Milton Friedman - The Robber Baron Myth

Professor Friedman explodes the myth that America's 19th century industrialists exploited the ordinary man. www.LibertyPen.com
Source: Milton Friedman Speaks
Buy it: www.freetochoose.net/store/pro...

[@maximemeis111]

"Everybody loves to argue with Milton, particularly when he isn't there" George Shultz

[@jimgallagher5902]

Thanks for the GREAT and 100% correct comment.

[@khalidalali186]

He just passed away, 22 days ago, at the age of 100.

[@tcskips]

@@khalidalali186 Wikipedia says he died in 2006

[@gonzalodossantos3176]

@@tcskips he was referring to George Shultz

[@chronosx7]

Finding videos about speeches and interviews of Milton Friedman, Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell nowadays almost feels like finding treasures almost lost to time. Can't help but be humbled at my own ignorance and grateful it is available for everyone to see.

[@matrixman8582]

Some people in the comment section didn't watch the whole video. He said that some people did get rich for the wrong reasons, but overall most people benefitted.

[@jaredb4283]

You’re telling me that the negative comments came from people who didn’t bother to watch or listen to others?😂

[@DanZhukovin]

To be honest, I freaking love Milton Friedman, my god, he's so cool...

[@DanZhukovin]

@@jackiesharlow5654 He was just a very smart guy, and that's why I liked him. I don't really care if capitalism is largely nonsense.

[@DanZhukovin]

@@jackiesharlow5654 Yeah. I tend to overlook whether people spread stupidity if they are themselves smart. But it's hard to observe a person who seems to mistreat others all the time, and still have a positive attitude toward them. I really don't like aggressive people in that intrapersonal sense of the word.

[@DanZhukovin]

@@jackiesharlow5654 I don't eat dairy cheese. Lactose and saturated fat, for starters, are some really unhealthy macronutrients that I stay away from as much as possible. I would say I like vegan cheese more.

[@weignerleigner3037]

@@DanZhukovin Milton Friedman’s argument in general is that the govt is worse at taking care of it’s citizens than free markets. He doesn’t ever claim capitalism is perfect or solves all problems, he just thinks it’s better than large govt. Which is what we have today, and people seem to complain a lot nowadays.

[@DanZhukovin]

@@weignerleigner3037 Friedman's bases don't mean anything in the present political climate. We have the problems we have now because of that kind of irrational thinking.

[@hrvad]

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

[@Klaaninka]

Friedman is saying something that is simple but hugely misunderstood: That Capitalism for all its faults is historically and intrinsically an engine of prosperity. And most importantly, though not stressed in this video, that Socialism is historically and inevitably an engine of economic doom and despotism. And that on God's Green Earth, while we might wish it to be otherwise, those are our only choices.

[@carldavies4651]

+Klaaninka How about social credit or social democracy?

[@ozpowermo]

Social democracy is a political system, not an economic system. As a political system it has an economic impact, and that economic impact is negative. Social credit has one false assumption: it treats the profit of companies as "magic money", i'e. money that the companies don't really need. The fact is that 97% of the companies fail within 10 years, this clearly indicates that they need every bit of profit they generate. The failure rate is already high enough, so the only thing a social credit system can do is make it much harder for smaller companies to succeed. At the same time, larger companies, which have a higher tolerance in their profit margins, will only go stronger/bigger due to the lack of competition from smaller disruptive players.

[@martinmadsen616]

Carl Davies Oki LL

[@commentsandlikes9509]

I think wannabe liberals like you (in the classical sense) tend to forget that at no point in the history of the United States did the Federal Government not take an active role in the country's economy. If it wasn't for the US cavalry protecting the construction of the transcontinental railway from Indian raids, would these robber barons have enjoyed rapid transportation of their goods across the national market? Since these robber barons profited from the US government's protection and intervention in Indian matters, is it not fair to say that the government had a stake and say in their economic activity? and that their economic activity should be regulated?

[@commentsandlikes9509]

​@DUDAH The US government wasn't protecting "people from people", what, you think the story of the US westward expansion is of the US government "protecting" Indians from white settlers or vice versa? The US government was actively promoting the economic interests of railway companies at the expense Indians, they didn't protect jack-shit when it came to the rights of indigenous people. how was it not an economic intervention when the US government conquered Indian land and sold them cheap to railway companies, then protected their economic interests from raids? Without the government's economic intervention, in a free and normal economy, the railway companies would have needed to buy the land from the Indians on an open market and/or hired expensive private security.

