I'm 35 years homeless...woke up so depressed today...went to the library...and found a new Blyth video...dude always blows my mind...every time I listen to him...the economic theater clarifies its cast of characters.
eric robinson Love listening to the no-nonsense clarity of Mark Blyth. Very comforting in these weird, upside down times. Don't know if its your thing, but there's a channel called Manufacturing Intellect you might like.
I have some great UK links for you with huge info to get past the LIES of everyone from Thatcher to now. T May says there is no 'magic money tree' or whatever, but that is a flat out LIE. The greedy sociopaths pretend that good things for all cannot be provided, they INTENTIONALLY defund everything so they can then RUN EVERYTHING and bill the govt any amount they want! THAT is the scam of privatization - devised by US greedy sociopaths, and they corrupted and coerced many countries after 1971, apologies. This site is starting a weekly podcast, I think, to inform people about the monetary TRUTH vs the lies that have been told. www.reknr.com/economics/tory-campaign-relies-on-your-economic-ignorance/
Here is a terrific - and BLUNT - professor of economics in the UK. He uses FB but may return more to Twitter soon. He teaches the public in the UK and in the US. He is part of the group of econ professors who also promotes an EXCELLENT Job Guarantee plan that could improve lives, communities, and the economy! Here is one of his informative FB posts: facebook.com/ellis.winningham/posts/1990558747669630
Check out the youtube channel Deficit Owls, tons of great video info explaining monetary TRUTH versus the lies we have been told by criminal sociopaths for decades. I started with this quiz which blew my mind and set me on the path to learn more. ua-cam.com/video/yofpo88ipmo/v-deo.html
The skilled professionals have been twiddling in the UK ever since Thatcher decided that UK industry came second to service industries and she dumped all the tech colleges . The USA knows its the tech and manufacturing that is the big power house for the average citizen standard of living not the elitist bubbles
Mark is a great speaker, he needs to be on more shows like this talking to the American people, spreading simplistic truth about an economy that is made complex by those in power for the sole purpose of control and manipulation.
I wouldn't say he's "spreading simplistic truth". Austerity is a "simplistic truth" that most people can relate to using their household economy as analogy. Mark challenges this simplistic model by emphasizing that the income of a nation depends on its spending. However, I agree that Mark is excellent at explaining complicated things in simple terms.
This is the best, positive aspect of social media. Knowledge for the masses - for free. Enlightening discussion. Economics that actually makes sense to me. No dislikes at the time of this post. Great!
This is the first time I've seen Mark go beyond just identifying problems well, which he always does, to briefly mentioning potential solutions - so much better. More solution talk please.
I’m so addicted to this guy... I think I listened to every video and still find an added bit of info in each one. He has changed my whole perspective which never happens.. Thanks Mark!
Mark Blyth is the only and rare Economist who is telling the truth.... Austerity Measures never worked... and that model is just a way for Affluent Pricks to get richer...
To be fair, he does live in the US these days, and he teaches at Brown University. But yeah it would be cool to see him speak at a British media outlet as well
I am watching this on 2/23/2019......what Blyth said about the midterms was spot on...as well as pretty much everything else.....I want to live in a world where Mark Blyth is a contender for the Nobel Prize in Economics and not marginalized by the economics establishment
Austerity: Good for the lender, bad for the borrower. Notice how when the lenders screw up they don't preach austerity to them, they talk about bail-outs. Austerity is preached to the borrowers when they screw up.
Just twigged to Mark Blyth a couple of weeks ago and now I can't get enough. One thing that Professor Blyth doesn't mention is that when people advocate for "austerity," they mean cuts in services for the bottom 90%. There's no government waste in the Pentagon, agribusiness subsidies, fossil-fuel subsidies, the tax code, etc.
I love Mark and I think he is spot-on with so many things. Everytime I listen to him his message gets clear in my mind and I think it's because he is getting better at articulating that message so that non economist's like myself can understand it better. I tried listening to his book on austerity and I found it flew way over my head and I just could not grasp The Core Concepts. I hope he writes another book that is much more approachable two non economist's and I think he can do it because his talks like this are becoming better and better.
Outstanding. Subscribed. I am already familiar with Mark Blyth, but always enjoy new videos with him. TIP: Please put brief subject in your video titles, since guest name alone is informationally insufficient.
This is what Stephen Harper and the Conservative party did to Canada for 9 years, and during the great recession years, later calling a deficit budget "morally wrong".
I think the chief failing of great contemporary economic thinkers is they make their money critiquing systems. So they're in it. They benefit just like govs, corps, media, and the wealthy, from an unstable system. I think that unstable system is the great economic driver, maybe always has been. Influence is the X factor. Magnates in the 20s, Corps and multi's since the 70s. Trade agreements in the 90s, and now government. Academics gain either way as long as we're talking g a out it. Brilliant man, I enjoy hearing him speak.
@@alloomis1635 Revolutions often don't bring the results you hope for. They grow from very real inequality and anger towards the system that isn't fair, how ever, if you look at the beginning of the century and raise of socialism, there were two schools of thought. One said let's try to change the system from the inside, by gradual change, by voting... Other side also known as communists said no, there is no time to waste, we must bring on the revolution by any means necessary, even force. That's how you got pathology of Soviet union on one side, and social democracies on the other.. which proved as better approach in the end? In the end, names changed, there were wars, but as far the system, on both sides became capitalistic, however, one of those didn't kill almost 20 or more millions of own people. Just imagine a soviet style revolution in todays America and what it would look like with all the armed citizens.. it would be a bloodbath followed by anarchy.. and law of the strongest.. gradual change is the only way and that starts from local level. If you were talking about something else, I apologize for me thinking aloud on wrong tangent.
19 down votes. What the hell is wrong with these people? You really can’t argue against Prof Blyth’s points. The ending about state welfare is very powerful. Allowing those with the talent to succeed the means to succeed pays for itself 10 times over. Moving education away from the poor is one of the greatest crimes of modern politics. So much potential that will never be realised.
If you look on other videos, he talks about how Keynesian policies caused the imbalance of power between capital and labour resulting in higher inflation. I really couldnt tell you where he stands but I think he would be like Professor David Harvey and say "I dont have all the solutions but I think I know enough to frame the problem"
Great interview with the always interesting Mark Blyth. Not only he gave back 10 times what he recieved as a youngster through the welfare programs, but the whole society saved god knows how much for not having to deal with the consequences of criminal behaviour that can be expected from people who are not given the chance to succeed.
Ivan Petrov ......some would argue that he gave back to a country which did NOT support him (USA) and not the one, which did (Scotland). He got his preliminary education in the social welfare state of UK/Scotland, but makes his money, and hence pays taxes, in the USA. If a country could recoup its debts (for educating, etc) from its citizens who plan to emigrate and who,have benefitted greatly from state benefits, by charging them for it before they leave, then I would be okay with such an equitable system.
That's a very valid point you are making here that sends me into various directions of thought : for one he wouldn't have made that much money had he stayed in Scotland, so the ratio might've been closer to 1:1, but i still insist on the quality of human being he was able to become instead of opting for becoming a drug dealer for example, so the overall benefits for society still remain intact.
Remlat Zargonix How do you know how much he repaid in taxes to the uk government before he left for the US. You don’t, you are assuming as such. And what about the people who were similarly from poor backgrounds but did not leave the UK ? Obviously a great many who entered the professions paid more taxes because of this. An argument to the contrary makes no sense. The more a society invests in it’s people the more successful that society.
@@remlatzargonix1329 Do you realise you're arguing for debt slavery? At the same time that corporations freely move money across borders, "free trade" deals ensure markets are forced open and jobs vanish as a result, you're arguing that educated people are the new pesants and must not move from the land because they owe a debt?
What about the argument that cuts in public spending will result in savings that can be passed on to the rich in the form of reduced the taxes which will somehow trickle down to the working class.
While Dr. Blyth's thinking on austerity is correct enough, the problem I am having is that austerity is not the traditional doctrine. Instead, the usual theory was that governments were supposed to run surpluses in good times so that they could EXPAND public spending in recessions. In fact, his discussion simply reflects the traditional view. This is how Australia avoided going into recession throughout the crisis: start with a low debt to GDP and increase public spending when the private sector wobbles. The real question, which is being missed, is why did the narrative change so very precipitously in the wake of the 2008 crisis? The first thing to remember is that governments in too many countries, especially the US, already had substantial public debt to GDP ratios at the start of the crisis. Dr. Blyth has charts on this to the effect that US debt was "not too bad" and then expanded rapidly due to the bailout. That is correct, but the fact is that his "not too bad" was already rather a large fraction of GDP. The second is a reflection of the leading recurring theme through all of Dr. Blyth's public presentations. Power. He advises (elsewhere) that the bail out transferred 17 trillion from the bottom to the top. He reminds us of the massive growth of income inequality over forty years that benefits the top 1% of the top1% and of the shifting tax burden away from the top / corporations and onto the bottom / middle. I have not heard any of his analysis on changes in transfers, but overall he has identified the root neo-liberal / globalisation causes: Capital has all the power, labour has none. Government is supposed to serve the people, but everyone knows that the principal function of a capitalist government is to serve capital. The United States in particular has become a pseudo-democracy. I can only find one explanation for the above inversion of the narrative. It must be the case that nowadays capital perceives that ANY public spending on public services takes away what is rightfully theirs. I would love to reject that explanation on the basis that such an approach is actually not in the overall interests of capital, so why would they do that? Because the overall self-interest of capital is decidedly different from the immediate self-interest of individual owners of capital. They are well into the process of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs and we now need to save the capitalists from themselves, just like FDR.
It's a pity governments can't built some hyperloop through Europe because such a project would give work and at the same time investors would be safe since planes will probably get discouraged in the future because of their emissions.
23:40 the moment when a guy in a suit realizes that a story is not funny because circumstances he cannot imagine for himself are reality for the majoriy...
It's obviously true that "public debt equals private savings", meaning private investors invest their savings in gov't bonds, but it's ridiculous to say that retiring gov't debt (i.e., repaying the bondholders) "destroys" the savings of the private investors. Redeeming the bonds simply returns the private savings to the investors, who then are able to reinvest their savings elsewhere.
Its not about redeeming the bonds, they are paid back all the time.. Its about issueing new bonds. If you do not issue new ones you are "paying back debt". Now since the interest rate of these bonds is extremely low, and interest rates are basicaly the price of debt, government debt is in high demand meaning the private sector is willing to buy it for a very low price. Seems to me they do not want to invest it elsewhere.
According to MB, the two major parties were blindsided, not corrupt. He is learning US elite politeness real quick... "Is our politicians being educated?'"
i didnt see him saying they not corrupt. what he seem to say is they were blindsided by trump simply going to these place they couldnt be bothered to go to and calling them and there bubble that things are going great for out.
@@nowaskmehow did the Democrats bother with those states? No it did not, it would rather try and steal republican votes than cater to its core, how did that work out? So yeah you could call it lazy, very stupid would be my assessment.
You moved from issues covered to campaign attention. And that is still wrong. The Hillary campaign was very busy. She worked herself to the bone. It was not laziness not campaigning in Michigan or deep PA. It was miscalculation. In PA they were going for the "moderet suburban Republican voter". Charles Schumer stated as much while the campaign was going on, on TV. Blythe is covering for the Democrat's failure at the the issue level because that's the polite thing to do in the US elite. So much for honesty.
@@nowaskmehow yeah the dumb fucks went for moderate republicans and shit all over progressives..... how'd that work out for ya 😂😂😂😂 When you offer the voter republican or republican lite, they'll choose republican every time. Chucky the shoe, Nancy piss features and the DNC lost over 1000 state legislators, not the greatest backbone to try and win...... but hey I'm sure the centre right DNC shit machine will learn from there mistakes...... 😂😂😂😂😂
Blyth is clearly just speaking about the 2018 mid-term. It's way too early to make any predictions about 2020. The biggest factor that will affect 2020 is the economy. Incumbents always win, unless there's a recession. Trade wars destroy economies as surely as real wars, and the Fed is still tapped out of the liquidity tricks it used to prop up the US economy after 2007.
CNN, MSNBC and the like are predicting such a big "blue wave" that nobody will turn out to actually vote blue (because "why bothering voting blue if we are winning anyway?")
Just be patient with DJT ,he's a well-needed overdue whirlwind in Washington,like a gatecrasher at an elitist cocktail party,love him or hate him but you must agree that things needed to be shaken up!
My understanding of Keynesian Economics: In times of deflation, the government should 1) Spend money and 2) Cut taxes. Everybody, poor and rich, is delighted. But in times of inflation, the government should 1) Cut spending and 2) Raise taxes. Everybody, poor and rich, is angry. In other words, Keynesian policy is politically viable in times of deflation, but not in times of inflation. I have been told that during the 70's (inflation), "Keynesian" policy (raise spending and cut taxes) was tried and was proved "false". Could somebody who knows all about economics critique the preceding?
