Ask Prof Wolff: The Conservative Libertarian Hustle
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 09. 2024
- A Patron of Economic Update asks: "Could you respond to Rand Paul's Town Hall video about the $3.5 Trillion spending bill. I find it to be a blatant misdirection of blame to the gov't instead of employers in the country. Clip: fb.watch/89IjRqxxm0; Full video: • 'We Cannot Keep Ignori... ."
This is Professor Richard Wolff's video response.
Submit your own question to be considered for a video response by Prof. Wolff on Patreon: / community .
Ask Prof Wolff is @democracyatwrk production. We are committed to providing these videos to you free of ads. Please consider supporting us on Patreon.com/economicupdate. Become a part of the growing Patreon community and gain access to exclusive patron-only content, along with the ability to ask Prof. Wolff questions like this one! Your support also helps keep this content free to the public. Spreading Prof. Wolff's message is more important than ever. Help us continue to make this possible.
_________________________________________________________________________
Learn more about d@w's NEW BOOK by award-winning print and broadcast journalist Robert "Bob" Hennelly.
"Stuck Nation: Can the United States Change Course on Our History of Choosing Profits Over People?" available at www.democracyatwork.info/books
“Hennelly brilliantly analyzes our capitalist crises and how individuals cope with them, tragically but often heroically. He helps us draw inspiration and realistic hope from how courageous Americans are facing and fixing a stuck nation.” - Richard D. Wolff
_________________________________________________________________________
Follow Wolff ONLINE:
Web: www.rdwolff.com
Patreon: / economicupdate
Twitter: / profwolff
/ democracyatwrk
Facebook: / economicupdate
/ richarddwolff
/ democracyatwrk
Subscribe to the EU podcast: economicupdate....
Shop our worker CO-OP made MERCH: democracy-at-w...
I used to be a Libertarian when I was so young that my brain hadn't finished developing yet. I saw all the bad things that the government did, how both sides seemed to be actively working against the people and thought that cutting the government down might be a good choice. Then I grew up. I realized that the _reason_ the government seemed to be against the common people was because it was captured by corporate interests. Then I realized that removing the government, which at least has to pay lip service and somewhat pretend to help people in order to keep their cushy jobs, would only remove the stumbling block to corporations completely taking over.
People who are Conservative Libertarians (who aren't rich) seem to think that corporations are altruistic. They fail to understand that removing government regulations only serves to remove ANY accountability to the problems they have. If We the People get pissed off enough, we can vote the politicians out, but what do we do when it's a CEO or corporate board with their own private military?
I am still a Libertarian, but I'm a _LIBERAL_ Libertarian. I believe in personal freedoms and civil liberties. But corporations are NOT people and should be HIGHLY regulated. Corporations are, by their very nature, immoral. Not A-moral, but IM-moral. All they care about is profits, no matter how many lives they destroy and how much damage they do to the environment. That is their nature. It takes MORAL people to control that and if it's not a person who is accountable to the people, then who would it be?
The richer people get, the more their morality fades away. The richest people in the country (or even the world) are the most sociopathic. That's what it takes to build corporations. You have to set aside your humanity and learn not to care about individuals or even communities. To be a successful CEO, you can only care about the company that you are running making as much money as possible, the only thing that matters is the bottom line. And if you won't do that, there's always someone else who will.
gee, It's a shame that you have no knowledge of history regarding anything you have babbled...
@@jgalt308 Which would make sense if A) I weren't talking about my own experience or B) you had ANY evidence to back up your own bullshit. My "knowledge" seems to be perfectly adequate since you clearly can't actually refute anything I've said (or you would have done so). So, the only thing you've done here is to show what a petulant, idiotic child you are. GOOD JOB!!!
drugs are bad, m'kay.
@@zoomzoom3950 What?
No you weren't. You are another dumbass leftist LARPing and repeating the same talking point that you found thousands of other leftists spewing and you think it's some great own. It isn't.
"Usually within minutes" lmao
the first libertarian on this video was Freeman with a 24 minute response time.
It's called gaslighting so that the focus is never on the real problem, and sadly people fall for it all the time.
Speaking of Marxism
@@ryanlewis490 Speaking of GOP + Trumpism. Also, adding to the climate causing gases in the upper atmosphere.
@@thethirdgeneration1738
We are talking about gaslighting.
Gaslighting is the only thing Marxist have because history, economics and rational
@@ryanlewis490 That is what I was talking about. The term gaslighting became in vogue recently due to Trump. The media picked up on it in the last few years.
Trump is one huge Gaslighting exploding gas bag of hot CO2 gas every time the lies put out of his mouth.
@@thethirdgeneration1738
Compared to a Marxist. No. All politicians lie and gasligh. Or most. But to be a Marxist your very existence, your very beliefs are based in gaslighting.
Marxism is a mental health disorder. Not a political philosophy
In other words, Libertarians want to free Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk from government regulation.
No, those are "your words"...a distinction that you clearly are not capable of grasping...
just like the fact that you, like Wolff, have no idea what "capitalism" is.
@@jgalt308 OK John Galt. The government oppresses you. You can go back to your Ayn Rand novel now.
but not from the handouts
@@prschuster Why? It was a novel...just like 1984 and Brave New World and many others.
Do you not know the difference???
Apparently so. Recall that Rand considered the term “altruism” a word equivalent to the f-bomb. 😎
The logical consequence of conservative libertarianism is not the end of government but it's privatization. In other words, it is an attack on democracy in favor of plutocracy where only those with capital have any say in the management of society. The idea that they are opposing the institutional coercion of the public is absurd, but they are either too self-deluded to face it or are in on the con in the hopes of maximizing wealth and power for themselves.
You’re absolutely right 👍🏼
👏👏👏👏
Exactly that.
What's screwed up is that I personally know of libertarians that are aware of this. Their hate goes so far that they would rather be shot by the troops of Amazon or Apple rather than our police force. I have no idea what's going on with them, the poison runs incredibly deep.
