Milton Friedman: You Can Only Aim at Equality by Giving Some People the Right to Take Things From Others

“A society that aims first for liberty will not end up with equality, but it will end up with a closer approach to equality than any other kind of system that has ever been developed. Now that conclusion is based both on evidence from history, across history, and also I believe on reasoning which, if you try to follow through the implications of aiming first at equality, will become clear to you. You can only aim at equality by giving some people the right to take things from others. And what ultimately happens when you aim at equality is that A and B decide what C shall do for D. Except that they take a little bit of a commission off on the way.” - Milton Friedman Source: Common Sense Capitalism YouTube channel.

Translated by Jadranko Brkic. Freedom and Prosperity TV http://www.freedomandprosperity.tv/en

Transcript

Student:

You say that you believe many people in America believe in your definition of freedom. Freedom from coercion. And I might agree with you. But I also believe that many people in America believe in different kind of freedom. And that is freedom to well being. A certain level of standards for housing, at a good price, education, etc. The other thing I want to say is that the system has built into it that the poor remain poor and rich remain rich, and that is an externality of the system.

Milton Friedman:

It is not built into the system at all, it has never been true. It is simply false. If you look at the evidence, there is enormous amount of mobility from one class to the other. In fact, there used to be a saying: three generations from shirt sleeve to shirt sleeve. Which reflected exactly the opposite of that. No, it simply is not built into the system. On the contrary, there is a great deal of mobility within generations and between generations, and we shouldn't argue on the basis of false factual premises.

Student:

That mobility, aaa... Well, let me continue, because I’m not sure it really has an effect on the question. Because it is not immediately easy to become in the wealthy class, there are certain parts of the system which make that virtually impossible for the real person. I believe that this freedom too represents the belief in equality as opposed to liberty. And I wonder is it possible to build a system based on this equality, which I think that many people agree on and would not be willing to sacrifice to the liberty of freedom from.

Milton Friedman:

I'm not going to be able to give full answer to your question, because you've asked a very very complex question, and so you are going to have to pardon me if I am a little dogmatic, but I only want to suggest that statements I'm making are not without some thought and reason behind them. In my opinion, a society that aims for equality before liberty will end up with neither equality nor liberty. And a society that aims first for liberty will not end up with equality, but it will end up with a closer approach to equality than any other kind of system that has ever been developed. Now that conclusion is based both on evidence from history, across history, and also I believe on reasoning which, if you try to follow through the implications of aiming first at equality, will become clear to you. You can only aim at equality by giving some people the right to take things from others. And what ultimately happens when you aim at equality is that A and B decide what C shall do for D. Except that they take a little bit of a commission off on the way.