0 McKENZIE: Now, Milton, then you took us to Hong Kong on exactly that point, uh ... that here you said was a true model of market operating. Now is that really a fair description of Hong Kong?
Milton (Friedman) took us to Hong Kong. He did not take us there physically. He filmed part of his program in Hong Kong. He wanted to make a point about Hong Kong. The point he wanted to make was that it is a perfect example of a free market. It is a model of a market operating freely. He said, "Hong Kong is an example of a truly free market." He said Hong Kong was an example of a truly free market McKenzie, on the other hand, isn't so sure. He is not sure that it is an accurate description of Hong Kong.

on exactly that point To make exactly that point

here you said was a true model This is called "sequence of tenses." What Friedman said was: "Here is a true model...". When reported in the Past Tense, the tense of the statement itself changes: Here you said was a model. Few languages do this, but English does. (See F13d Limited Government 37 and F13d )

model Here, ideal or perfect example. A model factory. Also, a type or design of something. A car model.

of the market operating This is a little unfinished. He means something like "of the market operating properly, as it should be operating."

fair description A description that is accurate and reasonable. Description is the noun form of the verb to describe.

12.218905472636816 FRIEDMAN: At the moment, yes. It's not ... again, there aren't any such things as a hundred percent one way and a hundred percent the other. Everything is mixed, of course.
Friedman, however, says that yes, Hong Kong has a very free market. It is not 100% free, but in the real world no market can ever be 100% perfect. There is no such thing as a completely, or 100%, perfect market. Markets are always a mixture of different policies. Everything is mixed.

there aren't any such things More commonly, there's no such thing.

It's not — Sentence abandoned. Friedman probably started to say, "It's not perfect."

21.0089552238806 Hong Kong has a government, and it happens to be a government ... in this case there's no democracy in Hong Kong. It's run from Britain; it's a Crown Colony of Britain, and the British Governor General and so on, and Financial Secretary run it.
Hong Kong has a government. It is a colonial government. There is no democracy in Hong Kong. Britain runs it. It is run from Britain. It is a Crown Colony of Britain. There is a British Governor General in Hong Kong who is appointed by the British government in London. There is also a Financial Secretary. The Governor and the Secretary run the affairs of Hong Kong.

it happens to be a government — Sentence abandoned.

it's run from Britain. This is a Passive sentence.

run Here, to run means to administer, to manage, to govern. Note that to run has over 100 meanings! (Also see &

Governor General, Financial Secretary Titles of British officials who ran Hong Kong when it was a colony.

35.07064676616916 But the situation in Hong Kong is that there is very little government regulation of industry. There's complete free trade.
Even though Hong Kong is a colony, and even though it's not a democracy, there is still complete, or total, freedom to trade. There is complete free trade.

regulation (See F13d Limited Government 19)

43.37114427860697 There are no tariffs; there are no export subsidies; there are no restrictions on the purchase and sale of ... uh .. of monies, so that it is ... comes about as close to a complete free market as you can find in the world today, and there is no doubt that the main beneficiaries have been the low-income people, the poor people who have poured into Hong Kong by the hundreds of thousands and millions, out of Red China, and who keep on trying to get in there.
Hong Kong has no tariffs. No one in Hong Kong pays any taxes on products that are imported, and the government pays no money to businesses to help them export more products. For these reasons, Hong Kong comes close to being a completely free market. There is no other market that is closer to being a completely free market. It comes as close to being a completely free market as any market does in the world today. And it is definitely true, or there is no doubt, that the people who get the most benefit from this market have been the poor people, or the low-income people, who have crowded into Hong Kong in great numbers. Over the last 100 years, first hundreds of thousands of people, then millions of people, have left mainland China to move to Hong Kong, and they continue to try to get into Hong Kong even today.

tariffs A tax that is put on imports to make them more expensive and to protect a country's own products.

export Opposite of import, material or product that a country sells to other country. Note that export subsidies is another example of a noun modifier.

subsidies Money given by a government or organization to help people, or companies. or other organizations. The singular is subsidy, and the verb form is to subsidize. Most countries subsidize education. Our city got a subsidy to build a new sports field.

restriction Something that limits, a limitation. From the verb to restrict.

purchase Verb: to buy; noun: something that is bought. Japan purchases iron ore from China. Please pay for your purchases at the cash register.

monies = The plural of money, mainly used in formal financial or legal documents.

comes . . . close to = Is almost

there is no doubt that = There is no uncertainty, it is definitely true that.

main Most important, major

beneficiaries People (or sometimes, things) who benefit from something. Also, the people who inherit (see F13d Limited Government 37) money or property from someone. Singular = beneficiary.

low-income Here, poor, not having much money. Opposite: high-income. Low-income housing = housing for poor people. High-income families.

by the [number plural] See

Red China Old-fashioned term for "Communist China." Distinguishes mainland China, or "the People's Republic of China," from Taiwan, which is also formally "the Republic of China." In the 19th and 20th centuries, the color red was often associated with Communism.

keep on + Gerund = Continue to + Infinitive, not stop + Gerund. (Irregular verb: to keep on, kept on, kept on.) They kept on talking all night. I'll keep on walking till I get there.

