Milton Friedman on Wages, unions, and the minimum wage
Am I not entitled to sell my goods or my labor for what I consider them worth as long as I do not coerce anyone to buy? Is it morally wrong for Chile to expropriate the property of Anaconda Copper—i.e., to force it to sell its copper mines for a price less than its value; but morally right for the U.S. Government to force the worker to sell his labor for less than its value to him and to his employer?
Context. From the second of two New York Times op-ed essays on the wage and price controls, October 1971, on what enforcing the Phase II pay board and price board would do to ordinary people.
Where this comes from
Checked against the sourceThe wording was checked against the work itself.
Cite this passage
Milton Friedman, “Morality and Controls: II” (The New York Times, October 29, 1971; reprinted in the Congressional Record, Senate, October 29, 1971, p. 38202, introduced by Senator Mark O. Hatfield of Oregon, who dates the two essays to “the October 28 and 29 editions of the New York Times”. The reprint heads it only “Morality and Controls”; the date is the senator’s., 1971), Congressional Record, October 29, 1971, p. 38202. https://miltonfriedman.org/quotes/anaconda-copper-and-the-worker-1971
Quoted for commentary and research. Rights in the underlying work remain with its rights holder, so cite the work itself, not only this page.
Topics
He also said
On the other hand, if I say, regardless of the consequences, it is morally wrong for a government official to force me to rent a piece of property to you for less than the price at which I would voluntarily rent it, at that point, I am now speaking as a man with values and philosophy. That is to say, you have both principle and expediency involved. The economist talks to the expediency. The philosopher, the ethicist, the human being, talks to the principle.
Context. Asked by Heffner whether his opposition to spending other people’s money is that of the economist or of the philosopher. He has just described the deterioration and abandonment of buildings under New York City’s rent control as “a straight matter of technical economics.”
The Open MindInterview, 1977, The Open Mind, hosted by Richard Heffner, Episode “A Nobel Laureate on the American Economy” (May 3, 1977)Checked against the sourceWatch itA worker is protected from his employer by the existence of other employers for whom he can go to work. An employer is protected from exploitation by his employees by the existence of other workers whom he can hire. The consumer is protected from exploitation by a given seller by the existence of other sellers from whom he can buy.
Free to ChooseBook, 1980, Ch. 8 “Who Protects the Worker?”, p. 246Checked against the sourceFind the bookThe fallacy with that argument is that it begs the real question. Why should there be laws that in effect prevent you and me from buying in the cheapest market? When anyone complains about unfair competition, consumers beware. That is really a cry for special privilege, always at the expense of the consumer. … As consumers buying in an international market, the more unfair the competition, the better. That means lower prices and better quality for us. If foreign governments want to use their taxpayers’ money to sell people in the United States goods below cost, why should we complain? Their own taxpayers will complain soon enough, and it will not last for very long.
Context. Narrating the episode, he answers Richard P. Simmons of the specialty steel industry, who has just argued that asking the government to bring cases against foreign producers for unfair competition, such as steelmakers subsidized by their governments, is no different from reporting a theft to the police.
The Tyranny of ControlTelevision, 1980, PBS, Free to Choose (1980), vol. 2, at 20:11Checked against the sourceWatch it
Think this quote is wrong, misattributed, or missing context? Report it and it gets fixed, not argued with.