The trouble is that Chomsky and Rothbard are not fighting the same fight. Rothbard's grasp of history, economics and human rights dwarfs the confused rantings of Chomsky in every conceivable way.
Lol, not even true. Have you ever read a history book? The history of Capitalism is full of violence, slavery, genocides, colonialism, imperialism, human-rights violations, etc. The history taught in schools is a history written by imperialists powers in order to protect their interests. You don't have to be Chomsky to know that, libertarians live in a parallel fictional world. Chomsky is not even a Marxist Leninist, he's an anarchist.
@@laaranaroja5404 Genocides, colonialism, imperialism? Like many, you confuse anti-capitalist government agents with capitalist entrepreneurs. Actions taken by a government or in the name of a government are almost always *anti-capitalist,* not capitalist. The history taught in schools is indeed a white-washed set of lies intended to make anti-capitalist governments and politicians and bureaucrats look good, not to make capitalism look better than it is. Why capitalists get the blame for what governments do is the real question here. Why do *you* believe such nonsense? Also, Noam Chomsky, a cunning *linguist,* is very good at manipulating words. It's his specialty after all. He has described himself as a "libertarian socialist."
@@macsnafu The "history of Capitalism" is a history of self-correction. The role of most governments in that "history" is to control the wealth and freedom of individuals, ostensibly to harness the engine of capitalism for "the greater good". La Araña Roja's gripe seems better aimed at institutions "in charge" of capitalism (the usurpers and looters), rather than at the market of mutually beneficial exchange.
@@howardpatters3461 "The role of most governments in that "history" is to control the wealth and freedom of individuals, ostensibly to harness the engine of capitalism for "the greater good"." LOL. Because self-interested politicians and bureaucrats know what's "best" for the rest of us!
Too bad Rothbard lied about how banks work and how money is created. He pushed the phony "Fractional Reserve" model and fake "Money Multiplier Effect", neither of which exist in reality. In fact, banks create 100% of our money supply after the borrower signs the loan contract with no need for prior deposits or reserves. Rothbard never tested the nonsense models he taught.
Look at the number of years across the comments on this video. Oldest I have seen so far is 15 years ago. This is in itself amazing. We are all talking about Rothbard, or circumstances that Rothbard talks about. We are having a continuum across time, and its always relevant!
I find the classist elitist snobbery of hardcore Capitalists to be disgusting. They view the working class as subhuman. Just look at how they react anytime workers demand to be paid more or when CEOs are criticized for earning too much. I was a janitor at Walmart & have had many Libertarians & Republicans ridicule & disrespect me for it. I'll criticize trump then they bring up my job history to discredit me
@@SlashinatorZ yeaaaaa, it ain’t like communist governments produce forced labor and treat the working class as SUBHUMAN or anything… oh wait they do!! If you have a problem with a monopolist company such as Walmart then work for a local company that truly represents the free market, I know Walmart isn’t giving you a livable wage and I also know you aren’t asking every customer you come across what their political orientation is so that bs of Republican or libertarian down speak is exactly what it is… BS. MUST SUCK WHEN A COMPLETE STRANGER CALLS YOU OUT FOR A COMPLETE LIE
@Andrew sounds like it to me... Also the typical statist corporation.entioning like Walmart as a "capitalist" example.. Republicans ain't been capitalistic for 1 and 3/4 centuries for God's sake!! The best capitalism lenients were Grover Cleveland and John Tyler!!
Learning about the nature of money, and how fiat currencies transfer wealth from the working economy to the financial and political class made world economics so much easier to understand. And learning about the history of Allodial property rights in the US really opened my eyes to wealth, poverty, indentured slavery, and how power truly operates in the world. And how for good or bad, the founding fathers truly believed in the enlightenment and making a government for the people by the people, literally fighting and dying to break free from the old world monarchies and socialist/feudalist states that sucked the life out of the world's population since humanity first started to farm and collect wealth.
There's something incredibly eerie about the story of JP Morgan's central role in the forced cartelization of banking, and then to see the current role JPMC is playing in the SVB and regional bank bailouts. What is the saying, the more things change?
@@Datagrama "Journalists" print what they're told to print by the bankers and others in the cabal. They are just another batch of Useful Idiots. Not all of them but most of them.
I share in that affectionate sentiment. There's something so warm and jolly about him, despite fighting a lifelong losing cause. If only he could see the growing support for his ideas now!
@@Jay-zb6kb Hoppe's ideas would be the perfect stuff to call the next, new (relative to Rothbard himself anyway), even further enhanced and purified ideology of this sort, *IF* he wasn't somewhat of a collectivist of his own kind. That's why Rothbard is still the most pure, the true pinnacle and heart, of this ideology as it should be. As a "next step" guy, Walter Block is Much more fitting than Hoppe in truth.
The normal condition of a growing economy with a stable money supply is "deflation" of the sort that Rothbard speaks of. If the supply of goods and services is increasing and the supply of money is constant, the tendency will be a proportionate decrease in prices as the supply of money is spread over more stuff there is to buy.
Yes, the analysis rings true, and delivers immediate clarity. Reminds me of when I happened across Austrian econ 20 years ago, 4 years deep into an (incoherent) undergrad economics education. It was like someone turned the room lights on.
Of course they didn’t teach this is school, you think they want you to know how they’re breaking the law and colluding and fucking every future generation?! 😂
@@fallenangel2123 Disband it. They are a cult of criminals and want all of us Human Beings KILLED. We need to be putting them on trial for their Crimes and for High Treason. Prepare for Super inflation.
@@Charles-hy6gp the fed is a private institution. Has nothing to do with the American federal government, that’s why the congress has issues auditing the fed cause the private investors don’t allow it. The constitutionality of currency in the US is within congresses power, that’s undeniable. So why they don’t scare the fed with taking back that power should make you realize how much power those private investors actually have.
If only I could get HALF the people I would send this to to appreciate the first 5 minutes of this speach, we'd get America back again. I'd send it to every American.
Read two books if you want a deep understanding of what is coming for America: "The Creature From Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve" and "The Ominous Parallels" by Leonard Peikoff. Follow that up with "Why Government Doesn't Work" by Harry Browne and "Jury Nullification: The Evolution of a Doctrine" if you want a recipe for a solution. More to come. Over and out.
Just for the record, this was at the University of Houston. You can see that this was held at the Hilton College of Hotel and Restaurant Management on-campus.
On what topic? Rothbard covered most of them. He was an expert on history to the smallest detail. His four-volume "Conceived in Liberty" is an eye-opening history of the American Revolution. His "Panic of 1819" is the definitive work on the subject. "America's Great Depression" gives the fullest and most accurate account of that period. "Man, Economy and State" is a full account of the economy from all angles. There's a lot to go on.
the questioner @1:04:00 was ahead of his time. didn’t foresee 1% federal funds rates and negative real rates, and lower commercial rates. but he’s correct about an expansion of credit not necessarily resulting in an inflated money supply.
Agreed - lots of viewers probably perceive his questioning as “hostile”, but think he’s just bringing up an additional point that (if anything) is just an adjunct or parallel problem to everything Rothbard is citing. It was almost like a Teaser Trailer to what could have been a Sequel Lecture.
How can you know what I think? "Thoughts are free, who can guess them? They flee by like nocturnal shadows. No man can know them, no hunter can shoot them with powder and lead: Thoughts are free! I think what I want, and what delights me, still always reticent, and as it is suitable. My wish and desire, no one can deny me and so it will always be: Thoughts are free!" (Die Gedanken sind frei)
Basically….. the Bankers of the Federal Reserve are in FULL CONTROL of the money supply… without being on the Gold Standard….. they can flood the economy with money (zero interest lending, we experienced over the past few years) then let inflation set in and jack up the interest rates until the economy shrinks, collapsing housing, industry and GDP…. Then they sweep the winning of the table like a poker game Winner….. tell me thats not corruption!
The root problem in banking is long-term debt. Inflation is a symptom of debt, yes, but it can also be a symptom of many other causes, some good (for example, rising wages for skilled workers, rising prices for scarce items) and some bad (like health insurance and mortgage loans). By the same token, deflation is a symptom of both good and bad causes. This is what the last questioner might have been trying to point out: that the true villain is debt and not inflation.
@@jamespier7801 inflation is the increase in prices due to the increase in the supply of money. You and your fellow democratic mercantilists do not understand what money is - it is a medium of exchange - and therefore fail to realize that debt-money creates DIRECTED inflation rather than the general inflation from which the economy recovers during the Chartalist cycle.
This is another excellent information cache.. there's alot of terminology which is hard to understand unless you posses an Economic degree.. however the background of the players and the extent of influence throughout the subsequent hijacking and dismantling of the original currency system is really cool..like how they Morgan and Rockefeller went to school together and the beginning of progressive poisoning of society.. WOW. Lots of good stuff.. thanks
Though it's easy to understand without an economic degree if you're not in a rush. Like anything else in life worth learning, you just learn one piece at a time, and by learning enough of the foundational principles, eventually you will connect all the higher level stuff and more abstract ideas on your own. Economics is actually very basic, rudimentary and logical.. but if you watch the news, you'll be mystified by the smoke and mirrors and double speak that is absolutely not confusing on accident. It's simple, the powers that be want to inflate money as much as possible, as it functions as a mechanism of transferring wealth from the working class, to whoever gets the new money first. And on top of it, the Federal government has to pay interest on every single dollar that enters circulation. So it's a scam and a racket rolled into a single machine that enslaves the laborers by slowly stealing more and more of their wealth. The political and financial class doesn't care how much a dollar is worth because they'll just end up with more of them. Plus they invest in commodities and hard assets like land, buildings, gold and things anyway so they are protected on both fronts. It's a perfect system if your goal is to own all of the world's wealt... That's why it was so important for them to bomb all those middle eastern countries that wanted to break free of the Petro Dollar and start their own currencies. Because of the nature of fiat, any rival currency that deflates or even just inflates at a slower rate will generate profit for anyone that trades their USD for that currency. Like Rothbard was saying, these people hate competition because competition drives prices Down and quality Up... It's the same for currencies, if currencies were allowed to compete, the little people will win, because their money will increase in value. But with fiat, the bankers can capture all that extra wealth generated by growing economies and the massive increases in productivity due to new technological efficiencies and innovations. The world produces 100x more per person today than it did 100 years ago, yet our purchasing power has stagnated.... All that extra wealth has been transferred to the wealthy through the mechanism of inflation and their control over who always gets the new money.
"I am sure many, if not all of us here, are familiar with Murray's writings and his pronouncements." - Stephen O. Morrell Somehow the term 'pronouncements' brings to my mind the image of Moses coming down from the mountain after God gave him the ten commandments. Who has ever heard about an intellectual making 'pronouncements'? Rothbard's 'pronouncements' + critical thought = two worlds colliding!
I wish Murray Rothbard and Milton Friedman could swap places as far as the prominence they have in modern popular free market economics. Friedman was a decent enough public intellectual, but not nearly as insightful, thorough and, well, correct as Rothbard was. Having nothing significant to say against central banking is a huge blow against him, and if young right wingers today had been exposed to Rothbard the way many of them were to Milton Friedman I think we'd have more of a shot at abolishing central banks one day. As it is, looks like it's never going to happen, the scam will continue perpetually, the crashes will get worse and worse, until some kind of major paradigm shift, which can probably only come as a result of a collapse the likes of which we've never seen. As it is, the booms and busts are useful and convenient to the political class, the planners, the tyrants, the public sector, the bureaucrats, the cronies - it seems far too easy for the blame for every crash to be placed squarely on the shoulders of a free market that doesn't exist. And it's just a given that central banks must "respond" to downturns at this point. The really sad part is that young right wingers argue these claims from a position that assumes we actually have a free market right now, and central banks and fractional reserve banking don't get mentioned anywhere at all when it comes to platforms that normal voters are exposed to.
It happened because manufacturing processes were not as good then as now. The fact is that food quality has improved despite entrenched government bureaucracy and inefficiency, not because of it. In a free market, the producers couldn't hide behind FDA rules saying, "We followed the law!"
NBER :"Rothbard blames central banking for the existence of the business cycle, which is somewhat problematic, since the business cycle predates central banking. In fact, central banking in its modern form was introduced in an attempt to stabilise the business cycle. The US Federal Reserve was only established in 1913, after Mises had published his analysis. US had free banking from the Jackson Administration to the Civil War and that didn't stop the business cycle "
Mr.Rothbard is having such fun here. What a wonderful film. I could listen all day. Are there any more films or media files of Mr.Rothbard, no disrespect to Dr.Floy Lilley but Rothbard does Rothbard rather well.
People educated in the average mainstream economic doctrines are advised to digest this video in parts of 10 minutes at a time, or else risk a serious headache. :)
During the questioning period at the end, the fella with his hair slicked back (let’s call him Slick Willy) added some of the best “double talk” I’ve ever heard.
Good for you man. It's amazing how effectively the international banking cartel subverted the United States in 100 years. The world wars really accelerated their plans due to being able to suspend the constitution during wartime. From losing our right to transact in real, fair, money, to losing our Allodial property rights, to our president being shot in the head. Apparently, freedom isn't free.
The right of revolution is free tho, because that's the one right granted to us directly from nature, without the need for permission from any kind of official intermediary. We are born with that one. Unfortunately, it only becomes useful when there are enough people agitating for freedom at the same time that the whole system kind of resonates at a natural frequency. And until then, it's all just noise... Even more unfortunate is the fact that the resonator that aligns all those disconnected waves is human suffering. As history has shown, the powers that be eventually and always just take too much, and because of system dynamics, all the agitating waves will at some point spontaneously align and form a current. At which point there is no obstruction, and no diversion that can hope to stem the tide. It's only a question of when the tide turns, will we be alive to see it? More and more I think we will, because these things are non-linear, they accelerate towards confrontation at an ever-increasing rate. Until the levy can no longer hold back the currents of the whole godamn ocean... People will not accidentally be killed. Long kept secrets will once again be known. Public perceptions will change. And whoever is left will get to breathe the precious fresh air of freedom.
"They tried it over and over a hundred times and they all failed." The root word "progress" in "progressive," is contradictory to the vast majority of the outcomes of their schemes in all areas.
Walter Block sums it up very, very well. So does Rothbard. In private property rights you have the ownership of yourself, and of your labor - from those premises you can derive all other valid rights. Chomsky's socialism is utter economic nonsense, and has all the same problems that other socialists have failed to address. Who would do the work? How would people know how much to produce?
Tech progress - especially in the US - has traditionally been government funded, and I see no sign of that changing. Without government grants and government buying a product that otherwise was unsellable at the time, IBM would have never gotten the PC off the ground. Similarly the entire Internet was originally developed in the public sector using tax payer money. The private sector was slow coming to the party, and the big corporations are the main threat to freedom on the net now.
Chomsky objects neither to undesirable work being paid higher, nor to prices determined by a market of informed consumers making rational decisions. My point is that property rights can be traded and lost, while while human rights can not. If human rights are supposed to be worth the paper they are written on, they have to be derived from something other than property rights.
fmueller1 Libertarians generally advocate the theory of natural rights. These rights cannot be lost, they can only be respected or violated. Without respect for private property rights, we are left with only arbitrary means to determine who is the violator and who is the victim when there is a conflict between individuals exercising their natural rights. Private property establishes clear boundaries where one is free to exercise these natural rights without becoming a violator.
There is no freedom without democracy. In a functioning democracy, the roles of government are many and varied, and go far beyond the protection of individual lives. To give just one example, one role of a democratic government is to defend the democracy against undemocratic forces like yourself.
Definition of SOCIALISM 1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
@zsylvana There was no "free banking" in the US after the Jackson administration. It is true the Van Buren admin instituted what was arguably the best monetary system the US ever had. However, we've had several "central banks" prior to the fed. The first was during the revolutionary war that destroyed the Continental, the 2nd was chartered by Madison around 1816 and was dismantled by Jackson, and the third was instituted as the National Currency Act in the 1860s; a precursor to the FED.
Many thanks for the compliments. I too regret the shortness of responses here, which often leads to mindless accusations and name-calling instead of a reasoned debate, in which you are evidently interested. That said, being forced to condense a complex thought into a few lines can be a useful exercise. I haven't read the entire text you recommended, but that's no necessary to see that Rothbard sees the entire world through the tint of his idealog
People aren't ruled by the "wealthy". They are ruled by the government. Education is run by the government so this is about what one can expect. "What room for improvement do you see for our current economic system?" You just eliminate government violence from the system.
Everything is interconnected. Everything causes or implies something definite. Reasoning is contextual and hierarchical, building knowledge upon knowledge. Surgery is based upon anatomy. Building a house is based on knowing how to hammer, saw, and measure. Who says A must say B. There is no safe place to escape from the destructiveness of the evasion of reason. Reality is real and will not obey man's wishes and tears. Survival requires knowledge. Emotions are not knowledge.
1. There is nobody who knows nothing about finance. 2. No decision is ever just about finance. Under the current system plenty of people with degrees from fancy business schools run companies into the ground. Others lacking such formal training, and having been dealt a pretty tough hand to begin with, nevertheless keep their check books balanced, and manage to have a few bucks left at the end of each month. Do you think our current economic system is perfect, or is there room for improvement?
LOL, I totally agree. But you have to admit, the CZcams commenting system was pretty much designed to let people make baseless assertions. Having a real, intelligent debate with CZcams comments is pretty much impossible.
It is the job of businessmen to maximize their profit. There is nothing wrong with that. It is the job of a democratically elected government to regulate the economy so that everybody has a fair chance, and profits are shared for the advancement and benefit of society as a whole. The expectation that markets are fair and government regulation is not required is just as utopian as communism.
Good lord, I could hardly get started. This guy should teach a class called "How to use four hundred words to say what you could easily say with twenty. Blah, blah, blah. Seven minutes in he has made about two points, if you can somehow dig them out of that gobbledygook. He missed his calling if he was never in govt.
In my opinion the world is so complex and change happens so fast that any rule by a privileged few "who understand the natural laws of economics" is clumsy at best, calamitous at worst. What we need is a true democracy that gives each individual a vote of equal weight, allows free markets to blossom for the good of all, and cautiously regulates them where a few driven by pathological greed would otherwise take advantage.
fmueller1 I hope you realize you are making the same argument Hayek made against socialism and central economic planning numerous times. Read all of Hayek's works and then try to argue that the complexity of economic forces are a reason we need socialism.
fmueller1 I hope you realize you are making the same argument Hayek made against socialism and central economic planning numerous times. Read all of Hayek's works and then try to argue that the complexity of economic forces are a reason we need socialism.
