Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Milton Friedman, RIP
Undoubtedly the most successful and influential proponent of libertarian thought in the 20th century, Milton Friedman, died last night at age 94. His successes as both a technical economist and libertarian polemicist are enormous. We can thank him, in large part, for happy events from the elimination of the draft to the conquest of inflation. Just a quick note now--his impact was staggering, and there could never be enough words said in praise of him.
My 1995 Reason interview with him.
A 2005 Reason interview, with Nick Gillespie, on his legacy of fighting for school choice.
His most recent Reason interview, with me, in our November issue, as part of a roundtable on the Federal Reserve.
Jacob Sullum's celebration of Friedman's 90th birthday.
|11.16.06 @ 12:51PM|#
I saw him speak at a conference in San Jose once (and met his
son, David)--he was as impressive in person as on paper.
A great man, and a great loss. R.I.P.
|11.16.06 @ 12:58PM|#
I was a strange bird in college, a non-economics major who loved
economics.
Thanks Mr. Friedman for helping me to open my eyes a little wider
and see things as they really are.
R.I.P.
|11.16.06 @ 1:02PM|#
A great and influential man. One of the greatest intellectuals of our time. R.I.P.
The Wine Commonsewer|11.16.06 @ 1:07PM|#
I was fortunate enough to see him in Cabo a few months ago. Yes,
just see. I mean, what do you say to Milton Friedman? I
felt intrusive enough just taking his
picture.
A tip of the glass.........
|11.16.06 @ 1:10PM|#
Sadly, another beacon of liberty has been extinguished. But Dr.
Friedman enlightened and energized a whole generation of
libertarians. We are his legacy; let's do what we can to make him
proud.
Condolences to David, Rose and the entire
Friedman family.
|11.16.06 @ 1:12PM|#
Milton Friedman dead and Paul Krugman still ranting at the NY Times. Is there no justice in this world?
|11.16.06 @ 1:12PM|#
I don't think it goes to far to echo Stanton's words upon Lincoln's death, and say Mr. Friedman now belongs to the ages. We stand upon the shoulders of giants.
|11.16.06 @ 1:18PM|#
The Wine Commonsewer,
I was amazed how short he was when I saw him. But he's a giant in
every other way!
By the way, isn't Cabo great? I kayaked to the arch, caught dolphin
(the fishing there is great), saw whales, sailed on a wooden ship,
and ate great Mexican food when I was there. And had some
awesome margaritas and mojitos (the latter being Cuban, but good
anyway). I also went to the best bar on the planet, El Squid
Roe.
Incidentally, the real Mexican Independence Day is 16 de
Septiembre.
I'm glad that you posted his picture. It looks like he was going
strong until the end. Pretty danged good for 94!
tomWright|11.16.06 @ 1:19PM|#
He was also as genuinely nice and decent a person as he was a
sharp and clear thinker.
And that is saying a lot.
|11.16.06 @ 1:19PM|#
John, I hesitate to type the name of the NYT columnist you mention in a thread devoted to news of the passing of Milton Friedman, but if anyone wishes to understand what popular writing from the vantage point of the economist is capable of, Friedman's columns in Newsweek are well worth reading today, to say the least. I wonder if they ever have been collected in book form.
|11.16.06 @ 1:24PM|#
Christ, doesn't anyone remember Murray Rothbard's take on
Friendman?
In fact, in this as in other such cases, suspicion is precisely the right response for the libertarian, for Professor Friedmans particular brand of "free-market economics" is hardly calculated to ruffle the feathers of the powers-that-be. Milton Friedman is the Establishment's Court Libertarian, and it is high time that libertarians awaken to this fact of life.
It's a shame anyone suffers and dies, but please, spare us the
hagiography which declares one of the guys who was responsible for
income tax withholding to be a libertarian champion.
The Wine Commonsewer|11.16.06 @ 1:26PM|#
Yes, Pro, Cabo was fab. As pricey as here, but we had a perfect
time.
However, I am still jonesing for Aloha...........
I, too, was amazed at how short he was.
|11.16.06 @ 1:26PM|#
Thank you, Mr. Friedman. May you rest in peace.
Here's to a great thinker and a great man.
|11.16.06 @ 1:31PM|#
My father got to have lunch with Dr. Friedman when he was in
college; I've always envied that. When I was younger, it was
Friedman who helped me transition from Rand-style libertarianism to
something more grown-up.
I've known this day would come, but it's still sad. Thanks for
everything, Doctor.
|11.16.06 @ 1:33PM|#
Will Allen,
The old PBS Friedman did in the late 70s or early 80s were
fabulous. I think every American ought to have to watch them before
being allowed to vote. I can't imagine what the typical lefty PBS
viewer must of thought of them and I still can't believe PBS agreed
to them.
|11.16.06 @ 1:34PM|#
So what was the bigger tragedy of the Nixon administration: Watergate, or Dick's doing pretty much the exact opposite of what his adviser Milton Friedman told him to do in economic policy?
|11.16.06 @ 1:35PM|#
The old PBS Friedman did in the late 70s or early 80s were
fabulous.
You can still see them on Google Video (just search Milton
Friedman).
|11.16.06 @ 1:43PM|#
One thing that ought to be mentioned on this thread that hasn't been is that Friedman definitely ended the myth that Hoover caused the great depression and Roosevelt's programs did anything to help it. His writings in the early 1960s on monetary policy and the mistakes the Federal Reserve made causing the depression are probably the most significant pieces of academic writing in economics in the last century. Before, Friedman economists were like doctors in the middle-ages, they had no idea was caused the malidies they were trying to treat and often their cures were worse than the diseases. After Friedman, economists at least knew how to do no harm.
|11.16.06 @ 1:51PM|#
Herrick, if one discounts that Watergate may have been one of
the chief reasons that the Cambodians were completely abandoned to
the tender mercies of Pol Pot, then it is easily argued that wage
and price controls, and the installation of Arthur Burns at the
Fed, made Watergate look like a minor slip-up.
Nixon was forced to resign for the lesser reason.
|11.16.06 @ 1:53PM|#
My intention is not to denegrate Dr. Friedman, but I have often
used him as an example of how the casual and pragmatic evil that we
do almost always outlives the most heroic of our valiant
efforts.
Payroll tax withholding was Milton Friedman's idea, but despite the
subsequent 50 years of writing, teaching and championing economic
freedom we remain burdened with this evil.
Payroll tax withholding is not just an evil intrusion into the
lives of workers, but it aids in the unfettered growth of
government which leads to further losses of freedom and more
taxes.
