How Much Is Enough? - Robert and Edward Skidelsky
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 жов 2024
- Lord Skidelsky, Emeritus professor of political economy and Dr Edward Skidelsky, lecturer in philosophy tackle the questions: What constitutes the good life? What is the true value of money? Why do we work such long hours merely to acquire greater wealth? These are some of the questions that many asked themselves when the financial system crashed in 2008.
Listen to the podcast of the full event including audience Q&A: www.thersa.org/...
Our events are made possible with the support of our Fellowship. Support us by donating or applying to become a Fellow.
Donate: www.thersa.org/...
Become a Fellow: www.thersa.org/...
Not everyone has a 'career'. People who start work at 16 are as 'established' in the workplace at 25 as people who leave University at 21 are at 30. On that particular subject - my personal opinion is that most university courses are a complete waste of time, and the time wasted there could be far better spent in productive employment. The only thing university imparts is under-expectation in the non-university educated and over-expectation in those who attend.
Please start bumping up the sound volume of your videos!
We're producing more, but the wealth is being concentrated in fewer and fewer hands. You make more, but more is being taken away from you. The wealth of the majority is stagnant and dropping, while the wealth of the super rich is increasing hundred fold.
How can you guys upload these videos without the volume loud enough when my computer is on max???
Good health is the foundation for happiness.
The biggest problem in the UK is the competition for a finite resource - i.e. property. Competition for this is the highest of any resource, and people are driven to work long hours to afford to pay their rent or mortgage. I don't see any technological improvement changing this.
Well said my friend.
Gandhi said - "there is enough for every man's need but not for every man's greed" was relevant then, now and will be in future. Unless one can control desires, then greed can be controlled.
Ultimately, almost all of what which is produced is being consumed by the majority - not by the rich. If anything reduces standard of living, it's that up and coming economies are consuming a larger fraction of a finite set of resources, so "the majority" becomes a much larger group. Of course, production increases as well, so it's not a zero sum game in all respects.
Hey, I'm not prejudiced that a career has to mean a college degree. If the occupation a person wants is to be a farmer, more power to them I say! But having time to develop yourself as an adult before having responsibility to raise other human beings is what I'm getting at.
Wouldn't it be great if nobody had children before they were 30? Then everyone could be established in their careers and have gotten their wild youth behind them, and fewer children would be born overall, and parents would be more able to raise them well. But it would mean a fundamental switch in people's thinking away from the ideal of "be fruitful and multiply", as if breeding is a moral duty and security is through large population.
Exactly how poor do you think the housing situation needs to become before people start having fewer children?
I think I disagree with every grab-quote on the start of these videos. Endless growth? Cold fusion. Endlessly manipulative? Have you seen American politics... Should we found politics on things most people disagree with? Almost certainly, most people religious, politics should be humanist. Etc etc etc
money is a means to survival for some, luxury for others and true power for a few.
In short: money is a means.
In “Occupying Chairlifts” a simple rule tweak on inheritance ends up changing the direction and purpose of modern human life! Here’s a fair way to transition forward to where we’re rewarded for cooperating and creating instead of competing and conquering.
It's something specific we can demand. If this isnt the best answer, at least we’re thinking about what might be. Are we really just this close to having it work right?
Oh yeah, it's a Ski movie! “Occupying Chairlifts” on UA-cam!
This question is here to stay, about 2400 years ago Lao Tzu said superbly in his Tao Te Ching: "He who knows he has enough is rich" or "Therefore he who knows that enough is enough will always have enough." How you solve this issue, it's a personal quest, but it is worth it otherwise we will stay slaves forever. We pay all these junks with OUR LIFE hehehe, so stupid...
until we change the way we measure economic success from GDP to a more appropriate measure, none of these changes to advertising and equality and work hours will be viable as the press, public and politicians will only be viewing it as having a negative effect on what is considered to be the basis of our economy...GDP.
