Do We Actually Need Taxes?

[@EconomicsExplained]

Thanks as always for watching :D See new videos early, participate in exclusive Q&As, and more! www.patreon.com/EconomicsExplained

[@lubu2960]

"do we actually need property" next?

[@TheHarleyman10]

Make a video on the effects of a credit bubble burst!!

[@deek0146]

@David Dupont Colonial India.

[@tiagopaiva6885]

I do believe that we need taxes. The thing I believe that we don't need os public companies. In a market economy, the government should act as a referee and as a private investor, meaning that we were responsible for regulating and make sure that the purpose is being accomplished. But also as a lender/owner of part of the capital, instead of managing the company. This would allow for a company to still strive for profit but also had the "responsibility" to keep some kind of services in place. Otherwise, the government could sell their stock and invest in a company more aligned with social interests.

[@ralphsunico116]

What is the best alternative to taxation? Donations. Taxation is coercive. Donation is voluntary. If the government is corrupt and inefficient, donate less to it? If the government is not corrupt and efficient, then donate more to it. Can people choose not to donate to the government? They can. However, they will not have a functioning government... and most of them cannot psychologically handle that because people have been conditioned for thousands of years to feel safe when they are being ruled by other people... most of them have been conditioned for thousands of years to fear "dangerous freedom"...

[@dewberry_2716]

As a street lighting engineer with 10 years in the industry I'm genuinely happy to hear someone actually acknowledge my tiny passive contribution to society!

[@WookieChef]

I see you. I thank you.

[@caiocunha9775]

Thanks brotha

[@woozywitanuzi6208]

This is so wholesome 😊 thankyou for your contribution to society good sir.

[@facundocadaa9020]

@@WookieChef of course you see him, because there are street lights

[@dewberry_2716]

Wow thanks everyone! Just doing my best over here 🙂

[@hylianknight3]

Most people dont have a problem with some degree of taxes, most people have a problem with how many taxes there are, and how poorly the government uses those taxes

[@WeirdDuck781]

In Portugal we have a tax for owning a house that we pay twice a year and the more amenities you have nearby or a good view into the river or bunch of sunlight will increase this tax

[@TrickyTrickyFox]

@@WeirdDuck781 tax for owning a house, owning land that house stands on and your car that you use to get to said house. All is taxed, once per year. And that comes with 10,5% social tax + up to 24% income tax, based on salary (and not taking into consideration how much more is paid by employer). And 21% added value tax on any goods you buy. And extra fees on using free healthcare (i know how it sounds, that's Latvia) that you already support with your taxes. Taking all that into consideration, we somehow have national debt almost twice as national yearly budget. Greets from Latvia

[@terryharris1291]

@@TrickyTrickyFox Sounds a lot like here in New Zealand

[@equinox2584]

@Dickgirl Nationalist Yeah I would rather have healthcare than be fueling the war machine that is our broken economy.

[@ДартКсенос]

@@equinox2584 can't, imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism.

[@benjamino.7475]

Next video: How should we structure our taxes? Flat? Progressive? Regressive? Aggressive?

[@henk-3098]

aggressive taxes??

[@adamkoopmans3635]

Tax evasion is punishable by death

[@babycat5001]

No taxes

[@itsvmmc]

Agressive is the prefered option

[@3Black.1Red]

I propose a passive-aggressive tax rate.

[@rnrtruestories]

Just finished doing my taxes. I wouldn't mind paying taxes if the money was used wisely. As someone whose seen how different levels of government works, i can tell you a lot of our tax money pays for the bloated beuracracy as well. Sadly, reforming government and making it more efficient never seems to be on the top of a lot of people's list.

[@fieldmarshalbaltimore1329]

I'm sure the vast majority of people would love the government to be reformed into a much more caring and efficient organization. The problem is the people who can fix it are the problem. They don't. They refuse to. The only other people who can fix it is people like you and me. Only that usually comes from the barrel of a gun and no one seems to be willing to do that. So here we are. Watching an obvious problem we all know needs reworking but refusing to do anything about it.

[@chuck1804]

@@fieldmarshalbaltimore1329 So your answer to government corruption is to kill some politicians? Asking for a friend....

[@PeakedInterest]

I can understand this critique of people saying our taxes just go to bloated governments etc but the same thing happens in private industry too. The money just goes into a CEO or shareholder pocket instead of the government.

[@filippalexandrov1554]

Tell that to German taxpayers lol. I would bet 90% of our taxes is spent on bloated bureaucracy and paper printing.

[@chuck1804]

@@filippalexandrov1554 don't forget all the countries you have to bail out to prop up the EU!

[@UrbanLegend131]

I just think every Government should have a public display of invoices and receipts paid by all our taxes. So that its harder to steal and easier to debate their uses.

[@SethAndrew52]

A brutal truth to that is most wouldn't understand it anyway. Not to mention you run into the issue of expenditures in remote areas being at the good will of urban areas. Your idea is great in theory, but chaos in practice.

[@eggmeister6641]

that would be A LOT of data...

[@UrbanLegend131]

@@eggmeister6641 don't matter we should get to keep the receipts on all the sales the Government actually spend our money on.

[@elementhokage]

That’s what we’re supposed to have. But crooks in congress passed some kind of confidentiality legislation. They think we’re stupid or something. Well, we arnt all stupid. Either way, they’ll find out the hard way ;)

[@justinhodgson6804]

Insert blockchain discussion here

[@CosmiaNebula]

Economics Explained 2120: Do We Actually Need Death?

[@adlerwhitlock591]

Probably invented imortality lol

[@drmadjdsadjadi]

Sorry, CGP Grey already covered that one.

[@rexmann1984]

Exactly, we have outgrown taxes. And if we keep our space endeavors going we won't need death anymore either.

[@davihomem7342]

That actually is a nice point to see

[@otakurt1149]

@@davihomem7342 I suppose the only reason someone would want to die in that era is to escape debt

[@DataDr0id]

Just for future reference: Asterix is a Belgian comic book character; an asterisk is a character used to denote additional information elsewhere.

[@Alaryk111]

It's a French series not Belgian.

[@microcosmonauta]

Just for future reference: Asterix (and Obelix) is a French creation. Makes sense since it's a story about Gauls living in present day France (close to Belgium).

[@edparker1143]

I was just about to comment that...

[@xaviervangorp4862]

Wow first time I see something French misidentified as Belgian :o Uualy goes the other way, e.g. Fries, every single french speaking belgian artist, Tintin,...

[@DataDr0id]

Thanks for the correction. I was thinking of Tintin, which is a Belgian comic. I spent some of my life in Belgium, so I am one of the few people who are likely to make the reverse mistake.

[@erwinespinosa7122]

I don't mind paying taxes...as long as the collection doesn't end up in the pockets of corrupt public officials and their cronies in and out of the government. Look at the Philippines.

[@noel7777noel]

You do realize the politicians have possession of our currency printing press. That is way there is billionaires. Because trillionaires would be just showing off.

[@OVXX666]

look at america. the tax money just goes to bomb iran

[@pauloaustria7798]

LOL do You pay TAX except for VAT in the Philippines. If you work in the company yes you do pay TAX if you make more money like 60K per month but if you are in the minimum wage until 40K per month you pay 0%TAX and you pay PhilHealth, pagibig and SSS not TAX. If you have a business and you make 100K per month most of the people get away from it because it’s a cash earning as long your register to BIR is all legal and they can’t track it because is cash earnings. Look at the mami vendor or some of shomai vendor they make 8K-10K per day and they pay nothing except VAT.

[@mikecarr9849]

Pay my taxes then.

[@solomonnicholas1188]

I got bad news for you buddy.

[@taufiqutomo]

Economics Explained in 2019: Normal economics videos Economics Explained in 2020: Is war good for the economy? Do we need debt? Do we need taxes? I see, we all have our own existential crisis. Edit: I have an opinion regarding the answers to those questions, but I don't think I've ever won an internet argument so I'm not gonna debate here.

[@otten5666]

You don't need an existential crisis to read up about taxes. What constitutes a normal economics video to you if this topic is so absurd to you?

[@nerobernardino88]

@@otten5666 Take a chill pill bro. He's just joking about how these videos are named. They're like "Who am I?" or "What is love?" (baby don't hurt me~)

[@otten5666]

Sounds like you are taking too many pills making you read too much into things. What you said explains nothing to me, bro.

[@fearedjames]

@Checkmate Chess Channel When Anarcho Capitalists are considered logical, we're all screwed.

[@mooglecup]

@@fearedjames they already are

[@Miquiya]

I love how impartial and respectful you are while explaining topics that are otherwise polarizing.

[@cristianvelixar1385]

I disagree with that. The video established an Overton window. The debate within the Overton window was between anarcho-capitalism (far right) and neo-liberalism (centre right). There was no mention of social democracy - the welfare state. There was no mention of state capitalism, planned socialism, market socialism or syndicalism. While I don't necessarily advocate for any of the above systems, I can't agree that the video was impartial because it offered such a narrow range of options - centre right and far right.

[@loki-of-asgard7877]

@@cristianvelixar1385 It's not really narrow since all the options you mentioned lead to authoritarianism. That's like arguing why dont we consider segregraton? Hate to say it, but every version of socialism is a system of oppression because they all have one thing in common. They give unholy power to the state over the economy. You can really divide economics into two main categories and everything else is a subcategory. It's simple as less government intervention vs more. The reasons and beliefs behind those are just incentives not a function of the system or a result. People tend to over look that social democracy doesn't do much of anything different than other versions because people confuse ideological beliefs that act as motivators with the system itself. It is really not all that much different from Hitler's national socialism from an economic perspective minus the white supremacy .

[@loki-of-asgard7877]

@@cristianvelixar1385 Also nazi Germany had a welfare state. Good luck with that. Look up, "national socialist people's welfare." All horrible ideas that we've seen play out through history.

[@cristianvelixar1385]

@@loki-of-asgard7877 i don't want to correct all the misconceptions you have in regard to different ideologies. I'll just provide an example - left libertarianism is the opposite of authoritarian, while many over ideologies are not intrinsically authoritarian. The nazis made highways, therefore highways are bad - is a shitty arguement. You need to come up with a better criticism for the welfare system. And last, but not least, the underclasses don't have that much freedom in neoliberal or right libertarian systems, because they lack the resources required to access said freedoms. Less intervention by the state in the economy mostly means more freedom for the capital owners, which are a tiny % of the population.

[@cristianvelixar1385]

@@loki-of-asgard7877 btw, the traditional company, where the capital owners make all the important decisions, is authoritarian. A minority makes decisions for everybody involved, while the majority has no say in the decision making process. If you really advocate against authoritarianism, you should oppose the traditional capitalist company, which is the core unit of xcapitalism. But you don't, do you?

