I dont mean to be offtopic but does anybody know a method to get back into an Instagram account? I stupidly forgot my account password. I would love any tips you can offer me.
Yes, let a man choose what his gifts are and allow others to pay him in equivalent value to the value he gives them. and through that the nation will only have good book writers, and the nation will only have good schools, and the nation will only have quality mechanics, and the nation will only have well versed plumbers. not that poor quality workers do not exist, that instead they are outperformed by those who provide better value. and through that each and every man woman and child will deep down seek to create value of themselves in one way or another. and then the nation shall be strong.
However it is up to the government to create the conditions where one can compete and invent and allow that invisible hand to shape the market. When monopolies and crony capitalism and government corruption tilt the market the invisible hand is killed.
Not sure I can explain as grandly as Adam Smith did, but the opening section of the video points out that wealth isn't money, but the goods and services of the economy. Money is merely the tool or medium of exchange for wealth, i.e. goods and services. He also pointed out how division of labor increases productivity, by allowing the workers to make more pins than they could by themselves. The ideas the boy had to make things better are simply the entrepreneurial ideas anybody could have to improve the production and productivity of the business, if acted upon. The second part of the video points out how self-interest encourages people to help other people. Businesses seek to provide good and services that people want at prices they are willing to pay. Competition helps ensure that businesses stay in line by forcing them to pay higher wages and find ways to decrease costs (and thus offer lower prices) and find ways to increase production and productivity so they keep paying higher wages and offer lower prices. The only thing that really bothered me was the ending, because, sure, anybody can raise the capital they need by simply asking people for it, that's what sites like Kickstarter do, but banks have historically had a pretty big role an allowing people to store their savings so the banks can lend that out to businesses as capital for their enterprises. So we don't need to scoff at banks and gold (money), we simply need to understand their proper place in the economy. Adam Smith didn't get everything right, but he did place capitalist economics and economics in general on a solid foundation for future development. What we've done with it since isn't Smith's fault!
I’ve just finished reading THE WEALTH OF NATIONS for the second time(cover to cover),the first time was last year October but I didn’t really understand that much(coz largely,I was still very much arrogant about everything),and ultimately I lost everything,after re-reading it now it has completely changed my life and how I view the workings of the world. I’ve made a vow to myself that I have to,seriously have to read this book twice a year the minimum coz it is riddled with Information/Knowledge...its Lessons were equally important back 1776 as they are in this COVID19 riddled 2020. I’d urge everyone to read this book,it’s very very important on so many many levels.✌🏿🇿🇦
I don't think I've ever seen a youtube commenter admitting to arrogance (though is prvades youtube) and the subsequent fall that inevitably comes from it. You further propound the change that came from becoming more humble. It seems that this has been lost on the others who commented here, but I wanted you to know at least one person sees, appreciates, and marvels at the difficult nature of your accomplishment. Pride and arrogance are two of the most pernicious pitfalls besetting Western culture today - impelling us down this path to ruin. Dealing with them can be a very difficult but essential battle.
Apparently the smiling is accurate : he'd talk to himself and smile with huge tombstone teeth. Also, he was kidnapped by Tinkers as a child. Good drama , well scripted and acted.
He was a good man. Smith's ideology was good taken as/for evil by corporate manipulators; communism, an evil ideology disguised as good which has the operandum towards moral economic nihilism.
@@jakeytedesco3003If this is Smith's idea well he is wrong accumulation of capital is represented not by just gold in a bank but the machinery used in production, the land and natural resources. The owners of capital seek to maximize their return on investment. .
These days I'm digging into Adam Smith philosophy of trade and morals Sociaty... It seems we had a lot of common and I will learn more of his VALUES... I believe Universal value and morals won't die .. they are out there and it's up to us to carry these VALUES and principles and pass it on to the next generations.
If only the bosses weren't driven by greed than maybe capitalism could work but since the are it can't help but result in monopolization, government intervention and central bank monetary manipulation.
Capitalists are exploiters, it makes no difference if they are nice, bad, greedy, or generous. Capitalism's internal contradictions and processes is what leads to its collapse, not greed. Adam Smith was from the progressive period of capitalism, capitalism has long since moved on from its progressive period and has entered its decline, capitalism, just as aging, cannot reverse its decline. Capitalism has now entered the period where, if it is not removed by the working class, it will destroy humanity. It should be noted that Smith's positions , are about improving productivity, increasing the profits of a tiny minority of the worlds population, if he genuinely cared for the working class, he would have said, "workers seize control and use the wealth to improve the worlds living standards", but he doesn't, he was and is the mouth piece of the capitalist class. Try reading the WSWS site for a clear political analysis and program for the working class.
@@ppazpppaz8618 Actually that is not Lenin position which is instead that no situation is too hopeless for the capitalists. The wsws is group of sectarians who oppose any real struggles by the workers in the trade unions because they have their own doctrine and setup like the bureaucrats they claim to oppose. They demand the workers adopt their program and organization before doing anything.
Excellent play! I wish this had been used in my college Economics course, haha. Very well scripted, shot, and acted, a top notch and enjoyable distilled and presented basic summery of Smith's most famous points from the work. (Also, confession: I kept getting distracted by how stunningly beautiful that wench is.)
Capital and business always moves in the natural direction of economies of scale and the monopolization of industry and capital into fewer and fewer hands.
