The fact of the matter is that there shouldn't be any arguments about which is better; Socialism or Capitalism. Socialism has destroyed nations, Capitalism has lifted those nations from rubble. Europe has proved to us that Socialism is ineffective and an inept form of government. Europe has also proved that Conservative, Free-Market policies create wealth, power, incentives, and self-reliance. [I.E. Germany.]
It's a bit odd that someone watched this video and then, knowing its content, uploaded it to the Internet. Friedman claims that government bureaucracies don't create anything and don't lift people out of poverty, and yet we're all here watching this video on the Internet, created originally by the government to aid scientific research, not for greed. And plenty of people are using the Internet to lift themselves out of poverty.
@Blexine It was originally proposed by the government. It was developed with funding from the government. And the actual technology was built by the government. Therefore it was created by the government. The university officials you speak of were merely collaborators. The actual structure of the Internet was designed by a small steering committee at DARPA. Despite how dull and technical this all sounds, it's all fairly riveting. See "Where Wizards Stay Up Late" for more information.
@AreaCode000 Government Bureaucracies don't lift people out of poverty; they keep people in poverty by having them suck off the gov't in long term welfare programs. [Detroit is a perfect example of this, most of it's population lives on welfare and the families live on food stamps, etc. for generations] Bureaucracies aren't paying for that welfare, you, me, and every other taxpayer are the ones who are paying their salaries for their programs. It doesn't do anything for the poor.
@pwuint12 Government Bureaucracies don't lift people out of poverty? Go study up on FDR's new deal, and how it's new implimented government bureaus lifted people out of poverty. Not to mention any economist worth mentioning has said the new deal basically saved american capitalism as we know it, even milton friedman called the new deal a "lifesaver"... and guess what the new deal was criticized as being heavily influenced by socialism/communism. You need a history book, badly.
@pwuint12 Royal charters. The Homestead Act. Land grant colleges.
The New Deal. These are just a few of the government programs that have lifted people out of poverty. Welfare on the other hand, isn't actually intended to lift people out of poverty. No one has ever said that and it's dishonest of you to make that claim. Only education can lift people out of poverty, which is why college is free or heavily subsidized everywhere else in the Industrialized World.
@AreaCode000 Royal Charters is a very capitalist approach ; China is doing it right now [Since they are market capitalists]. The Homestead Act[of 1862] was also a Lincoln[Republican] Bill. This was used to further expansion, also to help the poor, but mostly expansion. You bring up the old argument of 'Everywhere else' when it comes to 'free everything'. Tip: Just because Europe does it, doesn't mean it's correct. The US isn't the most powerful nation ever because of free everything
@pwuint12 You completely missed the point of my comment. All of those programs were used here in America. I didn't even mention Europe. But I'm glad to see that you're not denying the fact that government programs can help the poor. Obviously America has no desire to end poverty "just because". Capitalism is only concerned with ROI. So it's not about "free everything" it's about using free x as an incentive to boost the economy.
He didn't answer the question as to if he ever had a doubt about Capitalism. If he had said no then it would obviously be a lie. Also, the Soviet Union beat America into space, and most of the history of mankind took place before Capitalism. Just saying..
@unifiedreality That is because while 65% of the Russian population had no food, all of their taxes were going to war efforts and Scientific development.
@unifiedreality Socialism is a branch of Communism. Democracy does not exist in Communism. [USSR is a perfect example and well known of this]. I myself do not agree with the main idea of Democracy [ Mob Rule ] But I do agree with democratic ideals. Such as the freedoms defined in the founding documents of America and other Republics. The Elite would be extreme leftists who employ the gov't agencies that utilize socialism for greed and self interest.
@pwuint12 Seriously, you need to get your facts straight, if you want to debate people on socialism vs capitalism. You look like a fool. Quote from you "Socialism is a branch of communism". Again your "facts" are wrong. Socialist ideas have been around since classical antiquity, and modern socialist roots go all the way back to the french revolution. That was at least 25 years before Karl Marx was even born. You're why people see capitalist (like me) as arrogant and ignorant... con't
@pwuint12 You don't even know why you hate socialism, yet you dismiss the entire philosophy and the people who support it. Like it or not socalist make some points, and they should be taken into consideration. You are so arrogant in your beliefs, and denounce all other ideologies so fervently. You don't even know what you're talking about when it comes ideals you do believe in, like democractic ideals. Mob Rule is not even close being a proper description of democracy...con't
@pwuint12 If it was mob rule then there would be no point in having elections. It is also interesting that you have denounced leftist and say they would use government agencies that utilize socialism for greed and self interest... The main goal for true leftist is to create an egalitarian society. Thomas Paine was a leftist, and his "elite" views earned him the title of "The father of the american revolution", you dumb fuck. It is so sad how little you know... con't
@pwuint12 Actually no, democracy is a type of government and socialism is an economic theory. It can quite easily be argued that putting civic utilities in private hands is very undemocratic because it isolates those utilities from the majority.
this video should be re-titled to communism vs. capitalism. Milton Friedman cited only communist countries. there is a very big difference between socialism and communism. socialism still has some free market, just not totally unregulated.
@rocknroll19842 Socialism does not include free market to any degree. In Socialism, even the most moderate of it; the Government controls the economic regulations, they decide how much you are taxed and where your taxdollars go, that is the complete opposite of a free market. In any socialist state, the head of that state is in complete fiscal power.
@pwuint12 Well, that is not exactley true. Socialism is actually impossible to truly define, there are many different styles of socialism. Under socialism; state-directed economies, market socialism, social democricies, & self-managed economies all have a presence of free market. Communists see socialism as the stage before the full blown proletariat run communist state has ended all forms of capitalism. Socialsim is monochromatic. Yet, you paint it with blunt absolute strokes.
@rocknroll19842 Socialism is one colour; Leftist. The colour of failure, poverty, and loss. Yes, socialism has many aspects, but it all connects to the central dogma; redistribution and control. Socialism, the idea, does not contain any free market. However, how a leader USES socialism may adapt to minute acceptance of small free market commerce. Conclusively, Socialism leads to gov't agencies controlling the economy, and market Socialism.
@pwuint12 Ok, I don't care to argue with you. I am 100% a pro free market capitalist. But you need to do your research, Fact: Socialism is impossible to define, becuase it has no central dogma, none. It is and has always been a political philosophy. Socialism is an idea of a soceity based on cooperation over competition. There is no scientific structured way to implement socialism, it is a philosophy. As such people interpret it, and try to implement it vastly different ways.
@rocknroll19842 Capitalism has no central dogma either. It isn't true that all people are greedy either, most are just trying to not be ripped off by whoever pays for their starvation wages, who would be a guy like Milton Freidman.
@HavidDagstrom I never said capitalism had a central dogma. Capitalism is just as much idealistic as socialism. All styles lof government/economies are based on a certain philosophy. Freidman dedicated his entire life to public service & economic education(which he won a nobel peace prize for). oh yeah, and he had a huge hand in repealing the draft so young men weren't forced into fighting wars they didn't believe in. he also never worked for any private companies.... con't
@HavidDagstrom after he left his work for the public, he spent the next 30+ years teaching at the university of chicago. So how did a guy like Freidman rip off anyone? Actually he did his best to make a sound and stabilized economy in the u.s. that would help people as much as possible. Learn your facts before you trash a great man... and all humans are greedy. Let me ask you a question to prove his/my point, do you wish for radical terrorist/terrorist cells to be eradicated?
@HavidDagstrom after he left his work for the public, he spent the next 30+ years teaching at the university of chicago. So how did a guy like Freidman rip off anyone? Actually he did his best to make a sound and stabilized economy in the u.s. that would help people as much as possible. Learn your facts before you trash a great man... and all humans are greedy. Let me ask you a question to prove his/my point, do you wish for radical terrorist/terrorist cells to be eradicated?
