Market Failures, Taxes, and Subsidies: Crash Course Economics #21

[@zr7951]

Takeaways: •Free riders - people who benefit without paying •Public good - anything having the characteristics of non-exclusion and non-rivalry - Non-exclusion - the idea that you can’t exclude ppl who don’t pay •Tragedy of the commons - the idea that common goods that everyone has access to are often misused or exploited. It explains most of environmental problems •Externalities - situations when there’s an external cost or benefit that accrue to other people or society as a whole. - Negative externality ex: polluted river - Positive externality ex: education •Regulatory policies - rules established by government decree •Market based policies - policies designed to manipulate markets, prices and incentives to correct market failures. Ex: taxes and subsidies

[@joelmcgowan7472]

She predicted the unsatisfying end to Game of Thrones ......wow

[@John-ww1jk]

yes!

[@AnoopShukla195]

The moment I heard it, knew there will be a top comment about this. 😛😛

[@lukelim5094]

you beat me by 5 months. people are still watching crash course video 3 years after it posted huh

[@sammyjess]

The power of economics.

[@alialikhalid9456]

I laughed when she said that I thought it was a joke then i saw the video was a 3 years ago 😂

[@npc6924]

"...or a satisfying ending to game of thrones" Yeah, too many free riders...

[@IdunRedstone]

that was because of lack of "regulation" on the staff as in not contracting them to make long enough episodes and enough seasons for the ending so it was just rushed. Honestly should have changed writers. Luckily they've been kicked off of making a star wars trilogy which is why they rushed and left.

[@NisargJain]

holy bejesus! they predicted the ending of game of thrones !!!!

[@bryanwan6169]

There are two things certain in life: death and awesome thought bubble animations

[@umnikos]

death is not certain...

[@kappyfulliness]

+Alex Stefanov (umnikos) dun dun dunnnnnnnn

[@Jackboy019]

+Alex Stefanov (umnikos) Definition of dying is the end of life, therefore death is 100% certain over infinite time. Checkmate atheists!

[@Jackboy019]

+Cryp Tic Two things in life are certain: Deez Nuts

[@natepetersen1508]

+Cryp Tic I see you fucking everywhere!

[@VercJames]

Politicians, Republican & Democrats alike, should watch these videos. Like if you agree ^.^

[@olliesims957]

+June Clever Haha. Socialist. If only you knew.

[@Phrozenflame500]

+June Clever I fucking love how hardcore capitalists call these videos socialists while actual socialists call these videos capitalist. It's the greatest thing.

[@Pedro66260]

+Verc James No, they should be replaced with engineers, scientists and people who know what to do and how, not only in USA. in all countrys. (this is called technocracy and it has evolved and kind of been corrupted but it still exist) sorry for my english it is not my main languaje.

[@Bynming]

+Verc James I agree but I don't like you specifically because you said "like if you agree".

[@VercJames]

+Carl M my humble apologies kind sir. I wanted to take advantage of UX design and needed something to take capitalize on the white space that a line break provides. Larger text area's with large white space is easier for the human eye to read at a glance. It also serves to call attention to content. What would you have me replace it with for future comments?

[@NuclearMushroom1000]

I have an economics exam next week and I'm watching this entire series as revision, thanks guys it's really helping :)

[@Deadvalley76]

+NuclearMushroom1000 read Mises

[@luismikalim2535]

Thank you Jacob, Adrian, John, Hank for providing free education and being such great teachers! I hope Crash Course will discreetly help shape our future (a better one of course) where people are educated and life on earth is better!

[@RainaRamsay]

It's fascinating to listen to the discussion of the Free Rider problem, and then hear a pitch for Patreon.

[@pythor2]

This video is a great primer for those who are convinced anarchocapitalism works well, and even for libertarians.

[@PFAlt]

+Matt Smith anarchocapitalism - Ok in idea, impossible in practice. You can't have capitalism yet be anarchic at the same time. they're contradictory.

[@beaz3784]

+MeGusta GameStation It's the same with Communism, though. Pure government is just as bad, in practice, as no government.

