Donald Trump just broke the stock market | POLITICS NEWS



investors have opened up a can of blue pass on Donald Trump after he opened up a can of dumbass on them Trump decided to date to further escalate his idiotic trade war which has harmed the US economy at least as much as it's harmed the Chinese economy as a result the smart money is fleeing the stock market with the expectation that Trump's gibberish policies are sending the market toward a crash the Dow Jones Industrial is currently down around 550 points at the time of publication and was down more than 700 points earlier this afternoon Wall Street is sending a loud and clear message to Donald Trump knock off the trade war nonsense but Trump doesn't seem to be getting the message he spent all morning posting tweets which incorrectly characterized what a tariff is and who pays it then this afternoon after investors kicked him around Trump told the television cameras that this is all somehow part of his genius plan to defeat the Chinese economically Trump needs to be careful here because he's doing the one thing that actually could cause the Republican establishment to finally turn against him for Republican politicians the first rule is that you don't mess with rich people's money billionaires and mega corporations fund Republican politicians for the sole purpose of protecting their ability to keep getting richer with his nonsensical tariffs and idiotic trade war Trump is setting wealthy donors money on fire will soon see those donors use their Republican puppets in Congress to loudly push back against Trump's tariffs and what will trump do

Jeff Bezos: Leadership, Principles and The Future (2018)



