Is a capitalist-socialist economy inevitable? | Big Think

Is a capitalist-sociality economy inevitable?
Watch the newest video from Big Think: bigth.ink/NewVideo
Learn skills from the world's top minds at Big Think Edge: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What will the economy of the future look like? To answer that we must first consider the current trajectory and the ways in which modern capitalism operates, who it benefits, and if it is sustainable.
In this video, historians, economists, and authors discuss income and wealth inequality, how the American economy grew into the machine that it is today, the pillars of capitalism and how the concept has changed over time, and ways in which the status quo can, and maybe even should, change.
"It's not that hierarchy is bad," says John Fullerton, founder of Capital Institute, "it's that hierarchy where the top extracts from below is definitely bad and unsustainable." He says that the modern capitalist system works this way, and that it perpetuates the cycle of growing inequality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
ANAND GIRIDHARADAS: Wealthy corporations and people love to ask the question: What can I do? What should we do? What can we start? What program could we launch? I would say to the billionaire change agents and corporate social responsibility departments of our country: Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what you've already done to your country.
TIMOTHY SNYDER: The United States is a country which is among the least equal in the world. According to Credit Suisse, which is a Swiss bank and not some kind of crazy left-wing organization, we are second in the world in wealth inequality after the Russian Federation. In the United States since the 1980s, basically 90 percent of the American population has seen no improvement in either wealth or income. Almost all of the improvement in wealth and income has been in the top ten percent and most of that's been in the top one percent and most of that has been in the top 0.1 percent and most of that has been in the top 0.01 percent, which means that not only are people not moving forward objectively, but the way they experience the world-and this is very powerful-is that other people are on top.
JOHN FULLERTON: Living systems have what are called healthy hierarchies-so it's not that hierarchy is bad. It's that hierarchy where the top extracts from below is definitely bad and unsustainable. So, take the lion in the forest or in the jungle. The lion is at the top of the food chain, but the lion sits around sleeping most of the day rather than eating and killing all day. And the lion, therefore, serves a very healthy hierarchical purpose in the food chain keeping the herd, keeping the balance between smaller animals and larger animals. But when the king of the jungle decides to extract as much as possible for its own benefit, you have a very unhealthy system. And unfortunately, that pretty well describes how the modern capitalist system works, where there are benefits of scale; the bigger get bigger, they get more powerful, they get more political influence. But their intention is to maximize shareholder value because that's what we do. So, the cycle of growing inequality is sort of locked into the system design.
GIRIDHARADAS: Before you want to start something of your own-a little private, unaccountable venture-do an audit. What do you pay people? Do you pay people enough? Do you use subcontractors to avoid responsibility for those workers? Do you pay benefits? When do your benefits kick in? What do you lobby for in Washington? Do you lobby for things that make everybody have a better life in America, or do you lobby against social policies that would cost you something? What's your tax avoidance situation? Do you happen to be this earnest company that wants to change the world? I mean, is this company paying its full measure of taxes? Does it use tax havens? Does it do the double Dutch with an Irish sandwich tax maneuver? Does it send money to the Cayman Islands and then back and do all this complex routing?
ALISSA QUART: Now to be middle class, you might not be able to have a summer holiday. You might not be able to own your home. You certainly wouldn't have two cars. What interests me is also we had this idea of the middle class as a solid thing and now it's a shaky thing. We also had this idea in the middle of the twentieth century of it as a humdrum, boring thing that we wanted to escape, kind of like Revolutionary Road, Richard Yates. And now it's like everyone just wants to get into it, into the dream, the American Dream of the middle class that's now so unstable. One of the things that happened was unions weakened. It used to be that 30 percent of employees were in unions in the '60s and now it's...
Read the full transcript at bigthink.com/videos/is-a-capi...

[@bigthink]

Do you think that a capitalist-socialist economy inevitable?

[@xCorvus7x]

Inevitable? No. History does not happen along clear lines. Nothing is predestined or inevitable, we could just as well see Fascism rise to power again (edit: in some places we already do). But it is plausible that today enough people will understand the problem of Capitalism and organise to change the system. Edit: Apparently I have misinterpreted the question as regarding the replacement of the current Capitalist order by a Socialist one. This is the context of my response.

[@mignas]

Most modern democracies are social-capitalist economies. Europe has been living like this for decades. Its inefficient for capitalism to ignore poor people. Social support system helps people from poor families to get better education, get free food at schools so theres initiative to let children attend it, reduced taxes to allow them to buy more with what they earn, reduced costs for after school activities, reduced rent cost for housing owned by the country, monthly baisc food supplies etc. The less poor people, the more rich people, the more buyers of goods or services, the more people in job market so wages can be lower or, in case of low pop countries in eastern europe, less employee deficit (think IT).

[@ajykumar2]

Now we have is capitalist- socialist economy. Centralized bank, Socilized regulations are the problem.

[@EGH181]

Absolutely

[@chuckkottke]

Yes. Societal equity is more important than hierarchical individualism, the path to reform starts with regaining representative government through amendments to abolish corporate personhood and to set limits on campaign cash and limits on overall donations. Ultimately we the people should have the right to amend our constitution directly, with a reasonable bar of let's say 2/3 majority approval by the voters to pass an amendment, to ensure generally sound amendments become law. Ending the corrupting effect big money has on campaigns will enable better representation to further empower worker ownership of businesses, ensure government roles are not eroded but buttressed with strong protections and support, so schools, roads, public research, health and the courts are fully funded and thus fully beneficial to we the people. Just by comparison, take any Scandinavian country, compare it to the US, and ask what the US can do better and how, applying principles from examples of success around the world. If more socialism works well there, then we too should do that.

[@Adrian-wh3mk]

I find it telling that public discourse used to refer to the population as “citizens”, but at some point the language changed to “consumers”, it was such a subtle change that few noticed. But language matters, particularly language that’s repeated again and again over time.

[@Sol-Invictus]

Right. I was a kid but found, still find it insulting. It is like the classical age citizen, medieval age serf/peasant. Capitalist more and more are neo-nobility, and don't shy away from it.

[@horizonstraining4006]

I noticed it particularly when I was at university and the new cards said "client number" rather than "student number"

[@Ryanowning]

The funniest thing about what you said is that socialism turns everyone into a super-consumer. Through welfare the poor's demand for commodities skyrockets while devouring all potential investment into supply growth. That's why the American dream is dead. I'm not saying capitalism is the answer though; capitalism is incapable of making things cheap enough for the poor to afford. After all, it relies on outdated conceptions of economics just like socialism does. What we're wrong about isn't whether we should be creating over-demand in the demand-class; instead, we should be creating a currency which carries inherent reward for generating limited over-supply. Our currency should only hold value when over-supply exists, but is not too large. Or, in other words, we should ditch previous conceptions of currency in favor of a Credit based economy. The value of a deal should always be what the future holds; never what the immediate deal would grant. After all, selling an item to the destitute which inherently boosts their economic productivity, such as food, shelter, transport, and education, should inherently grow the wealth of the entity who "sold" it to such an individual. How would the individual be able to "pay" for it? Simple, because they have nothing their Credit is 1: all investments, therefor, would gain substantially from their Credit rising a hundred fold: perspective growth, or growth potential/Credit, is all they can trade. Therefor, at a Credit of 1 when you have nothing your value should be the highest it can ever be... Provided the trades you engage with could actually increase your Credit. How many shares investors own of the destitute determines which investors, aka sellers, gains from the destitute growth, but this must never come as total demand destruction of growth of the destitute: it must always be new wealth creation. If we create an economic system whereby the incentive of the rich is to provide everything to the poor we will solve our problems. How do we achieve that? Simple: fiat. We have the right idea, but not the right implementation: dual-fiat created by trade is the only way to achieve this. Only investments into the poor should be able to create fiat currency; only by their success in rising out of poverty should the currency's generation be finally realized. Prospective investment should be made without risk, but success should be met with tremendous benefit... In the end, doesn't this simply make sense? All that needs to happen is to put the idea into mathematical terms. To create the financial system to actually realize this. To do that what we need is popular support for a Credit-Based Economy. Why would this work and why is it important? The whole structure is about hyper-financing into over-supply and seeing over-supply not as waste, but as the desirable outcome. It comes prior to market; so we fund over-supply before demand occurs and creates a supply push onto demand. We have limited knowledge of what happens in that scenario, granted, but the economics of it indicates that prolonged systems should result in explosive GDP growth. We may have to create something for when the economic ceiling is hit; when everyone becomes part of the "rich-class." Traditional knowledge states that that probably won't occur because economics is relative anyway. Here's hoping, but regardless, we need economists desperately to look at this.

[@TheChunkyluver53]

In an economical sense we're the consumers. Also it's like all citizens are consumers but not all consumers are citizens

[@Humanaut.]

It depends on context. "Consumers" is the correct word for a certain set of contexts.

[@Riggsnic_co]

Nobody can become financially successful overnight. They put in background work but we tend to see the finished part. Fear is a dangerous component, hindering us from taking bold steps we need in other to reach our goals. you have to contend with inflation, recession, decisions from the Feds and all. I was able to increase my portfolio by $289k in months. You have to seek for help in the right places.

[@kenanporubsky2122]

I think it's not always about fear, Sometimes realistic factors discourage people from reaching their goals in life. For instance, I've tried investing in the stock market several times but always got discouraged by fluctuations of stock value

[@martingiavarini]

This is the problem! Most times people with little or no knowledge of the stock market try investing by themselves. It once happened to me, then I learned my lesson and contacted a US-based finance consultant by name Catherine Morrison Evans and everything changed. In in the first quarter of this year i made $370k and counting.

[@bob.weaver72]

@@martingiavarini Hello there, please how do i find the lady you just mentioned?

[@hermanramos7092]

@@martingiavarini I looked Catherine up out of curiosity and she seem pretty proficient, thanks for sharing

[@shantcheetah]

Bro no one cares stop spamming omg

[@maybepriyansh9193]

Students who acquire large debts putting themselves through school are unlikely to think about changing society. When you trap people in a system of debt . they can’t afford the time to think. Tuition fee increases are a “disciplinary technique,” and, by the time students graduate, they are not only loaded with debt, but have also internalized the “disciplinarian culture.” This makes them efficient components of the consumer economy-Noam Chomsky

[@midwestron8576]

And yet, you can't find anyone to install a new sink faucet. No one wants to get their hands dirty anymore.

[@popopop984]

@@midwestron8576 It’s not like you can be a rich plumber so who would do that, you would be criticized for being too stupid for university and ended up as a plumber who made bad life decisions.

[@midwestron8576]

@@popopop984 To start, the vast majority of people are not rich. Going to university certainly does not guarantee that you will be rich either. Lots of really good teachers out there that will never be rich. I don't look down on people in skilled trades. Nearly all of them provide a service that everyone considers valuable and are willing to pay well for. Plumbers included.

