He was right. The ...( 9 months ago by chiefeditor)
He was right. The depression was "created" by the Fed Reserve on purpose. Glad that he spoke up.
he didn't say it ...( 5 months ago by rios9000)
he didn't say it was on purpose, he said they messed up
Freidman who? How ...( 5 months ago by documentaryunit)
Freidman who? How many people today follow his economic policies? NONE. Milton was a free enterprise propagandist. He will be rememeberd a Jurassic Park econonomist. Only useful among genetically modified dinosaurs.
Friedman is my ...( 5 months ago by ochobit)
Friedman is my homeboy.
Thank you Friedman for the economic success we as a world have had. Please may some politician in Argentina listen to your policies of freedom and choice.
Thank you Milton ...( 4 months ago by BoulderBoy101)
Thank you Milton Friedman
Does that include ...( 4 months ago by ThegoodEconomist)
Does that include the natural rate theory? Which is used as common knowledge in economic areas? Does that include a monetary history of the United States which proved the importance of money in the economy? What about his predictions about the USSR? Are you talking about that?
I have nothing ...( 4 months ago by documentaryunit)
I have nothing against Milton Friedman the propagandist. He's been very successful at that. But his economic theories were even discarded by Reagan and Thatcher, his principals early stalwarts. Milton argued that countries needed a catastrophe of gigantic proportions to implement his policies. Well, he got one but AFTER implementing them!
lol @ Ben Bernanke ...( 4 months ago by stealthswimmer)
lol @ Ben Bernanke they won't make that mistake again...they're making the OPPOSITE mistake now by having interest rates too LOW and increasing the money supply MORE than they're supposed to!
Milton was awesome though.
=)
Milton Friedman was ...( 3 months ago by BoulderBoy101)
Milton Friedman was Reagan's chief economic adviser moron. Milton wasn't an advocate of having a catastrophe to implement his policies, he meant that it usually takes a revolutionary event to bring freedom back to the people
Friedman was like a ...( 3 months ago by documentaryunit)
Friedman was like a vulture forever circling above the aftermaths of disasters in search of rich picking for his political masters. His Chile excursion was sad example of this unwise opportunist.
And with the ...( 3 months ago by jpbalkenende)
And with the economy down the tank so goes Milton's demented economic philosophy.
Yeah I'm sure a ...( 2 months ago by cochiserjs)
Yeah I'm sure a trillion dollar war had nothing to do with that. It's a testament how well the free market works when you can spend that much money and still have a populace living comfortably. If you think the economy won't recover, you're an idiot.
Of course it will ...( 2 months ago by jpbalkenende)
Of course it will recover. But you have to look at it in context. All those 'failed socialistic European states' are steaming ahead. America now is the 15th wealthiest country in the world, a historic low may I add never seen before. And the only country of those 14 who isn't more socialist than the USA is Qatar and that's an oil state who really don't have any achievements of their own.
Well these failed ...( 2 months ago by cochiserjs)
Well these failed socialistic European states are not really socialistic if we're being honest. Also you're being dishonest if you're asserting that centralized economies are more successful than free market economies, compare Zimbabwe and Venezuela to members of the EU or the USA. There really isn't a realistic argument against the success of capitalism to be made.
.... You see I ...( 2 months ago by jpbalkenende)
.... You see I would agree with you that they really aren't socialistic. But anytime anyone makes an argument to make the USA just the tiniest bit more like these non-socialist countries libertarians like yourself scream bloody murder and call them a bunch of commie dictators. With health care for example.
Let me rephrase I'm ...( 2 months ago by jpbalkenende)
Let me rephrase I'm making too many assumptions here especially considering you're English (oh did it again!). What I meant to say is "Libertarians like Milton Friedman scream bloody murder and make them out to be a bunch of commie dictators" so there :)
Well I'm not ...( 2 months ago by cochiserjs)
Well I'm not English, I'm Welsh but you weren't to know that.
But I don't really see your point. Especially given that the UK is also midst an economic crisis, which also is linked to massive government spending on the war.
For libertarians health care is more of a philosophical issue than an economic one (though the two are obviously inextricably linked). Health care is not seen as a right for non-dependents. The same is true of most if not all positive rights.
Yes but ...( 2 months ago by jpbalkenende)
Yes but libertarians constantly make the erroneous and inconsistent argument that things like health care or a higher tax would be catastrophic for the economy at large. Yet when you point out all the countries that do better than the USA despite these things they turn around and say the USA is socialist as well and that it doesn't matter that it is 'less socialist' because it is STILL socialist. This is inconsistent with the view that a lower tax or less government is always better.
Same thing with ...( 2 months ago by jpbalkenende)
Same thing with healthcare. When you point out that all these National healthcare systems outperform the American one in both cost and service they start blaming the government interference in the American system. Which again is besides the point and doesn't make any sense based on their own economic theories. It would be like if conservatives lower the tax rates libertarians wouldn't support it or wouldn't say it would be better simply because there'd still be a tax rate left. Makes no sense.
I've never known a ...( 2 months ago by cochiserjs)
I've never known a libertarian to not support a drop in the tax rate regardless of whether there is a tax rate left. This is a strange statement you've made.
More is spent by the government on the American private-public healthcare system per capita than on the univesally available Canadian system for example. And more is spent overall by the American government than by any other industrialized nation. It is clear that the current model is not cost eff ective.
In nations with ...( 2 months ago by cochiserjs)
In nations with universal health care it is a general truth that private companies outperform the national health service and are more cost effective, this obviously does not account for people with low income who cannot afford private health care currently.
By removing socialized medicine or Medicaid in the US, you will create a competitive market and prices will go down, whilst quality will generally go up. This is a demonstrable trend for other services, so why not for health care?
That was my point. ...( 2 months ago by jpbalkenende)
That was my point. You never see libertarians do that. Yet they make all sorts of excuses why the American healthcare system is worse than the European one despite it being more libertarian. The excuse they make is that it's not TOTALLY libertarian basically. As if a 30% tax rate isn't better than a 40% tax rate simply because both are more than 0% or because both are not totally libertarian.
That was my point. ...( 2 months ago by jpbalkenende)
That was my point. You never see libertarians do that. Yet they make all sorts of excuses why the American healthcare system is worse than the European one despite it being more libertarian. The excuse they make is that it's not TOTALLY libertarian basically. As if a 30% tax rate isn't better than a 40% tax rate simply because both are more than 0% or because both are not totally libertarian.
We'll all miss you, ...( 2 weeks ago by loarmistead)
But I don't really see your point. Especially given that the UK is also midst an economic crisis, which also is linked to massive government spending on the war. For libertarians health care is more of a philosophical issue than an economic one (though the two are obviously inextricably linked).
Health care is not seen as a right for non-dependents. The same is true of most if not all positive rights.
More is spent by the government on the American private-public healthcare system per capita than on the univesally available Canadian system for example. And more is spent overall by the American government than by any other industrialized nation. It is clear that the current model is not cost eff
ective.
By removing socialized medicine or Medicaid in the US, you will create a competitive market and prices will go down, whilst quality will generally go up. This is a demonstrable trend for other services, so why not for health care?