Posted on 08/06/2013 10:21:57 AM PDT by DannyTN
No it's not - it's not just wrong, it's wildly, crazily wrong. The only criticism that's valid is of what the writer calls "libertarian populists" (which is something of an oxymoron); he seems to be describing what is more frequently called crony capitalism, which deserves to be loathed but has little in common with libertarianism.
Friedman was right. About pretty much everything.
Boy, there sure is a lot of Alinskyite squawking going on about libertarians/libertarianism lately. Sounds like some establishment-types are getting scared.
Yeah, I stopped taking this op-ed seriously after reading the headline.
This author also lumps together Conservatives & Libertarians. They aren’t the same.
Friedmann(sp) is more right than Liberal economists who have a record of failure. Capitalism works all the time.
Huh? This guy is full of beans. I don’t consider myself to be a libertarian in many respects, but they are correct about people acting in their own self-interest. Everyone does, from Donald Trump to Mother Teresa. People do what moves them. Libertarians are all in favor of family and community groups and activities.
He is right, though, about some Tea Party people who still want their own government programs funded. That is why government spending will never decrease until we are in a real crisis. Just ask “conservative” farm state Republicans how they fell about farm subsidies.
I suppose this guy thinks that nobody ever does anything good unless government forces him to do it. As Mencken said, “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.”
I spent a week with Milton and Rose Friedman in the early 90’s. Nothing in the screed above has anything to do with the man. Oh, and Milton Friedman was right about nearly everything. Between he and his lovely wife Rose, together they pretty much had all the bases of a wonderful life covered.
"markets" really mean NO gov't regulation/interference with individual choices.
That article is a good example of attacking a strawman. It misrepresents libertarians in general and Friedman and Mises in particular.
But I suspect that these misrepresentations are not deliberate but come from the author’s own ignorance.
Praxealogy is not “the idea that all human action can be explained by self interest.” Nor did Mises even believe that.
Anyone who’d made even a cursory reading of Mises’s work would not have made that mistake.
The author gives away his socialist POV early in the article.
I don't want the "shared future" desired by socialists in which we are all nameless, faceless drones whose only motivation is to slavishly serve the state. Screw this idiot.
God bless Milton Friedman. May he rest in peace.
Sounds like statist tripe, “we know what’s best for you”
The writer has no idea of libertarian views...............
Shovels, being amoral, are necessarily immoral. If your brain accepts that logic... you might be a leftist.
/johnny
Actually the whole problem with free markets comes when some of the players figure out it is easier to just bribe the government to tilt the table in their direction than to continue with the competition.
The author is wrong is saying capitalism is immoral. Individuals take immoral actions, the system, he correct stately, is amoral.
While he points out ages old hypocrisy of demanding change for others, and not one self, it really has nothing to do with Milton Friedman.
Face it, human nature is motivated by self-interest. It can’t be replaced by government, but only restrained by religion and morality.
The whole problem with free markets is commies can’t navigate them.
"Shared future"? Right, they mean "shared misery", typical Commie gobbledygook.
So let's pick our masters who can dictate the use of resources more wisely. Riiiiight.
Mental masturbation...
Friedman makes more sense than anyone. Detroit is a great example of a liberal laboratory gone crazy.
I think they are afraid the NSA and IRS scandals are such that there is a real chance they could be shut down. Imagine the blow the loss of the surveillance-state would be to the statist; imagine how the push for real tax-reform would obliterate the current power-structure.
Yes, I think they are getting scared.
I got that from reading the article that the writer was confusing economic freedom and free markets with crony capitalism.
In the writers vast confusion,he also believes that supporters of economic freedom believe you have the right to harm others as long as it means profit, which is simply not true.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.