Friedman vs. McKenzie, Jay, Frances Piven, and Sowell
This discussion centers on the tension between freedom and equality, featuring Milton Friedman, an advocate for economic freedom, and his critics Frances Fox Piven, Thomas Sowell, Peter Jay, and Robert McKenzie.
Friedman’s Argument:
- Focuses on equality of opportunity, not outcome: Friedman argues for a system that grants everyone a fair shot at success, not one that guarantees equal results.
- Freedom and economic prosperity: He believes a free market system, with minimal government intervention, fosters both freedom and economic growth. This, in turn, supposedly benefits everyone through a rising tide that lifts all boats.
- Negative income tax as a safety net: While opposing wealth redistribution, Friedman acknowledges the need to alleviate poverty. He proposes a negative income tax as a way to help those in distress without hindering economic freedom.
- Criticisms of Friedman: Oversimplification of free enterprise: Piven challenges the idea of a pure, untainted free market system. She argues that historical examples of “free enterprise” often relied on government intervention, sometimes forceful, to establish dominance.
- Limited view of freedom: Jay critiques Friedman’s definition of freedom as primarily economic. He argues for a broader concept encompassing political and social liberties.
- Ignoring the starting point: Sowell raises the concern that even with equal opportunity, people begin from unequal positions due to factors like race or background. A purely opportunity-based system might not address these disparities.
Key Points of Discussion:
- The definition of equality: The discussion revolves around whether to strive for equality of opportunity (a fair chance to succeed) or equality of outcome (equal wealth or social standing for everyone).
- The role of government: Friedman views extensive government intervention as a threat to both freedom and economic growth. His critics argue for a role for government in regulating the market, addressing inequality, and protecting individual liberties.
- The historical context of free enterprise: Piven emphasizes the historical use of government power to establish supposedly “free” markets, often at the expense of individual freedoms.
The Outcome of the Discussion:
The debate remains unresolved. Friedman fails to convince his opponents of the absolute merits of his free-market ideology. Conversely, the critics don’t present a unified alternative. The discussion highlights the complexities of balancing freedom and equality in a real-world context.
Additional Notes:
The specific historical examples mentioned, like Chile under Pinochet’s regime, serve as flashpoints for the broader debate. The discussion predates the rise of income inequality as a major concern, but the underlying issues remain relevant.