To fix this and many issues in modern life, is to remove money from politics. It should be illegal to give money or incentives to a politician. They are employed by the people.
it's not though. one of the arguments made is that poor people are going to eat bad because they don't have the money to buy healthy foods therefore they will have higher medical expenses down the road. well a bag of apples and a glass of water are cheaper than a bag of cheetos and a mt. dew.
@@mfntonberry It kind of is, but not for the reasons OP suspects. When you're poor the taxation that you're forced to pay out of your paycheck and on goods and services hurts you more than someone middle class or above. That extra few dollars you pay on groceries hurts you more if you have less dollars to spend overall, that extra few dollars could be the difference between another good meal or having to starve it out for a day or two.
It definitely feels like we're near the end stages in a game of Monopoly, where a couple players own all the prominent properties, while most of us own a place like Baltic Ave. & are just trying our best to make it around to collect that $200 before we inevitably go bankrupt.
It's especially hilarious because the game was originally invented as a teaching method for how capitalism, and the landlord property system in particular, eventually lead to poverty for everyone except a select few
@@aceleracionistanoturno you contradicted your own statement. They are not officially the government. They are illegal entities assuming the role of government you could say. A distinction needs to be made when pointing fingers obviously
@@aceleracionistanoturnoMost of those people are working, albeit indirectly, in the interest of people with more zeros in their bank accounts than your typical gas station attendant.
The word "sabotage" comes from "sabot", French for a wooden shoe/clog. The workers chucked their sabots into the factory machinery, an act of "sabotage".
@@WmSrite-pi8ck That may be true, but sabots were also a real thing. They were work shoes used in France, Italy, Belgium etc around the 16th-19th century. They're big and cheap wooden clogs for poor peasants and the story of them being the origin of the term 'sabotage' is generally agreed to have happened when workers used their sabots to damage railway equipment in the early 1900s.
@@casbyness The connection to sabots is clear, but not that the sabots were actually used for the sabotage, just that they were worn by the workers in question. (I'm not saying there aren't _some_ historians who believe the sabot-throwing story).
@T hddh That's not depressing, it don't matter when the last time he had a gf was. What is sad an depressing is trying to put someone who you don't know down, for no reason, making it even worse there talking about how there going threw a hard time with w/e there going threw an you feel the need to make them feel worse. So no I feel pitty an saddness for you an hope you can find peace within yourself to where you don't need to hurt others to make yourself feel better.
Bro, I hope your referring to the pandemic an jus have lack of human contact for that reason but don't listen to this other asshat. Hang in there. An keep your head up. Life can always get better.
The key to changing our abusive system is, 1st make politicians retire at 65, stop all money in politics, and make a strictly enforced law that any outlet calling themselves news in any way cannot lie. The rest should fix itself.
Lol. And who decides what the truth is? What lawmakers are going to pass laws limiting their own power, or the power of their donor class when those donors are how they afford to run for office? Who are their friends they all went to school with? Who give them millions of dollars and boardroom positions when the leave office after years of loyal service? Your "quick fixes" are ineffectual bandaids on an inherently broken system, which exists because a few people can privately own our collective production as a species, which gives them an undemocratic and wildly disproportionate amount of power. That's what Marx was describing. That's the inevitable result of capitalism.
I just started a new job, because Corona cut my regular hours down to almost nothing. I have $62 in my bank account, and that has to last three weeks before my first paycheck. With my new job, essential work being the only thing hiring, I have no sort of medical insurance. My medication costs $113 generic. Also, my car insurance just came due, which I need to have for work, is $137. I haven't even put rent and utilities into this, nor food and basic living expense. Not sure if capitalism is dying, or if I am.
Lack of bottom level wages in last 40 years really hurting. And once self driving replaces commercial drivers. Better small scale robots cheaper. UBI going have to happen if they want keep capitalism, or people will get out the pick forks. yang was really best thing happen to Dems this election and party trying to ingore him.
@@Sinnehh I agree about Yang. I'm not at all happy with the current ballot we're seeing. Last term, I was hoping for Bernie. The lower class really needs more help, we can't keep America going at this rate.
Sounds like the system you live under is failing you... whatever that may be. But, considering you're living on the poverty line, have to pay $113 for generic meds, are worried about medical insurance, AND have stable access to internet, I'd say you're in the USA. Far be it from me that with all those things, it's so close to living under Fascism than Capitalism. Sorry for the struggles you must be having right now.
@@braegrimes8870 You're right, and thanks for your sympathy. The fact that so many more privileged people around me are toting this as the greatest nation in the world is a sheer embarrassment. Honestly, when I speak to people from other countries, I tend not to tell them that I'm from the U.S. I'm ashamed of my country, but have no idea how to change any of it. Which is insane, considering that democracy is what we pride ourselves in the most. I know that our nation is generally better off than many others, but it doesn't make my own everyday struggle any easier. In fact, it leaves me feeling inferior and guilty for not utilizing "the American dream."
@@MadamFoogie unfortunately thats an inbuilt element of the system. If youre not piloting your second yacht you feel guilt and like s failure. You need to free yourself mentally of those false beliefs. The working class is not a lower class. The working class are the honourable class. Their efforts keep society and economy afloat and alive. The parasitical classes of the uber wealthy are the true lower class. They are like pimps living off immoral earnings. My 2 cents
I'm currently recovering from emergency surgery, lying in bed and binge watching all of your videos. They are as soothing as my pain medication. They've kept my brain busy. Thank you😊
I agree. I am a baby boomer. I hear people bitch about millenials today, but they don't realize that millenials grew up watching both parent's and grandparent's working their ass's off to only have to keep working in their 70's and still not own any thing. So what do millenials have to look forward to?
@@davidgraylord5977 I was one of the lucky ones, I went into active military service at 18 (2006), saw bitcoin as a futures... and now im sitting on several hundred grand, with a military retirement. I dont need to work but im going to school fulltime for a masters degree in cybersec. I can buy a house outright in most states... but heck... i feel like the 1% of my generation.
I was a lucky one. Im gen z and i didnt go to college so i didnt get saddled with debt. Got a decent warehouse job and i bought my house last year at 23
@@user98xp UA-cam cannot stand not being the kings and queens of old. All the politicians want to revive the medieval ages where the rich are rich and poor are kicked like dogs.
Norway checking in here - Capitalism works fine, it just needs the correct amount of reigning in. Make sure to keep money and politics separated - I think the US has failed there. Also - probably fix your tax laws - my guess is that they are too complex and have too many holes in them. Keep it simple.
A dangerously broad assertion, don't you think? I'll leave you to exercise your mind to think of ways such bits of bumper sticker wisdom taken as sage advice could have disastrous consequences.
@@lifeinsaltlakecity4001 perhaps, but also consider the following: Change itself can be good or bad, there’s sometime no telling. However, if one is dogmatic about not wanting to, that leaves no room for options that could be beneficial.
@@Rairyuujin unless the change in question inherently represents a net loss for the person embracing said dogma. Therein lies a small measure of the dangers of the tyrannous state, that it purports to have the authority to deign to dictate to masses of disparate peoples with differing goals and subjective views what is best for them. The state and its wise, fearless leaders and supporters are full of bumper sticker wisdom about how you and I ought to be living. A one-size-fits-all prescription for living, backed by the threat of death for non-compliance. Historically, things end badly for those who dissent. And I dissent, sir.
@@rachel_v_k is a great place7l to and a great 5most people people the of easy to tnow is to get athe and your able tto to be for the of of of of ofhave yearnext year nextel yearnext yearnext ALl7 I next the to thingy same the atime you nd lthis ittle bit think have been have have to b 6een have been 7 a am be not am am Inot I the first time for of and gooandand good get a d a get abyourforthe le to beget beyou tfact that fact that he and of the can can world the ththe e the is is is is is a new a the best to knowtheis to gis et best way to is ias buy the to gyou are that that et best way to is is the the is is is is is is not is the is is is for best the the the is is and is is is not of best of the tis he most you ais ris is e you are yis ou are ake sure make sure make sure s and and to to more than than get a get a get a to is iand eand ver s to a be able to get get is the to do do the do s is ois search a job are lyto to ou want and ooking for looking for w it is very and and and and he k to work with the usual usual business experience and experience with
Economics is a very interesting and rich field. Heavily rooted in mathematics and philosophy. However modern economics is a pretty different animal than during the times of Smith and Marx.
The thing is, he's wrong, no one was just blind and decided to follow, there were no other choices, capitalism in itself is designed to slowly strangle out the middle class
try that with science laws if you truly mean it, ... scientist dare to state something is impossible when they know only a little of what actually exist in the universe
sad to say, but, i personally don't believe there is enough "non-sheeple" to accomplish this, yes, it's the best way, only thing stopping it is greed and that human trait will not shift,,,,,,
The problem with our current system is monopoly laws don't work and haven't in decades. Too many loop holes. When a company gets too big and anyone threatens them with monopoly suits, they just split the big company into two smaller companies still owned by the same corporate entity.
also the companys have realised by working with their competetiors they can price gouge more people and make more money, a bigger pie for everyone... well not everety one but the corporations
@@michaelo5665 do you know how much tax money is spent on social security? That has a large impact on how much taxes you pay. Regardless historical working hours are down.
@@NoddinOff. actually I do and it happens to pale in comparison to other parts of our budget but thanks for ignoring the meat of my comment in order to hold up yet another strawman.
@@NoddinOff. in fact in many states it is the government PERs system (a form of retirement) that's creating the biggest hurdles for battling the deficit.
This has to be one of the best scripted and most meaningful essays on how we got to the current economic crisis and what we can realistically do about it, that I have seen anywhere. A daring topic selection, Joe. My compliments on choosing a very controversial subject which sorely needed to be addressed and would scare away most writers who frankly, lack the fortitude to explore and present it in a public forum. Like a fresco, you've captured your subject with a fidelity and truthfulness within the tight constraints of limited time. A marvelous and informative example of realized art.
I think his way to approach the subject was the best I've seen. The humility to put his opinion down so to care for the dogmatic viewer was a teaching of its own. I'll use it in future debates myself.
We have been indoctrinated... to believe there's a viable alternative to capitalism. There isn't. The only countries with successful 'socialist' or 'communist' systems (e.g. China, and some would say Sweden) are ones that learned (the hard way) to embrace capitalist principles. All wealth comes through capitalism. The best any other economic system can do is redistribute the wealth that capitalism created, which undermines the further creation of wealth.
@@RatZapTshirt nobody disagrees when people say they want democratic socialism their talking about giving workers more choices and redistribution of wealth to build safety nets not completely change the free Market just more restrictions
@@danielmoreno-gama5973 If that were actually the case I wouldn't have a problem. A 'free market with a social safety net' would be fine by me (preferably a UBI). But what we get instead as 'democratic socialism' is more and more of those "restrictions" you mention. They've been accumulating for over a century. The banking system has been nationalized, the currency demonetized, etc. We no longer HAVE a free market. That's the only reason we even NEED a safety net now. We're eating the goose that lays the golden eggs, which is the flaw of traditional socialism.
@@degamispoudegamis I really wish the US wouldn't do that, because It gives every socialist government in the world a scapegoat to blame for their own failures. Socialism is so shitty it can't function without a credible scapegoat.
@@degamispoudegamis Oh, so you know something I don't, but should? Please enlighten me, master. Right now I'm thinking you probably have no argument but just wanted to have the last word anyway. Try again.
"Capitalism" failed in 2008 but there was enough money to temporarily "save" it, whereas "communism" failed in 1989 because there was no money to "save" it. All "quotations" intentional. What is need is that Maslow's basic needs in his pyramid be a human right - there needs to be a recognition of the concept of "common good". I really enjoyed this video. Well done Joe.
To first have a common good there must first be a common people. Modern America prioritizes the idea of diversity as a quilt where separate cultures and ideas are simply placed with others rather than the idea of an American Melting pot where cultures and ideas are assimilated and the best qualities are integrated to create a blended and United culture under one banner of American pride and the values which it holds and defends. Only when you can have a unanimous people who will fight for the same cause can you even begin to establish what defines the common good
Honestly people from the USA are WAY to touchy about this subject. To any reasonable person with any economical knowledge it should be obvious that western Europe ALSO has capitalism. They just put more limits on it, and it works out fine. In fact, it probably works better than what they have in the USA. But noooo, you criticize the specific USA brand of capitalism and they bring out the pitchforks...
@@MrGonzonator thats an excellent idea. Compare those factors in the Netherlands or Germany to the USA and you come to the conclusion that people in the Netherlands or Germany have it better in all of those statistics.
I agree. Americans have been propagandised for the past century to be afraid of cooperation. They are taught to fear socialism because the well being of people is in conflict with the greed of corporations. When your country's government is clearly wholly owned by corporations, when an HMOs profits are more important than your life, when dropping bombs and putting people in prison is profitable, your in denial about how great your system is
@@MrGonzonator That comparison wont do any good to the states. just put US to shame. specially when you factor things like paid maternity leave, paid vacations, healthcare, and so forth
“...dogmatic refusal to change is a losing strategy, whether it’s in economics, or society, or nature for that matter.” Bravo! 👏👏👏 That is the best thing I’ve heard in a long time.
Sunamer Z did you even watch the video? Taking someone’s quote out of context when he wasn’t suggesting anything within the realm of communism like that I doubt it. He was suggesting that we alter the structure of capitalism much the same way Theodore Roosevelt did by signing the “Square Deal” please just listen to others and know your own history first my friend, this was just an acknowledgement of the fact that capitalism has evolved and grown since the 1800s and we need to improve our system for the current age
@Sunamer ZSounds like someone is dogmatic. It's not a binary...there are steps. Runaway capitalism doesn't work, full blown communism doesn't work. Ideally, a capitalist society should provide and help create social programs to raise people up. With social programs, the people have more means to fuel the capitalist machine, society in balance. Those who vilify all socialism often demonstrate a struggle with compassion and tend to be selfish, elitist, fear mongering capitalists; the corporate cabals and the people they pay and manipulate.
@Sunamer Z I'm really not sure where you were going with this statement. But it comes off as you comparing a need to fix the economy to Socialism which is in no way what was suggested. It was a really dumb thing to say.. especially with what's going on in the US atm. =/ Education isn't evil... neither is common sense.
Thank you for this thoughtful and thought provoking video. Yes, it is clear that society is changing so rapidly and in so many multiple dimensions that the existing paradigms and systems are ineffective. I don’t know the best solution, but something that will combine the ideal intended outcomes of capitalism--that is, the creation of wealth and individual sovereignty--along with with the ideal intended outcomes of Marx and others--that is, that -“each gives according to his/her ability and each receives according to his/ her needs”, UBI at the very least, some equalization of economic class division or redistribution of wealth--seems to be in order. The guiding principles of society can no longer be limited to valuing only the economic persona or economic usefulness of a human (or animal or any sentient being)--but must shift to the recognition and value of the fulfillment of life itself as the end goal--with all economic systems and structures subjugated to the fulfillment of this higher end goal. This is similar to Maslow’s hierarchical pyramid of Self-Actualization--in other words, the economic system must truly become the servant of life and society, and no longer the master.
We don't need a class of capitalist owners anymore than we need a hole in the head. UBI is a fraud as it is a proposal to save capitalism. Not enough work than a cut in hours with no cut in pay to spread the work around. None of theses utopia libertarian proposals have a snowballs chance in hell of success since they have no way of coming to fruition without the good graces of the ruling capitalist class. The capitalists classes need to be removed from power as they are both incompetent and destructive to the world system of production. We the working class organized into trade unions and with a political party of our own are the only ones capable of doing that. Trump and Yang Wang can't do it for us.
I realize why people always leave it out, but it really helps to understand everything: Capitalism is an authoritarian economic system, while socialism is a democratic economic system. In Capitalism the rich own and control the workplace, while in Socialism the workers control the workplace. The "Communist" countries never succeed at becoming Socialist or Communist, but instead the leaders of the revolutions became a new oppressive ruling class.
@James Smith Socialism literally the idea that workers should democratically control their workplaces, and has nothing to do with any government; in fact communism is the idea of a socialist economy without any form of traditional state, basically no government as you would probably understand it. I pretty sure you didn't try to argue against the actually ideas, because you got nothing. Oh and the old "you just want free stuff"; I know you mad bro, because the system you want to defend is not a good one and people are waking up to that.
@James Smith I know basically no one is actually educated on political philosophy, so I never shocked people have no concept of left vs. right political spectrum. To explain in the simplest turns the political spectrum is about hierarchies where to the left is fewer hierarchy while to right is more hierarchy. There are no political philosophies regarding the proper size of government, because that would retarded. Capitalism as a system creates power hierarchies in economies, which literally is what leads to monopolies; it is not anything else. Citizens through organized political power can make demands of capitalists, but consumers on the other hand have no real power; voting with your wallet is just a bad joke.
@James Smith Wow, nothing is more convincing than a wall of demented ramblings. The old "government = always bad" is only convincing to the smoothest of brains. Governments are tools and like a hammer are no more evil than the manner in which they are used. If you cannot imagine a well functioning government, that is a personal failing. Worker cooperatives are a form of socialism and require no government intervention for their creation. Democracy refers to the idea of everyone having a voice. A citizen has a voice, a socialist work in a socialist economy has a voice, while a consumer has none. Voting with ones wallet is action of pitiful being stripped of any voice, forced to beg for treats from their capitalist masters. Again you have failed to argue against socialism, the concept of workers democratically controlling their workplaces.
@James Smith A strawman argument refers to when one creates a position and argues against their created position rather than any real position held. Or to connect the dots, you keep arguing against positions no one holds. Again, you have nothing. You have failed to make an argument against socialism.
In his video on future robots. He did say that the origin of the term Robots came from the serfs that made up the working class during the industrial revolution...
“This country has socialism for the rich, and rugged individualism for the poor.”-Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr, 1968 52 years later, and we still haven't corrected this?