@AndrewLLFrazier I did not say rising wages in general, I said rising wages for "skilled workers". The good which such a wage rise accomplishes is to encourage workers to acquire those skills and, if such labor is no forthcoming, the replacement of that skill by other factors. Not allowing those wages to increase compounds an existing shortage. Similarly for a scarce item, the rising price enables a market to move toward equilibrium. Lower prices make goods less available.
I am unaware of Chomky's stance on this issue, but in my view in a monarchy the monarch is sovereign and in a republic it's the people. I can't see how a state could be sovereign.
[oops, posted before completed] ideological sunglasses. His particular tint is so strong that reality is often indiscernible in the description of what he observes. Nobody frees us from having to do our own thinking, but when I read Chomsky I find a solid analysis of the world as we find it. I don't agree with all of his conclusions, but his observations are usually spot on, which is more than can be said about most, including Rothbard!
Collective ownership need not be applied to everything. I'd support everybody owning a toothbrush, but the toothbrush factory could be owned collectively by the people who make it run - workers and management. Similarly decisions about the egg sale could be made by interested parties - especially John - and not just the boss of the corporation that owns John's shack, and is based in Shanghai. But if people are never in control, then we can never have socialism - one thing less to worry about!
He doesn't miss it but you have to choose your battles in this war. People are waking up to the Lincoln pseudo-dictatorship fact lately, just takes time to raise the consciousness of the people.
@MattQB1990 I am an economist. "Cumulative fiscal deficit" is not a sentence, nor even a catchphrase, but a functional description of the federal debt. A deficit is a negative balance. A fiscal deficit is a deficit which a government has in its finances. The cumulative fiscal deficit is therefore the negative balance a government accumulates over time by postponing with debt what they could clear with fiat money. That is, the federal debt is an accumulation of prior years' deficits.
Yet he still supports the system that commits those acts as a rule. You can not be critical of the machine and still support how it funds itself and be morally consistent. Not to mention how often he talks himself in circles to avoid the reality that he is merely playing the part of internalize opposition that is more of a pressure relief valve rather than a rational critic.
@suddenlyitsobvious Did you not notice I said "See The Mystery of Banking"? That is a book he published around the same time as this lecture that makes his views quite clear. I don't know how more public you can get than a book that is available on the internet for free.
Having run out of arguments entirely, name calling and posturing appear to be all you have left. But to speak with Aristophanes: "To be insulted by you is to be garlanded with lillies". I thank you for the honor!
@zsylvana-Rothbard holds that the central bank is responsible for the severity of the business cycle. Fractional banking was always a factor. Rothbard was for 100% banking reserve requirement and 100% Gold standard.
@MattQB1990 I am not one of those "central bank advocates". I see no point in controlling inflation, prices, money supply or the economy through the banking system. Rather, I am advocating banks solely as adjudicators of financial contracts. The structure of the banking system I advocate would therefore be part of the federal structure of our judicial system. I would abolish the Federal Reserve, the private banking system and all debt beyond very short term, non-revolving loans.
1:03:37 he is right which is why ultimately the fed "printed" new money out of thin air. Of course it's done in a round about way to conceal and justify. Also regardless of what this does to the economy and business cycles, the system is permitting few to get extremely rich without producing anything (actually the financial system does provide a valuable service but not to the degree it is parasitic)
The trouble is that Chomsky and Rothbard are not fighting the same fight. Rothbard's grasp of history, economics and human rights dwarfs the confused rantings of Chomsky in every conceivable way.
mpc91 Chomsky tries to hide things to manipulate the argument, need the whole truth.
Lol, not even true. Have you ever read a history book? The history of Capitalism is full of violence, slavery, genocides, colonialism, imperialism, human-rights violations, etc.
The history taught in schools is a history written by imperialists powers in order to protect their interests. You don't have to be Chomsky to know that, libertarians live in a parallel fictional world. Chomsky is not even a Marxist Leninist, he's an anarchist.
@@laaranaroja5404 Genocides, colonialism, imperialism? Like many, you confuse anti-capitalist government agents with capitalist entrepreneurs. Actions taken by a government or in the name of a government are almost always *anti-capitalist,* not capitalist.
The history taught in schools is indeed a white-washed set of lies intended to make anti-capitalist governments and politicians and bureaucrats look good, not to make capitalism look better than it is. Why capitalists get the blame for what governments do is the real question here. Why do *you* believe such nonsense?
Also, Noam Chomsky, a cunning *linguist,* is very good at manipulating words. It's his specialty after all. He has described himself as a "libertarian socialist."
@@macsnafu The "history of Capitalism" is a history of self-correction. The role of most governments in that "history" is to control the wealth and freedom of individuals, ostensibly to harness the engine of capitalism for "the greater good". La Araña Roja's gripe seems better aimed at institutions "in charge" of capitalism (the usurpers and looters), rather than at the market of mutually beneficial exchange.
@@howardpatters3461 "The role of most governments in that "history" is to control the wealth and freedom of individuals, ostensibly to harness the engine of capitalism for "the greater good"."
LOL. Because self-interested politicians and bureaucrats know what's "best" for the rest of us!
Us born after Rothbard’s death are so lucky to get to hear these lectures. Agree or disagree he’s truly a treasure to western thought.
Most of us alive during his heyday didn't get to hear them till the present day either.
@@KC9UDX great point. I was probably a bit tipsy when posting that.
I had the pleasure of seeing him in person twice and meeting him.
Too bad Rothbard lied about how banks work and how money is created. He pushed the phony "Fractional Reserve" model and fake "Money Multiplier Effect", neither of which exist in reality. In fact, banks create 100% of our money supply after the borrower signs the loan contract with no need for prior deposits or reserves. Rothbard never tested the nonsense models he taught.
@@KC9UDX HeroBandIII❤HeroBandIIIHeroBandIIIHeroBandIIIHeroBandIIIHeroBandIII❤HeroBandIIIHeroBandIII¹1¹1¹aqqaaaq q¹HeroBandIIIHeroBandIII+q+❤❤❤
This man was a genius. Just a great great mind. It's a shame people don't live forever. lol
especially the good ones.
His can and hopefully will.
Some will, but not everyone will get to see this happen.
Imagine Morgan, Rothschild and Warburg lived forever 😅 but they kinda do in their family dynasties
Look at the number of years across the comments on this video. Oldest I have seen so far is 15 years ago. This is in itself amazing. We are all talking about Rothbard, or circumstances that Rothbard talks about. We are having a continuum across time, and its always relevant!
