would happily steal everything you have. Let's live in the real world here. Now arguments like this stretch on for pages and pages and I end up having to fill out that fucking annoying CAPTCHA with every comment, so I'm not responding to whatever you say, just read Rand's essay.
SpellboundSolution 4 months ago
@SpellboundSolution
"Try and use the combined force of you and your family to fight of all the criminals, bandits and aggressors who would happily steal everything you have."
Your logic is invalid. I could use that exact same argument against the Government.
"Try and use the combined force of you and your family to fight off tax collectors, DEA, etc who would happily steal everything you have."
KyleSkullz 4 months ago
@SpellboundSolution
"Let's live in the real world here."
We both live in the same world.
I believe it ought to be legal for anyone to do anything they want, so long as they do not initiate or threaten the use of violence and coercion the person or legitimately owned property of another. I do not believe this changes depending on what uniform you wear or what organization you work for. Do you disagree?
KyleSkullz 4 months ago
@KyleSkullz
Typo
", so long as they do not initiate or threaten the use of violence and coercion the person or legitimately owned property of another. "
Should read...
"so long as they do not initiate or threaten the use of violence and coercion against the person or legitimately owned property of another."
:-)
KyleSkullz 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SpellboundSolution
"so I'm not responding to whatever you say, just read Rand's essay."
I'm disappointed you don't want to continue our conversation, but respect your decision. :-)
I've read a lot of rands material, and am familiar with her arguments, but I will consider reading the essay you mentioned.
I would like you to consider viewing the following debate involving an Objectivist vs an Anarcho-Capitalist.
watch?v=2gK2xB9F9Ag
KyleSkullz 4 months ago
@LogicalFlawDetector
"A consistent libertarian is a minarchist."
I have a couple questions for you in regards to the consistency of minarchy, if you'd be so kind to answer
1. Do you feel that Minarchy is consistent with the principles of Non-aggression & self-ownership?
2. If no, What principles do you feel are consistent with Minarchism? If yes, please elaborate
KyleSkullz 7 months ago
Self-ownership is compatible with minarchy. And force is justified if and only if it is sanctioned to protect people's rights and to prevent third party effects. If a corporation like BP imposes negative externalities on third parties, it is mandatory to force BP to pay for restitution. In an anarcho-capitalist society, there would be no entity which doesn't rely on BP's voluntary payment, to help those who are affected. BP could so easily get away with it.
LogicalFlawDetector 7 months ago
@LogicalFlawDetector Sooooo Murray Rothbard was an idiot???????? he was one of the most brilliant economist of all time and was a student of Mises. You should read "Man Economy and State" it is amazing.
jbrack 7 months ago
It just goes to show that ppl aren't interested in this kind of stuff anymore. Our society was much more informed in a sense then as compared to now.
tatsumakisempyukaku 8 months ago
@tatsumakisempyukaku Quite the opposite, my friend. Libertarianism is on the rise. There are more independent voters than ever, precisely because people are recognizing that the Republicrats and Democans are both wedded to variations of the same church of ever expanding government. The fact that 44k people have viewed this video should alone tell you that the interest is there. The information is no longer limited to network TV as it was then, and it shows.
032125 8 months ago
@032125 well i hope you're right. We have one year to get the word out and get some one like RON PAUL in office.I say this with urgency because as Thomas Sowell has said, "there is such a thing as a point of no return." and though i have no evdence, it just feels like something big is gonna happen. You know what i mean?
tatsumakisempyukaku 8 months ago
The reality is that unchecked capitalism discourages competition. When you are bigger, your goal is to eat the other company alive. Competition is the result of two evenly matched entities. The goal of regulation should be to make it harder to be too big, and to allow those who are small to at least be heard. When a producer of a product becomes so gigantic, all that company has bully little John out of business.
cbrhawk1 8 months ago
@cbrhawk1 unchecked capitalism is an oxymoron; pure capitalism has plenty of checks; the nearly infinite numbers of transactions between individuals operating in a civil society is probably the greatest check; competition is another huge check; the reason companies evolve in giant monstrosities are the regulative effects crushing the "little guy" who might otherwise find a niche for himself
2dum2getsocialism 8 months ago
@2dum2getsocialism The regulations weren't put there for no reason. Factories didn't pinch pennies to pay average workers because of any regulation. No, minimum wage was put there to prevent that. Antitrust laws were put in when companies were charging outrageous prices because they had the market cornered. Competition is definitely no huge check when everyone just gets bought out in the end.