@@eldizo_ I think a lot of self described libertarians are just teenage boys in the bodies of men who would rather go down fighting for their personal greed than fight for a fairer society for all.
👍👏
Perfect analogy, thank you Dr. Wolff
I’m calling an ambulance lmao this vid is brutal
Brutal as in complete horseshit.
Yes this guy's a clown. Amazing how many people follow his blatant obvious garbage.
@@CesarGarcia-og8rz woah calm down
@@username19237 sure thing. I apologize 😌. Thank you for that
>guy who is more educated, well read and well written than you and 99.9% of the population is a clown
Lmaoooooo too funny 🤣 😆 😂 😄 💀 😁
Thank you Dr. Wolff!
Feisty Prof Wolff is my favorite Prof Wolff! ("Oh no no no no no." ...that was so funny.)
Thanks for making me laugh as this serf heads out to make more money for master this morning.
Stay well fellow serf
It sounds like Richard has the same opinion of Libertarians as I do.
Greed is God in Capitalism
I would love to see something from you on the current energy crisis hitting the UK. As an avid follower of your work and someone working in the industry. What's happening now with the gobbling up of the smaller fish is so indicative of a system that just doesn't work. If you've already done something on this then I'd be grateful if you could point me that way. Keep up the good fight Richard ✌️💪
Definitely does not work. Just look at Texas! ZERO incentive to even be bothered to adequately maintain much less update the system. And NO ONE EVER gets charged with MURDER when their negligence kills.
As someone else stated the rich and powerful gobble up the small independent business to monopolize or do as sharks do. Eat all the little fishies.
Capitalism has always been bloody and brutal, but at their violent inception, driving the serfs off the land, forcing them into the cities (where, if they were "lucky," they found work---if they didn't find a job and were found vagrant, they could be executed, there were many draconian laws directed at the new proletariat), at the beginning of their violent epoch, they could make the claim they were raising the quality of life for the masses.
"I have limited patience" lmfao 🤣😂😂
It's the same here in the UK. Our only growth industry is libertarian think-tanks and troll farms!
I just learned what is a "conservative libertarian" is. Thank you, Prof Wolff.
Thanks for calling him/them out. Want to know what Corpotations can do for you should visit Flint, MI. Oh that's the Government's fault. LOL
Perfectly said!
Bravo; as usual you are spot on.
Thank you very much for speaking the truth.
Avoiding the question is your understanding of "spot on"???
It is so obvious that it gets overlooked.
That is because people don’t have critical thing skills.
That is why Prof. Wolf has to explain it to us.
That is because of our education system educates workers not thinkers!
If you had "critical thinking skills" or "logical reasoning" skills...you would understand there is no rational explanation involved.
Should not have to be accountants. Lawyers. Activists. Overseers. Analysts. These government employees are supposed to represent the taxpayers. Not corporate welfare recipients.
@@petergraham8415 Life doesn't work like that...you need to acquire as much information as possible
about things that can affect you negatively...and associate with others who also understand this.
humans are faced with "game theory" choices of whether to cooperate or cheat...and they will cheat
whenever the consequences of it are minimal. In terms of the present, the laws are written to protect cheaters,
and those in the "government" first...( although with the knowledge you can protect yourself easier
against the government than you can against private cheaters...who using "contracts", which is
anything you sign...or agree to ( terms and conditions for use ) which are effectively a "waiver of rights"
and you have no choice because if you do not agree, you will simply be denied access to the product or service
you wish to use. )
This has been the law federally since 1952, and in every state since 1970.
Once this happens to you, you are lost...because since you failed to "reserve your rights" as
required by law...they are considered to have been "waived" and can not be raised at a later date...
this is your government and your country at every level...and every fool that raises the issue of "constitutional rights" is
an "idiot" because you don't have any...and it doesn't matter how loudly you yell...meanwhile all the people,
that you rely on for information...regardless of your "political views" none of them are either aware of it
or are too afraid to bring it up...and all their rhetoric is meaningless and all their outrage, protests,
efforts, and risk-taking...was and is doomed to fail, before it even starts.
So yes you do need to be all those things and more...and it still might not matter...because you are all
looking in the wrong place.
I've been kind of looking around. Is there an example where this libertarian thing was actually applied and made things better for people? I'm not talking investors and factory owner types, I mean the general populace. Maybe there is a little known country in Asia, Libertaria, where the living standard for their average resident is really good, but it sure is a well kept secret.
Government used to enforce segregation. We got that out of the way now we have an open and mixed race society and it is better.
But strange most of these "libertarians" never seem to brag about this victory over the Government.
Yeah. How many different examples would you like? When government got out of the way for FDA approval and red tape nonsense, a vaccine (whether you like it or not) was created and distributed in record time. The more libertarian era of US history (AKA the Industrial Revolution) literally created the middle class. Libertarians were advocating for marriage equality before Democrats ever did. Hong Kong went from being a part of authoritarian China to massively prosperous when it took a more libertarian route. Same kind of story for Singapore.
@@ExPwner
The FDA example is silly. Extreme circumstances necessitated extreme action for one. The FDA btw is now funded in majority by the very companies they are supposedly regulating too. Since that change, the number of annual evaluations rejected by the FDA dwindled to very low numbers. Definitely no conflict of interest could happen there right? So you wonder how anti smoking drugs approved for years now are found to cause cancer or some other harm and were known about and pushed anyway. Yet you somehow trust large corporations implicitly with regulating themselves, especially in a health context, despite much evidence to the contrary?
Singapore, is nothing close to being a libertarian exemplar nation. It has many highly regulated sectors of the market, 80% of the population live in government controlled housing. Even cars are heavily regulated and taxed, so many people don't own one. The media is basically government controlled. There is one effective party in power. Opposition parties are nominal only.
You could be put in jail for littering or chewing gum in the 80s. You should see what they did during lockdowns. It was highly authoritarian.