[@kimobrien.]

@Scott Covert The road to socialism is paved by the class struggle. Capitalism creates both the class that will replace them and the class struggle necessary. Ultimate victory is not inevitable but made possible from the lessons of the history of the class struggle itself. Creation of a Marxist cadre party of worker Bolsheviks stepped in the historical lessons of the class struggle is the most powerful weapon that can be used in the struggle.

[@lewis123417]

Universities are designed to radicalised students

[@glowwurm9365]

“We have a joyless economy” spot on, we’ve created a society on which few are genuinely happy, we’ve become nothing but consumers.

[@smokeyspeaks42069]

Exactly why I aim to make a new kind of governmental system where every house votes among them selfs then the most responsible person go's to court to represent them then that Courts vote gets represented and by the third time we have a uniform vote there's no politicians there's only the people fully represented and understood

[@hymanocohann2698]

Nothing describes the death of joy quite as well as Disney...

[@letsgowinnietheflu5439]

@@hymanocohann2698 diversity, equity

[@Showmetheevidence-]

To some degree maybe. But if you get off your ass and make an effort there is so much available to us all. Look how easy travel is compared to 40/50 years ago for e.g. It’s all how you approach and us it I believe. It isn’t perfect, but it’s much better than communism, fascism etc.

[@auntyjasmine2566]

Hmmm, I suppose it depends how you define happiness, however I’m not sure wealth equates to happiness

[@sagesingh]

6:20 politicians create an enemy for you with language to blame instead of a POLICY to create the necessary change

[@qjtvaddict]

So they create hatred for China instead of doing real change

[@JuanIII]

They redirect frustrations and attention. If you hate gay people, they'll point there. If you hate people who hate gay people, they'll point there. They'll point anywhere that isn't where the "magic" is happening.

[@wile123456]

Yep, what he is describing is populist fascism.

[@ansoc1173]

@@wile123456 We have no shortage of fascism in the good ole USA

[@heinkmeister8415]

they create trans bathroom scares instead of addressing actual sexual assault cases

[@claudermiller]

I'm a month away from 65. I remember Reagan firing the air traffic controllers and I remember arguing with friends who supported him that he was turning worker against worker and that we needed to stand together. I've watched the collapse of the middle class. I'm sitting here wondering how different my life would have been if it hadn't happened. Not financially, I've never really been someone who desired wealth, I mean emotionally. How would I be different today if I hadn't seen so many people hurt by this economy? I can deal with having less things it's the loss of happiness that really bothers me.

[@johnslugger]

The rich are not Sympathetic at all! They are simply AFRAID of the Angry Hoards coming for their heads. That is why the richest men all want to go into SPACE TO GET AWAY from the violence and the guns coming for them! As soon as the poor blacks and whites stop being divided by the media and the schools and the think-tanks that run them. When the poor of all races and creeds gets together then the shit will hit the fan for the rich! The violence the richest created by hoarding 95% of the cash liquidity supply.

[@lewis123417]

@@johnslugger hating people just because their wealthy is the politics of envy and anger. The same narrative was used to murder millions of peasents in Ukraine

[@Simon-d]

@@lewis123417 "millions of peasents in Ukraine" were killed in your head. get well soon.

[@matthylkema2717]

@@johnslugger so we can all be poor together right.....envying the rich is why everyone thinks there poor. Look around you man americans have it made.

[@lewis123417]

@@Simon-d lol your ignorance isn't a political debate

[@jedics1]

'The joyless economy' is so poetic, one phrase to encompass why Iv'e avoided full time jobs my whole life while I watch people give their whole life away to be old men who didn't enjoy the majority of their waking life.

[@assassisteve]

May I ask you what part time jobs did you have that still managed to pay the bills and get enough food to put on the table?

[@rodc5092]

You have heard it before, Trick is to do something you enjoy that challenges you constantly.

[@davidrojas4687]

@@assassisteve off-grid living?

[@chrisboshers]

@@davidrojas4687 hes has a cell phone. With internet access. How do you do that without money?

[@whitewhale9012]

@@chrisboshers Priviledged yuppie parents

[@jasonwaltman3566]

It always amazes me that when you look to the products of humanity (the arts, music, film, literature, etc.) there is a a recurring message of "the little guy" fighting for justice and freedom from the big bad oppressive force. People love that stuff. Yet, when they turn around and argue politics and economics they forget about it all and fall in line with what they've been told. They will go along with an idea that they see with their own eyes "DOES NOT WORK" and feel ashamed if they even think to question, let alone reject, what they know to be lie. It's quite an excellent brainwashing.

[@JohnDoe-do8fh]

Orwell laughing from somewhere up high

[@jerodriguez74]

It’s not only the brainwash, what I’ve come to realize and understand is that many of those “little guys” dream with making it big. They dream the “big lie” that says that if you work hard and play by the rules you can make it. That’s why dirt poor people would defend people like Bezos and Musk, bc they want to believe, despite all the evidence on the contrary, that they made it working hard and playing by the rules, therefore if they are to do the same they can make it big too and become wealthy too. The poor souls don’t want to understand that the system is rig and that most of those who’ve made it extremely big have indeed bent the rules and cheat their way up there by exploiting others using a system setup for exploitation.

[@Ryanowning]

@@JohnDoe-do8fh Orwell's INGSOC was specifically stated to be evolved from socialism in his book.

[@JohnDoe-do8fh]

​@@Ryanowning Well Orwell was a socialist.

