3 ms·

To quote Milton Friedman: > “Government has three primary functions. It should provide for military defense of the nation. It should enforce contracts between

by bcherny 10y ago

To quote Milton Friedman: > “Government has three primary functions. It should provide for military defense of the nation. It should enforce contracts between individuals. It should protect citizens from crimes against themselves or their property. When government-- in pursuit of good intentions tries to rearrange the economy, legislate morality, or help special interests, the cost come in inefficiency, lack of motivation, and loss of freedom. Government should be a referee, not an active player.” (from https://www.amazon.com/Capitalism-Freedom-Anniversary-Milton-Friedman/dp/0226264211 https://www.amazon.com/Capitalism-Freedom-Anniversary-Milton...) Specifically addressing antitrust: > My own views about the antitrust laws have changed greatly over time. When I started in this business, as a believer in competition, I was a great supporter of antitrust laws; I thought enforcing them was one of the few desirable things that the government could do to promote more competition. But as I watched what actually happened, I saw that, instead of promoting competition, antitrust laws tended to do exactly the opposite, because they tended, like so many government activities, to be taken over by the people they were supposed to regulate and control. And so over time I have gradually come to the conclusion that antitrust laws do far more harm than good and that we would be better off if we didn't have them at all, if we could get rid of them. But we do have them. > Under the circumstances, given that we do have antitrust laws, is it really in the self-interest of Silicon Valley to set the government on Microsoft? Your industry, the computer industry, moves so much more rapidly than the legal process, that by the time this suit is over, who knows what the shape of the industry will be. Never mind the fact that the human energy and the money that will be spent in hiring my fellow economists, as well as in other ways, would be much more productively employed in improving your products. It's a waste! But beyond that, you will rue the day when you called in the government. From now on the computer industry, which has been very fortunate in that it has been relatively free of government intrusion, will experience a continuous increase in government regulation. Antitrust very quickly becomes regulation. Here again is a case that seems to me to illustrate the suicidal impulse of the business community. (from http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/policy-report/1999/3/cpr399.pdf http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/po...)

matt4077 10y ago
To quote me: > Just because Milton Friedman says it, it doesn't mean it's not idiotic. Government is the embodiment of a collected conscience. And just as it would be immoral for you to watch someone suffer when you could easily help, it is unconscionable for government to remain passive when any of its subjects suffer.
- bcherny 10y ago
  I agree with the intention, but in practice it's not so easy :) If someone is hungry and govt wants to feed them, then govt needs to forcibly take food/money from someone else and give it to that person. That transfer of resources takes govt money and people to execute it. So in addition to an amount $A being transferred from person P1 to person P2, an amount $B must be expended. With a bureaucratic govt, that amount $B is non trivial relative to $A. We can imagine a system where $B is reduced, or even taken to zero. The idea is that if left to private markets, this sort of transfer happens anyway, but is (1) more efficient, and (2) more ethical because it does not rely on the use of force. It might happen due to family giving money, charity, etc. In a less extreme form, a negative income tax (still administered by govt) might replace welfare, or minimum income might replace minimum wage; both are more efficient.
  - matt4077 10y ago
    The problem with charity is that it feeds all the cute pandas in the world, but would never finance rehabilitation for convicted pedophiles with a drug problem. Also: you argument proves too much, i. e. if taxes are violence you should move to Somalia. Also please stop using the roads my friends and I build. Finally government bureaucracy is generally overrated, while most large cooperations can easily compete with any government in terms of waste and bureaucracy. It's innate to large organizations, which is why competition cannot solve it.

by bcherny 10y ago

matt4077 10y ago

To quote me: > Just because Milton Friedman says it, it doesn't mean it's not idiotic. Government is the embodiment of a collected conscience. And just as it would be immoral for you to watch someone suffer when you could easily help, it is unconscionable for government to remain passive when any of its subjects suffer.

bcherny 10y ago
I agree with the intention, but in practice it's not so easy :) If someone is hungry and govt wants to feed them, then govt needs to forcibly take food/money from someone else and give it to that person. That transfer of resources takes govt money and people to execute it. So in addition to an amount $A being transferred from person P1 to person P2, an amount $B must be expended. With a bureaucratic govt, that amount $B is non trivial relative to $A. We can imagine a system where $B is reduced, or even taken to zero. The idea is that if left to private markets, this sort of transfer happens anyway, but is (1) more efficient, and (2) more ethical because it does not rely on the use of force. It might happen due to family giving money, charity, etc. In a less extreme form, a negative income tax (still administered by govt) might replace welfare, or minimum income might replace minimum wage; both are more efficient.
- matt4077 10y ago
  The problem with charity is that it feeds all the cute pandas in the world, but would never finance rehabilitation for convicted pedophiles with a drug problem. Also: you argument proves too much, i. e. if taxes are violence you should move to Somalia. Also please stop using the roads my friends and I build. Finally government bureaucracy is generally overrated, while most large cooperations can easily compete with any government in terms of waste and bureaucracy. It's innate to large organizations, which is why competition cannot solve it.