Rest peacefully, Milton Friedman. I pray that all your good ideas
will yet overcome that bad one.
|11.16.06 @ 1:54PM|#
Will Allen,
I never thought of it quite that way, but good point. Thinka bout
this, without Nixon's screwups not only do we not get the
stagflation of the 1970s, we also don't get the 20% interest rates
and horrific 1982 recession that were the result of Paul Volker's
fixing the problem.
The Wine Commonsewer|11.16.06 @ 2:04PM|#
On a similar note, several of my libertarian friends have never forgiven Reagan for instituting state income tax withholding in Californicate.
|11.16.06 @ 2:09PM|#
Nonny, yer right, maybe Miltie will roast in hell for his transgressions against the populace.
|11.16.06 @ 2:13PM|#
Pat
What a denigration of your grandfather, whom you presumably
actually knew. Your tears are too cheap. Get a grip.
|11.16.06 @ 2:16PM|#
"He's the man who made me a libertarian."
Herrick
Too bad he's dead, or I'd ask him to make me one? What material did
he use? Sawdust for the brains, I'll bet.
ed|11.16.06 @ 2:19PM|#
Rand-style libertarianism to something more
grown-up
If Objectivism is college, Libertarianism is 7th Grade.
|11.16.06 @ 2:21PM|#
NoStar
Do you really think that nobody would have thought of payroll tax
withholding if Friedman hadn't come up with it? The intensity of
your ideological commitment makes me think that maybe you're a
libertarian only because the maoists didn't get to you first.
|11.16.06 @ 2:25PM|#
Concerning withholding taxes, I hate taxes as much as anyone, but we do have to have a government and to do that we need taxes. The income tax is a pretty efficient and fair tax when compared to other forms of taxes such as property taxes and ad volum taxes. It is not Friedman's fault that the government went bizerk with payroll taxes. Further, even if no on had ever thought of payroll taxes, you don't think the government couldn't collect too many taxes using other forms of taxation? Do you people really believe that the only way the government can over tax people is through the evil payroll tax? If you do, you have never lived in a state with high property and sales taxes.
|11.16.06 @ 2:27PM|#
John,
I saw reference to a book called There's No Such Thing as a
Free Lunch, which is a collection of his Newsweek
columns. I think it was published in 1977 or so.
|11.16.06 @ 2:27PM|#
Is it impossible to find a collection of Friedman's Newsweek
columns?
Yes John, according to an earlier post by asg there in book form.
You can buy the book on amazon.com
http://www.amazon.com/Bright-Promises-Dismal-Performance-Economists/dp/0156141612/sr=8-1/qid=1163701256/ref=sr_1_1/102-0877217-5874546?ie=UTF8&s=books&tag=reasonmagazineA
I not sure if they are on the web though
|11.16.06 @ 2:28PM|#
A telling Friedman quote:
http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/fri0int-2
"My parents were Orthodox Jews, but they weren't fanatic about it.
They observed the dietary laws and so on, but there was nothing
fanatical about it. They weren't, but I was. In my early years, I
was fanatic about it. If this was right, this was the religion, you
should do what you had to do, and so I was scrupulous, at about the
age of 11 or 12, maybe 13. Not quite 13, I guess. Ten, 11 or 12. I
was an enormously observant Jew. I remember once going on a joint
Boy Scout trip, a trip with a number of Boy Scout troops, in which
they were going to have hot dogs for lunch. They were not Kosher
hot dogs, so I ran away, because I didn't have the courage to stand
up and say I wasn't going to eat them. That was a defect in my
character, and I simply ran away. But then, somehow or another, and
I don't know where, I began to question it. When I finally decided
that there was no fundamental basis for it, that all of this was
mostly myths and prejudice, then I went the other way. My wife will
tell you that I became fanatically anti-religious."
PROF MAPLE|11.16.06 @ 2:29PM|#
He never ever gave up his fight against the "Distroyers" of
Education,the NEA.
Plaese note, I attented a public school as a LAD , and known first
hand what these people care and do not care about.
|11.16.06 @ 2:33PM|#
I always found it incredible that so many people listened to
Galbraith rather than Friedman.
Friedman will be missed.
Lord Duppy|11.16.06 @ 2:33PM|#
Joe, I like you pretty well and don't typically think you're a troll, but do you have to mock people paying their respects? Regardless of how cheesy some people might get, I doubt you'd act like so if you weren't shielded by the anonymity of the Internet.
|11.16.06 @ 2:34PM|#
Prof Maple
"Plaese [sic]note, I attented [sic]a public school as a LAD , and
known [sic] first hand what these people care and do not care
about."
I assume you flunked out.
|11.16.06 @ 2:35PM|#
"He's the man who made me a libertarian."
Herrick and his Balls,
Shouldn't that read, "He's the man who made us
libertarians?
Or do your Balls still hang to the left? Or to the right? Or
perhaps one swings left and the other swings right. If the one on
the right goes left and the one on the left hangs a right, this
could be a knotty problem of near Gordian proportions.
I do hope to honor Milton Friedman, you Let them Be Free!
|11.16.06 @ 2:38PM|#
Friedman has had lasting influence in mostly the right
direction. It is easy for Rothbard to sneer from his favored
position of irrelevance.
RIP Dr. Friedman
|11.16.06 @ 2:38PM|#
Joe,
I had been more of a big government type back in the day because I
did and still do have the liberal inclination to help the poor and
downtrodden. Friedman's work more than any one else's convinced me
that a much more effective way for a government to help the
unfortunate is to maintain a free market economy rather than
dirigisme or bureaucracy-driven welfare programs.
Thomas Paine\'s Goiter|11.16.06 @ 2:40PM|#
Milton will be sorely missed, though both his son and his grandson may someday be as original and influential as he.
The Wine Commonsewer|11.16.06 @ 2:40PM|#
Income tax withholding was instituted because during the war there were simply too many people like my grandfather who spent all his money on womanizing, gambling, drinking, and smokes. When the tax man came to the door he just shrugged, grinned, and said sorry boys, I'm broke. Can't get blood out of a turnip and all that.
|11.16.06 @ 2:42PM|#
Thanks for the link for the book. Friedman will definately be mourned in Estonia.
|11.16.06 @ 2:43PM|#
Lord Duppy,
I daresay this is a different "Joe". At least, it's not Captain
Former-Planner Democrat and Massachusetts-Lovin' joe.
|11.16.06 @ 2:44PM|#
At long last can we finally now universally agree that Joe is
nothing but a simple troll and ignore him?