Yup. I first saw this about 17 years ago.
Thanks Mises for everything, you enlightened me at a very early age.
Thanks again, everyone who works there is doing a great service to all of us.
сша деградировали. вы слепой?
I'm absolutely in awe when I listen to Rothbard speak. He's truly a genius.
I find the classist elitist snobbery of hardcore Capitalists to be disgusting. They view the working class as subhuman. Just look at how they react anytime workers demand to be paid more or when CEOs are criticized for earning too much.
I was a janitor at Walmart & have had many Libertarians & Republicans ridicule & disrespect me for it. I'll criticize trump then they bring up my job history to discredit me
Evan Gragg sorry about that buddy we aren't all bad
@@SlashinatorZ yeaaaaa, it ain’t like communist governments produce forced labor and treat the working class as SUBHUMAN or anything… oh wait they do!! If you have a problem with a monopolist company such as Walmart then work for a local company that truly represents the free market, I know Walmart isn’t giving you a livable wage and I also know you aren’t asking every customer you come across what their political orientation is so that bs of Republican or libertarian down speak is exactly what it is… BS. MUST SUCK WHEN A COMPLETE STRANGER CALLS YOU OUT FOR A COMPLETE LIE
@Andrew not imagined at all. They always insult me for my job or lack of to discredit my political views, especially on Facebook
@Andrew sounds like it to me... Also the typical statist corporation.entioning like Walmart as a "capitalist" example..
Republicans ain't been capitalistic for 1 and 3/4 centuries for God's sake!!
The best capitalism lenients were Grover Cleveland and John Tyler!!
I've listened to this about 50 times and it just gets better.
There is a modesty to Murray Rothbard's delivery that is refreshing.
Learning about the nature of money, and how fiat currencies transfer wealth from the working economy to the financial and political class made world economics so much easier to understand. And learning about the history of Allodial property rights in the US really opened my eyes to wealth, poverty, indentured slavery, and how power truly operates in the world. And how for good or bad, the founding fathers truly believed in the enlightenment and making a government for the people by the people, literally fighting and dying to break free from the old world monarchies and socialist/feudalist states that sucked the life out of the world's population since humanity first started to farm and collect wealth.
The founding fathers would be disgusted and take up the rifle if they were alive today
I've heard of, but never looked into, allodial property. Any sources of info you find particularly instructive?
The Q&A at the end was more informative than my Econ degree
There's something incredibly eerie about the story of JP Morgan's central role in the forced cartelization of banking, and then to see the current role JPMC is playing in the SVB and regional bank bailouts. What is the saying, the more things change?
Exactly! Notice that no journalist focuses on this to tell a more complete story of what is going on with central banks and federal reserve
@@Datagrama "Journalists" print what they're told to print by the bankers and others in the cabal. They are just another batch of Useful Idiots. Not all of them but most of them.
I share in that affectionate sentiment. There's something so warm and jolly about him, despite fighting a lifelong losing cause. If only he could see the growing support for his ideas now!
i just got on the train and currently becoming a hoppean as well.
@@Jay-zb6kb Hoppe's ideas would be the perfect stuff to call the next, new (relative to Rothbard himself anyway), even further enhanced and purified ideology of this sort, *IF* he wasn't somewhat of a collectivist of his own kind. That's why Rothbard is still the most pure, the true pinnacle and heart, of this ideology as it should be. As a "next step" guy, Walter Block is Much more fitting than Hoppe in truth.
Big Ron Paul supporter.. just started reading some of Rothbard's work and whoa... Rothbard kicks ass!! Can't wait to read more and more and more.
Jsteins27, I know, right? Took me 9 years longer to get here!
I am here today
The normal condition of a growing economy with a stable money supply is "deflation" of the sort that Rothbard speaks of. If the supply of goods and services is increasing and the supply of money is constant, the tendency will be a proportionate decrease in prices as the supply of money is spread over more stuff there is to buy.
I want my $0.10 plane tickets and a $90 house, dammit!! The Fed owes me like four pounds of gold at this point.
@@s.patrickcunningham6851 they owe me my first blowjob and that much weight in fuckin' palladium
@@s.patrickcunningham6851 AT LEAST 4 lbs
This is my first time hearing this man speak and within 5 min I know he is on point.
Yes, the analysis rings true, and delivers immediate clarity. Reminds me of when I happened across Austrian econ 20 years ago, 4 years deep into an (incoherent) undergrad economics education. It was like someone turned the room lights on.
Murray Rothbard laid it down like the BOSS he is!
What more can you say? It's Murray Rothbard. 'Nuff said.
They didn't teach us this in school. This actually makes sense.
Of course they didn’t teach this is school, you think they want you to know how they’re breaking the law and colluding and fucking every future generation?! 😂
Disband the Federal Reserve
nationalize it
@@fallenangel2123 Disband it. They are a cult of criminals and want all of us Human Beings KILLED. We need to be putting them on trial for their Crimes and for High Treason. Prepare for Super inflation.
@@greenenergy5481 A dictatorship is needed to do that, POTUS cant do anything without Congress and Supreme Court support
@@Charles-hy6gp the fed is a private institution. Has nothing to do with the American federal government, that’s why the congress has issues auditing the fed cause the private investors don’t allow it. The constitutionality of currency in the US is within congresses power, that’s undeniable. So why they don’t scare the fed with taking back that power should make you realize how much power those private investors actually have.
@@fallenangel2123 State-run Central Banking is still Central Banking
If only I could get HALF the people I would send this to to appreciate the first 5 minutes of this speach, we'd get America back again. I'd send it to every American.
END THE FEDERAL RESERVE WITH EXTREME PREJUDICE
They are a privately owned corporation ..owner lord rothschild..investors :-committee of 300
This is a gem. Thank you for posting.
Great material.
A lot of knowledge to extract - thank you very much!
I can imagine the walls in his study filled with photos of all this people and lines connecting them!😁
Can't love him enough.
Read two books if you want a deep understanding of what is coming for America: "The Creature From Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve" and "The Ominous Parallels" by Leonard Peikoff. Follow that up with "Why Government Doesn't Work" by Harry Browne and "Jury Nullification: The Evolution of a Doctrine" if you want a recipe for a solution. More to come. Over and out.
I'd advocate add George Gordon's understanding of Common Law to the equation as well.