[@andersonandrighi4539]

+Matt Smith there are three things you can't convince the internet: 1 - To be polite in the comment section 2 - That anarchocapitalism or libertarianism (US version) does not work, it is implausible 3 - That no one cares which console has incremental better graphics. In the end of the day, you don't get any money proving which platform is better

[@Jackboy019]

+Anderson Andrighi 666% true. We all know the consoles pale in comparison to the PC master race.

[@Lucy-ng7cw]

+Matthew Beazley +Matthew Beazley maybe even worse because true communism would be harder to escape than pure libertarianism.

[@mj2625]

I'm thankful for the Crash Course people. Teaching me what my teachers should have taught me instead of ignoring all of my questions. ☺️

[@kappyfulliness]

Man, I love this series. I regret not taking economics in university so this is filling in the gaps really well. Thanks Jacob and Adriene!!!! (I also figured some appreciation could cut through the grease of comment battles for you guys as well) (Thanks to the BTS team too!)

[@jakeho4390]

No one: Jacob: I'll talk about this abstract thing that most people won't be able to comprehend right away at the speed of bullets being shot out of a machine gun.

[@williammcpetrie1455]

haha we didnt get a satisfying ending to game of thrones anyways XD

[@tahrimamohsin976]

Become “More interesting to talk to at parties”, yup, that’s exactly why I’m obtaining my degrees

[@dandy-lions5788]

The video proposes taxes and subsidies as an ideal market-based solution to promote government policy, but if you've watched their earlier video about deadweight loss, you would know that actually there is a real, social cost towards taxation due to the decrease in business it causes. So if anything, taxation has a negative externality of decreasing social well-being by stifling the market and making everybody else in the economy less well-off. But don't despair! This video didn't mention this, but Nobel Prize-winning economist Ronald Coase came up with a solution where the free market can regulate externalities called the Coase Theorem. A good example is with carbon credits (not the same thing as cap-and-trade). By turning carbon emissions into tradeable, priceable goods, markets can be created where these costs can be negated without the deadweight loss of taxation. There are companies that now plant trees to gain credits that they then sell to coal power plants and other polluters. No taxes, no government intervention, no problem.

[@AndyRiot]

Thank you for that anecdote on the acid rain program - that is fascinating and positive news!

[@olliesims957]

A great, centralized video. Very minimal bias.

[@clemonsx90]

The situation with the students was an example of market failure, but that's because market failure applies to group action and not just product markets. Since governments are also groups of people, they can fail to create rational laws, resulting in harm. Governments also only solve the problems of externalities and monopolies by establishing a larger monopoly (itself) and externalizing potentially more costs onto the population (taxation and regulatory overhead).

[@TokenBlackman7]

@0:02 - Dope belt buckle, Jacob!

[@edralone20]

this series single handedly predicted the coronavirus pandemic and the crappy GoT ending.

[@natepetersen1508]

Guys, keep making crashcourse Economics, and keep doing the way you are, I really appreciate it (saying this because there is so much hate from libertarians and they seem to vocal to me due to the fact that only people who disagree have anything to comment on)

[@jjrabbit2023]

Interesting video, thanks for making economics enjoyable to watch :)

[@superiorseven4814]

So is building the largest military in the world a negative or positive externality? & what is the effect on the environment when building & using thousands of tanks, drones, helicopters, fighter planes, ships, bombs, & military bases?

[@welcome872]

Im new to this but why is everyone hating on these crash course economics videos. Im learning a lot. Are there any recommendations for a person new to economics.

[@ryanweaver962]

Seams and positive feesback loops. We can help streams of revenue be more attached to real world needs while also better understanding of stake holder needs of things like education… can help illuminate blind spots while growing opportunities and diversity of thoughts and communities.

[@zacharykrawczyk3942]

at 1:21 I was like: "That looks like my city." but then I was like: "It IS my city!". I forgot you guys are based in Indiana, the orange building is the NCAA. Right next to it (but not visible) is the canal.

[@Stone2home]

"... sometimes markets get it wrong...." Oh. You noticed.

[@elizabethmiller0420]

THEY BROUGHT THE ECON AC/DC GUY INTO CRASH COURSE. THIS IS THE BEST!!!!!!!

[@RaitoYagami88]

This is the part of economics right wingers like to forget about.

