misshgtraveling's review against another edition
4.0
It's taken me three goes at this book to finally finish it. I found myself getting too mad at our current outlook to continue. As per usual, Milton Friedman brought a lot to think over. Glad I finally finished it.
litcontours's review against another edition
3.0
Good to know the roots of the small conservative gov't movement during the high inflation of the 70s. Not particularly eye opening or deeply researched.
There were a few interesting takes on 'basically this social problem' is just a simple economic one. (E.g. you put a minimum wage floor: It doesn't allow for less educated teenagers to get lower paying jobs, which causes necessary discrimination of hires.) But again, not deeply researched and chalked up to the _hidden economic force_ of Adam Smith.
There were a few interesting takes on 'basically this social problem' is just a simple economic one. (E.g. you put a minimum wage floor: It doesn't allow for less educated teenagers to get lower paying jobs, which causes necessary discrimination of hires.) But again, not deeply researched and chalked up to the _hidden economic force_ of Adam Smith.
mdrfromga's review against another edition
5.0
Exceptionally clear arguments about how economic policies inhibit or allow freedom. Much more than just a cursory review, this book gives a thoughtful and multi-sided view of the subjects.
overheat4600's review against another edition
4.0
Had to read it for uni. Not as powerful as the Communist Manifesto, but makes more sense.
taylorkim's review against another edition
4.0
In my opinion a good economics book gets you to think about the world around you and helps you to see new perspectives. Regardless of your political leanings or economic perspective, this book will get you to think about the world around you in different ways. I highly recommend it.
alicesreflexion's review against another edition
3.0
It's undoubtable that Milton Friedman is an incredibly effective and persuasive writer and speaker. He has a way of distilling complex ideas and making his own conclusions seem inevitable.
His conclusions aren't inevitable, though. Some of them are even, dare I say it, completely wrong.
Like, minimum wage. The argument he presents is literally "I'd rather have someone employed at $2 than unemployed because the employer is unwilling to pay the minimum wage of $2.80." The fact that minimum wage impacts employment is not a foregone conclusion. I mean, obviously, a high enough minimum wage will have an effect on employment. But how high that should be depends on how elastic the demand for labor is. Right now? It seems like raising the minimum wage is pretty safe. There is some contention here, but most economists seem to agree.
Or like the chapter on education. He counters any "Jesus this would suck for poor people" with a "wtf you think poor people are stupid?? What a patronizing attitude!" Like, no, if you're working two jobs to make ends meet, it is actually more difficult to drive 2h a day to send your kid to a better school.
The chapter on inflation is somewhat amusing, looking at how low inflation is these days, and the problems Japan has with its own miniscule rate of inflation.
He leans on popular perception a lot. He assumes the reader is already opposed to affirmative action or school bussing programs, so he doesn't feel a need to portray those fairly. When talking about government programs, he cannot help himself but bring up the image of a "welfare queen," a caricature that has never meaningfully existed in any society.
I don't know if it would be fair to call Friedman a propagandist. His writing seems to be in good faith, out of a genuine conviction. His worldview is obviously very one-sided, but it is a coherent interpretation and reaction to the facts of his time.
I cannot say the same about his contemporary fanboys. It's insane, and almost embarrassing, how much these same arguments still get parrotted by right-wing pundits, either exactly, or sometimes even as weaker versions. Even if Friedman never intended this book to become propaganda, it seems to serve that role now for a lot of people.
On the one hand it's cool that you can bypass all the bullshit and go to like literally one book to get clearer versions of almost all libertarian talking points (Abolish the FDA is in here! Wow!), but also, it's kinda sad getting all your ideas from literally the one book.
His conclusions aren't inevitable, though. Some of them are even, dare I say it, completely wrong.
Like, minimum wage. The argument he presents is literally "I'd rather have someone employed at $2 than unemployed because the employer is unwilling to pay the minimum wage of $2.80." The fact that minimum wage impacts employment is not a foregone conclusion. I mean, obviously, a high enough minimum wage will have an effect on employment. But how high that should be depends on how elastic the demand for labor is. Right now? It seems like raising the minimum wage is pretty safe. There is some contention here, but most economists seem to agree.
Or like the chapter on education. He counters any "Jesus this would suck for poor people" with a "wtf you think poor people are stupid?? What a patronizing attitude!" Like, no, if you're working two jobs to make ends meet, it is actually more difficult to drive 2h a day to send your kid to a better school.
The chapter on inflation is somewhat amusing, looking at how low inflation is these days, and the problems Japan has with its own miniscule rate of inflation.
He leans on popular perception a lot. He assumes the reader is already opposed to affirmative action or school bussing programs, so he doesn't feel a need to portray those fairly. When talking about government programs, he cannot help himself but bring up the image of a "welfare queen," a caricature that has never meaningfully existed in any society.
I don't know if it would be fair to call Friedman a propagandist. His writing seems to be in good faith, out of a genuine conviction. His worldview is obviously very one-sided, but it is a coherent interpretation and reaction to the facts of his time.
I cannot say the same about his contemporary fanboys. It's insane, and almost embarrassing, how much these same arguments still get parrotted by right-wing pundits, either exactly, or sometimes even as weaker versions. Even if Friedman never intended this book to become propaganda, it seems to serve that role now for a lot of people.
On the one hand it's cool that you can bypass all the bullshit and go to like literally one book to get clearer versions of almost all libertarian talking points (Abolish the FDA is in here! Wow!), but also, it's kinda sad getting all your ideas from literally the one book.