It's a sad day, but 94 is a hell of a run and he did a hell of a
lot for a whole bunch of people. He shall be missed.
|11.16.06 @ 2:46PM|#
Why do ideologues so desperately need Heroes? Friedman was just an economist. Economics isn't some metaphysical system that generates immutable truths that can be turned into sacred dogma. What we should honor is the disinterested open-minded investigation that is the hallmark of science. All this canonization and adulation is an enormous denigration of the man and his fallible scholarship.
|11.16.06 @ 2:48PM|#
Joe,
It will take someone with better libertarian credentials than yours
to question my ideological commitment and its intensity.
You are, are you not, a proponent and an enforcer of zoning
laws?
|11.16.06 @ 2:54PM|#
Note the capital "J". As Pro Libertate pointed out, not the "joe" who is a know-it-all urban planner liberal.
|11.16.06 @ 2:55PM|#
Joe typed
"He's the man who made me a libertarian."
Herrick
Too bad he's dead, or I'd ask him to make me one? What material did
he use? Sawdust for the brains, I'll bet.
LAMO...In the midst of all the e-ulogizing this is the funniest
thing I've read/heard all day.
|11.16.06 @ 2:56PM|#
I'm a libertarian. I want government out of the bedroom. I love the free market and free speech. I believe that "troll" is a word mutual self-masturbators use to shut out anybody who intefers with their fun, the sort of people who like only free speech they agree with. I guess I forgot to genuflect.
|11.16.06 @ 2:57PM|#
Friedman was my hero.
His Free to Choose PBS series (what were they thinking?) and book
did more to convert me than anything else. I followed up with a
Cato seminar attended by many well known (at that time) lib's,
including a young Walter Williams (who we hung out with over a few
[many?] beers) and that was it. My liberal days were over.
He had the ability to debate in a rational, professional and polite
manner, and yet devastate others' arguments.
I love his recent quote on open borders, (paraphrased) "Sure, a
great idea, if we didn't have a welfare state."
|11.16.06 @ 3:03PM|#
NoStar
Read my post again. Far from questioning your ideological
commitment and its intensity, I compared it to that of the maoists.
You are one committed ideologue.
|11.16.06 @ 3:05PM|#
Joe:
Somehow I don't think Pinochet would have been any less of a
murderous bastard if we had him institute the state-capitalist
systems that our puppets in South Korea, Taiwan, or Iran utilized.
On the other hand (even though this will get me crucified as a
heretic on this board), a system more like that of SK or Taiwan
probably would have served Chile slightly better. I wouldn't blame
Pinochet on Friedman; I'd blame Pinochet on the idiots who
installed him.
Thomas Paine\'s Goiter|11.16.06 @ 3:05PM|#
I love his recent quote on open borders, (paraphrased)
"Sure, a great idea, if we didn't have a welfare state."
Which is unfortunately being used by the fence-builders as evidence
that libertarians want a fence too.
|11.16.06 @ 3:08PM|#
Milton Friedman is also the father of Cariadoc of the Bow, the first King of the Middle Kingdom in the Society for Creative Anachronism.
|11.16.06 @ 3:08PM|#
"Which is unfortunately being used by the fence-builders as
evidence that libertarians want a fence too."
It doesn't change how right he was. It is not that libertarians
don't want a fence, they don't, it is that they won't face the sad
reality that the welfare state is never going away.
|11.16.06 @ 3:09PM|#
I've got a tear in my eye, but it's hard to be sad.
What more could someone with such a titanic intellect want than to
put forth and be remembered for good ideas that will live
forever?
|11.16.06 @ 3:14PM|#
Postmodern
Friedman's willing collaboration with the murderous Pinochet makes
me wonder about his commitment to freedom. But I forgot. He's a
saint now that he's dead. Sorry.
|11.16.06 @ 3:16PM|#
I believe that "troll" is a word mutual self-masturbators
use to shut out anybody who intefers with their fun, the sort of
people who like only free speech they agree with.
Joe, you are correct. Free speech is wonderful! You are not only a
troll, you are an ass. Genuflection aside, claiming that people
have "sawdust for brains" and that they are libertarians only
because "maoists didn't get to them first" is trolling. Typical
asshat troll doesn't even use a real email address.
|11.16.06 @ 3:22PM|#
Kwix
Oh, so that's what trolling is! Thanks, Kwix. Does calling me an
ass and an asshat troll make you a troll then?
|11.16.06 @ 3:23PM|#
Oh well another monetarist has passed.....apparently addition injections of liquidity were unable to rescusitate him!
|11.16.06 @ 3:24PM|#
Oops, I see I confused one joe with another.
Hit&Run has become sloppy with joes.
I believe "joe" was here first. Could the rest of of the "Joes"
please do something more than capitalize their moniker to
differentiate themselves. Use an initial, add an umlaut. Help us
out here.
Hit&Run could use a scorecard with a roster list. "Get yer
scorecard here. Ya can't tell the trolls without a
scorecard!"
|11.16.06 @ 3:30PM|#
By the way, Kwix, I never claimed that anybody actually has sawdust for brains. It was just a joke. Did I hit a sore spot?
|11.16.06 @ 3:31PM|#
My sincerest condolences to Rose, who now faces life without her partner of many decades.
|11.16.06 @ 3:32PM|#
I'd have preferred the suggested umlaut: Jöseph. It's angrier. Like Götterdämmerung.
ed|11.16.06 @ 3:38PM|#
Rose, who now faces life without her partner of many
decades.
Well, she's pretty old too...
The Wine Commonsewer|11.16.06 @ 3:39PM|#
Robert Redford's willing collaboration with the murderous Castro makes me wonder about his commitment to freedom.
|11.16.06 @ 3:41PM|#
From the corner today. From a letter from Friedman to Bill
Bennett concerning drug legalization. Here is hopeing Bennet
managed to absorb some of it in between gambling binges.
You are not mistaken in believing that drugs are a scourge that is
devastating our society. You are not mistaken in believing that
drugs are tearing asunder our social fabric, ruining the lives of
many young people, and imposing heavy costs on some of the most
disadvantaged among us. You are not mistaken in believing that the
majority of the public share your concerns. In short, you are not
mistaken in the end you seek to achieve. Your mistake is failing to
recognize that the very measures you favor are a major source of
the evils you deplore. Of course the problem is demand, but it is
not only demand, it is demand that must operate through repressed
and illegal channels. Illegality creates obscene profits that
finance the murderous tactics of the drug lords; illegality leads
to the corruption of law enforcement officials; illegality
monopolizes the efforts of honest law forces so that they are
starved for resources to fight the simpler crimes of robbery, theft
and assault. Drugs are a tragedy for addicts. But criminalizing
their use converts that tragedy into a disaster for society, for
users and non-users alike. Our experience with the prohibition of
drugs is a replay of our experience with the prohibition of
alcoholic beverages. "
|11.16.06 @ 3:42PM|#
So so it's clear, this is my first post on this thread.
