Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Milton Friedman's contribution to the economy
Milton Friedman's contribution to the economy
Milton Friedman's contribution to the economy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Milton Friedman's contribution to the economy
Contrasting Ethics: Drucker and Friedman
Peter F. Drucker and Milton Friedman were two immensely successful men who made a huge impact on the business world during their lifetimes. As a matter of fact, their contributions in both theory and practice are still felt today. Both men were well-educated, leaders in their field, teachers, award winners, and published authors. One noted difference, however, was their backgrounds which were vastly different.
Peter Drucker was born in Austria during the early 1900’s of wealthy parents who were both professionals. His father served in a high government position as a lawyer and economist while his mother studied medicine (Beatty, 2005). Because of their affluence and influential place in society, Drucker’s parents surrounded themselves with the intelligentsia of their day, and thus, exposed young Drucker to some of the most profound thinkers of the period. For instance, he came into contact with Freud during this period. His parents often hosted gatherings for groups of modern thinkers in which lively discussions related to the arts and sciences was the rule of the day. Being privy to the musings of such intellectuals introduced Drucker to new ideas and ways of thinking (The Drucker Institute, 2011). Such an early introduction to genius and ingenuity made him a keen observer of people and paved the way for Drucker’s educational and professional achievements. Ultimately it was his fascination with people that lead him to the field of management.
Milton Friedman was also born in the early 1900s. Unlike Drucker, however, he was born in the United States to poor parents of Eastern-European background. Instead of spending time in the company of the intellectual elite, his family s...
... middle of paper ...
...eved at http://www.nationalaffairs.com/doclib/20080708_1981632whatisbusinessethicspeterfdrucker.pdf
Friedman, M. (1970, September). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, 18-36. Retrieved at
Jennings, M. M. (2009). Business ethics case studies and selected readings. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.
Makower, J. (November, 2006). Milton Friedman and the social responsibility of Business. Retrieved at http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/005373.html.
The Drucker Institute. (2011). Peter Drucker – about Peter Drucker. The Drucker Institute.com. Retrieved at http://www.druckerinstitute.com/link/about-peter-drucker/
The Nobel Foundation. (2005). Milton Friedman - autobiography. Nobelprize.org. 13 Mar 2012 Retrieved at http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/1976/friedman.html
...Foundational Considerations in the Corporate Social Responsibility Debate’, Business Horizons, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 9-18.
In Harold C. Livesay’s Andrew Carnegie and the rise of Big Business, Andrew Carnegie’s struggles and desires throughout his life are formed into different challenges of being the influential leader of the United States of America. The book also covers the belief of the American Dream in that people can climb up the ladder of society by hard work and the dream of becoming an influential citizen, just as Carnegie did.
American success history recognizes the contributions made by two of its renowned leaders. The two are regarded as heroes despite the obvious differences between them abound. The two figures are regarded with comparable amounts of reverence even though they lived their lives in different ways. Nevertheless, both Benjamin Franklin and Fredrick Douglas gained their status through treading pathway of hard work. This paper, therefore, seeks to discuss the experiences that shaped the lives of both Franklin and Douglas. It also seeks to analyze the life of Fredrick Douglas as presented by John Stauffer. In comparing the two personalities, I will lay much emphasis on the role education played in making better the lives of Franklin and Douglas. In this regard, it is worth noting that although their education was not that formal, it shaped their lives immensely. Franklin education, for instance, came while working under his brother James as an apprentice printer during his teen years. On the other hand, Douglas’s tale is much bleaker, but it depicts the use of wits coupled with natural talent to pull oneself to a respectable stature (Zafar 43). It is clear that Franklin persuasive rhetorical skills, which came in handy, in writing and oratory skills were natured by induction to printing apprenticeship as well as a great access to a variety of books. Critiques in later years would argue his love for books and learning made Franklin become an accomplished speaker, thinker, author, and a statement. In a nutshell, access to books and love for learning shaped Franklin’s Character to a great extent.
From the late 1800s to the early 1900s, the Gilded Age was a time of American inventions and innovation. As the work place transitioned from rural plantations to industrialized cities, specialized farmworkers stood no chance against a handful of powerful businessmen. A large majority of the socioeconomic power resided in the hands of large corporations, as they dominated the economy and its workers. In Makers, Takers, and Fakers, the author specifically targets Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller who monopolized the steel and oil industries, respectively. Although the author believes the development of the large corporations during the Industrial Revolution hindered the pursuit of the individual’s American Dream, the large businesses actually set the foundation for today’s economy and offered new opportunities for success.
According with the textbook and other internet sources, Milton Friedman described in his thesis that the main goal of a business is to generate gains or profits. As a result, several business have been using such thesis as a justification for some of the decisions they made. In the case of “A Civil Action” we had the two companies contaminating the little town water with chemicals used during the elaboration of their products. The use of trichloroethylene was apparently causing some of the children of the place to developed respiratory and other cancerous diseases such as leukemia. After the death of several children, people on town began to worry about the situation and everything pointed out ...
Although most economists cannot come to agreement on the definition of economics, the preceding quote from l. Robbins, in my opinion, seems to just about sum it up. Since the beginning, when man first had to choose between hunting and sleeping, there was economics. Today economics is in everything we buy, use, and make, from the gas in our cars to the food on our tables, economics plays a vital role with the manufacture, distrubution and consumption of each. To help us better understand the economic trends, certain men have become economist. In this paper I will revisit four of the major economists’ theories. Starting with the theories of Adam Smith, a philosopher well as an economist, to the modern (relatively) day theories of Milton Friedman, a Nobel Prize awardee, we will chronologically review the theories of Adam Smith, Karl Marx, John Maynard Keynes, and Milton Friedman.
Throughout the course of history, many people have influenced the lives of the American people and the economic course of the United States. Although only a little over two hundred years old, the United States has rapidly gained its economic power through the great minds and incentives of its people. During the early twentieth century, many Americans saw the prosperity that America had to offer. John D. Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan, and Andrew Carnegie took advantage of the growth of America and helped to shape the American business, economy, and society into what it is today.
First thing let us start with a little overview of what Milton Friedman exposed in his article. It seems that the whole point of his essay revolves around one basic statement which clearly says that the only social responsibility of business is to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long it stays within the rules of the game (Milton Friedman, the social responsibility of business is to increase profit).
While finding information on John D. Rockefeller Sr., I found that he became one of the world’s wealthiest men and a major philanthropist. Several sources have confirmed it along with how he is considered as one of America’s leading business men. Rockefeller was credited as a man who helped in shaping America into what it is today, not just through the Standard Oil Company but by donating approximately 540 million dollars to charities. 35 million of those dollars went to help pay for the creation of the University of Chicago which was quickly able to rank among the world’s higher learning institutions because of him, he later said it was “the best investment I ever made.”
Gallagher, S. A. 2005. Strategic response to Friedman’s critique of business ethics. Journal of Business Strategy, 26(6), 55-60.
Peter Brimelow is a senior editor for Forbes magazine. The essay was written taken from Forbes magazine (July 4, 1994).
Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. (2013). Business ethics: Ethical decision making and cases: 2011 custom edition (9th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.
Friedman, M. (1970). The Social Responsibility of Business is to make Profit. New York Times
The article “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits” is written by a famous economist Milton Friedman. Friedman in this article implies that shareholders are the main drivers of the corporations and he believes that it is to them corporations must be socially responsible to. The goal of any corporation is to maximize profits and return the portion of these profits to shareholders for investing in the corporation. The shareholders can themselves decide which social causes to take part in rather than assigning a corporate executive to decide on their behalf. Friedman argues that a corporation must have no social responsibility to society because its only concern is the increase profits for itself and its shareholders.
The first discussion question posed was, “How does Dr. Friedman characterize discussions on the “social responsibilities of business”? Why (Jennings, 2009, p. 79)? Friedman (1970) characterized the discussions on social responsibilities as one hundred percent unadulterated socialism. Friedman (1970) characterized these discussions in that manner because he felt that a corporate executive should focus solely on making profits and not on social aspects. He mentioned how people who conduct and express themselves in this fashion are positively reinforcing and supporting the actions of individuals that have been weakening the foundational blocks of free society. Friedman (1970) posed a question which was the crux of his 1970 article “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits” where he investigated the true contextual meaning of what responsibilities mean to businesses. Friedman describes how businesses cann...