[@Ryanowning]

​@@JohnDoe-do8fh Orwell wasn't either a socialist nor capitalist. Here, I'll show you what I mean by quoting him: “Collectivism is not inherently democratic,” Orwell wrote, “but, on the contrary, gives to a tyrannical minority such powers as the Spanish Inquisitors never dreamed of.”

[@ericklein3960]

harm in the billions and good in the millions, i absolutely love that quote, i will have to use this

[@fin31337]

This quote is nonsense, the reality is opposite Socialism harm billions And many countries have already proved it.

[@MajorWubba]

Sj J that’s not what your mom said last night

[@fin31337]

Flying Boombox But can't you write anything reasonable? I had no doubt

[@MajorWubba]

Sj J sorry bro railing out your mom like this is taking all my attention. What were we talking about?

[@fin31337]

Flying Boombox nothing new and adequate try again

[@daggerthree]

The title of this video really should be: "Income inequality is happening and its terrible"

[@Matt-ww9wv]

Income inequality has nothing to do with why socialism is inevitable, however. Socialism is inevitable due to innovation and the consequences that has over the hierarchical relationships people have with one another. Such decline in reason can be seen in the lack of preparation for a pandemic along with climate change along with a genuine concern about the disintegration of democracy throughout the world, with particular emphasis on the nations that led the most in neoliberalist policy.

[@jessemiller6318]

Income inequality is a direct result from development, and even happens in socialist countries unfortunately.

[@andyfriederichsen]

Move manufacturing back to America and out of China. Socialism isn't the solution.

[@skydragon23101979]

@@jessemiller6318 Agree income equality is a direct result of development. But when income equality causes people to lose their homes reduces disposable income you need socialism to balance it out. Or else if it continues you either get society that breaks down or u run out of customers.

[@jessemiller6318]

@@skydragon23101979 I don't disagree with that. I just think socialism is knowing when to do all of that, while taking things into consideration, to keep a society stable.

[@erinm1218]

A lot of people I know who drive for Uber or any number of "low-skill" jobs... they are highly intelligent and skilled people who don't have a niche in this economy. The vast majority of humans never get to realize their potential because of the way the economy expects people to have limited roles, be scripted, show absolute conformity to the boss, and relegate their talents to outside of office hours when people have spent most of their energy at work and have to give whatever they have left to raising the kids.

[@gerhardvanderpoll7378]

Well said ..🙂

[@WhistleAndSnap]

OMG it's... it's me. You described... me. I... feel... seen. Thank you.

[@rsimpson69]

The economy doesn't expect anything. The term is a useful fiction, a convenience. The people who comprise that term might expect things. Some expect corporate uniformity always and everywhere, and some value local variation and individuality more highly. Decide what you value, and which values in others you'd prefer to serve.

[@MedRider]

We already have a capitalist-socialist system, it's called corporate welfare. Profits are privatized, losses are paid for by everyone else.

[@axnyslie]

and the US Military industrial complex is as socialist as they come.

[@bread9815]

How do you imagine a capitalist army

[@hurrdurrmurrgurr]

@@bread9815 An army which sell their services to the highest bidder. Common in the time of Rome but an idea disregarded for how many times private armies were turned on Rome.

[@bread9815]

@@hurrdurrmurrgurr worthless mercenaries

[@letsgoBrandon204]

@@bread9815 not worthless, just not under the control of the state.

[@YiannisANO1911]

We are so good at analyzing and talking but im tired of all this. I want change. Lets move on from discussion and start taking action. For the sake of the world

[@Sean-ul4ck]

Those of us who have accepted these facts should be taking action, but one of the most important actions is getting others to accept this until we reach a critical mass.

[@Alex-fu3mi]

Then join an org and get started. Pick any one that speaks to you, any org that you think has good politics and aspirational goals. We don’t build change as isolated individuals, we make it as groups.

[@FromFame]

look to musk for action

[@Bungaroosh]

That action has but one name, Revolution

[@YiannisANO1911]

@@Bungaroosh recently i've been thinking the same, i agree. The way we are going, and the way politicians and people of power behave and act, the only solution is a revolution

[@banksofbarcelona3893]

Its called the american dream cos you have to be asleep to believe it - the late great George Carlin!

[@alephii]

yes... that is called life... You have to work and serve the society to receive something in return... Or we can just STEAL the work of others through the State and feel that we are good and just persons!

[@banksofbarcelona3893]

@@alephii Yeah unfortunately working to serve society isn't possible in a corporatocracy cos no matter what we do, we cannot defeat the corporatocracy. We must be subservient to the corporatocracy. There needs to be a capital gains tax and that's where you hit 'em up and decrease their tyranny and then we can create solutions to pressing problems without the fear of being trampled upon by the corporatocracy

[@alephii]

​@@banksofbarcelona3893 Just gather some people and buy some shares, most are public companies... Why do you want to use force to take the money of someone through tax? You tell me what is called when someone subtract something from someone else by force... Or if you dont like the corporation just stop using the service... There are lot of options that don't involve the legallized VIOLENCE!

[@banksofbarcelona3893]

@@alephii it's not taking by force, corporations should pay tax for doing business not income tax but capital gains tax

[@alephii]

@@banksofbarcelona3893 Sorry, that makes no sense at all... Why someone should pay tax by doing business??? Everyone is doing business, buy and selling things or services or labor... Something can increase in value, or have more value to A than it have to B... Dude... Sorry, it is hard to argue with such nonsense!

[@sionemafi4499]

More people should know about this. All through school I was taught about how evil socialism and communism was. Anything can be bad when employed wrong. Capitalism can be bad when done wrong. Doesn't mean that it can't work. I believe a capitalistic-socialistic mix is what we're headed towards. There should be a bare minimum for a countrys citizens that we could all expect. It used to be that way. Now a full time job gets you 2 roommates in California. My apartment in SACRAMENTO requires you to make $6050 a month for a 2 bedroom 1 bath to ensure you could afford the rent before moving in. Thats a lot of money for most. And most starting jobs here won't pay you anywhere near that much starting off. $15 an hour minimum wage/40 hrs a week. $2400 a month GROSS. It's sad. So many are without and are struggling.

[@coyoteblue4027]

There is no such thing as a mix of capitalism qnd socialism.

[@Paraselene_Tao]

@@coyoteblue4027 You're living in it right now. lol. To name a few socialist policies & legal bodies that we currently live with off the top of my head: social security; medicare; housing subsidies; food stamps; agriculture subsidies; federal student grants & loans; labor laws like banning childhood labor, lower the work day to 8 hours, OSHA, and minimum wage. There's probably 50 other programs and policies that I could include. We live in a mixed economy of capitalism and socialism already. We just have to decide how we want to balance said mixed economy.

[@Paraselene_Tao]

@@coyoteblue4027 Here are a few more of the “socialist” programs in the USA: the Department of Agriculture, Amber Alerts, Amtrak, public beaches, public busing services, business subsidies, the Census Bureau, the CIA, the court system, dams, public defenders, disability insurance, the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, farm subsidies, the FBI, the FCC, the FDA, FEMA, fire departments, garbage collection, health care, public housing, the IRS, public landfills, public libraries, Medicaid, the MILITARY, state and national monuments, public museums, NASA, the National Weather Service, NPR, public parks, PBS, the Peace Corps, police departments, prisons and jails, public schools, Secret Service, sewer systems, snow removal systems, public street lighting, the Department of Transportation, USPS, vaccines, veteran health care, welfare, the White House, the WIC program and state zoos. Next time you think we're living in a pure, capitalist utopia, then you might do yourself a favor and remember these things I listed.

[@coyoteblue4027]

@@Paraselene_Tao Socialism is not when the government does stuff. Socialism is economic democracy. Social ownership of the means of production. It is the diametric opposite of capitalism, where the means of production are owned privately. Socialized programs like healthcare, grants and student loans are not socialism.

[@coyoteblue4027]

@@Paraselene_Tao and we live under no such thing as a capitalist utopia. We live in a capitalist hellscape, that is rapidly hurtling us towards extinction.

[@billygauthier9512]

I believe we need to make education free for all. An intelligent democratic society is a society that is able to make intelligent decisions.

[@cubsfanap04]

I think we can provide free education for everyone as soon as internet is readily available for every person. How each person spends their time exploring the internet will be the next factor in determining their quality of life.

[@RidinSpinners36]

we need to marketize education. government indoctrination facilities for children have no place in this world

[@RidinSpinners36]

@Simon Bolduc just look at Florida's anti grooming bill or as the authoritarian left calls it "don't say gay" bill

[@adrielhernandez4073]

Thats a reason I believe they keep education expensive: The elite can afford it and learn, poor people get trapped, and are angry because they are educated and know how they are being fucked when they get older and educated. If higher education was free, too many people may start demanding a change in society, and eventually, lead to a decrease in elite-wealth.

[@jeremymizer8958]

@Simon Bolduc internet without education leads to sharing minion memes about climate change disinformation.

[@ajayskumar1747]

Q: Why does the TRICKLE DOWN theory always fail? A: Coz it was never destined to succeed... The working apparatus is designed to SUCK UP.

[@sh130carter11]

Because everything is outsourced to china and everyone chooses to buy cheap rather than buy local or even buy american made when you buy within your own capitalist society you keep more monetary value circulating in our economy

[@cryptorufio5048]

This is why we need a trickle up economy centered around a UBI. Capital makes the market grow, UBI is capitalism that doesn't start at 0 for the consumer.

[@kerriekupar6466]

@@cryptorufio5048 just make sure it's an addition to the social safety net not a replacement.

[@terrellbradshaw3504]

@@sh130carter11 That’s because that is how our “oh so superior” economic system was changed to now be dependent on. Now we are in a situation to where the people have no choice but to buy these cheap goods because in the pursuit of profits at all cost, wages were also on the chopping block. Make the good with cheap labor, make more money. Pay American workers like shit, make more money.

[@peteradaniel]

@@sh130carter11 That’s nice if you can afford it! I’m sick of idiots blaming the failures of capitalism on the impracticalities of the poor. And their answers are always vacuous, platitudinal and illogical.

[@warhol20000]

The question is “Who controls the surplus”, Varoufakis bullseye!

[@Dinofaustivoro]

This is where libertarian socialism has the answer: make every workspace a coop, democratize the means of production (and surplus).

[@DrSmileyFace18]

@@Dinofaustivoro if we gotta call it libertarian socialism to get the right wingers on board so be it. The right wing libertarians in the 1800s were right when they said their greatest achievements was stealing "libertarian" from the left wing

[@Kobe29261]

He never fails - its also why every body in Europe with something to lose will accept his head on any platter! Incredible mind and spirit!

