Economics In One Lesson - The Basic Lesson

[@randy109]

I got my Econ Degree in '77. I wasn't introduced to Hazlitt and Von Mises (Bastiat, et al) until much later. In the 70's it was all "Keynesian". The Austrian School, however harsh, opened my eyes as to the true nature of Capitalism. Many people are quite fearful of Von Mises' simple truths and it's easy to see why...

[@connor9423]

Thanks for sharing this. I'm set to get mine this April (2019)... Not much has changed. Almost all the macro economics classes focus their teaching on a Keynesian approach. I never heard of Hayek, Mises, and hardly even Freidman until I got a job, and a colleague at work recommended Milton's work "free to choose". In my final macro course there was a mention that Keynesian economics is now being rejected, and a more "bottom-up" approach is being used in macroeconomic academia... But from the courses I've had this year it seems keynsian school of through still dominates. A friend of mine took a political science course "theories of democracy", the course text featured essays from both hayak and Friedman on the ideas of "protective democracy", but they didn't cover that material...

[@soapbxprod]

BRAVO! Samuelson was a Communist.

[@vergeREVO]

This true, basic, wise approach makes perfect sense. Bastiat was the foundational work for me 25 years ago. This economic concept of liberty to innovate, but with ethics and wisdom... is so necessary to correct the destructive trajectory our nation has been on.

[@Sagemaster00]

Someone send this to Bernie Sanders

[@CoomerGremlinDGGfan]

+Elephant #feelthebern

[@Sagemaster00]

+scabies Pretty sure thats the scabies on your ass my friend

[@TheKiwiColonel]

+Elephant There's nothing wrong with Bernie. He's simply proposing to move the spending from military and other things to college? So it isn't really him being stupid. Simply diverting the opportunity cost.

[@usaalways]

+KiwiGaming Ahhhh but you missed the basic point of this. Go watch it again. That "basics" mentioned here are during peacetime. While it may seem so, but China and Russia are advancing, while here We have many, many ways to get college tuition other then federal gov't. So yes there is EVERYTHING wrong with Bernie as He isn't telling you the global threats that are real...

[@cadethumann8605]

+usaalways Did you really need to add that "aahh"? It just made you seem condescending. You could have gotten your point across without it.

[@vincenzoaureo6060]

This music and his voice almost made me fall asleep

[@TheKiwiColonel]

+VinentPlayz lol

[@jePelletier]

So simplist vision of a much complicated world

[@soapbxprod]

Send your kids to Hillsdale College! Austrian Econ is TRUE Econ!

[@toddlavigne6441]

excellent video and explanation

[@waysoflife88]

I have several comments: 1. I love the music, Avril 14th? 2. Ron Paul influenced me to learn about austrian economics. 3. I am half way through this book ( you might say..why only half way?) well im also reading ron paul's "Liberty Defined" at the same time. 4. Between Economics in one lesson, The Revolution (ron paul), and Liberty Defined (Ron Paul), I am more educated now than all my years in school. ~Thank you Ludwig Von Mises and all Austrian Economists!

[@ouimetco]

Great information and actually I was suffering from one fallacy... the broken window example corrected my thinking. However I feel like I was at a funeral the whole time jajajaja

[@RaymondReise]

this is some deep shit...

[@adilmohammed6146]

Raymundo Garza LOOOL

[@sarah_jessica]

Thank you soo much for this! I can now understand economics.

[@Spamlure]

I erred in my last post. Diskpanic (not Mr. Teflonish) pointed out correctly the loss of the window is a loss to the whole society. Well said, Mr. Diskpanic.

[@nupian06]

great work, thank you very much.

[@peterjaketalkswrasslin6920]

That last part of this is pure gold.

[@bond3161]

In general I agree. I'm not sure if it addresses how, if at any, war MAY stimulate the economy - e.g. increased pressure to do well, for the family, for the country, to put into research, etc.

[@LucisFerre1]

Excellent video. Sound logic.

[@TheManiacalSatanist6]

Ayn Rand was not a propopent of Lassiez-Faire Capitalism. As Murray Rothbard said about Ayn Rand; "she is too committed emotionally to worship of the Big Businessman-as-Hero to concede that it is precisely Big Business that is largely responsible for the twentieth-century march into aggressive statism."

[@Spamlure]

I think we agree(see my other remarks) Here's another example of similar logic. If nations want wealth, they must export, not import. For ALL nations to be wealthy, ALL exporting ships should be sunk at sea. I think I've mentioned in other comments on this same video that I agree with society losing capital, in the form of the window. In the quote you refer to, I am only pointing out that the "symbol" remains, redirected to a new window, or hiring a guard for the hole where the window was.

