Continuing…

The market does not eliminate the need for government, but it does greatly reduce the areas that government, and by default politicians, needs to exercise its influence over. Rather than enforcing the rules of the game, government inserts itself into the game when controlling economic issues. When government does get involved in the economy, it tends to necessitate conformity. The market, on the other hand, tends to promote diversity, giving consumers more choices and allowing them to acquire goods and services that the majority does not want.

The market, therefore, promotes economic freedom.

Friedman continues by comparing political power to economic power. He does not think that a fixed amount of economic power exists. After all, many millionaires can exist in a society, but it is hard to imagine many political leaders possessing substantial power in the same society (I will come back to this idea). Consequently, when economic power and political power are joined, the end result is likely to be a concentration of economic power. Conversely, when the two are separate (how possible is this?) the economic sphere can act as a powerful check on political power.

Friedman concludes chapter 1 by focusing on some examples that illustrate the interaction between the political and economic spheres and the impact of these interactions.

I am considering focusing on summarizing a text for one week and then spending the next week thinking about and analyzing the previous week’s text.