Man, this guy had a good command of the English language. <object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RWsx1X8PV_A&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RWsx1X8PV_A&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object> What would he make of Bernanke and today's policymakers? How would he have responded to the banking crisis and today's mountain of debt?
Friedman was a genius and one of my economic heroes. The irony is Phil Donahue positioning an argument in direct contradiction to his own financial wealth. Donahue's liberal argument and philosophy stands in direct contrast to his success and the free market system for which he despises so much. For some inexplicable reason, these facts are lost on the so-called intellectual left.
I studied Economics at a UK University and all we got was Keynes, Keynes and more Keynes... Nothing about Hayek or Mises and the Austrian school. I don't even recall what they said about Friedman. Nothing was said at University about German hyperinflation in the 1920s. Everything was about how it was the Great Depression and Deflation that created Nazi Germany and lead to WW2, no consideration of the possibility that Germany having a worthless currency might have lead them down the road taking desperate measures... I wonder if Ben Bernanke's economic studies even considered the pre-1929 period. He seems to be a little too sure about the path he has taken us down. Instinctively I believe in capitalism, but when someone on the left in the UK argues for a bank bailout, minimum wages or the social justness of higher and higher taxes I feel my arguments are weak...I am hoping that a study of Friedman will help to improve my understanding. In a sense it feels like my economic studies have only just begun...
The beauty and genius in Friedman's perspective is in the simplicity and common sense that only a great communicator can convey. The more you study Friedman, the more you slap yourself on the head and think..."of course! why didn't I see that before!"
I would be interested to know more about his response to the Japan crisis. Please could you elaborate? Central banks always print money, it is just a question of degree... Are you suggesting that his solutions to today's events would be very similar to those pursued by Bernanke? Friedman said he was in favour of competition and lower taxes, not propping up large corporations with taxpayer funded bailouts. That suggests a very different, non-interventionalist approach.
I'm referring to monetary policy He was a big defender of Japanese QE http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/28/friedman-on-japan/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/29/more-on-friedmanjapan/
Age 93, Friedman interview with Charlie Rose (2005), before the recent crisis and QE:- http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/608 (06:20) Rose: What might cause someone (foreign investors) to say, "we're holding too many dollars, and we don't think it's healthy?" Friedman: "There's only one thing that would cause them to do that and if that's if we engaged in inflation...if our monetary authority lost its good behaviour, and started to print too much money. That might do it. But that's not going to happen" :eek: