iOwnTheWorld.com

Friedman absolutely neutered Donahue in that interview. His was the ULTIMATE defense of capitalism, and argument against socialism.

I keep this clip saved in my “favorites” – it obliterates the leftist/socialist/statist argument. There is no credible response to Friedman’s argument.

+8

Rush played this today. Total logic.

HBD Milton

+3

Mmmmmm….greed!

0

This should be mandatory viewing (as well as the PBS series he did) in every high-school in America.

I could tear my hair out when my kids come home from school and tell me they were babysat by CSI when the bio teacher was out sick or “The Santa Clause” when some other teacher is out sick!

+3

Why was Friedman opposing HAYEK’s proposition of DECENTRALIZING CENTRAL-BANKING and retiring the State his monopoly on currency-issuing?

0

The lefties have probably been busy for years trying to figure out how to outlaw anything Friedman said.

+3

He swings! It’s a long fly ball to DEEP centerfield! Way back. Way Back! WAY BACK! You can tell it goodbye!

+2

I just love the red mark on Phil’s cheek where Dr. Friedman bitch slapped him…

+1

That was great.

+1

LMFAO!

The day before MSNBC announced that it was pulling the plug on Phil Donahue’s nightly show, the man who pretty much invented talk TV was interviewing actress and author Rosie O’Donnell.

I hope dies from ass cancer.

0

HE “it” or whatever progressives call themselves these days.

0

The sad thing is, they weren’t listening to him then. Is anyone listening now?

Just us….fewer & fewer.

0

@katechon

you ask a question which suggests you have an answer already. what is it?

0

@reddecaesari

I really don’t know. I’m reading Hayek’s “Denationalisation of Money”, and he was very surprised by Friedman’s opposition to his proposal.

http://mises.org/books/denationalisation.pdf

Hayek:

“I am in complete agreement with Professor Friedman on the inevitability of inflation under the existing political and financial institutions. But I believe that it will lead to the DESTRUCTION OF OUR CIVILIZATION unless we change the political framework.”
p. 84

0

Hayek vs Friedman on C-Banking

Hayek:

“Professor Friedman has since more fully explained his doubts about the efficacy of my proposal and claimed that

‘we have ample empirical and historical evidence that suggests that [my] hopes would not in fact be realised-that private currencies which offer purchasing power security would not drive out governmental currencies.’

I can find no such evidence that anything like a currency of which the public has learnt to understand that the issuer can continue business only if he maintains its currency constant, for which all the usual banking facilities are provided and which is legally recognised as an instrument for contracts, accounting and calculation has not been preferred to a deteriorating official currency, simply because such a situation seems never to have existed. It may well be that in many countries the issue ofsuch a currency is not actually prohibited,
but the other conditions are rarely if ever satisfied. And everybody knows that if such a private experiment promised to succeed, governments would at once step in to prevent it.”

p. 84

0

Hayek basically suggests a radical privatization of currencies. Whereas Friedman suggests to stick with the state-monopoly on currency-issuing.

0

@kat

interesting read. i wonder if friedman addresses this in any of his writings.

0

Friedman was a brilliant genius. I highly recommend his series:

http://miltonfriedman.blogspot.com/

+5

Irony – thank you, thank you. I had no idea that series was online.

In Econ 101 in 1966 I was introduced to Friedman via one of his books. Fell in love with his mind, and drooled over that series. We even made our little kids watch it. DH recently pulled two of his books out of our basement and is almost finished reading the second book.

Friedman was prophetic.

0

@katechon

Milton Friedman on Hayek’s “Road to Serfdom” 1994 Interview

0