well ladies and gentlemen welcome to historic Moody Coliseum in to the forum on leadership closing conversation with Jeff Bezos I hope you're glad to be here my name is Brad cheves and I serve as vice president for development External Affairs here at the University and SMU is honored to co-hosts this afternoon's closing conversation with the Bush presidential center and I'm so glad so many of you are able to join us this evening this has been a great week for SMU and the bush Center and we know tonight will be a fantastic conversation thank you for being here and now please join me in welcoming to the podium the tenth president of SMU dr. R Gerald Turner Thank You Brad and I'm too delighted to have all of you here this is the kind of event that we envisioned when we were talking to the bushes about having the library here that for big events moody Coliseum would be the perfect place I'd take an advantage of this opportunity also for us to take a moment to acknowledge the loss all of us feel in our country feels for the passing of miss Barbara Bush and the words of her son George W Bush Barbara Bush was a fabulous first lady a woman like unlike any other who brought love and literacy to millions that's why we have our white ribbons on as Laura said signifying her hair and those three strands of pearls so would you join me for a moment of silence in honor of a memory of Barbara Bush thank you tonight not only marks the conclusion of the bush Center's inaugural forum on leadership but it also occurs on the fifth anniversary of the dedication of the George W Bush presidential center which includes the library the museum and the George W Bush Institute our pride in being home to the George W Bush presidential center as we would say at SMU its unbridled it's been ten years since SMU was announced as the home of the George W Bush presidential center in that time SMU is partnered with the President and First Lady on initiatives that have truly enriched the lives of countless students faculty and staff several programs have benefited from the experts and unique resources available at the bush center over a hundred students have interned there dozens of faculty members have participated in programs and studies and of course our students and our faculty members and their families regularly visit the museum to learn from the holdings and the special exhibitions following the dedication of the center in April 2013 over 1 million people have visited the library and museum many walking the SMU campus for the very first time the president didn't graduate from SMU but he did the next best thing he married in and we were always proud of the fact that Laura graduated from SMU and is a member of our board of trustees and the president drops in to various classes from time to time in fact to last week at any time there's that he's on campus when they see those SUVs with a dark window circling then the texts start flying because they know that he's going to be speaking somewhere and obviously it's wonderful to have them here for so many basketball games he is greeted every time with www and I'm sure the players enjoy it too because they want to shake his hand so tonight is very special for the entire SMU community in honor of this occasion the Board of Trustees passed a resolution commemorating the 10th anniversary of SM use resin selection as the site and the fifth anniversary of its opening we have those resolutions out in the lobby that if you didn't see them on the way in hopefully you will on your way out so on behalf of the SMU community we again think the president mrs. Bush and the bush selection committee that was chaired by Don Evans for the unique honor it's been to collaborate with the Bush presidential center for the past five years the partnership makes us both stronger at this time I'm pleased to introduce two graduates of Princeton the old guy an 85 graduate Ken Hirsch president and CEO of the bush Center and an 86 graduate coming along right behind him Jeff Bezos founder and CEO of Amazon so please join me and welcome them to SMU [Applause] well Jeff welcome to Dallas I'm excited that you can see what a city that really wants you here looks like right guys [Laughter] sorry that was too tempting so I I've left 30 seconds here and just in case there's a little real estate deal that you want to it's very nice to be here all right I tried I tried the before we get started I do want to I do want to thank the sponsors tonight Amarillo National Bank and Highland Capital Management this is a multi-faceted event we're here with SMU our great partner we're here as the engage event sponsored by Highland capital and we're also here is the culminating conversation of our forum on leadership and this has been a great couple of days with Bono Priscilla Chan governor Hickenlooper Martinez Ben Bernanke Hank Paulson many others and condi rice and president mrs. Bush talking about leadership so I want to talk about leadership yeah and the the first thing to really talk about is to I want to take you back to to the beginning and in 1995 you started young you went public in 97 and I'll adjust for stock splits but you raised stock you rate you issued shares at a dollar fifty a share in 1988 your revenue was six hundred million dollars and you lost 125 million but your stock had gone to $55 a share so you doubled down sales went up threefold you lost another four hundred million but your stock went up to seventy six dollars twenty seven billion dollars of market cap your personal net worth of nine billion take us back to that time where the market is telling you you're doing great but you have red ink in the company you took on two billion dollars of debt from 99201 while you tripled while you doubled sales yet again what were you thinking back then well that's a great great question and it is kind of fun to go back and think about those days you know in those days when we had I don't know when I started the company and it was just one person and then there were ten people and today there are almost 600,000 people so there's a lot of chain but back in that time we were still pretty small company by most standards but we were we were growing fast and it was very exciting you know I had when I started I was driving all the packages through the post office myself I knew the UPS guy so well that he would let me in even like five minutes after closing so it was you I hoped one day we'd be able to afford a forklift it was that kind of operation we were so inefficient with our operations and logistics in those early days when there were just 10 of us that I didn't have packing tables we were packing on the floor on our hands and knees and I said to one of the software engineers who was packing alongside me you know we should do we should get knee pads and he looked at me like I was the dumbest guy he'd ever seen in his life and he said Jeff we should get packing tables and we next day I got packing tables and it doubled our productivity and so but by then the error you're talking about we had we'd gone public and you're riding on a split adjusted basis it's a dollar fiftieth share in today's terms and the market became very quickly a kind of an internet bubble kind of market and the stock prices went up very very high when I raise the initial funding for Amazon I had to talk to 60 prospective investors to raise a million dollars and I raised a million dollars from 22 different investors $50,000 at a time and they got 20% of the company for a million dollars and that was in 95 but just three years two or three years later you know Stanford MBA with no business experience could raise twenty five million dollars with a single phone call if they had a internet business plan so the whole thing in just two or three years the excitement really as we could shortly see when the bubble burst in the year 2000 the hyperbolic excitements about the internet had infected everybody and I I was I knew that there was that we had a fun I liked our business and I liked the fundamentals of our business but I also knew that the stock price was disconnected from what we were doing on a day to day basis and so I was always preaching we would have All Hands meetings and there was a small number of employees at that time but you know probably let's see in 97 I think we would have had a few hundred employees we have All Hands meetings and I would said look you know we ought to remember the great quote from Benjamin Graham that in the short run the stock market is a voting machine in the long run it's a weighing machine so don't think about the daily stock price who's going up every day whose stock price is going up and I didn't want because all the employees had stock options and I didn't want them counting their success that way and so I would say look when the stock is up 30% in a month don't feel 30% smarter because when it's down 30% in a month then you're gonna have to feel 30% dumber and it's not gonna feel as good and it was good that I kind of laid that groundwork because you know sure enough in the year 2000 the whole thing came tumbling down I think Amazon went back that's six dollars went down to six dollars and that I don't even know if that's on a split adjusted basis I think that's probably that was below I was on a split adjusted basis probably below $1 so and you never doubt the business model at that point no so I you know it's very interesting to me because I had all the internal metrics on you know how many customers we had what was going on I could see people thought we were losing money because we were selling dollar bills for 90 cents you know we were very clear that we were not we were we had high fixed costs and but we had contribution margin positive contribution margin and I just knew that it was a fixed cost business and as soon as we reached the sufficient scale we would have a very good business and so that was that understanding the fixed nature of our expenses relative to physical world retail is what led us to have the get big fast strategy we knew that it would be that our economics would be very much improved if we could have a sufficient scale so we worked hard so so at that time you're you're preaching the benefits of e-commerce and ass and really yeah this intermediating the business so fast-forward to today now we have content we have physical Amazon stores we have Amazon cashier les stores yeah which we used to call shoplifting and and then now you shoplifting without the jail time that's right and then and then and then buying whole foods here for a Texas company so how does that how does that fit together your vision and then how do you manage these disparate businesses with different cost structures now yeah well maybe just finishing up a little Oh in that prior point before I answer that question I and and also with you know the memory of Barbara Bush in all of our minds I I think part of if you're in a lot of people in this room are entrepreneurs start their own businesses done various things taking risks of various kinds and I think the one of the precursors one of the foundational things to being able to take risk is to have had some kind of support from somebody you have to have some mentors you have to have somebody who loves you these are the kind of things that build up and allow you to kind of you know jump off into uncharted terrain and do something new because you know you have a support system of one kind or another and and I'd certainly did so I for me I just want to point out that I feel very strongly that there's a well I've won a lot of lotteries Amazon is one of the lotteries that I've won but I had a big lottery with my parents my dad is a Cuban immigrant he came here when he was 16 years old and speaking in English my a great guy and my mother had her had me when she was seventeen years old so she was a pregnant 16 year old in Albuquerque New Mexico in high school which was not cool and she made it work and heard her parents my grandparents helped her with that whole thing and made made that all work and if you don't get that kind of support somehow it doesn't have to be your parents sometimes people get lucky it's a grandparent or it's a friend or a feeling friend or a teacher it can be somebody but you need that somebody has to step into your life and that's the lottery that I suspect a lot of people in this room have also one just like me so the question go Amazon go and all that as we do so many different things so this is the question I started get how can you do so many different things why don't you stick to the knitting the kind of traditional advice would be to stay focused and keep the business simple and the way I think about this is we actually do stick to one thing it's just not described it's not the businesses so if we do web services which is you know big enterprise is buying compute services from us and we have our retail business and we have Amazon Studios which is making original content Amazon go the things you listed so but the cultural thread that runs through all these things is the same we only have a few principles of the Amazon kind of core values that we go back to over and over again and if you looked at each of the things that we do you would see those run straight through everything so the first one and by far the most important one is customer obsession and we talk about it as customer obsession as opposed to competitor obsession and I have seen over and over again companies talk about that their customer focused but really when I pay close attention to them I believe they are competitor focused and that's just a completely different mentality by the way competitor focus can work but I don't think it works in the long run as well as customer focus for one thing once you're the leader if your whole culture is competitor obsessed it's kind of hard to stay energized and motivated if you're out in front whereas customers are always unsatisfied they're always discontent they always want more and so no matter how far you get out there in front of your competitors you're still behind your customers so they're always pulling you along so customer obsession is a deep principle that underlies everything we do another one is eagerness to invent so we love to pioneer and when we have done by the way whenever we have tried to do something in a kind of me to fashion we have failed at it we need to have something that is differentiated unique something that customers are going to like that we're kind of leading with so that's another element that works for us and then another one is long-term thinking we are willing to to take some time and be patient with our business initiatives and that runs through everything so a lot of our competitors might have two to three year kind of timeframes and we might have more of a five to seven year sort of timeframe and then the last one operational excellence so literally you know how do you have high standards around you know identifying defects fixing defects at the root all those kinds of things that lead to what I think also can be in a simpler way just stated as professionalism that you want to do things right just for the ritz sake of doing them right so let's talk about that with a with another I guess this is a corollary now that you have about 600,000 employees I calculated you're adding about 250 people a day you've mentioned that you're trying to fend off day – yeah and you've said that day two is stasis followed by irrelevance followed by excruciating ly painful decline followed by death yeah that's why it is always day one yeah yeah how's that work well so day one and this is a phrase that we use at Amazon all the time I've