Change doesn't happen until it needs to happen. The riots occurring this year are clues to the government that _something_ needs to change so you can bet your ass that lobbyist are lining up to tell them what needs to change. That's a problem as lobbyists are generally company representatives and don't have the interests of the average individual in mind. Unfortunately the cycle repeats itself until the culture that causes this changes. Any change to culture takes around 2 generations to change. You'll see noticeable change when millennial are in the position baby boomers are today.
@@BassenGaming No, it is the government's fault. They interefered in the market, making it possible for lobbyists to push for such policies. We need to do away with all our "socialist" policies.
So here's my current experience: my company was purchased by another, from a complementary side of the industry. Not one employee has benefited, and many have lost their job or seen a large decrease in benefits. My company posted profitable year after profitable year since inception and was in no danger whatsoever. The only ones who benefited were those at the top, controlling it all. This merger/buyout does nothing good for the average citizen either. This is all too common, and just another example of what Joe is talking about.
@W.A M.P See, Mark believes that risking capital (what employers do) and accepting compensation in exchange for time and labor (what employees do) are the same thing. More precisely, if he's not smart enough to take care of himself...he's probably not smart enough to care of me either. Which is why I fired him.
@W.A M.P First, I'm not sure why you think I feel entitled. I am asking only for job security, when I've spent years working for the company. I'm not asking for money to be dumped on me, and I don't think it is unreasonable to expect that the things I was told were part of my compensation package upon hire should remain as such. My company was in no financial danger at all, as I stated they have been profitable since inception, nearly 40 years ago. The company had 13000 staff, and was purchased by a company with something very similar. Several of the points you make sound like you're jaded from your bad experiences owning a business, and at the same time, you make the point that you were the only one to absorb any risk, as is how it works when you own a business. It is shortsighted to assume that I have no concept of what the day to day requirements are for running a business just because I don't run one of my own. I personally have never owned a business, though I helped my father run his for a few years. He has told me on many occasions that if he had it to do over again, he wouldn't. And he isn't the only one I've known to say that. But of course, I wasn't talking about a small business to begin with. I'm talking about a large, multi-national corporation that generated hundred of millions of dollars in annual revenue. As Joe's point goes, capitalism in and of itself isn't the issue, but the extreme version we see today where all that matters seems to be maximizing profit at the expense of just about everything else is. Your comment about how employees aren't individually important just proves that point. Each of those people who lose their job have a life and possible a family that are relying on them. And replacing a salary isn't an easy task when every company wants to pay you the minimum they can get away with. One cannot equate a job at one company as the a job at another. Sure, if I lose my job I can probably find a job quickly, but it wouldn't be earning nearly what I make right now. You may not be negatively impacted by simply replacing them with another person, probably at a lower wage and maybe in another country - but people matter. Your attitude about them seems to suggest that you don't view employees as people, and THAT is the issue with late stage capitalism. You comment that " for years, just to benefit one's enormous pile of stock shares provides nothing for anyone but oneself (already a multi-millionaire). How much is enough?
Joe: Bring it in group hug. Me: literally hugs my laptop. Joe: Oh yeah that's good stuff Me: steps away from laptop Also super informative Joe thanks for another great vid keep it up!
@@mebreevee Hugs from. Yeah I needed it too. I have a "FREE HUGS" t-shirt but since there's a pandemic going on I'm not sure if I'll ever be able to wear that shirt again.
Great balance walking the line, I love the subject exploration here! I've often thought the same thing and this opened an avenue for appropriate discussion. Thanks Joe, as always!
Thank you for discussing a difficult topic, during a difficult time and at self acknowledged possible risk to your livelihood. Evil wins when good people do nothing, and in my opinion, you are the best type of human.
I just find it insane that the 1% as they get richer, get slammed with less taxes than I do with a salary that doesn't reach 100k and get 35% taken out of my paycheck. It's also insanity that such rich people exist with such amounts of money, it's almost obscene. The law will always lobby for the rich, sadly
“Can capitalism be reformed” is far less important than “will those who are currently on top give up some power to reform, or will they risk everything to maintain their current level of power?” Crisis in economic systems is hardly new, and capitalism in America survived serious threats during the guildes age and Great Depression through reform. These processes weren’t easy (many labor strikers were killed for their views), but the resulting compromises saved most of the system as-was. There is no particular reason to believe that we can’t reform the system today, the only question is political will.
Begs to question if reform is even needed, or if personal accountability for actions and decisions are taken into account. Capitalism requires that you be a contributor to the system, or you are a casualty of it. Does that make you a victim of the system or you choices? Much of what is put off on others is really a personal choice in how you conduct yourself, your business, and your overall life goals. If your content living in a shack, then so be it. I don’t understand why people settle for this, but then again you are free to be a ‘victim’ of yourself at anytime...
@@ForzaJersey eventually the deceptions of the elite will be exposed and they will be massacred. Numerous billionaires have already set up boltholes around the world in places like New Zealand and kept their private jets fully fueled and on standby.
@@ForzaJersey BLM and Antifa are simple misdirections created by the Powerful to distract common folk from the real problems. That's why nobody takes them seriously. They aren't *meant* to be serious threats.
@@longwildernesswalks - There are people who exist who are unable to account for their own actions. A LOT of people, in fact. Some are mentally incapacitated from birth or otherwise, some are physically incapacitated from birth or otherwise, some are just older people with dementia, parkinson's, alzheimer's, etc. But also, who determines what contributes what to society? For instance, service work (retail, customer service, food service, etc.) is probably one of the most important contributing jobs, but it pays horribly. If you own a distributing warehouse for trading cards, something far less important, you probably make a crapton more than that. Poor examples on my part, maybe, but you could find hundreds more, including some voluntary work that contributes a ton, is considered necessary even, and doesn't pay a cent because it's not profitable. Don't get me wrong, though. I'm with you on the idea that, for society to run, people need to contribute to it. And for people to contribute, they need an incentive. I'm just against the idea that _everyone_ is needed for this, that the best incentive is money, or that incentive for contribution = not being penalized for not contributing. Balance can be struck through incentive alone.
Agreed. There is SO MUCH personal sensitivity around these issues, especially for Americans over 40. Yet, those of us who watched all the factory jobs "disappear" in the eighties and nineties ought to be able to handle the truth. And anyone who refuses to see the end of the Industrial Revolution for what IT IS, needs to go read a book.
@@delirium1643 free speech means that you should get a platform, not that people have to agree with you... Are "socialists" getting banned or arrested for their views?
As a Norwegian living under a socialistic capitalist society I'm think you have a good point. Capitalism can be a lot of things. What we have in Norway resembles the beginning of a society where all base needs are met, and you work to get further advantages like; better living, fulfilling work, financing hobbies, etc. This is still a capitalist society but I can say that no one needs to worry if they will have a roof to live under, if they can pay for medical emergencies, or if they can have food on the table. Yes, it's not perfect, and there are poor people, but the society cares for them, and being poor in Norway can't be compared to being poor anywhere else outside of the Nordic countries. Some people are in financial crisis, some have no way of getting work, and some have other problems (like drugs, mental issues or medical issues) that makes them poor in comparison with the normal in Norway (or other Nordic countries), but they still mostly have food enough, they still have access to schools, and they have free health services. The community/state will even help them with a place to live and programs to get the back to work, and if they are completely unable to work will give them a minimum income. This is not much to live off, especially with kids, but it keeps food on the table, and gives opportunities to be able to do other stuff to get an additional income. This is only one of many versions of capitalism that works in a future where the more classical capitalism creates divides that can not be mended. Though even here we see the ultra rich getting richer much faster than the general population, but we do not have a "poor" working class as such. Everyone else is basically middle class...
well norway is kind of a paradox and an unsubstainable one, very high level of living, very ecological society etc all paid by oil so yes some people say norway is the most hypocritical country in the world
@@oribeth7229 Typical ignorant american anti-socialist statement :P Norway doesn`t spend it`s oil money, only 3% of the annual interest generated by it
I believe the word you are looking for is 'social democracy'. Its better for the people living within the country, but certainly not for those on the receiving end of the one side trade deals and overseas exploitative labor. Capitalism is a global issue, and if you believe that all human lives are equally valuable, a social democracy is not an acceptable solution.
@Gabriel Reed it would be interesting to know what alternative you propose that does not have the negative sides that you point out. Is there a way to solve that problem globally?
dragosus Are you busy sorting because there are many great ones? Our real danger is the 2020 scheme going into public schools to brainwash our children. We are getting too close to the end of the book of How Rome Fell. America has great potential to soar and great potential to collapse. Unions that helped in the past are hurting us now.
Saying the Church says money bad is a misrepresentation of the Christian faith. The bible never says money is bad. Heck it even recommends strategies of how to manage it and invest it. What the bible says is The "love of money" is bad, meaning Greed. This is because if you love money too much it becomes your God and then you loose sight of the more important things in life.
Great you're tackling this even handedly plus getting back on that horse regardless of misguided backlash you may/probably will get - there's many more of us who appreciate your light touch on these subjects.
I just found you last week, and am totally addicted. I just wanted to say thank you, and also, I love your sense of humor. Sarcasm and dad jokes are the best! Whisper "socialism"... made me giggle out loud, so now I'm insane to those around me. Made it through about 20 or so episodes so far, and really looking forward to those I haven't seen yet. Great show, much appreciated! By the way, a simple move toward fixing some of the problems in our system is simply to tax the wealthy fairly. We used to do that, but since we stopped, things have gotten crazy. I'd suggest we start there, and see what happens. Cheers!
as a socialist, I didn't become one instantly but I became one because of what it could do for humanity and such. It values equality, better health even free health care, better services, etc. If you are curious to learn more I would ask you to look at the YTber second thought which makes amazing content on capitalism and how it affects our society and how socialism is our solution. Honestly, you don't have to be a socialist but if you do agree with the things that socialism is trying to achieve than we know things have to change.
@koiyujo1543 I like to refer to myself as a social capitalist. Something like a Social Democrat but I believe that capitalism is only a system that can work if it is, in fact, regulated by the government, which is then accountable to the people. I think calling assistant my betta social democracy is okay, but I think calling it a social capitalism is probably more accurate and less stigmatizing unfortunately, in this country we don't practice any of that, we practice government-supported capitalism in that they socialize their losses but they privatized their games, and the government that is meant to represent the people, ends up representing the best interest of the capitalist instead. We are obviously tilting heavily toward a failure in the system as a result of unfairly prioritizing the needs of Industry over the needs of those pain for all the industry, which is stupid and short-sighted way to look at an economic society, and oddly enough seems to be completely lost on all of the most wealthy people in the country which inherently belies the idea that it's a meritocracy. I don't have a problem with socialism, I know how to read, but it's been falsely created with Communism for so long that most people in this country don't have enough knowledge about it to recognize how it's being manipulated against them. Hell most of them don't even realize that we live in a social democracy already. My favorite is when people who work for the government yell about how they'll never let socialism into their country. SMH
@Hooda the Antagonist. How will we achieve that if people shouting for equality, take people's jobs and lives because of there religion, race, and occupation.
@@drewtastic2a763 basically need one unifying goal to work towards that a majority of people want, can't move forwards if everyone is taking the off-ramp ideas
@@ivanliu2581 you understand for the VAST majority of Americans that's simply not feasible right? And to what end? When you become the boss you're just becoming what you hated, another labor exploiting member of the owner class
This is such a complicated set of ideas, I've never felt comfortable trying to understand it. But on a gut level, very emotional, changing "Capitalisms scares the crap out of me. Change is not easy and it triggers some of us. Thanks for trying to break this down for our understanding.
The workings of the capitalist profit system are such that it leads to both war, fascism and revolution. Capitalism is based in the nation state and those nation states can't avoid going into Imperialist war.
All jibber jabber aside, I just love this video for bringing up the importance of adaptation to circumstances. Clinging to specific "isms" is never going to work beyond a few generations. Every few generations, humanity needs to update itself on a range of parameters.
@@cwg9238 modern socialists, who for example want worker cooperatives, are not state socialists (but want the worker to own the means of production). As long as they don't use the state to force it, but build these companies themselves as an alternative, I don't see how "socialism" and capitalism are not compatible. State socialism (authoritarianism) and capitalism are enemies. Modern socialists and capitalists are not
@@aldoushuxley5953 "As long as they don't use the state to force it, but build these companies themselves" well, fair enough. most of the rhetoric i hear is about SEIZING the means of production. what entitles one to just walk into a business and demand some ownership of it? you cant even force me to hire you in the first place. telling people to establish their own means is offensive somehow.
@@cwg9238 Yes, those people are stupid. State socialism/stalinism/maoism is one of the most evil ideologies to ever exist. The problem with -isms is however, that people use them to mean different things. Many marxists of today use my definition of a "libertarian" marxism to "fix" issues they see with modern capitalism. They don't like stalinism either. (I am not a marxist, but just had a discussion with someone, who considers themselves a libertarian marxist, and I was confused at first too)
Before getting laid off from 'the dark times' I was in the best paid hourly position at my work. TIL I made less than $4 in 1970's money, that's both depressing and enlightening for why I can't afford much.
This is really a more awkward conversation for the US. As a nation you've really gone hard on the capitalism. Most advanced economies are a lot more varied with a lot more centrally located services think universal education and health. I think the argument gets bogged down in it's either everything is market based or everything is centrally owned. That's despite the fact that there's a lot of room on the spectrum between these two extremes...
Market Socialism and Social Democracy have arisen out of pragmatic compromise between the interests of industry and the interests of the people. Now I dont think either of these systems are perfect, but they present how neolib capitalism as shown in the US and most of the Americas is a very inefficient system that will ultimately leave industry unhappy with its lack ability to adapt due to monopolies and a weak centeal government (weak regulation) and people unhappy due rising inequality and class conflict. With State Socialism (i.e. USSR before Gorbechov burned the system and Russia as a whole with it) there will be industry unhappy with slow progress due to extreme level of social support for people, and people frustrated with lack of industrial progress and a very rigid centralized system that cant adapt to their specific community and personal needs and desires. Allowing industry to progress and people to have more freedom for themselves and their community is why socialist states like China and Vietnam and Capitalist states like Japan and Sweden have more stability and economic progress than they otherwise would under extreme economic policies, imo. Then again Im just a dumb youtube commenter
"Dogmatic refusal to change is a losing strategy" damn thats so true. Adaptability is key to survival - we had to evolve to get to where we are now physically so its pretty naive to suggest that we've arrived at the finished product of our development.
@Paradoxical Nightmare In a course of centuries/milleniums, we haven´t changed much. Wars were declared at a whim of the current emperor. But violence in general has come drastically down and it is (in western world at least) almost impossible to declare a war against another nation. While we still are fairly similar to ancient Greeks in many ways, attitudes have changed significantly in the last few decades. And they will, but it will still be a slow process, since ppl are slow to change.
@Paradoxical Nightmare I do realize that. They are still fighting in Africa. And there are still bombings in middle east. I´m not saying that there isn´t wars or violence. I am 41, when I was in school, my map had eastern and western Germany. And (naturally) Soviet Union. But in general, we are still living in the least violent era ever. That was the point I was trying to make.
Yes, let’s evolve past basic human rights like property rights, let’s get rid off the right to speech as well, too many idiots blathering their mouths.
@Charles Jones tbf tho I'm not suggesting that the only way to "evolve" is into socialism. Its probably important to note that evolution is a gradual process of trial and error in order to refine and improve. Revolution however is an entire upheaval. I think the US has a big fear of a socialist upheaval and revolution of their capitalist society. But i don't actually think thats what I or the video was getting at. If we take nature as an example of how to prosper in any condition its very rare to see a plant or animal devolve; so the whole idea of "make America great again", harkening back to a bygone era doesn't make any sense to me. To me that slogan suggests a devolution back to the 60s/70s. But the whole playing field was different back then. Im not saying they were bad times, they were just of their time. This is a new time. We need to update systems to cope with fresh problems. No hate tho man. Just having a civil discussion 😉
@Paradoxical Nightmare yeah man thats what I'm saying. We haven't stopped evolving by any stretch of the imagination. So if we stay rigidly attached to dogma and policies which were created in eras long-gone, we're dead in the water! If we want to one day become a teir 3 civ I think we would need to update our systems beyond those set up in the 1960s 😂 ya dig? But yeah no hate man, just good to discuss
I'm not great at German but I was able to gist out the convo even though I haven't touched it in like a year. Is this what being bilingual feels like all the time?
LOL!🤣Es bringt mich zum Lachen, wenn meine amerikanischen Landsleute denken, dass sie wissen, was für den Rest der Welt am besten ist und was für dieses Land am besten ist. Ich denke, dieser Kerl ist ein Nächtriges.
I'd like to see the data graphs for other things that seem to have gotten worse over the decades: depression, loneliness, pollution, climate change, social mobility, inequality, debt, addiction, etc... What was the cost of progress? What can we do to ensure we mitigate those costs so that progress doesnt have to come at the expense of the future?
@ching chong I welcome you to Google it. There is quite a huge body of work showing that it is indeed growing. Mostly on a national level within countries, but even on an international level where it was falling before, climate change and automation (without re-skilling of the middle and lower class workers) is now causing even more inequality.
What can we do as the average person? Probably nothing substantial without some political upheaval in our current system. Things need to change at the government level, and I don't have any faith in our political system to make those changes. I know libertarians like to argue "but big guv'ment = bad guv'ment." Well, we already tried the hands-off approach. I guess it worked great if you like zero workers protections, snake oil, and economic depressions. It's ironic how many times socialist reforms have had to save capitalism from itself. In the words of FDR, "...make your mind up to pick up the platform that more nearly squares with the record, and you will have your hand on the Socialist platform."
@@TH3M0L3CUL3M4N We can become more self-aware and knowledgeable about the state of world. Then work to solve these problems by helping others via organizations, initiatives, and ethical business. Sure it often feels like the 'average person' can't do much to change things... but the world is made of average people. The more of us choose to be better and do better, the more likely we are to change things on a massive scale.
@@elijahclaude3413 I'm not saying it's an exercise in futility to be more self-aware, I'm just saying it won't ever be anything substantial. Just an example, 71% of all carbon emissions come from corporations. No grassroots activism will ever be influential enough to affect change like the government can. A large chunk of our population is just too lazy, disinterested, and easily distracted. Another large chunk meets any progressive steps we take with ridicule or fanatical contempt. If you want to harness the power of the people to change our society in this day and age, an uphill battle is a gross understatement.
@@TH3M0L3CUL3M4N Yeah, but what else do you expect to do? This is the first time in human history when a person out of some backwoods could make a startup that grows to impact the lives of billions of people and the environment. Elon Musk has his problems, but 10 years ago everybody laughed at him for talking about making electric cars. The very idea was a joke, now every car manufacturer is making at least 1 line of electric vehicles. Its still really hard for individuals to effect massive change, yes... but it is possible, and it is more possible than ever before. That starts with looking at these really hard problems and saying 'fck it, Im going to try anyways'. That is the beauty of human ingenuity and stubbornness/ambition. We created these problems because we weren't self aware enough as individuals or as a society... now we NEED to become more self aware on both levels in order to solve them. Yes, its hard. It feels futile. But you either can sit around and complain, or get up and try to fix it anyways. "Its not your fault, but it is your responsibility" Oh and NO you dont need to start a company to do so. You can try to change the government like Andrew Yang is trying to do, or you can do nonprofits like Khan Academy or Charity:Water, or you can create communities like IndieHackers, or you can do podcasts and videos that impact millions of ambitious people like Lex Fridman. Check out 80,000 hours for a 8-year study they did on picking important problems to solve.
Andersen Zheng and that has some merits to it too. Winston Churchill was an authoritarian mfer but he helped get the rest of the world through ww2, he was kicked out of parliament for obvious reasons during peacetime. Sometimes taking away freedoms offers more safety than the amount of free will lost. You have to strike a good balance, and the ability to adapt to new situations
Communism creates freedom of speach. Thats cause under a classless and stateless society, there are by defenition nobody on the top preventing you from speaking out
Joe, my 13 year old son turned me onto this video. I thank you for making it, and for putting it out there for all to watch. I wish every damn person in the country would watch this. You bring up good questions and good possible solutions - all with humor. WELL DONE. ✊🏾
Please have him also hear the other side.. Listen to Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell. I would argue Capitalism actually works to empower society. As backwards as it can seem, "social good" is indeed the by-product of capitalism. Consumers "vote" every day with their money. We as society choose which services, goods, and companies deserve our almighty dollar. Do we want a greener future? Then we show it with our wallets, we buy EVs and punish companies making gas guzzlers. Can government help? Yes to a degree. But we have to be truly sure that the anecdote is not worse than the disease - as it so often is.
@@wilethecoyote If we lived in a pure capitalistic society, perhaps capitalism would actually empower society. But since we have welfare capitalism that save companies that wouldn't survive if it weren't for a bail out (or whatever). Hence, those companies are not the "social good" that results from capitalism.
@@ThroughMeToYouPuppetry I actually agree with you. The government and their perverse involvement within industry is almost always the one to blame. Not capitalism. My fear is for the viewers of this that use it to warm up to socialism. We cant have the government decide what "social good" is best for us. We must decide.
He's talking about the early 20th century. He even went out of his way to show the disparity difference between J.P. Morgan and Jeff Bezos. We broke those monopolies up. We still do have the issue today, but it's not like it was.
@@ollythainrap They're nothing on Standard Oil or the monopolies of those days, or even a little bit later. United Fruit literally took over a whole country.
@JoeScott Despite your intense consternation regarding the topic of this video it was actually one of the best you’ve posted so far. I’ve been writing summaries about economics for my last 2 employers (startups that IPO’ed) & thought I was reasonably informed, but I actually learned some interesting tidbits from this one, so NICE WORK! I understand your anxiety about this topic, but you did a fine job sticking with factual information. Nicely done, Mr. Scott.
@@dwindeyer Since you're so nice, i'll tell you to start by reading the Myth of the robber barons by Burt Folsom, Economics in one lesson by Henry Hazlitt or Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell. Good luck!
yeah kinda sad you have to do all these reassurances before even start talking about a topic so not everyone is instantly triggered or tunes out. just shows the level of brainwashing even within an audience I would imagine to be more on the rational side of things
Just have to say, there's something so lovable about you Joe Scott! You have a way if making even tense subjects relaxed, peaceful, and even...fun! Love your channel please never stop!
@@Rem_NL there were approx 1 to 2 million people killed in the russion revolution and in the gulags. many of them were Nazi-collaborateurs. How many people were killed by capitalism though? is it 20 million each year?
@@WastedContender dude socialism killed well over hundreds of millions.. Capitalism on the other hand saved more peoples lives, and extended their lives
@@Rem_NL Neo-Nazis, pro-capitalist fanatics and hardcore anarchists would love to scream that the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin have killed ranging from 20 million to more than 60 million people from 1927 to 1953. Not only that figure was very far from the truth, it was plain silly. Considering that the population of the Soviet Union during Stalin’s years had been growing at a normally steady to rapid rate, it is highly unlikely for the government to kill a number of people by the order of more than six digits. At most, the government only had almost 800,000 dissidents, criminals and rebels criminally executed throughout 1928 to 1953.[1] After that, we all know it’s World War Second that the Germans are up to some genocide when they invaded the country, killing 20 million undesirables[2] in the name of their expansionist adventures across Eastern Europe. After the war, the country pretty much went back to normal, rebuilding the country and just jailing criminals and dissidents and making them do forced labor and all that but not much executions anymore. Long after the war the country pretty much went to normal until its fall in 1992. Everyone wants to talk about the gulag, the penal labor system that has been going on long before the Soviet Union was born and has been going on since the Imperial era of Russia. Did anyone even know that during the heyday of gulag in the Union only 5% resulted in deaths inside the penal labor camps? Prisoner mortality rate in the Soviet labor camps as part of gulag system Holodomor? Only if the landlords (i.e. the kulaks) hadn’t been so greedy at all, hoarding stacks of grain to avoid collective quotas while selling them later at posh prices on the black market, the infamous famine could have been avoided. Also, in response, some of the kulaks whose land was expropriated even raided other collective farms and burnt their stacks of grain. The result? Yes, the Soviet famine every capitalist fanatic talks about. Except famines have already been an integral part of Russia long before this one, and even worse than this one. Only by the Soviet policies did the famines throughout its territories did stop, permanently and for good. Saying that the Soviet government ordered the deaths of 60 million citizens is also saying that it is conducting a self-genocide demographic suicide campaign. And that China issue, very little among people knew that deadly famines are already a thing there long before Mao Zedong administered the country. The figures for the Great Chinese Famine of 1959-61 was at a maximum of 15 million deaths. However, pre-1949 famines in China already killed 13 to 45 million people[3][4], with the most recent in 1937 before the communist takeover in 1949 taking 5 million lives alone.[5] Weather was always the determining factor of famines, something that not even the Communist government back then was capable of tackling until their upgrading of weather detection technology and better improved irrigation systems in the mid-1960s and beyond. China today is still communist, but the long dreaded famines of old are no more. The Cultural Revolution was mainly shaming people of ‘unrevolutionary’ character, people who are no longer quite acquainted to the norms and policies of the Communist Party. That included both public and classified torture, shaming and smearing campaigns, propaganda every day, the jailing of religious leaders and the destruction of religious centers (doesn’t matter quite much as China was already an atheist-majority country since the imperial era), sending dissidents and criminals to the labor camps, execution of proven corrupt party members, and brainwashing college students into reading Mao’s Little Red Book, nothing else follows. It only lasted from 1966 to 1968, and on the contrary did not kill tens of millions of people as those pro-capitalist scholars tend to suggest. Those same scholars count those incarcerated and tortured under criminal law in China from 1950 to 1976 as deaths attributed to the communist government. They can never get any more silly than this. And this gets the most controversy, the Cambodian Genocide by Pol Pot that killed 1.7 million people by way of murders. It should be noted, however, that Communist Kampuchea was already allied somewhat to the United States thanks to U.S. State Secretary Henry Kissinger and his deeds to counter Vietnam’s power after 1975. The CIA have largely turned a blind eye to this until 1990s. It took another communist country in Vietnam to invade the country and put an end to the genocide. So what does such an exaggerated figure suggest? To demonize the communist states and communism in general, while turning a blind eye on the atrocities of many capitalist nations committed worldwide? Then what if I told you that the British had 6 million Bengali civilians killed due to the 1943 Bengal famine, due to their selfish policies of bringing food straight out of them and directly only to Britain under orders from Churchill? Is the regime changes done by the British and Americans in Iran, Nicaragua, Chile, Indonesia and many others, against the people’s will, any better? Did they not result in high death tolls in the ensuing years also? The fact that three million North Korean civilians dead from 1950-53 were still etched in the minds of the old citizens of North Korea might tell the reason why to this day its citizens hate the United States and its South Korean ally with burning passion and seething hatred. And sure, 14 million Vietnamese civilians lay dead as a result of biochemical strafing, strategic aerial bombing that included incendiary and napalm bombs, and village massacres by the United States and its allies during the Vietnam War[6] is completely benevolent, is it? And the resulting economic sanctions also, as a payback for America’s loss in the war, is it? Even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, they were still invaded by the capitalist West. The result? 2 million Iraqi civilians dead since 2003,[7] as a result of American-led occupation of the country. Yes, that’s lawful, too, huh? If one talks about the tortures taking place inside North Korea, then one should also know the atrocities inside Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. Not to mention the most capitalistic country in the world holds the most number of prison inmates more than most of the nations’ prison populations combined. The thing is, if one tries to demonize a certain ideology, never use the number of deaths. It is way too biased as not only one ideology caused immense suffering and deaths. If one computes all the related deaths combined, then that person must realize that communism never killed 100 million people. Footnotes [1] "Большой террор": 1937-1938. Краткая хроника [2] www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07430170050116366?journalCode=cdan19 [3] Northern Chinese Famine of 1876-79 - Wikipedia [4] FEARFUL FAMINES OF THE PAST [5] Intute [6] www.globalresearch.ca/us-has-killed-more-than-20-million-people-in-37-victim-nations-since-world-war-ii/5492051 [7] The Iraq Death Toll 15 Years After the US Invasion
As a staunch capitalist when this video came out, I refuse to watch it, even listen to the first second of it. But now after looking at other materials and being more favorable towards socialism I’m watching this video and commenting at 3:20 and laughing at how indoctrinated I used to be
Yeah. The red scare here brought TONS of propaganda with it. That is why people down here started mixing it up. Now, we have the"Tea" party. It was started and funded by the oil industry's (up until recently) biggest RepubliKKKan party donors. They were tricked into thinking that our government takes to much taxes from us citizens, which WOULD be true, if the government didn't spend more than half of all discretionary spending. Anyway, they wanted to pay less taxes and that made it easier for the tax cuts Trump and the Republikkkan party forced through. The tea party people may pay slightly less, but Trump's stupid tariffs are a tax.
Couldn't agree more, friend. I've been trying to nudge people-in my life and even here online-toward examining this system of ours. The problem isn't that capitalism doesn't work. Look no further than most other developed countries where they have universal healthcare, paid leave/vacation, and all the rest. The biggest problem with capitalism in general is that it incentivizes greed.
@@thomasridley8675 It's a good question. The question, even. It doesn't seem to be a concern among the highest ranks of either dominant political party though-perhaps because so many are millionaires. It's not unrelated, that's for sure. Anyway, I do think we'll pull through, probably by the skin of our teeth. I am an optimist (as often as possible!), so it's kind of just a hunch. But there are some reasons to be hopeful. Like the overwhelming number of young people who know what the problem is & want to change it. Sorry if that's a bit much, I tend to rant. 😅
18:30 "it didnt really increase employment". of course not. why would UBI increase employment? its not FOR that. its to offset the poverty that comes with a lack of employment
Well, it is also important to consider that in Finland, thanks to an economy and society that is already very entrepreneurial and small business friendly, it stands to reason that UBI wouldn't improve it very much. Also important to note is that I believe that with the UBI experiment in Finland there was seen a very significant increase in productivity at work.
One of the perks, according to proponents of UBI, would be that some people who benefit could get a part time job and earn a little extra cash. Some argue this would be the case while others believe people would settle for the money they are getting. It's still up for debate and more experiments are needed.
@@JorgeTorresH No. It needs to happen right now. If even for the couple of years that it's going to take to get the economy moving forward. If we can even do it by then. Personally I feel like, "break out the pitch forks" lol.
Interesting fact, the word sabotage comes from the French word sabot, meaning clog/wooden shoe because workers would throw their clog in the machines to break it. This is probably also where the term clogged up machine comes from.
The problem with it is that capitalism died a while ago in America. Large corporations own everything, and they receive too many government benefits to be considered borne of capitalism, as they would have went bankrupt long ago without government support.
@@protodroidstuff correct. Government supporting businesses without being considered an investor or having some type of monetary interest in the welfare of the corporation, is called a bailout. Bailouts are not investments because they're ultimately funded by the people without getting anything in return. Government provides nothing monetarily. They only redistribute and manage money. What people complain about when they refer to capitalism (in favor of socialism) is actually crony capitalism...which is a misdirect term to describe socialism.
Socialism has always been a wonderful economic system. The people of Venezuela have benefitted greatly from it. I just cannot understand why Americans are so critical of it. It might be because humans are ALL corrupt and that socialism simply gives the government too much power over us. They literally hold the power of deciding who lives and who dies. From food supply to health care, the government will own you. Venezuelans have no food in their grocery stores so, it matters not if they have food vouchers. People really need to wake up and understand that you have to work to have nice things. No one is going to give them to you nor should they. In 100 years we have managed to go from the Greatest Generation to the Laziest Generation. Absolutely mindboggling...
@philajfran except there is unless you think human civilisation exists to cause humans suffering. The problem is when the free market interacts with unfree markets like China's. It forces us to compete with government industries that can drop their prices to below break-even for a decade to run us into the ground and then price gouge our entire economy.
@@DSiren Yes, but it is amazing how quickly supply chains can be altered, given the will and leadership to do so. We now are the world's largest manufacturer of ventilators; even Ford is making them!!
Americans should know that in Denmark we have a term "American conditions." Which describes an extreme version of whatever trying to be fixed. It is usually used in combination with violence, no care for the lowerclass, environment and society in general. e.g. *Party opposes lowering taxes for the rich.* "We dont support this bill, as it moves us towards american conditions."
Kind of a relief to learn that, on an international sort of level, we're like the problematic, exploitative uncle that's propped up as a Bad Example of where to go, legislatively speaking.
@@Mehaara infact, probably in all german speaking countries, i've heard this here in swtizerland too... I would guess its a known term in most of europe xD
I love America, and I love hard work. (I'm disabled and I work when ever I can) I am a conservative also. BUT I loved this video! I read the title and was like ".....so many videos are about the end of normal for meeeee" But this video was not what I thought. Thank you for such a balanced video and not just hating things. I really appreciated it!
Exactly what I was thinking! I’m a conservative myself and I saw this title and just groaned. I gave it a chance and while I still disagree with the majority of the ideas in it I do appreciate the respectful tone and the “make your own decision” type attitude rather than most of these types of videos that force communism down your throat and call you evil for believing in capitalism.
An American conservative who is happy about the lack of hate. That is refreshing. Or do you mean Joe didn't spend an uncomfortable amount of time concentrating on your core values?
Dave Oc Traditional values literally revolve around trying to control others and hating others that are different. The idea that the left is intolerant is ridiculous. Maybe only true to the extent that they don’t tolerate people who can’t tolerate THEM.
I will say this. I am an "essential worker." You know, those folks keeping the grocery stores, hospitals, and gas stations running to keep society from collapsing. I am currently homeless, using the wifi at a shelter to watch this video and post this comment. Rent is monumental. Personally, I can't afford it plus debt payments, medications, gas, and food. At one point prior to becoming homeless, I had sacrificed so much food that my blood sugar tanked and I collapsed on the floor. Meanwhile, my landlord rakes in the green. Socialism has its perks. Capitalism has it's perks. But if we're not willing to enact a resource-based economy and deal with a potential mechano-laborious uprising, then we AT THE VERY LEAST need to strongly consider adding a substantial model of Universal Basic Income. That alone would have kept me off the streets. Edit: Gosh, thank you for all of the likes and support! Love you guys 💜
Since I'm old enough to remember the 1970s in the UK. Health care was free, university or polytechnic education was free, and so were evening classes. There wasn't so much choice in the shops (or anywhere else) as there is now, and under the "Sort of Modified Keynesian" mixed economy, there were constraints on economic activity. There were strict regulations on any kind of lending, personal or commercial and the shops were closed on Sundays, and for half a day in the week. Public transport (Buses, trains, ferries, trams) were owned and run by local and national government, as were utilities. I bought a house, the bank lent me twice my salary, and I saved 10% of the price for my deposit, out of my pay in a factory. When I moved in, there were British Gas, and East Midlands Electricity, and British Telecommunications, no need for endless comparison sites, because that's all there was. There was a deal, you kept your nose clean at school and there would be a job for you. There were enough places to live. The government took responsibility for those two things, and as per John Maynard Keynes, saw their duty to "Prime the Pumps" as in spend some money, in order to support working people, and keep them working. There was, I think the same amount of money in the economy, it was spread across the whole economy better, mitigating the worst excesses of Capitalism. I'm not decided on the benefits of UBI, but a home and something to do for everyone can't be a bad start, rather than just giving people money.
I would suggest that giving people money (UBI) that they could use for buying (or renting) a place to live and upkeeping a basic lifestyle would amount to the same thing as ensuring they have a job and giving them a house, but with added flexibility of encouraging frugal lifestyles, side hustles, business creation and investing. Things that really build wealth.
I grew up in the UK too and remember those days. As a kid I didn't realize what was the prevailing setup but I did notice a lot of hatred for Maggie Thatcher. Now I know why.
@@mk1st "Margaret Thatcher, Margaret Thatcher, see the way she's looking atcha, she can see inside your head, she is going to steal your bread." Rick from The Young Ones.
Certainly not impartial, but very compelling nonetheless. Even with his lackadaisical delivery, I found myself getting a little passionate while watching.
@@spldrong Well i dont know about it being natural. If you mean back when we had tribes we worked together as hunters and gatherers so I dont see that and even if it was it doesn't mean its the way foward. Socialism means that the public owns the means of production and abolition of the commodity form. Did you read your definition of socialism on the same website people post that vaccines have microchips in them?
The following seems appropriate for this discussion. It's from an article by Matt Barnes (I think) "Capitalism: The worst economic system, except for all the others Capitalism is no different from anything else in this world. It is imperfect because imperfect men created it. Humans are not perfect, nor are they capable of perfection. Avarice and greed are not unique to capitalism. They were present in the USSR, and they will be present in any man-made system."
Thanks for sharing this great quote. Capitalism essentially represents the market will of the collective. Many other systems that rely on central planning rely on the will of the few. Chances are that the few eventually end with with bad or misplaced intentions.
Jonathan Sager The problem is though, that the system would be designed by a lesser group of individuals whom are also greedy non-perfect human beings.
It's what seperates us from the other animals. The ability to lie... to ourselves and believe it over time. Silly little hairless primates with a self over complicated psyche. Nobody, I think, can be completely honest while secrets can be kept, but I think it is possible to at least try. Justify yourselves into oblivion, my great ape fellows.
got a bachelor's in economics, and this sort of discussion about 'future economics' was not present whatsoever (Aussie uni). so, i don't know any better than anyone else here, but i'll throw my hat in for a suggestion anyway: i think the resource-based economy is the inevitable outcome, whether or not its wanted or worked towards; the idea of scarcity in a [for lack of better term] kardashev type 1+ civilization is ludicrous - even precious metals can become as common as air and water. adding in the effect of automation, there's just no escaping it. that said, if there's no transition from contemporary capitalism to resource-based, there'll be a lot of friction (causing god knows how many social problems in the short and medium runs), so something like universal basic income (that incidentally sets the stage for impermeable consumerism) would be similarly necessary during that time. i'm also gonna get ahead of one criticism: that being automation taking all future jobs. people have (correctly) claimed that automation in the past created more jobs than it consumed, and that made a lot of sense back in the day - a ratcheting machine does need a ratcheting machine repairman, after all. but the automation of the future is a *completely* different beast: a ratcheting machine can be repaired by a ratcheting machine repair machine (which can also be repaired by... you get the point) - where production gave way to services, services can *also* be replaced by future automation (whether its by stacking shelves in a store, to delivering food, to legal representation, to whatever you can imagine). its this paradigm that'll kill capitalism: service jobs being replace by automation have nothing (that i know of) to open a new employment vista to; the only thing left for humans at that point is art, philosophy, sports, and hobbies (since even fields of physics and medicine could conceivably become automated too!). so that's why i feel adamant about the resource based economy perspective: all roads seem to lead to it, whether by ending scarcity (in the case of asteroid mining, etc) or by complete automation (demanding the need for non-labour based 'income')
this is tripe! The problems are twofold: 1. consumerism; 2. debt fueling consumerism. On top of that is the human need for something to do, when machines do all we have been doing. Education perhaps is the solution? But then again, a predator like humans, is always lazy, if not coerced by need, real or imagined
If you really want to be divorced from the effects of capitalism and the pseudo chains you imagine it binds you by you need to be castaway on a deserted island and hope your next meal is going to pop up out of the water without you having to dive in and catch it.......capitalism has smoothed the food train so that someone else slaughters it without you having to watch the blood flow from the food you want to eat.
@@guyvert49 i'm not sure what you're trying to say here, so imma take a stab: consumerism isn't necessarily good, or even necessary - all people have different preferences and demands, and a resource-based economy (as in the venus project) would *ideally* flatten the demand for frivolous things. if you're arguing that, without consumerism, economies won't grow? fine, i'll grant it, but growth isn't the purpose of a resource-based economy: it's making more *efficient* use of the resources you have. imagine if, for whatever reason, no country on earth could grow their economies; this doesn't necessarily mean that the economic system fails outright, neither does it mean that the existing economic system can't be improved. instead, it means that the (only?) improvement you can make is by using your resources more efficiently, rather than by riding the coattails of economies of scale. as an aside, i'm a frugal spender, and if everyone in my country spent like me, the economy would (probably) crash. is that a selling point for contemporary capitalism, or a point of criticism? because if it's a selling point (that consumerism is endorsed by the systems it exists within because it engenders growth), that's a crap system as it necessarily engenders waste. if it's a criticism, you're already halfway to a resource-based economy...eventually :3 also, debt-fueled consumerism? is this a caution that the debt can't be forgiven or transmogrified for a different economic system? is this a question of how prospective entrepreneurs could acquire capital to start a business? i'm not sure what exactly the worry is here...
The game Monopoly ends in three ways: 1) somebody wins with all the property and money. 2) players get bored and quit. 3) the losing player gets mad and upends the game with pieces and money going everywhere.
Most people who are railing against Capitalism, are actually for capitalism. There was the idea that capitalism was evil, like a fire burning everything it touched. It was then argued that fire when properly harnessed in an engine does work. That is when regulated it can power progress. We had our greatest economic growth with that view point. The idea was a mixed economy.
I agree, at least to the extent that large companies should be discouraged from using frivolous law suits to crush smaller companies that can't afford to keep up with the legal fees. One of my business professors told me, "If you develop a small company, and a large company wants to buy you out, take the buyout, or they will just wipe you out." The government, who employs judges, could do something to discourage these malicious practices.
@@abram730 Considering Capitalism has concentrated vast amounts of wealth to the very few, and at its most extreme has created massive class divisions, via liberalism and neo-liberalism, capitalism isn't peachy.
@@abdallahmanasrah2317 yeah, it's very counter intuitive but science's generic meaning of positive doesn't usually align with the human meaning of positive 😅
@@AshleyWilsonAU i think it's fine as "positive feedback loop"as it's followed with a well known example when used outside scientific context. Speakers/PA system screeching is likely the most common example of this that people experience as schools cannot justify hiring a fully qualified sound professional 😅
this has been a heavy topic for me that has ended in many shouting matches. the problem with current society and capitalism is the elite have a stranglehold on the population to the point where not only do they control aspects of the government, but they influence social structures and create taboos. when people say "get a job" they don't mean create things, or invent new ways to contribute to society, they mean, go work for this corporation that doesn't value you, where your skills mean nothing, your aspirations are considered selfish and you can easily be replaced at any time. not to mention the wealth gap. if you're rich you can get training for any job or have funds for any passion project you want, but if you're poor, you end wasting your life doing a job you don`t like with the future goal of eventually fueling your passion, but by the time you have enough you're too tired, and broken to pursue anything. And this is treated as a "normal" expectation. Everyone is fixated on making money, not on being creative or producing things. Society itself is very toxic towards eccentric or creative thinkers, often labeling them as "autistic" or mentally ill, simply for breaking the mold and not wanted to fall under the social expectation of "Keeping up with the jone's". if someone wants to build a house out of recycled materials and live in it, because a house is too expensive, the response should not be "Look at how crazy they are". the elitist mindset punishes people who want to be happy and innovate. the system has done nothing but offer them lemons and now society punishes people who try to make lemonade. Even UA-cam is being stigmatized as a source of income. and do you wanna know where this all comes from? the mass media, the mass media thats primarily controlled and funded by the rich, the rich... who wanna stay rich. I'm going to leave a final note with this, ignore the elites, ignore the mass media, and ignore the society thats brainwashed into thinking that you can only buy the things that you need. build your recycled pop bottle houses, learn to fix stuff that's broken, use tools in ways they were not intended, and innovate and adapt for you and those you care about.
From where is it assumed that the "elites" come? The elites, by and large, are not born into wealth but become "elite" by dint of their own efforts. With a few exceptions, every wealthy person I know (millionaires and billionaires) came from what you might call the lower or middle classes. There are millions of millionaires in the US because of opportunities derived from capitalism. There are many routes to economic success in a capitalistic system but nowhere in history has an economic system existed that guarantees success. To conceive of a system where everyone is "economically equal" requires normative standards which, by definition, create oppression. Striving for a "more equal" society sounds like jealousy and whining because of insecurity and envy. The world economy is not a fixed "pie" from which we all must share in equal parts. With capitalism, the pie is ever-growing and there is unimited opportunity to participate in the creation of more wealth for the creator as well as those who help create.
@@jonathanmaher2680 You really should consider studying economics. I suggest the very readable book, "Economics 101", by Thomas Sowell. I think it is possible you have not been exposed to the massive amounts of money that the wealthy return to the economy through philanthropism, The numbers are staggering. Perhaps not all of the wealthy are returning all of their acquired wealth to the people of the world, but individual and corporate giving is greater in the world's most successful economy than in any country in the history of the world.
This is not to mention that "The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid roughly $616 billion, or 38.5 percent of all income taxes, while the bottom 90 percent paid about $479 billion, or 29.9 percent of all income taxes. - federal income tax data 2020," The TaxFoundation.
@Himme Himme I'm sorry if I offended you, but you might only notice the impact of philanthropy id it stopped. I like the idea of a living wage. Should there be a minimum amount of money that every person should earn regardless of the difficulty of the job or the quality of work perfomed by each worker? Try thinking about this from the perspective of an employer. Or, should all producers in a society support all others in the society if they either cannot or choose not to work?
Since arguing with everyone would be a mess, I'll just share something we can all agree on: ua-cam.com/video/16W7c0mb-rE/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/rvskMHn0sqQ/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/iQhkrYqA7S4/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/yFeGNX06Zmk/v-deo.html
DATING HARLEY QUINN 2 things: 1) capitalism needs not be defended, it stands on its own 2) the US is not a free market capitalist society as it once was and has been going downhill since.
@DATING HARLEY QUINN isn't it funny that more socialist minded people watched the video immediately, in the middle of the work day? Weird how that works out. Perhaps you're not representative of the majority of viewers, but simply saw it first.
I was forcefully video-hugged without consent during this video. Now considering I haven't been hugged or even showed a sign of affection for years, I may/may not have enjoyed it. Regardless you'll be hearing from my lawyers Joe.
I dont have to be a philosopher or an economist to know that capitalism no longer works in the same way I dont have to be a singer to know what bad singing is. Capitalism was good, was the solution, was used and it worked. Not anymore.
To fix this and many issues in modern life, is to remove money from politics. It should be illegal to give money or incentives to a politician. They are employed by the people.
laughing in clinton
* They *should* be employed by the people.
The problem is is all the politicians are only in this for their own gains not ours
2nd good sir and well said
I think is more easier to go over the speed of light than to do this
"Anyone who has ever struggled with poverty knows how extremely expensive it is to be poor."
--James Baldwin
Poverty is relative though. The poorest person in the US is still better off than poor people in Socialist countries. Been there myself so...
it's not though. one of the arguments made is that poor people are going to eat bad because they don't have the money to buy healthy foods therefore they will have higher medical expenses down the road. well a bag of apples and a glass of water are cheaper than a bag of cheetos and a mt. dew.
+++
@@mfntonberry It kind of is, but not for the reasons OP suspects. When you're poor the taxation that you're forced to pay out of your paycheck and on goods and services hurts you more than someone middle class or above. That extra few dollars you pay on groceries hurts you more if you have less dollars to spend overall, that extra few dollars could be the difference between another good meal or having to starve it out for a day or two.
Infinity Dragon And what socialist country would that be?
It definitely feels like we're near the end stages in a game of Monopoly, where a couple players own all the prominent properties, while most of us own a place like Baltic Ave. & are just trying our best to make it around to collect that $200 before we inevitably go bankrupt.
At least in monopoly there is a sort of basic income
and you know how that ends - flipping the board in rage
It's especially hilarious because the game was originally invented as a teaching method for how capitalism, and the landlord property system in particular, eventually lead to poverty for everyone except a select few
Dustin lance black
Things were far worse in the late 1800s before regulations.
I can’t imagine a “good” system where a select group of people decide what “good things” are.
The Won Percent!
If youre afraid of the government, be even more weary of the ppl above the government
@@PhsychoSomatic But those people are the government. Not government itself.
@@aceleracionistanoturno you contradicted your own statement. They are not officially the government. They are illegal entities assuming the role of government you could say. A distinction needs to be made when pointing fingers obviously
@@aceleracionistanoturnoMost of those people are working, albeit indirectly, in the interest of people with more zeros in their bank accounts than your typical gas station attendant.
The word "sabotage" comes from "sabot", French for a wooden shoe/clog. The workers chucked their sabots into the factory machinery, an act of "sabotage".
We've all seen Star Trek VI, but thanks anyway.
@@casbyness I haven't, you inconsiderate, star trek loving, "death by teleportation disintegration", fanboy. : )
The French word for 'shoe' is 'chaussure.' Sabot is the French word for 'tub.'
@@WmSrite-pi8ck That may be true, but sabots were also a real thing. They were work shoes used in France, Italy, Belgium etc around the 16th-19th century. They're big and cheap wooden clogs for poor peasants and the story of them being the origin of the term 'sabotage' is generally agreed to have happened when workers used their sabots to damage railway equipment in the early 1900s.
@@casbyness The connection to sabots is clear, but not that the sabots were actually used for the sabotage, just that they were worn by the workers in question. (I'm not saying there aren't _some_ historians who believe the sabot-throwing story).
When your subject matter is so controversial that you have to spend the first 4 minutes apologizing.
@Kurt Barryman To be fair, the Bolshevik Revolution happened like over 100 years ago
@Vlasko60, and socialism isnt a religion based on everyone being equally poor?
@@archdukefranzferdinand567 he's talking about the riots
Only in the US...
@@Blastmaster321 Those aren't about communism though
Thanks for the hug joe. You know you miss human contact when hugging a phone gave you a fuzzy feeling
@T hddh That's not depressing, it don't matter when the last time he had a gf was. What is sad an depressing is trying to put someone who you don't know down, for no reason, making it even worse there talking about how there going threw a hard time with w/e there going threw an you feel the need to make them feel worse. So no I feel pitty an saddness for you an hope you can find peace within yourself to where you don't need to hurt others to make yourself feel better.
Bro, I hope your referring to the pandemic an jus have lack of human contact for that reason but don't listen to this other asshat. Hang in there. An keep your head up. Life can always get better.
Jonathan Van Duzee you sure that wasn’t just a bad earth/ground in your phone charger? Could have been a small electric shock :)
Yea
eh yeah. i got plants for company 🌱
The key to changing our abusive system is, 1st make politicians retire at 65, stop all money in politics, and make a strictly enforced law that any outlet calling themselves news in any way cannot lie. The rest should fix itself.
Most intelligent comment
@@C3Think Thank you, we should do all we can to make that happen.
Politicians and judges.
Lol. And who decides what the truth is? What lawmakers are going to pass laws limiting their own power, or the power of their donor class when those donors are how they afford to run for office? Who are their friends they all went to school with? Who give them millions of dollars and boardroom positions when the leave office after years of loyal service? Your "quick fixes" are ineffectual bandaids on an inherently broken system, which exists because a few people can privately own our collective production as a species, which gives them an undemocratic and wildly disproportionate amount of power. That's what Marx was describing. That's the inevitable result of capitalism.
Also term limits on Senate/Congress.
I just started a new job, because Corona cut my regular hours down to almost nothing. I have $62 in my bank account, and that has to last three weeks before my first paycheck. With my new job, essential work being the only thing hiring, I have no sort of medical insurance. My medication costs $113 generic. Also, my car insurance just came due, which I need to have for work, is $137. I haven't even put rent and utilities into this, nor food and basic living expense. Not sure if capitalism is dying, or if I am.
Lack of bottom level wages in last 40 years really hurting. And once self driving replaces commercial drivers. Better small scale robots cheaper. UBI going have to happen if they want keep capitalism, or people will get out the pick forks. yang was really best thing happen to Dems this election and party trying to ingore him.
@@Sinnehh I agree about Yang. I'm not at all happy with the current ballot we're seeing. Last term, I was hoping for Bernie. The lower class really needs more help, we can't keep America going at this rate.
Sounds like the system you live under is failing you... whatever that may be. But, considering you're living on the poverty line, have to pay $113 for generic meds, are worried about medical insurance, AND have stable access to internet, I'd say you're in the USA. Far be it from me that with all those things, it's so close to living under Fascism than Capitalism. Sorry for the struggles you must be having right now.
@@braegrimes8870 You're right, and thanks for your sympathy. The fact that so many more privileged people around me are toting this as the greatest nation in the world is a sheer embarrassment. Honestly, when I speak to people from other countries, I tend not to tell them that I'm from the U.S. I'm ashamed of my country, but have no idea how to change any of it. Which is insane, considering that democracy is what we pride ourselves in the most. I know that our nation is generally better off than many others, but it doesn't make my own everyday struggle any easier. In fact, it leaves me feeling inferior and guilty for not utilizing "the American dream."
@@MadamFoogie unfortunately thats an inbuilt element of the system. If youre not piloting your second yacht you feel guilt and like s failure. You need to free yourself mentally of those false beliefs. The working class is not a lower class. The working class are the honourable class. Their efforts keep society and economy afloat and alive. The parasitical classes of the uber wealthy are the true lower class. They are like pimps living off immoral earnings. My 2 cents
I'm currently recovering from emergency surgery, lying in bed and binge watching all of your videos. They are as soothing as my pain medication. They've kept my brain busy. Thank you😊
How ya feeling now?
@@hunterflowerson4460 well rip
@@swami7829 well rip rip
@@yooro3948 well rip rip rip
so, are you poor now? I've heard that going to the doctor in the u.s. bankrupts everyone because of capitalism
14:23 easy to avoid trees falling on our houses, we (my generation - millennials) don't really own any in the first place! Crisis averted /s
I agree. I am a baby boomer. I hear people bitch about millenials today, but they don't realize that millenials grew up watching both parent's and grandparent's working their ass's off to only have to keep working in their 70's and still not own any thing. So what do millenials have to look forward to?
@@davidgraylord5977 as a gen z’r I’m just awaiting the revolution at this point
Well I am a millennial and getting tired of this thing. yeah literally i wanna dropout and trade stocks and forex
@@davidgraylord5977 I was one of the lucky ones, I went into active military service at 18 (2006), saw bitcoin as a futures... and now im sitting on several hundred grand, with a military retirement. I dont need to work but im going to school fulltime for a masters degree in cybersec. I can buy a house outright in most states... but heck... i feel like the 1% of my generation.
I was a lucky one. Im gen z and i didnt go to college so i didnt get saddled with debt. Got a decent warehouse job and i bought my house last year at 23
Never be afraid to stand and fight to create change for the world you want to live in. Well made video, love the new perspective.
UA-cam crashed as you said “you might even hear the word... sociali...” and it was really funny xD
haha.. and you hear the endless loop "..sociali... lie.. lie.. lie.. lie.. .. "
R/thathappend
Socialism crashed the inter tube
@@user98xp UA-cam cannot stand not being the kings and queens of old. All the politicians want to revive the medieval ages where the rich are rich and poor are kicked like dogs.
Great post. (Reimiel)
Norway checking in here - Capitalism works fine, it just needs the correct amount of reigning in.
Make sure to keep money and politics separated - I think the US has failed there.
Also - probably fix your tax laws - my guess is that they are too complex and have too many holes in them. Keep it simple.
US tax laws are so complex our tax lawyers dont understand them.
If I recall correctly, Norway has a pretty hefty oil fund right? (Purely civil discussion).
Best comment I've seen so far!
I like you
@@haydenarchambault2927 Yes, they do. because they banked it.
"Dogmatic refusal to change is a losing strategy".
Deep.
Facts. Just ask the Spartans lmao
A dangerously broad assertion, don't you think? I'll leave you to exercise your mind to think of ways such bits of bumper sticker wisdom taken as sage advice could have disastrous consequences.
@@lifeinsaltlakecity4001 perhaps, but also consider the following:
Change itself can be good or bad, there’s sometime no telling. However, if one is dogmatic about not wanting to, that leaves no room for options that could be beneficial.
@@Rairyuujin unless the change in question inherently represents a net loss for the person embracing said dogma. Therein lies a small measure of the dangers of the tyrannous state, that it purports to have the authority to deign to dictate to masses of disparate peoples with differing goals and subjective views what is best for them.
The state and its wise, fearless leaders and supporters are full of bumper sticker wisdom about how you and I ought to be living. A one-size-fits-all prescription for living, backed by the threat of death for non-compliance.
Historically, things end badly for those who dissent. And I dissent, sir.
Religion should take note... But it refuses to admit it is not perfect.
Another issue that not enough people talk about is outsourcing. Corps are outsourcing jobs at an alarming rate and it needs to stop.
Somehow he made economics interesting. I can't believe I watched 23 minutes worth of content about capitalism, and stayed captivated. Bravo.
I completely agree! The time just flew by and I learned a lot.
Thank you, Joe!🙏
Excellent video! 😊💗
@@rachel_v_k is a great place7l to and a great 5most people people the of easy to tnow is to get athe and your able tto to be for the of of of of ofhave yearnext year nextel yearnext yearnext ALl7 I next the to thingy same the atime you nd lthis ittle bit think have been have have to b 6een have been 7 a am be not am am Inot I the first time for of and gooandand good get a d a get abyourforthe le to beget beyou tfact that fact that he and of the can can world the ththe e the is is is is is a new a the best to knowtheis to gis et best way to is ias buy the to gyou are that that et best way to is is the the is is is is is is not is the is is is for best the the the is is and is is is not of best of the tis he most you ais ris is e you are yis ou are ake sure make sure make sure s and and to to more than than get a get a get a to is iand eand ver s to a be able to get get is the to do do the do s is ois search a job are lyto to ou want and ooking for looking for w it is very and and and and he k to work with the usual usual business experience and experience with
Shout out to economics explained
Hooked
Economics is a very interesting and rich field. Heavily rooted in mathematics and philosophy. However modern economics is a pretty different animal than during the times of Smith and Marx.
"we need to make a shift towards solutions and away from blind following of ideologies" - Joe Scott
this quote is golden, fr 💯
1000%
The thing is, he's wrong, no one was just blind and decided to follow, there were no other choices, capitalism in itself is designed to slowly strangle out the middle class
@@capo_di_capi Not unless you infer such intent, which is like inferring that "medicine is designed to harm people".
try that with science laws if you truly mean it, ... scientist dare to state something is impossible when they know only a little of what actually exist in the universe
sad to say, but, i personally don't believe there is enough "non-sheeple" to accomplish this,
yes, it's the best way, only thing stopping it is greed and that human trait will not shift,,,,,,
The problem with our current system is monopoly laws don't work and haven't in decades. Too many loop holes. When a company gets too big and anyone threatens them with monopoly suits, they just split the big company into two smaller companies still owned by the same corporate entity.
Not to mention intellectual property is also a monopoly.
Put simply every brand should be broken off and given a new board of directors (at least one director representing the workers)
as a socialist that's very true and socialism is the solution but democratic socialism is something amazing that not everyone realizes
also the companys have realised by working with their competetiors they can price gouge more people and make more money, a bigger pie for everyone... well not everety one but the corporations
Hi from Germany! Love your channel Joe! Thank you for all the amazing work you and your team do. 🙏💜
-
- Thumbs -- Way -- U P to
Joe ' s " " U N S E E N " " team .
-
"Work hours are down" -> except the chart shows everyone under 50 has only seen increasing work hours in their lifetime
Because a certain generation didn’t focus more on retirement than relying on ssi
@@NoddinOff. did you miss the under 50 part of that comment?
@@michaelo5665 do you know how much tax money is spent on social security? That has a large impact on how much taxes you pay. Regardless historical working hours are down.
@@NoddinOff. actually I do and it happens to pale in comparison to other parts of our budget but thanks for ignoring the meat of my comment in order to hold up yet another strawman.
@@NoddinOff. in fact in many states it is the government PERs system (a form of retirement) that's creating the biggest hurdles for battling the deficit.
This has to be one of the best scripted and most meaningful essays on how we got to the current economic crisis and what we can realistically do about it, that I have seen anywhere. A daring topic selection, Joe. My compliments on choosing a very controversial subject which sorely needed to be addressed and would scare away most writers who frankly, lack the fortitude to explore and present it in a public forum. Like a fresco, you've captured your subject with a fidelity and truthfulness within the tight constraints of limited time. A marvelous and informative example of realized art.
Yes, this!
I think his way to approach the subject was the best I've seen.
The humility to put his opinion down so to care for the dogmatic viewer was a teaching of its own. I'll use it in future debates myself.
William Swenson what’s bout how there’s socialism for the rich.. like the elites and the wealthy
omg this was so well written, hard agree.
well sed
i love how careful people have to talk about capitalism. we’ve been so indoctrinated.
We have been indoctrinated... to believe there's a viable alternative to capitalism. There isn't. The only countries with successful 'socialist' or 'communist' systems (e.g. China, and some would say Sweden) are ones that learned (the hard way) to embrace capitalist principles. All wealth comes through capitalism. The best any other economic system can do is redistribute the wealth that capitalism created, which undermines the further creation of wealth.
@@RatZapTshirt nobody disagrees when people say they want democratic socialism their talking about giving workers more choices and redistribution of wealth to build safety nets not completely change the free Market just more restrictions
@@danielmoreno-gama5973 If that were actually the case I wouldn't have a problem. A 'free market with a social safety net' would be fine by me (preferably a UBI). But what we get instead as 'democratic socialism' is more and more of those "restrictions" you mention. They've been accumulating for over a century. The banking system has been nationalized, the currency demonetized, etc. We no longer HAVE a free market. That's the only reason we even NEED a safety net now. We're eating the goose that lays the golden eggs, which is the flaw of traditional socialism.
@@degamispoudegamis I really wish the US wouldn't do that, because It gives every socialist government in the world a scapegoat to blame for their own failures. Socialism is so shitty it can't function without a credible scapegoat.
@@degamispoudegamis Oh, so you know something I don't, but should? Please enlighten me, master.
Right now I'm thinking you probably have no argument but just wanted to have the last word anyway. Try again.
"Capitalism" failed in 2008 but there was enough money to temporarily "save" it, whereas "communism" failed in 1989 because there was no money to "save" it. All "quotations" intentional. What is need is that Maslow's basic needs in his pyramid be a human right - there needs to be a recognition of the concept of "common good". I really enjoyed this video. Well done Joe.
To first have a common good there must first be a common people. Modern America prioritizes the idea of diversity as a quilt where separate cultures and ideas are simply placed with others rather than the idea of an American Melting pot where cultures and ideas are assimilated and the best qualities are integrated to create a blended and United culture under one banner of American pride and the values which it holds and defends. Only when you can have a unanimous people who will fight for the same cause can you even begin to establish what defines the common good
Honestly people from the USA are WAY to touchy about this subject. To any reasonable person with any economical knowledge it should be obvious that western Europe ALSO has capitalism. They just put more limits on it, and it works out fine. In fact, it probably works better than what they have in the USA.
But noooo, you criticize the specific USA brand of capitalism and they bring out the pitchforks...
Let's compare levels of poverty, education and social mobility and see which approach fares better.
@@MrGonzonator thats an excellent idea. Compare those factors in the Netherlands or Germany to the USA and you come to the conclusion that people in the Netherlands or Germany have it better in all of those statistics.
@@mistrants2745 it _is_ an excellent basis for comparison :)
If you count, or read a graph.
(ref OP for lack of education in the US)
I agree. Americans have been propagandised for the past century to be afraid of cooperation. They are taught to fear socialism because the well being of people is in conflict with the greed of corporations. When your country's government is clearly wholly owned by corporations, when an HMOs profits are more important than your life, when dropping bombs and putting people in prison is profitable, your in denial about how great your system is
@@MrGonzonator That comparison wont do any good to the states. just put US to shame. specially when you factor things like paid maternity leave, paid vacations, healthcare, and so forth
Wife walked in while I was hugging the monitor. She walked out before I could explain.
Ha ha haaaa!
But seriously, my condolences.
That must be tough
Missing element, Joe always adds some humor to lighten things up & I wish that could have become part of it, good one.
Divorce papers to follow....
I hope you said it was an experimental kind of virtual porn, easier to explain...
“...dogmatic refusal to change is a losing strategy, whether it’s in economics, or society, or nature for that matter.”
Bravo! 👏👏👏
That is the best thing I’ve heard in a long time.
Sunamer Z did you even watch the video? Taking someone’s quote out of context when he wasn’t suggesting anything within the realm of communism like that I doubt it. He was suggesting that we alter the structure of capitalism much the same way Theodore Roosevelt did by signing the “Square Deal” please just listen to others and know your own history first my friend, this was just an acknowledgement of the fact that capitalism has evolved and grown since the 1800s and we need to improve our system for the current age
Dogmatic refusal to change is a failing strategy - solid explanation for the ever increasing number of non religious people in the world.
@Sunamer ZSounds like someone is dogmatic.
It's not a binary...there are steps.
Runaway capitalism doesn't work, full blown communism doesn't work. Ideally, a capitalist society should provide and help create social programs to raise people up. With social programs, the people have more means to fuel the capitalist machine, society in balance.
Those who vilify all socialism often demonstrate a struggle with compassion and tend to be selfish, elitist, fear mongering capitalists; the corporate cabals and the people they pay and manipulate.
@Sunamer Z I'm really not sure where you were going with this statement. But it comes off as you comparing a need to fix the economy to Socialism which is in no way what was suggested. It was a really dumb thing to say.. especially with what's going on in the US atm. =/
Education isn't evil... neither is common sense.
@Sunamer Z What dogma do you think marxists have?
Thank you for this thoughtful and thought provoking video.
Yes, it is clear that society is changing so rapidly and in so many multiple dimensions that the existing paradigms and systems are ineffective.
I don’t know the best solution, but something that will combine the ideal intended outcomes of capitalism--that is, the creation of wealth and individual sovereignty--along with with the ideal intended outcomes of Marx and others--that is, that -“each gives according to his/her ability and each receives according to his/ her needs”, UBI at the very least, some equalization of economic class division or redistribution of wealth--seems to be in order.
The guiding principles of society can no longer be limited to valuing only the economic persona or economic usefulness of a human (or animal or any sentient being)--but must shift to the recognition and value of the fulfillment of life itself as the end goal--with all economic systems and structures subjugated to the fulfillment of this higher end goal. This is similar to Maslow’s hierarchical pyramid of Self-Actualization--in other words, the economic system must truly become the servant of life and society, and no longer the master.
We don't need a class of capitalist owners anymore than we need a hole in the head. UBI is a fraud as it is a proposal to save capitalism. Not enough work than a cut in hours with no cut in pay to spread the work around. None of theses utopia libertarian proposals have a snowballs chance in hell of success since they have no way of coming to fruition without the good graces of the ruling capitalist class. The capitalists classes need to be removed from power as they are both incompetent and destructive to the world system of production. We the working class organized into trade unions and with a political party of our own are the only ones capable of doing that. Trump and Yang Wang can't do it for us.
I realize why people always leave it out, but it really helps to understand everything: Capitalism is an authoritarian economic system, while socialism is a democratic economic system. In Capitalism the rich own and control the workplace, while in Socialism the workers control the workplace. The "Communist" countries never succeed at becoming Socialist or Communist, but instead the leaders of the revolutions became a new oppressive ruling class.
Exactly. Socialism is democracy applied to the economy.
@James Smith Socialism literally the idea that workers should democratically control their workplaces, and has nothing to do with any government; in fact communism is the idea of a socialist economy without any form of traditional state, basically no government as you would probably understand it. I pretty sure you didn't try to argue against the actually ideas, because you got nothing.
Oh and the old "you just want free stuff"; I know you mad bro, because the system you want to defend is not a good one and people are waking up to that.
@James Smith I know basically no one is actually educated on political philosophy, so I never shocked people have no concept of left vs. right political spectrum. To explain in the simplest turns the political spectrum is about hierarchies where to the left is fewer hierarchy while to right is more hierarchy. There are no political philosophies regarding the proper size of government, because that would retarded.
Capitalism as a system creates power hierarchies in economies, which literally is what leads to monopolies; it is not anything else. Citizens through organized political power can make demands of capitalists, but consumers on the other hand have no real power; voting with your wallet is just a bad joke.
@James Smith Wow, nothing is more convincing than a wall of demented ramblings.
The old "government = always bad" is only convincing to the smoothest of brains. Governments are tools and like a hammer are no more evil than the manner in which they are used. If you cannot imagine a well functioning government, that is a personal failing.
Worker cooperatives are a form of socialism and require no government intervention for their creation.
Democracy refers to the idea of everyone having a voice. A citizen has a voice, a socialist work in a socialist economy has a voice, while a consumer has none. Voting with ones wallet is action of pitiful being stripped of any voice, forced to beg for treats from their capitalist masters.
Again you have failed to argue against socialism, the concept of workers democratically controlling their workplaces.
@James Smith A strawman argument refers to when one creates a position and argues against their created position rather than any real position held. Or to connect the dots, you keep arguing against positions no one holds.
Again, you have nothing. You have failed to make an argument against socialism.
I love how you handle volatile subjects and still manage to add humour and objectivity. Bravo sir bravo
"How do you start a working-class revolution without a working class?"
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how the robot uprising started.
This is the plot of iRobot isn't it?
@Thomas Chrombly How is that a "maybe"? If everyone is unemployed, everyone will make $0. It's basically Communism
Nobody born as working class and no working class people want to remain as working class for entire life.
In his video on future robots. He did say that the origin of the term Robots came from the serfs that made up the working class during the industrial revolution...
@Thomas Chrombly Exactly, so robot communism would work
This is the best, well researched production I have seen for months. Full of content. Facts. History.
“This country has socialism for the rich, and rugged individualism for the poor.”-Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr, 1968
52 years later, and we still haven't corrected this?
You can thank the government for that.
Change doesn't happen until it needs to happen. The riots occurring this year are clues to the government that _something_ needs to change so you can bet your ass that lobbyist are lining up to tell them what needs to change.
That's a problem as lobbyists are generally company representatives and don't have the interests of the average individual in mind. Unfortunately the cycle repeats itself until the culture that causes this changes. Any change to culture takes around 2 generations to change. You'll see noticeable change when millennial are in the position baby boomers are today.
Nor will we, there is no practical way given today's technologies.
The bottom 40% pay zero in taxes. The top 4% give (not taken)over 85% of charitable donations.
@@BassenGaming
No, it is the government's fault. They interefered in the market, making it possible for lobbyists to push for such policies. We need to do away with all our "socialist" policies.
So here's my current experience: my company was purchased by another, from a complementary side of the industry. Not one employee has benefited, and many have lost their job or seen a large decrease in benefits. My company posted profitable year after profitable year since inception and was in no danger whatsoever. The only ones who benefited were those at the top, controlling it all. This merger/buyout does nothing good for the average citizen either. This is all too common, and just another example of what Joe is talking about.
Mark, this is your boss. You're fired and are now free to seek benefits elsewhere. Congratulations.
@W.A M.P See, Mark believes that risking capital (what employers do) and accepting compensation in exchange for time and labor (what employees do) are the same thing. More precisely, if he's not smart enough to take care of himself...he's probably not smart enough to care of me either. Which is why I fired him.
@W.A M.P First, I'm not sure why you think I feel entitled. I am asking only for job security, when I've spent years working for the company. I'm not asking for money to be dumped on me, and I don't think it is unreasonable to expect that the things I was told were part of my compensation package upon hire should remain as such.
My company was in no financial danger at all, as I stated they have been profitable since inception, nearly 40 years ago. The company had 13000 staff, and was purchased by a company with something very similar.
Several of the points you make sound like you're jaded from your bad experiences owning a business, and at the same time, you make the point that you were the only one to absorb any risk, as is how it works when you own a business. It is shortsighted to assume that I have no concept of what the day to day requirements are for running a business just because I don't run one of my own. I personally have never owned a business, though I helped my father run his for a few years. He has told me on many occasions that if he had it to do over again, he wouldn't. And he isn't the only one I've known to say that. But of course, I wasn't talking about a small business to begin with. I'm talking about a large, multi-national corporation that generated hundred of millions of dollars in annual revenue.
As Joe's point goes, capitalism in and of itself isn't the issue, but the extreme version we see today where all that matters seems to be maximizing profit at the expense of just about everything else is. Your comment about how employees aren't individually important just proves that point. Each of those people who lose their job have a life and possible a family that are relying on them. And replacing a salary isn't an easy task when every company wants to pay you the minimum they can get away with. One cannot equate a job at one company as the a job at another. Sure, if I lose my job I can probably find a job quickly, but it wouldn't be earning nearly what I make right now. You may not be negatively impacted by simply replacing them with another person, probably at a lower wage and maybe in another country - but people matter. Your attitude about them seems to suggest that you don't view employees as people, and THAT is the issue with late stage capitalism. You comment that "
for years, just to benefit one's enormous pile of stock shares provides nothing for anyone but oneself (already a multi-millionaire). How much is enough?
So you would rather the workers control it? sounds like communism to me
@@maryolee8303 Where did I say that?
Joe: Bring it in group hug.
Me: literally hugs my laptop.
Joe: Oh yeah that's good stuff
Me: steps away from laptop
Also super informative Joe thanks for another great vid keep it up!
Jo Dearwester I needed that hug today! :D
@@mebreevee Hugs from. Yeah I needed it too. I have a "FREE HUGS" t-shirt but since there's a pandemic going on I'm not sure if I'll ever be able to wear that shirt again.
You now have covid.
Dan Cobb Oh thats sad
Shadow Prince Don’t give up hope.
You can always sharpie in “Free in spirit hugs.”
Great balance walking the line, I love the subject exploration here! I've often thought the same thing and this opened an avenue for appropriate discussion. Thanks Joe, as always!
Thank you for discussing a difficult topic, during a difficult time and at self acknowledged possible risk to your livelihood. Evil wins when good people do nothing, and in my opinion, you are the best type of human.
big mood @ this comment.
2:12 Sir I am uncomfortable already, having been virtually hugged by a man while pooping.
🤣🤣🤣🤣👍
I could have lived my whole life without knowing that
I was wiping. How do you think I feel? ;-)
@@justgold4113 I'm so sorry bro💀
@@phillipsfamily27 😂
Ha! I was on the show! :D Thank you Joe and keep on doing what you're doing! You Rock!!! :)
Nice interpretation skills Felix. Big fan of both of you !
Nice crossover :)
I just find it insane that the 1% as they get richer, get slammed with less taxes than I do with a salary that doesn't reach 100k and get 35% taken out of my paycheck. It's also insanity that such rich people exist with such amounts of money, it's almost obscene. The law will always lobby for the rich, sadly
“Can capitalism be reformed” is far less important than “will those who are currently on top give up some power to reform, or will they risk everything to maintain their current level of power?”
Crisis in economic systems is hardly new, and capitalism in America survived serious threats during the guildes age and Great Depression through reform. These processes weren’t easy (many labor strikers were killed for their views), but the resulting compromises saved most of the system as-was. There is no particular reason to believe that we can’t reform the system today, the only question is political will.
Begs to question if reform is even needed, or if personal accountability for actions and decisions are taken into account. Capitalism requires that you be a contributor to the system, or you are a casualty of it. Does that make you a victim of the system or you choices? Much of what is put off on others is really a personal choice in how you conduct yourself, your business, and your overall life goals. If your content living in a shack, then so be it. I don’t understand why people settle for this, but then again you are free to be a ‘victim’ of yourself at anytime...
Long Wilderness Walks would you make the same argument about laborers during the Great Depression, or during the gilded age? Why or why not?
@@ForzaJersey eventually the deceptions of the elite will be exposed and they will be massacred. Numerous billionaires have already set up boltholes around the world in places like New Zealand and kept their private jets fully fueled and on standby.
@@ForzaJersey BLM and Antifa are simple misdirections created by the Powerful to distract common folk from the real problems. That's why nobody takes them seriously. They aren't *meant* to be serious threats.
@@longwildernesswalks - There are people who exist who are unable to account for their own actions. A LOT of people, in fact. Some are mentally incapacitated from birth or otherwise, some are physically incapacitated from birth or otherwise, some are just older people with dementia, parkinson's, alzheimer's, etc.
But also, who determines what contributes what to society? For instance, service work (retail, customer service, food service, etc.) is probably one of the most important contributing jobs, but it pays horribly. If you own a distributing warehouse for trading cards, something far less important, you probably make a crapton more than that. Poor examples on my part, maybe, but you could find hundreds more, including some voluntary work that contributes a ton, is considered necessary even, and doesn't pay a cent because it's not profitable.
Don't get me wrong, though. I'm with you on the idea that, for society to run, people need to contribute to it. And for people to contribute, they need an incentive. I'm just against the idea that _everyone_ is needed for this, that the best incentive is money, or that incentive for contribution = not being penalized for not contributing. Balance can be struck through incentive alone.
Joe: Things can always be worse!
2020: I'm working on it!
Unoriginal
Alien invasion resulting in human enslavement finna happen next month
What could possibly go wrong in only 3 more months? /s
As an American, it's embarrassing that you have to handle my fellow citizens with kid gloves when it comes to stating facts about capitalism.
Right? It's like free speech is good until they say something you don't agree with.
@@thomaswenzel1393 "I'm all for free speech
*BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUT"*
Agreed. There is SO MUCH personal sensitivity around these issues, especially for Americans over 40. Yet, those of us who watched all the factory jobs "disappear" in the eighties and nineties ought to be able to handle the truth. And anyone who refuses to see the end of the Industrial Revolution for what IT IS, needs to go read a book.
@@delirium1643 free speech means that you should get a platform, not that people have to agree with you...
Are "socialists" getting banned or arrested for their views?
Aldous Huxley how could they, they run just about all forms of media and universities at this point.
3:58 3% raise in wages + 25% raise in rent DOES = Late stage capitalism
As a Norwegian living under a socialistic capitalist society I'm think you have a good point. Capitalism can be a lot of things. What we have in Norway resembles the beginning of a society where all base needs are met, and you work to get further advantages like; better living, fulfilling work, financing hobbies, etc. This is still a capitalist society but I can say that no one needs to worry if they will have a roof to live under, if they can pay for medical emergencies, or if they can have food on the table.
Yes, it's not perfect, and there are poor people, but the society cares for them, and being poor in Norway can't be compared to being poor anywhere else outside of the Nordic countries. Some people are in financial crisis, some have no way of getting work, and some have other problems (like drugs, mental issues or medical issues) that makes them poor in comparison with the normal in Norway (or other Nordic countries), but they still mostly have food enough, they still have access to schools, and they have free health services. The community/state will even help them with a place to live and programs to get the back to work, and if they are completely unable to work will give them a minimum income. This is not much to live off, especially with kids, but it keeps food on the table, and gives opportunities to be able to do other stuff to get an additional income.
This is only one of many versions of capitalism that works in a future where the more classical capitalism creates divides that can not be mended. Though even here we see the ultra rich getting richer much faster than the general population, but we do not have a "poor" working class as such. Everyone else is basically middle class...
well norway is kind of a paradox and an unsubstainable one, very high level of living, very ecological society etc all paid by oil so yes some people say norway is the most hypocritical country in the world
@@oribeth7229 Typical ignorant american anti-socialist statement :P Norway doesn`t spend it`s oil money, only 3% of the annual interest generated by it
I believe the word you are looking for is 'social democracy'. Its better for the people living within the country, but certainly not for those on the receiving end of the one side trade deals and overseas exploitative labor. Capitalism is a global issue, and if you believe that all human lives are equally valuable, a social democracy is not an acceptable solution.
@Gabriel Reed it would be interesting to know what alternative you propose that does not have the negative sides that you point out. Is there a way to solve that problem globally?
@@Sauromannen Yes. That solution would be Communism.
The Church: money bad
Peasants: ok, what should we do with it then?
The Church: Gimme
dragosus Are you busy sorting because there are many great ones? Our real danger is the 2020 scheme going into public schools to brainwash our children. We are getting too close to the end of the book of How Rome Fell. America has great potential to soar and great potential to collapse. Unions that helped in the past are hurting us now.
@@stevenrofe6195 I was making joke for the medieval part of the video, calm down
Antifa & BLM: money bad
Normies: ok, what should we do with it then?
Antifa & BLM: Gimmie Bail money.
Saying the Church says money bad is a misrepresentation of the Christian faith. The bible never says money is bad. Heck it even recommends strategies of how to manage it and invest it.
What the bible says is The "love of money" is bad, meaning Greed. This is because if you love money too much it becomes your God and then you loose sight of the more important things in life.
@@justk.d3706 I dunno, the Catholic church used to be pretty greedy, which was the point of the joke.
Great you're tackling this even handedly plus getting back on that horse regardless of misguided backlash you may/probably will get - there's many more of us who appreciate your light touch on these subjects.
I just found you last week, and am totally addicted. I just wanted to say thank you, and also, I love your sense of humor. Sarcasm and dad jokes are the best! Whisper "socialism"... made me giggle out loud, so now I'm insane to those around me. Made it through about 20 or so episodes so far, and really looking forward to those I haven't seen yet. Great show, much appreciated!
By the way, a simple move toward fixing some of the problems in our system is simply to tax the wealthy fairly. We used to do that, but since we stopped, things have gotten crazy. I'd suggest we start there, and see what happens.
Cheers!
as a socialist, I didn't become one instantly but I became one because of what it could do for humanity and such. It values equality, better health even free health care, better services, etc. If you are curious to learn more I would ask you to look at the YTber second thought which makes amazing content on capitalism and how it affects our society and how socialism is our solution. Honestly, you don't have to be a socialist but if you do agree with the things that socialism is trying to achieve than we know things have to change.
@koiyujo1543 I like to refer to myself as a social capitalist. Something like a Social Democrat but I believe that capitalism is only a system that can work if it is, in fact, regulated by the government, which is then accountable to the people. I think calling assistant my betta social democracy is okay, but I think calling it a social capitalism is probably more accurate and less stigmatizing unfortunately, in this country we don't practice any of that, we practice government-supported capitalism in that they socialize their losses but they privatized their games, and the government that is meant to represent the people, ends up representing the best interest of the capitalist instead. We are obviously tilting heavily toward a failure in the system as a result of unfairly prioritizing the needs of Industry over the needs of those pain for all the industry, which is stupid and short-sighted way to look at an economic society, and oddly enough seems to be completely lost on all of the most wealthy people in the country which inherently belies the idea that it's a meritocracy. I don't have a problem with socialism, I know how to read, but it's been falsely created with Communism for so long that most people in this country don't have enough knowledge about it to recognize how it's being manipulated against them. Hell most of them don't even realize that we live in a social democracy already. My favorite is when people who work for the government yell about how they'll never let socialism into their country. SMH
great vid Joe....
this felt like a gentle, respectful intervention,
with your typical good sense of humour mixed in
EXCELLENT
You know, all anyone ever wanted in life was an unfair advantage.
@Hooda the Antagonist. How will we achieve that if people shouting for equality, take people's jobs and lives because of there religion, race, and occupation.
@@drewtastic2a763 basically need one unifying goal to work towards that a majority of people want, can't move forwards if everyone is taking the off-ramp ideas
why dont you become a boss then?
@Hooda the Antagonist damn straight comrade
@@ivanliu2581 you understand for the VAST majority of Americans that's simply not feasible right? And to what end? When you become the boss you're just becoming what you hated, another labor exploiting member of the owner class
Thank you for addressing this issue in such a sober and non-dogmatic way. One of the best videos on the topic I’ve seen.
I'm surprised that some one would talk about an economic system but say so little.
This is such a complicated set of ideas, I've never felt comfortable trying to understand it. But on a gut level, very emotional, changing "Capitalisms scares the crap out of me. Change is not easy and it triggers some of us. Thanks for trying to break this down for our understanding.
The workings of the capitalist profit system are such that it leads to both war, fascism and revolution. Capitalism is based in the nation state and those nation states can't avoid going into Imperialist war.
I needed that hug joe
All jibber jabber aside, I just love this video for bringing up the importance of adaptation to circumstances.
Clinging to specific "isms" is never going to work beyond a few generations. Every few generations, humanity needs to update itself on a range of parameters.
and you cant MAKE that happen with violent revolution or abolishing the notion of property. theres adapting, and then theres "the great leap forward."
@@cwg9238 modern socialists, who for example want worker cooperatives, are not state socialists (but want the worker to own the means of production).
As long as they don't use the state to force it, but build these companies themselves as an alternative, I don't see how "socialism" and capitalism are not compatible.
State socialism (authoritarianism) and capitalism are enemies.
Modern socialists and capitalists are not
@@aldoushuxley5953 "As long as they don't use the state to force it, but build these companies themselves"
well, fair enough. most of the rhetoric i hear is about SEIZING the means of production. what entitles one to just walk into a business and demand some ownership of it? you cant even force me to hire you in the first place.
telling people to establish their own means is offensive somehow.
@@cwg9238 Yes, those people are stupid. State socialism/stalinism/maoism is one of the most evil ideologies to ever exist.
The problem with -isms is however, that people use them to mean different things.
Many marxists of today use my definition of a "libertarian" marxism to "fix" issues they see with modern capitalism.
They don't like stalinism either.
(I am not a marxist, but just had a discussion with someone, who considers themselves a libertarian marxist, and I was confused at first too)
Before getting laid off from 'the dark times' I was in the best paid hourly position at my work. TIL I made less than $4 in 1970's money, that's both depressing and enlightening for why I can't afford much.
i just did the math, and i make essentially the same. FML.
What does TIL mean?
Evan Wilkinson what’s the math for it
Kj16V Today I Learned
@@Kj16V TIL = today I learned
This is really a more awkward conversation for the US. As a nation you've really gone hard on the capitalism. Most advanced economies are a lot more varied with a lot more centrally located services think universal education and health. I think the argument gets bogged down in it's either everything is market based or everything is centrally owned. That's despite the fact that there's a lot of room on the spectrum between these two extremes...
Market Socialism and Social Democracy have arisen out of pragmatic compromise between the interests of industry and the interests of the people. Now I dont think either of these systems are perfect, but they present how neolib capitalism as shown in the US and most of the Americas is a very inefficient system that will ultimately leave industry unhappy with its lack ability to adapt due to monopolies and a weak centeal government (weak regulation) and people unhappy due rising inequality and class conflict. With State Socialism (i.e. USSR before Gorbechov burned the system and Russia as a whole with it) there will be industry unhappy with slow progress due to extreme level of social support for people, and people frustrated with lack of industrial progress and a very rigid centralized system that cant adapt to their specific community and personal needs and desires. Allowing industry to progress and people to have more freedom for themselves and their community is why socialist states like China and Vietnam and Capitalist states like Japan and Sweden have more stability and economic progress than they otherwise would under extreme economic policies, imo. Then again Im just a dumb youtube commenter
22:18 Absolutely, Joe. If we are inflexible, we will break when pressure is applied. Great video. Thank you.
So you are flexible?
"Dogmatic refusal to change is a losing strategy" damn thats so true.
Adaptability is key to survival - we had to evolve to get to where we are now physically so its pretty naive to suggest that we've arrived at the finished product of our development.
@Paradoxical Nightmare In a course of centuries/milleniums, we haven´t changed much. Wars were declared at a whim of the current emperor. But violence in general has come drastically down and it is (in western world at least) almost impossible to declare a war against another nation. While we still are fairly similar to ancient Greeks in many ways, attitudes have changed significantly in the last few decades. And they will, but it will still be a slow process, since ppl are slow to change.
@Paradoxical Nightmare I do realize that. They are still fighting in Africa. And there are still bombings in middle east. I´m not saying that there isn´t wars or violence.
I am 41, when I was in school, my map had eastern and western Germany. And (naturally) Soviet Union.
But in general, we are still living in the least violent era ever.
That was the point I was trying to make.
Yes, let’s evolve past basic human rights like property rights, let’s get rid off the right to speech as well, too many idiots blathering their mouths.
@Charles Jones tbf tho I'm not suggesting that the only way to "evolve" is into socialism. Its probably important to note that evolution is a gradual process of trial and error in order to refine and improve. Revolution however is an entire upheaval. I think the US has a big fear of a socialist upheaval and revolution of their capitalist society. But i don't actually think thats what I or the video was getting at.
If we take nature as an example of how to prosper in any condition its very rare to see a plant or animal devolve; so the whole idea of "make America great again", harkening back to a bygone era doesn't make any sense to me. To me that slogan suggests a devolution back to the 60s/70s. But the whole playing field was different back then. Im not saying they were bad times, they were just of their time. This is a new time. We need to update systems to cope with fresh problems.
No hate tho man. Just having a civil discussion 😉
@Paradoxical Nightmare yeah man thats what I'm saying. We haven't stopped evolving by any stretch of the imagination. So if we stay rigidly attached to dogma and policies which were created in eras long-gone, we're dead in the water!
If we want to one day become a teir 3 civ I think we would need to update our systems beyond those set up in the 1960s 😂 ya dig?
But yeah no hate man, just good to discuss
I very much appreciate this kind of level headed discussion of topics that can be so polarizing.
also most of what he said is common knowledge twisted and lost in all the partisan debate
agreed
European here - socialism not a swear word here! Thanks for your insightful video.
As a German, your attempt on speaking German was very entertaining 😂👍🏼 btw love your videos ☺️
Same. "Klar, immer wieder gerne, lass krachen" also gave the rest to me xD
Für jemanden der beide Sprachen versteht war das echt lustig
I'm not great at German but I was able to gist out the convo even though I haven't touched it in like a year.
Is this what being bilingual feels like all the time?
@@Nevarek_ are you Not bilingual ?
LOL!🤣Es bringt mich zum Lachen, wenn meine amerikanischen Landsleute denken, dass sie wissen, was für den Rest der Welt am besten ist und was für dieses Land am besten ist. Ich denke, dieser Kerl ist ein Nächtriges.
I'd like to see the data graphs for other things that seem to have gotten worse over the decades: depression, loneliness, pollution, climate change, social mobility, inequality, debt, addiction, etc...
What was the cost of progress? What can we do to ensure we mitigate those costs so that progress doesnt have to come at the expense of the future?
@ching chong I welcome you to Google it. There is quite a huge body of work showing that it is indeed growing. Mostly on a national level within countries, but even on an international level where it was falling before, climate change and automation (without re-skilling of the middle and lower class workers) is now causing even more inequality.
What can we do as the average person? Probably nothing substantial without some political upheaval in our current system. Things need to change at the government level, and I don't have any faith in our political system to make those changes. I know libertarians like to argue "but big guv'ment = bad guv'ment." Well, we already tried the hands-off approach. I guess it worked great if you like zero workers protections, snake oil, and economic depressions.
It's ironic how many times socialist reforms have had to save capitalism from itself. In the words of FDR, "...make your mind up to pick up the platform that more nearly squares with the record, and you will have your hand on the Socialist platform."
@@TH3M0L3CUL3M4N We can become more self-aware and knowledgeable about the state of world. Then work to solve these problems by helping others via organizations, initiatives, and ethical business.
Sure it often feels like the 'average person' can't do much to change things... but the world is made of average people. The more of us choose to be better and do better, the more likely we are to change things on a massive scale.
@@elijahclaude3413 I'm not saying it's an exercise in futility to be more self-aware, I'm just saying it won't ever be anything substantial. Just an example, 71% of all carbon emissions come from corporations. No grassroots activism will ever be influential enough to affect change like the government can. A large chunk of our population is just too lazy, disinterested, and easily distracted. Another large chunk meets any progressive steps we take with ridicule or fanatical contempt. If you want to harness the power of the people to change our society in this day and age, an uphill battle is a gross understatement.
@@TH3M0L3CUL3M4N Yeah, but what else do you expect to do?
This is the first time in human history when a person out of some backwoods could make a startup that grows to impact the lives of billions of people and the environment.
Elon Musk has his problems, but 10 years ago everybody laughed at him for talking about making electric cars. The very idea was a joke, now every car manufacturer is making at least 1 line of electric vehicles.
Its still really hard for individuals to effect massive change, yes... but it is possible, and it is more possible than ever before.
That starts with looking at these really hard problems and saying 'fck it, Im going to try anyways'. That is the beauty of human ingenuity and stubbornness/ambition. We created these problems because we weren't self aware enough as individuals or as a society... now we NEED to become more self aware on both levels in order to solve them.
Yes, its hard. It feels futile. But you either can sit around and complain, or get up and try to fix it anyways.
"Its not your fault, but it is your responsibility"
Oh and NO you dont need to start a company to do so. You can try to change the government like Andrew Yang is trying to do, or you can do nonprofits like Khan Academy or Charity:Water, or you can create communities like IndieHackers, or you can do podcasts and videos that impact millions of ambitious people like Lex Fridman.
Check out 80,000 hours for a 8-year study they did on picking important problems to solve.
I like freedom of speech. It protects everyone. And that includes everyone you disagree with.
That’s how it should be.
Until big brother thinks you are a threat.Then national security will have to come first
Andersen Zheng and that has some merits to it too. Winston Churchill was an authoritarian mfer but he helped get the rest of the world through ww2, he was kicked out of parliament for obvious reasons during peacetime. Sometimes taking away freedoms offers more safety than the amount of free will lost. You have to strike a good balance, and the ability to adapt to new situations
Communism creates freedom of speach. Thats cause under a classless and stateless society, there are by defenition nobody on the top preventing you from speaking out
@@andersenzheng Not just big brother #cancelculture
@@haider9874 show me an example of that? Never happens that way
Question shouldn't be "Which system works best?" but rather "Which system is easiest to fix when it goes bad?" They all do.
Joe, my 13 year old son turned me onto this video. I thank you for making it, and for putting it out there for all to watch. I wish every damn person in the country would watch this. You bring up good questions and good possible solutions - all with humor. WELL DONE. ✊🏾
You have a smart kid!
You give Joe a chocolate bar. He has a good head on his shoulders
Please have him also hear the other side.. Listen to Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell. I would argue Capitalism actually works to empower society. As backwards as it can seem, "social good" is indeed the by-product of capitalism. Consumers "vote" every day with their money. We as society choose which services, goods, and companies deserve our almighty dollar. Do we want a greener future? Then we show it with our wallets, we buy EVs and punish companies making gas guzzlers. Can government help? Yes to a degree. But we have to be truly sure that the anecdote is not worse than the disease - as it so often is.
@@wilethecoyote If we lived in a pure capitalistic society, perhaps capitalism would actually empower society. But since we have welfare capitalism that save companies that wouldn't survive if it weren't for a bail out (or whatever). Hence, those companies are not the "social good" that results from capitalism.
@@ThroughMeToYouPuppetry I actually agree with you. The government and their perverse involvement within industry is almost always the one to blame. Not capitalism. My fear is for the viewers of this that use it to warm up to socialism. We cant have the government decide what "social good" is best for us. We must decide.
"Monarchies were replaced by Monopolies." Wait are you still talking about the late 1800s or are you talking about now? Asking for a friend.
yes
Jeff Bezos wants your location
He's talking about the early 20th century. He even went out of his way to show the disparity difference between J.P. Morgan and Jeff Bezos. We broke those monopolies up. We still do have the issue today, but it's not like it was.
@@carlonryan180 ever heard of the coca-cola beverage company?
the amazon group? nestle food group?
the list goes on and on
@@ollythainrap They're nothing on Standard Oil or the monopolies of those days, or even a little bit later. United Fruit literally took over a whole country.
@JoeScott Despite your intense consternation regarding the topic of this video it was actually one of the best you’ve posted so far. I’ve been writing summaries about economics for my last 2 employers (startups that IPO’ed) & thought I was reasonably informed, but I actually learned some interesting tidbits from this one, so NICE WORK! I understand your anxiety about this topic, but you did a fine job sticking with factual information. Nicely done, Mr. Scott.
you have very low standards.
@@xxtradamxx i'm not going to address every idiocy in the video just for you.
@@rutessian What about for me
@@dwindeyer Since you're so nice, i'll tell you to start by reading the Myth of the robber barons by Burt Folsom, Economics in one lesson by Henry Hazlitt or Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell. Good luck!
America is an Empire in decline due to its current economic system of Predatory, Unfettered Capitalism
I still appreciate that you made thus video , given how uncomfortable it truly is to speak about publicly. Thank you !
good god the contortions just to give your take on a subject. good on you for going for it. people hate hearing this/need to hear it. all sides of it.
yeah kinda sad you have to do all these reassurances before even start talking about a topic so not everyone is instantly triggered or tunes out. just shows the level of brainwashing even within an audience I would imagine to be more on the rational side of things
Just have to say, there's something so lovable about you Joe Scott! You have a way if making even tense subjects relaxed, peaceful, and even...fun! Love your channel please never stop!
well hes not advocating for the type of socialism that has killed hundreds of million of people, so that kinda helps..
@@Rem_NL there were approx 1 to 2 million people killed in the russion revolution and in the gulags. many of them were Nazi-collaborateurs. How many people were killed by capitalism though? is it 20 million each year?
@@WastedContender dude socialism killed well over hundreds of millions.. Capitalism on the other hand saved more peoples lives, and extended their lives
@@Rem_NL you literally dont have a clue. stop spreading your fascist lies around the internet
@@Rem_NL Neo-Nazis, pro-capitalist fanatics and hardcore anarchists would love to scream that the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin have killed ranging from 20 million to more than 60 million people from 1927 to 1953. Not only that figure was very far from the truth, it was plain silly.
Considering that the population of the Soviet Union during Stalin’s years had been growing at a normally steady to rapid rate, it is highly unlikely for the government to kill a number of people by the order of more than six digits.
At most, the government only had almost 800,000 dissidents, criminals and rebels criminally executed throughout 1928 to 1953.[1] After that, we all know it’s World War Second that the Germans are up to some genocide when they invaded the country, killing 20 million undesirables[2] in the name of their expansionist adventures across Eastern Europe. After the war, the country pretty much went back to normal, rebuilding the country and just jailing criminals and dissidents and making them do forced labor and all that but not much executions anymore. Long after the war the country pretty much went to normal until its fall in 1992.
Everyone wants to talk about the gulag, the penal labor system that has been going on long before the Soviet Union was born and has been going on since the Imperial era of Russia. Did anyone even know that during the heyday of gulag in the Union only 5% resulted in deaths inside the penal labor camps?
Prisoner mortality rate in the Soviet labor camps as part of gulag system
Holodomor? Only if the landlords (i.e. the kulaks) hadn’t been so greedy at all, hoarding stacks of grain to avoid collective quotas while selling them later at posh prices on the black market, the infamous famine could have been avoided. Also, in response, some of the kulaks whose land was expropriated even raided other collective farms and burnt their stacks of grain. The result? Yes, the Soviet famine every capitalist fanatic talks about. Except famines have already been an integral part of Russia long before this one, and even worse than this one. Only by the Soviet policies did the famines throughout its territories did stop, permanently and for good.
Saying that the Soviet government ordered the deaths of 60 million citizens is also saying that it is conducting a self-genocide demographic suicide campaign.
And that China issue, very little among people knew that deadly famines are already a thing there long before Mao Zedong administered the country. The figures for the Great Chinese Famine of 1959-61 was at a maximum of 15 million deaths. However, pre-1949 famines in China already killed 13 to 45 million people[3][4], with the most recent in 1937 before the communist takeover in 1949 taking 5 million lives alone.[5] Weather was always the determining factor of famines, something that not even the Communist government back then was capable of tackling until their upgrading of weather detection technology and better improved irrigation systems in the mid-1960s and beyond. China today is still communist, but the long dreaded famines of old are no more.
The Cultural Revolution was mainly shaming people of ‘unrevolutionary’ character, people who are no longer quite acquainted to the norms and policies of the Communist Party. That included both public and classified torture, shaming and smearing campaigns, propaganda every day, the jailing of religious leaders and the destruction of religious centers (doesn’t matter quite much as China was already an atheist-majority country since the imperial era), sending dissidents and criminals to the labor camps, execution of proven corrupt party members, and brainwashing college students into reading Mao’s Little Red Book, nothing else follows. It only lasted from 1966 to 1968, and on the contrary did not kill tens of millions of people as those pro-capitalist scholars tend to suggest.
Those same scholars count those incarcerated and tortured under criminal law in China from 1950 to 1976 as deaths attributed to the communist government. They can never get any more silly than this.
And this gets the most controversy, the Cambodian Genocide by Pol Pot that killed 1.7 million people by way of murders. It should be noted, however, that Communist Kampuchea was already allied somewhat to the United States thanks to U.S. State Secretary Henry Kissinger and his deeds to counter Vietnam’s power after 1975. The CIA have largely turned a blind eye to this until 1990s. It took another communist country in Vietnam to invade the country and put an end to the genocide.
So what does such an exaggerated figure suggest? To demonize the communist states and communism in general, while turning a blind eye on the atrocities of many capitalist nations committed worldwide?
Then what if I told you that the British had 6 million Bengali civilians killed due to the 1943 Bengal famine, due to their selfish policies of bringing food straight out of them and directly only to Britain under orders from Churchill?
Is the regime changes done by the British and Americans in Iran, Nicaragua, Chile, Indonesia and many others, against the people’s will, any better? Did they not result in high death tolls in the ensuing years also?
The fact that three million North Korean civilians dead from 1950-53 were still etched in the minds of the old citizens of North Korea might tell the reason why to this day its citizens hate the United States and its South Korean ally with burning passion and seething hatred.
And sure, 14 million Vietnamese civilians lay dead as a result of biochemical strafing, strategic aerial bombing that included incendiary and napalm bombs, and village massacres by the United States and its allies during the Vietnam War[6] is completely benevolent, is it? And the resulting economic sanctions also, as a payback for America’s loss in the war, is it?
Even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, they were still invaded by the capitalist West. The result? 2 million Iraqi civilians dead since 2003,[7] as a result of American-led occupation of the country. Yes, that’s lawful, too, huh?
If one talks about the tortures taking place inside North Korea, then one should also know the atrocities inside Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. Not to mention the most capitalistic country in the world holds the most number of prison inmates more than most of the nations’ prison populations combined.
The thing is, if one tries to demonize a certain ideology, never use the number of deaths. It is way too biased as not only one ideology caused immense suffering and deaths.
If one computes all the related deaths combined, then that person must realize that communism never killed 100 million people.
Footnotes
[1] "Большой террор": 1937-1938. Краткая хроника
[2] www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07430170050116366?journalCode=cdan19
[3] Northern Chinese Famine of 1876-79 - Wikipedia
[4] FEARFUL FAMINES OF THE PAST
[5] Intute
[6] www.globalresearch.ca/us-has-killed-more-than-20-million-people-in-37-victim-nations-since-world-war-ii/5492051
[7] The Iraq Death Toll 15 Years After the US Invasion
I didn’t know I needed a hug, but thank you ❤️
Same. Thanks, Joe. ❤️
Time to hug you and then sneak a Dill pickle with googly eyes on it into your pocket...
That was my first UA-cam hug ever.
@@georhayy and it felt like my first hug ever
Hugs should be the new world’s currency.
As a staunch capitalist when this video came out, I refuse to watch it, even listen to the first second of it. But now after looking at other materials and being more favorable towards socialism I’m watching this video and commenting at 3:20 and laughing at how indoctrinated I used to be
Canadian here... so... this is literally the first time it occurred to me that *some people* might conflate capitalism with democracy. I'm gobsmacked.
Yeah, whence on Earth came that idea?
Yeah. The red scare here brought TONS of propaganda with it. That is why people down here started mixing it up. Now, we have the"Tea" party. It was started and funded by the oil industry's (up until recently) biggest RepubliKKKan party donors. They were tricked into thinking that our government takes to much taxes from us citizens, which WOULD be true, if the government didn't spend more than half of all discretionary spending. Anyway, they wanted to pay less taxes and that made it easier for the tax cuts Trump and the Republikkkan party forced through. The tea party people may pay slightly less, but Trump's stupid tariffs are a tax.
Yeah calling something capitalist in the real world implies that its greedy, nihilistic and exploitative.
Its a slur where im from
@@PennyDreadful1
I'm curious, whence are you?
@@xCorvus7x Scandinavian.
I believe this video is extremely important and people must watch it with an open mind
Couldn't agree more, friend. I've been trying to nudge people-in my life and even here online-toward examining this system of ours. The problem isn't that capitalism doesn't work. Look no further than most other developed countries where they have universal healthcare, paid leave/vacation, and all the rest. The biggest problem with capitalism in general is that it incentivizes greed.
I don't know where we are going. But we are certainly going there.
Can we make the changes needed in time is the question.
@@thomasridley8675 It's a good question. The question, even. It doesn't seem to be a concern among the highest ranks of either dominant political party though-perhaps because so many are millionaires. It's not unrelated, that's for sure.
Anyway,
I do think we'll pull through, probably by the skin of our teeth. I am an optimist (as often as possible!), so it's kind of just a hunch. But there are some reasons to be hopeful. Like the overwhelming number of young people who know what the problem is & want to change it.
Sorry if that's a bit much, I tend to rant. 😅
@@irighterotica
I have too agree. We have too many stuck in the past.
And it wasn't too much. ✌️
18:30 "it didnt really increase employment". of course not. why would UBI increase employment? its not FOR that. its to offset the poverty that comes with a lack of employment
Well, it is also important to consider that in Finland, thanks to an economy and society that is already very entrepreneurial and small business friendly, it stands to reason that UBI wouldn't improve it very much. Also important to note is that I believe that with the UBI experiment in Finland there was seen a very significant increase in productivity at work.
One of the perks, according to proponents of UBI, would be that some people who benefit could get a part time job and earn a little extra cash. Some argue this would be the case while others believe people would settle for the money they are getting. It's still up for debate and more experiments are needed.
@@JorgeTorresH No. It needs to happen right now. If even for the couple of years that it's going to take to get the economy moving forward. If we can even do it by then. Personally I feel like, "break out the pitch forks" lol.
UBI is an amazing way to open up vocational careers that historically don't pay well, but are still important.
I think that what he wanted to say was that it didn't increase UNemployment. With UBI opponents always fearing that ppl will just lase at home
Astute, topical and challenging. And fun. Why I stay tuned. Stay the course bruv. Love your work 😁
Interesting fact, the word sabotage comes from the French word sabot, meaning clog/wooden shoe because workers would throw their clog in the machines to break it. This is probably also where the term clogged up machine comes from.
So they had enough money for foot ware to be expendable!!!!!
@@Diggnuts lots of trees around to make new shoes
This reminds me of Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.
@@Diggnuts I don't think the workers cared.
That actually IS an interesting fact! Thank you!
It's a shame Joe has to defend himself so much in the beginning of the video for fear of outrage over a common sense conversation.
He has to play an effective babyface before he starts dropping the big lies about Bezos, Carnegie, etc. Seems like it worked.
but he didn't
@@smithpalacios5513 ^
The problem with it is that capitalism died a while ago in America. Large corporations own everything, and they receive too many government benefits to be considered borne of capitalism, as they would have went bankrupt long ago without government support.
@@protodroidstuff correct. Government supporting businesses without being considered an investor or having some type of monetary interest in the welfare of the corporation, is called a bailout. Bailouts are not investments because they're ultimately funded by the people without getting anything in return. Government provides nothing monetarily. They only redistribute and manage money. What people complain about when they refer to capitalism (in favor of socialism) is actually crony capitalism...which is a misdirect term to describe socialism.
I love how this vídeo still have mostly likes that proves that You know how to aproach the topic
Yep, he is very level-headed.