[@kyleh9325]

When thinking about different forms of taxation and government, or the anarcho-capitalism situation you described, I keep ending with some similar kind of end point problem. Like the problems eventually created by any kind of human based system are unavoidable and baked into reality itself. I feel like the corruption of power, the increasing points of failure in an expanding complex system, the Pareto distribution (in terms of wealth and power concentration) and even the fear of unfairness (necessitating controls and restraints in prevention, even if unfairness isn't actually present) all lead to some fucked situation at some point down the line. It's almost like entropy inevitably taking hold of our societies, with disorder, inefficiency, corruption, inequality and distrust. While we have never had a society last "forever," and the way we approach our large economic problems has changed, I think there is a general feeling of progression. Like we are building towards something approximating the correct way of organisation. Is that just a shared delusion? Can we ever come up with a perfectly effective and fair system? Would the world be a better place if we strived for improvement but understood that we can only get so far to utopia, and we don't even know how far along in that sort of development we already are? I'm actually asking, I watch interesting videos like this for fun and I'm not educated or well versed in socioeconomic theory or the fundamental forces in human made systems. It is fascinating though. Maybe all that is endorsement for some kind of AI run economy and government. Then again, even that's designed by humans, and might come with a whole new set of problems that I'm not seeing, beyond the questions of "who gets to program it, and how exactly." Awesome video, thanks.

[@hammerheadd]

Your comment asks some pretty deep questions. I'll try to take a crack at them. The feeling that we, whether on a global or national scale, are necessarily progressing towards better governance over the course of history I have always found nonsensical. The idea of societal entropy, that governance worsens over long periods of time, as well as human corruptibility, should be made obvious by the impermanence of any governing structure is strangely lost nowadays. Of course, the upside is that a society can change for the better; the constitutional American system is superior to both the previous unstable confederate or unaccountable British colonial systems. People are weirdly utopian to an increasing degree in the West. It is largely born out of the belief that people are inherently good, or at least a blank slate. In either view a perfect society could be achieved, considering people could be made used to it. I hold that humans are self interested to the point of selfishness. I think that better explains why things get worse before they get better, as society worsens to the points even the most selfish people are pushed to stop it. It also explains why things get worse to begin with, considering corruption always seeps into governing structures eventually. Maybe you wanted more economics, but the questions you have are really philosophical ones more than practical or scientific. The best thing is for government to be structures so that even grotesquely selfish people would be incentivised to do good, but people will eventually find ways around it. The best thing to do as an individual is to maintain a virtuous life and hold others accountable for their actions. Sorry if it came off as ranting, I've has these thoughts for a while and wanted to get them of my chest. I just despise the blank slate and positive views of human nature, when myself and all those around me are counterexamples to such ideas.

[@kyleh9325]

@@hammerheadd @hammerhead2090 d Thank you for your insight. I appreciate you taking the time to help answer my questions. I definitely agree that the view of basic human good and ideas like "all humans are born pure of evil, only learning those traits from society" is at best an overly simplistic view, or at worst completely detached from reality. In most difficult, and hotly debated topics, I find myself usually gravitating towards a center stance. Finding most answers comprised of "it's complicated and a little bit of both." I'm not sure if that's due to my own pre conceived notions and beliefs, or if it's because most hotly debated topics are "hot" because of their inherent complexity, meaning some degree of nuanced "shade of grey" answer. I think that, in regards to blank slate human utopianism, people not only see what they want to see, but also choose to see it that way to avoid the messy issue of breaking down and identifying several competing factors in an unknown blend of nature and nurture. It's easier, and more comforting, to see the world simple, black/white terms. I think the rise of views like this, the blank slate, "the noble savage", utopianism ect are born from defiance and rejection of our modern world. A byproduct of the cynicism and nihilism brought about at the end of the first world war. They condemn our current society and serve a utopian reorganization. I personally think humans are born with far less evil in their hearts than a resentful, world-weary person will have, or even that of the average person. I also think however, that certain traits are baked into our genetic code, some of them serving an evolutionary purpose, and no amount of socializing can fully get rid of them. Selfishness, fear, impulsivity and rage are all inherent to humans, and while socialization can minimize these impulses, I don't think they can ever be eliminated. Nor do I think total elimination would be a good thing, if possible. I'm sure these "negative" traits serve us and society, perhaps even in ways I don't see or understand. It's beyond my understanding, but I do feel the answer of both nature vs nurture and how much can (and should) be taught/unlearned is somewhere in the middle between the extremes of both positions. I definitely also agree with your position on governance. I think the best system (that I can think of anyway) is one where individual freedom, individual responsibility and incentivized understanding, that people can often act selfishly or irrationally, is our best bet. Something that blows my mind is when people who advocate for relinquishing power and freedoms don't see how that can become a huge issue for them and their loved one's in the near future. I understand (but don't agree with) the bit about wanting to radically shake up the current system. I can even see those advocates thinking that power over parts of their own lives is worth giving over, to the dream of a better future system. What I can't understand is the blindness to the fact that history has shown us again and again that shitty, tyrannical individuals thrive in that environment and that even if a revolutionary organisation doesn't start from the ground up being tyrannical in nature, a tyrant will eventually murder their way to the top of it. It's like they don't see that bad people don't play by the optimistic rules they lay down. I'm ranting off a bit, I apologize, it just baffles me. Humans have, for a very long time now, always been the biggest threat to other humans. It's the darker parts of our soul, if you like, that can't be stamped out or protected from. How do we build the shining walled city on a hill when the monsters are already lurking inside? I can't think of a way to eliminate the evil drives of man without crushing it through the state (a poor and short term solution, with it's own set of problems) or by genetically engineering it out (at which point can we even say we are still human?) Maybe it's best to be realistic about both our accomplishments and virtues, as well as about our limitations and bad tendencies. I appreciate your insight on this, I'm actively trying to develop my thoughts on this subject and you raise some good points that have me thinking about it. I don't know how "far" forward we can progress in total or even how far along that process we are now, but I can be really grateful to be living here and now. We have problems, but never before have people had things this good.

[@Raptoria7]

You would have ensure the AI isn’t using biased models that benefit one group over another. Eventually the AI could design itself, but it does need to be coded by humans to begin with

[@CounterFlow64]

@@hammerheadd Believing selfishness to be human nature is nothing more than a self fulfilling prophecy. Not to mention, it's scientifically wrong. As scientific as psychology can get, at least. Humans have lived in vastly different social conditions during time and culture. Certain ancient societies had things we would now believe impossible, like public housing. A lot of the things we observe would just not make sense if self interest was the only thing, or even the majority of human thought. Altruism isn't human nature either, not any more or less than selfishness. Human nature is dynamic and complex, and is heavily dependent on the environment, and perhaps genetics play a role too, but environment is certainly the biggest factor.

[@chickenpuncher1674]

Gotta understand we work off incentive more than anything most days. Also gotta knock everyone down a peg or two, like we're all POS's and need to strive not to be. Everyone thinks their opinion is dang near fact and theyre always right, no self doubt. Everybody thinks those with everything should do great things with all their power but have never considered sending $100 to a poor remote village once a month to change the lives of 50 people. I like people, too, also ignore the blanket everybodies in there you know what i mean! Also gotta force the hank hill, batman, saint type people into positions of power. For the greater good, like save us from us because if you put me in charge I'll just do blow and bang secretaries. "Well Steve, we dont care that your a plumber, we ran the most extensive background check ever, nobody you met in your 45 years had a bad thing to say about you, so here the keys youre driving now" That's my take

[@falsehero2001]

“Do we actually need taxes?” Close, but you’re not asking the right question. “What are our taxes being spent on?” That, is the right question.

[@vocesdelrioriourbano7236]

You nailed it!!!

[@larryfoster8820]

He asked that question by asking his original question. Asking what do we spend taxes on doesn't ask do we need taxes...

[@jimdean294]

Whatever. Your poor, your poor. Get lucky, well

[@wls6788]

Corrupt countries spend them on private villa's, where they live and make their life like heaven on earth.

[@AManik635]

And I think equally important following on "What are our taxes being spent on?" is "Who decides?". Should it be entirely democratic whenever the government wants to spend money on anything we all log into an app and vote (imagine trying to parse out a budget of hundreds of billions of dollars among 330+ million people) or do we delegate a few individuals to decide for us....

[@DrunkCatEyeless]

Living in Brazil I have one thing to say about taxes: The more horrible and inneficient your government, more is the pain to paying it up. Nothing agains't taxes, but totally against bad administered taxes. So if your government has dumb structures of power, it totally affects the psychology of its habitants. It makes people distrustful and makes them dread their "representatives" which no one feels like they have. Because people don't have it... Dumb Brazilian corporations have it and for me the worst part is just the deception. If they told it out loud it would hurt way less.

[@dorivaldojunior2254]

www.institutoliberal.org.br/blog/m-friedman-e-as-quatro-formas-de-se-gastar-dinheiro/ Os impostos são basicamente a terceira e a quarta forma de gastar dinheiro descrita por Friedman. Por isso é ineficiente. Pode ser mais cmo no Brasil, ou menos como em Singapura...

[@Vitorruy1]

@@dorivaldojunior2254 cuidado em basear todo seu entendimento economico num autor só

[@Costa_123]

Esto

[@princesstinklepanties2720]

F brasil bro. What ever happened to that olympics stadium they built in rio?

[@albertocast.2426]

The real democracy is the free market, in which you are voting with every decission you make and each time you decide whether to pay for something or go on to other product/service that better fullfil your needs

[@EconomicsExplained]

Last time I was this early we still paid taxes on tea. (ohwait)

[@theparker3759]

Economics Explained what a boomer

[@N01CurryClassEnjoyer]

you are a silly sausage!!!!!!

[@themongolsarecoming_9437]

lose a colony or let some tea drown? Britain 🤔 #priorities

[@Hrafnskald]

Last time comments were this late they got sent to a penal colony and ended up with a better GDP per capita ;)

[@InvestorCenter]

Haha love it

[@NINJAxBACON]

We just need a publicly available and easily accessible audit trail of where our taxes go. This would basically solve all problems

[@SmileyEmoji42]

How? Almost all taxes are spent on things that SOMEBODY wants. Unless you are just complaining about corruption in which case taxes are irrelevant - The government will steal your stuff whether through taxes or at gunpoint.

[@NINJAxBACON]

@@SmileyEmoji42 audit trail will tell which hands the money goes to in the process. Yeah, we have money that goes to medicaid, but how many hands does it pass through until then? Can severely cut back on costs if we knew. Most of medicaid taxes are administration expenses

[@SmileyEmoji42]

@@NINJAxBACON Who decides what is necessary expenditure except more beurocrats? The public has neither the will nor the information to decide this.

[@NINJAxBACON]

@@SmileyEmoji42 that doesn't mean it would hurt to have access to information so we can actually elect the correct bureaucrats

[@davidplunkett8499]

@@NINJAxBACON While the flow of money is not 100% transparent, it is generally pretty transparent, and you can find evidence of how the money is actually spent. I think the problem is more that we as voters want our interests promoted over other people['s interests,and money spent on 'those' programs are corrupt and wasteful, while the money spent on 'these' programs are critical to the success of the Nation.