been using it's in my first annual shareholder letter from 20 years ago and we stay it's always day one and it needs to be day one for the reason that you just mentioned and how do you it so the real question for me is how do you go about maintaining a day one culture you know it's great to have the the scale of Amazon we have financial resources we have lots of brilliant people we can accomplish great things we have global scope we have operations all over the world but the downside of that is that you can lose your nimbleness you can lose your entrepreneurial spirit you can lose your that kind of heart the the that small companies often have and so if you could have the best of both worlds if you can have that entrepreneurial spirit and heart while at the same time having all the advantages that come with scale and scope I think think of the things that you could do and and so how the question is how do you achieve that the scale is good because it makes you robust you know a big box or can take a punch to the head the question is you also want to dodge those punches so you'd like to be nimble you want to be big and nimble and I find there are a lot of things that are protective of the day one mentality I already spent some time on one of them which is customer obsession I think that's the most important thing if you can and it gets harder as you get bigger when you're a little tiny company so you're a 10 person startup company every single person the company is focused on the customer when you get to be a bigger company you've got all the milk you've got middle managers and you've got all these layers and the those people aren't on the front lines they're not interacting with customers every day they're insulated from customers and they start to manage not the customer happiness directly but they start to manage through proxies like metrics and processes and some of those things can become bureaucratic so it's very challenging but one of the things that happens is the decision-making velocity slows down and I think the reason one of the reasons that that happens is that people also junior executives inside the big company start to model all decisions as if they are heavyweight irreversible highly consequential decisions and so even two-way doors you could make you make a decision it's the wrong decision you can just got back through the door and try again even those reversible decisions start to be made with heavyweight processes and so you can teach people that these pitfalls and and and traps and then teach them to avoid those traps and that's what we're trying to do at Amazon so that we can maintain our inventiveness and our heart and our kind of small companies spirit even as we have the scale and scope of a larger company so six hundred thousand people small company which that's a that's a trick so I know the bush Center we focus on leadership and I know that you're also a voracious reader and you're fond of a book by now seem to leave called the Black Swan yes sure and it's it's about humans tendencies to reduce thing to anecdote reduce things to anecdotal stories and to shield us from sort of the randomness of the way things actually have building narratives and and how could we human they'll to create a narrative around anything to connect any sequence of facts we can create a narrative so how do you infect that throughout the whole organization when you have that many that many layers well I think what I would say about that it's really a little different from the way that that black swan talks about anecdotes the way you're talking about but I'm actually a big fan of anecdotes in business not building a narrative structure around them necessarily but I still have an email address that customers can write to I see most of those emails and I don't answer very many of them anymore but but I see them and I and I forward them some of them the ones that catch my curiosity I forward them to the executives in charge that area but with a question mark and that question mark is just a shorthand for can you look into this why is this happening what does what's going on and what I find it strange because we have tons of metrics we have you know weekly business reviews with these metric decks and we look at our we know so many things about customers there there you know whether we're delivering on time what you know whether the packages have too much air in them and you know wasteful of packaging and so on we have so many metrics that we monitor and the thing I have noticed is that when the anecdotes and the data disagree the anecdotes are usually right there's something wrong with the way you're measuring it and that's why it's so important to to keep your you need to run it something that you were you're doing you know shipping billions of packages a year for sure you need good data and metrics are you delivering on time you deliver on time in every city are you delivering on time to apartment complexes are you delivering on time in certain countries you do need the data but then you need to check that data with your intuition and your instincts and you need to teach that to the all the senior executives and and junior executives so if you're not answering your emails can you give us your cell phone maybe a text is still have the to pizza rule and no powerpoints oh yeah the to pizza team we try to we try to create teams that are no larger than can be fed with two pizzas we call that the two pizza team rule no powerpoints are used inside of Amazon so every meeting we have that when we hire a new executive from the outside this is the weirdest meeting culture you will ever encounter and new executives have a little bit of you know culture shock in their first Amazon meeting because what we do is somebody for the meeting has prepared a six page memo a narrative lis structured memo that is got you know real sentences and topic sentences and verbs and now it's not just bullet points and it lays out and supposed to create the context for what will then be a good discussion so and then we read those memos silently in the meeting so it's like a study hall and we do that everybody sits around the table and we read silently from usually about half an hour however long it takes us to read the document and then we discuss it and it's so much better than the typical PowerPoint presentation for so many reasons I could talk about this for although nobody needs to know nobody's eating the pizza at that point because we're standing right no pizza usually at that point you know one author said that that takes you back to River Oaks Elementary School in Houston where you started where they started with a reading with a silent reading exercise I never made that connection but I you know you never know where things come from I did have a great experience there so but I definitely recommend the memo over the PowerPoint and the reason we read them in the room by the way is because just like you know high school kids executives will Bluff their way through the meeting as if they've read the memo because we're busy and so you got to actually carve out the time for the memo to get read and that's what the first half hour of the meeting is for and then everybody's actually read the memo they're not just pretending to have read that's pretty effective how has your life how has your leadership style changed over the years it's changed a lot mostly just because it's had to you know the company has changed so much and I can't you know the company is ten people or a hundred people I can be involved in every decision not just you know not just the objectives like what are we gonna do but even the methods how are we going to do it and a wedge of company gets bigger as you know the CEO or the founder whoever it is leading the company cannot be involved in all of those decisions they certainly cannot be involved in the methods of how things were going to get done so you do have to change your leadership approach as the company scales but the the but the principles of the company have not changed in fact I probably spend more of my time now on culture and studying trying to set high standards for or things the lead customer obsession and inventiveness and things like that so for me I'm I'm kind of a teacher now so it's changed quite a bit and I have this great luxury I love my job I tap dance into work even I get that I just got back for an amazing vacation in Norway I got to go dogsledding and go to a wolf preserve and all this really cool stuff but I couldn't wait to get back to work because it's so fun and the reason weather is this fun for me is I get to work in the future so my job I have very limited kind of day-to-day operational needs that you know I've constructed my job so that I don't have to be pulled into the present I can stay 2 or 3 years in the future and actually I'm I'm O's advising my senior team the people who report to me that they should organize themselves in the same way we're big enough now that they need to be able to look around corners they can't be if something pulls me into the present it's because something has gone wrong you know and we need to you know kind of fear it so it's a firefighting exercise and that's not how you should be running a business of this skill so yeah it's changed a lot ok so following up with that you were quoted as saying I believe you have to be willing to be misunderstood innovate so how are you misunderstood you're gonna do if you're gonna do anything new or innovative you have to be willing to be misunderstood and if you can't tolerate that then for God's sake don't do anything new or innovative every important thing we've done has been misunderstood often by well-meaning sincere critics sometimes of course by self-interested insincere critics but but you know I'll give you an example a thousand years ago we started this thing called customer reviews and we let customers review books we only sold books that time and customers could come in and rate a book between one and five stars and they could write a text-based review you guys are very familiar with this it's a now very normal thing but back then this was crazy and the the publishers the book publishers did not like this because of course not all the reviews are positive and the I got a letter from one publisher that said I have a good idea for you why don't you just publish the positive customer reviews and I thought about this and because and he is arguments making to me is that our sales would go up if we just published the positive customer reviews I thought about this I thought I don't I don't actually believe that because I don't think we make money when we sell something we make money when we help someone make a purchase decision and it's just a slightly different way of looking at it because people are the part of what they're paying us for is helping them make a purchase decision and if you think about it that way then you want the negative reviews too and of course it has been extremely helpful for people to have negative customer views and by the way it's come full circle now where the product manufacturers use the customer reviews to improve the next generation of the product so it's actually helping the whole ecosystem but now nobody criticizes customer reviews in fact if you were in the you know here in the year 2018 if some ecommerce company were to say we're only going to publish the positive customer views that would be the crazy thing that would get criticized so the new and innovative quickly becomes the new normal and then it's you know it's it's the new incumbent idea and then it doesn't get criticized went by the way more generally and what I preached at Amazon to all of our employees is when we are criticized there is a simple process that you need to go through which is first you look yourself in the mirror and decide is your critical right do you agree are we doing something wrong if you are change and by the way if you look yourself in the mirror and you decide that your critic as wrong as we did with the customer reviews then do not change no matter how much pressure is brought to bear do the right thing in that case as well have a deep Keil you have to have a deep teal good so why don't we shift to personal away from Amazon a little bit if if you could write your legacy what would you want your legacy to read world's oldest man as I stole that that's not original um but I would love it let's work on that I keep telling my biotech friends hurry the hell guys come on you know I don't know I'm probably if you think long term and I can talk about this great length but long term the thing if you take a really long run view you know many decades maybe even a couple of hundred years I think the most important work that I'm doing and I get increasing conviction on this with every passing year is the work I'm doing a Blue Origin on space travel well I don't what well why don't we talk about that okay because I think I think from a vision standpoint I think people should appreciate the horizon that you have so let's talk about your kind of view I'll call it your near-term objectives we'll say 75 years yeah and then your long-term objectives 100 to 300 years from there well so first of all you don't choose your passions your passions choose you and all of us are gifted with certain passions and the people who are lucky are the ones who get to follow those things and I always advise our young employees or meet with interns as well and you can have and my kids too you're gonna have a job or you can have a career or you can have a calling and if you can somehow figure out how to have a calling you have hit the jackpot because that's the big deal and most people don't ever get there you know you're very lucky if you have a career a lot of people end up with a job and so you know for me I have been interested in Rockets space travel propulsion since I was a five year old boy and I have spent a tremendous amount of time thinking about it so it's not like I really have a choice to follow this passion it has captured me but I think it's very important that we go out into space as a civilization and the reason is not the one that you that I think is very commonly there are many reasons that are there given one of the reasons that is out there and it's a very old idea one of the people who first articulated it very well was arthur c clarke he said all civilizations become spacefaring or extinct and that even may be technically true in a long run kind of long enough verizon but that idea is one of the has kind of come to be that we need to we got all our eggs in one basket and we need a plan B you know if we had a civilization elsewhere on another planet somewhere in the source system then when earth gets destroyed humanity will still be fine I find this particular argument incredibly unmotivated we we have now sent robotic probes to every planet in this solar system believe me this is the best one it is not close my friends who want to move to Mars I say I have an idea for you why don't you first for a year move to the top of Mount Everest because the top of Mount Everest is a garden paradise compared to Mars and and so it's a this planet is a gym this planet is unbelievable and as you travel around the more you travel around you the more you see how incredible it is and I'm not even just talking about nature I'm talking about the civilization we built in the urban cities that we have and all of this these amazing things and so we need to protect it now and I'm not even talking about protecting it from asteroids or nuclear holocaust or anything so although all this things are probably important and valid but we don't need to worry about that because we have something more certain that is a problem and that is if you take current baseline energy usage on Earth today global energy usage and compound that at just 3% a year then in just a few hundred years you're gonna have to cover the entire surface of the earth and solar cells that's how powerful compounding is so and by the way we have been growing energy usage at a few percent a year for a long time so and we and we our civilization has a lot of advantages because we increase our energy usage the human body if we in a state of nature if you are just an animal and the state of nature your body or metabolic rate uses about a hundred watts of power but a modern person living in a developed country you actually use your your your all in civilizational per capita metabolic rate is 11,000 watts we use a lot of energy that's about as much energy as a blue whale uses and so we have you know there are billions of us and most of us don't even aren't even really living in the kind of lifestyle of a developed country yet but they will be very soon and we hope they will be we want them to and so you're gonna face a choice and you won't face this choice and I won't face this choice but your grandchildren's grandchildren will face this choice do you want to live in a world of stasis or do you want to have a trillion humans living in the solar system because the source system is big earth is small we capture a tiny Earth surface is so small it captures a tiny tiny fraction of the solar output so once you got into space you have for practical purposes once again unlimited resources and the solar system can easily support trillion humans we've got a trillion humans and you'd have a thousand mozart's and a thousand Einsteins and so on and so on that would be a dynamic incredible civilization in which you would want your grandchildren's grandchildren to live in I think ultimately earth becomes zoned you know residential and light industrial and you know we'll have universities here and and beautiful parks and houses and but we won't have big factories here all of that will be much better done in space where we have access to much higher quality resources and so that's going to take several you know that's a multi hundred year vision and my piece of this vision is I'm taking my amazon lottery winnings and I'm converting them into reusable rocket vehicles so that we can lower the cost of access to space because right now the price of admission to do the interesting things in space is just too high if I look at what Amazon was able to do 20 years ago we didn't have to build a transportation network it already existed that heavy lifting was in place we didn't have to build a payment system that heavy lifting had already been done it was the credit card system we didn't have to build put a compute every desk that had already been done – mostly for playing games by the way and so on so all the pieces of heavy lifting were already in place 20 years ago and that's why as with a million dollars I could start this company today you know and and then there are even better examples on the internet over the last 20 years you know Facebook started in a dorm room I guarantee you two kids can not build a giant space company in their dorm room it's impossible but I want to create the heavy lifting infrastructure kind of do the hard part so that a future the future generation two kids in a dorm room will be able to create a giant space company so that's the goal and then because thank you you're not gonna you're not going to achieve the vision that I just laid out of a trillion humans living in space and having this dynamic world without a big industry made up of thousands of companies but it has to start with making the vehicles much more productive and right now you use a rock at once and you throw it away and that is just a very expensive way to do business so can I talk it in about another element with to get you to discuss your vision this may not be germane to the work you're doing but I'm but you are you are one of the great thinkers artificial intelligence yeah pros and cons we've heard people talk about the great benefits we've heard about disrupting and changing and leaving us all in a jobless society we've heard autonomous weapons or a disaster yeah where do you fall on the on your vision of we're in artificial intelligence is going to go and also some of the I think some of the more cautionary ounces and ever benefits well you mentioned a few things there each of those is worth visiting because they're different I think autonomous weapons are extremely scary I think it's a big and you'd by the way do not need general AI so right now the things that we know how to do you would you should think of those things of what is called narrow AI things like machine vision and so on to build incredibly scary autonomous weapons you do not need general AI the techniques that we already know and understand are perfectly adequate and these weapons some of the ideas that people have these weapons are in fact very scary and so I don't know what the solution that but smart people need to be thinking about that doing a lot of R&D is there is there a kind of you know multi it'd have to be a big treaty like the Geneva Convention or something that would help regulate these weapons because you yeah they're actually they have a lot of issues so that one I think is genuinely scary the idea that there's going to be a general AI Overlord that subjugates us or kills us all I think is not something to worry about I think that is overhyped I I'm first of all we don't know we're nowhere close to knowing how to build a general AI something that could set its own objectives we have no idea it wouldn't even it's not even hardly it's not even a valid research area we're so we're so far back on that one so that's a I think that's a very long-term prospect that it could even happen but second of all I think it's unlikely that such a things first instincts would be to exterminate us as it seems that would seem surprising to me maybe unemploy is much more likely it will help us you know because we know we're perfectly capable of hurting ourselves you know maybe we could use some help so I'm optimistic about that one and certainly don't think we need to worry about it today and then the jobless you know is are we gonna is a I gonna put everybody out of work I am not worried about this I find the people all of us I include myself we are so unimaginative about what future jobs are going to look like and what they're going to be you know if I took you back in time a hundred years when everyone almost everyone was a farmer and I told you know we're having where it's um big Farming convention or something and I say in the year 2018 there is gonna be a job occupation called massage therapist they would not have believed you and in fact I was telling this story to a friend they said Jeff forget massage therapist there are dog psychiatrists and I went I would probably find one on Amazigh went and look that up on the internet sure enough you can easily hire a psychiatrist for your dog and so what you know there is where we we humans like to do things and we like to be productive and we will figure out things to do and we will use these tools to make ourselves more powerful and and in fact what I predict is that jobs will get more engaging yes because you have to remember you know a lot of the jobs today are are quite routine they are not necessarily anybody's as I said before career or calling and so I predict that because of artificial intelligence and its ability to automate certain tasks that in the past were impossible to automate not only will we have a much wealthier civilization but that the quality of work will go up very significantly and that a higher fraction of people will have callings and careers relative to today so can I yet can I bring you back down to down to the president a little bit and then I'd be remiss if I didn't use some of our time on your personal purchase of the Washington Post so you buy the Washington Post a few years ago is it is it going the way you thought it would go much better much faster so the post is profitable today so I bought the Post in 2013 the post was still a fantastic institution at that time but it was in great financial difficulty it's a fixed cost business as most of all most all publishing is and their revenues over about six years from sort of 2007-2008 to 2013 had been cut in half from a billion dollars a year to half a billion dollars a year and that in a fixed cost business puts a tremendous amount of pressure on the business they were they needed to reduce the size of the newsroom layoffs reporters and and it was very difficult and Don Graham whose family had owned the paper for a long period of time he contacted me through dinner Meteor actually we and we'd known each other for almost 20 years actually and I was very surprised but he said that he was interested in selling the paper and he wanted to he I said look like I'm not the right buyer Don because I don't know anything about the newspaper business and he said we don't need into that we've got lots of people who understand this business we need somebody who understands the internet better and this was a great act of love of Don's because the paper had been their family for a long time and he cared more about the paper than he cared about his ownership of it and he's if any of you know him he's an incredible gentleman just a wonderful guy and so overall several conversations he finally convinced me that I could help and then I had to convince myself of a couple of things one was did I really believe it was an important institution and I and and that for me was a very quick gate to get through I I you know I I felt very powerfully that it was an important institution I do believe that democracy dies in darkness I think that the the paper is resides in Washington DC the capital city of the United States of America the most powerful country in the world needs a paper like The Washington Post and so it was easy to decide it's an important institution I would not have bought and tried to help turn around a financially upside-down salty snack food company you know I just have better things to do so that's why for me it was so important that it be I might buy a really well-run healthy soft food snack company that would just be an investment and so I so I that and then the second gate I had to go through after that was I really wanted to convince myself that it wasn't hopeless because if it had been hopeless you know also I wouldn't want to get involved but I didn't think it was and and and it has turned out to work for every well we did one very simple thing really which is we switched from it's been a lot of work and I don't mean to make it sound simple the team has done an amazing amount of work and we have a great editor and Marty Baron and a great publisher and Fred Ryan and a great technical leader inside lash I mean we've got a killer team at the post but the big kind of strategic change at the post was flipping it from being a fantastic local regional newspaper to being a fantastic national global newspaper and the reason we did that is very simple the internet took away so many gifts from newspapers mostly their kind of local ad monopolies and so on like the internet just solved all the gifts that newspapers had but the one gift that it brought to the table for newspapers is almost free global distribution because you can do it digitally and so we refocused on that and we have to we had to switch from making a relatively large amount of money per reader on a relatively small number of readers to a small amount of money per reader on a much larger number of readers and that's what we've that's what we've done and so in our time remaining a couple quick ones yeah who do you emulate what kind of role model Oh a bunch of people you know I have been a Warren Buffett fan in the business room I've been a Warren Buffett fan since my early 20s I read the things he writes I am so he's a very big fan I think kind of CEOs today out there that I like again in the business realm Jamie Dimon I think if there a couple CEOs that I think if I were a big shareholder in JPMorgan Chase I would just show up every Monday morning with like pastries and coffee for Jamie and I'd be like so you happy you good because I think he's a terrific executive and in a very complicated company same thing Bob Iger at Disney I think is a superb executive some probably bring him pastries so there are a lot of hello models healthy pastries well yeah I guess I hadn't thought about that you know that's right yeah but and then outside of that you know I've had lots of role models throughout my life yeah some of my teachers at River Oaks Elementary School that you mentioned I had you know I had my parents so I talked about a little earlier didn't talk too much about my grandfather but he was a gigantic influence in my life I had the great good fortune because my mom was so young my grandparents would take me every summer starting at age 4 every summer kind of to give her a break really for the whole summer so I'd be with my grandparents and on their ranch in Cotulla Texas which is halfway between San Antonio and Laredo we lived in Houston and so we would make the 5-hour drive out to Cotulla they dropped me off it's been a couple of days there that they go back to Houston I'd spend the summer and I went every day of the ranch with my grandfather to help now a four year old boy on a ranch in South Texas it's not a lot of help but I didn't know that I thought I was helping and and that is like by the time I was 16 I actually was helping so I have you know I I can I can suture up a prolapsed cow I can fix windmills my grandfather was so resourceful and that he made his own veterinary needles he would take a little piece of wire and pound it flat with a was like a oxy-acetylene torch and then drill a little hole through it and then we would do we did all of our own veterinary work some of the cattle even survived and so we had but we had great fun out there you know we built barns and welded things and he bought a d6 Caterpillar bulldozer used as like 1955 model year for five thousand dollars it was completely broken the gears were stripped and then we spent you know a whole summer repairing that the first thing we had to do to repair it was build a crane to take the gears out of the transmission and so you know what I learned from watching him was just how resourceful he was he didn't ever call a repairman he figured it out and I do think that that's one of the things that you know super lucky for me to grow up in that environment where you got to see resourcefulness in action so my grandfather giant role model from but Jeff you are you're an American icon and these stories really reflect how grounded you are and starting a company from the time where you were doing it yourself to where you are today and to maintain that touch that you have at the same time that you have this vision is really what leadership is all about the bush center we focus on developing and recognizing leadership and that's what we're doing this week our time is up and I do want to thank you I also want to remind people that in honor of our fifth anniversary of the bush Center our friends at Northern Trust have made it free of charge to go through the bush library and museum starting today and extending through next Friday so thank you for that thank you to our wonderful friends at SMU thank you all for being here please join me in thanking one of the great Americans [Applause]

Thank God for Government Waste!



but the reason I have some hope is mostly the major source I off hope I have frankly is because government is so inefficient that's the real hope if government were spending the 40 percent of our income even that it announcements efficiently I'd give up hope but thank God they waste most of it people complain about waste I don't complain about waste tell me would you people in this room really like the IRS to be spending its money efficiently now obviously in general we don't like waste but one of the effects of this is that government doesn't have as much control as you might think it would because you and the other businessmen you see you have a war you have a few hundred thousand or a million bureaucrats and you have 200 million people figuring ways to get around the bureaucrats and generally we mostly can outsmart them now that wastes our substance and makes us poorer but at least it's reserved some element of our freedom now that's a major source of hope because it gives us maneuver and it also means that the public learns that this is an efficient

Bond Market : How to Buy Government Bonds



Uncle Sam wants you well no no no not you physically but he does want your money because the US government has done a horrible job over many many years of balancing the amount of money that they bring in versus the amount of money that they spend there like a perpetual kid and that they're perpetually broke they have to fund that somehow and they do that by issuing US government bonds today's lesson is about how to buy them and I'm Roger grow if you go to your local bank or stock brokerage firm or even on to the US Treasury website you can buy Treasuries for all different lengths of maturities directly through any of those institutions it might be easier to buy them through a bank or a brokerage firm because when it comes time to sell them you can do it instantly online if you do it through the government it's a little more burdensome although fee is differ between the two and you need to look at what you're going to make after fees and after tax to be sure that you pick the right way for you to know to generate the highest after tax after expense rate of return so how do you do it go back to your brokerage firm to your bank or to the US Treasuries website and do it directly through them I'm Roger grow and thank you for spending a few minutes with me