[@Spamlure]

Unfortunately, (as you use the phrase "by your argument") I am correct. There was a great economic boom following WW2. (Lots of glass windows to replace, perhaps...) But I agree with your point. Society (or at least, the baker) is out a window. So what happens to the window maker, when everybody has a window? Does the simple economy you've described grind to a halt?

[@Spamlure]

Right. The problem is the simple examples burgeon out of control, as more variables are placed into the scenario. I feel uncomfortable with the argument about natural movements of the market. The market is anything BUT natural. (mmm....I really haven't given much thought to that last line...)

[@InstTaxSolutionsLLC]

The taxpayer story is interesting as there is some benefit to those industries involved in the war machine, yet the number of those industries is small as compared to those peacetime efforts. This would indicate that peacetime efforts could be a greater economic benefit.

[@super0roman1]

Thank you for this video. I would like to learn more about economics and government systems/policies. If anyone has any good sources, please share them with me!

Take a look at CrashCourse, it's pretty awesome

[@djamalInfo]

Naked Economics is a good book to start with

[@dheerajmaske1194]

Taxpayers (Baker) don't know what is good for them. So politicians/Rich people have to choose for them. Give this a thought.

[@IknowIamafool]

Thanks for the explanation Sir.

[@niupaidanui]

The cartoon politician has orange hair and hands waving!

[@Spamlure]

Jacksoncapper, your scenario of working less and maintaining (or even increasing) a standard of living is the way it should work. It won't happen under the current system. The disparity between classes will continue to grow, until you wind up with a few ultra rich, and the rest of us poor. The last thing corporations want is competition. Do you think Walmart likes competition? After they've shut down Mom and Pop businesses across America? Perhaps the goal is to destroy your competitor.

[@TheManiacalSatanist6]

@Cornampoo It's not Keynesian at all. Keynesians think that lack of demand is what creates economic busts, and that by stimulating aggregate demand, they can cure the bust. A supporter of Laissez-Faire will say that people's values must be left to the subjective individual to decide, and must not be distorted to what it wouldn't have been without government intervention, i.e., manipulating interest rates, bailouts, etc.

[@humanvegetable]

Great Book.

[@beemo9]

I'm confused, it says at 5:27 that the net effect on the economy is zero, but 2 sentences later he says "the overall wealth of the economy is $200 less". Which one is it?

[@Teflonish]

In this simple case, yes, the window maker loses. This is a consequence of scarcity, the first law of Economics. The purpose of applied economic theory is to maximize loss, given the resource constraint, or to put it another way, to maximize utility. In real life, this is called, "everybody can't have everything they want". That is done by, amongst other things, not committing the broken window fallacy.

[@cheefybeefy]

the song is Sleep Away by Bob Acri

[@DaemonKrusher]

Thankyou was enlightening

[@Spamlure]

The goal of every business is to maximize its' profits and transfer that wealth into the pockets of the owners. If you get rid of all those pesky labor laws (overtime pay, minimum wage, etc) businesses have no reason whatsoever to share their profits with the workers. The same goes for better working conditions. Why would a business owner spend money on worker comfort? "If you don't like it here, move on, pal! I can get people to replace you for less!" And that's why your wages go down.

[@Teflonish]

Perhaps, spam, it'd be more useful to track some abstract value, independent of the glassmaker and the baker. Call it Utility, and index it to 0. The window is broke, and repaired by the baker. He is no better off post-repair, but the windowmaker is made better off by the bakers purchase. The Utility Index for the economy is now at 10. Alternatively, the window is never lost. The baker buys a new pair of shoes. He now has a good window, and new shoes. He is better off, and the UI climbs to 20.

[@Waywardpaladin]

@waysoflife88 So, what do you think about praxeology and the rejection of empiricism?

[@somya0009]

start from 2:48

[@user3086]

No, 4:20 Not a pot joke

[@nupian06]

LIFE is simple, knowing wrongs from rights that all it takes lol

[@bobkatwu3682]

People knew that the earth was spherical before Columbus trip to the Americas.

[@TheManiacalSatanist6]

@Cornampoo Yes they are. If you are a supporter of Laissez-Faire, you don't worship big-businessmen anyway. You respect them and acknowledge their contributions, but you don't worship them. If a supporter, a LEGITIMATE supporter, of Laissez-Faire worships anyone, it's the consumer since the consumer controls the means of production through their buying and abstention from buying.

[@1cont]

Rand Paul 2016.... because he understands the broken window fallacy and wants to keep more money in the productive, efficient, private sector.

[@1cont]

@waysoflife88 Your studying is the revolution will never end. These ideas are powerful. You will become a powerful person after reading those three. Hayek's road to serfdom got me started Ron Paul 2012. Balanced budgets, Free Markets, Peace, and sound constitutional money

[@MrFernandotti]

While the music and tone of voice could have been better, the content was good. Thank you

[@childsrachael]

I want to know as well!

