Why Is America So Rich? | 5 Minute Video
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 лип 2024
- Why is America the world's richest nation? Is it mostly because of the government, or is it thanks to entrepreneurs and businessmen? Historian Burt Folsom of Hillsdale College explains.
Donate today to PragerU! l.prageru.com/2ylo1Yt
Joining PragerU is free! Sign up now to get all our videos as soon as they're released. prageru.com/signup
Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips.
iPhone: l.prageru.com/2dlsnbG
Android: l.prageru.com/2dlsS5e
Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys
Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! optin.mobiniti.com/prageru
Do you shop on Amazon? Click smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful.
VISIT PragerU! www.prageru.com
FOLLOW us!
Facebook: / prageru
Twitter: / prageru
Instagram: / prageru
PragerU is on Snapchat!
JOIN PragerFORCE!
For Students: l.prageru.com/29SgPaX
JOIN our Educators Network! l.prageru.com/2c8vsff
Script:
The United States is the world’s most prosperous economy. It’s been that way for so long -- over a hundred years -- that we take it for granted.
But how did it happen?
There are many answers, of course. One is that the United States values the free market over government control of the economy.
But here’s a point that is seldom made:
It didn’t begin that way
Before the country placed its trust in the free market, it trusted the government to make important business decisions. Or to put it another way, only after the government failed repeatedly to promote economic growth and only after private enterprise succeeded where the government failed did the United States start to develop a world beating economy.
Let’s look at three telling examples:
In 1808 John Jacob Astor formed the American Fur Company and marketed American furs around the world. Europeans adored beaver hats for their peerless warmth and durability. Astor gave them what they wanted.
Instead of leaving the fur business to capable entrepreneurs like Astor, the government decided it wanted to be in on the action.
So, it subsidized its own fur company run by a self-promoting government official named Thomas McKenney. McKenney should have won the competition. After all, he had the federal government backing him.
But while Astor employed hundreds of people and still made a tidy profit, McKenney’s company lost money every year. Finally, Congress in 1822, came to its senses and ended the subsidies for McKenney and his associates.
A similar situation developed in the 1840’s around the telegraph.
The telegraph was the first step toward the instant communication we have today. Invented by Samuel Morse, the telegraph transmitted sound - as dots and dashes representing letters of the alphabet.
Morse built his first telegraph wire between Washington, D.C. and Baltimore with the help of a government grant. Morse, more of an idealist than businessman, agreed to let the government own and operate the telegraph “in the national interest.”
But the government steadily lost money each month it operated the telegraph. During 1845, expenditures for the telegraph exceeded revenue by six-to-one and sometimes by ten-to-one. Seeing no value in the invention, Congress turned the money-loser over to private enterprise.
In the hands of entrepreneurs, the business took off. Telegraph promoters showed the press how it could instantly report stories occurring hundreds of miles away. Bankers, stock brokers and insurance companies saw how they could instantly monitor investments near and far. And dozens of other valuable uses were soon discovered.
As the quality of service improved, telegraph lines were strung across the country - from 40 miles of wire in 1846 to 23,000 miles in 1852. By the 1860s, the U.S. had a transcontinental telegraph wire. And by the end of that decade entrepreneurs had strung a telegraph cable across the Atlantic Ocean.
Why didn’t the US government profitably use what Morse had invented? Part of the answer is that the incentives for bureaucrats differ sharply from those of entrepreneurs. When government operated the telegraph, Washington bureaucrats received no profits from the messages they sent, and the cash they lost was the taxpayers’, not their own. So government officials had no incentive to improve service, to find new customers, or to expand to more cities.
For the complete script, visit www.prageru.com/videos/why-am...
Now the question is, does the welfare state subsidize degeneracy in the population?
No
The bailouts of the worthless banking elite says yes
I live in Denmark, and we have one of the lowest working morals in the world.
You can live great without a job in Denmark, which removes the need to get a job.
We have even reached a point where people were complaining that government cut the welfare even though that welfare recipients in some cases still got even more than people who had a job.
So yes it does create an unhealthy society.
It sound so great that we should help the people in need, but by doing to good a job we have made such a large part of our population dependent on the government that you only have to promise keep giving people stuff to get elected.
Preem Yes. It just pays people not to work. A good welfare net should incentivize people to work, like the Universal Basic Income - a govt payment high enough to make you scrape by. You don't lose the right to it if you work, so there is no large incentive to replace working with getting welfare.
Preem It subsidizes it but doesn't cause it. America has a small welfare state but boasts BOTH the hardest working population and the highest unemployed prime-working-age population.
There is a small correlation internationally. But a large correlation between states.
It's mostly culture.
Government should not prop up ineffective companies. Let them sink.
@Thillie Twickeywabbit no GM should have gone bankrupt.
2020 and the government just did the same crap again
You cannot just say such sweeping statements
Some companies and services are necessary even when they lose money and therefore have to be propped up. Others aren’t and therefore shouldn’t be subsided. But you cannot just say that no company should be subsidised.
That's so wrong. We humans created by the same Allah should help each other
yes! then Ford would be America’s only auto producer!
Politicians don't have an entrepreneur's mind. This is why SpaceX did what NASA could never achieve.
Eric Decamps NASA could do a lot when they were privately owned, then the government bought NASA and it started failing.
Spacex is massively subsidized
TRUE!!!
I wish I could buy a share of NASA so that they can do more in Space studies and exploration to learn more about the Universe for the good of mankind!
not always true, ISO is a government agency, but still, it has the highest launching rate from last 2years among all space agencies in the world.
*2.1 thousand angry communists and socialists*
2.5k now
Led by Pelosi, Schumer, Nadler, The Squad, Leftist governors, and other deeps state swamp monsters.
Still 2.5k
Yall are fuk'n bugn out lol yall are acting like we dont subsidize corporations today? Go to reddits unemployment page and hear from real people not ultra rich pricks like prager.
Damn Hitl*r lover
This is kind of like buzz feed but for the right.
This is for the right, BuzzFeed is for the wrong.
Joel HC but they are wrong here, America is not rich, it's trillions in debt, there are many countries with more total wealth because they managed and *regulated* their banks better.
Morru Qu'aan true, they just wanted to explain the sources of wealth and to point out examples. From these and info of recent markets history you can come up with the conclusion that USA hasn't followed the right track for a long time, not that Capitalism is wrong.
well, they haven't been following proper capitalism, its full of cronyism and that's causing a lot of problems.
NO, Prager U is not racist and they provide you with actual facts to back up their stories, plus look at their like/dislike ratio ...
some are rich ,but most of us are not.
It's always like that, resources are and always will be scarce in nature. The important bit is that people can climb up the ladder
most of us are... we take it for granted and think we aren't because we compare outselves to those richer than us, rather than those poorer
Adam Kurowski Yes! And if there are no more ladders to climb, they can make new ladders and climb those. We must all dare to become creative again. It takes creativity to survive and thrive.
