Johan Norberg: Naomi Klein on Milton Friedman

Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine purports to be an exposé of the ruthless nature of free-market capitalism and its chief recent exponent, Milton Friedman. Johan Norberg, a Cato Institute Senior Fellow points out that many of the actions for which Klein would like to credit Friedman ... Friedman actually opposed. Norberg dissects the Shock Doctrine in his new paper, The Klein Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Polemics.

[@scottharris9962]

Milton Friedman was AGAINST the invasion of Iraq. I sat with him and Rose in their living room for over an hour before taking them to a dinner party with Bob Chitester (producer of Free to Choose). Milton, gruffly, waving his hand: "Foreign adventurism!" Rose: "Oh Milton, what if no one had come for us in Germany?"

[@Forceofwill303]

@2:14 "She pretends that he supported the IMF policies in ... whereas he opposed the IMF generally" - Actually what Klien stated (page 162) was "Friedman may have opposed the institutions (IMF, world bank) oh philosophical grounds, but practically there were no institutions better positioned to implement his crisis theory.

[@johnwise1538]

As intelligent as Klein is, there are some things she says that are off the wall. For example claiming that Bush's primary intention in invading Iraq was to build a "free market." Never mind the fact that Bush was for regulations and one of the greatest instigators of expanding central planning in history.

[@SaulOhio]

+John Wise I'm not sure by what standard you call Klein intelligent. Maybe a sly demagogue.

[@Johnny_Sunshine]

You do need heavy state intervention & regulation to underpine a "freemarket", though (i.e. the European Union). However, to say that to create one in Irak was Bush's main motive in invading the country is indeed a reach.

[@Sharp_3yE]

NEVER did Friedman support violence by the state. In fact he support the idea that the state would have no or very little involvement in the market. He supported FREEDOM. Friedman thought that the government should only be involved in things that it is needed such as protection.

[@DouglasEdward84]

Its actually quite despicable how Klein dishonestly attacks Milton Friedman. He may have been a small man but he had a great impact on our world and the vast majority of that was positive.

[@Sharp_3yE]

A person who steals my property is at known risk that they infringed upon my rights of owning my property and having consequences for their actions. A person may go to jail for stealing, destroying, or even being forced to be removed away from my property. If there were no consequences then how can property be even own if it is not protected?

[@ConductorF]

Read his full evisceration of Klein's "Shock Doctrine." He destroys every single one of her arguments.

[@NixontheVix3n]

I hate how Klein calls herself and her cohorts "Keynesians." Her ideology is no where near what Keynes promoted.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Ownership makes a person what to make sure what they own works well, is protected, and flourishes. Ex. You plant a rose in your garden and want to eneter a rose contest. You own that rose and want to make it grow very healthy, because there is competition ahead you want to make it more beautiful then other roses so you put a lot of time and effort into making that rose beautiful. No one else can disturb that rose because you own it. If they did they can be sued.

[@Sharp_3yE]

USA has been going strong for well over 200 years. Many places have been around even longer and still thrive. You can't say capitalism has failed where it has been tried when the nations that have it are thriving. China is different. They have different rules and in Beijing it went from poor to one of the fastest growing cities to one of the richest.

[@dfountain2000]

"Free market capitalism" is, at its core, having clearly defined property rights and enforcing rule of law subject to the fundamental that anything is permitted as long as it doesn't interfere with someone else's freedom. Everything in the system is voluntary. How does a system like that destroy anything? No one can legally take what isn't theirs nor force someone to buy what they do not want. Consumers protect themselves by using consumer reports and other info to avoid immoral practices.

[@Sharp_3yE]

In free to choose a man was interviewed that quite his job, sold lots of his possessions just to make and produce a product that actually makes it easier to clean up oil spills. The only reason he said that he actually did this was because he knew he could make money by selling the product and get rich. That was his biggest incentive. If he could not make money off of the product he would never have taken the risk he did.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Capitalism doesnt centralize power. It has the effect to actually disperse it. In a free country a person who gains much wealth can only do so by providing a product or service that people freely want to buy. The only reason they want to buy it is because it is better then what they had previously to them. Which means the businesses dont have power over anyone. People choose to buy their products.

[@Sharp_3yE]

It was never public. You have no idea how this was distributed. The OS was always private. A person makes it then sells it to hardware companies to get a money and make a profit. In fact, even Linux makes money. Secondly, a person who starts a business is creating jobs for others. So in fact they are making other people rich. There are secretaries who make over $200,000 a year.Why would anyone want to create a business if they are going to make little money?

[@Sharp_3yE]

NO YOU ARE NOT. I know of a book where a guy went to a random state with a couple dollars in his pocket when he arrived. He was able to get a job, live in a shelter, and eventually get enough money to then live in a place with a few friends. He actually kept getting higher wages. Then he wrote a book about it. Poor are better off because they have the oppertunity to get a jobs.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Thing is Steve Wozniak wasn't owned by apple but had a mutual beneficial contract the he chose to have. Steve Wozniak is also recognized by his work as well. His work was his own. He also freely left Apple to persue his other interests. He founded a new venture called CL 9, which developed and brought the first programmable universal remote control to market in 1987. He provided money for getting a technology program in his local school district. People are free to choose their employment.

[@Sharp_3yE]

I advocate a system of freedom where people are free to own their stuff and trade anything they own.

[@Sharp_3yE]

A former Dem. congressman tried to start a bed in breakfast and through his effort of doing so he made a statement talking about how congress is hurting businesses making them struggle because of the regulations and said he wish he tried starting a business before he was in congress to know how it can actually hurt a business.

[@Sharp_3yE]

No one is forced to work for a company because of the existence of alternatives.

[@Sharp_3yE]

You can't compare feudal lords to employers because employers cant control the worker through laws and have no force over the employee. The employee freely gets into a contract with the employer. This is way different then force.

[@Sharp_3yE]

No, those are not rights. U do not have the right to food, shelter, water, education, or medical treatment. U do have the right to obtain all of those. The rich do have more opportunities at their disposal. No one is under someone's rule except the governments. The only way to protect people from an employer is to have other employers. Alternatives is the only way to protect anybody from being at the mercy of someone.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Why was there the great depression? Why did it take so long to get over it? What got us out of the depression after WWII?

[@Sharp_3yE]

WRONG AGAIN. Competition creates better work conditions and better pay. If a company is treating the workers badly then they can leave and get a job where they are treated nice. A business needs workers to be able to function. A business is the workers who make the service and/or product. No one wants to work in a crappy place. The more businesses the more competition and the better the working conditions and pay will be because they want workers.

[@Sharp_3yE]

DOS was invented by 1 man. Microsoft bought DOS. It ran just as DOS did. Later they came out with windows which does do what u say. Its that simple. Do not over complicate this. A company came to Microsoft for a OS that would run on their computers. Eventually the company tried doing other things but came back to Bill Gates and then MS bought DOS and changed it to MS-DOS and distributed that product.

[@FletchforFreedom]

@surecorrect I won't apologize for being informed or for recognizing, as most do, that Perkins' book is a work of complete fiction. I never argued that Klein had a hand in the fiasco, nor, for that matter did I ever argue that the US had no hand in it, though no competent reading of history can argue that Chileans were not in large part responsible as well. The only position I have maintained is that, contrary to Klein's lies, Friedman had nothing to do with it, which is absolutely true.

[@dfountain2000]

Your whole argument of the rich being controlled by the poor also has a precondition that the poor are stupid (which I personally find condescending) and cannot invent something to get their way out of poverty, cannot be loaned money to do such a thing, cannot move from areas where there is pollution, etc. and that the rich will always shut out the poor from becoming rich. Free markets encourage the spreading of capital and knowledge being put to good use because it provides more goods and...

[@Sharp_3yE]

In my system a company owned by its workers are free to do so. In my system people are free.

[@mrvendetta123]

Competition does not lower the price of labor. Competition would increases prices because if two or more companies are competing to get more customers, the companies' demand for labor increases since they want to produce more goods. If there is no competition, then there is no incentives to increase supply, hence the demand for labor will not increase. High demand for labor means higher wages because businesses will bid the price of the worker's labor up.

[@agapeiron]

Whoa, the Cato Institute rising up in defense of Milton Friedman?!?! No way! There must be a mistake.

[@kernel83]

I'm as SHOCKED as you are 🤣

[@Sharp_3yE]

If more products were made here they would cost 5x(or greater) more because of mostly 3 things. Taxes, regulations, and high cost of living. Also the computer you are using (phone, tablet, laptop, desktop) the parts do not come from one place. The raw materials must come from somewhere, are made into something somewhere else, then are assembled in another part of the world. Whether the product is assembled in USA, China, Germany, Russia or anywhere it doesn't really matter as long as u get it.

[@Sharp_3yE]

A worker can choose to work for company A over company B. Then company C comes along so they then switch to company C. Competition protects the worker and the buyer. It also protects the employer by giving them a choice of who they can employ. If they have a crappy employee then can fire them and hire a better employee. The employee that was fire can get a job at a different company.

[@Sharp_3yE]

What you are talking about is a difference between good managers and bad managers. There are good and bad people in every field. Why do you shop at one place over another? Why do you go to one restuarant over another? Y would you want to work for one company over another? Those answers can be because one place has bad workers or bad management over another place. This is why choice is so important. Bad places go out of business because of competition between good ones.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Everyone can't be paid a high wages. Every job cant. A low skilled working isn't worth paying 15/hr. A cashier job isn't worth 15/hr.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Explians what? She hasn't always been a manager. She has done many jobs. Just recently she became a manager and the ones who employed her like her and the people she manages typically like her. She use to clean building, she has been a sub teacher, a cashier. Now she is making more then she ever did in other jobs and its taken skill and work to be where she is. I know a few managers and they tend to be very nice.

[@Sharp_3yE]

I completely agree that Keynesian(developed by John maynard Keynes) economics is flawed but Keynesian is about aggregate demand that is typically stimulated by the government when times are going down hill which is what has been happening and not been working. Milton never believed in this theory to be successful at all. In fact he has always wanted government to stay out of business. I think you are very confused.

[@Sharp_3yE]

No ur completely wrong. Apparently you have never been a manager. They do lots of work. The organize how the business is run and that is a skill that not everyone can do. 1 or 2 people managing a whole store making it run well is not an easy task. A cashier has mainly one job and young first time employees can do that job. How many management jobs are the managers first ever job n have not been taught how to do it through years of experience n learning?

[@Sharp_3yE]

A wage is partly based on how much that job is worth to that company. A management is worth more because it keeps the business moving. It keeps organization of the business. If you pay a crappy wage for a management spot u will get a crappy manager. A manager wont work for less then the other positions because how would take the management spot if the other workers are paid more?

[@Sharp_3yE]

WRONG AGAIN. Countries where manufacturing businesses come in and hire people, the people actually get a better wage then they did before. Before those businesses came they were farmers and much more poor. In fact because they make more money more kids can go to school because the kids do not have to work and the parents can afford to support their family. Countries that are worse off such as in Africa, the government actually is very suppressive. They will tear down their little business.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Without private ownership, there is no drive to work and produce.

[@FletchforFreedom]

@surecorrect The facts (as even the letter in Klein's book demonstrates) is that Friedman had NOTHING to do with Pinochet's rise to power or his policies. When he LATER visited Chile, he met briefly with Pinochet AND denouced the repressive aspects of the regime). The timeline (actual history), the letter, the vast differences between Friedman's policies and Pinochet's (excepting ONLY monetary policy) prove Frediman completely innocent of Chile's conditions. Try real research.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Managers will have their own boss unless the owner is the manager. So managers are even fired for not doing well or having bad behavior and this is what helps keep managers in check. The fact that someone can be fired n lose their job is important because that forces people to do well in their job.

[@FletchforFreedom]

+CC3GROUNDZERO What planet are you from? Capitalism has been wholly responsible for the increase in compensation, working conditions and living standards (including the effective end of child labor) that began at the start of the Industrial Revolution. The US has led the way in that regard specifically because of the embrace of capitalism. That socialistic intervention - manipulation of the currency, redistribution of wealth - has undermined that and created the boom and bust cycle much to the detriment of people is certainly a horrible thing, but helps make the case for abandoning socialism, not capitalism. The Marxian notion of “exploitation” has been on the ash heap of debunked nonsense for more than a century, but the notion that the US economy is no longer based on production (manufacturing output continues to soar during non-recessionary times even as - like literally every other country on the globe - the increased prosperity has created more opportunities in the service sector) is even more asinine (though not perhaps as much as the claim that “finance capitalism is faith-based). Sadly, the socialistic interventions of the current and previous administration have undermined the strength of the US economy, but, even then, the US still has the wealthiest “poor” on the planet, strong income mobility and steadily and substantially improving conditions for workers (again, excepting recessions), the “stagnation” myth having been long debunked. So bottom line, it's completely ridiculous for anyone to defend socialism at this point.

[@Myndir]

It's not impressive to take on someone who is too old or too dead to talk back.

[@Sharp_3yE]

The thing is people dont just work and stay static. People in the effort to make their lives better get higher wages because of competition. When a person stays with a company and is productive that company wants that person to stay n not go somewhere else so they give them a higher wage. If they didnt that person can leave and get a job somewhere else to earn more money. This give power to the worker. Now there are companies that are owned by the employees. Thats what so beautiful about freedom

[@Sharp_3yE]

When did I ever mention that Bill Gates and Paul Allen designed DOS? When did I ever bring up DOS. U brought up DOS not me. Microsoft bought DOS in 1981. It was a new thing because it was an OS specifically made for certain hardware. It was different. I think u need to get ur facts straight before talking nonsense.

[@Zatzzo]

so we shouldnt ever talk about hitler or stalin right?

[@Sharp_3yE]

No actually I dont think all regulations are bad. It actually has lots to do with the conversation. Our conversation is about milton friendman who loved freedom. Who says more regulations restricts not only freedom but business opportunity which then limits competition, jobs, choice.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Seemingly sending jobs over seas is at a disadvantage because its less jobs here. But when a business leaves another one comes in. People move to different jobs and can even get a better job especially since they have experience already which tends to give higher wages. The biggest benefit is actually cost of products. Businesses are always trying to find the best way to bring costs down since that allows for more production, cheaper prices, and greater sales.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Nope. Economic systems are not systems of power. They are systems on how the economy will be structured. A political system is a system of power. The political system can influence or even be apart of the economic system. And please prove your theory.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Capitalism is based on private property. The whole system is based on owning what u have. You can then sell what you own. If you don't own it you cant sell it. Do you realize that a person who is a programmer, trying to make software on his own, can be much harder with less pay then to be able to get a job at a highly rated and well known/distributed company such as apple? The man who created they touch sensitive keyboard is payed lots of money.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Freedom also creates more competition which means the wealth is spread out as well as protection of the consumer, the worker and employer. Freedom creates more competition by allowing a business to be made easily. Proof can be shown by reduction of regulation in the airline industry in USA at one point. When reduction of regulation was made more airline companies started and more competition was introduced which gives people more options for employment and to buy a different product.

[@FletchforFreedom]

@surecorrect The facts (as even the letter in Klein's book demonstrates) is that Friedman had nothing to do with the rise to power of Pinochet or his policies. He visited Chile and, while there met briefly with Pinochet AND denouced the repressive aspects of the regime). The timeline, the letter, the vast differences between Friedman's policies and those of Pinochet (except ONLY with monetary policy) all prove conclusively that Frediman's denial is the only position consistent with the facts.

[@Sharp_3yE]

USA will always have some kind of work as long as there is something valuable here to sell and there is lots of stuff to sell. In Beijing, China they have very few raw materials and import most things yet have one of the most booming economies.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Yes the kind of slavery this nation had was terrible. Even in the bible it rejected that sort of slavery.

[@Sharp_3yE]

You really haven't looked these terms up have you? Its really simple. Socialism is characterized by SOCIAL ownership. Capitalism is characterized by PRIVATE ownership.

[@Sharp_3yE]

It is not a myth. Why do people get higher wages when they work at a business for a while? Because if they didn't the worker can take their skills and go to a different business and get paid a higher wage with their skills. Competition makes higher wages. My friend worked at Walmart as a cashier. She moved because of college and got a job at home depot because she had cashier skills. Her starting wage was higher then other workers because she had skills n they didnt want competition to hire her.