cbrhawk1 8 months ago
@2dum2getsocialism It is true that it should be much easier than it is to start a business. There are certain regulations that don't make a lot of sense, but the reason companies grow so large certainly isn't because the little guy is being crushed.It's because larger companies have the means of mass production. They can produce an individual product far more cheaply and efficiently,as well as use their wealth to squash anyone who competes.Look at what Wal-Mart nearly did to K-Mart for example
cbrhawk1 8 months ago
@cbrhawk1 no! regulations and crony capitalism are symbiotic; large companies can afford to hire lobbyists and attorneys to fight for their cause; this is much less risky than free market competition and provides tremendous payoffs; dont confuse the "industrialist" with a free market capitalist for it is the industrialist who would preach for capitalism but practice the art of government intervention/cronyism to eliminate competition
2dum2getsocialism 8 months ago
This guy is a very well-schooled guy. He's got more knowledge than I will have in 80 years, I'll tell you that, but I think he gives only the potential causes of things that fit his point, rather than being honest and listing other possible causes. He says the depression was caused by the Fed's fail to act. That may be true, but there are many, many more things that contributed. The same goes for many of his points.
cbrhawk1 8 months ago
One of the best commentaries I heard. Milton Friedman at his best.
usadesigaru 8 months ago
I'm 45 now. When I was a kid I never liked Danahue, but after seeing this series I think he is fantastic. Don't get me wrong, I agree with Milton Friedman's position, but I really love the way PD interviews him. He is so much better than what we have today.
A1373S9865 9 months ago
@A1373S9865 fair enough, I remember getting paid 4.00 AU when I was 12....
heyZuesification 9 months ago
"I'm not an anarchist"
Friedman's biggest flaw. :-)
KyleSkullz 9 months ago 11
@KyleSkullz wow 18 idiots agree with you. Tell me how many countries are Anarchist? Stop dreaming and wake up.
Xantheus07 8 months ago
@Xantheus07 Exactly? anarchy only give the despot and totalitarian a back door entry into power
100% government sucks
100% lack of government sucks
2dum2getsocialism 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@2dum2getsocialism
"100% lack of government sucks"
If by government you mean an organization that is allowed to use the coercive force and threats to obtain property (tax), than you are dead wrong.
KyleSkullz 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Xantheus07
"wow 18 idiots agree with you"
Oh, immediate ad-hominem fallacy. You must be a really bright one.
"Tell me how many countries are Anarchist?"
Irrelevant. 300 years ago, most countries had slaves. That doesn't mean slavery was good or necessary.
KyleSkullz 8 months ago
@KyleSkullz
You are an idiot!
LogicalFlawDetector 7 months ago
@LogicalFlawDetector
Interesting name for someone so quick to resort to an ad-hominem fallacy. :-)
KyleSkullz 7 months ago
@KyleSkullz: There is no civilization that can come to fruition or be sustained without a central government. You may think such a thing is possible but when you really consider human nature and competition for wealth and power, you realize the neccessity of government. However, I do believe that there is a case to balance the power alotted to governement and the power to the people. I want free-enterprise while the government maintains the civility of society (to a certain extent).
summercures2 7 months ago
@summercures2 Agree Fuck Arnarchy Pro Freedom to be what you wnat as long as it dosen't prohibit others right to do the same.
callofduty4eva 7 months ago
@callofduty4eva: Just to be clear, I don't think competition for wealth and power is a bad thing. Competiton is what motivates businesses to serve the consumer with quality goods and services. All I'm saying is that anarchy would only be temporary until the strongest rise to power, by whatever means, and start making rules. That's just the reality of it.
summercures2 7 months ago
@summercures2 I know also would cause so many deaths until a victor was found.
callofduty4eva 7 months ago
@KyleSkullz Did you hear 6:13?
MrNonintendo 7 months ago
@MrNonintendo
Yea, that's exactly what I was quoting. :-)
KyleSkullz 7 months ago
@KyleSkullz Stupid me I understood wrong lol
MrNonintendo 7 months ago
@KyleSkullz It's not a flaw, govt is necessary.