Friedman was wrong about most everything, but he was a genuine
intellectual and moved the conversation forward.
I'm sure he and Galbraith are going at right now in Heaven.
RIP.
|11.16.06 @ 3:42PM|#
"But I forgot. He's a saint now that he's dead. Sorry."
Joe:
In 2002, when Paul Wellstone was killed in a plane crash, a friend
of mine- who is a very conservative Minnesotan blogger and opponent
of Wellstone- wrote an entirely snark-free tribute to the man, and
attacked several other bloggers for a notable lack of respect for
the dead. I don't know about you, but where I come from, insulting
mourners is a quick way to get a punch in the face. Being dead
doesn't make one a saint- but I can't say that spitting on
Friedman's grave is called for, either.
|11.16.06 @ 3:44PM|#
"Friedman was wrong about most everything, but he was a genuine
intellectual and moved the conversation forward"
Yeah,
He was just right about montary policy, the causes of inflation and
the root causes of the great depression. Just little things like
that. I have no doubt Friedman is doing much conversing with
Galbraith right now, since Galbraith is no doubt in a pit of
purgatory atoning for his horrible economic thinking and the damage
it did.
|11.16.06 @ 3:45PM|#
BTW, quite a few of you were real shits on the thread about Galbraith's passing.
|11.16.06 @ 3:45PM|#
"Robert Redford's willing collaboration with the murderous
Castro makes me wonder about his commitment to freedom."
Me too. Leftists like Redford have long been rather tolerant of
Castro's butchery.
|11.16.06 @ 3:46PM|#
I have tears too. Milton Friedman contributed greatly to the
liberty and prosperity of our country and others by shattering the
prevailing liberal/left statist orthodoxy and pointing the way to
the many benefits of economic liberty including the diminution of
other liberties when economic liberty is reduced.
His scholarly accomplishments include monetary history and theory
and his demonstration of the complexity of stabilization policy for
which he won the Nobel Prize. In doing what he loved, Milton
enriched many lives.
Comfort to his family and friends.
|11.16.06 @ 3:46PM|#
Galbraith was not a bad guy personally, but he was dead wrong about a lot of things and his thinking hurt a lot of people and to this day are used to justify a lot of stupid ideas and damaging policies. I am sure he was a great guy to have dinner with. I am just sorry he never realized the errors of his ways.
|11.16.06 @ 3:48PM|#
Postmodern
There is a big difference between refusing to endorse a
canonization and spitting on a grave.
|11.16.06 @ 3:49PM|#
joe,
Galbraith was wrong about most everything, but he was a genuine
intellectual and moved the conversation forward.
There. Better? :)
By the way, maybe you should use the umlaut. I can't
figure out why we have so many "Joes", but they keep popping up and
confusing everyone.
|11.16.06 @ 3:50PM|#
Joe
Milton Friedman never had a "willing" (or any other kind
of) "collaboration with the murderous Pinochet".
You are perhaps thinking of the graduates of the University of
Chicago (who were inaccurately referred to as disciples of Milton
Friedman) who advised the Chilean Government on economic
matters.
Friedman himelf was never and advisor to the Pinochet
regime and the only statements I heard him make about Pinochet were
critical.
This is a sad day. RIP.
|11.16.06 @ 3:50PM|#
How about a moment of silence for the dead victims of Friedman's friend Pinochet?
|11.16.06 @ 3:51PM|#
Milton & Rose Friedman's book "Free to Choose" was the required reading book at my college my sophomore year. It was nothing short of an epiphany for me. Later, I saw Mr. Friedman on the Donahue show espousing - horror of horrors - privatising social security. Donahue worked his audience up into loud booing, but Friedman stood firm with a very eloquent and logical defense of his position. I never met the man, but I loved him. A truly great man has died. We are all better off because he lived in the world. He will be sorely missed.
|11.16.06 @ 3:52PM|#
PL,
That was much more gracious than what John had to say on that
thread.
BTW, I'm joe, the real joe, and all you other joes are just
imitating.
So won't the real joe please hit post. please hit post. please hit
post.
I know about that rap music you kids do. That hippity-hop. I'm one
hippity-hop cat.
|11.16.06 @ 3:56PM|#
"Me too. Leftists like Redford have long been rather tolerant of
Castro's butchery."
According to Postmodern Roommate and her mom, Castro never
butchered anyone except land-stealing criminals that deserved it.
They like to heap scorn upon Pinochet and Shah Palavhi,
however.
|11.16.06 @ 3:57PM|#
Joe:
Friedman was wrong about most everything
That's a lot. Elaborate. I'm not really expecting much from
you, Joe as your comments in this thread have revealed a profound
lack of knowledge of the subject along with an abundance of silly
Non sequiturs.
You've also displayed callous poor taste.
|11.16.06 @ 4:02PM|#
Rick Barton,
Joe != joe
Joe(Joseph) = non sequiturs and poor taste
joe = "Friedman was wrong about most everything"
|11.16.06 @ 4:04PM|#
"You are one committed ideologue."
Dear Joseph/Joe,
I commend your restraint for not adding and one ideologue that
should be committed"...
or was that simply an oversite?
|11.16.06 @ 4:07PM|#
Huh. joe, I'd watch out, because your identity is being
threatened. Why, I don't even believe that Dan T. even exists after
all his impersonators got through. Virtual existence is such a
tenuous thing. . . .
Incidentally, I forgot to tell you that Friedman was right about
almost everything :)
|11.16.06 @ 4:07PM|#
Just so it's clear, this is also MY first post on this thread. Just wanted to say that Milton Friedman was a certified badass, and he'll be missed. Thank goodness we had someone to carry the torch of capitalism and lbiertarianism through the second half of the 20th century.
|11.16.06 @ 4:08PM|#
Rick Barton,
I don't intend to elaborate, because my comment was deliberate
vague, and meant only to show goodwill across an ideological
divide.
|11.16.06 @ 4:09PM|#
(Not only that, but he's deathly afraid of being proven wrong on every point... as usual. Poor little Marxist.)
|11.16.06 @ 4:10PM|#
How's this:
Conservatism accomplishes good to the extent that it furthers
self-correction and humility within liberalism, and Milton Friedman
accomplished a great deal of good in helping American liberalism to
avoid overreaching.
|11.16.06 @ 4:13PM|#
Very diplomatic, joe. Of course, I would call Friedman a classic liberal, too (unlike the neoMarxist hijacking of the term in vogue today...)
|11.16.06 @ 4:17PM|#
Hey, joe, can we have "liberal" back? Y'all ain't using it anymore, after all. And it would be a nice tribute to Dr. Friedman.
wingnutx|11.16.06 @ 4:19PM|#
The old PBS Friedman did in the late 70s or early 80s
were fabulous. I think every American ought to have to watch them
before being allowed to vote. I can't imagine what the typical
lefty PBS viewer must of thought of them and I still can't believe
PBS agreed to them.
