Ep. 7 - Who Protects the Consumer [3/7]. Milton Friedman's Free to Choose (1980)

Do consumers need protection? Increasingly the public answer to this question has been "yes." Increasingly, too, the Federal government has been identified as the source of this protection.

Milton Friedman disputes the views that (1) consumers are in dire need of governmental protection against the wiles of the business community and that (2) governmental actions tend to make consumers better off. He argues that consumers' problems more frequently than not can be attributed to failures of government rather than to failures of free markets. The best protection for the consumer, in Dr. Friedman's view, is the free market. Despite popular mythology, business interests do not have the power to make people purchase something they do not want. Consider, for example, the failure of the highly touted Edsel, a product that was heavily promoted by the best advertising brains at the Ford Motor Company and its advertising agencies.

When people have alternatives, they will not accept products they do not want. In a competitive market system, business people's recognition that consumers have alternatives provides a powerful stimulus to keep product quality high. Fear of losing business to competitors provides a strong protective shield for the consumer. Armed with the protection offered by the free market, the consumer, says Dr. Friedman, really needs very little protection by the government. Indeed, many government attempts to protect consumers have made them worse off than they were before

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Milton
• Friedman
• free
• market
• capitalism
• FDA
• consumer
• rights
• regulations

[MartinDHash]

How about equating alcohol prohibition to marijuana & cocaine prohibition - not drug safety?

OMG - is Dr. Friedman really raising the specter of murder, extortion, and Al Capone!?

[MartinDHash]

Did Dr. Friedman insist that ALL people are motivated by self-interest and fear of censure. I'll take his word for it that he operates that way but he has NO business impinging other people's motivations!

[MartinDHash]

Ancedotal endorsements of drugs by layman are not acceptable arguments. Didn't the doctor who was interviewed say that there was a panel of experts focused on safety?