Idealistic guy vs Friedman

[CrONoS]

I really love how clear are the explanation of Friedman economic point of view.

[Vesayen]

Friedman is a waste of space and a pathetic exscuse for a human being. I cheered the day he died.

Every member of a society has moral obligations to other members.

These obligations cannot be discharged, short of leaving our society all together and depending on how you define society, that may not be possible at all(I would define it generally as a nation-state, others might say the whole human race).

These do not magically dissapear if you make a promise to be the best corporate officer you can be.

General moral obligations to society outweigh promises you willingly make to serve as a corporate officer.

Corporations are made of people and thus have a higher duty then maximizing profits within the law(and social custom).

If I promise to murder someone and then I murder them, I am not innocent of murder because I fulfiled a promise I made. That promise was immoral and less important then my obligation to not murder.

I did not get along with my economics professor, who worshiped the guy.

The more I learned about Friedman, the more I learned about why he is wrong and a very, very immoral person.

Friedman is one of the big reasons CEOs can do whatever the hell they want and claim it is moral.

[Vesayen]

Watched the video.

A college freshman, with a speach impedament no less, who starts off his argument by misquoting what Friedman said, squares off against a master orrator with decades of experience. Is it supposed to be shocking who won?

Of course Friedman won, that does not mean he is right, only he had a very poor opponent.

Would you post a video of Mike Tyson pushing a little old lady down the stairs next?

How about some of the worlds most one sided fist fights?

[CrONoS]

Where did I blame this young guy? Or where did I say this was a good debates.

I didn't send this video, to show, how much great is Friedman vs this young guy.

But because his explanations are clear and simple. And he is answering; many question that many people are asking themselves in our society.

[Vesayen]

Fair enough.

When I hear his name, I foam at the mouth, I assumed you were posting this to show he was correct. My gut reaction to even hearing that name is to debunk him.

[snoopy369]

Milton Friedman

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Milton Friedman

[Vesayen]

Satan

[snoopy369]

Milton Friedman

Satan

Stalin

[chequita guevara]

Freidman and Pinochet are sharing a room in Hell.

[Winston]

Idealistic guy vs Friedman

Biggest genius since Einstein.

The one who did not wear a smelly T-shirt or display a bad temper in the face of supreme logic.

[DanS]

Watching Friedman in his heyday is refreshing.

The value of a life is a very interesting subject in its own right and I think societies would do well to examine it. Unfortunately, we don't consider it often enough.

F.e., there are 40,000 auto traffic fatalities and 2 million injuries in the US each year. How much should we be willing to spend to eliminate these fatalities and injuries?

There are 16,000 murders and many associated injuries in the US each year. How much should we be willing to spend to eliminate these murders and injuries?

[Dinner]

Friedman got a lot of things right but he missed some obvious problems caused when his argument was taken to its logical conclusions.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by DanS
Watching Friedman in his heyday is refreshing.

The value of a life is a very interesting subject in its own right and I think societies would do well to examine it. Unfortunately, we don't consider it often enough.

F.e., there are 40,000 auto traffic fatalities and 2 million injuries in the US each year. How much should we be willing to spend to eliminate these fatalities and injuries?

There are 16,000 murders and many associated injuries in the US each year. How much should we be willing to spend to eliminate these murders and injuries?

It does seem silly that somehow we go out of our way to quantify personal injury torts, wrongful death torts, life insurance claims, medical bills, etc. while at the same time turning around to tout the untouchable "sanctity of human life" having no pecuniary value. Which is it gonna be already?

How can we say 200 deaths a year is too many but 1 is a necessary risk without showing a glaring inconsistency in principle?

[BeBMan]

I think YouTube means the end of western civlization or at least the Poly OTF as we know it.