72.11442786069652 This goes to Michael Harrington's question: if an industrial system, if a free enterprise system is a system in which the poor are ground beneath the heels of the rapacious industrialists he's worried about, how would he explain the success in Hong Kong, the extent to which people continue to vote with their feet to go there.

Earlier, Michael Harrington had said that a free enterprise system was a system that exploited poor people. Friedman now exaggerates — he makes what Harrington said sound worse than what he actually said. This is a kind of sarcasm. or using words in a way that makes fun of someone else. Friedman is making fun of Harrington for being too "liberal" and anti-free market. Friedman is challenging Harrington: if the Hong Kong system "grinds people down" and only benefits greedy, "rapacious" industrialists, how does Harrington explain the success of Hong Kong? And how does he explain the extent, or the large number, of people who keep on moving there?

Even though people in Hong Kong can't vote in elections, millions of people have moved there. You could say that they voted with their feet. The direction their feet moved showed what they were "voting" for.

are ground beneath the heels = Exploited, oppressed. Ground is the Past Participle of an irregular verb (to grind, ground, ground), which literally means "to reduce to small pieces or particles by crushing." to grind coffee, ground coffee, freshly ground coffee

rapacious Aggressive and greedy. Here, another example of sarcasm. Harrington probably didn't use a word this negative.

industrialists Persons who run a (usually big) business or businesses, especially large factories. Henry Ford was a famous American industrialist. Many wealthy industrialists are based in Mumbay.

to vote with their feet (Also see &) Voting is usually formal, with a paper ballot, raising a hand, or calling out Yes!/Yay! or No!/Nay! at a meeting. Here voting is used in a figurative sense of showing your choice by where you move.

continue to check = keep on checking

92.08656716417912 CONABLE: You're not asking us to make of the United States one gigantic Hong Kong, or sweatshop, or whatever you want to call it. You would acknowledge that there is a historical development of an economy, and what may be right for one stage in the development of an economy may not be right for another stage.
Conable can't believe that Friedman wants the U.S. to become like Hong Kong. For him, Hong Kong is nothing more than a gigantic, or very big, sweatshop. So if the U.S. became exactly like Hong Kong, it would be a sweatshop just like Hong Kong but much, much bigger. The U.S. would be nothing more than a gigantic, or very big, sweatshop. Conable thinks that Friedman will acknowledge, or admit, that economies change over time. Economies have a history of development. What is right, or appropriate, for one period, or stage, may not be right for another. (For example, small children used to work in factories with their parents. Some people thought this was a good system because it helped families earn a little more money, which they needed badly. By the end of the 19th century, child labor was considered cruel. Most people thought it was not right; it was a form of exploitation. (See F11 Hong Kong 29)

one gigantic sweatshop Here one doesn't really mean "1." The pattern one adjective noun is an informal American way of emphasizing something, often in the form of an exclamation: That's one cute baby! = What a cute baby!

gigantic Huge, enormous, very large. From the Latin word for giant, a real or unreal person who is much taller than average.

sweatshop (See F13D Limited Government 19)

You would acknowledge Often, as here, contrary-to-fact conditions (see &&) are used without the first part of the condition, especially if the speaker thinks the listener can guess what the condition is. Here, it might have been: If I asked you, or, If I insisted, [you would acknowledge . . .].

may be right for One of the major uses of may or might in the present or future is to express possibility. Conable is saying that what is possibly right for one period is possibly not right for another.

stage Here = period of time before or after another period of time.

111.55024875621892 Isn't the issue, where do we go from here? What pragmatic decisions do we make about the direction of the American economy. Should it be toward more and more government, or should it be trying to preserve an adequate balance between freedom of choice and government intervention?

Conable thinks the most important issue, or question, is: what do we do now? Where do we go from here? What pragmatic, or practical and common-sense, decisions should Americans now make about where the American economy should go. How should it change? Should change be in the direction of more and more government? Or should Americans try to balance their own individual freedom to make choices with increased government involvement in our lives?

The argument is between those who believe in more government rules and regulations and those who believe in less rules and regulations. Dr. Friedman is in the second group. He describes his goal as "freedom of choice." Conable uses the same words. This is a signal that he agrees with Friedman. We get a good idea of how Conable feels by his choice of words. "Freedom of choice" sounds very positive; especially in a democracy; "government intervention" sounds negative.

issue Here question, problem. Very common in business, especially the computer and software industry. issues of the day. Users had a lot of issues with that software. That's why they took if off the market so fast. Also see to issue &

pragmatic Practical, sensible, using common sense.

the direction of the American economy = where the American economy is going.

Should it be . . . . Should here expresses something like may/might (see above) but with more sureness, more certainty. It may (or might) rain tomorrow =There is some possibility that it will rain tomorrow. It should rain tomorrow. = It probably will rain tomorrow.

to preserve To keep safe and/or fresh. They preserved vegetables for the winter. We must preserve our health.

adequate Here = enough of. adequate balance = enough of a balance.

balance Noun and verb. Original meaning = equal distribution of weight. The circus performer balanced on the rope. Extended meaning, as here, giving equal importance to two things. A good balance between work and studies.

freedom of choice = freedom to choose

intervention Noun form of the verb to intervene, which has two meanings 1) happening between two events and 2) (as here) to step in, to interfere, to get mixed up in, to get involved in.

128.84179104477613 FRIEDMAN: Again, the problem is to distinguish two things. This comes back to an earlier comment: the circumstances in terms of the physical arrangements, and the circumstances in terms of the rules that guide the society.

Friedman doesn't answer Conable's question. He responds to the first thing Conable said. He responds to the question whether he wants the US to become a gigantic sweatshop. He repeats his earlier point that it is important to distinguish two things. One is the physical circumstances of Hong Kong: how much land it has and how many people live on that land. The other is Hong Kong's political and economic circumstances: the laws and the rules that define the political life and the operation of the market.

to distinguish To see the difference between two or more things. Make out, perceive. It was so dark, I couldn't distinguish one house from another.

circumstances See F13d Limited Government 159.

physical arrangements = physical circumstances

in terms of X = in connection with X or taking X into consideration. In terms of adds almost nothing to this sentence. "The circumstances of the physical arrangements" means almost exactly the same thing.

143.61194029850748 Now in the case of Hong Kong, of course, I'm not asking that we crowd our people to a density of population such as Hong Kong has. Hong Kong is a marvelous example just because its circumstances are so terrible, its physical circumstances. And the people in Hong Kong would love to get elsewhere, into less crowded circumstances, if other people would let them in. This is the problem of immigration, which is a very important restriction on human freedom. In the period before 1913 we had complete, a hundred percent freedom of immigration into the United States. We don't now, but go back to your question. CONABLE: Do you think Hong Kong ... do you think Hong Kong would exist if it weren't in close juxtaposition to ... to Communist China?

Friedman returns to the case, or example, of Hong Kong. Hong Kong has many people living on very little land. It has high population density. The U.S. has a much lower density of population. Friedman certainly doesn't want the U.S. to have so many people living in such a small space. He does not want to crowd the American people into the same density of population that Hong Kong has.

Hong Kong is an excellent example of good policies because the policies are successful even though Hong Kong's physical circumstances are very bad. People in Hong Kong would love to emigrate to other, less crowded countries. However, most countries, including the US, have severe restrictions on immigration. Friedman thinks that restrictions on immigration are a major restriction on human freedom. He remembers the "good old days" before 1913, when the U.S.had, according to him, "100% freedom of immigration." This is new topic and a digression from his main theme. Friedman stops the digression, and asks Conable to continue his question. Conable asks whether Hong Kong would "exist" if it weren't close to China. He means: "Would Hong Kong exist as it is today, with its policies, if it weren't in close right next to China?"

Now A signal that he is changing the subject of the conversation, here to a topic they have discussed earlier, the high population in Hong Kong.

in the case of Hong Kong = In Hong Kong, for example.

density of population = ratio of population to the area on which that population lives. To calculate the density of population, divide the number of people by the area on which those people live.

marvelous, terrible

immigration = movement of people into a country, in order to stay and live there. It is the opposite of emigration, movement of people out of a country. (Compare the opposition between import and export.) The difference between immigration and emigration divided by 1000 is called net migration.

freedom of immigration = freedom to immigrate. See freedom of choice above.

in close juxtaposition to = very near, very close to

if it weren't Contrary-to-fact condition. See &

180.39701492537316 FRIEDMAN: Hong Kong would exist. It is very dubious that it would have the policies it has now if it weren't in close just ... juxtaposition to Communist China. Well, now, but to answer your question directly, yes. I am in favor of the United States having not the circumstances, not the physical circumstances, but the policies that Hong Kong has had of zero tariffs, complete free trade, of no restrictions on exports, no restrictions on monetary transactions, of a far greater degree of government ... far lesser degree of governmental regulation.

Friedman says it would exist. It would be a place, but it wouldn't be the same. He doubts very much that it would have the same kinds of economic policies if it weren't very close to Communist China.

Friedman then goes back to Conable's real question: what policies would he recommend for the US? He does not want the U.S. to have the physical circumstances of Hong Kong — the over-crowding and the lack of resources. — but he is in favor of the U.S. having Hong Kong's economic policies. Friedman recommends completely free trade. This means: no tariffs, no restrictions on what can be exported, completely free exchanges of money, and so on. He would also like the U.S. to have much less government regulation or much greater degree of freedom from government regulation. Notice how he emphasizes lesser to show that this and not "greater" is what he really wanted to say.

180

would exist Friedman uses the conditional because he means, Even if Hong Kong were not close to China, it would (still) exist.

very dubious = very doubtful, unlikely (See &)

zero tariffs = no tariffs

restrictions (See above)

monetary transactions Here, exchanging money between different national currencies, e.g., US dollars (USD) for Hong Kong dollars (HKD) and back.

far greater degree . . . far lesser degree Much more/Much less regulation (See "regulations" above)

217.5253731343284 I agree with what Russell Peterson said before, that there are third party effects, there are things like pollution. The question is whether we're handling them in the right way, and I think we're not.
Friedman agrees with Peterson is that pollution is a problem. In economics, pollution is an example of third-party effects, or externalities. Friedman agrees that they are a problem. The question is how to handle that problem. The question is whether the US is handling that problem in the right way. He thinks that we are not.

third-party effects Consider a factory that pollutes the water and air. It sells its product; somebody buys it. These are two parties, or participants, of economic transactions. People who live near the factory are a third party. They don't buy the factory's products. However, they pay a kind of "price." They fall ill because of the pollution. The price of their houses goes down because the water is polluted, so if they have to sell their house, they lose money. These are "third-party effects." They are also called "externalities" because people who live near the factory are external to the economic activity of the factory. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality.)

pollution Here, making nature dirty. or hurting the natural world. Air pollution. Pollution killed all the fish in that river. The verb form is to pollute.

I think we're not [handling them the right way]. Only the auxiliary verb needs to be repeated.

226.38009950248758 McKENZIE: I want to bring Bob Galvin in here. Bob, the beginning of Milton's agenda there, no tariffs, for example, no restrictions, no quotas. Now, will business, big business, wear that kind of policy?
McKenzie says he wants Bob Galvin to enter the discussion. He wants to bring Galvin in. Calvin is a representative of Big Business. McKenzie asks him if Big Business will support support the policies proposed by Friedman. Will Big Business agree to Milton Friedman's agenda? The agenda includes no tariffs, no restrictions on trade, and no quotas. Big business often asks the government for "business protection," which means exactly tariffs or quotas on foreign goods.

Bob, the beginning of Milton's agenda Note how McKenzie call these very important people (a big business executive, a famous economist) by their first names.

big business Sometimes capitalized (Big Business), the largest and most powerful corporations, especially in the U.S. The phrase is often used negatively, implying that these top corporations are too big and powerful, and place their own interests ahead of the interests of the people and the country.

agenda Originally, list of things to be done or (as at a meeting) to be discussed. What is today's agenda? Here, a list of policy proposals.

quotas Here, an economic term meaning a limitation on the number or amount of something that may be imported. Import quotas. Set a quota on auto imports, clothing imports.

wear that kind of policy Here wear [irregular verb: to wear, wore, worn] is an informal British English expression meaning "agree to" or to accept. Normally wear is not used in this way in the U.S.

policy A position or course of action supported by a person or an organization. A government policy.

236.86467661691546 GALVIN: I think big business and all business could wear that kind of policy if we could find the appropriate balancing factor that in the rest of world trade, where we trade outside our border, and as others come in, we are required to trade against socialized institutions. That's a very different kind of an institution than the private institution.

Galvin thinks that all kinds of business, big as well as small, would accept a completely free trade policy if other countries also accepted such a policy. He says that other countries and businesses in other countries are "socialized institutions." This is a strange use of the word "socialized." He means that businesses in other countries are closely connected with the government and receive a lot of government support. Socialized institutions are very different from private institutions, such as American businesses. If American businesses have to compete against socialized institutions then they need help to balance the government support of foreign businesses. They need a balancing factor.

balancing factor = a policy or mechanism that would balance a situation that is out of balance.

trade against This is a mix of two phrases: "trade with" and "compete against." He means: "We have to compete, in our trade with the rest of the world, with other businesses who also want to trade and who can offer better prices because they are supported by their governments."

socialized institutions Here = government-supported for-profit institutions, or simply government-supported businesses. Calvin calls them "socialized" because he wants to imply that they are similar to "socialist institutions." "Socialist" was a bad word in the American political language because the Soviet Union called itself a socialist country. In the Soviet Union, all businesses were not just supported by the government but simply owned by the government. It was illegal to have a private business. Galvin cannot say that European private businesses are "socialist" because they are not owned by the government, but he calls them socialized. Some big businesses in Europe and the UK were, in fact, owned by the government, but many of them have been sold to private owners, because private businesses are usually more efficient.

different than = different from

private here = independent from the government; not public

261.4507462686567 The private institution can clearly operate more efficiently if it is not imposed upon by an artificial price from the socialized institution across the seas. So I think there has to be, not protectionism, but there has to be an international rule of the road that prevents the socialized institution from subsidizing and taking advantage of the private institution.

It is clear that private institutions are more efficient than socialized institutions. Clearly, they can operate more efficiently. However, they cannot compete against artificially low prices from socialized institutions. Those prices are artificial because they are not decided by a free market. They are low because they are subsidized by foreign governments. Foreign governments use government money to subsidize their businesses. Galvin is not for protectionism. He is for creating rules of international trade. Such rules would not allow foreign governments to subsidize their socialized businesses. The rules would prevent the governments from subsidizing.

imposed upon Here, forced to compete on unfair terms.

artificial Not natural, man-made.

across the seas He probably means Europe and Japan, two main competitors of American business at the time.

protectionism A policy of protecting your country's business from competition from other countries. Protectionist policies include imp rot tariffs and quotas and export subsidies.

rule of the road = traffic rule. The phrase is often used metaphorically for situations in which many people act and there is a possibility of collision. Here it is for rules of international trade. International trade is like a road on which many businesses travel, and they have to follow rules of the road.

prevents from Stops from happening. Prevent fires. Try to prevent a war. The noun form is prevention.

subsidizing Help an organization or the like with money.

taking advantage of Taking advantage of something is not bad. (Let's take advantage of good weather and go for a walk.) Taking advantage of somebody = Unfairly benefit or profit from somebody, at somebody's expense. (He is taking advantage of your kindness. = He uses your kindness for personal profit and causes you harm.)

