Milton Friedman - Morality & Capitalism Video

Milton Friedman responds to questions of morality and principle regarding capitalism. http://www.libertypen.com

Source: Milton Friedman Speaks
Buy it: http://www.freetochoose.net/store/product_info.php?products_id=152

what a? disgusting ...
what a? disgusting way to answer a question like that.

That answer is not ...
That answer is not construed at all. The role of government is clearly defined, both? in the video and in jlfm9102's comment.

Damn young Michael ...
Damn young Michael Moore just got an eloquent and brilliant? ass-kicking. Makes my day :)

Then the kid would ...
Then the kid would have been satisfied by a different outcome based on the same principle to which he was once opposed. The? point is that all decreases in risk must be weighed against their cost. You cannot put an infinite value on human life and say that's the only moral approach, then no moral option would exist, because it'd be impossible to live in a world where safety was categorically non-negotiable.

You get so little ...
You get so little out of this exchange. What Friedman was trying to say was that the kid was not discussing principle, he was indeed asking if Ford had evaluated the cost of each life at the right? price. Perhaps they should have estimated a million dollars per life. Based on the same principle, they would have concluded it'd be cheaper to install the part; the kid would have been satisfied. The question is "why?". Because Ford put a higher monetary value on life? Then the kid would have been sa

I'm? not anti- ...
I'm? not anti-government. I'm against *most* government. But I take it you aren't a liberal, because the mocking of "diversity" negates that possibility. So at least you and I share some beliefs.

It doesn't matter ...
It doesn't matter what you call yourself. You are an anti government rebel without a cause. That makes you a libertarian. I don't care if you think you're in the Whig party, the Independence party, A TEA bagger, It? doesn't f**king matter what you call yourself, You have Libertarian ideas. If someone says: "Ban all guns, & I love the diversity Obama brings to the white house" What are they? A Liberal, & it doesn't matter if they claim to be a conservative, or whatever.

I'm not going to ...
I'm not going to reveal my political party alignment with you because it's too much fun for me to keep you in the dark. And to address your other point, think about it. The entire? war on drugs is a DIRECT RESULT OF GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT. You blame the private sector for incarceration rates, but not the laws that were precisely responsible for pushing nonviolent offenders into the hands of the privatized prison system. Forest, trees...

"You sound like a? ...
"You sound like a? libertarian, though. That is, you seem to despise corporations because they bribe politicians." - oldoddjobs. That is not an aspect of Libertarianism. They blame the politicians for existing, not the corporations for? bribing them.

I? know you are a ...
I? know you are a kid, you haven't argued a single point. All you have brought to the discussion is: "You're wrong, & you use bad words" Start over kid, & use real examples to make your point.

The point still ...
The point still stands, with the single F - bomb & all. I'm sorry if it hurts your feelings. ARKAE is suggesting that it makes no difference if something is illegal, because they will break the law anyway. Any thinking person knows that is a bunch of bulls**t.. Uh oh..? Another swear word.. Better focus on that & the the substance of the argument.

There is nothing ...
There is nothing confusing at all in the way I wrote that. I provide real examples to make my points, you just clack out putdowns on your keyboard. I could never be on the low level of a libertarian, because I support regulations, & I'm aware enough to know that it is Government, & government only that makes, & enforces, laws & regulations. For lobbying to? be illegal what would that take? & the answer is not a law making private for profit company.

You use abstract ...
You use abstract nouns in a very superficial and confused fashion. Your first sentence alone is uniquely baffling. You sound like a libertarian, though. That is, you seem to despise corporations because they bribe politcians. They're not? doing it right! You'd like a free market, is that it? One without all this intervention and corruption?

Clichéd vulgarity ...
Clichéd vulgarity wins? arguments, right?

Forgive me? O wise ...
Forgive me? O wise one! Do all grown-ups talk like you? ! Your "examples" are too baffling and hysterical to process. Give me a while, I'm just a kid.

How is an anti- ...
How is an anti-government rebel without a cause like yourself not a Libertarian? That is exactly what you are, so if the thought of your? identity is so hilarious then laugh away. Do you remember the "Cash for Kids" case in Penn? The judge got 20 years.. A judge.. 20 years in prison. So just because he was a judge didn't mean he was untouchable. & the law/regulations are the only way to keep s**t in check.