End the Fed, but don't stop there: also end the ECB!
Maarten van der Poel The Fed, the ECB, the Bank of England, the People’s Bank of China, end it all
end every bank that runs of fractional reserve
End the fdc
End the fcc also
And the ICC.
Cristine, please keep up the struggle as you are obviously a sane voice in an insane world.
Incredible
Just for the record, this was at the University of Houston. You can see that this was held at the Hilton College of Hotel and Restaurant Management on-campus.
On what topic? Rothbard covered most of them. He was an expert on history to the smallest detail. His four-volume "Conceived in Liberty" is an eye-opening history of the American Revolution. His "Panic of 1819" is the definitive work on the subject. "America's Great Depression" gives the fullest and most accurate account of that period. "Man, Economy and State" is a full account of the economy from all angles. There's a lot to go on.
And "Power and Markets".
I find that if I first read Rothbard on a subject, then I listen/watch a lecture of his on the same topic, then I get much more out of the lecture.
I don't completely agree with Rothbard but I always enjoy his lectures.
0:53 Hoppe approves
Why did you make this comment? Does Hoppe hold a similar belief?
@@RunnerBul1 "so to speak" is a phrase that Hoppe frequently uses, so it's become a meme
@@djordjebokun882 It's become a meme so to speak :)
Voltaire said:
"It's Easy To Tell Who It Is That Rules Over You, By Finding Out Who It Is That You Cannot Criticize."
_/ € ₩ $ !
Greatest man the 20th century ever produced.
Come on man, Obama (peace be upon Him) was born in the twentieth century!
the questioner @1:04:00 was ahead of his time. didn’t foresee 1% federal funds rates and negative real rates, and lower commercial rates. but he’s correct about an expansion of credit not necessarily resulting in an inflated money supply.
Agreed - lots of viewers probably perceive his questioning as “hostile”, but think he’s just bringing up an additional point that (if anything) is just an adjunct or parallel problem to everything Rothbard is citing. It was almost like a Teaser Trailer to what could have been a Sequel Lecture.
Murray "N" Rothbard, cuz he a reall-ass one ✊🏿✊🏾✊🏽✊🏼✊
thanks for posting...watched the whole thing...
Beyond the limit of reason, you are correct.
Learning is relative to reality, an impossibility for multicultural subjectivists trapped inside social approval.
How can you know what I think?
"Thoughts are free, who can guess them?
They flee by like nocturnal shadows.
No man can know them, no hunter can shoot them
with powder and lead: Thoughts are free!
I think what I want, and what delights me,
still always reticent, and as it is suitable.
My wish and desire, no one can deny me
and so it will always be: Thoughts are free!"
(Die Gedanken sind frei)
How central banking takes your wealth and leaves you in debt is the subject of the CZcams video WHY WE ARE IN SO MUCH DEBT. Highly recommended.
Basically….. the Bankers of the Federal Reserve are in FULL CONTROL of the money supply… without being on the Gold Standard….. they can flood the economy with money (zero interest lending, we experienced over the past few years) then let inflation set in and jack up the interest rates until the economy shrinks, collapsing housing, industry and GDP…. Then they sweep the winning of the table like a poker game Winner….. tell me thats not corruption!
Yes, they did it in 2008 and the table is set, once again.
The root problem in banking is long-term debt. Inflation is a symptom of debt, yes, but it can also be a symptom of many other causes, some good (for example, rising wages for skilled workers, rising prices for scarce items) and some bad (like health insurance and mortgage loans). By the same token, deflation is a symptom of both good and bad causes. This is what the last questioner might have been trying to point out: that the true villain is debt and not inflation.
you are confused about what inflation is
@@jamespier7801 inflation is the increase in prices due to the increase in the supply of money. You and your fellow democratic mercantilists do not understand what money is - it is a medium of exchange - and therefore fail to realize that debt-money creates DIRECTED inflation rather than the general inflation from which the economy recovers during the Chartalist cycle.
This is another excellent information cache.. there's alot of terminology which is hard to understand unless you posses an Economic degree.. however the background of the players and the extent of influence throughout the subsequent hijacking and dismantling of the original currency system is really cool..like how they Morgan and Rockefeller went to school together and the beginning of progressive poisoning of society.. WOW. Lots of good stuff.. thanks
Though it's easy to understand without an economic degree if you're not in a rush. Like anything else in life worth learning, you just learn one piece at a time, and by learning enough of the foundational principles, eventually you will connect all the higher level stuff and more abstract ideas on your own. Economics is actually very basic, rudimentary and logical.. but if you watch the news, you'll be mystified by the smoke and mirrors and double speak that is absolutely not confusing on accident. It's simple, the powers that be want to inflate money as much as possible, as it functions as a mechanism of transferring wealth from the working class, to whoever gets the new money first. And on top of it, the Federal government has to pay interest on every single dollar that enters circulation. So it's a scam and a racket rolled into a single machine that enslaves the laborers by slowly stealing more and more of their wealth. The political and financial class doesn't care how much a dollar is worth because they'll just end up with more of them. Plus they invest in commodities and hard assets like land, buildings, gold and things anyway so they are protected on both fronts. It's a perfect system if your goal is to own all of the world's wealt... That's why it was so important for them to bomb all those middle eastern countries that wanted to break free of the Petro Dollar and start their own currencies. Because of the nature of fiat, any rival currency that deflates or even just inflates at a slower rate will generate profit for anyone that trades their USD for that currency. Like Rothbard was saying, these people hate competition because competition drives prices Down and quality Up... It's the same for currencies, if currencies were allowed to compete, the little people will win, because their money will increase in value. But with fiat, the bankers can capture all that extra wealth generated by growing economies and the massive increases in productivity due to new technological efficiencies and innovations. The world produces 100x more per person today than it did 100 years ago, yet our purchasing power has stagnated.... All that extra wealth has been transferred to the wealthy through the mechanism of inflation and their control over who always gets the new money.
"I am sure many, if not all of us here, are familiar with Murray's writings and his pronouncements." - Stephen O. Morrell
Somehow the term 'pronouncements' brings to my mind the image of Moses coming down from the mountain after God gave him the ten commandments.
Who has ever heard about an intellectual making 'pronouncements'?
Rothbard's 'pronouncements' + critical thought = two worlds colliding!
