Milton Friedman, with us or against us?

Well, I call Milton Friedman "the master" for his explanations in favor of individual liberty and free trade.

Many economists and writers who I read and respect are critical of Friedman. In the past week, several bloggers at Lew Rockwell's website (a place I can enjoy reading great articles daily) have been criticizing Friedman.
I am critical of Friedman on one issue - that is of money and banking. Although Friedman didn't like the Fed, he did believe in central control of the money supply. But I think it is a shame that the ONLY thing that so many economists talk about and support Friedman for his one (in our opinion) incorrect view. And this results in many forgetting about his great clarity and defense of liberty. Yes, the money issue is an inconsistency, but I think instead of focusing on deriding his views on money, we should promote the rest of his views. I think Free to Choose is just as good a defense of freedom as is Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson . I do support Austrian economics and my understanding of praxeology. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with arriving at a pro-liberty view in a different way. In fact, in addition to his clarity, I believe having a different view but coming to the same solution can only broaden the appeal for liberty.

And even on the "negative income tax" scheme which he supported - he supported this to replace all other forms of welfare. Although neither him nor I agree that aggression should be used to take anyone's money for redistribution, I think it is an interesting idea for the government to simply hand them money instead of coupons for certain things - coupons or stamps could distort the market in favor of things that all people, rich and poor, might not otherwise want as much of.

(I don't endorse the negative income tax. But I acknowledge that it is a reasonable thing to debate if it includes ending all other welfare programs.)