Behavioural Economics and Government Policy (Nudge Policies)



hi everybody in this video we are going to consider the usefulness of behavioral economics teachings to policymaking behavioral economics policies can be very useful in overcoming lots of market failures that exist in society we are going to focus our attention based on that idea behavioral economics policies focus on the choice architecture idea go and watch my previous video if you're unsure of choice architecture and remember choice architecture is the idea that individual decision making can be bias or influence based on the location of something based on the placement of something or based on the way in which information is presented to us we are going to look at variety of choice architecture related policies which can influence this decision-making and get us to do whatever the government wants us to do which will improve social welfare these policies are also known as nudge policy sometimes these policies are very different to traditional what we call shove policies policies like taxes like subsidies like regulation where we don't really have the choice we just have to accept whatever the government is enforcing on us whereas nudge policies we are given essentially a nudge to do something but we still have freedom of choice as to whether we want to do that thing or not we're not forced necessarily into doing that thing guaranteed we still have choices whereas with tax subsidy regulation the shop policies no such choice exists so what kind of choice architecture policies or nudge policies can exist to influence decision making to help with policy making well let's take them one by one the first one is framing again I cover framing in my previous video what's this idea well framing is the way in which information is presented to us so maybe some policies could be improved the way in which low fat or no sugar or low cholesterol labeling is done you know is marketed so maybe that's the coloring or the size or forcing companies to in Mack that on their on their packaging whatever whereby we can see that information maybe our decision-making can be more informed and can be more socially desirable as a result maybe it's with recycling so information about how recycle material can be used for other uses if that's household I got in waste if that's plastics whatever it might be if it's calorie content on menus and the way in which that information is presented maybe it's ensuring that the information is presented in the first place maybe it's price information to encourage us to to use gyms or to use leisure centers so there are state-funded leisure centers maybe it's the government maintaining or making sure that price information is done weekly or monthly instead of it being done yearly if we see a yearly price it looks like a bigger sum compared to a monthly breakdown or a weekly breakdown at price I mean if information is framed that way we are more likely to use gyms or leisure centers to encourage more healthy exercise maybe it's nudges themselves literally ways in which we can be influenced by product placement or location so if that's a location of salad bars in canteens or in restaurants positioning them in areas where people are more likely to eat salad if it's recycled bins okay and that nudging is with the with the with the design of recycle bins or the location of recycle bins in a company let's say in a school let's say to encourage more recycling if it's to discourage unhealthy options by repositioning where they are located in supermarkets so sort of the first thing you see are our chocolate bars and doughnuts that are maybe on sale or something instead you see fruit and veg that are on sale at the front of supermarkets or healthy yogurts or something on the front so discouraging healthy options by moving their location maybe it's a designer buildings whereby you've got stairs at the front of buildings whereas the escalators of the lifts or towards the back to encourage people to use the stairs more so that's the idea of a nudge changing the location of the placement is something to decision-making to get us to do the right thing according to other government ones default choice this is where we basically off are going to be entered into something unless we opt out of it so unless we make a formal decision to opt out of the scheme we are in by default so an example of making something a default choice could be with organ donation now all the donation used to be what we call a mandated choice where we used to have to make a decision one way or the other if we wanted to be an organ donor but there are some places in the UK now that changed the way in which they look organ donation and moved away from mandated choice where people are forced to either say in or out this time to default choice when you're in unless you say you're out so organ donation to encourage the number of donors that we have of organ donation since this move has been made in the UK there have been invest an increase in the number of donors the same is true in the u.s. when they move towards a default choice way of looking at organ donation instead of mandated choice the idea of you know having an aside salad instead of an order of fries with your burger is a good way of encouraging more healthy eating if it's pension enrollment you know so you're automatically enrolled in a pension scheme so for example the teachers pension scheme you're automatically enrolled in unless you want to be out of that but you have to physically say I want to be out of it otherwise you're enrolled in automatically so think of default choices you're automatically in unless you by your own force opt out of the scheme a clever way of getting people to do things which you wouldn't ordinarily otherwise force themselves to do restricted choice literally restricting the number of choices available for a consumer so for example public smoking bans this is not a shove policy because it's not taking away freedom and choice completely but a public smoking ban restricts the choice that smokers have as to where they can smoke and maybe give them a little bit of a therefore to stop smoking the idea of location of takeaways nearby schools so maybe the government same law within a certain area take away locations are not allowed to operate so that restricts the amount of choice that schoolchildren have of purchasing food and drink and school choices literally within schools so the the choice that students have a what to consume at lunchtime so taking away things like you know fizzy drinks from from vending machines or or chips and pizzas and things from lunch menus on a daily basis restricts the choice that pupils have when it comes to eating a school lunch when it comes to having snacks at break time if it's license plate bans for example used in India used in China you know so if you have a certain number on your license plates at the end of your license plate you're not allowed to drive on that day well that gives you a note that gives you an incentive to use public transport instead it's not a complete ban of using your car but on a certain day gives you a restricted choice and it makes you use public transport the idea is that public transport is strong enough for you to use instead and as I've just explained mandated choice this is the idea that you have to make a choice one way or the other whether you want to do something so organ donation some parts of the UK still a member choy you have to decide one way or the other but recycle bins you know many councils now have got different colored bins to encourage recycling that forces a choice to be made either through that or through that or to use that bin or whatever that is a mandated choice in that respect to encourage more recycling so these are the various choice architecture related policies when it comes to an exam guides and you have a question about a given market let's say let's say recycling so policies behavioural policies to be used to encourage more recycle always think about the five choice architectural related policies that are available to you and then list for each one try to applied to recycling is there a way in which information can be framed to encourage more recycling etc etc and then you have whatever you need so have these five is your kind of Bank of policies your choice architecture policies and then always apply to another market you have in your essay but there are other sides of the item in to which you need to consider so on the other hand what are the failings one of the issues of choice architecture or nudge related policies well you can argue that they're too paternalistic is this the government going a bit too fine influencing our decision-making that's a good argument to me they're very unpredictable and costly there is no guarantee these policies are going to work at all there is no guarantee that consumers will react to let's say different locations of salad bars or you know different locations and one healthy options or public smoking bans in the way that the government wants them to react so they might not work and some of them are very costly a lot of them have big administration costs so bear that in mind and if the cost outweighs the benefit that could be a risk of government failure so the fact that they don't necessarily work and they're costly might reduce their effectiveness significantly the fact that they're based on fallacies individual fallacies and and that individuals are influenced heavily by biases people might argue that we're not actually this stupid well not this dumb we're not as individuals always going to succumb to the fallacies and biases that these policies are based on so your mom going to argue that you know the idea that people are stupid or the idea that people are dumb might be looking at people the wrong way and in fact dumbing down the idea that people are sensible that people can make rational decisions on their own you know whether that's true or not whether that makes consumers come across as a city is dumb you can argue that's an issue with such policies it is based on the idea that people are not necessarily the cleverest people that we don't consider information whether they don't make rational decisions in the way that they are supposed to and are they strong enough policies to overcome deep-rooted issues you know like addictiveness issues for example you know the problems of them of overdrinking for example the deep-rooted issues of information things are such policies strong enough to overcome those deep-rooted choose in society maybe not the deep-rooted issues of why consumers over consume fast food and sugary drink that's quite a strong idea so when it comes to evaluation what kind of points are you likely to make in your judgement or throughout your essay well you can sell your way up the costs and benefits argument are there more costs of enacting these policies than benefits using the physical cost involved and also talking about the chance of these policies failing if you're worried about the costs exceeding the benefits it gives you the government failure route to go down and maybe the argument that government should stay away from these policies especially they're not likely to have much of an important impact can you argue them any information provisions are better ideas are literally just pouring information out there if that is the root cause of many irrational decisions that consumers made if that is a root cause of under consumption or overconsumption of merit and demerit goods maybe information provision is a better way of going rather than trying to influence decision-making through these you might argue on substantial policies can you argue that maybe some shoved policies are better suited at dealing with deep-rooted market failures maybe taxation subsidies regulation are more likely to have the effect that we want them to have in overcoming various market failures as opposed to these smaller scale natural related policies in which respect many of these policies are not useless completely maybe alongside more targeted direct approaches like tax subsidy regulation we are more likely to get the socially optimum level so these are all factors to consider in a valuation when it comes to writing your judgment but here are your two sides of the argument when it comes to using behavioral economics to inform policymaking to increase Social Welfare and society thank you so much for watching guys hopefully that's very helpful now for you when it comes to writing an essay I'll see you all in the next video