[@313Nadir]

"hyperinflation is straight up not a good time" Economics Explained, 2020

[@iamagi]

unless you have huge loans

[@SomeRandomGuy-us1yb]

@@iamagi And an asset

[@HiiPPi3]

@@iamagi *unless the loans are in your denomination/currency And even then it's basically: "i'll make my debt disappear, and along with all my peeps savings"

[@JugglingAddict]

@@iamagi or if you're shorting that currency.

[@Zorro9129]

-Pinochet, 1973

[@robertmiller6444]

"take on debt to _temporarily_ live above its means" _temporarily_ - yeah, sure, if only.

[@Hust91]

It's in many cases very possible to simply outgrow debt if you invest it well, which is much easier for goverments than individuals. If your debt becomes a much smaller percentage of your income, it's no longer as big an issue even though you still haven't paid it all off and you're ultimately better off than if you hadn't borrowed to invest into your future income. That is, of course, not what the US is doing.

[@joecurran2811]

@@Hust91 Most countries weren't doing that, even before the COVID crisis. Paying off debt is harder than it looks and sounds, especially when it gets to a significant amount. It may be best to avoid debt and build/grow organically.

[@osmane.ferguson3102]

@@Hust91 well, you have a very good understanding of how macroeconomics work now days, now you just need to learn why this is wrong

[@osmane.ferguson3102]

@@joecurran2811 you are totally correct, but organically built growth takes too long and isn't profitable for politicians, so "no can do" x'D

[@TheCountess666]

@@joecurran2811 Except countries don't need to pay off debt. The US never paid off its WW2 debt for example. but at $241.86 billion in 1946, that amount today is completely insignificant. inflation and economic growth have rendered it basically irrelevant.

[@reckeroffaces880]

I am a bit tired so I thought the title was "Do We Actually Need Texas?" Am pleasantly surprised

[@echoybyte42]

Me too!!

[@Randan444]

Do we though?

[@tren-y2m]

@@Randan444 but Barbecue ribs

[@diarmuidfaherty9458]

Same

[@fosterslover]

@Daniel von Strangle Give it 8 years and it won't be red no more

[@nox3335]

Glad to come across this channel. As a philosophy student each vid contains a wealth of interesting material to dive into. Much appreciated.

[@Timbaleek]

It has come to the point where it seems weird when I see crowds of people in these stockfootages. Quarantine really got me lol

[@omarchanouha9508]

Mate look at the protests in America

[@omarchanouha9508]

RedAnarchist223 what???

[@covid20pro86]

@RedAnarchist223 if that statement is not a sarcasm, i truly question your intelligence

[@theaustraliatimes3286]

Same here

[@ResumedPausing]

Thought the title said "do we actually need Texas" and had to do a double take

[@EconomicsExplained]

Everybody knows we don' need Texas, not too much to discuss there.

[@NA.NA..]

@@EconomicsExplained we dont need Australia either

[@PABLO1SEBASTIAN1]

@@NA.NA.. XD

[@DarkKreig]

@@EconomicsExplained "Texans are an unfortunate reality for most people living and working in the modern world, we pay them every year, we complain about them, and then we forget them until next year. "

[@themongolsarecoming_9437]

@@EconomicsExplained *angry cowboy noises

[@Chukwu121]

When you explained why there wouldn’t be a military I thought “well they could just all pay a small fee to maintain a military and every- ......oooooh”

[@blackmesa232323]

Anarcho-capitalism or even anarcho-communism always seem to find their way back to government. "What if the people decided to organize themselves, ohhhhhhhhhh....."

[@spliffzombonie]

same lol

[@jacobw703]

Yup. I find it surprising how often people criticize some aspect of the modern world, but then they're suggested "better alternative" just ends up essentially a rebranding of what we already have. Just goes to show that a lot of bitching is just that, and doesn't necessarily have any substance backing it up.

[@babycat5001]

Yes you dont need a military if people have guns. Why do you think the nazi's invaded whole europe except for switserland? Not worth it.

[@kazsmaz]

@@babycat5001 Because Switzerland wasnt strategically worth it.

[@nilsqvis4337]

How much people mind paying taxes is also greatly depending on how it's done. If it's directly drawn from your salary you might not even notice it, while if you have to do the calculations yourself and pay after you've received your earnings, you're probably gonna be less happy about it.

[@TdotSoul]

Same thing in advertising. If the advertised prices for things already included all taxes and fees, I think people would be less resentful. Of course, it would still be important to break down what the taxes and fees are for transparency.

[@looinrims]

“Or take on more debt until they go bankrupt” *Stock footage of the Greek flag*

[@universenerdd]

@@dj-ph8mw the majority of national debt was by trump

[@ragefacememeaholic5366]

@@universenerdd You do realize that congress sets taxes and spending right? And for half of Trumps presidency the house was controlled by dems. Not that I like Trump but politically illiterate people like you force me to defend him at every turn because if you are going to criticize him, criticize something he actually did.

[@zamasuawaken1908]

Yes i am greek and i felt that...

[@bradhaines3142]

@@universenerdd i dont even like trump and have to tell you youre wrong. get to know some facts in your life, everything makes way more sense once you get a little truth also, mainstream media, facebook/twitter are NOT the place to get any kind of news or information

[@jomo4435]

2007 08 09 criminal capitalist world financial crash perpetrators still profiting haha put the world on its knees ....where we still lay

[@Manos_P_]

Economics of Ancient city states, take Athens f.e., it's a nice case study

[@EconomicsExplained]

I have done Rome, but eventually I plan to look at many more :)

[@cfv7461]

@@EconomicsExplained you also did ancient china. What about the inca empire or ancient egypt? they were pretty unique too! nice work btw

[@mateoguzmansubiria1749]

@@cfv7461 I'd love to see the Inca up there.

[@alanredmond88]

@@cfv7461 +1 for ancient Egypt

[@mayabelgaonkar4218]

Economics of British East India Company will be interesting.

[@tis_ace]

Interesting indeed but it's still a bit sensitive topic for indians.

[@castlazary8706]

They already made one! kzbin.info/www/bejne/npu5d6qngpyrq9E

[@kieranmorris7315]

@@castlazary8706 that's on the Dutch East India Company (VOC), both influential economic forces in their times, but very different beasts

[@Roxor128]

I wouldn't mind seeing his take on the South Sea Bubble (which happens to be my favourite series of Extra History).

[@JaspreetSingh-dh4nf]

@@Roxor128 mine also!

[@townsendliving9750]

"Rich people just declare war on things to get thier way" ummmm yea that's happening now, just not with rifles but every other way imaginable.

[@arielsproul8811]

so if they're not killing people, is it even a war?

[@gamerplays5131]

@@arielsproul8811 Who says they aren't killing people, they are just very subtle and patient about it

[@dieptrieu6564]

@@arielsproul8811 Cold war exist

[@eggmeister6641]

ah yes, like the catholics did to... everyone...

[@TSERJI]

@@gamerplays5131 example?

[@MrAmeame]

"Sounds like a government with extra steps" 😂😂 That part got 2 large exhales from my nose 😂

[@elkinkku]

One from each nostril?

[@jensjensen9035]

Ame Masire Rick and Morty

[@Juvelqairth]

I'm not sure if it is a worldwide context.

[@ArtumTsumia]

The interesting thing that was mentioned here, and a point I often bring up when it comes to the "necessity of government" is that even in the absence of a true Government, smaller, self governing bodies would emerge. With those systems, some manner of taxation would arise, either via direct service or monetary contribution and individuals not willing to contribute to their community would be removed. These kinds of units already exist for such purposes, from housing communities to member exclusive clubs, or even criminal gangs. In a world with no government, individuals become incredibly weak and it becomes quite important to become part of some manner of community, much to the dismay of those who might support Anarchism. Some form of system will arise out of pure necessity.

[@juancuelloespinosa]

agreed. we humans are psychologically pre-disposed to forming institutions to regulate interactions with eachother. I'm personally an anarchist, but I'm an anarchist that understands that most people simply feel uncomfortable with the idea of everyone for themselves; even though people will always work together because that's the best way to get things done.

[@kazykamakaze131]

You'd find "night watchmen libertarianism" interesting.

[@theprophylacticprotectagai2069]

thats IDIOTIC & as perverse & myopic as this Koolaid fruitcakes video... some form of system??... wow thats a deep intellectual donation... THAT IS THE POINT... the USA DID NOT HAVE this UNIVERSAL INCOME TAX until the NWO Cabal created its LARCENIC Non Fed Non Reserve Non Bank in 1913... Think ant HOW DID THE US SURVIVE for OVER A HUNDRED YEARS WITHOUT these TAXES ??? The CRITIQUE is that the current Military Industrial Psycho system is NOT GOOD & Changes are necessary ... Look up Mancur Olsen ... GOVT MUS HAVE EXPLICIT LIMITS or It ALWAYS becomes an EVIL CANCER by Its very Nature...but the MIC LOSING 4 TRILLION UISD on the day that the inside 9/11 occurred is probably just not a problem for you & this vids creator...

[@Stabsdagoblin]

@@theprophylacticprotectagai2069 You talk like a schizophrenic

[@Rob-fx2dw]

@@theprophylacticprotectagai2069 You are right that government must have limits. If anyone needs confirmation just look at what has happend in so many countries where central governments have ridden over the rights of any other local governemnt and every person's rights.

[@uomosaiber2866]

"rich people just declare war on things to get their way" yeah, that's called medieval Europe

[@Notmyname1593]

I would argue that feudalism is the closest thing to anarcho capitalism we have had. Everything was privately owned exept maybe church assets.

[@uomosaiber2866]

@@Notmyname1593 agreed

[@secondavenger9775]

Actually it's called the oil, military and banking lobbies.

[@fltfathin]

@@secondavenger9775 that's the goal, not the things in their way

[@SteveZeugner]

It's closer to the 20th-21st century global situation than the video suggests

[@vincentvisser3067]

You actually made me feel better about taxes as a necessity. I guess my problem with it is how much is being stolen by the government. We pay all our taxes, but get told that there is no money to pay for the things we need. Just in my town we have a private group of individuals footing the bill for everything that goes wrong. Much of the repairs come out of their pockets. We can opt into subscription with the group and effectively get everything done ourselves, but then the government just smiles because now their revenue stays constant, but their expenses decrease. Good video. Love the explanations. Hate my current governmental situation.

[@onymous.of.moonrift]

That's fair, but in my opinion people/corporations not paying their share or outright avoiding taxes is the bigger problem.

[@kingali1606]

"Nothing is certain except death and taxes" *Laughs in Jeff Bezos*

[@themongolsarecoming_9437]

this meme was made by immortal gang *proceeds to show photo of queen elizabeth

[@asielmilian38]

@Iu Iulitza Really?

[@kingali1606]

@Iu Iulitza It was just a joke dude

[@o-taco4010]

@Iu Iulitza On one hand he employed hundreds of thousands maybe millions of people saving them from potential hardships, on the other hand he legally* sacked Billions of dollars that could have gone to welfare of people already suffering hardships. Pick you're poison.

