|
copenhagen1221 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
and we must depend on private "certification" institutions (which do exist today) to test these products and give their approval. Companies that are selling these products will be happy to pay them to test because it will lead to an increase in sales as consumers will not buy untested, uncertified products. Certification institutions will not be corrupted either because they depend on consumer trust to make profit. If someone dies, the certification company loses consumer trust and profit.
SourAlex85 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Good point. Consumer education should play a bigger role in a country who's economy is based on free market principles.
Bepartofmynovel (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
well, this kid had some good examples but poor arguments. He should have asked Friedman about his wrong assumptions of "full market information". Consumers do not know the perils of the products they are buying most of the times, because companies hide those facts, or those facts are hard to obtain for the consumers. Goods and services that can be dangerous to consumers, such as medical treatments and also cars, should be subject to government regulation to protect consumers...
jiujitsuhath (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Yeah he did!
milfhuntergk (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Wow. He pwned that kid.
paupmaster2k (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Principle: A fundamental, primary, or general law or truth from which others are derived. Principles govern. Just think through it and you will find this to be self evident.
UWBADGER1 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Where are his "concrete examples"? He failed to make a single valid point that Friedman couldn't crush!
zsylvana (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Is it the "F-Twist" you arguing about?Friedman versus Samuelson,Robinson and Lester 1963?It was a methodological discussion.MIT,Harvard and Columbia critisized Chicago-School.
cjanne9 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
The Friedman controversy originates from
qrituue of Friedman, M. (1953) "The Methodology of Positive Economics"", in: Essays in Positive Economics, Chicago and London, University of Chicago Press"
Friedman distinguishes assumptions of a theory (like utility and profit maximization) from implications of a theory, like equilibrium prices going up or down as a result of certain variables of the theory going up or down.
cjanne9 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Friedman opposes the idea of evaluating a theory by testing the realism of its assumptions. He opposes the idea of abandoning assumptions when they are discovered to be not realistic.
A first group erring in this respect, according to Friedman, are those abandoning the assumptions of "perfectness" of competition an of monopoly in analysis market price formation. In the time Friedman wrote, E.H. Chamberlin (The Theory of Monopolistic Competition, Cambridge Mass.: Harvard Un. Press, 1933) |