The extreme level of stress driven by their education system starting from age 0 pretty much is insane. I have friends and family there. It's almost obscene what they do to their kids in the aim of productivity and overachievment. They also give people money to encourage them to have kids lmao. They are so overworked in general it probably makes no sense for many to even try having kids.
You could also argue that once they opened up a bit, the govt control of how the markets were loosened in targeted ways is what actually lead to their economic success. Much like China. They deregulated the ease of doing business and lowered taxes, but everything else is tighter than Mao's sphincter.
What an absolutely silly thing to try and pass off as a win for libertarianism. 😂
To the OP, don't believe this dude, but do your own research and check up on my claims. There are no libertarian countries, for a reason. It's a ridiculous ideology that most people can see through with a bit of examination and enough clarity to not want to ever try in a pure form. The already most ruthless, aggressive and powerful people would simply be given more leeway to get away with whatever they wanted, no oversight at all. Like we see today but greatly amplified and without that damn veneer of a collective good being a worthy thing, unless in the aid of whatever profit us little folk provides in tithe to these new Lords of Libertopia.
@@MonkeyBreadMagic no, the FDA example is not silly. It's a fact that most drugs are kept off of the market artificially longer than they should because the FDA is inefficient and ineffective. They routinely commit Type I and Type II errors (taking too long to approve good drugs and erroneously approving unsafe drugs) which costs lives. The private market does a better job and has consistently called out bad drugs before the FDA has recalled them, so your moronic "hurr regulating itself!" nonsense is just wrong.
Citation needed for claims on Singapore. Last time I checked they rank high on the economic freedom index.
"They deregulated the ease of doing business and lowered taxes"
Thanks for playing!
@@ExPwner Yes your FDA example is very silly. I already said exactly why. And the OP asked for a place or nation that may have tried libertardian beliefs in totality, not a very small narrow example that you just try to use as a proxy because no such actual place exists, historically or currently. You simply believe there is never an obvious conflict of interest at play with businesses regulating themselves, because you discount that corporations can and will do corrupt ant-trust things in the interest of maximising profit. This belief is highly naive and very amusing.
"Citations needed". Try the Internet, it's an amazing tool developed and funded by a government, you may have heard of it. Try doing some research, and check my claim. That's what an honest person really wanting to know would do. Instead of relying on making boring talking point libertard hyperbolic claims that you clearly have only regurgitated superficially from somewhere and never bothered to actually confirm or find any other information about other aspects of Singapore's governance that are totally antithetical to Rand's retarded ideas. I've been to Singapore many many times. I helped evaluate government programs of theirs wrt Human resource capability of the public service to see if any of their approaches to development of workforce capacity of the public sector was fit for the New Zealand context, in my day job.
"last time you checked" Be honest, did you even check yourself? Yes it's higher on that one index. Is NZ also a libertarian hot-spot according to you? I live there. We're number 2 on that scale. How about Estonia? Australia?
The fact that libertards get so hard for the AUTHORITARIAN government of Singapore is a big sign as to your cognitive abilities. The fact that you can discount all the other authoritarian and government controlled aspects I mentioned and still call it a sign of a "libertarian" win is so desperate and silly on face value that it really doesn't deserve a response. But here I am wasting too much of my time on you and your angry ranty friend J Galt. But I will not waste another iota of my valued time on such a tag team duo of such clear intellectual giants!
The OP sounds intelligent enough to do their own research, and unlike you, will likely quickly and easily find out how wrong you are, so no worries. As for you, I don't really give a single shit what you believe. You already have shown how lazy you are in not knowing anything about Singapore while using it as some prime exemplar. Thanks for the cognitive dissonance however, which is amusing to observe.
“Implementing Extreme Social Darwinism, one grave at a time.”
Keep your classes coming. 👍🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰
His class is NOT your class...
I'm frankly surprised that Prof Wolff doesn't introduce the concept of Anarcho Capitalism in this commentary.
Yeah, what's a few more meaningless words...among so many others.
@@jgalt308 A person who takes his name from a shitty Ayn Rand novel so vapid that only sociopaths can make it through is criticizing words. Nice.
@@Eudaemon1 these people have lead poisoning, don't even bother arguing with them
as always ON POINT !
This vid is fire🔥
"And I have limited patience"
Oof, I felt that.
not to mention "there usual level of reality..." 🤣
Nice Yellow Vest you've got in the background proff 😁
The only thing I can say about conservative libertarian is, it's an oxymoron. The two don't coincide in any good direction.
Except that if you're in the top one percent, it's a good direction if you don't care much about the other 99 or just think they can all pull themselves up by their own bootstraps like a Horatio Alger novel.
@@abeautifuldayful You know he couldn't give two rats asses about the other 99%. 99% of the people in Congress don't give a shit about the other 99%. Let's just keep it real. The Democrats are now the Republicans of the '80s and '90s. That's how sad it is.
@@DonaldAJr Who are you talking about? The hidden ruling elites are the one percent. They don't care about the two-party system except to make sure it doesn't get along so they can keep the status quo and reap the benefits not going to the rest of us. That's who I'm talking about in case I wasn't clear to you.
Well then if that's the only thing you can say...you have said nothing. But thanks for sharing...NOTHING!!!!
@@jgalt308 technically I wasn't clear on that but I do agree with everything you're saying. I've been saying that for I don't know how many years. Just listen to George Carlin the comedian who passed away a few years back or many years back, I can't remember when. He has no chill when it comes to telling how things really are politically.
Thank you for being part of the human awakening ❤️🍃
The only time they don’t blame the government is when they say that fractional reserve banking, whether backed by the government or not, is what causes economic downturns.
But government is the source of that...so you really have no idea what the words mean.
@@jgalt308 cope
@@CripplingDuality Identiying has no relevance to "coping"...I am coping just fine. Ignorance is the rule, not the exception.
