Milton Friedman's "Free Market" vs. The Austrian School
VINNY GOOMBA
Posts: 1,818
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard43.html
This is a very interesting article explaining the (big) fundamental differences between what those in the Austrian School of Free Market Economics believe vs. the Chicagoan version, which is what Milton Friedman preached. Unfortunately, "free markets" are often associated with either Friedman's beliefs (which much like our current system features use of a fiat currency, The Federal Reserve or equal Central Bank, "trust-busting," income taxes, and other forms of big government control) or some form of cold anarchy with no consideration for humanity or the environment. The Austrian School is much different, and unfortunately lesser known, but is about the most fair system that can be realistically implemented in my honest opinion.
For those of us that have associated "free market capitalism" with Friedman's beliefs, who also believe it is a large part of our mixed-market economy here in the US, and hate on it-- let me just say that I agree with you. When you see me harp on and on about free market capitalism, I am not advocating the same system that all the talking heads on the conservative news channels are trying to offer as an alternative to the system currently in place. It IS a good chunk of the system in place, more or less, with a different, falsely-patriotic label. It's more fascist than anything else really, and a bastardized form of socialism (not even close to what many real "socialists" would like to see). Really, it's very subject to manipulation, and it does make you wonder why Friedman has been pushed as the face of the Libertarian side of Economics, while his beliefs are far from "Libertarian." It appears he is just another member of the good ol' boys club.
Anyway, for those who want an introduction to the Austrian School of Free Market Economics, check out the article. It's becoming more and more popular, which is exactly what any school of thought needs to take hold. Whenever you see me on this forum ranting and raving about how I favor the "free market," I'm coming from the Austrian School's view on things-- a system based on very basic natural laws of economics, with inherent checks and balances, and that really has never been tried anywhere as far as I can tell. Tell me, is it a pipe dream? I personally just don't see it that way.
This is a very interesting article explaining the (big) fundamental differences between what those in the Austrian School of Free Market Economics believe vs. the Chicagoan version, which is what Milton Friedman preached. Unfortunately, "free markets" are often associated with either Friedman's beliefs (which much like our current system features use of a fiat currency, The Federal Reserve or equal Central Bank, "trust-busting," income taxes, and other forms of big government control) or some form of cold anarchy with no consideration for humanity or the environment. The Austrian School is much different, and unfortunately lesser known, but is about the most fair system that can be realistically implemented in my honest opinion.
For those of us that have associated "free market capitalism" with Friedman's beliefs, who also believe it is a large part of our mixed-market economy here in the US, and hate on it-- let me just say that I agree with you. When you see me harp on and on about free market capitalism, I am not advocating the same system that all the talking heads on the conservative news channels are trying to offer as an alternative to the system currently in place. It IS a good chunk of the system in place, more or less, with a different, falsely-patriotic label. It's more fascist than anything else really, and a bastardized form of socialism (not even close to what many real "socialists" would like to see). Really, it's very subject to manipulation, and it does make you wonder why Friedman has been pushed as the face of the Libertarian side of Economics, while his beliefs are far from "Libertarian." It appears he is just another member of the good ol' boys club.
Anyway, for those who want an introduction to the Austrian School of Free Market Economics, check out the article. It's becoming more and more popular, which is exactly what any school of thought needs to take hold. Whenever you see me on this forum ranting and raving about how I favor the "free market," I'm coming from the Austrian School's view on things-- a system based on very basic natural laws of economics, with inherent checks and balances, and that really has never been tried anywhere as far as I can tell. Tell me, is it a pipe dream? I personally just don't see it that way.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
I take a bit of issue with this portrayal of Friedmans "free market" vision.
Go download Milton Friedman's Free To Choose ... (which was redone in the 90s, same documentary, different in studio commentary\discussion\free-for-all-attack against Milton by the likes of Donald Rumsfeld et al; both versions at link above)
Also,
you should read what Milton actually had to say himself.
He wasn't perfect.
No one is.
BUT, HE WAS NOT AN INFLATIONIST AT HEART.
At the VERY core of Milton Friedman's economic value system was the BELIEF THAT THE FEDERAL RESERVE SHOULD BE DISMANTLED AND THAT ALL "HIGH POWERED MONEY" (ie Fed Res Notes) BE FROZEN AT CURRENT LEVELS.
Milton believed that ALL OPTIONS OPEN, THIS WAS THE BEST ONE, the hardest to get the central powers and beuracrats to accept, but the most important and necessary when all was said and done.
He thought that the FREE MARKET should be allowed to pick and choose what other forms of inflationary currency were needed (just as our country originally allowed private banks to issue, before Hamiltonians won the war for a Federalised bullshit banking system). And he was VERY CLEAR THAT THE FEDERAL RESERVE DID NOT FUNCTION AS PROMISED AND SHOULD NECESSARILY BE ABOLISHED TO PERMANENTLY END THE CYCLE OF WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION THROUGH INFLATION.
Seriously, go read what the guy actually had to say.
Those that portray him as an inflationist or an idiot are usually either ignorant of the truth, or worse -- they are trying to cover up the truth, to keep you stuck in a mire of delusion and lies.
Just my take on the guy.
I happen to like the man.
Again maybe he wasn't always spot on, but in the context of best solutions for a free world,
i think he actually manages to hit most of the nails right on the head.
If I opened it now would you not understand?