To celebrate the 40th Anniversary of Free To Choose, we are sharing some of Milton Friedman’s most compelling talks. In this original recording from 1978, the quality of public education in America today in many places is in a clear downward spiral. Dr. Friedman identifies the increasing centralization and bureaucratization of the educational establishment, which inhibits educators from seeing and responding to the needs of their “consumers” — parents and students; He also touches on our altered view of the relationship between the individual and society— the shift from seeing the individual as responsible for oneself to seeing the individual as someone controlled by social forces. An obvious solution is to give power back to the parents. Could the voucher system be a means of exercising that power and foster competition among public and private institutions? Would that incite them to offer us a better quality educational “product”? As Milton sees it, “We have seen problems of discipline, problems of schools becoming places for keeping people rather than for schooling and educating people. Throughout the country SAT scores, College Board scores, have been going down for some fifteen or twenty years. At every level, we have a deplorable state of our present educational system. And as I say, I need spend very little time over the fact that it is a problem about which we should be very much aware, and about which it is essential to try to do something.” What is that something? Listen to the podcast Milton Friedman Speaks – “Putting Learning Back in the Classroom” to find out.  

To celebrate the 40th Anniversary of Free To Choose, we are sharing some of Milton Friedman’s most compelling talks. In this original recording, Friedman explores equality and freedom in the free enterprise system. If the government has the power and responsibility to promote equality of income, then how do we define the concept of equality? Jefferson, in his Declaration of Independence, meant equality before the law, a concept necessary precisely because people are not equal in tastes, values, or capacities. Later, equality came to mean equality of opportunity—the chance to run a fair race. Within a free-market system, both definitions are consistent with other values: Efficiency, justice, and liberty. More recently, equality has come to mean equality of outcome. Equality of outcome cannot be mandated, cannot be insured. Any serious attempt to achieve it would destroy freedom. In Milton’s own words, “There is no way in any literal sense you can achieve equality of oppor­tunity, and yet the concept has a meaning and a significance. What we really mean by it, I believe, is not the literal sense that people shall have equal opportunities, because that’s impossible. What we really mean is something else…that every career shall be open to every individual who shall have the talent, and the ability, and the good fortune to have had the upbringing which would qualify him for it. The meaning of equality of opportunity, in this sense, is that there shall be no arbitrary obstacles placed to prevent people from achieving those careers, those positions, those opportunities for which they have the ability, and the capac­ity and the taste to qualify. In that sense, equality of opportunity, as we shall see, is also a necessary condition for freedom.” So how do we correct course? Take a listen and find out in the podcast Milton Friedman Speaks – “Equality and Freedom in the Free Enterprise System.” It was originally recorded back in 1978.

To celebrate the 40th Anniversary of Free To Choose, we are sharing some of Milton Friedman’s most compelling talks. In this original recording from 1978, the question asked is what is wrong with the welfare state? The welfare state is an attempt to “do good” with someone else’s money. The aim may be worthy, but the means are faulty. The problem is that you do not spend someone else’s money as carefully as your own. More to the point, it’s impossible to “do good” with someone else’s money without first taking it away from someone else. That implies coercion—the use of bad means to corrupt the good ends of the welfare state. Welfare programs implicitly encourage competition for government funds and create unfortunate divisions and antagonisms in our society that erode individual freedom. We must find other means—voluntary cooperation and private giving, for example — to achieve our objective. In this episode, Milton Friedman poses the question, “Why it is that the noble objectives which have animated the growth of the welfare state have produced results that disappoint almost everybody- regardless of whether they were initially in favor or initially opposed to the various measures; and finally, ask ourselves what if anything is the alternative to it and what can we do about it?” Find out where he thinks the problems of this noble intention truly lie in the podcast above, Milton Friedman Speaks – “What is Wrong with the Welfare State?”. It was originally recorded back in 1978.

To celebrate the 40th Anniversary of Free To Choose, we are sharing some of Milton Friedman’s most compelling talks. In this original recording from 1978, the question is what is the role of government in a free society? If we are to define the role of government in a free society, we must first specify the needs a government is expected to provide. Defense from foreign enemies and protection of property, including the enforcement of private contracts, are clearly legitimate functions of government. But when we come to two other functions of government—providing a substitute for voluntary cooperation when it appears impossible to achieve and providing for irresponsible individuals— the justification is much less clear-cut. In a free society, people should be able to take risks but should not be able to force others to pay the consequences. If the proper limitations of government action were observed, the government would not do many things it now does. We should not resort to government regulations until we have adequately explored the possibilities for coordinating our activities through voluntary means. If we understood the implications of our own values, we would not allow ourselves to be “front men” for values we oppose, merely because we are confused about the meaning of freedom and the legitimate role of government in a free society. As Milton Friedman puts it, “It’s often forgotten that a corollary to freedom of speech is freedom to listen. Freedom of speech does not mean the right to force anybody to listen to what you have to say. Freedom of speech means the freedom to stand up, hire a hall, offer to speak, and let anybody come who wants to listen to you. A very sharp contrast to that kind of freedom is the freedom that was suggested back in the days of World War II by Franklin Roosevelt when he spoke of the four freedoms and spoke of the freedom from want. That’s a very different kind of freedom.” Hear what else he has to say about the role of government in the podcast above, Milton Friedman Speaks – “The Role of Government in a Free Society.”

To celebrate the 40th Anniversary of Free To Choose, we are sharing some of Milton Friedman’s most compelling talks. In this original recording from 1978, the question asked is, “Is capitalism humane?” According to Milton Friedman, the question is irrelevant. Capitalism per se is not humane or inhumane; nor is socialism. If we compare the two in terms of results, it is clear that only capitalism fosters equality and works toward social justice. The one is based on the principle of voluntary cooperation and free exchange, the other on force of position and power. In a free economy, it is hard to do good. You either have to use your own hard-earned money to do it or work hard to persuade others to your cause. But by the same token, it is difficult to do harm because by preventing a concentration of power, capitalism prevents people from committing sustained, serious harm. Is capitalism humane or inhumane? It is neither. But it tends to give free rein to the human values of human beings. In this program, Milton states, “The argument used to be about strictly the form of economic organization: should we have government control of production and distribution, or should we have a market control? And the argument used to be made in terms of the supposedly greater efficiency of centralized government and of centralized control. Nobody makes that argument anymore…But the interesting thing is that nonetheless, there is widespread opposition to capitalism as a system of organization and there is widespread support for some vague system labeled socialism.” Hear what else he has to say on this question in the podcast above, Milton Friedman Speaks – “Is Capitalism Humane?” It was originally recorded back in 1978.

Critics of the free market system often point out that it is an unfair system due to it leaving some with wealth at the expense of oppressing others. What those critics often ignore is that exchanges in this economic structure are voluntary. Each side comes out of the interaction with their desired result. Since the seller is amassing wealth by helping others get the goods and services they need, isn’t that more moral than proposed socialist solutions? When it comes to the relationship between morals and economics, Dr. Walter Williams has this to say, “Unless you believe that there’s a tooth fairy or a Santa Claus giving government the money, the only way the government can give one American citizen one dollar is first through intimidation, threats, and coercion. (To) confiscate it from some other American first. And I’m very sure that when Moses came down with The Commandments, one of them being “Thou shall not steal,” it didn’t mean that thou shall not steal unless you had a majority vote. And it probably also meant that you shouldn’t be a recipient of stolen goods. I think that there’s this problem of whether morality is a majoritarian thing.” Join Walter, along with Dr. Karen Vaughn, to see how this is viewed within the church in this episode of the Free To Choose Media Podcast, “Morality of the Free Market.” Originally Recorded: 1993

Restraint and common sense, urges the inventor of the Ames Test, Professor Bruce Ames. He’s concerned with the exaggeration of the danger of chemical residues in the environment. Can these views be applied to other aspects of our lives? Originally Recorded:  1987

Join us for Part Two of the conversation between noted economist Friedrich Hayek and the founder of Free To Choose Network, Bob Chitester as they continue to discuss American thought and culture, and the ramifications of constant change in American economic and social policies. Listen to how the themes are still relevant today, despite being recorded in over 40 years ago. Originally Recorded:  1978

Does the United States shift its economic policy too quickly? Not allowing enough time for these policies to take hold may be leading to some unintended consequences. Join noted economist Friedrich Hayek and the founder of Free To Choose Network, Bob Chitester as they discuss just that, along with other topics. Originally Recorded: 1978

Today’s podcast is a conversation with William R. Allen, a former Professor of Economics at UCLA, and former host of The Midnight Economist radio series. Allen, intent on improving the quality of economic education, believes journalists, politicians, and most teachers don’t understand or choose to ignore the lessons of economics. He is also troubled by the well-intentioned efforts of businesses to promote free enterprise. Originally Recorded: 1987