@@jgalt308 source of what? Fractional reserve banking does not even exist anymore. Old, long defunct system. lolbertarians stick to movies J galt lol
@@henrygustav7948 Really...then why are banks required to have "reserves"? You're not
too bright are you or very well informed???
big thanks
LOL Salty Prof. Wolff is always fun to watch.
Salt Rand the snail!
This is the Knowledge problem. Any central planner or the government so to speak doesn't have the means or capability to determine how to distribute goods efficiently for society. Libertarians have a point I should say, both theoretically and in application in the real world. The commentary by Prof. Wolff was once again one of those 'good-to-hear' critiques you hear from time to time but lacked actual application in the real world and will just stay as an idea for the rest of time...
In short, the idea is wonderful. It’s only the reality that didn’t cooperate.
Ron Paul is a somewhat reasonable person, although he absolutely has some quackery with his libertarian bent. One of the most quack ideas was name his son after Ayn Rand. I am making this up, but its probably true.
He's a whack job. Plain and simple. Even his neighbor tried to beat the daylights out of him. Every single Libratarian I know, is a wacko. That's no lie. Their coo cuckoo. I've argued with them everywhere! in 5 states.
Very effective. Especially the last bit. Governments do not exist in a vacuum, nor are the immune to lobbying which is at least as much a source of influence as any other you could imagine, and most likely more so.
Some day we can become a truly participatory democracy, and that will end the blaming the government nonsense.
Excellent analysis!
Thanks ever so much, prof. Wolff, for your tireless work.
Split the nation up. Let us all have the economic system we prefer.
Yes!
Would love to see Harriet’s take on Libertarians from a Psych POV. Is it just misanthropy and greed? I know many poor Libertarians. Why do they carry water for corporations and the donor class?
prof's at the end-of-career george carlin stage now
"Good, good, let the hate flow through you."
And that is why political economic lobbying has to be considered a crime against humanity when it is used for private or gain.
*The* *reality* *of* *the* *rich* *and* *the* *poor* *is* *this:* *the* *rich* *invest* *their* *money* *and* *spend* *what* *is* *left.* *The* *poor* *spend* *their* *money* *and* *invest* *what* *is* *left*
As a single mother crypto investment has helped me pay my bills and live happy... Wish I invested from the early days
Every wise individual should have a portfolio in crypto or stock market
I wanted to trade crypto but I really don't know how to do that 😒😂
He has really made a good name for himself
I was able to maximize more profit with the assistance of sir Harrison Vincent, am really grateful
Nice one Prof 👍
he's absolutely spitting
Bingo!!............right on Prof.
Nothing " right " involved...but send money, that is the point of this site...no intellect required.
Then you too will be allowed to play the question lottery...whose answer Wolff will avoid.
Wolff said no thrills, just the analysis
Libertarian Conservative Republican. Man, sort that one out.
Okay, I'll try. Extreme liberty means those with extreme wealth in extreme capitalism from extreme conservatism from extreme right-wing radicals get to rule with extreme power to the point of enslavement if they wish or desire.
@@abeautifuldayful That's basically the big difference between left vs right liberalism as far as I can tell. Left liberalism is about freedom from oppression nd exploitation first and foremost, a collective freedom. Right liberalism (or libertarianism as it's often called to differentiate) seems to me like the freedom of those capable of it to oppress and exploit for their own benefit, an individualist form of freedom aptly described as social darwinism. If left liberalism is the embodiment of "all for one and one for all" then libertarianism must be "one for one and none for all".
@@Arbaaltheundefeated Also, libertarianism gets the whole pie at its palatial business tower party, but uninvited left liberalism gets to sweep up the crumbs under the table, if they're even lucky to find a broom and a few crumbs, long after the party's over or moved on to the after-party behind high-security gates at the one-percenter's gilded mansions.
@@abeautifuldayful Thanks!!
@@oldfan1963 It's my pleasure. All these labels people give themselves sound good until you dissect what's underneath the veneer to see if they make sense in any way, let alone the way you might be thinking or they want you to think!
Dan, Rand, it’s all the same.🤣
Rand Paul says he forgot to send paperwork disclosing his wife's stock purchase in remdesivir by gilead.
Republican Sen. Rand Paul and his wife had not bought stock in an individual company in at least 10 years before Kelley Paul purchased shares of the drug company Gilead Sciences in early 2020
That purchase was made one day after the first clinical trial began for Gilead’s remdesivir as a treatment for Covid-19, records show.
The Kentucky senator disclosed his wife’s purchase on Wednesday, more than 16 months after the legal deadline for such disclosures by a member of Congress.
Paul sits on the Senate health committee, which was briefed on the coronavirus threat a month before his wife purchased the Gilead shares.
So they think anarchy is better? I guess when you’re on the winning team - at least for the moment.
solid
Love when rick gets sassy
'Libertarian conservative' is redundant, in any event, as the 'free' market they favor would only reinforce and exaggerate all existing power relationships: they are conservatives because they are advocating for more of the same, and more so.
I’m unaware if you have commented on it before but Professor Wolff I’d love to hear your views on the Resource Based Economy as proffered by Jacques Fresco. There is a lot I like about it and some I don’t but I would sincerely love to hear your analysis.
That approach to "economics" would be "empirically based"...and would be subject to actual testing.
That would eliminate all the babbling that is the present state of "economics"...and poor Wolff would
be lost...since he can't define or represent "capitalism" correctly...and as wandered so far off
the beaten path that he thinks...the employer/employee and democracy are somehow relevant
to "economic" theories...along with other foolish claims...which are both historically ignorant as well
logically inconsistent with reality.
In any case, you have to pay to play "ask prof wolff"...only to have him avoid the question
completely...or spend most of his time, distorting "the question" so that it fits the "answers"
he has already given.
You're on a role these past few weeks, Prof. I've been thinking of creating power maps in my community based on your comments and see if they serve as good infographics to help push our community to question more throughout this COVID winter indoors and most likely isolating and keeping our bubbles small.
