A student poses a series of question on based on Friedman's notion that people should pursue their own self-interest. The student points out that he'd read that Friedman had previously come out against disaster aid for victims of a flood in Pennsylvania. Friedman corrected the questioner and noted that he did not come out against private aid for flood victims but instead was against the Federal Government providing discounted flood insurance in advance to home purchasers which motivated people to build houses in areas where they otherwise would not have been able to obtain insurance privately. If not for the discounted insurance, it's likely many of the flooded houses would never have been built in the first place as it wouldn't have been in peoples self-interest.
The student went on to note that it was recently reported that an old man in Ohio died when the electric company turned off his power when he'd failed to pay his electric bill. Was it moral for the company to act in it's own self-interest to do so? Friedman responded by asking what if the electric company never turned off the power for anyone? Who would pay the cost--the people who own or work at the electric company? It would be unjust to impose that responsibility on individuals who are running an honest business of providing electricity. Friedman suggests that the true responsibility lies on the mans neighbors and friends who were not charitable enough to allow him to meet the electric bills.
Finally the student uses the example of Ford deciding not to install a $13 block of plastic which would prevent it's Pinto cars from exploding in a rear-end collision. Ford estimated such a move would cost 200 lives a year at a cost of $200,000 per life lost. They multiplied and found that it wasn't worth it to install the plastic block. He asked if a corporation seeking it's own self-interest was a good thing in this case? Friedman responded by asking, what if it cost $1 billion to save each life, should Ford have put in the block? It's simply not practical to put an infinite value on an individuals life. If it took $1 billion in resources to keep one individual safe, and acquiring those resources meant that a million people must starve, it's a bad deal. Friedman concludes that he doesn't know if the $200,000 number that Ford used was the right number to maximize the overall benefits, but at the end of the day the principle is that we can't simply protect ourselves from everything and impose that cost on others. Friedman posits that the question the student should be raising, is should Ford be required to attach the statement to the car, "we've made this car $13 cheaper, and therefore it is X% more risky for you to buy it".
Like to rate videos and let people know what you think?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
Like to share videos with friends?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
This video has been removed from your Favorites. (Undo)
Like to Favorite videos and let people know what you think?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
I really dont associate myself with either party,but you could say i lean to the right on most issues. I dont like to put a title on what i beleve in ,but if i did you could call me a freadom loving conservative libertarian if that makes any sense to you.
Right, I thought you meant you're anti-democracy! I'm British, hence the confusion (divided by a common language) Soz. I was in attack dog mode after needing to pwn some communist girl in a seminar at uni yesterday, who literally doesn't beleive in democracy and thinks certain people should control the market. People like that invariably do not consider what 100% control of the market entails: everything bad and uncompetitive, unfair and unequitable that we may find in capitalism is WORSE under
Well i think we are on the same page now. Here in the states we have a huge problem with the same stuff you have been describing. sorry about my Language earlier,
No problem! I should have realised you were referring to the Democratic Party. Anyway, this commie at uni doesn't understand how the market is more humane than some people having absolute control over the economic actions of the majority, because it works through negative not positive processes, ie it is natural and not an intervention. Where liberty produces unfair and inefficient results it can be regulated, but to destroy liberty is to entrench absolute unfair inefficiency, 100% mercantilism
In that sense it is feudalism but worse than we have known it before, because the rulers forcibly prevent any economic activity below them, so they can ordinate everything for equality-but it is a system of feudal inequality, where capitalism has been retarded to the state where it is fettered by subjugation preventing enterprise and efficiency and choice and freedom. Communism is effectively what we had 1000 years ago-the King and his Lords owning everything and everybody.
worse under communism because such communist leaders have absolute control over society and capital. Hence unilateral trade with China-their enslaved workers are presented to western comapnies as cheap labour, the proceeds go to state capitalist finances which continue the subjugation of chinese people, who have no ability to trade or profit from the wealth their labour creates, meaning they haev few imports. This keeps the dollar artifically high against the yuan. It's a communist scheme to
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.