Paraphrased, he's saying 'Exploitation is good for everyone. My mum was exploited but it didn't do me any harm'. Friedman was only highly rated because he told the powerful what they wanted to hear.
An economist of international infamy and disrepute. Friedman, Thatcher and Raegan were outliers until they were voted in and led us to the economic disaster most of us (except the billionaires) are living today.
I interviewed him for the student newspaper after he gave a speech at Strathclyde University in Glasgow in the late 70s. When I asked him to elaborate on his statement that wages had to be suppressed 'as far as possible' - did he mean to a degree just short of rioting in the streets? - his reply was a calm "as much as can be agreed or, if necessary, enforced." He was quite openly unapologetic about suffering caused by the free market system.
Food you can't eat, products that will kill you (cigarettes, fuel tanks split open in collisons - thanks for fixing, Ralph Nader), transactions that rip you off.
We've had over four decades in which to test his theories, and they've created an economic environment in which the already wealthy have found it ever-easier to appropriate an increasing share of a nation's wealth, primarily at the expense of the least well-off. NB: Friedman later disowned Thatcherism.
@@robertcampbell8027 Mafia in Suits think about it,when things arnt going right in the economy the SUITs take you to War ,dont waste a good War,out of the age old play book,historys at least taught us that.Trump wasnt re-elected 5mins and hez threatened 3 countries with invasion?Theyve lost every War since WW2!The ppl with MONEY pull the puppets strings!
All that unchecked, unregulated economic opportunism of the early 1900's led to the Great Depression. John Keynes fixed it. Milton Freidman wrecked it again. Now we're all paying for it.
Keynes didn't fix it, he only pot a sticking plaster on it - and what is worse there a more than a few who didn't understand him and who are spouting pseudo Keynesian economic today.
And this is why during the Solon era in Athenian Republic the economical orientation was the distribution of opportunities also to the middle class, something that Friedman detested. Once the policies of Solon were reversed by who other than Pericles, Athens became money oriented, then empire until it was defeated in the series of wars against unwilling nation states as well as Sparta.
No. Friedman reported a quote made by many workers who said that it is better to be exploited by capitalists than to be not exploited at all and treated as surplus people by slaving planters. But these workers were just quoting Lenin who said that there are situations where accessing capitalism is a good.
What this espoused is that capital is the only good and labor is insignificant since, magically, everone benefits. Truly a towering figure of the 19th century.
Another reason that the "free market" is bunkum is that big corporations are subsidized in many ways by governments (therefore the tax paying ordinary citizens), such as direct subsidies, or generous government contracts, or public land and other public assets being sold to them cheaply.
That he was not. He was -- like Ayn Rand, btw -- a psychopath, utterly w/o conscience, empathy, or concern for anyone unworthy. Shrewd, clever, articulate, and massively, overweeningly evil -- but (unlike most of his followers today), never a fool.
Deluded. The poster boy of the very rich and libertarians. One thing to point to this gentleman, if he was still alive, is that the “freedom” experienced by market participants will never be the same across the board. If you are worth a fortune your ability to exploit such unregulated market is orders of magnitude better than a recently arrived immigrant. He talked a lot about free markets, like the other hypocrite of Rand, but did they ever touch of having the same level playing field for all participants? Of course not! Inequality, as it has been abundantly shown, grows with time in a free market environment. Inequality doesn’t reduce and in a democracy that eventually manifests itself in rampant populism, and in the erosion of the civil rights. So to me they are not just economists advocating for some questionable ideology. To me they are agents of fascism because that’s the natural outcome of the progression of their agenda.
The USA and the UK as well are going straight back to that....and the voters in the US cant see it....Yet!.....Farage is very much hoping to re-introduce the same kind of tune...... 😮
I thought his methodology was based on greed from the start, because it sure wasn't based on societal cohesion, functional governance, nor regulated financial institutions.
Does the state exist to give you your choices or does the state exist to limit your choices? This is the fundamental question. The National Curriculum or the 10 Commandments for example.
