Great illustration of socialism: during pandemic daughter worked for restaurant waiting tables. Since they could only seat 1/2 the tables and since they were forced to close for two months, management said all the tips would be pooled and split evenly among all workers and no one would get a paycheck. The best waiters quickly left because they saw their tips, their earnings, being given to others like hostesses who spent much of the evening on their cell phones. The positions that were normally paid minimum wage were making more money, and the ones who ran their butts off to make the owner’s customers happy made a lot less.
We don’t have capitalism we have creditism which relies on fiat money and big government. It will crash and they will want socialism. I just want capitalism back.
When I was in Junior H.S. I was doing homework for history class. I asked my Dad what he thought about all of the different kinds of government. He put his newspaper down on his lap saying "Well, kid they all look good on paper but capitalism has the richest peasants."
@@eadgbefreak Thank you very much. He grew up during the depression.His dad left when he was two. By the age of 8 he and his two sisters were on the streets of Philadelphia Pa selling pretzels,apples and pencils. A WWII soldier in the SouthPacificJungle War2yrs2mos2days. He used to say as we were leaving home,"Don't take any wooden nickles kid." He passed away 13 yrs ago. I am sure he would have appreciated Trump as he refused to vote after he voted for Roosevelt.
Nice, but so naive. Capitalism also has the poorest peasants, Somalia is even more capitalist than America. What he did, like most Americans, is attribute how good things are for him to being capitalist, instead of attributing richness to being a citizen of the global hegemonic super power. The Romans could've said their system has the richest peasants because they had very few rights! It's a shame humans tend to attribute success where they want to instead of where logic allows (or would allow if most people were able to process it).
I agree with most of what he says, and greatly oppose Marxism. However, Austrian economics is quite flawed if one values national sovereignty, and greatly contributed to the shrinking markets problem that has caused the US to lose their middle class and purchasing power
"All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party." MAO ZEDONG
@Mecoracon Lola only after the Belfour Declaration of 1917 where Zionists Jews got America to join the fight on britian side and undermine Germany from within. Known as "the stab in the back" This was also the beginnings of communism in Germany. Churchill said fascism was the antidote to communism
@Lucky Skunk, so you blame what happened from 1917 on to the US, Britain, and/or any supporters of the clearly endangered jewish diaspora? WWI didn’t even end until June 1918, so the Western Allies were to blame for WWII, Fascism, and 20th Century Marxism/Communism before they even really began in earnest. Hence you believe they caused them? Preposterous!
@@TheSMEAC sorry, minor technical glitch, working on that evidence. You're saying Jews all around the world where endangered, because they didnt have a homeland. The Balfour declaration in Jacob Rothchilds own words was "the most cunning piece of political opportunism in history" It is said that they brought America into the war, in ww1 and ww2. They undermined germanies war effort, a war they where most definetly going to win. America was supposed to be founded to avoid centralized power and centralized struggles, and yet, here they where attacking Europa, getting involved when they shouldn't have. There where 20000 german Jews in Britain prior to ww2, in positions of influence. They most likely funded Churchill from 1928 to 1936 while he held no public office, yet enjoyed a fantastic estate along with servants. The British had no choice in him being their Prime Minister either
There is another take. Much of our economy relies on volunteers, many people are prepared to spend time helping others for no material reward. What people object to is being exploited for another person's gain. Being underpaid is being exploited.
@@sheldonkostynuik1739 based on the cost of living in the country that you are working in. Some migrant workers maybe paid a fraction of what the locals earn and by their home country standards are paid well, but that undermines the pay rates for the workers of the country that they are working in. Which is often why migrant labour is used even when there are high levels of unemployment in the country that migrant workers come to. It becomes a way of undermining unions.
@@davidalexanderlourie4371 Except there is no ONE cost of living in a country. Especially in the United States. And what you are describing isn't exploitation...migrant workers flee their countries to pursue the opportunity to improve their living conditions or to raise their opportunity ceilings. Sometimes they need to take a pay cut by moving here to accomplish this. It's normally temporary, and we know this because migrant workers often climb the economic ladder faster and more efficiently than their US counterparts. So where is the exploitation?
@@sheldonkostynuik1739 There are many different migrants. There are some that arrive with capital to give themselves a head start. These are not migrant workers. There are some who exploit there own people and set up their own exploitative labour hire businesses. In general newly arrived migrants start from such a low baseline they either stagnate or markedly improve their lifestyle. Many suffer exploitation on the way but endure as there is no other option. Many migrants don't have their qualifications recognized and spend years resittng exams. Of course a few have skyrocketing success but for most success is joining the working poor of their adoptive country. How is this exploitative? When the exploited are expected to sacrifice many of their human rights and social needs to enrich those who seek to gain by using these people.
@Internet Connection In USSR you get put up against the wall and shot after years of starvation. I'd rather work in Amazon, which in fact pays 15$/hour.
You do know they used to have a Communist Government there, not a Socialist one don't you? And i wonder if you know also countries like Finland, Denmark, Norway and Sweden also are Socialist, and each have free elections and things like stock exchanges?
@Robert Swanson Please do Google 'Democratic Socialism', that is the system of Government i was talking about. And for more information, please Google Olof Palme, that is the type of leader i think is best suited to lead this type of government.
It's excellent because the studies shown that the underweight persons live longer. Do you imagine how much they would save with the healthy bills? They are concerned about savings the Earth, well with the electricity, hot water, gas running only at certain hours it will be much better than any green deal.
Great presentation. I tried to explain to my brother in law the concept of giving a dollar to one means you need to take it from another. He says, "oh you're one of those guys that thinks that money is real, the government can just print more". I just shook my head and literally walked away and left the conversation hanging.
1990 I escaped from Communist regime and I wish no one to live under communist. Socialism is the road to communism. "All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party." MAO ZEDONG
@@themeadowlarkminutewithpau8184 me too. In 1990 I moved from socialist Poland to Canada...... Poland is now a market economy and is much better off than it was in the 80s
Mao was a realist. If it's not the gun, it's the money. For the West it's about the money. Every system is corrupt because it's corrupt man running it.
@dodeca hedron You are welcome to your opinion. I doubt you know what you are talking about. You've merely been brain washed as all societies brain wash their own people.
@@chriswysocki8816 While it may be time to go back...Poland has always been surrounded and not big enough to hold their own with natural defenses. Too bad too, the Polish immigrants from behind the iron curtain are very fine, hard working life-loving folk.
“In a free market society, where liberty comes first, individuals tend to be more creative and to innovate; in welfare states that assign priority to equality, the natural resourcefulness of human beings is perverted. To become successful, you must learn how to “work the system” rather than how to develop a better product. Risk is avoided, and individual responsibility is thwarted. Although superficially the system may appear fair, it promises mediocrity and a sense of victimhood, and it discourages those who want to excel” - Ayaan Hirsi Ali
frontporch968 NOPE. You have misunderstood the idea about Scandinavian welfare state. Free market society is a direct road to dictatorship, where ultimately only huge monopoly companies will succeed and kill smaller individual competitors. Globally they distroy all liberty from every country. Try again.
Well not really. Many big companies have died, not only to pressures of activism, but also to market forces of not conforming to what the masses of people want.
ile vaan, huge monopoly companies which exercise monopolistic practices get that way by using corrupt elected officials and corrupt bureaucrats in government which itself is a form of socialism. So-called democratic socialism is another form of authoritarian government which can steal and manipulate people.
Lawrence Miller -- Urbanization is a hidden bondage of slavery where everyone has lost their human-like natural kinship and neighborhood relationships. In fact, work is done at workplaces whose owners are as strange as in communist society, and so are the makers of companies equally strange. I have always wondered why people are like sheep who agree to live their lives as farm animals. It was born in a country where, during my youth, almost all of them were small entrepreneurs in villages with their own independent development and partial self-reliance. The unfair competition of companies has previously destroyed healthy communities. This can be seen as a globalization on a small scale, because its operation is based on the same principle and can be used to figure out how the future will be. The population and the environment of the communities are defined by the needs of the enterprises but not the natural balance of human relations.
Noone will believe this, but when we lived in Denmark my family had an apartment in the UK. Even though we did not rent it out, the Danish tax authorities said they had to assume it was been rented for a grand a month, and so we were taxed on the non-existent rent!!!
Or Germany, Norway, Japan, Mexico, France, Italy, UK, Australia, Canada, even the fucking US of A! Every fucking country practices levels of socialism. Venezuela as an aristocratic fascist racist oligarchy pissed to the bone since literacy rates increased thus voting participation that means they'll never have democratic governmental power again. They still have businesses there, oligopolies; but they also have been pandering the EU to the US to any nation that will go for a coupe with promises of sweet sweet oil.... well dirty heavy oil in the case of Venezuela. What's currently destroying that country is both the fall in oil prices, even Brazil and Argentina... fuck the entire S. America has shit itself as commodity prices went south. Then add the fact US has placed sanctions on the nation. Sanctions can royally fuck up most nations. Particularly if it has the clout of a bully super power. Funny to pick Venezuela, they never went that far socialism as some nations. Oh no! They nationalized their oil! So does Norway, Sweden, Mexico, etc. Many nations nationalize certain minerals because they're technically owned by the nation as a whole.
@Scamp Diesel There was zero American interference in the famine of the Ukraine, which starved to death 6 million Ukrainians. No, that was all on the Soviet Socialists..
Perhaps you should live in Somalia for a year. In my college Economics classes, my minor, I was taught it's actually simple. Who pays for something. Society, i.e. the taxpayer, or a private individual or group of private individuals. The rest is just political hot air to scare people into going against their own best interest. It's not Socialism versus Capitalism. It's how much Socialism, taxpayer paid, versus how much Capitalism. Most agree that the problem is getting the right mix for the time. No one choice is ever right for everyone. Our military and our police are socialism. Why? Simple, the taxpayer pays for them. Why do we need to massively complicate something that is so simple. Who pays?
The professors themselves have been brainwashed by the Frankfurt School that took over American education, now in turn they proceed to disseminate the lies they were taught , most of them have spent their life time in academia and have never lived in the real world . They have never worked in finance, farming, industry, manufacturing or any of the trades . These “ professors “ , for the most part ( there are some very good ones out there but they’re few and far between since conservatives “ need not apply”) have never experienced the consequences of socialism and its errors . They are not held accountable for the disastrous policies they have inspired and the devastation they have wrought as Thomas Sowell has pointed out . They live in a world of ideological fantasies .
I'm reading The Road To Serfdom now, and also starting Planned Chaos by Ludwig von Mises. Both are so rich with ideas, and brim with insightful thoughts on every page. Fascinating.
It is funny when he talked about the progressive income tax. They have been trying to implement a progressive state income tax in Colorado and they say they need to do it to compensate for other taxes being regressive. (So, fix one problem by creating another.) And the other evening on a PBS show here, a progressive guest made the comment that Colorado needs get rid of the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) because 'it prevents the state from retaining all of the income that it needs'.
Her party has got the country over 2 trillion GBP in debt because they kept bailing out banks. I'm not taking bloody lectures on fiscal responsibility from people who bankrupted the country. Btw You could at least spell her name correctly and get the date of the quote right.
That is the truest political statement in History. Being in Canada, we’re going to learn this the hard way. We gave a modern, successful economy to Peter Pan. He has chosen tinker bell as finance minister and used rainbow logic to choose the remainder of his government. This is the least gifted government in the history of the world. What can go wrong?
If we're still allowed to use the tools of logic:. 2 questions: 1. What is economics? Economics is the study of how to meet our unlimited needs with our limited resources. Need is infinite. Resources are finite. Need is subjective & immeasurable. Production is objective & measurable. 2. How CAN we meet unlimited need with our limited resources? There are two basic options: Option A:. Distribute goods to each according to what he produces. That incentivizes production which creates wealth and lifts people out of poverty. Option B:. to each according to what he needs. That incentivizes need. Need crushes production. It requires force & violence to take from people what they've produced. Choose your option.
@@falsum2701 No, Cameron. We have less & less reason to produce If our production' is taken from us. That's human nature. That's why socialism fails. Production fails. As long as human nature exists.
@@falsum2701 Cameron, when the rich--or anyone-- takes our money without our consent, Americans still have freedom to quit or the right to sue. That's capitalism. When the State takes your property without your consent, It will imprison you for dissent and kill your loved ones. That's socialism. Please try to appreciate the freedom we possess: free people, free markets.