@@kimobrien. Yes but actually no. If you actually take a look at the trends, Poverty has actually decreased in more capitalistic nations and the median household income has increased (even after adjusting for inflation). Now lets look at the trends in your stupi- communist system, Property is stolen, poverty increases, the likely hood of the government becoming authoritarian HEAVILY increases. Lets get some basic facts of reality out of the way 1. the more power you give the government, the more they are able to take control of the country and become a dictatorship 2. stealing from people leads to resentment, and people will never agree 100% 3. if there is no enterprise, there is no innovation. 4. People will work reward (capital) and so if you remove capital than the only motivator to do labor left is punishment (not good) 5. a "real" socialist system is actually degrading 6. The reason that "that wasn't real socialism" is because "real socialism" doesn't exist, It cannot be properly implemented. yes people have tried. 7. you cannot be free and socialist, you gotta choose one or the other Now here's some fun facts. There were many socialists communes (around 30) in the United States in the 19th century. they all failed, because people would rather live in a free market. funny thing, in a REAL free market economy, you can be a socialist, but in a REAL socialist "economy" you cannot be a capitalist and Sweden isn't socialist (their welfare is actually called pensions and they are privatized look it up)
James The transfer of sovereignty over Hong Kong,[1][2][3] commonly known as the handover of Hong Kong (or simply the Handover, also the Return in mainland China), occurred at midnight at the start of 1 July 1997, when the United Kingdom ended administration for the colony of Hong Kong and returned control of the territory to China. Hong Kong became a special administrative region and continues to maintain governing and economic systems separate from those of mainland China. Nowadays there’s political stress and protests in Hong Kong as China’s government is gaining total control over their economic and political system. People from Hong Kong want to keep their liberty but it seems almost impossible.
This is such a good demonstration of what capitalism was originally intended to be. Shame what it has come to. Nowadays everything is a marketing strategy. Even people are treated as products. Whatever you talk about, you get an ad of it on your social media which itself is run by a company that provides your data not just to other companies but even politicians.
Sounds like stakeholder theory or might lead to it. I like the idea of being selfish in the market over this. Everyone should be looking out for their best interest. This might be that but it could be more. In a 2 day Adam Smith dive and I’m not sure I like it. He adds some weird shit into it.
Agree. The couse of poverty in former Soviet Union is the absence of free market and socialistic ideology. My parents have never heard about Smith. This literature was forbidden by comunist party. Fortunately now we are able to self-educate via the internet and dont have censor. And our country on its way to success. Of course if russia doesnt destroy the human kind by nuclear weapon earlier.
Adam Smith wrote about capitalism before the industrial revolution. Therefore he saw a positive future. Karl Marks was born in that future after the industrial revolution. He saw that along with the positives, many negatives also came with the industrial revolution. So he wrote about a way out of the negative impacts of capitalism. In fact Adam Smith wrote about the ways out of Mercantilism. Before the industrial revolution, merchants believed in hoarding money. They didn’t care about the life of the workers or the conditions of the factory. This he labelled as Mercantilism. Adam Smith theorised that morality or the invisible hand could help in this. If a merchant allowed his morality to help make the conditions of the worker better then the efficiency of the worker would increase as a result the factory would produce more and better quality products making the merchant win the competition. Both in my opinion were against the domination of a merchant over the lives of the workers. Both wanted to improve the life of the worker. The worker was the protagonist in both of their theories
An example I know of is De Haviland (SP) dinner ware. They had a system where on worker did all the steps to make dinner ware. Not all workers were as skilled in every aspect of it. Some of the workers help each other with their skills, and shared in the profit, according to an agreed upon schedule of payment. Not long after that they were the premier makers of fine table ware in France. by dividing up the labor among those with individual skills, the finished product was of such quality it was in demand all over the world. Now, in 2024, i dare you to find me a factory that does not divide up the labor according to skillsets. If you do, are there more than 2 or 4 workers there?
Didn't Smith also mention 'a level playing field'?- everyone born with equal opportunities to follow their dreams? That needs 'interventionist' government policies and those have been in retreat for 40+ years and counting. BTW, 'the invisible hand' gets many more mentions here than in 'The Wealth of Nations', if I remember rightly.
Indian philosophy talked about free market way before Don't believe me? Check what's Ram rajya is Ram rajya is worshiping of lord Ram It's a free society The king didn't interfere in market And even the king didn't supply the Money Everything was done by people People were free to do what they wanted That's our Indian philosophy brother But sad part is today in India the intellects don't understand free market, no party is in favour of free market because their Power is gone, we followed Socialism after independence and after 1991 crisis we continued demand side economics. Many historical figures said these things but I still respect adam Smith because he said in modern era and his ideas were followed.
This is a classic generalized inference. When was morality and compassion central elements over supply and demand. If you see advertisements from the 1940’s and 50’s you will see magazine campaigns that boldly state things like: “ and here is a handy little gadget to make sure you prepared a dinner your husband will reward you for with a night at the movies”...or “4 out of 5 doctors recommend Camel Cigarettes for an enjoyable treat”...I can go back as far as you want and there will be things in there that would appall us today. I can also guarantee you that what you just said was probably said every decade for the last 100 years or more. So, no, not much has actually changed. People still want to buy stuff and other people want to produce stuff people buy. Bottom line..
zeroceiling i think there’s is a point where scale and volume push things into a different place. Your argument could as easily imply that it was never ok, although I could still argue it’s gotten worse as it’s gotten bigger faster than could be accommodated for without making moral exceptions different to what mankind experienced the vast majority of his existence. Also to give a time frame of 100 years as evidence doesn’t work for me, it tracks well with the industrial revolution 🤷♀️
Nashira 409 ....100 years may not work for you...and thats fine...its simply that this is a reference-able timeframe for which we have some accessible data. If you want to go farther back..thats fine...but you do realize that just because records are flimsy and not as well kept or kept at all...does not somehow prove that things were different at that point...and hence proves you right. Here is an interesting fact: Each time Amazon notably improves its technology....it hires more people....and each person becomes more productive. (A recent study by The Economist). So it would appear that the model is holding...
