If you walked into a faculty lounge in 1962 and started talking about why we should abolish the medical license or replace public schools with vouchers, people would’ve looked at you like you’d lost your mind. It was the era of "Big Government." The New Deal was the gospel. John Maynard Keynes was the high priest of economics. Then comes this short, energetic guy from the University of Chicago named Milton Friedman, and he drops a book that basically tells the world they’ve got it all backward.
That book was Capitalism and Freedom.
Honestly, it wasn't an instant bestseller. It took years for the ideas to seep into the mainstream. But by the time the 1980s rolled around, Friedman’s fingerprints were everywhere—from Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts to Margaret Thatcher’s privatization of British industries. Even today, whether you love the guy or think his ideas paved the road to inequality, you can't ignore him. He changed the "common sense" of the world.
The Big Idea: Freedom is One Big Lump
Most people think of "economic freedom" (like starting a business) and "political freedom" (like voting) as two different buckets. Friedman didn't.
His central argument in Capitalism and Freedom is that you cannot have one without the other. He saw economic freedom as a necessary condition for political freedom. Think about it: if the government owns all the printing presses, how can you print a newspaper that criticizes the government? If the state is your only possible employer, how do you go on strike or protest?
He argued that capitalism is the only system that separates economic power from political power. By having millions of different bosses and businesses, no single person or group can completely control your life. It’s kinda like a giant check-and-balance system.
What He Actually Said (It’s Weirder Than You Think)
Friedman wasn’t just a "pro-business" guy. In fact, he was often quite suspicious of big businesses because they love to ask the government for favors. He wanted a "competitive capitalism" where nobody gets a head start from Uncle Sam.
💡 You might also like: Freeport McMoRan Stock Symbol: Why FCX Is The Copper King To Watch
Here’s a quick look at some of the radical proposals he packed into those chapters:
- The Negative Income Tax: Instead of a giant, messy welfare bureaucracy, why not just give poor people cash? If you earn below a certain amount, the government pays you. It’s basically a precursor to Universal Basic Income (UBI), which is funny because many modern libertarians hate the idea, yet here was their hero pitching it back in the '60s.
- The Volunteer Army: At the time, the U.S. had a draft. Friedman hated it. He thought it was a "form of slavery" and argued for a professional, paid military. He eventually won this battle in 1973.
- School Vouchers: He didn't think the government should run schools. He thought they should just give parents a "voucher" for the cost of education and let them choose where to send their kids—private, public, or religious.
- Abolishing Licensure: This is where he really loses people. Friedman argued that requiring a license to be a doctor or a lawyer was just a way for those professions to keep competition out and prices high. He thought "certification" (a badge of quality) was fine, but "licensure" (the legal right to practice) was a monopoly.
The Great Depression: Friedman vs. Everyone
For decades, the standard story was that capitalism failed in 1929 and the government had to step in to save it. Friedman flipped the script. Along with Anna Schwartz, he argued that the Great Depression wasn't a failure of the free market; it was a failure of the Federal Reserve.
He claimed the Fed sat on its hands while the money supply shrank by a third. Basically, they let the engine run out of oil and then wondered why the car stopped. This was a massive shift in how we think about "monetary policy." Instead of the government spending more money (fiscal policy), Friedman wanted the central bank to just keep the money supply growing at a steady, predictable rate.
Why People Get Him Wrong
You'll often hear critics say Friedman was "heartless" or only cared about the rich. If you actually read the book, it’s clear he was obsessed with the "little guy." He genuinely believed that the free market was the best way to help minorities and outsiders.
Why? Because the market is "colorblind." A shopkeeper doesn't care if you're Black, white, or purple; they care if your money is green. In Capitalism and Freedom, he points out that it’s usually government regulations—like minimum wage laws or licensing requirements—that end up hurting the poorest people by making it harder for them to get a foot in the door.
👉 See also: Why The New York Times Logo Almost Never Changes
The Chilean Controversy
We can't talk about Friedman without mentioning Chile. In the 1970s, some of his students (the "Chicago Boys") helped overhaul the Chilean economy under the dictator Augusto Pinochet.
Friedman was hammered for this. People accused him of supporting a tyrant. His defense was consistent: he believed that by bringing economic freedom to Chile, they were planting the seeds that would eventually destroy the dictatorship and bring back democracy. Was he right? Chile did eventually return to democracy, and it became the most prosperous country in South Latin America, but the human cost under Pinochet was horrific. It remains the biggest "asterisk" on his legacy.
Is He Still Relevant in 2026?
We are living in a weird time. On one hand, you have the "new Right" and the "progressive Left" both calling for more government intervention, tariffs, and industrial policy. It feels a lot like 1962 again.
But Friedman’s warnings about "neighborhood effects" (what we now call externalities) and the danger of concentrated power still ring true. When the government and giant tech monopolies start getting too cozy, Friedman’s call for a "separation of powers" feels pretty prophetic.
How to Apply These Ideas Today
If you want to actually use the insights from Capitalism and Freedom, you don't have to become a hardcore libertarian. You can just start looking at the world through the lens of "incentives" and "power."
- Question the License: Next time you hear about a new regulation or a "requirement" to enter a field, ask: Is this protecting the consumer, or is it protecting the people who are already in the business?
- Focus on Cash, Not Programs: If you're looking at how to help the poor, consider if a direct cash transfer is more effective than a top-down government program that spends half its budget on administrators.
- Watch the Money Supply: Keep an eye on the Fed. Friedman taught us that what happens with the money supply is often more important than what happens in Congress.
Friedman’s book isn't a "how-to" guide for a perfect world. He knew the world was messy. But it is a powerful reminder that whenever we ask the government to solve a problem, we are trading away a little bit of our own agency. Sometimes that trade is worth it. Friedman just wanted to make sure we knew exactly what we were giving up.
📖 Related: What Does Ted Turner Own? Why the Media Mogul Traded Cable for Conservation
Next Steps for Deepening Your Knowledge:
- Read the Source: Pick up the 40th-anniversary edition of Capitalism and Freedom. It's surprisingly short and written for a general audience, not just academics.
- Watch 'Free to Choose': This was the 1980 TV series Friedman did. It’s on YouTube and does a great job of visualizing these abstract economic concepts with real-world examples from that era.
- Compare Viewpoints: To see the other side, read The Price of Inequality by Joseph Stiglitz. It provides a modern counter-argument to the idea that free markets naturally lead to the best social outcomes.