noam chomsky vs milton friedman

[keilly]

i have no friends to discuss this with, so i wanted to find a forum to let my little mind say whatever i wanted.


noam chomsky and milton friedman are boring. chomsky is super boring and friedman is relatively boring. i hate discussing economics and i feel miserable that im required to do this, but at the same time, im somehow grateful because im learning a lot of necessary information.


what do you think about these two economists?

 

[Pennywise]

Chomsky is an economist? I thought he was just a hypocritical communist.

 

[westwall]

Chomsky's a proven liar so he can say nothing that a rational person would find compelling.

 

[jasonnfree]

Chomsky's a proven liar so he can say nothing that a rational person would find compelling.

What are some of his lies? He's a little hypocrital I'll admit, being as wealthy as Mitt Romney. Anyway, on to the lies.

 

[jasonnfree]

i have no friends to discuss this with, so i wanted to find a forum to let my little mind say whatever i wanted.


noam chomsky and milton friedman are boring. chomsky is super boring and friedman is relatively boring. i hate discussing economics and i feel miserable that im required to do this, but at the same time, im somehow grateful because im learning a lot of necessary information.


what do you think about these two economists?

Chomsky's a linguist, not an economist.

 

[bripat9643]

i have no friends to discuss this with, so i wanted to find a forum to let my little mind say whatever i wanted.


noam chomsky and milton friedman are boring. chomsky is super boring and friedman is relatively boring. i hate discussing economics and i feel miserable that im required to do this, but at the same time, im somehow grateful because im learning a lot of necessary information.


what do you think about these two economists?

Noam Chomsky isn't an economist. He's a linguist. He knows zip about economics. Furthermore he's a Marxist. In fact, he's the worst kind of Marxist: He's a Maoist who defended the Khmer Rouge slaughter in Cambodia. The term "Marxist economist" is an oxymoron. Marxism is the denial of economics.

 

[bripat9643]

Chomsky's a proven liar so he can say nothing that a rational person would find compelling.

What are some of his lies? He's a little hypocrital I'll admit, being as wealthy as Mitt Romney. Anyway, on to the lies.

Cambodian genocide denial - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linguist Noam Chomsky was among the academics who attempted to refute Barron, Paul, Ponchaud, and Lacouture. On June 6, 1977, Chomsky and his co-author Edward S. Herman published a review of the books by Barron and Paul, Ponchaud, and Porter in The Nation. They called Barron and Paul's book, Murder of a Gentle Land, "third rate propaganda" and part of a "vast and unprecedented propaganda campaign" against the Khmer Rouge. According to Chomsky and Herman, Ponchaud's book Year Zero was "serious and worth reading" but "the serious reader will find much to make him somewhat wary." The two author's wrote that the refugee stories of Khmer Rouge atrocities should be treated with great "care and caution" as no independent verification was available.[12]

In the American edition of his book, Ponchaud responded to Chomsky.

"He [Chomsky] wrote me a letter on October 19, 1977 in which he drew my attention to the way it [Year Zero] was being misused by antirevolutionary propagandists. He has made it my duty to 'stem the flood of lies' about Cambodia -- particularly, according to him, those propagated by Anthony Paul and John Barron in Murder of a Gentle Land."[13]

By contrast, Chomsky was highly favorable towards Porter and Hildebrand's book, which, according to journalist Andrew Anthony in the London Observer, "cravenly rehashed the Khmer Rouge's most outlandish lies to produce a picture of a kind of radical bucolic idyll."[14] Chomsky also opined that the documentation of Porter's book was superior to that of Ponchaud's -- although almost all the references cited by Porter came from Khmer Rouge documents while Ponchaud's came from interviews with Cambodian refugees.[15]

 

[Shanty]

Chomsky is an economist? I thought he was just a hypocritical communist.

True, he's not an economist. But then, Milton Friedman was proven wrong, generally. So, comparing the two isn't that far out of line.

 

[R.C. Christian]

I'm no leftist, but I like Noam. Not everything he says, but a great deal of it.

