In 1976, two Americans both won the Nobel Prize. One in literature, one in economics. Respectively, Saul Bellow and Milton Friedman. In this great video footage from Free To Choose Network, literary maven Richard Stern points out what the two had in common. Do you know?
I don't smoke. I used to. And I like it. But since I quit I don't much like walking into a smoky bar and have to smell it, get it in my clothes, etc. Do my preferences supercede the property rights of the bar owner--which may include allowing people to smoke?
We're running full steam celebrating Milton Friedman's Century. In this exclusive archival footage from Free To Choose Network, Friedman asks: In what sphere of life would we reduce the feedback mechanism of the customer and centralize the power of the producer? In one of the most important spheres of life, of course: education. No wonder our public education system has flatlined. So what do we do about it?
There are a lot of reasons someone might vote for a candidate. But one big reason is that he thinks he'll get something out of it.
The idea of voting out of narrow self-interest is not new. And, of course, people can vote for ideological reasons, in cults of personality, or for perfectly foolish reasons that have little to do with substance or selfishness. Some people might even believe they're being "good" or "compassionate" when they go into the voting booth, or that their team is the one that's morally upright.
But many times, people think they are ensuring that goodies flow to them. Just think about how many groups are on the take from government right now in the United States:
Free To Choose Network is back! I am proud to have been an associate producer on this great program. Check out "Testing Milton Friedman" and share with your friends. Testing will be coming to a public television station near you.
WARNING: IF YOU ARE EASILY OFFENDED BY SWEARING, DO NOT WATCH THIS.
But if you can handle the bad words, you may certainly agree with the sentiment. Earlier this week we discussed a TEDx video, which shows a child regurgitating some of the green-Malthusian propaganda he's been getting at home and in school. We showed how he parrots the propaganda by blaming "corporations" and advertisers (which is typical). But corporations are not the root of the problem. It's the state and government policy -- as Penn Jillette reminds us in the clip above.
If you think the "one percent" is a group that controls too much wealth, consider the resources Congress controls, says Robert Lawson. That's only 535 people controlling $3.5 trillion -- 20 times the income controlled by the 535 wealthiest private individuals. Talk about inequality.
Kids are cute. Birk Baehr's little Buncombe County, NC accent is cute, too. But what he is saying isn't very cute at all. It shows that indoctrination -- bad-economics-cum-eco-religion -- is getting to the young. And you better believe this has been the plan all along.
But, honestly, what's so objectionable about what this kid is saying?
Off today, but didn't want to leave you without a nice nugget. Here's Christopher Coyne explaining the economics of Valentine's Day (which, don't forget, is tomorrow).
Is the purpose of a business to maximize shareholder value? Yes and no. Obviously profit is one side of the coin. But as John Mackey of Whole Foods reminds us, purpose is the other. Both having and expressing that deeper purpose makes for a more holistic understanding of an organization and it's surrounding ecosystem. Ironically, that makes companies more profitable.
Entrepreneurs who understand both sides of the capitalist coin will create long term value and make the world a better place. But some people think that John Mackey's "conscious capitalism" is too squishy -- that it's really just good branding.