[@Deadvalley76]

+RaitoYagami88 The Left wants to control business and the Right favors corporate welfare. There's no difference between the two. This video was showing the dangers of crippling government regulations and the poisoning of the free market with subsidies.

[@TheProdigalBard]

+RaitoYagami88 What makes you think economics is a right-wing/left-wing thing? I thought this was about SCIENCE?

[@netsquall]

+Deadvalley76 What are you talking about? How did you get that out of this video.

[@thechillywinds5810]

+Jachim Soyer If you know politics then you know that a lot of republicans think that a completely free market is somehow a good thing. Thats what he is talking about.

[@Biggnuncio]

+The ChillyWinds There is no such politician that thinks a completely free market is a good thing.

[@rhs1990org]

(@9:05) If tax revenue from cigarettes are used for "other purposes" that are not the externalities caused by the cigarettes, then government, and the population in whole, ends up having a perverse incentive to keep people smoking. When smoking goes down because of the tax on it, the unrelated programs that have come to rely on people smoking will suffer. If the revenue from cigarette taxes only goes to cover the externalities, then there's a natural tracking of the cost of those externalities to the revenue from the vice tax.

[@jackiearteaga2439]

Wonderful explanation. Thank you.

[@Ryguy2824]

Sorry to break this to you but most of this video is empirically wrong.

[@YujieWangtheawesome]

+Ryguy2824 Citations? I find it mildly numerous that you claim that the video is "empirically wrong," and don't provide and empirical evidence to back yourself up.

[@netsquall]

+Yujie Wang ignore him, hej's a nitwit.

[@carrot272727]

Awesome Episode!

[@drnimshah]

One problem with regulation and tax is the proliferation of illegal market or what we call black market

[@nayabbbbb]

Covid 19 is also an example of market failure 😂😂

[@ray1983able]

Free Riders , Public Good: non exclusion , Non Rivilary , The tragedy of the commons , Enviromental Economics , Negative Eternality , Positive Externality , Regulatory Policies , Market based policies .

[@jacquiz.6837]

Do the thumbnails for these videos say "Don't Forget to Be Awesome" in Latin? (Look on the arch in the middle of the dollar.)

[@Imthefake]

yes

[@azraieruslim]

I would like to thank all patreons for allowing us freeloaders enjoy crash course as you do.

[@Sarah1627]

Very helpful thank you.. some teachers need to watch more YT, they need some improvement in their teaching skills!! JUST SAYING

[@rehmsmeyer]

My first realization against the 100% free market scenario came in environmental disasters caused by commodity companies (producers/end-users, not the actual traders).

[@rabeaelnahrawy4578]

the greatest channel ever ❤ love u mr &mrs bubles😂❤

[@Spartakus1919]

Can you go over resource based economies?

[@DSQueenie]

"Sometimes"

[@Freshbott2]

This addresses a simple but extremely important issue that isn't limited specifically to this topic; the typical left vs. right politics isn't about which is right or wrong or fair or inherently better or worse, it's about what decisions will benefit society. Regulations are rules. Rules aren't right or wrong. Some rules are right, some rules are wrong. It's interesting to note for example that in conservative politics, discourse often centres around regulation as being intrusive and inhibitive economically, and that this undermines individuals' freedom or rights. But some on this side of politics argue for rules that directly intrude into other people's lives, such as what people can wear (e.g. religious dress) or what gender parents can adopt or raise children. It perfectly paints the image that those who believe they are principally opposed to 'rules', actually support rules which they personally believe are beneficial in exactly the same way as those they oppose. On all sides of politics, it seems the most important factor in whether or not particular regulations are supported is whether it affects the individual speaking.

[@lucasjantunen5797]

You can't say nobody is perfect. I'm perfect. My mom said so!

[@Jackboy019]

+Lucas Robert Hansen Jantunen (Jobnm) What is perfect though?

[@connormowry]

No, she said you're special. There is a difference.

[@wedeldylan]

special needs

[@momergil]

I noticed the video almost did an apology of "some level of government (estate) intervention" buy completely ignoring some of the critics done my economists against such measures, such as the problem with negative side effects of such interventions (they seem to have assumed that always when government intervenes everything works great as expected)

[@sharperguy]

Why is democracy any more likely to produce correct allocation of resources than the market? Are they not also subject to the exact same failures as markets? Possibly even to a greater extent.