Jonathan SumAKAGoogleSearch-arma2oa the poverty line in the US is the highest in the world. You can have a house, a car, internet and cable and still be under the poverty line. Fact of the matter is, wealthy people are wealthy because they took risk. Either them or heir fathers before them. Most people don't like to leave their comfort zone and stay where they're at. Nobody else made you poor. There are plenty of examples of people going from rags to riches for it to be false.
Jonathan SumAKAGoogleSearch-arma2oa Most likely you earn more than 10K a year, so yes, you are rich in comparison.
And one more reason: People who are good at politics don't understand anything but politics.
You’re saying the us government is smart when they thought they’d get away with 9/11 having no proof of an inside job? Please.
Now it is the other way around now the business men own the government..
Capitalism
Wait a minute.Prosperity is at odds with equality.No wonder progressives are opposed to the very notion.
Capitalism, sounds like the only and easiest reason to think about. There is still Government involvement to help them. I think the reason why America prospers because there is a government who is willing to provide infrastructure and military prowess to guard their property. If the government didn't build the Erie canal, would there be incentive for people to settle in the midwest? Without railways, would Chicago prosper? Without force eviction of Mexicans and Indians, would we ever settle the west?
The reason why people prosper is because there is a government which is willing to aid competition and provide the right infrastructure to let people travel where ever they want to start new businesses. That is why we have a booming industrialisation period from 1830 right up to the civil war, because the government provided the infrastructure to transport people to places where they can make their ideas grow into reality.
Capitalism is the natural state of the world, which is why it works. The natural state of the world is also evil....
The government didn't build the Erie canal. Taxpayers did, private and corporate. The government coordinated the building. But the blood, sweat, and tears were all private citizens' and private companies' subcontracted by the taxpayer with politicians taking the bow for writing the checks cashed from our accounts at the end. The government doesn't build anything in any significant sense of the word "build".
The Erie canal was administered by New York State Canal Corporation, a government corporation, and was built primarily by companies who had contracts from the government. Thus it is a government project and in most cases, engineers regard it as government built. Or else, I think Trump didn't build his Trump tower or Route 66 wasn't government built. However, I digress.
The Free market wouldn't have funded such projects as it was expensive, time costly and doesn't bring much benefits monetarily wise. Only the business friendly government which intends to expand west will do these infrastructure works.
The point of my comment was to address the common myth about capitalism being the sole reason why America prospers. There are always a few factors to building America as what it is today, and government is one of the major reasons.
Beautiful free market capitalism
nattygsbord then it isn't socialism
WooWooWooWoo!!!
nattygsbord
Do you have any evidence or even an anecdote? Or do you just expect people to agree because rich bankers are an easy target?
1. The rich in the United States are always fluctuating. If you look at the top 10 richest people, most were not born rich. Therefore I have to ask, why did those rich people plan for so many new people to get rich instead of themselves? There are also many rich people who lose their fortune from bad investments and high spending.
2. What tools do these rich people have to keep themselves rich and plan the economy? Bankers do reject many loan applications, but they are eager to loan money to someone they think will succeed and become rich. Their biggest tool is the government which they constantly lobby for subsidies and for laws that hurt their competitors more than themselves.
3. The economy consists of millions of individual voluntary transactions that are made every single day by ordinary people. Unless you can implement some form of force (using government), you won't have much control. Without government backing, your best course of action to get rich is to provide a better cheaper service so that many more people will voluntarily choose to buy your product/service instead of your competitors. Apple didn't get rich from stealing money. Every transaction was voluntary because people wanted an iPod/iPhone. Now that they are rich, they still can't force anyone to buy an iPhone instead of a Samsung, HTC, or an old flip phone. They still need to innovate or eventually go out of business... or ask for government help if they can't keep producing things we want to buy.
So in summary: The rich control the economy mostly through government... but it is really the rich and not government that is to blame.
The unfortunate side effect of blaming "the rich" is that I will automatically become one of this evil and corrupt group as soon as I make over a certain threshold of money. I'd rather point to corrupt individuals and target them rather than blaming an entire economic class of people that is constantly fluctuating. If the problem is as widespread as you say it is, finding the individuals shouldn't be a problem. Then we can join together to fight against the corruption.
Also, Apple is rich so there must be some way they exploited us. They did so by stealing technology and putting it on devices that millions of people wanted to buy... but they didn't contribute to society because they didn't pay enough taxes. Society would be better off if we didn't have nice mp3 players and smart phones because that isn't how you contribute to society. You contribute to society by paying more money to a government that doesn't produce anything. The government needs all the money it can get so that it can give out even more favors to the politically well connected.
I am not saying Apple is a model company or beyond reproach. In fact, I am generally against Apple for many reasons, but if any person or company can produce something I want to buy, it doesn't make them evil because they get rich from the money I voluntarily give them. I would be happier if companies paid NO taxes so that everyone could have cheaper goods. On the flip side, I want a government that gives NO subsidies so that businesses will go out of business when they no longer provide something people want to buy.
Anyway, I see that you are fairly entrenched in your belief system. I am not really trying to convince you one way or another. If you are ever in the mood to learn something new even if it goes against your currently held world-view I would recommend reading Free to Choose by Milton Friedman. Sorry for the long posts, have a great day!
thats why government should be smaller :)
Walk into any DMV and you know why you don't want govt to be creating jobs....
Evan Chan Excellent Logic
That my friend is a great example! Cheers!
i dont disagree but can you explain and elaborate please?
This video honestly kills socialism without even mentioning it.
no?
It doesn't
Sweden: Am i a joke to you?
@@WhateverDudeMan Sweden is not Socialist.
@@zwiebelface185 what is it then?
Thanks to great capitalism #maga
marlin lol ur funny
marlin if you had half the brain that you pretend to have "comrade" you would know that slavery actually stifles the American economy slavery destroys incentive One has only to look at The poverty-stricken mountains of Appalachia some of those areas still haven't recovered from the lack of incentive from having no pay for your work in slavery days. As for imperialism in your watered down two dimensional attempt to America as just another empire is laughable The extension of American power to distant territories and initially hostile cultures never depended on military force alone. In the grueling struggle in the Philippines for instance the United States exceeded through generous policies during the occupation as much is through courage on the battlefield Max Boot describes US efforts in his book The Savage Wars of Peace "soldiers built schools ran sanitation campaigns, vaccinated people, collected customs duties, set up courts run by natives, supervised municipal elections and generally administered governmental functions efficiently and honestly. A Thousand idealistic young American civilians Journey to the Philippines to teach school in a precursor of the peace corps (an icon of American liberalism)" Manuel Quezon, Who became the first president of the independent commonwealth of the Philippines in 1935 once served as a major in the army fighting to resist the American forces during the Philippine American war and lamented the American kindness that undermine his insurrection against the Americans because so many of his people liked them. Quezon, openly saying in frustration at the time "damn the Americans! Why don't they tyrannize us more?!!!!!"
i was joking but ok
trump's economic plan is not free market at all
+ ari maki
Trump is on record saying he is against free market economy, you dumb shit!
ELON MUSK USES GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES!
*runs away*
He does use government subsidies, but the company Tesla makes a loss almost every quarter and above all hasn't made a yearly profit ever since it's existence.
that is the point he makes profit from other companies + subsidies to fund his failing companies that ARE TRYING TO SAVE THE WORLD FROM CLIMATE CHANGE AND OVERPOPULATION
That explains why his company Tesla is failing, can't solve the problems with its products, and hasn't ever made a profit. A great woman once said, "If you are too stupid to figure out simple things like how to make a profit in business, then you are too stupid to do anything more important as well. Humble yourself, go work for somebody who knows what they are doing, and learn from them, before you screw up everybody else's lives as much as you've screwed up your own."
AL: yes true and the buyers also get subsidies [up to $7,500] -- that is they TAKE your hard worked for earn income and give it to those that are wealthy enough and smart enough; of course there are all those that have jobs resulting from the Tesla...its complicated social situation
the jury is still out on Tesla, they are burning government grants and the cars sell at a loss; no one knows the future so we do not know yet if Tesla motors will be a success on its own accord; wish Elon and all success for all of America
Capitalism would like to know your location
The reason is : MILITARY POWER AND ME
Hey, military power, you and ME TOO!!!
GOVT should never control any production or service !!!
not even talking of necessary needs such as water, healthcare and food
TheWorldEnd2 Food is privatized.
FOOD should be privatized. Everything should be privatized with a HUGE tax on excess profits.
mba2ceo The Gov't should not be able to set a cap on how much a company can make by heavily taxing profits. Thats is just going to drive up how much product costs and lower worker wages.
Not true. Cost & servitude is determined by supply and demand and is NO WAY AFFECTED BY TAXATION.
This is one of the best PragerU videos yet. The free market has done more to eliminate poverty, death, disease, and suffering more than every government redistribution program in history, combined. By global standards, America's poor is *upper* "middle class". It's absolutely *horrifying* that modern college students are actively protesting for *less* freedom, protesting *for* implementing speech codes and government-implemented socialism.. This generation thinks that the noble way to live is to essentially embrace the communist regimes that their grandparents fought to eliminate! American "higher education" means *nothing* anymore, and desperately needs to be reformed. Make American great again, and keep fighting the good fight!
(Not saying that it ever has been anything but great, but it could use improvement these days)!
J. Gona.... Where did you go to college ? ..lol
There is a place for "regulation" -- the "Savings and Loan" disaster of the 1980's was a direct result of member banks of the Federal Reserve seeking to promote deregulation of elements of the banking industry. Savings and loans were required to clear their funds through the Federal Reserve system. In the 1980’s banking was benefiting from large data and could see the amount of the loans, the money that was not under their control. The artificial rise in the interest rate by increasing the overnight lending rate of the member banks of the Federal Reserve had a devastating impact on the Savings and loans. The bankers were able to have a fraction of their loans covered by actual assets of their institution, they were allowed to borrow from other “member” banks of the Federal Reserve to cover their asset requirements. The Savings and Loans did not have this ability, if they lent a dollar, they had to have a dollar in assets. These institutions issued “certificates of deposit” for long terms at rates that had been fairly stable and predictable. But their loans were made for 20 years at a set rate for home mortgages. Instantly the increase in the overnight lending rate increased rapidly even higher than 12%, the bankers had their money in shorter term certificates of deposit as well as the advantage of borrowing from the member banks to cover their percentage of assets required to keep the bank regulatory agencies appeased. The savings and loan industry was eliminated overnight. The bankers were the heroes who took o all these long-term loans at low interest rates, but quickly the overnight lending rate decreased so the bankers had gained a segment of the financial market that had escaped their grasp. This was a part of the beginning of the push to deregulate the banking industry, they had been forbidden to have multiple banks across state lines, strange holding companies in foreign companies began to own banks in different states, the sales of securities had been a separate industry, insurance, the list goes on. Banking wanted to have the ability to be a part of any movement of a dollar. This similar history can be told of the 2008 financial crises. The sub-prime lending rates (Who was making these loans? No one seems to ever talk about this? But the answer is out there.) Who was “forced” to take on the mess of “country wide”? I am not saying these are not cleaver takeovers but if the regulatory agencies would have had their eyes open, they could have seen these coming years before it happened. It was absolutely obvious to me and I don’t even watch these indicators any longer. A clear separation in aspects of the money supply in the USA would benefit from strict regulatory guidelines. Unless you are a member of the Federal Reserve system.
J. Gona the free market didn’t really do a ton to regulate death and poverty? Look back at late 1800s with no anti trust laws / activity. People made low wages and worked high hours. Nice try buddy ;)
@@CaptiveReefSystems Agree.
Not a word about FED (Federal Reserve System). Really?
Alexis Lysenko it’s theirs baby
next time---that is a topic too big to be part of another video.
@@lucasirnaten5098 prager u wanted to get rid of ss and fed idiot
The fed reserve impacts your personal life, how?
If the fed didn't exist we would be 100 times more wealthy
Tell that to your cat. I have been there five times, but don't feel like visiting a country with rude customs, an infrastructure in ruins, too many guns (bat shit crazy NRA), shiny corporate offices versus waisted neighborhoods a block away, failing healthcare, credit card culture (buying crap with no money), a politically embedded military culture that is gobbling up way too much budget, corruption within the political elite beyond belief, corrupt law enforcement, poor education, scam universities overcharging students. A country full of potential, but unfortunately sinking into poop thanks to corruption, greed and short sighted thinking.
Damn, I know I'm a year late, but go off Chief
This comment is very relevant in my current timeline
Based on what is the USA the worlds most prosperous economy?
It's not the fastest growing and doesn't have the highest GDP per capita. Sure you could measure the whole nations GDP but that doesn't sit right, as india and mexico are then more proserous than switzerland..
even if you use GDP per capita and measure it on a PPP (purcharsing power parity) level. The USA is the only substantially big country that is near the top. It is only beaten by smaller and typically natural resource rich nations like Qatar, Norway, Brunei, and other tiny city states. USA ranks no.1 or no.2 at total GDP and the only large nation that is so high up on the GDP per capita list. Therefore it is not wrong to call it the most prosperous economy.
I never really got how people would compare the entire united states to much smaller countries and say it's not great because it's not as successful or not as safe because they have successful gun bans; America is a huge country with a big population it's nowhere near as easy to regulate as those tiny EU countries, it's like saying it's as easy for a mother to take care of one kid as it is to take care of six kids (though if we're being accurate it would be more than that.).
On the other does America have the reserve currency, and when it negotiates trade deals it does offer a market of 300+ million people which gives a bit more bargening power than if Macedonia would try to make some global trade deals. And if social reforms would be too difficult at Federal level, America could just imitate European countries and do it at the state level instead.
So having a big country got both advantages and disadvantages.
Why are you looking at GDP? Why not innovations, standard of living, available education options, medical advancements, etc? Even with all the hate directed at the US health care system people still fly in from other countries to have surgeries done here for the latest procedures and quality. Prospering doesn't refer to government revenues or GDP necessarily.
singularity_is_unstoppable
And guess what? The highest paying Swedish jobs pay about $50,000 a year. The AVERAGE American job pays about $55,000 a year, and our highest pay goes up to $350,000+. If you don't open a business. If you do open a business though, America has the best business oppourtunies on Earth.
there is no free marcket in todays capitalism big companies just crush small businesses they completly tear the market and politics to their advantage. Adam smith would not say that we are leaving in a liberal economy
Cédric Sorry to say it but that is free market. Economic growth doesn’t happen by stepping aside and letting the little guy steal your costumers. Capitalism is great because of competition. If small companies want to become large they need to make something revolutionary. They need be able to compete with the big guys by making better products which makes the big guys make better products to be able to compete. That’s why capitalism brings with it so much technological advancement. Competition drives innovation in free market. If you can’t compete then you better innovate to be able to.
The reason small businesses get crushed is because it is so ridiculously expensive to run a business. The reason for this has to do with a lot of government involvement which makes it difficult to start a small business. In a lot of situations just to get licensing and approval can cost millions, which someone can't do if you aren't rich/have the backing of those who are. This causes a loop where the only companies that can survive are the ones that the system benefits, and it only benefits them because the government interferes with the economy.
@@kyloren7892 then less regulation is the answer, free market and less government regulation go hand in hand not the other way round.
Government should get out of the way as much as possible.
The simplest answer is also the hardest (any question can be handled on its own)
Pienso que este profesor es muy inteligente !! Gracias por este vídeo tan informativo !! Un saludos
..........but we are trillions and trillions and trillions in debt.....
Roy Paris why do I feel like we are economically weaker then we use to be
bcs of Obama
You are not economicly weaker just the other countries like India China etc. growed as well.
*I found this comment that will help put your doubts into perspective:*
"People here only mentioning the $19T of US public debt and saying the US is bankrupt. Please take an accounting course before making such silly comments. The $19T debt is backed by the full taxing authority of the US gov't, which is expected to bring in $3.7T of revenues in 2018. The US gov't can borrow MUCH, MUCH MORE than the current debt and still be comfortably solvent. As with private companies, the debt provides leverage and can boost performance when things go well since it creates new industries that hire people, make profits, thus increasing the base of that taxing authority. If anyone hasn't noticed, the US economy, represented by the stock mkts and housing prices, is revving like an F1 super car.
From a balance sheet perspective, the combined financial assets of the US is around $270T, while the combined public and private debt is $146T, giving it a net worth of $124T. Assets - Liabilities = Equity. The gov't sector is the ONLY sector w/ a negative net worth of about $11T, which can easily be absorbed by the private sector if needed. But we don't do that in the US like they do in socialist countries because we respect private property and the sweat (& risk) that is required to produce it.
Economically, the US is the healthiest it has ever been."
No, the Government is trillions in debt. Private industries are not.
This is the quickest I've gotten to a prageru vid
Competition is one of the prime reasons a market economy works. As in nature, the more intelligent, the swifter , the stronger prosper and thrive. Those better able to adapt do well. A market economy does the same.
Thank yo9u, Professor Burton Folsom and Praeger University. I would love to see this updated with more recent examples of government intervention, Ii.e., auto manufacturing, windmills and solar.
3:58 sounds like my cell phone provider...
Completely agree. Free enterprise (with a massive population) is the reason the US is able to surpass every other nation in its economic output, however, there are many things today which may stifle the growth of the economy.
High economic burdens on small business owners and entrepreneurs discourage innovation.
Extreme wealth inequality results in fewer chances for entrepreneurs to start businesses or sell ideas.
Outsourcing means fewer business owners are willing to stay and innovate within the country.
Unchecked capitalism results in non-competitive marketplaces.
Unchecked bureaucracy results in non-competitive marketplaces.
Low-quality infrastructure means any production is far less productive.
Government lobbying by unions is bad for business
Government lobbying by business is bad for other businesses
A government that doesn't represent the people is unable to policies that would increase growth, freedoms and happiness within society (what the people want).
These are only but a few issues that plague the growth (both economic and social) in the US, and the only way these issues can be solved is through discussion, reason and an open mind.
-The low wage share and the high capital share out of the profits have lead to an unequal economy where the rich are getting richer while social mobility is getting harder for the hardworking bottom 95%, and with less money in their pockets its harder to keep spending up - which is the income source for buisnesses.
- The high indebtibness have lead to money is getting sucked out from the economy. WIth lower interest rates on loans the nation would see that money going into consumer spending, buisness profits, job creation, and the increased demand would make it more profitable to expand production by investing in new factories and more machines that increase productivity and wages.
Hey its someone intelligent
Not to mention copyright, which it's supposed to increase innovation and creativity, but it backfired.
1."High economic burdens on small business owners and entrepreneurs discourage innovation."
I assume you mean government burdens, such as taxes and regulations. Yes.
2. "Extreme wealth inequality results in fewer chances for entrepreneurs to start businesses or sell ideas. "
No. Lack of wealth will do that, but inequality has no effect on the matter.
3. "Outsourcing means fewer business owners are willing to stay and innovate within the country. "
Not true. Outsourcing allows companies to make bigger profits and employ and serve more people overall. This adds much more to the economy than it would if they could not outsource. It makes things cheaper, too.
4. "Unchecked capitalism results in non-competitive marketplaces."
That's literally the opposite of how it works. Truly free market capitalism mandates competition. It is government that limits competition.
5." Unchecked bureaucracy results in non-competitive marketplaces."
Yep.
"Low-quality infrastructure means any production is far less productive."
True...maybe if government didn't control infrastructure that wouldn't be such a big problem then...
6. "Government lobbying by unions is bad for business
Government lobbying by business is bad for other businesses"
Wouldn't matter if the government didn't have the authority to regulate and tax companies like they do.
7. "A government that doesn't represent the people is unable to policies that would increase growth, freedoms and happiness within society (what the people want)."
Not all people (actually, not most people) want freedom. That's why we have half the country for Democrats and half of the other half voting for neocon leftist Republicans.
nah, unchecked capitalism is dangerous. Look at the banking crisis, look at telecom in germany, look for microsoft, look at the asia crisis, look for 재벌 in korea. Ever wondered why the Justice Antitrust Devision exist? Sorry, it is not that easy. Unregulated capitalism lead to all the economic bubbles we had. Your ideas were disproved 100 years ago.
Mrs Anna is legit and her method works like magic I keep on earning every single week with her new strategy
My first investment with Mrs Anna gave me profit of over $24,000 us dollars and ever since then she has never failed to deliver and I can even say she's the most sincere broker I have known
Who's this professional everyone is talking about I always see her post on top comment on every UA-cam video I watched
I think I'm interested how can I get in touch with Mrs Anna
I lost $1200 carelessly trading on a platform then I was referred to expert Mrs Anna she recovered the loss and made an extra profit of $4600
You can reach her via WhatsApp.👇
Oh sure ±➀➄➀➇➂➀⓪➁➁➁➂🇺🇸
The telegraph wire never made it to Japan. :'( lol
Here's an example, but beforehand: *WARNING: The following message contains content that people without a sense for satire may find disturbing.*
Libya is being ruled by Gaddafi and is also ripe with oil...So America sees this and is all like: "Looks like Libya needs a few dozen packages of "Freedom" oh and while we're at it, let us liberate you of this foul blackened water..."
Royal Gopnik the mainland Chinese are well off. The next Chinese golden age is approaching. By 2030-50 China might surpass the US economy. No, there debt is not an issue. Here's why and here are some numbers:
The U.S. national debt grew by just a bit more than $600 billion in fiscal year 2017, almost half the average annual growth seen in the Obama years. The national debt ended at $20.244 trillion on the last business day of September, an increase of $671 billion from the start of the fiscal year in October 2016.
At the end of FY 2018 the total government debt in the United States, including federal, state, and local, is expected to be $24.6 trillion.
Student loans and mortgages are marketed as good debt. But having credit card debt is considered bad. The conventional wisdom is that it's okay to take on debt that has the potential to either increase your net worth or boost your earnings potential.
The national debt (or government debt) of the People's Republic of China is the total amount of money owed by the government and all state organizations and government branches of China. As of March 2016, it stands at approximately CN¥ 28 trillion (US$ 4.3 trillion), equivalent to about 41% of GDP.
awww, to look at the world though a child's eyes
So how much oil do we import from Libya?Not very much at allwww.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm
RIP colonel Muammar Gaddafi.
Minor point: SOME in mainland China are well off. Most rurals are struggling in farms, sweatshop factories, shanty towns, and worse. Still, the prospects *seem* to be improving.
This explains the great service I received from USPS and the DMV, thank you!
Progress takes hard work and creativity. Both mean leaving your comfort zone, something people generally don't like to do if they don't have to. Public sector folks don't have to, it's not like there's a competing government you have to worry about. Private sector folks don't have that luxury. If they don't move to improve their product, their competition will, so they have to. That's why free market economies thrive, while managed economies stagnate.
I think when it really comes down to it, it's geographical positioning. Started from beating the British (that too, partly thanks to geograqphical positioning) America sits alone, as far as possible from any would-be competition. This has given America many luxurious opportunities throughout history. The opportunity to profiteer from all the other countries blowing each other to bits at various points in time was the kick-starter to the superpower we know today. It enabled America to fund it's now unrivalled military, which it now uses to "liberate" sandy countries with lots of oil.
And then the other choices in this video also apply.
I don`t think that`s true. The place where USA is, have people before the times pilgrim came to America. And the native american achieve nothing with these land. So i think what this video says is all true.
We are rich in debt.
Calvin Brown rich in food stamps
Tell that to our GDP
Japan debt is 3x times larger than usa..
What's China's GDP? What's China's Debt? Germany's? France's? Britain's? Netherland's? Russia's? 🤔
We need to increase that debt. Our economy is doing good. How about we decrease tax revenue! (Sarcasm). Our grandkids are paying our current tax cuts.
People here only mentioning the $19T of US public debt and saying the US is bankrupt. Please take an accounting course before making such silly comments. The $19T debt is backed by the full taxing authority of the US gov't, which is expected to bring in $3.7T of revenues in 2018. The US gov't can borrow MUCH, MUCH MORE than the current debt and still be comfortably solvent. As with private companies, the debt provides leverage and can boost performance when things go well since it creates new industries that hire people, make profits, thus increasing the base of that taxing authority. If anyone hasn't noticed, the US economy, represented by the stock mkts and housing prices, is revving like an F1 super car.
From a balance sheet perspective, the combined financial assets of the US is around $270T, while the combined public and private debt is $146T, giving it a net worth of $124T. Assets - Liabilities = Equity. The gov't sector is the ONLY sector w/ a negative net worth of about $11T, which can easily be absorbed by the private sector if needed. But we don't do that in the US like they do in socialist countries because we respect private property and the sweat (& risk) that is required to produce it.
Economically, the US is the healthiest it has ever been.
Yeah, and soon corporations will have machines to replace almost everybody and the rich will have more elbow room.
@@Itsatz0 that will happen in 2050 at the earliest. you have till then to be educated and so you're not easily replaced
@@tobiasit2190 It's happening now. Whenever a technology comes along that replaces humans, humans are replaced. Driverless taxis, robots that lift heavy things in the warehouse. Better to move to China, where machines cannot replace people if it puts them out of work.
Spend all you want the US will make more paper for you to use...
@@drbrown2402 Good, I can use the extra toilet paper.
what I really want to know and this video and many others don't explain me is how was the US in the 1700's, 1800's...were you already a superpower? Did you have poverty? What kind of congressmen you had? Were people more educated in comparison with other "new" countries?
What I leant from this video: If incentives are properly examined and set, public company can be inovative and efficient.
The saying goes the Freer the Market the Freer the People
Excellent video. Congratulations for communicating the truth in such a clear, concise and essential manner.
As an American I think Canada and the United Kingdom should become just as rich
Yeah but they aren’t
Canada is mostly wasteland, and the UK is as big as Michigan
Mr.Burton Folsom. i"m from India, your words say the indeed depth of economic revolution raised and spreaded over the oceans, and your analysys on that economy proves your knowledge strength ...days will change soon..
you only say the outcome but not the reasons. this video is completely uneducational
Free Market Capitalism.
If you actually listened to the whole video, you would have gotten the reasons. I was saying the same thing when I got around to half the video and then I waited. Patience is a virtue.
yes it did say the reasons at 4:32-5:10-5:30
INCENTIVE.
Because we have a debt based economy
Right! You are reach with debts.
Dont worry Money is just an illusion .
karan verma it’s what keeps the word moving!!! Also America has the brains and that goes a long way!!!
John Brogan - that's not the reason. Most economies are consumer based. The US was for a long, long time the world's biggest exporter of goods until recently replaced by China. The answer is long, historical and complicated and relates to geography, timing, some luck, hard work, war, and is also influenced by the character and attitudes of the migrants that left Europe for the new world.
An interesting theory of why Americans are so entrepreneurial is actually a kind of genetic argument... Think about the type of people who were brave enough and willing to take the risk to leave Europe for a new life hundreds of years ago... amongst these people you would have thousands upon thousands of people willing to work hard to make their families lives better. People that wanted to chase opportunities in a free market society to make money. Then fast forward a few hundred years and these genes are more widespread in American society than anywhere else. I heard this argument not long ago and thought it was quite interesting anyway... this is obviously just one of many many factors that have made the US so unbelievably successful.