How do American politics affect Canada? | Outburst



how do American politics affect Canada well we have a lot of politics that are being affected because of the u.s. so right now because of our new trade agreement with the US Canada Mexico agreement our dairy products are being affected because we lost four percent of our market share of the dairy products we also have like the automotive industry that's affected also I mean honestly the US has a big impact on our industry obviously because it's our next-door neighbor so a lot of our trades are being done with them they affect us in so many ways it affects us as much even as our exchange rate is affected by it you know difficulties crossing the border that comes to mind with the you know current legislation in Canada and the current administration you're talking about legislation wanna legislation in particular yeah that came to mind I mean international trade is huge as well I work for Canada's export credit agency so US Canada relations are always top of mind there I think unfortunately they have probably more impact on our own politics too because of the amount of an American content the media that we consume on a daily basis I think that Canadians are inherently subject to you know the the marketing intentions of media conglomerates the United States and I think you know we oftentimes distract ourselves with what's you know the bright headlines of the American political spectrum and then in Canada we don't really know what's going on so I think it you know a huge huge play in Canadian politics unfortunately

Milton Friedman – Big Business, Big Government



yes sir dr. Freeman we recently had a guest convocation speaker in the name of Jane Fonda who spoke to a overcapacity and I might say enthusiastic crowd regarding the fear of big government big business in influencing government decisions and running the world virtually and I would say that she influenced a lot of people here and although her speech might have been alarmist there seem to be quite a bit of credible credibility to it could you have some comment as far as what you feel sure there's a great deal of merit in the position she was taking one of the reasons you must distinguish sharply between ping pro free enterprise which I am and being pro-business which I am NOT those are two different things the reason I am Pro free enterprise the reason I am for a free market on a political level is primarily because I believe the problem in this world is to avoid a concentration of power to have a dispersal of power that unless we have a dispersal of power we will not be able to maintain a free society now Jane Fonda is right that if we have a system under which government is in a position to give large and does give large favors it's human nature for people to try to get those favors whether those people are large enterprises such as the oil industry or the automobile industry or the steel industry or whether they are small people like the farmers who are driving tractors around Washington or whether they are representatives of other special groups and in my opinion the only way you can prevent that and make sure that businesses operate in the public interest is to is to force them to engage in competition one with the other so that she is right insofar as she says there is a great danger of having large small and in between corporations exert undue influence on government where people like Jane fun to go wrong is it not recognizing what the answer is they think that the cure to big government is to have bigger government except with them running it instead of people in our own but in my opinion the only effective cure is to reduce the scope of government to get government out of the business if government is prohibited from engaging in activities which can benefit special groups in those special groups will not have any incentive to go to Washington for example to dream an ideal suppose we could have a constitutional amendment prohibiting Congress from making any laws imposing tariffs well there would be a lot law a lot of lobbyists in Washington who would lose their jobs overnight that would reduce the incentive for corporations to try to affect government and similarly down the line so we must separate diagnosis and problem from cure and I believe that that's the area in which she is likely to mislead the public I want to say one more thing if you've got a choice between big government and big business there's one important difference no big business whether it be General Motors or US Steel or any other can get $1 from you unless you voluntarily pay it off and think you're getting your dollars worth in return General Motors cannot send a policeman to take money out of your pocket it can only get money from you in so far as it can produce a product that you think worth buying it may indirectly get money out of your pocket by operating on government to impose tariffs on foreign cars that's why we want to do that but in the market no business however they can get money from you except by providing you with something you value in return that's hardly the case with government big government can send a policeman to and take money out of your pocket whether you believe you're getting your money's worth or not that's an enormous difference it's a difference between freedom and coercion and it's a difference that we can only maintain if we keep down the size and scope in role of government thank you you