[@BigEvan96]

last semester i had this driven into my head that all industrialists were evil.

[@U.S.SlaveOfficial]

Look into titanic hoax. Wealthy are evil

[@BigEvan96]

***** bullshit, the wealthy are not inherently evil.

[@SovereignStatesman]

BigEvan96 No more than ants at a picnic, i.e. they're the inevitable consequences of a coercive all-powerful state; if the People don't rule themselves, someone else will. But Friedman was an economist who believed in magic markets that ruled themselves, not so much political realism where logic applies; so of course he was in denial about Crony-Capitalism following a military-industrial coup that enslaved the American populace under a dead-ringer for Captain Ahab. Heck, he was in denial about ALL pesky facts that confused his libertardian Ancaptopia, which was basically Marxism with a different route.

[@SovereignStatesman]

BigEvan96 A coercive state is evil; industrial lobbying is just the inevitable result, like ruling classes under feudalism. Friedman was just too much of a libertardian to know that sovereign republics are coercive oligarchies no matter how you squint your eyes and mince words, it's the elephant in the room that they claim isn't there.

[@BigEvan96]

Tom Evans What do you think we should do about it?

[@Tofflemire5]

This guy is a genius. I love listening to smart people who actually understand the world in which we live.

[@beng4647]

Joke?

[@dank6336]

I do not understand how anyone can argue for less economic or legal freedom to the people. Milton was a genius at presenting this simple reality to people so that they could understand this. Arguing between big government vs big business misses the point. Often they are the same side of the crony monopolistic coin. Milton argues for true free markets but that is no utopia. People still have to vote intelligently with their money and actual ballots to keep from getting the shaft. Freedom is a double edged sword that contains responsibility. You never want to give up your freedoms or take them for granted. Trust neither government or big business. Watch them closely and educate yourself and those around you or suffer the results of apathy & false political trust.

[@Cryofax]

Damn you Milton Friedman for your brilliant insights. Watching your videos is like eating potato chips. You can't watch just one. R.I.P.

[@matthewgillespie2835]

So true! Lol

[@JonathanAllen0379]

This man was an absolute genius, and anybody who disagrees doesn't like being confronted by reality.

[@carldavies4651]

+Johnson Steele Well that is the end of the discussion then. The invisible hand is that of God.

[@21boxhead]

+Johnson Steele only to an idiot would he see him as a genius

[@SlashinatorZ]

like the reality that John Rockefeller & Jp morgan were horrible people? Or the reality that rich people arent better than us or work harder than us? that capitalism needs regulations & safety nets to sustain itself? or that CEOs need workers more than workers need them?

[@mannyfan165]

+Evan Gragg absolutely none of what you said comes close to reality

[@flax3lbs]

Simply a genius! People weren't exploited because I say so! What an airtight argument.

[@saintpeeter]

The day that Ronald Reagan first heard of the name Milton Friedman should be a national holiday

[@liams4499]

That's surprisingly racist for the tolerant liberal.

[@SlashinatorZ]

Reagan destroyed the middle class & is highly overrated

[@Godzilla52]

Reagan went against most of the principles that Friedman advocated, so he's not a very good example of Friedman theories done right. Reagan increased the size of government, increased spending, increased regulations and was the most protectionist President since Herbert Hoover. The only two things he did that Friedman was asking for was lowering income taxes and reducing inflation.

[@TheJTcreate]

Actually that is not all correct. You're describing Bush senior after Reagan. Reagan did increase military spending but he slashed lots of regulations and slashed taxes. He also did one thing no President had the balls to do since Eisenhower. He instructed the Federal Reservce to contain inflation which is why the economy did a dive and Reagan's credibility rating took a hit. Bush Senior undid all of what Reagan was trying to do.

[@Godzilla52]

He did slash taxes, I never disputed that. Though my other points still stand. He increased debt, ballooned government spending and left the government bigger than it was when he came to office. The only two things to his credit I can give him are lowering taxes and containing inflation. mises.org/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/spending2_1.png?itok=NM-nL0TE

[@Hatchet-Jack]

Really enjoy listening to Friedman. Thanks for posting.

[@darthutah6649]

3:27-3:51 is just pure gold

[@AxelXGabriel]

You notice how Milton doesn't ONCE address all the horrible things they did.