"An interesting theory of why Americans are so entrepreneurial is actually a kind of genetic argument... Think about the type of people who were brave enough and willing to take the risk to leave Europe for a new life hundreds of years ago... amongst these people you would have thousands upon thousands of people willing to work hard to make their families lives better. People that wanted to chase opportunities in a free market society to make money. Then fast forward a few hundred years and these genes are more widespread in American society than anywhere else." well, the same happened to all the "american continent" and not all the "american countries" are rich, or so entrepreneur as americans, but the other part of your comment was interesting, but of course it is more complex than just that, if you think well all countries export goods and services(maybe it's different if you count countries that exports commodities, but i think you can count that as a good maybe? wathever) the difference is the relation between how much people want that good, and how much are producing(there are more things like productivity and so on...), (supply and demand) if you produce something that a lot of people want really badly and not so much people produce it the way you do, you are going to make a lot of money until someone else do the same as you and then you will have to innovate(that's the reason why the richest civilizations are so much more innovative than the poorest ones, if they don't, they lose market and money) so if you link that to china and usa, you can figure out that these countries are the ones most inovative and that produce the goods and services that most people want and buy, i'm not talking about only electronics and cars or that kind of product, I'm talking about all kind of markets and products, chips for motherboards, cellphones, eletric components, plastic products, tvs, beds, machines for extracting minerals, machines for industries in general and so on and on... it's scary when you think about how much things you buy that was made by people from these two countries, and the thing is these two countries nowdays are in the group of countries with the greater economic freedom in the world with greater population that makes that country so much economically influent, of course it is not as simple as that either, but i can't make a book in an youtube comments section and that's the simpler i could make it.
This has provided my with an excellent point, so thank you.
except its a a gross oversimplification. I give a 3 out of 10
0:09 Hey I live in Folsom CA!
,,Rich'' the Us has 20 Trillion debts
Sirius HD there are still 10Tn dollars missing.
Sirius HD yea but guess what if I had 40 bucks and you had 80 you asked for 20 to make 100 I could loan it to you because you already have more than me and can indefinitely pay me back that's called power people wouldn't loan the u.s. if they didn't think they would get it back
Basic economics will teach wealth is determined by GDP. Which is why we are rich. Not because of our debt. Actually terrifies me that so many people commented this same comment as you. School systems are failing us. This video is a historic break down as to why our GDP is as high as it is today
Granted, corps take billions on tax exemptions and foreign financial heavens...
1. In global economics debt doesnt mean youre broke.
2. We are a debtor nation.. our economy functions on debt.
1.130 communists dislikes, so far.
I want free market for Brazil !
We are two!!!
Tamo Junto!
ENEPEPE Rafa me too , my dream
Fazer o Brasil grande de novo!!!!
Victims of color revolution brainwash.
So, do you mean that the key is on privatize everything?
Education, health care, and security should be under government. Business should be given to private enterprise.
@@oscarchute5702
Not education.
@@cydra-evolution5623 yeah maybe not education
No mention of having a vast continent to develop and build upon?
It's true what the video says. But it is not the main reason why America is rich. There are a lot of other countries that encourage private companies over state companies. The main reason why America is rich it's because it won WW2. It's not an attack.
Half true. Though not the sole reason, alot of of the US' prosperity after WWII is due to the simple fact that you weren't invaded. When every single 1st world country lay in ruins and had to be rebuilt, you already had the factories, the infrastructure and the resources.
america has a lot of money because it has a lot of people. when you compare gdp per capita, many "socialist" countries are almost as rich or even richer.
So that makes China the wealthiest country in the world. Besides the fact that they all work in factories making 2 cents per hour.
Simon Khorolskiy china's gdp per capita is much lower than usa. It's PPP Gdp is larger.
Lucian cahil America does have higher GDP per capita than most socialist countries. Do you really you can honestly tell people in Cuba and Venezuela that their average wealth is higher than ours?
The average person in the US has more property and money than the average person in Venezuela. Look at how bad it is there.
Yourtube compared to its GDP percentage in debt not much, most of it is owed by domestic investors and it ranks better than other nations like the UK and Japan
The finest minds in the world teaching the world through PregarU.
The short answer is: genuine MERITOCRACY. The government does not, in general, employ the best people to perform the job while private companies , again not all the time but in general, hire the best people they can find to do the job. Having said that privatization of infrastructure and other public services is usually not beneficial to the wide public as often the quality of services is diminished and prices increased after a private company takes over.
Absolutely
Why are subsidies still given to companies like Exxon? Thank You
Good question.
Because politicians want to sit on Exxon's board and make millions of dollars after they quit working in government.
Hi, I also don't like TYT but I do like the Jimmy Dore Show. I agree with your point however it seems that the professor is pointing out that subsidies are anti free market but I want to hear him say that Exxon should not receive a handout from the government. I'm not for sure but I don't think he will.
Exxon buys politicians.
to keep gas prices low
Why do they pay the most for so many things? Why does such a rich country have so many poor people? Why is a rich country $20,000,000,000,000 in debt?
Poor in the US is not like poor in most countries.
Because the government sucks.
David Darling
You should see some of the shit-shacks people live in in Appalachia.
The biggest differences is they have a laptop, aren't starving, but trust me, they're still poor by North American/European standards.
How bad would it need to be for you to personally consider their quality of life to be not good?
It would be hard growing up in poverty. What is considered poverty in the US by dollar amounts could be considered middle class in many places even Europe. Remember the poor in the US do get Healthcare, housing,food. I disagree that they are poor compared to European standards. IT's a misconception. mises.org/blog/poor-us-are-richer-middle-class-much-europe
Now when I traveled to India and the Philipines, that is true poverty.
David Darling
We have people deciding between paying for their medication or their rent.
Yes, there are poor Americans.
Just because they're not as poor as Indians that scavenge for scraps by the train tracks doesn't mean they're not poor.
I've seen crap-holes like that too, but we expect it there.
God Bless America✨
Great Informative Video, Thanks ton for Sharing !!!!
Thank you for explaining this so simply and succinctly. This fact about the impact of entrepreneurship is why I believe so fervently in supporting entrepreneurs in any way possible. And that's why I provide consulting exclusively for entrepreneurs. No one understands an entrepreneur except another entrepreneur.
..
Jesus Christ is the only hope in this world no other gods will lead you to heaven
There is no security or hope with out Jesus Christ in this world come and repent of all sins today
Today is the day of salvation come to the loving savior Today repent and do not go to hell
Come to Jesus Christ today
Jesus Christ is only way to heaven
Repent and follow him today seek his heart Jesus Christ can fill the emptiness he can fill the void
Heaven and hell is real cone to the loving savior today
Today is the day of salvation tomorrow might be to late come to the loving savior today
Holy Spirit Can give you peace guidance and purpose and the Lord will
John 3:16-21
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Mark 1.15
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Hebrews 11:6
6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Jesus
Burton is a very underrated advocate for free market capitalism. Makes his point clearly and without pretentiousness. God knows we need more of that.
I’ve never heard these stories. What are your sources?
Well said, the subsidies of business come from the research and development dollars spent in funding projects at MIT, Berkley, and the list is long to include Vanderbilt University, the complexity of the projects that are being resolved is far beyond the means of anyone trying to make a dollar from the product produced. Free enterprise has taken the "glues" the "graphene", the "physics", discovered, theorized, in these institutions to include the hundreds of products developed by NASA, the list is nearly endless. As an "entrepreneur" it takes great incentives to take some strange product such as "Aerogel" (super-insulator) and make a commercially via the product. The discovery, the science may not have produced the process, actual end-user product but this is revolutionary. Sometimes it seems that the "government" has to "invest" in an industry before the visible evidence is there for the entrepreneur to be able to see the clear lines of profit. I would argue that Mr. Charles Koch appreciated the investment in chemical engineering that was made at Yale as he became educated in industrial chemical processes. Much of the funding coming through research grants from the government, through private foundations, brilliant students, creating the perfect storm of mixing philosophy, a family of strong enterprising entrepreneurs, educated professors (working on their dream projects but also teaching the basics), to glean that information and make the practical applications that has awarded him and thousands of others around the world. I am certain that his corporations have not discovered all of the processes used to make the "glues" that used in the lamination of wood for example. I agree with your premise it is ignoring the strong partnership between the government and free enterprise.
Because we are not Russia.
DeepBlue bcoz u all steal oil
Interesting what "the sanctions" have achieved since 2002.
Russia had to modernise and get with the program - and they *are* doing just that.
+DeepBlue
_Because we are not Russia_
Perhaps if it was the other way around, and Russians had invested in the establishmen of a sick ideology in USA and some 30% of the population (the most productive) of the USA was exterminated, another 20% was going in and out of the gulags and the rest 50% was working robotically under the drum beat of the establishment, perhaps then USA would not be as rich.
Because America is not Vietnam, congratulations
+ Panos A
...Your comment literally has no sense. Looks like i needa be a telepath to understand it.
Even the pilgrims tried socialism first. When it failed they resorted to incentives, which succeeded.
How do we explain Valleant and Shkreli price gauging?
A debt growing every second by the millions
America is rich because of our great military. If it wasn't for us winning all those wars and acquiring natural resources and land, we wouldn't be so rich
Yea . That's true
Yeah thats true. People shouldn't complain about government spending so much money in military, it is the main reason America is still alive today and it is the reason it is rich.
Plundering oil you mean
If we are such a prosperous nation, why does over half of america make 30,000 or less?
Why should a person have to work 40 hours a week and still be in poverty?
Why has profit always gone up [ overall since 1950 to 2010 ], but workers wages have stagnated and gone down since ~1972?
You ask the real questions.
because of the extreme wealth inequality. America is rich for the rich. There over 46 million people in America that rely on food stamps. Its ridiculous. yes itis the 'richest' country (17 trillion $ debt ahum) however in a social way it is the poorest
What the hell 30k a year in most countries is middle class...
Patrick Roybal Depending on where you live in America 30k per year is sufficient. Not so much if you have children.
ahhahaha, I live in Ukraine, and I earn about 200$/month, and it's quite okay. and you complain about "o gosh, I make less than 30k, I am so so much poor(((" you make me laugh))) You ctually proved that the USA is rich nation, if annual wage under 30k is considered low...
Another example would be the railway services, where a less the optimal system has been replaced with a free market shit storm of more expensive death traps, as prices have gone up while safety's gone down. Explain that one away.
One of the best videos yet.....why we haven't learned yet is beyond me. Wow
@Flashback Cubsfan We learn but we forget that is why every generation has to be reminded.
Yeah, WWl and ll didn't help at all.
lol....you..know..how..much...wars..cost?
Look up when the USA became the worlds largest economy (hint:it was before WWI)
And the Cold War
rcmunro22 you know how much we gained?
Despite what you may think, War is not a net wealth generator. It is a destroyer of wealth. Because capital and manpower that went into the war effort could have been utilized in an activity that produced future returns, that's called opportunity cost. When a tank construction and design is successful, the best outcome is that it ends the war earlier, in other words, a successful armament is one which enables its own disuse because it only serves one function. A tractor, on the other hand, is designed to continuously produce yields and profit. You need to read Bastiat.
China, also need to learn its own lessons. Thanks for this video as we are all so similar disregarding we live in different zone.
Next iteration of this principle: space travel.
Of I were in USA
PragerU - your videos are amazing! I'm 66 and have wondered WHY WHY WHY so many things are messed-up that it seems (to me, anyway) should be easy to fix. Each time I watch one of your broadcasts, which goes into something I wonder, I come away with what I KNOW TO BE the correct answer / solution.
This video was THE PERFECT EXAMPLE of why, every time the government interferes with things, those things go from bad to worse.
I TRY TO IMAGINE what the government would be like if it were run by entrepreneurs - whose salary/bonus would be tied to them doing what they were hired to do...
The biggest drain on the economy is the unaccountable government bureaucracy. Redistributing other people’s hard earned money to feed power hungry bureaucrats. ✌🏼🇺🇸
Europe had all of these things. The reasons were :
1. Due to World War II destruction of Europe.
2. Petrodollar system which forces middle eastern oil rich countries to sell oil in USD thereby ensuring the USD remains a global trade currency.
3. Fractional reserve banking systems which enabled them to turn the whole population into debt slaves.
4. By occupying most of the post-colonial weak countries through military bases
Also the geography of the us is incredibly important to its wealth most countries with good resources are taken but the us had the right political system to not allow them to abuse the system
Surrounded by weak neighbours and fish helps too
Ok bismark
Having freedom also helps
Such a complex question can't be explained by such a simple example. Economic prosperity in the US came from a mix of Government creativity, protectionism and "free" enterprise. While these two examples maybe valid, they show only one very small part of what is a complex issue. Ii hope those exploring this topic will seek many other sources. One interesting issue is that most of the really big drivers of the US economy happen through government- there is massive spending by the government on weapons systems and space exploration that flow to the "free market" that uses ideas developed at tax payers expence to value add. In reality the US is rich because of a combination of things, and as one comment below rightly points out, being on the winning side of two world wars and acting pretty much as the "bank" for the second one are also two very important aspects to this. The idea that "free enterprise", only, made the US so "rich" is just not true.
The US economy was already the largest in the world before WWI began.
The wars didn’t create American dominance. They enriched an already dominant nation, while simultaneously hollowing out any who would challenge her
Government creativity? Hahaha you're funny.
silverwurm When the war began, the U.S. economy was in recession. But a 44-month economic boom ensued from 1914 to 1918, first as Europeans began purchasing U.S. goods for the war and later as the United States itself joined the battle. The long period of U.S. neutrality made the ultimate conversion of the economy to a wartime basis easier than it otherwise would have been.
