Customer Reviews:
| Showing reviews 121-124 of 124 | | « PREV 1 ... | | |
 all 100% correct except for one glaring ommission August 11, 1999
6 out of 37 found this review helpful
Mr. Friedman is certainly the greatest living economist and this book is the best there is for an introduction to what capitalism really is. Mr Friedman explains to us the complex basics of economics that most still don't understand. For example when two capitalists exchange money or goods is one getting ripped off, are they doing something trivial, selfish, or wasteful that should be regulated by the gov't, or are they advancing the cause of prosperity ,civilization and freedom? Mr. Friedman walks us through these issues, and more, very brilliantly but in the end he doesn't tell us what to do. When we watch the evening news or walk into the voting booth we are not asked for our opinion of capitialism,rather, we are asked our opinions of Democrats and Republicans. The real issue is not capitalism vs. other; it is Republicans vs Democrats. The book: Understanding The Difference Between Democrats and Republicans is still one of the very few, unbelievably, that deals with this, the most important issue we face. And it isn't ashamed to point out at great length the connection between Republicans, capitalism, and freedom.
 Vintage, yet compact, Friedman May 23, 1999
12 out of 14 found this review helpful
In the tradition of Hayek, Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom attempts to show the dangers of centralized power. Although it is rather short, much like the Road to Serfdom, and lacks the comprehensiveness of a Free to Choose (also by Milton and Rose Friedman) it still comes across rather forcefully. His attention to principle's, something lacking in our 'pragmatic' politics of today, and his ability to come to logical conclusions is remarkable.I gave the book five stars because I welcome such analysis and believe the book to have achieved what it set out to do (at varying points in the book Friedman would point out that this book is not meant to be 'thorough' in the sense of a complete exposition and refers the reader to alternate books for further discussion). A must read for all politicians and government types alike (whether in Canada or abroad).
 Good August 23, 1998
3 out of 5 found this review helpful
Milton Friedman is a great economist and a good man. His books, especially his Monetary History, have been a great contribution to 20th century thought. In this book he presents a strong case for liberty. For the most part, he is very consistent. However, his stance on education is a bit weak. He seems to miss that public education is a horrible and ultimately destructive institution. Despite this, I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in capitalism. But, I would also have to recommend Sheldon Richman's "Separating School and State" as a supplement.
 Badly written, garbled ideas, but important historically. August 1, 1998
8 out of 29 found this review helpful
This book gets 3 stars because of its historical importance, not its contents. It consists of an introduction plus the first two chapters stating his political credo and argument (sort of) and then applies the principles in a number of different areas. These latter chapters are essentially reworked from a series of lectures on those principles.Obviously, he's very pro capitalism (without explaining what he thinks capitalism is or its benefits are), which is contradictory as he is also explicitly against concentration of power (mainly because of the dangers of the powers abuse). His political philosophy and notion of freedom is shallow, and if you have read original works on and the history of libertarianism may appear laughable. As I understand it, the work was originally not thought much of at the time of release but acquired respectability over time with the acceptance of chicago-school economics in the political domain. The work is full of non-sequitors and sta! tements of ideological position without substantiation. It is useful however historically, as an important statement of where Freidman and the Chicago school of economic thought are coming from,and would be useful to read for perspective before his better written later books such as Free to Choose. His basic position is that the government should be limited in scope to protection of freedom (from socialist forces), making and enforcing laws and ensuring private contracts are honoured, and to foster competitive markets. Furthermore, political power should be decentralised from federal to state and state to local. He doesn't think substantive issues can be resolved at the ballot box, and so advocates the free market over democracy for deciding substantive issues. He focuses on his notion of freedom and the preeminence of market forces in facilitating it.
|
