fool. there hasn't been a free market in at least 20 years! Damn journalists were right to call Bush a neocon. His policies were not conservative just republican. I can still hear those words he spoke in an inteview during his last days in office "I gave up on free market principles" damn right you did! Obama's trillion dollar defecits is what will really kill peoples 401ks and any life savings. yes lets fix unpaid debts with money we don't have. then we'll fix those with higher debts!
woohoo, Friedman called it like it is, "the only reason foreigners would start dumping dollars would be if we started printing money like crazy" amen. word to Obama"I guess he really wants to turn the United States into Kenya" Ben Bernanke and the democrats need to know if we don't restore fiscal sanity, we will have double digit inflation and high unemployment. Which is a conundrum to Keynesians. This situation will be worse than the Great Depression: I guess we have to bury Keynes a 3rd time!
Ok, so assuming free market is a half way to reach ultimate freedom, are you free if you live in a city in which you have to lock yourself inside your home to avoid being robbed?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Milton's unwarranted monopoly on economical policies for the last two decades has delayed development of models that might actually work for majority of the people. His ideology also has distracted many smart economists from working -they spent years promoting an ideology instead of creating new ideas. Let's move on shall we?
why is there a noble prize for economics? Economists are simpletons. I dont care what books this guy writes this debate was over 30 years ago and we(canadians) still suffer under socialism so what the hell does this guy do for a living. Europe can re-examine its "model" but they will still vote like idiot euro shit.
@Chrisdow...People who cannot spell or use proper grammar are "simpletons." Economics is one the most important subjects there is. It creates the environment needed to pursue other studies. You should go back to commenting on Soldier Boy videos because this is not your strong suit.
should they not have the "freedom" to be socialists? lol. Don't get me wrong, I think socialists are dead wrong, but if they have no means to interfere with my freedoms, they can assemble and do their idiotic redistributing as much as they want.
No, they should be allowed to belive in whatever they want to, but they should not be allowed to make a law in any country, because there is only one true humanitarian system - capitalism + leseferism. There is no other way in that matter.
My bad, sorry - english is not my native language, so forgive me mistakes.
But to be honest, I can agree with what Agusto Pinochet did in Chile. Sometimes we must think like: "There's no freedom for the enemies of fredom.", because (as we can see now), they will be taking our freedom piece by piece, leading us to the worst kind of slavery - slavery hidden behind democratic laws and "modern" society.
The president does not have authority over fiscal policy. It is the congress who controls that matter. Blame those in congress since that is where the fault belongs.
"There would be only one thing that would cause them to do that, and that would be inflation, if our monetary authority; started to print to much money; that might do it. But thats not gonna happen."
Well, that says it all, and for those of you who don't know about this inflation; the money supply has increased by ALOT in the past 4 months since these bailouts started. All the right conditions have been met for foreigners to dump US dollars.
I didn't suggest that he advocated anything that led to this crisis. On the contrary, I think he was very right to criticize the Fed and thought that it should be abolished. I'd just be thrilled to know what he would make of this current situation.
And of course I wanted to say that i do not 100% aggree with Milton. Although I think he was without a doubt a fantastic person. Champion of free economy as it was said at the beginning. And my concernes are just technicals, not clouding the whole libertarian disciple image of Milton Friedman.
Im actually confused and hope someone would explain this concept to me:
I come from a very liberal High school and my econ teacher this year says that Bush cutting taxes was a horrible thing to do, especially in the time of war. and has increased deficit spending and national debt.
Coz it made deficit even bigger, and that is an decreasing FED interest rates and inflationary action. And what can be the outcome of too low interest rates, and bank loans for everyone I think U can see by Yourself
Isnt bigger deficit bad? And one of the reason why we are in this crisis is because the banks were loaning everyone carelessly with low interest rates. I still dont see why friedman would think that this is a good idea.
How does cutting taxes increase the deficit? If the govt. is taking in less money then how can the defict increase? Wouldn't you need more money to spend to increase the debt? Seems to me it is not the amount of revenue coming into the govt. hands that causes the debt to increase or decrease but instead the manner in which the revenue is spent.
If you could explin you reasoning behind your conclusion it would be a great help.
The deficit can always insrease, coz govt don't have to have money he spend. It is called deficit financing, and in that king of a situation govt is borrowing or (more often) printing money (directly printing or selling bondg which is more or less the same). So if the govt is taking less money and do not cut spendings at the same time deficit will always increase.
If that wasn't clear enough, or U have some other questions I will be happy to answer.
When govt print money new cash appear on the market. Govt didn'd had that money, they just made completly new ones and now they can use them (clearly inflationary move). When gov sell bonds more or less the same situation appear - they sell sth they dotn have and they use money earned on it. When time comes to buy them back they sell more bonds to pay those earlier and to finance present deficit.
Tax cuts lead to increased federal receipts. Problem is Congress spent it all and more and Bush sold out. Between 2000 and 2006, pre-tax income for the top 1 percent of tax returns grew by 34 percent, while pre-tax income for the bottom 50 percent increased by 22 percent. All figures are nominal (not adjusted for inflation).
Numbers courtesy of the Heritage Foundation (numbers in billions of dollars):
"only one thing would cause them to dump American assets: inflation". And what are we doing now? Printing a lot of money to pay for assets priced only by their sellers (reverse auction).
well they want keynesian economics, deficit spending, huge new powers to the fed, and redistribution of wealth- unless george bush does it- in which case it's grounds for complaints---
Your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to continue facing and fighting the beast through acknowledgment of the true realities occurring here and your refusal to be the pawns of the dark agencies. Each truth you accept shall make you strong. Each one you teach of the truths shall make you all stronger. In the end, it will be fine. If you do not choose to accept the mission then all I can say to you ismea culpa, mea culpa, the die is cast.
"haha good liberal comeback. Bush this, bush that. shit is getting old. Bush is a flaming liberal. he tripled federal spending. increased spending on welfare, war on global poverty crap, "spreading democracy" thats a progressive policy starting all the way back to woodrow wilson, no child left behind, and this stupid bailout plan. thats what i can come with off the top of my head. oh this housing market crash? three words: COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ACT. liberal prints all over it since 1977."
Bush has increased the size and scope of the federal government on an astronomic scale. He rejects free markets. He has no respect for individual liberty, instead turning to government to solve our problems. Sounds like a leftist to me.
His(and McCain's)positions on most issues are remarkably close to those of Obama. Get a clue...take an economics class...and stop voting to steal my freedom.
that, bighitter, should be the real criticisms of george bush- but it would be too self incriminating , so people would rather call him 'flaming' or some other name calling- which isn't an argument or a critique.
You'll notice the person I said that to never responded. Just another zombie repeating the party line, not understanding the ideas that drive policy, nor why those ideas are better than the other side's. Whole lotta cool-aid drinkers out there on both sides and it tears me apart to watch it ruin this country.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Friedman was a brilliant man, but his freemarket fundamentalism/philosphy is also the reason for the crisis of today.
He didnt see the bubble in the house market that was at its peak when this interview was given. Also, his claim that democracy and free market go hand in hand, is not validated of what is now going on in China and Russia.
