Monthly Archives: August 2012

Francis Schaeffer’s film series “How should we then live?” (The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence) can be seen on the www.thedailyhatch.org

August 26, 2012 – 12:52 am

Francis and Edith Schaeffer January 1975
Huemoz sur Ollon at L’abri, Switzerland

 

Schaeffer rightly identifies what college students are thinking in this episode and he has the best answers for them too. Below is a portion of the episode with links to the complete episodes:

E P I S O D E 9

How Should We Then Live 9#1

T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce

I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought

II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads to Pessimism

Regarding a Meaning for Life and for Fixed Values

A. General acceptance of selfish values (personal peace and affluence) accompanied rejection of Christian consensus.

1. Personal peace means: I want to be left alone, and I don’t care what happens to the man across the street or across the world. I want my own life-style to be undisturbed regardless of what it will mean — even to my own children and grandchildren.

2. Affluence means things, things, things, always more things — and success is seen as an abundance of things.

B. Students wish to escape meaninglessness of much of adult society.

1. Watershed was Berkeley in 1964.

2. Drug Taking as an ideology: “turning on” the world.

3. Free Speech Movement on Sproul Plaza.

a) At first neither Left nor Right.

b) Soon became the New Left.

(1) Followed Marcuse.

(2) Paris riots.

4. Student analysis of problem was right, but solution wrong.

5. Woodstock, Altamont, and the end of innocence.

6. Drug taking survives the death of ideology but as an escape.

7. Demise of New Left: radical bombings.

8. Apathy supreme. The young accept values of the older generation: their own idea of personal peace and affluence, even though adopting a different life-style.

Other segments:

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 1 0 How Should We Then Live 10#1 FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be led by an elite: John Kenneth […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 9 How Should We Then Live 9#1 T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads to Pessimism Regarding a Meaning for Life and for Fixed […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 8 “The Age of Fragmentation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 8 How Should We Then Live 8#1 I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, Degas) and Post-Impressionism (Cézanne, Van Gogh, Gauguin, […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 7 “The Age of Non-Reason” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 7 How Should We Then Live 7#1 I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act on his belief that we live […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 6 “The Scientific Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in Modern Science. A. Change in conviction from earlier modern scientists.B. From an open to a closed natural system: […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 5 “The Revolutionary Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live 5-1 I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there was a unique improvement. A. […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 4 “The Reformation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

How Should We Then Live 4-1 I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to how to be right with […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance”

How Should We Then Live 3-1 I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so many problems today with this excellent episode. He noted, “Could have gone either way—with emphasis on real people living in […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 2 “The Middle Ages” (Schaeffer Sundays)

How Should We Then Live 2-1 I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard to authority and the approach to God.” […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 1 “The Roman Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

How Should We Then Live 1-1 Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why it fell. It fell because of inward […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Comments (0)

Francis Schaeffer would be 100 years old this year (Schaeffer Sunday)

August 25, 2012 – 8:00 pm

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Extra – Interview – Part 2

Francis Schaeffer had a big impact on me in the late 1970’s and I have been enjoying his books and films ever since. Here is great video clip of an interview and below is a fine article about him.

Francis Schaeffer

1912-1984

Christian Theologian, Philosopher, and Missionary

by Rit Nosotro First Published:: 2003

( Last updated: 09/02/2010 18:08:13)

One of the greatest Christian thinkers of the 20th century, Francis Schaeffer, was born January 30, 1912 in Germantown, Pennsylvania. He was the only son of a tradesman and grew up in a Christian home. However, during his years as an adolescent he rejected Christianity and became an agnostic. In his senior year of high school he began reading the Bible in search of answers, and months later he converted to Christianity at a tent meeting held by Anthony Zeoli. After graduating high school he enrolled in night school to study mechanical engineering. However, he soon decided he wanted to enter the ministry so he enrolled in Hampden Sydney College. During his time there he met his future wife Edith Seville, who was the daughter of missionaries working with China Inland Mission. In 1935 he graduated magna cum laude and that same summer he married Edith Seville. Together they had four children, Janet Priscilla born in 1938, Susan born in 1941, Deborah born in 1945, and Francis August Schaeffer V in 1952. After graduating college Schaeffer enrolled in Westminster Theological Seminary where he studied with Cornelius Van Til and J. Gresham Machen. Then in 1937 he transferred to Faith Theological Seminary where he became the first student to graduate from the seminary and ordained as a minister of the Bible Presbyterian Church. From there he went on to serve as a pastor.

After graduating from Faith Theological Seminary Schaeffer served as the pastor for churches in Grove City and Chester, Pennsylvania and then later went on to serve in St. Louis, Missouri. During those years he left the Bible Presbyterian Church and joined the Reformed Presbyterian Church. In 1947 he was sent to Europe as a representative for the Independent Board for Presbyterian Foreign Missions. His job was to survey the state of the churches in countries affected by World War II. In 1948 he moved the family to Switzerland to serve as missionaries. In 1954 Schaeffer severed ties with the board due to conflicts in emphasis in missionary work. That same year he was awarded the honorary Doctor of Divinity degree from Highland College. A year later he and his wife Edith opened up their home to become L’Abri, which is the French word for shelter. L’Abri became an international spiritual retreat center where people could come to study and discuss Christian thought, lifestyle, and goals. L’Abri was opened to be a center for authentic Christian community. People came from all over to talk to Schaeffer and ask difficult philosophical questions. Several years after the opening of L’Abri, Schaeffer received the honorary Doctor of Letters degree from Gordon College. Then in 1979 he began L’Abri in America. During his last few years of life, Schaeffer spent his time writing books and encouraging Christians to be active in the fight against abortion. He died of cancer May 15, 1984 in his home.

Francis Schaeffer is most famous for his writings and for the establishment of L’Abri community in Switzerland. He wrote twenty two books on topics ranging from the Christian view of philosophy and culture, the inerrancy of the Bible, the Christian view of spirituality and the church, and the Christian view of the west. Some of his works include The God Who Is There, A Christian Manifesto, and How Should We Then Live?. He is often credited for sparking a return to political activism among Protestant evangelicals and fundamentalists. He has been cited numerous times in works by other Christians and is considered to be one of the greatest Christian thinkers of the 20th century alongside C.S. Lewis.