My big issue with you Prof Wolff is that you view everything through the lens of the population is/should be predominantly employees of employers. This is a dated thought process.
No. Perfect is only when all people worldwide own all things worldwide.
Why would you or anyone want anything else that is not perfect??
Right and "left" libertarians (incl. Wolff) are indistinguishable in many ways.
For one, by erroneously (deceptively) referring to "The Government" as if it's some abstract, autonomous, ethereal entity, rather than what it clearly is: an institution that serves the interests of one class against the interests of other classes. (Wolff is not an idiot, he does this consciously.)
This leads into another major similarity between right and "left" libertarians: both consistently denounce any working class government as "authoritarian" whenever the capitalist destroyers are forcefully prevented from raping, robbing, and re-enslaving the working class.
Richard Wolff isn't a libertarian. He constantly advocates for big state policies.
I agree that the state serves the political class over the rest of us.
Any institution that initiates force against others is authoritarian. Capitalists are not destroying anything. They aren't raping or robbing or enslaving you either.
@@ExPwner You have a great power of denial. What is causing the extreme environmental damage, government? In a post above, I reported how the paper mill in the small town where I was raised used the river going through town as a toilet. There was 10 feet of rotting paper pulp coating the river floor and fish were black inside. The river smelled like a toilet until the environmental movement in the 70's and RESTRICTIONS were created by GOVERNMENT, requiring pollution controls. Lett to themselves, companies will pollute earth to death. Where have you been all your life, in a basement reading Ayn Rand?
@@willchristie2650 Absolutely! I also grew up in a town dominated and destroyed by the robber baron owners of a papermill. Same story in my hometown.
In our case, the half-assed "clean-up" only occurred after there were regulations requiring it *AND* the papermill owners were given *PUBLIC FUNDS* to (partially) clean-up the mess which they created and got rich by creating! This was after the same criminal owners *STOLE* the pensions from every single employee and retiree when the plant shut down (~20 years ago)!
Today, the river is still dead. The city water (200 ft. deep ground well!) is still toxic. Many square miles of formerly pristine farmland are too polluted to till. The town is in every way poorer than it was even *before* the damn papermill was built. But the absentee-owners got rich, and then richer still, at the expense of every resident of the town.
One of the benefits of a mixed economy is that libertarians can credit everything they like to the Market and, as is pointed-out here, blame the government for everything they don't like (or that you don't like and they'll pretend not to like, as is often the case for racism-they often will go along with you if you say you don't like it, but many of them really don't believe it really exists).
I wish I could super like this video.
inflation....when the money supply grows faster than the growth in goods and services it represents ...govt controls the growth of the money supply.
The issue is that I have noticed that in this country many claim to know and understand Economics by watching news, reading this, and listening to politicians, and millionaires.
Anyone that want to understand sin depth the issue needs to take an economics course to understand jn in depth. Producer surplus ( profits), consumer surplus ( corporations ain’t like this cause it is benefiting you), negative and positive externalities and how each party benefits. Then, many will start to realize that the entire economical system has been set up form the beginning to benefit the corporations not the consumers. That’s why they keep reinvesting surpluses and expanding.
It's not a zero sum game. Consumers have benefitted.
*Waves hand*
You will feed the algorithm
IN MY EYES THE ALGORITHM IS EVIL!
@@drumlessons833 WELL THEN YOU ARE LOST
I don't like Libertarian ideology
It's dry and coarse and gets everywhere
Remember a thing called a labor report?
Unfortunately, the libertarians on the left are also against government. Government is the solution not the problem. We need public ownership of the MoP not private coops which are no different than private corporations.
The government gave you fiat and inflation caused by fiat...so the government is the problem...
and as the authority it has always been the problem...that is could BE a solution, is always
a possibility...that it never has been IS A FACT!!!!!
That people OBEY the authority or fail to resist or adapt to it...is the reason government is
the problem...and sane people DO NOT expect what is THE PROBLEM...to be its SOLUTION.
You seem to believe that it is the solution...and NOT the problem...that would mean you are INSANE???
No sir. Sounds like you are incapable of making simple distinctions, such as a person driving a bus and a bus. The problem is the driver not the bus itself. Wow, kid if you cant figure that out then you definitely disfunctional.
@@PoliticalEconomy101 Gee, I already explained both the car and the driver...
to which you had no response...your "functional illiteracy" is not my problem.
When you have an argument, feel free to try again...
@@jgalt308 Imagine believing in Ayn Rand lmao, so arrogant
@@jgalt308 1. Define inflation and types of inflation. Tell us how a Fiat currency works.
2. Fiat money and inflation, neither are the problem.
I wish Prof Wolff would debate Dave Ramsey's ass in debate.
Wolff would lose just like he always does because Wolff is a liar and a fraud, not a good faith debater. He made Destiny even sound reasonable.
I just call them corporate feudalists
That's because you're a dumbass that doesn't know what feudalism even means.
@@ExPwner Well he is partially correct...since the rentier aspect precedes "capitalism"
as do the aristocratic holding companies, East India Co, Dutch East India Co. etc precede
the later "corporate models"...but neither is "capitalism" in its productive sense.
It's a meaningless combination of words that conveys no useful information...and
this is the typical level of "intellect" that this site has to offer...by its host and his sycophants
It is not worthy of consideration...and only deserves a single word in response...Why???
to demonstrate your point. ( I realize it's is tempting to respond in kind, but why bother...
since the only thing that will result is more of the same? )
@@jgalt308 Yep.
Government is supposed to govern the speed at which the vampires (greed) are sucking the joy out of US.
I'm sure that definition exists somewhere...but governments make laws and they might even have
a constitution that is indicative of how they are supposed to govern which would indicate what the
purpose of those laws should be directed toward.
@@jgalt308 X-Files. Starships like the Enterprise are primitive. Vampires (greed) are using a darkship called the Whitehouse to suck the joy out of life and devour the planet. It's Also how the hostile alien invaders keep their "human cattle" corralled.
