The new TreaÂsury SecÂreÂtary unveiled his plan this mornÂing, and apparÂentÂly the marÂkets hate it, which pretÂty much guarÂanÂtees that we’ll be livÂing with our finanÂcial mess for a good while longer. As we know, this criÂsis could have been avoidÂed. But greed got the betÂter of us. So, I wonÂder what readÂers think when they see MilÂton FriedÂman’s 1979 defense of capÂiÂtalÂism and greed. Is it a modÂel, a line of arguÂment, that’s now disÂcredÂitÂed? Or do we grudgÂingÂly conÂcede his points and say that capÂiÂtalÂism is the worst ecoÂnomÂic modÂel except for all the othÂers that have been tried (a cheap play here on Churchill), and then figÂure out how to mop it up?
via Andrew SulÂliÂvan’s DaiÂly Dish
> Or do we grudgÂingÂly conÂcede his points and say that capÂiÂtalÂism is the worst ecoÂnomÂic modÂel except for all the othÂers that have been tried
Had we tried no othÂer modÂels that worked betÂter, I would be inclined to agree.
But the forms of demoÂcÂraÂtÂic socialÂism used by counÂtries such as SweÂden and CanaÂda (and IceÂland, until an ill-fatÂed flirÂtaÂtion with conÂserÂvÂaÂtive capÂiÂtalÂism that began 4 or 5 years ago) has worked much betÂter on a variÂety of fronts, from health care to bank regÂuÂlaÂtion.
Just for the record, I was posÂing a quesÂtion and not realÂly takÂing a posiÂtion.
How easy FriedÂman makes it for himÂself by comÂparÂing free marÂkets to comÂmuÂnism and nazism. Like there are not nuances between capÂiÂtalÂist counÂtries. We are witÂnessÂing the (oldÂer) FriedÂman the proÂpaÂganÂdist, and not the (younger) FriedÂman the sciÂenÂtist.
For the record. I’m not accusÂing Dan ColeÂman of any bias. Nice find.