[@patriongodoffinancialgainf6301]

Then Dictatorship FTW!!! No one can do something under glorious dictators nose! If one does,meets end of barrel! But really,if we voted for someone and we find out he does not do the things we asked him to do its ether to the fact some smaller politican's are misusing there power or the president does not care for our problem and is hoping some bigger mass of idiots will vote for him... It's never for "Government is evil!" Being evil for no reason is dumb AMD not how things work...

[@justadude4938]

+sharperguy Perfect example of government working is education. If government did not intervene in education, there'd be a stupider nation, and a stupider nation can't produce as many resources as a smart nation, even if that smart nation 'throws away' some of its resources on social programs like education.

[@justadude4938]

Adam Hamdan That's the government failing because the U.S has a crappy government, not because government intervention is inherently bad. Where I am, kids go to private schools to get easy As, in order to be able to apply to prestigious universities, and then flunk out of those universities since university is a lot harder than they were ready for. Public school is generally superior. If you're millionaire rich though and can afford a high level private school that does offer quality education, send your kids to it. That's free market doing its job, and working great. But it costs a lot of money to afford private school that's superior to public school, since the government offers free education, demand is very low.

[@Jackboy019]

+Jeremy Downey The allocation of resources only works best when the government actively reduces corruption in it's own governmental foundation and in the market as well. Obvious evidence is in the reduction of the middle class. Proof of a working economy is only evident when there is high class mobility and a large middle class. Capitalism does not work when the politicians in the government and big companies owners jerk each other off, because it lets the upper class have unrestrained political power, therefore they have no competition which reduces class mobility.

[@sharperguy]

+Tr lawi0 A dictatorship is even more likely to create an incentives failure than democracy.

[@chillsahoy2640]

This is why I'm not quite sure I understand Mr Cameron's statement that turning student maintenance grants (which have until now only been given to students from poor backgrounds) into student loans will result in increased aspirations of potential students. Especially given that the repayment threshold for student loans is going to remain frozen until 2021, meaning that as wages increase with inflation, alumni will start repaying their loans at salaries that will give them comparatively lower buying power. Turning grants into loans and making people repay those loans at lower salaries could potentially discourage people from disadvantaged backgrounds to play into the 'lottery' of higher education, as they might feel unsure about their future employability options and the fact that it will take even longer to repay those loans with interest, and the hardest patch will be precisely in the five years after graduation, when their careers are in the bud and at their most fragile.

[@gusg343]

You completely omitted the exclusionary use of property rights to solve environmental problems.....

[@steviewonder65]

your argument sounds like one advanced by an Austrian, likely an an-cap. traditionally, a thing (but specially land) passes from unowned to owned via either occupation, substantive improvement or by force of arms; if you are trying to use private property claims to protect land from human encroachment you can't use occupation or substantive improvement to justify your ownership claim, leaving just.......

[@saeedbaig4249]

+gusg343 Wat about cases where it is hard to quantify exactly who is being affected by what, like climate change?

[@gusg343]

Sideeq Mohammad Well would you the 12 different treaty's and billions spent on regulation has worked? I sure wouldn't, new technology will make oil and gas obsolete and that will have to happen at the pace of improvement, throwing billions at it has not speed up the development of alternatives so more of the same seems useless.

[@gusg343]

Stevie Wonder Force of arms is perfectly justifiable when used to defend someones rights to life liberty or property, outside of that it is morally wrong.

[@saeedbaig4249]

gusg343 So what is the criteria to be able to own land? Can I claim any land I want? How does 1 determine what is rightly THEIR property?

[@lukewhiteside3697]

2:00 Trust me it wasn't the pirates that made got's ending suck. Lol you guys are great.

[@Umi_2024]

So can anybody drop the answers for the worksheet

[@Nick-kg4hq]

I cant believe climate change's existence is still controversial in 2016

[@RamdomView]

Doug Dimmadome, owner of the Dimmsdale Dimmadome Because sadly, there are a lot of rich people who benefit (in their remaining lifespan) from spreading denial.