[@johnnynick3621]

Then why don't YOU mention the horrible things *they* did. But be very specific and make sure you can *back up* your claims with actual evidence. I'm sure lots of people would welcome it, if it was *factual* and not just angry, envious rhetoric.

[@AT-yn9dm]

Those guys weren't robbers or barons. They earned their money fairly, and they made most of their wealth through the businesses that they created.

[@coindorni]

Well, although it's true many of them who are now regarded as monopolists were regarded as anti-monopolists since they gained their money fairly there were still some businesses which even received direct monopolies (not simply subsidies). For example, at the time Vanderbilt was getting into business it was illegal to own a company for transportation by boat, later, after that policy stopped being a thing, the government kept on subsidizing certain companies. I recommend reading a book named "The Myth lf the Robber Barons" which includes much information about the topic.

[@coindorni]

​@Mackenzie Bauroth Do you have any proof to back up that claim? Furthermore, that would've made no sense, at least being paid entirely in those tokens only recognized by the company you worked for, nor would it make sense for the company itself. If a worker worked in, let's say, Standard Oil, Rockefeller's company, and they paid that worker completely in tokens only recognized by Standard Oil then the worker would starve, because all they can do with the tokens is buy oil, after all Standard Oil didn't sell food, nor water, nor shelter. At most they could exchange the tokens for other goods to people that want to buy oil. It's not convenient for a company that all their workers die, nor is it convenient for the worker, for obvious reasons. Something which was kind of common, though, which is similar to getting paid in tokens in some way I guess, was getting paid in Wildcat currencies, which were currencies issued by private banks on a rather local level instead of the national currency which was the US dollar. By the way, if you are interested on the topic of free banking and wildcat currencies there's this book www.dropbox.com/s/7sk0ttin1v3drmq/free%20banking%20theory%2C%20history%2C%20and%20a%20laissez-faire%20model_2.pdf?dl=0 about free banking, there's a whole chapter about free banking in the US.

[@coindorni]

​@Mackenzie Bauroth The Battle of Blair Mountain was about unionizing, not about the currency which the mining companies used to pay their workers, I'm not sure what one thing has to do with the other. You can easily use it as criticism for the Gilded Age and whatever but I'm not sure if it's proper if the topic is method of payment and not unionizing or yellow-dog contracts or whatever.

[@coindorni]

@Mackenzie Bauroth No, I'm not saying that, what I'm saying is that you didn't show proof that it happened, you just listed a conflict which involved mainly unionizing and yellow-dog contracts but didn't say anything about tokens. I'm not saying it's either ok or not ok, in fact, I said that listing the Battle of Blair Mountain is a valid criticism to the Gilded Age, what I'm saying is that, for the very little I read from that battle, it had nothing to do with the method by which the workers were paid but had much more to do with employers not hiring unionized workers in mining towns.

[@SanAntonioSlim]

Friedman = Freed Thought. Post more, share more, educate more

[@TheLifeTrekker]

Its amazing how the schools are so anti economically liberal. They have taught, at least me, that government is the savior from business. Today, I see through all the lies and propaganda but its become ingrained in kids today. Fortunately, there is a liberty movement going on uniting conservatives, classical liberals, libertarians, and independents. Thanks libertypen for your great work in spreading truth.

[@pointjabber]

Do you have the full video? Very insightful. Must watch.

[@ACTopher315]

I'm a product of a school choice program and I am very thankful that I was given options. My home school was overrun by gangs and had a very poor graduation rate. Instead I opted to go to a school a little farther away that was much safer, had much better curriculum, and over all was of a higher quality. The school choice program is a success in my opinion.

[@Paladin1983PL]

End the FED. End fiat currency. End fractional reserve banking. RON PAUL!

[@bingeltube]

Very recommendable! Good question: Why did millions of immigrants kept coming to the shores of the U.S. despite so called robber barons were ruling and exploiting

[@alexanderishere6205]

Thomas Bingel well there was no internet so new didn’t spread that fast and even if they did hear Croatia Germans and Italy thought there country was more overcrowded than the US which they were run

[@bingeltube]

None of the listed countries was overcrowded at the time!

[@rm06c]

You're right, economics is not greed. We are all guilty of greed when we choose to buy a cheaper TV over a more expensive TV. That's the human condition, no system will eliminate greed and no system will eliminate inequality. Adam Smith said it best: "By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good."

