Every now and then I love watching this (and things like it) to remind me that we’ve seen all this nonsense before. Note the year: 1979, the tail-end of another president’s single term.
There's one big problem here though Jonah. In 1979, Friedman could use the Soviet Union as a foil for American style capitalism and the failures of 1970's era liberalism made his ideas a much easier sell.
Today, the right doesn't have the old Soviet Union to bash any more. The "communist" Chinese economy is growing at much faster rates than the US. Conservatives unconvincingly account for the failure of the Bush tax cuts to create widely shared prosperity. And liberals have upped their game by embracing free markets (last I checked Summers Krugman Reich et al were basically free marketers) and reminding us why government regulations of banking and welfare state protections were put in place to begin with, which in light of the present recession seems more apt than the context of 1979.
So I think we conservatives have made things to easy on ourselves with stuff like this. The historical context is alot different and the competition is tougher.
The Chinese economy is growing faster. But, from a smaller base, percentages work that way. Additionally, it has grown since the commissars (thanks Uncle Milt for that word) freed up a portion of the economy. Much of that growth is led by non-Chinese investment and benefits a very narrow population. Go see a true 1% situation.
Our meager economic growth now stems primarily from the overbearing government that Friedman warns about.
This is perfect, both in its succinctness and its logic.We are now in 2012 and even with all the additional time to craft answers to Milton Friedman's questions, today's responses would be no better than Phil Donohue's pained look of confusion and defeat. Priceless.
Here's one from the same era I enjoy even more. The whole discussion is good but I like the exchange between Thomas Sowell and Francis Fox Priven beginning about 3:30. Notice Priven's opening line: "People have an ascribed status..."
I loved that and am taking notes for liberal Dem relatives who are jumping on the "evil capitalist" society while hoping their 401k and the stock market continue to blossom.
The NR editors could learn a thing or two by going back and reading Friedman, how far they have strayed. But I suppose Costa and Lowry and the rest think Romney is perfectly in line with this.
Conservatives had won this argument a long time ago and made the mistake believing the issue had been settled.
Romney is going to need moments like this to defend free enterprise and economic freedom because Obama has nothing to run on but the politics of envy and class warfare.
Later on in that same broadcast, Friedman provides the answer to the Occupy Movement. Really! Comes at about 6:09 of clip No. 4. (the entire broadcast is on YouTube in five parts)
Why did you have to put this out here. Spending way too much time watching Milton Friedman videos now. So brilliant. It also amazes me how good natured he was when dealing with morons.
It isn't even "capitalism". It's freedom of people to live and work as they please, and respect for the property they may build as a result of their life and work.
Since this was aired, the GOP has belied its faith in freedom and property, endorsing the suspicions of the "progressives" and liberals. It's still true, but thirty years of lousy governance has shifted the cultural presumption to the view that the government can and should improve any grievance.
This is a good watch- first time for me. I also like watching the Reagan "Time For Choosing" speech every month or two, just to remind myself of the fact that nothing is, in fact, all that new. There is always Friedman's glorious "pencil story". There is, especially in this primary season, the "I PAID FOR THIS MICROPHONE, MR. GREEN !" Reagan's Challenger speech is a yearly ritual for me. There are others. Rush's live video of "Freewill" is good, but only tangentially fits here.
All of that said, I don't do that nearly as often as I read "The Hop Bird" piece you so graciously allowed us all to... enjoy is not the right word. Maybe "participate with you in your mourning and celebration" of your father. I read it often on the anniversary of the passing of important people in my life, and sometimes just to help me stay grounded and "real, yo !".
I both shudder and smile wondering what Mr. Goldberg Sr. thinks as he looks down and sees me typing a missive regarding his life that includes the phrase "real, yo!"
An Upper West Side co-denizen, Mr. Goldberg, and a one-time Baltimore resident, too.
