Sorry to be blunt, but i think he said nothing that cannot be learned from a careful reading of Wealth of Nations. Google's rent seeking vs the merchants and large manufacturers. Smith said that the latter two had monopolistic tendencies, rent seeking and lobbying in modern terms i guess, and whined about wages being too high. The little guys for Smith were the peasant and small proprietors. Weavers, blacksmiths, and the like. The middle class. Smith was only positive about them. Believed they had good character, were thrifty, looked only to improve their lot and leave wages high, or, as he wrote, hoped for the "liberal reward of labour." (In other words an economy of small start ups that don't have the time, power, and money to fiddle around with the porter forces!) Mainstream capitalism sounds a hell of a lot like WN to me, but maybe I'm missing something.
New startups? The markets are saturated and dominated by large corporations. We have to change the basic structure. We need cooperatives, worker owed and operated. Startups keeps the game rigged. Cooperatives, workers buying out the existing companies will allow mobility and increase in wages and freedom.
Start-ups.. yeah, right. Successful start-ups are bought by corporations anyway, so that's not the answer. The answer is to boycott as many corporations as possible, giving preference to small businesses, and to buy things made in America whenever possible. Money is a language those greedy bastards understand.
This guy has only just started down the path of understanding how things work with our species with regards to the allocation of resources and our untapped potential. Give him a decade or two and he'll probably get there, but he will be behind many of us.
Startups rely on access to labour and capital. The government can help provide these. Startups can't afford to provide the Education and Training needed to create a skilled labour force but the government can use taxes to fund these which also returns income back to people, in the form of qualifications and skills, more efficiently than asking them to pay their own way individually. Similarly, Startups can't afford to provide the access to Medical care needed to ensure a healthy and consequently more productive, workforce. Again, governments can pool incomes via taxes to provide this while also returning this income back to people, in the form of improved health and medical outcomes, more efficiently than asking them to pay their own way individually. Similarly, for transport and communications infrastructure and Academic (Basic) Research governments can use taxes to provide reliable, efficient transportation for workers and fund research which creates the technology of tomorrow, both of which also eventually benefit the taxpayer. If the government acts indirectly, but STRATEGICALLY to provide an Educated/Skilled, Healthy workforce which can commute easily to/from the workplace, or work productively from home or while traveling, then Startups will have the ingredients they need to sprout, grow and perhaps eventually blossom...
"most people" don't want to live in a meritocracy. they'd rather have everyone be equally poor together than be better off if that means others get to be even better off than themselves
When have we ever lived in a meritocracy? I would love to live in a meritocracy, but that is nothing like the Western corporate oligarchic system we currently live in.
They call it a meritocracy, but the "merit" is really just insider privilege. Your definition of what "most people" want is skewed by libertarian delusions.
@@warrenflood2809 we haven't ever lived in a meritocracy. I also resent it when people point at the failings of crony capitalism (due to large government interacting/interfering with the market) and strawman libertarians with said failings. Having said that no system is perfect. But I do believe that on the whole less government (far far less government) would lead to greater happiness on every axis of measurement for the entire population. It would be imperfect and life will never be 100% fair. But why is it a valid argument to reject libertarianism because "it's not perfect"... whereas the current system and socialism is so goddamned far from perfect it feels like we're living in a dystopian idiocracy movie!
Lol.... I hope you didn't bruise your brain coming up with such a wild and innovative solution . You better go rest ....I imagine all that deep and critical thinking wore you out. Pundits like you make me sick. do you really think you can raise a horse from the dead?
Sorry to be blunt, but i think he said nothing that cannot be learned from a careful reading of Wealth of Nations. Google's rent seeking vs the merchants and large manufacturers. Smith said that the latter two had monopolistic tendencies, rent seeking and lobbying in modern terms i guess, and whined about wages being too high. The little guys for Smith were the peasant and small proprietors. Weavers, blacksmiths, and the like. The middle class. Smith was only positive about them. Believed they had good character, were thrifty, looked only to improve their lot and leave wages high, or, as he wrote, hoped for the "liberal reward of labour." (In other words an economy of small start ups that don't have the time, power, and money to fiddle around with the porter forces!) Mainstream capitalism sounds a hell of a lot like WN to me, but maybe I'm missing something.