However it is up to the government to create the conditions where one can compete and invent and allow that invisible hand to shape the market. When monopolies and crony capitalism and government corruption tilt the market the invisible hand is killed.
At what point does capitalism cross the line over to ‘corporatism’? So for example, say there are 5 of the biggest car part manufacturers that have, in the past, created products that simply outmatched their competitors in a fair manner. This was a net-positive due to capitalism. Those who came up the bright ideas of making more efficient, durable, cheaper products were rewarded with a greater share of the public’s business, and the customer in turn received better car parts. And over time, these select few manufacturers started growing larger, and they took greater and greater percentages of the car part customer-base. As they should, right? They were being rewarded with having and putting into effect their smart ideas. However, we must remember, the biggest reason as to what motivated those to come up with these ideas was the dream of getting the rewards. The wealth, respect, power, stability, etc. Of course there were those who came up with ideas out of the desire to bring a positive change to society out of sheer benevolence, but there are definitely a lot who thought more of the former motivation. So these 5 car part manufacturers scaled up in size. They grew wealthier, and with this wealth, they spent more money researching and developing better car parts, running their businesses more efficiently, marketing their products better, etc. This in turn made them more money, and you can see how the snowball grew. The years went by, and these top 5 companies ended up becoming 90% of the car part market. They did capitalism to a tee. Everyone benefitted. The owners who came up with the smart ideas grew wealthier, more powerful, more respected, etc. The people had faster, more fuel efficient, more aerodynamic cars. And lots of people now had jobs working for these companies. However, along comes a newly started company who has done their own research. They have come up with better products, ways to more efficiently run their business while increasing their workers salaries, and an innovative new style of marketing. In capitalistic theory, this new company would start taking a larger piece of the market pie as they outcompeted the big 5. But this doesn’t happen in reality. What actually happens is the owners of the top 5 car part manufacturing companies meet up together in secret. They have all realized that this new company is a threat to their businesses. They simply outcompete. So the owners decide to work together. The big companies, all in cahoots with each other, drop the prices of their products way, way down past the prices of their new competition. They are fine with operating at a loss because they are so big that they can afford to. In the long run, they know this move will net them more money than to begin with. As time goes on, customers leave the new, talented company for the big 5, because it’s simply far cheaper. The new company, who doesn’t have all that much resource, is forced to close down. The owners of the companies that work as an oligopoly raise their prices back up, and keep their 90% share of the car part market. Is what they did still considered capitalism? They acted as sovereign individuals, and came up with ideas to benefit their business, which is allowed in theory with capitalism. A big part of capitalism is that it works with the knowledge that the majority of people want to benefit themselves before society, and it harnesses this self interest to benefit society. However, we can see that there are some exploits that are technically still considered capitalism. Should there be an updated version of capitalism that addresses these holes in the system?
Dear Sirs and Ladies who made comments I think the majority here are interested in economics, so how about we form a group of economists online to benefit from experiences?
I plan to study Adam Smith's book and philosophy in a few months. I know a little about him now. I've heard that this thing about the invisible hand is greatly exaggerated by people quoting him. I'll find out the truth later.
Misleading at best... Adam Smith was employed by England to write "The Wealth of Nations". A book made to destroy the independence of North American colonies. Smith's student was Carl Marx! Anti-British economic policies (The American System) are in Hamilton's paper "On The Subject Of Manufactures With Issue".
"destroy the independence of North American Colonies" how? by promoting the idea of independence and free market? you realize that North American colonies were under control of the Navigation act and the Capitalist system actually supports the North American ideas of simply ignoring the act and continuing to sell to whoever they wanted.
I like Adam Smith and his idea that if the government will stay out of practicing favoritism and stick with stable, equal laws, that people will create wealth. Unfortunately, this little play was rather silly.
Right, that's the part quite some of his epigones fell for, sadly. But, as @War Tome above pointed out, this video opens up avenues to including other stakeholder groups too, and alternatives to a one-factor explanation. Supply and demands across all inputs and outputs, that is, and entrepreneurship to seek out ever better combinations. Me likes.
Lets just make short work of Adam Smith. His view of Capitalism is such that kingdoms that embrace his brand of Capitalism will rise to prominent positions of power. But I will say this: once they do other kingdoms will vie for power and war will emerge ruining their seat of power. Such happened to the British Empire. Kingdoms that do not have policies to help their neighbors and work together to share and distribute goods will ultimately fail.
Those who say this should be used as university material prolly never went to a proper uni. It's like using triumph of the will as a historically accurate depiction of Germany.
right so, let me explain what a shareholder is if I start a company, its pretty small and to expand I need more money, so that I can either for example build a better production system, or improve my shop, or develop a new product. something that will help my company be more important and reach more people. so get get money, I sell a share of my company to some opportunistic rich guy who thinks that I will succeed and will help me because he thinks he can profit off it. With this money I expand my company and become rich. the opportunistic rich guy, once his share has gained enough value to satisfy him, either sells it or trades it to somebody else. there is nothing evil about Shareholders, they actually help the development of an economy and support innovation.
Those people who think they understand and no Adam Smith only because of the exposure to the book wealth of nations are in error! No one can understand the true Adam Smith without reading his first book a theory of moral sentiments and I would ask anyone who would like to understand wealth of nations and would like a better grasp on the ideas a free market capitalism or compassionate capitalism as it has been referred to must first read a theory of moral sentiments and everything will become clear!
The problem with ideology, in general, is it's just that--ideology. What makes sense on paper is too soon corrupted in practice, whether that be Marxism, Capitalism, or anything in between. Solutions will come through a balance between ideologies, and orchestrated by wise and mentally healthy individuals. But any system with masses of dis-eased men and women will not succeed. How and what we consume, then, is perhaps a more relevant determinant of true economic (and environmental) success than how we produce, distribute, and market it. For, an economy focused on healthy goods and services will produce a healthy people, and visa versa. As we see, Communist China is a toxic mess due to producing so much toxic junk to satisfy Capitalism's appetite across the world. Ironic, eh?
