Yeah, rich are getting richer, man with power becomes families with power. And some people still belive in this kind of idealisitic bullshit. The difference is there and your average citizen will never have the chance to close the gap if they dont want you to.
@Charlie Sthill Nope. Freedom creates solutions people prefer (necessity is the mother of invention, not a bureaucratic agency). We do need equal protection under the law (which we don't actually have any more than we have liberty) to limit government powers as government will always be with us. China will be a great example to see how it turns out. They are growing in economic liberty, so now we'll have to see if political/personal liberty and equality grow or not.
The society that had the highest incarceration rate in the world but also calls itself "Land of the Free" should think twice. That freedom still didn't bring equality to the minorities.
You are a national treasure to Sweden Johan much like Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell has been to the United States. I very much appreciate your work.
Fantastic work. Understanding that equality for the left is always equality of outcome is really a key concept. In Argentina, and also in Brazil, we are struggling to learn this lesson and instead we insist with populist daddy-state-takes-care-of-all kind of ideas. It ends up badly of course and we experience this documentary lesson in the negative form: “Populism loves the poor so much, it multiplies them.” ~ Mariano Grondona
Sebastian Sastre Keep fighting my friend. Many of us in Europe are optimistic that great nations like Argentina will fully embrace the concept of individual liberty and demand truly free markets. The entire South American continent is full of untapped potential. Once the powerhouses like Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Colombia, and Venezuela are freed from the tyranny of the collectivist state, the living standards and future prospects for the entire continent will be transformed for the better. There is no reason that the major nations of South America cannot replicate the massive transformation seen across Asia since the 1980s.
@@BeatBoXXfreaK Mexico is hopeless, however. You people are experiencing now what we in Brazil and Argentina have experienced since the start of the century (or perhaps even before that): stupid left-wing populism. Spoiler: it doesn't end well.
Sebastian wrote, "Understanding that equality for the left is always equality of outcome..." Yeah, that strawman makes it easy peasy to ignore any critique from the left, or from conservative viewpoints that see a role for government.
Too many great quotes to list. EXCELLENT video!!! I only just discovered it through a review left on Milton's original book. I google'd Johan Norberg and found this video. More people need to watch this. This was by far the best break down of this argument I've ever heard in such a short and digestible video.
Beautiful! Truthful! and enlightening. Loved your encounter in Hong Kong with Mr. Chang (?), it seems that he is not one of the most adaptable, but has certainly improved his life and, above all, has kept his Freedom. Greetings from a brand new failed socialist paradise called Ecuador.
Johan heads off to you.... this is one beautiful and insightful video... I've been watching your videos lately and they're really interesting and provides with ample amount of thoughtful information.. keep up the good work
From most of the documentaries that I have watched, you are among the few people that I can authoritatively say, you have the right information and idea about communism in China. On the same topic, you do offer a new perspective for the populace to understand about China and not to jumping to the obvious conclusion. Thank you for an amazing work
As an economics student, I'm an advocate of Adam- Friedman -Keynisian economics. Studying and reading their books, I realized a lot of their concepts have been misinterpreted.
"The society that puts equality before freedom will end up with neither but a society that puts freedom before equality will end up with an abundance of both" - Milton Friedman.
Since the free market privatized the penitentiary system the incarceration rate has skyrocketed. The gap between rich and poor is growing. Big companies make it impossible for start ups to flourish. So much for freedom and equality. Both economically and socially.
This video should be recommended to everyone who has access to TH-cam. Brilliant work Johan! I greatly appreciate your work! From a Socialist Country- India 🇮🇳.
Whatever you do, every society will always end up with concentrations of power. The people who end up with the power may have originally got there though admirable qualities like intelligence and hard work, or less desirable qualities like destroying competitors. Their children may be different but they usually hang onto the privileges for a few generations.
Market economy is simply the best because it assures best capital allocation (because privateers manage their own money or are held accountable by shareholders and lenders) . The government doesn’t because responsibilities are dispersed and “shareholders” (aka tax-payers) don’t have direct mechanisms to check capital allocation.
Yes. Although in a free market everyone (including the poorest) wins from the advancements and innovations achieved by the successful. And although quality of life plummets for the majority of the population under socialism, socialism always has an elite who enjoy wealth and power--not because they've benefited others (as is the case with the successful in capitalism), but because they're oppressing others and stealing from them.
Milton friedman didn't say the economic freedom will lead to political freedom, but he said the free market is a naccassary but "not sufficient Condition" for free society.