This darkship is using a cloaking device called Jesus (love) to make itself invisible.
Darkness (business) exists so that stars like US have a place to shine in heaven (joy, beauty and harmony).
Stars like US don't exist to be sucked out of heaven by a giant black hole in space called "greed" and it's ignorance (hate).
Imagine how bad it would be without the government.
So what's a progressive libertarian?
👍👍
Rand is a moderate at best.
I do have to ask this question which comes to mind every time I hear Liberals, conservatives and their ilk trying to convince us that they have logic, they make sense, they are there for the good of ordinary people. My question is, do these conservative thinking people have brains, and grey matter that is different, from genuine human beings, who do their utmost to bring equality, and fight what is right to create a happy society?
They say, "never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity". However, I am willing to give Wolff the benefit of the doubt and assume he is being maliciously deceptive here.
Obviously he is aware that libertarians consistently oppose government intervention. One of the main reasons for this position is to avoid the possibility of the corrupting influence of government centralization. Yet, Wolff is content to deceive his audience. He makes the incredible leap of attributing the role of lobbyists and government to advocates of liberty.
How exactly can one lobby, if there are no government regulators to lobby? Lobbyists have no role in the laissez-faire system.
This is just one of many examples of where Wolff's program requires deliberate deceptions or perhaps in the case of his unfortunate viewers, a distinct lack of curiosity.
But if they don't have to go through government, then no one can enforce rules against pollution of common areas, for worker protections when they are taken advantage of by employers (long working hours, no benefits, unsafe quarters, etc), and so on. People with power could ignore all the externalities of what they do, since no one would be big enough to stop them. Even the most ardent militias are not going to overtake employers who have convinced employees they do everything in their interest, who can threaten to take away pay and employment.
@@audiho When big corp pollutes within the guidelines of the EPA and they're not liable for damages, you're argument falls apart. Also regulatory capture as alluded to above. You may also find the I-81 interstate in Syracuse an interesting case.
A private law society would solve this. Has anyone here actually read libertarian theory? Everyone is so sure of themselves, but the inaccuracies are glaring.
"externalities" ffs!
I recommend Hans Hermann Hoppe - Democracy: The God That Failed.
"When big corp pollutes within the guidelines of the EPA and they're not liable for damages, you're argument falls apart." Doesn't this suggest that guidelines should be strengthened? Just because a law does not result in its intended effects does not mean we should throw the baby out with the bathwater.
@@DolphLongedgreens And why are you huffing over the term externality?
@@audiho That's certainly one approach, but it does nothing to address the underlying problems of political economy and regulatory capture.
On one hand you decry lobbyist manipulation and corruption, yet on the other you conclude that the power and purview of the state should be increased. You can't get there from here.
A for 'externalities', in this example they are being actively externalized by the state. A purely private system would take them in account.
Just try the Hoppe book and get back to me. You can't learn libertarian theory from a marxist.
This whole comment section is a bunch of people who you use some work in taking care of their emotions. After that...start accepting that you don't know about what you don't know about.
I don't care much for living in a plutocracy. I won't leave without my adult son and my beloved black arabian stallion. Then there's the small matter of decided where to go. Maybe keep the house in New Mexico for the winter months and become duel citizens in Canada and the United States.
I like how said “agents”. Like in Matrix
well stated
While I generally agree, the (mainly local) governments forcing business shutdowns, while not subsidizing lost paychecks and rent, *is* the government's fault (and is unique to thy United States).
I don't care much for living in a plutocracy. I won't leave without my adult son and my beloved black arabian stallion. Then there's the small matter of decided where to go. Maybe keep the house in New Mexico for the winter months and become duel citizens in Canada and the United States although Canadian housing is really pricy so I'm not so sure. We might do better in an expat community in Mexico. My son works from home online so as long as we have good WiFi service we can live anywhere. My son's live in girlfriend would probably prefer Mexico.
I don't mean to be argumentative or anything, but can someone please explain to me how the employer class causes pandemic inflation?
They literally raised the prices, sure there are other factors, but they raised the prices
@@jaydenburgher2651 Other factors? They raised the prices because they raised the prices? For an "economics professor" to just blame capitalism, and imply that it's just employers shows the pathetic level of his discourse.
They didn't, but Richard Wolff will lie and blame capitalism for everything he doesn't like because he's a grifter.
@@chuckleaf8027 oh thats not the reason why the capitalists raised the prices, not for its own sake. I'm just saying that inflation is when capitalists raise prices, so of course they are blame for that
@@jaydenburgher2651 Cool story bro.
A government of, by and for the people VS Autocracy
Of the people, for the people, by the people….but the people are retarded - Osho
Even Biden knows socialists are goofy
When a country has insider traders in government who get away Scot free it would be time to throw in the towel for me.
Of course in the US corruption is normal, but it really thrives anywhere there are incentives to do so. Corruption and waste could exist in a pure socialist society too, but I believe there are fewer incentives to do so.
To be a Libertarian you have to either believe in a mandate that restricts maximum market share ownership or income of a company or individual, or you have to believe that monopolies are good.
Because no government control or regulations in capitalism means over time winners and losers will result in monopolies occurring, and capital (and power) will consolidate into fewer and fewer hands. Which will result in effective tyranny.
Conservatives need to realize that blind respect of private property and 'a free market' will lead to private tyrannies. If somebody can control the lives of massed amounts of people without their consent or input - that is tyranny, whether they are a fascist dictator or a corporate CEO.
No, you don't.
"Because no government control or regulations in capitalism means over time winners and losers will result in monopolies occurring"
No it doesn't. Historically this is false and you're talking out of your ass.
" respect of private property and 'a free market' will lead to private tyrannies."
Again says no evidence ever from the dumbass talking out of his ass.
"If somebody can control the lives of massed amounts of people without their consent or input - that is tyranny, whether they are a fascist dictator or a corporate CEO."