I don’t wish anyone one to burn for eternity in hell, but being fried to a crisp in flames is in his name. We’ve just been mispronouncing it all along.
Problem is many people are too irresponsible to take advantage of what a truly free market offers them. They need government to hand them a job. Pathetic.
@@politicalcustard when you call this video “part 1” and conclude by saying “more Milton Friedman soon,” it suggests that “red tape” is the first part and that the next video will be about something else he said, not that this is his argument and your rebuttal will follow. The title also makes it clear that you disagree with him as you call him an “architect of misery,” and you say the viewer can “see where this is going”. It sounds more like you just want people to reflexively agree with you and hand wave his arguments away. In answer to your question, I am open minded and willing to entertain argument both ways. I think workers’ rights are (mostly) well-intentioned. However, I think they can form barriers to entry both in terms of employment and in terms of getting a business off the ground, which ends up benefiting bigger businesses over smaller ones. One major concern I have about the concept is that it’s based on the assumption that it’s about bad jobs vs good jobs, when in many cases it’s about bad jobs vs no jobs.
@@politicalcustard I’m sure I replied but it disappeared for some reason, so apologies if this is a double post. When you call this video “part 1” and conclude by saying “more Milton Friedman soon,” it suggests that “red tape” is the first part and that the next video will be about something else he said, not that this is his argument and your rebuttal will follow. So when you describe him in the title as an “architect of misery” and say stuff like “you can see where this is going,” it makes it sound more like you are just assuming viewers will reflexively roll their eyes at his arguments. In answer to your question, I think workers’ rights are (mostly) well-intentioned. However, I think they can form barriers to entry both in terms of employment and in terms of getting a business off the ground, which ends up benefiting bigger businesses over smaller ones, and the whole idea falsely assumes that the choice is between good jobs and bad jobs when it can be between bad jobs and no jobs.
@@MetalCooking666 so, better no regulations on start-ups, then. Take the bad job or have no job. So, if the start-up does well, the boss can hand some rewards to the loyal staff. Is that the plan?
This is a terrible miss representation of what he said. You need to read his books and not just take a few shots out of his videos out of context. None of the backstory is there. Just bits. It's a terrible video by a smart ass.
What a time to be alive, a TH-camr poo-pooing the words of a Nobel prize winning economist who studied the subject his whole life, but hey lets stick our fingers in our ears and watch this 2.5 minute TH-cam video, by someone who's not interested in facts he doesn't like.
Being a Nobel prize winner is no guarantee of infallibility. Milton Friedman has been proved badly mistaken, if not delusional. I'm old enough to remember that many people knew that he was wrong at the time when he was fashionable.
@@marijo1951 By all means post a link to your lifetimes work in economic theory and I'll have a read through. It seems that at the very least, the people who thought he was wrong weren't as good at putting their ideas to paper or getting them adopted 🤷♂
Fair point but you’re talking about a Nobel Prize winner in “Economic Sciences”. Friedman was NOT a scientist. He followed no scientific method, he had no means of experiment to test his theses, he simply passed opinion on human behaviour. And the idiots followed him like a deity. A two and a half minute TH-cam video is perfectly sufficient to pass judgement on religion
“He looked like he probably disliked garlic and sunlight a lot, and his idea of a tasty snack was something he sucked out of someone’s neck in the middle of the night.” Ian Slatter, Eco Worrier Trickle-down economics was always trickle-up economics. “How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power? Here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century” Aneurin Bevan “We could manage to survive without money changers and stockbrokers. We should find it harder to do without miners, steel workers and those who cultivate the land.” Aneurin Bevan Thanks for a very insightful video.
The only real trickle-down economics is Roosevelt's New Deal : if your industry is vital to the common good, you keep your whole profits. If your industry is less vital yo fall into the highest tax bracket.
You are free to choose, only if you have the means to choose.
That is brilliant !!!
Freedom with your back against the wall.