I am perennially grateful to you for uploading these videos. Wonderful. However, I wanted to know why his wife Rose Friedman , who co-authored the book, is never ever mentioned in the documentary? Was her contribution to the book unequal? Again. My apologies for pointing this out.
China is far from free but clearly outgrowing most free nations. I so hope the Chinese, the biggest group of people on Earth, gets also political development. When I was born Europe was divided with half the continent under strict communist regime. The Polish protests was at the same time as China shifted it's economics. China has had sucessfull capitalism soon 30 years, what political freedom did the population get yet? Chinas economical progress is astounding, it is a nothing short off a miracle. I hope the Chinese get their political freedom in my lifetime. For sure they could!
China is something different because they've got a BIG population there, and a big population means A BIG MARKET to trade in. If you asked me what country I would choose to advertise my products, I would definitely say CHINA, not Norway or Sweden even though they have a very high purchasing power.
It's communistic politically, but practises state capitalism especially in areas of natural resources and strategic foreign policy interests. There's still a number of private enterprises which operate as long as they don't criticize the government openly. They've also opened up to foreign companies as long as you don't interfere with the political environment. It's still the country with the second highest concentration of bilionaires in the world. I think the greater control is informed by fear of external influence given the Opium wars. Also, the huge population which may not be as easy to provide for and contain as countries with much lower population such as Sweden.
The physical needs for a human's healthy existence is only a vessel for what is needed to build the relationships within needed for the greater health of the whole of the rest of reality's conversation which exists as an expression of balance taking many forms. There in, should one desire to set a higher standard in one area, if you don't try to project it into the reality of what it meets, the normal desire will arise to work the disparity (differences) that can enable a few to take advantage of that difference only for their personal advantage. This becomes more evident where leaders restrict the natural balancing endeavors and have it dominated seeking to keep a ruling dominance. They are forgetting that there will always be the need to manage things (mainly by enlightening information) to achieve a better order in all relationships that need to exist. And that needs a valid reward also. I dare say they are able to deserve such a reward (and prove it in a validly competitive realm) and with much less trouble and desire for demanding inequality while staying in the enlightening place they should be in.
I disagree with Johan on one issue, and that is abortion. On 40:49 mark, he said that banning abortion will create a black market for abortion, but he seems to forget the fact that a third party is being affected by this kind of transaction (that is the baby). Milton Friedman was never in favour of any transaction that is taking place that isn't voluntary. In this case, the third party, the baby, did not choose to get aborted, hence it is the responsibility of the government to stop this kind of transaction from taking place. As much as I hate the government for getting involved in our lives, I am equally reprehended by the fact that government is not taking it's responsibility and performing it's basic functions such as protecting it's citizens from outward threat and protecting the citizen from another fellow citizen.
Hong Kong certainly did not gain economic freedom 'by accident as Mr Norberg claims. Any description of Hong Kong's economic success that does not mention John Cowperthwaite demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of how that success was achieved. Plus Free to chose may have been broadcast by PBS in the US however I dont think they made it they bought it as did many other countries.
Even the Queen of Britain has some restrictions and limited freedom. Even though, she's extremely wealthy and lives a life of a leasure that's enviable, she's always followed by the cameras. So, what are the alternatives?
Most “market failures” are government failures, like the most recent 2008 US housing crisis instigated by government interventions via Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, two GSEs, that bubbled the market pumping liquidity to first line lenders while taking all the risk upon themselves by buying all subprime loans from the lenders. That was a serious distortion of market economy because first-line lenders had no risk whatsoever to give loans even to the riskiest customers since FM&FM would immediately take them out of their hands and pay for them.
So you do not agree with economic uncertainty through competition , just opt for state intervention instead. That's why you got generous welfare administered by the Nanny state. Scandinavian public chooses to give chunks of their income for wealth redistribution, because it likes the state managing their money for them. It is better to keep more of your own and choose how to spend on services one requires. Not to say you do not need to contribute, only this model of high taxation makes you less competitive that impacts rate of your aggregate growth and prosperity.