Foxes and Hedgehogs: Too many world leaders are hedgehogs, and too few of them are foxes. The outcome of economic initiatives tend to be bad because hedgehogs are horrible at predicting the outcome of their actions. Hedgehogs may have intelligence, but they remain ignorant about the many things they need to know in order to make better decisions. We need to kick the hedgehogs out of office and elect more foxes.
Time for Mark to tackle growth as the concept which drives our (human manufactured) economic model. Is it sustainable, I cannot logically see how, but perhaps Mark has the answer.
He doesn't.....economics is bullshit, because all of its variations requires a continued growth approach. There is no "sustainable" economic theory as Economics Unmasked illustrates, and Blythe also seems to "believe" that it is government that prints the money, rather than private banks. But even if he were "correct", the interest that is required to pay the debt, is NOT printed, so whoever, prints the money, ends up owning everything. ( and this element would require periodic debt forgiveness, which is no longer an element of MMT, which has sought to make debt "eternal" by eliminating "bankruptcy", the final "evolved" form of debt forgiveness. ) He is entertaining, to a point....but that only gets you so far.
Seán O'Nilbud you are a tax heaven for big corporations that sell for the rest if europe. in a way, you are importing jobs from other european countries. try exit EU and use austerity and then tell me how did it go.
@@burusoila2303 most people have, if we learnt anything, brexit was how not to hold a referendum But the result stands, you can't stamp your feet like children until you get your own way. Or keep demanding new referendums until you get the desired result, that's not how democracy works. Personally I can't wait to see the back of the scummy EU, hopefully they take the moaning Scottish with them as well.
He didn't defent Brexit, he explained it. His opinion on Brexit is that it was stupid since Britain had a special deal with the EU and it needed to cooperate with the EU anyway, but now it had no power.
Holyshiiith this guy from Scotland just to get it all out.. go figure two thousand years same economic situation.. and it took a guy from Scotland to tell us what's wrong...🤔🤔🤔🙄🙄🙄🤫🤫🤫
Long term debt is not a "good" thing, including federal. It's false economy, to buy (even a bargain) on credit, and then pay for it may times over, in interest.
had to share: funny to hear about taking economics beyond mathematical models while doing my maths hw for my economics course. Need to keep my mouth shut during the tutorial tomorrow and not ask the question on everyone's lips: when do we get to the interesting part?
There will be no growth at all until there are wages that at least keep up with inflation... then go beyond... the FED should not be Raising rates to artificially cause a slowdown... instead the government should raise minimum wages significantly which in turn would generate higher wages for all people and generate spending (70% of the economy) ... which in turn causes a measured inflation based on people having more money to spend (not to mention a better quality of life) Giving away tax revenue to the wealthy does Nothing for the overall economy.!
supply side economics says that growth is how you pay for the debt after tax cuts. mb says that growth is how you pay for the debt after increase in public spending. could both be wrong or right? California wqent from red to black by cutting spending and increasing taxes to get revenue
"we've already decided where we wanna be and then we make the argument to fit" this is why economics is pseudo science, that and the fact economists use mythematics instead of mathematics. See Prof. Steve Keen also for some additional info ...
13.58 The world is an exceedingly complex place. I presume you’re talking about the fabrications of human civilisation. The world is a simple place which runs, as far as we can tell, on what we call the laws of physics. Ecology fits in these laws and our understanding of ecology is that all things are interdependent. There isn’t a seperate part of the planet set aside for Homo sapiens.
In a fiat based currency there will never be enough money. Companies and workers create wealth and government do not. And what about culture? The stuff that binds society beyond money.
Government is the mediator that prevents the guy with most money to hire thugs to make sure no one complains about their working conditions. Stop being a hyprocrite by relying on the government's protection and pretend it has nothing to do with wealth creation at the same time.
"I never said government did not play role in society. Stop jumping to conclusions." " Companies and workers create wealth and government do not." Contradict much?
The USD isn't just a "fiat currency": it is backed by the government's taxing power, which is backed by a $20 trillion economy. You have to get past the simplistic idea that money has to be backed by some commodity like gold. Money is the working fluid of the economy: central banks manage the money supply so as to maintain a positive but low rate of inflation - positive to discourage hoarding; low to encourage investment. In the US, government spending accounts for 20% of the GDP: governments are an integral part of the economy, and do as much to create wealth as the rest. In the form of human capital, for example. Infrastructure. A stable society. etc. The idea that "the government" is some black hole is the libertarian fallacy. The Marxist fallacy is that profit is some black hole. It all keeps working as long the money keeps circulating.
What would they actually debate about though? Their area of expertise's only cross sect on some peripheral subjects or am I mistaken? Pareto distribution that JB often talks about doesn't mean that you should let the successful thrive and let all others starve, just means that in the system we are living in, there will always be a percentage of people that will rise up to the top and contribute a lot, however, that is where some social order needs to be in written in law that takes care for elderly, less able, sick. The basic of civilized society upheld by democratically elected government looking out for interest and prosperity for all of it's citizens. Next step is to make it all sustainable before we wreck biosphere. If we menage that, we will colonize Solar system next, then who knows what wonders future technology brings.. or not and perish.
His point on the government not being like family and printing money to get out of trouble falls down when central banks are private with share houlders . The central banks tell the government's what to do not the other way round. Case in point the 2007/ 8 crash .
Mark needs to be more patient with people when he explains stuff. He acts as though it's all so obvious when it's actually not! We're not all economics professors Mark!
4:50 - The public debt is private savings. What a bunch of twisted up disingenuous malarky. We take part of our government budget, and instead of taxing people for the money to pay it, we borrow it. He calls that dishonestly public savings. Our government borrows money from the corporations and rich people who refuse to pay taxes which creates the deficit. They do not want to pay taxes and can politically force other people to pay their taxes, while they buy bonds and reap the interest from that. Consequently, the government amasses debt, and an interest payment which is now unmanageable. There is really no function or reason for government borrowing except they want to make the tax level so high, while at the same time being painless for the very rich and the corporations, which squeezes the hell out of the middle class and working people ... and that squeeze is getting tighter because the tax system in general is getting more regressive every year. If we were in an existential war, like WWII, going into debt would be necessary, but we are not, and in fact we are burning up our people in a similar way in which China enslaves its people to create cheap products that they can declare war on other countries' economies and middle classes. Our goverment is treating workers like slaves, like farm animals. Funny how Republicans are at the head of this, and they are always saying it is better to invest in private industry, but they create a big giveaway to people who blow up the debt, and for no reason ... in fact a reason that they Repulicans themselves disagree with.