[@cristianvillanueva8782]

@Iu Iulitza its simple then, we eat the Bezos

[@sssfsfdfsdsdffsfsdf4]

I love how this chanel goes into questions like this from a purley first principles point of view. You build the entire video up on little exceptions, and at the end, vwala, the concept of a government and the needs for taxes pops out the other end. Bravo

[@davidcooks2379]

It's voi-la m8

[@mgel7311]

Did you just... spell voilà as vwala?

[@curiousdilettante396]

@@mgel7311 Maybe it's the Wakanda version of "voila"

[@noahm4601]

Maybe it's some kind of French creole from the colonies

[@Barskor1]

Statists have no principals as they are willing by proxy to commit extortion assault and murder.

[@markschuette3770]

i don't mind paying taxes- but its the bookkeeping, paperwork and calculation of the taxes that drives me nuts due to the tedious math and stress involved!

[@karsten69]

@precizion The user-friendly software available lobbies the government to make taxes complicated so you need those user-friendly software companies in the first place. otherwise you would just do Return Free Filing

[@karsten69]

@precizion In Denmark it takes 5 minutes to do your taxes because it's that easy and we don't have a program to help. US Congress is being bribed to keep taxes difficult for you.

[@steventodd787]

I came here to say the same thing the other replies did. Our taxes could be done through Return-Free filing, which is what some other countries do.

[@krybling]

basically american politics want you to have a hard time doing taxes because it makes people hate taxes, there is really no other excuse since we have our taxes done automatically. but of course having the government taking your taxes/money automatically is when government does things for you therefore communism

[@cahoutcharles961]

"government does stuff for you is communism" might be one of the dumbest things I've ever read.

[@baronvonteuchter1412]

In the UK: The company you work for pays tax You pay tax on what you earn You pay tax on things you buy You pay tax on things you consume (food, drink, fuel, electricity) You pay tax to watch tv (tv licence) You pay tax to get a passport You pay tax to live in a house (council tax) You pay tax on things you import You pay tax to have a car (VED) You pay tax when you sell assets (CGT) You pay tax when you buy or build a house Then you die and your kids pay tax on what’s left Is it worth it? The principle is sound, the level of tax and the inefficiencies of how it is used by government is not.

[@naserdeen8210]

Unfair

[@davidlloyd-jones8519]

and on top of everything you have listed - there is the inflation tax and when i say on top - i mean that literally - ie on top of everything you have listed. Same goes for government/BoE debt and interest their on

[@sjjdhwhjw1257]

You can't really do anything about it considering the lack of resources in your country

[@georgemcnally4473]

Apart from shrink the size of government itself perhaps? Whole ministries could just go, together with their ministers, junior ministers, bureaucrats and buildings, and barely anyone would notice.

[@haute39234]

I keep going in circles: think of a perfect system, identify corruption/exploitation point, invent solution, realize human beings are the point of failure, repeat ad nauseam... I'm going to bed.

[@galacticplastic1741]

Imagine everyone is a leader with -Well built wisdom -Knows when a good fruit starts to rot -Doesn't ignore problems; it cares by taking actions -Learn to seek Improvements & Adapt to changes & mistakes -Determined,Persistent,Consistent *-Treat others at human level, not a living tool*

[@Seetiyan]

Humans are the thing I most love and most hate about this world. They are the source of most of life joys . . . and most of its sorrows.

[@amsd1231]

@@galacticplastic1741 Yeah that sounds like the frictionless vacuum environment we read about in highschool physics textbooks. That will never be real.

[@osmane.ferguson3102]

haha yeah, you have a point xD

[@falahati]

@@littlelad406 Humans wouldn't have that. To the first step. Try again.

[@scribblescrabble3185]

"Do We Actually Need Taxes?" Jeff Bezos is listening.

[@borislife4477]

He actually doesn't pay them anyway. And then taxes are helping him against competition.

[@AlexanderMichelson]

@@borislife4477 Excellent point! You are educated and smart!

[@LoomiYT]

While you are sitting here complaining the rich are taking investments and working hard for their money. Stfu

[@AlexanderMichelson]

@@LoomiYT stfu.

[@deeznutz32108]

@@LoomiYT stfu.

[@IOUaUsername]

I swear you've used that stock footage of a businessman sharing a McMuffin with a homeless man in EVERY SINGLE VIDEO.

[@memebro8703]

He can afford a lot of McMuffins.

[@lonestarr1490]

@@memebro8703 It's still the most unrealistic thing ever. The businessman would be way to concerned the hobo could get his suit smelly.

[@kekero540]

The McMuffin lord is KING

[@garrettzucker2894]

@@lonestarr1490 I don't see you giving out any McMuffins, Mr. High & Mighty?

[@samuelmora1327]

What time stamp?

[@chemacb]

You missed one very significant difference between the anarcho-capitalist city state and contemporary governments, the former would have residents who are have voluntarily accepted the terms of living there, the latter are coerced into following the laws set by the government.

[@princemc35]

I hope you're not Anarcho capitalist

[@chemacb]

@@princemc35 why do you hope that? 😆

[@LeRoiJojo]

"You are an extremely silly sausage" is going to be my favorite insult from now on.

[@mechislander]

"I got an uncle who live in Texas." "No, I mean taxes. Dollars, taxes." "Yeah, that's it! Dallas, Texas!"

[@HockeyVictory66]

They make up their income revenue loss with super high property taxes. In California, homeowners are protected by prop 13. So, they have higher income taxes to make up for that shortfall. You will always be paying taxes in one form or another. Don’t be fooled by state governments who proclaim no income taxes.

[@YourMajesty143]

A bit misquoted, but pretty close. Chicolini in 1933's "Duck Soup": kzbin.info/www/bejne/opi1k6t-qdmNia8

[@edwardfiorvante6123]

75

[@willIV9962]

Ok Marx brothers. : )

[@jainish1556]

Taxes are the monthly subscription to live in the country and avail its facilities. Childhood was the free trial

[@twoeightythreez]

Except that super rich and to a lesser extent, the poor, get to enjoy the subscription without paying for it. The super rich also get to have all the extra perks of the premier subscription.

[@jeez5735]

@@twoeightythreez the top 10% pay 70% of income taxes. The super rich in which case I believe you are referring to the top 1% are also paying their taxes. They just find loopholes to pay less on most cases. They still pay them just a smaller amount than what they are originally required to pay by their companies progressive tax laws. In addition in the case of owners of corporations a lot of them will only make $1 a year and get the rest for being a shareholder. In that case they are still taxes for that but they don't get the double tax that corporate owners usually get

[@hanarielgodlike9283]

last time i checked, no montly subscription service bullyied me into subscribing...

[@jeez5735]

@@hanarielgodlike9283 idk where that came from but tbf by living in the states you are actively using it already so it's kinda like forcing you to pay them back

[@sorintavala]

@@hanarielgodlike9283 you can always move into the woods and live off the grid. Then you don't get to pay taxes and won't use any of the amenities either.

[@gardevoirtrainer4526]

Sale's taxes are super annoying at times. When I think I have enough to purchase something, sale's tax comes in and squashes that purchase. I feel everything should have the actual full cost on the price tag.

[@alvisjenkins1305]

About sales tax here in Florida. Florida Statute chapter 212 section 212.05 states that every person e exercises a taxable privilege when engaging in the business of selling tangible personal property at retail in the state. Nothing is said in this statute about purchasers of retail products ever exercising a taxable privilege. The Legislature corrupted itself by corrupting the statute by stating that retail dealers are not to absorb tax but are to collect tax from purchaser. Liability for any tax is precedent to any tax debt, and the general population of the state have no liability for tax within all of Chapter 212 FS. Hopefully one day this tax law will be challenged in court.

[@erikschaal4124]

​@alvisjenkins1305 doesn't seem to be an issue in my state. But the other issue is that state and local governments have different tax rates and laws regarding what even gets taxed. This stops most large businesses from advertising a single price. (With tax included. )

[@snappps]

My largest issue with taxes isn't spending money on something I wouldn't have or even on something I don't personally support. It's that I don't know if it is actually true and not just kept by politicians

[@marcheradiuju9328]

The real question is: do we need roads? To which I would answer: where we’re going, we don’t need roads.

[@BLAZINGINGPHOENIX]

If you think that taxes are needed then who do you think is creating the money is it the goverment if so then why doesn't the goverment just make the money to fund itself and essential services instead of taxing the ppl there supposed to be serving

[@BLAZINGINGPHOENIX]

Who do you think these that's are going to. There going to the private Banksters who loan lend this fake money the goverment asks them for

[@MondeSerenaWilliams]

@@BLAZINGINGPHOENIX you're not really bright, are you?

[@DaveMeuleman]

Where we're going, we don't need eyes to see...

[@suthinanahkist2521]

Well, roads aren't necessary, but they do help people get from point A to point B! Things like roads do NOT have to be monopolized by the government!

[@petermathieson5692]

Well done. Your channel and others serve to inform, enlighten, and stimulate thought to a breadth of audience not possible 20 years ago. Not all who might benefit can or will tune in, but many will, and you - you and others - will have enriched the world as a result. Thank you.

[@oliver_siegel]

Right? 👏

[@ejrorem4890]

Q: What is Libertarian clickbait? A:

[@alexcereuceta5907]

You know, when you lure a rabbit with a carrot in your left hand, the rabbit gets closer and closer, meanwhile you’re holding a baton with your right hand behind your back... when the libertarian clicks..... I mean, the rabbit gets close enough, bam! “Total free market (anarcho-capitalism) is just taxation with extra steps”. EE was heinous this time.

[@googleuser9383]

I hate all of you. The Q and A meme was once good. Then you started leaving gaps. Some people even write: " Everyone: KZbin: " And that shyt gets upvoted to oblivion. Is this a choose your own adventure game?

[@DaltonHBrown]

@@googleuser9383 Op: makes a joke You:

[@seafoam6119]

@@googleuser9383 cry some more.

[@Zorro9129]

I have to say yes, it worked. However the video is unconvincing, not least because enforced monopolies by nature lead to uneconomic results. Voluntary societies lead to more efficient allocation.

[@PeakedInterest]

It's two years since this was released but I just watched it now and it's pretty obvious that the best system is one which we leave the consumer and luxury goods markets to the free market and things which are considered a social benefit (healthcare, police, fire, water, power, and basic housing) are paid via taxation. Free market is great and all but without limitations it eventually just becomes one giant monopoly as big companies continue to merge take over others until there is no choice anymore, there is just one big mega corporation who controls an entire market. At which point mega corp can simply charge whatever it wants and people have no choice but to pay. Government would provide basic alternatives to the market on things like housing, water power etc for a very low taxation. This way corporations would need to provide a service which justifies it's higher price or people will just choose the basic option instead. Government provided services like this give the market a "floor" which is reasonable. Without it the floor just becomes a ceiling.

[@coopsnz1]

Franchise are small business owners aswell dumb fk

[@Mr_frckls]

But even then there is an inherent problem in the capitalistic world-view. An economy, which relys on eternal ever increasing growth, on a planet which is finite, implicates that the resources will be burnt out eventually. Even with regenerative technologies, you just cannot grow forever. And a free market will always look for the most profit while searching the lowest expanse. And this means someone will always be greedier than another. Capitalism is a competition of the greediest. Without state set regulations someone always will be exploited, humans, animals, the earth. It is the nature of capitalism to exploit with no other thought than profit.