@rocknroll19842 By practice Socialism does have a definition. Yes, it has branches, but the central DOGMA of it is the redistribution of wealth, equality [social equality and labour ] and government agency interventionism. Socialism CAN and IS defined by this type of practice. They may implement in an array of different formats, but all for the same purpose and by the same type of policies; big government, redistribution, and social equality. Research? Common sense.
@pwuint12 I really have to explain this to you again? Socialism is a PHILOSOPHY of a society based on cooperation over competition. How a government decides to implement their interpretation of said philosophy is what gives you big government, redistribution etc. Governments who try to put socialism into practice have a central dogma in which they think will accomplish their interpretation of the philosophy. You are trying to define the indefinable, that is beyond common sense.
@rocknroll19842 Incorrect. Based upon the interpretation of states that have utilized Socialism, it HAS a definition. Socialism is not a religious text that can be interpreted ten thousand different ways, it is interpreted by how it affects the daily lives of constituents, government control, and nationalization of the economy. It is purely common sense to interpret Socialism as how it is used and always has been used. It always has been used to expand gov't and to control.
@rocknroll19842 Socialism is NOT a philosophy. Socialism is an economic SYSTEM. Socialism has never been used differently, it has been used the same since it's creation; give what you accumulate to others, let others make your decisions, etc. It all circulates around the common principles of government interventionalism and government power.
@pwuint12 Ok seriously, this is the last time I tell you this. I have already acknowledged that modern socialism is an economic system 50 times. But what you can't seem to get through you head; is that the Socialist economic system is based on a POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY. The philosophy of a society based on cooperation rather than competition. You even proved my right when you say "based upon the interpretation of states that have utilized socalism, has definition"... con't
@pwuint12 Then you go on to say that socialism has only been used on way, and never been used differently, seriously? There are 5 different economic models based on socialism that have been used in modern countries. Not to mention the 5 major classifications of socialistic economies. Then there are the socialist political movements that all have a different interpretations of the political philosophy of socialism. Should I keep going? you need to study your history, you are clueless.
GREED: intense and selfish desire for wealth, power, or food.
I am not greedy I don't have any desire to have billions or even millions of dollars, all I want is an equal, a fair share of the work and wealth. I don't want to live in a mansion and drive million dollar cars, All I want is a decent living and life as a free man, I don't want to be a wage slave working like an animal so some Milton Friedman guy gets to live like a king, while me and my family live like dogs. FUCK YOU MILTON!
@12Ominous We can hope it isn't Greece, the country which is now in recovery from bankruptcy. Who bailed them out? Conservative Germany. Left Wing politics don't work. What country do you live in?
The whole fundamental of this system is the question is that are social rights granted on a clean slate? The whole fight between political parties are based on the Second Bill of Rights, that is the debate if citizens are entitled to the rights. This is the debate about rights and democracy, not only economic systems. This is much larger than we can expect, the entire financial crisis is caused by so much shit,all caused by both economic systems, so we should have checks and balances.
"So far discovered..." - Mr. Friedman, 1979. We live not only in the 21st century but the year is 2012. I think we are now beginning to see a shred of light on new alternatives; RBE anyone...?
@OArmaKeonO If you are referring to the Resource Based Economy, it can't work. Its another form of Socialism. By promoting "usership" instead of ownership, there is no longer any incentive to innovate, work harder, etc. Besides, some system of government has to manage that system. As the old adage goes, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. It has happened before, and it would happen again. How many times do we need to try the same failed ideas with diff names?
@anvilsnare I cannot say it will or will not work with absolute certainty (no more than I can predict the future of our mixed economy). Although, we could at-least try, if not on a global scale than surely on a small scale... an island perhaps. My greatest fear is that it might actually work; it might work so extravagantly that fearful governments so corrupt and power hungry will somehow pervert it from within. Somehow smearing RBE as the enemy, and reporting it as a cult or evil.
this man is a genius. yea capitalism has its flaws but there are no alternatives that work better. my advice would be to work hard and have faith in God. if you do that then whatever happens was meant to be.
Socialsm is a system of economics that is run through a central mechanism. The nazi, Facist and communist all operated under nationally central controlled economics.
No society even a capitalist one is complete free of socialist elements. There always going to be infrastructures and services that will have social importance.
This not the same as saying everything should be run from a collective system. Milton Friedman is correct in his assertions of free markets helping the poor.
@bighands69 free market is an economic model that concludes that producers are in position to extract profit from the goods they sell and the consumers are able to acquire the goods at the cost of production. could you tell me what is an example of a free market that actually functions in the reality and how it helps the poor?
@TheHagitta Your local flea-market is as close an example of how a free-market system would work if government allowed all markets to operate under the same conditions. Market forces would drive prices lower and drive wages higher, because workers will tend to work for the highest salary available to them at time of hire, and consumers will tend to buy products for the lowest price at time of purchase. Competing businesses will force these conditions on each other, unbeknownst.
@beauxq I know I seemed a bit self-contradicting, saying -ism is how to manage money while anarchism not dealing with money, but anarchism is an outlier; in other words it seemed strange to even acknowledge it, unless you believe nations should have revolutions. Unless you believe that... I don't see any reason to have brought it up.
@andresan3277 My main point here is only to get people to avoid obviously false general statements like your "The point in any -ism is how to make money." The things that are most hurting society have nothing to do with the economic system. What hurts society the most is people holding on to ideas like that. People should choose their words more carefully and question themselves more. If people do that, it won't matter whether we use capitalism or socialism or anarchism.
@beauxq Anarchism is the belief of the removal of gov't and any form of a society, but it doesn't deal with money-just the ruling aspect; unless I misread the definition and didn't see the econ. principles. So, your claim of my point being refuted isn't very clear to me. If you were to make an innovative creation, wouldn't you want credit and compensation?
@CitizenPlusPlus That's true, Wozniak was an innovative engineer, but the point is still clear. I have to agree, people from back then were much more genuine and clever in innovations, now all we have are improvements of the old. Like the Bible says, "There is nothing new...", only new approaches. It is a shame.
@thumpybones I wasn't advocating anarchy, I was just using it as an example to show that your statement is wrong. Less capitalism does not necessarily mean more government control.
Capitalism reduces the opportunity of people supporting something out of the kindness of their hearts, because people don't have the time or resources to support something out of the kindness of their hearts, because they have to go to work, and they have to pay for their food and shelter.
@beauxq Less capitalism IS more government control. More regulations, more taxes, more barriers to entry (business).
Capitalism increases charitable giving. When taxes are lower, charitable donations go up. People have less time and fewer resources when the tax burden is higher.
@JoshMan522 And who will be this arbiter of how much money a person has is "too much"? You? The government? Sorry, but that's not how I want to live. As long as one earns money honestly, there should be no limits. Wealth is created, money is not a finite pie. If a person is successful financially, it doesn't limit another man's ability to earn. Not in a FREE society at least.
@thumpybones there doesn't have to be an "arbiter" to decide how much people make. With decent labour, environmental, and judicial laws you can have a society in which someone could be free to earn as much as they are able (not as much as they want) because they have to share in their profits with the people that help create the wealth (those who sweat for it), they can't simply uproot the business and go overseas, because the "workers" are seen as partners BECAUSE THEY WORK FOR IT
@thumpybones In any civilized DEMOCRACY there are regulations put on greed. Capitalism as we know it is not democratic, and needs fixin' as it is. It is wrong to pay people shit and work their fingers to the bone and, in turn, get rich, while they are demoralized. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, it is good to create jobs, yeah, yeah, yeah... but when does a worker become a slave? Workers should have fair vote in their workplaces. The unbridled fatcat saying he's trickling down his wealth... barf!
