The Milton Friedman Choir singing about Friedman’s definiton of a corporation. This clip can be found in the DVD special features section of The Corporation.
Duration : 0:2:53
[youtube W3Seg0JE1PM]
The Milton Friedman Choir singing about Friedman’s definiton of a corporation. This clip can be found in the DVD special features section of The Corporation.
Duration : 0:2:53
[youtube W3Seg0JE1PM]
…Do you have any …
…Do you have any idea just how ill informed that statement was? So what you are saying is that the natural rate theory is false? Monetary policy has more effect then fiscal policy, he started that idea. Are also saying that the new Phillips curves are incorrect? and if so do you not believe in the aggregate functions? Please learn about a subject before you talk about it
great video
great video
that was scary…
that was scary…
Yeah, I’m ignorant. …
Yeah, I’m ignorant. You, on the other hand, know that I was born that way and will die that way. Your source?
One comment on a YouTube video. Thanks Doctor.
you were born as …
you were born as ignorant and and you will die as ignorant.
I don’t know why …
I don’t know why anyone still takes him seriously. His theories have been proven to be wrong. , they were proved wrong before he was even born . . .
Awesome, I hope …
Awesome, I hope more people learn about how school vouchers work.
There is an excellent documentary that exposes government run schools, its called: “The Cartel” -by Bob Bowdon
Nice try. Keep it …
Nice try. Keep it up check out esteembpo + com for social media marketing. efrsdf
Someone needs to …
Someone needs to teach those girls how to stand with one foot slightly in front of the other.
Then how do you …
Then how do you explain the popularity of those ‘really existing cooperate conscience’? Yes, we all know that it is one of the many ways of marketing technique, but nonetheless, “there really is no better way”. Or, are you just afraid of betting in some ‘worse ways’? Wiping the slate clean from controls before deciding what cease the day?
To ask the right question, rather than asking ‘are we really have the freedom of choice?’, which is ‘Do you dare to choose freedom?’
I think you’re …
I think you’re missing the point. Corporations are not individuals. Therefore, a corporation cannot have a conscience–something unique to individuals. There is no such thing as a collective consciousness.
Its duty is to serve the shareholders, as it is owned by them. The only way for the shareholders to be served is for consumers to be served in a competitive process.
It was a tongue in …
It was a tongue in cheek lyric.
What he was saying is that we shouldn’t be so focused on corporations “moral obligations” (great contradiction right there) but instead focus on educating ourselves on which corporations we want to endorse (with money) and which ones we don’t.
Furthermore, corporatizing and privatizing is seen as synonymous in this song.
Haha, it’s …
Haha, it’s hilarious and I love it!
The shareholders-part is so good.
I know. I just …
I know. I just thought it was pretty funny. I’m used to singing stuff like Poulenc. Poetic stuff.
Great parody of …
Great parody of Friedman’s propositions. (I hope it was meant as a parody anyway!)
“The corporation has no conscience and has no moral duty, nor should it have either. So let’s turn everything in a corporation, because that is, erm, good for, erm, freedom”.
Yep, I’d set that in a minor key myself as wel, heheh.
Brilliant.
Brilliant.
well honey, the …
well honey, the song itself is very political
Lordy, lordy, that …
Lordy, lordy, that was funny. The lyrics sound like they were taken verbatim from one of Friedman’s interviews. Watch out Handel!
5 Stars to Ooftyman!
5 Stars to Ooftyman!
OMG! we have been …
OMG! we have been doing that since the Carter Admin.created the Department….and its the same thing …we need more money…blah blah…its called failure
What needs to be …
What needs to be distinguished is the difference between public and private goods. This is something most people don’t distinguish between…
There are things …
There are things that does not profitable enough for private sector to take on. In those areas government spending is necessary. Besides if it is a functioning democracy public scrutiny would force the government officials spend wisely. A bridge to nowhere might be built to make that place ‘somewhere’. And usually ‘bridges to no where’ are built by government since there is usually no short-term profit opportunities.
Keynesianism, …
Keynesianism, anyone? Haha… Keynes = epic fail.
You’re kidding, …
You’re kidding, right? This is the oldest propaganda in the book. Friedman despised Pinochet.
This is because …
This is because they have INCENTIVES to act efficiently. The Federal government has no incentives to spend the money wisely. This is the heart of the argument. What difference does it make if the government spends $100m or $110m on building an bridge? The government gladly shells out the latter on occasion after occasion. Why? Because there is no disincentive toward wasteful spending. No one among the government is harmed by spending more than is efficient while only the taxpayers are harmed.