Entry into the war in 1917 unleashed massive U.S. federal spending which shifted national production from civilian to war goods. Between 1914 and 1918, some 3 million people were added to the military and half a million to the government. Overall, unemployment declined from 7.9 percent to 1.4 percent in this period, in part because workers were drawn in to new manufacturing jobs and because the military draft removed from many young men from the civilian labor force.
Lorenzo Stewart: "Prior to WW1 we weren't economically a rival to Germany. GERMANY started the industrial revolution not us"
First, no, Germany did not start the industrial revolution, Britain did.
Second, who started the revolution is irrelevant. If the first inventors of a technology always dominate its use, then China would have conquered the world millennia ago.
Third, all the sources I can find that actually list numbers give the point at which the US gained a GDP larger than any other country at some time between 1870 and 1900 (GDP wasn't really reported back then, so estimates will be a bit fuzzy). Also, in 1913, just before the outbreak of WWI, industrial output(something much easier to track) of the US was about double that of Germany (GDP also seems to have been around double that of Germany, though, as mentioned previously, this is a bit more fuzzy).
Think about that, especially in light of what Michael Smith has added. The US was that far above Germany after having gone through a multi year recession. And then went to being the main supplier of the Allied war effort, both for material and money, practically overnight.
I repeat: The USA was already the worlds largest economy before WWI broke out. It wouldn't have survived such actions if it wasn't.
The Ottoman empire was a wreck after literally centuries of terrible management. They used to call it the sick man of europe. It wasn't even in the same economic galaxy as pre WWI US.
This is the kind of videos Prager U should make not right wing propaganda.
We still have subsidies today and regulations. In most things we should get rid of subsidies.
5:30: "prosperidade econômica vem do livre empreendimento, e não de subsídios do Governo"!!!
Exato
Rich? We're several trillion dollars in debt! (i mean yeah we got it better than places like... Africa i guess... but still.)
The debt isn't because we're not rich. It's because of wasteful spending and forcing our jobs through heavy taxes to leave the country and do their business in other countries. America is still very rich; it has the highest GDP in the world, and is among the best GDP per capita in the world. Just because we're very wasteful with the amount of money our country generates doesn't mean we are not rich.
JaxfirebusIsBack1 The stupid federal government is what's in debt, not us, did you not pay attention? All our businesses are privately owned. No business owner is responsible to the governments debt. Blame the socialists like sanders for the us debt problem.
***** Your blind if you think over time the government hasn't severely separated itself from the people and the states.
Only in wars for Israel under Bush, the US spent/got in debt 5 trillion.
Israel is for sure your greatest ally. XD
JaxfirebusIsBack1 in debt to who? God?
USA is rich because of Wall Street and Wall street dominated because the other financial markets in Europe and Japan got destroyed during world wars. Even the Swiss got affected by some degrees, so over the decades after the wars, many see the USA as a safe haven for investment or endowment. So money flowed to USA and caused the rapid growth in startups and innovations due to venture capitalism and strength of US dollars.
State run firms are a short term approach to protect public sector industries with corperatisation returning control through ownership to the public sector. Corperatisation.
Why is America so rich?and
Why are many Americans so poor?
Because they dont want to work
Let he who promotes socialism cast the first smartphone.
Touch screen, GPS technologies are all Defense Department research programs.
Is Sputnik good enough?
What about the entire soviet space program?
The smartphone was conceived of and engineered by socialists... It was inspired by Star Trek's socialist Eutopian technology, and realised by trekkies.
"It's the INCENTIVE and the PROTOTYPE and RESEARCH and DEVELOPMENT"
And yet capitalists didn't provide any of those.
The two words war also helped immensely.
Young people nowadays confuse corporatism with capitalism knowing smaller and medium business create the most jobs .
This is a myth
The protectionism was America's de facto policy from the passage of the Tariff of 1816 to World War II, "switching to free trade only in 1945, when most of its industrial competitors had been wiped out" by the war. However, it has been argued that one of the underlying motivations for the American Revolution itself was a desire to industrialize, and reverse the trade deficit with Britain, which had grown by a factor of ten in the space of a few decades, from £67,000 (1721-30) to £739,000 (1761-70).
The first U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, advocated tariffs to help protect infant industries in his "Report on Manufactures." Heeding Hamilton's advice, George Washington signed the Tariff Act of 1789, making it the Republic's second ever piece of legislation. Increasing the domestic supply of manufactured goods, particularly war materials, was seen as an issue of national security. Washington and Hamilton believed that political independence was predicated upon economic independence.
For the most part, the "Jeffersonians" strongly opposed it. However, after the War of 1812, Thomas Jefferson himself acknowledged that tariffs were necessary for preventing import dependency, which undermined the nation's security.
Avante Brasil God bless you fascist brother!
So much ignorance, so densely packed, I cant even
Zombie Jesus Lord of Grass guess the truth is ignorant now... Read the book "Bad Samaritan", cuckservative
Alexander Hamilton is best president 😏👍
While tariffs were imposed to fund the govt, there was no income tax before 1913 in USA. Federal Govt spending never exceeded 3 percent in peace times before 1913.
It's true in principle. However you also need infrastructure like roads that are used by all competitors. I supply of educated employees who were educated by the state. Rules and regulations that give consumers confidence that what they are buying won't poison or harm them. Also, trade treaties between countries so that products can be exported. Governments have also stimulated economic growth by funding research by millitary or scientific spending. Very few things in our modern complex world can be reduced to a simplistic truth. What is promoted here is a principle. The practice is more complex
Great video, thank you
I thought it was because Christians were fleeing religious persecution in England, and God blessed the pilgrims endeavors to found a nation built on Christian principles.
😅 Not sure if you're being real or sarcastic!
Hum the country is rich but many of the American no.
Go in Norway, Netherlands, Australia, Canada, Japan, Danemark, Switzerland, South Korea, Taiwan for the see a global rich population.
But the most billionaires in the world come from from USA
N USA produces bilionairs a very day tho
You just mentioned all the nation's the United States help build up.Do you not know what Marshall plan was ,look it up.
Wild Earth all those countries have a free market LMAO, and 9/10 Americans live above the world medium standard of living rate, if you’re poor in the US compared to the rest of the world you’re still doing extremely better off
Actually the US has a higher GDP per capita than Canada, Australia, South Korea, Japan. You’re wrong on most of these.
@@hecke1959 Yes, USA helped a lot of countries after WWII. Notice that only two of them become economic powers - Germany and Japan. Both of them have low corruption and high work ethics.
All I want to say is that the American aid after WWII is not the only reason some countries do well. It has been a long time after the war.
Incentive. Drives. All. Economic. Prosperity. Fact! 😏
Should we add Amtrak to this video?
not sure if this will get a reply but i have a genuine question. If the US actually valued the free market wouldn't we have let the big banks fail in 08 like leman brothers did?