An Economic History of the U.

S
Free or Equal

1. Professor Milton Friedmans research led him to believe in the power of free markets and
economic freedom
2. If the government vies everybody the same freedom to work, some will do better than others.
The result will be equality of opportunity but not equality of outcome.
3. Hong Kong became and economic power house because
The British government couldnt be bothered with local Hong Kong affairs
The Governor here happened to favor free markets
Hong Kong never introduced all those policies that other governments did: no tariffs, no
regulations, or no government interventions in the Economy.
So the economy could evolve in a natural way.
4. The free market enables people to go into any industry they want; to trade who whomever they
want; to buy in the cheapest market around the world; to sell in the dearest market around the
world. But most important of all, if they fail, the bear the cost. If they succeed they get the
benefits.
5. Define voluntary association as described in the video.
What we do together on our own free will. Anything that is going on between consenting adults
6. In the example of the lead pencil, what conclusion did Professor Friedman reach in the context
of invisible hands
No single person could make a lead pencil. The wood had to be cut from a tree, to cut down that
tree it took a saw, to make the saw it took steel, and to make steel it took iron ore.
7. The Founding Fathers had learned the lesson of history. The great danger to freedom is the
concentration of power, especially in the hands of a government.
8. In the last 100 years with relatively free markets, we have created more wealth than in the
100,000 years before.
9. As Milton Friedman said, The society that puts equality before freedom will end up with
neither. The society that puts freedom before equality will end up with a great measure of both.
10. If we applied the fair shares for all concept in this class, I definitely wouldnt approve of it. I
would much rather be able to work hard and get a better grade than a C than just default at that
no matter what I do. If you take away incentive to work hard, why work at all? If I know at the
end of the day Im going to get a C it completely kills all incentive to work hard and get an A.
Most people are probably like that, and if there was a set amount of points there wouldnt be
any points left to redistribute to get everyone to a C.
I dont think this differs very much from an economic view of fair shares for all, its a very
accurate portrayal of what redistribution of wealth is like. Without incentive to work people
stop, and then you run out of money to redistribute. This was one of the main reasons
communist Russia failed and capitalist America succeeded. Socialism and Communism doesnt

give people a motive to work and so theyre not the ones coming up with new technology and a
higher standard of living. You wouldnt have had Bill Gates or Thomas Edison taking risks to
invent the things they did if they knew they wouldnt be able to reap the rewards of their
inventions. Everyone is entitled to the sweat from their brow and redistribution of wealth takes
that away from people.
History shows us that free markets promote growth and advancement. Having a planned central
economy doesnt give people the incentive to work and grow. Redistribution of wealth will
inevitably result in a society of people living off the government, and few people working.
Detroit, Michigan is a perfect example of this. As people who worked and paid taxes left the
state you were left with a population relying on the government to survive, and now the state is
running out of money to keep giving people their benefits they feel entitled to. Bad tax laws
made it a state where people didnt want to start businesses and instead flocked to places like
Utah and Texas where taxes are lower and there is a greater incentive to build a company. The
evidence to not live by a fare shares for all policy is undeniable.