AB , of course you are quite right. The key phrase is "orchestrated by wise and mentally healthy individuals". May I suggest the less prolix , more economical , "good institutions". After the banking crises I recall an old time banker expressing dismay at their behaviour ; contrasting it with the honourable institution it had been in his day.
If only we had a "wise and healthy men" filter.... It used to be the media. What must also be realized is that people aren't naturally inclined to be self interested production maximisers. Building a society where life/death depends on ones ability to be production maximisers is not realistic unless markets reward EVERY skill, and they don't - never will. Examples - most liberal arts skills.
@dolofonos I am afraid you missed my main point--it is the "what" of consumerism (junk food, plastics that crap up the waterways, etc that destroy the earth and soul of humankind. DESPITE the "form" of gov. if you have been to China as I have and toured factories as I have and breathed the toxic air as I have perhaps you will see my point here, again healthy product lines and healthy lifestyle drive healthy planets and this is called green business, worker cooperatives and conscientious consumerism..so yes free markets unshackled can be as productive as it wishes, but it's also the reason for mass human gluttony obesity eco-destruction children made stupid by certain video games etc. and if you read my comment, you will see that I equally bashed all systems who create this nasty coca cola fat pig economy
Problem is Marxist will feel like capitalism is exploitation and that capitalists are exploiting them. To people like me who support capitalism, powerful bureaucratic govt mechanism, Marxism and high tax would be exploitation and I would fight against it. So best solution is to keep capitalism in capitalist contries and commuism in communist contries, that way nobody would be exploited and people would be left to face the consequences of their choices instead of draging someone else into it. Eg: if marxism fail only they have to deal with it. Im ok with the consequences of capitalism. Capitalist nations like US, gulf countries, Singapore, South korea etc should deport communists to communist contries
Modern Capitalism simply creates more wealth for all classes, cultures, races. The ideological conflict is the degree of regulation of this system. The struggle of today ( 2024), is between Free democratic capitalism and « Autocratic capitalism» ( Russia, China). If we are not carefull the rivalry and struggle for Empire will lead to war
“Liberate his gifts and the nation will be strong “
My favorite part
I dont mean to be offtopic but does anybody know a method to get back into an Instagram account?
I stupidly forgot my account password. I would love any tips you can offer me.
@Fox Chaim instablaster :)
The freedom of die by starving.
Yes, let a man choose what his gifts are and allow others to pay him in equivalent value to the value he gives them. and through that the nation will only have good book writers, and the nation will only have good schools, and the nation will only have quality mechanics, and the nation will only have well versed plumbers. not that poor quality workers do not exist, that instead they are outperformed by those who provide better value. and through that each and every man woman and child will deep down seek to create value of themselves in one way or another. and then the nation shall be strong.
However it is up to the government to create the conditions where one can compete and invent and allow that invisible hand to shape the market. When monopolies and crony capitalism and government corruption tilt the market the invisible hand is killed.
camera qualities were so good back in the days
And it was so clean!
Not sure I can explain as grandly as Adam Smith did, but the opening section of the video points out that wealth isn't money, but the goods and services of the economy. Money is merely the tool or medium of exchange for wealth, i.e. goods and services. He also pointed out how division of labor increases productivity, by allowing the workers to make more pins than they could by themselves.
The ideas the boy had to make things better are simply the entrepreneurial ideas anybody could have to improve the production and productivity of the business, if acted upon.
The second part of the video points out how self-interest encourages people to help other people. Businesses seek to provide good and services that people want at prices they are willing to pay. Competition helps ensure that businesses stay in line by forcing them to pay higher wages and find ways to decrease costs (and thus offer lower prices) and find ways to increase production and productivity so they keep paying higher wages and offer lower prices.
The only thing that really bothered me was the ending, because, sure, anybody can raise the capital they need by simply asking people for it, that's what sites like Kickstarter do, but banks have historically had a pretty big role an allowing people to store their savings so the banks can lend that out to businesses as capital for their enterprises. So we don't need to scoff at banks and gold (money), we simply need to understand their proper place in the economy.
Adam Smith didn't get everything right, but he did place capitalist economics and economics in general on a solid foundation for future development. What we've done with it since isn't Smith's fault!
Well said
I’ve just finished reading THE WEALTH OF NATIONS for the second time(cover to cover),the first time was last year October but I didn’t really understand that much(coz largely,I was still very much arrogant about everything),and ultimately I lost everything,after re-reading it now it has completely changed my life and how I view the workings of the world.
I’ve made a vow to myself that I have to,seriously have to read this book twice a year the minimum coz it is riddled with Information/Knowledge...its Lessons were equally important back 1776 as they are in this COVID19 riddled 2020.
I’d urge everyone to read this book,it’s very very important on so many many levels.✌🏿🇿🇦
Which book was it there were 5 I remember?
Read Marx’ Capital, it’s much more insightful.
I don't think I've ever seen a youtube commenter admitting to arrogance (though is prvades youtube) and the subsequent fall that inevitably comes from it. You further propound the change that came from becoming more humble. It seems that this has been lost on the others who commented here, but I wanted you to know at least one person sees, appreciates, and marvels at the difficult nature of your accomplishment. Pride and arrogance are two of the most pernicious pitfalls besetting Western culture today - impelling us down this path to ruin. Dealing with them can be a very difficult but essential battle.
@@chasengrieshopbased
Read Milton Frieman and some textbooks on accounting and finance.
Apparently the smiling is accurate : he'd talk to himself and smile
with huge tombstone teeth.