Matthew 7:7 says “Ask, and you will receive; seek, and you will find; knock and the door will be opened for you.” That is exactly what Francis Schaeffer did. He sought after the truth and found it. Ever since that time Schaeffer sought the truth as a senior in high school, he has aided thousands of other people in their search for truth. Instead of ignoring the difficult questions he sought answers and found them. Francis Schaeffer demonstrated that Christianity is not a blind faith without valid reasons for what it believes, but rather that Biblical Christianity is the only worldview compatible with reality. He also demonstrated what Christian community really looks like through the L’Abri communities. President Ronald Reagan summed up Francis Schaeffer’s life nicely when he said “It can rarely be said of an individual that his life touched many others and affected them for the better; it will be said of Dr. Francis Schaeffer that his life touched millions of souls and brought them to the truth of their Creator.”

Sources

“Francis Schaeffer” at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Schaeffer

“Francis Schaeffer biography” at http://www.heroesofhistory.com/page57.html

“Francis Schaeffer biography” at http://www.wheaton.edu/bgc/archives/GUIDES/220.htm

“Francis Schaeffer biography” at ttp://members.aol.com/JAMIETAMPA/Schaeffer/index2.html

“Francis Schaeffer” at http://prayerfoundation.org/books/book_r19.jpg

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Comments (1)

Mark May at Little Rock Touchdown Club Part 5

August 25, 2012 – 10:07 am

I always enjoy the Little Rock Touchdown Club meeting and August 20th was better than I expected. Mark May did a great job. I thought his answer concerning Tennessee being a sleeper team was an excellent description of them. I have not heard many commentators talking about the Vols challenging for the SEC East conference title. However, they do have some very good receivers and a fine quarterback in Tyler Bray.

I also was surprised that David said he did not invite Mark Henry to speak till his son committed to be a Razorback. Maybe David is right but I thought the members of the LR Touchdown Club would be able to rise above that. Keith Jackson played at Oklahoma and he has been on the radio broadcast for years.

1:00 am – August 21, 2012

<:header>

May gets TD Club off to good start

By Harry King

Arkansas News Bureau

hking@arkansasnews.com

LITTLE ROCK — Decked out in shorts and a colorful button-down collar shirt, ESPN analyst Mark May dropped by a Little Rock radio station to talk a little football on Monday morning.

Off the air, there was a conversation about his blunt assessment of the Penn State mess and how his employer appreciated his honesty to the point of wanting May to weigh in on all things controversial in college football.

You know the man is candid when he tells several hundred football fans from Arkansas that if he had a son who was a top recruit, he would encourage the young man to go to Alabama and play for Nick Saban. He is the best at developing talent, May told the Little Rock Touchdown Club.

The Outland Trophy winner while at Pittsburgh, May was a good leadoff hitter for the TD Club. Before May was introduced, club president David Bazzel reviewed the lineup of speakers, including the interesting timing of UA coach John L. Smith on Sept. 24 and UA athletic director Jeff Long in mid-October. Smith will be 10 days post-Alabama and Long is up when Arkansas is halfway through its Southeastern Conference schedule.

May had high praise for Long, crediting the athletic director with putting UA football on the map nationally, for the way he handled the dismissal of Bobby Petrino, and for hiring Smith as a CEO to oversee the program. Asked about the next coach, May said “most of those big names, you can’t get them,” but that if Long zeroes in on somebody, he would pursue him like a “rabid dog.”

Tossing out names, May mentioned Cincinnati coach Butch Jones, Louisville coach Charlie Strong, Florida State defensive coordinator Mark Stoops, and Texas defensive coordinator Manny Diaz. At our table, Smith’s successor received more attention than the upcoming season.

On the 2012 season, May said what Razorback fans want to hear, that Arkansas has a “road to the national championship.” Whether they heard his preamble, who knows.

He said Petrino left the cupboard full, but that he wanted to see running back Knile Davis get hit before the season opener, that the defense is still a question mark, and that the Razorbacks needed big plays from special teams. May noted that Arkansas would be favored in nine games and said fans should make sure the atmosphere is raucous for Alabama and LSU in Fayetteville.

He did say that he believed Alabama would win the SEC, that the loss of Tyrann Mathieu would hurt LSU severely, and that USC is thin on defense and has a weak schedule.

May had some fun with Lou Holtz, his foil on “Final Verdict” with robe-wearing Rece Davis, including word that the bit is never rehearsed. Holtz gets ticked when he loses, particularly after his golfing buddies in Florida chide him about being outdone by May. “Have you ever been threatened by a 73-year-old?” May asked.

Bazzel got the jump on May, playing the tape of a phone message supposedly from Holtz. Bazzel’s former coach said he would have liked to have been in Little Rock for the meeting, but that he has a busy schedule. “Mark May doesn’t,” the caller said.

May did say he and Holtz would be putting in about 16 hours each Saturday since the Pac-12 has promised a 10:30 p.m. kickoff every week and that there is a wrapup show to follow.

May encouraged questions and picked Tennessee as a possible surprise in the SEC. He said he is not a big fan of the new four-team playoff in college football, pointing out that a team that goes through the rugged SEC must still win a conference championship game and a semifinal game to reach the title game while a team in the Big 12 has an advantage since there is no conference title game.

———-

Harry King is sports columnist for Stephens Media’s Arkansas News Bureau. His e-mail address is hking@arkansasnews.com.

Related posts:

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

Open letter to President Obama (Part 130)

August 25, 2012 – 9:37 am

President Obama c/o The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here.

Why does the federal government have to take so much control of our lives? Back in 1929 the federal government spent 3% of GDP and now it spends 24.8%. Back then in 1929 there was 8.9% by State and local governments for a total of 11.9% and our freedom day was February 12th when we turn our attention to spending our money on the things we need. Now the government spends over 50% of our money and we don’t get our freedom day until sometime in July!!!

Milton Friedman on Tax Freedom Day

Posted by Chris Edwards

The Tax Foundation reported that Tuesday was Tax Freedom Day (TFD), which is the day that Americans stop “working for the government” through their tax payments and start working for themselves.

TFD is calculated by taking total federal, state, and local taxes and dividing by national income to get a ratio representing the share of income that the average person pays in all taxes. That ratio is applied to the 365-day calendar. This year the ratio is 29.2 percent, which translates into April 17 for TFD. Time to party!

But maybe not quite yet…

When I worked at Tax Foundation in 1993, I mailed a letter to Milton Friedman asking about his view on TFD. He kindly responded with a letter and a 1974 Newsweek article in which he proposed a “Personal Independence Day.” That day would be based on total government spending, which is larger than total taxes, and thus our day to celebrate freedom from the government hasn’t yet arrived this year.

In his letter to me, Friedman stressed that total spending is the important variable in assessing the burden of government: “If government spends an amount equal to 50 percent of the national income, only 50 percent is left to be available for private purposes, and that is true however the 50 percent that government spends is financed.” And while some economists focus on how government borrowing may “crowd out” private investment, Friedman said, “What does the crowding out is government spending, however financed, not government deficits.”

In its TFD report, Tax Foundation includes a supplemental calculation looking at spending. The thinktank figures that Americans will work until May 14 this year to be free from the burden of federal, state, and local spending. The Foundation is lacking a snappy name for that important day, but now we are reminded that Friedman has already suggested one.  

Friedman hoped that “Personal Independence Day” would complement our national Independence Day of July 4. The latter is the day we celebrate independence from the “Royal Brute of Britain,” as Tom Paine called him in Common Sense. But for Paine and the other Founders, the deeper goal of July 4, 1776 was to create a limited government to ensure the maximum space for the exercise of individual freedom. As Paine noted, private “society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil.”

So Milton Friedman’s Personal Independence Day can be our annual reminder that while our forefathers gave the boot to the “crowned ruffians” of Old Europe, we’ve still got work to do in limiting the power grabbing of our own elected ruffians in Washington.

__________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com

____________

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Milton Friedman, President Obama, spending out of control, Taxes | Comments (0)

Listing of transcripts and videos of “Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave on www.theDailyHatch.org

August 25, 2012 – 4:52 am

In the last few years the number of people receiving Food Stamps has skyrocketed. President Obama has not cut any federal welfare programs but has increased them, and he  has used class warfare over and over the last few months and according to him equality at the finish line is the equality that we should all be talking about. However, socialism has never worked and it has always killed incentive to produce more. Milton Friedman shows in this film series below how so many people get caught in the “Welfare Trap.” Friedman also gives a great solution to this problem in the “negative income tax.” I am glad that I had the chance to be studying his work for over 30 years now.

In 1980 when I first sat down and read the book “Free to Choose” I was involved in Ronald Reagan’s campaign for president and excited about the race. Milton Friedman’s books and film series really helped form my conservative views. Take a look at one of my favorite films of his:

Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 1 of 7)

Volume 4 – From Cradle to Grave
Abstract:

Since the Depression years of the 1930s, there has been almost continuous expansion of governmental efforts to provide for people’s welfare. First, there was a tremendous expansion of public works. The Social Security Act followed close behind. Soon other efforts extended governmental activities in all areas of the welfare sector. Growth of governmental welfare activity continued unabated, and today it has reached truly staggering proportions. Travelling in both Britain and the U.S., Milton Friedman points out that though many government welfare programs are well intentioned, they tend to have pernicious side effects. In Dr. Friedman’s view, perhaps the most serious shortcoming of governmental welfare activities is their tendency to strip away individual independence and dignity. This is because bureaucrats in welfare agencies are placed in positions of tremendous power over welfare recipients, exercising great influence over their lives. Because people never spend someone else’s money as carefully as they spend their own, inefficiency, waste, abuse, theft, and corruption are inevitable. In addition, welfare programs tend to be self-perpetuating because they destroy work incentives. Indeed, it is often in the welfare recipients’ best interests to remain unemployed. Dr. Friedman suggests a negative income tax as a way of helping the poor. The government would pay money to people falling below a certain income level. As they obtained jobs and earned money, they would continue to receive some payments from the government until their outside income reached a certain ceiling. This system would make people better off who sought work and earned income. This contrasts with many of today’s programs where one dollar earned means nearly one dollar lost in welfare payments.