"As late as 1950, only 18% of black households were single parent. From 1890 to 1940, a slightly higher percentage of black adults had married than white adults. In 1938, black illegitimacy was about 11% instead of today’s 75%. In 1925, 85% of black households in New York City were two-parent. Today, the black family is a mere shadow of its past. Slightly over 70% of black children are raised in female-headed households." - Walter E. Williams is a "black" professor of economics at George Mason University
Hong Kong regulates housing the city of hong kong leases out land to house developers and from that they earn many billions of dollars a year, the record price paid for one land leasing deed deal was two billion dollars! this is why housing in hong kong is so extremely expensive, not lack of land, 97 percent of hong kong is non developed land, but if if this land was to be leased out, the price of the deeds would fall drastically , and this would lower the city of hong kongs income , this is why hong kong is not a market economy, a big part of it , is governement controlled.
Milton Friedman was a capitalist that has received Nobel prize in economic. Is there any social economist or marxist economist has received the Nobel Prize?
Any Marxist would reject such a bourgeois prize on principle. Le Doc Thu to his everlasting credit rejected his shared peace prize with the war criminal Henry Kissinger.
Misbah Hussain Qasemi haha of course not, Marxist economist is an oxymoron as Marxism ignores all the basic tenets of economics and hence always leads to economic collapse or stagnation
An excellent doc, YT at its best, an unboring walk and talk with Johann Norberg through the world of economics (aired in 2010), a fascinating 3 way perspective - 1980 with Milton Frieberg/President Reagan, 2010 with Mr. Norberg/President Obama and now with ??/President Trump. (The following is my reaction to the vid. Click READ MORE at yer own peril.) Not a bit boring. Well, it helps that Johann is kinda cute. Really, I'm totally straight, but that little flip of hair in the front? AND he's intelligent? Talk about inequality. Sigh. Ok, yall gotta check out the Great and Powerful Uncle Milty with his smarmy, weird smile rationalizing everything from tomatoes to totalitarianism with a slap of the ol' invisible backhand. Using his best kindergartner teacher's voice - you know, speak slowly, put a space between words - he sounds like he's trying to convince us why it's better to poop in the potty rather than selling us he and his boss' plans to spend more taxpayer money than all administrations before them - combined. What annoys me most about Mr. Friedman, as Mr. Norberg points out too, is that he is correct. To date, free markets have provided a lifestyle beyond what our parents dreamed of. But seven years later we are looking at the first gen of Americans who will NOT do better than their parents. In large part because of the immense debt rung up by Milt's ilk. Ignore the men behind the curtain.
Well written! "Milty visited Chile and something something a `difficult period of adjustment´....fast forward a decade, FREEDOM!". Who could argue with that? 10,000 chileans surely can not anymore.
The Free Market would be great if it wasn't corrupt; Once the initial success stories reach the top, they monopolize the markets, raise the prices, outsource the jobs and use the government subsidies to expand, not risking losses while pocketing the gains. Not to mention the damage unchecked corporations do to the environment.
Some companies remain dominant because people still want use their product. And if so, then what's the problem? As long as they offer a good deal to consumers, then yes, competition will have a hard time to arise. But if they increased prices or lowered quality, then that opens the door to someone else who'll offer the same product with lower prices and cut them off. Name one legitimate monopoly that raised its prices or offered an inferior service and still maintained that monopoly.
Outsourcing jobs means the labor elsewhere is cheaper, which means the price of their product will be cheaper. And when the prices of products are cheaper, consumer will have more money to spend, thus increasing their purchasing power. More spending will mean more opportunities to other businesses to either be created or to grow and hire more people. That's why, despite all the outsourcing, the unemployment rate in America still hovers around 5% like it was in 1890. Government subsidies is a great argument to shrink government power and meddling in business, yes.
Amy Works you can’t remedy/prevent corruption in humans. That’s a given. What you CAN do is to allow ample competition to iron-out corruption. State interventions instigate and incentivize corruption.
I would like him to have taken eastern Europe, as an example. 30 years of free markets. How have these countries changed? It doesn't seem to me that they have become like Honk Kong.
Kim O'Brien I don’t think it’s prudent to talk about a road to serfdom (Hayek) with a profile image such as yours. I don’t think you have realized yet how wrong Marx was. So wrong that he had to change his theory multiple times until his death because reality simply superseded his theory. Not just wrong but also dangerous! His followers later became the Bolsheviks, the Fascists, the Nationalsocialists, all collectivists (with more weight to certain parameters) and anticapitalists.
@9:00 Totally misinformative... HongKong was the capital of heroin trade financing and money laundering. It was the inheritor of the British East India company, which was the greatest drug pusher of the 19th century.. That's why it was so rich. It is laughable to believe that just by removing taxes and tariffs one can develop an economy to HongKong levels.