I agree. We're seeing a clear example of runaway rent seeking behavior by financialized corporations rather than down funding new productive means.
New startups? The markets are saturated and dominated by large corporations.
We have to change the basic structure. We need cooperatives, worker owed and operated.
Startups keeps the game rigged. Cooperatives, workers buying out the existing companies will allow mobility and increase in wages and freedom.
What about Worker Self Directed Enterprises (Richard Wolff)?
That is the answer!
They will be start-ups as well...and will need protection from the major corporations.
Start-ups.. yeah, right. Successful start-ups are bought by corporations anyway, so that's not the answer. The answer is to boycott as many corporations as possible, giving preference to small businesses, and to buy things made in America whenever possible. Money is a language those greedy bastards understand.
This guy has only just started down the path of understanding how things work with our species with regards to the allocation of resources and our untapped potential. Give him a decade or two and he'll probably get there, but he will be behind many of us.
National health care would be a boom for startups. The obstruction would be eliminated.
Greatest hits: the startups!
By average he means unprivileged and unfortunate?
Startups rely on access to labour and capital. The government can help provide these.
Startups can't afford to provide the Education and Training needed to create a skilled labour force but the government can use taxes to fund these which also returns income back to people, in the form of qualifications and skills, more efficiently than asking them to pay their own way individually.
Similarly, Startups can't afford to provide the access to Medical care needed to ensure a healthy and consequently more productive, workforce. Again, governments can pool incomes via taxes to provide this while also returning this income back to people, in the form of improved health and medical outcomes, more efficiently than asking them to pay their own way individually.
Similarly, for transport and communications infrastructure and Academic (Basic) Research governments can use taxes to provide reliable, efficient transportation for workers and fund research which creates the technology of tomorrow, both of which also eventually benefit the taxpayer.
If the government acts indirectly, but STRATEGICALLY to provide an Educated/Skilled, Healthy workforce which can commute easily to/from the workplace, or work productively from home or while traveling, then Startups will have the ingredients they need to sprout, grow and perhaps eventually blossom...
It's simple really. Bring back price discovery.
cr1138 I was wondering when someone would invoke the market God. Simple!
"most people" don't want to live in a meritocracy. they'd rather have everyone be equally poor together than be better off if that means others get to be even better off than themselves
When have we ever lived in a meritocracy? I would love to live in a meritocracy, but that is nothing like the Western corporate oligarchic system we currently live in.
As if we ever lived in a true meritocracy. Ever.
They call it a meritocracy, but the "merit" is really just insider privilege. Your definition of what "most people" want is skewed by libertarian delusions.
@@warrenflood2809 we haven't ever lived in a meritocracy. I also resent it when people point at the failings of crony capitalism (due to large government interacting/interfering with the market) and strawman libertarians with said failings.
Having said that no system is perfect. But I do believe that on the whole less government (far far less government) would lead to greater happiness on every axis of measurement for the entire population. It would be imperfect and life will never be 100% fair. But why is it a valid argument to reject libertarianism because "it's not perfect"... whereas the current system and socialism is so goddamned far from perfect it feels like we're living in a dystopian idiocracy movie!
Just take all money in the world, distribute it among ppl equaly and then ''pre-privatize" all the companies. BUM problems in the world disapear.
Yeah, "just" do that. Great point.
garbage should not be saved or prolonged
Lol....
I hope you didn't bruise your brain coming up with such a wild and innovative solution . You better go rest ....I imagine all that deep and critical thinking wore you out. Pundits like you make me sick.
do you really think you can raise a horse from the dead?