You are getting Mr Blythe all wrong here, buddy. Its not disingenious what he said. It's a simple fact. US Governmente biggest debt is to its own population. If you have been saving into a "private pension" with millions of others and that money was used to purchase Government bonds... would you want the Government to default on repayment, after spending your money? If interest is not fair on the Government, then why would anyone save on bonds when money loses value over time. Anyway Mr Blythe is all about getting the Government to spend more on infrastructure, schools, hospitals and welfare. He is against austerity because it hits the poorest and middle class... who are the real consumers and the driving force behind an economy... He is also against Coroporate companies hording large amounts of savings.. which has the effect of slowing down the economy. So Yes to high Taxes on the hoarders of wealth.. Yes to Government spending.. That is essentially what you are both saying.
> US Governmente biggest debt is to its own population. The "population" implies the people, but most of the debt is to trusts, corporations and very rich people. It is dishonest to frame it as belonging to "the people" as if it is democratic, because even the debt that in some way does trace back to individual investors does so through large corporate institutions. The question is who has to pay it off and increasingly that is the working and middle classes of America, and that raise in their taxes at the time when wages are stagnant or decreasing is a method of political control by Republicans.. It also has nothing to do with what I or any other group or regular Americans wants to happen, another disingenuous take by you on this mess. Just because I called Blythe on the comment about debt, does not mean I do not agree with him about the damage from austerity. Hiw framing of the issue in my opinion is a kind of smart ass response that does not lead to or motivate a solution.
The two interviewers ( although appearing to dress as if they know what they thought they knew ) appear dumbfounded when confronted by The scholarly knowledge of Mr Blyth . Talk about a waste of natural resources .
just look at the recent history of the prc. they are not 'communists,' anymore, but neither are they capitalists. politicians rule, not plutocrats. better yet, the politicians are smart, educated, and intensely interested in promoting the prosperity of their nation. they plan, they follow the plan, and the result is growth and general welfare. this history should end all discussion about market-driven society being best. unless you are a plutocrat, or unless your career depends on the grace and favor of plutocrats. blyth can point out the lies and myths that allow the usa to pretend to concern itself about the general welfare, but he can not bring himself to point out that the fundamental problem of the usa is the constitution: it was written to create plutocracy, and it has been effective in doing so. no amount of economic nit-picking will do any good until someone raises the banner of revolution.
When you can sit for 27 minutes and talk intelligently, articulately and using language that you communicate your ideas as coherently as Blyth has, then I'll give credibility to your opinions. Until then, you're just some idiot on the internet for whom mentioning those 3 names at once loosens your bladder.
I'm 35 years homeless...woke up so depressed today...went to the library...and found a new Blyth video...dude always blows my mind...every time I listen to him...the economic theater clarifies its cast of characters.
eric robinson stop watching UA-cam you bum and work
@@sagardhillon9270 Did that make you feel big? Because it made you look very, very small. You can do so much better.
Could not have said it better
eric robinson Love listening to the no-nonsense clarity of Mark Blyth. Very comforting in these weird, upside down times. Don't know if its your thing, but there's a channel called Manufacturing Intellect you might like.
James I could not have said it better
Mark definitely needs more air time , and god knows we could do with him in the UK!
I have some great UK links for you with huge info to get past the LIES of everyone from Thatcher to now. T May says there is no 'magic money tree' or whatever, but that is a flat out LIE. The greedy sociopaths pretend that good things for all cannot be provided, they INTENTIONALLY defund everything so they can then RUN EVERYTHING and bill the govt any amount they want! THAT is the scam of privatization - devised by US greedy sociopaths, and they corrupted and coerced many countries after 1971, apologies.
This site is starting a weekly podcast, I think, to inform people about the monetary TRUTH vs the lies that have been told.
www.reknr.com/economics/tory-campaign-relies-on-your-economic-ignorance/
Here is a terrific - and BLUNT - professor of economics in the UK. He uses FB but may return more to Twitter soon. He teaches the public in the UK and in the US. He is part of the group of econ professors who also promotes an EXCELLENT Job Guarantee plan that could improve lives, communities, and the economy!
Here is one of his informative FB posts: facebook.com/ellis.winningham/posts/1990558747669630
Check out the youtube channel Deficit Owls, tons of great video info explaining monetary TRUTH versus the lies we have been told by criminal sociopaths for decades. I started with this quiz which blew my mind and set me on the path to learn more. ua-cam.com/video/yofpo88ipmo/v-deo.html
The skilled professionals have been twiddling in the UK ever since Thatcher decided that UK industry came second to service industries and she dumped all the tech colleges .
The USA knows its the tech and manufacturing that is the big power house for the average citizen standard of living not the elitist bubbles
I would start a petition to get him to appear on question time!
I am glad we have the new media. Would never have known about Mark Blyth without it.
I'll wager Google will demonetize it, as soon as it gets a few more viewers. This is knowledge you're not supposed to have.
Mark is a great speaker, he needs to be on more shows like this talking to the American people, spreading simplistic truth about an economy that is made complex by those in power for the sole purpose of control and manipulation.
I wouldn't say he's "spreading simplistic truth". Austerity is a "simplistic truth" that most people can relate to using their household economy as analogy. Mark challenges this simplistic model by emphasizing that the income of a nation depends on its spending. However, I agree that Mark is excellent at explaining complicated things in simple terms.
The corporate media will NEVER let him on. He represents the antithesis of their own selfish interests.
This is the best, positive aspect of social media. Knowledge for the masses - for free. Enlightening discussion. Economics that actually makes sense to me. No dislikes at the time of this post. Great!
social media is not free knowledge that is public school. where you have to learn not just click
This is the first time I've seen Mark go beyond just identifying problems well, which he always does, to briefly mentioning potential solutions - so much better.
More solution talk please.
You aren't wrong sir...
I’m so addicted to this guy... I think I listened to every video and still find an added bit of info in each one. He has changed my whole perspective which never happens.. Thanks Mark!
I can listen to Mark Blyth for hours, hope he does way more interviews!
Mark is my Favorite economist/ humanities professor, one of the best no doubt.