Milton Friedman – Government Regulation



you falooda might mmm little might mark everything everybody's favorite example well I'm well I may be leading with my chin on this one but I'm going to lead with it anyway 50s and 60s it is marketed in Europe as a drug to help women get through the nausea that they sometimes experience during pregnancy the Food and Drug Administration said it had been inadequately tested in the United States and for batted to be marketed in this country with the result that thousands of children were born with horrible birth defects in Europe to mothers who had used the lid amide but that didn't happen to American children because the FDA and intervened and kept that drug off the market thank God for the FDA right rum all right why this is a case in which they did save lives this was a good cake but I suppose they are equally slow in adopting a drug which turns out to be very good and very beneficial how would you ever see the lives that are lost because of that you're an FBI official right you have a question of whether to approve or disapprove a new drug if you approve it and it turns out to be a bad drug length little boy you're in the soup you're going to your name is going to be on every a table I get hauled up wrong gets to testify on the other hand if you disapprove it but it turns out to be good well then later on you approve it four or five years later nobody is going to complain about the fact that you didn't prove earlier except those greedy pharmaceutical companies that want to make profits at the expense of the public as the saying goes everybody will say and so the result is that the pressure on the FDA is always to be late in approving and there is enormous evidence that they have caused more deaths by bitter they're late approvals than they have saved by their early approvals so your view is abolish the FDA absolutely and what comes up when comes always is it's in the self-interest of pharmaceutical companies not to have these bad things do you think the manufacturer thalidomide made a profit out of the letter mine I see and you have to have people should be responsible for harm that they do it should have been pumped so tort law it takes care of a lot of this absolutely all right if I if Lily or Merck or somebody else comes up with a drug that does me harm they have I go after them I do it join a class action with everybody else who's taken that pill and we sue them for billions of dollars and wipe out their shareholders equity absolutely and then that they have every interest to be extremely rigorous in testing that drug before they make it available they may give you a different Oracle the rules imposed on on Airlines for safety suppose who has a most interest in preventing airline accidents after the passenger themselves the airline's well it's not even clear that the Predators have more enters from the airline all right because included in the passengers are the pilots right of course why is the government going to improve airline safety how are they going to do it how do they add any incentive to anybody to improve airline safer recent years it was very tough for a dieter to pick up a package in the grocery store and figure out what the ingredients were what the carbohydrate content is the fat calories and so on and so forth so the government imposes quite modest rules for posting the nutritional values on packages in the grocery store now you can say this has so much fat this has less fat I'll buy this now isn't that a modest and completely acceptable government intervention let's keep going all right and the government also prevents useful information from being passed on let me give you the simplest example all right aspirin we you I know and I know that a year well-advised to take an aspirin every other day to reduce the danger of heart attack right but but that's not allowed to be stated on an aspirin package on account of FDA prohibited they they control the information that can be stated on a label right now there are some libertarian manufacturers of of drugs who have proposed who've tried to push through the idea that they can put on their the thing this is what the FDA says and this is what we say choose and they are not being allowed to do it they're not even being allowed to do that so that if if customers really wanted to know about the ingredients it would be in the self-interest of the people producing it to put it on their packages those packages that had the ingredients on it would be more attractive to consumers of those than didn't but now it's always a mystery to me why people think that some experts in a Washington office who don't know you don't know me don't know our children know better than you and I do what we want to have on our packages and what we want our children to know once again on balance get rid of the FDA F get rid of these government regulation absolutely the FDA initially had the requirement to assure the safety but not the efficacy of the drugs that they approved with the so-called Keith Lauver amendments that came in as a result of thalidomide and would you brought up the FDA was expanded its mandate that it is required to assure both the safety and the efficacy of the drugs and that has enormous ly raised the cost of getting drugs of Brut I say that if you wanted to have a halfway house you could go back to the earlier standard where the FDA had to certify the safely but did not have to express a judgement on the efficacy the FDA simply ensures that pharmaceutical companies live up to the old dictum first do no harm right this pill name may not change your life but it won't hurt you therefore it may be marketed yeah okay now let me move to another case and this one this one I think is pretty tough know for a libertarian all right so you may you're allowed to take a deep breath before I hit you with this one if you want to civil rights swing ran by civil rights sip by what I mean by civil rights is to take a raw case the South under Jim Crow in the 1950s but that was a case a government of too much government even was little I thought the South in those days had relatively low tax rates relatively long ago no but then government provided for a separate it was a government that enforced separate areas for blacks and whites it was a government that enforced the law that the blacks had to sit at the back of buses those were all government laws in the absence of those government laws that wouldn't have taken place in other words when the government laws you would have had a gradual development it would have taken place somewhere and not other work and you would have and look what happened in the north where there weren't those government law right there may have been they undoubtedly don't misunderstand me there is prejudice there's no question right and undoubtedly it has bad effects on various people but there but in the absence of the laws in the south it would have broken down much faster and much earlier that's if you could cite any case for libertarianism that's it

Milton Friedman – The Proper Role of Government



the subject of the talk tonight is the role of government in a free society and I think in discussing that subject the first thing you have to do is to emphasize the very different meanings that Free has there are two quite different meanings of free which tend to get confused and which it's important to keep separate the first is freedom in the sense of the absence of coercion that's the sense in which I shall be trying to use the term the second is free in the sense of free lunch in the sense of absence of cost the two meanings are very different and there are few sources few more important sources of confusion about the proper role of government in our society than the confusion between the two very different meanings of the word free the freedom that was suggested back in the days of world war ii by franklin roosevelt when he spoke of the Four Freedoms and spoke of the freedom from want how can you guarantee one person of freedom from want except by coercing another person to provide the material means for his being free from want freedom from want involves coercion it may be a fine objective but it uses the word freedom in an altogether different sense now obviously if men are going to live in a society there is no way in which you can have absolute freedom there is a famous dictum of a Supreme Court justice then my freedom to move my fist is limited by the proximity of your chin in a society in which there are many people freedoms are bound to interfere one with the other we are bound to have and the question that we need to ask and the question that I want to talk about tonight is what arrangements in a society will minimize coercion while preserving the maximum opportunity for members of a society to cooperate with one another to achieve their separate objectives the fundamental principle that I am going to try to uphold was stated by John Stuart Mill in on Liberty over a hundred years ago the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community against his will is to prevent harm to others his own good either physical or moral is not a sufficient warrant that's the fundamental principle that I am going to take as a given as describing my own values in trying to discuss the question of what government government's role in a society dedicated to promoting freedom in that sense what its role is from this point of view the nation-state is a means to an end not an end in itself this notion that the individual or rather in our society in every society the family is a basic unit that we have responsible individuals or families cooperating one with another to achieve their objectives is in very very sharp contrast to the notion that the fundamental unit is the state that you have a nation-state and that the individual serves the individual exists to serve the state the ideal is it you shall have joint action only insofar as people have been persuaded to act together that you should have joint action only insofar as responsible individuals after free and full discussion have agreed jointly to cooperate in some venture it's from this point of view that the market voluntary exchange through buying and selling is so important as a basis for a free society the market has the enormous virtue that it enables you to achieve voluntary cooperation to achieve unanimity without conformity everybody can do his own thing everybody can go to the store and buy what he wants to buy however there are some items where it is not feasible for everybody to do his own thing there are some cases in which you must have uniformity some cases in which the answer must be the same for all the people the most obvious example is in the case of national defense there is no way in which some people in a country can be engaged in an international war and other people in a country can be not engaged in that war the decision whether the country is at war is a yes or no decision that must be the same answer for all ideally the ideal would be that we should not engage in such joint activities unless we have first achieved unanimity but it is clear that that's not a feasible ideal it is clear that you cannot in a changing world subject to problems that come up from time to time that you cannot afford the time that would be required in order to get everybody jointly to agree on the same course of action and hence all of us who have lived in these kinds of societies all societies of this kind have been led to adopt something short of unanimity a majority rule as an expedient for reaching those kinds of decisions which require conformable I let me stress that the majority rule in that concept context is not a principle it's an expedient people generally are inclined to equate democracy with majority rule I believe that is a great mistake there is nobody who believes in majority rule as an absolute there is nobody who believes that if 51% of the people should vote to shoot the other 49% that that would make it okay and our society in particular is is erected on the notion that minorities have rights and not merely majorities the bill of rights of our constitution was an attempt to prescribe an assurance that majorities would not rule and we are not willing to have a simple majority said as it settle everything for some purposes a simple majority will do if it's more important to reach a decision than it is what decision to reach find a majority will do but if it's something fundamental for example of foreign treaty our Constitution requires a two-thirds vote if it's something even more fundamental such as changing our basic Constitution well then we provide that you must have much more than a simple majority you must have a a qualified majority of the various states as well as of the Congress so majority rule is an expedient which we have adopted in those cases where we need conformity now the reason why this is important is because the use of the political channel for deciding issues while it is absolutely inevitable while you must do it inevitably tends to strain the social cohesion essential for a stable society no society can be stable unless there is a basic unthinking unquestioning allegiance to certain common principles if we are going to maintain a free society especially in a society in which you have why differences of customs and values and beliefs it is essential that you rely as little as possible on the political mechanism and as much as possible on the market mechanism of voluntary cooperation where each group can go its own way