 

[Toro]

Norm's a douchebag.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Chomsky is an economist? I thought he was just a hypocritical communist.

True, he's not an economist. But then, Milton Friedman was proven wrong, generally. So, comparing the two isn't that far out of line.

Huh?

 

[Youch]

i have no friends to discuss this with, so i wanted to find a forum to let my little mind say whatever i wanted.


noam chomsky and milton friedman are boring. chomsky is super boring and friedman is relatively boring. i hate discussing economics and i feel miserable that im required to do this, but at the same time, im somehow grateful because im learning a lot of necessary information.


what do you think about these two economists?

Chomsky is a liberal who advocates Statism. Such a point of view has failed everywhere and everytime it has ever been tried.

Friedman advocated free markets and individuality, and made his case in spades.

What's the issue???

 

[The Rabbi]

i have no friends to discuss this with, so i wanted to find a forum to let my little mind say whatever i wanted.


noam chomsky and milton friedman are boring. chomsky is super boring and friedman is relatively boring. i hate discussing economics and i feel miserable that im required to do this, but at the same time, im somehow grateful because im learning a lot of necessary information.


what do you think about these two economists?

Chomsky is a liberal who advocates Statism. Such a point of view has failed everywhere and everytime it has ever been tried.

Friedman advocated free markets and individuality, and made his case in spades.

What's the issue???

The issue is that liberals are sort of stupid. So when presented with evidence they simply deny it. "Free markets dont work". "More regulation will solve problems." Crap like that. There is no arguing with people who deny reality.

 

[SmedlyButler]

Norm's a douchebag.

What do you think o Noam?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Chomsky is an economist? I thought he was just a hypocritical communist.

True, he's not an economist. But then, Milton Friedman was proven wrong, generally. So, comparing the two isn't that far out of line.

Friedman wrong?? Someone should tell the Chinese quickly before they all get rich having switched to captialism as Friedman suggested!

 

[SillyWabbit]

i have no friends to discuss this with, so i wanted to find a forum to let my little mind say whatever i wanted.


noam chomsky and milton friedman are boring. chomsky is super boring and friedman is relatively boring. i hate discussing economics and i feel miserable that im required to do this, but at the same time, im somehow grateful because im learning a lot of necessary information.


what do you think about these two economists?

Chomsky is a liberal who advocates Statism. Such a point of view has failed everywhere and everytime it has ever been tried.

Friedman advocated free markets and individuality, and made his case in spades.

What's the issue???

The issue is that liberals are sort of stupid. So when presented with evidence they simply deny it. "Free markets dont work". "More regulation will solve problems." Crap like that. There is no arguing with people who deny reality.

So what you're saying is that if I completely deny reality people won't argue with me? I'm not sure that will work, but, what the hell, I'll give it a try!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So what you're saying is that if I completely deny reality people won't argue with me? I'm not sure that will work, but, what the hell, I'll give it a try!

only a liberal would be attracted to the idea of denying reality.

 

[jasonnfree]

So what you're saying is that if I completely deny reality people won't argue with me? I'm not sure that will work, but, what the hell, I'll give it a try!

only a liberal would be attracted to the idea of denying reality.

I don't think there's much reality in your statement. It makes no sense. where do your ideas ideas from, Ed?

 

[jasonnfree]

i have no friends to discuss this with, so i wanted to find a forum to let my little mind say whatever i wanted.


noam chomsky and milton friedman are boring. chomsky is super boring and friedman is relatively boring. i hate discussing economics and i feel miserable that im required to do this, but at the same time, im somehow grateful because im learning a lot of necessary information.


what do you think about these two economists?

Chomsky is a liberal who advocates Statism. Such a point of view has failed everywhere and everytime it has ever been tried.

Friedman advocated free markets and individuality, and made his case in spades.

What's the issue???

Where are these free markets and individuality that friedman was involved in.

 

[jasonnfree]

Norm's a douchebag.

Kind of what I thought due to his immense wealth. He plays the part of a poor college professor.