288.91741293532345 McKENZIE: Do you include the nine countries to the Common Market, though, as socialist countries, or are you prepared to have competition from all the nine countries in the Common Market? GALVIN: The nine countries of the European Common Market engage in the most dramatic of the socialized institutions.
McKenzie asks Galvin about European countries. European countries are members of the Common Market, now called European Union. McKenzie asks: "Do you consider them socialist countries, or are you prepared to compete with them without any additional "rules of the road." Note that McKenzie says "socialist," not "socialized." He speaks correct English, and he wants Galvin to say clearly what he means. Galvin answers that the governments of the Common Market strongly support their businesses. In other words, Galvin is not prepared to compete with them unless the US government helps his business, or convinces European governments to stop their support for their businesses.

Common Market = European Union. It now has 25 members.

engage in ... socialized institutions This is a strange use of the verb"engage." Usually it is used with activities: Engage in espionage He means: "They engage in actions that are typical of socialized institutions."

most dramatic Here, it simply means "They are very much socialized; the governments give a lot of support to businesses."

304.50447761194033 FRIEDMAN: I don't agree with him at all. We are hurting ourselves by restricting trade from abroad. Other countries are hurting themselves and us by the measures you describe, but we're only hurting ourselves even the more if we imitate them.
Friedman doesn't agree with him. Not at all. When we put restrictions on trade, we hurt ourselves. We are already hurting ourselves by putting restrictions on trade. Other countries are also hurting themselves by doing what you have described: tariffs and subsidies from the government to business. They are also hurting us by such measures. However, if we do what they do, if we imitate them, we will also hurt ourselves. We will not gain from it, we will only hurt ourselves even more.

by restricting trade This is a Gerund form of the verb restrict. It follows a preposition, the way nouns do; and it has a direct object (trade) the way verbs do.

measures Here, means of achieving something.

describe Give a fairly detailed account of something. Noun form: description.

imitate Copy someone's way of speaking or acting. Noun form: imitation

317.8587064676617 CONABLE: I don't think, Dr. Friedman, that your mother would get a job sewing today in America, if we had no tariffs at all. What would happen is, there wouldn't be any sewing jobs in America, we'd be making nothing but computers. (several talking at once.) FRIEDMAN: But then there would be some other kinds of jobs. Then she would get a job at a very low level in making computers.
Earlier in the program, Friedman showed women sewing clothes. He said that his mother, an immigrant to the US, had such a job. Conable makes a reference to that. He says that if Friedman's mother immigrated to the U.S. today, she would not be able to find a sewing job if we didn't have any tariffs. Clothes made by American workers would be more expensive than clothes made abroad. There would be no sewing jobs in America. American workers would be making only computers, nothing but computers. (At that time, computer manufacturing was one area where American workers were still competitive against foreign workers.) Friedman replies that that would be okay, because, even if there were no sewing jobs, his mother could get a very low-level, non-technical job making computers.

would get a job Several examples of conditionals in this passage. Two contrary-to-fact conditions are discussed: What would happen if Friedman's mother immigrated into the US today, and there were no tariffs.

get a job doing X = get a job in which you do X. Get a job sewing, making computers, cleaning houses, taking care of older people.

nothing but = Only

337.53930348258706 McKENZIE: Yeah. Although you face the problem, that you've had both a leading businessman and a leading conservative Congressman not accepting your prescription of sweeping away tariffs ... FRIEDMAN: But, of course, the two greatest enemies of ... I would say the greatest enemies of free enterprise and of freedom in the world have been on the one hand the industrialists, and on the other hand most of my academic colleagues, who end up in government.

McKenzie says: Yes but you have a problem. The problem is in front of you, in front of your face. You have to face it. The problem is this. You argue for certain policies. They are conservative policies. Usually, businessmen and conservative politicians support conservative policies. However, here you have a leading businessman and a leading conservative congressman who are against your proposal to have completely free trade.

Friedman's response is difficult because it is half-serious, half-a joke. He says that the worst enemies of free markets have been industrialists and university professors. He is a university professor himself, so other professors are his colleagues. He doesn't really think that they are the "greatest enemies" of free enterprise, but he does think that they are enemies. He also says that many university professors, after working in academia, end up in government. This is not really true, but he has to answer McKenzie who spoke of an industrialist (Galvin) and a leading conservative congressman (Conable). Conable never was a university professor, he was a lawyer. Many people in government are lawyers.

Yeah Informal way of saying "yes." In fact, "yeah" is much more common in conversation than "yes." McKenzie says the word with the intonation that implies doubt: "Yes, that's what you say, but there is a problem ..."

you face the problem = The problem is right in front of you. You have to face the problem = You cannot turn away from the problem, you have to deal with it.

leading = Most important

sweeping away Literally, cleaning off with a brush or a broom. Figuratively, as here, getting rid of, eliminating.

enemies Opposite of friends.

prescription Literal meaning: a written order for a medicine or treatment. Figuratively, as here, a strong recommendation, often for solving a problem. A prescription for success. A prescription for peace. Verb form: to prescribe.

academic = Having to do with higher education.

my academic colleagues = Other people working for universities. This is a very polite expression.

end up in government = After doing something else, start working in government.

