Milton Friedman Puts A Young (and skinny) Michael Moore In His Place

Quote from Lucrum:

So who wins the bet if his chosen profession is managing a fast food restaurant?
:)


I didn't think he was particularly cool or composed, but then I watched the video without any preconceived bias against Friedman.


If he's a fast food manager you win, if he owns a mcDonalds franchise, I win.
Biased??? WTF I like Friedman, he just didn't do well in this one exchange.
 
Quote from bigarrow:

If he's a fast food manager you win, if he owns a mcDonalds franchise, I win.
Biased??? WTF I like Friedman, he just didn't do well in this one exchange.
How the heck are we going to find him? Start searching through the OWS crowds?
:D
 
Well that's because the "others" chose communism vs. having faith in capitalism. Capitalism does great work after depression. Communism extends depression.

Quote from Martinghoul:

Yeah, but that's a very US-centric view... The Depression had other, less pleasant effects in other places.
 
Quote from Lights:
Well that's because the "others" chose communism vs. having faith in capitalism. Capitalism does great work after depression. Communism extends depression.
Huh? Who "chose" communism?
 
Oligarchs. Communism isn't socialism, it's where the uberwealthy retain their power & wealth as did Stalin and Mao and their wealthy minions. The great depression saw the ultra rich in the US lose everything. That is capitalism.

Quote from Martinghoul:

Huh? Who "chose" communism?
 
Quote from Lights:
Oligarchs. Communism isn't socialism, it's where the uberwealthy retain their power & wealth as did Stalin and Mao and their wealthy minions. The great depression saw the ultra rich in the US lose everything. That is capitalism.
Well, Stalin's ascent doesn't really have anything to do with the Great Depression. Neither does Mao's. I was talking about Germany, primarily, and Europe.
 
Rise of communist ideology was a backlash against capitalist cycles promised and sold to the working class majority by the wealthy oligarchy. The great depression had everything to do with the rise of communism. It was easily sold to the defeated and starving.

Europe entered totalitarian facism after the great depression. Similar concept. Oligarchs retaining power. That's why the rest of the world lagged behind.

Quote from Martinghoul:

Well, Stalin's ascent doesn't really have anything to do with the Great Depression. Neither does Mao's. I was talking about Germany, primarily, and Europe.
 
Quote from Lights:
Rise of communist ideology was a backlash against capitalist cycles promised and sold to the working class majority by the wealthy oligarchy. The great depression had everything to do with the rise of communism. It was easily sold to the defeated and starving.
Not at all sure how you figure that, 'cause I can't figure out the chronology. However, it doesn't really matter.
Europe entered totalitarian facism after the great depression. Similar concept. Oligarchs retaining power. That's why the rest of the world lagged behind.
Right, so are you suggesting that European totalitarian fascism can be attributed, at least partly, to the Great Depression?
 
Yes, but before this thread had morphed, my original comment is that in a capitalist society, velocity of prosperity is preceded by velocity of the hosing. Any other ideology or structure is where this paradigm ceases to exist. They chose their fate

Quote from Martinghoul:

Not at all sure how you figure that, 'cause I can't figure out the chronology. However, it doesn't really matter.

Right, so are you suggesting that European totalitarian fascism can be attributed, at least partly, to the Great Depression?
 
Quote from Martinghoul:

Not at all sure how you figure that, 'cause I can't figure out the chronology. However, it doesn't really matter.

Right, so are you suggesting that European totalitarian fascism can be attributed, at least partly, to the Great Depression?


ahh the socratic method.

Question - in your opinion what effects did the great depression have in europe.


I will tell you mine... just for fun.

I learned that since most of our heavy trading partners were net importers... when the tariffs and trade barriers went up, they insulted their economies to a some extent and the barriers encouraged local production. therefore they were not hit as hard.

If the above is true, since we are now an importer I think it shows that we may want to drop the income tax and put up some tariffs.

Which will stimulate consumption and the need for our own production.

I would think it would be a great experiment.
And if it turns out my plan is not revenue neutral... whats the difference ... we have politicians who don't care and a fed who will just monetize it.
 
Back
Top