All men are created equal until they prove they are not? Ever dreamt of having the same flaws as many??? Bahahah. In any case safety is for the sophisticated first, since they are the ones in danger and they certainly don't represent a danger except grading people, since you can't grade yourself.
"The society that puts freedom before equality will end up with a great measure of both". Epic.
Yeah, rich are getting richer, man with power becomes families with power. And some people still belive in this kind of idealisitic bullshit. The difference is there and your average citizen will never have the chance to close the gap if they dont want you to.
@Charlie Sthill Nope. Freedom creates solutions people prefer (necessity is the mother of invention, not a bureaucratic agency). We do need equal protection under the law (which we don't actually have any more than we have liberty) to limit government powers as government will always be with us. China will be a great example to see how it turns out. They are growing in economic liberty, so now we'll have to see if political/personal liberty and equality grow or not.
The society that had the highest incarceration rate in the world but also calls itself "Land of the Free" should think twice.
That freedom still didn't bring equality to the minorities.
You are a national treasure to Sweden Johan much like Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell has been to the United States.
I very much appreciate your work.
Thomas who? Never heard of him. Marx yes
@@ligayabarlow5077 marx the idiot?
Freedom To Choose channel, thank you so much for upholding the fundamental principle of liberty.
Fantastic work. Understanding that equality for the left is always equality of outcome is really a key concept.
In Argentina, and also in Brazil, we are struggling to learn this lesson and instead we insist with populist daddy-state-takes-care-of-all kind of ideas. It ends up badly of course and we experience this documentary lesson in the negative form:
“Populism loves the poor so much, it multiplies them.” ~ Mariano Grondona
Sebastian Sastre Keep fighting my friend. Many of us in Europe are optimistic that great nations like Argentina will fully embrace the concept of individual liberty and demand truly free markets. The entire South American continent is full of untapped potential. Once the powerhouses like Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Colombia, and Venezuela are freed from the tyranny of the collectivist state, the living standards and future prospects for the entire continent will be transformed for the better. There is no reason that the major nations of South America cannot replicate the massive transformation seen across Asia since the 1980s.
Mexico is the same man, sad.
@@BeatBoXXfreaK Mexico is hopeless, however. You people are experiencing now what we in Brazil and Argentina have experienced since the start of the century (or perhaps even before that): stupid left-wing populism. Spoiler: it doesn't end well.
Sebastian wrote, "Understanding that equality for the left is always equality of outcome..."
Yeah, that strawman makes it easy peasy to ignore any critique from the left, or from conservative viewpoints that see a role for government.
man.... ARGENTINA, man, that was sad to see... the last sunday....
I saw this on PBS in 2011, been looking for it ever since. Thank you for uploading it
Too many great quotes to list. EXCELLENT video!!! I only just discovered it through a review left on Milton's original book. I google'd Johan Norberg and found this video. More people need to watch this. This was by far the best break down of this argument I've ever heard in such a short and digestible video.
I share this video with as many people as I can. Liberty is easily lost if we don't guard it.
Thanks for making this available!!!
outstanding work . thanks for the info,from namibia southwestern africa
Beautiful! Truthful! and enlightening. Loved your encounter in Hong Kong with Mr. Chang (?), it seems that he is not one of the most adaptable, but has certainly improved his life and, above all, has kept his Freedom. Greetings from a brand new failed socialist paradise called Ecuador.
Johan heads off to you.... this is one beautiful and insightful video... I've been watching your videos lately and they're really interesting and provides with ample amount of thoughtful information.. keep up the good work
Hats off has a very different meaning than heads off.
I just want to thank you for passing these valuable principles about economics, it really means a lot
Thank you for sharing this!
Excellent!!!
From most of the documentaries that I have watched, you are among the few people that I can authoritatively say, you have the right information and idea about communism in China. On the same topic, you do offer a new perspective for the populace to understand about China and not to jumping to the obvious conclusion.
Thank you for an amazing work
Great film Johan. I missed this one. You put things so simply.
I enjoyed it in a very progressive gain.
Liked it a lot! Everyone should see it!
As an economics student, I'm an advocate of Adam- Friedman -Keynisian economics. Studying and reading their books, I realized a lot of their concepts have been misinterpreted.
"The society that puts equality before freedom will end up with neither but a society that puts freedom before equality will end up with an abundance of both" - Milton Friedman.
Whats he meant by "equality" ?
