Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
John Stossel :: Townhall.com Columnist
Milton Friedman Day
by John Stossel
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Monday is Milton Friedman Day.

At 2 p.m. a memorial service will be held at the University of Chicago, where Friedman taught for so many years.

In New York City I'll join a Manhattan Institute seminar to celebrate the man The Economist called "the most influential economist of the second half of the 20th Century ... possibly of all of it."

That magazine will host a web discussion on Friedman's contributions to economics beginning tomorrow and going through Monday.

A "Day of National Debate" about Friedman's work will be held at universities, and free-market think tanks throughout America will hold events.

There will even be a "Challenge the Status Quo" video contest in honor of Friedman on YouTube.

Finally, on Monday evening, PBS will premier a documentary about Friedman titled "The Power of Choice," produced by Free to Choose Media.

It's a fitting tribute to a man who did more than anyone to remind the world that individual freedom matters.

Friedman won the Nobel Prize in 1976 for his technical work in consumption analysis and monetary theory. But his real impact came through his popular writings in books and magazines. The consummate public intellectual -- clear, concise, and congenial -- Friedman taught millions worldwide about the virtues of the free market and individual liberty. When communism fell in the Soviet bloc, a new generation of Friedman-inspired activists and intellectuals were ready to implement his message of less government and more freedom.

As you'll see in the documentary, Friedman was the furthest thing from a stuffy academic. With his impish smile and sparking eyes, he lucidly debunked the once-reigning idea that government regulators know best.

His interests were not narrowly focused on economics. He pointed out the folly of the government's so-called "war on drugs." His ideas helped create the school-voucher movement. And when the Vietnam war raged in the 1960s and early 1970s, no one argued more eloquently for ending the draft, and he helped bring about the all-volunteer army.

But you probably know all that. You may be less aware of how brilliantly Milton Friedman made the case for freedom in plain English. Here are samples from Reason magazine:

"The case for free enterprise, for competition, is that it's the only system that will keep the capitalists from having too much power. ... The virtue of free enterprise capitalism is that it sets one businessman against another, and it's a most effective device for control."

"[S]tate laws requiring people who ride motorcycles to wear helmets ... is the best litmus paper to distinguish true believers in individualism ... because the person riding the motorcycle is risking only his own life. He may be a fool to drive that motorcycle without a helmet, but part of freedom ... is the freedom to be a fool."

"Many people complain about government waste, but I welcome it. ... [W]aste brings home to the public at large the fact that government is not an efficient and effective instrument for achieving its objectives. One of the great causes for hope is a growing disillusionment with the idea that government is the all-wise, all-powerful big brother who can solve every problem that comes along."

"I want [education] vouchers to be ... available to everyone. They should contain few or no restrictions on how they can be used. We need a system in which the government says to every parent: 'Here is a piece of paper you can use for the education purposes of your child. It will cover the full cost per student at a government school. It is worth X dollars toward the cost of educational services that you purchase from parochial schools, private for-profit schools, private nonprofit schools, or other purveyors of educational services. You may add from your own funds to the voucher if you wish and can afford to.'

"Empowering parents would generate a competitive education market, which would lead to a burst of innovation and improvement, as competition has done in so many other areas. There's nothing that would do so much to avoid the danger of a two-tiered society, of a class-based society ... "

The cause of liberty will miss Milton Friedman.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
John Stossel blogs at http://blogs.abcnews.com/johnstossel/ is an award-winning news correspondent and author of Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel--Why Everything You Know is Wrong.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read John Stossel's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
a true genius
I think Milton Friedman ranks with Reagan for his contributions to making the USA (and the world) a better place in the 2nd half of the 20th century. Both turned the tide against socialism and its influence. I personally count Friedman and Hayek as my 2 greatest intellectual influences.

Sadly, many of today's students probably know more about black female lesbian poets of the 18th century than they do about Friedman.

Too bad the man was a monetarist

and didn't believe in freedom of money. A few hundred years from now if the world is lucky hell be seen merely as the bridge between Marx/Keynes and the greatest economist of the 20th century Ludwig von Mises.

http://www.mises.org/story/2414

Milton Friedman - RIP
How deep is the socialist swamp in our country, that we could ignore this man's ideas (decades ago) on school vouchers?