@thumpybones Socialism is NOT the government takeover of the capitalist class. Socialism is the worker takeover of the capitalist class. It is you making the decisions in the work place and in the public space. Not the government. And not the capitalist. Socialism is direct democracy. Capitalism is where one has to shut the frell up when the boss is an ignoramus and our senator is a corporate shill; because we still need the work.
@beauxq Well how else do ideas get implemented in any society? The point in any -ism is how to make money. Didn't Hitler go after money trying to implement his Socialist "utopia". If I make a good idea, I want credit and compensation- if not you wouldn't have a computer, electricity, or Steve Jobs.
@andresan3277 Frell Steve Jobs. Wozniak was a genius. But Gates and Jobs have both set the computer industry back decades, from what it could have achieved. Which really is a long dark age in computer years. Its really sad for the people who develop this electronic stuff and see so much wasted potential.
@andresan3277 "The point in any -ism is how to make money." This is the problem with so many people's thinking today. They're too limited in the possibilities they consider. The point of anarchism is not how to make money, because money wouldn't be worth anything. So your statement is wrong.
I respect Friedmans intelligence, although I do not agree with all of his views. However, I find any video that has an us vs them theme to it and only one side of the fence is present doing the talking is always biased. You may as well have a video "Republicans vs Democrats" with only a Republican being asked about both sides.
@juanlmesl Yeah, so go live in Cuba or North Korea, genius. Then you'll find out "how great" it is to live under a collectivist state where the government owns all means of production and they tell you where to live, where to work and what to read. Idiot!
@8thRRFS North Korea is off the charts and doesn't even enter into the debate as capitalist or socialist.
For Cuba, 90% of the sugar plantations were owned by American Corporations b4 the 1959 revolution. Since then growth skyrocketed with now an ave lifespan of 77 yrs. While the revolution is far from complete in Cuba. The question isn't why didn't democratic revolution succeed in Cuba? (Its just started). But why hasn't democratic revolution succeeded in America?
@mba2ceo im not sure the 'elites' wanted Friedman to speak about true capitalism and ending the ELITES private paper money federal reserve bank, in fact he is against the elites, we have crony capitalism today not free markets.
Milton Friedman was an arrogant cock. Einstein didn't do what he did under order from government bureaucrats? True. By the government did fund his experiments on numerous occasions. On a completely unrelated note, Einstein published a paper in 1949 called "Why Socialism", pretty much advocating for socialism. How ironic lol Milton Friedman bashing socialism and using Einstein to back him up and Einstein was a socialist lmao
Socialism has been responsible for the greatest human atrocities in history. It's people have been oppressed, and suffer in ways beyond definition. Capitalism has raised more people out of poverty than any governmental system in history. People escape socialist countries fleeing to Capitalist countries. not the other way around. What is there to understand?
@Trauncherwhat thats the same staff that they teach you in school, its called brain washing. socialism never existed as it should because the governments who implemented them where doing it their own way. i mean just because socialism promotes public ownership does not mean that private property gets taken away. so yea they did it wrong if you ask me. every one cuba, north korea ussr. socialism its really no different from capitalism, differences is that people in generals get more benefits
one day we will a a new form a govt and we will look back on this man and see ignorance and stupidity.....Until that day comes I will say he is a intelligent man
Call what is happening today all the names you can think of. Left Wing, Right wing, fasicism, Socialism, Yada yada yada!!! Simply put it is pure evil. No other explaination. History is repeating itself. God Bless, Walk in the light!
The existence of paranormal phenomenon is in no way contingent upon whether any individual believes. As a modern American woman from Juarez I exercise my right to "go Mexican."
Socialism vs socialism is not the issue. This is covering up the real battle which is plutocracy vs democracy. Milton Friedman is just another deluded lackey of the plutocratic state who lost his humanity long ago and doesn't recognize it.
Every time I watch this, and it's been many times (as well as watching the entire Friedman/Donahue interview) I am in awe of this man, his wisdom and ability to cut through the inept, false, and failed ideas of the big government society wishers. Socialism has been tried over and over in the course of human civilization and its goals of having complete economic equality with a high standard of living is totally a pie in the sky dream. It always results in a lower standard of living for ALL.
I'm all for voluntary socialism, but coercive socialism both reduces freedom and creates suffering. Personal and economic freedom are the path to the greatest prosperity.
Desiderio Alberto Arnaz y de Acha's insistence on worshiping Babalú-Ayé drove Lucille Désirée Ball into the hollow, hairy, stinking armpits of Gary Morton. [I believe that long-crapped-out actors Richard Egan & Bruce Cabot were the same guy. He'll be crapping out soon. He who needs to crap out.]
Marxism? Owenism? Lovely. Let's device a 5-yr. plan to distribute oleo to the burbs by unelected central planners. They shall determine how much dog food & penicillin & antiseptic will be appropriated to sector 32. Who needs the free market anyway? Let 1982 Czechoslovakia be our touchstone. The Czechs loved waiting in line 7 hrs. for a pound of fatty, fly-blown ham. It broke the monotony of a grueling day of idling 6 hours in line for 2 gallons of petrol.
@MindCrimesInc the 100 million people murdered by marxist regimes, and the hundreds of millions of people oppressed by them don't like it much either. Get a clue.
@YourUTubeMonitor Damn straight. We should do the Christian thing: each pursue our own greed, lie, cheat and steal from our neighbor, sell our souls and the heart of our nation to corporate interests, and then laugh at the poor, the hungry and the homeless as they die on the street from lack of health care.
@YourUTubeMonitor lmfao, take your own advice pal. I'll believe that "you" are not "we" when you stop using the socialized police, fire department and libraries, and when you stop donating to your local church, commie.
By definition there's no such thing as a scientific theory. Either you know or you don't. On the other hand, if it's the goal of collectivists to destroy traditional Western Culture then muddling about with language is the way to go.
HER ENORMOUS INCOME {Able-bodied man seeking able-bodied woman for procreation. Candidate must be fecund.}
I remember working @ a job 5 years & being barked orders by someone hired a half hour before. {It's Bermuda's public triangle repeated: internal editing mechanisms, clock-works, running through women's underwear in a silly mood.}
Through my experience of studying both free-market economics and socialism I have come to the conclusion that those who advocate free-markets, or capitalism, define socialism very differently than those who advocate socialism itself, and vice-avers.
And that those who advocate socialism define capitalism very differently than those who advocate capitalism, and vice-avers.
We need to understand each others' philosophies before we just hate each other y'all.
@ruvvjub History is the best definer of Socialism. 100 million murdered people under socialism and the immeasurable suffering of people under socialism ends the debate.
@Trauncher Of please. How many people died in the name of Capitalism? How many innocent lives were crushed by Americans in Latin America or Vietnam? How many people were killed by Capitalists and Mercantilists in Africa? In North America? In Asia? How many wars were waged for the lust of gold and the rights to rape and pillage the vanquished?
@Danlovesmakinvids Yeah I agree with Milton Friedman here, I am definitely in favor of free-market economics, not controlled economics. There is no sure way to govern the market, so just let it be.
My comment was merely trying to bridge the gap of thinking from those who are independents (capitalists) to those who are dependents (socialists).
Let us champion collectivism by whatever form, as WE expect to be paid commensurate with our abilities. Collectivism doesn't provide for eye doctors making more money than garbage men. Collectivism provides NO incentive for product innovation. In the Soviet system intellectual property was shamelessly stolen from the West. The red Russians & the red Chinese couldn't manufacture a decent car, a modern commode nor keep market shelves stocked.
DHARMA DRAMA—Particle board is to lumber as tater tots are to whole potatoes. Who needs the public john at the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C. to take a greasy dump when Thomas Woodrow Wilson's coffin is in the open just a dump away?