[@tenzindakpa7500]

why use bob acri music with this, made me feel so sleepy lol

[@fukimimatt]

+Tenzin Dakpa yeah I feel like a punk rock song or some dubstep would really get people into the topic XD

[@sailoriro8854]

me too

[@Spamlure]

Ya, da8ish, a nice place to be, indeed. As long as we perceive we are advancing our prosperity, that is.

[@joelyntison5287]

haha! the ending is unexpectedly the best!

[@koalabear4884]

The "dismal science" is a phrase coined by Thomas Carlyle

[@luciencharette8599]

Mr. Harper; as the leader of our Country, what will it take for you, and our other party leaders in Canada, to believe, and implement laws, to protect these simple truths? We need Government; not figure heads." No punn intended "

[@JovianAtrocity]

@waysoflife88 The song is not Aphex Twin's "Avril 14th." Anyway, great little video.

[@angelosenlob4328]

bravo

[@YEETSWORLDWIDE]

Weird. I came out of North Korea and that definitely isn't how we tend to operate.

[@Spamlure]

I concede. Dead is dead, and the deceased are neither better or worse off. But the survivors of the deceased(you didn't think I'd give up completely?) Again, the winner is certainly better off. Not only is he alive to enjoy the fruits of his winnings, but he has cowered all the relatives of his victims from trying to usurp him. Kinda like Stalin, eh?...:)

[@sexigirlphi]

It's very Mr. Roger's-ish... :-)

[@eKoush]

best background music :) great explanation, thanks

[@dr.postgraduatechannel6515]

top video ever !!

[@Teflonish]

Simple enough for your mind to follow, I hope?

[@Spamlure]

For this example, I am in full agreement with your comment.

[@chuckevans7917]

This is the conclusion that shortsighted people often reach. Just because Economics does not support these actions that are in the "don't do" column of your agenda, doesn't mean that other purposes besides trade are not served by them. A government is not a business, not a family and not balance sheet. It is a entity designed to provide a balance between freedom and responsibility, free enterprise and provision, and to do for all what one person cannot do alone. If you believe this position as you suggest, give back your social security check when you become eligible. Then wait to see who says "thank you". None of the conservative opponents of social engineering will say it. They will quietly think you are simpleminded.

[@schiessl69]

What if the glazier buys a new suit with his $200?

[@Sazabiiiiii]

Does anyone know the background music? It would be greatly appreciated!

[@pacoimadumbass]

so the economics ways is base on more money for services and business so they can tribune that money for tax and then that money go for roads,schools and the american people

[@someones5551]

.... punish the vandal i don't know why I found that pause funny lol

[@jenice105]

i didnt want a history lesson jus some basics and i didnt even get that damn

[@M0j0S0D0pe420]

My cat is an economist.

[@nustada]

+M0j0S0D0pe420 What is your cat's name, I am convinced it knows more than Bernie or Trump. I will write him in on the ballet.

[@dontamputate]

THE LESSON!

[@Spamlure]

OK, the baker can't buy a new suit. But the glassmaker can. He just made money off the baker. Reward the vandal? The flaw I see in these simplistic examples are what really happens to the money. The speaker decrys "what could have been done with the money". The money was merely diverted, not destroyed.

[@florisplaysgames]

My father is a economist.

[@ArmandoBellagio]

What about morals? I mean forget about good or bad for economy, breaking something is still vandalism

[@Cornampoo]

@muridsilat LOL genius comeback.

wow, that almost unbiased and not oversimplified in any way...

[@Spamlure]

Right...look around us at our unemployment dilemma today. Has it occurred to you that "losers" (the unemployed) are excess labor, and that they have absolutely no value to our economy? Far better they should walk off and starve, lest we waste precious tax dollars on their continued sustenance. If this modest proposal doesn't appeal to you, have you got a better solution to the problem of the unemployed window maker? You'd have the Nobel prize in economics if you could solve this one.

[@muridsilat]

@DugbaLaser - That's right! It wouldn't make sense to break your windows if your house in in perfect condition, but let's say your roof starts leaking. It would obviously be in your best interest to break your windows at that point. Heck, I'd burn down my house! Imagine all the overtime I'd have to put in just to replace everything I lost. It would be great fun! It's a good thing there are folks like us around to set these crazy Austrians straight.

[@Spamlure]

So the baker has new shoes and a window, and the shoemaker has the baker's money. The shoemaker buys bread from the baker, thereby allowing the baker to recoup his money. The shoe-less window maker quietly starves, having no use to this simple, limited economy. Utility index for the baker and shoe maker: 20. Utility index for the window maker: 0.

[@diskpanic]

But society is down one window. In the long-term, the money is a wash, but the window is still gone. Without destroying the window, society would not have to spend time and resources replacing the window. War would be a broad creator of wealth. By your argument, the devastation caused by World War II should have created an economic boom, however it was decades before Europe fully recovered from both World Wars. Without vandalism (war) Europe would have had historic buildings and prosperity.

