For the Austrian piece, the central difference is that the business cycle is not endogenous. So the great depression is the result of intervention and therefore intervention should be avoided.
@@danhworth100 Which Austrians? I believe the whole "money" issue has been thoroughly fleshed out in hundreds(if not, thousands) of pages from Menger, Bohm-Bawerk, Mises, etc. Lending creates deposits in a fiat-based, fractional reserve system like we have in the US. Mostly correct. Deposits create lending in a market free from fiat and fractional reserve system. "Austrians" know the difference. And I'm sure most "Austrians" would prefer the latter situation but that's not an economic argument.
Lex Fridman Podcast full episode: ua-cam.com/video/Rz-4ulRKnz4/v-deo.html Thank you for listening ❤ Check out our sponsors: lexfridman.com/sponsors/cv8397-sa See below for guest bio, links, and to give feedback, submit questions, contact Lex, etc. *GUEST BIO:* Jennifer Burns is a historian of ideas, focusing on the evolution of economic, political, and social ideas in the United States in the 20th century. She wrote two biographies, one on Milton Friedman, and the other on Ayn Rand. *CONTACT LEX:* *Feedback* - give feedback to Lex: lexfridman.com/survey *AMA* - submit questions, videos or call-in: lexfridman.com/ama *Hiring* - join our team: lexfridman.com/hiring *Other* - other ways to get in touch: lexfridman.com/contact *EPISODE LINKS:* Jennifer's X: x.com/profburns Jennifer's Website: www.jenniferburns.org Jennifer's Books: Milton Friedman biography: amzn.to/4hfy1HO Ayn Rand biography: amzn.to/4afr3A0 *SPONSORS:* To support this podcast, check out our sponsors & get discounts: *Brain.fm:* Music for focus. Go to lexfridman.com/s/brainfm-cv8397-sa *GitHub:* Developer platform and AI code editor. Go to lexfridman.com/s/github-cv8397-sa *LMNT:* Zero-sugar electrolyte drink mix. Go to lexfridman.com/s/lmnt-cv8397-sa *Shopify:* Sell stuff online. Go to lexfridman.com/s/shopify-cv8397-sa *AG1:* All-in-one daily nutrition drinks. Go to lexfridman.com/s/ag1-cv8397-sa *PODCAST LINKS:* - Podcast Website: lexfridman.com/podcast - Apple Podcasts: apple.co/2lwqZIr - Spotify: spoti.fi/2nEwCF8 - RSS: lexfridman.com/feed/podcast/ - Podcast Playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLrAXtmErZgOdP_8GztsuKi9nrraNbKKp4.html - Clips Channel: ua-cam.com/users/lexclips *SOCIAL LINKS:* - X: x.com/lexfridman - Instagram: instagram.com/lexfridman - TikTok: tiktok.com/@lexfridman - LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/lexfridman - Facebook: facebook.com/lexfridman - Patreon: patreon.com/lexfridman - Telegram: t.me/lexfridman - Reddit: reddit.com/r/lexfridman
@@Henley-j5w state power isn't the opposite of corporate power, in fact, corporate power is a creation of the state. Consider corporate personhood for example.
Keynes gave a response to the failure of economic policy. That is the reason that other schools developed competing responses afterwards. Like all economists he gave a view of how capitalism could work, in a manner like Milton Friedman. He helped develop the system that gave the dollar global dominance. The US had wanted this for a century. The USA has practiced Neoliberalism since the 70s and had the Mic since the 50s. If you do not like what has happened since then you can hardly blame Keynes. But I agree that it is all about power, that is why economic views come and go.
That's jumping to a questionable conclusion. Keynesism is simply expounding human psychology - nervous people don't invest or borrow to invest, they horde. Trust breaks down, the economy freezes, stagnation ensues. Private capital is too nervous to break cover and everyone is risk adverse. One only has to watch the stock market's bull and bear runs to see psychology and herd behaviour is central. Momentum stocks are a prime example. Very little government involvement.
One thing is for sure from this bit. Her level of understanding of Austrian economics is infinitesimally close to zero. She should at least be humble enough to say that she knows nothing about it. At least, she did admit to not knowing much about von Mises. In a nutshell, her description of Austrian economics was like as if I were to describe general relativity as follows: "I think it's about the speed of light, and some wacky idea that it's constant or something... what was that?.. Einstein? Who's that?" Most prominent mainstream economists are snake oil salesmen who try to sell their own little special concoction to politicians and the public on the promise that their particular control measures will boost economic growth. And they hate or ignore Austrians because they're the only ones that call them out. And the whole dig on Austrians about what to do in a depression is pretty unfair. That's as if a guy was begging you not to get behind the wheel of your car after drinking a whole bottle of whiskey, and then blaming them after you crashed for not giving you advice on how to drive while smashed.
Letting asset prices fall is one of the things that Austrian economists get right. Their dogmatic stance against government is more often deeply damaging and can be viewed as the primary cause of the Great Depression.
"Most prominent mainstream economists are snake oil salesmen," but this minority of cranks over here who just happen to align with my libertarian notions and whose claims have already been thoroughly examined by academia decades ago before even the advent of the computing boom surely understand the economy better than what the mainstream thinks! Funny how It's always some random armchair ideologue who has never taken anything harder than precalc who thinks they know better 😂
I was waiting for the Ludwig Von Mises lesson but then she didn’t even know anything about what he knew about the business cycle! Wow. The Austrians understood it the most.
The personality differences play a role: it’s the Sensates vs the iNtuitives. (Meyers/Briggs personality types of Thinkers come in two types: Sensates learn from experience and iNtuitives are abstract (e.g., the invisible hand and unintended consequences are obvious to the latter who take lines of reasoning further). Sensates can learn from history and experience, when they live it. Most people in the market are not adept at the abstract thought needed to see the future consequences of the processes of economics, without guidance. But they like gold, anyway! (Hefty, shiny, real and reassuring to the senses.). This is the tug of war that each type must factor in to their hypotheses for the entire market. Sensates outnumber iNtuitives in the market by quite a bit, and velocity of their perception of and action in response to change is a drag until it isn’t. This difference is a communication problem.
In a practical sense macroeconomics is a form of data-assisted rhetoric aimed at determining how scarce resources ought to be distributed. In short, economic studies and texts of this sort exist to bolster argumentation. Furthermore, economics differs from the natural sciences in that it examines arbitrary human-made systems, rather than the unchanging laws of nature. Notably, while economists may occasionally provide scientific insights, this is a byproduct of their work, not its primary concern.
No talk of Murray Rothbard??? His book "America's Great Depression" is the stongest economic analysis out there. Rothbard puts together the pieces of the puzzle that Hayek was not able to in Austrian Economics. Hayek is my least favorite Austrian Economist, especially when it came to banking.
I wish someone put me on rothbard 20 years ago. I read miltons history of money in the United States and was just operating on broken information for years
Why is the fact that the Austrians predicted the collapse in the Great Depression ignored? And why do we not hear about Mises showing that Socialist economic planning is not possible even in theory?
@SigFigNewton nope. Keynes believed stocks would go up. He was heavily investing in stocks in 1929. That's why he made up fairly tales to save the stock market and hence save his investments.
I enjoyed this very much; she does a great job of tracking the history of thought in economics. I would suggest, however, that if she wants to take more of a future oriented view towards the direction of economics that she should explore the work of John Nash.
in my opinion, we have to start talking about financial systems first , about how the production is financed and then about how it is being managed and what the role of the government is. Without financial part it is all just talks for the sake of talks.
Keynesism was a response to a point in time, i.e. in a prolonged depression when the wheels of the economy have nearly ground to a halt, only the government has sufficient clout to tip the scales. FDR splurging money on the Hoover Dam being one example - a giant infrastructure project had more benefit that just managing water supplies - it injected liquidity into the economy as workers spent their earnings, and suppliers sold construction equipment etc. It's one of the few times that trickle down economics actually works plus you get useful infrastructure almost as a side effect.
Hahahahaha I thought that trickle down economics was tax cuts will make people spend more not government big projects will make people spend more but you always learn something interesting on the Internet every day
@@SigFigNewtonBlows my mind that you don’t understand that socialism is just trickle down economics where the government takes taxes from the middle class and trickles down, inefficiently, to the lower class.
Classical "is concerned with distribution?" I am not sure how a suppliers and buyer care about the distribution of anything other than the goods they are trading.
Rarely is the concept of private charity brought up in these conversations. If you're going to advocate for laissez-faire, then you need to advocate for private charity in an equal proportion, otherwise the equation is off balance. And by private charity I mean everything from individual donations to entire church organizations providing services like soup kitchens, shelter, etc. If government is going to take a step back in terms of the amount of welfare it provides, churches need to be ready to step up.
@@SigFigNewtonit was not wishful thinking in the 1920s when charities, not the government, took care of ppl in need far more efficiently and effectively than the state did. You're willfully ignorant of history to support your ideological gripes.
Currency is like current: it flows like water or power. Money, like water, seeks its own level. Inflation adds space, not weight or mass. Velocity plays a role in currency flows. In short: it’s complex and has laws that can’t be broken.
Ultimately, I think she misunderstood Friedman. Her book draws several connections I disagree with, though there are some I agree with. Her final interpretation paints Friedman as slightly progressive, which I don’t believe is accurate. Moreover, I do not think he would have supported government stimulus checks, not even the first round.
Extreme economic says that the system is too complex to measure, for taken somehow work out how the entire complex systems works just by knowing people take actions and Make decisions. That is absurd
@@chesterg.791 it’s not an argument. I said you sound brainwashed because of your conviction. You didn’t try and explain. Instead you seem condescending. Then you reply with “good argument”?
What most people fail to realize is that the behavior of people is often manipulated, and it is the beliefs they hold that are the biggest driving forces. People argue about who is allowed to manipulate the market, and are never logically consistent. If were going to allow one consolidation of capital manipukate the market, nameky corporations, then we ought to allow others too, especially considering those corporations tanked the economy to begin with.
Any correct theory of economic has to include not only itself but also all incorrect theories that believe. It’s hopeless. People choose theories not because correctness but personal bias.
I think there is no 1 model that would be perfect to the every country. The way I see it is: -Keynesians think they discovered the infinite money glitch.. government invests, money comes back double / triple... government spends double / triple.. money comes back quintuple/sextuple... -Classic and neoclassic had a good start, but became what the US represents: crony capitalism.. -Austrian and anarcho capitalism is closest to what libertarians would want ... leave us alone and let us figure things out. Minimal state interference... I think a smart and honest government would use the austrian theory as base, mixed in with a little of other theories when and where necessary.
That last remark in this video is stunning to me as a libertarian. The first rounds of coronavirus relief were necessary because the government did something unnecessary, namely shutting down the economy by force, which has been proven to have been counterproductive. How interesting that she leaves that detail out when talking about openness to government intervention in the economy.
I read her book and I think she got Friedman wrong. Even thought she calls him the last conservative, which he wasn’t, she ends up panting him a slight progressive.
Meh, the state should issue public currency, and collect taxes in that currency, limit private debt and so on in terms of interest rates. The state should issue new notes in accordance with growth and spendjng patters changing to stabilize patterns by varying the ratio of tax money spent on gov operations and investment and new money introduced by the government in accordance with growth such that inflation/deflation can be balanced. If you have a lot of growth, less taxes has to be levied to pay for gov employees, and new money can be printed and injected into the system to pay for it, or to be invested in public good, infrastructure or whatever else, subsidies whatever. By varying the input to the money supply in this way, what gets added in also reduces the tax burden ect. Anyway, private control of money supplies is a bad idea.
Different versions of mechantilism. There is no real capitalism outside of organized crime. Government is always your business partner. Ecomometrics is neo-Pythagoreanism.
Economic depression is clearly a secular problem. Among the Christians (and Jews) no government intervention is needed. The people take care of each other. And, unlike the one-size-fits-all inefficiencies using government, the redistribution of wealth is fine tuned towards individual needs. It appears the concept of subsidiarity is completely missed here. Secularism is not the path to a better world.
In a "non-secular society", religion is a part of, or even entirely, the government. Like Iran. I guess you forgot to mention Islam by chance. And even in religious societies, economic depressions are caused by government intervention, not the cure. Religions are as much materialistic ideologies created by humans as the ideologies you call secular, to ignore economic laws is naive at best.
Five thousand years of civilization and you want to talk about a 100 year old stock market that never goes now. Why don't you get a larger sample size like 500 years or 1000 years. Oh wait, the average empire lasts less than 300 years. So America might now be around in around in a few hundred years, so how will we still have a stock market then? Secondly, most business eventually die and end, so thier stocks don't always go up.
The stock market is not some magical entity, nor is it truly random when approached with knowledge, patience, and discernment. While it’s true that everyday investors may not reap the same rewards as insiders like corporate executives, politicians, or lobbyists, the market has consistently proven to generate wealth over decades. Its core function is to facilitate an exchange where businesses offer individuals ownership (stock) in return for capital (cash). This mutually beneficial relationship provides businesses with the funding they need to grow while giving investors the opportunity to benefit from the increasing value of their equity stake. For those who take the time to research financially sound, well-managed, and visionary companies operating in high-growth sectors, the market can be a reliable vehicle for long-term success-not a random gamble.
@@mwalsh128has to outpace inflation. Always. A fuck ton of money had been printed in the last 40 years (15 in particular). The wealthy boomers and feb x are making sure they’re enjoying their last years. Party is going to end soon. Hopefully it’s not the last.
i dont think the history of economics matters. economics is a study of human behavior. over time this studies have been improved this is why ancient ideologies were patch updated. if your interested in economics, the modern studies is way to go. its simply analyzing human behavior and then u make decisions based on human behavior and some math involved to help your decide where or how you can make a meaningful impact on society. for example you would want to enter into markets where profits are high and competition is low. u wouldnt want to open a furnature store when all the ones in your neighborhood are all going out of business. etc. this decision making process studying economics helps you make better choices.
you don't know what you are talking about. Economics is not the study of human behavior. Go get an education. Economics is the study of scarcity and its implications for the use of resources, production of goods and services, growth of production and welfare over time, and a great variety of other complex issues of vital concern to society.
@@hamedhosseinzade2825 youtube playlists are pretty good free stuff on youtube. just type in macro economics playlist, or micro economics play list. one us large scale decision making, the other is more small scale aspects.
Just furious about she talks BS. "What Mises says about what do during depression? - I don't know". Of course you should help people. First of all by NOT touching economy because depression happened ONLY because FED was created and they started to mess up with money supply! Why do you think there were 300 years without financial crisis and SUDDENLY, OUT of nowhere crisis appears.
it is not a high school level, instead of giving key ideas she goes into unnecessary historical remarks, Lex even tried to bring the convo back by asking explicitly what is the difference and trying to explain a bit by himself to give her a hint
@@xasm83 Yeah she's a historian, obviously. He's not trying to give her a hint, he's trying to see if he understood what she said. You have a high school level of understanding, at most.
To the extent Keynes is right, if at all, it’s that govt can push the economy so far off the rails with govt intervention that natural remedies could either be ineffective or too slow.
![Nassim Taleb - The TRUTH About Employment [w/ Russ Roberts]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OF0t-1T02ro/mqdefault.jpg)
![Nassim Taleb - The TRUTH About Employment [w/ Russ Roberts]](/img/tr.png)
Showing the pictures of the people being discussed is a subtle but very much appreciated part of the podcast.
It really sets this podcast apart.
Very tasteful and informative supplements for the discussion
For the Austrian piece, the central difference is that the business cycle is not endogenous. So the great depression is the result of intervention and therefore intervention should be avoided.
She missed a fair few key points from these economists.
Austrians don’t understand the money supply though. Deposits don’t create lending, lending creates deposits.
@@danhworth100 Which Austrians? I believe the whole "money" issue has been thoroughly fleshed out in hundreds(if not, thousands) of pages from Menger, Bohm-Bawerk, Mises, etc.
Lending creates deposits in a fiat-based, fractional reserve system like we have in the US. Mostly correct. Deposits create lending in a market free from fiat and fractional reserve system. "Austrians" know the difference. And I'm sure most "Austrians" would prefer the latter situation but that's not an economic argument.
It was the result of insufficient interference for decades and of incorrect intervention once the free market created disaster.
Lex Fridman Podcast full episode: ua-cam.com/video/Rz-4ulRKnz4/v-deo.html
Thank you for listening ❤ Check out our sponsors: lexfridman.com/sponsors/cv8397-sa
See below for guest bio, links, and to give feedback, submit questions, contact Lex, etc.
*GUEST BIO:*
Jennifer Burns is a historian of ideas, focusing on the evolution of economic, political, and social ideas in the United States in the 20th century. She wrote two biographies, one on Milton Friedman, and the other on Ayn Rand.
*CONTACT LEX:*
*Feedback* - give feedback to Lex: lexfridman.com/survey
*AMA* - submit questions, videos or call-in: lexfridman.com/ama
*Hiring* - join our team: lexfridman.com/hiring
*Other* - other ways to get in touch: lexfridman.com/contact
*EPISODE LINKS:*
Jennifer's X: x.com/profburns
Jennifer's Website: www.jenniferburns.org
Jennifer's Books:
Milton Friedman biography: amzn.to/4hfy1HO
Ayn Rand biography: amzn.to/4afr3A0
*SPONSORS:*
To support this podcast, check out our sponsors & get discounts:
*Brain.fm:* Music for focus.
Go to lexfridman.com/s/brainfm-cv8397-sa
*GitHub:* Developer platform and AI code editor.
Go to lexfridman.com/s/github-cv8397-sa
*LMNT:* Zero-sugar electrolyte drink mix.
Go to lexfridman.com/s/lmnt-cv8397-sa
*Shopify:* Sell stuff online.
Go to lexfridman.com/s/shopify-cv8397-sa
*AG1:* All-in-one daily nutrition drinks.
Go to lexfridman.com/s/ag1-cv8397-sa
*PODCAST LINKS:*
- Podcast Website: lexfridman.com/podcast
- Apple Podcasts: apple.co/2lwqZIr
- Spotify: spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
- RSS: lexfridman.com/feed/podcast/
- Podcast Playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLrAXtmErZgOdP_8GztsuKi9nrraNbKKp4.html
- Clips Channel: ua-cam.com/users/lexclips
*SOCIAL LINKS:*
- X: x.com/lexfridman
- Instagram: instagram.com/lexfridman
- TikTok: tiktok.com/@lexfridman
- LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/lexfridman
- Facebook: facebook.com/lexfridman
- Patreon: patreon.com/lexfridman
- Telegram: t.me/lexfridman
- Reddit: reddit.com/r/lexfridman
We need Lex and Thomas Sowell to discuss Friedman and economics in general before he passes.
Would be amazing. Let's request it
Sowell is as much of a clown as Friedman was
@@SigFigNewtonSlander
@@SigFigNewton you are technically correct. neither is a clown.
“The misfortune of Milton Friedman is that his policies have been tried.”
-John Kenneth Galbraith
Keynesism became dominate because it justified more state power. It’s all about power.
Nailed it.
Oligarch’s power doesn’t seem to bother you, perhaps you are one of the few billionaires….
@@Henley-j5w state power isn't the opposite of corporate power, in fact, corporate power is a creation of the state. Consider corporate personhood for example.
Keynes gave a response to the failure of economic policy. That is the reason that other schools developed competing responses afterwards. Like all economists he gave a view of how capitalism could work, in a manner like Milton Friedman. He helped develop the system that gave the dollar global dominance. The US had wanted this for a century. The USA has practiced Neoliberalism since the 70s and had the Mic since the 50s. If you do not like what has happened since then you can hardly blame Keynes. But I agree that it is all about power, that is why economic views come and go.
That's jumping to a questionable conclusion. Keynesism is simply expounding human psychology - nervous people don't invest or borrow to invest, they horde. Trust breaks down, the economy freezes, stagnation ensues. Private capital is too nervous to break cover and everyone is risk adverse.
One only has to watch the stock market's bull and bear runs to see psychology and herd behaviour is central. Momentum stocks are a prime example. Very little government involvement.
One thing is for sure from this bit. Her level of understanding of Austrian economics is infinitesimally close to zero. She should at least be humble enough to say that she knows nothing about it. At least, she did admit to not knowing much about von Mises.
In a nutshell, her description of Austrian economics was like as if I were to describe general relativity as follows: "I think it's about the speed of light, and some wacky idea that it's constant or something... what was that?.. Einstein? Who's that?"
Most prominent mainstream economists are snake oil salesmen who try to sell their own little special concoction to politicians and the public on the promise that their particular control measures will boost economic growth. And they hate or ignore Austrians because they're the only ones that call them out.
And the whole dig on Austrians about what to do in a depression is pretty unfair. That's as if a guy was begging you not to get behind the wheel of your car after drinking a whole bottle of whiskey, and then blaming them after you crashed for not giving you advice on how to drive while smashed.
Austrians know exactly what to do in a depression: let the bad investments go broke.
Letting asset prices fall is one of the things that Austrian economists get right. Their dogmatic stance against government is more often deeply damaging and can be viewed as the primary cause of the Great Depression.
"Most prominent mainstream economists are snake oil salesmen," but this minority of cranks over here who just happen to align with my libertarian notions and whose claims have already been thoroughly examined by academia decades ago before even the advent of the computing boom surely understand the economy better than what the mainstream thinks!
Funny how It's always some random armchair ideologue who has never taken anything harder than precalc who thinks they know better 😂
@@SigFigNewtonobjectively not even close to true.
Do you imagine that there was a single cause?
The fundamental insight of marginal economics is that value is a subjective assessment of utility of a good to a consumer.
It naively believes that the free market is efficient at getting goods to where they’re most useful
Thanks for so much education in such a short amount of time.
She is amazing and such an intelligent teacher. So patient and easy to understand complex concepts and historical views.
Joseph Schumpeter - innovation drives economic cycles, markets dictate price and value is subjective
I was waiting for the Ludwig Von Mises lesson but then she didn’t even know anything about what he knew about the business cycle! Wow. The Austrians understood it the most.
excellent discussion and source of information, thank you lex
Gonna have to watch the full pod.
The personality differences play a role: it’s the Sensates vs the iNtuitives. (Meyers/Briggs personality types of Thinkers come in two types: Sensates learn from experience and iNtuitives are abstract (e.g., the invisible hand and unintended consequences are obvious to the latter who take lines of reasoning further). Sensates can learn from history and experience, when they live it. Most people in the market are not adept at the abstract thought needed to see the future consequences of the processes of economics, without guidance. But they like gold, anyway! (Hefty, shiny, real and reassuring to the senses.). This is the tug of war that each type must factor in to their hypotheses for the entire market. Sensates outnumber iNtuitives in the market by quite a bit, and velocity of their perception of and action in response to change is a drag until it isn’t. This difference is a communication problem.
In a practical sense macroeconomics is a form of data-assisted rhetoric aimed at determining how scarce resources ought to be distributed. In short, economic studies and texts of this sort exist to bolster argumentation. Furthermore, economics differs from the natural sciences in that it examines arbitrary human-made systems, rather than the unchanging laws of nature. Notably, while economists may occasionally provide scientific insights, this is a byproduct of their work, not its primary concern.
No talk of Murray Rothbard??? His book "America's Great Depression" is the stongest economic analysis out there. Rothbard puts together the pieces of the puzzle that Hayek was not able to in Austrian Economics. Hayek is my least favorite Austrian Economist, especially when it came to banking.
It's because of the deep state
I wish someone put me on rothbard 20 years ago. I read miltons history of money in the United States and was just operating on broken information for years
Why is the fact that the Austrians predicted the collapse in the Great Depression ignored? And why do we not hear about Mises showing that Socialist economic planning is not possible even in theory?
It was moreso Keynesian economics that predicted it. Austrian think helped cause it.
@SigFigNewton nope. Keynes believed stocks would go up. He was heavily investing in stocks in 1929. That's why he made up fairly tales to save the stock market and hence save his investments.
@@SigFigNewtonAustrians definitely didn’t help cause it. Lol they are against the credit expansion by the Fed that caused the bubble.
The lady is brilliantly knowledgeable
I enjoyed this very much; she does a great job of tracking the history of thought in economics. I would suggest, however, that if she wants to take more of a future oriented view towards the direction of economics that she should explore the work of John Nash.
Thank you 🙏 I’m reading Atlas Shrugged at the moment & this gives great perspective.
Economists are like weather forecasters. They take in a bunch of data and guess
You need Creative Destruction. Schumpter. We no longer have that. The to big to fail can not exist
"If we let our big companies fail then China is going to win."
Love this women’s mind.
what an intelligent woman
What just rewards hard work to fill customer needs and wants. And protects ownership
I saw “clips” and was thinking this was long for a clip. Then I saw the original video below 😮
Keynsien economics is crumbling before our eyes
Excelent video.
in my opinion, we have to start talking about financial systems first , about how the production is financed and then about how it is being managed and what the role of the government is. Without financial part it is all just talks for the sake of talks.
Keynesism was a response to a point in time, i.e. in a prolonged depression when the wheels of the economy have nearly ground to a halt, only the government has sufficient clout to tip the scales. FDR splurging money on the Hoover Dam being one example - a giant infrastructure project had more benefit that just managing water supplies - it injected liquidity into the economy as workers spent their earnings, and suppliers sold construction equipment etc. It's one of the few times that trickle down economics actually works plus you get useful infrastructure almost as a side effect.
Hahahahaha I thought that trickle down economics was tax cuts will make people spend more not government big projects will make people spend more but you always learn something interesting on the Internet every day
Blows my mind that some people still genuinely believe that trickle down works
@@SigFigNewtonBlows my mind that you don’t understand that socialism is just trickle down economics where the government takes taxes from the middle class and trickles down, inefficiently, to the lower class.
The government caused the depression and FDR prolonged it with even more spending. Clearly you don’t full understand history.
Classical "is concerned with distribution?" I am not sure how a suppliers and buyer care about the distribution of anything other than the goods they are trading.
This woman doesn’t understand Mises
Rarely is the concept of private charity brought up in these conversations.
If you're going to advocate for laissez-faire, then you need to advocate for private charity in an equal proportion, otherwise the equation is off balance.
And by private charity I mean everything from individual donations to entire church organizations providing services like soup kitchens, shelter, etc.
If government is going to take a step back in terms of the amount of welfare it provides, churches need to be ready to step up.
Advocating for it doesn’t keep it from being wishful thinking
@@SigFigNewtonit was not wishful thinking in the 1920s when charities, not the government, took care of ppl in need far more efficiently and effectively than the state did. You're willfully ignorant of history to support your ideological gripes.
Free school lunches is the best nutrition that many children receive.
@@SigFigNewton a. Not true. b. There's no such thing as a free lunch.
