Friedman Response

While reading Friedman’s analysis I was struck at how one sided it was and at his inability to account for other factors outside of the rules of the Golden Straitjacket. He says that a country must accept or move toward the principals of low inflation, a shrinking bureaucracy, the elimination of tariffs and other limitations on foreign investment, the removal of trade restrictions, the decentralization of the government, removal of subsidies, and the privatizing of industries; and once enacted, the Golden Straitjacket is complete and growth can take place. Friedman asserts that “the tighter you wear it, the more gold it produces,” however; I find it hard to believe that there is only one solution to a prosperous economy. Friedman firmly believes that a country must adhere to the factors above in order to be a ‘winner’, and with the Golden Straitjacket comes success. Friedman claims that the jacket is “one size fits all,” but why can’t there be many sizes of the straitjacket? Can’t each country experiment to find the right size Golden Straightjacket that best fits their circumstances? It’s almost ignorant to assume that the key to globalization is black and white without any room for interpretation. The conditions listed above are Friedman’s “ideal” model to increase the standard of living and personal freedoms. He suggests that the Golden Straightjacket is impermeable and absolute, however he doesn’t account for the unpredictability of the markets. No matter how sound of policies and how strictly a country adheres to the conditions of the Golden Straightjacket, there will be fluctuations of the market, disagreements between countries, and natural disasters that will call for revisions in policy making, and the economy. Friedman doesn’t give these factors enough analysis and blindly assumes that the Golden Straightjacket is the solution to the economy’s ills.