Since the free market privatized the penitentiary system the incarceration rate has skyrocketed.
The gap between rich and poor is growing.
Big companies make it impossible for start ups to flourish.
So much for freedom and equality. Both economically and socially.
Thank you, Free To Choose Network! Keep up the good work.
Thank you Free To Choose Network for explaining the invisible hand.
This video should be recommended to everyone who has access to TH-cam. Brilliant work Johan! I greatly appreciate your work! From a Socialist Country- India 🇮🇳.
We're not socialist anymore
Milton Friedman - the god of classical liberalism/ libertarianism
Libertarianism a fat guy doing a strip tease at the Libertarian Party convention.
Free to choose ,this was a great upload
Fantastic! Thank u for sharing ☺️
Excellent
Whatever you do, every society will always end up with concentrations of power. The people who end up with the power may have originally got there though admirable qualities like intelligence and hard work, or less desirable qualities like destroying competitors. Their children may be different but they usually hang onto the privileges for a few generations.
Wonderful thank you
"If you are willing to give up your freedom for "equality" you will soon find that you have neither"
Benjamin Franklin
Did he say this when he owned slaves or there after?
I wished my Brazil had taken this route 40 years ago
i just learned more about a subject that i find very interesting
Very Cool
Great video, please work on the getting subtitles in Spanish, if possible. Thanks.
Excellent video, hopefully this video has many million views soon :)
Market economy is simply the best because it assures best capital allocation (because privateers manage their own money or are held accountable by shareholders and lenders) . The government doesn’t because responsibilities are dispersed and “shareholders” (aka tax-payers) don’t have direct mechanisms to check capital allocation.
This guy is the pew die pie of economics.
Thank you so much for this great Video. Great job!
Great documentary. Thank free to choose network! Unfortunately i fear you mainly preach to the converts, but still...
If I had to describe the difference between capitalism and socialism: in capitalism some win and others lose, vs socialism everyone loses.
Yes. Although in a free market everyone (including the poorest) wins from the advancements and innovations achieved by the successful. And although quality of life plummets for the majority of the population under socialism, socialism always has an elite who enjoy wealth and power--not because they've benefited others (as is the case with the successful in capitalism), but because they're oppressing others and stealing from them.
Milton friedman didn't say the economic freedom will lead to political freedom, but he said the free market is a naccassary but "not sufficient Condition" for free society.
Great work, thanks
Free because if you have freedom everything will follow.
Interesting and informative thank you
I am perennially grateful to you for uploading these videos. Wonderful. However, I wanted to know why his wife Rose Friedman , who co-authored the book, is never ever mentioned in the documentary? Was her contribution to the book unequal? Again. My apologies for pointing this out.
China is far from free but clearly outgrowing most free nations. I so hope the Chinese, the biggest group of people on Earth, gets also political development.
When I was born Europe was divided with half the continent under strict communist regime. The Polish protests was at the same time as China shifted it's economics.
China has had sucessfull capitalism soon 30 years, what political freedom did the population get yet? Chinas economical progress is astounding, it is a nothing short off a miracle.
I hope the Chinese get their political freedom in my lifetime. For sure they could!
China is something different because they've got a BIG population there, and a big population means A BIG MARKET to trade in. If you asked me what country I would choose to advertise my products, I would definitely say CHINA, not Norway or Sweden even though they have a very high purchasing power.
It's communistic politically, but practises state capitalism especially in areas of natural resources and strategic foreign policy interests. There's still a number of private enterprises which operate as long as they don't criticize the government openly. They've also opened up to foreign companies as long as you don't interfere with the political environment. It's still the country with the second highest concentration of bilionaires in the world. I think the greater control is informed by fear of external influence given the Opium wars. Also, the huge population which may not be as easy to provide for and contain as countries with much lower population such as Sweden.
All social-democrats should see this!
Mises , Haye and to a certain degree Friedman understood this, yet the political global elites persists in these failed policies. Davos anyone?
