He's the man.

And, his video talking about the four ways of spending money is also very instructive.

It's always easy to spend someone else's money on someone else. You're never as careful as when you spend your own money on yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Un4-eI1T71E&feature=related

Ok, THAT just completely confused ol Phil, a man who made his pot of money in a capitalist country.

And you could tell he did not like being presented with common sense knowledge.

david warren has a nice column on the evils of the nanny state

David Warren

As he says, "We are presented, it seems to me, with two terrible "options." The first is, that honest citizen methodically continues to obey all laws, and he and his immediate dependents quietly starve. And the second is, the entire economy is metamorphosed into a black market, carrying society into real lawlessness, as the Nanny State crumbles under its own weight."

And we'll be seeing more of the black market and increasing crime as the welfare state removes the ability of private citizens to look after themselves.

Donahue gives us the Leftard 1000m (1000 yard for non-Euroweenies) Stare as his cerebral cortex overheats and turns to mush with a full force onslaught of reality and logic.

he was but a voice crying in the wilderness. his last line was a prediction of "the one" Obama

where in the world are you going to find these angels that are going to ORGANISE society for us.

Organize Organize -- a community organizer. it it the one.

Amen to that.

My 15 year old just started a course in 'Civics.' Armed with this video, she should be able to silence the 'idealists' in her class. lol

Friedman was the greatest economists of our century, and my personal hero. And I despise when neoconservatives and social conservatives attempt to appropriate him into their tent when in reality, they don't believe or support 95% of the shit that Friedman espoused.

Friedman was not religious. He was an agnostic and despised organized religion, like he did the coercive powers of the state.

He also criticized the extent of the US military industrial complex, which the neoconservatives swear by.

Friedman was no friend of the Dick Cheney's or Donald Rumsfeld's of the world. And it irks me when people will hold him up as an example alongside these men.

Friedman was an enlightened capitalist economist, and a powerful advocate for liberty and freedom. The modern day Republican Party (save maybe Mr. Ron Paul) cares less than a shit about freedom. What they care about is their version of freedom which is: the wholesome, Christian, nuclear family. Free from the sinful "homosexual lobby" and foreigners.

I run into so many socons who claim to love Friedman, yet almost none of them have read the man.

They also like to trumped Ayn Rand too, without knowledge of her atheism and the fact she despised conservatives, and was irritated by people who called her a conservative. Milton Friedman also did not accept the label conservative, either.

I no longer accept the label conservative, as I've now watched as the "conservative movement" in the US and Canada have single-handily delivered us into the bondage of socialism.

Just my two cents.

Here's a media manipulator, profiting under a capitalist system, wondering if capitalism is preferable when it can be so easily manipulated. I guess you ought to know, Phil! Me thinks Phil was attempting pathos, and Milton saw right through it: "I don't even trust you".

Don't get me started on my disgust at Naomi Klein, and how she has tried to tarnish the outstanding work of this great man

It's sad that "capitalism" has that name. It makes it sound like it's just another "ism" in competition with socialism, facsism, communism, etc. It's not. Capitalism should be given a name that reflects its true nature: "reality."

All those other isms are fantasies made up in the minds of men. Capitalism is nature. It's like physics, while the other above-mentioned isms are more like magic or superstition.

Socialism = Envy. They just want to steal what others accomplish being bitter they are not the machine that runs civilization only its by product.

She sure likes the sound of her own voice....

How many businesses (successful) has she run? How many employees has she hired?

Or has it all been on the government dole?

She's just another member of the chattering class, taking selective, and not necessarily related facts, twisting them into her distorted, biased, and hateful world view

Tom, you are absolutely correct. To quote myself "Capitalism is what free people do when you leave them alone."

Dan? Who ya talking about?

Mike,

Milton often called himself as a "classic liberal".

Getting ahead in life is the natural order of things and one of the best methods to date is Capitalism. The under achievers and unproductive are the socialists that rely on others to look after them and as Friedman said, name me another system that is better and working in the world today. I have often wondered how these socialist types deal with the end if their life, laying there and thinking, all this time here and I have accomplished nothing, it must be hard to face, if they even realize what a productive life is.

As one said, socialism is great until other peoples money runs out, then the unproductive are shown up for what they truly are, insignificant.

Naomi Klein is married to Avi Lewis. Parasites usually attract to each other.

Words like "liberal", "condservative" and "progressive" were drained of any real meaning a long, long time ago...

Oops!

Typo alert!

Should have been "conservative."

Mike, it is easy for you to mock many conservative's concerns about 'foreigners' -- you probably feel pretty secure in what I assume is a very specialized technical job.

Other people just haven't been blessed with your talents.

Oh and those 'foreigners' are MUCH more hostile to your atheism than the average Anglo-Saxon Canadian.

Ayn Rand wrote some pretty cool stuff, but the twisted _irrational_ wreck that passed for her personal life casts too great a pall over her theories for me to find them anything more than entertaining time wasters.

Interestingly, Friedman's wife was a huge supporter of the Iraq War even though her husband was not.

Tom Paine wrote:
"All those other isms are fantasies made up in the minds of men. Capitalism is nature. It's like physics, while the other above-mentioned isms are more like magic or superstition."

Very astute posting.

People have always traded, no matter what the medium for exchange of the day was, or is.

Socialists like to paint the world in rigid terms that divide rich from poor and class from class. What is more often true is when that we are young we often start at low paying jobs and develop our earning power as we grow older. Thus we move upwards in earning power with age and experience.

It is often the case that those in the highest income brackets do not stay there. For instance, some are business people who are cashing out of their businesses while retiring are not likely to repeat this income.

The single greatest determinant of poverty is not race, sex or education but single parenting.

Conservatism has lost some great spokespeople in the past few years: Milton Friedman and William Buckley to name two bright lights.

"..Conservatism has lost some great spokespeople in the past few years: Milton Friedman and William Buckley to name two bright lights."

Agree. I always appreciated Buckley's sense of humor - a real light touch.

Friedman:

"You know, I don't even trust you to do that"

ZING!

Mike Brock said: "I no longer accept the label conservative, as I've now watched as the "conservative movement" in the US and Canada have single-handily delivered us into the bondage of socialism."

So Mike, ever hear the expression "together we stand, divided we fall"? If it was so easy to defeat tyranny I'd send you off to do it yourself and lean back with a beer.

Maybe you're going to have to suck it up and hang out with people that don't meet your standards sometimes, if you want to win. To quote one of those eeeevile neocons, "The New Hampshire license plate says 'live free or die'. It doesn't say 'live free or whine.'"

Sorry, got on a tangent there. Watched the Youtube videos, where there were "Friedman vs Naomi Klein vids. And she's giving long winded diatribes about capitalism and it's evils, blah, blah, blah.....

sorry crowd.

Friedman was brilliant beyond his years. He's spot on with his points, leaving Donowho(?) speechless.

"Capitalism is what free people do when you leave them alone."

If only that were true. Capitalism is only possible when there is a strong moral code in place and accepted by almost everyone. This strong moral code is implemented by strong laws enforced by a strong state.

Capitalism doesn't happen by accident.

The goal of all real 'conservatism' is the preservation of wealth and property.
Real prudent conservatives hate to see munney wasted on anything.
And there is nothing wrong in getting value for the munney.

The 2 biggest destroyers of wealth and property are big gubmints and wars, which are usually started by gubmints that want to get to bigger.

And then you can break these gubmints down by ruling class - religion, ethnic group, economic class, region, etc.
Been happening since the beginning of time.

>>>If only that were true. Capitalism is only possible when there is a strong moral code in place and accepted by almost everyone. This strong moral code is implemented by strong laws enforced by a strong state.

Baloney. That's fascist statism you are trying to describe, but can't, because the internal contradictions are messing you up.

For those with time to spare, and it's a good investment, watch "Free to Choose" on youtube. You'll see a young Thomas Sowell there as well, another great man.

who needs capitalism when you gots canajun gubmint.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090208/tax_millions_090208/20090208?hub=Canada

Mike Brock - "What [the modern day Republican Party] care about is their version of freedom which is: the wholesome, Christian, nuclear family. Free from the sinful "homosexual lobby" and foreigners.

No they don't. They scarcely treat their "moral muddle" any better than our own Conservatives, they toe the "gay" party line (bad boy: thou shalt not use the homo word!), and they positively welcome illegal aliens. Do you really believe the narrative the talking heads dish out, and the party branding attempts?

“the wholesome, Christian, nuclear family”:

Perhaps instead of wholesome, you would prefer depraved? You want to provide details for our amusement? I got popcorn.
Don't want Christians as neighbours? What do you object to, the saccharine or the sincerity? Oh, I know, the hypocrisy can be off-putting, but you can get endless amusement by acting like they are vanilla atheists. You might even be right.
Family? Oh, the kids make too much noise for you? Drive up you property taxes? Suck it up boyo – maybe they will be nice to you and support you in you old age. What? You think pensions will be there for you?!

I think you have a touch of delusion and “category confusion” . I recommend a dose of reality.

Now, if only there were MORE wholesome Christian families...

Joe - "moral code is implemented by strong laws enforced by a strong state"

No. Behaviour is enforced. Not the same thing. At best, you can make a case for law as a mechanism to train people in acceptable behaviour. Oh, pardon me, did I say "people"? I meant "children".

Any society that requires strong laws and a strong state is either tyrannical, or its citizens are childish…or both.

Is "Freedman" supposed to be a play on words?

I like to conserve liberty.
Am I conservative, or liberal?
When it comes to capitalism,
I prefer Ionic to Corinthian.

"Capitalism doesn't happen by accident." I wouldn't say it happened by accident but I do believe it is what free people do when you leave them alone. What totalitarian governments like to call "the black market", is what is really the free market. It is uncoerced trading between consenting parties. It will certainly happen more sufficiently in places where property is protected by laws, but it happens everywhere all the time whether governments protect it or try to squash it.

Not trying to pick nits Tenebris but in my mind 'strong moral code' means accepted and expected conduct based on mutual trust. After all if I want make a trade with you say a goat for a bag of potatoes, I need to know that the bag of potatoes I receive is actually a bag of potatoes and not a bag with potatoes on top and rocks underneath. I also need to have recourse to a higher power should you try to slip me a bag of rocks. Indeed free people can enter freely into contract and bond but that contract and bond is only as good as the individuals making the contract and the laws in place that enforce said contract and bond. Think of the mess that would have been averted if there was a strong moral code enforced by law in the recent housing boondoggle in the USA or the Madoff affair. Let us hope that punitive law may be enforced that helps the next generation of would be bandits entrusted with other people's money not steal said money.

The problem remains: those who have not grasped the fundamental moral principal of avoiding avraice by eschewing the greed that's the gateway to hubris are always going to be dangerous to the good of the rest of us. The trick is to figure out how to go around them, and not through them. Pardon the platitude, yet I think that Benjamin Franklin had it pretty-much fig'ered out when he said, "If you know how to spend less than you get, you have the philosopher's stone". On the other hand, if you can't go around the untrustworthy, you may find that you can't eat stone.

Is he related to the Jewish druggist on Family Guy?

Oh, 'greed' caused Einstein to develop his theories, did it Friedman? HMMMM...

I watched Milton Friedman on "the Open Mind"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfdRpyfEmBE

He was brilliant. And it made me wonder what he would think about the bailouts that have taken place recently. He had a documentary about the role of gold in the great depression in which he talked about the dwindling money supply and how it contributed to the depression. I'm not certain he would be against the bailouts, perhaps he would be against how they were applied.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7pnjzCuSv8&feature=related

Still, a brilliant economist.

Tenebris: Strong and successful capitalist societies have strong moral undercurrents. Protestant work ethic for example. Respect for private property. And some kind of responsive government.

Without the rule of law, try to collect what is owed to you.

Derek

I believe capitalism knows no politics. Capital serves totalitarian and libertarian alike. Capitalism is apolitical. Why slaughter the language by using "capitalism" as a euphemism for "totalitarianism" when you can easily say "totalitarianism." That way you get the right, the left, and red in one fell swoop.

If you would like to view the entire Donahue/Friedman interview.

On the other hand, don't confuse free-marketism, capitalism,
corporatism, and oligarchy either, they too are all different.
Isn't language wonderful? What would we do without it?

Capitalism is actually a marxist term.

Free market economy is the more traditional term.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

" When it comes to capitalism,
I prefer Ionic to Corinthian."

lol personally I prefer Doric.

W.p.p. sez "Capitalism is apolitical"
Bingo!
and Joe if you wanted to trade goats for poatoes, it wouldn't take long for you to know if you've been ripped off. You don't need a government or laws to help you in that area.At the heart of socialism is a demand for the government to 'fix' everything. That is what we are seeing right now.

Tenebris...excellent @9:24 and 9:42!

I watched that Naomi Klein vid also. She wouldn't stand a chance if she went face to face with Freidman. That sounded like a grade 8 speech.

"Capitalism is only possible when there is a strong moral code in place and accepted by almost everyone."

Socialist much?

Posted by: Joe at February 8, 2009 8:29 PM

Capitalism is only possible when there is a strong moral code in place and accepted by almost everyone. This strong moral code is implemented by strong laws enforced by a strong state.

Capitalism doesn't happen by accident.

So true. Trading occurs throughout the world. There are market stalls wherever someone grows cassava or corn. What takes an economy from a gathering of market stalls where neighbors trade with neighbors to a “free enterprise system” is the rule of law, supported by a value system that encourages individual or group efforts towards personal or group economic advancement.

There are at least three necessary elements to economic advance.
- Firstly we need to allow people to act in their self interest. Call it greed, call it a natural law like physics – there is no real progress without it.
- Secondly, the rule of law is needed. This permits the entering into of contracts for delivery and trade of benefits to happen in the future. It permits specialization. It permits the development of economies of scale and scope. It allows recourse when someone passes a bag of rocks off as a bag of potatoes. This needs to be enforceable so the police and judiciary need to be available and strong.
- And thirdly, there needs to be a culture or value system that encourages or rewards individual or group efforts for acting in their self interest. Where this is absent as in socialist states or Muslim states, economic progress lags.

"Maybe you're going to have to suck it up and hang out with people that don't meet your standards sometimes, if you want to win. To quote one of those eeeevile neocons, "The New Hampshire license plate says 'live free or die'. It doesn't say 'live free or whine.'"

Look, I'm willing to work with anybody who wants to promote the cause of freedom. Those people have nominally been conservatives. I will continue to ally myself with conservatives if they share goals that get me closer to my goals which are: personal, cultural, political and economic freedom.

I am not throwing in the towel, but I am very frustrated at this point.

Midway through 2008, the free speech movement in Canada seemed to have a lot of momentum. Where are we now?

We thought the Conservative Party would be the beginning of the end of runaway social spending. Yet they increased spending at a faster rate--relative to inflation--that any other government in history... and that was before this bailout bullshit.

Just how much of this march towards statism and socialism will I have to endure before it gets better?

I find it absolutely amazing that "conservatives" are willing to accept socialist policies as long as they're proscribed by a party called the "Conservative Party". Somebody should notify the NDP just how far a simple name change could go for their cause.

"Any society that requires strong laws and a strong state is either tyrannical, or its citizens are childish…or both."

I think yer onto something...just not what you thought you were onto..

real. he meant the freedom that people have under some political systems.

"It's sad that 'capitalism' has that name. It makes it sound like it's just another 'ism' in competition with socialism, facsism, communism, etc. It's not."

Yup. Capitalism is simply a human activity. It requires neither dogma nor ideology.

Also, "free market economy" and "capitalism" are not synonyms.

Any true capitalist wants to corner the market and control it. Capitalists operate in free markets because they have to, not because they want to.

JJM@6:46 "Any true capitalist wants to corner the market and control it"

Well, of course! And in a true free market, there are a hundred other guys attempting to do that same thing thus providing the consumer with "capitalist efficiency". Conversely, we all know how much "consumer choice" one had under the commies!!

You then go on to say: "Capitalists operate in free markets because they have to, not because they want to"

Not really sure what you are saying here, but capitalism requires private ownership of capital. If you have anything other than a free market system, then that system ALWAYS work against true capitalism.

Either it is the state itself that tries to acquire that capital (usually via force) or powerful groups/individuals that may not represent the state but which have undue influence on the state. I guess in the latter, one could argue that the capital is still private, but as the state has been used to acquire it it hardly makes a difference.
Thus, truly private capital tends to flee NON Free-market economies.

So, is that what you are saying, that capitalism would prefer to operate everywhere but knows that it is only truly safe in the Free Market!!

The left is making "capatalist" into a bad word.

"All those other isms are fantasies made up in the minds of men. Capitalism is nature. It's like physics, while the other above-mentioned isms are more like magic or superstition."

WOW! This has to be the most ideologically pure statement I've read in a long time. I'm not suggesting I'm above ideology, I'm simply suggesting this statement is a rarefied and most distilled form of ideology.

I'm not going to get into a debate about capitalism on here. An honest discussion about capitalism around here would be tantamount to ripping your own hearts out to examine them. I might just humbly suggest that a capitalist economy is not reducible to the existence of trade or even markets. There are trading systems which are not capitalist. Might I suggest Karl Polanyi's (1944) "The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time". A true classic. In his analysis of the underlying assumptions of market economies he begins with the following insight. No greater misreading of the past (Adam Smith's baseless notion that man's propensity is to "truck, barter, or trade"; the basis of man is an economic animal) has been more prophetic of the future. That many believe that capitalism is eternal and natural, inevitable and incontrovertible is the result of an ideological victory not of human nature.

"Isn't language wonderful? What would we do without it?"

Especially when the one using it is infatuated with it to the point were what is being said is secondary to language itself.

It's, I think, worth noting that:

1. Professor Friedman stayed cool, didn't accuse anybody of bad faith, and poked only the gentlest fun at Phil Donahue.

2. Professor Friedman didn't say capitalism was perfect. He pointed out only that it was better than any other system that has been tried.

We conservatives would benefit if we had more Milton Friedmans and William F. Buckleys representing our views to the world and fewer Bill O'Reillys and Ann Coulters.

SVJ

Hmmm, egghead or packaging?

The real problem with Conservatism is that it hasn't evolved. Same old boring shyte for the last 200 years.

Wake up Conservatives get down and get hip!

Something was being said, Herodotus?

Herodotus: You don't get Vitruvius's essential and highly-valued irony which people who appreciate him, including myself, GET.

Milton Friedman said: "There's no such thing as a free lunch."
Friedman (I believe) told Charlie Rose -- in answer to Charlie's praise -- that his ideas didn't actually get drilled down into the culture. No kidding!

Me No Dhimmi: There's no such thing as a democratic majority which believes there's no such thing as a free lunch.

Yup, the world runs on egoism. Nothing wrong with that. Every act, no matter how selfless it may appear, has an ulterior motive. And thank goodness - people would be so hard to understand otherwise.

Donahue is a hoot. This is the guy who once bought and then tore down a million dollar house because it was blocking his view of the ocean. Unbeleivable.

Fortunately for naomi klein, Friedman is deceased; she'd look even more idiotic debating him in real life.

But how typical of her to attack the man's theories and philosophies when he's unable to defend them.

She isn't fit to shine Friedman's shoes.

mhb23re
at gmail d0t calm