Govt funded K12 education has killed Private Schools.

QUESTION: given our hide-bound politicians, we must think in 'incremental steps'. Can we not make Private School tuition tax-deductible?


A very strong Libertarian...
...and all that that implies.I appreciate some of the Libertarian philosophy while recognizing it can go too far.The modern day Libertarian is a man who,if it was demonstrated that drinking a glass of water was good for you,they would go out and drink Lake Erie.

Friedman's opposition to the military draft was wrong.I was serving in the Army at the time and the men I served with who were drafted were a cross section of American men from all walks of life and they were ,on the whole,the best soldiers I worked with.Libertarians have a tendency (at least my impression of them)think everything should be voluntary.The individual is very important and has inalienable rights,but he is also part of a society that must be maintained if he is to survive.

If the defense of our country(our society) is to be voluntary,shouldn't paying taxes also be voluntary?The draft,like taxes,has been passed by representative government.Libertarians(and the rest of us)had their say and lost because they were part of the minority of opinion.End of discussion.A military draft is a tax on men for the defense of our nation.

Nam65-66
A peculiar argument: "Libertarians had their say and lost," yet ending the Draft was wrong. Do you not see the inconsistency in your thinking?

Fergus...
...Yeah,that wasn't written very well.Sorry.

The point I was trying to make was that those Libertarians that don't like taxes lost the debate.They have to live with that.I lost the debate on the draft and I have to live with that.It's called democracy.

Nam65-66
I agree that the draft is vital to the defense of our Republic. My favorite line from Friedman is when he responded to Gen Westmoreland's retort that he (Westmoreland) did not want to command an army of mercenaries.

From Salon.com
'"General," Friedman asked, "would you rather command an army of slaves?" Westmoreland got angry: "I don't like to hear our patriotic draftees referred to as slaves." And Friedman got rolling: "I don't like to hear our patriotic volunteers referred to as mercenaries." And he did not stop: " If they are mercenaries, then I, sir, am a mercenary professor, and you, sir, are a mercenary general. We are served by mercenary physicians, we use a mercenary lawyer, and we get our meat from a mercenary butcher."'

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/11/17/milton_friedman/

Not opposed to the concept of a draft, but I think the utility of the draft is not applicable to all foreign engagements.

It's a brave new world
It's a brave new world with a disturbing new world order. TK_libertarian alluded to the real tragedy: today's university student will know more about homosexual, socialist poets than champions of liberty the likes of Milton Friedman.

He was truely an eighteenth century man in a twentieth century world. I'm quite convinced he would have been most at home with men like Fredric Bastiat or Thomas Paine.

Mr. Friedman will be sadly missed at his post on the wall of liberty.


I'll begin my broken record now:

Vote school vouchers! - Vote school choice!
http://www.friedmanfoundation.org/schoolchoice/index.html




Pitbull (and others concerned with K12),
My personal belief is that we made a very bad bargain when it came to education. In trying to 'fix' the inequality that no doubt existed in the early 20th century, we shackled ourselves to a big Govt solution - which becomes bigger (and less productive) with every generation.

Pitbull's contention is that we are not going to get out of this mess as long as the Democrats are in a majority in Congress. I share that gloomy sentiment in general - but think that there may be some 'incremental' steps that might be possible if the Dems want to be pretend-centrists leading up to 2008.

Could there be an appetite for an incremental step such as making pvt school tuition tax deductible? After all, it is money that is paid (voluntarily) by those who opt out of the free (tax coerced) system.

BTW, vouchers too are an incremental step - but have become a third-rail issue under the present circumstances.

Nam65-66
I would agree that you need to learn to live with having lost on that issue, in the sense that you probably ought not to revolt against the government on that issue; however, I think there is nothing that says that you can't continue to struggle against something that you see as an injustice, however futile that struggle may be.

