Tyler Cowen on "Why Is There No Milton Friedman Today?"

Tyler County David may be the token leftist here but I'm the token contrarians and then is perhaps a bit more dangerous all hazard the claim that there is a built-in treatment today and he's named as Paul Krugman built a treatment had a Nobel Prize Paul Krugman has a Nobel Prize Hilton treatment had a large popular audience improvement has a roughly comparable large popular audience through newspapers television and so on so there you go we have our Milton treatment yeah what are some of the differences treatment I think could have one more than one Nobel Prize has could have Coast had they allowed individuals to win more than once I think Friedman could have one of these three and Krugman I think fully deserves a Nobel Prize but I think he really only deserves one again this isn't surprising so earlier economists are more fundamental than later economist Adam Smith is for more fundamental the Friedman Friedman is more fundamental than Krugman maybe crouppen is more fundamental than David McDaniel McFadden right so as science progresses you will get economists speed more specialized and being less dramatically top tapped important Krugman is thought is important theoretically as Paul Samuelson or Ken arrow again that's actually consistent with Paul Krugman being today's and to treatment I'll suggest that he is now in terms of their popular presidents I think you can say Friedman was unfailingly polite I was a sign I find it quite interesting to watch those old videos on YouTube try to decide what a must-read been actually getting quite irritated I think I can tell I'll never know if I'm right enough but to some extent it was a facade but Friedman lived in a very polite age so someone who was kind of a appear Friedman like Thomas Schelling also extremely polite very much always gentlemen it was a gentlemanly age in good ways and in bad ways Krugman to his intellectual opponents our political opponents because less polite this is fair to say but I would say today we live in a less polite age content right partly because of the Internet partly because political power is that he should has gone up other reasons so you have a point man in a fine age and you have a less polite man and a less behind age I would say that again means Paul Krugman is the Milton treatment of today yeah what's another small difference between the two minute well Milton Friedman was a classical liberal Paul Krugman I think I would call him a leader of the progressive left this may be the fairest term but it certainly got different points of view than what Milton Friedman had we would all agree with that but again I think you have to compare the eras so think of some of the core issues of Milton Friedman communism I don't mean the treatment on communism with the capital C so much it is clearly thought of communism and it's pretty clear he was completely correct tax rates being too high they work the disadvantageous consequences of giving unions too much political privilege especially in the United Kingdom floating exchange rates whether you should nationalize industry or privatizing there's some exceptions some particular issues but pretty much I think Friedman was close to completely right about all of those things retreatment on the euro zone you never thought it wasn't kind of work he had a pretty consistent point of view and on the issues of his day he a was right and B was perceived as being right not at first and over time I think for the most part a few of you mentioned on capitalism and freedom it's very interesting if you go back and you read that nineteen six - both you look at what issues are covered for instance there's remarkably little about health care or the problems of the elderly a bit it was just less of an issue then it's hard to imagine a comparable book today from any point of view that would afford those issues so little space now let's consider what some of the big issues are today here's what four really big ones first climate change second health care third inequality and for the financial crisis probably about employment if you want now in my talk I don't want to debate these issues politically like who's right who's wrong left wing right wing but let's just say I think we can all agree let's are perceived mostly as being left wing issues whether or not they should be maybe health care should be a market issue whatever but if you ask the citizenry they're perceived as left wing issues I think even if you pull professional economists for the most part those would be pinpointed as left wing issues and even a lot of professional economists will have so much left issue points of view on they're seen as cases as market failure or maybe that the market doesn't meet some kind of external ethical standard so those are all the issues today but communism is a less big issue a lot of Friedman's issues apart because of Friedman have become less deep so we have all these big issues that are perceived as left-wing and voila what do you get you get a left-wing freedom that left-wing Milton Friedman I submit is named Paul Krugman and there you go so the parallels actually are fairly uncanny it's just a baby not all of you in the audience like those parallels I think it's quite striking if you read some of the other I don't know if you call the right-wing free market free catering market oriented classical liberal economics writers today I don't want to make this too personal but take someone who's a very smart kind of highly accomplished he may win a Nobel Prize I wouldn't bet my life on it but he has quite a good chance and that's John Gallin kay here at top schools he's in the popular I somewhat but if you just compare like the popular writings of John Taylor the popular writings of Paul Krugman again put aside who is if you agree with but who writes with more dedication more energy more insight for troop I mean come on clearly these crude crouppen wins that one great man acute brilliant guy there's an awful lot you could say on his behalf that's something textbook ever perhaps but look man if you basically gave up Bobby Krugman is kept body you might agree with thank you again not my point the point is Greg Mankiw did not think that big push to be the Milton Friedman of his generation so you could get a few more names again I'm not here to deliver some kind of writing judgment on everyone out of there but I think again when you actually compare proven to the alternatives left right center it's clearly Paul Krugman I don't even quite see him love second so this to me is interesting the main change really is the political change politeness change is less important and there you go so you might ask it will be the next generations Paul Krugman more mental Friedman I don't know I think one thing interesting when you look at the economics of Fame if you pointed this out in the 18th century he said you have a lot of periods that coin people as being very famous or very iconic and then they're followed by people who are maybe known as smart no less energetic but they don't become iconic in the same way so if you look at like an air and think there's Andy Warhol there's still a lot of people today like who paint really well maybe they paint a lot better than Warhol right you could debate that but or host the famous guy with the image on the shopping bag Jackie Dell and all that roy lichtenstein jasper johns and you are all there iconic today's American painters whether you like and more or less they're not iconic this is more of them they're more diverse they're more engaged oriented lanky sixties the Beatles the Rolling Stones Bob Dylan their iconic Rolling Stones are still together it's hilarious all right like who of today's musical groups is going to be the next Rolling Stones groups are locking out if they make an album at all maybe they make three albums they're gone there's data I'm like tracking how long groups last it's amazing and that durability drops off like there well you know maybe you to a bit of time ago is like the weakest latest runner-up - whose than experinece Jones we're not even managing Union - so you turn these corners were at some point into vacation starts all of a sudden even if a lot of town the achievers are less iconic so there's groovin today I don't think we've quite at that turning point but I actually think there won't be a next ball group and crouppen is sort of the end of that line it's interesting when you recruit men writing about freedom I'd like to have a psychoanalyst trying to shorten sail under but there's no economist who so gets up Krugman skandera's Friedman like your recruitment that link the essay in the New York Review of Books on Friedman read that piece grooving on treatment and then the Harold Bloom the anxiety and influence and then sit down with a bit of Freud and you're gonna laugh a good five or ten minutes because it's very clear what's going on Krugman like sees treatment as his rival he's afraid he as a top treatment and in terms of influence he's not even close he just differs like in what way it is proven optimal treatment is that treatment either personally or through students or through ideas so many of his ideas came to reality look at Krugman he calls them very serious people can stay afar influence than he does they're like the austere Ian's they're like the people don't listen and this to right-wing the stimulus to be twice as high go on and on whatever it is what we should do tax rates like France agree or not but we haven't done it even it the Affordable Care Act treatment preferred to doing anything but it's not really what he wanted he wanted single-payer even government provision of hospitals like the VA system so Krugman is kind of got the nut of what he wants and in that regard he's not the drill to Milton Friedman all an entire movement has got none of that because the treatment still has influence so mental treatment of today first pick Paul Krugman second pick

Channel: Mercatus Center

Views: 19,608

Rating: 4.775701 out of 5

Keywords: YouTube Editor

Id: ZDxcURE7sJs

Length: 11min 12sec (672 seconds)

Published: Thu Sep 26 2013