They were rammed down PBS' throat.
from Tim Graham, via the corner:
The last chapter in my friend Laurence Jarvik's terrific book "PBS:
Behind the Screen" explains how Milton Friedman's groundbreaking
PBS series "Free to Choose" made such an impact. It certainly did
on 16-year-old me. Jarvik reported the free-market series on PBS
was given, as you might expect, a difficult berth on the
taxpayer-funded liberal network, as in New York, where it was shown
opposite the Super Bowl:
"Yet in at least one case, PBS aired a blockbuster miniseries
unwillingly, a program it neither purchased, funded, nor
commissioned, and which it fought to keep off the national schedule
every step of the way - as it had with the Mobil Masterpiece
Theatre production of the similarly successful 'Upstairs,
Downstairs.' The year was 1980, the same year Cosmos aired, and the
program was Milton Friedman's ten-part documentary miniseries Free
to Choose: The Importance of Free Markets to Personal and Political
Freedom. Despite its scheduling problems, the series was extremely
successful. The companion volume by Friedman, and his wife, Rose,
was on the New York Times bestseller list for a year and was the
best-selling nonfiction book of 1980. The sales, which made
Friedman a millionaire, did much to expose American audiences to
economic ideas that were crucial to understanding what would be
called the Reagan revolution…
Heh.
|11.16.06 @ 4:38PM|#
Clean Hands, Pro Libertate,
Those of us whose liberalism can account for the changes wrought by
the industrial revolution have are under no obligation to limit the
use of the term to those liberals still stuck in 1800.
|11.16.06 @ 4:46PM|#
Watch it, joe, or I'll give you a liberal piece of my mind
:)
Stuck in 1800, indeed. Are you repudiating the Constitution? See? I
am armed in adamantine snarkiness.
Look, you take Progressive back from the music industry--where it
has no meaning--and we'll take Liberal back in politics. And, if
you act now, we'll let you have this this marble statue of Thomas
Jefferson. . .at no additional charge! Our representatives are
standing by.
|11.16.06 @ 4:48PM|#
"Changes wrought by industrial revolution" = "Everything we ever
said before about limited government? Toss it out."
And lo, an apple becomes an orange.
Brian Defferding|11.16.06 @ 4:49PM|#
One of the greatest economists of the 20th century, and a
tireless fighter.
What an incredible loss. I will miss him.
|11.16.06 @ 4:56PM|#
pshaw. Your adamantine snarkiness is no match for my casual
condescention! Take that, libertoid freak!
"Look, you take Progressive back from the music industry..." No
way, man. Peter Gabriel got latex adhesive all over it, and Rick
Wakeman stretched it all out. I don't want it.
Give me an L!...you know, don't. Cuz I totally wouldn't want to
make you uncomfortable. Maybe we should just hug.
|11.16.06 @ 5:00PM|#
One of the greatest economists of the 20th century, and a
tireless fighter.
Maybe not so tireless anymore.
Damn my smart ass.
|11.16.06 @ 5:03PM|#
joe,
I've got it figured out. You're a Classical Progressive. Stuck in
1900. Like we Classical Liberals are stuck in 1800. I feel like
everything is now properly labeled.
Sorry for the threadjacking, everyone. Friedman was great and
deserves further praise. I'm curious to see what some of the
luminaries out there have to say about him. I might go check out
VP's site to see what she has to say, now that I think about
it.
|11.16.06 @ 5:06PM|#
132 comments on a thread that didn't involve Julian insulting the crying daughter of a deposed right-wing Senator... very impressive.
|11.16.06 @ 5:13PM|#
"132 comments on a thread that didn't involve Julian insulting
the crying daughter of a deposed right-wing Senator... very
impressive."
However, we did manage to turn a memorial into one of our usual
snarky exchanges with a generous helping of ad hominem and
non-sequiturs. ;)
|11.16.06 @ 5:16PM|#
Aresen,
Except for Jöseph's contributions, I think that's my fault. Sorry.
Friedman was the best of us libertarian folk and will be missed
tremendously. If we could produce more people like him, with the
right ideas and the ability to influence people to adopt those
ideas, maybe we'd see Libertopia in our lifetimes.
|11.16.06 @ 5:27PM|#
Rick
"Who will support chilean dictators now?"
Dunno. But I'm sure the liberals will continue to support the Cuban
one.
|11.16.06 @ 5:40PM|#
BTW, quite a few of you were real shits on the thread about
Galbraith's passing.
This
thread? There are a couple of insults ("glib old windbag",
"evil man") and several honest dismissals of his work that lacked
the backhanded smarm of your take on Friedman. Of the people from
that thread actually in this thread, Rick Barton made the
same "comfort to his family and friends" remark.
I don't see much shittiness there at all, those two aforementioned
insults aside.
|11.16.06 @ 5:41PM|#
Friedman was a good man and I have to say I am pretty irritated
to see a lot of snarky, sub-adolescent folk making dumb comments
here. (Did he "support Chilean dictators", as some dickhead
claims?
Friedman did not get everything right (who does?), and I suppose
compared to some utopian model of perfection, he fell a bit short.
But really, on the big issues: the role of the state, inflation,
trade, the draft, the war on drugs, education....he got them right,
and is being proved right now. He also opposed the invasion of Iraq
and was a skeptic about Bush's brand of conservatism years before
most commentators. He was a liberal in the truest sense -- ie, not
American but British - use of that word.
Someone else mentioned the rude reactions of some to the death of
JK Galbraith as a sort of contrast. The rudeness was pretty nasty I
will concede, but the problem with Galbraith was that he was on the
wrong side of the sort of arguments we are talking about and
dismissed the importance of liberty. He was what I would call a
professional smart-alec, but there was not much substance. Friedman
was of a different order.