Talking about money obsession, true story:
I know a professor who is stinkin' rich, earns shitload of cash, lives in a fancy house.. buut, he buys cheapest ugliest USED clothing, every time he passes garbage container, he checks it for deposit glassware, has no mobile phone (because it's too expensive to talk on mobile phones) and always complains how poor he is. He's around 70 years old, and he still has 3 jobs.
I truly feel sorry for him.
Don't feel sorry for him. He's doing life on his terms, in his way.
With so many people unemployed worldwide, governments needing ways of keeping their populations from revolting, and a growing desire for a sense of purpose in so many people, it may not be nec. to force anybody into this arraingement. I do not know how this would come about, I only wish to plant an IDEA in people's minds.
what do you do?
Is contraception a technology?
a distinction without a difference...he said "wealth" not "cash." Having CONTROL over tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in wealth (in whatever form) while the majority have none is the issue. It is irrelevant as to HOW or IF the wealthy person spends it on personal consumption.
the point is that as our needs are met, we would need less money. if everyones housing needs were finally met, millions of people who's jobs rely on the housing market would be lost. under our current measures, that's bad because GDP relies on the perpetuation of need. under an alternative way, we would simply reduce the working week and spread the hours. yes wages would go down but housing needs would no longer exist. this idea wouldn't hold water while we still base success on GDP
you own nothing u gain nothing, worker bees get a small slice for their work and always will. solution? start your own hive.
A job needs to become something you like to do, not a means of survival. There are enough resources, technology and knowledge to take care of everyone, I agree. So I dont believe in rotating, spirituality should be a part of everyone s life, there is no need for anyone to work around the clock on one specific subject and becoming an idiot in all of the others. Divide the work, divide the leisure, and let everyone do what they do best, and the world will not only be ok, but thrive.
oh, and the goal is welfare, sustainability and peace. Anything less can hardly even be considered political.
£35,000 per year, and being able to do anything I want on a whim, that would be enough for me.
A comment on the advertising part, i think that we rather than controlling the free market, we should learn/educate our children to just ignore that pesky invention.
Material wants are only infinite when people have no spiritual basis for their lives, and no religious tradition to guide them. With current technology and global trade, I'll bet we could give the whole world a middle-class modern quality of life using only half the workforce. The other half would find its' purpose in spiritual and mental study and growth. To avoid a forming a permanent "working" class v. a "priestly class", they would have to switch off every so often. Any reactions?
Advertising is a toilet hanging upside down over all our lives
Better buildings. That's how technology could change that.
Quality of health, respect as two from seven needs of any human being, minimal unconditional income, redistribution of GDP and work there are ideas much vehiculated but obviously not depending of middle or poor class to be practically sustained and applied. Standards of happiness failed up when just taking in account GDP per capita...
im using headphones
@theRSAorg
Sadhguru would have much more to say on this topic. Do call him.
These guys have obviously good intentions but are way behind. Presentation like this could be given by so many people today.
same is the problem in highly populous asian nations.
I had to laugh: I DO work 15 hour days goddammit!!
/me hugs "drgerke" :'(
The goal is to live forever. Happy be damned, I want to live forever. Any true agnostic and atheist would agree to this goal, as they should not be under the delusion that we live forever once we die (its like if some economist told us we could be rich if we spent all our money first). If I live forever, no amount of time with unhappiness is bad, because I know I'd survive into the happy time.
Amazing video, but not in a good way. Who exactly is going to choose for us poor peasants what we are to be able to buy or want? I suppose some goofy collection of so called enlightened individuals represented on this panel. The road to hell is paved with "good" intentions. The free market is the only way to determine these things properly.
"The wealth of the majority is stagnant and dropping, while the wealth of the super rich is increasing hundred fold."
That's really nowhere near accurate. The thing is that while capitalists may be valued at ridiculous sums of money, such wealth is always mostly in the form of owning businesses. It's not money that could ever be used for consumption. The moment anyone did, wages would have to explode and inflation would just eat up the ability of the capitalists to invest.
He looks like a Jew~!!! All money are in their pockets~