The Daily Dozen
- Hating Milton Friedman? "[B]y making a principled case for free markets, international trade, and individual rights, Friedman actually helped create the opposite of global misery. Millions of people continue to be lifted out of poverty worldwide based on these principles. If more politicians had listened to Friedman’s warnings about loose money and ill-conceived interventions in the economy, we might have avoided the latest round of economic misery as well." Indeed.
- How the e-book will change the way we read and write. There is great promise and opportunity in the digital-books revolution. The question is: Will we recognize the book itself when that revolution has run its course? Author Steven Johnson makes a strong case that we're in store for a level of change unseen since Gutenberg.
- Nintendo and Sony "freaking out" over the Apple iPhone?
- Use composition rules to take better photos.
- On causality and correlation in economics.
- Robert Pollie and Russ Roberts talk about wealth, growth, and economics as a science.
- A Somali pirate is in New York today to begin prosecution against him -- possibly the first pirate on trial in the US since the 19th century: "One thing is certain. The defendant has won second prize in the piracy lottery. So far, deterrence is not on the horizon. From the moment he was captured by US forces, the alleged pirate's life expectancy went up by decades. In the coming months, years and maybe decades, he is likely to get the best nutrition and accommodation he or anyone he knows has ever had. Given that he did not kill or injure anyone, a life sentence is very unlikely. If he serves 15 years in a federal prison and is then allowed to remain in America, he will likely come out the healthiest, most educated and perhaps oldest former Somali pirate around."
- Why faculty are like AIG executives.
- Palm's webOS lives up to hype, early developers say.
- Environmentalists hoping for a green revolution are "hoping against history." Instead, as everyone grow richer, the planet will get greener.
- O'Reilly begins selling books through the Kindle bookstore. Are we beginning to see the bursting of the floodgates for eBooks?
- The US News Law School Rankings are out. GMU is now at # 41. (Although our part-time program is #5.)
2 comments:
Friedman was a brilliant economist and influential figure. But I have trouble with people wanting to make him into some sort of godlike figure.
Does anyone think Friedman was the first or only one to argue for free markets, international trade, or human rights?
Let's also face facts: Friedman was a flawed human being like the rest of us, and on some issues he was wrong...very wrong. One can find many critiques of his work and policy ideas among respected commentators and I won't get into these debates here and now. I would be surprised if he were never wrong, for it would mean he was the first perfect human since Jesus (accepting the theology that Jesus was fully human and fully God).
I notice some have a tendency to cite certain influential figures as if they are the ultimate authority. You see some cite Adam Smith in the same way, as if his Wealth of Nations was The Bible.
The reality is that these great figures in history are still human and still not going to be 100% correct about everything. Additionally, they are also products of their time, and so their ideas must be placed in proper context. Ideas for one era may not be entirely suitable for another.
Then there is the fact that with complex systems like the economies of nations, there are no ideal solutions, and so all ideas will be imperfect in the sense that they will always leave some problems unresolved and create some negative consequences of their own.
So I have real doubts about this theory that if we just followed the great god of Milton Friedman for all time that all of our economic woes would disappear and we'd have economic utopia. Milton was good but not that good.
Thinking, a few responses:
1) I would point to your comments on this blog about Obama as one of the most extreme examples of someone attributing godlikeness to an individual. Go back and read through your comments and you'll see what I mean.
2) You say Friedman was “wrong…very wrong.” About what? Saying someone was wrong doesn’t make him so. Friedman (and Smith for that matter) is revered by many because has been vindicated on a great many issues and because of the power and persuasiveness of his arguments. You aren’t giving any arguments or persuading anybody when you say this. Look at countries that ignore what Friedman and Smith wrote and tell me which ones you'd like to live in? Communist Russia? North Korea? China?
3) You cite authority as much as anyone. Just like point #1, all you have to do is go back and read through your comments on this blog.
4) No one ever claimed anyone was 100% right about everything. What people do claim is that folks like Friedman have a much better track record than 99% of the population. (And 99.99% of the politicians.)
5) If you think Friedman is wrong, on what points? He had a very well-laid out worldview that he made incredibly public. What do you think he got wrong and why? How familiar are you with what he actually wrote?
6) Friedman never argued that we could have an economic utopia. If you read his writing, you will recognize that. Part of the reason he engaged the public so vigorously is that he expected there would be economic crises and wanted his ideas to be relevant to the debate during those times.
I am convinced, as are many economists and other thinkers, that the world would be a far better place if politicians and policy makers listened to the likes of Friedman.
Post a Comment