Also, he was kidnapped by Tinkers as a child.
Good drama , well scripted and acted.
Walt Disney would've paid for this production out of
sheer good will towards his fellow human beings!
Yes and the current management of Disney would have it squelched
What a conversation to be had at an underground bar.
Excellent video. Thank you for posting this!
Best lesson I have learned.
Great video big martin! I really learn't a lot! Stay super duper awesome!
so true brother
Quite possibly the 2nd most important man to ever have lived. His ideas literally changed the world.
Who’s the most important
@@sellars825 The lord Jesus Christ.
@@oskaveli662 Of course...
@@sellars825 Marx is the 1st.
what about tesla, einstein, turing, and others?
There are not many people in this world who watched this Video or know him but I'm the one who still thinks that Adam Smith is My true Hero....
He was a good man. Smith's ideology was good taken as/for evil by corporate manipulators; communism, an evil ideology disguised as good which has the operandum towards moral economic nihilism.
Just an outlook
For me it's Smith and Fugger ( the german banker who founded the Fuggerei )
cringe, Ricardo is better and way more rigorous .
@@jakeytedesco3003If this is Smith's idea well he is wrong accumulation of capital is represented not by just gold in a bank but the machinery used in production, the land and natural resources. The owners of capital seek to maximize their return on investment. .
These days I'm digging into Adam Smith philosophy of trade and morals Sociaty... It seems we had a lot of common and I will learn more of his VALUES... I believe Universal value and morals won't die .. they are out there and it's up to us to carry these VALUES and principles and pass it on to the next generations.
If only the bosses weren't driven by greed than maybe capitalism could work but since the are it can't help but result in monopolization, government intervention and central bank monetary manipulation.
Capitalists are exploiters, it makes no difference if they are nice, bad, greedy, or generous. Capitalism's internal contradictions and processes is what leads to its collapse, not greed.
Adam Smith was from the progressive period of capitalism, capitalism has long since moved on from its progressive period and has entered its decline, capitalism, just as aging, cannot reverse its decline.
Capitalism has now entered the period where, if it is not removed by the working class, it will destroy humanity.
It should be noted that Smith's positions , are about improving productivity, increasing the profits of a tiny minority of the worlds population, if he genuinely cared for the working class, he would have said, "workers seize control and use the wealth to improve the worlds living standards", but he doesn't, he was and is the mouth piece of the capitalist class.
Try reading the WSWS site for a clear political analysis and program for the working class.
@@ppazpppaz8618 Actually that is not Lenin position which is instead that no situation is too hopeless for the capitalists. The wsws is group of sectarians who oppose any real struggles by the workers in the trade unions because they have their own doctrine and setup like the bureaucrats they claim to oppose. They demand the workers adopt their program and organization before doing anything.
Even a psychopath can learn from his book, but the sad thing is...a psychopath will do better than a normal person, today.
Excellent play! I wish this had been used in my college Economics course, haha. Very well scripted, shot, and acted, a top notch and enjoyable distilled and presented basic summery of Smith's most famous points from the work. (Also, confession: I kept getting distracted by how stunningly beautiful that wench is.)
Capital and business always moves in the natural direction of economies of scale and the monopolization of industry and capital into fewer and fewer hands.
@@kimobrien. Yes but actually no. If you actually take a look at the trends, Poverty has actually decreased in more capitalistic nations and the median household income has increased (even after adjusting for inflation). Now lets look at the trends in your stupi- communist system, Property is stolen, poverty increases, the likely hood of the government becoming authoritarian HEAVILY increases.
Lets get some basic facts of reality out of the way
1. the more power you give the government, the more they are able to take control of the country and become a dictatorship
2. stealing from people leads to resentment, and people will never agree 100%
3. if there is no enterprise, there is no innovation.
4. People will work reward (capital) and so if you remove capital than the only motivator to do labor left is punishment (not good)
5. a "real" socialist system is actually degrading
6. The reason that "that wasn't real socialism" is because "real socialism" doesn't exist, It cannot be properly implemented. yes people have tried.
7. you cannot be free and socialist, you gotta choose one or the other
Now here's some fun facts.
There were many socialists communes (around 30) in the United States in the 19th century. they all failed, because people would rather live in a free market. funny thing, in a REAL free market economy, you can be a socialist, but in a REAL socialist "economy" you cannot be a capitalist
and Sweden isn't socialist (their welfare is actually called pensions and they are privatized look it up)
Wait, this is division of labour. Chapter 1 of book 1 of the wealth of nations
Where can I get more of the videos like this? Is this a part of movie? Where can I get the rest and what is the name of movie please
the video was titled Compassionate Capitalism ... it had a VHS release, I do not know where it is available as a whole product
Adam Smith 🙏🏼👑
This is insanely amazing! keep it up Martin!
They should name Hong Kong, Smith Kong in his honor.
Why?
@@ras573 Is the Country that has better applied free market policies for economic growth. Greetings! 😊
@@BorreLira a region in communist country is the best example of capitalism?
James The transfer of sovereignty over Hong Kong,[1][2][3] commonly known as the handover of Hong Kong (or simply the Handover, also the Return in mainland China), occurred at midnight at the start of 1 July 1997, when the United Kingdom ended administration for the colony of Hong Kong and returned control of the territory to China. Hong Kong became a special administrative region and continues to maintain governing and economic systems separate from those of mainland China.
Nowadays there’s political stress and protests in Hong Kong as China’s government is gaining total control over their economic and political system. People from Hong Kong want to keep their liberty but it seems almost impossible.
@@BorreLiraSmith would fundamentally be appalled at how Hong Kong Society functions.
Thanks
Watching it from India
Excellent video.
Where can I find the full video, please?
Hillsdale College uses Adam Smith’s teachings because they are true and work.