[Let's crap in buckets for all the good that'd do. Oh yeah: Let scrap...let's crap...room in Rome; Roman room...] What would be the total tax burden upon me in a socialists' utopia? Might I travel freely? Own guns? Refuse serums? Heat my house with wood? Grow vegetables? Drink unpasteurized milk?
@YourUTubeMonitor I don't comment often on this video but, after reading your post I have only one question.... WTF are talking about? Explain. Socialism doesn't mean "anti-freedom."
@26Francis92 not really irrelevent sir considering friedman mentioned Einstein in the video there. I just taught id make that point to youtubers, that Einstein did believe in socialism maybe not the soviet communist model of it, but democratic socialism was his ideal.
Wasn't it a surprise that Phil the great could not answer the question that liberals love to spew their diatribe. Wish i could have seen the whole show. Milton puts them to shame and they are left wondering how to swing the discussion to a side street as when they meet him head on, he is driving the Mack truck and they are in a Yugo.
Anyone who thinks State control is better than private control needs to go to Eastern Europe and meet a few people who went through state control.
Everything is achieved by force!
In a private owned economy everything is achieved by persuasion and power is only held when the customer is happy. Everyone can choose what they want without having a gun pointed at them their whole lives. Corporations can only exist by providing service.
Don't confuse Capitalism with Corporatism like Michael Moore
There is a huge discrepancy between the hypothetical ideal of "Free Markets" supported by strident libertarians, and their actual manifestations in the real world. People can be told the truth, that a truly free market has never existed, yet they'll listen to this crap by Friedman. Look at Friedman's ideological consequences on the real world as seen in Reaganomics. I lived through "The Reagan Years," and only Margaret Thatcher succeeded in smashing down working people in England better!
The fact of the matter is that there shouldn't be any arguments about which is better; Socialism or Capitalism. Socialism has destroyed nations, Capitalism has lifted those nations from rubble. Europe has proved to us that Socialism is ineffective and an inept form of government. Europe has also proved that Conservative, Free-Market policies create wealth, power, incentives, and self-reliance. [I.E. Germany.]
pwuint12 2 days ago
It's a bit odd that someone watched this video and then, knowing its content, uploaded it to the Internet. Friedman claims that government bureaucracies don't create anything and don't lift people out of poverty, and yet we're all here watching this video on the Internet, created originally by the government to aid scientific research, not for greed. And plenty of people are using the Internet to lift themselves out of poverty.
AreaCode000 2 days ago
@AreaCode000 The internet was developed within universities. It is not government made.
Blexine 2 days ago
Comment removed
AreaCode000 7 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Blexine It was originally proposed by the government. It was developed with funding from the government. And the actual technology was built by the government. Therefore it was created by the government. The university officials you speak of were merely collaborators. The actual structure of the Internet was designed by a small steering committee at DARPA. Despite how dull and technical this all sounds, it's all fairly riveting. See "Where Wizards Stay Up Late" for more information.
AreaCode000 7 hours ago
@AreaCode000 Government Bureaucracies don't lift people out of poverty; they keep people in poverty by having them suck off the gov't in long term welfare programs. [Detroit is a perfect example of this, most of it's population lives on welfare and the families live on food stamps, etc. for generations] Bureaucracies aren't paying for that welfare, you, me, and every other taxpayer are the ones who are paying their salaries for their programs. It doesn't do anything for the poor.
pwuint12 2 days ago
@pwuint12 Government Bureaucracies don't lift people out of poverty? Go study up on FDR's new deal, and how it's new implimented government bureaus lifted people out of poverty. Not to mention any economist worth mentioning has said the new deal basically saved american capitalism as we know it, even milton friedman called the new deal a "lifesaver"... and guess what the new deal was criticized as being heavily influenced by socialism/communism. You need a history book, badly.
rocknroll19842 1 day ago
@pwuint12 Royal charters. The Homestead Act. Land grant colleges.
The New Deal. These are just a few of the government programs that have lifted people out of poverty. Welfare on the other hand, isn't actually intended to lift people out of poverty. No one has ever said that and it's dishonest of you to make that claim. Only education can lift people out of poverty, which is why college is free or heavily subsidized everywhere else in the Industrialized World.
AreaCode000 7 hours ago
@AreaCode000 Royal Charters is a very capitalist approach ; China is doing it right now [Since they are market capitalists]. The Homestead Act[of 1862] was also a Lincoln[Republican] Bill. This was used to further expansion, also to help the poor, but mostly expansion. You bring up the old argument of 'Everywhere else' when it comes to 'free everything'. Tip: Just because Europe does it, doesn't mean it's correct. The US isn't the most powerful nation ever because of free everything
pwuint12 7 hours ago
@pwuint12 You completely missed the point of my comment. All of those programs were used here in America. I didn't even mention Europe. But I'm glad to see that you're not denying the fact that government programs can help the poor. Obviously America has no desire to end poverty "just because". Capitalism is only concerned with ROI. So it's not about "free everything" it's about using free x as an incentive to boost the economy.
AreaCode000 4 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
nice upload, friedman was a criminal and should have been ashamed of himself, i also like your name as the uploader.
JagjeetMann 2 days ago
Comment removed
JagjeetMann 2 days ago
He didn't answer the question as to if he ever had a doubt about Capitalism. If he had said no then it would obviously be a lie. Also, the Soviet Union beat America into space, and most of the history of mankind took place before Capitalism. Just saying..
unifiedreality 4 days ago
@unifiedreality That is because while 65% of the Russian population had no food, all of their taxes were going to war efforts and Scientific development.
pwuint12 3 days ago
@pwuint12 You're talking about the actions of a non-democratic elite.
unifiedreality 2 days ago
@unifiedreality Socialism is a branch of Communism. Democracy does not exist in Communism. [USSR is a perfect example and well known of this]. I myself do not agree with the main idea of Democracy [ Mob Rule ] But I do agree with democratic ideals. Such as the freedoms defined in the founding documents of America and other Republics. The Elite would be extreme leftists who employ the gov't agencies that utilize socialism for greed and self interest.
pwuint12 2 days ago
@pwuint12 Seriously, you need to get your facts straight, if you want to debate people on socialism vs capitalism. You look like a fool. Quote from you "Socialism is a branch of communism". Again your "facts" are wrong. Socialist ideas have been around since classical antiquity, and modern socialist roots go all the way back to the french revolution. That was at least 25 years before Karl Marx was even born. You're why people see capitalist (like me) as arrogant and ignorant... con't
rocknroll19842 1 day ago
@pwuint12 You don't even know why you hate socialism, yet you dismiss the entire philosophy and the people who support it. Like it or not socalist make some points, and they should be taken into consideration. You are so arrogant in your beliefs, and denounce all other ideologies so fervently. You don't even know what you're talking about when it comes ideals you do believe in, like democractic ideals. Mob Rule is not even close being a proper description of democracy...con't
rocknroll19842 1 day ago
@pwuint12 If it was mob rule then there would be no point in having elections. It is also interesting that you have denounced leftist and say they would use government agencies that utilize socialism for greed and self interest... The main goal for true leftist is to create an egalitarian society. Thomas Paine was a leftist, and his "elite" views earned him the title of "The father of the american revolution", you dumb fuck. It is so sad how little you know... con't
rocknroll19842 1 day ago
@pwuint12 Actually no, democracy is a type of government and socialism is an economic theory. It can quite easily be argued that putting civic utilities in private hands is very undemocratic because it isolates those utilities from the majority.
unifiedreality 1 day ago
this video should be re-titled to communism vs. capitalism. Milton Friedman cited only communist countries. there is a very big difference between socialism and communism. socialism still has some free market, just not totally unregulated.
rocknroll19842 4 days ago
@rocknroll19842 Socialism does not include free market to any degree. In Socialism, even the most moderate of it; the Government controls the economic regulations, they decide how much you are taxed and where your taxdollars go, that is the complete opposite of a free market. In any socialist state, the head of that state is in complete fiscal power.
pwuint12 3 days ago
@pwuint12 Well, that is not exactley true. Socialism is actually impossible to truly define, there are many different styles of socialism. Under socialism; state-directed economies, market socialism, social democricies, & self-managed economies all have a presence of free market. Communists see socialism as the stage before the full blown proletariat run communist state has ended all forms of capitalism. Socialsim is monochromatic. Yet, you paint it with blunt absolute strokes.
rocknroll19842 2 days ago
@rocknroll19842 Socialism is one colour; Leftist. The colour of failure, poverty, and loss. Yes, socialism has many aspects, but it all connects to the central dogma; redistribution and control. Socialism, the idea, does not contain any free market. However, how a leader USES socialism may adapt to minute acceptance of small free market commerce. Conclusively, Socialism leads to gov't agencies controlling the economy, and market Socialism.
pwuint12 2 days ago
@pwuint12 Ok, I don't care to argue with you. I am 100% a pro free market capitalist. But you need to do your research, Fact: Socialism is impossible to define, becuase it has no central dogma, none. It is and has always been a political philosophy. Socialism is an idea of a soceity based on cooperation over competition. There is no scientific structured way to implement socialism, it is a philosophy. As such people interpret it, and try to implement it vastly different ways.
rocknroll19842 2 days ago
@rocknroll19842 Capitalism has no central dogma either. It isn't true that all people are greedy either, most are just trying to not be ripped off by whoever pays for their starvation wages, who would be a guy like Milton Freidman.
HavidDagstrom 2 days ago
@HavidDagstrom I never said capitalism had a central dogma. Capitalism is just as much idealistic as socialism. All styles lof government/economies are based on a certain philosophy. Freidman dedicated his entire life to public service & economic education(which he won a nobel peace prize for). oh yeah, and he had a huge hand in repealing the draft so young men weren't forced into fighting wars they didn't believe in. he also never worked for any private companies.... con't
rocknroll19842 2 days ago
@HavidDagstrom after he left his work for the public, he spent the next 30+ years teaching at the university of chicago. So how did a guy like Freidman rip off anyone? Actually he did his best to make a sound and stabilized economy in the u.s. that would help people as much as possible. Learn your facts before you trash a great man... and all humans are greedy. Let me ask you a question to prove his/my point, do you wish for radical terrorist/terrorist cells to be eradicated?
rocknroll19842 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HavidDagstrom after he left his work for the public, he spent the next 30+ years teaching at the university of chicago. So how did a guy like Freidman rip off anyone? Actually he did his best to make a sound and stabilized economy in the u.s. that would help people as much as possible. Learn your facts before you trash a great man... and all humans are greedy. Let me ask you a question to prove his/my point, do you wish for radical terrorist/terrorist cells to be eradicated?
rocknroll19842 2 days ago
@rocknroll19842 By practice Socialism does have a definition. Yes, it has branches, but the central DOGMA of it is the redistribution of wealth, equality [social equality and labour ] and government agency interventionism. Socialism CAN and IS defined by this type of practice. They may implement in an array of different formats, but all for the same purpose and by the same type of policies; big government, redistribution, and social equality. Research? Common sense.
pwuint12 2 days ago
@pwuint12 I really have to explain this to you again? Socialism is a PHILOSOPHY of a society based on cooperation over competition. How a government decides to implement their interpretation of said philosophy is what gives you big government, redistribution etc. Governments who try to put socialism into practice have a central dogma in which they think will accomplish their interpretation of the philosophy. You are trying to define the indefinable, that is beyond common sense.
rocknroll19842 2 days ago
@rocknroll19842 Incorrect. Based upon the interpretation of states that have utilized Socialism, it HAS a definition. Socialism is not a religious text that can be interpreted ten thousand different ways, it is interpreted by how it affects the daily lives of constituents, government control, and nationalization of the economy. It is purely common sense to interpret Socialism as how it is used and always has been used. It always has been used to expand gov't and to control.
pwuint12 1 day ago
@rocknroll19842 Socialism is NOT a philosophy. Socialism is an economic SYSTEM. Socialism has never been used differently, it has been used the same since it's creation; give what you accumulate to others, let others make your decisions, etc. It all circulates around the common principles of government interventionalism and government power.
pwuint12 1 day ago
@pwuint12 Ok seriously, this is the last time I tell you this. I have already acknowledged that modern socialism is an economic system 50 times. But what you can't seem to get through you head; is that the Socialist economic system is based on a POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY. The philosophy of a society based on cooperation rather than competition. You even proved my right when you say "based upon the interpretation of states that have utilized socalism, has definition"... con't
rocknroll19842 1 day ago
@pwuint12 Then you go on to say that socialism has only been used on way, and never been used differently, seriously? There are 5 different economic models based on socialism that have been used in modern countries. Not to mention the 5 major classifications of socialistic economies. Then there are the socialist political movements that all have a different interpretations of the political philosophy of socialism. Should I keep going? you need to study your history, you are clueless.
rocknroll19842 1 day ago
Comment removed
Delorian82 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GREED: intense and selfish desire for wealth, power, or food.
I am not greedy I don't have any desire to have billions or even millions of dollars, all I want is an equal, a fair share of the work and wealth. I don't want to live in a mansion and drive million dollar cars, All I want is a decent living and life as a free man, I don't want to be a wage slave working like an animal so some Milton Friedman guy gets to live like a king, while me and my family live like dogs. FUCK YOU MILTON!
Cristoviolanalgonas1 1 week ago
Comment removed
Cristoviolanalgonas1 1 week ago
If you're an enlightened human being you're probably a socialist.
12Ominous 1 week ago
@12Ominous Enlightened, and don't accept human self-interest that everyone has, or how economies succeed and fail.
nyctoo 1 week ago
@12Ominous If you hate your country, you're also probably a socialist.
pwuint12 6 days ago
@pwuint12 What if you live in a socialist country? I love my country, its socialist in its outlook, that's enough for me.
12Ominous 5 days ago
@12Ominous We can hope it isn't Greece, the country which is now in recovery from bankruptcy. Who bailed them out? Conservative Germany. Left Wing politics don't work. What country do you live in?
pwuint12 3 days ago
The whole fundamental of this system is the question is that are social rights granted on a clean slate? The whole fight between political parties are based on the Second Bill of Rights, that is the debate if citizens are entitled to the rights. This is the debate about rights and democracy, not only economic systems. This is much larger than we can expect, the entire financial crisis is caused by so much shit,all caused by both economic systems, so we should have checks and balances.
MissourHanzai 5 days ago
"So far discovered..." - Mr. Friedman, 1979. We live not only in the 21st century but the year is 2012. I think we are now beginning to see a shred of light on new alternatives; RBE anyone...?
OArmaKeonO 2 weeks ago
@OArmaKeonO If you are referring to the Resource Based Economy, it can't work. Its another form of Socialism. By promoting "usership" instead of ownership, there is no longer any incentive to innovate, work harder, etc. Besides, some system of government has to manage that system. As the old adage goes, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. It has happened before, and it would happen again. How many times do we need to try the same failed ideas with diff names?
anvilsnare 1 week ago
@anvilsnare I cannot say it will or will not work with absolute certainty (no more than I can predict the future of our mixed economy). Although, we could at-least try, if not on a global scale than surely on a small scale... an island perhaps. My greatest fear is that it might actually work; it might work so extravagantly that fearful governments so corrupt and power hungry will somehow pervert it from within. Somehow smearing RBE as the enemy, and reporting it as a cult or evil.
OArmaKeonO 1 week ago
Capitalism = exploitation Socialism = cooperation
mba2ceo 2 weeks ago
@mba2ceo lol, expand it...