[@siriusalpha7908]

why economic persons always smile like a fake happines? things are very strange

[@stephenarling1667]

You might smile too if you could make a good living regurgitating flimflam.

[@TheManiacalSatanist6]

@Waywardpaladin That's the same question I'm posing to a lot of so called Austrians. I've found that half of the people professing to understand Austrian economics don't know shit.

[@ARE4LNOOB]

Ron Paul

[@phantomfury7652]

BRUH I SLEPT WTF IS THIS?

[@Cornampoo]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 the consumer, really? Sounds very Keynesian to me. Anyway, I don't think it's up to us to draw the line between respect and worship.

[@Cornampoo]

@TheManiacalSatanist6 the support of laissez-faire capitalism and the worship of big businessmen are not mutually exclusive.

[@Spamlure]

Yes, they can start working at lower wages. There are no guarantees that businesses hire people when their taxes get lowered. They don't have to hire them back at a higher wage. Put that 10-20k you talked about into the pockets of poor, and they'll spend every last dime as quickly as they can. The result is the money goes directly into their local economy in most cases (food, clothing, rent). Give the rich man a tax break, and watch him give a job to some poor third world dude. (not us)

[@Shivdotb]

I’m really feeling to sleep 😢

[@Spamlure]

Well, it is called the dismal science....:)

[@MANGOS487]

called dismal science by whom?

[@siriusalpha7908]

money is weapon of reptillian humanoids Soul is everything

[@odalrich1109]

To RFPD2010. Man, you ought to dedicate yourself to Agitprop politics; that video is a political programme, nothing to do with economics. Ayn Rand's "philosophy" is just a "moral" guide for sociopaths. What is not seen in your video is that I waisted my precious time and there has not been any intellectual gain and, in the long run, no economic profit.

[@Altcapball]

Considering that much of Rands extrapolations are dirivative of Aristotles philosophy it is interesting to note that none of the people making this argument ever have the balls to directly attack the source with the same tactics. For some reason when he holds the same position he is expousing uncontraversial wisdom, but if Rand paraphrases it, its sociopathy. The common denominator though that I find betwen those that make these arguments often through the patterns by which they speak of the topic leak their inability to cognizantly understand the philosophy of either one of them. Beyond that, could you point out what part of this argument has anything to do with Rand?

[@siriusalpha7908]

person on the pictures member of reptillian brotherhood

[@smh9902]

So in other words the world has a finite amount of resources and money. No shit.

[@peterjs87]

but - but - this is a false analysis! No matter if the baker has his window broken or buys the suit instead, the amount of money available to the 'economy' is still his $200 and the net loss or gain for the 'economy' is $0 for either outcome! The only difference is that the vandal forces who receives the $200 :/

[@max_headroom_1987]

So boring. I feel like I'm back at school

[@SameBasicRiff]

holy fuck this is boring man, jump around and have some energy!! this is important information!!

[@paulgrewe]

Interesting: but it's not a lesson in Economics. It's a lesson in one, now discredited, school of thought. This video is comparable to a history of "Young-Earth" philosophy. The history is OK, but the economics is all wrong.

[@Altcapball]

Saying that something is discredited is not what makes something valid or invalid, nor is comparing something to a discredited concept comprise of an actual argument.

[@rolandwarren3834]

Saaaah boring, what is going on for the first 3 minutes? get int o the stuff!

[@mariusk1243]

boring....

[@lithelily]

This is not an economics lesson, it is a political agenda. Thanks for nothing.

[@oogs]

+lily economics is in direct correlation with everything, especially politics

[@clay07770]

@GravitySmashify It's a summary of basic economic theory by primarily Hazlett. You sound absolutely ridiculous. I think my former micro and macro economics professors would agree... Keynesian/contemporary economic theory is NOT the whole of the subject. You have a very narrow view of the subject it seems to me.

[@clay07770]

@GravitySmashify My philosophy professors for example, would NOT explain it every day when they argue from a position that they did not create and don't necessarily agree with. They would only explain that to the stupid students who somehow think that the teacher has adopted the view. The agenda of the video is to spread a summarized version of Hazlitt's work based on his own interpretation... What is the fuckin' issue with that?? Plus between you people, ya cant figure out whether its the maker of the video you want to critique or Hazlett himself.

[@clay07770]

@GravitySmashify No man.... Just no.... If people are smart enough to understand economics of any school, they are smart enough to discover that this is about Henry Hazlitt's BOOK by that title and this is " - A basic lesson" concerning HH's book (or whatever it said in the title)...

[@waneagony]

@GravitySmashify Hazlett's book is titled "Economics in one lesson". Know what you're criticizing, my fellow 'Smasher'.

[@silablago7781]

Boring, nothing personal, dude