That would include, by the way, making use of the soapbox whenever and wherever you feel like. The fact that one holds an unpopular position on an issue is no reason to feel compelled to shut up now and forever on that issue; the electorate have been known to change their minds - witness Prohibition, for example.

So, to that end, I would never tell you (as someone who disagrees with you) to "shut up about the Draft; you lost," just as I hope you would never encourage me to do the same with regard to the income tax, where, once again, I believe that you and I may well disagree.

Nam65-66
Apparently, our military service was contemporary.

I don't agree with keeping the draft unless it involves ALL citizens (including women) and provides alternative service in some form of community service.

Not all draftees were good soldiers, nor were all RA's, ER's or NG's. That's the way life is in any organization, civilian or military.

The REAL question is: do citizens owe anything to their country (other than payment of taxes)?

I say, let the individual decide.

Liberty and Gold
You cannot support liberty and be for government control of money.

It was because of Friedman's unsolicited advice to Nixon that the U.S. was taken off the Gold Standard. Let him be judged by, of all people, Sir Alan Greenspan:

"Although the gold standard could hardly be portrayed as having produced a period of price tranquillity, it was the case that the price level in 1929 was not much different, on net, from what it had been in 1800. But, in the two decades following the abandonment of the gold standard in 1933, the consumer price index in the United States nearly doubled. And, in the four decades after that, prices quintupled. Monetary policy, unleashed from the constraint of domestic gold convertibility, had allowed a persistent
overissuance of money. As recently as a decade ago, central bankers, having witnessed more than a half-century of chronic inflation, appeared to confirm that a fiat currency was inherently subject to excess".

- Sir AlanGreenspan in a speech on "Issues for Monetary Policy" to the Economic Club of New York.

George Bernard Shaw said:
"You have to choose between trusting to the natural stability of gold and the natural stability of the honesty and intelligence of members of the government. And with due respect to these gentlemen, I advise you, as long as the capitalist system lasts, to vote for gold".


Green Lantern: Ummm...
Have you thought this through?

"It was because of Friedman's unsolicited advice to Nixon that the U.S. was taken off the Gold Standard... 'in the two decades following the abandonment of the gold standard in 1933...'"

So, when Friedman was finishing up his MA at the University of Chicago, he offered advice to Richard Nixon, who was at that time a student at Whittier... and that somehow caused FDR to take us off the gold standard???

Am I missing something?

To Fergus Maclennan:


I believe what Green Lantern is refering to is that in 1971 Milton Friedman (a monetary statist), advised Nixon to abandon the Bretton Woods "Gold Exchange Standard", which was basically a gold standard in name only, the Classical Gold Standard was abandoned in 1933 by the US, in 1922 by Britain. Here are two very good articles, one a synopsis as to how and why the Classical Gold Standard was abandoned, and the other on the nature of what would constitute a true gold standard dollar.

http://www.mises.org/money/4s1.asp

http://www.mises.org/rothbard/genuine.asp

Reply to "A very strong Libertarian"
Nam65-66 posted:
A very strong Libertarian...
...and all that that implies.I appreciate some of the Libertarian philosophy while recognizing it can go too far.The modern day Libertarian is a man who,if it was demonstrated that drinking a glass of water was good for you,they would go out and drink Lake Erie."

You have something of a point here. I consider myself a libertarian, but more of a moderate libertarian as opposed to the extreme purist libertarians you may be familiar with. I think individual freedom is extremely important and I would like to see the powers and functions of government much reduced from what they are now, but I acknowledge that there are other significant values besides freedom and that it may not be practically or politically possible to reduce or eliminate government to the extent that the libertarian purists would like. (This makes me, in their eyes, not a "real" libertarian, or even an "advocate of slavery".)
On the other hand...

"Friedman's opposition to the military draft was wrong.I was serving in the Army at the time and the men I served with who were drafted were a cross section of American men from all walks of life and they were ,on the whole,the best soldiers I worked with.Libertarians have a tendency (at least my impression of them)think everything should be voluntary.The individual is very important and has inalienable rights,but he is also part of a society that must be maintained if he is to survive.