Prosecuted by who? ...
Prosecuted by who? The state-run courts who are in on it? You act as if there are? zero non-governmental methods of getting others to behave in a civilized, mutually beneficial manner. And keep on calling me a libertarian, it makes me laugh.

The difference is.. ...
The difference is.. Drum roll please.... IF ITS ILLEGAL THEY CAN BE PROSECUTED!.... Duhhhh! We still have insider trading, so what is the difference if it is illegal? &? I don't give a flying f**k what you call yourself. You have Libertarian ideals.. That makes you a libertarian.

Again, I'm NOT a ...
Again, I'm NOT a libertarian. Why do you think this? And answer the question. What is the actual difference? in outcome?

"Whats the ...
"Whats the difference if bribery is illegal or not" - ARKAEA33...? LOL! Libertardian quote of the day!

Bulls**t. The war ...
Bulls**t. The war on drugs was? not "created" as a result of the private prison system, it has existed long before 1984. Remember prohibition... no? Also, crack conveniently was created in '84 as well, which you fail to mention. And a great many police and other law enforcement peoples (note: government employees) support the drug war because it puts cash in their bank accounts. Legal or not, it happens. So what's the difference?

1984 was the first ...
1984 was the first year the private prison industry but their "Businesses" in place. Look at the incarceration timeline in the U.S. It exploded in the 80's & went up up up & continues to climb. The war on drugs was created to fill the cells of those prisons, & the bank accounts of the people who run those companies. The biggest difference in the type of Court, &? police bribery you mention is that its... wait for it... ILLEGAL. & the Lobbying done by companies like the CCA is Legal, & accepted.

First? of all, stop ...
First? of all, stop saying "you." In case you hadn't noticed, I have used "they" to describe libertarians each and every time I reference them, so perhaps you may want to reevaluate my beliefs. Also, supporting private prisons doesn't mean you support drug-use sentences. Not at all, actually. Finally, do you believe that state-run prisons, courts, police, etc. don't feed a massive amount of pockets with dirty money? If so, you are living under a rock at the bottom of the Marianas Trench.

Because there isn't ...
Because there isn't a company that is staking it's existence, & worth on the amount of inmates it has. Canada has laws that public officials can't take money from private interests groups until 5 years after they leave office. You are complicit in corruption with? your love of bribery. You don't support drug users being locked up? In a roundabout way you do, because you support the profit prisons that make their money by doing exactly that.

There has yet to be ...
There has yet to be one single society that didn't include bribery as a means of advancing one's status in said society. Additionally, you misunderstood my point on prison sentences. I didn't say that they wanted state-run prisons, just that they don't support sending someone to prison for smoking weed or something along those lines. Which they? don't. Furthermore, how can you suggest state-run prisons aren't a conflict of interest?

The current system ...
The current system supports bribery.? Someone stands to gain financially from people being in prison, so guess what? More people are in prison. 5% of the worlds pop, 1/4 25% percent of the prisoners. It is because of the conflict of interests that the involvement of money creates. It isn't that hard to figure out. & No, most libertarians would not disagree with the current for profit prison system, because the alternative is state run prisons, & it is obvious how Libertarians think about that.

Hold on, are you ...
Hold on, are you suggesting that bribery is exclusive to capitalist systems? Also, most libertarians would not support any nonviolent prison sentences, outside? of white-collar crime.

Okay. Go get to ...
Okay. Go get to work on that CDC business. Or maybe a "National Air traffic Control Service" Be sure to give the airlines a good deal. But don't worry? about hiring capable air traffic controllers. The government has no right to make sure the people you hire can do their job, that would be impinging on your freedom. Now off you go, get started.

Abandoning doesn't ...
Abandoning doesn't mean you have changed your mind, it simply means you stopped pressing the issue, which was true in multiple cases, and with much less of a fight? than I usually experience. It was my understanding that you were attempting to point out different things that could not be possibly be privatized, and I explained how they could be, while dispelling your accusations of immorality with facts. In any case, your comprehension seems poor, and I am no longer interested.

"abandon one ...
"abandon one position after another." - jarvy. If I'm arguing with someone that insists 2 + 2 = 5, what is there left to argue? I'm using different examples to point out why every god damned thing should not be privatized, & that there of? course is immorality in the free market.