My friend
believes that a mixed economy provides a safe society for everyone
gives talented people the chance to get good jobs even if they’re from a poor family
dislikes free market economy because it assumes that privates are rational beings
dislikes greed
Which book/cartoon/article/video should I recommend him?
So irrational beings should be allowed therefore to have coercive power over other people?
My advice? Don’t bother converting people. If he’s obviously uninterested when you introduce the subject matter (if you haven’t already), don’t go any further. I’ve gone a crusade to convert some of my friends and it’s a futile effort. Best you can do is if politics/economics ever comes up state your opinion and don’t bother arguing. They have to come around on their own.
Paul
Have him watch this video
Greed (1/3) (Video) (12min) (John Stossel, ABC News)
Greed (2/3) (Video) (13min) (John Stossel, ABC News)
Greed (3/3) (Video) (14min) (John Stossel, ABC News)
Thanks PT! 
No Problem.
I live in Poland - we have here the “mixed economy” - it doesn’t create safeness for anyone, it creates only mirages!
People here sometimes look for job - I mean ANY job - for months (!) no matter whether they are skilled or not - “connections” decide!
Taxes are horrible, but welfare is illusory; it provides means of living which could satisfy maybe the starving homeless, sustaining his very life.
Free market economy does not assume rationality of humans…
Every noble man dislikes it - but free market is not based on greed…
Few societies have been more libertarian than USA around a couple of centuries ago. Yet there was a lot of violence; indians and farmers were dislodged. Even Jefferson kept slaves. Eventuelly it was the state that had to intervene to protect property rights for everyone.
The first step to converting anyone to a new belief system is to prioritize that accomplishment above retaining the friendship.
Do you honestly not see the contradiction here?
liberty is a long, long cultural evolutionary story. Jefferson wasn’t a libertarian. He was indeed a president of a government at one point. The violence against Amerindians was mainly enacted by the U.S. military. And it was the state that expanded as the whole mantra of the U.S. in the 19th century was “Manifest Destiny”. The U.S. government believed it was their destiny to eventually have a geographical monopoly “from sea to shining sea”. Remember Jefferson sent Lewis and Clark west to find a route to the Pacific Ocean. It wasn’t only a botany trip, but they also ushered in the realization that it was possible to make it by land to the Pacific Ocean. There was the Trail of Tears - the “Five Civilized Tribes”. They had actually integrated with the U.S. culture. Many were having houses that mirrored the U.S. culture, but they were forced off their land still. That actually was enforced by an Act of Congress. And it’s not as well known but Amerindians in the north as well were forcibly removed from their lands by this same Act. It’s a long history of government intervention. Even settlers that would go west, some integrated their way of life cooperatively with the Amerindians and others became hostile towards them. Usually the U.S. military stepped in to support the U.S. settlers without question as to who started it and such. Justice wasn’t on the minds of these interventions. It’s basically a question of coercion versus peace - that’s the NAP.