Excuse me did he say! "We'll never have a government irresponsible enough to drive inflation up" and that Our "economy is doing just dandy" Old fart is hi on methodone or sucking on some corporate opium . being the expert that people dim him to be I can't believe he didn't warn us about the crisis we have right now. which to me kinda indicates he didn't give a fuck cuz he is the 1 that developed modern economic theory of mindless consumption.That only benefits vile imperialist oppressive sytms
Many Republicans, especially the neo-conservatives, have been imposing their social morals on the people while abandoning capitalist views and supporting a more socialist system. Many Republicans these days aren't capitalists.
No, it is absolutely substantiated fact. Look at the increase in unemployment in the areas in which the government mandates a minimum wage. It is "support for one set of workers at the expense of the others."
Plenty of countries with minimum wage and regulations on market forces have low unemployment...pretty selective with your 'facts' there aren't you!...minimum wage for all IS support for ALL workers!! It doesn't necessarily have to impinge on profit for employers, or create inflation...
Here's an idea for all those protectionists out there: What are you afraid of? Do you think American businesses cannot compete? Why not let consumers decide what products they wanna choose, and where they want their products from, instead of the government?
ha yea i know, 6% gain in dollar vs euro. i dont care what people say bernanke is doing a good job and M1, M2 is beginning to level off so all the people who are fretting about inflation will be missing out on obscene profits from dollar appreciation.
But Friedmans Concept was not matched by economic success.The profit stagnation in industrial enterprise worldwide continued.The surge upward of the stock markets everywhere was based not on productive profits but large speculative financial manipulations.The distribution of income worldwide and in countries became very skewed a massive increase in the income of the top 10% especially of the top 1% of the world population but a decline in real income of much of the rest of the world's
Zsylvana, it seems to me that this is exactly what Friedman would want. In his view, the disparity in income distribution is fine, so long as the free market is at work. Free marketers complain whenever governments implement too many social programs for the poor, but they are fine with corporate bailouts a la Bear Stearns. Interesting.
zsylvana,show me the data that shows stock prices that dont correlate with profits. and where do you get the idea of the decline in real income?its just wrong. look at a standard of living in countries like china,india, brazil, poland,and their rise in real income along with their policies of free trade,free markets, which fuel growth and fdi.then look at north korea with its planned,controlled economy riddled with shortages,low standard of living.and ask a bear shareholder if he was bailed out.
ok i dont know anything about this wallerstein and he may or may not have some interesting findings but something i do know since i myself am a financial speculator is that there is some short-term volatile fluctuations due to speculation but in long-term valuations prices always directly correlate with output.and ever since this country abandoned its keynesian mentality in 70s this country has never been so prosperous and standard living so high.redistribution doesnt solve fundemental problems
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Well, at over 3 years old, this interview from the beginning has proven false.
This guy thought back then the dollar was somehow invincible and now we're on the verge of a depression due to excessive credit being given that is backed by nothing.
Charlie Rose was more correct by playing devil's advocate.
false? you have no idea what your talking about. the dollar is the largest reserve currency in the world. core cpi inflation is only 4.18% as of may. q1 inflation is up .6%. credit backed by nothing? wut the hell does that mean. feds enacting loose monetary policy for sake of financial system otherwise we would definitely be in recession but still we are doing relatively good in terms of price stability. look at 1980 with double digit inflation and negative gdp growth.
free enterprise doesn't make "cash" the ultimate king. it makes the person who can MAKE cash the ultimate king. do you know what it takes to MAKE wealth?
you seem like a dirty commie so i guess i'll have to explain.
first it takes a JOB!
then you follow that with EDUCATION!
next. apply INNOVATION.and INVESTMENT/SACRIFICE.
all of these taking SELF DETERMINATION!
successful people MAKE themselves do the things that unsuccessful people will not do.
Milton Friedman was a brilliant man. Sad about his loss. Grateful there are still intelligent men of principle in the world today to carry on: Ron Paul
Unfortunatelly, Friedman aided governments which quashed the freedom to choose of their citizens. Everybody agrees now that F became a propagandist (some call him more elegantly an economic evangelist. Many of this theories are now defunct. His purpose was to sell off government property and make its citizens fend for themselves. Many fell into poverty. Better economists were the ones that came after him to fix his wrongdoings.
Most of it is propaganda, not just the facts. Russia bought back Gazprom because the State couldn't pays bills while the US engaged in two invasions+increased defence spending. So it's not all about economics. Same with the UK, which bought back the railways. All countries go up&down no matter what voodoo economics they practice. It's true the pendulum sometimes goes too far in either direction, both in private and state economics. So it's good to pull them back from either extremism.
We must not forget that 1% of people own 80% of wealth. So you have to entice them to come to you with rick pickings. That's the idea. To tempt them to invest with you and then hammer them with taxes when they earned too much at the expense of others.
Paul A. Samuelson, the Nobel Prize-winning economist and professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has reassessed the advantages of free-trade; that globalization has its limits; that is simplistic to assume that it is win-win. At some point he pointed out that real losses from trade could exceed the benefits affecting, not just local industries but doing serious damage to the economy as a whole.
Paul A. Samuelson also said that the Soviet Union was unequivocal proof that a command economy could work and even prosper. Obviously, he was wrong.
and Pismakron is correct: if a person or group was on the "losing" end of a free-trade arrangement, then they wouldn't even participate in the first place.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Milton Friedman propaganda was so useless that even Margaret Thatcher (his greatest apologist) had to discard his economic theories. This guy ended up in the dustbin of history, in the same bin where Soviet Socialism finished. Mitlon, stick to stand up comedy.
True true. But you don't have to agree with all of Friedman's ideas to appreciate the fact that he's a great man, and made important contributions to economic theory. His politics, on the other hand, are greatly controversial.
I'll tell you: there's no universally agreed upon definition of "socialism." It is difficult to define precisely such a broad term. Thus, to call oneself "socialist" is bit odd.
I don't personally think there's anything bad about "socialists" themselves. I don't judge people based on their political beliefs, even if they can't define them. It's immature to take politics personally.
agreed. He said he figured they would never print too much money. Unfortunately he died last year, as he may have been able to influence our current economy.
He's probably rolling is his grave right now over what the Fed is doing!
For we find Friedman bearing heavy responsibility both for the withholding tax system and for the disastrous guaranteed annual income looming on the horizon. At the same time, we find Friedman calling for absolute control by the State over the supply of money -- a crucial part of the market economy. Whenever the government has, fitfully and almost by accident,
But it is in the macro sphere, unwisely hived off from the micro by economists who remain after sixty years ignorant of Ludwig von Mises's achievement in integrating them, it is here that Friedman's influence has been at its most baleful.
However, instead of the common response of reverence and awe for "one of our own who has made it," libertarians should greet the whole affair with deep suspicion: "If he's so devoted a libertarian, how come he's a favorite of the Establishment?" An advisor of Richard Nixon and a friend and associate of most Administration economists, Friedman has, in fact, made his mark in current policy, and indeed reciprocates as a sort of leading unofficial apologist for Nixonite policy.
AMention "free-market economics" to a member of the lay public and chances are that if he has heard the term at all, he identifies it completely with the name Milton Friedman. For several years, Professor Friedman has won continuing honors from the press and the profession alike, and a school of Friedmanites and "monetarists" has arisen in seeming challenge to the Keynesian orthodoxy.
U seem to forget how much of a 'company man' Keynes was. You think Keynesian Econ is more 'free-market'? he was on FDR's board, an adviser-- a New Dealer. I dont know how much less free market you can get.....than social security, high taxes and minimum wage (in this country)
There are only the merest fringes of truth here. Do you remember why free trade was choked in the days of Ford. We are headed for an S2. Can you see the possibilities for Persia?
You're (the US) state of prosperity has been created by HUGE debts. Friedman says "deficits" aren't bad? Well, look at your recession right now! Friedman's economics are SO flawed its unbelievable anyone would believe what he is saying. It is great that he made this interview, so you know what kind of economics you can blame about your economy's current state! Too much DEBT and CONSUMING, not enough savings.
i agree the standard of living is crazy. free market is base on debt. look at our buyiny power and out put a worker at mc donalds cant buy a meal on one hour of work but his output provides food the dozen of people. while asking him to increase his output with compensation. and then provide him a credit card to buy a flat screen. it is a corupted scam.
You have no idea what you're talking about. There is no recession right now. The U.S. technically hasn't had a real recession since the early Reagan years, which itself was caused by the previous policies of Carter and before. The "recession" under Bush Sr. was tiny, the economy grew 3% that year, under Bush Jr., the "recession" in the early 2000s wasn't even a real recession b/c the economy has to dip for two quarters in a row, whcih it didn't. Right now the economy is not in any recession.
Mention "free-market economics" to a member of the lay public and chances are that if he has heard the term at all, he identifies it completely with the name Milton Friedman. For several years, Professor Friedman has won continuing honors from the press and the profession alike, and a school of Friedmanites and "monetarists" has arisen in seeming challenge to the Keynesian orthodoxy.
Whats ineresting is that during time of this inerview DOLLAR gained its pick levell against EURO about 1.18. ..and since then tere is stable up-trend (down for dollar) EURO/USD about 1.47 today. What does it mean? Freadman was wrong (?)or Fed took the wrong course...?
He was wrong. The rally in the $US in 2005 was simply a bear market rally. The Fed has not taken the wrong course since this interview but rather it had been on the wrong course for a long time and has remained on the wrong course to this day. This is not limited to the USD vs the Euro. Look at currencies around the world and gold. I am not saying he was stupid or bad but simply wrong about that issue.
Its amazing that all the unemployed workers and murdered union leaders can't feed their kids all this positive GDP and income per capita information. This is why you cannot let economists into politics, they only see numbers and never leave the office long enough to see the bloody reality of their policies. No greater example of this than Milt.
GDP is an imperfect, but still very good measure of the well being of individuals in society. Economists try to figure out the truth about how the economy works, and how to maximize the well being of individuals participating in an economy. If you want to see a "bloody reality" go to Zimbabwe - a case study of what happens when governments don't listen to economists. Isn't it great that Robert Mugabe "doesn't see numbers" and truly cares about the downtrodden?
GDP is not a good measure at all. Brazil and South Africa have fantastic GDP/capita yet the vast majority of their people live in poverty, and they have the higheset reported crime rates on the planet. Inequality is the most devastating quantitative determinant of quality of life in a country, and the policies which Milt advocated to increase GDP require the consolidation of resources to the few.
This is simply not true. You can't point to only two countries, make a vague statement about how the majority of their citizens are living in poverty, and conclude that GDP is a bad measure of well being. I would like you to provide me with a measure that you feel is more accurate.
"Humans everywhere, from Norway to Sierra Leone, apparently evaluate their life by a common standard of material prosperity, which changes as GDP increases."
"The GDP differences between countries are enormous, and highly predictive of differences in life satisfaction. In a sample of over 130,000 people from 126 countries, the correlation between the life satisfaction of individuals and the GDP of the country in which they live was over .40 -- an exceptionally high value in social science."
Not to mention the torture, village burning, slaughter and devastation which is required to put the policies in place once the population responds to the inevitable rises in commodity prices, union busting and unemployment. Ask any Latin American how they feel about Milt before you sing his praises, you can hear the racism in his analysis every step of the way.
Absolutely not. I would offer that your wife must have been one of the lucky ones, or perhaps she's Costa Rican (a country which was payed off in US aid from seeking alternative forms of governance, and thus avoided retribution).
Living in central america, the story in every other country was that when any form of governance was attempted which included elements of democracy, self-sufficiency (i.e. growing food for your own population instead of sugar and coffee for your Northern Master), land reform, etc...the School of Americas sent their best in to slaughter the population into submission. Milt, the man who helped install most oppressive Latin American dictators because they provided "exciting market opportunities".
sorry, kaffulel, but what you write is just too wacko for me to respond to properly. apologies. when you come back to earth we can hook up and continue this at a later date.
He said real change happens when a crisis exists or is perceived to exist. They used 9/11 to take our freedoms away,start war in Iraq,etc. See 'Shock Doctrine'.
You're confusing description with prescription. Friedman's statement about how crisis brings about change was descriptive. For example, my brother doesn't wear his seatbelt very often. I may say something like, "he will need to be in a car accident before he realizes the importance of wearing a seatbelt". By your logic, this is equivalent to saying that I want by brother to be in a car accident.
At 19:30, he says for the first 75 years of the Fed it was a major negative for the economy, and we wouldn't have even HAD a Great Depression if not for the Fed. So why is Ron Paul treated scornfully for wanting to get rid of it? Why is Friedman exalted and Ron Paul dissed for essentially the same idea?
Hmm...2 years later the dollar index has fallen through the floor and our inflation is out of control. I guess what Milton said is unlikely to happen is happening.
gotta love milton friedman. 93 years old still in full control of his mind and putting it down for the free market. God bless you Milton Friedman. Rest in peace.
We'd have better care if we all just paid cash, and if we would reduce regulations the poor would have access to some cheap, efficient care. Working for government checks makes people lazy. Working for a patient makes us compassionate.
He is 2 old? What a moronic attitude. The power of a person's ideas are to judged by the age of that person, but rather by the validity and relevancy of the ideas. Milton Friedman is indeed old. He'd be the first to admit it. But, "binshamak" is a shallow individual who will never get it.
He is 2 old? What a moronic attitude. The power of a person's ideas are to judged by the age of that person, but rather by the validity and relevancy of the ideas. Milton Friedman is indeed old. He'd be the first to admit it. But, "binshamak" is a shallow individual who will never get it.
How so? Through his monetarist theory he gave the conditions in which and economy could have high inflation and high unemployment which is impossible according to Keynes.
Friedman's monetarist theories are widely accepted by central bankers.
He probably hadn't anticipated the vast increases in our foreign policy spending on Iraq. A lot of money was printed and a lot of debt was undertaken for that war.
Angående att läkare har hög lön: statistiken förvrängs ofta. Härom dagen kunde man läsa i Aftonbladet att läkare i snitt tjänar 50000 kr i månaden. Detta gäller för överläkare, vilket man oftast blir efter 40-årsåldern. Jag tjänar mindre än en lärare i min ålder. Det publicerades nyss en internationell rapport som konkluderade att Sveriges vård är medioker jmf jämförbara länder. Ang att läraryrket har låg lön: jag håller med!
Alla yrken du räknade upp som låglöneyrken (inkl ditt eget) har ett gemensamt: de finns i offentlig sektor. Offentlig förvaltning är inte bara dåligt för "kunderna", utan också för de anställda (fråga vem du vill i vården vad de tycker om landstinget som arbetsgivare). Tvärt om mot den allmänt spridda klyschan att privata föredrag går rovdrift på anställda.
"Sweden has no problem with low wages...". Where did you get that from. I work as a junior doctor in a swedish hospital. I am, litterarly, responsible for life and death in the ER and i eran MUCH les than, say, a construction worker or a carpenter. Not to mention the nurses etc. Apart from that, we have big problems with availability, long waiting times before you get help, poor service-mindedness. Every day I have to deal with frustrated, dissatisfied patients.
How old is this interview?
stokepogue 3 years ago
Such clear thinking.
This is a stark reminder of the freedoms we don't have.
Especially his comments on immigration.
orderofribs 3 years ago
This is like listening to the engineers of the Titanic talking about the miraculous wonders of their creation just as it's leaving the harbor.
caelarent 3 years ago
fool. there hasn't been a free market in at least 20 years! Damn journalists were right to call Bush a neocon. His policies were not conservative just republican. I can still hear those words he spoke in an inteview during his last days in office "I gave up on free market principles" damn right you did! Obama's trillion dollar defecits is what will really kill peoples 401ks and any life savings. yes lets fix unpaid debts with money we don't have. then we'll fix those with higher debts!
metalnecromancer 3 years ago
Free markets work.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac don't and neither does government.
Truthpolice9698 3 years ago 2
Amen!!
cupacuppers 3 years ago
Milton Friedman rules!
justinwlaurab 3 years ago
Long vid but interesting. He is a nobel Prize winner. - Check 6:30 - the only reason why people would dump dollars. Great vid.
chugo145 3 years ago
woohoo, Friedman called it like it is, "the only reason foreigners would start dumping dollars would be if we started printing money like crazy" amen. word to Obama"I guess he really wants to turn the United States into Kenya" Ben Bernanke and the democrats need to know if we don't restore fiscal sanity, we will have double digit inflation and high unemployment. Which is a conundrum to Keynesians. This situation will be worse than the Great Depression: I guess we have to bury Keynes a 3rd time!
theone1087 3 years ago
The welfare state is a capitalist model.
nicobolso 3 years ago
i disagree
economically you still are free to pursue your self-interest but only the end result to get half of it taken away (taxes)
thats not capitalism
ncposs 3 years ago
Ok, so assuming free market is a half way to reach ultimate freedom, are you free if you live in a city in which you have to lock yourself inside your home to avoid being robbed?
nicobolso 3 years ago
There is no one forcing you to live in the city, you can move to the country. Land is cheaper there.
soupI8 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Milton's unwarranted monopoly on economical policies for the last two decades has delayed development of models that might actually work for majority of the people. His ideology also has distracted many smart economists from working -they spent years promoting an ideology instead of creating new ideas. Let's move on shall we?
nycistanbul 3 years ago
why is there a noble prize for economics? Economists are simpletons. I dont care what books this guy writes this debate was over 30 years ago and we(canadians) still suffer under socialism so what the hell does this guy do for a living. Europe can re-examine its "model" but they will still vote like idiot euro shit.
chrisrdow 3 years ago
@Chrisdow...People who cannot spell or use proper grammar are "simpletons." Economics is one the most important subjects there is. It creates the environment needed to pursue other studies. You should go back to commenting on Soldier Boy videos because this is not your strong suit.
IconicFiber 3 years ago 4
Friedman's praise for Alan Greenspan has made me realize that I am not part of the neo-classical thought, but rather the Austrian school.
I still love Friedman, but he fell down a couple of notches right there.
Elasaltaculos 3 years ago
There is no other way than freedom. We must finally get rid of all enemies of freedom, like all socialists scums allover the world.
NivoUF 3 years ago
should they not have the "freedom" to be socialists? lol. Don't get me wrong, I think socialists are dead wrong, but if they have no means to interfere with my freedoms, they can assemble and do their idiotic redistributing as much as they want.
Elasaltaculos 3 years ago
No, they should be allowed to belive in whatever they want to, but they should not be allowed to make a law in any country, because there is only one true humanitarian system - capitalism + leseferism. There is no other way in that matter.
NivoUF 3 years ago
Ok, lol, that I can agree with.
"Get rid" are pretty strong words, it is kind of line with what Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot or Castro would do
Elasaltaculos 3 years ago
My bad, sorry - english is not my native language, so forgive me mistakes.
But to be honest, I can agree with what Agusto Pinochet did in Chile. Sometimes we must think like: "There's no freedom for the enemies of fredom.", because (as we can see now), they will be taking our freedom piece by piece, leading us to the worst kind of slavery - slavery hidden behind democratic laws and "modern" society.
NivoUF 3 years ago
The president does not have authority over fiscal policy. It is the congress who controls that matter. Blame those in congress since that is where the fault belongs.
wqvsaa 3 years ago
"what would case a foreign dump of US assets."
"There would be only one thing that would cause them to do that, and that would be inflation, if our monetary authority; started to print to much money; that might do it. But thats not gonna happen."
Well, that says it all, and for those of you who don't know about this inflation; the money supply has increased by ALOT in the past 4 months since these bailouts started. All the right conditions have been met for foreigners to dump US dollars.
Scottnice 3 years ago
You are wrong. The economies of these foreign coutries are far worse off than ours here in the US.
If what you're saying were true then what are they waiting for?
wqvsaa 3 years ago
What would Friedman say today in Dec. 2008, with 1 USD=89 Japanese yen and DOW at 1997 level? Couple of decades ago 1 US dollar was 500 JPY.
glassvision 3 years ago
I wish he was around to comment on the bailout and the credit crunch.
triniduane 3 years ago
I'd be thrilled to know what Friedman would have to say about the economic crisis
entelekhia 3 years ago 3
What specificlly did Milton Friedman advocate that led to this crisis?
CrowdPleeza 3 years ago
Did Milton ever advocate subprime loans?
CrowdPleeza 3 years ago
I didn't suggest that he advocated anything that led to this crisis. On the contrary, I think he was very right to criticize the Fed and thought that it should be abolished. I'd just be thrilled to know what he would make of this current situation.
entelekhia 3 years ago
Alright. I thought there was some sarcasm with your question.
CrowdPleeza 3 years ago
And of course I wanted to say that i do not 100% aggree with Milton. Although I think he was without a doubt a fantastic person. Champion of free economy as it was said at the beginning. And my concernes are just technicals, not clouding the whole libertarian disciple image of Milton Friedman.
gromph86 3 years ago
Im actually confused and hope someone would explain this concept to me:
I come from a very liberal High school and my econ teacher this year says that Bush cutting taxes was a horrible thing to do, especially in the time of war. and has increased deficit spending and national debt.
Why then does friedman think its good?
rl0u8888 3 years ago
Coz it made deficit even bigger, and that is an decreasing FED interest rates and inflationary action. And what can be the outcome of too low interest rates, and bank loans for everyone I think U can see by Yourself
gromph86 3 years ago
Isnt bigger deficit bad? And one of the reason why we are in this crisis is because the banks were loaning everyone carelessly with low interest rates. I still dont see why friedman would think that this is a good idea.
rl0u8888 3 years ago
How does cutting taxes increase the deficit? If the govt. is taking in less money then how can the defict increase? Wouldn't you need more money to spend to increase the debt? Seems to me it is not the amount of revenue coming into the govt. hands that causes the debt to increase or decrease but instead the manner in which the revenue is spent.
If you could explin you reasoning behind your conclusion it would be a great help.
Thank you
wqvsaa 3 years ago
The deficit can always insrease, coz govt don't have to have money he spend. It is called deficit financing, and in that king of a situation govt is borrowing or (more often) printing money (directly printing or selling bondg which is more or less the same). So if the govt is taking less money and do not cut spendings at the same time deficit will always increase.
If that wasn't clear enough, or U have some other questions I will be happy to answer.
gromph86 3 years ago
How is printing more money more or less the same as selling bonds?
wqvsaa 3 years ago
When govt print money new cash appear on the market. Govt didn'd had that money, they just made completly new ones and now they can use them (clearly inflationary move). When gov sell bonds more or less the same situation appear - they sell sth they dotn have and they use money earned on it. When time comes to buy them back they sell more bonds to pay those earlier and to finance present deficit.
gromph86 3 years ago
I thought when bonds are sold it takes money OUT of circulation? So that would mean the new printed money would be cancelled out by the bonds sold.
wqvsaa 3 years ago
Tax cuts lead to increased federal receipts. Problem is Congress spent it all and more and Bush sold out. Between 2000 and 2006, pre-tax income for the top 1 percent of tax returns grew by 34 percent, while pre-tax income for the bottom 50 percent increased by 22 percent. All figures are nominal (not adjusted for inflation).
Numbers courtesy of the Heritage Foundation (numbers in billions of dollars):
2003: $748
2004: $832
2005: $935
2006: $1,024
(link available on demand)
classic7890 3 years ago
"only one thing would cause them to dump American assets: inflation". And what are we doing now? Printing a lot of money to pay for assets priced only by their sellers (reverse auction).
blakeada999 3 years ago
well they want keynesian economics, deficit spending, huge new powers to the fed, and redistribution of wealth- unless george bush does it- in which case it's grounds for complaints---
cubencis 3 years ago 2
"There never would have been a Great Depression if there hadn't been a Fed."
Best line in the whole interview!
klaptongroovemaster 3 years ago
Your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to continue facing and fighting the beast through acknowledgment of the true realities occurring here and your refusal to be the pawns of the dark agencies. Each truth you accept shall make you strong. Each one you teach of the truths shall make you all stronger. In the end, it will be fine. If you do not choose to accept the mission then all I can say to you ismea culpa, mea culpa, the die is cast.
teddymarvelle 3 years ago
Friedman even points out a danger we should be concerned about right now (the only cause for a loss of confidence in the Dollar)
Printing too much money!
mycolebee 3 years ago
"haha good liberal comeback. Bush this, bush that. shit is getting old. Bush is a flaming liberal. he tripled federal spending. increased spending on welfare, war on global poverty crap, "spreading democracy" thats a progressive policy starting all the way back to woodrow wilson, no child left behind, and this stupid bailout plan. thats what i can come with off the top of my head. oh this housing market crash? three words: COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ACT. liberal prints all over it since 1977."
+1
bighitter42 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Bush is a flaming Republican. He's confused on economics and bewildered by complex issues.
No more simpletons in the White House. Vote Obama '08!
mycolebee 3 years ago
Explain yourself.
Bush has increased the size and scope of the federal government on an astronomic scale. He rejects free markets. He has no respect for individual liberty, instead turning to government to solve our problems. Sounds like a leftist to me.
His(and McCain's)positions on most issues are remarkably close to those of Obama. Get a clue...take an economics class...and stop voting to steal my freedom.
bighitter42 3 years ago 4
that, bighitter, should be the real criticisms of george bush- but it would be too self incriminating , so people would rather call him 'flaming' or some other name calling- which isn't an argument or a critique.
cubencis 3 years ago 3
You'll notice the person I said that to never responded. Just another zombie repeating the party line, not understanding the ideas that drive policy, nor why those ideas are better than the other side's. Whole lotta cool-aid drinkers out there on both sides and it tears me apart to watch it ruin this country.
bighitter42 3 years ago
Certainly you meant to add that the democrats are equally worthless?
bighitter42 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Friedman was a brilliant man, but his freemarket fundamentalism/philosphy is also the reason for the crisis of today.
He didnt see the bubble in the house market that was at its peak when this interview was given. Also, his claim that democracy and free market go hand in hand, is not validated of what is now going on in China and Russia.
lamperoneagain 3 years ago
Excuse me did he say! "We'll never have a government irresponsible enough to drive inflation up" and that Our "economy is doing just dandy" Old fart is hi on methodone or sucking on some corporate opium . being the expert that people dim him to be I can't believe he didn't warn us about the crisis we have right now. which to me kinda indicates he didn't give a fuck cuz he is the 1 that developed modern economic theory of mindless consumption.That only benefits vile imperialist oppressive sytms
OGraphics 3 years ago
Capitalists don't run to socialism. Corporatists who claim to be capitalists are the ones who run to socialism.
;-)
stealthswimmer 3 years ago 3
Even Republicans are running to socialism now so we can bail out these corporations and banks to get the economy going again.
mycolebee 3 years ago 2
Unfortunately, you are correct.
=(
Many Republicans, especially the neo-conservatives, have been imposing their social morals on the people while abandoning capitalist views and supporting a more socialist system. Many Republicans these days aren't capitalists.
=(
stealthswimmer 3 years ago 2
I Agree!Mc Cain is a Communist!We must stop this guy and vote Obama!
zsylvana 3 years ago
Hayek is the real guy who brought free market theories to chicago shool of ceonomics and it bred friedman and many others.
beatnik8983 3 years ago 4
What a difference 3 years makes.
timatotoro 3 years ago 2
Friedman owns.
dquijano 3 years ago 3
Keynesians have proven you wrong, and Friedman knows that that protectionism and possitive intervensionism have caused prosperity for the USA.
SeanBote 3 years ago
There is not such thing as "protectionism". There is only the support of one set of workers at the expense of the others.
Myndir 3 years ago 2
'There is only the support of one set of workers at the expense of the others'....unsubstantiated rubbish!