Yes Adam Smith is a hero indeed.
This is a very nice video, I learnt a lot from this, thank you for making this video
Brilliant video. Thank you very much.
In reality:
The guy hears the idea for a better pin shop, patents it, and sells it off.
Government IP strikes again.
Voluntarist Jeff lol
Awesome play
Brilliant! THANK YOU!
That was amazing!
I'm glad to have seen this video and learned about Adam Smith. Thank you.
Thank you for making this
you're welcome
I like this man 👨 professor Admas Smith
Awesome
adam smith santa claus edition
what is the film tittle ?
What is this from? Good stuff
Wow if oleny we lived like this Adam Smith was smart. Lets all Dream. N bring God back into our homes. AWAKE 🌐 the World
This is such a good demonstration of what capitalism was originally intended to be. Shame what it has come to. Nowadays everything is a marketing strategy. Even people are treated as products. Whatever you talk about, you get an ad of it on your social media which itself is run by a company that provides your data not just to other companies but even politicians.
Marketing is a good thing
U r again taking things in wrong way
Capitalism is ruined by scientific theories actually.
It is ruined by greed
This isn't really capitalism though. This is corporatism and it arose out of government incorporation laws.
Look at Darwin and Spencer.
Brilliant video
Gave me chills....
kool
Wealth definition🙋🏻♂️🙏🏻
هل يوجد فلم كامل عن هذا ؟؟؟
great
8:45 “I know what he pay his workers and I know I could PAY THEM LESS”. Fixed.
Well then nobody would work at his new factory 😂
Sounds like stakeholder theory or might lead to it.
I like the idea of being selfish in the market over this. Everyone should be looking out for their best interest. This might be that but it could be more. In a 2 day Adam Smith dive and I’m not sure I like it. He adds some weird shit into it.
It was an archetype, so it's obviously gonna be a little less formulated and more idealistic.
Wench invested in the new business. Now, I call it a win-win.
4 seconds in "PROOOFESUR!!!"
today someone would have said 'shut up adam, your drunk again'
4:45 Is that were the term 'Human Resource' came from?
Excellent
orginal movie name pls
Wish more people would watch this, and hopefully learn something, rather than just throwing around slogans and abuse, if only.
Well done...
📌2023, the best explanation, ever on youtube , about , the invisible hand, the market.
They should teach this in collage instead of Marx.
Wrong. They should teach Marx and Smith both in colleges.
@@davintedja6705 Yes let the students decide for themselves
They teach both in business management. Professors are also extremely balanced contradicting to what conservatives bang on about online
I learn from ECO class and I really love Adam Smith ideas.
Agree. The couse of poverty in former Soviet Union is the absence of free market and socialistic ideology. My parents have never heard about Smith. This literature was forbidden by comunist party. Fortunately now we are able to self-educate via the internet and dont have censor. And our country on its way to success. Of course if russia doesnt destroy the human kind by nuclear weapon earlier.
Adam Smith wrote about capitalism before the industrial revolution. Therefore he saw a positive future. Karl Marks was born in that future after the industrial revolution. He saw that along with the positives, many negatives also came with the industrial revolution. So he wrote about a way out of the negative impacts of capitalism. In fact Adam Smith wrote about the ways out of Mercantilism. Before the industrial revolution, merchants believed in hoarding money. They didn’t care about the life of the workers or the conditions of the factory. This he labelled as Mercantilism. Adam Smith theorised that morality or the invisible hand could help in this. If a merchant allowed his morality to help make the conditions of the worker better then the efficiency of the worker would increase as a result the factory would produce more and better quality products making the merchant win the competition. Both in my opinion were against the domination of a merchant over the lives of the workers. Both wanted to improve the life of the worker. The worker was the protagonist in both of their theories
He was SO close to not being wrong...
An example I know of is De Haviland (SP) dinner ware. They had a system where on worker did all the steps to make dinner ware. Not all workers were as skilled in every aspect of it. Some of the workers help each other with their skills, and shared in the profit, according to an agreed upon schedule of payment. Not long after that they were the premier makers of fine table ware in France. by dividing up the labor among those with individual skills, the finished product was of such quality it was in demand all over the world. Now, in 2024, i dare you to find me a factory that does not divide up the labor according to skillsets. If you do, are there more than 2 or 4 workers there?
5:05? Who owns the pin shop? The f _ t a_s in the wig
Didn't Smith also mention 'a level playing field'?- everyone born with equal opportunities to follow their dreams? That needs 'interventionist' government policies and those have been in retreat for 40+ years and counting. BTW, 'the invisible hand' gets many more mentions here than in 'The Wealth of Nations', if I remember rightly.
These accents are fantastic.
This Same Thing Was Said By The Bhisma, Kautilya, Etc.I Respect Adam Smith As Well
Indian philosophy talked about free market way before
Don't believe me?
Check what's Ram rajya is
Ram rajya is worshiping of lord Ram
It's a free society
The king didn't interfere in market
And even the king didn't supply the Money
Everything was done by people
People were free to do what they wanted
That's our Indian philosophy brother
But sad part is today in India the intellects don't understand free market, no party is in favour of free market because their Power is gone, we followed Socialism after independence and after 1991 crisis we continued demand side economics.
Many historical figures said these things but I still respect adam Smith because he said in modern era and his ideas were followed.
Life begins from India 😂😂😂😂 the most civilised nation on the earth whose PM is a convicted terrorist
Liberate his gifts and he might out-do me. Can’t have that.
I wonder if their pin shop ever became a success.
What are those accents
He took a loan and then his business failed.
Compassion and morality is missing in today's capitalism, so what went wrong?
People control their actions so who do you think is the problem.
@@mrbust999 We do control our actions but how many of us actually have control over ourselves?