The biggest hypocrisy of Anarchist is that they continue to live under a govt. on their own free will.
tjohn1986 6 months ago 2
@KyleSkullz haha, nice. His son is though! I like David a lot.
mastercloud977 6 months ago
@KyleSkullz
and your biggest flaw is not understanding the difference between an anarchist and libertarian.
DraughtOfPeace 3 months ago
@DraughtOfPeace
I understand the difference, I just think they are consistent with eachother, and that Anarchy is the logical conclusion of the principles of libertarianism..
Libertarianism does not require "rulers" therefore, anarchy is consistent with the philosophy of liberty.
"The great non sequitur committed by defenders of the State... is to leap from the necessity of society to the necessity of the State." - Rothbard
KyleSkullz 3 months ago
@KyleSkullz
Anarchy requires that there be no government and laws themselves be decentralized. Libertarianism says no such thing. It requires the presence of a government to enforce the rights that citizens are born with, so no man can take away another's rights. You're right, libertarianism requires no 'rulers'. "Rulers" are a property of forms of government that require mob rule - like democracy and communism.
DraughtOfPeace 3 months ago
@DraughtOfPeace
Liberty exists wherever there is an absence of coercion and force. It is a natural phenomenon, and thus it does not require government since it can exist, to various degrees, with or without government.
All Libertarians believe in Maximizing Individual Liberty, but some believe governments must be formed to protect it, while others believe that this involves a logical contradiction, and that government is force, and therefore the enemy of liberty.
I am in the latter.
KyleSkullz 3 months ago
@DraughtOfPeace
you said: "You're right, libertarianism requires no 'rulers'. "Rulers"
That's why it's consistent with Anarchy. The orginal greek definition of Anarchy is "Without Ruler(s)". An(without)archy(ruler).
you said: "Rulers" are a property of forms of government that require mob rule - like democracy and communism."
Republics, as well (Electing representatives through mob rule.) Rulers are an effect the state. The state is always an enemy of liberty, not the protector of it.
KyleSkullz 3 months ago
@KyleSkullz
That's not what I meant, I said 'rulers' in the sense that they 'rule' over people. Anyway, a libertarian's preference for the government is guided only by his need for the existence of a body to safeguard individual rights. Again, this is just a theory. In practice, neither this model nor yours exist, or have existed anywhere in the world. It's impossible to implement and sustain any model to the letter.
DraughtOfPeace 3 months ago
liberalism would be destroyed if more people would listen to this guy, my god communism needs to end
beefdog 9 months ago
This si so refreshing to watch, in contrast to the world today; where people get their economics from Whoopie Goldberg and their morality from Oprah.
FabiusMaximus1000 9 months ago
if you hire people people and place a worthless value on the skills you train them in, then their skills will be worthless
heyZuesification 10 months ago
@heyZuesification you are a idiot, not only for your lack of grammer but also your lack of cohesive thought process, have fun flipping burgers at whatever fast food place employs you now!
iusepepper 9 months ago
@iusepepper just saying, if flipping burgers is such a worthless skill (i assume your trying to insult me) - and there is no value to it, then how will decreasing the monetary value of employing the service increase peoples attitudes to value the work experience? You yourself just proved my point because you yourself do not values the skills earned in the fast food chain... They already earn minimum wage, if they earn less would you value the service more? Would you still use it inyourinsult?
heyZuesification 9 months ago
@heyZuesification if somebody works flipping burgers from 16 to 18 years old and they develop a work ethic and they prove that they can show up on time and be a reliable employee, then those are all skills that future employers would be happy to see. It doesn't necessarily matter that he's never going to flip burgers ever again. But that person should have a way easier time getting hired than someone who shows up at 18 or 20 years old and has never worked before.
pro404 9 months ago
@pro404 sure, but they aren't really skills, they are work values and ethics... Decreasing the monetary worth of earning those ethics only allows the company to exploit those values for profit. Those initial ethics are developed in the upbringing of the child and their interactions with their parents and families. Allowing Ronald MacDonald to take advantage of ethical people seams to me to be un-ethical - you say a 16 year old should have more incentives to be employed- what abouta10yo, 1rice?
heyZuesification 9 months ago
@heyZuesification i'm not saying anyone should or shouldn't do anthing, its their own decision. But if a 16 year old is willing to work for $5 an hour, its awfully silly to say "no, sorry, you have to be unemployed, its for your own good."
i worked for less than minimum wage when i was 17, and i know plenty of people who had to work under the table to get a job. We were happy to have jobs for the sake of the work experience. And we never once thought that we were being "taken advantage of."