If the defense of our country(our society) is to be voluntary,shouldn't paying taxes also be voluntary?The draft,like taxes,has been passed by representative government.Libertarians(and the rest of us)had their say and lost because they were part of the minority of opinion.End of discussion.A military draft is a tax on men for the defense of our nation."

I do not have military experience myself, so I can't speak from personal knowledge, but most of the reports I've seen suggest that ending the draft benefited the military more than it hurt. Any disadvantage from not having as much of a "cross section of society" was counterbalanced by the advantage of not filling the ranks with resentful, coerced soldiers who would leave as soon as possible after having resources expended in their training.

Anyway, part of my "moderate" libertarianism is that I'm not absolutely 100% opposed to the draft under all possible circumstances. If the nation's survival is at stake and a draft is the only possible way to get enough manpower to defend it, sacrificing some freedom of draftees is better than sacrificing all freedom as a result of a conquest or total military defeat.

But I am libertarian enough that I don't favor the draft *unless* the nation's survival is at stake, and I honor Dr. Friedman for his role in halting the draft. Individual freedom may not be the *only* value, but I believe it is more important than the other values, such as equality or "diversity", that lead some people to believe a draft would be preferable to other voluntary means of obtaining military personnel.

I don't think comparing paying taxes to the draft is very valid. When you pay taxes, part of your earnings are taken and your freedom is abridged to the extent that you are not free to use your own earnings as you choose. However, at least you remain free to choose where and how to work to earn money to pay taxes and other expenses, where to live, how to spend your free time when not working, etc. Drafted military service abridges all these freedoms. And of course paying taxes doesn't usually result in death or permanent injury.

This should not be taken as disrespect to the military or denial that we *need* a military. I am very grateful to all those who *voluntarily* choose to serve in the military and defend our freedoms. But I believe the choice should *remain* voluntary, as far as possible.

As for your statement "The draft was passed by representative government and libertarians lost", the present reality seems to be the opposite-- the draft was *ended* by representative government and advocates of a draft lost. Ending the draft was one of the biggest and clearest political victories in recent decades for the libertarian philosophy (and, again, Dr. Friedman deserved much credit for that).

nam65-66
First, God bless you for your service to this country.

However, I also disagree with you about the draft. Surely, you had the honor of serving with a number of draftees who were excellent soldiers. I can't imagine, though, that you would rather also serve with men that had no desire to be there.

There are problems with our volunteer troops. I think that the current troops that are vocally against the war are probably those that enlisted during the Clinton years expecting free job training and free education, but not expecting to actually have to hold up their end of the bargain. Still, there numbers are much fewer than what a random draft would bring.

About taxes - why can't they be voluntary? Why can't taxes be tied to services that people voluntarily use - sales tax, toll roads, contract insurance, etc.?

Keynesism
Milton friedman was to economic theory what Phyllis Schlafly was to the ERA. Just as Schlafly almost single handedly derailed the ERA by exposing its feminist/fascist initiatives, Friedman exposed the Keynesian idiocy that a society can tax its way to prosperity. To the extent that he provided a basis for Reaganism and supply side economics, while discrediting tax and spend liberalism, we owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to Milton Friedman.

My favorite Friedman quote: "Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself." This is psychotic basis of the liberal credo.

In other words, this is all you have to remember when some tinfoil, pointy headed psuedo-intellectual or politician has an idea about how a business should be run from taxing it to determining whether it allows smoking or consumption of fois-gras. Or those that sponsor legislation such as McCain-Feingold.

Such advocates are, in fact, tin-horn fascists who really want and are capable of going well beyond these little initiatives - and are not to be trusted.

Another of his ideas is school vouchers - another freedom liberals can't stand.

Handy
Your head is in your a$$ - quit trying to distort the legacy of a great man - you simply look stupid to those who know otherwise.

voluntary taxes
The closest we will get to voluntary taxes will be the FairTax. Eliminate the muscles of the K Street lobbyists.

Voluntary Tax
-- is an oxymoron.

If it's voluntary, it's not a tax.