360.8567164179105 For opposite reasons. (laughter) For opposite reasons. McKENZIE: Michael Harrington, I guess, would agree with this. FRIEDMAN: People like Michael Harrington, and my academic colleagues, want freedom for themselves. They want free speech, they want freedom to write, they want freedom to publish, to do research, but they don't want freedom for any of those awful businessmen.

Industrialists and university professors oppose free market for opposite reasons. (McKenzie says that Harrington would agree with that if he were speaking now. (Harrington is a socialist and opponent of big business. Like Conable, he is a lawyer, not a university professor) Friedman says that people like Harrington and his academic colleagues want many kinds of freedom for themselves. They want free speech, freedom to write and publish, freedom to research whatever they want. However, they don't want to give the freedom of the market to businessmen. They want to regulate the market. They don't like those "awful businessmen." (Friedman quotes the opinion of his academic colleagues. Friedman doesn't really think businessmen are "awful." This is a kind of joke. He is being sarcastic.

For opposite reasons Industrialists oppose free markets for one reason, while "academic colleagues" oppose them for another reason, and those reasons are totally different.

I guess = here, I suppose, I think. More common in this usage in American English than in British English.

freedom to write, etc. (See &)

to do research same as "to research"

awful Original meaning = making one afraid (or filling a person with awe). More commonly, very bad, terrible, horrible.

376.5313432835821 Now the businessmen are very different. Every businessman wants freedom for somebody else, but he wants special privilege for himself. He wants a tariff from Congress, and the Congress ... well the way in which Congressmen get elected is by performing favors to constituents.
Businessmen are very different from academics. They want freedom for others. For themselves, they want protections. They want special privileges, like tariffs. In this way, they are against the free market. They want tariffs from tariffs from Congress. They want Congress to pass a law that would create tariffs. And as for Congress - congressmen want to get elected. They get elected by people in their districts. People who vote are called constituents. Congressmen get elected by doing what their constituents want. They get elected (or reelected) when they do favors to their constituents. They get elected by performing favors to their constituents.

special privilege A little redundant, or repetitive, since a privilege is in itself a special right or advantage others don't enjoy. The senior students have dining privileges. Also, in an extended sense, a great honor, typically used in very polite phrases like: It was a privilege to meet you. It's been a privilege studying with you.

Congress/Congressmen The U.S. has two "houses" that together make laws for the country. Congress refers to them both, but congressman or congresswoman only refers to a member of the House of Representatives. (Ex: Representative Smith = Congressman Smith. Senator Ramirez is a member of Congress.)

to get elected Passive (See F11 Hong Kong 239)

performing favors Much more commonly, doing favors. In American English, a favor is a an act of kindness or generosity beyond what is expected. Do me a favor, hand me my glasses. That congressman did us a lot of favors when he was in office. Note that favor has a different meaning here than in the expression to be in favor of. (See F13d Limited Government 0)

by performing favors Another example of a Gerund phrase.

constituents The voters who live in a politician's district. (Another word for a politician's district or for these voters is constituency.)

392.77313432835825 And if indeed you were to wipe out completely all tariffs, if you were to reduce government controls in this country to what they are now, I do not think that would be in the self-interest of ... McKENZIE: Well, then ... FRIEDMAN: ... even Barber Conable, for whom I have the very greatest respect, or Bob Galvin, for whom I have the respect. I think it would be in the self-interest of Michael Harrington. McKENZIE: Now let's ask what the American people want and will wear, because you're saying, in effect, that to get elected the Congressman is giving the people what they want.

So, if we completely eliminated all tariffs and reduced government controls, it would not be in the self-interest of Conable, because Conable would have to vote to eliminate tariffs, and his constituents would not re-elect him. It would not be in the self-interest of Calvin because he wants tariffs to protect his business. Friedman thinks it would be in the interest of Harrington. He does not say why he thinks so. Probably because eliminating all tariffs would result in greater unemployment, and more workers would join Harrington's socialist organization, Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee. Note that Friedman has "the very greatest respect" for Conable, simply "respect" for Galvin, but he doesn't say that he has any kind of respect for Harrington.

McKenzie then asks this question: What do the American people want? Will they support Friedman's policies? Friedman has said that congressmen get elected when they give the people what they want.

if . . . you were to wipe out = if you wiped out. A more formal, less conversational way to form contrary-to-fact conditions. In this pattern, were + Infinitive is used instead of the past tense in the "if" clause.

to wipe out Here, to do away with, to eliminate

for whom I have the respect Friedman accidentally left out a word here, probably greatest, as above.

will wear (See wear above226 )

you're saying, in effect = What you are saying can be said more briefly or more simply as follows: ... .

419.5582089552239 Now, aren't you saying in the end, then, the people don't want this or don't understand the advantage of it? FRIEDMAN: I'm saying that my whole function and purpose is to try to persuade the people to make a different thing politically profitable. I'm trying to persuade the people to make it clear that Congressmen who pursue these policies are gonna lose their jobs, and if we do that - Congressmen are pursuing their self-interests. They're in a market, there's a political market. They've got a product to sell, and they've got to appeal to their customers. And I am just engaging in the kind of advertising Mr. Galvin and other companies engage in. McKENZIE: We've got another very experienced politician, Governor Peterson.

