|
|
52 of 61 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent, brief articulation of Friedman's beliefs, July 16, 2002
By A Customer
Friedman's critics and fellow travelers in the libertarian fold rightfully viewed Capitalism and Freedom as a landmark book in 1962. The author brilliantly, if albeit briefly, articulated his theories of human behavior, which stood in contrast to the prevailing Keynesian ideology. The book has stood the test of time, and has become a classic part of libertarian literature. Like Marx's Das Kapital, the book has become a common point of reference for review in many college courses for members of the Left and the Right.Some quick notes. The book was not written as an exhaustive economics treatise that purported to evaluate every single possible component of economics. Friedman did not present every single ideological permutation's view of price supports for farm products, as an example. Anyone looking for Every Possible Libertarian Opinion on a Given Economic Question, much less the contrasting viewpoints of Marxists/Neo-Keynesians/Flat Earth Society proponents, will need to look elsewhere (Keynesian Paul Samuelson's classic work, "Economics", is recommended for as a starting point). Friedman's reputation in the economics profession was not earned from this book, but his other works, especially his "Monetary History of the United States". As for Paul Krugman's criticisms of Milton Friedman, the potential reader should heed the old axiom, "consider the source". Krugman is a brilliant economist, who after being exposed for decades to a mass of information on the failings of government meddling in the economy, persistently recommends a watered down version of the same failed policies that didn't work in the past. Interestingly enough, he belongs to that peculiar breed of economist who stridently defends "free" trade between nations, but somehow believes that individual entrepreneurs in a national economy require "guidance" from Big Brother (regulate, baby, regulate). Krugman, like many economists of all political preferences, carefully chooses data that conforms to his preconceived opinions (monetarism under Thatcher and the early Volker years in the US), while excluding any information that might challenge his assumptions. Krugman fails to mention that in 1979, with 21% interest rates and 13.5% CPI in the US, his fellow Keynesians were recommending as a "cure" an increase in inflationary spending, higher marginal tax rates, and increased spending by the government. Some cure. Which is exactly why so many people anxiously embraced the monetarist creed at the time. Equally bogus is his claim that Volker's altered policies in the mid-1980s were a reversion to Keynesian monetary doctrine. Krugman's analysis of supply-side economics, which Friedman never supported, contains many of the same "ignore the facts" approach. Final note. Many of the same economists who criticize Friedman for his lack of intellectual rigor slam Robert Lucas, another University of Chicago Nobel Prize Winner, for being too rigorous and dependent on advanced mathematical models that don't reflect the "real world".
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|