[@BenjaminRaymundo18]

Weren't people getting paid so little? And suffered severely in factories? Men, women and even children forced to work to even afford food. Even if the food costs lowered, they couldn't afford much since they had little money. I do understand that todays its possible due to these sacrifices but its not a reach to say they were some Robber barons. Some had immense political, economical and social influence.

[@rogermetzger7335]

The government took land it didn't pay for and gave it to people who also didn't pay for it - only because they happened to be in the railroad business. Then the railroads competed. Except when they didn't. And fixing prices for commodities such as grain was intended to maximize the profits of the railroad owners at the expense of the family farmers. Granges were created to allow the farmers to "collectively" bargain with the railroad owners. When the idea caught on, factory workers decided to also use that tactic. Labor unions did a lot of good - for their own members - but there was a flaw in that idea. Unions made it difficult or impossible for workers to compete who preferred to negotiate directly with the business owners - i.e. the free enterprise system. That would have been bad enough but then the unions employed threats against people who didn't want to join the unions. That, in turn, prevented many people from participating in "collective bargaining" because they thought it was immoral to use coercion against independent workers. So yes, Professor Friedman is partly right. But he is leaving out way too much for his story to be considered the whole story.

[@coindorni]

This is a pretty good comment to be honest. One of the big flaws of Classical Liberalism on its beginnings is believing the state was the one that should take either direct or indirect reponsibility for railroads (and ports). It just resulted in the government using imminent domain to buy the land and then selling it to the railroad companies on the most inneficient way of hiring them, paying them for the total length of the railroad. Then there's what all of what you said.

[@theeconomist100]

We miss you milton. RIP

[@FletchforFreedom]

It amazes me that people can listen to such common sense and then be baffled that people pay attention to it.

[@rm06c]

I agree with you! ALL children should be fed and educated! But what are we to do about it!? I would implore everyone to care for their children and parents, but I cannot force them to do so. I will do so with mine, at my own expense, because I love them. But I cannot do so for everyone. I would gladly donate to a charity whose goal is to help people because I believe it to be a noble cause. But that still does not give me the right to rob you to help those people!

[@chiliray4515]

Nothing like a little charity to mollify the masses.

[@Lukeor]

This is by far my most common argument with statists and they almost never concede the market monopoly vs the government monopoly point.

[@HereticNix]

Do you have a link that explains this?

[@49dm222]

Such clarity of thought is rare

[@squamish4244]

Anyone who questions the reality of the robber barons should read the 2005 book about the partnership between Andrew Carnegie and Henry Clay Frick and their union-busting schemes. The book's title is based on a phrase in Frick's last message to Carnegie before he died: "Meet You in Hell."

[@rm06c]

It's not just "WalMart or 7-11." There's also the local restaurants, schools, delivery companies, banks, construction companies, etc. ad nauseam. I have family who have worked at WalMart. No one says its glamorous, but it was perfectly safe, and it provided the money they needed to continue in life. They gained important skills and experience, and they're working better jobs now. I went to school and studied Engineering and didn't have to work at WalMart. I would've if I needed to though.

[@Uhkilleez]

No, I just understand that they cannot exist without government in the first place, and their influence over government merely allows them to accumulate even more capital. It's a vicious circle and it starts with government.

[@fzqlcs]

just two points. the workers obviously felt more exploited on the farm since they did not return to the rural areas. and, children worked because families (not industry) believed it was in their best interest. people always choose their best option among the choices they have. The do-gooders who banned child labor made many families poorer.

[@maxpower3206]

liberty cannot exist in socialism because the individual cannot exist in socialism. And there are few greater cruelties than to deny man his liberty.

[@eval_is_evil]

I'm sure I misunderstood but did mr Friedman imply that prices going down around the board is a sign of good economy ?

[@sonictech1000]

Tomi I'm not sure what "around the board " means but yes, the natural result of a strong, productive economy is lower prices.

[@bingeltube]

Very recommendable!

[@tvlangsam]

Awesome!

[@squamish4244]

Back then unions were vitally important. Working conditions were terrible and workers were not paid living wages. 16 hour days were common. People died like flies in the urban slums. Unions were absolutely necessary to force the owners to change and give the workers rights.

[@FletchforFreedom]

Not the old stagnation myth again. The fact is that total real compensation has grown consistently and substantially over the last 40 years. The primary driver of inflation durung that period was health care costs paid for with benefits so benefits have risen at a greater pace. Disposable income has INCREASED substantially.

[@effervesce0]

Interesting video. I'm interested in what people think about how this applies to today. In the 19th century there was a lot of useful free land to go around, but that's not really true today. How does that affect this?