[@DrSmileyFace18]

@Fred Forbes socialism is the answer, profit is the real theft

[@DrSmileyFace18]

@Fred Forbes can you define socialism

[@vasilisk2211]

Exactly, they blame the others instead of providing a policy in which people can thrive again to close the ever growing gap of classes

[@XOPOIIIO]

You're already thriving.

[@robwealer5416]

Things seemed to be headed toward the Denmark model... wide open business economy, limited bureaucracy and a high VAT. Ironically, this is a highly regressive model that loads a big chunk of taxes on workers themselves. But employment insurance is generous, full health bennies, you can leave a job for no reason and still get EI benefits for a long stretch. You can also be fired with no recourse for wrongful dismissal but go on benefits anyway. It's enormously business friendly, relatively low capital gains (historically) tax.

[@BigHenFor]

This shows that people don't understand if spent Wisely, taxes are not a burden but a collective insurance against the things that destroy human welfare. Any system that doesn't prioritise that has gone astray.

[@michaelloveless8184]

the rich- 'everything's good for us so it's all good'

[@user-bs6xz1lk1r]

1^ ^8^4^5^ 2^4^4^ 0^7^1^9^ a DM for your guidance and assistance

[@davidfeld22]

Inevitable? It's already here. Just ask yourself, who gets bailed out when capitalism fails? This level of wealth inequality hasn't been seen since the Pharaohs.

[@freezingka3730]

The bail outs are not decided by capitalism but by interested politicians. If capitalism was to work without government constraints there would be no bail outs for failed companies of any kind.

[@johncarlollavor2146]

Ever heard of the Gilded Age Mr. Feld?

[@johnslugger]

What a horrible country we have here. Why are millions of brown people storming the boarders trying to get into a racist country full of inequality. THINGS THAT MAKE YOU GO "HUMMMM

[@RidinSpinners36]

corporatism is not capitalism

[@ems7623]

That's not what a socialist-capitalist economy is defined by. You might want to better inform yourself

[@Christopher_Bachm]

As long as rich folks ambitions create a demand for a massive supply of poor people, it's going to be hard to make change. The general population allowed itself to be divided over nonsense.

[@Ryanowning]

Rich folks, as you put it, never created a demand for a "supply" of poor people. By actual mechanics of economics poor people are not a supply, they are a lack of supply. The reality is that communist and socialist monetary policies always fail because money is make believe. Nothing changes if you shift around make believe. Real-world implementations of full-fledged socialism and communism always learn that the hard way, but because of capitalistic aggression socialists/communists within capitalist societies never learn from it. If you want to provide the future you seek in communism/socialism you cannot do it through monetary policies. All those do is skyrocket consumerism for the poor without providing supply into the poor-economy. That's why the value a worker provides is far higher than what they're provided with in turn: because they're under the invisible tax of over-demand in their class's economy. Instead of trying to think of ways to provide make believe monopoly money to the poor instead focus on generating more supply for the poor-economy that reduces prices naturally. Nothing else works. No economics of the past, capitalism included, actually try to do that.

[@Christopher_Bachm]

@@Ryanowning Monetary policy is how they rob us of the fuits of this Earth and the value of our service. Debating failed political philosophy is fun, but irrelevant. Hmmm... Funny the focus that way.

[@Ryanowning]

@@Christopher_Bachm "They"? Monetary policy is the government whom, in a democratic society, abides by the voices of the people. Because the people aren't all educated in economics they make uneducated guesses as to what might work and, as a result, think socialism is the way to go. Neither capitalism nor socialism works. What we need is a Credit Based Economy whereby prospective economic growth is our currency. It is essentially an inverted currency whereby 1 is the most valuable Credit a person can hold; the destitute can only grow economically and thus, we need a currency which reflects this reality. Fiat was a brilliant idea, but because it's not directly tied to rising people out of poverty it isn't as good of a system as we would want. All trades should carry fiat currency creation respective of future economic growth; basically, what each market participant has to offer is their economic future, but we must be careful that repayment does not occur until the market participant leaves the economy permanently. Traditional investment has the problem of repayment destroying economic productivity. Instead this system would create the fiat currency instead of actual currency exchange. The result of this change would see preventative care for healthcare becoming extraordinarily cheap to the consumer and massively profitable to the corporation. This would see food, shelter, internet, electricity, education, and water be basically free to the destitute because these are a necessity for their future economic growth. This would carry the negative fallout of inability to afford people who have no economic futures from this base change alone, but I'm sure that can be solved.

[@Christopher_Bachm]

@@Ryanowning You seem to believe that it is important, after all.

[@XOPOIIIO]

Rich folks are benefiting more from people who actually could pay for their goods. Richest people live in richest countries.

[@bjoe631]

If you’re reading this, know that you are worthy of anything you desire. Most times it amazes me greatly how I moved from an average lifestyle to earning over $63k per month, Utter shock is the word. I have understood a lot in the past few years that there are lots of opportunities in the financial market. The only thing is to know where to invest.

[@maryelvis3172]

I agree with you and I believe that the secret to financial stability is having the right investment ideas to enable you earn more money, I don’t know who agrees with me but either way I recommend either real estate or bitcoin and stocks.

[@nyreggie]

I keep wondering how people earn money in financial markets, i tried trading bitcoin on my own made a huge loss and now I'm scared of investing more.

[@bjoe631]

@@nyreggie That won't bother you if you trade with a professional like *Mr Gary Mason Brooks* my coach, you may have come across him on interviews relating to bitcoin and stocks. He trades, manage trading account and offer mentorship program for clients who wish to become professional investors.

