Visitors Now:
Total Visits:
Total Stories:
Profile image
By Sanjeev Sabhlok's Occasional Blog-Liberty (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

How Milton Friedman recanted from monetarism towards the end of his life

Sunday, August 5, 2012 4:09
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

Thanks to Mithun Dutta (FTI member)'s blog post I'm pleased to learn that even Milton Friedman finally recanted from his faith in central banks (and thus active monetarism, which is centralised 'fine tuning' of the economy by the central bank, something I now seriously question).

Friedman expresses his opposition to central banking at the very end of this short talk. (I'd like to see the full talk and any writings of his on this subject.)

Here's Mithun's full blog post (from his blog, which is linked here). I'm really pleased that liberals like Mithun have joined FTI. Today, in my view, FTI brings some of the very best Indian thinkers together. It is moving in the right direction.

I am a great fan of Milton Friedman. He is still a great inspiration. I love his views on freedom and liberty.  No doubt those are absolute truths.
Milton Friedman went wrong on several occasions where it mattered. He was bad with money.
Rothbard’s law, which is that people tend to specialize in what they are worst at. Henry George, for example, is great on everything but land, so therefore he writes about land 90% of the time. Friedman is great except on money, so he concentrates on money. Mises, however, and Kirzner too, always did what they were best at.
Here is Friedman explaining the great depression and says that the Federal Reserve was supposed to act as lender of last resort and provide liquidity for banks that didn’t have the funds to meet all the demands on the deposits…and when they didn’t, a lot of banks failed, causing the money supply to shrink by a third from 1929-1933 which was at least in large part what he argued was a source for much of the misery of the Great Depression.
However towards the end he did suggest to abolish the FED.
This is a problem for most statist’s on how to justify the role of the state and explain its functioning to various aspects of the society. Somewhere down the line everyone knows that the state is evil and useless. Anyone when reasoned to justify the states existence tend to get confused and provide real life evidences when they attempt to justify it. Same happened with Friedman, he should have simply stuck to the fact that Central Banks are unnecessary. Also he expresses concerns over the danger that people will ask for bigger government in the future which we find at present to be true. I find it is extremely surprising that how could he find Bernanke good when he knew Bernanke was a Keynesian.  He had been a critic for Keynesian most of his life. Finally he maintained that FED had to go. This is where it becomes necessary to say that when it comes to money do not follow Milton Friedman.
His son David Friedman however feels that the state is completely unnecessary.
I will be talking more on freedom and liberty on this blog but feel free to join Indian Libertarians Facebook page here:
For further debate and discussions on the principles feel free to join this group.
For participating in bringing a political change, good governance, promote a liberty and libertarianism in our society please look forward joining Freedom Team of India



Source:

Report abuse

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Top Stories
Recent Stories

Register

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.