[@shiron222]

I mean is that so shocking when the President of the United States is a reality TV Show host who is also a conman?

[@joshua_tobler]

Seriously - especially since global temperature has been stagnant now for over a decade and all warming prior to that has underperformed the models.

[@BlueAxeRacer]

Well maybe if scientists kept overestimating the rate at which the polar ice cap is shrinking, and creating predictive weather formulae that tells them whatever they want it to, it wouldn't.

[@wolfsden6479]

Its cause isn't proven to be linked to Co2 ,so it exests but regulating CO2 will not help.

[@romanhoax9014]

New episodes pls! can't get enough

[@Rasecz]

I've been watching since episode one, and Adriene Hill gets prettier and prettier

[@MusicalSawMen]

This is the best video of the serie ! Big thumb up !

[@siddharthtripathi5806]

Economist Palpatine: Did you hear the tragedy of commons? It's the story that the producers don,t want you to hear.

[@ExPwner]

Also education is one of the biggest examples of government failures when it comes to trying to mandate a higher supply at the expense of high costs and poor quality.

[@cn6519]

Yes.. To assume that everyone gets a great education is what makes this video wrong.

[@iridium1118]

And the implicit assumption that private = prohibitively expensive

[@munizakhan2985]

Thank you so much for uploading this video and working so hard on it, it helped alot in the understanding of this concept ☺️☺️

[@jmong2871]

We didn’t get a satisfying ending to Game of Thrones. Too many people illegally downloaded I guess.

[@ALLIRIX]

Came here to say this

[@amgclark]

Perhaps this is true, maybe D&D were so pissed off about it they decided to ruin it on purpose. Or perhaps, they were the market failure in the first place, banking on someone else doing the heavy lifting and then when Martin told them to eff off they tanked.

[@tristonmccoy7739]

At the beginning of the video, if you have captions on there's a typo that instead of Adriene saying 2015 the captions say that she says 2105.

[@janpetternytvedt322]

here in socialist Norway, the government taxes, subsidises and regulate the market very much without to much intervening. like with fishing, fishermen have a limit on how much they can fish per boat.

[@TheLineCutter]

so basically the good follow the bad because otherwise the good wouldn't have any. yes, i realized that at the age of 9. still watching economics video's makes my eyes glaze over and infurates me at the same time. how could something be this effective in dumbing down en masse the intuition of us that is so important to our survival.

[@ProfessionalTycoons]

Amazing video, very very good explanation of what causes market failure as well as incentive.

[@ExPwner]

The free rider problem isn't a market failure, it's a collectivism problem. You get it with government, not with the market. Also fire, defense and education aren't a collective issue. People should be free to opt out as they see fit. No payment, no service. Further, the market isn't failing to provide them. The government took them over. Defense actually isn't non-excludable either. You can choose to not defend a patch of ground.

[@Zoykah]

James Adams How about those who can't afford to pay? Should we let them die in the fire because they "chose" to buy food instead of a fire insurance ?

[@ExPwner]

Zoykah appeal to emotion fallacy. No person is entitled to a good or service for existing.

[@Zoykah]

James Adams So you say yes, we should let them die. Well I understand now why you seem to be a fan of the Austrian school. I mean, sure those people who don't have insurance could die because of that, but at least we followed logic, so the system works!

[@blagfire]

so you say the army could say "ah we don't defend your house just your neighbours house?" thats just rediculus. And you have basic human rights if you can pay for it or not. Otherways everyone with a disbility woud be left to die. If really think so you are just a monster.

[@ExPwner]

It's not "rediculous" but just impractical. You don't have a "basic human right" to someone else's stuff, period. To suggest otherwise is slavery. That makes you the monster, not me.

[@momergil]

Question (for information, not for debates!): How does free market capitalism advocates such as Milton Friedmann and Hayek responded to the problems mentioned in this video? (that is, what were they proposed solutions?)