Eclipsepoland 2 weeks ago
@mba2ceo
I'm sorry. It appears that you have been brainwashed by the government education system.
Allow me to help you.
Crony Capitalism = Exploitation and Manipulation
Socialism = Laziness and Mediocrity
Capitalism = Cooperation and Lawful
karozans 2 weeks ago
@mba2ceo Explain how socialism achieves cooperation, because I can fully explain how capitalism achieves cooperation and destroys exploitation.
treason3005 2 weeks ago
@treason3005 ... if U could U would have already ... but feel free to entertain me how exploiting other is cooperation
mba2ceo 2 weeks ago
this man is a genius. yea capitalism has its flaws but there are no alternatives that work better. my advice would be to work hard and have faith in God. if you do that then whatever happens was meant to be.
scarsofbravery 2 weeks ago
@scarsofbravery any idiot that believes in Capitalism is stupid enough to belief in GOD ... BOTH fantasies ... THAT is why the RICH win.
mba2ceo 2 weeks ago
@scarsofbravery ... BTW FOOCH GOD if he created me to serve others.
mba2ceo 2 weeks ago
Donahue exemplifies the illogical, brains-full-of-mush, empathy-obsessed hypocritical leftist ideologue...
MrPaevo 3 weeks ago
@MrPaevo empathy obsessed? empathy is what spurs everything good- kindness, utilitarian ideology, etc - how is equality illogical?
Instead of promoting doing everything for money and a materialistic nature why not promote people doing things for virtue
JaysEpiphany 6 days ago
Socialsm is a system of economics that is run through a central mechanism. The nazi, Facist and communist all operated under nationally central controlled economics.
No society even a capitalist one is complete free of socialist elements. There always going to be infrastructures and services that will have social importance.
This not the same as saying everything should be run from a collective system. Milton Friedman is correct in his assertions of free markets helping the poor.
bighands69 3 weeks ago
@bighands69 free market is an economic model that concludes that producers are in position to extract profit from the goods they sell and the consumers are able to acquire the goods at the cost of production. could you tell me what is an example of a free market that actually functions in the reality and how it helps the poor?
TheHagitta 2 weeks ago
@TheHagitta Your local flea-market is as close an example of how a free-market system would work if government allowed all markets to operate under the same conditions. Market forces would drive prices lower and drive wages higher, because workers will tend to work for the highest salary available to them at time of hire, and consumers will tend to buy products for the lowest price at time of purchase. Competing businesses will force these conditions on each other, unbeknownst.
treason3005 2 weeks ago
@ExterminateKIKEscum
Nowhere in my post did I state my personal political affiliation.
I am a free-market guy, like yourself
ruvvjub 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
tobythewonderseal 4 weeks ago
@beauxq WELL SAID BROTHER WELL SAID
riseingstardust 4 weeks ago
@beauxq I know I seemed a bit self-contradicting, saying -ism is how to manage money while anarchism not dealing with money, but anarchism is an outlier; in other words it seemed strange to even acknowledge it, unless you believe nations should have revolutions. Unless you believe that... I don't see any reason to have brought it up.
andresan3277 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
beauxq 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@andresan3277 My main point here is only to get people to avoid obviously false general statements like your "The point in any -ism is how to make money." The things that are most hurting society have nothing to do with the economic system. What hurts society the most is people holding on to ideas like that. People should choose their words more carefully and question themselves more. If people do that, it won't matter whether we use capitalism or socialism or anarchism.
beauxq 3 weeks ago
@beauxq Anarchism is the belief of the removal of gov't and any form of a society, but it doesn't deal with money-just the ruling aspect; unless I misread the definition and didn't see the econ. principles. So, your claim of my point being refuted isn't very clear to me. If you were to make an innovative creation, wouldn't you want credit and compensation?
andresan3277 4 weeks ago
@CitizenPlusPlus That's true, Wozniak was an innovative engineer, but the point is still clear. I have to agree, people from back then were much more genuine and clever in innovations, now all we have are improvements of the old. Like the Bible says, "There is nothing new...", only new approaches. It is a shame.
andresan3277 4 weeks ago
@thumpybones I wasn't advocating anarchy, I was just using it as an example to show that your statement is wrong. Less capitalism does not necessarily mean more government control.
Capitalism reduces the opportunity of people supporting something out of the kindness of their hearts, because people don't have the time or resources to support something out of the kindness of their hearts, because they have to go to work, and they have to pay for their food and shelter.
beauxq 4 weeks ago
@beauxq Less capitalism IS more government control. More regulations, more taxes, more barriers to entry (business).
Capitalism increases charitable giving. When taxes are lower, charitable donations go up. People have less time and fewer resources when the tax burden is higher.
thumpybones 4 weeks ago
@thumpybones I just showed you an example of how less capitalism isn't more government control. Are you just going to pretend that I didn't?
beauxq 4 weeks ago
@beauxq Yes anarchy is zero government control and no capitalism either. So? Happy New Year!
thumpybones 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
beauxq 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thumpybones So, that means your statement is wrong. Less capitalism is not more government control.
beauxq 4 weeks ago
@beauxq Oops, one other thing, if I may. Please watch this video again. Especially from 1:05. Thank you.
thumpybones 4 weeks ago
Its better to be rich and unhappy than poor and unhappy. bye
LukasX62S 3 weeks ago
@JoshMan522 And who will be this arbiter of how much money a person has is "too much"? You? The government? Sorry, but that's not how I want to live. As long as one earns money honestly, there should be no limits. Wealth is created, money is not a finite pie. If a person is successful financially, it doesn't limit another man's ability to earn. Not in a FREE society at least.
thumpybones 4 weeks ago
@thumpybones there doesn't have to be an "arbiter" to decide how much people make. With decent labour, environmental, and judicial laws you can have a society in which someone could be free to earn as much as they are able (not as much as they want) because they have to share in their profits with the people that help create the wealth (those who sweat for it), they can't simply uproot the business and go overseas, because the "workers" are seen as partners BECAUSE THEY WORK FOR IT
JoshMan522 4 weeks ago
@JoshMan522 "Earn as much as they're able, not as much as they want"? "Share in their profits"? Communism failed. Happy New Year! Ron Paul in 2012!
thumpybones 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
JoshMan522 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thumpybones In any civilized DEMOCRACY there are regulations put on greed. Capitalism as we know it is not democratic, and needs fixin' as it is. It is wrong to pay people shit and work their fingers to the bone and, in turn, get rich, while they are demoralized. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, it is good to create jobs, yeah, yeah, yeah... but when does a worker become a slave? Workers should have fair vote in their workplaces. The unbridled fatcat saying he's trickling down his wealth... barf!
JoshMan522 4 weeks ago
@thumpybones Socialism is NOT the government takeover of the capitalist class. Socialism is the worker takeover of the capitalist class. It is you making the decisions in the work place and in the public space. Not the government. And not the capitalist. Socialism is direct democracy. Capitalism is where one has to shut the frell up when the boss is an ignoramus and our senator is a corporate shill; because we still need the work.
CitizenPlusPlus 1 month ago
@beauxq Well how else do ideas get implemented in any society? The point in any -ism is how to make money. Didn't Hitler go after money trying to implement his Socialist "utopia". If I make a good idea, I want credit and compensation- if not you wouldn't have a computer, electricity, or Steve Jobs.
andresan3277 1 month ago
@andresan3277 Frell Steve Jobs. Wozniak was a genius. But Gates and Jobs have both set the computer industry back decades, from what it could have achieved. Which really is a long dark age in computer years. Its really sad for the people who develop this electronic stuff and see so much wasted potential.