The physical needs for a human's healthy existence is only a vessel for what is needed to build the relationships within needed for the greater health of the whole of the rest of reality's conversation which exists as an expression of balance taking many forms. There in, should one desire to set a higher standard in one area, if you don't try to project it into the reality of what it meets, the normal desire will arise to work the disparity (differences) that can enable a few to take advantage of that difference only for their personal advantage. This becomes more evident where leaders restrict the natural balancing endeavors and have it dominated seeking to keep a ruling dominance. They are forgetting that there will always be the need to manage things (mainly by enlightening information) to achieve a better order in all relationships that need to exist. And that needs a valid reward also. I dare say they are able to deserve such a reward (and prove it in a validly competitive realm) and with much less trouble and desire for demanding inequality while staying in the enlightening place they should be in.
so what form of liberalism solved the tension between liberty vs equality
You need to translate this video to spanish. There's not enough videos like this in spanish and many people around the world needs to see it.
may test tayo dito sa friday ah
I disagree with Johan on one issue, and that is abortion. On 40:49 mark, he said that banning abortion will create a black market for abortion, but he seems to forget the fact that a third party is being affected by this kind of transaction (that is the baby). Milton Friedman was never in favour of any transaction that is taking place that isn't voluntary. In this case, the third party, the baby, did not choose to get aborted, hence it is the responsibility of the government to stop this kind of transaction from taking place.
As much as I hate the government for getting involved in our lives, I am equally reprehended by the fact that government is not taking it's responsibility and performing it's basic functions such as protecting it's citizens from outward threat and protecting the citizen from another fellow citizen.
got to say as all things American it has got to be taken with a pinch of salt.
Hong Kong certainly did not gain economic freedom 'by accident as Mr Norberg claims. Any description of Hong Kong's economic success that does not mention John Cowperthwaite demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of how that success was achieved. Plus Free to chose may have been broadcast by PBS in the US however I dont think they made it they bought it as did many other countries.
Even the Queen of Britain has some restrictions and limited freedom. Even though, she's extremely wealthy and lives a life of a leasure that's enviable, she's always followed by the cameras. So, what are the alternatives?
what about market failure? to what extent should the government interfere?
piecesputra if the market failed what make you thing the government Will do à better job ?
Most “market failures” are government failures, like the most recent 2008 US housing crisis instigated by government interventions via Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, two GSEs, that bubbled the market pumping liquidity to first line lenders while taking all the risk upon themselves by buying all subprime loans from the lenders. That was a serious distortion of market economy because first-line lenders had no risk whatsoever to give loans even to the riskiest customers since FM&FM would immediately take them out of their hands and pay for them.
Milton Friedman ...❤️🧡💙💚
29" to 37" makes good arguments about the unintended consequences of the Scandinavian welfare states
fyi, This is from 2010 I think...
So you do not agree with economic uncertainty through competition , just opt for state intervention instead. That's why you got generous welfare administered by the Nanny state. Scandinavian public chooses to give chunks of their income for wealth redistribution, because it likes the state managing their money for them. It is better to keep more of your own and choose how to spend on services one requires. Not to say you do not need to contribute, only this model of high taxation makes you less competitive that impacts rate of your aggregate growth and prosperity.
Creative destruction is the economic equivalent to life and death, as well as Evolution's natural selection.
"As late as 1950, only 18% of black households were single parent. From 1890 to 1940, a slightly higher percentage of black adults had married than white adults. In 1938, black illegitimacy was about 11% instead of today’s 75%. In 1925, 85% of black households in New York City were two-parent. Today, the black family is a mere shadow of its past. Slightly over 70% of black children are raised in female-headed households." - Walter E. Williams is a "black" professor of economics at George Mason University
So? Your point is?
Hong Kong regulates housing
the city of hong kong leases out land to house developers and from that they earn many billions of dollars a year, the record price paid for one land leasing deed deal was two billion dollars!
this is why housing in hong kong is so extremely expensive, not lack of land, 97 percent of hong kong is non developed land, but if if this land was to be leased out, the price of the deeds would fall drastically , and this would lower the city of hong kongs income , this is why hong kong is not a market economy, a big part of it , is governement controlled.
Milton Friedman was a capitalist that has received Nobel prize in economic. Is there any social economist or marxist economist has received the Nobel Prize?
Any Marxist would reject such a bourgeois prize on principle. Le Doc Thu to his everlasting credit rejected his shared peace prize with the war criminal Henry Kissinger.
Misbah Hussain Qasemi haha Marxist economist is an oxymoron, lol
The closest to a Marxist economist (an oxymoron in itself) is a Keynesian economist of whom many have received Nobel prizes.