[@nyreggie]

@@bjoe631 You allow people to trade for you? that's interesting, I would love to learn, hope it’s safe?

[@susanhaynes679]

Wow I'm a bit perplexed you guys are discussing about Gary Mason Brooks , I once met him at a conference in California 2019, just before the pandemic. I can testify that he’s very good in trading..Highly recommended.

[@zoeitzaify]

I look forward to a future where our basic needs are taken care of, I think more people will be creative and artistic with the confidence that their work doesn’t need to make them money.

[@amadeusdebussy6736]

"I look forward to a future where our basic needs are taken care of..." By who?

[@donpete9372]

I used to think so too, then I looked at artistic and creative people and the sad lives they lead, motivation for art doesn't come from life being good, it's the exact opposite, it's from utter despair and troubled nature, art finds you when you are tired of yourself/ego and need s'thing else to hold on too.

[@zoeitzaify]

Abel Peter I think inspiration can come from difficult life’s, but the ability to practice an artistic skill comes from free time and energy. Plus the confidence that that time is not wasted, as we sadly see time spent on exploring ideas that we can not moneytise. I have personally tried to make money on what I love, I ended up very poor and working part time as a warehouse cleaner and I can no longer stand to sew for fun anymore.

[@entropicpedro]

@@zoeitzaify I know, another guy recommending to you a KZbin video about a glorious Scandinavian country😂😂 but there's this one doc by Economics explained on Sweden's economy and how with it's Socialism it gives people, such as artistes the capacity to be more productive...

[@zoeitzaify]

@@entropicpedro Thank you for the recommendation, I will have a look :)

[@Brainhoneywalker]

This was an awesome discussion. Thank you for posting this.

[@rubenguayasamin]

There are no shortage of videos on KZbin that intricately detail what is wrong with our economy, culture, environment, etc etc etc. Knowing what is wrong and exactly how to fix it is no indication of “inevitability”. There is no revolution without bloodshed.

[@CharlieRogers50]

The problem is most people think of wealth as a limited resource: if they have it, I don't. They don't realize that only in a capitalistic society do people have the opportunity to CREATE their own wealth. This is a fundamental difference in philosophy on wealth, and needs to be one of the pillars of financial literacy in our young people. It really starts with parenting, which has been completely undermined and devalued in today's society. The book "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" is a good one to learn more about it. Don't worry about how much money others make. Worry about learning how to create opportunity and wealth for yourself and those you care about.

[@chrisjamel8461]

The problem is Economies of scale have limited growth and their ability to generate equitable labor compensation is not only compromised due to the nature of profitable business, but in some cases might not be sustain the creation of growth through debt. Society wants to consume cheaply but then wants high compensation...these two things are at odds. Now society wants to transition to cheap consumption and low compensation leaving those at the top with even more and those at the bottom with even less.

[@jish55]

What many in power ignore is how, if capitalism keeps going the way it's going, in 10 years time, the majority of people will no longer be in support of capitalism, especially with how much its screwed over so many. Also, unlike before when socialism was a dirty word meant to scare people into remaining patriotic, people now a days are seeing what socialism does, and how adding socialism isn't a bad thing. So honestly, in 10 years, we may very well see a massive decline in capitalism as people push for more social programs to better society. Also, thanks to the rise and increase in automation, capitalism cannot support support us, especially since capitalism is not designed to function under a humanless working society, where humans no longer have the ability to work thanks to ai and automation.

[@cosmicrider5898]

No they merely do not care.. As marie antionette said let them eat cake . they have consolidated the worlds wealth.. they only want more because they are sociopaths .

[@daniellassander]

Capitalism screwed over so many, that is not at all what the facts on the ground is saying though. The facts are saying everything the government tries to fix with the economy they fucking ruin it more, and this is what has happened over the years. USA has ventured further and further away from capitalism into controlled markets which in the end hurts everyone.

[@moestietabarnak]

@@daniellassander under Capitalist control, yup the government does not improve the live of the common.. You keep giving the reign of government to people that tell you that government doesn't work.. and make sure it doesn't !

[@tusker2418]

Well, this is essentially what Marx says. Capitalism causes it's own contradictions.

[@aaronblain6377]

Yes, to expand a little on what others have mentioned, this is what Marx meant when he said that capitalists produce their own gravediggers. Capitalism gradually converts everyone into desperate wage-earners. And because the market makes competition compulsory (you can't just decide to be a 'nice' capitalist), you have to keep looking for ways to put the squeeze on workers. As you have more people becoming more insecure and more angry, they're more and more willing to ask questions and question their lifetime of brainwashing and state propaganda. Engels outlines this process of 'proletarianization' clearly in _The Principles of Communism_ . In his time you had all traditional independent artisans etc being forced out of their trades into low-paying manufacturing jobs where they don't own any of their own equipment or workshops anymore. It's the same process we're discussing in this thread.