Zero CEOs can do this to you, and the libertarian approach never advocates for people to be able to violate your individual consent. Why are you intentionally lying about this?
@@ExPwner You and I clearly live on different planets, James. Repeal of Glass-Steagall (a government regulation) in 1999 has lead to massive consolidation in the financial sector. There are fewer banks than ever, and it looks like the top 12 big banks in the financial sector has an effective monopoly on private capital. Pretty much every sector has a tendency towards monopoly. Google controls search. Facebook is the social media site. Walmart is the dominant market share of brick & mortar retail. Amazon is a near-monopoly online retailer and delivery service. The Federal Communications Act deregulated media companies - now about 6 billionaires own all the major print and cable media outlets.
So when you say "Historically this is false" - what do you mean by that? Striving for and the acquisition of monopolies are everywhere in American history. Did you ever hear of Robber Barons? Standard Oil? Or the examples I listed in the above paragraph?
And when a CEO and corporate board decide to say, move a factory out of the country, thus destroying the livelyhood of thousands in a community - I would say 'individual consent' has been violated, if the workers wanted to continue working. That is what I am talking about when I say tyranny of capitalism. It allows private individuals to make decisions which affect the lives of thousands (or even millions).
@@gfarrell80 no, the partial repeal of GS was not what created the massive consolidation. Most of the failed banks in 2008 either could have already merged under GS or didn't merge after its repeal. Furthermore, it was more regulation and government interference that made banks MORE consolidated after 2008.
No, most sectors do not naturally tend towards monopoly. Google is not a monopoly on search. Facebook is not a monopoly on social media. Amazon is not a monopoly on retail.
When I say historically this is false I mean exactly that. Your so-called period of "robber barons" was none of the sort. Standard Oil never had 100% of the market. It got up to something like 85% or 90% and declined on its own, and at no point was it robbing people nor was it barons. It instead lowered the cost of oil to consumers.
You clearly don't understand consent. Consent is a two way street. When you walk off of a job, you are voicing your consent to leave the job. When the employer shuts down, moves shop or fires you, that is HIS consent to end the relationship. There is no tyranny in someone firing you.
@@ExPwner well yes, it does appear we are living on different planets.
# of banks started declining in 2000. From a little over 8,000 FDIC banks in 2000, to a little over 4,000 banks in 2019. That is a pretty dramatic drop, representing a massive consolidation. And you're going to tell me government regulation caused this? What specific government regulation was it that caused our number of FDIC banks to drop by about half over 20 years? Because the trend was well underway before 2008.
Market share does not have to be 100% to be a monopoly. Any single corporation or individual who controls 50% or more of a market has monopoly tendencies. A collection of large corps can also form a cartel, with monopolistic controls by cooperating amongst themselves. If you bring up Standard Oil, acknowledging that they had 85 to 90% of the market share, and say 'they were not a monopoly', well, you're nuts.
@@gfarrell80 why would you limit it to FDIC banks? Also why are you ignoring that there was government intervention and regulation AFTER 2008 that consolidated?
You can look up the history of banking including Dodd Frank and other responses to the 2008 crisis. The Fed/government basically FORCED banks to buy out the failed ones as part of their response.
What are monopoly tendencies? Go ahead and tell me, since Standard Oil was still lowering the price and didn't raise it. I don't want your ignorant narrative, I want facts.
what does Rand Paul say about the Sackers and its opioids?Well....waiting
I don't think I can stomach hearing his condescending drawl for more than a few seconds
@@coldsnap999 so if he said anything about Big Pharma opiate pushers, it would be with-drawl, eh? Bah-dah-bah.
👍
My question is, Why can't people see that Capitalism continuously has to eat? It nevers stops eating, and it can't stop eating or it will die.
False.
@@ExPwner proof I am wrong please.
@@Sweeney-Kubach Well then you are a "capitalist" but you can prove me wrong...just stop eating.
@@jgalt308 I have stop eating, because I got laid off my job because I need hernia surgery. I haven't eaten anything in 3 days. So piss off my sarcastic friend.
@@Sweeney-Kubach Good for you but starvation takes a little longer...you can look it up.
Deprivation of water takes less...but I'm sorry you are "offended" by facts that contradict your
attempted equation...maybe you should have given it a little more thought...although you are actually correct...
all life is "capitalistic"...you just don't have the "intelligence" to understand why, even when you get it right.
Damn, this is one of the most based videos Wolff has ever put out
Biased????
@@jgalt308
No, based.
@@AlexDeLarge1 Really??? Another word that has no meaning attached...and no recognizable usage that is intelligible???
When the verb base is used with its “to find a foundation or basis for” meaning, it usually pulls a preposition along with it to do the job. Typically and historically, that preposition is on, or somewhat less frequently, upon:
Our modern prophetic idealism is narrow because it has undergone a persistent process of elimination. We must ask for new things because we are not allowed to ask for old things. The whole position is based on this idea that we have got all the good that can be got out of the ideas of the past.
- G.K. Chesterton, What’s Wrong with the World, 1910
The prepositions on and upon seem logical enough for the phrase: you find a foundation or basis for something on or upon something else: you build on that foundation or basis.
But increasingly we are seeing off filling the role on and upon hold:
Diets at the time, for rich and poor alike, were based off the humoral science of the ancient Greeks, which held that unevenness between the body’s four humors-blood, phlegm, choler (yellow bile) and melancholy (black bile)-caused every kind of ailment.
- Michael Snyder, The New York Times Style Magazine, 17 July 2020
So you are definitely a "trail blazer"...but it may take a while for the rest of the English speaking
world to catch up and they already have a hard enough time as it is.
Especially when "biased" actually is more accurate as a description and fits.
@@jgalt308 step away from the computer and read something less cringe than Ayn Rand.
@@jgalt308
Everyone here knows what I am talking about except you, apparently.