Paraphrased, he's saying 'Exploitation is good for everyone. My mum was exploited but it didn't do me any harm'. Friedman was only highly rated because he told the powerful what they wanted to hear.
An economist of international infamy and disrepute. Friedman, Thatcher and Raegan were outliers until they were voted in and led us to the economic disaster most of us (except the billionaires) are living today.
Absolutely spot on. 👍
Actually, wasn't Freidrich Hayek also a key proponent of uncontrolled capitalism?
What a load of crap. Margret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan were two of the greatest leaders of the 20th century.
@@rickjohnson2165 Perhaps you would change your mind if you knew anything about economics, Rick.
@@rickjohnson2165 - You gotta be kidding. Thatcher destroyed Britain and we are still living, or dying (as a nation), with the consequences.
And we are still paying for it.
Absolutely! People really don't know how devastating this individual and others were to the global markets.
I interviewed him for the student newspaper after he gave a speech at Strathclyde University in Glasgow in the late 70s. When I asked him to elaborate on his statement that wages had to be suppressed 'as far as possible' - did he mean to a degree just short of rioting in the streets? - his reply was a calm "as much as can be agreed or, if necessary, enforced." He was quite openly unapologetic about suffering caused by the free market system.
The other side of that is that in a free market prices are supposed to be suppressed by competition.
@@fredgillespie5855in a "free market" that doesn't really exist due to increasing corporate concentration.
@@heronimousbrapson863 - That is what I was implying.
Damn!
Regulation, regulation, regulation. If you leave it to big business you'll always have slave labour.
Food you can't eat, products that will kill you (cigarettes, fuel tanks split open in collisons - thanks for fixing, Ralph Nader), transactions that rip you off.
That darned red tape, preventing me from making people do useful things (for me)
He's on the hard right, only looking out for his own interests and the wealthy
We've had over four decades in which to test his theories, and they've created an economic environment in which the already wealthy have found it ever-easier to appropriate an increasing share of a nation's wealth, primarily at the expense of the least well-off. NB: Friedman later disowned Thatcherism.
“…few rules and regulations, no licenses, no permits, no red tape to restrict them…” Sounds like the Mafia.
@@robertcampbell8027 Mafia in Suits think about it,when things arnt going right in the economy the SUITs take you to War ,dont waste a good War,out of the age old play book,historys at least taught us that.Trump wasnt re-elected 5mins and hez threatened 3 countries with invasion?Theyve lost every War since WW2!The ppl with MONEY pull the puppets strings!
@@robertcampbell8027 Mafia in suits GOVs and Bankers
@@robertcampbell8027 i see the ai has removed my original comment-truth hurts even ai?
If hell is real, he's there!
The ladies in that factory look more like long-term employees, not people doing the job short term until they find something better.
What a horror individual
All that unchecked, unregulated economic opportunism of the early 1900's led to the Great Depression. John Keynes fixed it. Milton Freidman wrecked it again. Now we're all paying for it.
Keynes didn't fix it, he only pot a sticking plaster on it - and what is worse there a more than a few who didn't understand him and who are spouting pseudo Keynesian economic today.
@@fredgillespie5855 Yeah well I could have written a 5,000 word response like I did for my B.Business Degree but this is only TH-cam.
Con man. Nothing more.
Concentration of wealth is ALWAYS destined to be in the hands of a few without strong regulation.
And this is why during the Solon era in Athenian Republic the economical orientation was the distribution of opportunities also to the middle class, something that Friedman detested. Once the policies of Solon were reversed by who other than Pericles, Athens became money oriented, then empire until it was defeated in the series of wars against unwilling nation states as well as Sparta.
No regulations. Except the regulations lobbied for by corporates to actually stop the free market and shut down all their competition
He actually did write about that. He even coined the term “regulatory capture” I believe.
By Friedman's argument you would expect a few of those pictured to become millionaires ... i wonder how many actually did???
Well every one of them _could_ have, if only they’d worked harder…
@@bestbehave - Or won the lottery.