This is a classic generalized inference. When was morality and compassion central elements over supply and demand.
If you see advertisements from the 1940’s and 50’s you will see magazine campaigns that boldly state things like: “ and here is a handy little gadget to make sure you prepared a dinner your husband will reward you for with a night at the movies”...or “4 out of 5 doctors recommend Camel Cigarettes for an enjoyable treat”...I can go back as far as you want and there will be things in there that would appall us today. I can also guarantee you that what you just said was probably said every decade for the last 100 years or more. So, no, not much has actually changed. People still want to buy stuff and other people want to produce stuff people buy. Bottom line..
zeroceiling i think there’s is a point where scale and volume push things into a different place. Your argument could as easily imply that it was never ok, although I could still argue it’s gotten worse as it’s gotten bigger faster than could be accommodated for without making moral exceptions different to what mankind experienced the vast majority of his existence. Also to give a time frame of 100 years as evidence doesn’t work for me, it tracks well with the industrial revolution 🤷♀️
Nashira 409 ....100 years may not work for you...and thats fine...its simply that this is a reference-able timeframe for which we have some accessible data. If you want to go farther back..thats fine...but you do realize that just because records are flimsy and not as well kept or kept at all...does not somehow prove that things were different at that point...and hence proves you right.
Here is an interesting fact: Each time Amazon notably improves its technology....it hires more people....and each person becomes more productive. (A recent study by The Economist). So it would appear that the model is holding...
*P R O F E S S A*
However it is up to the government to create the conditions where one can compete and invent and allow that invisible hand to shape the market. When monopolies and crony capitalism and government corruption tilt the market the invisible hand is killed.
At what point does capitalism cross the line over to ‘corporatism’?
So for example, say there are 5 of the biggest car part manufacturers that have, in the past, created products that simply outmatched their competitors in a fair manner. This was a net-positive due to capitalism. Those who came up the bright ideas of making more efficient, durable, cheaper products were rewarded with a greater share of the public’s business, and the customer in turn received better car parts.
And over time, these select few manufacturers started growing larger, and they took greater and greater percentages of the car part customer-base. As they should, right? They were being rewarded with having and putting into effect their smart ideas.
However, we must remember, the biggest reason as to what motivated those to come up with these ideas was the dream of getting the rewards. The wealth, respect, power, stability, etc. Of course there were those who came up with ideas out of the desire to bring a positive change to society out of sheer benevolence, but there are definitely a lot who thought more of the former motivation.
So these 5 car part manufacturers scaled up in size. They grew wealthier, and with this wealth, they spent more money researching and developing better car parts, running their businesses more efficiently, marketing their products better, etc. This in turn made them more money, and you can see how the snowball grew.
The years went by, and these top 5 companies ended up becoming 90% of the car part market. They did capitalism to a tee. Everyone benefitted. The owners who came up with the smart ideas grew wealthier, more powerful, more respected, etc. The people had faster, more fuel efficient, more aerodynamic cars. And lots of people now had jobs working for these companies.
However, along comes a newly started company who has done their own research. They have come up with better products, ways to more efficiently run their business while increasing their workers salaries, and an innovative new style of marketing. In capitalistic theory, this new company would start taking a larger piece of the market pie as they outcompeted the big 5. But this doesn’t happen in reality.
What actually happens is the owners of the top 5 car part manufacturing companies meet up together in secret. They have all realized that this new company is a threat to their businesses. They simply outcompete. So the owners decide to work together.
The big companies, all in cahoots with each other, drop the prices of their products way, way down past the prices of their new competition. They are fine with operating at a loss because they are so big that they can afford to. In the long run, they know this move will net them more money than to begin with.
As time goes on, customers leave the new, talented company for the big 5, because it’s simply far cheaper. The new company, who doesn’t have all that much resource, is forced to close down. The owners of the companies that work as an oligopoly raise their prices back up, and keep their 90% share of the car part market.
Is what they did still considered capitalism? They acted as sovereign individuals, and came up with ideas to benefit their business, which is allowed in theory with capitalism. A big part of capitalism is that it works with the knowledge that the majority of people want to benefit themselves before society, and it harnesses this self interest to benefit society. However, we can see that there are some exploits that are technically still considered capitalism.
Should there be an updated version of capitalism that addresses these holes in the system?
He didn't mention the violence inherent in the system oppressing the proletariat under the yoke of the petit bourgeoisie.
Ends on child labor... oddly accurate lol
FYI, child labor doesn't need capitalism. My country isn't capitalistic, yet child labor is going strong.
FYI that's not what I said, all it takes is to open a book on the industrial revolution and you are set@@narindraramanankasaina2545
Chinese sweat shop workers lol
(facepalm)
Dear Sirs and Ladies who made comments
I think the majority here are interested in economics, so how about we form a group of economists online to benefit from experiences?
I plan to study Adam Smith's book and philosophy in a few months. I know a little about him now. I've heard that this thing about the invisible hand is greatly exaggerated by people quoting him. I'll find out the truth later.
You may also want to have a read of the WSWS site.
Did Adam Smith ever say "Communities in which they live"? Nope, that's a cant of our time.
Misleading at best...
Adam Smith was employed by England to write "The Wealth of Nations". A book made to destroy the independence of North American colonies.
Smith's student was Carl Marx!
Anti-British economic policies (The American System) are in Hamilton's paper "On The Subject Of Manufactures With Issue".
"destroy the independence of North American Colonies"
how? by promoting the idea of independence and free market? you realize that North American colonies were under control of the Navigation act and the Capitalist system actually supports the North American ideas of simply ignoring the act and continuing to sell to whoever they wanted.
Smith being descended from a blacksmith obviously had a tradesman's intellect.
He could see both sides.