Misbah Hussain Qasemi haha of course not, Marxist economist is an oxymoron as Marxism ignores all the basic tenets of economics and hence always leads to economic collapse or stagnation
An excellent doc, YT at its best, an unboring walk and talk with Johann Norberg through the world of economics (aired in 2010), a fascinating 3 way perspective - 1980 with Milton Frieberg/President Reagan, 2010 with Mr. Norberg/President Obama and now with ??/President Trump. (The following is my reaction to the vid. Click READ MORE at yer own peril.)
Not a bit boring. Well, it helps that Johann is kinda cute. Really, I'm totally straight, but that little flip of hair in the front? AND he's intelligent? Talk about inequality. Sigh.
Ok, yall gotta check out the Great and Powerful Uncle Milty with his smarmy, weird smile rationalizing everything from tomatoes to totalitarianism with a slap of the ol' invisible backhand. Using his best kindergartner teacher's voice - you know, speak slowly, put a space between words - he sounds like he's trying to convince us why it's better to poop in the potty rather than selling us he and his boss' plans to spend more taxpayer money than all administrations before them - combined.
What annoys me most about Mr. Friedman, as Mr. Norberg points out too, is that he is correct. To date, free markets have provided a lifestyle beyond what our parents dreamed of. But seven years later we are looking at the first gen of Americans who will NOT do better than their parents. In large part because of the immense debt rung up by Milt's ilk.
Ignore the men behind the curtain.
Well written!
"Milty visited Chile and something something a `difficult period of adjustment´....fast forward a decade, FREEDOM!".
Who could argue with that? 10,000 chileans surely can not anymore.
EQUAL!!!!!
19:24 fruits ok, but computers development where funded by govern
Chinese people of Hong Kong never gratitude Milton freedman.
I see some Swedes finally got it.....
The key to get always crap. The Americans talk how Europe IS. The Europeans talk how America IS.
Unlimited economic freedom is nearly as dangerous as physical violence - Karl Popper
The Free Market would be great if it wasn't corrupt; Once the initial success stories reach the top, they monopolize the markets, raise the prices, outsource the jobs and use the government subsidies to expand, not risking losses while pocketing the gains. Not to mention the damage unchecked corporations do to the environment.
Some companies remain dominant because people still want use their product. And if so, then what's the problem? As long as they offer a good deal to consumers, then yes, competition will have a hard time to arise. But if they increased prices or lowered quality, then that opens the door to someone else who'll offer the same product with lower prices and cut them off.
Name one legitimate monopoly that raised its prices or offered an inferior service and still maintained that monopoly.
Outsourcing jobs means the labor elsewhere is cheaper, which means the price of their product will be cheaper. And when the prices of products are cheaper, consumer will have more money to spend, thus increasing their purchasing power. More spending will mean more opportunities to other businesses to either be created or to grow and hire more people. That's why, despite all the outsourcing, the unemployment rate in America still hovers around 5% like it was in 1890.
Government subsidies is a great argument to shrink government power and meddling in business, yes.
@@nonmagicmike723 "I've abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system," George W. Bush
Amy Works you can’t remedy/prevent corruption in humans. That’s a given. What you CAN do is to allow ample competition to iron-out corruption. State interventions instigate and incentivize corruption.
@Amy Works Yes, the Free Market is corrupted by the Government.
I would like him to have taken eastern Europe, as an example. 30 years of free markets. How have these countries changed? It doesn't seem to me that they have become like Honk Kong.
You can't compare their lives now compared to the commumist era
You can't compare their lives now compared to the commumist era
high taxes and corrupt goverments.
Don't include abortion here, this is not the same, you are saying that we should not ban abortion is same like we should not Ban Murder
The Free Market Toll Road to Serfdom.
Kim O'Brien I don’t think it’s prudent to talk about a road to serfdom (Hayek) with a profile image such as yours. I don’t think you have realized yet how wrong Marx was. So wrong that he had to change his theory multiple times until his death because reality simply superseded his theory. Not just wrong but also dangerous! His followers later became the Bolsheviks, the Fascists, the Nationalsocialists, all collectivists (with more weight to certain parameters) and anticapitalists.
@9:00 Totally misinformative...
HongKong was the capital of heroin trade financing and money laundering. It was the inheritor of the British East India company, which was the greatest drug pusher of the 19th century.. That's why it was so rich.
It is laughable to believe that just by removing taxes and tariffs one can develop an economy to HongKong levels.
All men are created equal until they prove they are not? Ever dreamt of having the same flaws as many??? Bahahah. In any case safety is for the sophisticated first, since they are the ones in danger and they certainly don't represent a danger except grading people, since you can't grade yourself.