Interpreting Friedman:
Exploit labor because it's better than starvation.
No. Friedman reported a quote made by many workers who said that it is better to be exploited by capitalists than to be not exploited at all and treated as surplus people by slaving planters. But these workers were just quoting Lenin who said that there are situations where accessing capitalism is a good.
This is what your enemy looks like.
Do Not Forget
What this espoused is that capital is the only good and labor is insignificant since, magically, everone benefits. Truly a towering figure of the 19th century.
Same argument for not regulating child labour. Freedom to be ripped off
Another reason that the "free market" is bunkum is that big corporations are subsidized in many ways by governments (therefore the tax paying ordinary citizens), such as direct subsidies, or generous government contracts, or public land and other public assets being sold to them cheaply.
In a word - slavery. We only have his word that his mother actually worked in a sweat shop. His father died young, I wonder why?
Friedman has always been a fool!
That he was not.
He was -- like Ayn Rand, btw -- a psychopath, utterly w/o conscience, empathy, or concern for anyone unworthy.
Shrewd, clever, articulate, and massively, overweeningly evil -- but (unlike most of his followers today), never a fool.
Deluded. The poster boy of the very rich and libertarians.
One thing to point to this gentleman, if he was still alive, is that the “freedom” experienced by market participants will never be the same across the board. If you are worth a fortune your ability to exploit such unregulated market is orders of magnitude better than a recently arrived immigrant. He talked a lot about free markets, like the other hypocrite of Rand, but did they ever touch of having the same level playing field for all participants? Of course not! Inequality, as it has been abundantly shown, grows with time in a free market environment. Inequality doesn’t reduce and in a democracy that eventually manifests itself in rampant populism, and in the erosion of the civil rights. So to me they are not just economists advocating for some questionable ideology. To me they are agents of fascism because that’s the natural outcome of the progression of their agenda.
The USA and the UK as well are going straight back to that....and the voters in the US cant see it....Yet!.....Farage is very much hoping to re-introduce the same kind of tune...... 😮
Absolutely! It is not even a train wreck waiting to happen, it has already happened and the damage/ derailing process is ongoing.
That was then now is now brutal and broken promises 😔
I like your title!
Friedman neglected to consider the effect of greed in his methodology.
I thought his methodology was based on greed from the start, because it sure wasn't based on societal cohesion, functional governance, nor regulated financial institutions.
No he hasn't got a point.
The land of opportunity he's talking about, is the opportunity to exploit the workforce, that's not free market
Overrated and unrealistic economist.
I think you’re being very kind there tbh
e "CON" omist the clues in the word its a "CON" TRICK(le) DOWN
For sure!!!
--- IF SPOKEN IN GERMAN . . . Uncle Milton's defence of the exploitation of labour sounds pretty and worthwhile.
Does the state exist to give you your choices or does the state exist to limit your choices? This is the fundamental question. The National Curriculum or the 10 Commandments for example.
You are not free to chose if you’re one pay cheque away from penury.
Absolutely!
I don’t wish anyone one to burn for eternity in hell, but being fried to a crisp in flames is in his name. We’ve just been mispronouncing it all along.
A fantastic communicator but with a very narrow view of the world
Don't forget Chile. If workers have any thoughts of proper pay, regulations and proper working conditions we'll tech them "freedom" .
France has never had an unemployment rate of lower than 7%.
Snake oil anyone?
LOL! True.
well someone found the villain of the piece?!
Cee U Next Thursday.
I wonder if we had instead chosen to make quality of life for all our goal would we still have climate change and super-rich?
Problem is many people are too irresponsible to take advantage of what a truly free market offers them. They need government to hand them a job. Pathetic.
So what’s your counter argument other than “hmmmmmm”?
It's part one. Be patient. But in the meantime do you think worker's rights are a bad thing?