@Samyasi Orion Samyas, how? Socialism opposes private property. Stock market = private property. Freedom is full of risk and brings happiness. Socialism is full of oppression and fear..Please choose freedom.
In a dark time where collectivist thought dominates college and university campuses, in a time where the collectivist empire is marching towards total tyranny, a new hope rises with the likes of the Mises Institute.
@@marylamb7707 so where is this call for communism coming from or is in the mind of many the idea that communism is anything that is not conformity with corporatist capitalism. Is it that what tyrannises the poor frees the rich and what tyrannises the rich frees the poor. Is what is tyranny to the rich the same as tyranny for the poor. For the rich tyranny is paying tax, tyranny is having to obey the law, tyranny is not being able to divert government income streams into their own pockets, tyranny is having to live in a just and equitable society. For the poor tyranny is the fear of and having to live in poverty, tyranny is not having access to health care or having to sell their house to pay for life threatening medical intervention, tyranny is losing health insurance when you lose your job, tyranny is living in poverty while your taxes are spent mass murdering people of color in other countries to steal their resources and change their governments so the rich don't have to pay taxes in the conquered country, obey their laws and can exploit their people, and their environment without consequence as protecting individual liberty. Tyranny for the poor is watching their children go hungry, get a poor quality education, Tyranny being fearful to go outside because many of the citizens are permitted to be armed and dangerous. Tyranny having a high chance of being arrested for being a person of color. Tyranny is a justice system that has a low threshold for long term imprisonment. Tyranny is a police and justice system that rounds people up to generate income for private prisons that trade in the captured labour in their charge. The civil war is a class war where the rich have lost all sense of proportion and pushed the poor beyond what any human being can be expected to endure while protecting their own comforts and privileges. For the rich tyranny is the potential for social justice, for the poor tyranny is realizing they are living under fascism.
@@davidalexanderlourie4371 From Biden, Sanders, AOC, Harris, Pelosi, the Biden/Sanders policy, the new green deal, marxists, the fact that socialism is being taught in public schools, Sanders talking about. Is that enough?
Now I get why there are like 4 versions of this talk online. Wow. I’ve had it on the back burner for a long time because I figured I was already familiar with the material. I was bored so I put it on and it turned out to be a REALLY good talk. Covers so many different aspects- from egalitarianism to welfare to the false choice of democracy vs. dictatorship in economic affairs and includes some great quotes. It's like a crash course.
I'm 35, and first to admit I could NEVER POSSIBLY KNOW ENOUGH, yet all my peers my age and under think they know it all, whilst possessing the intellectual capacity of a potato, with daddies credit card. Fucking putrid. Work hard, play hard, and don't let anyone make life easier for you. Easier=weaker!
Definition of a socialism as "absence of the connection between an effort and a reward " is also a description of the policy in many US public schools. This scares the soul out of me.
James Dunkerson - directly designed as a Russian version of the German Sturmgewehr StG-44, the first weapon to coin the term assault rifle - so all the Russians did was demonstrate their ability to copy other people's stuff, like the Chinese
Funny how it was only a military weapon that was inspired by and used principles that the Russians analyzed in the Sturmgewehr StG-44. Virtually everything the Russians made were inferior copies of Western tech, from the B-29 being the basis of the Tu-95 Bear bomber to all of their jet engines being based on stolen British designs.
+J V this isn't correct. The Assault rifle being a medium cartridge was literally the only thing the stg44 and ak platform rifles have in common. They're entirely different weapon system designs.
When I was in junior high in the late '80s, we were taught the ills of communism. I went to a public school, with union teachers.... everyone was well-aware that communism was a bad idea then. It seems that lesson has been forgotten.
Wow, great talk! I love the points, I love economic analysis and it is so refreshing to hear them simply elucidated. I'll probably get this book and recommend it out. We need more education like this on our campuses and let the students decide which side makes more sense, instead of indoctrinating them only with statist philosophy.
Norm sadly untrue. A judge had to halt a draconian cut to food stamps Trump tried to push through just this year. Welfare for the most vulnerable at this pandemic time while giving tax breaks to people that don’t need it is criminal. Yet welfare is always on the chopping block, is the pentagon budget? Ever? When?
Friedman was the first to run down and help the murderer Pinochet with his economic theories. So much for the free market meaning liberty when Pinochet overthrow an elected government, rounded up his anti coup opposition and then murdered them in a soccer stadium.
@@kimobrien. just like elected chavez , maduro and mossadegh ? going full socialist and bankrupting their country the moment they got a chance ? by the way ,chile survived the communism wave of the south america and they prosper today. also why there where so many polish and ukrainians in chile political prison ? pinochet just gave up after the last election , can't say that about any socialist. may be maduro ? lets bet on it .
@@shahabmos5130 Pinochet in Chile was an A&P butcher from the beginning. He over threw a Democratically elected government with US CIA help. Milton Freedman went down the help the Fascist General Pinochet.
It is a very simple problem the kids these days have conflated actual socialism and having a socially responsible government with robust social programs they think it's the same thing that's the problem and it's very simple
I think you have it backwards, its the adults who lived through the red scare that conflate Communism/Socialism with robust social programs. Kids nowadays don't have any comparison for the 2. Democratic socialism is the New Socialism.
@@Booer how so? all i said was kids these days take ACTUAL full blown socialism, and confuse it with a democratic capitalism based society that has *robust social programs* . what are you referring to which do NOT understand? i was pointing out that they do not understand that socialism doesn't automatically mean that the government will be able to afford BETTER social programs than a richer capitalized society which prioritizes social programs. my point was you are better off in a capitalized society with robust social programs then you are in an ACTUAL full blown SOCIALISM based system. is that NOT right? and if not then WHY?
Imagine living in a society where your hungry all the time and you never make your own decisions, choose a career, speak your mind or travel at will. If you think thats OK give it a try there are several places you can give it a shot!
Before you judge, please read with open mind. Socialism is a two sided coin: I come from Central European country that was unfortunately taken over by Soviet Russia after WW2. For 40 years we had to live under the socialist authoritarian regime. It destroyed our economy and our countries plummeted down culturally far below our western neighbours(huge corruption and zero political awareness from the lack of democracy). The problem was that we had to implement all the aspects of socialism. Both good and bad. But take a look at Scandinavian countries(or even Central Europe). They implemented the best ideas of socialism, like healthcare and education for free, which is an amazing perk.
I'm 71 years old, there was a time in my youth where as the U.S.A had no debt; We not only had no debt, there were many countries that actually owed us money. I'm not sure when, but at some point it was changed and today, we are indebt trillions of dollars. The US is sliding towards socialism as the years pass. It starts by introdternating children. I mean why when there's a sports event involving children is there no longer a winner. Both sides are given the same exact participation awards. Thus generation such as millenials are learning that it's not a matter of winning nor loosing, it's a matter of participation in which one can get ahead. There has never been a time that so many small business's have and will fail. Todays millenials all believe that just starting a business will make it sucessful, competion aka wining or loosing isn't an issue. Just participate, and your business will be sucessful. Today in America aka the U.S.A., the number of individual collecting some form of Social Security is above 50 percent. Thus the minority of employee's both hourly and salired are supporting the majority. And the number of individuals whom actually paid into the system are now in the minority of those collecting it. Doing the math, one can see, the eventual collapse of the system.
I always bring up Kurt Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron when I talk about this topic because it's such a perfect example of forced egalitarianism leading to a dystopian nightmare. You can even see a little bit of this in those Scandinavian countries you mention where the culture openly scoffs at the overachievers. There is a Danish derogatory word that describes this, but I forgot what it is.
What's odd is that Vonnegut is a self-described socialist. "Harrison Bergeron" was actually written as a spoof of anti-communist propaganda; the story is satirizing what Vonnegut saw as an overblown fear of what socialist "equality" might lead to. Nevertheless, the story serves as an excellent metaphor for socialist nonsense, but that was not at all intended by Vonnegut. He's a complex guy, and I can't really figure him out ideologically. On the one hand, he obviously has a big soft spot for socialism, but then he writes a story like "Player Piano", where the elite are (almost) overthrown by a mob of the common people, who proceed to destroy things that are actually valuable, such as the town sewer works. This is an excellent portrayal (whether intentional or not) of how a revolution led by "The People" is not necessarily good or well-thought out.
The most ironic thing is that Kurt Vonnegut wrote Harrison Bergeron as a *satire* of conservative views regarding the political Left's desire for radical egalitarianism. He was strawmanning the conservatives' rejection of egalitarian views. Funny thing is, what he originally wrote as being mocking story about what he viewed as conservative fear-mongering has turned out true now. What you're thinking of is what is called the "the Law of Jante".
5 things Mises should know about Praxeology It is not a science, or even close to one, it is self inconsistent, and inconsistent with the genuine sciences on all fronts. It is not a science, or even close to one, it is self inconsistent, and inconsistent with the genuine sciences on all fronts. It is not a science, or even close to one, it is self inconsistent, and inconsistent with the genuine sciences on all fronts. It is not a science, or even close to one, it is self inconsistent, and inconsistent with the genuine sciences on all fronts. It is not a science, or even close to one, it is self inconsistent, and inconsistent with the genuine sciences on all fronts.
Where can I find information about Scandinavian economy like the information DiLorenzo spoke about (The zero emplyments created, the cutback of socialist policies), it is very interesting to me to investigate about it, would be great if somebody can recommend me a book(s). Thanks in advance.
A fair comparison would be to visit socialist and capitalist countries and see which you want to live in, then move to the one you think is best. If you doubt this talk, PLEASE please move to Venezuala, Russia or any other socialist country of your choice.
Jeff Bezos has more wealth than close to the poorest half of the world combined. You are silly if you think it is physically possible to put in more effort than billions and billions of combined effort
Apple Pie there is a link between the risk he had to take and the reward. What reason would he have to take those risk if he wouldnt be rewarded for the risk or the value he produced? His wealth is directly proportionate to the value he provides to society.
Let's start with the obvious. Bezos did not put anywhere near a 100 billion dollars on the line to start amazon. Rewards far lower than his current wealth could make a website such as amazon worth making. He is currently not being rewarded for the value he produces, he is being rewarded for the value _other_ people are producing. Would you care to explain how you figured out that his wealth is proportional to the value he provides?
You clearly have never started a business. If you had you'd have some respect for those like Bezos. The risk is immense, it's easy to go bankrupt or worse, and running a business is a grueling job that's more than 8 hours per day. People think it's so easy to be a CEO or business owner. Only a small % of businesses ever make it. Bezos created a site that provides millions of people convenience and reshaped the landscape of retail. He also created means for others to profit through selling on the marketplace and created countless jobs as well. You can now order something online at an extremely low price and literally have it at your doorstep sometimes the same day without setting foot outside your home. Look at entities like Myspace that had a big boom then fizzled out. The fact Bezos has continued to expand and improve Amazon is a testament to his skill in managing the company and continuing to provide consumers value. Who are you to judge what his contribution is worth to the world? Does Bill Gates not deserve his billions? Think where the world would be today without Windows and the PC. I see Bezos and see something to aspire to. The ingrates see him and think it's "not fair." Well maybe they should come up with an idea or a service that brings immense value to millions of people.
@@dyrthos2955 Its not the "only" thing they care about, but certainly makes the field more attractive as it logically should. Is there a problem with that?
Palak Shah doctors must live with the crushing burden of death on their conscience when they fail, and doctors have a terrible life expectancy once they are forced to treat the upper echelons of the Party in a socialist regime. If your patient dies, you are a dissenter who intentionally killed them. Truth is merely what the Party says it is. So your mistake is welcomed with execution. The accumulation of wealth is merely to justify the terrible hours, massive time in school, and the use of your talents in a high risk field. Most doctors are smart enough to do something else. They need to be paid well otherwise they will do something else.
In the late 60s, we were required to read Vonnegut and Orwell. I wonder what is going on now? We were idealist teenagers, but never were much into socialism, just stopping the Vietnam War.
Another thing I'm curious about for your opinions is something like the Kibbutzim in Israel. Everybody works, from childcare, to cooking to factory or field work etc, they are all taken care of, and they have all asked to be there. Each kibbutz provides a service or goods to sell in the free market to keep itself running. My brother and sister have both lived on one for a few years, one of those was for example selling from their sticky tape factory, I forget the other.