BigDeanoSyd 3 years ago
No, it is absolutely substantiated fact. Look at the increase in unemployment in the areas in which the government mandates a minimum wage. It is "support for one set of workers at the expense of the others."
Fail.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
Plenty of countries with minimum wage and regulations on market forces have low unemployment...pretty selective with your 'facts' there aren't you!...minimum wage for all IS support for ALL workers!! It doesn't necessarily have to impinge on profit for employers, or create inflation...
'Fail' back
BigDeanoSyd 3 years ago
Here's an idea for all those protectionists out there: What are you afraid of? Do you think American businesses cannot compete? Why not let consumers decide what products they wanna choose, and where they want their products from, instead of the government?
dex216sims 3 years ago 3
ha yea i know, 6% gain in dollar vs euro. i dont care what people say bernanke is doing a good job and M1, M2 is beginning to level off so all the people who are fretting about inflation will be missing out on obscene profits from dollar appreciation.
pkenans 3 years ago
How can one called the free market when Federal Reserve sets the interest rate?
ashishdave22 3 years ago
Be Free and be open minded!!!
sainuudotcom 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
But Friedmans Concept was not matched by economic success.The profit stagnation in industrial enterprise worldwide continued.The surge upward of the stock markets everywhere was based not on productive profits but large speculative financial manipulations.The distribution of income worldwide and in countries became very skewed a massive increase in the income of the top 10% especially of the top 1% of the world population but a decline in real income of much of the rest of the world's
zsylvana 3 years ago
Zsylvana, it seems to me that this is exactly what Friedman would want. In his view, the disparity in income distribution is fine, so long as the free market is at work. Free marketers complain whenever governments implement too many social programs for the poor, but they are fine with corporate bailouts a la Bear Stearns. Interesting.
cosmicviewer477 3 years ago
zsylvana,show me the data that shows stock prices that dont correlate with profits. and where do you get the idea of the decline in real income?its just wrong. look at a standard of living in countries like china,india, brazil, poland,and their rise in real income along with their policies of free trade,free markets, which fuel growth and fdi.then look at north korea with its planned,controlled economy riddled with shortages,low standard of living.and ask a bear shareholder if he was bailed out.
pkenans 3 years ago
pkenans you can check it out best at chairmain of On International Sociological
Accosiation Immanuel Wallerstein Professor at Yale University.Or Look at his comments and at Binghamton studies for long term economic studies.
at Binghamton University
zsylvana 3 years ago
ok i dont know anything about this wallerstein and he may or may not have some interesting findings but something i do know since i myself am a financial speculator is that there is some short-term volatile fluctuations due to speculation but in long-term valuations prices always directly correlate with output.and ever since this country abandoned its keynesian mentality in 70s this country has never been so prosperous and standard living so high.redistribution doesnt solve fundemental problems
pkenans 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Bill Gate and his followers fixed economics, not Greenspan nor Clinton nor Reagen.
Civsuccess2 3 years ago
Record failed investment comes after FED pump more money into economy.
I can't pay for my Hummer which I borrowed from bank!!!!
Civsuccess2 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Well, at over 3 years old, this interview from the beginning has proven false.
This guy thought back then the dollar was somehow invincible and now we're on the verge of a depression due to excessive credit being given that is backed by nothing.
Charlie Rose was more correct by playing devil's advocate.
bonzelite 3 years ago
false? you have no idea what your talking about. the dollar is the largest reserve currency in the world. core cpi inflation is only 4.18% as of may. q1 inflation is up .6%. credit backed by nothing? wut the hell does that mean. feds enacting loose monetary policy for sake of financial system otherwise we would definitely be in recession but still we are doing relatively good in terms of price stability. look at 1980 with double digit inflation and negative gdp growth.
pkenans 3 years ago
lol. you are a tard.
free enterprise doesn't make "cash" the ultimate king. it makes the person who can MAKE cash the ultimate king. do you know what it takes to MAKE wealth?
you seem like a dirty commie so i guess i'll have to explain.
first it takes a JOB!
then you follow that with EDUCATION!
next. apply INNOVATION.and INVESTMENT/SACRIFICE.
all of these taking SELF DETERMINATION!
successful people MAKE themselves do the things that unsuccessful people will not do.
sweetmpea55 3 years ago 6
Milton Friedman was a brilliant man. Sad about his loss. Grateful there are still intelligent men of principle in the world today to carry on: Ron Paul
jema32 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
يستحق المشاهدة
استضافة رائعة للمذيع النيويوركي شارلي روز يكرم فيها عبقرية واحد من أساطين الاقتصاد الأمكريكي وحائز جائزة نوبل بالاقتصاد لعام 1967 ميلتون فريدمان
abdlmoty 3 years ago
Unfortunatelly, Friedman aided governments which quashed the freedom to choose of their citizens. Everybody agrees now that F became a propagandist (some call him more elegantly an economic evangelist. Many of this theories are now defunct. His purpose was to sell off government property and make its citizens fend for themselves. Many fell into poverty. Better economists were the ones that came after him to fix his wrongdoings.
documentaryunit 3 years ago
Most of it is propaganda, not just the facts. Russia bought back Gazprom because the State couldn't pays bills while the US engaged in two invasions+increased defence spending. So it's not all about economics. Same with the UK, which bought back the railways. All countries go up&down no matter what voodoo economics they practice. It's true the pendulum sometimes goes too far in either direction, both in private and state economics. So it's good to pull them back from either extremism.
documentaryunit 3 years ago
We must not forget that 1% of people own 80% of wealth. So you have to entice them to come to you with rick pickings. That's the idea. To tempt them to invest with you and then hammer them with taxes when they earned too much at the expense of others.
documentaryunit 3 years ago
Mr. Friedman should be interviewed again in 2008 and asked the same questions...
macsm 3 years ago
He died a few years ago.
cromicus 3 years ago
He passed away in 2006
ticopete 3 years ago
Paul A. Samuelson, the Nobel Prize-winning economist and professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has reassessed the advantages of free-trade; that globalization has its limits; that is simplistic to assume that it is win-win. At some point he pointed out that real losses from trade could exceed the benefits affecting, not just local industries but doing serious damage to the economy as a whole.
mujaku 3 years ago
The great thing about free trade is that it is voluntary. If it is not to your advantage you do not have to engage in it.
Pismakron 3 years ago 2
Paul A. Samuelson also said that the Soviet Union was unequivocal proof that a command economy could work and even prosper. Obviously, he was wrong.
and Pismakron is correct: if a person or group was on the "losing" end of a free-trade arrangement, then they wouldn't even participate in the first place.
highonhayek 3 years ago
a good question to ask is how much government is makes socialism.
bmtimv 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Milton Friedman propaganda was so useless that even Margaret Thatcher (his greatest apologist) had to discard his economic theories. This guy ended up in the dustbin of history, in the same bin where Soviet Socialism finished. Mitlon, stick to stand up comedy.
documentaryunit 3 years ago
this vid almost makes me wanna say "I wanna be Milton Friedman when I grow up!"
=D
stealthswimmer 3 years ago 5
lol yeah me 2
zarrah20 3 years ago
Milton Friedman wasn't a true capitalist...soyes you're right.