[@SlipClipRip]

Very well put.

[@FletchforFreedom]

@blastsummit Since his history and economics hold up (with a few exceptions in the latter case), how is it "propoganda"?

[@MichaelDewey]

@halloranedward So the land values going up of the 1880s, while the the land was getting destroyed was ok?

[@rm06c]

You have misunderstood what Adam Smith has said. Self-interest is not just greed. It includes a whole host of things, such as feeding his family, educating his children, providing for his elderly parents, etc. These are in our self-interest, and when we pursue them within a free-trade society, we promote those interests far better than when a politician says he's going to do it for you.

[@ACDC7369]

Pure brilliance!

[@FletchforFreedom]

And to the extent that it was initially driven by textiles, such was the case NOT in the United States where slavery was a factor in the industry but in Great Britain where the mass production of cloth began the factory system and the end of "home industries". Even if you argue that material costs may have been lower due to slavery (a highly debatable premise), it has no bearing on the nature and effects of industrialization IN the free market that existed.

[@fzqlcs]

Thank you. I believe you have agreed that families sent their children because it was in their self-interest to increase the household income. As you say, child labor laws, like minimum wage, were simply tactics to increase the cost of competitive labor or eliminate it altogether. Gee, I think we are in agreement.

[@todovibra]

The only thing I didn't quite understand was at 9:00 when he asks "How do you become wealthy today?" and then answers "By getting government assistance." Is his definition of government assistance substantially broader and more general than say: food stamps, medicaid, pell grants etc. Because otherwise I don't see how one becomes rich by being poor and thus qualifying for federal aid. This idea is expanded upon a bit later on, but I don't see the clear evidence supporting this type of statement.

[@garymorrison4139]

Production is secondary to the primary freedom to control the allocation of resources. Your idea of how to challenge the structure is by reenforcing it.

[@ShubhamBhushanCC]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre Such Nice Charitable "Barons"

[@megsloss268]

He revels in exalting himself above the vulnerable and disadvantaged. He has found a way to hide his greed by bashing "the other".

the point I was trying to make is that there were in fact Robber Barons. And you wouldnt believe their opulence. (the point of excessive wealth is not to use it, but - as history shows - to show off).

[@FletchforFreedom]

@FletchforFreedom In fact, in India, the poverty rate has been HALVED in a quarter century as a direct result of the greater adoption of capitlism (as is the case for the world as a whole, albeit, because some countries still reject capitalism, it has taken 40 years). Trends are, in fact, so positive, that it is expected that most Indians will be in the middle class in the next dozen years or so.

[@MichaelDewey]

There is a $23 Billion a year Worker Owned Business in the Basque Region of pain that owns its own Bank, which reinvests in itself, which founds its own Collage which trains it's worker owners. Most of the CEOs (owners also.) earn around 5 times the rank and file with a few around 9 times more. It even has its own Social Security, but the key to retirement is that the owners cash in their shares upon retiring.

[@LucisFerre1]

Every industrial nation goes through it's "sweatshop" period. One good thing about going towards a service industry economy is that factories filled with uneducated and largely unskilled workers in dead-end jobs is no longer the norm. The good thing about sweatshops overseas is that they usually offer 2,3, even 5 times the national average income. /watch?v=O2sW2wt3nLU

[@ShubhamSaxena2329]

that's classical indian instrumental tune at the beginning of each Milton's video

[@iseeyou1312]

In the US social liberalism is called liberalism and classical liberalism is called libertarianism (with a more focused role on reducing government intervention). Basically in America free markets were the norm, so "liberalism" was used to describe the emerging welfare state in the early-mid 20th century. Whereas Europe, with Socialism being the norm, called the ideas of reducing governments and free markets "liberalism".

[@madjack443]

Friedman himself said that the most important part of a market system is the actual goods and services themselves. which is one of the keystone ideas that our current societies have lost. When looking at human history we can see that one constant is that humans all have an intrinsic need for acheivement. today we measure that achievement in dollars. That necessity for achieving has not changed, just how we measure it.

[@EyeLean5280]

...this was due to the arrival on the scene by competing factories that did not offer the high standards of the Lowell Mills. The Lowell Co. had to cut costs to compete. It wasn't very long before these mills were as terrible as any others in the country, with young children at the looms and whole families living in squalid company flats, buying goods at company stores, that cost more than their wages could pay and plunging them into hopeless debt.

