He believes that the spending the government is doing has detrimental effects on the economy and is actually making it less stable. On this point, he directly references hard evidence that he has obtained through his own research. This research demonstrated that a rise in government spending resulted in an approximately identical rise in GDP, a complete contradiction of the Keynesian multiplier …show more content…
He begins on the subject of the distribution of income, examining the progressive tax that was introduced. While the tax was specifically engineered in order to make things fairer through redistribution, Friedman observes that no change is occurring for the individuals who require this income because the rich are taking advantage of the loopholes within the tax. He notes that it would be much fairer to have a flat tax with no deductions; he states that this tax could meet the 1962 tax revenues with an only slighter higher rate than that time’s lowest bracket. Moving onward, Friedman disproves the effectiveness of social welfare measures. He admits that they are adopted with the absolute purest of intentions, but unfortunately remarks that they simply do not provide the help they are designed to supply. Social security is exemplified as one of the most unfair systems currently in place. On perhaps the most pertinent issue related to the lower class, Milton Friedman proposes a plan for the alleviation of poverty. He firmly believes in the notion that a negative income tax will fix the issue by giving each individual a guaranteed income, as opposed to the inefficient system in place