The Economics (?) Behind Polarization Explained in One Minute
Вставка
- Опубліковано 31 тра 2024
- I have to say, and this is coming from someone who is anything but a controversial figure, the intellectual landscape is so polarized nowadays that people are either afraid to articulate thoughts (the fear of being judged, or worse) or, on the contrary, deploy full-on rage mode and share opinions in ultra-polarizing manners.
The result?
Debates, if we can even call them that anymore, end up suffering. And this is not just something specific to economics, not by a long shot. We live in a world where common sense discussions become increasingly difficult to come by. A status quo which results in society as a whole suffering.
Everything has to be "edgy" and bombastic apparently. Who needs calm, rational discussions anymore?
In my opinion, we do. All of us. And desperately so. Yet instead of collectively coming to this realization, it seems everyone is busy digging deeper ideological trenches. Not only does this hinder progress, the consequences or let's say potential consequences can get much worse. So bad that I do not even want to address them just yet. Perhaps I will do so in future videos but for now, I felt the need to vent :(
GiganticWebsites.com is a project through which I make it possible for people to build truly gigantic websites (thousands of articles each!) at ridiculously low prices. If you have a great domain you want to turn into an amazing website or an existing site you'd like to upgrade/scale, visit our website or check out the One Minute Economics presentation video below:
ua-cam.com/video/gE8yEOQFMvo/v-deo.html
Please note that this comment is not an ad for a third-party service provider. GiganticWebsites.com is my baby 100% and I will personally be involved in each and every project so as to ensure the website turns out great :)
Love your videos. They’re so concise and teach you about really complex topics
Thank you SO much for the kind words! Comments like yours help waaaaaaaaay more than most folks realize, they essentially make my day :)
@@OneMinuteEconomics :)
@@dumbgenious1960 We watched one of his videos in history class today the animation is weird and his voice sounds weird and most of the class was not paying attention even me and he doesn't talk about fortnite so I was already uninterested and bored because I don't really hate school
Intolerance of intolerance is required for a tolerant society...
Full support for all of this. I’m a greenie for context & I’m very grateful to all your videos
Thank you!!!
It's wild how rude and off subject you are in the other comment section.
@@shawn8847 You’ve given a boring & irrelevant conversation in defence of your own lack of propriety. If you’re offended by that being pointed out to you time & again then the problem is your wounded pride
@@ConnorCocoas Lol you keep talking about wounded pride. I keep talking about finance and economics. Youre showing your insecurities and have no idea.
@@ConnorCocoas Not once have you proposed any economic points. It's been non stop negativity, and obfuscation. Typically right wing. Don't forget, Albert Einstein wrote a short essay, "Why Socialism".
If you liked this video, I think you'll love The Age of Anomaly, my Wall Street Journal and USA Today best-selling book about preparing for financial calamities (whatever they may involve). You can buy it over at:
1) Amazon: www.amazon.com/Reasonable-Case-Bitcoin-Andrei-Polgar-ebook/dp/B09G6Z45QB
2) Barnes & Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-age-of-anomaly-andrei-polgar/1127084693?ean=2940155383970
3) Apple Books: books.apple.com/us/book/the-age-of-anomaly-spotting-financial-storms-in/id1331704265
4) Kobo: www.kobo.com/ww/en/ebook/the-age-of-anomaly-spotting-financial-storms-in-a-sea-of-uncertainty
It's actually what happens when you have contradictory neoliberalism in politics over the last 4 decades. The money system is incompatible with neoliberalism. Neoliberalism insists on the importance on the free market while not giving the government any chances to correct distortions or unfairness in the economy.
For example, you are pro free trade, anti regulation, pro business, anti consumer but also demand austerity. The first 4 might make sense because there are economic benefits but the societal problems were brushed away. Austerity then breaks the camels back because the government isn't allowed to e.g. spend money on infrastructure to create jobs that were lost due to the 4 factors. Pick 4 out of 5 and you will be fine, pick all 5 and you will be in trouble. That's where the contradiction lies.