His influence, overwhelmingly positive, will endure. RIP.
|11.16.06 @ 6:18PM|#
I recall first reading Friedman's piece extolling a flat rate income tax in an issue of Playboy sometime in the early '70s. It not only illustrated that some people did read Playboy for the articles, but was the most enlightening view on economic and taxation policy I had encountered to that date. That article was key to forming many of my political/economic beliefs today. RIP
lunchstealer|11.16.06 @ 6:39PM|#
I can't help but think of the stories of Milton and Rose together. By all accounts, not just tremendous contributors to economic and libertarian thought, but genuinely delightful people as well. My thoughts and condolences to Rose and the Friedman family.
|11.16.06 @ 7:14PM|#
So let me get this straight: Milton Friedman discovered
monetarism. He was the first one to write that it was expansions in
the money supply that caused inflation.
So during the 1930s, when places like Germany were cranking out
legal tender around the clock, and prices were increasing by 2000%
per year, they had no idea that the two were related. They watched
prices rise, were at a loss to explain why that kept happening, and
went on printing money, completely oblivious.
Is that accurate?
Lord Duppy|11.16.06 @ 7:25PM|#
I don't really care whether he "discovered" monetarism. I don't
even care about his Nobel. "Free to Choose" resonated with me more
than anything I have ever read, and for that alone I owe him a
great deal of respect.
joe, I apologise for thinking capitalized Joe was you.
Lord Duppy|11.16.06 @ 7:28PM|#
Regarding Pinochet. From a Q/A session after Friedman's short
lecture "The Drug War as a Socialist Enterprise" (well worth
reading - click my name for reference.)
Trebach: This question says you supported Pinochet or advised
Pinochet.
Friedman: I never advised Pinochet. I never supported
Pinochet.
Trebach: We'll throw that one away.
Friedman: But hold on. No, I don't want to evade the
question.
Trebachi: All right.
Friedman: Chile was a case in which a military regime, headed by
Pinochet, was willing to switch the organization of the economy
from a top-down to a bottom-up mode. In that process, a group of
people who had been trained at the University of Chicago in the
Department of Economics, who came to be called the Chicago Boys,
played a major role in designing and implementing the economic
reforrns. The real miracle in Chile was not that those economic
reforms worked so well, because that's what Adam Smith said they
would do. Chile is by all odds the best economic success story in
Latin America today.
The real miracle is that a military junta was willing to let them
do it. As I said to begin with, the principle of the military is
from the top down. The principle of a market is from the bottom up.
It's a real miracle that a mititary group was willing to let a
bottom-up approach take over. I did make a trip to Chile and I gave
talks in Chile. In fact, I did meet with Mr. Pinochet, but I never
was an adviser to him, and I never got a penny from the Chdean
government. But I will say that that process led to a situation in
which you were able to get an election which ended the military
junta. You now have a democratic government in Chile. There is as
yet no similar example from the world of entirely socialist
states.
So, I was not an adviser to Pinochet. I was not an adviser to the
Chilean government, but I am more thanwifling to share in the
credit for the extraordinary job that our students did down
there.
|11.16.06 @ 7:29PM|#
Did he "support Chilean dictators", as some dickhead
claims?
No. See my post at 3:50pm.
Although the canard that he was an "advisor" to Pinochet continues
to be told. It was repeated on All Things Considered on
NPR this evening.
|11.16.06 @ 7:30PM|#
My condolences to Rose and thre Friedman family.
Uncle Milty will be missed by all friends of liberty.
TWC|11.16.06 @ 7:39PM|#
Eric makes a good point besides which, this thread is ours. It would have been unkind to go to a lefty thread and bag on Galbraith on the day of his death.
Robert R.|11.16.06 @ 7:41PM|#
Ironically, many who insist that they are "pro-choice" are opposed to the ideas expressed in Free to Choose.
|11.16.06 @ 8:04PM|#
A sad day... as an econ major, he was one of the few we studied
that made sense.
And, yes, there are criticisms of M.F. to be made just as there are
of Rothbard, Hayek, and the rest of the crew. But, no other 20th
century economist brought conservative and/or libertarian theory
more into mainstream America than he.
Paul|11.16.06 @ 8:17PM|#
NPR Obit: Friedman was interesting and all, but...[insert criticism from hack from American Prospect]
Guillermo Pineda|11.16.06 @ 9:06PM|#
Mi más sincero pésame a Rose y David. Sus logros nunca serán olvidados y continuaremos la lucha por la Libertad individual y una sociedad próspera fundamentada en el Estado de Derecho y el respeto de la libertad individual de actuar en el libre comercio sin coerción ni privilegios.
|11.16.06 @ 9:55PM|#
Gary Becker's Business Week columns inspired me, an engineering
grad student, to apply to the University of Chicago B-school 13 yrs
ago. Once there I discovered Professor Friedman's legacy, the
fruits of which transformed my life and work.
What a towering and thoughtful presence. What a wonderfully lived
life. He'll live on for many, many years. Thanks to both Milton and
Rose Friedman for all they have given us.
Robert Goodman|11.16.06 @ 11:21PM|#
Wha'd he die of? Yeah, not as big a deal at his age, but I gotta know.
|11.17.06 @ 12:18AM|#
As a public policy advocate Friedman had priorities. I believe
the six causes he MOST associated himself with were...
1.) Monetary discipline
2.) Abolishing conscription
3.) Social Security reform
4.) Educational choice
5.) A Flat Tax
6.) Drug legalization
He flat-out won the public policy debate on the first two issues.
At least introduced the next two into the public discussion.
And for the last two...well, no soap!
Not bad. Who else has been a comparable influence for good?
A couple of things he WASN'T: he was neither a Deficit Hawk, nor a
Supply-Sider. He saw no point in "taxing up" to balance the budget
for a bloated government, nor "taxing down" to shift the same
bloated government into deficit.
He was a Monetarist, not a Keynesian. He did not believe fiscal
effects were important, and always contended that the real burden
of government was what government spends - the cureent stream of
goods and services commandeered by the state, whether obtained by
direct conscription, or from the credit markets.
|11.17.06 @ 1:36AM|#
The Wine Commonsewer,
Kudos on the nice pic of Milton and your intriging web site:
http://www.winecommonsewer.com/the_wine_commonsewer/2006/05/milton_friedman.html
|11.17.06 @ 1:39AM|#
Rose and David Friedman,
Many of us here want you to know that we loved Milton too.
|11.17.06 @ 1:58AM|#
I thought I'd posted on this topic before, or did I dream
it?
Anyway, RIP, Milton Friedman.
|11.17.06 @ 3:46AM|#
I met David Friedman several times, and if it is true that
certain traits are inherited, then his dad must have been a very
likeable person, as well as wise and right on the big issues.
My condolences to the Friedman family. May they continue Milton's
good work. I am sure that they will.
|11.17.06 @ 8:25AM|#
When I was an impressionable young man, I remember a teacher who
waxed effusively about Maynard Keynes, and introduced Milton
Friedman as a foil. But even through the leftist smokescreen of
that first lesson, I discovered how brilliant Friedman was, and
became a true believer in supply-side economics.