Socialism has always been a wonderful economic system. The people of Venezuela have benefitted greatly from it. I just cannot understand why Americans are so critical of it. It might be because humans are ALL corrupt and that socialism simply gives the government too much power over us. They literally hold the power of deciding who lives and who dies. From food supply to health care, the government will own you. Venezuelans have no food in their grocery stores so, it matters not if they have food vouchers. People really need to wake up and understand that you have to work to have nice things. No one is going to give them to you nor should they. In 100 years we have managed to go from the Greatest Generation to the Laziest Generation. Absolutely mindboggling...
Watches "Is This The End Of Capitalism?" gets an ad for eToro :D
Yeah, the title was a question, not an answer, please note the question mark.
eToro adds are so cancerous I sold communism to a few people by saying under communism eToro wont exist.
@philajfran except there is unless you think human civilisation exists to cause humans suffering. The problem is when the free market interacts with unfree markets like China's. It forces us to compete with government industries that can drop their prices to below break-even for a decade to run us into the ground and then price gouge our entire economy.
@@DSiren Yes, but it is amazing how quickly supply chains can be altered, given the will and leadership to do so. We now are the world's largest manufacturer of ventilators; even Ford is making them!!
really ? that's funny. Try AVG ad block a free chrome plug in.
Americans should know that in Denmark we have a term "American conditions." Which describes an extreme version of whatever trying to be fixed. It is usually used in combination with violence, no care for the lowerclass, environment and society in general.
e.g. *Party opposes lowering taxes for the rich.* "We dont support this bill, as it moves us towards american conditions."
Thank you. Very well said.
Kind of a relief to learn that, on an international sort of level, we're like the problematic, exploitative uncle that's propped up as a Bad Example of where to go, legislatively speaking.
Germany: Amerikanische Verhältnisse. Same thing.
@@Mehaara infact, probably in all german speaking countries, i've heard this here in swtizerland too... I would guess its a known term in most of europe xD
So... if America is that terrible, is TRUMP actually helping all the immigrants he manages to keep out of the country?
I love America, and I love hard work. (I'm disabled and I work when ever I can) I am a conservative also. BUT I loved this video! I read the title and was like ".....so many videos are about the end of normal for meeeee" But this video was not what I thought. Thank you for such a balanced video and not just hating things. I really appreciated it!
Exactly what I was thinking! I’m a conservative myself and I saw this title and just groaned. I gave it a chance and while I still disagree with the majority of the ideas in it I do appreciate the respectful tone and the “make your own decision” type attitude rather than most of these types of videos that force communism down your throat and call you evil for believing in capitalism.
An American conservative who is happy about the lack of hate. That is refreshing. Or do you mean Joe didn't spend an uncomfortable amount of time concentrating on your core values?
@@morganthedruid1 most want less hate but the democrats want it to thrive
Dave Oc Traditional values literally revolve around trying to control others and hating others that are different. The idea that the left is intolerant is ridiculous. Maybe only true to the extent that they don’t tolerate people who can’t tolerate THEM.
It's faraway from balanced
Hey Joe, great video, your insight is always valuable. Thank you for bringing up yang's ubi. It needs to reach as many people as possible.
I will say this. I am an "essential worker." You know, those folks keeping the grocery stores, hospitals, and gas stations running to keep society from collapsing.
I am currently homeless, using the wifi at a shelter to watch this video and post this comment.
Rent is monumental. Personally, I can't afford it plus debt payments, medications, gas, and food. At one point prior to becoming homeless, I had sacrificed so much food that my blood sugar tanked and I collapsed on the floor. Meanwhile, my landlord rakes in the green.
Socialism has its perks. Capitalism has it's perks. But if we're not willing to enact a resource-based economy and deal with a potential mechano-laborious uprising, then we AT THE VERY LEAST need to strongly consider adding a substantial model of Universal Basic Income. That alone would have kept me off the streets.
Edit: Gosh, thank you for all of the likes and support! Love you guys 💜
Harsh :( Hope things get better.
@@ninstar8165 Thanks, all the best to you
Oof yeah the system fucked rn i hope things get better for you
@@deadtoallnohonornohope Thanks, and all the best to you as well
Thank you for your work
Since I'm old enough to remember the 1970s in the UK. Health care was free, university or polytechnic education was free, and so were evening classes. There wasn't so much choice in the shops (or anywhere else) as there is now, and under the "Sort of Modified Keynesian" mixed economy, there were constraints on economic activity. There were strict regulations on any kind of lending, personal or commercial and the shops were closed on Sundays, and for half a day in the week.
Public transport (Buses, trains, ferries, trams) were owned and run by local and national government, as were utilities. I bought a house, the bank lent me twice my salary, and I saved 10% of the price for my deposit, out of my pay in a factory. When I moved in, there were British Gas, and East Midlands Electricity, and British Telecommunications, no need for endless comparison sites, because that's all there was.
There was a deal, you kept your nose clean at school and there would be a job for you. There were enough places to live. The government took responsibility for those two things, and as per John Maynard Keynes, saw their duty to "Prime the Pumps" as in spend some money, in order to support working people, and keep them working.
There was, I think the same amount of money in the economy, it was spread across the whole economy better, mitigating the worst excesses of Capitalism. I'm not decided on the benefits of UBI, but a home and something to do for everyone can't be a bad start, rather than just giving people money.
I would suggest that giving people money (UBI) that they could use for buying (or renting) a place to live and upkeeping a basic lifestyle would amount to the same thing as ensuring they have a job and giving them a house, but with added flexibility of encouraging frugal lifestyles, side hustles, business creation and investing. Things that really build wealth.
I would imagine that UBI would only become necessary when automation has taken so many jobs away that there’s literally not enough to go around.
I grew up in the UK too and remember those days. As a kid I didn't realize what was the prevailing setup but I did notice a lot of hatred for Maggie Thatcher. Now I know why.
@@mk1st "Margaret Thatcher, Margaret Thatcher,
see the way she's looking atcha, she can see inside your head, she is going to steal your bread."
Rick from The Young Ones.
@@AmosIrontree the problem is that there are no homes.
Man! Your topics are so varied! Your channel is wonderful Joe - just wonderful!
Very nicely articulated. Very insightful. Really great talk. Thanks!!
This was an extremely impartial and well put together video. It’s sad how much you had to ease into it
Certainly not impartial, but very compelling nonetheless. Even with his lackadaisical delivery, I found myself getting a little passionate while watching.
@@spldrong what’s the other side
@@spldrong Enlighten us you gatekeeping capitalistic prodigy.
@@spldrong If you cant describe something simply, then you don't understand it enough.
@@spldrong Well i dont know about it being natural. If you mean back when we had tribes we worked together as hunters and gatherers so I dont see that and even if it was it doesn't mean its the way foward. Socialism means that the public owns the means of production and abolition of the commodity form. Did you read your definition of socialism on the same website people post that vaccines have microchips in them?
The following seems appropriate for this discussion. It's from an article by Matt Barnes (I think)
"Capitalism: The worst economic system, except for all the others
Capitalism is no different from anything else in this world. It is imperfect because imperfect men created it. Humans are not perfect, nor are they capable of perfection. Avarice and greed are not unique to capitalism. They were present in the USSR, and they will be present in any man-made system."
Thanks for sharing this great quote. Capitalism essentially represents the market will of the collective. Many other systems that rely on central planning rely on the will of the few. Chances are that the few eventually end with with bad or misplaced intentions.
Cringe
Jonathan Sager The problem is though, that the system would be designed by a lesser group of individuals whom are also greedy non-perfect human beings.
@@Scrinch_stole_schristmas While I think this is a good thought, I think unless you have an actual proposal its nothing more then hopes and dreams.
It's what seperates us from the other animals. The ability to lie... to ourselves and believe it over time. Silly little hairless primates with a self over complicated psyche. Nobody, I think, can be completely honest while secrets can be kept, but I think it is possible to at least try. Justify yourselves into oblivion, my great ape fellows.
got a bachelor's in economics, and this sort of discussion about 'future economics' was not present whatsoever (Aussie uni). so, i don't know any better than anyone else here, but i'll throw my hat in for a suggestion anyway:
i think the resource-based economy is the inevitable outcome, whether or not its wanted or worked towards; the idea of scarcity in a [for lack of better term] kardashev type 1+ civilization is ludicrous - even precious metals can become as common as air and water. adding in the effect of automation, there's just no escaping it.
that said, if there's no transition from contemporary capitalism to resource-based, there'll be a lot of friction (causing god knows how many social problems in the short and medium runs), so something like universal basic income (that incidentally sets the stage for impermeable consumerism) would be similarly necessary during that time.
i'm also gonna get ahead of one criticism: that being automation taking all future jobs. people have (correctly) claimed that automation in the past created more jobs than it consumed, and that made a lot of sense back in the day - a ratcheting machine does need a ratcheting machine repairman, after all. but the automation of the future is a *completely* different beast: a ratcheting machine can be repaired by a ratcheting machine repair machine (which can also be repaired by... you get the point) - where production gave way to services, services can *also* be replaced by future automation (whether its by stacking shelves in a store, to delivering food, to legal representation, to whatever you can imagine). its this paradigm that'll kill capitalism: service jobs being replace by automation have nothing (that i know of) to open a new employment vista to; the only thing left for humans at that point is art, philosophy, sports, and hobbies (since even fields of physics and medicine could conceivably become automated too!).
so that's why i feel adamant about the resource based economy perspective: all roads seem to lead to it, whether by ending scarcity (in the case of asteroid mining, etc) or by complete automation (demanding the need for non-labour based 'income')
this is tripe! The problems are twofold: 1. consumerism; 2. debt fueling consumerism. On top of that is the human need for something to do, when machines do all we have been doing. Education perhaps is the solution? But then again, a predator like humans, is always lazy, if not coerced by need, real or imagined
If you really want to be divorced from the effects of capitalism and the pseudo chains you imagine it binds you by you need to be castaway on a deserted island and hope your next meal is going to pop up out of the water without you having to dive in and catch it.......capitalism has smoothed the food train so that someone else slaughters it without you having to watch the blood flow from the food you want to eat.
@@guyvert49 i'm not sure what you're trying to say here, so imma take a stab:
consumerism isn't necessarily good, or even necessary - all people have different preferences and demands, and a resource-based economy (as in the venus project) would *ideally* flatten the demand for frivolous things. if you're arguing that, without consumerism, economies won't grow? fine, i'll grant it, but growth isn't the purpose of a resource-based economy: it's making more *efficient* use of the resources you have. imagine if, for whatever reason, no country on earth could grow their economies; this doesn't necessarily mean that the economic system fails outright, neither does it mean that the existing economic system can't be improved. instead, it means that the (only?) improvement you can make is by using your resources more efficiently, rather than by riding the coattails of economies of scale.
as an aside, i'm a frugal spender, and if everyone in my country spent like me, the economy would (probably) crash. is that a selling point for contemporary capitalism, or a point of criticism? because if it's a selling point (that consumerism is endorsed by the systems it exists within because it engenders growth), that's a crap system as it necessarily engenders waste. if it's a criticism, you're already halfway to a resource-based economy...eventually :3
also, debt-fueled consumerism? is this a caution that the debt can't be forgiven or transmogrified for a different economic system? is this a question of how prospective entrepreneurs could acquire capital to start a business? i'm not sure what exactly the worry is here...
@@gangleweed i'm not sure how you're defining capitalism here...
@@borisdaanimal4014 Venus project is just communism with a computer dictator.
The game Monopoly ends in three ways: 1) somebody wins with all the property and money. 2) players get bored and quit. 3) the losing player gets mad and upends the game with pieces and money going everywhere.
As a pro-capitalist I would welcome anti-monopoly measures.
Most people who are railing against Capitalism, are actually for capitalism. There was the idea that capitalism was evil, like a fire burning everything it touched. It was then argued that fire when properly harnessed in an engine does work. That is when regulated it can power progress. We had our greatest economic growth with that view point.
The idea was a mixed economy.
I agree, at least to the extent that large companies should be discouraged from using frivolous law suits to crush smaller companies that can't afford to keep up with the legal fees. One of my business professors told me, "If you develop a small company, and a large company wants to buy you out, take the buyout, or they will just wipe you out." The government, who employs judges, could do something to discourage these malicious practices.
I mean, Adam Smith was against monopolies. So any true Capitalist should be. What's the good of competition if there is none?
Michael-6 you are totally correct
@@abram730 Considering Capitalism has concentrated vast amounts of wealth to the very few, and at its most extreme has created massive class divisions, via liberalism and neo-liberalism, capitalism isn't peachy.
Correction: @14:55 "negative feedback loop" should actually be "positive feedback loop". Negative feedback loops are self correcting whereas positive feedback loops create a runaway condition.
I assume he meant 'a negative [affecting] [positive] feedback loop'
Good catch! So, he was thinking, a positive feedback loop with negative consequences.
@@abdallahmanasrah2317 yeah, it's very counter intuitive but science's generic meaning of positive doesn't usually align with the human meaning of positive 😅
@@hippoplatypus Does "compounding loop" and "self-correcting loop" make it clearer?
@@AshleyWilsonAU i think it's fine as "positive feedback loop"as it's followed with a well known example when used outside scientific context. Speakers/PA system screeching is likely the most common example of this that people experience as schools cannot justify hiring a fully qualified sound professional 😅
this has been a heavy topic for me that has ended in many shouting matches. the problem with current society and capitalism is the elite have a stranglehold on the population to the point where not only do they control aspects of the government, but they influence social structures and create taboos.
when people say "get a job" they don't mean create things, or invent new ways to contribute to society, they mean, go work for this corporation that doesn't value you, where your skills mean nothing, your aspirations are considered selfish and you can easily be replaced at any time.
not to mention the wealth gap. if you're rich you can get training for any job or have funds for any passion project you want, but if you're poor, you end wasting your life doing a job you don`t like with the future goal of eventually fueling your passion, but by the time you have enough you're too tired, and broken to pursue anything. And this is treated as a "normal" expectation.
Everyone is fixated on making money, not on being creative or producing things. Society itself is very toxic towards eccentric or creative thinkers, often labeling them as "autistic" or mentally ill, simply for breaking the mold and not wanted to fall under the social expectation of "Keeping up with the jone's". if someone wants to build a house out of recycled materials and live in it, because a house is too expensive, the response should not be "Look at how crazy they are".
the elitist mindset punishes people who want to be happy and innovate. the system has done nothing but offer them lemons and now society punishes people who try to make lemonade. Even UA-cam is being stigmatized as a source of income. and do you wanna know where this all comes from? the mass media, the mass media thats primarily controlled and funded by the rich, the rich... who wanna stay rich.
I'm going to leave a final note with this, ignore the elites, ignore the mass media, and ignore the society thats brainwashed into thinking that you can only buy the things that you need. build your recycled pop bottle houses, learn to fix stuff that's broken, use tools in ways they were not intended, and innovate and adapt for you and those you care about.
From where is it assumed that the "elites" come? The elites, by and large, are not born into wealth but become "elite" by dint of their own efforts. With a few exceptions, every wealthy person I know (millionaires and billionaires) came from what you might call the lower or middle classes. There are millions of millionaires in the US because of opportunities derived from capitalism. There are many routes to economic success in a capitalistic system but nowhere in history has an economic system existed that guarantees success. To conceive of a system where everyone is "economically equal" requires normative standards which, by definition, create oppression. Striving for a "more equal" society sounds like jealousy and whining because of insecurity and envy. The world economy is not a fixed "pie" from which we all must share in equal parts. With capitalism, the pie is ever-growing and there is unimited opportunity to participate in the creation of more wealth for the creator as well as those who help create.
@@jonathanmaher2680 You really should consider studying economics. I suggest the very readable book, "Economics 101", by Thomas Sowell. I think it is possible you have not been exposed to the massive amounts of money that the wealthy return to the economy through philanthropism, The numbers are staggering. Perhaps not all of the wealthy are returning all of their acquired wealth to the people of the world, but individual and corporate giving is greater in the world's most successful economy than in any country in the history of the world.
This is not to mention that "The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid roughly $616 billion, or 38.5 percent of all income taxes, while the bottom 90 percent paid about $479 billion, or 29.9 percent of all income taxes. - federal income tax data 2020," The TaxFoundation.
@Himme Himme I'm sorry if I offended you, but you might only notice the impact of philanthropy id it stopped. I like the idea of a living wage. Should there be a minimum amount of money that every person should earn regardless of the difficulty of the job or the quality of work perfomed by each worker? Try thinking about this from the perspective of an employer. Or, should all producers in a society support all others in the society if they either cannot or choose not to work?
@Himme Himme You have internet but can only eat noodles?
good job choosing the active voice over the passive, and being a clear to the point communicator!
meanwhile, in the subtitles: "donkey shane claudio gana venom um yes farfight nougat"
ok, subscribed.
Well
The comments section will be fun
Since arguing with everyone would be a mess, I'll just share something we can all agree on:
ua-cam.com/video/16W7c0mb-rE/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/rvskMHn0sqQ/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/iQhkrYqA7S4/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/yFeGNX06Zmk/v-deo.html
@DATING HARLEY QUINN I think you spoke to soon
DATING HARLEY QUINN 2 things: 1) capitalism needs not be defended, it stands on its own
2) the US is not a free market capitalist society as it once was and has been going downhill since.
"This is where the fun begins."
@DATING HARLEY QUINN isn't it funny that more socialist minded people watched the video immediately, in the middle of the work day? Weird how that works out. Perhaps you're not representative of the majority of viewers, but simply saw it first.
I was forcefully video-hugged without consent during this video. Now considering I haven't been hugged or even showed a sign of affection for years, I may/may not have enjoyed it.
Regardless you'll be hearing from my lawyers Joe.
We don't need your lawyer pulling a filibuster in the comments.
Why you got love for free and think of this.If you wanted to care for a child you would have to pay a bill.
#Trump2020
😂😂😂
does he have a HR dept. think i've been molested sort of.
I dont have to be a philosopher or an economist to know that capitalism no longer works in the same way I dont have to be a singer to know what bad singing is.
Capitalism was good, was the solution, was used and it worked. Not anymore.