Yes it's even more simple the bureaucracy writes and government says but only sometimes why they talk economics rest remain blind invisible drama
I hope you are fine
What else would cause inflation but the government pumping money (increasing demand) into the financial system and shutting down businesses (decreasing supply)?
The Fed and Congress definitely affect the money supply. While Wolff didn’t talk about it in this video, he has in others. The government Can def have blame for inflation.
However, it’s not that simple. The private sector also has an affect on inflation. Private banks also can create money when providing loans, which has happened a ton in recent decades
LULA ESTADISTA
#eattherich
Exactly professor!
Truth be told, a private exchange system strips labor-capacity from the working class.
Labor-capacity is turned into a commodity with a price on it is only possible when factories, offices, cities, are all privately owned.
In the classical view, the forces of production, represented by industrialized machinery and tools, technology, cities, transportation etc., even science, were once in the possession of the workers as the property of the workers but never as the property of the working class as a whole except in Russia and China where a worker's state in the name of communism in its own conflicts was, at times, communism in the name of a worker's state, I view as historic lessons and examples of socialism evolving, but in the period preceding capitalism going as far back as Ancient Rome, the means of production were the property of the workers. In some places the workers were property alongside property as slaves, but when workers were made propertyless, lost their workshops, land and tools, what is left in them is their labor-capacity. In exchange for wages representing the necessaries of life is how the working poor acquire the ability to reproduce their labor capacity in the capitalist epoch. The right wing cannot argue against a criticism of privatization when that criticism looks at privatization from the standpoint of the working poor in society. The conflict that arises in a person finding their labor-capacity produces value for its buyer but nothing for its owner, is a raw deal and the wages received for that work can only buy so much and not enough to live is far lower than the value created on the job is the basic schematic for a capitalist society.
Wrong dumbass. The labor theory of value and Marxist exploitation theory are wrong. Learn real economics.
@@ExPwner My GPS tracking device tells me you are behind a desk in Langley, Va.
Unfortunately, labor is " a means of production"...and absent "slavery"...you are simply trying
to establish..."labor" as a superior element and as more deserving...which you have
failed to do. ( and have employed all manner of irrelevant rhetoric to avoid the singular task required. )
Land, labor, capital...that's what you have to work with...and you can start anytime.
@@jgalt308 You are not wrong you are a tool when you call yourself a means of production and you are, after all, a product of labor yourself, both socially and personally, and not like a slave you do not have any value because you produce value, a slave is a value. Slaveowner history proves how valuable slaves were.
You are a separate part of the means of production and you do create capital for the buyer of your labor-capacity. What are you going to do to resolve that contradiction?
@@MrDXRamirez What contradiction...or did you miss the "absent slavery" part...or the land, labor , capital part?
As a human I am a multi-faceted tool...capable of thought, invention, labor and accumulating
capital...and I am free to resist any type of "coercion" applied... by any means necessary
by virtue of the single universal unalienable right possessed by all life... that I can choose to
exercise or not. ( someday, and that day may never come, humans might actually be able
to identify that right, but I'm still waiting )
Also all of your irrelevant rhetoric can not be attributed to whatever the economics of a system
are...that is determined by those in control of the system. ( and there are reasons for seeking
that control that are inherent in all humans and you are no exception...you are simply not
the one in control and probably don't understand or will acknowledge the reasons for seeking it. )
So, now that that is out of the way...you can begin at any time...
Given what the Fed does with bank reserves and money supply, using inflation as an argument in this conversation probably isn’t the best choice. (Unless you want to go down the it isn’t “federal” nor a “reserve” route - but that is a long conversation.) Personally not a fan of large government or large corporations. Dr. Wolff should do a podcast with Gerald Cilente. Two guys with extremely different personalities/backgrounds/audiences that oddly echo much of the same critique albeit from different approaches.
🍎🍎🍎
Watched the whole video. This guy is a strawman grifter. Easiest spot of my life... c'mon now people. You have a brain so use it.
What's his strawman? I hear libertarians make these exact arguments all the time.
So Rand Paul is bad for calling out government fukery. How is that Capitalism?
Pretty simple game of sophistry. Look who has the money and power, say what they like and profit. Describes pretty well every rightwing in history save a few fools who actually believe the lies coming from above.
Nah, that would be communists like Richard Wolff
Wolff is totally ignorant about price inflation. Price inflation can indeed be the result of non-governmental factors (chiefly the normal working of the law of supply and demand, specifically reduced supply and/or increased demand)), but when price inflation results from inflation of the money supply, defined as raising the ratio of money in circulation to the amount of goods and services in the marketplace, it ABSOLUTELY IS "the fault of the government"!
Learn MMT kid
Yeah thats nonsense and comes from Milton Friedmans quantity theory of money which says that MV=PQ. Long story short he assumed that velocity V is constant and output Q is also a constant and if the level of the money supply rises then the price level rises as well. That is clearly wrong as velocity of money changes and is not constant and output can always be increased if there is unemployment and unused resources.
Price inflation doesn't have squat to do with inflation of money supply. People like you buy into the fantasy because its easy to think about. If you increase the supply of something then it MUST be worth less and less. That is because you don't understand what the US dollar is. It is a unit of measurment, not a commodity, its a tax credit and issuing more of them does not mean each dollar is worth less. The reality is that inflation is more complicated than that. Oh and yeah Learn some MMT, you will understand things much better and on a different level.
@@PoliticalEconomy101 learn real economics and not made up nonsense.
@@henrygustav7948 wrong. It's not nonsense. Increasing the money supply does create inflation. MMT is the nonsense. You don't know what the hell you're talking about.
That’s not true. Sellers increase prices because they choose to do so. An increased money supply just means that raising the prices of commodities will have less negative consequences. That’s why capitalists raise prices when the money supply increases. But don’t confuse the issue, the government doesn’t force sellers to increase prices, they do it of their own accord.
LMFAOO "Conservative Libertarian" might as well say dry water or square circle, this is the epitome of statism