pro404 9 months ago
@pro404 this is the truth-- uncle miltie would be proud
what a crazy world we live in where learning basic skills is not allowed
2dum2getsocialism 9 months ago
So if Friedman is right, then i can't buy gold to protect my savings against inflation?
ptevans01 10 months ago
@ptevans01 you can buy gold but it won't protect you from inflation. When this entire system comes down with a crash, the government will demand your gold and give you worthless cash for it. This was done in the past, best thing to do is buy yourself a small farm, raise some chickens, and grow your own food.
crazyfool8839 10 months ago
@crazyfool8839
When did this happen in the past? How can the government seriously have the power to steal my gold? Would they actually arrest me? Why can't i bury it and lie to the government that i ever had gold?
ptevans01 10 months ago
@crazyfool8839 i don't remember the exact date but i believe it was 1938 when the US government confiscated all the gold.
crazyfool8839 10 months ago
@ptevans01 i don't remember the exact date but i believe it was 1938 when the US government confiscated all the gold.
crazyfool8839 10 months ago
Having a conversation with a bunch of economically illiterate house wifes? I admire Dr Friedman's patience.
yamahaU3 10 months ago
School vouchers are a terrible idea. They were a bad idea in 1979, and a bad idea in 2011. The free market doesn't work when 3rd parties pay the bill. Vouchers will drive the price of private education up and the quality down.
christo930 10 months ago
@christo930 public school is not third party?
spyletu 10 months ago
@spyletu The pubic school is the government. But look at other areas where 3rd parties pay bills such as in insurance. If you have insurance, you don't care what your health care costs, you don't shop around for prices, demand unnecessary medication (like antibiotics for a cold),demand excessive testing just to be sure etc. Let's say they start vouchers and they put a limit of 10k per year per kid. Guess how much all regular private schools will suddenly cost?
christo930 10 months ago
Both liberals and conservatives can find something Friedman said to support their own views. But both of them are just quoting him out of context. Friedman is an economist. He's no for or against liberals or conservatives. He supports efficiency.
BlueCrystalGem 10 months ago
This Friedman interview is timeless. If he'd been listened to 30 years ago (which Reagan mostly did, causing a huge economic boom) we wouldn't be where we are today fiscally. Shame on both parties. Shame on the American people for demanding more and more services from its government without being willing to pay for them. But especially shame on our politicians from refusing to say "There is no free lunch." The American people were fooled into thinking that this debt and senseless printing of mo
pumpkinmedic 10 months ago
I think Phil was very respectful of Professor Friedman, and was for the most part with all his guests.
cciccone61 10 months ago 2
Donahue is pwned!!
objectivist1 10 months ago
Obama printing money with OE2 & all the bailouts so that his socialistic Union thugs & rich bankers can manipulate the free market so that the Black/Latinos can live off Union FatCat wages & services at the expense of hard working Asian families.
UCSDEngineerDoctor 10 months ago
Being Asian & growing up in the USA in the 70's & 80's, I felt all the racists looks when I drove around in my Toyota truck. This guy is a true visionary. Back in those days I wouldnt even dare say "let Chrysler go bankrupt & Toyota should take over Chrysler" - I would be shot on the spot. Today when I see Obama bailout GMAC, I think back to those days & now see Obama as a Socialist Union Thug & a racist against Asian people.
UCSDEngineerDoctor 10 months ago
@UCSDEngineerDoctor Obama only helps Blacks & Latinos, because like Milton says, Obama determines who is worthy of his help. Obama socialist agenda only helps his own kind or people he believes is worthy - with affirmative action, amnesty, & welfare for Blacks/Latinos. Obama basically excludes Asians, because we do not operate on social welfare, but free capitalistic means. In other words, Asians do it through hard work. Obama is the most racist President against Asians.
UCSDEngineerDoctor 10 months ago
he didn't mention gold as a hedge against inflation
mike6459 11 months ago
@mike6459 maybe because gold bullion was just recently legal to own in 1979 (it was illegal to own bullion up till 1976 i believe)
crabtrap 10 months ago
"inflation is driven by demand and capitilistic greed"--blakdog90
wtf? inflation in the free market view is largely an increase in the money supply. In a Keynesian view it is rising prices, whereas money supply is treated differently (as often the lag in money supply becoming rising prices is 1.5 to 3 years). Either way, greed, wages, or labor have anything to do with it. You must have inflation at low rates anyway, it's organic, and necessary to avoid glut, or the deflation spiral. Commie.
