I just finished reading Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments and was surprised at how human and well-meaning he seemed. I wished that more people knew about the kind intentions behind his thinking; instead, it seems that a lot of people have misunderstood his economics theories as rather cold, and "self interest" as mere "selfishness". I was so happy to see this video give his work more justice in this light!
he was pretty darn racist. But it was probably because of the society he lived in and the stories he had heard. Considering how smart he was, I feel like if he actually went and experienced all the interesting things non-European societies had to offer, he would change his mind. I hope. I'll obviously never know though because homeboy is long dead.
BINGO !!! Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations should be understood in context of Theory of Moral Sentiments . In the context of his time , he detested vast wealth inequality in Glasgow , where there where rich tobacco , lumber and cotton merchants , while there was massive urban poverty . Smith was NOT advocating for Lassie Faire economics . I need to find the quote , but Adam Smith was actually advocating that every person , regardless of their own wealth , should be able to participate in a free market economy . Also , as Micheal Hudson points out , like all Classical Economists , Smith made the clear distinction between using capital to create wealth ( goods ) and using wealth to exploit other people .
@@landsea7332 But he did believe in Laissez-faire economics. The government shouldn't be setting price floors/ceilings, shouldn't bailout business interests, shouldn't give subsidies, etc... The corporations of his time were largely the result of government enforcement. There were quite literally monopoly charters that protected trade companies from competition in Britain. He also believed in taxing land values, because to him landlords unjustly reaped what they didn't sow. Basically he saw them as parasites.
Michael Carpenter Have you read or listened to (free on UA-cam in audio) the book by George Orwell 1984? If you have but read it a long time ago it will REALLY trip you out! 💚
There is a reason why people call the age of enlightenment the age of enlightenment because the beliefs and ideas that they developed truly enlightened the souls of the people and that's why the words and everything they say is still alive today. The world enlightenment or enlighten has the light, Europe experience the dark ages and finally accepting knowledge and how they used knowledge to brighten their dark world they decided to describe what they experienced by making a work called enlightenment. Education and knowledge is power but it can also be hope and I don't know about you I felt nothing but hope when I read the works of Adam Smith, some philosophers provide a sense of pessimism and harsh criticisms of the world but they do it in an enlightening way to spread awareness of the people hoping that someday people can see what they see and feel what they feel and find a way to address the problems of this world. People say the Age of Enlightenment is the Age of Reason I also believe it is the age of hope where a beacon of light shed to the people of Europe, regardless of the wrongs that they committed through colonialism what these Enlightenment thinkers experienced and felt were real and I feel people need to reconnect to the experience these thinkers went through today so that we can renew and restore the hope that once existed. Our education system cannot just teach they need to spread knowledge and shed a light in the minds of the people, to give a sense of hope and purpose, to be excited to learn and feel something that is so amazing after learning something that they never learned before.
I never knew philosophy was a subject . No school or college or university provides this discipline in my country such a shame in today's world we need philosophy more than anything 😕
+The School of Life i think i was searching educating channels with illustrations on youtube and you guys came up! You are doing a great job especially considering that you present every subject objectively. I would really like to see some scientific areas analysed too, like mathematicians and engineers :3
+The School of Life Lovely Channel. Could you also make videos for many of the great Medieval Islamic and Arab Philosopher and Thinkers ? Like Ibn Rushd, Ibn Khaldun, The Muta'zilite Philosophers, Al Razi, Ibn Sina etc.
Good presentation. I think it's also fair to say that Adam Smith was indeed very critical of capitalism. In his book "Wealth of Nations" he refers to the capitalists' mentality (like the elites have always thought throughout history)... " All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind. "
I was unaware of his background before making this comment. In my defense there isn't an ideal of what an American should look like, it's an amalgam of people. Here in the states we often recognize those who made a significant contribution to history for the better, although adopting his philosophies is one of the biggest ways of showing that appreciations, it still would be cool to see him on a bill.
I had no idea about these ideas proposed by Smith, I only looked at him as the main face of our current capitalist systems, and as a leftist, I thought he was "the enemy" and Marx "the hero" in a sense, now that I've seen your videos about them both, I understand that that's not necessarily the case, both intellectuals share ideas of great value, we have to use these ideas to create a better system for everyone. Thanks for opening my mind a little more, that's why I love this channel so much! Peace!
Diego C marxism and capitalism both seem different ideology but if you study them thoughtfully they both are a path to materialistic and social fullfilment of a nation.
Marx could only point out flaws the man didn't have any idea how to solve problems, benifit people or understand the people he pretended to want to help his ideas produce misery and death Smith seems to me to be a freind of man kind unlike marx who just hated the rich
maybe this is because the consumers are not separate from the capitalistic economy, they are part of it. They are not just a consumer, they are also part of the production machine of businesses. Once we can truly separate the consumers from the producers, the consumers will actually have power to choose. Which means, none of the consumers should be workers, since the workers will be exploited by businesses to produce the maximum value at the cheapest price. Which probably means all the consumers should become business owners, and the workers would have to be replaced by machines, who can be exploited without guilt, at least for now. Then the consumers will actually have choosing power. whoa, I can't believe I just thought all of that! I'm gonna post this in the main comment section.
@@ranguy1379 I don't think you're that far off. The problem is that isn't attainable under Modern Capitalism because it historically causes power to trickle up rather than down (see the last 40 years of U.S. domestic economic policy). In practice, when there is a strong oligarchy backed by a strong military and police state, the powerful will serve their own interests first, and won't abdicate their power unless forced to do so - eg: dying of old age. Modern Capitalism is missing a huge component of Hume's work - the need for the fostering of social-emotional development through public education, and the need for all economic and legislative decisions to be guided by compassion rather than greed. This is because the powerful use it as a means to an end, while paying lip service to the more humanistic aspects of the original theory. Modern Capitalism cannot be saved.
When companies don't pay quality salaries, how are consumers meant to buy quality products? It's pretty similar if you look at it from the other side - if consumers don't buy quality products, how are companies meant to pay quality salaries? I think both of these issues boil down largely to human greed - trying to get as much as they can from their economic power. Yes people near the bottom now have to buy cheap products to make ends meet, but if you had to reset the economy, I think you would find people buying cheaply relatively quickly in order to extent their economic power. Another important hurdle is people do not trust that companies price fairly - buying cheaper products ensures competition in the market space. Consumers need to be confident that companies are pricing fairly.
When you have businesses busy doing creation of demand and production done for the sake of growth (including selling crap in the name of job creation), it's bound to go bad
This is the best treatment on Adam Smith I have ever heard and the rest of the videos are of similar quality. Thank you for these publications and your service.
I can't tell you how thankful I am to have stumbled onto this video (and the channel for that matter) because I have been trying to tell people this for so long, and everyone either looks at me like I've got several heads or just outright dismisses the idea that Adam Smith's version of capitalism isn't about endless accumulation and trampling on everyone at the bottom. But I guess that tends to happen when everyone reads Marx and no one reads Smith. Keep up the good work!
+Neil Backus Marx had no idea what true capitalism meant. Everyone has the idea of a savage capitalism (or Laissez Faire) but true capitalism (now called "limited capitalism", don't know why) is the best system that adequates to human reality in a way that both people and wealth are well treated.
***** okay but why not teach on condensed version or just hit the main points. also I wasn't just talking about this video in particular but all the videos school of life does, none of this gets taught until college and only if you take classes in the humanities which many people don't. I think this knowledge is essential for all humans
Sanzh Bait spiritual? its about learning how to THINK, along with science. don't learn these things and you'll just be another lemming and deprive yourself of something every single human should be aware of and receive instruction in.
Sanzh Bait i agree with you but I think that philosophy and science are essential for learning how to think as appose to knowing only what to think. it should b taught in high school to all students
***** I dont agree with that, i think every human needs to receive humanities courses during their high school years, its extremely important that people know how to think as apposed to what to think.
I'm very grateful to this channel. how revealing that in US economics courses, we were taught only that Smith subscribed to unfettered corporate activity, and any restrictions placed upon them might upset the economy. Glad yo learn Smiths philosophy was do much richer.
Simon Cote Capitalism without checks and balances, or government intervention is self-destructive. Better than Smith is John Keynes, his ideology fixes Smith’s problems
@@alilalani9531 Both can be true at the same time. Ibn Khaldun, Thomas Jefferson, Charlemagne all express the importance of the relation between individuals and their society in the function of the quality of their education. There is no capitalism without the concept of value. Bernays with is work on propaganda(ideological narrative) have given rise to a vast campaign of disinformation. If you can't individually have the cognitive tool to justly appreciate the value of anything that be can exchange for money, you are subservient to the narrative you are in impose:; you are not free. If you control the currency, you control the behaviour. I'm not sure how classical economist fit supranational governing entities in their economic model or how what to do when a company is so powerful it regulates many national governments. Anyway, I'm not an economist. I appreciate your input. have a nice day.
Capitalism with educated consumers would work? How? Does it work as it is now? Is it not going to crash down? And education or programming? What is the case with the consumers today?
@@LevaISanningen Capitalism with educated consumer (not indoctrinated) would work better. The propaganda model for corporation proposed by Bernays is programming and it prove it's limitation. The education system need to be separated from the influence of corporation; the current system try to make factory worker and not fully develop individual. Capitalism as to be limited by the Universal declaration of human right, environmental consideration, the awareness of the Gini coefficient and we should have a better judicial system to sue multinational on a international level. Consumer today are indoctrinated and programmed. We are going in wrong direction. I know it's more complicated than that...Have a nice day . (We should also see what other kind of system can compensate for the weakness of the capitalism system, some socialist idea are good and need to be implemented)
I always thought she said, “As Admiral Smith said...”. I thought she was referring to an Adam Smith like person of the future, as some of the “quotes” are of future philosophers.