[@Sharp_3yE]

An employee should be awarded to what they are worth to the company. At McDonalds the people who flip burgers are not wroth very much because it is not a job that requires a lot of skill, there are many people willing to do the job, and it costs little to cook burgers. A manager is paid much higher because they are in a position that takes more skill, there are less people qualified to do the job, and they have more responsibilities and are worth more because companies need good ones as well.

[@Sharp_3yE]

No DOS is the program. DOS is an operating system. DOS isn't inside DOS making DOS easier to use. That makes no sense. Microsoft bought DOS. They didnt do anything to the original product. They just Bought it and had the rights to it.

[@Sharp_3yE]

No its not a system of power. As you know there are worker cooperatives in capitalists nations. There are things that work and things that dont. In free market capitalism, its a big experiment of this search. When things are working, they are successful, people should be getting richer. Nothing is perfect and you will always have bad times in a society. There is no escaping it. Do u realize that people also get fired from worker cooperatives or just leave on their own to do other things?

[@Sharp_3yE]

So how do poor people make money then so that they can afford food and shelter?

[@Sharp_3yE]

First CHARITY IS NOT SOMETHING TO LIVE OFF OF. Its never intended to be. Its a means to help a person as they are struggling. Then later they dont need charity. Now there is a 7.9% unemployment rate in USA which are people who are currently seeking a job. The other 92.1% are employed. Never will it get down to 0% but it is high right now. Thats also not counting the people who have stopped looking for work. Yes right now there is a resesion. But 90% are employed. Many are in middle class.

[@Sharp_3yE]

NO competition increases price of labor. The reason it does is because people not only want jobs but need jobs. But people not only want a job they want good paying jobs. People are always trying to make more money. So if a person works as a cashier for a year and dosent earn a higher wage they can then quite and become a cashier at a different business. The business will pay them a higher rate to get their skills instead of someone else.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Wages are set based on the skill it takes, the skill a person has, the productivity a person has, how much that job is worth, and the amount of people able n willing to do that job. This is why a cashier job is a low wage while management is a higher wage job.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Why would an employer hire people how make more then they do? If an employer didnt make more then the rest of the workers no one would want to be the employer. The manager also makes sure things run well. If you dont have a good one things done run well. So their wage must be to what they are worth to the company.

[@Sharp_3yE]

An employer does not own a person. A person is free to choose who they work for or to even work for themselves. There is no coercion. Thats my point. None what so ever. We are free to choose what we want to do and who to do it for.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Here is the problem with your question. U say "rule" and ive been trying to tell you that there is no ruling from one individual to another unless one individual is forced by law or harm by the other individual. No one has to work for anyone else. Choice is the only way people are not ruled over by other people. I can choose here or there. They can not force me to do anything I do not what to so there is no rule. Being harmed by another is protected against by law. So there is no rule by another

[@Sharp_3yE]

WOW you just made no sense at all. He did not manipulate me at all. I think you are holding onto this idea of what you think works and what I find to be bad. But anyway you made no sense when talking about Friedman. So apparently all his interviews, lectures, 10 hour tv series called "free to choose", the book free to choose, his other books, and every time he talked to leaders of a nation he was lying? Of course you who never knew him or spoke with him know that he was being secretive.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Of course there doesn't always have be laws about everything. That's part of the idea of the free market. The idea that the market should be controlled by a select few people is ridiculous. People are smart enough in their own lives to decide what works and doesn't in their pursuit of trade and wealth.

[@Sharp_3yE]

If someone makes a lot of money its because they worked for it. If people want more money they need to gain certain skill to be able to be placed in a high paying job. Not just anyone can be a manager of a Hotel, or a rocket scientist, or a highly paid actor. It takes skill to do so and many other things. Why are people paid high wages? Because some people have high skills, a great profitable product, and/or a great profitable service.