Volume 4 – From Cradle to Grave
Transcript:
Friedman: After the 2nd World War, New York City authorities retained rent control supposedly to help their poorer citizens. The intentions were good. This in the Bronx was one result.
By the 50’s the same authorities were taxing their citizens. Including those who lived in the Bronx and other devastated areas beyond the East River to subsidize public housing. Another idea with good intentions yet poor people are paying for this, subsidized apartments for the well-to-do. When government at city or federal level spends our money to help us, strange things happen.
The idea that government had to protect us came to be accepted during the terrible years of the Depression. Capitalism was said to have failed. And politicians were looking for a new approach.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a candidate for the presidency. He was governor of New York State. At the governor’s mansion in Albany, he met repeatedly with friends and colleagues to try to find some way out of the Depression. The problems of the day were to be solved by government action and government spending. The measures that FDR and his associates discussed here derived from a long line of past experience. Some of the roots of these measures go back to Bismark’s Germany at the end of the 19th Century. The first modern state to institute old age pensions and other similar measures on the part of government. In the early 20th Century Great Britain followed suit under Lloyd George and Churchill. It too instituted old age pensions and similar plans.
These precursors of the modern welfare state had little effect on practice in the United States. But they did have a very great effect on the intellectuals on the campus like those who gathered here with FDR. The people who met here had little personal experience of the horrors of the Depression but they were confident that they had the solution. In their long discussions as they sat around this fireplace trying to design programs to meet the problems raised by the worst Depression in the history of the United States, they quite naturally drew upon the ideas that were prevalent at the time. The intellectual climate had become one in which it was taken for granted that government had to play a major role in solving the problems in providing what came later to be called Security from Cradle to Grave.
Roosevelt’s first priority after his election was to deal with massive unemployment. A Public Works program was started. The government financed projects to build highways, bridges and dams. The National Recovery Administration was set up to revitalize industry. Roosevelt wanted to see America move into a new era. The Social Security Act was passed and other measures followed. Unemployment benefits, welfare payments, distribution of surplus food. With these measures, of course, came rules, regulations and red tape as familiar today as they were novel then. The government bureaucracy began to grow and it’s been growing ever since.
This is just a small part of the Social Security empire today. Their headquarters in Baltimore has 16 rooms this size. All these people are dispensing our money with the best possible intentions. But at what cost?
In the 50 years since the Albany meetings, we have given government more and more control over our lives and our income. In New York State alone, these government buildings house 11,000 bureaucrats. Administering government programs that cost New York taxpayers 22 billion dollars. At the federal level, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare alone has a budget larger than any government in the world except only Russia and the United States.
Yet these government measures often do not help the people they are supposed to. Richard Brown’s daughter, Helema, needs constant medical attention. She has a throat defect and has to be connected to a breathing machine so that she’ll survive the nights. It’s expensive treatment and you might expect the family to qualify for a Medicaid grant.
Richard Brown: No, I don’t get it, cause I’m not eligible for it. I make a few dollars too much and the salary that I make I can’t afford to really live and to save anything is out of the question. And I mean, I live, we live from payday to payday. I mean literally from payday to payday.
Friedman: His struggle isn’t made any easier by the fact that Mr. Brown knows that if he gave up his job as an orderly at the Harlem Hospital, he would qualify for a government handout. And he’d be better off financially.
Hospital Worker: Mr. Brown, do me a favor please? There is a section patient.
Friedman: It’s a terrible pressure on him. But he is proud of the work that he does here and he’s strong enough to resist the pressure.
Richard Brown: I’m Mr. Brown. Your fully dilated and I’m here to take you to the delivery. Try not to push, please. We want to have a nice sterile delivery.
Friedman: Mr. Brown has found out the hard way that welfare programs destroy an individual’s independence.
Richard Brown: We’ve considered welfare. We went to see, to apply for welfare but, we were told that we were only eligible for $5.00 a month. And, to receive this $5.00 we would have to cash in our son’s savings bonds. And that’s not even worth it. I don’t believe in something for nothing anyway.
Mrs. Brown: I think a lot of people are capable of working and are willing to work, but it’s just the way it is set up. It, the mother and the children are better off if the husband isn’t working or if the husband isn’t there. And this breaks up so many poor families.
Friedman: One of the saddest things is that many of the children whose parents are on welfare will in their turn end up in the welfare trap when they grow up. In this public housing project in the Bronx, New York, 3/4’s of the families are now receiving welfare payments.
Well Mr. Brown wanted to keep away from this kind of thing for a very good reason. The people who get on welfare lose their human independence and feeling of dignity. They become subject to the dictates and whims of their welfare supervisor who can tell them whether they can live here or there, whether they may put in a telephone, what they may do with their lives. They are treated like children, not like responsible adults and they are trapped in the system. Maybe a job comes up which looks better than welfare but they are afraid to take it because if they lose it after a few months it maybe six months or nine months before they can get back onto welfare. And as a result, this becomes a self-perpetuating cycle rather than simply a temporary state of affairs.
Things have gone even further elsewhere. This is a huge mistake. A public housing project in Manchester, England.
Well we’re 3,000 miles away from the Bronx here but you’d never know it just by looking around. It looks as if we are at the same place. It’s the same kind of flats, the same kind of massive housing units, decrepit even though they were only built 7 or 8 years ago. Vandalism, graffiti, the same feeling about the place. Of people who don’t have a great deal of drive and energy because somebody else is taking care of their day to day needs because the state has deprived them of an incentive to find jobs to become responsible people to be the real support for themselves and their families.

Other segments:

Milton Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 7 of 7)

I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. TEMIN: We don’t think the big capital arose before the government did? VON HOFFMAN: Listen, what are we doing here? I mean __ defending big government is like defending death and taxes. […]

Milton Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 6 of 7)

I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen worked pretty well for a whole generation. Now anything that works well for a whole generation isn’t entirely bad. From the fact __ from that fact, and the undeniable fact that things […]

Milton Friedman discusses Reagan and Reagan discusses Friedman

Uploaded by YAFTV on Aug 19, 2009 Nobel Laureate Dr. Milton Friedman discusses the principles of Ronald Reagan during this talk for students at Young America’s Foundation’s 25th annual National Conservative Student Conference MILTON FRIEDMAN ON RONALD REAGAN In Friday’s WSJ, Milton Friedman reflectedon Ronald Reagan’s legacy. (The link should work for a few more […]

Milton Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 5 of 7)

 I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. PART 5 of 7 MCKENZIE: Ah, well, that’s not on our agenda actually. (Laughter) VOICE OFF SCREEN: Why not? MCKENZIE: I boldly repeat the question, though, the expectation having been __ having […]

War on poverty is a failure in USA

Milton Friedman’s solution to limiting poverty Liberals just don’t get it. They should listen to Milton Friedman (who is quoted in this video below concerning the best way to limit poverty). New Video Shows the War on Poverty Is a Failure Posted by Daniel J. Mitchell The Center for Freedom and Prosperity has released another […]

Milton Friedman Friday: (“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 4 of 7)

 I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. PART 4 of 7 The massive growth of central government that started after the depression has continued ever since. If anything, it has even speeded up in recent years. Each year there […]

Milton Friedman Friday: (“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 3 of 7)

 I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. PART 3 OF 7 Worse still, America’s depression was to become worldwide because of what lies behind these doors. This is the vault of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Inside […]

 

Milton Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 2 of 7)

 I am currently going through his film series “Free to Choose” which is one the most powerful film series I have ever seen. For the past 7 years Maureen Ramsey has had to buy food and clothes for her family out of a government handout. For the whole of that time, her husband, Steve, hasn’t […]

Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 1 of 7)

Friedman Friday:(“Free to Choose” episode 4 – From Cradle to Grave, Part 1 of 7) Volume 4 – From Cradle to Grave Abstract: Since the Depression years of the 1930s, there has been almost continuous expansion of governmental efforts to provide for people’s welfare. First, there was a tremendous expansion of public works. The Social Security Act […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman, President Obama, spending out of control | Comments (0)

Open letter to President Obama (Part 129 B)

August 25, 2012 – 12:33 am

President Obama c/o The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here.

We need some austerity in the USA and I don’t mean tax increases. That never helps. However, just like many of the European countries we have run away federal government spending that needs to be cut. Why can’t we learn from others mistakes?

Looking at Austerity in Italy

Posted by Juan Carlos Hidalgo

The Italian economy contracted for a third quarter in a row, deepening the country’s recession and adding to the fire of the euro crisis. Italy is the third largest economy in the Eurozone, and many view it as the endgame of an eventual collapse of the common currency because it is too big to fail. Neither the EU nor the IMF have enough cash to rescue it. If the country defaults, that would probably spell the end of the euro.

Austerity is being blamed for Italy’s economic troubles. Chiara Corsa, an economist at UniCredit, wrote that “The key factor is austerity, which is weighing heavily on consumption and investment.” Recent local elections saw the rise of anti-austerity parties. Paul Krugman warned about this back in December when he described the austerity push of Prime Minister Mario Monti as “self-defeating” and “delusional.”

However, as is the case for Britain, France and Greece, commentators are unclear about what austerity means for Italy, although many seem to imply spending cuts. For example, if Krugman’s criticism about Italian austerity is consistent with his critiques about austerity elsewhere in Europe, we know he means spending cuts. So let’s take a look and see if there has been any:


* Using GDP deflator.
Source: European Commission, Economic and Financial Affairs.

Spending in nominal terms increased by a yearly average of 4.1% between 2000 and 2009, and then fell slightly the following year. In 2011 government spending was just 0.14% below its 2009 level. As for spending in real terms, there’s no cut whatsoever. And as a share of the economy, total spending reached a peak in 2009 at 51.6% of GDP, and it fell to 49.6% last year, a decline far from significant.

So what’s austerity all about in Italy so far? According to The Financial Times, the “government’s €30 billion austerity package, passed in December, was heavily oriented towards tax increases rather than spending cuts, an emphasis that is now widely recognized by ministers as having driven Italy deeper into recession.” The FT adds that the Monti administration is facing “intense pressure from business, politicians and the public to shift the burden of austerity away from heavy taxation towards cuts in public spending.” As a result, the Italian Prime Minister announced €4.2 billion in spending cuts starting in June, still less than 1% of total public spending. That doesn’t sound savage to me.

But it’s quite fascinating to see the hysteria surrounding non existent spending cuts and its supposedly negative impact on economic growth. For example, last December The Economist warned:

“But too great an emphasis on austerity in the short run risks sending the continent’s economy into a deep recession; the latest data on Italian industrial production showed an annual fall of 4.1% in October, even before budget cuts were introduced by the new government.”

Interestingly, according to The Economist, spending cuts were somehow responsible for a decline in economic output in Italy even before being implemented!

If austerity is to blame for Italy’s recession, we need to be clear that by austerity we mean mostly tax increases with almost no reduction in government spending.

_______________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in President Obama, spending out of control, Taxes | Comments (0)

Free or equal? 30 years after Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose (Part 5)

August 24, 2012 – 10:09 am

Johan Norberg – Free or Equal – Free to Choose 30 years later 5/5

Published on Jun 10, 2012 by

In 1980 economist and Nobel laureate Milton Friedman inspired market reform in the West and revolutions in the East with his celebrated television series “Free To Choose.”
Thirty years later, in this one-hour documentary, the young Swedish writer, analyst and Cato Institute Fellow Johan Norberg travels in Friedman’s footsteps to see what has
actually happened in the places Friedman’s ideas helped transform. In location after location Norberg examines the contemporary relevance of Friedman’s ideas in the 2011 world of globalization and financial crisis. Central to his examination are the perennial questions concerning power and prosperity, and the trade-offs between individual liberty and income equality.

___________

I have enjoyed reading this series of reviews by T. Kurt Jaros on Milton and Rose Friedman’s book “Free to Choose.” I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

I have posted several transcripts and videos of the FREE TO CHOOSE film series on my blog. My favorite episodes are the “Failure of Socialism” and  “Power of the Market.” (This is the 1990 version but the 1980 version is good too.) Today with the increase of the welfare state maybe people should take a long look again at the episode “From Cradle to Grave.” 

Milton Friedman’s  view on vouchers for the schools needs to be heeded now more than ever too. “Created Equal” is probably the episode that I wanted President Obama to see the most and I wrote several letters to him suggesting that.

T. Kurt Jaros is currently a Master’s student studying Systematic Theology at King’s College in London.  He holds a B.A. in Philosophy and Political Science cum laude and an M.A. in Christian Apologetics high honors from Biola University, an evangelical Christian university outside of Los Angeles.

He enjoys learning and thinking about theology, specifically historical theology, philosophical theology and philosophy of religion, and issues pertaining to monergism and synergism.  Additionally, he enjoys learning and thinking about political philosophy, economics, American political history, and campaigns.

The Tyranny of Controls: Part 2

T. Kurt Jaros on Economics

This is part of a series on Milton Friedman’s “Free to Choose.”

In my previous post I explained why the government should not regulate tariffs due to their harmful consequences toward consumers and innovation. This is part five of a series on Free to Choose by Milton Friedman. In the second chapter, Friedman writes on the role of government as it relates to trade. He makes a strong case for free trade, and specifically focuses on international trade.

Economic arrangements are attached to political arrangements among countries. “International free trade fosters harmonious relations among nations that differ in culture and institutions,” just as the same thing happens domestically at a smaller scale. Cooperation among the countries is the rule, and both sides end up happy if they believe they benefit. Otherwise the trade would not take place.

However, once government intervenes, problems begin to rise. If regulation occurs within a country, there is fierce lobbying between businesses to gain exemptions to regulations or for subsidies. The matter only gets worse when you consider trade agreements between two nations. If the government stayed out of regulation, there would be peace and harmony between the two businesses trading. Yet, instead, “high government officials jet around the world to trade conferences” and tension is developed. Instead of a completely private agreement between two companies, the collectivist bureaucrats of their countries represent the businesses.

It is then that the economic matters become political ones, and may even lead to deadly consequences: trade becomes a political weapon. Consider how our federal government uses trade agreements as leverage between Asian or South American countries. In my humble opinion, this just gives politicians another thing to keep busy about. They take time to have “hearings” that include irrelevant sources, use staffers to print up more paperwork and take time to find more politicians that can vote for their bill, etc. If there are no regulations, then there are no politicians wasting time and money harming the economy and diplomatic relations.

Friedman uses the section “Central Economic Planning” to provide historical evidence that wherever there is central economic planning, “ordinary citizens are in political fetters, have a low standard of living, and have little power to control their own destiny.” Consider the stark contrast between East and West Germany. These people were of the same heritage, same skills and same knowledge. But one side had to build a wall not to stop people from coming in, but to stop people from leaving. As Friedman was writing this book, the wall still existed! 

“Which [side] must man it today with armed guards, assisted by fierce dogs, minefields, and similar devices of devilish ingenuity in order to frustrate brace and desperate citizens who are willing to risk their lives to leave their communist paradise for the capitalist hell on the other side of the wall?”

We know too well where socialism and communism lead. Why can’t we see the reality that these philosophies are taking over our own country? In schools we’re taught that FDR’s New Deal was that great thing to help people get through the Great Depression. In reality, he was responsible for extending it. We’re taught that LBJ had this great vision for the Great Society and his war on poverty. In reality, he’s extended it. We think the Department of Education (signed into law by Jimmy Carter) is well intentioned.  Yet it is still central economic planning. That is socialism.

On the other side of the Berlin wall, there were brightly lit, not dull, stores. The streets were filled with cheerful people, not empty and quiet. The newspapers provided all sorts of opinions, not one. The buildings were nicely built, unlike on the other side, where “wartime destruction ha[d] not yet been repaired after more than three decades.” The beauty of our system of government is that we have something to say and can change the way our government regulates the economy. Although we may have to work through the political corruption, it’s possible to bring real change to the path of statism with an irate minority or by having that minority grow to become a majority.

Related posts:

Reason Magazine’s rightly praises Milton Friedman but makes foolish claim along the way

I must say that I have lots of respect for Reason Magazine and for their admiration of Milton Friedman. However, I do disagree with one phrase below. At the end of this post I will tell you what sentence it is. Uploaded by ReasonTV on Jul 28, 2011 There’s no way to appreciate fully the […]

Video clip:Milton Friedman discusses his view of numerous political figures and policy issues in (Part 1)

Milton Friedman on Hayek’s “Road to Serfdom” 1994 Interview 1 of 2 Uploaded by PenguinProseMedia on Oct 25, 2011 Says Federal Reserve should be abolished, criticizes Keynes. One of Friedman’s best interviews, discussion spans Friedman’s career and his view of numerous political figures and public policy issues. ___________________ Two Lucky People by Milton and Rose Friedman […]

Milton Friedman remembered at 100 years from his birth (Part 1)

What a great man Milton Friedman was. The Legacy of Milton Friedman November 18, 2006 Alexander Tabarrok Great economist by day and crusading public intellectual by night, Milton Friedman was my hero. Friedman’s contributions to economics are profound, the permanent income hypothesis, the resurrection of the quantity theory of money, and his magnum opus with […]

Milton Friedman videos and transcripts Part 7

Milton Friedman videos and transcripts Part 7 On my blog http://www.thedailyhatch.org I have an extensive list of posts that have both videos and transcripts of MiltonFriedman’s interviews and speeches. Here below is just small list of those and more can be accessed by clicking on “Milton Friedman” on the side of this page or searching […]

Milton Friedman at Hillsdale College 2006 (part 1)

Milton Friedman at Hillsdale College 2006 July 2006 Free to Choose: A Conversation with Milton Friedman Milton Friedman Economist Milton Friedman is a senior research fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and a professor emeritus of economics at the University of Chicago, where he taught from 1946-1976. Dr. Friedman received the Nobel Memorial […]

Open letter to President Obama (Part 116.6)

Milton Friedman said that getting George Bush I to be his vice president was his biggest mistake because he knew that Bush was not a true conservative and sure enough George Bush did raise taxes when he later became President. Below is a speech by George W. Bush honoring Milton Friedman: Milton Friedman Honored for […]

Transcript and video of Milton Friedman on Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan (Part 1)

Below is a discussion from Milton Friedman on Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan. February 10, 1999 | Recorded on February 10, 1999 audio, video, and blogs » uncommon knowledge PRESIDENTIAL REPORT CARD: Milton Friedman on the State of the Union with guest Milton Friedman Milton Friedman, Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution and Nobel Laureate in […]

Dan Mitchell’s article on Chili and video clip on Milton Friedman’s influence

Milton Friedman and Chile – The Power of Choice Uploaded by FreeToChooseNetwork on May 13, 2011 In this excerpt from Free To Choose Network’s “The Power of Choice (2006)”, we set the record straight on Milton Friedman’s dealings with Chile — including training the Chicago Boys and his meeting with Augusto Pinochet. Was the tremendous […]

Open letter to President Obama (Part 116.5)

Milton Friedman’s negative income tax explained by Friedman in 1968: President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a […]

“Friedman Friday” :“A Nobel Laureate on the American Economy” VTR: 5/31/77 Transcript and video clip (Part 5)

Milton Friedman on the American Economy (5 of 6)   Uploaded by donotswallow on Aug 9, 2009 THE OPEN MIND Host: Richard D. Heffner Guest: Milton Friedman Title: A Nobel Laureate on the American Economy VTR: 5/31/77 _____________________________________ Below is a transcipt from a portion of an interview that Milton Friedman gave on 5-31-77: Friedman: […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman | Comments (0)

Razorbacks blew a few games because of kicking

August 24, 2012 – 7:00 am

I was really upset at the Florida game in 2009 that we lost because we could not a field goal and the same could be said about the 3 rd overtime short 38 yard kick we missed that would have won the game against Tennessee in Knoxville in 2002. We ended up losing in 6 overtimes.

