Kemper's article is a foundational article in consideration of economic thought and behavior of
the government as well firms. I agree Chicago school of thought, such as with Milton Friedman,
was the defining school of economic thought in the post Ford era. She notes important changes
from the Fordist era to the Post Fordist era – shifts in focus from manufacturing to finance,
national firms turning global,etc. accompanying change in economic thought. I also thought
Milton Friedman had lots to do with the influence of economic global policy as well, when it
came to Reagan and Thatcher.
I believe she explains and justifies the trend she explains, realizing the hazards of self-regulation
that was often touted by Chicago school of thought economics will demand neo-Keynesian
policy. Generally explaining much of that demand due to the failures in recent financial crisis,
she also importantly explains contrarian thinkers going back to even Milton Friedman's time. She
discusses interesting ideas by Archie Carroll, and the legal, ethical, as well philanthropic role of
the firm, Donaldson's work "Corporations & Morality", social contract between business and
society, Fama's pricing in social responsibility, and more.
While I generally agree with this article that the economic freedom promoted by Friedman and
the like can be abused and misinterpreted, I don’t necessarily disagree with everything Friedman
claimed in theory. I believe this article should of dug more into what he had to say, there was a
little bit of a limited selection of ideas he presented here.
the government as well firms. I agree Chicago school of thought, such as with Milton Friedman,
was the defining school of economic thought in the post Ford era. She notes important changes
from the Fordist era to the Post Fordist era – shifts in focus from manufacturing to finance,
national firms turning global,etc. accompanying change in economic thought. I also thought
Milton Friedman had lots to do with the influence of economic global policy as well, when it
came to Reagan and Thatcher.
I believe she explains and justifies the trend she explains, realizing the hazards of self-regulation
that was often touted by Chicago school of thought economics will demand neo-Keynesian
policy. Generally explaining much of that demand due to the failures in recent financial crisis,
she also importantly explains contrarian thinkers going back to even Milton Friedman's time. She
discusses interesting ideas by Archie Carroll, and the legal, ethical, as well philanthropic role of
the firm, Donaldson's work "Corporations & Morality", social contract between business and
society, Fama's pricing in social responsibility, and more.
While I generally agree with this article that the economic freedom promoted by Friedman and
the like can be abused and misinterpreted, I don’t necessarily disagree with everything Friedman
claimed in theory. I believe this article should of dug more into what he had to say, there was a
little bit of a limited selection of ideas he presented here.