[@Sharp_3yE]

If you look at history, there has never been any actual completely free markets. It just cant be done. I do think there should be some regulations. Some regulations would have already started without the use of force in the market but then a law comes in after people are already changing. That happens a lot. My point is most things done need regulation because people are smart in their own lives. But of course there should be some. Never have I objected to them.

[@Sharp_3yE]

EVERYONE IS FORCED BY HUNGER AND SHELTER. Rich people at some point didn't start rich. If a person was born into a rich family well either the father, mother, grandfather, grandmother or someone in the family did something to become rich and were poor. Often people start in the middle class or lower class and work their way up to a higher standard of living. No im not advocating a system which rich rule over poor. In fact its a system that allows people to be free to do what they want.

[@Sharp_3yE]

You are talking about the USA when you are talking about capitalist systems. USA is one of them. You can't count out a place that involves a system that you are engaged in a conversation that involves it. Businesses have been created in countries where the people want to work in them where they make more money.

[@Sharp_3yE]

First you are wrong about Milton. Second Capitalism is not wage slavery. Capitalism has had the effect of raising peoples standard of living. Capitalism has made it much easier for people to gain higher wages then ever before. People if are free enough can start a business, or work for who ever they want to that will hire them.

[@Sharp_3yE]

No. The first software he and his friend made was for a computer that had no software for it. All it did was turn on some flashy lights. Gates and his friend sent them a letter asking if they could make software for the machine and they accepted.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Actually Labor Unions do have power. Its much more increasingly hard to fire a person or to change rules without the approval of the Labor Union. But labor unions are not always good for the laborers or managing a company. Take Hostess for example. The union made it so Hostess couldn't change wages because of the union and the union instituted rules on the workplace but not all of them made sense economically. The union had power and didn't allow changes to happen so Hostess went bankrupt.

[@Sharp_3yE]

The employer has rights to. They need to feed their family. Just because a person owns a business doesn't mean they are rich. Its tuff to be a business owner. People will only buy what they want. Thats y many businesses fail because they simply didnt have anything the people want. The employer is protected by how many employee they have the option of hiring. The employee is protected by how many employees would hire them. Of course there also needs to be laws. An employer can mistreat employees

[@Sharp_3yE]

Give me an example if you are right. Ive never heard this. I have never gov even being able to remove a worker from a business. Actually they cant unless the worker is causing some sort of destruction or harm to property of a person then police obviously should be involved like anytime a person is causing property damage.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Here is the problem. They do not rule over the work place. There has to be some sort of conduct in the work place. If there wasn't people wouldn't do their jobs, look proper, or act nicely even. If there was no dress requirements then the workers may come in looking skanky or with torn jeans. A manager may want them to look proper because thats what the customers want. Or there are rules for safety reasons.

[@squamish4244]

@FletchforFreedom He allowed companies to exploit the Congo without restraint, without accountability, without anything, alongside government forces. I have a history degree, thanks for playing.

[@WideWorldOfWisdom]

@basch2020 It's not that she has a "problem" with Friedman per se...it's more that he is quite possibly the most famous, recognizable and influential economist of our time--certainly of the last half century. She essentially uses his clout in an attempt to leapfrog herself into more greater notoriety and attention. It basically boils down to name-dropping. Honestly consider...how many people would know her name if she didn't misrepresent Friedman the way she does. I sure wouldn't.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Why do cashiers make less then managers? Cause it takes less skill, less training, and many people are willing to do such a job. Many people have started off as cashiers n then later have done other things to be much more successful. How many cashiers been a cashier for 20 years? I dont know any. What was your first job?

[@FletchforFreedom]

@surecorrect There is actually ONLY evidence that Friedman was pro-entrepreneur and no evidence beyond the voices in your head that he ws pro "corporate maneuvering". Corporate managers in the real world are focused on providing a good or service in the marketplace in a better way than their competitors so that their enterprise can survuve in the long term resulting in benefits to themselves, their workers and consumers. And many of them are entrepreneurs.

[@FletchforFreedom]

@squamish4244 Actually, no, Leopold did NOT sell off large chunks of the Congo nor did he ultimately sell it. Leopold retained power at all times, leasing large swaths of land and resources (a very different thing) until Belgium annexed the country. You began with the smartass (and grossly misleading) comment about corporations and subsequently decided to appeal to your resume and, forgive me, but I don't think 50 (28 years as an economist) is "very, very old".