[@reinhardtsanchez7952]

I may not pay taxes but I make sure I watch EE when he uploads a new video.

[@EconomicsExplained]

Well we all contribute in our own way I suppose xD

[@kingspammernerd]

Don't you pay sales tax on everything that has a barcode on it?

[@lonestarr1490]

@@kingspammernerd I guess he's a thief then.

[@jakob6960]

How do you not pay taxes? :o

[@ThexXxXxOLOxXxXx]

@@jakob6960 Even the gulf states implemted taxes

[@Nuvendil]

Not an anarcho-capitalist myself, but actually, on the street lamps, private security, and private fire department arguments, there are fairly easy ways to see how those could be provided through purely private means. Street Lamps, for example, would be built by the company that own or provides the roads as a means of competition. The most likely method of funding that would be that companies who own roads would essentially lease or sell street frontage (with a right of first refusal to buy it back), requiring those who want to build on a street or connect to a street with a driveway to pay a fee. With or without street lamps, this would be necessary to generate revenue from the asset in the case of streets. In areas where street lights would be highly desirable, a company unwilling to provide them would find themselves competitively disadvantaged by those who would be willing. Dame would apply to toll roads. Private fire departments and private security would likely focus on assets held by the operating company but would also be an incentive to work with that company in exchange for discounts or complimentary services. Also, you would likely have multiple companies providing these services competing for customers. This kind of happened in Gurgaon for a while due to the dysfunctional and borderline absent Municipal government. Again, not an anarcho-capitalist myself but the trouble doesn't really come with the provision of these kinds of services necessarily.

[@essassasassaass]

there is no market good that has utility to people that can't also be a market good. there is literally no justification for public goods.

[@notafox]

When I got the notification I misread "do we actually need Texas?"

[@sirzorg5728]

Remove texas.

[@AvatarOfBhaal]

Texas is theft! Abolish Texas! I hate Texas!

[@vylbird8014]

Texas, thanks to their general dislike of taxation, actually receives more money from the federal government than they pay in federal taxes. So... no.

[@blankblankpog]

@@vylbird8014 If we're talking about budget deficit CA is the worst of them all, eventhough they're boasting pretty high taxes this year they announced 55 Billion deficit in their budget and their total debt to the federal goverment is around 1 Trillion

[@frocco7125]

Bye cowboys and girls

[@User__Not__Found]

On the note of Street lamps, the land owners would likely add that onto the price of collective rent In accordance with public demand for them. You can't stop someone from using it when it's up, but you can turn people away from your land if they don't want to pay for all its services. Remember, even streets are privately owned. Entrances and exits to streets would likely have large security gates around them unless you have something akin to an "Acess card" that land owners collectively use (which would be maintained by yet another outside entity) so all land owners could collectively provide/restrict access based on what residents are paying for access to. Think about it. You could have a street acess card that has a small subscription fee for literally any possible route. Don't think you're going to get sick or use the hospital? Don't pay for access. Don't think you'll need to travel between states? don't pay for Interstate access. Are you a homebody that only goes to work/ the grocery store/ and back home? Pay for those and ignore the rest. Remember, EVERYTHING can be charged for in some form or fashion, as long as you're legally allowed to restrict access to it. In an anarcho-capitalist society, there's no law saying you can't restrict acess to roads, therefore they would be gated as heavily as Trump wanted the US Mexico border and THEN some. On a side-note, even THIS sector would be competitive. Finding the cheapest way to light up large sections of an area without endangering the users would be highly profitable. LED's would likely be common. With walls restricting access, they would likely not need lamp posts, but rather be attached to the pre-existing walls aimed down so the light from one section doesn't flow much out of that area. Street Lights would likely turn off if sensors didnt detect anyone on the street within a certain distance. Other such things that would both save money and ensure the customer gets its product would become exceedingly common.

[@williamchristy9463]

I'm not going to lie, that sounds like a hellhole.

[@MarinelliBrosPodcast]

Libertarians have joined the chat.

[@dmitrizaslavski8480]

@Rory McDonald Translation of your comment = ignorant leeches have joined the chat.

[@legoboy-ox2kx]

My opinion is that the government should not have VAT. sales tax or income tax. I think we should just have property taxes, revenue taxes and capital gains taxes. The US government needs to severely reduce spending. Get rid of the welfare state, social security and government backed student loans. We should also defund the FDA, FDE and FCC, on top of that, get rid of much of the spending on the US military.

[@MarinelliBrosPodcast]

@@legoboy-ox2kx IMO free market social security is better.

[@legoboy-ox2kx]

@@MarinelliBrosPodcast Fair enough, I personally don't feel the need for it, but I definitely think that it would be pretty popular

[@nb-eq6rw]

Libertarians are worse than vegans with their virtue signaling

[@dylant830]

>Neighbor walking along the sidewalk >trips over a crack >touches one millimeter of my lawn, violating the NAP >Call the McDonalds Property Protection Death Squadron™ >Neighbor is violently raped and murdered in front of my home, deterring future acts of outright aggression >McDonalds upgrades my subscription to Silver Tier because some of their bullets hit my house

[@stevencooper4422]

I'm lovin it

[@kolamoose8717]

Subscription is tax

[@miguelsilva1446]

Did you get to see the Mac Marines?

[@Barskor1]

Reductio ad absurdum you are using a debate fallacy and you clearly don't understand the NAP.

[@Barskor1]

@@kolamoose8717 Subscriptions are a choice taxation is a gun to your head.

[@kaen_tqk3918]

Librights agree with the thumbnail.

[@Valiguss]

And someone who doesn’t know the difference between a libertarian and liberal has an existential crisis

[@nominatorchris5591]

@Secret Sauce Thanks for the insight nerd.

[@BubbleGaming]

Yes.

[@Zero-ye2dk]

Secret Sauce tru

[@mariokartpete]

@Secret Sauce and so are some republicans. Maybe try to see that a lot of liberals are like a lot of republicans, and that there are a stupid minority of people on both side. Don't just assume all liberals are insufferable, because saying that makes liberals think you are insufferable.

[@Elkunas]

I would love a VAT over an income tax. I can always reduce consumption, but reducing income is weird.

[@andrewlucas246]

We have a tax called the GST in Australia that tacks on 10 percent to all goods and services transactions in the country. While reducing consumption sounds like an ideal solution, the issue is that there are many people who cannot reduce their consumption any further. For those living hand to mouth their ability to eat and survive within society is 10% harder with no alternatives. On the flip side those with high disposable income easily absorb the costs and have the option to reduce consumption to save if needed. That doesn't do the economy any favours. The scalability, flexibility and tunability of income tax is superior in this respect

[@notnidan]

Dubai and Texas: We don't tax, but we do tax India: We do tax, but only the wrong people

[@themongolsarecoming_9437]

saying the truth ....... to the guillotine... sorry wrong country.

[@jaiparwani4279]

Farmers are not taxed but workers are. What wrong people

[@notnidan]

@@jaiparwani4279 I am talking about Black Money here

[@je.m3320]

Oooohhhh killem

[@Hrafnskald]

Also India: Nice shiny new paper currency you have there, shame if we made it worthless by decree :)

[@NotFil11]

" In theory , the natural resources of most countries belong to the people of that country." Dude. We're Australian. Pretty sure Gina Rinehart owns all ours.

[@kieranmorris7315]

It's either her, Clive or Rio Tinto

[@mrjgoodman94]

There's a good clip in the Simpsons movie I need to dig up for how Alaskans get paid to ignore the destruction of their environment

[@mrjgoodman94]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/hnPbq6l8fdyfZqs got it

[@mateenabbasi9856]

"I'm to cute for prison" was hilarious

[@tobigrunfeld4869]

Wemen all time

[@Aaron-fb1pq]

Too*

[@jonathanlance6379]

Too*

[@billabong272]

*Too

[@johncashwell1024]

"too" is the proper spelling. One goes 'to' prison or is 'too' cute for prison. Hope this helps.

[@henryhabra4094]

You should do a video that explores the theory of our federal government having a restriction (law) that prevents them deficit spending. Explore how this would change their spending. They could ONLY spend the money that they have. No printing money. No borrowing money. No issuing bonds. What programs would get priority? What spending would be eliminated>

[@ultimatestoryteller]

US citizens : Why is tax ? N.Korea citizens : How is tax ? *Middle East Emiratis subjects : But who is tax ?*

[@carlosandleon]

@Setzer K developing countries generally don't pay as much though

[@drjp4212]

@@carlosandleon What?

[@chandy3859]

@@drjp4212 more poor people mean more people pay less taxes probably.

[@drjp4212]

@@chandy3859 It's exactly the other way around. Ofc we're not talking about total taxed amount, but proportional taxation. Ppl are poorer exactly because they are more taxed and have less economic liberty (mostly governments prohibits small businesses to work through a lot of regulation demands which increase a lot the constant costs of any business). Where I live, Brazil, it's easily >50% of any poor class income gone for taxes, because taxation is heavily directed into consumption. Most third world countries work the same, and that's why they are poor and cannot develop. If you search for "taxation for GDP" in Brazil, it's about 37%...because middle class, workers and poor ppl, in general, pay a far greater load of taxes.

[@amazinghannure6440]

but the UAE has 5 percent VAT. And note: the system they follow in middle eastern nations with minimal tax wouldn't work anywhere else, it is uniquely set for these countires and haas significant drawbacks that the west would not like.

[@Mythhammer]

Rothbard called, he would like to explain the details of AC to you. ^^ In the case of the street lights, I suspect that the same group who did the streets, would do the lights. It would be factored in to the fee for the use of the roads. Pollution is dealt with by property rights. Polluting the air or water, outside of your own property, damages the property of another. That would result in arbitration. The vast majority of these details have been worked out, in the works of Rothbard, Mises, Professor Walter Block, various others.

[@morganirosonna2871]

Well they are a lot of questions that arise. This "group" which built or played for the building of the roads would not freely allow any other person from using the roads unless they pay some sort of fees (taxes). Also, the idea of a property right or rights for any matter becomes obsolete because only the super rich determine what rights to uphold and who it applies to (even breaking some of their preconceived rules to increase profit and lifestyle [Animal Farm]). Also the idea of pollution being squeezed into a land space is VERY ILLOGICAL. The effect of air pollution cannot be contained in one nation not to talk of an individual property. Essentially, it is impossible to pollute without harming another and most industries require some sort of pollution to manufacture goods and services.