Why can't we have all 5? Because the money system does not allow negative interest rates. The government cannot reduce its debt burden with positive interest. It's simply not meant to happen. You're always supposed to have 2% inflation which also means 2% more debt every year. If you want austerity then you have to cut something else, maybe global trade, introduce regulation, do anti business practices like strengthening unions or become pro consumer so that people buy more things.
Sustained negative rates as well as reducing the debt burden in a positive interest rate environment are both possible. It's debatable how probable, however :)
If creditors other than central banks play ball and are willing to accept negative interest rates for an extended period of time, perhaps in a perfect storm of a risk-off play, then you can essentially tackle current debt levels by being paid to take on new debt. Probable? No. Possible? Yes.
In a positive interest rate environment, it would without a doubt be possible to tackle the debt burden as long as... well, the GDP goes up more aggressively than the debt, thereby resulting in a gradually lower debt to GDP ratio. It would be anything but historically unprecedented. However, in today's landscape of disappointing growth and diminishing results for additional units of debt added, it's... well, easier said than done :(
Richer people want regressive taxes such as cigarette tax, fuel tax, etc. That's because they pay less percent of their salaries on these than the poors. The poors want non-regressive taxes. It's all self interest. This explains why richer people practice the global warming religion. Apart from that, with the laws of the global warming religion, the factories of the poorer countries can be outlawed as heretics, thus their competition is eliminated.
Beauty
Please come onto Greg Hunter USA Watchdog
Thank you! I'm glad you are interested in my views to enough of a degree to encourage me to go on as a guest. In terms of appearances, I'm not all that active at this point in time but whenever I am invited, I do my best to honor that invitation. When I am on let's say book tour, I deploy a more proactive approach. In other instances, I tone it down a notch or two, as I'm not extroverted enough to maintain a robust guest appearance pace... I'm kind of in that strange spot between introverted and extroverted :)
The left Vs right only seems to be getting worse!
Yep :(
The left organizes for democracy, healthcare, and basic human rights. The right organized for ultra individualism, nationalism, and war capitalism at the expense of racism, and labor division.
Hi Shawn, the thing is that your description presents the left in the best possible light and the right in the worst possible one. A right-wing enthusiast could do the same by stating that the right organizes for freedom, prosperity and progress. And that the left organizes for confiscation, censorship and ideological warfare. Therein lies perhaps the main message I wanted to get across, that many folks are so deeply in love with one ideology or another that they embrace a narrative which presents said ideology as seen through rose-colored glasses rather than in an unbiased manner. And in my opinion, society loses in the long run as a result. Regardless if it's the left or the right that prevails :(
@@OneMinuteEconomics The thing is, it's not my description, it's the facts. Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), the largest leftist group in USA, organizes tennant's associations, abortion education, teachers unions, universal healthcare, voting registration, and so on. Right wingers literally do the opposite. Numerous states are in hot water for repressing voting rights, anti abortion, union busting, and so on. Keep playing yourself, you'll never have a good grasp on economics.
@@shawn8847 Given how this video was about the foolishness of polarising political (& non-political) issues; I’m guessing it might have touched a nerve for you. Otherwise I cannot think of a reason you’d feel it was appropriate to demean the skills of an accomplished economist; even though YOU CHOSE to watch this rather uncontroversial video FOR FREE!
Now I’m a Greenie & I can say that the list of “left wing” accomplishments you feel supportive of is hardly left wing in my country. I’m not saying this to attack you or your values but to highlight how easy it is to be tricked into thinking you & your side is morally superior & “in the truth.” Historically it’s been self righteous religious (yet largely unspiritual) types who find it so easy to hurt & criticise others yet remain oddly blind to their own side’s long list of failings…….it’s your choice if you wish to join them in this tradition. Now I won’t be replying to or reviewing any of your replies so go nuts, or not, it won’t matter either way; but whatever you do please just be respectful & kind, especially to content creators who are from non English speaking countries who don’t really deserve to have American born persons belittle their expertise & hard earned educational achievements, especially when they use such things to freely entertain or educate others online
It's fine to vent, but I really wonder if comparisons like the ones you made there help the discourse at all.
Pointing out "hypocrisies" is a terrible way to engage with an idea, even if you're going out of your way to point to "both sides". Let me give you an apolitical example.
Let's say I preach for family values and respect torward woman. If I get caught cheating on my wife, that would mean I'm a huge hypocrite, right? But would that mean that family values and respect torward woman that I preached are incorrect ideas? Hell no. People fail. If left wingers are mad at everyone and are major hypocrites, it doesn't mean they are incorrect in preaching inclusiveness. If right wingers are major hypocrites for following populist politicians while preaching meritocracy, it doesn't mean they are incorrect in preaching meritocracy.
You can take this as a criticism, or a hint, but the reason I follow insane polarized political figures on the left is because they are the ones actually making points on why inclusiveness makes the world better and meritocracy is actually a distopian term to trick right wingers and is actually a terrible ideal. And the reason I follow insane polarized political figures on the right is because they are the ones actually making points on why meritocracy is worth defending, and why inclusiveness is just a void trick for dumb leftists to allow corruption to run in the country.
The TL;DR here is that pointing out hypocrisy is just inneficient. People lie all the time about what they believe. I'd rather listen to arguments on why I should believe something.
First of all, thanks a lot for the thoughtful comment Henrique! And, indeed, you are correct in pointing out that there is a fair bit of frustration on my end behind this video.
However, I do believe that there is merit to pointing out hypocrisy. If for no other reason than the fact that it paints an inaccurate picture of reality. To remain in the sphere of your example, I for one would stop following a person who let's say preaches family values but cheated on his wife. Not because said family values are incorrect but rather because... well, there has to be a more congruent promoter thereof. Someone who actually walks the walk, so to speak. With the same principle being valid with the inclusiveness example.
Furthermore, not only do I believe it's possible to make points without embracing polarization, I actually believe it represents the optimal approach.
Also, what bothers me perhaps more so than anything else is the "dosage" dimension. There has always been polarization and assuming we can simply make it go away completely would be unrealistic to the point of delusional. What I am scared of is the fact that polarization is spreading to such a degree that it ends up quasi-ubiquitous to the point of leaving little room for more balanced approaches. With perhaps the ultimate irony being represented by the fact that by trying to deploy said balance approach, you oftentimes end up facing the wrath of both sides. In other words incurring more damage than those on one extreme or another. Ouch! :)
I understand that point (& I know this wasn’t directed at me but I’d still like to say something if I may). I would counter though that these polarised figures are at the end of the day pursuing power. What good are they if they leave a mess behind them as they grab it. What good are their values if they cannot solve problems and govern properly. We should work to build consensus around any new ideas so policies can be born of temperance, the knowledge of experts, the wisdom of public servants & thereby serve the greater good not simply our “side”
Connor's reply pretty much sums up my attitude, eloquently put!
@@ConnorCocoas I too would love to hold hands together in order to lift the entire society to higher grounds. But that's simply not how it works. Philosophers argue for millenia about the freedom vs security question, for example. Each side tends torwards one and "working together" doesnt work. You have to convince people. And you do that by making arguments about IDEAS, not pointing void hipocrisies about this or that dishonest actor.
I dont care about individuals. Strong ideas build a better society. Strong individuals just build narcisist cults and autocracies.
@@HCosta1001 I’m a little confused with your reply but what I can agree on is the value of those good ideas & I whole heartedly believe that it is polarising power hungry narcissists & their vain & misinformed supporters that get in the way of properly discussing these good ideas & implementing them as policies.
Could you please talk a little bit slower
Sorry about that, I sometimes get carried away :(
Glad he quit terrible vid
Not sure what you mean, sorry you didn't like the video. Hope some of my other stuff will prove to be more helpful and make up for it
@@OneMinuteEconomics i watched ten videos and you rambled in all of them but sorry fir being extra mean tho that was rude of me
No problem, crazy times for everyone, no judgement here :)