Great stuff! And it shows what's lacking in so many GOP candidates, i.e., that readiness to silence leftists like Donahue with 30 seconds of reason and history. But I think Friedman missed a great opportunity. Donahue says captialism doesn't seem to reward virtue, but rather the ability to manipulate the system. That's such an absurd characterization of 95% and maybe 99% of capitalism as it exists in the West. Especially today this holds, I think. What is virtue, but hard work toward one's studies as a child and young adult; consistent and dedicated work as an employee at a firm that both demands virtue and rewards it, disciplined savings and investment of one's earned income, sobriety, and sexual and reproductive continence? I think of some of my classmates in high school, a couple of which are partners in major New York City law firms making seven figures a year. They epitomized virtue. Thanks to the New York Times I would say particularly, but other media outlets as well, those 1-5% of cases where "system manipulators" derive wealth are emphasized - and they should be so as to police abuses in our capitalism. But to characterize that as typical is absurd. But speaking of virtue, would the New York Times investigative journalists report on the daily lives of the USA's poor with such vigor, that is where you'd find the vice; not the rich. It's capitalism inspiring virtue, sometimes via greed, but more often via all those wonderful human sentiments that inspire virtue perhaps encapsulated well enough in the term "flourishing" - something about which Aristotle wrote. Capitalism, policed effectively, inspires people to want to be lawyers, doctors, engineers, professors, etc. - and esteemed parents and grandparents. More now than ever as Charles Murray and David Brooks report recently, virtue derives wealth and vice poverty. Capitalism is working, it's statistically the poor who are not. And those in the USA who are poor are losing ground to the international poor in places like India, China, and Brazil, who surpass them. I'd resist blaming the poor with all my might for fear of doing so cruelly. But if it the case statistically, it IS a worse cruelty to ignore it and thus fail to remedy their plight where practically possible.
You cut off what Donahue says to the last point by Friedman. I was eager to find out so I got the clip off You Tube: External Link. It begins at the 3:00 mark on what's titled as this: Milton Friedman on Donahue 1979 (3/5).
First, wonderfully charming, Friedman says he does not trust himself either [to make decisions for others akin to angels]. Then Donahue goes, "we'll be right back" ... and also well done he says, "one of the great things about having your own show is at any time you can say 'we'll be right back.'" But the look on his face ... he lost and he was angry. He's used to being the smartest guy in the room and also the most esteemed quasi-saint. Friedman struck at his core pride for want of a better word.
When the show resumes he goes to questions from the audience.
There's one big problem here though Jonah. In 1979, Friedman could use the Soviet Union as a foil for American style capitalism and the failures of 1970's era liberalism made his ideas a much easier sell.
Today, the right doesn't have the old Soviet Union to bash any more. The "communist" Chinese economy is growing at much faster rates than the US. Conservatives unconvincingly account for the failure of the Bush tax cuts to create widely shared prosperity. And liberals have upped their game by embracing free markets (last I checked Summers Krugman Reich et al were basically free marketers) and reminding us why government regulations of banking and welfare state protections were put in place to begin with, which in light of the present recession seems more apt than the context of 1979.
So I think we conservatives have made things to easy on ourselves with stuff like this. The historical context is alot different and the competition is tougher.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe Chinese economy is growing faster. But, from a smaller base, percentages work that way. Additionally, it has grown since the commissars (thanks Uncle Milt for that word) freed up a portion of the economy. Much of that growth is led by non-Chinese investment and benefits a very narrow population. Go see a true 1% situation.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOur meager economic growth now stems primarily from the overbearing government that Friedman warns about.
Today, the right has Europe (Greece, ....) to look for examples of an over bearing goverment driving nations into the ground.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is perfect, both in its succinctness and its logic.We are now in 2012 and even with all the additional time to craft answers to Milton Friedman's questions, today's responses would be no better than Phil Donohue's pained look of confusion and defeat. Priceless.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGreat video, but I offer a mild criticism of it here: External Link
Credit to Donohue for one thing--at least he and the audience let a guest who disagrees with them give a complete answer.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHere's one from the same era I enjoy even more. The whole discussion is good but I like the exchange between Thomas Sowell and Francis Fox Priven beginning about 3:30. Notice Priven's opening line: "People have an ascribed status..."
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOne of my favorite videos. God we could use Milton Friedman today.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI loved that and am taking notes for liberal Dem relatives who are jumping on the "evil capitalist" society while hoping their 401k and the stock market continue to blossom.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe NR editors could learn a thing or two by going back and reading Friedman, how far they have strayed. But I suppose Costa and Lowry and the rest think Romney is perfectly in line with this.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseConservatives had won this argument a long time ago and made the mistake believing the issue had been settled.