CitizenPlusPlus 1 month ago
@andresan3277 "The point in any -ism is how to make money." This is the problem with so many people's thinking today. They're too limited in the possibilities they consider. The point of anarchism is not how to make money, because money wouldn't be worth anything. So your statement is wrong.
beauxq 1 month ago
I respect Friedmans intelligence, although I do not agree with all of his views. However, I find any video that has an us vs them theme to it and only one side of the fence is present doing the talking is always biased. You may as well have a video "Republicans vs Democrats" with only a Republican being asked about both sides.
bodinian 1 month ago
Socialism always brings unbridled misery, poverty, and lack of liberty.
8thRRFS 1 month ago
@8thRRFS sorry i think you misspell that its spell capitalism but the description is correct
juanlmesl 1 month ago
@juanlmesl Yeah, so go live in Cuba or North Korea, genius. Then you'll find out "how great" it is to live under a collectivist state where the government owns all means of production and they tell you where to live, where to work and what to read. Idiot!
8thRRFS 1 month ago
@8thRRFS North Korea is off the charts and doesn't even enter into the debate as capitalist or socialist.
For Cuba, 90% of the sugar plantations were owned by American Corporations b4 the 1959 revolution. Since then growth skyrocketed with now an ave lifespan of 77 yrs. While the revolution is far from complete in Cuba. The question isn't why didn't democratic revolution succeed in Cuba? (Its just started). But why hasn't democratic revolution succeeded in America?
CitizenPlusPlus 1 month ago
Who's the next Milton Friedman?
nottinmatterz2day 1 month ago
@nottinmatterz2day ... whoever the ELITES choose as their spokesman.
mba2ceo 2 weeks ago
@mba2ceo im not sure the 'elites' wanted Friedman to speak about true capitalism and ending the ELITES private paper money federal reserve bank, in fact he is against the elites, we have crony capitalism today not free markets.
guerilla1985 1 week ago
@guerilla1985 Crony capitalism is a result of government.
boshembechle 6 days ago
@boshembechle And the total collapse of economies and empires is the result of Socialism.
pwuint12 6 days ago
If I only had his brain I would be a billionaire by now.
vonGleichenT 1 month ago
Anyone know the song that plays in the background?
Tzumachiru 1 month ago
I really don't think that enough oxygen ever got to Donahue's brain to enable him ever to question his love affair with statist, slaver regimes.
Wikipunani 1 month ago
It truly is a mind crime how little most Americans know about Capitalism and Freedom. Milton Friedman we miss you.
Danlovesmakinvids 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
What a brilliant, well spoken, and patient man. Wow. I just found my life's role-model.
PhantoMPhreeK92 1 month ago
The universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements: energy, matter, and enlightened self interest.
Tiwaking 1 month ago
Milton is just a con artist for the FED---His trickle down theory has sucked the life out of the middle class..
riseingstardust 1 month ago
@riseingstardust Milton Friedman opposed the Fed, just as Ron Paul does.
thumpybones 4 weeks ago
What's the difference between incentive and greed?
Appleholic1 1 month ago
@Freethinker12341 I smell a Socialist hippie, I'm guessing that's you?
SuckDeezNutzBitch 1 month ago
Milton Friedman was an arrogant cock. Einstein didn't do what he did under order from government bureaucrats? True. By the government did fund his experiments on numerous occasions. On a completely unrelated note, Einstein published a paper in 1949 called "Why Socialism", pretty much advocating for socialism. How ironic lol Milton Friedman bashing socialism and using Einstein to back him up and Einstein was a socialist lmao
Freethinker12341 1 month ago
Comment removed
Freethinker12341 1 month ago
Socialism has been responsible for the greatest human atrocities in history. It's people have been oppressed, and suffer in ways beyond definition. Capitalism has raised more people out of poverty than any governmental system in history. People escape socialist countries fleeing to Capitalist countries. not the other way around. What is there to understand?
Trauncher 1 month ago
@Trauncherwhat thats the same staff that they teach you in school, its called brain washing. socialism never existed as it should because the governments who implemented them where doing it their own way. i mean just because socialism promotes public ownership does not mean that private property gets taken away. so yea they did it wrong if you ask me. every one cuba, north korea ussr. socialism its really no different from capitalism, differences is that people in generals get more benefits
juanlmesl 1 month ago
one day we will a a new form a govt and we will look back on this man and see ignorance and stupidity.....Until that day comes I will say he is a intelligent man
Theozzie11 1 month ago
Capitalism = Responsibility
Socialism = Lazy
Fascism = Evil
SuckDeezNutzBitch 1 month ago 2
@SuckDeezNutzBitch you = stupid, bigoted, ignorant
Freethinker12341 1 month ago
Call what is happening today all the names you can think of. Left Wing, Right wing, fasicism, Socialism, Yada yada yada!!! Simply put it is pure evil. No other explaination. History is repeating itself. God Bless, Walk in the light!
tkd4zgqg 1 month ago
I love how this guy put phil in his place.
ruj1970 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A pederast is a homosexual man who conquers boys.
The perversion is pederasty.
YourUTubeMonitor 1 month ago
The existence of paranormal phenomenon is in no way contingent upon whether any individual believes. As a modern American woman from Juarez I exercise my right to "go Mexican."
YourUTubeMonitor 1 month ago
Nobody can tell when the next terrorist will explode.
YourUTubeMonitor 1 month ago
Very few Floridians cross the straits in leaky, home-made boats to seek fortune and political sanctuary in Cuba.
YourUTubeMonitor 1 month ago
Well considering trickle down 'voodoo" economics are considered failures nowadays.....
But in this interview he is not addressing how to improve the US or capitalism, just the argument "Democracy good. Socialism bad."
plaidchuck 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Adopting communist ideology from the west is the only copy-crime the Chinese had committed, with much regrets".
-Chan Chau Taow (1970- )
taow222328 1 month ago
Socialism vs socialism is not the issue. This is covering up the real battle which is plutocracy vs democracy. Milton Friedman is just another deluded lackey of the plutocratic state who lost his humanity long ago and doesn't recognize it.
mujaku 1 month ago
Every time I watch this, and it's been many times (as well as watching the entire Friedman/Donahue interview) I am in awe of this man, his wisdom and ability to cut through the inept, false, and failed ideas of the big government society wishers. Socialism has been tried over and over in the course of human civilization and its goals of having complete economic equality with a high standard of living is totally a pie in the sky dream. It always results in a lower standard of living for ALL.
Betcsbirds 1 month ago
socialism sucks
belke05 1 month ago
@RememberPantera lol thanks man
I'm a big fan of Pantera as well, so keep rockin man \m/
ruvvjub 1 month ago
I'm all for voluntary socialism, but coercive socialism both reduces freedom and creates suffering. Personal and economic freedom are the path to the greatest prosperity.
ElJefer 2 months ago
@ElJefer
Isn't voluntary socialism also known as charity?
karozans 2 months ago
@karozans Well, voluntary socialism is collectivization of resources by willing people, like Israeli Kibuttzes
ElJefer 1 month ago
its wrong to compare free capitalism with dictator owned coutries.
Troforso 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Desiderio Alberto Arnaz y de Acha's insistence on worshiping Babalú-Ayé drove Lucille Désirée Ball into the hollow, hairy, stinking armpits of Gary Morton. [I believe that long-crapped-out actors Richard Egan & Bruce Cabot were the same guy. He'll be crapping out soon. He who needs to crap out.]
YourUTubeMonitor 2 months ago
Marxism? Owenism? Lovely. Let's device a 5-yr. plan to distribute oleo to the burbs by unelected central planners. They shall determine how much dog food & penicillin & antiseptic will be appropriated to sector 32. Who needs the free market anyway? Let 1982 Czechoslovakia be our touchstone. The Czechs loved waiting in line 7 hrs. for a pound of fatty, fly-blown ham. It broke the monotony of a grueling day of idling 6 hours in line for 2 gallons of petrol.