Mark Blyth always makes me feel like I can understand what is really going on, he is a great speaker!
Professor Blyth has me speaking in Scottish accent every time I listen to the man. I wish I will have the insightful knowledge as he does one day.
Superb guest and discussion. Truth and clarity in an age of propaganda peddling FUD.
(Fear - Uncertainty - Doubt)
Mark Blyth is the only and rare Economist who is telling the truth.... Austerity Measures never worked... and that model is just a way for Affluent Pricks to get richer...
Brilliant. Why is it we in Britain never say Prof Blyth on the BBC, or any other mainstream media outlet... Oh right....
To be fair, he does live in the US these days, and he teaches at Brown University. But yeah it would be cool to see him speak at a British media outlet as well
This was a great interview, both by Mark and the interviewers alike.
Clear and succinct as usual....I've learnt a lot from this man....
Such rare clarity and wisdom, Mark. Thank you.
Great interview, wonderful guest and really on point questions by the hosts
We need more Mark Blyth.
I am watching this on 2/23/2019......what Blyth said about the midterms was spot on...as well as pretty much everything else.....I want to live in a world where Mark Blyth is a contender for the Nobel Prize in Economics and not marginalized by the economics establishment
Excellent as always Mark, very powerful last point
If i were a british prime minister i wouldn,t appoint another M.P. as chancellor i'd appoint mark blythe
A welfare state success story-teller. Invest in your people people.
No your not you are a nigga lover aren't ya
Charity is the voluntary form of the taxation-powered state-welfare.
@Accelerationist Then you are an asshole, and probably racist.
Well, there's the obvious point that he is a *Scotish* welfare state kid, but his high wage taxes are paid in the US.
@Captain Caveman Free education. Taxes.
25:15 "I would not expect them to do as well as they think they're going to do."
Turns out he was exactly right.
not so many foreigners understand the ambulance story. I know it myself I saw it a middle class couple. heartbreaking
Austerity: Good for the lender, bad for the borrower. Notice how when the lenders screw up they don't preach austerity to them, they talk about bail-outs. Austerity is preached to the borrowers when they screw up.
Powerful.
Just found this channel Loved it
Just twigged to Mark Blyth a couple of weeks ago and now I can't get enough.
One thing that Professor Blyth doesn't mention is that when people advocate for "austerity," they mean cuts in services for the bottom 90%. There's no government waste in the Pentagon, agribusiness subsidies, fossil-fuel subsidies, the tax code, etc.
Great explanation of Political Economics
Mark is the shit
Thank you Mark
Wasn’t it Trump who said. “ If you owe the bank a million $, they own you. You owe the bank a billion, you own them.” China is the same
I love Mark and I think he is spot-on with so many things. Everytime I listen to him his message gets clear in my mind and I think it's because he is getting better at articulating that message so that non economist's like myself can understand it better. I tried listening to his book on austerity and I found it flew way over my head and I just could not grasp The Core Concepts. I hope he writes another book that is much more approachable two non economist's and I think he can do it because his talks like this are becoming better and better.
Outstanding. Subscribed. I am already familiar with Mark Blyth, but always enjoy new videos with him. TIP: Please put brief subject in your video titles, since guest name alone is informationally insufficient.
Thanks.
Hi Harry!
Thanks The Pell Center.☺ Thanks Mark.☺
This is what Stephen Harper and the Conservative party did to Canada for 9 years, and during the great recession years, later calling a deficit budget "morally wrong".
Also he lied and ran large deficits while giving huge tax giveaways to elites, Trudeau continues the kabal, so will Sheer.
I think the chief failing of great contemporary economic thinkers is they make their money critiquing systems. So they're in it. They benefit just like govs, corps, media, and the wealthy, from an unstable system. I think that unstable system is the great economic driver, maybe always has been. Influence is the X factor. Magnates in the 20s, Corps and multi's since the 70s. Trade agreements in the 90s, and now government. Academics gain either way as long as we're talking g a out it. Brilliant man, I enjoy hearing him speak.
he's not a revolutionary- paid too well. can't blame him.
@@alloomis1635 Revolutions often don't bring the results you hope for. They grow from very real inequality and anger towards the system that isn't fair, how ever, if you look at the beginning of the century and raise of socialism, there were two schools of thought. One said let's try to change the system from the inside, by gradual change, by voting... Other side also known as communists said no, there is no time to waste, we must bring on the revolution by any means necessary, even force. That's how you got pathology of Soviet union on one side, and social democracies on the other.. which proved as better approach in the end? In the end, names changed, there were wars, but as far the system, on both sides became capitalistic, however, one of those didn't kill almost 20 or more millions of own people.
Just imagine a soviet style revolution in todays America and what it would look like with all the armed citizens.. it would be a bloodbath followed by anarchy.. and law of the strongest.. gradual change is the only way and that starts from local level.
If you were talking about something else, I apologize for me thinking aloud on wrong tangent.
He does a great job explaining beyond just the subject at hand to talk about scholars are "BS testers". Boy! Do we need that nowadays!
Mark's ideas are so important, why not turn up the microphone?
19 down votes. What the hell is wrong with these people? You really can’t argue against Prof Blyth’s points. The ending about state welfare is very powerful. Allowing those with the talent to succeed the means to succeed pays for itself 10 times over. Moving education away from the poor is one of the greatest crimes of modern politics. So much potential that will never be realised.
So, Blyth is basically a neo-Keynesian. That's a pretty radical position in today's world. But, it shouldn't be.
TheTalkWatcher what’s kanye west have to do with this
@@paulies5407 I hope that's a joke.
If you look on other videos, he talks about how Keynesian policies caused the imbalance of power between capital and labour resulting in higher inflation. I really couldnt tell you where he stands but I think he would be like Professor David Harvey and say "I dont have all the solutions but I think I know enough to frame the problem"
I like his final point you make people more productive by education.
Great interview with the always interesting Mark Blyth.
Not only he gave back 10 times what he recieved as a youngster through the welfare programs, but the whole society saved god knows how much for not having to deal with the consequences of criminal behaviour that can be expected from people who are not given the chance to succeed.
Ivan Petrov ......some would argue that he gave back to a country which did NOT support him (USA) and not the one, which did (Scotland).
He got his preliminary education in the social welfare state of UK/Scotland, but makes his money, and hence pays taxes, in the USA.
If a country could recoup its debts (for educating, etc) from its citizens who plan to emigrate and who,have benefitted greatly from state benefits, by charging them for it before they leave, then I would be okay with such an equitable system.