Romney is going to need moments like this to defend free enterprise and economic freedom because Obama has nothing to run on but the politics of envy and class warfare.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSend this clip to Mittens ASAP.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThanks for posting that. If only our GOP candidates were as succinct & confident.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThanks for posting that. If only our GOP candidates were as succinct & confident.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf only our GOP candidates were as succinct & confident when they speak of such topics.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLater on in that same broadcast, Friedman provides the answer to the Occupy Movement. Really! Comes at about 6:09 of clip No. 4. (the entire broadcast is on YouTube in five parts)
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhy did you have to put this out here. Spending way too much time watching Milton Friedman videos now. So brilliant. It also amazes me how good natured he was when dealing with morons.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt isn't even "capitalism". It's freedom of people to live and work as they please, and respect for the property they may build as a result of their life and work.
Since this was aired, the GOP has belied its faith in freedom and property, endorsing the suspicions of the "progressives" and liberals. It's still true, but thirty years of lousy governance has shifted the cultural presumption to the view that the government can and should improve any grievance.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is a good watch- first time for me. I also like watching the Reagan "Time For Choosing" speech every month or two, just to remind myself of the fact that nothing is, in fact, all that new. There is always Friedman's glorious "pencil story". There is, especially in this primary season, the "I PAID FOR THIS MICROPHONE, MR. GREEN !" Reagan's Challenger speech is a yearly ritual for me. There are others. Rush's live video of "Freewill" is good, but only tangentially fits here.
All of that said, I don't do that nearly as often as I read "The Hop Bird" piece you so graciously allowed us all to... enjoy is not the right word. Maybe "participate with you in your mourning and celebration" of your father. I read it often on the anniversary of the passing of important people in my life, and sometimes just to help me stay grounded and "real, yo !".
I both shudder and smile wondering what Mr. Goldberg Sr. thinks as he looks down and sees me typing a missive regarding his life that includes the phrase "real, yo!"
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAn Upper West Side co-denizen, Mr. Goldberg, and a one-time Baltimore resident, too.
Great stuff! And it shows what's lacking in so many GOP candidates, i.e., that readiness to silence leftists like Donahue with 30 seconds of reason and history. But I think Friedman missed a great opportunity. Donahue says captialism doesn't seem to reward virtue, but rather the ability to manipulate the system. That's such an absurd characterization of 95% and maybe 99% of capitalism as it exists in the West. Especially today this holds, I think. What is virtue, but hard work toward one's studies as a child and young adult; consistent and dedicated work as an employee at a firm that both demands virtue and rewards it, disciplined savings and investment of one's earned income, sobriety, and sexual and reproductive continence? I think of some of my classmates in high school, a couple of which are partners in major New York City law firms making seven figures a year. They epitomized virtue. Thanks to the New York Times I would say particularly, but other media outlets as well, those 1-5% of cases where "system manipulators" derive wealth are emphasized - and they should be so as to police abuses in our capitalism. But to characterize that as typical is absurd. But speaking of virtue, would the New York Times investigative journalists report on the daily lives of the USA's poor with such vigor, that is where you'd find the vice; not the rich. It's capitalism inspiring virtue, sometimes via greed, but more often via all those wonderful human sentiments that inspire virtue perhaps encapsulated well enough in the term "flourishing" - something about which Aristotle wrote. Capitalism, policed effectively, inspires people to want to be lawyers, doctors, engineers, professors, etc. - and esteemed parents and grandparents. More now than ever as Charles Murray and David Brooks report recently, virtue derives wealth and vice poverty. Capitalism is working, it's statistically the poor who are not. And those in the USA who are poor are losing ground to the international poor in places like India, China, and Brazil, who surpass them. I'd resist blaming the poor with all my might for fear of doing so cruelly. But if it the case statistically, it IS a worse cruelty to ignore it and thus fail to remedy their plight where practically possible.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePlease add 15 seconds to clip.
You cut off what Donahue says to the last point by Friedman. I was eager to find out so I got the clip off You Tube: External Link
. It begins at the 3:00 mark on what's titled as this: Milton Friedman on Donahue 1979 (3/5).
First, wonderfully charming, Friedman says he does not trust himself either [to make decisions for others akin to angels]. Then Donahue goes, "we'll be right back" ... and also well done he says, "one of the great things about having your own show is at any time you can say 'we'll be right back.'" But the look on his face ... he lost and he was angry. He's used to being the smartest guy in the room and also the most esteemed quasi-saint. Friedman struck at his core pride for want of a better word.
When the show resumes he goes to questions from the audience.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse