In Memoriam: Milton Friedman continued

Last Updated at 5:03 PM CST

For all of our coverage of the passing of Milton Friedman, and all the links you could ever want, go to our Milton Friedman Memorial page.

The government solution to a problem is usually as bad as the problem.

– Milton Friedman

This is day two of us scouring the web for peoples thoughts and opinions on the passing of Milton Friedman. Much more to come, scroll down for our earlier posts filled with links to videos, commentary, interviews and more. We will be updating as time permits.

Over at Division of Labor Robert Lawson and others give their thoughts including the forward to the book that described the research behind the Economic Freedom Index:

For many of us, freedom-economic, political, civil-is an end in itself not a means to other ends-it is what makes life worthwhile. We would prefer to live in a free country even if it did not provide us and our fellow citizens with a higher standard of life than an alternative regime. But I am firmly persuaded that a free society could never survive under such circumstances. A free society is a delicate balance, constantly under attack, even by many who profess to be its partisans. I believe that free societies have arisen and persisted only because economic freedom is so much more productive economically than other methods of controlling economic activity………….

To achieve these advantages, it was essential that the measure of economic freedom not beg any questions by depending on outcomes; it was essential that it depend only on objective characteristics of an economy. This may seem obvious but I assure you that it is not. After all, the rate of economic growth or the level of living may be an excellent proxy for economic freedom, just as an auto’s maximum speed may be an excellent proxy for the power of its motor. But any such connections must be demonstrated not assumed or taken for granted. There is nothing in the way the indexes are calculated that would prevent them from having no correlation whatsoever with such completely independent numbers as per capita GDP and the rate of growth of GDP. Yet the actual correlation between the indexes and the level and rate of economic growth documented in some of the extraordinarily informative graphs in the book (e.g., Exhibit S-2) is most impressive. No qualitative verbal description can match the power of that graph.

You can read more about this incredible effort he inspired here.

Virginia Postrel reflects and provides a link to an interview she column she wrote on Ben Bernanke which discusses Milton. She also sends us to Austan Goolsbee in the New York Times who gives us a glimpse into the reaction at the University of Chicago where Milton was a giant as a teacher and scholar:

What struck me as I talked with my colleagues yesterday was how Mr. Friedman’s legacy among economists is in some ways similar but in some ways quite different from the public view. His manner of research, his personality, even the topics he studied spawned a great deal of the economics we know today — even among economists whose politics differ greatly from his. A striking number of topics he worked on, for example, ultimately developed into other people’s Nobel awards.

Greg Mankiw gives us a column he wrote in 1998 which touched on the controversy over his advice to the Pinochet led government of Chile:

The Friedmans’ political involvement came with its share of controversy. Most notably, in 1975 Milton spent six days giving lectures on public policy in Chile and had one brief meeting with right-wing dictator Augusto Pinochet. The result was a firestorm of protest. When Friedman won a Nobel Prize the next year, public objections came from all directions, including previous prize-winners David Baltimore and Linus Pauling.

Friedman was–and is–unrepentant. Of course, he did not endorse the dictatorship. But, he wrote, “I do not regard it evil for an economist to render technical economic advice to the Chilean government to help end the plague of inflation, any more than I would regard it as evil for a physician to give technical medical advice to the Chilean government to end a medical plague.” He also notes that years later, when he offered similar economic advice to China, there were no similar protests, even though the left-wing Chinese dictators were no less oppressive than Pinochet.

Matthew Yglesias makes a point that I had noticed in my own reading, that Alex Tabarrok and Milton misread John Kennedy in Capitalism and Freedom:

President Kennedy said, “Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.”… Neither half of that statement expresses a relation between the citizen and his government that is worthy of the ideals of free men in a free society.

This seems like a straightforward misreading of Kennedy’s statement. He didn’t say “ask what you can do for your government” he said “ask what you can do for your country.”Matt is right, though I think the rest of his post is a bit surly in making his points, they are correct. Of course I am of the opinion that generally Friedman was correct far more often than Matt. It may be that galls him;^)

Neo-neocon wonders what went into forming a man such as Friedman and selects this quote from the New York Times as especially relevant in understanding his influence:

Mr. Samuelson…of M.I.T., [who often disagreed with Friedman], who was not above wisecracking himself, had a standard line in his economics classes that always brought down the house: “Just because Milton Friedman says it doesn’t mean that it’s necessarily untrue.”

But Professor Samuelson said he never joked in class unless he was serious — that his friend and intellectual opponent was, in fact, often right when at first he sounded wrong.

Mr. Friedman’s opposition to rent control after World War II, for example, incurred the wrath of many colleagues. They took it as an unpatriotic criticism of economic policies that had been successful in helping the nation mobilize for war. Later, Mr. Samuelson said, “probably 98 percent of them would agree that he was right.”

Eric Rauchway has an interesting comparison:

There’s something a bit Jefferson/Adams about Friedman and Galbraith passing on in the same year. A productive quarrel is at long last over. Their peace is our loss.

If you are not aware of one of the most fitting and bizarre coincidences (?) in all of human history click on the link he provides.

Reihan at The American Scene is saddened and at Cato you can find all kinds of things, but Justin Logan gives us another lesson:

“War is a friend of the state,” Friedman said. It is always expensive, requiring higher taxes, and, “In time of war, government will take powers and do things that it would not ordinarily do.”

Marginal Revolution continues to add to their thoughts on Milton. Tyler Cowen points out that Milton by helping Leo Melamed he was one of the reasons the financial futures markets came into being:

I asked him [Friedman] whether he would endorse—when Bretton Woods collapsed—the concept of futures contracts in foreign exchange. Without hesitation, Dr. Milton Friedman embraced the concept and authored a study in December 1971 which became the intellectual foundation for the birth of currency futures. It was not a major treatise, hundreds of pages long with footnotes and a bibliography. The world-renowned economist stated all he needed to say in just 11 pages. His paper, entitled “The Need for Futures Markets in Currencies,” provided us with academic authenticity of the highest magnitude to prove that our theory was a viable necessity. As I often stated, “Professor Friedman gave my idea the credibility without which the concept might never have become a reality.” For with Dr. Friedman’s paper in hand, I was able to convince government officials, bank presidents and the CME brokerage community that the idea had merit.

Tyler also discusses his contribution to the methodology of positive economics with a link to Milton’s classic exposition of his concepts.

Via Instapundit we get this wonderful piece on Milton as a tennis player from Ralph Kinney Bennett and the lessons he learned that day about Milton in general:

It dawned on me that the “weak” shot with which he had won the initial serve had been completely calculated. Now he was dropping impudent little spins masterfully over the net as I rushed futilely to get them. He had chances to rip forehands past me, but instead he directed the ball to some unexpected point in my court, making me scramble to get my racket on it.

I had the distinct impression each time we volleyed that he had his next three shots already planned out and it seemed I could do nothing to change his plan.

I quickly changed from wondering how not to make an aging icon look bad to struggling on my own part to look a little bit good. It was great fun, a really good match, which ended with him winning.

The lesson:

That night, as I lay in bed, I thought back to how adroitly this spindly-legged “egghead” had controlled that tennis match. He had carefully gauged my strengths and weaknesses, yes, but that was only part of it. He was completely at peace with his own strengths and weaknesses and he had a seamless confidence born of being so honest about himself.

And withal, not a hint of swagger or superiority.

Many times in the ensuing years, when I saw Milton Friedman in discussion or debate, or had the rare occasion to converse with him, I thought of the qualities he had displayed in that tennis match. I always marveled at the precision of his thinking, the seriousness (not solemnity) with which he regarded those he engaged, and the absolute intellectual honesty with which he defended and advocated the overarching principle of his life – individual liberty.

We also find out from Glenn Reynolds that Milton was a Sci-fi fan:

Popular Mechanics Editor Jim Meigs emails:

I loved the Tennis with Milton piece. Did you also know that Friedman was a sci-fi fan?

My father, A. James Meigs, studied under Friedman at the University of Chicago and remained a lifelong friend. We visited Milton and his wife, Rose, at their summer house in New England when I was 15 years old. I remember vividly how Milton quizzed me on what books I was reading. When I mentioned Robert Heinlein he was delighted. We had a detailed conversation about “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress,” Heinlein’s great thought experiment in radical libertarianism.

I came away struck with his genuine interest in the thoughts of a semi-articulate teenager. My father says this was one of Friedman’s most striking traits as a teacher. “I never met a more gracious professor,” he says.

At a time when every political debate seems to devolve instantly into name calling, it is nice to remember Friedman’s wonderful example of gracious, gentlemanly debate. We could use more of that today.

Josh Polson suggests the best idea yet on how to honor Milton Friedman:

The Friedman Amendment

Now that Milton is gone it would be best to honor his memory in some substantial way. Perhaps it would be best to right one wrong he wrought and make the United States better in the process. To that end I offer the Friedman Amendment:

Amendment XXVIII—Limiting Taxation and Voting to Specific Dates

1. Each year all Federal, State, and local government shall hold two elections for public offices: a primary election the first Tuesday in May and a general election the first Tuesday in November.
2. All taxes and set-asides, except the collection of sales taxes by sellers from direct consumers, shall be paid twice annually, due two weeks before the primary and general elections.
3. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Almost nothing I can imagine would be so honest and yet so effective at reducing the size of government.

The New York Sun gives us a bevy of links to interviews and other remembrances:

Milton Friedman
New York Sun Editorial, November 17, 2006

Milton Friedman, 94, Clarion of Economic Freedom
by STEPHEN MILLER – Staff Reporter of the Sun, November 17, 2006

Friedman’s Warmth
by AMITY SHLAES, November 17, 2006

In Memoriam: Interview With Milton Friedman
November 16, 2006

At Dinner With the Great Revel
by R. EMMETT TYRRELL JR., May 4, 2006

Friedman, 93, Set To Unleash Power of Choice
by JOSH GERSTEIN – Staff Reporter of the Sun, March 22, 2006

Optimism On Friedman Night
by WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY JR. – Universal Press Syndicate, June 27, 2005

An Evening With Milton Friedman
Knickerbocker
by SETH LIPSKY, June 24, 2005

Subverting Conservatism
by BRUCE BARTLETT, February 24, 2004

From Presto Pundit here are a few links I hadn’t found yet:

Art Diamond remembers Milton Friedman.

Walter Block’s personal recollections of Milton Friedman.

Bruce Bartlett on the Death of a Master.

Greg Ip & Mark Whitehouse — How Friedman Changed the World.

Milton Friedman Signs a Copy of Free To Choose.

David Boaz — The World Turner.

[tags] Milton Friedman, Economics, obituary [/tags]

powered by performancing firefox