[@Sharp_3yE]

Capitalism is a economic system of where there is private ownership of production of good and services. He privately owned his product and service and would own the money he would make.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Do you realize that working is just trade? You provide a service to someone in order to trade for something else which is usually money. People have made lots of money just from trading their services.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Capitalism is a sufficient part for freedom. Besides, y would someone invent something without getting anything in return?

[@Sharp_3yE]

Since you don't understand what the symbol ? is ill tell you. Its a question not a statement. It is something for you to answer not judge.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Why would apple invent the ipod if they could not own it or make a profit? Would an ipod even been made if there was no push from competition? Capitalism has a lot to do with invention and production of products and services. Why were automatic windows produced? Because there was a demand for them to be sold to make a profit off of them but they wouldn't be produce if there was no profit, no ownership or competition for car makers to want to put them on to be better then other car companies.

[@Sharp_3yE]

I wasn't talking about DOS. Dos was not before Bill Gates. It was already designed but never in commercial use when Microsoft purchased it from Tim Paterson in 1981 I believe. It was then called MS-DOS. Microsoft licensed it out to hardware manufacturers.

[@Sharp_3yE]

explain to me how power gets centralized in a free capitalist nation.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Wages have gone up dramatically in the past 100 years or 50 years, or even the past 30 years in the united states. Recently have gone down due to bad economic times. People in the USA can buy more things then ever before. We have LOTS more buying power. What does this tell me. Capitalism has the effect of increasing wages, lowering prices, and giving people a higher living standard.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Capitalism is not based on labor. There is no point in laboring if you can't own something from your labor. Why would I take a job where I worked hard and wasn't able to own anything from my labor? Labor is not the fundamental principle in capitalism. It is ownership. Of course labor is important, but its not the fundamental principle in capitalism. Look up capitalism. its really simple.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Milton Friedman loved freedom. He also said where ever you had freedom you had capitalism. Capitalism is about private ownership, production for profits, competition, and capital accumulation. If you dont have a certain amount of freedom then you dont have capitalism.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Of course there should be some regulations. Gov should protect people from theft. If someone takes someones idea they can be sued. There should be some standards but theres lots of regulations that have had negative effects and not positive.

[@Sharp_3yE]

See u suggest that is due to capitalism. Yet when USA had the least amount of regulations, gov spend very little, and lots of laws were not constructed yet, it was people who came to USA in droves because USA gave them the best oppertunity to better themselves which they did. It was a time where we saw the greatest jump in the average person's wealth. So what u say in simply not true and is based on history. Look at Beijing. Very little regulations on the Market yet has grown so fast.

[@Sharp_3yE]

U mean workers who own the business they work in? That is private ownership. Explain to me why USSR economic system failed.

[@Sharp_3yE]

I cant believe u just said so much crap. When leaders who Milton inspired or talked to who went in his direction those nations actually had an improvement in their economy. Now of course I dont know all the leaders he inspired but Ive seen a couple interviews. Before Milton was born there were people who believe as Milton did. Milton took a lot from these people. Milton didnt come up with his beliefs and theories on his own. He also proves his theories through history and examples in the future

[@FletchforFreedom]

@surecorrect Since, on planet earth, the Chicago boys were merely involved in an exchange prgram between the University of Chicago and its sister school in Chile, were not clones of Friedman and, even if they had been, did not advocate ANY of the repressive policies of the Pinochet regime, the response is puzzling. At best, mentioning them doesn't help your case; at worst you are making a point that is demonstrably false and thus further demonstrates your ignorance of the subject.

[@Sharp_3yE]

False. Actually the opposite happens. The poor become richer and more competition comes which has the effect of increasing the general wealth of people.

[@Sharp_3yE]

Do you realize that its these capitalists that have invested in so many companies that have worked, and also ones that havent. Its all a big risk for these people yet they are willing to risk thousands or even millions just to get someone or some people a chance to make a profitable business? A person who helps start a manufacturing business that is a worker owned, how are they any different then a person who helps someones start a car repair shop?