ProIndividual 11 months ago
man, this guy is on fire
suchafool990 11 months ago
Actually Donahue was also great. A whole lot of ppl completely missed how good host he was. Argueing "like a leftist'' when your guest is anything but that is a must if you wanna have a challenging discussion. Nothing is more boring than a host that keeps strengthening the ideas of his/her guest and wont force him/her to prove his/her right. Thats the cathegory of propaganda bullshit.
sierrahun1 11 months ago
@sierrahun1
Yes its important to discuss and challenge the great minds when you have a chance too.
unfad1ng 11 months ago
Friedman was great
arusac410 11 months ago
wasn't the same exact question asked at 2:58 answered earlier? is it that hard to understand?...
Qboy316 11 months ago
Ok blakdog90... Supply and demand dictate a price of goods, demand is high, price is high because the supply is lowered... Conversely I'd you and everybody else have a bunch of stuff nobody really wants, you have to price it at a discount..
Inflation is literally the buying power (value) of currency versus it's backing of real material value, used to be gold but for simplicity, a $1 gold or trade GDP coin, allows a $1 bill to be printed... 0% inflation, print more to monetize debt, $2 dollar b
taewsk 11 months ago
and when gov't drives & keeps its people in poverty, they keep control of them
ICONICFREEDOM 1 year ago
Yeah, this is PBS before cable bicker-fests even existed. This is not meant to be O'Reillyesque "Host vs Guest" slugfest. This is meant to be a civil exploration of ideas. Donahue is playing devils advocate in order to provide a through provoking counter to Prof. Friedman's statements.
Nowhereman1280 1 year ago
@Nowhereman1280 If only this style of television talk show still existed. I think Jerry Springer started out wanting to host a show like this and ended up in the gutter. Oprah started like this but is garbage in comparison.
Siegetower 1 year ago
@Siegetower Agreed. If someone tried to interview Friedman today they would likely spend most of the time trying to devolve the interview into some debate about Ronald Regan vs FDR. Then again there aren't a lot of intellectual giants out there these days (and maybe never were) that could stand toe-to-toe with Friedman. His genius wasn't necessarily his ideas (though prefer them myself) it was the way in which he conveyed them and controlled the debate, even with non-economist "common folk".
Nowhereman1280 1 year ago
Donahue got spanked
EnigmaticWolf1 1 year ago
Despite some negative comments made about Friedman by particular members of the audience, it is interesting to note the frequent applause given to him by the audience at large. Friedman might actually be booed on the Oprah show today. Most of all, the applause he get despite his honesty is remarkable and would be strange in our times.
buffysummersfanboy 1 year ago 24
@buffysummersfanboy Worse yet, if he were to go on The View today, they would walk out on him and label him as cruel and inhuman.
FabiusMaximus1000 9 months ago
@FabiusMaximus1000 Yeah, cuz he's exactly like Bill O Reilly.
lanetaism 9 months ago
@buffysummersfanboy watch ron paul on the view :) some people still like the idea of freedom.
falsehopehero 6 months ago
The smartest guy to walk the planet in my lifetime!
top1jack 1 year ago
Why didn't you morons make this guy your president?
jbohler33 1 year ago
Comment removed
aramachandran271 11 months ago
what the hell?......3:07
blakdog90 1 year ago
@blakdog90 He means diversify your asset holdings. That's safest, statistically.
aramachandran271 11 months ago
@aramachandran271 no, that's not what he is saying. he's saying materialize your assets. that doesn't make since.
inflation is driven by demand and capitilistic greed. the more people demand the more corporations charge you.
in return the govt raises min. wage to accomodate that demand so people will spend more money....cause and effect.
blakdog90 11 months ago
@blakdog90 that's not inflation, it's just a change in price due to increase in demand and matters only when referring to one good. when prices in an economy increase overall, that's inflation. inflation happens for multiple reasons, but primarily because of a loose money supply, since there's more money in circulation to buy the same good. that's why QE2 increased oil prices to shoot up. minimum wage helps a little bit with reducing wage stickiness, and mitigates its effects, but not a lot.
aramachandran271 11 months ago
i think he should ask why does the government have to raise minimum wage.
it raises it because of inflation.
blakdog90 1 year ago
Obama never ran a company. Now he's head of the largest company in the world. Too much money passes through congress' hands, and to add injury to injury, they never spend it properly. End the fed. Cut govt programs. No more welfare, healthcare, social security, and drug laws. Let us be free! Let us breathe! Let me keep my money and leave it to me if i help the poor in my area. Let me make or break mt success! The white pillars of washington should be cut into tombs to bury our corruption forever
nickvonmises 1 year ago
Thanks a lot for uploading. Friedman is truly outstanding.
OtZman 1 year ago
Believe it or not, minimum wage actually creates low pay! For example, the workers do not have to work at Mc Donalds. If they were not happy with their pay, they would work somewhere else. If No one would be willing to work at Mc Donalds, then Mc Donalds would be forced to higher their wages because they couldn't function without workers! If more Americans understood this principle, there would be more real "fairness" in today's economy. Study Adam Smith's book: Wealth of Nations.
TheIzzymuse 1 year ago
I want to be like Milton when I grow up.
brad238899 1 year ago
thank you so much for uploading these vids
killerbee2k 1 year ago
Milton Friedman, still kicking ass and taking names after he's dead and buried. May there be a million more like him.
kev3d 1 year ago
Donahue was(and still is) an unabashing lib, but his program was revolutionary and he was great at playing devil's advocate..true, he spoke mostly from the liberal side, but his show is something we don't have anymore but need again badly!
Obviously "Uncle Milty" was the best and has set a blueprint for the 21 century "reaffirmation" of the free enterprise system
sps242 1 year ago
My gratitude for providing excellent videos.
dmorgan0628 1 year ago
Amazing, all the problems of today were the problems of way back, and the debate is still the same as well.
JWRandall423 1 year ago
We still have the same problems as "they" did 30 years ago. Friendman's / the correct solutions have not been tried, in fact, we have only done the exact opposite. We have a MUCH larger govt and more reguations than 30 years ago, and what has that lead us to? Only more and more of the same problems...
I hope we continue to wake up as a nation and quit being so naive - socialism does not work (no such thing as nirvana in this life) free market does! End of discussion
383mazda 1 year ago
What's sad is that nothing Friedman said was tough to understand or didn't make sence. You could teach this stuff to a 3rd grader. But I was never tought this in any of my schooling, including college. I wasn't even tought how to think like that. It's a good thing I was tought how to think and solve problems (not symptoms) at home.
383mazda 1 year ago
talk about intelligence
wealthmaster71 1 year ago
Milton speaks the truth in the most clear way for the average person to start to understand the truth in what he's saying: we must look at history to see the effects of good policy he is advocating, stop looking at the surface effects and look more long term, and realize that all economic decisions involve special interests. Therefore, the best idea is to put the power back to the market and out of the hands of government and large corporations that cater to it.
RIP Milton-one of a kind.
tigerhop 1 year ago
It's really great how so many of Friedmans arguments during this interview still represent the backbone of economic studies (I have studied economics myself for 5 years). It would have been interesting to get his opinion about the recent american bank failures. A major bank failure has much more serious consequences than the failure of an ordinary company, since its lenders (including other banks) lose their access to financing, possibly causing them in turn to go bankrupt -->stoneage :)
huleboer84 1 year ago
I think you people are a bit too harsh on Donahue. I once had the chance of watching a video that various people paid tribute to Friedman, and Donahue was one of those who had only kind, warm words and admiration for Dr. Friedman. These two people here have a great debate, and Donahue's questions were very good and smart, which is good because this way we can see how smart Friedman is.
I truly wish we had more people like them in our days, on television and real life.
redpyramid88 1 year ago
I agree with equsnarnd in that Donahue was a lib, but he was at least intellectually honest enough to invite a juggernaut like friedman on his show. Those were different times though and I was way too young to know them if I was even alive
tatsumakisempyukaku 1 year ago
Friedman's ghost for prez 2012. It would be the best candidate.
leakanddestroy 1 year ago 3
You can tell how frazzled Donahue was getting.
TheRealTaco87 1 year ago
The only issue with minimum wage is businesses then bring in iimmigrants (and some illegal) to work for low wages. Milton is right but only if we take out the immigrant factor.
pdynamics1 1 year ago
The Undeniable Simple TRUTH. Milton makes it easy for all to understand.
truwired 1 year ago 3
Thanks for these Friedman series. They are fantastic.