[@guccigoldberg5303]

My Economic Idea I think enterprises should be: 1/3 owned by private investors 1/3 owned by the workers 1/3 owned by the government *The private investors bring capital and have a profit motive to increase productivity. *The workers look out for their own interests, eg higher wages and so a better standard of living. *The government look out for the national interest. Examples: 1.The private investors want to move production to China, where labour is cheaper, to increase profits. The government will vote against this because the government wants to keep exports high, unemployment low and can generate taxes from the factory and it’s workers who stimulate the economy with their spending. While the workers don’t want to loose their jobs and so also vote against it. 2. The workers are asking to raise wages of low level factory workers from $25,000 to $50,000 a year. The government and the private investors know if they do so prices will have to increase and the company, which is important to the economy as whole, will become uncompetitive and could sink and so they vote against it. But the government knows this plant employs 5,000 people who all have families and friends and so by not giving the workers what they want they could loose lots of votes furthermore, a wage boost for the workers will increase spending and so local business in the town will benefit. The government compromises and promises vote with the workers for a wage increase to $35,000 a year.

[@maozidog9278]

1/3 owned by private investors 🤢

[@nicolasargon1436]

Interesting idea. Two thoughts. First, who represents the government? Are they elected, appointed, or hired? How or by who? In other words, what mechanism of accountability are there for the government side of the triad? The investors staked their money, the workers staked their livelihood, and yes technically the institution of the 'government' staked its credibility but what about the representative of the government? The status of the government's credibility would act like a tragedy of the commons here. One bad representative wouldn't tarnish the status completely so its hard not to free-ride and for many bad apples to take the gamble as representatives of the 'government'. Corruption controls would need to be critical. Which gets into the second issue. the non-rivalrous nature of the 'government'. What I mean is that the government would have 1/3 ownership in ALL private companies simultaneously. This actually gives the government considerable leverage as it could coordinate its decisions across companies. Technically investors can be member to multiple companies but they would not be ubiquitous like the government in this case. I could see a worst case scenario in which the entire economy is held hostage by all government parties in all corporations coordinating some kind of fillibuster, corrupt dealings, price fixing, and so on.

[@guccigoldberg5303]

@@nicolasargon1436 The elected government would appoint people to be make decisions on behalf of them. These people would have to make decisions based on achieving goals chosen by top level government or by just following their exact orders. Depending on the importance of a decision and what the vote regards, it would have to be approved by various government body's. If the government officials are failing to meet up to goals and the problems can be traced back to the way they voted they would be fired. The government wouldn't have too much power as if they faced opposition from both workers and private investors they could always be outvoted.

[@guccigoldberg5303]

@@nicolasargon1436 The government's stake would be that if things go wrong they end up having to bail out the companies. Perhaps, the government could have 1/3 of the voting rights without actually owning stocks and receiving dividends. Perhaps that would come only if the government invested money in to these companies. The government wouldn't have to get involved with companies bellow a certain size, things like family resteraunts would make all the decions by themselves, ofcource while following government regulations.

[@aidan8578]

this seems entirely arbitrary. how did you arrive at this conclusion? why is each stake what it is? how would this be arrived at? this is rather like starting with the topmost part of a building and trying to build downwards.

[@kazasta1362]

This is probably the 15th video I've watched this month.. (not in a sparky way) but y am I learning American economics from an Australian ;) thanks for the knowledge, your amazing!

[@DrEhrfurchtgebietend]

I'm pretty OK with cutting a ton of government services especially the bureaucracy

[@DiamondDaveGtr]

how much bureaucracy do you think there is? and how much more or less would you find in private companies? I would argue government "bureaucracy" is actually pretty moderate when compared to private industries, especially considering how everything in the government needs to be super above board because they're constantly being watched.

[@DrEhrfurchtgebietend]

@@DiamondDaveGtr I have worked for companies in both the public and private. I would say that there is at least twice as much beurocracy in the gov. I would also cut several whole sectors

[@AdamFitton]

Which services do you want to cut funding to?

[@DrEhrfurchtgebietend]

@@AdamFitton mostly the regulatory obes like. Private insurance and licencing

[@hund4440]

Well there is more bureaucracy, because there also obliged to care about things like ethics, long term effects, the environment etc. instead of just profits.

[@StratejikKomutan]

What if instead of paying a subscription fee to a company for indiscriminate goods, you actually become a shareholder of that company and those goods are simply considered as administrative expenses? The basic logic could go like this: Initially, you make a decision to move into this company's territory. In order to move, you need to either buy the shares of the company from someone within, or simply ask the company to issue new shares for you (you would be required to provide many years of your estimated expense as capital). After you move in, all the "public" expenses would be made by the company, which in turn affect the bottomline of the company you are a shareholder of. And if the company profits from it's operations after all the expenses, you would get a dividend. Also most likely, the company would employ from it's own community. The board would be consisted of these resident shareholders and they would try to turn a profit from producing and selling goods to outside communities. It sounds like an interesting thought, and I hope you see this.

[@valdamirlebanon4508]

Wouldn't that just be exactly like what natural resource rich governments such as Alaska or Arabian Oil Monarchies use as an alternative to taxation. The only difference being that the "government" would have near monopolistic control over multiple different sectors of the economy to pay for it's activities, instead of just natural resources.

[@miran2215]

that just sounds like paid citizenship

[@sten260]

what do you mean "move in"? and you can already buy shares of public companies and they pay you dividends or just provide growth

[@samuelerembado3152]

I don't know enough to propose a whole economic system, but here some thoughts I think it may worth reflect on: 1) We need a central government not only because of those objects of value that are not "marketable" for pragmatic reasons as you suggested in the video, but also because in an anarcho-capitalism the supply of goods is driven ONLY by what people wants and (think to) need. I'd argue that a macro-level people don't know what they need... until it hit them directly or well after. Think of climate change, rare disaster that might occur as solar storm or pandemics, space travel (a few years ago), science research ecc... The end result is the same (Not-marketable items), but leading cause is different. 2) I thought about this a lot of times but never reaching a conclusive thought for lack of knowledge, so maybe someone here can help me: Why not having a tax on purchased items and services expressed in % of which amount is chosen by the government for every and each item/service based on: a) what the society in that moment needs and b) whether it is a basic-need item/services or a luxury one. Why that tax couldn't be even negative? That would be a way to have social spending from the government on things the society needs while also keeping the advantages of the free market. (Competition increase for tax-light items/services and that keeps prices down). Society needs face masks? Here: 20% extra profit to whoever can make and sell one. Of course you would need to think and implement a regulatory system to prevent "scams", but so as you need a system to prevent tax evasion... please someone enlighten me! XD

[@raymondanielson8438]

I don't need a governement.

[@Tronoslycer]

@@raymondanielson8438 speak for yourself!

[@jackcameron4835]

Great vid, just one nitpick/question about the lack of things like street lamps in an anarchist-capitalist society - would private entities owning roads not just use the street lamps as an safety advertising feature and therefore compete against other, less safe road companies, and/or charge a premium for well lit roads?

[@dieptrieu6564]

But it beg another question. Why would you do that if people have to go through your road regardless? Road is not the same as other assets like cars. You can easily choose any cars you want. But if the place you want to go only have 1 road. You really can't choose another road for that

[@cookingandjava7574]

Competition cant really work with roads though. If you wanna visit an address on a certain street, you don't have the option to use another street with lights. (Sure, sometimes there are multiple routes to a given location, but not necessarily)

[@aaroncouch4337]

The lamps would have blue tooth so would the chip in your phone or body. You'd automatically get charged as you get closer. Probably what track and trace will end up being used for. Road use charge etc.

[@coolmenscool4436]

Places that not many people visit will not be profitable, and therefore not have roads, or bad roads in a system like that.

[@seandelaney1700]

@@coolmenscool4436 Yes, quality would go where society deemed it important and not wasted an areas where it's not.

[@Eggmancan]

The government is just an insurance company with an army. Honestly, people wouldn't complain so much about taxes if they didn't have to personally file them every year. They also need to be fair. VATs are good because they can make taxes mostly invisible and painless (although there is some question about their fairness). There are a lot of good ideas out there for reforming taxes, but (in America at least) the tax accountant lobby has big incentive to keep taxes as painful and difficult as possible.

[@whitehawk4099]

Having taxes obvious to everyone is by design. When taxes are out of sight they lose visibility. It makes it much harder for citizens to actually know whether the government they have elected is actually being successful or not. Having a lower barrier to information about the economics of your country is a good thing, as it allows people to make more informed decisions about the course their country will chart in the future.

[@101m4n]

Here in the UK, it's all handled for us before the paycheck even hits our bank accounts :)

[@schuylergeery-zink1923]

Income taxes and payroll taxes, social security, Medicare, are taken out of pay checks. Most of us Americans don’t file for enough “dependents” tho so the gov takes too much money therefore taking a interest free loan from the taxpayer. Hence, tax returns. But taxes do get more complicated when you’re running a business.

[@lawsonj39]

True--and another problem with America's tax system is the gigantic hassle involved. The government should simply present its calculation of what you owe or what they owe you and allow you to appeal if you disagree.

[@zabdi786]

It took me 5 minutes to realize this video was not about "Do We Actually Need Texas?"

[@vittocrazi]

as soon as he said "income tax" it was clear as water.

[@tobigrunfeld4869]

Texas incoming

[@andyhaochizhang]

For the example of street lamps, I guess one can argue companies who build the streets would be incentivized to install them to attract more customers. But consider services like drainage and sewage, extremely costly to build but no way to control access once built (except spending even more money to destroy it). Not to mention building these often require large scale cooperation and long term planning.

[@JKRyuugan]

MMT or Modern Monetary Theory is analytical theory how the current economical system works. It in itself doesn't suggest any reforms etc.

[@baronmeduse]

Well it suggests at least one: Job Guarantee. But also: abolition of bond sales; not tinkering with interest rates to try and achieve outcomes unrelated to the problems it supposedly addresses, plus dumping the failed idea of central bank independence; abolition of NAIRU.

[@saintburnsy2468]

With the streetlight example: if it's on a privately-held road, wouldn't the owner want the users (their customers!) to experience a better service? To distinguish them from the streetlight-less car crash hellscapes run by their competitors?

[@thomasfplm]

The problem is that if someone builds a road right beside yours and doesn't install lights, it would benefit from your lights and cost less, so it would be able to charge less. Also, considering the length of the property, it would be very hard to avoid people to use it widout paying. Unless you're the only one allowed/capable to build roads in the region, and then it is a monopoly and you can charge whatever you want widout caring for quality.

[@wickederebus]

@@thomasfplm Luckily I, and many others in history, know of a wonderful technology that fixes those exact issues. In fact, it is such a ubiquitous concept that the 45th president of the US proposed building one to reduce the humanitarian crisis created by human traffickers at the southern border of the United States. This invention is called a "wall." it can be made of wood, plastic, concrete, iron, steel, brick, and many other materials depending on if the consumer(s) needs something to block some light out, to keep animals out, or to keep the elements like wind, snow, and rain out.

[@thomasfplm]

@@wickederebus , and unfortunately I've seen quite a few of those being broken by people who simply wanted to cross a road widout going to an elevated passage, and that's not even something they would gain or lose money, it is something to gain a few minutes every day. And building walls is a lot more expensive and hard than breaking them, specially if you are going to place on both sides of an entire road system. Notice even that said president did not finish the wall he proposed, and that one would be a fraction the size of what you are proposing.

