In: Economics
what is Friedmanism?
The great irony for Friedman's fans is that the one piece of
public policy he was responsible for that was widely and
internationally adopted was one that greatly increased the ability
of central governments to collect taxes - a policy he later
repudiated in disgust.
Milton Friedman, who has died aged 94, was not the most important
economist of the post-war era - that title belongs to the brilliant
Paul Samuelson - but he was certainly the most controversial. Yet
despite his views being championed by so many politicians on the
right, it may come as a surprise that Friedman's career as a
policymaker largely ended in failure.
Given his status as a long-standing hate figure, the assumption by many of the left is that his agenda was cemented into place during the Reagan and Thatcher administrations in the early 1980s, especially Friedman's well-known view that inflation is solely influenced by changes in the money supply. But very few of Friedman's most cherished proposals were ever put in to practice. Of those that where - such as monetarism - almost all turned into failure.
The great irony for Friedman's fans is that the one piece of public
policy he was responsible for that was widely and internationally
adopted was one that greatly increased the ability of central
governments to collect taxes - a policy he later repudiated in
disgust.
Obituaries of Friedman will doubtlessly sing of his successes. But
close examination will show them to be few, and none unalloyed. For
all his high public profile - thanks to his regular column in
Newsweek and series on US television, Free To Choose, which made
him into something of a star - today no mainstream academic
economist is a monetarist and Friedman left no lasting school of
academic heirs. Even the "Chicago school" at the University of
Chicago has waned in influence, eclipsed by the mighty MIT army of
economists that followed Samuelson.
Of course Friedman is greatly respected for his theoretical work as an economist, especially on his analysis of the role of money, the importance of inflation expectations in wages and employment, and perhaps his most lasting contribution (it could be argued), the permanent income hypothesis, which suggests that households take a longer view of anticipating their past and future income than previously thought. His award of a Nobel prize in economics was richly deserved - even if he was churlish in accepting it (he said after winning: "I would not want a professional judgment of my scientific work to be those seven people who selected me for the award.
Denationalizing schooling would widen the range of choice available to parents. If, as at present, parents can send their children to public schools without special payment, very few can or will send them to other schools unless they too are subsidized. Parochial schools are at a disadvantage in not getting any of the public funds devoted to schooling, but they have the compensating advantage of being run by institutions that are willing to subsidize them and can raise funds to do so. There are few other sources of subsidies for private schools.