EchoesUnlimited 3 years ago
True true. But you don't have to agree with all of Friedman's ideas to appreciate the fact that he's a great man, and made important contributions to economic theory. His politics, on the other hand, are greatly controversial.
Slimdawgc 4 years ago 7
I'll tell you: there's no universally agreed upon definition of "socialism." It is difficult to define precisely such a broad term. Thus, to call oneself "socialist" is bit odd.
I don't personally think there's anything bad about "socialists" themselves. I don't judge people based on their political beliefs, even if they can't define them. It's immature to take politics personally.
Slimdawgc 4 years ago 4
I guess he was wrong on inflation. thank you Fed!
jetblackjp 4 years ago
agreed. He said he figured they would never print too much money. Unfortunately he died last year, as he may have been able to influence our current economy.
He's probably rolling is his grave right now over what the Fed is doing!
stealthswimmer 3 years ago
For we find Friedman bearing heavy responsibility both for the withholding tax system and for the disastrous guaranteed annual income looming on the horizon. At the same time, we find Friedman calling for absolute control by the State over the supply of money -- a crucial part of the market economy. Whenever the government has, fitfully and almost by accident,
EchoesUnlimited 4 years ago
But it is in the macro sphere, unwisely hived off from the micro by economists who remain after sixty years ignorant of Ludwig von Mises's achievement in integrating them, it is here that Friedman's influence has been at its most baleful.
EchoesUnlimited 4 years ago
However, instead of the common response of reverence and awe for "one of our own who has made it," libertarians should greet the whole affair with deep suspicion: "If he's so devoted a libertarian, how come he's a favorite of the Establishment?" An advisor of Richard Nixon and a friend and associate of most Administration economists, Friedman has, in fact, made his mark in current policy, and indeed reciprocates as a sort of leading unofficial apologist for Nixonite policy.
EchoesUnlimited 4 years ago
lmfao the swiss! they're a bunch of socialists.
EchoesUnlimited 4 years ago
Friedman liked the freemarket but he wasn't a free market economist.
EchoesUnlimited 4 years ago
Yes, he was. Read a few of his books.
Disposable50 4 years ago
I have. Someone who supports the FED isn't a freemarket economist.
You should read a few other books.
EchoesUnlimited 4 years ago
Could you please clarify your point? Your comment seems interesting. I would be more than happy to hear what you have to say. Thank you.
beglight 4 years ago
It's pretty clear.
AMention "free-market economics" to a member of the lay public and chances are that if he has heard the term at all, he identifies it completely with the name Milton Friedman. For several years, Professor Friedman has won continuing honors from the press and the profession alike, and a school of Friedmanites and "monetarists" has arisen in seeming challenge to the Keynesian orthodoxy.
EchoesUnlimited 4 years ago
U seem to forget how much of a 'company man' Keynes was. You think Keynesian Econ is more 'free-market'? he was on FDR's board, an adviser-- a New Dealer. I dont know how much less free market you can get.....than social security, high taxes and minimum wage (in this country)
cubencis 4 years ago
Well, people do forget that he was born into a working class family.
Slimdawgc 4 years ago 3
read free to choose, yes he was for a central bank but wanted to move towards hard currency.
bmtimv 3 years ago
There are only the merest fringes of truth here. Do you remember why free trade was choked in the days of Ford. We are headed for an S2. Can you see the possibilities for Persia?
runninwiththeaxe 4 years ago
You're (the US) state of prosperity has been created by HUGE debts. Friedman says "deficits" aren't bad? Well, look at your recession right now! Friedman's economics are SO flawed its unbelievable anyone would believe what he is saying. It is great that he made this interview, so you know what kind of economics you can blame about your economy's current state! Too much DEBT and CONSUMING, not enough savings.
hand112 4 years ago
i agree the standard of living is crazy. free market is base on debt. look at our buyiny power and out put a worker at mc donalds cant buy a meal on one hour of work but his output provides food the dozen of people. while asking him to increase his output with compensation. and then provide him a credit card to buy a flat screen. it is a corupted scam.
macadomus 4 years ago
You have no idea what you're talking about. There is no recession right now. The U.S. technically hasn't had a real recession since the early Reagan years, which itself was caused by the previous policies of Carter and before. The "recession" under Bush Sr. was tiny, the economy grew 3% that year, under Bush Jr., the "recession" in the early 2000s wasn't even a real recession b/c the economy has to dip for two quarters in a row, whcih it didn't. Right now the economy is not in any recession.
WheelsRCool 4 years ago
Mention "free-market economics" to a member of the lay public and chances are that if he has heard the term at all, he identifies it completely with the name Milton Friedman. For several years, Professor Friedman has won continuing honors from the press and the profession alike, and a school of Friedmanites and "monetarists" has arisen in seeming challenge to the Keynesian orthodoxy.
EchoesUnlimited 4 years ago 3
Recomand Youtube: "The Ultimate American Dollar Collapse"
askwara 4 years ago
Whats ineresting is that during time of this inerview DOLLAR gained its pick levell against EURO about 1.18. ..and since then tere is stable up-trend (down for dollar) EURO/USD about 1.47 today. What does it mean? Freadman was wrong (?)or Fed took the wrong course...?
askwara 4 years ago
I have the same question. If someone knows the answer, I'd like to hear it.
etsneroj 4 years ago
He was wrong. The rally in the $US in 2005 was simply a bear market rally. The Fed has not taken the wrong course since this interview but rather it had been on the wrong course for a long time and has remained on the wrong course to this day. This is not limited to the USD vs the Euro. Look at currencies around the world and gold. I am not saying he was stupid or bad but simply wrong about that issue.
cnairn 4 years ago
Its amazing that all the unemployed workers and murdered union leaders can't feed their kids all this positive GDP and income per capita information. This is why you cannot let economists into politics, they only see numbers and never leave the office long enough to see the bloody reality of their policies. No greater example of this than Milt.
kaffuffel 4 years ago
GDP is an imperfect, but still very good measure of the well being of individuals in society. Economists try to figure out the truth about how the economy works, and how to maximize the well being of individuals participating in an economy. If you want to see a "bloody reality" go to Zimbabwe - a case study of what happens when governments don't listen to economists. Isn't it great that Robert Mugabe "doesn't see numbers" and truly cares about the downtrodden?
mistahtut 4 years ago 2
GDP is not a good measure at all. Brazil and South Africa have fantastic GDP/capita yet the vast majority of their people live in poverty, and they have the higheset reported crime rates on the planet. Inequality is the most devastating quantitative determinant of quality of life in a country, and the policies which Milt advocated to increase GDP require the consolidation of resources to the few.
kaffuffel 4 years ago
This is simply not true. You can't point to only two countries, make a vague statement about how the majority of their citizens are living in poverty, and conclude that GDP is a bad measure of well being. I would like you to provide me with a measure that you feel is more accurate.
mistahtut 4 years ago
"Humans everywhere, from Norway to Sierra Leone, apparently evaluate their life by a common standard of material prosperity, which changes as GDP increases."