So if we have tariffs and government controls, it must be be because the people want them and don't want your policies. They don't understand the advantages of free trade.

Friedman answers that the major purpose of his life is to change people's minds. He wants people to tell their congressman or congresswoman clearly that they are not going to vote for them -- and so they will lose their jobs -- if they keep on voting for tariffs and controls. He then makes the point that congressmen aren't really very different from businesspeople. They both have a product "to sell." (In the case of Congress, the "product" is a law or a policy.) Friedman tries to change the minds of the consumers of that product, the constituents who vote for or against a congressman. His analogy is incorrect: he is more like an educator who is trying to persuade consumers not to buy McDonalds hamburgers (tariffs) but buy healthy food (free market) instead.

McKenzie turns to conversation to another participant, Governor Peterson. Peterson is an experienced politician. He used to be Governor of the State of Delaware. He is no longer Governor, but it is polite to use the title even after the person is no longer in office.

aren't you saying that ... = You're saying, in effect, that ..., aren't you? Negative questions like this expect a positive answer.

my whole function and purpose A little exaggerated, perhaps, but Friedman is saying that the whole point of, or entire reason for, his life as an intellectual and public figure is to try to change people's minds about the free enterprise system.

persuade someone to = Talk someone into

profitable (See F11 Hong Kong 63)

make it clear that Express oneself in a way that's easy to understand.

gonna = Going to. Are you gonna come or not? = Are you going to come or not? Very common in informal spoken English, a little surprising to hear it in this formal setting.

to appeal to Here, to try to be attractive or liked. Compare adjective appealing. Her music appealed to people all over the word = Her music was appealing to people everywhere.

They've got a product to sell

engage in = to be involved in (See 288 above.)

very experienced = Has a large amount of experience

politician Person who is involved in politics, the activities connected with government, especially in a democracy.

Grammar topics:

Expressions:

make the most of, take for granted, move to another job; take place; seize the opportunity, bear the cost

Vocabulary:

haven; despite; population growth; natural resources; standard of living; exploitation of workers; fourfold; competition; profitable; adapt; adjust; transaction; cost; benefit; incentive.
Exercise 1.
Present Perfect Progressive tense and adverb phrases of time with the word since

In this exercise, you are given two sentences. One sentence describes a present condition, the other gives the time when this condition started. Combine the two sentences into one using a time adverb with since. Note that you can combine since and before, as in "since before the Great Depression"

Given: All American workers work an eight-hour day. This started in 1938.
Result: Since 1938, all American workers have been working an eight-hour day.

I study 40 hours a week. This started last year.
The demand for traditional wedding gowns is going down. This started in 1998.
Hong Kong 's standard of living is going up. This started after the war.
Profits increased fourfold. This started in 2006.
Losses increased threefold. This started in 2007.
Their standard of living fell. This started in 2000.
Exercise 2.
Present Perfect Progressive with adverb clauses of time.

This exercise is like exercise 1 except the second sentence gives the event that started the condition. The word since is followed by a clause, not a phrase.

Given: John studies ten minutes a day. It started when he got a high grade on the last test.

Result: Since he got a high grade on the last test, John has been studying ten minutes a day.

Wages in Hong Kong are going up. This started when the workers demanded higher pay..
Oil prices are going up. This started when India and China started using more oil.
Mr. Yu is looking for a new product. This started when competition from Taiwan made his business less profitable.
Mr. Yu's brother is looking for a new business opportunity. This started when his standard of living fell.
Ms. Wong is looking for a traditional wedding gown. This started when she decided to get married.
Exercise 3.
Adverbs of time "for" and "over"; progressive , perfect progressive, perfect

Add the adverb of time "for" or "over" and change in two ways: (1) from the progressive to the perfect progressive and (2) from the progressive to the perfect.

Given: Unemployment is increasing. 6 months.

Results (1):

For the last 6 months, unemployment has been increasing.

Over the last 6 months, unemployment has been increasing.

Results (2):

For the last 6 months, unemployment has increased.

Over the last 6 months, unemployment has increased.

Unemployment is going down. 1 month.
The population is growing. 2 years.
The population is shrinking. 5 years.
The standard of living is going up. 10 years.
His standard of living is going down. 1 year.
Our standard of living is going up. 3 years.
Exercise 4.
Simple Past, Present Perfect. Adverbs with in and since.

Make sentences from the phrases below, making the verb (1) Simple Past and then (2) Present Perfect. In the Present Perfect sentences use since if the adverb specifies the starting point, and for if the adverb specifies duration.

Given: 1930, many businessmen, lose their money

(1) In 1930, many businessmen lost their money. (Simple Past)

(2) Since 1930 , many businessmen have lost their money. (Present Perfect)

Given: 50 years, many banks fail

(1) Fifty years ago , many banks failed. (Simple Past)

(2) Over the last 50 years, many banks have failed. (Present Perfect)

1950, many political refugees came to Hong Kong
50 years, there is a lot of unemployment
1990, economic freedom increased
1995, the standard of living rose three-fold
50 years, many businessmen lose their money
1989, the population grew four-fold
1979, competition increased.
50 years, cost of materials goes down
50 years, Mr. Yu's firm makes traditional Cantonese wedding gowns.
1984, productivity declined significantly.
50 years, many businessmen make a lot of money
50 years, many immigrants come to Hong Kong
Exercise 5.
Gerund phrases

Given: The city solved its housing problem. It built a lot of affordable apartments.