[@50733Blabla1337]

@@wickederebus this is one of the dumbest takes I have read in a while. Thanks for the laugh

[@GhullieUser]

Here I am living in a country with Income tax and VAT realizing over half of my income is going to taxes.

[@bigz5262]

That means you are working half the year for free

[@adamkinsten9231]

@@bigz5262 not really, cus you Get services for those taxes that you normally could not afford

[@bigz5262]

@@adamkinsten9231 so you can opt out of those services and not pay the taxes for them?

[@LolLol-zr9jc]

I’m guessing UK

[@xpkareem]

@@bigz5262 Sure can. Nobody is forcing you to remain a citizen. It's a package deal tho. Take it or leave it.

[@BusinessMadhouse]

Until 2019 - No taxes in Saudi 2020 - Saudi Imposed taxes You inspired me to start my channel

[@sanketbajaj1317]

Woah, your channel has got some great stuff dude. Amazing video on Softbank! Subscribed buddy.

[@surajkasat4713]

Awesome work bro. You got a new sub

[@ritwiksen868]

Great stuff

[@sejalchandak8060]

Great Content !

[@medraut6599]

Well you just gained yourself a subscriber.

[@thejunkyardnecromancer]

I really like your videos, and I appreciate the careful thought you put into every topic. In regards to Anarcho-Capitalism, I think something people overlook is culture and altruism. I think AnCap could work if people with more money funded some of the things you mentioned (ie street lamps) just out of kindness. If the culture of an AnCap society supported the idea of looking out for the less fortunate, I think they could be a successful society. Maybe I'm being optimistic, but it is interesting to think about.

[@JAMESmmmmmm]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/pnaxholvebGUaMk kzbin.info/www/bejne/fpXPh6prgKt2p6ecttps://kzbin.info/www/bejne/foWxZ2edbtF0aMk I want uou to watch these 😂

[@mikexhotmail]

You are talking about (good) Monarchy?

[@thejunkyardnecromancer]

@@mikexhotmail No. Not monarchy at all.

[@spehhhsssmarineer8961]

In the mall there are lights and air conditioning. The mall makes no money from these things yet they provide them for free. Why would street lamps not be the same?

[@provolone5336]

The comments are gonna be about Texas

[@EconomicsExplained]

I don't understand why? I mean they have the same letters? but cmon people.

[@theparker3759]

Asher Alonso I think we are just all illiterate.

[@Hrafnskald]

Remember the Alonsomo! :)

[@themongolsarecoming_9437]

@@EconomicsExplained well,australians read it upside down soooooo..... ha

[@shree711]

New Zealanders would pronounce Taxes quite close to Texas

[@nathanfereig]

im not first but economics explained is my favourite channel

[@EconomicsExplained]

Thanks not first person :)

[@JimPluck45]

Economics Explained please do a video on why we don’t need Texas

[@theparker3759]

Robert Pluck I ate Texas, sorry

[@constantinedesjardins7216]

*favorite

[@nathanfereig]

@@constantinedesjardins7216 im Aussie so Favourite lol

[@jamesmccabe3041]

My "perfect" economy of Perfecktastan : Resources: The country would charge a 10% royalty on extracted resources (oil, minerals, coal excetera). Additionally, Mining and oil companies would be required to pay a deposit before any resources are extracted. When the site is depleted, the deposit is returned to the company and can be used to restore the site. Orphan wells are a big problem if left unchecked because companies have been known to sell the rights of depleted mines to smaller companies that declare bankruptcies. This leaves the government on the hook for restoring mining sites. To compensate for this large upfront investment, no royalties would need to be payed for the first year of extraction. Education: My economy would prioritize education. Especially early education. Providing nationalized early childhood care for children aged 1-6 would provide a number of economic benefits. First, it would increase the number of working woman in the workforce and would increase the productivity of mothers. This increased productivity would partially help pay for the service. Second, providing low income families with childcare would increase the economic potential of low income children. This would potentially lower the crime rate and lower the need for high police budgets. The last year of secondary school would require a mandatory internship. This would give young students early working experience in a field of interest which would help them integrate easily into the workforce. This would also increase the productivity of participating businesses. Businesses would need to apply to join the program and provide a suitable learning curriculum. Prioritizing education would lead to the establishment of prestigious Universities that would attract wealthy foreign students from worldwide. These wealthy foreign students would boost the rest of the economy through their spending and leads to an increase in skilled workers for the foreign students that wish to stay. Healthcare: Perfecktastan would provide universal healthcare. This provides a secure safety net for its citizens and also makes Perfecktastan a more attractive to companies since they don't need to provide health insurance to their employees. Plus having universal healthcare gives the country an extra incentive to improve the health of its citizens. Immigration: Perfecktastan would have a point system to score immigrants. Immigrants would be given points for speaking a national language, having a post-secondary education, being highly skilled and having experience in a field that is low in worker supply. This would ensure that a high percentage of immigrants would be highly productive and contribute to the social programs of Perfecktastan. Military: Invest just enough in military to discourage foreign aggression. Miscellaneous Other Polices: Prostitution would be legalized in Perfecktastan. This would have a number of benefits. First, this would increase the safety of everyone involved in prostitutes and would shift prostitution revenue away from gangs and into the government coffers. Perfecktastan would have a foreign home buyer's tax and an airbnb tax. This would help control the rise of home prices and help pay for Perfecktastan's social programs. Well there's the economy of Perfektastan. It certainly was fun to dream up!

[@lucasvouzela7314]

Nice! Got me thinking! Assuming you dont have a very resource rich country you will need some sort of income/sales tax at least to get to the point where you are a spot for wealthy students/business. I always figured being a tax haven, specially for financial assets, helps speed the foreign income up.

[@forgottenrights351]

I made a video on the morality of taxation, in part in response to Ben Shapiro, the silver tongued conservative podcaster: kzbin.info/www/bejne/hmLSZWWrlNt-jas

[@bluecarbon]

Some good ideas, but it's a bit held back by the fact that the economy is built on resource extraction which is, by definition, unsustainable. It might work for generations, but at some point, the wells are going to dry up. Additionally, it means that Perfecktastan would always be at the whims of the global market. Living in an area whose economy is primarily based on oil and gas, let me tell you, things get bad RIGHT QUICK when the price of oil drops. Also, what would you do about the tension between foreign home buyer's taxes and the expectation that foreign students would provide significant revenue? Even if your University can rival something like Harvard, you're going to have a hard time convincing the wealthy to move somewhere that is actively targeting them with additional taxes.

[@munindramohanta2584]

interesting ...... but mann did you type all that for the sake if this comment ...???

[@philipberthiaume2314]

I work for a municipality of one million ppl. We offered local business a fee based refuse pick up program that worked in line with the tax based residential service. And it was cheap. There was strong interest except that the higher level government made any such program illegal. The reason? Because it would interfere with private markets, (which were more expencive). As a result, public service sector unions began competing for contracts and they won a bunch of them. The reason? No profit margin, just benefits for workers and costs of service...

[@nw9801]

3:06 “I’m too cute for prison.” 😑 Truer words have never been spoken.

[@Jobe385]

So, I know this way late, but I'm just going to throw my thoughts out for grins and giggles: State governments should oversee the majority of civil services, with their taxation of citizens determined by the needs of their individual state. The federal government should primarily be concerned with national defense, international trade, and intranational trade (within the nation but a cross state lines). The primary income of the federal government should come from taxation on this trade, though an argument (however morally dubious)could be made for finding profits through war. This would likely necessitate a large reduction of government spending, with a simple first step of non-stacking retirement payouts for government positions and a second step of restructuring government contracts with the private sector (particularly as regards military spending). While I'm sure there are more issues I missed, I think that is a decent big picture idea

[@Dayvit78]

You're missing the concept of free trade, which England developed and America took on. Our government doesn't want taxes from trade (or companies apparently since they let them have tax havens in other countries). So... the people are the only ones left to tax. In that regard, the Constitution says that the government has to tax the people of different states equally (per capita).

[@jamie7351]

I'd love to hear your thoughts on the economics of The Venus Project.

[@shaneyoung9060]

Tax on tickets

[@kerloom]

A video on this topic would be great

[@bazag]

Fresco's hypothesis doesnt hold a stick to reality, if you look at the curve, top 10% of welathiest men holds around 80% of the overall wealth, while the bottom actually has negative. People will always has the tendency of being greedy, but it is actually benifitial for humanity in a bigger picture. Sure we have not eliminated key problems that the venus projects higlighted but we have in every way improve a lot on all of it. The venus project will also destroy heirarchies which is not good for everyone. Unless it will be a contained society for highly intelligent, with the same quality genes (some of the top predictors of success in human behaviour), the venus project will not work. It is utopia in its finest but the reality is, people are more complex than he can imagine. A lot of people actually have more than what they need but still wanted more. One of the best example; obesity is now a bigger problem than famine.

[@relight6931]

@@bazag Excuse me but as much as I remember Venus project for cities doesn't have much to do with what you are talking about. It was just a way to build a city in the most efficiant way. Also about other things you said, while I agree with you and it is something that is more of a prerogative of our biology interfaced with society, that usually the 10% of most tallented, driven, workoholic people make something like 50% of all food, inventions etc.. Also we've seen what happens when you force those to do something else, like in Soviet Union or under Mao, but it's not necessarily greed, just the fact that they wouldn't know how to be otherway. So yeah, agree on you that we are not equall, agree on that it's beneficial for everypne to let those that are excellent in their fields to be excellent, but don't agree on greed being the root couse or that greed should be celebrated. We are social creatures, we become what we are thanks to languange, invention of tools and cooperation. Our biggest problem at the moment the way I see it, are two things: 1) no real alternative to our majority energy sources, because nuclear has become a dirty word and nothing else even comes close, also since wind and eletric still produce something like maybe one percent of worlds needs while most of else that is called sustainable, usually isn't and in the end just boils down to burning things, storage of said energy and 2) even bigger taboo, problem of overpopulation. How to do it in a good way. Once you realize that just bringing the so called thirld world countries to a level of developed ones, we need resources of another few Earths, you realize it's not just "evil zionist conspiracy", it's an actual problem. Let's hope that those 10% strike out again, before we run out of time, if we haven't already.

[@bazag]

@@relight6931 dude it is exactly about what im talking about, it is about building a sustainable and efficient city as we possible can in hopes to solve the problems aforementioned. Watch the documentary oblivion, again, if you already watched. But yes greed might not be the right term, but you get the point. My point still stands that even under the best environment, human will have the tendency to compete and take advantage of people. Regarding the problems you mentioned, thats why i idolized Elon than the old man, Elon tries to find a way to give people what they want and still help out with the battle agiants global warming, he understand people. Biggest problem we got is china. Not being racist here, but facts are fact, they are the biggest CO2 emittors with little to no effort on trying alternative sustainable energies which we have a lot by the way, but most of them are not taxable thats why its so hard to get them to the public.

[@georgesbv1]

It depends on what taxes and contributions are considered. In Europe, a large portion of the taxes are represented by social security and health insurance, but also income tax or VAT (much higher than US). The problem is that apart from employees there can be many other types of income that can create advantages so some: corporate tax is on profit not on all income, contractors are not taxed the same way as it is very complicate to track them, free lance artists, stock exchange (long, short, ESPP), dividends all have different taxation rules.

[@themongolsarecoming_9437]

"there's a tax for that " some french noble, - circa 1784 sorry wrong channel, (in my defense he did say oversimplified at 1:49)

[@sorolxp29]

xD

[@georgforster8114]

XD

[@pocketanime]

quality comment

[@NarendraWicaksono]

dude... uncool.

[@KingUnKaged]

My parents complain they're charged too much in taxes, meanwhile I'm finishing grad school and can only dream of the day when I make enough to actually *PAY* taxes

[@EconomicsExplained]

we can only hope :')

[@folwr3653]

That’s the spirit👍

[@LunaProtege]

"It would be really difficult to justify street lamps in a purely profit driven society"; back up to the bits where you say it provides safety and security, ask yourself about the insurance question again; and realize that insurance providers would prefer to minimize the risk of paying out; and if street lamps will help lower the odds of someone careening off the road, or getting stabbed; then they'll pay out for that. Not to mention, home owner groups may decide to pool their money to provide it for themselves, if only because it helps with the atmosphere. ... Apologies for not waiting for you to finish your point at 14:19 before replying to this point, but I needed to make the case.

[@gazesalso645]

What if there is more than one insurance company? who will pay for the lighting if no company can prevent individuals from benefiting from lighting? The more insurance companies the less likely any one company will act and the greater the incentive for free riders. On home owners, it covers areas where there are home owners. What about freeways? Or remote areas? It all gets very complicated. And this is just one example.

[@LunaProtege]

@@gazesalso645 Funnily enough, since my comment, I found out that one good previously thought of in the same terms as these streetlamps actually was at one point fully privatized: Lighthouses. Every ship heading into port benefited from the lighthouse, and some claimed the ships didn't have to pay for the lighthouse... But you know who they did have to pay? The docks they pulled up at; who happened to pay for the lighthouses. This story aside, I've also since noticed the case: who actually cares that the free riders are benefiting? The people paying for it get what they want, the people providing it get paid, and the spill overs are considered by all others to be a happy accident. Look up what the Misus institute says on the so called Free Rider "Problem", they can go in much greater depth on this than I could in a simple youtube comment; and for much longer.

[@mattmunn71]

How about an advertising model, you are enjoying this street lamp due to the courtesy of Bob's country meats

[@illumancer]

Also, one big benefit from government is justice. Without it, contracts and human rights are only enforceable to the degree you have the ability to enforce them yourself through your own or a paid military/police force. Without justice, you don't get the peace and stability to have a prosperous society and you also get a lot of money, people, and resources tied up in private military forces. Just imagine if each company and neighborhood needed their own military to prevent theft by individuals or other companies. As to the common complaint people have about how their tax dollars are spent, paying taxes for things you don't agree with or understand is the price of living in a democracy. Other people will disagree with you on some issues, whether it's the amount of money spent on the military, the need for environmental regulations, or even taxation policy itself (like mortgage deductions or corporate tax rates). The value of living in a democracy outweighs any benefit you might get by allowing each person to dictate exactly how their tax dollars are spent, especially since a lot of things have value that people don't necessarily realize until something goes seriously wrong (like the CDC or meat inspectors) or that are just politically unpopular (like the IRS). If nothing else, I'd personally rather pay a set tax rate than have to scroll through pages and pages to approve or disapprove expenditures. Plus, allowing individual line item vetos would run into the exact same issues discussed in this video.

[@robertshea2010]

Fun thought experiment: A small micro nation funded by IP revenue filled with artists and designers.

[@josemaria1035]

That's just the venetian republic with extra steps

[@sgerardpandian]

It does exist in India: Auroville

[@fierrosound]

Yeah, and who's gonna service them? You'll still end up with more people doing other things in the end.

[@admiral_waffles533]

What about Sealand?

[@robertshea2010]

That or the wind up to a Bioshock reference.

[@apacheattackhelicopter8185]

One of the recent surprises of the Internet for me was discovering that there are actually people that believe that having private everything and no government is a viable system

[@yotubeification]

I know. It's essentially aristocratic feudalism. Company X owns some land. Person Y also owns some land nearby. Company Z owns land and has a large private military and offers, or forcefully arranges, to give their protection to X and Y. X and Y have to pay for that service, i.e. taxes since they don't want to pay it. They would use the itinerant workers to work the land, produce goods, then sell them for cash which then would be partially turned over to person Z and partially kept for themselves as payment for letting the works inhabit the land. It would circle back to governments and feudalistic ones at that

[@irek1394]

Because those people think that life will be just like now but they will avoid paying for things they dont use... While the truth would be that they would have to pay 1000 different things and it would be much more expensive

[@atirix9459]

Irek Cz. Why would it be more expensive? Also, as explained in the video, there is always the option of insurance to provide security.

[@MyAquilo]

Joseph Henry At least Company Z’s jurisdiction would be relatively small (hypothetically) and company Z wouldn’t limit the gallons per minute of my shower, wattage of my vacuum cleaner or fine businesses for not being ‘diverse’ enough

[@Rowdy422]

My friend is a hardcore 'taxation is theft' libertarian type, and concedes that you can't get rid of all the government optimally. His compromise was to...just keep the police and military. That aged like fine milk in regards to current times. Just try imagine a national police force with no government oversight.

[@gordonevans4879]

There is a quote: "you don't, in any statistically significant way, increase your chances of winning the lottery by buying a ticket". Some time ago I tried to interest the Australian Governments in a scheme where they nationalised lotteries and used them for voluntary savings by tagging all tickets to an individual and the money expended on the ticket was split with a percentage to the prize but the fast majority going to the individual's superannuation account - thereby reducing social security cost enormously. If all gambling was worked on a similar principle whereby a proportion of the cost of a lottery ticket went to public services and a small proportion was allocated to a prize pool it would painlessly (relatively) supply funds for essential works. (The UK use lotteries for Arts Projects.) This proposed system uses the income for works but also offers a windfall for the payer, and as noted initially, the chances or winning do not enter into the equation for purchase - it is the possibility of winning that guides the purchase. Voluntary taxation - now, there is a novel thought.

[@josephdestaubin7426]

One of the many challenges that happen in societies that lack direct tax support is the disconnect between the government and the people being governed; it always leads to governments seriously going off the deep end, toward authoritarianism. The actual cause and effect here are hard to pin down, but I would suggest looking at any number of states both past and present around the world. That there is a connection is beyond doubt, though researchers continue to argue about the details of the relationship. Personally, I think that people are willing to spend much more of their time pushing back on relatively small acts of misbehavior by governments when they have already spent cold hard cash supporting said government, to say nothing of the time people spend doing their taxes. Interestingly, in the US, under-taxed and thereby under-vested communities usually only protest when their relatives are being killed by police, whereas the heavily taxed part of our society get all up in the face of government when the wrong type of street lamp is put in, or the school curriculum is not just so, and god help the police if they want to randomly search your bag or car. The point is that there is plenty of evidence to support the conclusions.

[@JoramHimself]

In the Netherlands most forms of gambling are nationalised and profits thus fund part of the government budget. The perverse effect is that the government actually promotes gambling using advertisements xD

[@Deviantygr]

State run gambling is a tax on the STUPID. It is therefore one of THE MOST regressive taxes.

[@gordonevans4879]

@@Deviantygr Agree entirely - except that the scheme mentioned put 85% of the gambled money into the gambler's superannuation fund which is locked until retirement - it was using the gambling motive for voluntary savings for independence in old age. Seemed like a reasonable compromise. Better than being wasted on government boondoggles or private profit for billionaires. But I agree - gambling is insidious.

[@scuti7073]

When we are talking about taxes, it is usually about income tax. Singapore only taxes those who use a certain service- high taxes on car owners only. Governments can pay for the revenue that usually comes from taxes through selling natural resources that would otherwise go to consumers.

[@nz3134]

Did you watch this video?

[@scuti7073]

@@nz3134of course i did

[@Palatineoffacts]

i fell like the lamp example is a passive agressive attack on free viewers lol, like "i have a patreon you know, you can just block ads and watch my stuff for free but ya"

[@Hrafnskald]

I was thinking he was segueing into "Patreon as a funding model for Governments" :)

[@livethefuture2492]

Ed Hrafnskald Conway Well unfortunately most governments aren't as well liked as EE with his smooth Aussie accent!

[@medraut6599]

When i took econ in college that was the example that our professor used, so I thought huh they teach that example everywhere. I get what you are trying to say, but that is what came to mind lol Nice observation.

[@jeremyquentin42]

@@livethefuture2492 I think you misspelled "despite".

[@AwesomeHairo]

I can feel the guilty conscious from you

[@bgiv2010]

"Very quickly you arrive at an outcome where rich people just declare war on things to get their way!" That's what happens already!!

[@Barskor1]

And it gets even worse as the public is footing the bill and not the rich people if rich people actually had to pay for their wars there would be no wars just assassinating them would also end the war.

[@gamebook727]

Yes, throughout most of history that is what is called government. Our modern state systems are not tools of oppression but the result of revolutions for freedom to form representative governments that are accountable to and work to benefit the people (England 1689, America 1776, France 1789). The alternative to modern democratic capitalism is not anarcho-capitalism, it is feudal absolute monarchy.

[@KalamariFromTheParty]

@@gamebook727 we can have anarcho capitalism work. Not today, probably not for another few hundred years. But technology will be able to track all expenses, even street light usage, and then bill you for it.

[@osmane.ferguson3102]

@@gamebook727 I don´t know you're on hard core drugs or just joking xD

[@osmane.ferguson3102]

@@KalamariFromTheParty that is just a government with extra steps.

[@ReiP95]

So next video shall be: "do we need death?" XD

[@theparker3759]

ReiP95 I think CGP grey made a video on that

[@metalcake2288]

Breaking news: no

[@unintentionallydramatic]

That's more an Exa Cognition/Isaac Arthur topic.

[@babycat5001]

Taxes are unnecessary, people have lived before them.

[@jaiparwani4279]

@@theparker3759 also watch dragon tyrant

[@mugithti]

In my country street lighting is funded by private sector, street lamps have mini billboards which advertisers pay for

[@minipiman]

"Societies can grow from effective taxation and crumble without it..." *Shows images of Barcelona*

[@danielredfearn2875]

We don't need taxes but we do need Texas!

[@EconomicsExplained]

The correct answer.

[@schrodingersman9405]

@@EconomicsExplained Hey! That's a contradiction EE!! U approved two contradictions commented by this Daniel Redfearn to be coreect.

[@themongolsarecoming_9437]

@@schrodingersman9405 illuminati confirmed?

[@jaiparwani4279]

Texas won't be an American problem too long

[@jaaksavat7916]

That's an idiocy

[@bitbucketcynic]

The problem is that governments today are borrowing at an exponential pace with no intent to ever pay it back, and no intent to even slow down. What cannot continue indefinitely will not continue for long.

[@Vitorruy1]

Great topic for a video