YourUTubeMonitor 2 months ago 12
@YourUTubeMonitor Yeah, we get it, you don't like or agree with Socialism. We get it man... we get it.
MindCrimesInc 2 months ago
@MindCrimesInc And nobody should
ElJefer 2 months ago
@MindCrimesInc the 100 million people murdered by marxist regimes, and the hundreds of millions of people oppressed by them don't like it much either. Get a clue.
Trauncher 1 month ago
@YourUTubeMonitor Damn straight. We should do the Christian thing: each pursue our own greed, lie, cheat and steal from our neighbor, sell our souls and the heart of our nation to corporate interests, and then laugh at the poor, the hungry and the homeless as they die on the street from lack of health care.
Yay lassiez-faire Capitalism!
Esoteric0714 1 month ago
@Esoteric0714 :
I am I, not we. I am not a worker-bee nor a drone. I do not belong to the hive. My labor is mine, not yours. Stealing is a crime. Change your ways.
YourUTubeMonitor 1 month ago
@YourUTubeMonitor lmfao, take your own advice pal. I'll believe that "you" are not "we" when you stop using the socialized police, fire department and libraries, and when you stop donating to your local church, commie.
Esoteric0714 1 month ago
@Esoteric0714 : You write of yourself in the third person. Why?
YourUTubeMonitor 1 month ago
@YourUTubeMonitor You cornered the market on stupid.
fanadfilms 1 month ago
@YourUTubeMonitor People are quick to point out where socialism fails instead of where it succeeds.
1019079 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Science fr. "scire" to know
Theory fr. "theoria" to suppose
By definition there's no such thing as a scientific theory. Either you know or you don't. On the other hand, if it's the goal of collectivists to destroy traditional Western Culture then muddling about with language is the way to go.
YourUTubeMonitor 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
HER ENORMOUS INCOME {Able-bodied man seeking able-bodied woman for procreation. Candidate must be fecund.}
I remember working @ a job 5 years & being barked orders by someone hired a half hour before. {It's Bermuda's public triangle repeated: internal editing mechanisms, clock-works, running through women's underwear in a silly mood.}
YourUTubeMonitor 2 months ago
Through my experience of studying both free-market economics and socialism I have come to the conclusion that those who advocate free-markets, or capitalism, define socialism very differently than those who advocate socialism itself, and vice-avers.
And that those who advocate socialism define capitalism very differently than those who advocate capitalism, and vice-avers.
We need to understand each others' philosophies before we just hate each other y'all.
ruvvjub 2 months ago 10
@ruvvjub History is the best definer of Socialism. 100 million murdered people under socialism and the immeasurable suffering of people under socialism ends the debate.
Trauncher 1 month ago
@Trauncher Of please. How many people died in the name of Capitalism? How many innocent lives were crushed by Americans in Latin America or Vietnam? How many people were killed by Capitalists and Mercantilists in Africa? In North America? In Asia? How many wars were waged for the lust of gold and the rights to rape and pillage the vanquished?
Esoteric0714 1 month ago
@Esoteric0714 : Pillaging & murder are not capitalism.
YourUTubeMonitor 1 month ago
@YourUTubeMonitor ROFLMFAO. Read "Open veins of Latin America".
2iorj32r 1 month ago
Comment removed
YourUTubeMonitor 1 month ago
@Trauncher I'm not in favor of socialism, I am just trying to bridge the gap between two radically different ways of thinking and understanding.
ruvvjub 1 month ago
@ruvvjub I don't mean to be critical but the fact is that socialism sounds good but the economics of it are impossible to maintain.
Danlovesmakinvids 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
@Danlovesmakinvids Yeah I agree with Milton Friedman here, I am definitely in favor of free-market economics, not controlled economics. There is no sure way to govern the market, so just let it be.
My comment was merely trying to bridge the gap of thinking from those who are independents (capitalists) to those who are dependents (socialists).
ruvvjub 1 month ago
@ruvvjub thats the human race for ya
Jodasie 1 month ago
@ruvvjub sorry, i dont need to know why a thief takes, theft is always wrong.
surrealnumber 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ruvvjub sorry, i dont need to know why a thief takes, theft is always wrong.
surrealnumber 1 month ago
@ruvvjub Y'all need to look at the facts y'all. Y'all benefit better under capitalism y'all, whether you like or not y'all. Y'all.
PadrethePio 1 month ago
@PadrethePio I'm in favor of capitalism, I never said I wasn't you intolerant asshole.
ruvvjub 1 month ago
@ruvvjub understood. but capitalism sucks LOL
juanlmesl 1 month ago
Comment removed
ruvvjub 2 months ago
Let us champion collectivism by whatever form, as WE expect to be paid commensurate with our abilities. Collectivism doesn't provide for eye doctors making more money than garbage men. Collectivism provides NO incentive for product innovation. In the Soviet system intellectual property was shamelessly stolen from the West. The red Russians & the red Chinese couldn't manufacture a decent car, a modern commode nor keep market shelves stocked.
YourUTubeMonitor 2 months ago
DHARMA DRAMA—Particle board is to lumber as tater tots are to whole potatoes. Who needs the public john at the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C. to take a greasy dump when Thomas Woodrow Wilson's coffin is in the open just a dump away?
YourUTubeMonitor 2 months ago
@YourUTubeMonitor Hahaha...What? :l
MindCrimesInc 2 months ago
[Let's crap in buckets for all the good that'd do. Oh yeah: Let scrap...let's crap...room in Rome; Roman room...] What would be the total tax burden upon me in a socialists' utopia? Might I travel freely? Own guns? Refuse serums? Heat my house with wood? Grow vegetables? Drink unpasteurized milk?
YourUTubeMonitor 2 months ago
@YourUTubeMonitor I don't comment often on this video but, after reading your post I have only one question.... WTF are talking about? Explain. Socialism doesn't mean "anti-freedom."
MindCrimesInc 2 months ago
@MindCrimesInc : Your policy of not commenting often is prudent.
YourUTubeMonitor 2 months ago
einstein believed in socialism, he said it himself.
ColossalCollapse 2 months ago
@ColossalCollapse irrelevant.
26Francis92 2 months ago
@26Francis92 not really irrelevent sir considering friedman mentioned Einstein in the video there. I just taught id make that point to youtubers, that Einstein did believe in socialism maybe not the soviet communist model of it, but democratic socialism was his ideal.
ColossalCollapse 2 months ago
@ColossalCollapse his ideal could have been mass slavery, it still wouldnt relate to the point friedman was making.
26Francis92 2 months ago
Wasn't it a surprise that Phil the great could not answer the question that liberals love to spew their diatribe. Wish i could have seen the whole show. Milton puts them to shame and they are left wondering how to swing the discussion to a side street as when they meet him head on, he is driving the Mack truck and they are in a Yugo.
.
mpl632 2 months ago
Anyone who thinks State control is better than private control needs to go to Eastern Europe and meet a few people who went through state control.
Everything is achieved by force!
In a private owned economy everything is achieved by persuasion and power is only held when the customer is happy. Everyone can choose what they want without having a gun pointed at them their whole lives. Corporations can only exist by providing service.
Don't confuse Capitalism with Corporatism like Michael Moore
Freedomnotforced 2 months ago
There is a huge discrepancy between the hypothetical ideal of "Free Markets" supported by strident libertarians, and their actual manifestations in the real world. People can be told the truth, that a truly free market has never existed, yet they'll listen to this crap by Friedman. Look at Friedman's ideological consequences on the real world as seen in Reaganomics. I lived through "The Reagan Years," and only Margaret Thatcher succeeded in smashing down working people in England better!
CosmicFork 2 months ago
We should officially start to spell out "Free" with an I.. =D
Airplay89 2 months ago
@bulldogger u r so right,, idiotic was of resoning
sonjasprem 2 months ago