<!–

23

–>

8/23/2012 at 1:00pm

Arkansas kicker Alex Tejada helped the Razorbacks win the 2010 Liberty Bowl. But the inconsistency of Tejada and other Razorback kickers over the years were a source of great frustration for fans.
Image by Mark Wagner

Arkansas kicker Alex Tejada helped the Razorbacks win the 2010 Liberty Bowl. But the inconsistency of Tejada and other Razorback kickers over the years were a source of great frustration for fans.

This football season marks the 21st for the Razorbacks as members of the SEC. Having completed two decades in the league it seemed worth reflecting on how far the program has come. Which victories over the last 20 years were the sweetest? Were there losses that hurt more than others? What coaching decisions still have folks scratching their heads? ArkansasSports360.com assembled a panel aimed at answering these questions. We have our list and we’d love to hear yours.

No. 6 on our moments you would love to forget …

SHAKY KICKING

When it happened: 2002-2009

Who we remember: Alex Tejada, Brendan O’Donohoe.

Why we’d like to forget: Arkansas has had an amazing run of clutch kickers over the years, starting with Tom McNelly winning the Texas game in Austin in 1960, a program-changing victory for Frank Broyles. Bob White, Bill McClard, Steve Little, Ish Ordonez, Bruce Lahay, Kendall Trainor and Todd Wright all became household names to Razorback fans for making the extra point and field goal “automatic.”

So it was that Hog fans and UA coaches were yanking their hair out in the 2000s when games were lost on the foot of such highly recruited kickers as El Dorado’s Brendan O’Donohoe and Springdale’s Alex Tejada.

Houston Nutt could find a walk-on like Todd Latourette, Chris Balserio or David Carlton to rescue the kicking game during his 10-year run, and it was rare he would offer a high school kicker a scholarship until O’Donohoe came along out of El Dorado.

But Nutt was almost past the frustration point with his kicker when O’Donohoe was called on to end the Tennessee game in the third overtime in Knoxville in 2002. From 34 yards away, he missed for the third time in the game, and Tennessee escaped with a victory in the sixth overtime.

Tejada was much heralded for his leg strength, but his direction left lots to be desired, especially with Bobby Petrino in 2008-09. A missed field at Kentucky in ’08 would have provided the Hogs with the winning margin there, and Tejada badly blew a 47-yarder at the end of regulation in a 31-28 loss at Mississippi State. In 2009, Tejada failed both at Florida in a game the Hogs lost 23-20 and in overtime at LSU in a 33-30 defeat.

Providence yet shined on Tejada: He delivered the winner in overtime to beat East Carolina in the Liberty Bowl on Jan. 2, 2010. Then he gave way in the 2010 season to Russellville product Zach Hocker, who has had an amazing run of success for two seasons.

Up Next: October unkind to Razorbacks …

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

Mark May at Little Rock Touchdown Club Part 4

August 24, 2012 – 6:40 am

Too bad for Ohio State they had to forfeit the Sugar Bowl victory in 2011.

I got to hear Mark May speak at the Little Rock Touchdown Club on August 20, 2012 and he did a great job.

May sees hurdles for Hogs in SEC

By Jeremy Muck

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

LITTLE ROCK — During his 32-minute speech to the Little Rock Touchdown Club at The Peabody Little Rock hotel Monday, ESPN college football analyst Mark May had high hopes for the Arkansas football team.

“If they win less than nine games, I’ll be surprised,” said May of the No. 10 Razorbacks, who finished 11-2 last season and beat Kansas State in the Cotton Bowl. “The two challenges, obviously, are LSU and Alabama but they get them both at home [Alabama on Sept. 15, LSU on Nov. 23]. They’re going to have to go to South Carolina and from all indications, [ junior running back] Marcus Lattimore is back. It’s going to be tough to stop them because if he’s back to 100 percent after the knee injury, he’s one of the top three backs in the nation, without a doubt.

“Those are the three games they’re going to have to target. Every other game, they should be favored in.”

May, 52, was a first-round draft pick in 1981 by the Washington Redskins from Pittsburgh. He played on two Super Bowl-winning teams with the Redskins and was an All-American and Outland Trophy winner in 1980.

After playing 13 seasons in the NFL (1981-1990 Redskins, 1991 San Diego Chargers, 1992-1993 Arizona Cardinals), May worked for TNT and CBS before joining ESPN in 2001. He is an analyst on ESPN’s College Football Scoreboard and College Football Final.

May praised Long’s decision in April to hire Coach John L. Smith to replace former coach Bobby Petrino, who was fired. Long had served as Arkansas’ special teams coach before leaving to take the Weber State head coaching position last December,

“It was a short window that had to be filled in a hurry,” May said. “I think what Jeff Long did was he brought in a CEO. He wanted a guy that’s not going to tinker with the major problems on this football team, if there are any.”

May said that if Smith is not retained by Arkansas after this season, possible coaching candidates could include Cincinnati Coach Butch Jones, Louisville Coach Charlie Strong (Batesville) and defensive coordinators Manny Diaz at Texas and Mark Stoops at Florida State.

As for Petrino, May believes he should take his time getting back into head coaching.

“I’d try to go out and get a job as an offensive coordinator someplace, maybe Conference USA,” May said, “to at least get back into the game and re-establish myself.Maybe in another 3-5 years, he would have another opportunity to be a head coach again. But right now, he’s as toxic as [former Ohio State coach] Jim Tressel.”

Junior running back Knile Davis – who missed the 2011 season after ankle surgery – has not participated in contact drills since Arkansas opened camp earlier this month, which concerns May leading up to the Razorbacks’ opener Sept. 1 against Jacksonville State in Fayetteville.