@@noahwhipkey6262 yep, a year late, but cost of living is the point exactly, doesn't matter what the gdp per head is compared to other nations if the actual cost of living is prohibitive then that gdp is meaningless; better to ask questions about disposable income and purchasing power of currency
You know also who are equal from income point of view, Afghanistan everyone's paychecks are arround 600 so the moral of the story is that you can be equal but miserable.
And not only that: At some way, you are the "wolf" for the other "lambs", and others are wolves to you, as each person struggles to allocate his/her own resources (and services) without the fundamental freedom of voluntary giving and taking...
@Mark Johhson LOL. Look back at your history. No one actually paid that much in taxes. You're distilling your argument to one faulty data point. You're missing quite a lot. You have correlation, but not causation. There is no "economic pie". There is no fixed amount of wealth anymore than any given material is inherently a resource. But if you want to make the argument that there is, then by all means, convince me that levels of wealth have remained stagnant across the ages. Dystopian nightmare huh? I guess all the death camps and famine in the 20th century Socialist nations was your peak ideal of human achievement? That's quite an odd thing to want, but to each their own, so long as they don't push their own onto others. Don't get me wrong, there's plenty I would change from what we have now. Real markets would be nice. Elimination of property taxes, more school choice would be great, smaller federal government, etc. However compared to the hellscape the Socialist nations created, we've got it more than damn good. Oh, but yes. Do go on and tell us how NAP and self ownership cause "dystopia" while equity set by a centralized singular vision with State planned economics has done just oh so well where it's been tried.
fast forward 4 years.. There's a youtuber from Canada trying to move TO Venesuela.. has been there a couple times.. bought property. Vlogged it... Their biggest problems now (corona phobia aside) are the trade embargo preventing goods from going in and out and the loss of know how on self sufficiency.
Well said frontporch. While I am not an expert when it comes to all the political classes out there, I am a fan of history. And I may be mistaken, but I could not think of any example now or in the past where socialism was a success.
"For tax years 1944 through 1951, the highest marginal tax rate for individuals was 91%, increasing to 92% for 1952 and 1953, and reverting to 91% for tax years 1954 through 1963. For the 1964 tax year, the top marginal tax rate for individuals was lowered to 77%, and then to 70% for tax years 1965 through 1981." So the United States always been a socialist country? Following his arguments on taxes...
@@mariussielcken are you sure especially on the date? What is your source? "In July 1862, during the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln and Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1862, creating the office of Commissioner of Internal Revenue and enacting a temporary income tax to pay war expenses. The Revenue Act of 1862 was passed as an emergency and temporary war-time tax. It copied a relatively new British system of income taxation, instead of trade and property taxation. The first income tax was passed in 1862: The initial rate was 3% on income over $800, which exempted most wage-earners. In 1862 the rate was 3% on income between $600 and $10,000, and 5% on income over $10,000. By the end of the war, 10% of Union households had paid some form of income tax, and the Union raised 21% of its war revenue through income taxes." The IRS originates from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, a federal office created in 1862 to assess the nation's first income tax to fund the American Civil War. The temporary measure funded over a fifth of the Union's war expenses before being allowed to expire a decade later. In 1913, the Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, authorizing Congress to impose a tax on income and leading to the creation of the Bureau of Internal Revenue. In 1953, the agency was renamed the Internal Revenue Service, and in subsequent decades underwent numerous reforms and reorganizations, most significantly in the 1990s." www.irs.gov/irs-history-timeline Maybe that information is not correct and if you have the correct information please share.
Thomas J. DiLorenzo, do you currently teach History of Economic Thought? In those lectures do you cover the work of Karl Marx, Henry George, and other prominent "progressive" ideologies? Economic Paralysis and its Antidote - Geophilos (Mason Gaffney & Fred Harrison) czcams.com/video/dl75grPaTbw/video.html My Greedy Generation - Geophilos (Mason Gaffney & Fred Harrison) czcams.com/video/PwkvHPnDqwY/video.html
Cross Roads Productions I know more liberal college grads than conservative ones. Maybe bc they learn how to think on their own and then adopt the same mod mentality they will crucify the right for.
Colleges are doing their best to defeat even hard majors. Many engineering schools now team with social justice majors on projects. The result is engineering graduates that rarely last more than a year at actual work. A shining example is a young engineer who handed me a bridge rating that was negative - when I told the young engineer that the negative rating implied that the bridge would not support its own weight, the young engineer shrugged. Think about this the next time you drive across a bridge.
Master plumber is a major and it pays better than "entitled dipwad with the same degree as the other 3897593 motherfuckers in front of you". CAUTION. You may need to buy hand soap.
“The problem with capitalism is that eventually you need socialism to bail out tyrannical shadow oligarchies who control the government” - Ronald Reagan
One point that I think is important to distinguish when discussing socialism is this: The definition being stated as public ownership of property versus private ownership of property is economically specious. The issue is this: in terms of economic principles, the issue is about who makes the economically relevant decisions / the means and mechanisms of how those decisions get made and implemented, not who "owns" the property in question. That definition is poorly stated in that it is not about who owns the property but who controls it and makes the economically relevant decisions for it's use. The assumption in the definition being that who owns the property is identical to who is making the decisions determining its economic use. Thus to state it is terms of who owns it is, assumptively, identical to stating who controls it. The issue after all is how it gets used economically, not who "owns" it in that use. This is why the distinction that it is NOT ownership but _control_ that is the distinguishing feature. If the economic application of a property is as because the central planners directly own it and thus directly apply their agenda or if the economic application of the property is exactly same because the central planners compel the "owner" to utilize it as they determine, then how is there any significant difference? In this case, "ownership" is a distinction without a difference. So to properly restate it: public _control_ of property versus private _control_ of property Now, why this matters vis a vis "socialism" is that with this understanding we can readily see the fundamental fallacy of the common apologia for policies such as advocated by Bernie Sanders. The proposal is that "but it's not 'state' ownership of property, there is still "private ownership" of property." Sure, but the problem is that even though "private" property is allowed, it is _controlled_ by the state via regulatory bodies. And it is then easy to see why they would say this. Why bother with "owning" the property if you can still _control_ it to serve your agendas via fiat and decree of "regulation"? You get the best of both worlds: none of the problems or costs associated with ownership but all of the benefits vis a vis one's agendas. If I can tell you what you can or cannot make with your "property" (or what you are compelled to make), what you can sell it for, etc. why would I even care who "owns" it vis a vis an economic agenda of central planning and control?
On taxes the issue is this: the common narrative is that wealthier people should pay more because they "owe more back to society." In a capitalist free market society, this makes no sense. How is it that they have that wealth? In a capitalistic free market economy, it can only be because they created at leas that much value into the economy. If they did not, the who freely engaged in those transactions if they did not get at least as much in value for what they gave that person in exchange? Who freely engages in a transaction in which they get less than they give? It would just make no sense. So that being the case, that they have X amount of wealth means implicitly that they created at least that much value (and probably much more) into the economy - to the benefit of the participants in that economy - meaning, the people. But for some reason, having created that much value for the people of the economy, they somehow "owe" society yet more on top of that. For example, consider Steve Jobs. He created value to billions of people with the iPhone and in turn accrued great wealth as people exchanged to obtain the benefit of that value. But apparently some people seem to think: "gee, thanks Steve for gifting the world with the iPhone - but now you 'owe' society more in return." WTF? FFS, he created the benefit of the iPhone to society, how exactly does that create an obligation to "owe" to society? We can pursue that even further down the rabbit hole on the other end of the scale. "You didn't produce any value into society, in fact you consumed more from society than you contributed to it, so that means that society owes you more."
I'm not sure if Austrian economics exactly equated to "anarcho-capitalism", but does Austrianism define the justifiable functions of the state? e.g. military, police force, courts, etc.? As for privatizing roads ... it would be a good idea if you were "colonizing" virgin territory, but how would you privatize EXISTING roads? Auction them off? And what does Austrianism have to say about the concept of "natural monopolies", where parallel competing infrastructure would be impractical? IOW, would a private monopoly owning all of our roads be any better? If not, how would competition be practical?
How about making a claim on someone else's land? their political system? economic system? how about using money and military to force someone to exploit their resources to you? Is that evil??? NAH!!!! That's just 'HEALTHY COMPETITION' You can't just put evil in capital letters and win, your tired ass statement has been tried billions of times, and never rationally defended.
@Mike "How about making a claim on someone else's land?" Also evil. "their political system?" I don't know what it means to make a claim on someone else's political system. Claim it how? Do you mean a coup? "economic system?" I don't know what it means to make a claim on someone else's economic system. Do you mean operating with a different system than the one which currently dominates the culture? "how about using money and military to force someone to exploit their resources to you?" By that do you mean attacking another country (unprovoked) and taking their stuff? That is certainly evil. I totally agree with Howard Crawford's assessment that taking someone else's labor against their will is evil. Please explain why doing something like that should be acceptable.
@@Shozb0t I suppose I meant 'lay claim that you can control their economies and political systems at will', to shape their systems.. etc. I think it was pretty straight forward, I don't know where the misunderstanding should come it. Maybe the word claim isn't perfect but it's easy to get the just... a vast amount of western wealth was 'stolen' from other countries, through imperialist agendas. So when these countries strive towards or vote for getting their resources back... that's not theft buddy, it's called reclamation.
@Mike "lay claim that you can control their economies and political systems at will', to shape their systems.. etc." You are talking about dictatorship, then (such as in North Korea). That is also evil. "a vast amount of western wealth was 'stolen' from other countries, through imperialist agendas." Are you talking about the Third Reich? I'm pretty sure that Germany was wiped out after WWII. They had to start over again. Any wealth that they stole they certainly didn't keep. But yes, it is evil for any country to steal wealth from another country--just as it is evil for any individual to steal from another individual. The bottom line is that socialism is a corrupt and evil system which places the individual in the position of indentured servant supposedly to serve some sort of "common good." Every individual deserves to live his or her own life without interference from anyone. The only thing that can be considered a common good is freedom (freedom from coercion). Human beings need freedom in order to live properly. By the way, you didn't explain why taking someone else's labor against their will is an acceptable thing.
It is refreshing to hear these excellent economic principles. I'm not sure how the open-minded person could listen to them and disagree with them. Excellent presentation Mr. DiLorenzo!
The mind open to becoming another wealthy capitalist will be refreshed to know that a bourgeois professor of economics is in complete agreement. In other words in this situation a dog does not bite its master. In fact not only does this dog not bite the master but is willing to help with the hunt for bigger profits.
In pp. 165-170 The Decline of the American Republic by John T. Flynn, there is a list of necessary reforms to stop Socialism. DiL, ask your publisher whether there should be a book that updates this list.
@@finlaystevenson7438Venezuela is a simple ffg dictatorship and Maduro and his wife do what they want. Namely, take the national banks money, sell cocaine internationally, and get billions from China and Russia to keep the military paid so he can stay in power.
I lived under socialism, the real one. It was horrible and the millenials have no clue what they are asking for. Their problem is that they will get exactly what they ask for. I will be out of their way and they will reap the benefits of a completely ruined economy. Poor grandchildren of mine.
people need to be tought the basics before philosophies of public. integrity, honesty, respect, responsibility, fairness, kindness, strength, perserverance, etc....
A socialist country will have high corporate tax rates They tax the mining and oil companies that take it. The purpose of this video is to degrade socialism because of it's fiscal policy . This video was specificially produced for that purpose
Questionable sources and outright lies are what the libtard position is based on. Liberalism is a form of mental illness. Socialism fails every where it goes. You can see California sinking already.
The whole problem faced by the Austrians is that only human labor can create and assign value. This is what prevents a price system from being able to correctly assign prices.