mistahtut 4 years ago
"The GDP differences between countries are enormous, and highly predictive of differences in life satisfaction. In a sample of over 130,000 people from 126 countries, the correlation between the life satisfaction of individuals and the GDP of the country in which they live was over .40 -- an exceptionally high value in social science."
mistahtut 4 years ago
Not to mention the torture, village burning, slaughter and devastation which is required to put the policies in place once the population responds to the inevitable rises in commodity prices, union busting and unemployment. Ask any Latin American how they feel about Milt before you sing his praises, you can hear the racism in his analysis every step of the way.
kaffuffel 4 years ago
My wife's latin-american. I asked her. She likes Milt. Good enough for you mr 'village burning, slaughter and devestation' kaffufel?
trumpetuk111 4 years ago
Absolutely not. I would offer that your wife must have been one of the lucky ones, or perhaps she's Costa Rican (a country which was payed off in US aid from seeking alternative forms of governance, and thus avoided retribution).
kaffuffel 4 years ago
Living in central america, the story in every other country was that when any form of governance was attempted which included elements of democracy, self-sufficiency (i.e. growing food for your own population instead of sugar and coffee for your Northern Master), land reform, etc...the School of Americas sent their best in to slaughter the population into submission. Milt, the man who helped install most oppressive Latin American dictators because they provided "exciting market opportunities".
kaffuffel 4 years ago
sorry, kaffulel, but what you write is just too wacko for me to respond to properly. apologies. when you come back to earth we can hook up and continue this at a later date.
trumpetuk111 4 years ago
Has visto Costa Rica? Es hermosa, y la gente es tan amable. Ojala q lo veas una vez.
trumpetuk111 4 years ago
He said real change happens when a crisis exists or is perceived to exist. They used 9/11 to take our freedoms away,start war in Iraq,etc. See 'Shock Doctrine'.
suhu8 4 years ago
You're confusing description with prescription. Friedman's statement about how crisis brings about change was descriptive. For example, my brother doesn't wear his seatbelt very often. I may say something like, "he will need to be in a car accident before he realizes the importance of wearing a seatbelt". By your logic, this is equivalent to saying that I want by brother to be in a car accident.
mistahtut 4 years ago 2
america, No risk fund??? he was wrong look at the subprime crisis......
Antaraton 4 years ago
The Subprime crisis is no more than a pimple on a multi-trillion dollar economy.
dbarber970 4 years ago
Strong dollar? Stable economy? Milton was wrong.
trogenus 4 years ago
But what about the strong job growth? Now everybody can work 2 or 3 jobs.
suhu8 4 years ago
Oh Yes, Alan Greenspan can be thanked. sure.
rezek71 4 years ago
fantastic economist and gentleman.
emperoratuni 4 years ago 4
thats not a whole hour thats 57:57 i feel so betrayed!! FLAGGED FOR SEXUAL CONTENT
vampyre88 4 years ago
haha Friedman was a genius.... who else fells he was wrong about Bernanke?
Mattes50A05 4 years ago 2
At 19:30, he says for the first 75 years of the Fed it was a major negative for the economy, and we wouldn't have even HAD a Great Depression if not for the Fed. So why is Ron Paul treated scornfully for wanting to get rid of it? Why is Friedman exalted and Ron Paul dissed for essentially the same idea?
ItsFazsha 4 years ago 3
Look at how Charlie Rose REALLY lays it on thick for Clinton 40:00. What a tool.
ScottfromTexas 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Jew double-talk.
ScottfromTexas 4 years ago
Hmm...2 years later the dollar index has fallen through the floor and our inflation is out of control. I guess what Milton said is unlikely to happen is happening.
daveho77 4 years ago
Gotta love this man!!
Monetarism is Working well in the EU!!
But I still think that in many Countries, Like China and India, Keynesianism can be defended!
GrinddalCPH 4 years ago
Great video thanks for sharing.
hueyot 4 years ago
commie.
johnebii 4 years ago
gotta love milton friedman. 93 years old still in full control of his mind and putting it down for the free market. God bless you Milton Friedman. Rest in peace.
johnebii 4 years ago 3
We'd have better care if we all just paid cash, and if we would reduce regulations the poor would have access to some cheap, efficient care. Working for government checks makes people lazy. Working for a patient makes us compassionate.
CowWithBeef 4 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
He is 2 old.
binshamak 4 years ago
He is 2 old? What a moronic attitude. The power of a person's ideas are to judged by the age of that person, but rather by the validity and relevancy of the ideas. Milton Friedman is indeed old. He'd be the first to admit it. But, "binshamak" is a shallow individual who will never get it.
TommyD1of11 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
What a disaster.
binshamak 4 years ago
He is 2 old? What a moronic attitude. The power of a person's ideas are to judged by the age of that person, but rather by the validity and relevancy of the ideas. Milton Friedman is indeed old. He'd be the first to admit it. But, "binshamak" is a shallow individual who will never get it.
TommyD1of11 4 years ago
Well he was wrong about the dollar.
jacknewt 4 years ago
How so? Through his monetarist theory he gave the conditions in which and economy could have high inflation and high unemployment which is impossible according to Keynes.
Friedman's monetarist theories are widely accepted by central bankers.
davidmesaaz 4 years ago
He's talking about at the beginning of the interview when Friedman said the dollar would stay stronger than the euro for 5-10 years.
IrrigatedPancake 4 years ago
He probably hadn't anticipated the vast increases in our foreign policy spending on Iraq. A lot of money was printed and a lot of debt was undertaken for that war.
CowWithBeef 4 years ago 4
Angående att läkare har hög lön: statistiken förvrängs ofta. Härom dagen kunde man läsa i Aftonbladet att läkare i snitt tjänar 50000 kr i månaden. Detta gäller för överläkare, vilket man oftast blir efter 40-årsåldern. Jag tjänar mindre än en lärare i min ålder. Det publicerades nyss en internationell rapport som konkluderade att Sveriges vård är medioker jmf jämförbara länder. Ang att läraryrket har låg lön: jag håller med!
Sumeg666 4 years ago
Alla yrken du räknade upp som låglöneyrken (inkl ditt eget) har ett gemensamt: de finns i offentlig sektor. Offentlig förvaltning är inte bara dåligt för "kunderna", utan också för de anställda (fråga vem du vill i vården vad de tycker om landstinget som arbetsgivare). Tvärt om mot den allmänt spridda klyschan att privata föredrag går rovdrift på anställda.
Sumeg666 4 years ago
"Sweden has no problem with low wages...". Where did you get that from. I work as a junior doctor in a swedish hospital. I am, litterarly, responsible for life and death in the ER and i eran MUCH les than, say, a construction worker or a carpenter. Not to mention the nurses etc. Apart from that, we have big problems with availability, long waiting times before you get help, poor service-mindedness. Every day I have to deal with frustrated, dissatisfied patients.
Sumeg666 4 years ago
Doesn't Sweden have socialized medical care?
CowWithBeef 4 years ago
Although, veterinary Healthcare is private and it doesn't cause any problems.
Why animals must have better life than people here in Poland?
Why don't make the same with ordinary hospitals?
kalabim 4 years ago 2