[@notreallymuslim6659]

1) rejecting the idea of a "common good" 2) rejecting the idea that a government has the right to initiate force 3) accepting the notion that subsidies create market bubbles that aren't sustainable and eventually lead to crashes 4) solving the free rider/pollution problems by privatizing land if you want me to elaborate on any of these I can

[@futureastro]

Not bad, you laid out the standard, Pigovian for taxes and subsidies. Unfortuantely, however, you did not include anything talking about the problems with giving government powers that they did not previously have and the perverse incentives that may create. Also, a discussion of the Coase theorem or private property rights is not included, which is essential in this kind of lesson. Overall, I give this a B. Good presentation, good graphics and pictures, not enough depth with the content, especially when it comes to criticism of government action.

[@saeedbaig4249]

Well it is "Crash Course" economics. From what I understand, their series r mainly aimed at making the curriculum more digestible 4 students. In light of that, I 2 would like (but not expect) them 2 go more in depth with topics like Coase Theorem and the like.

[@xOALtoFrEak900Ox]

Betsy DeVos needs to watch this.

[@frencheneesz]

10:23 Cap & Trade all but guarantees a suboptimal outcome because the external cost doesn't directly effect production. A far more optimal solution in the case of pollution is a simple constant tax per unit volume of pollution. This way, if the value gotten from creating that pollution goes up, companies will produce more, and conversely if the value gotten from creating that pollution goes DOWN, companies will produce LESS. Cap & Trade guarantees a constant level of pollution without the possibility of reducing it below that level via the free market (ie without changing the cap by government decree).

[@JamesArdito27]

A free market is not solely buying an selling, its responses and communication.

[@alfiahthahirah9205]

Thank u Mr and Mrs ❤

[@Rififi50]

I'd choose 6p with the goal that no one gets extra points... Yeah, I'm that kind of douche...

[@middleclassseabass7178]

+Rififi50 I would choose 6 because I would be perfectly fine with getting none, what do I have to lose? It also makes it more fair if nobody gets it.

[@dangerouslytalented]

If everybody gets 2 points the value of points decreases.

[@Jackboy019]

+MiddleClass SeaBass Yeah, I agree. Everyone equally losing out on just 2 points is way more fair than letting a couple douchebags win 6.

[@PajamaMan44]

+dangerouslytalented Only if the test would be curved down.

[@dandy-lions5788]

+Rififi50 This is why we can't have nice things. But seriously though, I read that professor's study. People don't ever pick two points because two points never does anybody good, but people on the edge need that six points.

[@mastring1966]

regulations are like the game of lemonade. It's tough to find the balance point where you're not shutting down business with too much regulation but still accomplishing the intended purpose. Unless your intention is to use regulation punitively to put a whole sector out of business (like the coal industry).

[@jmitterii2]

+Verl Humpherys You could end up with regulatory capture. It just depends on how the regulations are being implemented. Are the policies very demand side driven such as putting all fees and cost burden just on the business, or establishing a too, no profit or very little profit margin price control? Or are they heavily supply side driven with no counter balance on the demand side, heavy subsidies for the business, many tax breaks or credits for the business with no assistance toward the demand side. Any regulation can be poorly written up, those that don't address both the supply and demand side. The example for the coal industry, poor policy would be forcing supply side to eat all the costs such as simply taxing more in a cap and trade program or just limiting their production too low for much profit. An example of a policy that would work without causing too much problems would funding research and development as well as implementation on cleaner coal use technologies (this helps the supply side meet their obligation). As well as ensure the demand side that coal doesn't become too expensive nor loss of jobs. However, at some point coal will likely become obsolete and in this case, assisting on the demand side would require worker retraining toward a different sector or possibly transition them to a different energy sector; such as nuclear fusion, wind, solar, or whatever substitute eventually leads to coals obsolescence. Good policy must address both the supply and demand curves. Otherwise there are high chances of a or many unintended undesired consequences.

[@Ryguy2824]

A video about how crowd sourcing doesn't work On a crowd sourced channel

[@speedray__]

aside from the lesson, what i would have done for the extra credit question is: got all the results of the whole class and gave a select amount of 6points (under 10%) to those who got lower scores and the 2s to the higher scores. therefore, making it somewhat even?

[@frencheneesz]

11:34 Actually, the question in any given case *is* in fact "which is better?". Often times, governments attempt to correct for real market failures, but the government solutions are much worse than how the market was operating. The cure is worse than the disease in many cases. So we *should* be asking "in this scenario, which is better, a government solution, or a market solution?"