India had one of the wealthiest countries if you do not factor in the poor untouchables living and dying on the streets. A bigoted shameful! religious practice of cast system caused India collapsed from within. This cast system guaranteed a permanent ruling elite as part of the religious structure as well as the governing of India. This meant the majority of people had no hope of advancement and lived to serve at their masters will. This totalitarian regime collapsed from it's own cruel practices and was made ripe for conquering by Great Britain. Whether a country's economic base is Communist or Capitalist, if there is no Democracy governing the whole it will degenerate because the competitive nature of advancement in the country will no longer exist. You see, Democracy is a from of governing and Capitalism is an approach to it's economy. There are also many Conservatives among those who support legal and illegal migration who are taking our jobs because they feel it is good for business to keep our wages as low as possible. This is why so many Conservatives are also resisting President Trump's plans to secure our borders and bring jobs back to our country. This is why they also turned a blind eye as the schools and universities degenerated into chaos. These are the bureaucrats who are resisting our climb out of the swamp to restore our country into it's former glory.. In the 1999 it was the people on the left who protested NAFTA and WTO Globalization in "The Battle for Seattle" in Seattle Washington. Now this is the Republican Party of Donald Trump who is championing the issues of the working class and standing firm against a Globalist take over of the WTO, EU and UN. I am now a proud Deplorable Republican because I stand with the working class who are not the wealthy elite but the regular folks willing to work hard for a place at the table of the American Dream. So what do you do with the poor, the sick, the elderly and the children? Do we as a Nation turn our back on them and do we remove the words "In God We Trust" from our currency and our hearts? What happens when the balance of economic power and a winner takes all philosophy of someone like Ayn Rand makes upward mobility impossible for the majority of people? Is your economics also an extremist view like the "Robber Barons of the 19th century monopolies? As the jobs left the USA to China and other 3rd world countries in the 1960's and now people graduate college with massive debt and no sustainable job prospects, many people turned to socialism (communism) as a viable alternative to poverty and a bleak future. President Trump wants to bring jobs back and secure our borders but this does not happen overnight and people are still in need. Make America Great Again, more than a promise it is a wake up call and even a battle cry to stop the agenda of world control and destruction of our Democracy and National Democracies all over the world. Aleada Siragusa
Totalitarian state central planning has not worked in the USSR and China. It only resulted in forced labour camps in Chines rice fields or in the Russian gulags. Top-down planning restrains individual creativity and individual income growth. As a result an enterprise market system will win the technology and productivity race of GDP. However, no monopoly markets and company should exist, like now on Wallstreet. They should be splitup into less than 5% of market, and the shares distributed also. Small is beautifull, BIG (Wallstreet crime cartel) is ugly.
Sweden has a great social system.. As it is normal in Europe 🇪🇺 you do have a healthcaressystem where you don't have to worry no matter of if you give birth to a baby or if you have cancer and need lots of doctor appointments. A country should provide that. And of course boarder security. That's the first thing and a duty of a good leadership 🙏 That's a problem since 2015 in Germany 🇩🇪 and now in the US 🇺🇸 as we see the pictures from our boarders.
A defense of socialism I've heard more than once, when bring up the horrors in other countries or how it has never worked, they say, "that's communism not socialism."
then you can say that there has never been capitalism since there are collusions, huge goverment spending, etc. what they do i compare the idea of socialism vs capitalism in reality instead of the idea. also socialism will always lead to dictatorships poverty and genocide since the nations interests are always the interests of a group of people and they cannot do economic calculation. So what happened with communism last century was the logical outcome. Really recommend hayek here.
I was a Bernie supporter bc what he was saying sounded good HOWEVER when I started actually educating myself on what socialism was I grew up and abandoned that toxic ideology. People just have no idea!
A socialist is just someone who is unable to get over his or her astonishment that most people who have lived and died have spent lives of wretched, fruitless, unremitting toil...
@@HallyVee What you don't get is that human suffering will never stop. It will always be there on some level, it's just a matter of degree depending on the economic system Over 100 million people have been murdered in this century alone in an attempt to end human suffering. Marxism increases suffering much more than capitalism ever could
@@xallthatremains8339 I agree that we are far from ending all suffering. We don't attempt to. We merely attempt to end the suffering that ends in death or privation. The easy stuff like access to water and housing and food, childcare and a livelihood. If your belief in the continuation of human suffering allows you to overlook an easily solved lack, I would suggest your belief is serving you suspiciously well.
@@HallyVee My point is that socialism is not the way to end human suffering in America or the rest of the world. The implementation of true socialism (really communism/marxism) have done an outrageous amount of harm under the guise of doing good all over the world for well over a century and it still is. The socialist programs in existence have done plenty of harm to the poor and suffering in America but is ignored in favor of trashing capitalism and portraying it as evil I absolutley understand that there is still a lot of suffering worldwide. There are over one billion people who have no access to clean water and/or food. I am for any reasonable measures to remedy the issues humanity faces. However I will never advocate for giving a government more money and power to do so. Even though it has proven disastrous and deadly every time it has been attempted, the idea doesn't seem to die
@@xallthatremains8339 that idea is so effective and refuses to die because it is propaganda against my solution. All governments tend to disallow alternatives. I definitely agree that granting Excess power to any concentrated governmental entity he's a recipe for disaster. Unlss as in communism that government is comprised of Representative or direct democracy. Full and instant recall of Representatives, all inclusive participation, and widespread comprehension of the issues are all core tenets of communism.
The ultimate injustice and exploitation is when you take the fruits of hard labour and expertise of an industrious individual and give it to a lazy and indolent person who otherwise is totally capable of earning a decent living but doesn't want to. At the same time I totally agree with supporting those who are incapable of being productive either because they are mentally ill, or are not mentally ill but not sufficiently intelligent to hold any job, or have been injured into incapacity (by war or accident). A civilized society will have to take care of the vulnerable but not the lazy.
a lot of my friends preach this "democratic socialism" and it drives me crazy. just because you discovered loony bernie sanders 2 years ago, doesn't mean it's a tenable solution for the US, Bernie's promises were as lofty and far off as Trump's. if anything, that's the system already in place, since we get from the government but we benefit from capitalism and as we can see the two don't co-exist well. In california, we keep raising the middle wage and our homelessness problem keeps rising, the number of working poor is rising. socialism/communism are failed ideals and they don't work because greed exists, the need for psychological/financial/physical dominance exists. there is no socialist utopia out there- this is a failed system and like he said has made countries and continents BROKE..
Trump is more of a capitalist than 80% of the Republicans in Washington. Do some research on what he has done in this past year and you will be amazed, that is if you value freedom and a strong economy/Country.
Kayla B You are taking a totally broken system and saying it is the real world. It isn't. You should take a look at Scandinavia and most of Europe - all basically socialist countries. And Bernie was the only one talking sense in the USA, but most people in the USA were too brainwashed to realise it. Therefore Don the Fart, the morally bankrupt bankrupt, science denying, lying, bald headed warmonger and the YEC Pence.
I find myself disagreeing with colleged aged liberals on socialism but at least most of them actually sort of kind of know the difference between socialism and communism, which is more than this guy can say. He should be learning from them, not trying to educate them.
A book that provides the detailed analysis of the pros and cons of socialism and capitalism was published at the turn of the 20th century, before any society even attempted to introduce socialism as a societal system. This book, titled "Democracy versus Socialism," was written by an Austrian named Max Hirsch. Hirsch argues that the enemy of democracy is monopoly privilege, and also that democracy requires a high degree of individualism. He argues further that if socialists get what they want, they will simply replace one form of monopoly privilege with bureaucratic hierarchy and privilege. Individualism, on the other hand, requires the elimination of monopoly privilege. Hirsch examines the sources of such privilege and the measures requires to achieve equality of opportunity. He attacks rentier privilege, embracing Henry George's argument that rents from all sources are legitimately societal property, the fund to pay for democratically-agreed upon public goods and services and (potentially) a citizen's dividend from any surplus. Taxes on earned income, on capital goods and on commerce must be eliminated, as these represent the confiscation of legitimate private property.
Great illustration of socialism: during pandemic daughter worked for restaurant waiting tables. Since they could only seat 1/2 the tables and since they were forced to close for two months, management said all the tips would be pooled and split evenly among all workers and no one would get a paycheck. The best waiters quickly left because they saw their tips, their earnings, being given to others like hostesses who spent much of the evening on their cell phones. The positions that were normally paid minimum wage were making more money, and the ones who ran their butts off to make the owner’s customers happy made a lot less.
The best description ever. That's exactly what happens in all communist countries in real life.
We don’t have capitalism we have creditism which relies on fiat money and big government. It will crash and they will want socialism. I just want capitalism back.
Well said!
You don't seem to have a working brain.
I want the 50s era, got a time machine
@@boffeycn he he, comedy, coming at ya...whoa!🤣
@@jkgkjgkijk Tell your doctor your meds. aren't working.
When I was in Junior H.S. I was doing homework for history class. I asked my Dad what he thought about all of the different kinds of government. He put his newspaper down on his lap saying
"Well, kid they all look good on paper
but capitalism has the richest peasants."
Your Dad was / is brilliant!
@@eadgbefreak Thank you very much. He grew up during the depression.His dad left when he was two. By the age of 8 he and his two sisters were on the streets of Philadelphia Pa selling pretzels,apples and pencils.
A WWII soldier in the SouthPacificJungle War2yrs2mos2days.
He used to say as we were leaving home,"Don't take any wooden nickles kid."
He passed away 13 yrs ago. I am sure he would have appreciated Trump as he refused to vote after he voted for Roosevelt.
@@shirleylake7738 In today's world they would be shut down for not having a license or permit to sell things
Nice, but so naive. Capitalism also has the poorest peasants, Somalia is even more capitalist than America.
What he did, like most Americans, is attribute how good things are for him to being capitalist, instead of attributing richness to being a citizen of the global hegemonic super power. The Romans could've said their system has the richest peasants because they had very few rights!
It's a shame humans tend to attribute success where they want to instead of where logic allows (or would allow if most people were able to process it).
Capitalism is a made up word. Commies did it to sound derogatory. Free trade is what we mean and what it is. It's the best for most people.
This man is very sane. He is an Austrian economist, appreciate it a lot.
I agree with most of what he says, and greatly oppose Marxism. However, Austrian economics is quite flawed if one values national sovereignty, and greatly contributed to the shrinking markets problem that has caused the US to lose their middle class and purchasing power
@@dr.lyleevans6915 shrinking markets is not a 'problem', it's a fallacy
@@dr.lyleevans6915 Shrinking markets? Seriously?
"All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party." MAO ZEDONG
So So we need to ban all gun control laws
@Mecoracon Lola only after the Belfour Declaration of 1917 where Zionists Jews got America to join the fight on britian side and undermine Germany from within. Known as "the stab in the back"
This was also the beginnings of communism in Germany.
Churchill said fascism was the antidote to communism
@Lucky Skunk, so you blame what happened from 1917 on to the US, Britain, and/or any supporters of the clearly endangered jewish diaspora? WWI didn’t even end until June 1918, so the Western Allies were to blame for WWII, Fascism, and 20th Century Marxism/Communism before they even really began in earnest. Hence you believe they caused them? Preposterous!
@@TheSMEAC i dont necassarily think all that. I'm not blaming western countries persay
I can show you this as supporting evidence
@@TheSMEAC sorry, minor technical glitch, working on that evidence.
You're saying Jews all around the world where endangered, because they didnt have a homeland.
The Balfour declaration in Jacob Rothchilds own words was "the most cunning piece of political opportunism in history"
It is said that they brought America into the war, in ww1 and ww2.
They undermined germanies war effort, a war they where most definetly going to win.
America was supposed to be founded to avoid centralized power and centralized struggles, and yet, here they where attacking Europa, getting involved when they shouldn't have.
There where 20000 german Jews in Britain prior to ww2, in positions of influence. They most likely funded Churchill from 1928 to 1936 while he held no public office, yet enjoyed a fantastic estate along with servants.
The British had no choice in him being their Prime Minister either
"If there's no link between effort and reward, you get less effort."
There is another take. Much of our economy relies on volunteers, many people are prepared to spend time helping others for no material reward.
What people object to is being exploited for another person's gain.
Being underpaid is being exploited.
@@davidalexanderlourie4371 Except how do you determine if you are underpaid? Your opinion?
@@sheldonkostynuik1739 based on the cost of living in the country that you are working in. Some migrant workers maybe paid a fraction of what the locals earn and by their home country standards are paid well, but that undermines the pay rates for the workers of the country that they are working in. Which is often why migrant labour is used even when there are high levels of unemployment in the country that migrant workers come to. It becomes a way of undermining unions.
@@davidalexanderlourie4371 Except there is no ONE cost of living in a country. Especially in the United States. And what you are describing isn't exploitation...migrant workers flee their countries to pursue the opportunity to improve their living conditions or to raise their opportunity ceilings. Sometimes they need to take a pay cut by moving here to accomplish this. It's normally temporary, and we know this because migrant workers often climb the economic ladder faster and more efficiently than their US counterparts. So where is the exploitation?
@@sheldonkostynuik1739 There are many different migrants. There are some that arrive with capital to give themselves a head start. These are not migrant workers. There are some who exploit there own people and set up their own exploitative labour hire businesses.
In general newly arrived migrants start from such a low baseline they either stagnate or markedly improve their lifestyle. Many suffer exploitation on the way but endure as there is no other option. Many migrants don't have their qualifications recognized and spend years resittng exams.
Of course a few have skyrocketing success but for most success is joining the working poor of their adoptive country.
How is this exploitative? When the exploited are expected to sacrifice many of their human rights and social needs to enrich those who seek to gain by using these people.
"The incentive problem...: if you remove the link between effort and reward, you get no effort."
Gee Willickers the education problem. If people are not patriotic and literate then chaos and anarchy are more likelu
People do just what you pay them to do. If you pay people to do nothing...
Gee Willickers well ironically the Libertarians have the Libertarian problems themselves.
Anon54387 look into the results of UBI experiments. Turns out people became productive.
@@abdullopez5170 source?
In USSR the saying was “ They pretend to pay us and we pretend to work” !!!
@Internet Connection In USSR you get put up against the wall and shot after years of starvation. I'd rather work in Amazon, which in fact pays 15$/hour.
@@topias1685 you know Bernie sanders is the reason they pay 15 bucks an hour?
You do know they used to have a Communist Government there, not a Socialist one don't you? And i wonder if you know also countries like Finland, Denmark, Norway and Sweden also are Socialist, and each have free elections and things like stock exchanges?
@Robert Swanson Please do Google 'Democratic Socialism', that is the system of Government i was talking about. And for more information, please Google Olof Palme, that is the type of leader i think is best suited to lead this type of government.
Dictatorship has nothing to do with socialism
SOCIALISM: FINALLY A DIET THAT WORKS.
It's excellent because the studies shown that the underweight persons live longer. Do you imagine how much they would save with the healthy bills?
They are concerned about savings the Earth, well with the electricity, hot water, gas running only at certain hours it will be much better than any green deal.
Get skinny fast!! Socialism!!
gulag!!!!!
@Mika Shiota And don't forget the other bonus, skinny people live longer.
@Diane Mowrey Venezuela
Great presentation. I tried to explain to my brother in law the concept of giving a dollar to one means you need to take it from another. He says, "oh you're one of those guys that thinks that money is real, the government can just print more". I just shook my head and literally walked away and left the conversation hanging.
1990 I escaped from Communist regime and I wish no one to live under communist. Socialism is the road to communism.
"All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party." MAO ZEDONG
I’m glad you escaped! ❤️
@@themeadowlarkminutewithpau8184 me too. In 1990 I moved from socialist Poland to Canada...... Poland is now a market economy and is much better off than it was in the 80s
Mao was a realist. If it's not the gun, it's the money. For the West it's about the money. Every system is corrupt because it's corrupt man running it.
@dodeca hedron You are welcome to your opinion. I doubt you know what you are talking about. You've merely been brain washed as all societies brain wash their own people.
@@chriswysocki8816 While it may be time to go back...Poland has always been surrounded and not big enough to hold their own with natural defenses. Too bad too, the Polish immigrants from behind the iron curtain are very fine, hard working life-loving folk.
“In a free market society, where liberty comes first, individuals tend to be more creative and to innovate; in welfare states that assign priority to equality, the natural resourcefulness of human beings is perverted. To become successful, you must learn how to “work the system” rather than how to develop a better product. Risk is avoided, and individual responsibility is thwarted. Although superficially the system may appear fair, it promises mediocrity and a sense of victimhood, and it discourages those who want to excel” - Ayaan Hirsi Ali
frontporch968 - which is why communist states must steal intellectual property
frontporch968
NOPE. You have misunderstood the idea about Scandinavian welfare state.
Free market society is a direct road to dictatorship, where ultimately only huge monopoly companies will succeed and kill smaller individual competitors.
Globally they distroy all liberty from every country.
Try again.
Well not really. Many big companies have died, not only to pressures of activism, but also to market forces of not conforming to what the masses of people want.
ile vaan, huge monopoly companies which exercise monopolistic practices get that way by using corrupt elected officials and corrupt bureaucrats in government which itself is a form of socialism. So-called democratic socialism is another form of authoritarian government which can steal and manipulate people.
Lawrence Miller -- Urbanization is a hidden bondage of slavery where everyone has lost their human-like natural kinship and neighborhood relationships.
In fact, work is done at workplaces whose owners are as strange as in communist society, and so are the makers of companies equally strange.
I have always wondered why people are like sheep who agree to live their lives as farm animals.
It was born in a country where, during my youth, almost all of them were small entrepreneurs in villages with their own independent development and partial self-reliance. The unfair competition of companies has previously destroyed healthy communities. This can be seen as a globalization on a small scale, because its operation is based on the same principle and can be used to figure out how the future will be. The population and the environment of the communities are defined by the needs of the enterprises but not the natural balance of human relations.
Noone will believe this, but when we lived in Denmark my family had an apartment in the UK. Even though we did not rent it out, the Danish tax authorities said they had to assume it was been rented for a grand a month, and so we were taxed on the non-existent rent!!!
It sounds like a bunch of college professors and students need to live in Venezuela for a year!
Or Germany, Norway, Japan, Mexico, France, Italy, UK, Australia, Canada, even the fucking US of A!
Every fucking country practices levels of socialism.
Venezuela as an aristocratic fascist racist oligarchy pissed to the bone since literacy rates increased thus voting participation that means they'll never have democratic governmental power again. They still have businesses there, oligopolies; but they also have been pandering the EU to the US to any nation that will go for a coupe with promises of sweet sweet oil.... well dirty heavy oil in the case of Venezuela.
What's currently destroying that country is both the fall in oil prices, even Brazil and Argentina... fuck the entire S. America has shit itself as commodity prices went south.
Then add the fact US has placed sanctions on the nation.
Sanctions can royally fuck up most nations. Particularly if it has the clout of a bully super power.
Funny to pick Venezuela, they never went that far socialism as some nations.
Oh no! They nationalized their oil! So does Norway, Sweden, Mexico, etc.
Many nations nationalize certain minerals because they're technically owned by the nation as a whole.
@Scamp Diesel There was zero American interference in the famine of the Ukraine, which starved to death 6 million Ukrainians. No, that was all on the Soviet Socialists..
Perhaps you should live in Somalia for a year. In my college Economics classes, my minor, I was taught it's actually simple. Who pays for something. Society, i.e. the taxpayer, or a private individual or group of private individuals. The rest is just political hot air to scare people into going against their own best interest. It's not Socialism versus Capitalism. It's how much Socialism, taxpayer paid, versus how much Capitalism. Most agree that the problem is getting the right mix for the time. No one choice is ever right for everyone. Our military and our police are socialism. Why? Simple, the taxpayer pays for them. Why do we need to massively complicate something that is so simple. Who pays?
The professors themselves have been brainwashed by the Frankfurt School that took over American education, now in turn they proceed to disseminate the lies they were taught , most of them have spent their life time in academia and have never lived in the real world . They have never worked in finance, farming, industry, manufacturing or any of the trades . These “ professors “ , for the most part ( there are some very good ones out there but they’re few and far between since conservatives “ need not apply”) have never experienced the consequences of socialism and its errors . They are not held accountable for the disastrous policies they have inspired and the devastation they have wrought as Thomas Sowell has pointed out . They live in a world of ideological fantasies .
FYI dumbshit, Japanese healthcare is privatized.
I'm reading The Road To Serfdom now, and also starting Planned Chaos by Ludwig von Mises. Both are so rich with ideas, and brim with insightful thoughts on every page. Fascinating.
It is funny when he talked about the progressive income tax. They have been trying to implement a progressive state income tax in Colorado and they say they need to do it to compensate for other taxes being regressive. (So, fix one problem by creating another.) And the other evening on a PBS show here, a progressive guest made the comment that Colorado needs get rid of the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) because 'it prevents the state from retaining all of the income that it needs'.
“The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.”. Margaret Tatcher.. 2009.
Her party has got the country over 2 trillion GBP in debt because they kept bailing out banks. I'm not taking bloody lectures on fiscal responsibility from people who bankrupted the country. Btw You could at least spell her name correctly and get the date of the quote right.
@@archvaldor You got triggered now? Spelling Nazi.
Well she must have done something right, since she was the longest serving Prime minister of all times.
That is the truest political statement in History. Being in Canada, we’re going to learn this the hard way. We gave a modern, successful economy to Peter Pan. He has chosen tinker bell as finance minister and used rainbow logic to choose the remainder of his government. This is the least gifted government in the history of the world. What can go wrong?
As if Margaret Thatcher's mind was an open one ?
If we're still allowed to use the tools of logic:. 2 questions:
1. What is economics?
Economics is the study of how to meet our unlimited needs with our limited resources.
Need is infinite.
Resources are finite.
Need is subjective & immeasurable.
Production is objective & measurable.
2. How CAN we meet unlimited need with our limited resources?
There are two basic options:
Option A:. Distribute goods to each according to what he produces. That incentivizes production which creates wealth and lifts people out of poverty.
Option B:. to each according to what he needs. That incentivizes need. Need crushes production. It requires force & violence to take from people what they've produced.
Choose your option.
@@falsum2701
No, Cameron. We have less & less reason to produce If our production' is taken from us. That's human nature. That's why socialism fails. Production fails. As long as human nature exists.
@@falsum2701
Cameron, when the rich--or anyone-- takes our money without our consent, Americans still have freedom to quit or the right to sue. That's capitalism.
When the State takes your property without your consent, It will imprison you for dissent and kill your loved ones. That's socialism.
Please try to appreciate the freedom we possess: free people, free markets.
@Samyasi Orion Samyas, how? Socialism opposes private property. Stock market = private property.
Freedom is full of risk and brings happiness. Socialism is full of oppression and fear..Please choose freedom.
Here's an alternative:
The Bruderhof
In a dark time where collectivist thought dominates college and university campuses, in a time where the collectivist empire is marching towards total tyranny, a new hope rises with the likes of the Mises Institute.
Come on man! I read this comment in the voice of a dramatic movie trailer guy.
@@whiteyquartz3409 maybe he is being ironic.
Funny, watching this and reading this now, while we are in the middle of a civil war, communism at the door. 😢 😢 😢
@@marylamb7707 so where is this call for communism coming from or is in the mind of many the idea that communism is anything that is not conformity with corporatist capitalism. Is it that what tyrannises the poor frees the rich and what tyrannises the rich frees the poor. Is what is tyranny to the rich the same as tyranny for the poor.
For the rich tyranny is paying tax, tyranny is having to obey the law, tyranny is not being able to divert government income streams into their own pockets, tyranny is having to live in a just and equitable society.
For the poor tyranny is the fear of and having to live in poverty, tyranny is not having access to health care or having to sell their house to pay for life threatening medical intervention, tyranny is losing health insurance when you lose your job, tyranny is living in poverty while your taxes are spent mass murdering people of color in other countries to steal their resources and change their governments so the rich don't have to pay taxes in the conquered country, obey their laws and can exploit their people, and their environment without consequence as protecting individual liberty. Tyranny for the poor is watching their children go hungry, get a poor quality education, Tyranny being fearful to go outside because many of the citizens are permitted to be armed and dangerous. Tyranny having a high chance of being arrested for being a person of color. Tyranny is a justice system that has a low threshold for long term imprisonment. Tyranny is a police and justice system that rounds people up to generate income for private prisons that trade in the captured labour in their charge.
The civil war is a class war where the rich have lost all sense of proportion and pushed the poor beyond what any human being can be expected to endure while protecting their own comforts and privileges.
For the rich tyranny is the potential for social justice, for the poor tyranny is realizing they are living under fascism.
@@davidalexanderlourie4371
From Biden, Sanders, AOC, Harris, Pelosi, the Biden/Sanders policy, the new green deal, marxists, the fact that socialism is being taught in public schools, Sanders talking about.
Is that enough?
Now I get why there are like 4 versions of this talk online. Wow. I’ve had it on the back burner for a long time because I figured I was already familiar with the material. I was bored so I put it on and it turned out to be a REALLY good talk. Covers so many different aspects- from egalitarianism to welfare to the false choice of democracy vs. dictatorship in economic affairs and includes some great quotes. It's like a crash course.
I'm 35, and first to admit I could NEVER POSSIBLY KNOW ENOUGH, yet all my peers my age and under think they know it all, whilst possessing the intellectual capacity of a potato, with daddies credit card. Fucking putrid. Work hard, play hard, and don't let anyone make life easier for you. Easier=weaker!
Animal Farm tells the whole story. Unfortunately it is no longer required reading in high school.
Definition of a socialism as "absence of the connection between an effort and a reward " is also a description of the policy in many US public schools. This scares the soul out of me.
Russia did produce 1 marketable product, the AK-47.
James Dunkerson - directly designed as a Russian version of the German Sturmgewehr StG-44, the first weapon to coin the term assault rifle - so all the Russians did was demonstrate their ability to copy other people's stuff, like the Chinese
That is true, but it is not the Sturmgewehr that has been used all over the world for many decades.
wrong, the entire kolesnikov range is marketable
Funny how it was only a military weapon that was inspired by and used principles that the Russians analyzed in the Sturmgewehr StG-44.
Virtually everything the Russians made were inferior copies of Western tech, from the B-29 being the basis of the Tu-95 Bear bomber to all of their jet engines being based on stolen British designs.
+J V this isn't correct. The Assault rifle being a medium cartridge was literally the only thing the stg44 and ak platform rifles have in common. They're entirely different weapon system designs.
When I was in junior high in the late '80s, we were taught the ills of communism. I went to a public school, with union teachers.... everyone was well-aware that communism was a bad idea then. It seems that lesson has been forgotten.
It creeps. And, well, education being state run basically makes it a socialist leaning concept.
Wow, great talk! I love the points, I love economic analysis and it is so refreshing to hear them simply elucidated. I'll probably get this book and recommend it out. We need more education like this on our campuses and let the students decide which side makes more sense, instead of indoctrinating them only with statist philosophy.
Trenton you should read Heiner Flassbeck
Watching in September 2020...and here we are...
I never see a shortage of funds for more bombs and weapons
I never see a shortage of funds for welfare either. What's your point?
Norm sadly untrue. A judge had to halt a draconian cut to food stamps Trump tried to push through just this year. Welfare for the most vulnerable at this pandemic time while giving tax breaks to people that don’t need it is criminal. Yet welfare is always on the chopping block, is the pentagon budget? Ever? When?
@@normmacdonaldrules4602 welfare has pros and cons but I don't hear that its killing innocent people etc what's your point asshole
Greetings from denmark ... we cheat a lot in taxes ... a lot :D oh and also #taxationistheft
should probably stop using public works, broadband, airports... lol
How is it possible to cheat? greetings from norway
karsy579 get a job that pays cash, greeting from USA lol
Nice try, bot.
If you use cash here you would be suspected of being criminal
I'm surprised he didn't make much reference to Friedman. His anecdotes and discussions with respect to the flaws of socialism are excellent.
Friedman was the first to run down and help the murderer Pinochet with his economic theories. So much for the free market meaning liberty when Pinochet overthrow an elected government, rounded up his anti coup opposition and then murdered them in a soccer stadium.
@@kimobrien. just like elected chavez , maduro and mossadegh ?
going full socialist and bankrupting their country the moment they got a chance ?
by the way ,chile survived the communism wave of the south america and they prosper today.
also why there where so many polish and ukrainians in chile political prison ?
pinochet just gave up after the last election , can't say that about any socialist.
may be maduro ? lets bet on it .
@@shahabmos5130 Pinochet in Chile was an A&P butcher from the beginning. He over threw a Democratically elected government with US CIA help. Milton Freedman went down the help the Fascist General Pinochet.
@@kimobrien. Friedman never helped a murder. Stop making things up. He promotes a free market... czcams.com/video/dzgMNLtLJ2k/video.html
@@kimobrien. czcams.com/video/dzgMNLtLJ2k/video.html
It is a very simple problem the kids these days have conflated actual socialism and having a socially responsible government with robust social programs they think it's the same thing that's the problem and it's very simple
I think you have it backwards, its the adults who lived through the red scare that conflate Communism/Socialism with robust social programs. Kids nowadays don't have any comparison for the 2. Democratic socialism is the New Socialism.
Seems like you don't understand the economy system that has been manufactured by the system you exist in
@@Booer how so? all i said was kids these days take ACTUAL full blown socialism, and confuse it with a democratic capitalism based society that has *robust social programs* . what are you referring to which do NOT understand? i was pointing out that they do not understand that socialism doesn't automatically mean that the government will be able to afford BETTER social programs than a richer capitalized society which prioritizes social programs. my point was you are better off in a capitalized society with robust social programs then you are in an ACTUAL full blown SOCIALISM based system. is that NOT right? and if not then WHY?
Imagine living in a society where your hungry all the time and you never make your own decisions, choose a career, speak your mind or travel at will. If you think thats OK give it a try there are several places you can give it a shot!
Coming to America!
Professor DiLorenzo is a pleasure to listen to. Lucky audience!
No, it was not a pleasure for me. He says lies, but dressed so, that they are invisible to the "blind".
Before you judge, please read with open mind. Socialism is a two sided coin:
I come from Central European country that was unfortunately taken over by Soviet Russia after WW2. For 40 years we had to live under the socialist authoritarian regime. It destroyed our economy and our countries plummeted down culturally far below our western neighbours(huge corruption and zero political awareness from the lack of democracy). The problem was that we had to implement all the aspects of socialism. Both good and bad.
But take a look at Scandinavian countries(or even Central Europe). They implemented the best ideas of socialism, like healthcare and education for free, which is an amazing perk.
they are still top 20 most capitalist countries in the world but besides that. public spending has crippled salaries there.
Plenty of old people today claim they miss communism. They got security snd economic improvement, but the biggest plus was the comradeship they felt.
I'm 71 years old, there was a time in my youth where as the U.S.A had no debt; We not only had no debt, there were many countries that actually owed us money. I'm not sure when, but at some point it was changed and today, we are indebt trillions of dollars.
The US is sliding towards socialism as the years pass. It starts by introdternating children. I mean why when there's a sports event involving children is there no longer a winner. Both sides are given the same exact participation awards. Thus generation such as millenials are learning that it's not a matter of winning nor loosing, it's a matter of participation in which one can get ahead. There has never been a time that so many small business's have and will fail. Todays millenials all believe that just starting a business will make it sucessful, competion aka wining or loosing isn't an issue. Just participate, and your business will be sucessful.
Today in America aka the U.S.A., the number of individual collecting some form of Social Security is above 50 percent. Thus the minority of employee's both hourly and salired are supporting the majority. And the number of individuals whom actually paid into the system are now in the minority of those collecting it. Doing the math, one can see, the eventual collapse of the system.
This is really good. Thanks for posting.
"The problem with Capitalism is Capitalists...the problem with Socialism is Socialism" - European politician quote in recent years.
Yea because a politician wouldn't talk shit for his side...
I always bring up Kurt Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron when I talk about this topic because it's such a perfect example of forced egalitarianism leading to a dystopian nightmare. You can even see a little bit of this in those Scandinavian countries you mention where the culture openly scoffs at the overachievers. There is a Danish derogatory word that describes this, but I forgot what it is.
it also has a 180% tax for cars, great place
What's odd is that Vonnegut is a self-described socialist. "Harrison Bergeron" was actually written as a spoof of anti-communist propaganda; the story is satirizing what Vonnegut saw as an overblown fear of what socialist "equality" might lead to. Nevertheless, the story serves as an excellent metaphor for socialist nonsense, but that was not at all intended by Vonnegut.
He's a complex guy, and I can't really figure him out ideologically. On the one hand, he obviously has a big soft spot for socialism, but then he writes a story like "Player Piano", where the elite are (almost) overthrown by a mob of the common people, who proceed to destroy things that are actually valuable, such as the town sewer works. This is an excellent portrayal (whether intentional or not) of how a revolution led by "The People" is not necessarily good or well-thought out.
That's interesting, akirak. I did not know that. Thanks for the insight!
Yes Vonnegut was actually laughing at you.
The most ironic thing is that Kurt Vonnegut wrote Harrison Bergeron as a *satire* of conservative views regarding the political Left's desire for radical egalitarianism. He was strawmanning the conservatives' rejection of egalitarian views. Funny thing is, what he originally wrote as being mocking story about what he viewed as conservative fear-mongering has turned out true now.
What you're thinking of is what is called the "the Law of Jante".
I didn't know Charles Barkley played basketball for Auburn. Thanks, this lecture was very informative! :-p
Could someone please point me in the right direction for literature describing and analysing economic situation in scandinavian countries.
Only wish people in India see this atleast!
5 things Mises should know about Praxeology
It is not a science, or even close to one, it is self inconsistent, and inconsistent with the genuine sciences on all fronts.
It is not a science, or even close to one, it is self inconsistent, and inconsistent with the genuine sciences on all fronts.
It is not a science, or even close to one, it is self inconsistent, and inconsistent with the genuine sciences on all fronts.
It is not a science, or even close to one, it is self inconsistent, and inconsistent with the genuine sciences on all fronts.
It is not a science, or even close to one, it is self inconsistent, and inconsistent with the genuine sciences on all fronts.
This class should be mandatory every year at the college
Where can I find information about Scandinavian economy like the information DiLorenzo spoke about (The zero emplyments created, the cutback of socialist policies), it is very interesting to me to investigate about it, would be great if somebody can recommend me a book(s).
Thanks in advance.
The Nordic Model
You may also try "Debunking Utopia" by Sanandaji.
Yeah what’s with the nonsense of “democratic” socialism. It’s socialism ... the only thing that democratic means is the rout to it.
zakhar shamilyan The socialist DDR had Democratic in their name and was totally not democratic.
Dictatorships have nothing to do with socialism or social democracy
Excellent talk which gives in a nutshell the main quicksands of Socialism.
A fair comparison would be to visit socialist and capitalist countries and see which you want to live in, then move to the one you think is best. If you doubt this talk, PLEASE please move to Venezuala, Russia or any other socialist country of your choice.
I am learnig english and Im listening this podcast about economy. Thanks for information.
What will happen when Bitcoin replaces Fiat currency?
"If there's no link between effort and reward, you get less effort."
Bingo. Trust fund baby psychology right there.
Jeff Bezos has more wealth than close to the poorest half of the world combined. You are silly if you think it is physically possible to put in more effort than billions and billions of combined effort
Funnily enough, they don't see the hypocrisy and some actually believe that there is a link between Jeff Bezos's rewards and his effort.
Apple Pie there is a link between the risk he had to take and the reward. What reason would he have to take those risk if he wouldnt be rewarded for the risk or the value he produced? His wealth is directly proportionate to the value he provides to society.
Let's start with the obvious. Bezos did not put anywhere near a 100 billion dollars on the line to start amazon. Rewards far lower than his current wealth could make a website such as amazon worth making. He is currently not being rewarded for the value he produces, he is being rewarded for the value _other_ people are producing. Would you care to explain how you figured out that his wealth is proportional to the value he provides?
You clearly have never started a business. If you had you'd have some respect for those like Bezos. The risk is immense, it's easy to go bankrupt or worse, and running a business is a grueling job that's more than 8 hours per day. People think it's so easy to be a CEO or business owner. Only a small % of businesses ever make it. Bezos created a site that provides millions of people convenience and reshaped the landscape of retail. He also created means for others to profit through selling on the marketplace and created countless jobs as well. You can now order something online at an extremely low price and literally have it at your doorstep sometimes the same day without setting foot outside your home. Look at entities like Myspace that had a big boom then fizzled out. The fact Bezos has continued to expand and improve Amazon is a testament to his skill in managing the company and continuing to provide consumers value. Who are you to judge what his contribution is worth to the world? Does Bill Gates not deserve his billions? Think where the world would be today without Windows and the PC.
I see Bezos and see something to aspire to. The ingrates see him and think it's "not fair." Well maybe they should come up with an idea or a service that brings immense value to millions of people.
If a doctor makes as much as someone who doesn't work, why be a doctor. A scientist? An anything?
You're assuming only thing doctors care about is the accumulation of wealth because that is what capitalism is about.
@@dyrthos2955 Its not the "only" thing they care about, but certainly makes the field more attractive as it logically should. Is there a problem with that?
Thats why it's never worked anywhere and won't work here when it comes.
Palak Shah doctors must live with the crushing burden of death on their conscience when they fail, and doctors have a terrible life expectancy once they are forced to treat the upper echelons of the Party in a socialist regime. If your patient dies, you are a dissenter who intentionally killed them. Truth is merely what the Party says it is. So your mistake is welcomed with execution.
The accumulation of wealth is merely to justify the terrible hours, massive time in school, and the use of your talents in a high risk field. Most doctors are smart enough to do something else. They need to be paid well otherwise they will do something else.
I once met a doctor in Cuba who was working as a doorman for a hotel; the Government just assigned this job to him, no explanations given.
where is the pew poll mentioned at the start?
In the late 60s, we were required to read Vonnegut and Orwell. I wonder what is going on now? We were idealist teenagers, but never were much into socialism, just stopping the Vietnam War.
The book would have to be in comic book form. They hate to read.
Socialists: We'll get smarter people to "Steal" from each more effectively....this will fix all of the past failures. 🤣
Another thing I'm curious about for your opinions is something like the Kibbutzim in Israel. Everybody works, from childcare, to cooking to factory or field work etc, they are all taken care of, and they have all asked to be there. Each kibbutz provides a service or goods to sell in the free market to keep itself running. My brother and sister have both lived on one for a few years, one of those was for example selling from their sticky tape factory, I forget the other.
how do u find out total tax rate for any country ? like u told sweden has it 70% . i want to find it for other countries .
GDP per capita in PPP in Sweden is $50k. GDP per capita in Mississippi is $30k.
now do a cost of living analysis and tell me who pays more in taxes :)
@@noahwhipkey6262 yep, a year late, but cost of living is the point exactly, doesn't matter what the gdp per head is compared to other nations if the actual cost of living is prohibitive then that gdp is meaningless; better to ask questions about disposable income and purchasing power of currency
@@stephenparry6811 Totally agree.
You know also who are equal from income point of view, Afghanistan everyone's paychecks are arround 600 so the moral of the story is that you can be equal but miserable.
@@stephenparry6811 Yes, 57% tax in 2020 but they have payed even 61% or more.
"Democratic socialism" can best be understood as two wolves and a lamb voting WHAT (who) is for dinner
And not only that: At some way, you are the "wolf" for the other "lambs", and others are wolves to you, as each person struggles to allocate his/her own resources (and services) without the fundamental freedom of voluntary giving and taking...
"Democratic Socialism": Becasue voting to take other people's stuff makes it all better!
@Mark Johhson LOL. Look back at your history. No one actually paid that much in taxes. You're distilling your argument to one faulty data point. You're missing quite a lot. You have correlation, but not causation.
There is no "economic pie". There is no fixed amount of wealth anymore than any given material is inherently a resource. But if you want to make the argument that there is, then by all means, convince me that levels of wealth have remained stagnant across the ages.
Dystopian nightmare huh? I guess all the death camps and famine in the 20th century Socialist nations was your peak ideal of human achievement? That's quite an odd thing to want, but to each their own, so long as they don't push their own onto others. Don't get me wrong, there's plenty I would change from what we have now. Real markets would be nice. Elimination of property taxes, more school choice would be great, smaller federal government, etc. However compared to the hellscape the Socialist nations created, we've got it more than damn good. Oh, but yes. Do go on and tell us how NAP and self ownership cause "dystopia" while equity set by a centralized singular vision with State planned economics has done just oh so well where it's been tried.
fast forward 4 years.. There's a youtuber from Canada trying to move TO Venesuela.. has been there a couple times.. bought property. Vlogged it... Their biggest problems now (corona phobia aside) are the trade embargo preventing goods from going in and out and the loss of know how on self sufficiency.
What do you guys think about corporate socialism?
Well said frontporch. While I am not an expert when it comes to all the political classes out there, I am a fan of history. And I may be mistaken, but I could not think of any example now or in the past where socialism was a success.
You should think of yourself like an English Feudal King who says I can think of nowhere that capitalism has been a success.
First man into space isn't success?
"For tax years 1944 through 1951, the highest marginal tax rate for individuals was 91%, increasing to 92% for 1952 and 1953, and reverting to 91% for tax years 1954 through 1963. For the 1964 tax year, the top marginal tax rate for individuals was lowered to 77%, and then to 70% for tax years 1965 through 1981."
So the United States always been a socialist country? Following his arguments on taxes...
The IRS was founded in 1944
@@mariussielcken are you sure especially on the date? What is your source?
"In July 1862, during the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln and Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1862, creating the office of Commissioner of Internal Revenue and enacting a temporary income tax to pay war expenses.
The Revenue Act of 1862 was passed as an emergency and temporary war-time tax. It copied a relatively new British system of income taxation, instead of trade and property taxation. The first income tax was passed in 1862:
The initial rate was 3% on income over $800, which exempted most wage-earners.
In 1862 the rate was 3% on income between $600 and $10,000, and 5% on income over $10,000.
By the end of the war, 10% of Union households had paid some form of income tax, and the Union raised 21% of its war revenue through income taxes."
The IRS originates from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, a federal office created in 1862 to assess the nation's first income tax to fund the American Civil War. The temporary measure funded over a fifth of the Union's war expenses before being allowed to expire a decade later. In 1913, the Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, authorizing Congress to impose a tax on income and leading to the creation of the Bureau of Internal Revenue. In 1953, the agency was renamed the Internal Revenue Service, and in subsequent decades underwent numerous reforms and reorganizations, most significantly in the 1990s."
www.irs.gov/irs-history-timeline
Maybe that information is not correct and if you have the correct information please share.
Does George Choate still work at American University?
Thomas J. DiLorenzo, do you currently teach History of Economic Thought? In those lectures do you cover the work of Karl Marx, Henry George, and other prominent "progressive" ideologies?
Economic Paralysis and its Antidote - Geophilos (Mason Gaffney & Fred Harrison)
czcams.com/video/dl75grPaTbw/video.html
My Greedy Generation - Geophilos (Mason Gaffney & Fred Harrison)
czcams.com/video/PwkvHPnDqwY/video.html
Instead of spending money on a book just make sure your kid gets a hard major that'll get em a job and they probably won't be a liberal.
Leftist aren’t liberals, they’re the antithesis of freedom.
Cross Roads Productions I know more liberal college grads than conservative ones. Maybe bc they learn how to think on their own and then adopt the same mod mentality they will crucify the right for.
Yes but these mush heads need to understand conservatism in depth so they won't get fooled later and spread the word to others.
Colleges are doing their best to defeat even hard majors. Many engineering schools now team with social justice majors on projects. The result is engineering graduates that rarely last more than a year at actual work. A shining example is a young engineer who handed me a bridge rating that was negative - when I told the young engineer that the negative rating implied that the bridge would not support its own weight, the young engineer shrugged. Think about this the next time you drive across a bridge.
Master plumber is a major and it pays better than "entitled dipwad with the same degree as the other 3897593 motherfuckers in front of you". CAUTION. You may need to buy hand soap.
i am a millennial that loves capitalism
Does anyone know the title of the book???
Excellent work, sir.
“The problem with capitalism is that eventually you need socialism to bail out tyrannical shadow oligarchies who control the government” - Ronald Reagan
Reagan never said that. Google brings up nothing. It doesn't even sound like something he would say.
Alberto Balsalm
I can confirm the tax-rates in Denmark.
One point that I think is important to distinguish when discussing socialism is this: The definition being stated as
public ownership of property versus private ownership of property
is economically specious. The issue is this: in terms of economic principles, the issue is about who makes the economically relevant decisions / the means and mechanisms of how those decisions get made and implemented, not who "owns" the property in question.
That definition is poorly stated in that it is not about who owns the property but who controls it and makes the economically relevant decisions for it's use. The assumption in the definition being that who owns the property is identical to who is making the decisions determining its economic use. Thus to state it is terms of who owns it is, assumptively, identical to stating who controls it.
The issue after all is how it gets used economically, not who "owns" it in that use. This is why the distinction that it is NOT ownership but _control_ that is the distinguishing feature. If the economic application of a property is as because the central planners directly own it and thus directly apply their agenda or if the economic application of the property is exactly same because the central planners compel the "owner" to utilize it as they determine, then how is there any significant difference? In this case, "ownership" is a distinction without a difference. So to properly restate it:
public _control_ of property versus private _control_ of property
Now, why this matters vis a vis "socialism" is that with this understanding we can readily see the fundamental fallacy of the common apologia for policies such as advocated by Bernie Sanders. The proposal is that "but it's not 'state' ownership of property, there is still "private ownership" of property." Sure, but the problem is that even though "private" property is allowed, it is _controlled_ by the state via regulatory bodies. And it is then easy to see why they would say this. Why bother with "owning" the property if you can still _control_ it to serve your agendas via fiat and decree of "regulation"? You get the best of both worlds: none of the problems or costs associated with ownership but all of the benefits vis a vis one's agendas. If I can tell you what you can or cannot make with your "property" (or what you are compelled to make), what you can sell it for, etc. why would I even care who "owns" it vis a vis an economic agenda of central planning and control?
On taxes the issue is this: the common narrative is that wealthier people should pay more because they "owe more back to society." In a capitalist free market society, this makes no sense. How is it that they have that wealth? In a capitalistic free market economy, it can only be because they created at leas that much value into the economy. If they did not, the who freely engaged in those transactions if they did not get at least as much in value for what they gave that person in exchange? Who freely engages in a transaction in which they get less than they give? It would just make no sense. So that being the case, that they have X amount of wealth means implicitly that they created at least that much value (and probably much more) into the economy - to the benefit of the participants in that economy - meaning, the people.
But for some reason, having created that much value for the people of the economy, they somehow "owe" society yet more on top of that.
For example, consider Steve Jobs. He created value to billions of people with the iPhone and in turn accrued great wealth as people exchanged to obtain the benefit of that value. But apparently some people seem to think: "gee, thanks Steve for gifting the world with the iPhone - but now you 'owe' society more in return." WTF? FFS, he created the benefit of the iPhone to society, how exactly does that create an obligation to "owe" to society?
We can pursue that even further down the rabbit hole on the other end of the scale. "You didn't produce any value into society, in fact you consumed more from society than you contributed to it, so that means that society owes you more."
I'm not sure if Austrian economics exactly equated to "anarcho-capitalism", but does Austrianism define the justifiable functions of the state? e.g. military, police force, courts, etc.?
As for privatizing roads ... it would be a good idea if you were "colonizing" virgin territory, but how would you privatize EXISTING roads? Auction them off? And what does Austrianism have to say about the concept of "natural monopolies", where parallel competing infrastructure would be impractical? IOW, would a private monopoly owning all of our roads be any better? If not, how would competition be practical?
Anyone making a claim on someone else's labor is EVIL. That is the end of the debate.
How about making a claim on someone else's land? their political system? economic system? how about using money and military to force someone to exploit their resources to you? Is that evil???
NAH!!!! That's just 'HEALTHY COMPETITION'
You can't just put evil in capital letters and win, your tired ass statement has been tried billions of times, and never rationally defended.
Evil? - that’s a bit much... Less than virtuous? - fair assessment.
@Mike
"How about making a claim on someone else's land?"
Also evil.
"their political system?"
I don't know what it means to make a claim on someone else's political system. Claim it how? Do you mean a coup?
"economic system?"
I don't know what it means to make a claim on someone else's economic system. Do you mean operating with a different system than the one which currently dominates the culture?
"how about using money and military to force someone to exploit their resources to you?"
By that do you mean attacking another country (unprovoked) and taking their stuff? That is certainly evil.
I totally agree with Howard Crawford's assessment that taking someone else's labor against their will is evil. Please explain why doing something like that should be acceptable.
@@Shozb0t I suppose I meant 'lay claim that you can control their economies and political systems at will', to shape their systems.. etc. I think it was pretty straight forward, I don't know where the misunderstanding should come it. Maybe the word claim isn't perfect but it's easy to get the just... a vast amount of western wealth was 'stolen' from other countries, through imperialist agendas.
So when these countries strive towards or vote for getting their resources back... that's not theft buddy, it's called reclamation.
@Mike
"lay claim that you can control their economies and political systems at will', to shape their systems.. etc."
You are talking about dictatorship, then (such as in North Korea). That is also evil.
"a vast amount of western wealth was 'stolen' from other countries, through imperialist agendas."
Are you talking about the Third Reich? I'm pretty sure that Germany was wiped out after WWII. They had to start over again. Any wealth that they stole they certainly didn't keep. But yes, it is evil for any country to steal wealth from another country--just as it is evil for any individual to steal from another individual.
The bottom line is that socialism is a corrupt and evil system which places the individual in the position of indentured servant supposedly to serve some sort of "common good." Every individual deserves to live his or her own life without interference from anyone. The only thing that can be considered a common good is freedom (freedom from coercion). Human beings need freedom in order to live properly.
By the way, you didn't explain why taking someone else's labor against their will is an acceptable thing.
It is refreshing to hear these excellent economic principles. I'm not sure how the open-minded person could listen to them and disagree with them. Excellent presentation Mr. DiLorenzo!
The mind open to becoming another wealthy capitalist will be refreshed to know that a bourgeois professor of economics is in complete agreement. In other words in this situation a dog does not bite its master. In fact not only does this dog not bite the master but is willing to help with the hunt for bigger profits.
Great lecture, thanks!
In pp. 165-170 The Decline of the American Republic by John T. Flynn, there is a list of necessary reforms to stop Socialism.
DiL, ask your publisher whether there should be a book that updates this list.
4:07 exactly what is going on in my country venezuela right NOW!!
roughly 80% of Venezuela's economy is privately owned so if they are trying to nationalise everything they are doing a bad job
And you get your stats from where? Well, just read comments here form Venezualans.
@@finlaystevenson7438Venezuela is a simple ffg dictatorship and Maduro and his wife do what they want. Namely, take the national banks money, sell cocaine internationally, and get billions from China and Russia to keep the military paid so he can stay in power.
I lived under socialism, the real one. It was horrible and the millenials have no clue what they are asking for. Their problem is that they will get exactly what they ask for. I will be out of their way and they will reap the benefits of a completely ruined economy. Poor grandchildren of mine.
people need to be tought the basics before philosophies of public. integrity, honesty, respect, responsibility, fairness, kindness, strength, perserverance, etc....
Hmm... I'm curious how many books have been sold so far. ;p
Unfortunately, you cannot reason with modern day Liberals/Progressives/ Socialists
They have no logic to answer with. Only anger that you aren't stupid enough to believe it too.
A socialist country will have high corporate tax rates They tax the mining and oil companies that take it. The purpose of this video is to degrade socialism because of it's fiscal policy . This video was specificially produced for that purpose
Well when you use questionable sources and outright lies to defend your position, yeah the liberals tend to laugh in your face.
Bulletlube .What did the government do for revenue before personal income tax?
Questionable sources and outright lies are what the libtard position is based on. Liberalism is a form of mental illness. Socialism fails every where it goes. You can see California sinking already.
I just looked this up, Sweden does NOT have a per capita income less than Mississippi.
I noticed that too. That point needs clarification or redaction.
What the right wing idiot lied, wow what a surprise.
Varlwyll perhaps it is their post-tax income they are referring to, or something else. Or perhaps they are just wrong.
... And where did you "look" that up?
After tax income! That's lower.
The whole problem faced by the Austrians is that only human labor can create and assign value. This is what prevents a price system from being able to correctly assign prices.
This is amazing! Thank you
excellent talk
India had one of the wealthiest countries if you do not factor in the poor untouchables living and dying on the streets. A bigoted shameful! religious practice of cast system caused India collapsed from within. This cast system guaranteed a permanent ruling elite as part of the religious structure as well as the governing of India. This meant the majority of people had no hope of advancement and lived to serve at their masters will. This totalitarian regime collapsed from it's own cruel practices and was made ripe for conquering by Great Britain.
Whether a country's economic base is Communist or Capitalist, if there is no Democracy governing the whole it will degenerate because the competitive nature of advancement in the country will no longer exist. You see, Democracy is a from of governing and Capitalism is an approach to it's economy.
There are also many Conservatives among those who support legal and illegal migration who are taking our jobs because they feel it is good for business to keep our wages as low as possible. This is why so many Conservatives are also resisting President Trump's plans to secure our borders and bring jobs back to our country. This is why they also turned a blind eye as the schools and universities degenerated into chaos. These are the bureaucrats who are resisting our climb out of the swamp to restore our country into it's former glory..
In the 1999 it was the people on the left who protested NAFTA and WTO Globalization in "The Battle for Seattle" in Seattle Washington. Now this is the Republican Party of Donald Trump who is championing the issues of the working class and standing firm against a Globalist take over of the WTO, EU and UN. I am now a proud Deplorable Republican because I stand with the working class who are not the wealthy elite but the regular folks willing to work hard for a place at the table of the American Dream.
So what do you do with the poor, the sick, the elderly and the children? Do we as a Nation turn our back on them and do we remove the words "In God We Trust" from our currency and our hearts? What happens when the balance of economic power and a winner takes all philosophy of someone like Ayn Rand makes upward mobility impossible for the majority of people? Is your economics also an extremist view like the "Robber Barons of the 19th century monopolies?
As the jobs left the USA to China and other 3rd world countries in the 1960's and now people graduate college with massive debt and no sustainable job prospects, many people turned to socialism (communism) as a viable alternative to poverty and a bleak future.
President Trump wants to bring jobs back and secure our borders but this does not happen overnight and people are still in need. Make America Great Again, more than a promise it is a wake up call and even a battle cry to stop the agenda of world control and destruction of our Democracy and National Democracies all over the world.
Aleada Siragusa
what about a Republic
Very excellent, well researched presentation 👏
Mencken’s description of state as you read, is a very “eerie” description of the liberals, especially the unelected ones, in Canada.
Totalitarian state central planning has not worked in the USSR and China. It only resulted in forced labour camps in Chines rice fields or in the Russian gulags.
Top-down planning restrains individual creativity and individual income growth. As a result an enterprise market system will win the technology and productivity race of GDP.
However, no monopoly markets and company should exist, like now on Wallstreet. They should be splitup into less than 5% of market, and the shares distributed also.
Small is beautifull, BIG (Wallstreet crime cartel) is ugly.
"Take from each" negates all rights of the people and makes government the master intrinsically, from word one.
What could go wrong?
Sweden has a great social system..
As it is normal in Europe 🇪🇺
you do have a healthcaressystem where you don't have to worry no matter of if you give birth to a baby or if you have cancer and need lots of doctor appointments.
A country should provide that.
And of course boarder security.
That's the first thing and a duty of a good leadership 🙏
That's a problem since 2015 in
Germany 🇩🇪
and now in the
US 🇺🇸
as we see the pictures from our boarders.
A defense of socialism I've heard more than once, when bring up the horrors in other countries or how it has never worked, they say, "that's communism not socialism."
then you can say that there has never been capitalism since there are collusions, huge goverment spending, etc. what they do i compare the idea of socialism vs capitalism in reality instead of the idea.
also socialism will always lead to dictatorships poverty and genocide since the nations interests are always the interests of a group of people and they cannot do economic calculation. So what happened with communism last century was the logical outcome.
Really recommend hayek here.
I was a Bernie supporter bc what he was saying sounded good HOWEVER when I started actually educating myself on what socialism was I grew up and abandoned that toxic ideology. People just have no idea!
Bernie isn't a socialist though he is a social democrat
SovietScot it’s really the same thing in the end.
@@finlaystevenson7438, stfu. Sanders wants democratic socialism.
A socialist is just someone who is unable to get over his or her
astonishment that most people who have lived and died have spent lives
of wretched, fruitless, unremitting toil...
Rather, we are those who are willing to sacrifice to help stop that.
@@HallyVee What you don't get is that human suffering will never stop. It will always be there on some level, it's just a matter of degree depending on the economic system
Over 100 million people have been murdered in this century alone in an attempt to end human suffering. Marxism increases suffering much more than capitalism ever could
@@xallthatremains8339 I agree that we are far from ending all suffering. We don't attempt to. We merely attempt to end the suffering that ends in death or privation. The easy stuff like access to water and housing and food, childcare and a livelihood. If your belief in the continuation of human suffering allows you to overlook an easily solved lack, I would suggest your belief is serving you suspiciously well.
@@HallyVee My point is that socialism is not the way to end human suffering in America or the rest of the world. The implementation of true socialism (really communism/marxism) have done an outrageous amount of harm under the guise of doing good all over the world for well over a century and it still is. The socialist programs in existence have done plenty of harm to the poor and suffering in America but is ignored in favor of trashing capitalism and portraying it as evil
I absolutley understand that there is still a lot of suffering worldwide. There are over one billion people who have no access to clean water and/or food. I am for any reasonable measures to remedy the issues humanity faces. However I will never advocate for giving a government more money and power to do so. Even though it has proven disastrous and deadly every time it has been attempted, the idea doesn't seem to die
@@xallthatremains8339 that idea is so effective and refuses to die because it is propaganda against my solution. All governments tend to disallow alternatives.
I definitely agree that granting Excess power to any concentrated governmental entity he's a recipe for disaster. Unlss as in communism that government is comprised of Representative or direct democracy.
Full and instant recall of Representatives, all inclusive participation, and widespread comprehension of the issues are all core tenets of communism.
The ultimate injustice and exploitation is when you take the fruits of hard labour and expertise of an industrious individual and give it to a lazy and indolent person who otherwise is totally capable of earning a decent living but doesn't want to. At the same time I totally agree with supporting those who are incapable of being productive either because they are mentally ill, or are not mentally ill but not sufficiently intelligent to hold any job, or have been injured into incapacity (by war or accident). A civilized society will have to take care of the vulnerable but not the lazy.
I wish I heard this in 2016, when my son was attending an "elite east coast institution". Talk about captured!!
a lot of my friends preach this "democratic socialism" and it drives me crazy. just because you discovered loony bernie sanders 2 years ago, doesn't mean it's a tenable solution for the US, Bernie's promises were as lofty and far off as Trump's. if anything, that's the system already in place, since we get from the government but we benefit from capitalism and as we can see the two don't co-exist well. In california, we keep raising the middle wage and our homelessness problem keeps rising, the number of working poor is rising. socialism/communism are failed ideals and they don't work because greed exists, the need for psychological/financial/physical dominance exists. there is no socialist utopia out there- this is a failed system and like he said has made countries and continents BROKE..
Trump is more of a capitalist than 80% of the Republicans in Washington. Do some research on what he has done in this past year and you will be amazed, that is if you value freedom and a strong economy/Country.
Does the n for your ikon stand for nincompoop of numbskull?
Kayla B
You are taking a totally broken system and saying it is the real world. It isn't. You should take a look at Scandinavia and most of Europe - all basically socialist countries.
And Bernie was the only one talking sense in the USA, but most people in the USA were too brainwashed to realise it. Therefore Don the Fart, the morally bankrupt bankrupt, science denying, lying, bald headed warmonger and the YEC Pence.
nicole cameron
Silly child.
Hi wong, I thought I wander through some other comments and this is another one where it is clear that misunderstanding socialism is clear.
I find myself disagreeing with colleged aged liberals on socialism but at least most of them actually sort of kind of know the difference between socialism and communism, which is more than this guy can say. He should be learning from them, not trying to educate them.
Awesome lecture
A book that provides the detailed analysis of the pros and cons of socialism and capitalism was published at the turn of the 20th century, before any society even attempted to introduce socialism as a societal system. This book, titled "Democracy versus Socialism," was written by an Austrian named Max Hirsch. Hirsch argues that the enemy of democracy is monopoly privilege, and also that democracy requires a high degree of individualism. He argues further that if socialists get what they want, they will simply replace one form of monopoly privilege with bureaucratic hierarchy and privilege.
Individualism, on the other hand, requires the elimination of monopoly privilege. Hirsch examines the sources of such privilege and the measures requires to achieve equality of opportunity. He attacks rentier privilege, embracing Henry George's argument that rents from all sources are legitimately societal property, the fund to pay for democratically-agreed upon public goods and services and (potentially) a citizen's dividend from any surplus. Taxes on earned income, on capital goods and on commerce must be eliminated, as these represent the confiscation of legitimate private property.