It’s very true. The lunches provided by government, which private charity does not provide, keeps many children from being malnourished.
Currency is like current: it flows like water or power. Money, like water, seeks its own level. Inflation adds space, not weight or mass. Velocity plays a role in currency flows. In short: it’s complex and has laws that can’t be broken.
Ultimately, I think she misunderstood Friedman. Her book draws several connections I disagree with, though there are some I agree with. Her final interpretation paints Friedman as slightly progressive, which I don’t believe is accurate. Moreover, I do not think he would have supported government stimulus checks, not even the first round.
She is wrongly explaining the views of a man who was wrong about his views it is a sad state of things
@@yuriarlequimHow was Milton wrong…?
Austrian Economics is REAL economics because Praxeology. Case closed.
Yeah that's because you are poor and don't know what you are talking about. Case closed.
Extreme economic says that the system is too complex to measure, for taken somehow work out how the entire complex systems works just by knowing people take actions and Make decisions. That is absurd
You sound brainwashed
@joelbarrientos389 good argument 👍
@@chesterg.791 it’s not an argument. I said you sound brainwashed because of your conviction. You didn’t try and explain. Instead you seem condescending. Then you reply with “good argument”?
What most people fail to realize is that the behavior of people is often manipulated, and it is the beliefs they hold that are the biggest driving forces. People argue about who is allowed to manipulate the market, and are never logically consistent. If were going to allow one consolidation of capital manipukate the market, nameky corporations, then we ought to allow others too, especially considering those corporations tanked the economy to begin with.
When I got my poly sci degree we were required to read all of the works of Smith, Marx, Keynes, etc.
Keynesian Ecomonics = Fairy Tales.
Any correct theory of economic has to include not only itself but also all incorrect theories that believe. It’s hopeless. People choose theories not because correctness but personal bias.
Math? What are your constants? Value is subjective. Trades are based on inequalities of values. How do you do math on that?
I think there is no 1 model that would be perfect to the every country. The way I see it is:
-Keynesians think they discovered the infinite money glitch.. government invests, money comes back double / triple... government spends double / triple.. money comes back quintuple/sextuple...
-Classic and neoclassic had a good start, but became what the US represents: crony capitalism..
-Austrian and anarcho capitalism is closest to what libertarians would want ... leave us alone and let us figure things out. Minimal state interference...
I think a smart and honest government would use the austrian theory as base, mixed in with a little of other theories when and where necessary.
We wax and wane between more and less government throughout time. Sometimes we need more... sometimes we need less...
Without it, capitalism destroys itself in time
And we always need little.
So... different socioeconomic circumstances required different economic solutions. Next, globally attaching $ to the carbon atom.
That last remark in this video is stunning to me as a libertarian. The first rounds of coronavirus relief were necessary because the government did something unnecessary, namely shutting down the economy by force, which has been proven to have been counterproductive. How interesting that she leaves that detail out when talking about openness to government intervention in the economy.
I read her book and I think she got Friedman wrong. Even thought she calls him the last conservative, which he wasn’t, she ends up panting him a slight progressive.
Friedman’s policies are still eroding meritocracy
Only one real economics and that's Austrian
Meh, the state should issue public currency, and collect taxes in that currency, limit private debt and so on in terms of interest rates. The state should issue new notes in accordance with growth and spendjng patters changing to stabilize patterns by varying the ratio of tax money spent on gov operations and investment and new money introduced by the government in accordance with growth such that inflation/deflation can be balanced. If you have a lot of growth, less taxes has to be levied to pay for gov employees, and new money can be printed and injected into the system to pay for it, or to be invested in public good, infrastructure or whatever else, subsidies whatever. By varying the input to the money supply in this way, what gets added in also reduces the tax burden ect. Anyway, private control of money supplies is a bad idea.
She said , regarding the depression, “if you give people relief, they may not go back to work.” Prognosticator for Covid!
Different versions of mechantilism. There is no real capitalism outside of organized crime. Government is always your business partner. Ecomometrics is neo-Pythagoreanism.
Economic depression is clearly a secular problem. Among the Christians (and Jews) no government intervention is needed. The people take care of each other. And, unlike the one-size-fits-all inefficiencies using government, the redistribution of wealth is fine tuned towards individual needs. It appears the concept of subsidiarity is completely missed here. Secularism is not the path to a better world.
In a "non-secular society", religion is a part of, or even entirely, the government. Like Iran. I guess you forgot to mention Islam by chance. And even in religious societies, economic depressions are caused by government intervention, not the cure.
Religions are as much materialistic ideologies created by humans as the ideologies you call secular, to ignore economic laws is naive at best.