“I want to see him get hit before he plays,” said May of Davis. “I want to make sure he’s ready to go before the first whistle blows. I think John has to make that decision in the next week or so.”

Other highlights from May’s speech to the Little Rock Touchdown Club:

On LSU dismissing junior defensive back Tyrann Mathieu, who was a Heisman Trophy finalist last season: “People don’t realize how good he was. He changed the game against Arkansas. He changed the game against Florida. He changed the game in the SEC Championship Game against Georgia.In every one of those games, they were down. He scored a touchdown, whether it would be an interception return or a punt return. … He’s the momentum changer of that franchise, that program.”

On Southern California – which was on NCAA probation the past two seasons- being picked as the No. 1 team in The Associated Press Top 25 preseason poll: “That’s a hard one to fathom. They’re very thin. They’ve lost scholarships. … They have a weak schedule. You look at their schedule, their three nonconference games are Hawaii, Syracuse and Notre Dame. They’re going to be favored in every one of their games the entire season long. Their only challenge is going to be Oregon at home [Nov. 3]. That’s it. The second game will be when they play Oregon in the Pac-12 Championship Game. They’ve got an easy road to get to the championship game. But they’re going to be playing against a juggernaut from the SEC West.”

On whether the NCAA sanctions for Penn State’s football program were strong enough: “I think after the Freeh Report, I think Mark Emmert and the NCAA did a terrific job in how they handled it. The president of Penn State signed off on it. It was a brutal agreement for Penn State, but it was something that had to be done. … The way they protected people there was atrocious.”

Sports, Pages 15 on 08/21/2012

Related posts:

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

“Friedman Friday” : Jewish tradition is so akin to capitalism but many Jews are socialists, what a paradox (Part 4)

August 24, 2012 – 5:58 am

Milton Friedman on the American Economy (5 of 6)

Uploaded by on Aug 9, 2009

THE OPEN MIND
Host: Richard D. Heffner
Guest: Milton Friedman
Title: A Nobel Laureate on the American Economy VTR: 5/31/77

__________________

Below is a part of the series on an article by Milton Friedman called “Capitalism and the Jews” published in 1972. 

Capitalism and the Jews

October 1988 • Volume: 38 • Issue: 10 • Print This Post • 11 comments

Milton Friedman, recipient of the 1976 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science, is a Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution. This article is reprinted with the permission of Encounter and The Fraser Institute.

“Capitalism and the Jews” was originally presented as a lecture before the Mont Pelerin Society in 1972. It subsequently was published in England and Canada and appears here without significant revision.

Freedom of Entry and Jewish Representation

 Moreover, within those countries, Jews have flourished most in the sectors that have the freest entry and are in that sense most competitive. Compare the experience of the Jews in banking, that I have referred to, with their experience in retail trade, which has been almost a prototype of the textbook image of perfect competition and free entry. Or compare their minor role in large industry with their prominence in the professions such as law, medicine, accountancy and the like.[4] Though there are barriers to entry in the professions, too, once past the initial barriers, there is a large measure of free competition for custom. Even the differences within the professions illustrate my theme. In the U.S., for which I know the details, there was for a long time a major difference between medicine and law in the extent to which state licensure was an effective bar to entry. For reasons that are not relevant here, there was significant restriction of entry in medicine, relatively little in law. And Jews were proportionately much more numerous in law than in medicine.

 The movie industry in the U.S. was a new industry and for that reason open to all. Jews became a major factor and this carried over to radio and television when they came on the scene. But now that government control and regulation has become more and more important, I am under the impression that the Jewish role in radio and T.V. is declining.

Capitalism and Israel

 A rather different example of the benefits Jews have derived from competitive capitalism is provided by Israel, and this in a dual sense. 

First, Israel would hardly have been viable without the massive contributions that it received from world Jewry, primarily from the U.S., secondarily from Britain and other Western capitalist countries. Suppose these countries had been socialist. The hypothetical socialist countries might conceivably have contributed, but if so they would have done so for very different reasons and with very different conditions attached. Compare Soviet aid to Egypt or official U.S. aid to Israel with private contributions. In a capitalist system, any group, however small a minority, can use its own resources as it wishes, without seeking or getting the permission of the majority. 

Second, within Israel, despite all the talk of central control, the reality is that rapid development has been primarily the product of private initiative. After my first extended visit to Israel two decades ago, I concluded that two traditions were at work in Israel: an ancient one, going back nearly two thousand years, of finding ways around governmental restrictions; a modern one, going back a century, of belief in “democratic socialism” and “central planning.” Fortunately for Israel, the first tradition has proved far more potent than the second. 

To summarize: Except for the sporadic protection of individual monarchs to whom they were useful, Jews have seldom benefited from governmental intervention on their behalf. They have flourished when and only when there has been a widespread acceptance by the public at large of the general doctrine of non-intervention, so that a large measure of competitive capitalism and of tolerance for all groups has prevailed. They have flourished then despite continued widespread anti-Semitic prejudice because the general belief in non-intervention was more powerful than the specific urge to discriminate against the Jews.

III. The Anti-capitalist Mentality of the Jews

Despite this record, for the past century, the Jews have been a stronghold of anti-capitalist sentiment. From Karl Marx through Leon Trotsky to Herbert Marcuse, a sizable fraction of the revolutionary anti-capitalist literature has been authored by Jews. Communist parties in all countries, including the patty that achieved revolution in Russia but also present-day Communist parties in Western countries, and especially in the U.S.,[5] have been run and manned to a disproportionate extent by Jews—though I hasten to add that only a tiny fraction of Jews have ever been members of the Communist party. Jews have been equally active in the less- revolutionary socialist movements in all countries, as intellectuals generating socialist literature, as active participants in leadership, and as members. 

Coming still closer to the center, in Britain the Jewish vote and participation is predominantly in the Labor party, in the U.S., in the left wing of the Democratic party. The party programs of the so-called right-wing parties in Israel would be regarded as “liberal,” in the modern sense, almost everywhere else. These phenomena are so well known that they require little elaboration or documentation.[6]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Milton Friedman | Comments (0)