That's a very valid point you are making here that sends me into various directions of thought : for one he wouldn't have made that much money had he stayed in Scotland, so the ratio might've been closer to 1:1, but i still insist on the quality of human being he was able to become instead of opting for becoming a drug dealer for example, so the overall benefits for society still remain intact.
Remlat Zargonix How do you know how much he repaid in taxes to the uk government before he left for the US. You don’t, you are assuming as such. And what about the people who were similarly from poor backgrounds but did not leave the UK ? Obviously a great many who entered the professions paid more taxes because of this. An argument to the contrary makes no sense. The more a society invests in it’s people the more successful that society.
@@remlatzargonix1329 Do you realise you're arguing for debt slavery? At the same time that corporations freely move money across borders, "free trade" deals ensure markets are forced open and jobs vanish as a result, you're arguing that educated people are the new pesants and must not move from the land because they owe a debt?
@@brahnseer3512 And the more you invest in educating people, the less you will have to invest in building prisons
great show lads
much better than a noose in the public square
i must say
What about the argument that cuts in public spending will result in savings that can be passed on to the rich in the form of reduced the taxes which will somehow trickle down to the working class.
While Dr. Blyth's thinking on austerity is correct enough, the problem I am having is that austerity is not the traditional doctrine. Instead, the usual theory was that governments were supposed to run surpluses in good times so that they could EXPAND public spending in recessions. In fact, his discussion simply reflects the traditional view. This is how Australia avoided going into recession throughout the crisis: start with a low debt to GDP and increase public spending when the private sector wobbles.
The real question, which is being missed, is why did the narrative change so very precipitously in the wake of the 2008 crisis?
The first thing to remember is that governments in too many countries, especially the US, already had substantial public debt to GDP ratios at the start of the crisis. Dr. Blyth has charts on this to the effect that US debt was "not too bad" and then expanded rapidly due to the bailout. That is correct, but the fact is that his "not too bad" was already rather a large fraction of GDP.
The second is a reflection of the leading recurring theme through all of Dr. Blyth's public presentations. Power. He advises (elsewhere) that the bail out transferred 17 trillion from the bottom to the top. He reminds us of the massive growth of income inequality over forty years that benefits the top 1% of the top1% and of the shifting tax burden away from the top / corporations and onto the bottom / middle. I have not heard any of his analysis on changes in transfers, but overall he has identified the root neo-liberal / globalisation causes:
Capital has all the power, labour has none.
Government is supposed to serve the people, but everyone knows that the principal function of a capitalist government is to serve capital. The United States in particular has become a pseudo-democracy. I can only find one explanation for the above inversion of the narrative. It must be the case that nowadays capital perceives that ANY public spending on public services takes away what is rightfully theirs.
I would love to reject that explanation on the basis that such an approach is actually not in the overall interests of capital, so why would they do that? Because the overall self-interest of capital is decidedly different from the immediate self-interest of individual owners of capital.
They are well into the process of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs and we now need to save the capitalists from themselves, just like FDR.
It's a pity governments can't built some hyperloop through Europe because such a project would give work and at the same time investors would be safe since planes will probably get discouraged in the future because of their emissions.
MB, what a legend! I was a welfare kid too, now I'm a structural engineer :)
I would like to see a debate between Mark and Thomas Sowell.
It would help greatly if we all started a boycott cable news movement.
23:40 the moment when a guy in a suit realizes that a story is not funny because circumstances he cannot imagine for himself are reality for the majoriy...
Mark Blyth makes me want to be an economist
It's obviously true that "public debt equals private savings", meaning private investors invest their savings in gov't bonds, but it's ridiculous to say that retiring gov't debt (i.e., repaying the bondholders) "destroys" the savings of the private investors. Redeeming the bonds simply returns the private savings to the investors, who then are able to reinvest their savings elsewhere.
Its not about redeeming the bonds, they are paid back all the time.. Its about issueing new bonds. If you do not issue new ones you are "paying back debt". Now since the interest rate of these bonds is extremely low, and interest rates are basicaly the price of debt, government debt is in high demand meaning the private sector is willing to buy it for a very low price. Seems to me they do not want to invest it elsewhere.
Mark Blyth is the truth.
According to MB, the two major parties were blindsided, not corrupt. He is learning US elite politeness real quick... "Is our politicians being educated?'"
i didnt see him saying they not corrupt. what he seem to say is they were blindsided by trump simply going to these place they couldnt be bothered to go to and calling them and there bubble that things are going great for out.
"not be bothered to go" So it's laziness now...
@@nowaskmehow did the Democrats bother with those states? No it did not, it would rather try and steal republican votes than cater to its core, how did that work out?
So yeah you could call it lazy, very stupid would be my assessment.
You moved from issues covered to campaign attention. And that is still wrong. The Hillary campaign was very busy. She worked herself to the bone. It was not laziness not campaigning in Michigan or deep PA. It was miscalculation. In PA they were going for the "moderet suburban Republican voter". Charles Schumer stated as much while the campaign was going on, on TV.
Blythe is covering for the Democrat's failure at the the issue level because that's the polite thing to do in the US elite. So much for honesty.
@@nowaskmehow yeah the dumb fucks went for moderate republicans and shit all over progressives..... how'd that work out for ya 😂😂😂😂
When you offer the voter republican or republican lite, they'll choose republican every time.
Chucky the shoe, Nancy piss features and the DNC lost over 1000 state legislators, not the greatest backbone to try and win...... but hey I'm sure the centre right DNC shit machine will learn from there mistakes...... 😂😂😂😂😂
Definitely agree with Mark...democrats aren't going to do as well as they think they will!!!! Unfortunately, Trump will be voted in for a second term.
Correct - except the 'unfortunately'.
Blyth is clearly just speaking about the 2018 mid-term.
It's way too early to make any predictions about 2020. The biggest factor that will affect 2020 is the economy. Incumbents always win, unless there's a recession.
Trade wars destroy economies as surely as real wars, and the Fed is still tapped out of the liquidity tricks it used to prop up the US economy after 2007.
CNN, MSNBC and the like are predicting such a big "blue wave" that nobody will turn out to actually vote blue (because "why bothering voting blue if we are winning anyway?")
Cannot fool so many much longer.
Just be patient with DJT ,he's a well-needed overdue whirlwind in Washington,like a gatecrasher at an elitist cocktail party,love him or hate him but you must agree that things needed to be shaken up!
Gan yasel big man !
My understanding of Keynesian Economics: In times of deflation, the government should 1) Spend money and 2) Cut taxes. Everybody, poor and rich, is delighted. But in times of inflation, the government should 1) Cut spending and 2) Raise taxes. Everybody, poor and rich, is angry. In other words, Keynesian policy is politically viable in times of deflation, but not in times of inflation. I have been told that during the 70's (inflation), "Keynesian" policy (raise spending and cut taxes) was tried and was proved "false". Could somebody who knows all about economics critique the preceding?
The thing is that there is proof it already works! This is basically the basis of Keynesian economic policy - the underpinning of the postwar economy.
Why has he not received a Nobel Prize????? and will he be at Kilkenomics? Wish we had Kilkenomics here but no our 1% would not like that at all.....
Foxes and Hedgehogs: Too many world leaders are hedgehogs, and too few of them are foxes. The outcome of economic initiatives tend to be bad because hedgehogs are horrible at predicting the outcome of their actions. Hedgehogs may have intelligence, but they remain ignorant about the many things they need to know in order to make better decisions. We need to kick the hedgehogs out of office and elect more foxes.
Most of US debt is held by US financial institutions.
A fella named Scottie once told me “their are three kinds of shit; Bull, Horse, and Chicken. And then there is the truth."
Time for Mark to tackle growth as the concept which drives our (human manufactured) economic model. Is it sustainable, I cannot logically see how, but perhaps Mark has the answer.
He doesn't.....economics is bullshit, because all of its variations requires
a continued growth approach. There is no "sustainable" economic theory
as Economics Unmasked illustrates, and Blythe also seems to "believe" that
it is government that prints the money, rather than private banks. But even if
he were "correct", the interest that is required to pay the debt, is NOT printed,
so whoever, prints the money, ends up owning everything. ( and this element
would require periodic debt forgiveness, which is no longer an element of
MMT, which has sought to make debt "eternal" by eliminating "bankruptcy",
the final "evolved" form of debt forgiveness. )
He is entertaining, to a point....but that only gets you so far.
Thank you.
Austerity has worked fine in Ireland unemployment in the recession was 17% now it's 5%. debt to GDP is 68% down from 124%. inflation 0.7% growth 2.5%
Seán O'Nilbud you are a tax heaven for big corporations that sell for the rest if europe. in a way, you are importing jobs from other european countries. try exit EU and use austerity and then tell me how did it go.
Ireland offers the world nothing but a safe house for corrupt non tax paying entities.
You must be so proud.
Eleven thumbs downs from current and former Tory chancellors.
Make Dundee great again!
If you suck money out of an economy, you reduce the size. You can't reduce and expand at the same time.
It’s nice to see him praising the EU. I bet by now he knows that defending Brexit was a colossal mistake.
I would wait until brexit is done before making such statements, how do you know? It's never been done before.
The Gov'nor I sense Blythe has changed his tune on Brexit, just an impression...
@@burusoila2303 most people have, if we learnt anything, brexit was how not to hold a referendum
But the result stands, you can't stamp your feet like children until you get your own way. Or keep demanding new referendums until you get the desired result, that's not how democracy works.
Personally I can't wait to see the back of the scummy EU, hopefully they take the moaning Scottish with them as well.
He didn't defent Brexit, he explained it. His opinion on Brexit is that it was stupid since Britain had a special deal with the EU and it needed to cooperate with the EU anyway, but now it had no power.
Coromi1 He defended Brexit at the Milken Institute two years ago, next to a bunch of Ultra Tories, very unfortunate. Nice to see him change .
'I'm really cross with you. I'm now going to shoot myself in the head' - Sounds a lot like Brexit strategy.
15 minutes and 39 seconds I'm not . Allowed to talk about that because I'm not on Facebook. 🤔🤔🤔🤫🤫🤫🤭🤭🤭🙈🙉🙊
15 minutes and 33 seconds.. this guy pretty much says it all.. HOW WE TELL""STORIES""!!
if mark was in control of the worlds economy everybody would be lifted from poverty in time.
Welfare can be given voluntarily...
Everyone that listens to Mark Blythe has a look of wonder on their visage.
Holyshiiith this guy from Scotland just to get it all out.. go figure two thousand years same economic situation.. and it took a guy from Scotland to tell us what's wrong...🤔🤔🤔🙄🙄🙄🤫🤫🤫
Long term debt is not a "good" thing, including federal. It's false economy, to buy (even a bargain) on credit, and then pay for it may times over, in interest.
Did he say The Ohio Valley around 20 minutes?
had to share: funny to hear about taking economics beyond mathematical models while doing my maths hw for my economics course. Need to keep my mouth shut during the tutorial tomorrow and not ask the question on everyone's lips: when do we get to the interesting part?
If you make the poorest poorer then we are all poorer, the poor spend all of the money they earn and pump money around the system.
Andrew Yang takes it seriously!!!
Adore MB but want 2 hear him on bitcoin...
There will be no growth at all until there are wages that at least keep up with inflation... then go beyond... the FED should not be Raising rates to artificially cause a slowdown... instead the government should raise minimum wages significantly which in turn would generate higher wages for all people and generate spending (70% of the economy) ... which in turn causes a measured inflation based on people having more money to spend (not to mention a better quality of life) Giving away tax revenue to the wealthy does Nothing for the overall economy.!
supply side economics says that growth is how you pay for the debt after tax cuts. mb says that growth is how you pay for the debt after increase in public spending. could both be wrong or right? California wqent from red to black by cutting spending and increasing taxes to get revenue
Brill.
"we've already decided where we wanna be and then we make the argument to fit" this is why economics is pseudo science, that and the fact economists use mythematics instead of mathematics. See Prof. Steve Keen also for some additional info ...
13.58 The world is an exceedingly complex place. I presume you’re talking about the fabrications of human civilisation. The world is a simple place which runs, as far as we can tell, on what we call the laws of physics. Ecology fits in these laws and our understanding of ecology is that all things are interdependent. There isn’t a seperate part of the planet set aside for Homo sapiens.
Fan of Mark Blyth , however, he needs to get into what Jordan Peterson has to say about gender pay gap.
I'm sure like a lot of people, he's either read or seen Peterson and seen through his pseudo intellectual word soup nonsense.
In a fiat based currency there will never be enough money. Companies and workers create wealth and government do not. And what about culture? The stuff that binds society beyond money.