Friedman is simply one of the greatest men who has ever lived.
|11.17.06 @ 11:47AM|#
Friedman certainly "supported" Pinochet far more than these
mythological liberals "support" Castro. He liked to say that he
didn't support Pinochet, but then again, the CIA also likes to say
that. Let's go to the tape.
"I am not now, and never have been, an economic adviser to the Pinochet Chilean junta. I spent six days at the end of March 1975 in Chile under the auspices of a private Chilean bank. I gave public lectures and seminars on inflation, talked to many citizens from different walks of life and met with many government officials, including General Pinochet. That was my first and only visit to Chile, and my only contact with Chilean government officials."
|11.17.06 @ 12:43PM|#
Somebody upthread mentioned the open-borders issue.
Check out this quote from Milton Friedman (Free to Choose, book
198011, PBS series12):
"When the law contradicts what most people regard as moral
and proper, they will break the law -- whether the law is enacted
in the name of a noble ideal ... or in the naked interest of one
group at the expense of another."
I'm sure he didn't have illegal immigration in mind when he said
this. But boy does it bring illegal immigration to my mind
when I read it.
Come to think of it, drug prohibition applies as well.
|11.17.06 @ 12:49PM|#
I'm a libertarian. I want government out of the bedroom. I
love the free market and free speech.
Well Joe if that is true then why were you telling me to shut up
because I didn't have the proper education to discuss a particular
subject.
Liberal arts degree...BWAHAHHAHAHA!
|11.17.06 @ 1:24PM|#
I wonder if Friedman's being mourned in Chile.
If not they should be...from the CIA factbook they will soon be
doing better then France:
GDP - real growth rate: 6.3% (2005 est.)
GDP - per capita (PPP): $11,900 (2005 est.)
GDP - composition by sector:
agriculture: 6%
industry: 49.3%
services: 44.7% (2005 est.)
Labor force: 6.3 million (2005 est.)
Labor force - by occupation:
agriculture: 13.6%
industry: 23.4%
services: 63% (2003)
Unemployment rate: 8.1% (2005 est.)
It must be their private social security accounts that they hate
Friedman so much for.
|11.17.06 @ 1:50PM|#
joshua,
That wasn't me you dipshit.
I was wondering what you meant on the other thread.
|11.17.06 @ 1:57PM|#
Well done, neil. You managed to repeat the lie that Milton
Friedman supported Pinochet, and followed up with a quote
demonstrating its falsehood.
As many times as this lie is repeated I can understand why it is so
widely believed. But when one continues to repeat it after being
shown its falseness one has crossed from being mistaken to being a
liar.
And as for "mythical" liberals the list of leftwing intellectuals
and celebrities who have visited Cuba and praised the
accomplishments and greatness of Fidel is practically endless.
|11.17.06 @ 2:21PM|#
joe,
Your very existence is coming into question, thanks to all the
other "Joes". I'd sue. Otherwise, you'll become transparent like
Michael J. Fox's family in Back to the Future.
|11.17.06 @ 3:16PM|#
And congratulations to you, Isaac; you fell right into my trap: claiming that what Friedman did with Pinochet's Chile wasn't "support," and then spinning around and attacking an endless (and beginning-less) list of liberals for doing the same thing in Cuba: visiting on a junket, meeting with government officials, coming back talking about how wonderfully Miraculous things are there. Oh, but they aren't advisers, no no. Just admirers, well-wishers, enablers.
|11.17.06 @ 3:31PM|#
neil,
Clearly, you need to review Peter's Evil
Overlord List. Don't compliment your enemies for
falling into your trap. Simply vanquish them.
|11.17.06 @ 3:45PM|#
"Chile is an even more amazing political miracle. A military
regime has supported reforms that sharply reduce the role of the
state and replace control from the top with control from the
bottom..." -- Milton Friedman, Newsweek , January 25, 1982
I don't suppose he was making an ironic reference to the fact that
the regime hadn't allowed elections for nearly 10 years at that
point, do you?
|11.17.06 @ 4:04PM|#
A regime which refuses to hold elections is not one that's
committed to 'control from the bottom.' (To be fair, Friedman made
this comparison explicit in other speeches, preferring to spin it
that it was miraculous that a top-down military organization would
embrace 'bottom-up' economics. I think it's more fair to say they
had no such miraculous commitment to bottom-up anything, and their
policy was one that Friedman believed was fundamentally 'bottom-up'
even if it didn't look that way to the guys in charge.)
"Chile, as you know, was first taken over by Salvador Allende and a
socialist group...Allende's policies provoked the military to
overthrow him and set up a military junta led by General Pinochet
to run the country." -- Milton Friedman,
1991
So winning an election means 'taking over', but a forcible
overthrow of the government means you were 'provoked.' And surely
the massive amount of capital that the U.S. spent on creating
disorder didn't provoke the military.. no, it was just Allende's
anti-free-market policies. Policies like nationalizing the copper
industry. Oh wait, Pinochet continued the nationalization of
copper.. well, anyway, socialism is bad, m'kay?
But wait, there's more: "In Chile, the drive for political freedom,
that was generated by ecoriomic freedom and the resulting economic
success, ultimately resulted in a referendum that introduced
political democracy." That's right -- the centuries-old democratic
tradition in Chile, the most durable in Latin America before
Pinochet, is all thanks to the economic reforms introduced at the
barrel of a gun and praised by Friedman. And exactly why was it
that economic freedom took nearly 20 years to generate an election?
It seems that the lack of economic freedom that came before had a
better track record than that. Say what you will about Friedman's
responsibility for Chile, but I don't believe he'd have say
something this baldly absurd if he weren't ashamed of his support
for the regime.
|11.17.06 @ 4:10PM|#
Friedman made it abundantly clear then and later that he was
surprised that a government like that would pursue such economic
reforms. Hardly endorsing or supporting that sort of regime.
Friedman has been a consistent champion of freedom and deserves
better. If he thought that the greater economic freedom might lead
to greater political freedom, he wouldn't have been the first to
think so. And he might've been right.
This all stems from the fact that the Chicago Boys did
advise Pinochet. But Friedman wasn't one of them.
|11.17.06 @ 4:38PM|#
I think Neil got you, Isaac.
If "Cuba has universal health care and universal literacy" counts
as supporting Castro, then "Chile is an even more amazing political
miracle. A military regime has supported reforms that sharply
reduce the role of the state and replace control from the top with
control from the bottom..." counts as supporting Pinochet.
If justifying the Cuban revolution by tallking smack about Batista
counts as supporting Castro, then "Chile, as you know, was first
taken over by Salvador Allende and a socialist group...Allende's
policies provoked the military to overthrow him and set up a
military junta led by General Pinochet to run the country."
Personally, I don't think either one counts as supporting either
dictator, just acknowledging positive things that they
accomplished. But what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the
gander, and I can't count the number of times I've seen people on
this board accuse Hollywood liberals of supporting Castro for
saying things not very different than the quotes neil
provides.
neil, you should now set in motion a slow and cumbersome method of
killing Isaac Bertram, and leave before it is completed, confident
in its ultimate success. After all, he has fallen into your trap,
as you knew he would.
Mmm-ha. Mmm-ha-ha-ha. Mmmm-waah-ha-ha-ha-haaaaaaaaaa!
|11.17.06 @ 4:40PM|#
joe,
Now you should know better than to not kill your victim
immediately. I know you've seen the Overlord List before. For
shame.
|11.17.06 @ 4:43PM|#
joe, at least I always spell your name right. Is it too much to
ask you to do the same for me? :)
The family hasn't used that spelling since they crossed the channel
in 1066.
|11.17.06 @ 4:55PM|#
I'll go farther: Anyone who can look at a regime that overthrows an elected leader, puts a dictator in power indefinitely, cancels the constitution, shuts down newspapers, executes and tortures political dissidents, and say that this regime has "shown a miraculous devotion to bottom-up policies" is a straight up apologist. It's one thing to talk about the advantages of policies which were instituted by force, but when you go farther and describe those policies as reflecting well on the regime that put them in place, you're just not a credible champion of freedom.
|11.17.06 @ 8:01PM|#
I will concede that neil has caught me in a semantic trap. So,
of course, I deserve to be on this platform in the middle of this
tank full of sharks.
However the point that I was addressing is the oft repeated canard
that "Milton Friedman was an advisor to Pinochet". This
statement is plainly false and those who repeat it are either
mistaken or outright liars depending on the amount of information
they have. And it was repeated in NPR's coverage of his death.
Frankly, I expect better fact checking from an organization like
that.
Is Milton Friedman "soft on Communism" because he did essentially
the same things (give lectures and meet government officials) in
China and Yugoslavia?
joe, keep in mind that nobody ever says that anyone who just claims
that "Cuba has universal health care and universal literacy" (never
mind that Cuba had pretty good health care and universal literacy
under Battista* - it did after all have the highest standard of
living in Latin America; now it has the lowest, except for Haiti)
is an "advisor" to Castro.
The fact of the matter is that there is a particular kind of
American leftist (hell, my family is full of them) who not only
gushes over Castro's "achievements" but denies all of his abuses.
Hardly any of them is ever subject to any kind of criticism from
the rest of the liberal community.
*It also had arbitrary detention and torture of political
dissidents, of course, oh wait, nothing's changed there though, has
it?
|11.17.06 @ 8:53PM|#
I'm sorry Isaac, but on principul, I don't spell anything
correctly.
At I always say...
OK, if you are limited your comment to "advisor," you can get out
the shark tank.
|11.17.06 @ 9:47PM|#
I'm sorry Isaac, but on principul, I don't spell anything
correctly.
That's a damn lie. I know you can spell good. You just have it in
for me. :)
OK, if you are limited your comment to "advisor," you can get
out the shark tank.
Actually I was referring to the common allegation that Milton
Friedman had a formal relationship as an advisor to Pinochet.
But some of those sharks look like they might have fricking laser
beams.
|11.18.06 @ 10:23AM|#
"BTW, quite a few of you were real shits on the thread about
Galbraith's passing."
Maybe I'm confused but I thought this was mostly a libertarian
blog. And most people consider that Milton Friedman was in the
libertarian camp. So, it shouldn't be surprising to find that on a
libertarian blog many people here are going to be mourning a great
contributor to libertarian ideas and policy.
Galbraith, as someone else said, might have been a good dinner
guest, but he was unfriendly to many libertarian ideas. That
doesn't mean it's gentlemanly to take some pot shots at him, but it
shouldn't be all that surprising on a libertarian blog for people
to snark - people here would say even worse things about Kim Jong
the Second if he passed.
It *would* be behaving like "real shits" if we went over to a
"progressive" blog, friendly to the ideas of Galbraith, and knocked
him around a bit, while commenters *there* were remembering him
fondly (Just as it would be shitty to go onto a Star Trek blog and
make fun of people who were mourning the passing of the actor who
played "Scotty"). In case any of the Joes are confused, it's like
walking into a memorial service of someone you didn't know or even
didn't like, and regardless of the feelings of the hosts, you say
whatever you happen to be thinking at the moment.
|11.18.06 @ 10:39PM|#
"I'll go farther"
Should be written, "I'll go farther to distort the truth so I can
spin this according to my biases."
"Anyone who can look at a regime that overthrows an elected leader,
puts a dictator in power indefinitely, cancels the constitution,
shuts down newspapers, executes and tortures political dissidents,
and say that this regime has "shown a miraculous devotion to
bottom-up policies" is a straight up apologist."
He was talking about the "economic policies" - the market. He made
it clear he distinguished what happened above from the bottom up
policies of the market by calling military regimes, "top down." He
called the economic reforms in Chile a miracle in that it was so
extremely rare for bottom up economic policies to be given a trial
in such a top down climate. If he sounded effusive it was only that
at least the people were given some measure of choice in one aspect
of life, and Friedman consistently favored 'choice' in all aspects
of life. He was hopeful that the incursion of bottom up economic
policies in Chile would lead to bottom up policies in general in
Chile, that liberal democracy would eventually prevail. If he was
the supporter of fascism as Neil is trying to make him out to be,
he would not have been the one to advocate abandoning military
conscription, to ending the drug war, to giving students more
choice in what schools they could go to, etc.
Neil, I won't go so far as to call you a liar but this gross
distortion of the truth you have presented here is lying's ugly
sister. Better luck at the dance next time.
|11.24.06 @ 11:40PM|#
from page 170 of A Nation of Enemies: Chile Under
Pinochet:
"At the University of Chile, [Friedman] told students the economy
needed a 'shock treatment' and deep spending cuts. In a talk wiht
Pinochet, [Friedman] counseled the general to ignore his poor
image abroad, focus on curing the 'disease' of statism, and
take sharp action against inflation." (italics mine)
Friedman actively supported a military dictatorship that stripped
Chile of democracy and consistently and grossly violated basic
human rights. That makes him a dick.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245