I then made a colossal mistake. I scrolled down. There was the comment section. Filled mostly with good comments (after all, how many people who don't like capitalism or this charming small giant in economics would bother watching this? Phil Donahue gets his (surprisingly ugly) head handed to him). But there was one person who had posted claiming Friedman had been proven wrong on everything, and who said (full quote lifted) "but i don't want business to even exist, i want everything in public ownership".
This was too juicy to pass up. I spent the next 1/2 hour putting together a response from my heart, only to find there is a 500character limit for posting on YouTube. Probably wise of them. Or the comment sections would outweigh the storage of the videos. Anyway, not to be deterred, I tried to post it in parts. I obviously don't understand the vagueries of posting on YouTube. After all, I'm only a webmaster with my own dedicated server and a bloggist here.
Still not to be deterred (too close to "détente" for my taste) I decided to post it here. So. Here it is. Unedited. But then, unposted on YouTube also, so perhaps I should have edited it.
--==<< >>==--
I find it difficult to believe bigmac's links are working properly. He could not have been watching the same video clip. But then again he certainly can't be right anyway, because he claims Milton Friedman was proven wrong on everything. The whole middle of this clip appears to have escaped detection (you know, you're supposed to watch the whole thing...) Friedman is completely correct when he says the only times in history where people have escaped true poverty (not the two-car, four-television, 300lb cable-watching couch potato poverty we have here) is when there is capitalism and free trade. It is not called "equal distribution of wealth" it is called capitalism and free market economy.
Your premise is completely and totally flawed and it is proven by every example in history: if you vote in politicians who are going to redistribute wealth to you, you are going to get what they want to give you, not what your dreamy vision expects. Only the privileged few (chosen by the politicians) are going to have "wealth" and that wealth is going to be in the style of the former USSR where one car, an actual free-standing house, and enough food to eat was considered "aristocracy". How do I know this? My best friend as I was growing up was from the USSR where he lived in "upscale" housing because his father had a highly respected job. They shared a floor of a ten-story building where the elevator never worked (!) with seven other families and ONE BATHROOM for the whole hall. Apparently, he said, people drilled holes in the bathroom in order to see who was taking so long. Again, this was "upscale".
Perhaps the impression that communism (or, if you prefer, call it socialism - though the arguments here seem to be for actual communism) is going to be some "everyone lives a six-figure lifestyle" solution comes from our current examples of communism? Perhaps it comes from the high standard of living enjoyed by our current welfare recipients?
Even China has moved towards capitalism and free trade. They're giving up the only part of communism that is apparently being espoused by some on this thread.
Taking businesses out of private hands and putting them in the "public trust" has the very unfortunate (and very foreseeable) effect of putting someone else in charge of what goods and services you are allowed to have. Government officials, based on their personal self interests (not the self interests of those who elected them) decide what services you may have, what foods and drinks you may consume, what pastimes you may enjoy, what habitations you may use, and what the punishments are for going against their will. In a free market, if enough people want something, it is made available. How much people want it - what else they are willing to sacrifice for it - determines how much that something will cost.
It is an illusion that you will be able to have everything you want if all things are publicly owned. Look where it is tried: you have quotas and lines. The government decides only so many rolls of toilet paper are going to be made, and therefore how many you are allowed to have. If you use your roll up for the week, you are ".... out of luck" so to speak. You can't get a bunch in advance, you can get only what is given out on the day it is given.
The plea to have business removed form society can only come from those who imagine themselves able to lounge around in hedonism if only the government ran everything.
They had better awaken and look around the world: as was mentioned in the beginning of the video, there are a lot of have-nots out there. That's what you get when there is no capitalism.
Yes, capitalism and free market economies produce some insanely wealthy people. It also produces a "poverty line" which has to be measured against a national average because there is no comparison to real poverty found in non-capitalist societies.
It is NOT in your best interest to vote for politicians who want to redistribute wealth. They will (as is proven throughout history and current events) CAUSE - YOUR poverty.
--==<< >>==--
So, as you can see, my post was a little over the 500 character limit. Sorry about that.
1 comment:
That was obviously posted by someone who has never been outside of the United States. It was a shocking eye-opener when we went to Ireland and realized that the reason everyone thinks Americans are so rich is... because we ARE. Michael and I are FAR from well-off by American standards, and we would be considered VERY well-to-do in Ireland, and that's a "modern Western" country! The variety and standards that Americans consider a minimal standard of living are luxurious by other country's standards and I've only been in other countries that are also well off. People simply lack any real perspective. And what they don't know, could very certainly hurt all of us if they are allowed to make stupid decisions, which is a part of democracy. If enough people want to do something, no matter how stupid, we'll do it. Fortunately, we'll also be allowed to vote that stupid something back OUT of existence, and that's a choice many other countries just don't have.
-k
Post a Comment