Result: The city solved its housing problem by building a lot of affordable apartments.

After World War II, Hong Kong solved its population problem. It let in refugees.
After World War II, Hong Kong solved its economic problem. It let in refugees.
The government of Hong Kong encouraged business. It promoted free trade.
The government of Hong Kong promoted literacy. It built schools.
Mr. Yu's business will solve its problem. It will find a new product.
The students will improve their chances for a good job. They will study English.
Exercise 6.
Counter-to-fact conditionals.

Given: If the demand goes down, Mr.Chung will soon get that message.

Result: If the demand went down, Mr.Chung would soon get that message.

If the government of Hong Kong imposes tariffs, this will not be good for Hong Kong 's economy.
If a developing country removes all tariffs, many local enterpreneurs will go out of business.
If rich countries stop price support for agriculture, many poor countries will be better off.
If Mr. Huang is given an opportunity to export to the US , he will seize that opportunity.
If Mr's Huang's daughter goes to England to study, she will make the most of that opportunity.
If you go down any street in Hong Kong , you will see commercial activity.
Exercise 7.
Comprehension

Answer true or false. If the statement summarizes the film clip correctly, say or write "Yes, it is true that..." or "Yes, Friedman says that/claims that/tells us that... If it summarizes the film clip incorrectly, say, "It is not true that... In fact..."

Hong Kong has been a haven for people who wanted economic freedom.
People move to Hong Kong because they want economic and political freedom.
Hong Kong has not experienced rapid population growth.
Wages in Hong Kong have gone up a lot.
Hong Kong businessmen have been able to adapt to new conditions.
Hong Kong has an unusually free market.
When businesses fail in Hong Kong , the government helps.
Friedman thinks that government should help business.
Friedman thinks that the market, and not government, has made Hong Kong a good place.
Mr. Chung makes metal containers because the government has told him to.
Mr. Yung makes traditional Cantonese wedding gowns. The demand for them is high.
The doctor helps the man because he gets paid to do it.
The man goes to the doctor because the government has told him to do it.
Exercise 8.
Expressions

(1) Practice with individual expressions.

make the most of. This exercise just provides more sentences that use the idiomatic expressions in the film clip. To make it more interesting, finish the sentence as indicated in italics.

People in Hong Kong make the most of their abilities.
John wants to _____________________his life; that's why he...
Freedom allows people to ___________what they have; for example...
Exercise 9.
Expressions

(1) Practice with individual expressions.

take for granted

Economic freedom is ________________in Hong Kong ; that means that nobody thinks about it.
Freedom is _________________in Hong Kong ; that means
John has always been good at math; he ________ his abilities ______________.
John was good at math in school; he _________his abilities _____________.
But when he got to the university, he discovered that he wasn't doing very well. He could no longer ____________________. He had to stop _____________his abilities _________.
Exercise 10.
Expressions

(1) Practice with individual expressions.

move to another job

The workers in Hong Kong are free to _________________________.
If I don't like what I am doing, I will ______________________.
If my salary isn't high enough, I will _____________________.
Unfortunately, I do not have the freedom to __________________because
Exercise 11.
Expressions

(1) Practice with individual expressions.

take place:

Where does this film take place? It ___________________ in Hong Kong .
Friedman wanted the film to _____________in Hong Kong because...
A lot of things are ________________________here, for example...
Exercise 12.
Expressions

(1) Practice with individual expressions.

seize the opportunity

Look! Some nice shirts for sale! I will __________________and buy one.
Look at those books for sale! I will _____________________ and
John never _______________________; that's his problem.
He ____________________ and look what happened to him! He...
Exercise 13.
Expressions

(1) Practice with individual expressions.

bear the cost

Friedman thinks that businesses should _________________ of their failure.
Friedman thinks that businessmen should _____________________of their failure.
That business failed, the owner should ______________________.
Sometimes, governments do not allow business to ________________of their failure.
Exercise 14.
Vocabulary Exercise

haven; despite; population growth; natural resources; standard of living; exploitation of workers; fourfold; competition; profitable; adapt; adjust; transaction; cost; benefit; incentive;

Replace the blanks with a word from the vocabulary list above.

Hong Kong is a ____________for economic and political refugees.
_________its lack of ____________, it has a high ________________.
Its high _________________means that a lot of people are living there.
Businesses in Hong Kong are ________________________despite a lot of __________ among them.
The competition makes them _____________ to new conditions. The competition makes them ___________________to new conditions.
Friedman says that there is a lot of ________________to competition, although it also has a ___________.
Competition gives businesses ___________________to adjust; if they don't they will no longer be ________________.
Wages are now four times higher; they have gone up ________________.
When businesses try to make profits by paying their workers very little, this can result in ______________________; Friedman says this does not take place in Hong Kong .