Government is the mediator that prevents the guy with most money to hire thugs to make sure no one complains about their working conditions. Stop being a hyprocrite by relying on the government's protection and pretend it has nothing to do with wealth creation at the same time.
He is advocating unadulterated government spending. I never said government did not play role in society. Stop jumping to conclusions.
"I never said government did not play role in society. Stop jumping to conclusions."
" Companies and workers create wealth and government do not."
Contradict much?
The USD isn't just a "fiat currency": it is backed by the government's taxing power, which is backed by a $20 trillion economy. You have to get past the simplistic idea that money has to be backed by some commodity like gold. Money is the working fluid of the economy: central banks manage the money supply so as to maintain a positive but low rate of inflation - positive to discourage hoarding; low to encourage investment. In the US, government spending accounts for 20% of the GDP: governments are an integral part of the economy, and do as much to create wealth as the rest. In the form of human capital, for example. Infrastructure. A stable society. etc. The idea that "the government" is some black hole is the libertarian fallacy. The Marxist fallacy is that profit is some black hole. It all keeps working as long the money keeps circulating.
Nathan Fielure: You should watch this ua-cam.com/video/N6uVV2Dcqt0/v-deo.html
I NEED to see a debate between Mark Blyth and Jordan Peterson in my lifetime.
What would they actually debate about though? Their area of expertise's only cross sect on some peripheral subjects or am I mistaken?
Pareto distribution that JB often talks about doesn't mean that you should let the successful thrive and let all others starve, just means that in the system we are living in, there will always be a percentage of people that will rise up to the top and contribute a lot, however, that is where some social order needs to be in written in law that takes care for elderly, less able, sick. The basic of civilized society upheld by democratically elected government looking out for interest and prosperity for all of it's citizens.
Next step is to make it all sustainable before we wreck biosphere. If we menage that, we will colonize Solar system next, then who knows what wonders future technology brings.. or not and perish.
His point on the government not being like family and printing money to get out of trouble falls down when central banks are private with share houlders .
The central banks tell the government's what to do not the other way round. Case in point the 2007/ 8 crash .
From 16 minutes and 50 seconds.. slow it down watch their faces and listen to what they're saying...
We know who the billionaires are and where they live.
And as Mark has said in another video: "The Hamptons are not a defensible position. At some point people are going to come for you!"
Mark needs to be more patient with people when he explains stuff. He acts as though it's all so obvious when it's actually not! We're not all economics professors Mark!
4:50 - The public debt is private savings.
What a bunch of twisted up disingenuous malarky.
We take part of our government budget, and instead of taxing people for the money to pay it, we borrow it. He calls that dishonestly public savings.
Our government borrows money from the corporations and rich people who refuse to pay taxes which creates the deficit. They do not want to pay taxes and can politically force other people to pay their taxes, while they buy bonds and reap the interest from that.
Consequently, the government amasses debt, and an interest payment which is now unmanageable.
There is really no function or reason for government borrowing except they want to make the tax level so high, while at the same time being painless for the very rich and the corporations, which squeezes the hell out of the middle class and working people ... and that squeeze is getting tighter because the tax system in general is getting more regressive every year.
If we were in an existential war, like WWII, going into debt would be necessary, but we are not, and in fact we are burning up our people in a similar way in which China enslaves its people to create cheap products that they can declare war on other countries' economies and middle classes.
Our goverment is treating workers like slaves, like farm animals. Funny how Republicans are at the head of this, and they are always saying it is better to invest in private industry, but they create a big giveaway to people who blow up the debt, and for no reason ... in fact a reason that they Repulicans themselves disagree with.
You are getting Mr Blythe all wrong here, buddy.
Its not disingenious what he said. It's a simple fact.
US Governmente biggest debt is to its own population.
If you have been saving into a "private pension" with millions of others and that money was used to purchase Government bonds... would you want the Government to default on repayment, after spending your money?
If interest is not fair on the Government, then why would anyone save on bonds when money loses value over time.
Anyway Mr Blythe is all about getting the Government to spend more on infrastructure, schools, hospitals and welfare.
He is against austerity because it hits the poorest and middle class... who are the real consumers and the driving force behind an economy...
He is also against Coroporate companies hording large amounts of savings.. which has the effect of slowing down the economy.
So Yes to high Taxes on the hoarders of wealth..
Yes to Government spending..
That is essentially what you are both saying.
> US Governmente biggest debt is to its own population.
The "population" implies the people, but most of the debt is to trusts, corporations and very rich people. It is dishonest to frame it as belonging to "the people" as if it is democratic, because even the debt that in some way does trace back to individual investors does so through large corporate institutions.
The question is who has to pay it off and increasingly that is the working and middle classes of America, and that raise in their taxes at the time when wages are stagnant or decreasing is a method of political control by Republicans..
It also has nothing to do with what I or any other group or regular Americans wants to happen, another disingenuous take by you on this mess.
Just because I called Blythe on the comment about debt, does not mean I do not agree with him about the damage from austerity. Hiw framing of the issue in my opinion is a kind of smart ass response that does not lead to or motivate a solution.
The two interviewers ( although appearing to dress as if they know what they thought they knew ) appear dumbfounded when confronted by The scholarly knowledge of Mr Blyth . Talk about a waste of natural resources .
Or maybe they are playing the role of the uninformed so they can ask the right questions and lead the conversation?
just look at the recent history of the prc. they are not 'communists,' anymore, but neither are they capitalists. politicians rule, not plutocrats. better yet, the politicians are smart, educated, and intensely interested in promoting the prosperity of their nation. they plan, they follow the plan, and the result is growth and general welfare. this history should end all discussion about market-driven society being best. unless you are a plutocrat, or unless your career depends on the grace and favor of plutocrats.
blyth can point out the lies and myths that allow the usa to pretend to concern itself about the general welfare, but he can not bring himself to point out that the fundamental problem of the usa is the constitution: it was written to create plutocracy, and it has been effective in doing so. no amount of economic nit-picking will do any good until someone raises the banner of revolution.
Adam Smith, David Ricardo and Karl Marx all in the one sentence... Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...
When you can sit for 27 minutes and talk intelligently, articulately and using language that you communicate your ideas as coherently as Blyth has, then I'll give credibility to your opinions. Until then, you're just some idiot on the internet for whom mentioning those 3 names at once loosens your bladder.
@@chriszanf let's sit down and talk so
CLAIBORNE PELL RHODE ISLAND SENATOR.. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH