Speakeasy forum

General discussion

And here was me thinking that Friedman and the Chicago

by Ziks511 / May 13, 2013 10:46 PM PDT

School were simply honest men disagreeing with what had become economic orthodoxy. What an idiot I was.

``Libertarians will blanch at lumping their revered Vons—Mises and Hayek—in with the nutters and the shills. But between them, Von Hayek and Von Mises never seem to have held a single academic appointment that didn't involve a corporate sponsor. Even the renowned law and economics movement at the University of Chicago was, in its inception, heavily subsidized by business interests. ("Radical movements in capitalist societies," as Milton Friedman patiently explained, "have typically been supported by a few wealthy individuals.") Within academia, the philosophy of free markets in extremis was rarely embraced freely—i.e., by someone not on the dole of a wealthy benefactor. It cannot be stressed enough: In the decades after the war, a kind of levee separated polite discourse from free-market economics. The attitude is well-captured by John Maynard Keynes, who wrote in a review of Hayek's Prices and Production: "An extraordinary example of how, starting with a mistake, a remorseless logician can end up in Bedlam."``

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/the_dilettante/2011/06/the_liberty_scam.html

When the conclusions of a group of ``academics`` result in agreeement with their paymasters, you can be certain that The Fix was in from the beginning.

Nobody bought John Maynard Keynes, though, He was simply concerned with deciphering Economic activity, and offering his conclusions based upon unbiased data. The most influential event of his economic life was the Paris Peace Conference following World War 1, where he was the chief economist for the British, and the only man to say, ``Germany is broke. There are no reparations to be had. If you try to get them, you will force Germany to fight again.`` Eventually he resigned in protest. His magnum opus The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money. was published in 1936.

Rob

Rob

Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: And here was me thinking that Friedman and the Chicago
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: And here was me thinking that Friedman and the Chicago
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Popular Forums
icon
Computer Help 47,885 discussions
icon
Computer Newbies 10,322 discussions
icon
iPhones, iPods, & iPads 3,188 discussions
icon
Security 30,333 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 20,177 discussions
icon
HDTV Picture Setting 1,932 discussions
icon
Phones 15,713 discussions
icon
Windows 7 6,210 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 14,510 discussions

Big stars on small screens

Smosh tells CNET what it took to make it big online

Internet sensations Ian Hecox and Anthony Padilla discuss how YouTube has changed and why among all their goals, "real TV" isn't an ambition.