The 4 Ways to Spend Money by Milton Friedman Videos

less004 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - (contd.) Increasingly, companies make use of bonuses, share options and tax-free "incen tives", (the workers only incentive seems to be staying alive). In Britain, the bottom band of income tax is being removed. VAT (sales tax) is a flat tax - the poor pay the same rate for necessities as the rich. Finally, although estimates show that far more revenue is lost through income tax evasion than benefit fraud, far more resources combat benefit fraud than income tax fraud. Wonder why?

jamo387 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - The income tax should be abolished. Part of the Federal reserve Banking scam. No coincidence that they both came into being in the same year: 16th amendment Feb. 1913 - tax on income without apportionment, Federal Reserve Act, December 1913 - by the same "bought and paid for" congress and president. The IRS is merely a collection agency for the fed - a privately controlled, unaccountable bank responsible for devaluing our currency through inflation and fiat money distribution.

AAAAnya Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - so annoying i cudnt hear neting @ d end of d tape..

samraw22 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - ok so i've just listened to this guy speak on a few of his videos and i thought for a start that he was making a lot of sense...but now he's gone and ruined it by making some pretty dumb statements...seriously, does he think all people spend their own money well? what about people who spend half their paycheck on alcohol and cigarettes?and does he think that ALL politicians dishing out welfare are self-interested? a tad cynical don't you think?This guy is out of touch

littleredbirdy Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - Brilliant lay out by one of my favorite economists to ever live.

Seiku Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - Are you saying that someone who buys alcohol or cigarettes isnt a careful with their money? Come now, those who choose to do so, do it because they feel they can without consequence to others. Certainly my family buys alcoholic drinks and we don't burn our cash on it. There are obvious exceptions but its usualy because the individual has personal problems. Also all politicians 'mean well' but not always spend well. Those are two different things. Look at the government spending records.

samraw22 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - Well he may be a great economic mind, but this DOES NOT mean he is a great political mind. A strong economy in no way guarantees that all people will be treated ethically and enjoy prosperity - whether by choice or circumstance.

samraw22 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - I don't think you understood my example as I intended it. The person who buys a packet of cigarettes each day buys them because they feel they need them. To a person who doesn't smoke, this person is wasting their money.What I'm trying to point out is that people who make assertions like "individuals know how to spend their own money best" usually are better educated or in a better position to judge how to spend money. The reality is - many people DON'T know what is best for them.

Seiku Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - They are in a better position to judge how to spend the money. Regardless if its good or bad for them. They traded their time and energy to get the money in order to get those simple items. We don't always make the best choices, I buy alot of junk food.I believe Milton is trying to get us away from that philosophy. The idea that someone else, like a leader or politician, must decide or knows whats best for everyone else. And that person must use force to get the money in order to "do good".

Seiku Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - I believe that with a strong and prosperous economy there is the ability to provide for everyone. At the current economic state there is alot of strain on the welfare systems. This causes unrest with the people and leads to blame, racism/scapegoats, violence, crimes etc. So I feel that a good political leader in high positions should have a good understanding of economy. I hate the idea that they get their advice from other unknown individuals we never elect.

Seiku Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - (I mean advisors etc, sorry)

samraw22 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - I understand your side of the argument - you would argue we don't have liberty in spending our hard-earned money. I agree we need choice, but only to a point.If we are to live in densely populated societies, as the majority of the world lives in today, we NEED organisation and co-operation, which in turn ALLOWS for certain freedoms - freedom from violent crime, freedom of knowledge - theses things REQUIRE everyone to "chip in" as it were.Your taxes buy you more liberty than you realise.

samraw22 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - Yes I agree that our democratic system has flaws - for instance we vote for people behind the scenes, and for parties who instate laws we don't agree with. That problem has never been solved.I also agree with you that a prosperous economy can provide for everyone, but I don't agree this would happen if we gave every individual COMPLETE freedom over their wealth. Human nature and our inate tendencies are too self centred. We need to rise above our "Survival of the fittest" evolutionary past.

Seiku Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - Well I'm not against taxes, just social controls.

zardozcs Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - samraw22: "Human nature and our inate tendencies"Definitions, please, what is human nature?What are our innate tendencies?To me, human nature is our ability to think and exercise our free will.And I don't think there are any 'innate tendencies'. Do you mean innate since birth? Pre-programmed tendencies which we have no power to override? Then that's not free will.

samraw22 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - Yes, I do mean "innate since birth". Innate MEANS "Since birth". Humans also have culturally learned tendencies too.I'm not going to make a list of these human tendencies. But sufficed to say, we have evolved from ancestors who had tendencies such as self-preservation, selfishness, and the desire to reproduce. This is because these tendencies made these ancestors more successful than their counterparts, and therefore more likely to pass on their genes (aka their traits/tendencies).

samraw22 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - And yes, I agree with you that a big part of being human is our free will. But underlying that free will are our subconscious desires and tendencies that we inherited from our successful ancestors. What I'm saying is that now humanity has reached a point where we know this fact and can have a reasoned discussion about it. We can realise that we are innately self-serving and selfish, but that for society to operate, these tendencies aren't practical. So we should transend our evolutionary past.

samraw22 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - And just one further comment - because I realise that my last two comments may sound pretty cynical. I don't have a completely negative view of the human psyche. I realise we also have tendencies/traits such as compassion, love, etc. But to bring it back to what the discussion originated from: I don't think many people, given the chance, choose to help others in society. No matter how much personal wealth they have. So I think taxation and some controls are necessary for justice in society.

zardozcs Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - samraw22: Interesting. Thanks for posting. Still don't agree that any of those are 'innate tendencies' as opposed to something we've learned. Where do subconscious desires come from if not our habituated conscious choices. But then I think what most people call selfishess is only irrationality and I think that reasoned self-interest is a virtue. If you think people are evil and must be forced to be good where do you find the people good enough to use force wisely?

juury Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - Good, idea. Let's just keep all of our money to ourselves and then see what happens. The person with the most money wins! Everybody is happy! Right?Oh...and the poor are just poor because people are spending their hard earned tax dollars on frivolous things like education. Everybody for themselves!aaaannnnddd....GO!

Aika24 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - The American Public School System is a bastion of success on how to spend other people's money isn't it? What with 30% drop out rates, rising illiteracy, and a population, fucking dumb enough to re-elect George Bush.

TimeWarp66 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - You didn't understand this video at all "juury."

TimeWarp66 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - What are we sheep to you samraw22? "I don't agree this would happen if we gave every individual COMPLETE freedom over their wealth."who is "we"? The collective hive mind of humanity? Or the government? I take it you mean the government. The government has no right to reach into your pocket and steel from you every April 15. Or any other time for that matter? Do you think the government knows what is best for you? Knows what to do with your money better than you do?

TimeWarp66 Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - There is no such thing as a 'society" there are only individuals. When individuals are taxed half to death by this well organized mob we call the government, it makes them less likely to be charitable in the first place! Look at the 1920's in the U.S. No social safety nets, and so many private charities sprung up. I don't know what makes you think, if the government doesn't do it, no one else will? And where do you find these angels that are going to organize society for us?

danthemango Says:

Oct 14, 2008 - he is absolutely right when he says when you have money you have power, it doesn't mean that everyone has the same amount of power. Anyone should know, particularly through the example of hollywood, that production doesn't try to give to the masses what they want, but what sells the best, and that is usually to the few of society.