I wish Murray Rothbard and Milton Friedman could swap places as far as the prominence they have in modern popular free market economics. Friedman was a decent enough public intellectual, but not nearly as insightful, thorough and, well, correct as Rothbard was. Having nothing significant to say against central banking is a huge blow against him, and if young right wingers today had been exposed to Rothbard the way many of them were to Milton Friedman I think we'd have more of a shot at abolishing central banks one day.
As it is, looks like it's never going to happen, the scam will continue perpetually, the crashes will get worse and worse, until some kind of major paradigm shift, which can probably only come as a result of a collapse the likes of which we've never seen. As it is, the booms and busts are useful and convenient to the political class, the planners, the tyrants, the public sector, the bureaucrats, the cronies - it seems far too easy for the blame for every crash to be placed squarely on the shoulders of a free market that doesn't exist. And it's just a given that central banks must "respond" to downturns at this point. The really sad part is that young right wingers argue these claims from a position that assumes we actually have a free market right now, and central banks and fractional reserve banking don't get mentioned anywhere at all when it comes to platforms that normal voters are exposed to.
"limited government" is an oxymoron.
As is “military intelligence,” and “jumbo shrimp.”
@@kenzeier2943 “military intelligence, two words combined that can’t make sense” -Megadeth
It happened because manufacturing processes were not as good then as now.
The fact is that food quality has improved despite entrenched government bureaucracy and inefficiency, not because of it.
In a free market, the producers couldn't hide behind FDA rules saying, "We followed the law!"
Less Government is better government.
NBER :"Rothbard blames central banking for the existence of the business cycle, which is somewhat problematic, since the business cycle predates central banking. In fact, central banking in its modern form was introduced in an attempt to stabilise the business cycle. The US Federal Reserve was only established in 1913, after Mises had published his analysis. US had free banking from the Jackson Administration to the Civil War and that didn't stop the business cycle "
Mr.Rothbard is having such fun here. What a wonderful film. I could listen all day. Are there any more films or media files of Mr.Rothbard, no disrespect to Dr.Floy Lilley but Rothbard does Rothbard rather well.
He equates the Government with Federal Reserve; “We the people” have no control over the FR; there in lies the problem.
People educated in the average mainstream economic doctrines are advised to digest this video in parts of 10 minutes at a time, or else risk a serious headache. :)
During the questioning period at the end, the fella with his hair slicked back (let’s call him Slick Willy) added some of the best “double talk” I’ve ever heard.
Murray is my favorite author
Good for you man. It's amazing how effectively the international banking cartel subverted the United States in 100 years. The world wars really accelerated their plans due to being able to suspend the constitution during wartime. From losing our right to transact in real, fair, money, to losing our Allodial property rights, to our president being shot in the head. Apparently, freedom isn't free.
The right of revolution is free tho, because that's the one right granted to us directly from nature, without the need for permission from any kind of official intermediary. We are born with that one. Unfortunately, it only becomes useful when there are enough people agitating for freedom at the same time that the whole system kind of resonates at a natural frequency. And until then, it's all just noise... Even more unfortunate is the fact that the resonator that aligns all those disconnected waves is human suffering. As history has shown, the powers that be eventually and always just take too much, and because of system dynamics, all the agitating waves will at some point spontaneously align and form a current. At which point there is no obstruction, and no diversion that can hope to stem the tide. It's only a question of when the tide turns, will we be alive to see it? More and more I think we will, because these things are non-linear, they accelerate towards confrontation at an ever-increasing rate. Until the levy can no longer hold back the currents of the whole godamn ocean... People will not accidentally be killed. Long kept secrets will once again be known. Public perceptions will change. And whoever is left will get to breathe the precious fresh air of freedom.
END THE FED!
Economics of corruption. Static fossilized power structures, vs organized methods to build them up and break them down as needed.
"They tried it over and over a hundred times and they all failed." The root word "progress" in "progressive," is contradictory to the vast majority of the outcomes of their schemes in all areas.
Walter Block sums it up very, very well. So does Rothbard. In private property rights you have the ownership of yourself, and of your labor - from those premises you can derive all other valid rights.
Chomsky's socialism is utter economic nonsense, and has all the same problems that other socialists have failed to address. Who would do the work? How would people know how much to produce?
Tech progress - especially in the US - has traditionally been government funded, and I see no sign of that changing. Without government grants and government buying a product that otherwise was unsellable at the time, IBM would have never gotten the PC off the ground. Similarly the entire Internet was originally developed in the public sector using tax payer money. The private sector was slow coming to the party, and the big corporations are the main threat to freedom on the net now.
Chomsky objects neither to undesirable work being paid higher, nor to prices determined by a market of informed consumers making rational decisions.
My point is that property rights can be traded and lost, while while human rights can not. If human rights are supposed to be worth the paper they are written on, they have to be derived from something other than property rights.
fmueller1 Libertarians generally advocate the theory of natural rights. These rights cannot be lost, they can only be respected or violated. Without respect for private property rights, we are left with only arbitrary means to determine who is the violator and who is the victim when there is a conflict between individuals exercising their natural rights. Private property establishes clear boundaries where one is free to exercise these natural rights without becoming a violator.
Based.
such a brilliant mind its a shame he passed away relatively young at 68
There is no freedom without democracy. In a functioning democracy, the roles of government are many and varied, and go far beyond the protection of individual lives. To give just one example, one role of a democratic government is to defend the democracy against undemocratic forces like yourself.
Definition of SOCIALISM
1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
Cartels part goes hard
Fractionla reserve banking part as well
Role of the fed "Lender of last resort" "Expanded credit" "Elasticity"
39 secret meeting
@zsylvana There was no "free banking" in the US after the Jackson administration. It is true the Van Buren admin instituted what was arguably the best monetary system the US ever had. However, we've had several "central banks" prior to the fed. The first was during the revolutionary war that destroyed the Continental, the 2nd was chartered by Madison around 1816 and was dismantled by Jackson, and the third was instituted as the National Currency Act in the 1860s; a precursor to the FED.
Many thanks for the compliments. I too regret the shortness of responses here, which often leads to mindless accusations and name-calling instead of a reasoned debate, in which you are evidently interested. That said, being forced to condense a complex thought into a few lines can be a useful exercise. I haven't read the entire text you recommended, but that's no necessary to see that Rothbard sees the entire world through the tint of his idealog
In our republic the people were originally represented by their states. Your voice was heard at the national level by your state's reps/senators
People aren't ruled by the "wealthy". They are ruled by the government.
Education is run by the government so this is about what one can expect.
"What room for improvement do you see for our current economic system?" You just eliminate government violence from the system.
Who owns the government? Think it could be the "wealthy?"
Murray was the Lenny Bruce of economics.
Everything is interconnected. Everything causes or implies something definite. Reasoning is contextual and hierarchical, building knowledge upon knowledge. Surgery is based upon anatomy. Building a house is based on knowing how to hammer, saw, and measure. Who says A must say B. There is no safe place to escape from the destructiveness of the evasion of reason. Reality is real and will not obey man's wishes and tears. Survival requires knowledge. Emotions are not knowledge.
A total flopperoo, I'm going to use that. Great speech too.
1. There is nobody who knows nothing about finance.
2. No decision is ever just about finance.
Under the current system plenty of people with degrees from fancy business schools run companies into the ground. Others lacking such formal training, and having been dealt a pretty tough hand to begin with, nevertheless keep their check books balanced, and manage to have a few bucks left at the end of each month.
Do you think our current economic system is perfect, or is there room for improvement?
I am glad we finally agree on something!
I love that introduction
Loved this guy in Hoosiers.
LOL, I totally agree. But you have to admit, the CZcams commenting system was pretty much designed to let people make baseless assertions. Having a real, intelligent debate with CZcams comments is pretty much impossible.
No More War
It is the job of businessmen to maximize their profit. There is nothing wrong with that.
It is the job of a democratically elected government to regulate the economy so that everybody has a fair chance, and profits are shared for the advancement and benefit of society as a whole.
The expectation that markets are fair and government regulation is not required is just as utopian as communism.
Good lord, I could hardly get started. This guy should teach a class called "How to use four hundred words to say what you could easily say with twenty. Blah, blah, blah. Seven minutes in he has made about two points, if you can somehow dig them out of that gobbledygook. He missed his calling if he was never in govt.
In my opinion the world is so complex and change happens so fast that any rule by a privileged few "who understand the natural laws of economics" is clumsy at best, calamitous at worst. What we need is a true democracy that gives each individual a vote of equal weight, allows free markets to blossom for the good of all, and cautiously regulates them where a few driven by pathological greed would otherwise take advantage.
fmueller1 I hope you realize you are making the same argument Hayek made against socialism and central economic planning numerous times. Read all of Hayek's works and then try to argue that the complexity of economic forces are a reason we need socialism.
fmueller1 I hope you realize you are making the same argument Hayek made against socialism and central economic planning numerous times. Read all of Hayek's works and then try to argue that the complexity of economic forces are a reason we need socialism.
@AndrewLLFrazier I did not say rising wages in general, I said rising wages for "skilled workers". The good which such a wage rise accomplishes is to encourage workers to acquire those skills and, if such labor is no forthcoming, the replacement of that skill by other factors. Not allowing those wages to increase compounds an existing shortage. Similarly for a scarce item, the rising price enables a market to move toward equilibrium. Lower prices make goods less available.
The Fed is master of all it controls......Murray N. Rothbard
I am unaware of Chomky's stance on this issue, but in my view in a monarchy the monarch is sovereign and in a republic it's the people. I can't see how a state could be sovereign.
fmueller1 In a republic the sovereignty of the people is delegated to the state.
Forever the State's Greatest Enemy!!!
[oops, posted before completed] ideological sunglasses. His particular tint is so strong that reality is often indiscernible in the description of what he observes. Nobody frees us from having to do our own thinking, but when I read Chomsky I find a solid analysis of the world as we find it. I don't agree with all of his conclusions, but his observations are usually spot on, which is more than can be said about most, including Rothbard!
woop woop Murray Rothbard in the house
Collective ownership need not be applied to everything. I'd support everybody owning a toothbrush, but the toothbrush factory could be owned collectively by the people who make it run - workers and management. Similarly decisions about the egg sale could be made by interested parties - especially John - and not just the boss of the corporation that owns John's shack, and is based in Shanghai. But if people are never in control, then we can never have socialism - one thing less to worry about!
He doesn't miss it but you have to choose your battles in this war. People are waking up to the Lincoln pseudo-dictatorship fact lately, just takes time to raise the consciousness of the people.
Another member of the tribe
@MattQB1990 I am an economist. "Cumulative fiscal deficit" is not a sentence, nor even a catchphrase, but a functional description of the federal debt. A deficit is a negative balance. A fiscal deficit is a deficit which a government has in its finances. The cumulative fiscal deficit is therefore the negative balance a government accumulates over time by postponing with debt what they could clear with fiat money. That is, the federal debt is an accumulation of prior years' deficits.
Yet he still supports the system that commits those acts as a rule. You can not be critical of the machine and still support how it funds itself and be morally consistent. Not to mention how often he talks himself in circles to avoid the reality that he is merely playing the part of internalize opposition that is more of a pressure relief valve rather than a rational critic.
Murray Christmas!
And Hoppe holidays
Murray Rothbard was Jewish, he ain't got time for pagan nonsense.
Murray always reminded me of Burgess Meredith as the penguin
@suddenlyitsobvious Did you not notice I said "See The Mystery of Banking"? That is a book he published around the same time as this lecture that makes his views quite clear. I don't know how more public you can get than a book that is available on the internet for free.
Having run out of arguments entirely, name calling and posturing appear to be all you have left. But to speak with Aristophanes: "To be insulted by you is to be garlanded with lillies". I thank you for the honor!
@zsylvana-Rothbard holds that the central bank is responsible for the severity of the business cycle.
Fractional banking was always a factor. Rothbard was for 100% banking reserve requirement and 100% Gold standard.
@MattQB1990 I am not one of those "central bank advocates". I see no point in controlling inflation, prices, money supply or the economy through the banking system. Rather, I am advocating banks solely as adjudicators of financial contracts. The structure of the banking system I advocate would therefore be part of the federal structure of our judicial system. I would abolish the Federal Reserve, the private banking system and all debt beyond very short term, non-revolving loans.
1:03:37 he is right which is why ultimately the fed "printed" new money out of thin air. Of course it's done in a round about way to conceal and justify. Also regardless of what this does to the economy and business cycles, the system is permitting few to get extremely rich without producing anything (actually the financial system does provide a valuable service but not to the degree it is parasitic)