Search:

work from home work at home work at home jobs work from home jobs home work work at home job work home work from home data entry work at home moms

Milton Friedman on Self-Interest and the Profit Motive 2of2

Home Work Center
Home Work Center Home Work Center
Home Work Center

This clip is from the 15-part lecture series, "Milton Friedman Speaks" http://www.ideachannel.com/pro... Transcript available via FreedomChannel: http://freedomchannel.blogspot... Summary: A student poses a series of question on based on Friedman's notion that people should pursue their own self-interest. The student points out that he'd read that Friedman had previously come out against disaster aid for victims of a flood in Pennsylvania. Friedman corrected the questioner and noted that he did not come out against private aid for flood victims but instead was against the Federal Government providing discounted flood insurance in advance to home purchasers which motivated people to build houses in areas where they otherwise would not have been able to obtain insurance privately. If not for the discounted insurance, it's likely many of the flooded houses would never have been built in the first place as it wouldn't have been in peoples self-interest. The student went on to note that it was recently reported that an old man in Ohio died when the electric company turned off his power when he'd failed to pay his electric bill. Was it moral for the company to act in it's own self-interest to do so? Friedman responded by asking what if the electric company never turned off the power for anyone? Who would pay the cost--the people who own or work at the electric company? It would be unjust to impose that responsibility on individuals who are running an honest business of providing electricity. Friedman suggests that the true responsibility lies on the mans neighbors and friends who were not charitable enough to allow him to meet the electric bills. Finally the student uses the example of Ford deciding not to install a $13 block of plastic which would prevent it's Pinto cars from exploding in a rear-end collision. Ford estimated such a move would cost 200 lives a year at a cost of $200,000 per life lost. They multiplied and found that it wasn't worth it to install the plastic block. He asked if a corporation seeking it's own self-interest was a good thing in this case? Friedman responded by asking, what if it cost $1 billion to save each life, should Ford have put in the block? It's simply not practical to put an infinite value on an individuals life. If it took $1 billion in resources to keep one individual safe, and acquiring those resources meant that a million people must starve, it's a bad deal. Friedman concludes that he doesn't know if the $200,000 number that Ford used was the right number to maximize the overall benefits, but at the end of the day the principle is that we can't simply protect ourselves from everything and impose that cost on others. Friedman posits that the question the student should be raising, is should Ford be required to attach the statement to the car, "we've made this car $13 cheaper, and therefore it is X% more risky for you to buy it". See also: Free to Choose - All 15 episodes streaming online for free http://www.ideachannel.tv A history of Free to Choose http://www.freetochoose.com

Channel: News & Politics
Uploaded: November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am
Author: Sidewinder77

Length: 06:55
Rating: 4.84
Views: 24066

Tags: Capitalism  Corporations  Documentary  Ford  Freedom  Friedman  Milton  Nader  Pinto  Politics  Profits  Ralph  Socialism  Subsidies  

Video Url:


Embed Code:

Video Comments

zsylvana (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
The world has not been kind to Friedmans Neo-liberalism, that grab-bag of ideas based on the fundamentalist notion that markets are self-correcting, allocate resources efficiently, and serve the public interest well. It was this market fundamentalism that underlay Thatcherism, Reaganomics, and the so-called Washington Consensus in favor of privatization, liberalization, and independent central banks focusing single-mindedly on inflation.
zsylvana (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
The great irony for Friedman's fans is that the one piece of public policy he was responsible for that was widely and internationally adopted was one that greatly increased the ability of central governments to collect taxes.Called PAYE,Pay As You Earn. Obituaries of Friedman sing of his successes. But close examination will show them to be few,and none unalloyed.
zsylvana (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
All his high public profile - thanks to his regular column in Newsweek and series on US television, Free To Choose, which made him into something of a star - today no mainstream academic economist is a monetarist and Friedman left no lasting school of academic heirs. Even the "Chicago school" at the University of Chicago has waned in influence, eclipsed by the mighty MIT army of economists that followed Paul Samuelson.
zsylvana (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
For a quarter-century, there has been a contest among developing countries, and the losers are clear: countries that pursued neo-liberal policies lost the growth sweepstakes.Though neo-liberals do not want to admit it, their ideology also failed another test. No one can claim that financial markets did a stellar job in allocating resources in the late 1990s, with 97% of investments in fiber optics taking years to see any light,and the more recent massive misallocation of resources to housing.
JoshLucas5 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
This kid needs an ass-beating!!
jdrizd2 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
I disagree on your point that people can control their government. First of all, the private sector has much more money and influence than the government actually does. The government merely manages the populace for the special interests which actually determine the real agenda or policy. Lastly, the government doesn't necessarily respond to the overwhelming majority if it is in conflict with the interests of the private sector, for ex. the first 700 billion approved by congress, the war, etc
dogcow666 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
The car discussion is pure brilliance, Friedman exposes this kid as a douchebag
dogcow666 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
search "Friedman I don't believe in democracy" on here to find out whats wrong with this statement.
dogcow666 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
He pretty much does. He always points out big government begets big business and vice versa. But the government is something the people can control. Special interest can be eliminated by simply eliminating most of the power government has to give stuff to the special interests. Its not that hard.
soulshaker123 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
I really hope that kid didn't grow up to have any children, and I really hope he's not in a position to teach anybody's children.

Home Work Center



Home Work Center © 2007 All Rights Reserved.