@@politicalcustard when you call this video “part 1” and conclude by saying “more Milton Friedman soon,” it suggests that “red tape” is the first part and that the next video will be about something else he said, not that this is his argument and your rebuttal will follow. The title also makes it clear that you disagree with him as you call him an “architect of misery,” and you say the viewer can “see where this is going”. It sounds more like you just want people to reflexively agree with you and hand wave his arguments away.
In answer to your question, I am open minded and willing to entertain argument both ways. I think workers’ rights are (mostly) well-intentioned. However, I think they can form barriers to entry both in terms of employment and in terms of getting a business off the ground, which ends up benefiting bigger businesses over smaller ones. One major concern I have about the concept is that it’s based on the assumption that it’s about bad jobs vs good jobs, when in many cases it’s about bad jobs vs no jobs.
@@politicalcustard I’m sure I replied but it disappeared for some reason, so apologies if this is a double post.
When you call this video “part 1” and conclude by saying “more Milton Friedman soon,” it suggests that “red tape” is the first part and that the next video will be about something else he said, not that this is his argument and your rebuttal will follow. So when you describe him in the title as an “architect of misery” and say stuff like “you can see where this is going,” it makes it sound more like you are just assuming viewers will reflexively roll their eyes at his arguments.
In answer to your question, I think workers’ rights are (mostly) well-intentioned. However, I think they can form barriers to entry both in terms of employment and in terms of getting a business off the ground, which ends up benefiting bigger businesses over smaller ones, and the whole idea falsely assumes that the choice is between good jobs and bad jobs when it can be between bad jobs and no jobs.
@@MetalCooking666 so, better no regulations on start-ups, then. Take the bad job or have no job. So, if the start-up does well, the boss can hand some rewards to the loyal staff. Is that the plan?
@@BillDavies-ej6yewhose plan?
Zio debt slavery.
Political Custard are running out of subjects 🥱
I think he never got to labor as an economist like this. So naive!
he was never a conservative
But he was loved by so many conservatives, or rather cuckservatives.
This is a terrible miss representation of what he said. You need to read his books and not just take a few shots out of his videos out of context. None of the backstory is there. Just bits. It's a terrible video by a smart ass.
liberal nonsense
What a time to be alive, a TH-camr poo-pooing the words of a Nobel prize winning economist who studied the subject his whole life, but hey lets stick our fingers in our ears and watch this 2.5 minute TH-cam video, by someone who's not interested in facts he doesn't like.
The facts being an increasing inequality gap amongst nations that have applied his economic theory?
The man is essentially responsible for thatcherism and Reaganism. Top guy. I'm sure his prize was well deserved
Being a Nobel prize winner is no guarantee of infallibility. Milton Friedman has been proved badly mistaken, if not delusional. I'm old enough to remember that many people knew that he was wrong at the time when he was fashionable.
@@marijo1951 By all means post a link to your lifetimes work in economic theory and I'll have a read through.
It seems that at the very least, the people who thought he was wrong weren't as good at putting their ideas to paper or getting them adopted 🤷♂
Fair point but you’re talking about a Nobel Prize winner in “Economic Sciences”. Friedman was NOT a scientist. He followed no scientific method, he had no means of experiment to test his theses, he simply passed opinion on human behaviour. And the idiots followed him like a deity. A two and a half minute TH-cam video is perfectly sufficient to pass judgement on religion
Loved by the Right. Professor Sowell loves him.
“He looked like he probably disliked garlic and sunlight a lot, and his idea of a tasty snack was something he sucked out of someone’s neck in the middle of the night.”
Ian Slatter, Eco Worrier
Trickle-down economics was always trickle-up economics.
“How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power? Here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century”
Aneurin Bevan
“We could manage to survive without money changers and stockbrokers. We should find it harder to do without miners, steel workers and those who cultivate the land.”
Aneurin Bevan
Thanks for a very insightful video.
The only real trickle-down economics is Roosevelt's New Deal : if your industry is vital to the common good, you keep your whole profits. If your industry is less vital yo fall into the highest tax bracket.
Og fascist