[@Uhkilleez]

Furthermore, the denial of the worker's inalienable rights to organize and assemble, as well as the neglect of their abuse and murders, was a problem of government. Government sided with the mine operators and in many cases, such as that of governor Hatfield, offered small compromises and demanded with the threat of more violence that the workers accept the compromise and end the strikes. It is always government intervention that protects the well to do.

[@audrtuviashartel8291]

Hmmm… did he know anything about the existence of Tartaria previous to any of what he speaks of in disputing & claiming this myth of robber barons & which is where the term even came from in the first place? Just curious. Guess it’s impossible to know now since can’t exactly ask him.

[@lbrtolbrto3647]

I wonder if it was just me who noted how his argument went... First denying the existence of robber baron and then justifying the existence of robber baron...

[@FletchforFreedom]

@DoneWithDogma It's actually working FANTASTICALLY in China. After decades of economic stagnation under socialism, the greater adoption of capitalism has tremendously improved living standards in China (doubling in just the last 10 years) with improvements in working conditions from still worse levels that existed previously (even in Foxconn factories as audits have indicated). The fact is that the free market works and the interference you suggest maintains poverty.

[@squamish4244]

Unions were a major part of bringing that sweatshop period to an end however. If the robber barons were so innocent and the unions so bad, then why did they try to have unions broken up and threaten or beat striking workers - or in the case of Carnegie, hire a private police force that ended up killing a bunch of them?

[@rm06c]

I refer once again to Adam Smith;"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good." People working and being productive is more powerful in reaching the goal of equality and justice than the will to power of government bureaucrats.

[@pantera29palms]

WOW. So damn insightful and educational. A true intellectual.

[@FletchforFreedom]

That workers were largely (though not completely) paid in scrip was true but doesn't help your case. The availability of ordinary currency was ubiquitous and workers could (and frequently did) purchase items from numerous private businesses. The issue of "monopsony" - the position you seem to be taking about the company having all the power and the workers none - has been widely researched and found NOT to exist. Workers could (and frequently did) change jobs under the circumstances.

[@MichaelDewey]

@FletchforFreedom I know Mondragon's founding very well. The Basque people got together, when a Parish Priest who taught at a Trade School encouraged his students to start Worker Owned Cooperatives back in the 50s. It is a working example of a system that serves society very well there. Even in Spain's tough economic times, thanks mainly by the insanity of the eurozone, Mondragon is working fine, on its own. John Perkins speaks the truth of what greed is doing to enslave poor countries.

[@EyeLean5280]

The assertion that America's 19th century industrialists did not exploit the ordinary worker is an extraordinary one and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Unfortunately, the mass of evidence does not support this claim.

[@yaboipetunia]

The industrialists oversaw the construction of the railroad, provided the materials for the railroad and bought a great deal of bonds that helped to finance the railroads. I would say they were pretty damn important.

[@Joru666]

It is not a matter of personal charisma, it is about the merit of the speech.

[@pedrozaragoza2253]

A brilliant and clear man.

[@mashley40d]

Exactly. I want to hear someone try to argue that.

[@tsuba14]

@Hodenkat Your sarcasm notwithstanding, I think he is just saying entrepreneurs should not be irrationally vilified. Going after the mercantile class and stealing their assets destroys your own economy (e.g. Indonesia, USSR, China). That said, where I think government should intervene, is when businesses and individuals create monopolies.

[@CapitalistOverlord]

@alexlou09 I wish that Piero Sraffa was too, since he refutes subjective price theory, which, for some odd reason, is still taught in economics 101.

[@SevenRiderAirForce]

Friedman himself said that there were Robber Barons. Nobody said life was fair. Unions popped up, didn't they? Look at them today, the tables have turned!

[@jeronimotamayolopera4834]

GREAT.

[@squamish4244]

Carnegie spent so much on his library system partly out of guilt for the way he had treated workers building his fortune. As Frick said in his message when Carnegie attempted to reconcile with him before Frick died, "Tell him I'll meet him in hell, because that's where we're both going."

[@heyhey89674]

@ketsan Ok so what does that entail? Have you put any thought behind it? Look just as feudalism I see the current system as a tyrrany to a large extent. And then you say well dont support the tyrrany then but If the only alternative to a tyrrany is another tyrrany then what do you do? Or what if you can not afford the better alternative?(about consumption). I could continue another time, tomorrow perhaps. =)

[@7unity7]

in sales whilst i'm at university studying economics. I could guarantee I would not have gotten the job without the experience. I also voluntarily chose to work there because I wanted money for partying, video games and other luxuries of a teenager. It was one of the best choices of my life. Also, the billionaires didn't bust the unions in aus, they broke down because people didn't need them. They can negotiate better contracts individually and the unions became redundant. How would you know

[@jasonsmizer5431]

I just found these gems. Who is this man?

[@jackmcslay]

If workers wanted to control their means of production, they'd fucking do it. Nothing stops them from forming their own company and try to manage it without a boss but rather an equal representation of all workers. Oh wait, there actually is something preventing that, it's called government regulation

[@commiekiller1989]

Yeah, because we've been listening to his advice for the past 40 years... oh wait-

[@Uhkilleez]

Furthermore, I find it purely comical that you would insinuate I am pulling some kind of stunt as if I am using it to find ground to stand on, as if my intellectual arguments thus far have not been sound, especially when it's coming from one who has in this very comment thread resorted to poorly composed insults in their absence of sound argument.

[@patriciofernandez4158]

This same presentation today would have a bunch of immature kids there, who would not be interested in the topic to begin with, yelling something stupid to shut down the speaker, simply because they disagree (out of ignorance and "feelings") with what he/she is saying.

[@rm06c]

Workers reap their labor through their salaries and benefits. They reap skills which make them more marketable and earn them better salaries. They reap the opportunity to start their own business or pursuing a technical degree by saving money from their salary or taking advantage of company benefits. I myself will be pursuing a Master's degree at no cost to me thanks to the reimbursement plan offered by the company I work for. And no one forced them to do this.

[@FletchforFreedom]

Yes, we are familiar with ACTUAL labor history in the US which, in reality is rife with union instigated violence and murder as well including the murder of a "scab" near Ludlow resulting in the Guard being called out and the instigation of violence in West Virginia when Pinkerton Agents ATTEMPTING TO LEAVE were cornered and fired upon. Unions have cost the US $50 TRILLION, were not responsible for the middle class or the end of child labor or the 8 hour day or a whole host of things claimed.

[@FletchforFreedom]

@Auraruth8 I have seen "The Money Masters" more than once. I have also been studying economic history for nearly 30 years. Friedman not only wins that contest. It isn;t even close.

[@koyunbaba73]

@EconTruth Tom Sowell wrote a book on this very subject. It is worth reading.

[@Barskor1]

We have been using the Keynesian system at least since the Nixon era 1970's were he announced "We are all Keynesian's now". so read some history and think about it.

[@rm06c]

There are numerous studies conducted by independent organizations and state agencies which have found that vouchers DO improve schools. Where they have been tried in the US they have succeeded in improving schools. How is the US under-funding schools when it is spending more than $10000 per student, the 4th largest spender in education globally, but with abysmal results? How much more money do bureaucrats want to bleed from poor people to stick them in crappy schools? Why can't parents choose?!

[@7unity7]

Finally, your assertion that it's possible to economically hold down a minority based on discrimination must be backed up with evidence. The fact that even one minority group was able to prosper regardless of the discrimination they endured from the majority ultimately refutes your claim in showing that economic well being is significantly unrelated to social stigma. The reality that many minorities have been economically successful over the years despite racism just solidifies my point.

[@7unity7]

Thomas Sowell did some research on the effects of the minimum wage law on young African-American employment. To sum up, he talks about higher employment level in the 40's and 50's and compares it to the problems of today's era. The detailed version is in Basic Economics, but you can google some articles he wrote about it. No question slavery was wrong, but you'll find it interesting to see how the free market system negates discrimination. Because there's only one colour in capitalism, green.

[@Hodenkat]

Don't be afraid of liberty? Are you sure you know what you would be liberated from, and what would take it's place?

[@FletchforFreedom]

@DoneWithDogma Not sure what you find humprpous - A century of reseach is virtually unanimous - that minimum wage laws ONLY increase unemployment is established fact. And Foxconn has tens of thousands of employees a small handful of which threatened suicide. What's amazing is that anyone actually took the threat seriously (neither Foxconn or the threatening employees did). And food safety was not only not a real problem but was fast improving absent the FDA.

[@SpiritCannon]

Somehow I doubt that. The actions of the fed aren't consistent with Friedman's teachings.

[@fraxus]

They didn't happen in the 19th century - which is the topic. These incidents don't change the general outcomes either.