LEARN MIND MOTIF (an anagram!)

Fear of over-generalizing, too much simplification, or trite response to what many consider one of the most important books in the latter half of the twentieth century compels me to focus on one specific aspect among many of the timeless argumentative claims which seem to leap out of these chapters and dance in tickling circles around the mind (or something).
One main claim by Friedman throughout is that economic freedom negates or stomps out coercion by nature of the competition and alternative choices which all people have. The criticism of this lies in the notion that economic freedom creates enormous opportunity for unequal and perhaps even egregious distribution which then allows for coercion through economic power. The necessity for certain market limitations such as anti-monopoly laws are apparent in this sense. As one critique of Friedman states, “Professor Friedman does not see this as any threat to political freedom because he does not see that the capitalist market necessarily gives coercive power to those who succeed in amassing capital” (C.B. MacPherson).
In Friedman’s defense, he puts forward a solution to certain distribution problems by suggesting a reformation of the tax system. He explains that much of the inequality which pervades America is due to inheritance and property issues. In other words, we do not all start on the same level in life (I am sorry to pronounce and obvious truism). He states that the progressive income tax is “much less taxes on being wealthy than on becoming wealthy” (173) and he prefers a flat rate tax. Though radical in many ways, an interview with Friedman in The Times Herald in1978 sheds light on some more moderate inclinations. Although he states a view that tax is an opposing force to free enterprise—it is necessary good/evil for the purpose of “essential government functions” such as defense, police, etc. So, for him, “the question is, which are the least bad taxes?” This is a funny way of putting it, but it seems right—for that is how many moral considerations are weighed as well. Though we may not ever be able to get to the truth, and the formula to a perfect world in which people make choices that help others and promote the good for all perpetually evades us, we can justify small actions and promote certain lines of reasoning and motifs which will work toward an unattainable perfection without frustrating itself half way there.