This is the only conclusion I can reach after reading this. In it Friedman argued that the greenspan era showed that the federal reserve "have the technical abilty to maintain stable prices". Since this article was in 2006, I can only assume that the events of the next few years (had Friedman been alive) exposed the folly of average price levels, stable prices, monetary tinkering, low inflation won't hurt argument etc...
Folly is more resilient than you think.
Has his son changed his views? Has Krugman? Has anyone?
My humble blog
It's easy to refute an argument if you first misrepresent it. William Keizer
Friedman advocated a free banking system toward the end of his life.
'' The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.'' Stephen Hawking
Bottom line: no one belived them and many mock them, but austrians were right all the time.
If I had a cake and ate it, it can be concluded that I do not have it anymore. HHH
Friedman, 1995: "The difference between me and people like Murray Rothbard is that, though I want to know what my ideal is, I think I also have to be willing to discuss changes that are less than ideal so long as they point me in that direction. So while I'd like to abolish the Fed, I've written many pages on how the Fed, if it does exist, should be run."
We could always just ask his son what his fathers, and his own views, are on the Federal Reserve. He's been gracious enough to answer our questions in the past, so hopefully he'll oblidge us again.
David Friedman David Friedman David Friedman!