[@kellybrady7863]

serious problem with this, the problem is not that the factory is producing too many TVs. The problem is that the company is polluting a stream, so what does this mean... it means the damage done must be paid for, not reducing the production of goods .

[@kellybrady7863]

basically they discussed Pigou but not Coase, to my jaded mind it shows a bias....

[@MrRiotRyan]

Thanks for explaining externality for my igcse exam tmr!

[@RN-yo4qm]

Legalize marijuana and tax it! :)

[@user-yy8mi6cj4b]

Ryan Nguyen And subsidized it and regulate it and on and on.

[@CRPNW]

+Ryan Nguyen Move to California, Colorado, Washington, or other states where it's now legal ;)

[@RN-yo4qm]

Cynthia Russell I don't use it, no need for me to move. I support it because it's a good reform.

[@CRPNW]

Ryan Nguyen Well said :)

[@libertardsbeware4180]

Don’t legalise marijuana. Legalise guns.

[@satishkumarkrishnamurthy2581]

The crash course at cruising speed videos..had to watch at 0.9x :))

[@augustinesim1672]

0:36 Adriene: in 2015 Captions : *iN 2105* *really*

[@CarrollLiddell]

I choose 6, because no one should get extra credits.

[@byunbaek9660]

They're both a great teachers and economist . I understand their discussions very well . unlike the girl in Physics course . Myfavorite here is Economics and Astronomy . Its not that I dont like others but most of the others are based on US and Im not an american citizen .

[@martinm2871]

I support pigouvian taxes, the coase theorem, and land value taxes. I am also a geolibertarian.

[@omg_look_behind_you]

Target no longer sells nerve gas? Guess I'll have to go to Walmart for my Axe Body Spray.

[@ronpearson1912]

IF there is a demand for nuclear weapons why shouldn't they be for sale? They provide leverage.

[@4125730]

I m from IndiA , I love ur channel !

[@MartinNikov]

That was extremely educational ! Thanks CrashCourse ! :)

[@chhavi.jassal]

something about the IS and LM curve please.

[@TheShowThatSUX]

OK, but what do we do when GOV assumes a positive external and mistakenly creates a negative one? Neither the privet nor public sector is infallible: schools would be a great example. We can all concede the point that GOOD EDUCATION helps society at large: but on the whole is public school good education?

[@YoungDespereaux]

Want to prevent overfishing? Try selling part of the ocean to fishermen, they will then have the incentive to plan for the long run, and thus fish less. It worked for bison. Seriously, the vast majority of these problems can be solved with property rights. ALL tragedy of the commons problems can be solved with property rights.

[@panamahub]

Fire department can be private for-profit too.

[@TrueLifeRetelling]

The McDonald's Happy meal comes with a Free BigBoy. Get it?

[@frencheneesz]

6:10 Unfortunately, externalities aren't the justification that politicians use when deciding policy because its usually not something they care about.

[@magister343]

Even Adam Smith knew that sin taxes like those on cigarettes are not very effective, at least when levied on a per unit basis. He noted that sin taxes on alcohol actually seemed to worsen alcoholism, reducing the amount of moderate drinking but making binge drinking more common. They would work much more effectively in smokers had to apply for a smoker's license in advance and may a lump sum for the cigarettes they plan to be allowed to smoke for the rest of the year. Only selling the licenses during the first few weeks of the year when people are still trying to keep new years resolutions would make them even more effective.

[@matthewgilpincom]

Surely cap and trade can only go so far, though? It brings the amount of pollution down to the point of equilibrium and no further?

[@gabrielletenorio2438]

Federal grants for university will increase TUITION. That's what too much credit does

[@InugamiTheHound]

so damn true when it comes to consuming too much of our public goods for profit(oil,natural gas,fish, etc..)

[@jamiesanders9865]

They aren't public goods.

[@PegasusPablo]

I love her voice!

[@darrishawks6033]

If you captured the value of all of the negative ecological effects of production with taxation, you would instantly make most products either unprofitable or WAY less profitable, wouldn't you? If that's the case, shouldn't we just have the state do those things instead of taxing and hoping that the taxes will influence behavior in the right way?

[@martinm2871]

Market-based policies are better than regulations