I like Adam Smith and his idea that if the government will stay out of practicing favoritism and stick with stable, equal laws, that people will create wealth. Unfortunately, this little play was rather silly.
The pin shop owner is Klaus Schwab, Bill Gates, Tim Cook, etc….
He seems to have smiled a lot. Was he really from Kirkcaldy?
The freedom of die by starving.
Adam SMITH insandır.
And by the labour theory of value he paved the road to Marx.
Right, that's the part quite some of his epigones fell for, sadly. But, as
@War Tome above pointed out, this video opens up avenues to including other stakeholder groups too, and alternatives to a one-factor explanation. Supply and demands across all inputs and outputs, that is, and entrepreneurship to seek out ever better combinations. Me likes.
I wonder how that American kid ended up in Edinburgh in the 1700s?
Lets just make short work of Adam Smith. His view of Capitalism is such that kingdoms that embrace his brand of Capitalism will rise to prominent positions of power. But I will say this: once they do other kingdoms will vie for power and war will emerge ruining their seat of power. Such happened to the British Empire. Kingdoms that do not have policies to help their neighbors and work together to share and distribute goods will ultimately fail.
Those who say this should be used as university material prolly never went to a proper uni. It's like using triumph of the will as a historically accurate depiction of Germany.
Brilliant observations for 1765. Too bad we live in the time of shareholder capitalism now.
Wtf are you saying?! Those people who gave him the money are his company shareholders
right so, let me explain what a shareholder is
if I start a company, its pretty small and to expand I need more money, so that I can either for example build a better production system, or improve my shop, or develop a new product. something that will help my company be more important and reach more people. so get get money, I sell a share of my company to some opportunistic rich guy who thinks that I will succeed and will help me because he thinks he can profit off it. With this money I expand my company and become rich. the opportunistic rich guy, once his share has gained enough value to satisfy him, either sells it or trades it to somebody else.
there is nothing evil about Shareholders, they actually help the development of an economy and support innovation.
It is scandalous that his moral uprightness is not taught. He is much maligned.
Viewing people as a resource is one of the most horrific attributes of the capitalist mentality
Those people who think they understand and no Adam Smith only because of the exposure to the book wealth of nations are in error! No one can understand the true Adam Smith without reading his first book a theory of moral sentiments and I would ask anyone who would like to understand wealth of nations and would like a better grasp on the ideas a free market capitalism or compassionate capitalism as it has been referred to must first read a theory of moral sentiments and everything will become clear!
Share & Care 😊 Beautiful 😍
mmss self seeking compassionate liberating individual gifts free enterprise capitalism
Adam smith and Karl Marx Ideas are both valuable , if greedy and despots do not distort and twist their ideas in the name of ideology
The kid keft out the bit about importing cheap Muslim labour to undercut the locals.
The problem with ideology, in general, is it's just that--ideology. What makes sense on paper is too soon corrupted in practice, whether that be Marxism, Capitalism, or anything in between. Solutions will come through a balance between ideologies, and orchestrated by wise and mentally healthy individuals. But any system with masses of dis-eased men and women will not succeed. How and what we consume, then, is perhaps a more relevant determinant of true economic (and environmental) success than how we produce, distribute, and market it. For, an economy focused on healthy goods and services will produce a healthy people, and visa versa. As we see, Communist China is a toxic mess due to producing so much toxic junk to satisfy Capitalism's appetite across the world. Ironic, eh?
AB , of course you are quite right.
The key phrase is "orchestrated by wise and mentally healthy individuals".
May I suggest the less prolix , more economical , "good institutions".
After the banking crises I recall an old time banker expressing dismay
at their behaviour ; contrasting it with the honourable institution
it had been in his day.
If only we had a "wise and healthy men" filter.... It used to be the media.
What must also be realized is that people aren't naturally inclined to be self interested production maximisers. Building a society where life/death depends on ones ability to be production maximisers is not realistic unless markets reward EVERY skill, and they don't - never will. Examples - most liberal arts skills.
@dolofonos I am afraid you missed my main point--it is the "what" of consumerism (junk food, plastics that crap up the waterways, etc that destroy the earth and soul of humankind. DESPITE the "form" of gov. if you have been to China as I have and toured factories as I have and breathed the toxic air as I have perhaps you will see my point here, again healthy product lines and healthy lifestyle drive healthy planets and this is called green business, worker cooperatives and conscientious consumerism..so yes free markets unshackled can be as productive as it wishes, but it's also the reason for mass human gluttony obesity eco-destruction children made stupid by certain video games etc. and if you read my comment, you will see that I equally bashed all systems who create this nasty coca cola fat pig economy
Problem is Marxist will feel like capitalism is exploitation and that capitalists are exploiting them. To people like me who support capitalism, powerful bureaucratic govt mechanism, Marxism and high tax would be exploitation and I would fight against it. So best solution is to keep capitalism in capitalist contries and commuism in communist contries, that way nobody would be exploited and people would be left to face the consequences of their choices instead of draging someone else into it. Eg: if marxism fail only they have to deal with it. Im ok with the consequences of capitalism. Capitalist nations like US, gulf countries, Singapore, South korea etc should deport communists to communist contries
Modern Capitalism simply creates more wealth for all classes, cultures, races. The ideological conflict is the degree of regulation of this system.
The struggle of today ( 2024), is between Free democratic capitalism and « Autocratic capitalism» ( Russia, China).
If we are not carefull the rivalry and struggle for Empire will lead to war
Compassionate capitalism!!!! That's funny.
I hope he didn't molest that little boy.
Smith? More likely, Fatty the pin shop owner, if you meant that. Materialism kills compassion.
Christian K But Marx kills people
@@Pglarsen Correct. Because Marx was a materialist. Inventor of Historic Materialism. Epic Materialism, so to speak.
Beautiful