Keynesianism: Giving modern tyrants an excuse for almost a century.
No institutional
😢
It’s all about man economy and state, power and market 😜
Treating economics like a science is offensive to scientists (I’m a chemist).
The guy that thought stock prices would always go up wasn’t wrong.
You’re right until you’re wrong.
Five thousand years of civilization and you want to talk about a 100 year old stock market that never goes now. Why don't you get a larger sample size like 500 years or 1000 years. Oh wait, the average empire lasts less than 300 years. So America might now be around in around in a few hundred years, so how will we still have a stock market then?
Secondly, most business eventually die and end, so thier stocks don't always go up.
Go buy some random stocks and see how that works out for you
The stock market is not some magical entity, nor is it truly random when approached with knowledge, patience, and discernment. While it’s true that everyday investors may not reap the same rewards as insiders like corporate executives, politicians, or lobbyists, the market has consistently proven to generate wealth over decades. Its core function is to facilitate an exchange where businesses offer individuals ownership (stock) in return for capital (cash). This mutually beneficial relationship provides businesses with the funding they need to grow while giving investors the opportunity to benefit from the increasing value of their equity stake. For those who take the time to research financially sound, well-managed, and visionary companies operating in high-growth sectors, the market can be a reliable vehicle for long-term success-not a random gamble.
@@mwalsh128has to outpace inflation. Always. A fuck ton of money had been printed in the last 40 years (15 in particular). The wealthy boomers and feb x are making sure they’re enjoying their last years. Party is going to end soon. Hopefully it’s not the last.
Salamanca School......mother of ALL others schools
To understand Economics you don't really need math - you need to understand human behavior
i dont think the history of economics matters.
economics is a study of human behavior. over time this studies have been improved this is why ancient ideologies were patch updated.
if your interested in economics, the modern studies is way to go. its simply analyzing human behavior and then u make decisions based on human behavior and some math involved to help your decide where or how you can make a meaningful impact on society.
for example you would want to enter into markets where profits are high and competition is low. u wouldnt want to open a furnature store when all the ones in your neighborhood are all going out of business. etc. this decision making process studying economics helps you make better choices.
you don't know what you are talking about. Economics is not the study of human behavior. Go get an education.
Economics is the study of scarcity and its implications for the use of resources, production of goods and services, growth of production and welfare over time, and a great variety of other complex issues of vital concern to society.
Interesting, any recommendation on books or any resources?
Himan behaviour changes over time and it is important to know what are the consequences.
@@hamedhosseinzade2825 youtube playlists are pretty good free stuff on youtube. just type in macro economics playlist, or micro economics play list. one us large scale decision making, the other is more small scale aspects.
To much government involvement in the economy, this is the problem with the economy.
Gotta have Steve keen on otherwise you’re just talking to snake oil salesmen in the US.
He already had him on
Would Australian snake oil selesmen be better?
INVITE THOMAS SOWELL
Just furious about she talks BS. "What Mises says about what do during depression? - I don't know". Of course you should help people. First of all by NOT touching economy because depression happened ONLY because FED was created and they started to mess up with money supply! Why do you think there were 300 years without financial crisis and SUDDENLY, OUT of nowhere crisis appears.
Bunch of nerds in the comments
Lol well that explains it
Laber therapy of vale is classical??? Lol wtf
I don’t think she is good in explaining 👎
You are not smart enough to understand. That is the real problem.
She is actually really good at explaining
I’m guessing she is explaining the material at a high school level. Take notes, investigate concepts that don’t make sense to you.
it is not a high school level, instead of giving key ideas she goes into unnecessary historical remarks, Lex even tried to bring the convo back by asking explicitly what is the difference and trying to explain a bit by himself to give her a hint
@@xasm83 Yeah she's a historian, obviously. He's not trying to give her a hint, he's trying to see if he understood what she said. You have a high school level of understanding, at most.
She really mixes up the stories a lot, to the point where you don't understand who or what she's talking about.
Its really a dismal 'science'. What csn I say.
To the extent Keynes is right, if at all, it’s that govt can push the economy so far off the rails with govt intervention that natural remedies could either be ineffective or too slow.
Sorry too much
All these are out-dated and useless for the new digital world.
she is really bad at explanations, constantly switching away from a topic without giving the essence, honestly gpt would do better
This is a terrible analysis of the differing schools of economics.
They didn't mention Physiocrates either. This chick doesn't impress me.
Consumptive value
I wonder when neoclassical economists will try to validate their simplistic model and not just worship it as an idol.
Forever tainted by his interview with Netanyahu
Would somebody please tell this chick that its okay to clear her throat?