Eric John Indeed. I think the most important thing about Smith is that his work actually offers a basic understanding of some very common economic principles that have little to do with specific economic ideologies and more with very basic common sense, e.g. the benefits of the division of labour. I think many people think of Smith only as the figure head of free market capitalism, like you said, and they forget that Smith was actually the first person to introduce some much more basic thoughts which we know take for granted.
+Demian Haki The main problem with Smith's writings, is that certain people pick and choose the bits they think agree with their outlook. Take Margaret Thatcher for instance. She was probably the world's worst offender.
Yes!...and those who work on “parts” mustn’t be kept in the dark about their contribution to the whole. It’s only through this manipulation that we have income inequality! Intuitively people can feel whether they are valued or not.
My professor once told me that we should never dismiss or hate the sociological thinkers or thinkers in general. They're only responsible for their theories, it is us the interpreters who messed everything up, we all had the wrong interpretations of everything Adam Smith and Karl Marx have written, and the saddest thing ever now is that the followers of Marx hate the followers of Smith and vice versa, without ever having a good conceptual understanding of both.
Not ironic. Adam Smith was considered a hardline leftist back in his day Some quotes from him: -“As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed and demand a rent even for its natural produce.” -“Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.” -“No society can surely be flourishing and happy of which by far the greater part of the numbers are poor and miserable. ” -“It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.”
@@corlys6372 Well he never sought to destroy capitalism or to move into a post capitalist society he believed that capitalism can be reguided to create a more meaningful world.
@bitchasshoeism "liberal dumbass". It's amazing how you are interested in educating yourself with these videos, but you still represent such a poor level of communication after reading something you don't like
@@shoaibkayani1496 Yes because under Trump people have access to essential healthcare, worker rights have been protected, corporations are paying their tax like everyone else, far right terrorism is at an all time low, the wall has been built, Mexico paid for the wall, ........oh wait.
@@shoaibkayani1496 He has been a weak president presiding over an economic recovery that has been ongoing since Obama's tenure. Trump hasn't accomplished a single major platform goal. He has only made headline after headline while dismantling our nuclear security by ditching treaties while not proposing alternative means of handling the issues those treaties covered. So long, Iran Nuclear Deal. It was nice being able to readily inspect civilian nuclear power projects.
@@alexwinstanley424 Not as hard as the communist manifesto. I'm seventeen and got slightly above average grades in English and left the book with a basic understanding of it's concepts.
Adam Smith, a pure genius who documented how capitalism allows the consumer (The Invisible Hand) to determine what is to be produced and how efficient it is to be made, and who provided the basis for microeconomics or theory of the firm!
@Timothy Lee It would be nice if you made sense. Smith, a Scot, laid out the basis for capitalism through observation and common sense. Capitalism is the only form of economics that actually allows for the creation of wealth by using the consumer as the driving force for effective growth and betterment of humanity. Socialism as advanced by Marx is a form of tyranny imposed by government and is not a form of economics. History continues to prove this through the ages which is continually ignored by socialists.
@William Magee You make no sense at all, and are so indoctrinated into Communism you have made up your own facts to support your idea of how socialism/communism is good and capitalism is bad! You ignore what has happened to communist countries like China, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, and everywhere communism is tried. Communism enslaves the people it purports to liberate from capitalism. Why don't you actually examine these facts that cannot be denied even by you? I have absolutely no use for anyone who accepts any form of socialism/communism as a valid form of government and that includes you!
@William Magee You have just proved why socialism/communism will always fail using your own words, but I doubt you realize it. You blame the tyrants who led their countries into total slavery instead of blaming the very system (socialism/communism) that promoted these so called leaders to do what they did! Venezuela and Cuba leaders did the very same thing, as all countries have suffered from the resultant slavery of the people! How you can blame everything else but the actual cause is perplexing and it reveals your lack of ability to use logic and historical fact to arrive at the real reason (socialism/communism) for the dismal results. Communes have been tried over and over again here in America since its inception, and all have failed when the followers realized their slavery! Communism by any other name is Nazism/Fascism/socialism, they ALL lead to the same result - total slavery of the people under their repression! I know you don't understand this because your myopia is chronic and incurable as most Democrats here suffer from!
If you mean rich people voluntarily giving money to the government, it's no longer a tax, but charity. Rich people are obviously better off donating their money directly to charitable causes than giving it to government who can squander it, steal it through corruption, or even use it for negative purposes (like starting a war, or destroying a piece of nature to build an ugly statue glorifying the government).
+Simon Shulgefella I consider myself a social democrat. I want a capitalist society with regulations in order to prevent monopoly and oligopoly. But I would urge you to listen to people like Milton Friedman (right-libertarian). Always good to broadening ones viewes and ideas
in my opinion, a big government impact but with a small government. I have no problem paying 50% taxes but there is no need to raise multiple parliaments, commissions, counsels and god knows what. Redistribution, protection (police, healthcare), justice and infrastructure (roads,...) are all what is necessary. On the side of the economy, the government should be a referee much more so then a player. Give freedom but be ruthless with fraud and corruption. The people have enough initiative, no need for handholding.
I had the benefit or misfortune, depending on your outlook, of coming into this world via Kirkcaldy hospital, so with that I see it as my responsibility to let you know that it is pronounced Ker-caw-dee. Loving the videos.
+The School of Life Narcissist you didn't prove that, I think you proved that they are lonely inside and need validation from others for their existence. That I don't think is narcissism, depression maybe... Smith is a great as I understand it, I have never read his bio so dont really know, I just understand his theory's and like that.
+CaptainZuluGamma He said Narcissist because of Smiths argument that we need to feed their vanity, to give them awards and what not to feed their ego. Plus, to need validation from other for our existence is a human trait in general. Sociocultural psychology dictates "we are social animals with a need to belong" hence why we have social groups all around us that we identify ourselves with, a place to feel accepted and to feel wanted.
+CaptainZuluGamma He said Narcissist because of Smiths argument that we need to feed their vanity, to give them awards and what not to feed their ego. Plus, to need validation from other for our existence is a human trait in general. Sociocultural psychology dictates "we are social animals with a need to belong" hence why we have social groups all around us that we identify ourselves with, a place to feel accepted and to feel wanted.
I wish I was wealthy so that I could sponsor this channel and help fund its inevitable progression. This is, honestly, one of the only channels worth watching on youtube (Screw V-Sauce. It's for charlatans). Please post something on Pavlov and Skinner for your Psychology part of the curriculum. Conditioning is the greatest foundation for the psychology of today and the future. Finally, you should make another video like Why Some Countries are Poor and Others Rich.
i have a question? why was an illustration of Tommaso Campanella's City of the sun showed at 3:52? That is a Utopian City that did not govern nor act economicly like anything Smith would have explained in his political theories and ideas of the market mechanisms?
“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages” - Adam Smith
Being aware of the impossibleness to terminate vanity inside human being's veins, and proposing canalize them into good deeds rather than trying to suppress it, pure genius.
If we deny the fact that there is a lower class, then I totally agree with Smith. However, there is a big group of people who doesn't have the same a possibilities as common citizen when it comes to finding a good job and living a worthy life. Even though Smith is right about many things, we have to consider Marx too.
Marx's theories never worked. They assume to understand what every person desires. This is why the USSR failed and every other socialism system has as well. The reason as to why socialism always become tyranny is because it cannot control peoples desires and wants so it has to enforce its agenda.
It is simply not true that socialism always results in tyranny. This should be easy to see, if you look at some of the most socialistic, democratic countries in the world. Consider the Scandinavian countries. You are completely right, when you say that people’s desires and wants can't be controlled. I am from Denmark, and I can tell you for sure that, a socialistic society doesn't need to control peoples desires and wants in order to work properly. We don't need to control what people want because we believe that people can get the lives they want, if we provide freedom to them. Freedom to live the life you want to live, no matter how poor your family is, and no what serious disease you may suffer from.
UdSSR never had an actual socialism. What they had is better called "state-capitalism". From the beginning the Bolcheviks suppressed every popular socialst initiative there was, and instated their doctrine of one supreme leader leading an army of workers. So the Soviets are always a bad example when you want to prove that socialism/communism failed and always will fail.
Hi, I first want to say that I recently discovered your channel and I love it. I recommend it to everyone. I would like to see you make a video on the capitalist Milton Friedman.
Why is this Channel undersubbed/viewed/commented/liked? You guys need more publicity. I'm gonna share this channel with all my friends and family for the brilliant content you lot put time and effort into creating. Thank you.
Congratulations, The School of Life. You have created a 6 minute, 43 second video about Adam Smith, that has ABSOLUTELY no mention of any of the following topics: 1) MERCANTILISM (and Smith's objections to it) 2) Exchange rates 3) Tariffs Well done.
Doing a Progressive Tax on (Just) the “Greedy Part” of Wealth & Conservatively Spending (Just it) on Social Programs gets us a “Stable Society” (the “True Creator” of All Wealth!!) AND we do it with “Direct Democracy” where WE Directly Propose, Enact & Enforce “Merit Based Standardized” Laws & “Money” isn’t a factor!! - "Like" this so we all See & Do this!!
PS: Nobody’s taking away our “25 Rolls Royce’s” but WE MORALLY OWE (Just our “Greedy” 26th Rolls & up) BACK TO OUR STABLE SOCIETY (that “Owns & Allows” us to Create & Safely use our “25 Rolls”) TO KEEP IT STABLE!! We must Realize Nobody gets Rich without our “Fast Food Workers” who ironically Need “Food Stamps” for Stability!! No one is lazy & “Reaping Free Benefits off the Rich’s Money” because the GREEDY PART BELONGS to all of us!! Read Max Weber’s “Protestant Ethic & SPIRIT of Capitalism” where, early on, Wealth was only a Moral pursuit just to achieve our limited “State of Grace” & then we stopped so others could also achieve their monetary “Salvation” Watch “The Gods Must Be Crazy” where a “Coke bottle” falls from a plane into the midst of a primitive tribe & one guy grabs it & everyone fears him for grabbing ALL the “Money” & now being their “King”!! In "Direct Democracy" we vote directly for issues that we've tested for merit, etc before proposal, then we popularly enact them & then Voter Volunteers will easily enforce small & specific Laws that have all the "legal standards" for enforcement in them ... congress, senate, president, agencies, courts, etc have a role to play, but within it & in service to it ...
The invisible brain of libertarian capitalists. Capitalists all over the world talk about Adam smith but barely any of them have actually read him. The misunderstanding of the "invisible hand" quote being a perfect example. It isn't about unregulated capitalism at all, it's a argument against one regulation (protectionism) a fairly weak argument too, relying heavily on the patriotism of a person to invest in the national economic interest instead of they're own by not investing in cheap labour abroad. Allegiances that do not exist in a competitive society. It has nothing to do with laissez fair capitalism standing on its own.
+The Real Libertarian Whilst I disagree with the very idea of capitalism, I quite like Smith's vision of a capitalist society--he offers it in a very nuanced way. But I think that's the case with every pre-capitalist thinker, however. I'm convinced he would have denounced markets, under his own principles, if he had of lived another 50 years or so.
The invisible hand was based on the individual filling voids in society and satisfying needs to obtain capital. Its an argument for free markets because governments can't foresee individual needs of everyone. Markets are created based off the needs of people at the moment. The invisible hand is how we got UA-cam and cell phones.
ive been thru high school and college. economics has been presented as the ethics of produce more pay less, raise profits, and thats it. this is the first time that adam smith sounded like a decent guy
Kirkcaldy pronunciation- Kirk (as in Scottish for Church) Caw (as in "call" without the Ls) and Day The k and care kind of mashed together as one, the L is silent, and the A is pronounced like "awe". You'd think I'd have been taught about Adam Smith in School, given that I've grown up and lived in Kirkcaldy for over 26 years, but instead I was taught important things like 'if you're ever being chased by an alligator, run in a zig-zag pattern because they can't turn very well.'
Smith observed that many trade opportunities were created when the market was free from control or taxation by the State. Therefore, he was not in favor or against any class, but in fact, a free trade defender, making it a mechanism to generate more opportunities for all - and through this process, pulling people away from poverty. Adam Smith’s observations helped set people free . - Luiz Philippe de Orleans e Bragança (Brazilian Prince).
If it isn't the money the rich care about, then how do you explain the immoral behaviours of wall Street bankers who got fat bonuses while the rest of the US is left unrecovered? I just can't help to think that his wish thinking is gonna help anything. The more you have, the more you want to earn.
there's a limit to "the more you want to earn". When you come to that point where you got all the money you could possibly have, you start looking at other things. No money can buy love or honor....
@@hunglorin5838 if the rich people, like everyone else, only see money as a means to an end, they will continue to use it responsibly. If anyone, regardless of wealth, sees money as the ends themselves, than they do not deseeve to have it. After all, "the LOVE of money is the root of ALL KINDS of evil."
It may have been that consumer demand is what businesses used to serve and be directed by, but now they create the demand themselves in order to serve it.
That's what social-libertarians would have you believe. If this was the case then why do so many companies fail? Yes, many big businesses do dictate fashion, but just as many consumers dictate it to companies it completely depends on context. Besides, at the end of the day it doesn't matter particularly much because, as Smith points out, it's all about finding an equilibrium between the consumer and the company.
i agree with what you are saying, but just because big companies fail doesn't mean that they don artificially create demand for their own products,using billions of dollars to steer us into buying things we don't need. people are very easily influenced.
Have you considered adding poetry to your curriculum? I'd love to see a video on Pablo Neruda or George Gordon Lord Byron from TSOL. Furthermore, I'd pay for a longer format info-product where the videos would be animated in this fashion but more in depth... Similar to Alain's "The Perfect Home" series.
To people who do not get it: Any government that colludes or collaborates with the wealthy, primarily at the expense of the economy, the country, and society, is automatically the most tyranical government ever possible. If you refuse to have a government like such, keep the wealthy and the government separate, any kind of collusion or collaboration must be stopped with extreme prejudice.
"It's not companies that primarily degrade the world, it's our appetite, which they merely serve." Do the billions of dollars companies spent on advertising every year have nothing to do with our appetite?
I’ve read Adam and found him difficult to follow; I endeavor to double down and keep reading him until I can explain it to myself in a conversational style.
I can't remember how many times I've made this argument about taste to other people (not entirely aware it wasn't my own invention), but it often seems like no one today wants to believe anything they know or like, or how they behave, can be improved through knowledge and the development of better taste. Instead, if you dare suggest even the general notion, you're a snob and automatically wrong because of it.
People, or their minds, inhabit two separate realms which constantly come into conflict with each other often resulting in confusion as to where one ends and the other begins. These two realms are reality and the perception of reality. There was a James Bond film called "You only live Twice," the meaning of the title is found in the theme song by the same name in the very first lyrics: "You only live twice, or so it seems, one life for yourself and one for your dreams." The "dreams" could be defined as our concept of what reality is or what it ought to be. On the one hand you have reality, on the other you have religious faith, prejudice, fantasy, romanticism, idealism, misinterpretation, misconception, naivete, bliss, and all the many other things which make up our concept of reality, what it is or what it ought to be.
of course subscribed!!... thanks a billion times for simplifying the understanding of the biggest problems of our world in this video so that further time could be invested in finding solutions and better understanding of the problems too
I don't understand why people are so against capitalism and corporations. If someone has an ingenious idea, why not let them make money off it. They came up with the invention/idea. People always like to point to Marx as being their savior yet communism stagnates economic growth. Look at the USSR and Cuba.
because if this person got a genious idea, they need workers to make it work. And to make profits off of it, you need to exploit the workers so that you will gain money off of this idea.
Perhaps there are other factors in the downfall of USSR and Cuba. A much more positive example is China, communist-socialist and with a capitalist market experiment.
Larry R it isn't about if it's hard or not, it's about how important your work is. While I would agree that flipping burgers isn't essential to our society, I believe it is much more productive than a singer, a hooker, etc. But still, those entertainers are paid much more. And besides, preparing food is somehow important, after all, we wouldn't have doctors if there wasn't someone to make him or her bread, right ? Since they would have to make it by themselves. Also, since we can't have everyone being a doctor, or a singer, there has to be people doing jobs such as "flipping burgers", etc. So, since we need those workers, just as much as we need a carpenter, a doctor, an architect, I don't see why they should be paid less.
***** They are paid more because there is a greater demand for those careers. If they was no demand for the hooker, they would be unemployed. Society determines the price of things. I also have to hand it to you for keeping this conversation professional.
Tespri I meant he is the Karl Marx of capitalism, and no, it isn't impractical to encourage rich to help others. Actually it's practical with socialism. But Socialism is just a fairy tale, and it will never be a good economic system practically. But in theory is beyond goodness.
Tespri I do agree Adam Smiths ideas solve problems, but mostly not on good ways. Karl Marx ideas are way better theoretically, but particularly they will never work, because of something called 'Greed'.
Tespri It's really hard to encourage charity without economic incentives, for example tax breaks. Smith would call for a huge cultural shift where charity was the main determinant of success for an individual. That's a nice thought, but not something anyone can make happen, especially since our current culture values money itself, not so much how its obtained or spent. I mean, i'd prefer benevolent rich people over arrogant rich people too, it's just not something we can decide.
+Tespri because rich people invest money in job creating industries and are philanthropic as long as they are given pats on the back. rich people r human to with values
My largest objection to this video is that (yes in theory we could reform capitalism for the better by changing our tastes) but in practice our tastes are highly conditioned by advertising and the media and we have litle choice as to what we buy when we are traped in the cycle of poverty, exaustion, television brainwashing, and consumption. I think the corporate structure must be attacked directly, consumers alone cannot completly change capitalism by learning to buy better products from better companies because those same corporations invest so much in social control and manipulating consumer patterns.
Yes but others would argue that it's the ability for individuals the hoisted their ambitions for a better life for both themselves and the planet that capitalism can serve. If your base desires or ignorance leads to consumption of products that degrade your self or your environment then the responsibility stops with the you. This was true when man wiped out the wooly mammoth and the dodo and it's true now. If however you can elevate your habits of consumption to meet more altruistic or environmental demands then capitalism provides option such and fair trade and organic products. The choice is yours.
+limpact1 thank you for your reply, yes you are right in saying that consumer capitalism can trick people, 1) inaccurate adverts can mislead people into buying ineffective products and services, however this is countered by advertising watchdogs and Internet review sites, 2) aspirational advertising can create desires in people for things which are frivelus like Gucci sunglasses, but most people that I hang out with are intelligent and educated enough to know that these products do not buy happiness. The main alternative to free market capitalism is state owned companies, however history of the 20th century shows often leads to insurmountable poverty, look at China in the 1960s or Russia in the 1980s. Of course companies should be regulated, but if you introduce high taxes on companies which provide people which useful products and services you increase the price of the stuff they sell and make them inaccessible to normal people and also cause job redundancies. Ok so socialism can increase cash equality but what does this matter if you can't afford anything cool. Right now I can buy a rubber chicken on eBay or fly to majors for under 100 pound, thank you consumer capitalism. If u don't want this stuff then don't buy it. But it's not your or the states position to tell me I should spend like this! Cheers! Of course toxic products like cigarettes are an exception to this stance!
limpack1 Hi, thanks for the video link I will watch when I have a spare two hours. I'm sure capitalism has existed since money was invented, a farmer selling dates in ancient Babylonia to feed himself and his family, that's capitalism as much as Coca cola is capitalism. Capitalism doesn't have the conceit to promise universal happiness for all, obviously many people would rather not work and capitalism, unlike socialism wouldn't reward them for their idleness thus they would naturally be upset that they would have to go to work, boo hoo! *plays the world's tiniest violin* History shows that countries with only state run companies can have major problems with problems with providing people what they need and the famines of China under the watch of chairman Mao killed millions and now China is running a consumer capitalist competitive style economy. There havent been famines in asia for decades thanks to the agricultural revolution and free markers. Socialist have high ideals but they have a certain elitism to say that the state knows what people want or need more than the individual does. Obviously all modern successful countries have a mix between the two ideals, but capitalism provides the most amazing modern technologies which allow people to do cool stuff like for instance debate politics with strangers on youtube comment threads. How does it affect you on a practical level if there is a self-made billionaires in your country? His presence means inequality in cash terms but if you have cheap and affordable products and services provided by the system, how does this inequality hurt you?
TheZzpop True. Advertising was not mention. It was probably around but very crude in Smith's time. He could not have imagined then how sinister it would become.
The principle error in our times is consumer capitalism not serving to benefit the weak in society as smith put it, but instead has been used to benefit the privileged few. This therefore ruins the utility of consumer capitalism to be a tool of any form of social benefit to society.
it is an arrogant position to a random excess of wealth to trick;e it down - trickle-down theory - out of date and flawed to fair play to all participants in a society - contributing , so-called , or not
Hank Shirley yes if people didnt have a conscience. Only like 1 percent of the population is sociopath which means everyone else including rich people have empathy and a moral compass. The problem with global warming is it doesnt feel emminent. when companies pollute there isnt visible destruction that they can sense.
5:25 Oh please. You expect me to believe that taste is determined by demand? It's determined by supply. Ask yourself, is it your *taste* that causes you to buy gasoline-powered vehicles? Is it our *taste* that causes us to buy drinks loaded with high-fructose corn syrup? Or GMO corn and soy? No, it is out of economic (or practical) necessity. Supply comes first, demand comes in later. Or maybe the demand never comes, and the company ceases production. They take risks and sometimes they lose.
Yes, but there is no system in place (and to my knowledge never has been) by which consumers petition companies to make certain products. Companies make inventions, market them, and THEN the consumers decide if they want to buy them or not. Corn flakes weren't invented after a group of consumers got together and demanded that some company fund the creation and patent of a crispy corn-based breakfast cereal. It was invented by accident, patented, and sold. It happened to be successful, but it's just misleading to say that "Kellogg's fulfilled the demands of consumers." Hula hoops, yo-yo's, Coca Cola, even the light bulb, etc. were all invented, patented, marketed, and happened to be successful. Thank you for the excellent videos, but be careful that you're not putting the wrong spin on things.
mendali I used to believe this, but this is passing the blame, and refusing to take responsibility. Try selling something that's not poisonous for a while, and watch your business founder. This video is dead on in this respect - consumers need to be educated.
mendali Well, yes. Coke with cane sugar can now be purchased, at a higher price that coke with corn syrup. Corperations use corn products because they are cheaper. They are cheaper because the governent heavily subsidizes corn. We are hardly a free market economy.
People who think capitalism is evil need to try living like everybody else forcefully. People who think the rich benefit from others being poor don't realise that poverty generates no profit, therefore the more poor are the poor, the poorer are the rich.
I would love to see you guys doing videos on Austrian School of economics, Ayn Randt, Ron Paul and other libertarian authors who defend that if we are free to achieve our best, to be "selfish" the outcome is much greater than the imposed, controlled and shaming lifestyle proposed by Socialists and Statists who in reality want some "entity" a.k.a. government to take responsibility for our failures, but what is not clear is that this entity will never be composed of anything less than men, who will be then placed on a higher status with endless powers and above good and evil.
***** Of course there is profit in poverty, otherwise there would never have been a slave class. Labor is still a good, and one can sell the fruits of another's labor and thereby turn a profit. So if a poor person is paid 1.00/hour for 2 hours to make a product that sells for even as low a price as 5.00, then it necessarily follows that paying the poor person 25 cents an hour for the two hours has to increase the profit on the 5.00 item. 5.00-2.00 (forget all costs let's pretend like libertarians they are externalities) leaves 3.00, while 5.00-.50 leaves 4.50 (and to make it perfectly clear for you: 4.50>3.00).
+Mr English Nice appeal to majority fallacy. So what if they didn't like capitalism/hated it? The free market itself was a revolutionary idea, it challenges governmental mercantilism. Where do you think the term liberal comes from? They opposed large government, unlike modern day liberals. Your comment holds no grounds, you're just trying to use majority opinion distortedly
Could somebody direct me to where Adam Smith talks about moving on from 'frivolous' consumer culture to a more sustainable and human centered approach? I am doing my dissertation on sustainable consumerism and I think ol' Smith is a good place to start.
I just finished reading Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments and was surprised at how human and well-meaning he seemed. I wished that more people knew about the kind intentions behind his thinking; instead, it seems that a lot of people have misunderstood his economics theories as rather cold, and "self interest" as mere "selfishness". I was so happy to see this video give his work more justice in this light!
He is everything but selfish. Only when he died people discovered how much he donated
I'm glad that my cynical side gets a break when I see people as good as him.
he was pretty darn racist. But it was probably because of the society he lived in and the stories he had heard. Considering how smart he was, I feel like if he actually went and experienced all the interesting things non-European societies had to offer, he would change his mind. I hope. I'll obviously never know though because homeboy is long dead.
BINGO !!! Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations should be understood in context of Theory of Moral Sentiments . In the context of his time , he detested vast wealth inequality in Glasgow , where there where rich tobacco , lumber and cotton merchants , while there was massive urban poverty .
Smith was NOT advocating for Lassie Faire economics . I need to find the quote , but Adam Smith was actually advocating that every person , regardless of their own wealth , should be able to participate in a free market economy .
Also , as Micheal Hudson points out , like all Classical Economists , Smith made the clear distinction between using capital to create wealth ( goods ) and using wealth to exploit other people .
@@landsea7332 But he did believe in Laissez-faire economics. The government shouldn't be setting price floors/ceilings, shouldn't bailout business interests, shouldn't give subsidies, etc... The corporations of his time were largely the result of government enforcement. There were quite literally monopoly charters that protected trade companies from competition in Britain.
He also believed in taxing land values, because to him landlords unjustly reaped what they didn't sow. Basically he saw them as parasites.
These Philosophy videos are f***ing blowing my mind. I love them.
Michael Carpenter Have you read or listened to (free on UA-cam in audio) the book by George Orwell 1984? If you have but read it a long time ago it will REALLY trip you out! 💚
There is a reason why people call the age of enlightenment the age of enlightenment because the beliefs and ideas that they developed truly enlightened the souls of the people and that's why the words and everything they say is still alive today.
The world enlightenment or enlighten has the light, Europe experience the dark ages and finally accepting knowledge and how they used knowledge to brighten their dark world they decided to describe what they experienced by making a work called enlightenment. Education and knowledge is power but it can also be hope and I don't know about you I felt nothing but hope when I read the works of Adam Smith, some philosophers provide a sense of pessimism and harsh criticisms of the world but they do it in an enlightening way to spread awareness of the people hoping that someday people can see what they see and feel what they feel and find a way to address the problems of this world.
People say the Age of Enlightenment is the Age of Reason I also believe it is the age of hope where a beacon of light shed to the people of Europe, regardless of the wrongs that they committed through colonialism what these Enlightenment thinkers experienced and felt were real and I feel people need to reconnect to the experience these thinkers went through today so that we can renew and restore the hope that once existed. Our education system cannot just teach they need to spread knowledge and shed a light in the minds of the people, to give a sense of hope and purpose, to be excited to learn and feel something that is so amazing after learning something that they never learned before.
economic theory??
doing an assignment on this. it's interesting.
I never knew philosophy was a subject . No school or college or university provides this discipline in my country such a shame in today's world we need philosophy more than anything 😕
Narrator: “...the radical left-wing answer was, then and now...”
Me: “guillotine”
Narrator: “raise taxes”
Me: “taxes, yes of course”
Exactly. The more I listen to these school of life videos the more I hate them.
Jonas Steinberg cringe
@@gabrielonibudo5710 He's right tough :)
Probably the most underrated comment I've seen on UA-cam ever. Fucking gold man.
OjoRojo40 well, he’s not left. That’s for sure
ok this is one of the best channels of youtube and i ' m so happy i found it!
+The School of Life i think i was searching educating channels with illustrations on youtube and you guys came up! You are doing a great job especially considering that you present every subject objectively. I would really like to see some scientific areas analysed too, like mathematicians and engineers :3
+The School of Life make a video about vanity! and all usual behaviour that comes with it, cheers! :)
+Alice Dourountaki this and CrashCourse.
+The School of Life
Lovely Channel. Could you also make videos for many of the great Medieval Islamic and Arab Philosopher and Thinkers ?
Like Ibn Rushd, Ibn Khaldun, The Muta'zilite Philosophers, Al Razi, Ibn Sina etc.
agreed
Good presentation. I think it's also fair to say that Adam Smith was indeed very critical of capitalism. In his book "Wealth of Nations" he refers to the capitalists' mentality (like the elites have always thought throughout history)... " All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind. "
It's a shame he has the most generic name possible
EXPLOSIVE STRAWBERRY
Adam Smith though humorous, you kind of prove his point in the end...
thats great, because i can remember him correctly, than having name like xcuotlau or jean jaquestadora
i know right
Joseph Stalin good then
How isn't this man on a dollar bill, it would make perfect sense and he deserves it at the very least.
He's on the 20 pound note in the UK.
Jeff Da Maori
Good to know
Alex Yandel Torres Rosado oh does it? How many countries put foreign scholars on their money?
I was unaware of his background before making this comment. In my defense there isn't an ideal of what an American should look like, it's an amalgam of people. Here in the states we often recognize those who made a significant contribution to history for the better, although adopting his philosophies is one of the biggest ways of showing that appreciations, it still would be cool to see him on a bill.
Alex Yandel Torres Rosado he was on pound notes in the UK...
I had no idea about these ideas proposed by Smith, I only looked at him as the main face of our current capitalist systems, and as a leftist, I thought he was "the enemy" and Marx "the hero" in a sense, now that I've seen your videos about them both, I understand that that's not necessarily the case, both intellectuals share ideas of great value, we have to use these ideas to create a better system for everyone. Thanks for opening my mind a little more, that's why I love this channel so much!
Peace!
Diego C marxism and capitalism both seem different ideology but if you study them thoughtfully they both are a path to materialistic and social fullfilment of a nation.
Marx himself mentioned numerous times Adam Smith was an essential influence on his philosophy, specifically Das Kapital.
Marx could only point out flaws the man didn't have any idea how to solve problems, benifit people or understand the people he pretended to want to help his ideas produce misery and death Smith seems to me to be a freind of man kind unlike marx who just hated the rich
Looks like Smith understood human nature more than Marx
@@abditus5842 Yeah right. Thats why he believed the rich dont care about money but honor and respect. He was really naive
"Capitalism can be saved by elevating the quality of consumer demand" - The missing piece in the puzzle
problem is when people have to choose between a bad job and unemployment
maybe this is because the consumers are not separate from the capitalistic economy, they are part of it. They are not just a consumer, they are also part of the production machine of businesses. Once we can truly separate the consumers from the producers, the consumers will actually have power to choose. Which means, none of the consumers should be workers, since the workers will be exploited by businesses to produce the maximum value at the cheapest price. Which probably means all the consumers should become business owners, and the workers would have to be replaced by machines, who can be exploited without guilt, at least for now. Then the consumers will actually have choosing power. whoa, I can't believe I just thought all of that! I'm gonna post this in the main comment section.
@@ranguy1379 I don't think you're that far off. The problem is that isn't attainable under Modern Capitalism because it historically causes power to trickle up rather than down (see the last 40 years of U.S. domestic economic policy). In practice, when there is a strong oligarchy backed by a strong military and police state, the powerful will serve their own interests first, and won't abdicate their power unless forced to do so - eg: dying of old age. Modern Capitalism is missing a huge component of Hume's work - the need for the fostering of social-emotional development through public education, and the need for all economic and legislative decisions to be guided by compassion rather than greed. This is because the powerful use it as a means to an end, while paying lip service to the more humanistic aspects of the original theory. Modern Capitalism cannot be saved.
When companies don't pay quality salaries, how are consumers meant to buy quality products?
It's pretty similar if you look at it from the other side - if consumers don't buy quality products, how are companies meant to pay quality salaries?
I think both of these issues boil down largely to human greed - trying to get as much as they can from their economic power.
Yes people near the bottom now have to buy cheap products to make ends meet, but if you had to reset the economy, I think you would find people buying cheaply relatively quickly in order to extent their economic power.
Another important hurdle is people do not trust that companies price fairly - buying cheaper products ensures competition in the market space.
Consumers need to be confident that companies are pricing fairly.
When you have businesses busy doing creation of demand and production done for the sake of growth (including selling crap in the name of job creation), it's bound to go bad
This is the best treatment on Adam Smith I have ever heard and the rest of the videos are of similar quality. Thank you for these publications and your service.
Adam Smith was a man brilliant man, truly ahead of his time
I can't tell you how thankful I am to have stumbled onto this video (and the channel for that matter) because I have been trying to tell people this for so long, and everyone either looks at me like I've got several heads or just outright dismisses the idea that Adam Smith's version of capitalism isn't about endless accumulation and trampling on everyone at the bottom. But I guess that tends to happen when everyone reads Marx and no one reads Smith. Keep up the good work!
+Neil Backus Marx had no idea what true capitalism meant. Everyone has the idea of a savage capitalism (or Laissez Faire) but true capitalism (now called "limited capitalism", don't know why) is the best system that adequates to human reality in a way that both people and wealth are well treated.
The simpletons don't read Marx or Smith.
none of this is taught in high school.... why?
***** okay but why not teach on condensed version or just hit the main points. also I wasn't just talking about this video in particular but all the videos school of life does, none of this gets taught until college and only if you take classes in the humanities which many people don't. I think this knowledge is essential for all humans
Sanzh Bait spiritual? its about learning how to THINK, along with science. don't learn these things and you'll just be another lemming and deprive yourself of something every single human should be aware of and receive instruction in.
Sanzh Bait i agree with you but I think that philosophy and science are essential for learning how to think as appose to knowing only what to think. it should b taught in high school to all students
***** I dont agree with that, i think every human needs to receive humanities courses during their high school years, its extremely important that people know how to think as apposed to what to think.
+Tyler Durden A trip to your local library will illustrate just how little is taught in high school. Especially in the Reference section.
I'm very grateful to this channel. how revealing that in US economics courses, we were taught only that Smith subscribed to unfettered corporate activity, and any restrictions placed upon them might upset the economy. Glad yo learn Smiths philosophy was do much richer.
Capitalism without an educated consumer is auto-destructive.
Simon Cote Capitalism without checks and balances, or government intervention is self-destructive. Better than Smith is John Keynes, his ideology fixes Smith’s problems
@@alilalani9531 Both can be true at the same time. Ibn Khaldun, Thomas Jefferson, Charlemagne all express the importance of the relation between individuals and their society in the function of the quality of their education. There is no capitalism without the concept of value. Bernays with is work on propaganda(ideological narrative) have given rise to a vast campaign of disinformation. If you can't individually have the cognitive tool to justly appreciate the value of anything that be can exchange for money, you are subservient to the narrative you are in impose:; you are not free. If you control the currency, you control the behaviour. I'm not sure how classical economist fit supranational governing entities in their economic model or how what to do when a company is so powerful it regulates many national governments. Anyway, I'm not an economist. I appreciate your input. have a nice day.
Capitalism with educated consumers would work? How? Does it work as it is now? Is it not going to crash down? And education or programming? What is the case with the consumers today?
@@LevaISanningen Capitalism with educated consumer (not indoctrinated) would work better. The propaganda model for corporation proposed by Bernays is programming and it prove it's limitation. The education system need to be separated from the influence of corporation; the current system try to make factory worker and not fully develop individual. Capitalism as to be limited by the Universal declaration of human right, environmental consideration, the awareness of the Gini coefficient and we should have a better judicial system to sue multinational on a international level. Consumer today are indoctrinated and programmed. We are going in wrong direction. I know it's more complicated than that...Have a nice day
. (We should also see what other kind of system can compensate for the weakness of the capitalism system, some socialist idea are good and need to be implemented)
Capitalism is auto-destructive even with an educated consumer base. People behave irrationally regardless of their education background.
0:54 I. Specialisation
2:34 II. Consumer capitalism
4:04 III. How to treat the rich
5:08 IV. Educate consumers
As Adam Smith said, trade is the lifeblood of nations ;)
What's ours is yours, for a price.
Polycube That completely depends on how far ikeyB moral compass will allow him/her to go. Same here.
Ral Crux We were both doing quotes from the game Civilization Beyond Earth.
An EFFICIENT trade is a lifeline of the nation.
I always thought she said, “As Admiral Smith said...”. I thought she was referring to an Adam Smith like person of the future, as some of the “quotes” are of future philosophers.
I've never seen Adam Smith's ideas being taught in a class
fucking T H I S.
oh my god.
because they don't like capitalism
@@kyleseageruberalles2222 and they wonder why there’s a rise in Marxism and fascism
Have u taken economics class?
You would be taught about calvin cycle only when u take biology as a subject.
It is taught in secondary school economics. But most people dont choose that specialisation .they take math science and bussiness accounting.
Thank you for this. It certainly challenged my simplistic idea of Smith as a blind, free market materialist.
Eric John Check out the blog post "Liberals, you must reclaim Adam Smith" by David Brin
GeneralNazort Will do. Thanks for the tip.
Eric John Indeed. I think the most important thing about Smith is that his work actually offers a basic understanding of some very common economic principles that have little to do with specific economic ideologies and more with very basic common sense, e.g. the benefits of the division of labour.
I think many people think of Smith only as the figure head of free market capitalism, like you said, and they forget that Smith was actually the first person to introduce some much more basic thoughts which we know take for granted.
+Demian Haki The main problem with Smith's writings, is that certain people pick and choose the bits they think agree with their outlook. Take Margaret Thatcher for instance. She was probably the world's worst offender.
Some people are intelligent enough to speak well of bad ideas.
"Too many men work on parts of things. Doing a job to completeness satisfies a man.” ― Richard Proenneke.
Soon it'll be Christmas and 'Alone in the Wilderness' will be popping up of what's left of PBS.
Yes!...and those who work on “parts” mustn’t be kept in the dark about their contribution to the whole. It’s only through this manipulation that we have income inequality! Intuitively people can feel whether they are valued or not.
@@keithvolpe1065 Try building a smart phone yourself, all alone.
This channel is one of the best on UA-cam, so glad I found it. The website is awesome too, good to see people bringing philosophy back to relevancy.
My professor once told me that we should never dismiss or hate the sociological thinkers or thinkers in general. They're only responsible for their theories, it is us the interpreters who messed everything up, we all had the wrong interpretations of everything Adam Smith and Karl Marx have written, and the saddest thing ever now is that the followers of Marx hate the followers of Smith and vice versa, without ever having a good conceptual understanding of both.
Top notch exposition. Such clarity and ease of communication. It satisfies me so much!
This guy was so great that everyone started to copy his firstname and lastname everywhere.
I agree with absolutley everything this man has to say
With Adam Smith or the school of life?
youtubeviewer Yes
In fact marx agrees in many things with him :S
Not ironic. Adam Smith was considered a hardline leftist back in his day
Some quotes from him:
-“As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed and demand a rent even for its natural produce.”
-“Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.”
-“No society can surely be flourishing and happy of which by far the greater part of the numbers are poor and miserable. ”
-“It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.”
@@corlys6372 Well he never sought to destroy capitalism or to move into a post capitalist society he believed that capitalism can be reguided to create a more meaningful world.
I like how you showed Donald Trump there.
And the video was made in December 2014, long before the he become President and everyone can now see his vile attitude!
@bitchasshoeism "liberal dumbass". It's amazing how you are interested in educating yourself with these videos, but you still represent such a poor level of communication after reading something you don't like
Regardless on whether you like him or not, he has been a great President
@@shoaibkayani1496 Yes because under Trump people have access to essential healthcare, worker rights have been protected, corporations are paying their tax like everyone else, far right terrorism is at an all time low, the wall has been built, Mexico paid for the wall, ........oh wait.
@@shoaibkayani1496 He has been a weak president presiding over an economic recovery that has been ongoing since Obama's tenure. Trump hasn't accomplished a single major platform goal. He has only made headline after headline while dismantling our nuclear security by ditching treaties while not proposing alternative means of handling the issues those treaties covered. So long, Iran Nuclear Deal. It was nice being able to readily inspect civilian nuclear power projects.
Through reading his book I learned much of the pin crafting industry.
That username tgo
@@angelbarajas9180based? Based on what?
I've heard that it's very difficult to read, how hard is it?
@@alexwinstanley424 Not as hard as the communist manifesto. I'm seventeen and got slightly above average grades in English and left the book with a basic understanding of it's concepts.
@@lmaozedong501 when you say basic, you mean there is a more complex version!? You have a German Chancellor's full blown interest.
Adam Smith, a pure genius who documented how capitalism allows the consumer (The Invisible Hand) to determine what is to be produced and how efficient it is to be made, and who provided the basis for microeconomics or theory of the firm!
@Timothy Lee It would be nice if you made sense. Smith, a Scot, laid out the basis for capitalism through observation and common sense. Capitalism is the only form of economics that actually allows for the creation of wealth by using the consumer as the driving force for effective growth and betterment of humanity. Socialism as advanced by Marx is a form of tyranny imposed by government and is not a form of economics. History continues to prove this through the ages which is continually ignored by socialists.
@William Magee You make no sense at all, and are so indoctrinated into Communism you have made up your own facts to support your idea of how socialism/communism is good and capitalism is bad! You ignore what has happened to communist countries like China, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, and everywhere communism is tried. Communism enslaves the people it purports to liberate from capitalism. Why don't you actually examine these facts that cannot be denied even by you? I have absolutely no use for anyone who accepts any form of socialism/communism as a valid form of government and that includes you!
@William Magee You have just proved why socialism/communism will always fail using your own words, but I doubt you realize it. You blame the tyrants who led their countries into total slavery instead of blaming the very system (socialism/communism) that promoted these so called leaders to do what they did! Venezuela and Cuba leaders did the very same thing, as all countries have suffered from the resultant slavery of the people! How you can blame everything else but the actual cause is perplexing and it reveals your lack of ability to use logic and historical fact to arrive at the real reason (socialism/communism) for the dismal results. Communes have been tried over and over again here in America since its inception, and all have failed when the followers realized their slavery! Communism by any other name is Nazism/Fascism/socialism, they ALL lead to the same result - total slavery of the people under their repression! I know you don't understand this because your myopia is chronic and incurable as most Democrats here suffer from!
This dude had some great ideas! If you wanna learn more, we've summarized every chapter of The Wealth of Nations
I love this. It opens things to a new perspective and what forgotten idols strived for in their views of society
I absolutely loved reading The Theory of Moral Sentiments in college... what an awesome book!
+ The School of Life could you please do a video on Freidrich Hayek and his 'Road to Serfdom'?
What about huge honours and accolades for paying the most tax?
If you mean rich people voluntarily giving money to the government, it's no longer a tax, but charity. Rich people are obviously better off donating their money directly to charitable causes than giving it to government who can squander it, steal it through corruption, or even use it for negative purposes (like starting a war, or destroying a piece of nature to build an ugly statue glorifying the government).
@@robertdegroot8302 out of topic, but do you still struggling with existential crisis?
This is a veritable masterwork of a documentary. Indeed one of the best available on UA-cam. A must watch for any educated person.
I'm a leftist but this kinda makes more sense than the Karl Marx idea
+Simon Shulgefella I consider myself a social democrat. I want a capitalist society with regulations in order to prevent monopoly and oligopoly. But I would urge you to listen to people like Milton Friedman (right-libertarian). Always good to broadening ones viewes and ideas
in my opinion, a big government impact but with a small government. I have no problem paying 50% taxes but there is no need to raise multiple parliaments, commissions, counsels and god knows what. Redistribution, protection (police, healthcare), justice and infrastructure (roads,...) are all what is necessary. On the side of the economy, the government should be a referee much more so then a player. Give freedom but be ruthless with fraud and corruption. The people have enough initiative, no need for handholding.
That's because Smith made more sense than Marx... a lot more sense.
***** smith was wrong on so many levels. Most recently the proof of lack of his invisible hand
alex vdb Still more correct than Marx ever was.
Please could you do a political theory about Bakunin or Tolstoy?
I had the benefit or misfortune, depending on your outlook, of coming into this world via Kirkcaldy hospital, so with that I see it as my responsibility to let you know that it is pronounced Ker-caw-dee. Loving the videos.
It is quite all right, it will not be held against you in any way at all :-D
+The School of Life Narcissist you didn't prove that, I think you proved that they are lonely inside and need validation from others for their existence.
That I don't think is narcissism, depression maybe...
Smith is a great as I understand it, I have never read his bio so dont really know, I just understand his theory's and like that.
+CaptainZuluGamma He said Narcissist because of Smiths argument that we need to feed their vanity, to give them awards and what not to feed their ego.
Plus, to need validation from other for our existence is a human trait in general.
Sociocultural psychology dictates "we are social animals with a need to belong" hence why we have social groups all around us that we identify ourselves with, a place to feel accepted and to feel wanted.
+CaptainZuluGamma He said Narcissist because of Smiths argument that we need to feed their vanity, to give them awards and what not to feed their ego.
Plus, to need validation from other for our existence is a human trait in general.
Sociocultural psychology dictates "we are social animals with a need to belong" hence why we have social groups all around us that we identify ourselves with, a place to feel accepted and to feel wanted.
+Return to the sun Sorta like like Cawdor is from Calder. Something happens to the "L".
I wish I was wealthy so that I could sponsor this channel and help fund its inevitable progression. This is, honestly, one of the only channels worth watching on youtube (Screw V-Sauce. It's for charlatans). Please post something on Pavlov and Skinner for your Psychology part of the curriculum. Conditioning is the greatest foundation for the psychology of today and the future. Finally, you should make another video like Why Some Countries are Poor and Others Rich.
i have a question? why was an illustration of Tommaso Campanella's City of the sun showed at 3:52? That is a Utopian City that did not govern nor act economicly like anything Smith would have explained in his political theories and ideas of the market mechanisms?
“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages” - Adam Smith
The more I find out about Rousseau the less I like him.
+Buck Shot Rousseau was a douchebag
***** lol
I dig 'im tbh.
the more i read rousseau the more i like smith
The more I read Rousseau, the more I realize that Rousseau was for imposing morality out of his own fantasies.
I would recommend that you buy a pop guard for your microphone. It's a really bad sound without one.
Please do a Thomas Paine video.
Proudhon and/or Voltairine de Clayre would be nice as well.
Being aware of the impossibleness to terminate vanity inside human being's veins, and proposing canalize them into good deeds rather than trying to suppress it, pure genius.
the part of educate consumer is SO IMPORTANT and its barely talk about!
So true
So many don't think they have a choice or power.
Ikr. Like think about how corporations scammy tactics would fall flat with consumers highly educated
Oh Smith's idea about how to get the rich to be good is brilliant, I love when I encounter a philosopher's brilliant ideas. :)
Loved the Perry Mason reference at 1:52.
Love how he flat out calls rich people narcissists. It's true though.
This is the only intro-level piece I've found online that doesn't reduce Smith's thought to free market capitalism. Very nice!
What Smith's book can you find the part 4 "Educate Consumer"? Also, specifically which chapter?
If we deny the fact that there is a lower class, then I totally agree with Smith. However, there is a big group of people who doesn't have the same a possibilities as common citizen when it comes to finding a good job and living a worthy life.
Even though Smith is right about many things, we have to consider Marx too.
Marx's theories never worked. They assume to understand what every person desires.
This is why the USSR failed and every other socialism system has as well. The reason as to why socialism always become tyranny is because it cannot control peoples desires and wants so it has to enforce its agenda.
It is simply not true that socialism always results in tyranny. This should be easy to see, if you look at some of the most socialistic, democratic countries in the world. Consider the Scandinavian countries. You are completely right, when you say that people’s desires and wants can't be controlled. I am from Denmark, and I can tell you for sure that, a socialistic society doesn't need to control peoples desires and wants in order to work properly. We don't need to control what people want because we believe that people can get the lives they want, if we provide freedom to them. Freedom to live the life you want to live, no matter how poor your family is, and no what serious disease you may suffer from.
Marx's theories have been implemented more or less successfully on small and medium scales, and unfortunately the USSR got Stalin to ruin everything.
UdSSR never had an actual socialism. What they had is better called "state-capitalism". From the beginning the Bolcheviks suppressed every popular socialst initiative there was, and instated their doctrine of one supreme leader leading an army of workers. So the Soviets are always a bad example when you want to prove that socialism/communism failed and always will fail.
No, we don't need to consider that tyrant Marx.
Hi, I first want to say that I recently discovered your channel and I love it. I recommend it to everyone. I would like to see you make a video on the capitalist Milton Friedman.
Why is this Channel undersubbed/viewed/commented/liked? You guys need more publicity. I'm gonna share this channel with all my friends and family for the brilliant content you lot put time and effort into creating. Thank you.
Congratulations, The School of Life. You have created a 6 minute, 43 second video about Adam Smith, that has ABSOLUTELY no mention of any of the following topics:
1) MERCANTILISM (and Smith's objections to it)
2) Exchange rates
3) Tariffs
Well done.
Amazing channel! I've learned so much!
Doing a Progressive Tax on (Just) the “Greedy Part” of Wealth & Conservatively Spending (Just it) on Social Programs gets us a “Stable Society” (the “True Creator” of All Wealth!!) AND we do it with “Direct Democracy” where WE Directly Propose, Enact & Enforce “Merit Based Standardized” Laws & “Money” isn’t a factor!! - "Like" this so we all See & Do this!!
PS: Nobody’s taking away our “25 Rolls Royce’s” but WE MORALLY OWE (Just
our “Greedy” 26th Rolls & up) BACK TO OUR STABLE SOCIETY (that “Owns & Allows” us to Create & Safely use our “25 Rolls”) TO KEEP IT STABLE!!
We must Realize Nobody gets Rich without our “Fast Food Workers” who
ironically Need “Food Stamps” for Stability!!
No one is lazy & “Reaping Free Benefits off the Rich’s Money” because the GREEDY PART BELONGS to all of us!!
Read Max Weber’s “Protestant Ethic & SPIRIT of Capitalism” where, early on, Wealth was only a Moral pursuit just to achieve our limited “State of Grace” & then we stopped so others could also achieve their monetary “Salvation”
Watch “The Gods Must Be Crazy” where a “Coke bottle” falls from a plane into the midst of a primitive tribe & one guy grabs it & everyone fears him for grabbing ALL the “Money” & now being their “King”!!
In "Direct Democracy" we vote directly for issues that we've tested for merit, etc before proposal, then we popularly enact them & then Voter Volunteers will easily enforce small & specific Laws that have all the "legal standards" for enforcement in them ... congress, senate, president, agencies, courts, etc have a role to play, but within it & in service to it ...
The invisible brain of libertarian capitalists. Capitalists all over the world talk about Adam smith but barely any of them have actually read him.
The misunderstanding of the "invisible hand" quote being a perfect example. It isn't about unregulated capitalism at all, it's a argument against one regulation (protectionism) a fairly weak argument too, relying heavily on the patriotism of a person to invest in the national economic interest instead of they're own by not investing in cheap labour abroad. Allegiances that do not exist in a competitive society. It has nothing to do with laissez fair capitalism standing on its own.
+The Real Libertarian
Whilst I disagree with the very idea of capitalism, I quite like Smith's vision of a capitalist society--he offers it in a very nuanced way.
But I think that's the case with every pre-capitalist thinker, however. I'm convinced he would have denounced markets, under his own principles, if he had of lived another 50 years or so.
Adam Smith work was again "mercantilism "nationalist state supervised market. He was a huge fan of the physiocrats who advocated for free markets.
The invisible hand was based on the individual filling voids in society and satisfying needs to obtain capital. Its an argument for free markets because governments can't foresee individual needs of everyone. Markets are created based off the needs of people at the moment. The invisible hand is how we got UA-cam and cell phones.
So it was the "invisible hand" that created the computer chip and Internet or was it DARPA?
Or was it the US Navi which invented GPS? Or all the satellites we use every second which were launched there by governments?
Scotland gave us hockey and capitalism. Two of my favorite things.
ive been thru high school and college. economics has been presented as the ethics of produce more pay less, raise profits, and thats it. this is the first time that adam smith sounded like a decent guy
+rbmaserang he was a really decent guy. Most economists nowadays haven't read a single book by Adam Smith or by the first capitalist thinkers/writers.
Kirkcaldy pronunciation- Kirk (as in Scottish for Church) Caw (as in "call" without the Ls) and Day
The k and care kind of mashed together as one, the L is silent, and the A is pronounced like "awe".
You'd think I'd have been taught about Adam Smith in School, given that I've grown up and lived in Kirkcaldy for over 26 years, but instead I was taught important things like 'if you're ever being chased by an alligator, run in a zig-zag pattern because they can't turn very well.'
Wow I was randomly searching my name and found this
Lol, great name 👍
"We need to be taught to ... pay a proper price..." 5:36
*Me: buys a $2 Maccas meal*
Fun fact : Adam Smith never mention word 'capitalism' in his book "Wealth of Nation".
The true name of capitalism is actually "Commercial Society"
Capitalism as a term was first used by protosocialists and popularized by Karl Marx
Video was less than 7 minutes. What stood out most for me was "the rich are vain narcissists."
That sounds about right.
Smith observed that many trade opportunities were created when the market was free from control or taxation by the State. Therefore, he was not in favor or against any class, but in fact, a free trade defender, making it a mechanism to generate more opportunities for all - and through this process, pulling people away from poverty.
Adam Smith’s observations helped set people free
. - Luiz Philippe de Orleans e Bragança (Brazilian Prince).
Fascinating, keep these coming!
If it isn't the money the rich care about, then how do you explain the immoral behaviours of wall Street bankers who got fat bonuses while the rest of the US is left unrecovered? I just can't help to think that his wish thinking is gonna help anything.
The more you have, the more you want to earn.
there's a limit to "the more you want to earn". When you come to that point where you got all the money you could possibly have, you start looking at other things. No money can buy love or honor....
@@hunglorin5838 if the rich people, like everyone else, only see money as a means to an end, they will continue to use it responsibly.
If anyone, regardless of wealth, sees money as the ends themselves, than they do not deseeve to have it.
After all, "the LOVE of money is the root of ALL KINDS of evil."
It may have been that consumer demand is what businesses used to serve and be directed by, but now they create the demand themselves in order to serve it.
That's what social-libertarians would have you believe. If this was the case then why do so many companies fail? Yes, many big businesses do dictate fashion, but just as many consumers dictate it to companies it completely depends on context.
Besides, at the end of the day it doesn't matter particularly much because, as Smith points out, it's all about finding an equilibrium between the consumer and the company.
i agree with what you are saying, but just because big companies fail doesn't mean that they don artificially create demand for their own products,using billions of dollars to steer us into buying things we don't need. people are very easily influenced.
he is legendary for his contribution to humanity with his ideas
This is from 2014?!? How do people not know about this channel? This is way better than most UNIVERSITY courses
Have you considered adding poetry to your curriculum? I'd love to see a video on Pablo Neruda or George Gordon Lord Byron from TSOL.
Furthermore, I'd pay for a longer format info-product where the videos would be animated in this fashion but more in depth... Similar to Alain's "The Perfect Home" series.
***** Absolutely, I appreciate the consideration. In the meanwhile, enjoy:
society6.com/product/lit-lust_tapestry#55=414
"The government of an exclusive company of merchants is, perhaps, the worst of all governments for any country whatever." - Adam Smith
To people who do not get it:
Any government that colludes or collaborates with the wealthy, primarily at the expense of the economy, the country, and society, is automatically the most tyranical government ever possible.
If you refuse to have a government like such, keep the wealthy and the government separate, any kind of collusion or collaboration must be stopped with extreme prejudice.
"It's not companies that primarily degrade the world, it's our appetite, which they merely serve." Do the billions of dollars companies spent on advertising every year have nothing to do with our appetite?
Thank you. Glad somebody else saw the nonsense.
Really awesome channel has already answered a big question I had that no one seemed to have a reasonable answer to.
IM IMPRESSED BY HOW GOOD YOU ARE MAKING TH ANIMATIONS.....
In the 18th-19th century drawings, everyone had huge calfs
I’ve read Adam and found him difficult to follow; I endeavor to double down and keep reading him until I can explain it to myself in a conversational style.
I can't remember how many times I've made this argument about taste to other people (not entirely aware it wasn't my own invention), but it often seems like no one today wants to believe anything they know or like, or how they behave, can be improved through knowledge and the development of better taste. Instead, if you dare suggest even the general notion, you're a snob and automatically wrong because of it.
People, or their minds, inhabit two separate realms which constantly come into conflict with each other often resulting in confusion as to where one ends and the other begins. These two realms are reality and the perception of reality. There was a James Bond film called "You only live Twice," the meaning of the title is found in the theme song by the same name in the very first lyrics: "You only live twice, or so it seems, one life for yourself and one for your dreams." The "dreams" could be defined as our concept of what reality is or what it ought to be. On the one hand you have reality, on the other you have religious faith, prejudice, fantasy, romanticism, idealism, misinterpretation, misconception, naivete, bliss, and all the many other things which make up our concept of reality, what it is or what it ought to be.
of course subscribed!!... thanks a billion times for simplifying the understanding of the biggest problems of our world in this video so that further time could be invested in finding solutions and better understanding of the problems too
The pic of Trump after saying the rich "desire honor" sure didn't age well.
I don't understand why people are so against capitalism and corporations. If someone has an ingenious idea, why not let them make money off it. They came up with the invention/idea. People always like to point to Marx as being their savior yet communism stagnates economic growth. Look at the USSR and Cuba.
because if this person got a genious idea, they need workers to make it work. And to make profits off of it, you need to exploit the workers so that you will gain money off of this idea.
***** I see no exploitation in paying workers. Flipping a burger isn't that difficult. You are lucky to be receiving minimum wage.
Perhaps there are other factors in the downfall of USSR and Cuba. A much more positive example is China, communist-socialist and with a capitalist market experiment.
Larry R it isn't about if it's hard or not, it's about how important your work is. While I would agree that flipping burgers isn't essential to our society, I believe it is much more productive than a singer, a hooker, etc. But still, those entertainers are paid much more. And besides, preparing food is somehow important, after all, we wouldn't have doctors if there wasn't someone to make him or her bread, right ? Since they would have to make it by themselves.
Also, since we can't have everyone being a doctor, or a singer, there has to be people doing jobs such as "flipping burgers", etc. So, since we need those workers, just as much as we need a carpenter, a doctor, an architect, I don't see why they should be paid less.
***** They are paid more because there is a greater demand for those careers. If they was no demand for the hooker, they would be unemployed. Society determines the price of things. I also have to hand it to you for keeping this conversation professional.
4:44, this has aged well
Never heard of Smith before. Strikingly relevant. That bit on vanity is genius!
Adam Smith is bangin'. I disliked shopping at cheap stores even before I came across his work.
Adam Smith seems like the Karl Marx of capitalism: all the right ideas, but really impractical solutions.
Actually he is.
Tespri I meant he is the Karl Marx of capitalism, and no, it isn't impractical to encourage rich to help others. Actually it's practical with socialism. But Socialism is just a fairy tale, and it will never be a good economic system practically. But in theory is beyond goodness.
Tespri I do agree Adam Smiths ideas solve problems, but mostly not on good ways. Karl Marx ideas are way better theoretically, but particularly they will never work, because of something called 'Greed'.
Tespri It's really hard to encourage charity without economic incentives, for example tax breaks. Smith would call for a huge cultural shift where charity was the main determinant of success for an individual. That's a nice thought, but not something anyone can make happen, especially since our current culture values money itself, not so much how its obtained or spent. I mean, i'd prefer benevolent rich people over arrogant rich people too, it's just not something we can decide.
+Tespri because rich people invest money in job creating industries and are philanthropic as long as they are given pats on the back. rich people r human to with values
My largest objection to this video is that (yes in theory we could reform capitalism for the better by changing our tastes) but in practice our tastes are highly conditioned by advertising and the media and we have litle choice as to what we buy when we are traped in the cycle of poverty, exaustion, television brainwashing, and consumption. I think the corporate structure must be attacked directly, consumers alone cannot completly change capitalism by learning to buy better products from better companies because those same corporations invest so much in social control and manipulating consumer patterns.
Yes but others would argue that it's the ability for individuals the hoisted their ambitions for a better life for both themselves and the planet that capitalism can serve. If your base desires or ignorance leads to consumption of products that degrade your self or your environment then the responsibility stops with the you. This was true when man wiped out the wooly mammoth and the dodo and it's true now. If however you can elevate your habits of consumption to meet more altruistic or environmental demands then capitalism provides option such and fair trade and organic products. The choice is yours.
PS capitalism =/= corporatism
+limpact1 thank you for your reply, yes you are right in saying that consumer capitalism can trick people, 1) inaccurate adverts can mislead people into buying ineffective products and services, however this is countered by advertising watchdogs and Internet review sites, 2) aspirational advertising can create desires in people for things which are frivelus like Gucci sunglasses, but most people that I hang out with are intelligent and educated enough to know that these products do not buy happiness. The main alternative to free market capitalism is state owned companies, however history of the 20th century shows often leads to insurmountable poverty, look at China in the 1960s or Russia in the 1980s. Of course companies should be regulated, but if you introduce high taxes on companies which provide people which useful products and services you increase the price of the stuff they sell and make them inaccessible to normal people and also cause job redundancies. Ok so socialism can increase cash equality but what does this matter if you can't afford anything cool. Right now I can buy a rubber chicken on eBay or fly to majors for under 100 pound, thank you consumer capitalism. If u don't want this stuff then don't buy it. But it's not your or the states position to tell me I should spend like this! Cheers! Of course toxic products like cigarettes are an exception to this stance!
limpack1 Hi, thanks for the video link I will watch when I have a spare two hours. I'm sure capitalism has existed since money was invented, a farmer selling dates in ancient Babylonia to feed himself and his family, that's capitalism as much as Coca cola is capitalism. Capitalism doesn't have the conceit to promise universal happiness for all, obviously many people would rather not work and capitalism, unlike socialism wouldn't reward them for their idleness thus they would naturally be upset that they would have to go to work, boo hoo! *plays the world's tiniest violin*
History shows that countries with only state run companies can have major problems with problems with providing people what they need and the famines of China under the watch of chairman Mao killed millions and now China is running a consumer capitalist competitive style economy. There havent been famines in asia for decades thanks to the agricultural revolution and free markers. Socialist have high ideals but they have a certain elitism to say that the state knows what people want or need more than the individual does. Obviously all modern successful countries have a mix between the two ideals, but capitalism provides the most amazing modern technologies which allow people to do cool stuff like for instance debate politics with strangers on youtube comment threads.
How does it affect you on a practical level if there is a self-made billionaires in your country? His presence means inequality in cash terms but if you have cheap and affordable products and services provided by the system, how does this inequality hurt you?
TheZzpop True. Advertising was not mention. It was probably around but very crude in Smith's time. He could not have imagined then how sinister it would become.
One way or another he’s spitting Straight facts here!
Exactly, finally great content to consume on UA-cam :) keep it up thank you for this amazing videos.
this channel helps a lot with school, good job on all the videos!
The principle error in our times is consumer capitalism not serving to benefit the weak in society as smith put it, but instead has been used to benefit the privileged few. This therefore ruins the utility of consumer capitalism to be a tool of any form of social benefit to society.
it is an arrogant position to a random excess of wealth to trick;e it down - trickle-down theory - out of date and flawed to fair play to all participants in a society - contributing , so-called , or not
I don't think Adam Smith took into consideration the effect consumerism has on the planets resources.
+TheSuperNESman Malthus.
That's because of the time period in which he lived, there was no way of them knowing back then some of the harmful impacts of industrialisation.
When you're out to only make profits, nothing else matters.
Hank Shirley
yes if people didnt have a conscience. Only like 1 percent of the population is sociopath which means everyone else including rich people have empathy and a moral compass. The problem with global warming is it doesnt feel emminent. when companies pollute there isnt visible destruction that they can sense.
Shhhh, just think of the money man! Forget the planet and your fellow human beings!
IT'S PRONOUNCED KIR-KODDY
source: live north of it
*****
too bad you probably didn't save the project either eh?
+Pat Moon why so mean. He admitted the mistake. Great work as usual school of Life.
Rebecca Monroe And just how am I being mean?
thanks school of life, our society is still young. I hope you will become so big that you break UA-cam
I would love to know the name of the arts used in the video, especially the one at 4:30, at the right side...
5:25 Oh please. You expect me to believe that taste is determined by demand? It's determined by supply. Ask yourself, is it your *taste* that causes you to buy gasoline-powered vehicles? Is it our *taste* that causes us to buy drinks loaded with high-fructose corn syrup? Or GMO corn and soy? No, it is out of economic (or practical) necessity. Supply comes first, demand comes in later. Or maybe the demand never comes, and the company ceases production. They take risks and sometimes they lose.
Yes, but there is no system in place (and to my knowledge never has been) by which consumers petition companies to make certain products. Companies make inventions, market them, and THEN the consumers decide if they want to buy them or not. Corn flakes weren't invented after a group of consumers got together and demanded that some company fund the creation and patent of a crispy corn-based breakfast cereal. It was invented by accident, patented, and sold. It happened to be successful, but it's just misleading to say that "Kellogg's fulfilled the demands of consumers." Hula hoops, yo-yo's, Coca Cola, even the light bulb, etc. were all invented, patented, marketed, and happened to be successful. Thank you for the excellent videos, but be careful that you're not putting the wrong spin on things.
I'm with you on that. Thanks for clarifying.
That's actually Say's Law,lol which was proved wrong by John Keynes,it's a classical idea.
mendali I used to believe this, but this is passing the blame, and refusing to take responsibility. Try selling something that's not poisonous for a while, and watch your business founder. This video is dead on in this respect - consumers need to be educated.
mendali Well, yes. Coke with cane sugar can now be purchased, at a higher price that coke with corn syrup. Corperations use corn products because they are cheaper. They are cheaper because the governent heavily subsidizes corn. We are hardly a free market economy.
The speakers soothing voice makes me sleepy.
People who think capitalism is evil need to try living like everybody else forcefully. People who think the rich benefit from others being poor don't realise that poverty generates no profit, therefore the more poor are the poor, the poorer are the rich.
I would love to see you guys doing videos on Austrian School of economics, Ayn Randt, Ron Paul and other libertarian authors who defend that if we are free to achieve our best, to be "selfish" the outcome is much greater than the imposed, controlled and shaming lifestyle proposed by Socialists and Statists who in reality want some "entity" a.k.a. government to take responsibility for our failures, but what is not clear is that this entity will never be composed of anything less than men, who will be then placed on a higher status with endless powers and above good and evil.
***** Of course there is profit in poverty, otherwise there would never have been a slave class. Labor is still a good, and one can sell the fruits of another's labor and thereby turn a profit. So if a poor person is paid 1.00/hour for 2 hours to make a product that sells for even as low a price as 5.00, then it necessarily follows that paying the poor person 25 cents an hour for the two hours has to increase the profit on the 5.00 item. 5.00-2.00 (forget all costs let's pretend like libertarians they are externalities) leaves 3.00, while 5.00-.50 leaves 4.50 (and to make it perfectly clear for you: 4.50>3.00).
+Mr English Nice appeal to majority fallacy. So what if they didn't like capitalism/hated it? The free market itself was a revolutionary idea, it challenges governmental mercantilism. Where do you think the term liberal comes from? They opposed large government, unlike modern day liberals. Your comment holds no grounds, you're just trying to use majority opinion distortedly
+Tamiris Loureiro Capitalism is not evil. People are evil. And you are a prime example.
+Greatest Khan Here endeth the chapter on 'How to be a good GOPher'
God bless Adam Smith.
Truly a genius.
Could somebody direct me to where Adam Smith talks about moving on from 'frivolous' consumer culture to a more sustainable and human centered approach? I am doing my dissertation on sustainable consumerism and I think ol' Smith is a good place to start.