Canuteson 1 year ago 3
@hayden50 Ouch.. I am so hurt by your unfeeling barb; honestly... Did you have a cogent point to make or something to say that actually speaks to my prior point or is that it? Are you a fan or this dead-end in place for the last 40 years failed policy because you honestly think it works or does it just make you feel comfortable with your own racism?
Coklan 1 year ago
Markets are not free, they have never been and they never will be. Markets are created by "We The People" who select Representation to set up the rules to insure a fair market, not a free market. Without Government, there is anarchy and a need for Government.
Coklan 1 year ago
@Coklan you must be a welfare junky...
hayden50 1 year ago
David Stockman Regan's Director of the OMB: in his recent NY Times Oped has all but apologized for putting Freedman's insanity in place. It is bankrupting the GOP, our nation and the free nations of the world at the benefit of China and to a lessor degree India. Read the Art of War people.
Coklan 1 year ago
Milton Freedman was mistaken and continues to be. Friedman's philosophy in place from 1982 to today . Read the Art of War, required reading in China. "Excellence lies not in winning every battle but by defeating the enemy with out ever fighting" The GOP, brought to you by China thanks to the SCOTUS ruling Citizens United vs. The FEC. Vote Progressive! Vote American!
Coklan 1 year ago
Slaves do not get wages. Slaves are also forced to work. Minimum wage is yet another example of government using force, not allowing the free market to work. Government intervention in the housing market caused the problems with AIG, Fannie/Freddie, and the current crisis we are in today. Without government intervention, people who weren't credit worthy would not have gotten credit.
rudytbone 1 year ago
If teenagers and their parents would like them to work for "slave wages", what should give you the right to stop them? The problem with the bleeding hearts "defending" the poor who are being "exploited" in all these scenarios is that the people working these crappy jobs do it because it is the best option they have (in their eyes) and much better than any alternative they have.
DMisigoy 1 year ago
Your wages is determined by supply and demand and your productivity. There is no such thing as slave wages. Wages are paid according to supply and demand. There is a reason why a brain surgeon gets paid a lot more than someone that flips hamburgers.
buffteethr 1 year ago
Friedman would let teenagers work for slave wages or less. Costing nothing, they could all have jobs!
chessNIC 1 year ago
@chessNIC Your right, better they never get jobs and so never get skills and have to ask for handouts all their lives. I'm sure they're glad your watching out for them.
angpetru 1 year ago
@chessNIC Did you listen to the whole thing? Because their is a minimum wage, a company that is hiring at that wage can get older more experienced employee than a teenager. When that happens the teenagers do not get on the job training, and learning new skills. If your post is all you took in from that segment, then you should really listen to it again.
garyjcurrier 1 year ago
Comment removed
chessNIC 1 year ago
Neither side has the moral high ground. They don't have any moral ground at all. What they do is never on principle, never in the furtherance of Liberty but always in the interests of their respective party and always to aggrandize the power of the state at the expense of Liberty. They are more immoral than drug dealers selling drugs to kids. And I don't mean that as hyperbole. People who sell out freedom for anything are immoral but those that do it for petty power and money are lowlifes.
equsnarnd 1 year ago
1. 'You cannot succeed by advertising what's not true."
Really? Then please explain the success of the following:
Psychics
Religion
Accupuncture
Lady GaGa
2. "People think the public at large are a bunch of stupid people. They're not."
See #1
borstalboy1981 1 year ago
When the market balance is grossly tipped, one side will revolt and the others can be taken down or worse.
chessNIC 1 year ago
So what's wrong with unions that confront the might of accumulated capital with an amalgamation of labor's market power? The fairness of a day's work/pay requires balance.
chessNIC 1 year ago
@chessNIC There's nothing wrong with voluntary unions. Provided union membership is a choice, I think they're an important part of any capitalist system. But history shows that, in the long run, the way towards better wages is good education and strong economic growth. All unions can do is make negotiation easier.
Unions only become problematic if membership is a prerequisite of getting a job or they start intimidating/attacking/killing workers.
But "fairness" is just sentimentalism.
Myndir 1 year ago
Like the kings and tsars of old, Friedman doesn't believe in a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. They lost their liberty, in many cases their heads because they were outnumbered, outgunned, and stupidly selfish.
chessNIC