If it's a "fee for services rendered" where you don't have to pay the fee if you don't get the service, then we might as well privatize everything.

I'm not saying that's necessarily a bad idea on an "abstract" sort of level -- but it's politically impossible for any number of reasons.

Indeed -- ANY kind of REAL tax reform is going to be, I predict, politically impossible. We can argue "fair" tax vs. "flat" tax vs. "sales" tax vs. "tax only to the Several States" vs. "tax on the vowels in your name." Don't matter which.

For one thing, it means taking away the Power of Congress to micro-manage. At no time in the history of the world has any ruling body ever VOLUNTARILY reduced their Power, without it being coerced by a Greater Power.

That's why we have Term Limits on the presidency -- enacted by Congress -- and why we'll NEVER have Term Limits on Congress; coz it needs to be enacted by Congress. Ain't gonna happen.

The draft is a bad idea...
... not just on individual liberty grounds (although those are valid in my book). It also distorts the cost of war, making the decision to go to war artificially less "costly". Having a conscripted military means that the cost of military action is understated, creating a greater chance of overuse of the military.

In an all-volunteer military, you have people there who truly want to be there. Surveys have shown that the "typical" military volunteer is better-educated than the "typical" civilian, so we're getting a cut above. Sounds like a win-win situation to me.

That being said, if we were truly in a situation where the safety of the country absolutely depended on a draft, I would support a limited version, as long as it included a sunset provision that would require oversight and reauthorization.

John Galt
I agree with you and others that the draft is a VERY BAD IDEA.

It allows the politicians to put their kids in and STILL pulls strings. The closest Al Gore got to actual combat is the roll of sh*tpaper in an ALICE pack of the grunt that stole it from Al Gore's private toilet! Senator Al Gore Sr saw to that!

Think of the draft as adding a gallon of water to some frozen concentrated OJ. It dilutes it right? Adding people WHO DO NOT want to be there will do the same to our volunteer military and with 59 MILLION eligible men who can serve (CIA factbook 2006), where are you gonna put them all?


John Galt -- I agree, but --
If we were truly in a situation where the safety of the country absolutely depended on an INCREASED MILITARY -- wouldn't you suppose people would enlist VOLUNTARILY?

Take, for example, the huge increase in enlistments after 9/11.

The only reason you need a draft is so you'll have cannon-fodder for an unpopular war. Nobody wants to fight and risk bodily harm and death without a damm good reason. WHEN THERE'S A DAMM GOOD REASON, the problem changes from "How to get More People" to "How to turn them away."

So, you're right -- the draft is a bad idea on liberty grounds -- and it's bad idea on practical grounds also.

It amazes me

how Republican Conservatives fight tooth and nail for the right of a fetus to it's life; a fetus has a right to it's life so they claim, and then they dare to claim that when that fetus turns eighteen it no longer has a right to ownership of it's life or limb or mind, but that his life becomes the property of the state, the property of the colllective, to dispense with in whatever war the collective decides it wishes to wage.

Which is more evil, to deny a fetus the right to life, or to deny that fetus his right to ownership of his life and limb and mind when that fetus turns eighteen?

And don't tell me pragmatic neccessity, neccessitates, the violation of the eighteen year old's right to life, that's the same argument abortionists use; pragmatic neccesity demands the killing of one to save the other, you can't have your cake and it eat too Republican Conservatives.

Um -- Augustus --
quoth Augustus_Mcrae: "It amazes me how Republican Conservatives ... dare to claim that when that [a person] turns eighteen [he] no longer has a right to ownership of [his] life or limb or mind, but that his life becomes the property of the state, the property of the colllective, to dispense with in whatever war the collective decides it wishes to wage."

Ummmm -- Augustus, I don't know how to tell you this -- but --

The guy talking about re-instituting the draft is Charlie Rangel, a DEMOCRAT.

Milton Friedman
My take on Milton Friedman is a little different from most people's. The most interesting thing he said in class, as far as I am concerned was "let's look at the data."

There it is. No "I think." No "This is what I want the truth to be." Just the data.

I'll miss him and his clarity and honesty of thought.

Barry
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.