[@MusingsFromTheJohn00]

Except in dictatorships, all economic systems within nations are a blend of capitalism & socialism. Now, capitalism does not require socialism, because it can exist in a dictatorship, but no true socialism can exist without capitalism. One of the problems with more pure unrestrained capitalism is that those who win can then more easily win again, while those who lose have a harder time winning next time against those who won already. If capitalism is not restrained it leads to increasingly few winners who eventually turn into dictators simply from the power & wealth they have capitalistically won. The problem with some socialist systems, some of which sell the dream of communism, is that in a manner of speaking it is a social/political capitalism where instead of money being the currency it is social/political power that is the currency. If the social/political power is won by an increasingly small number of people it stops being socialist and becomes a dictatorship. Some socialist countries have had a few people gain dictatorial power by selling to the masses the idea of a good socialist society for the people, but in the process those countries became a dictatorship where the winners of the social/political power became the "CAPITALISTIC" winners of economic wealth/power. The USSR was a great example of this, where the vast majority of the population lived in poverty and to gain a better economic life a person had to join the "Communist Party" and climb the political ranks which directly correlated to their economic wealth & power... but they were no socialist anymore and certainly not communist, they were a capitalistic dictatorship enforced by a political dictatorship. So, my point is, if one wants capitalism without having a dictatorship then they need to blend that capitalism with socialism that restrains the capitalism from getting out of hand... and not just economic capitalism, but social/political capitalism as well.

[@whitewhale9012]

Regulating market economies isn't socialism.

[@MusingsFromTheJohn00]

@@whitewhale9012 Don't you know the definition of Socialism? Guess too much political propaganda keeps people like you from understanding the truth. When the people of a country control the government through a democratic process, including the most common democratic form of a "Democratic Republic" and the leaders of that country who were democratically elected regulate ownership of property, production of property, services, sales, etc., etc., that is a form of socialism. Try reading the definition of socialism. Every country in the world which has a democratically elected government has a blended "Socialistic" & "Capitalistic" economy. Even countries which are questionably democratic, like China and Russia, still are blended economies partly capitalistic in nature. The real issue is what kind of blend we get and between ~1940 to ~1980 the USA had the best blend in the world making the USA the envy of the world with the largest strongest middle class... which began going down hill in the 1980s towards present time as the economy became increasingly controlled by the most powerful and wealthy.

[@ALL_CAPS__]

Ananda and Yanis are always on point!

[@Iandar1]

John Fullerton there are very few hierarchies that are healthy most are unsustainable. Wendell pierce read All three volumes of Capital.

[@youxkio]

In my country, there was an explosion of industrial progress in the years between 1968-74. This also met a baby-boom. The investment and policies made to accomodate industry to exports, provided wealth for the middle and working class that was emigrating until then. Private and public companies that could afford, would invest in the construction of social neighborhoods for employees. Some were private garment factories, others were glass manufacturing and oil transportation and refining. Logically, there was a contract that included the instalment deducted from salary for the house expense. Nevertheless, the amount was acceptable and affordable, much more than any other regular one built for regular purposes of real estate acquisition.

[@alephii]

but them the state saw an opportunity to steal more from the companies and from the people through higher taxes... To improve the life of the people.... of course, the people bought the idea.... The riches have to pay more taxes... Them all the prosperity and growth turn to a shrink and poverty spread... The solution? Of course! More populism and more taxes... Welcome to the way argentina so deeply followed and many other countries are following nowadays! The solution? More taxes on the riches (ok... lets not learn from the recent failures on that from france and argentina).... Lets just keep fighting for social and economic equality!

[@youxkio]

​@@alephii Well, in my country happened exactly that. After '74, there was a revolution and almost everything was nationalized to the point of protecting the recent formed government. Having the government surrounded with so much power there was also the need for budget. However, they mismanaged it so badly to protect the co-opted that corruption assiduously emptied most of the budget in detriment of public goods. Taxes rose, and protectionist measures for the corporativist actors subsided. Which was pretty much similar to what existed until '68 dictatorship, making difficult for growth. The government always blamed somewhere crisis that also affected the country but in reality there was no correlation. It served only as an excuse for the government's bad governance and protect corruption. Fortunately, since 2015, that some reforms forced the government to become more impartial and neutral, having less influence with private actors. I hope Argentina gets better too. I believe being part of a regional economic zone may have some importance in reforming the Argentinian economy.

[@shiteetah]

I’ve only recently been reading and learning more about economic philosophy in the last year or so (other than all Marx’s publications which I read decades ago) so I don’t know much about it at all. What I do feel though, is the current course we’re on is unsustainable, not just for humans but the planet itself which is my ultimate concern. I honestly hope that the planet’s population reaches a point of determined revolution before we’re over the precipice. Unfortunately, we’re animals that tend to put too much stock in our intelligence while ignoring our evolutionary drive for “more”. Give the average person a choice between an eco friendly life in the woods versus a highlife with all the trappings in say, Beverly Hills and they’ll almost certainly choose the latter.

[@Ryanowning]

Considering the world's population has already peaked and is now in free-fall because nobody had enough kids? LOL we're all going to go extinct. You've definitely read the wrong philosophies. Why do I say that? Because nobody has written the correct philosophies regarding economics. I'll share a bit of wisdom only gained just recently: money is make believe. All it does is create psychological impulses on demand: because it is purely psychological. The only thing that has ever worked has been creating systems that strongly encourages people to work, never (and I do mean never) generating over-demand in the poor-economy, and yet figuring out how to generate over-supply indefinitely for the poor-economy. The reality of our situation is that we might need dual currencies: one for the poor and one for the rich. Why? So that socialists finally understand reality. Because, in the end, those economies are already completely different. The only demand that the rich-economy has is from the rich. The demand for the poor-economy only comes from the poor. The rich has never had an impact on the poor-economy. The only thing that destroys economics for the poor is monetary policy of the government or a lack of supply by the rich. The rich are not powerful enough to provide indefinite over-supply for the poor, however, without government help. That's why Chinese hyper financing for jobs creation actually worked out pretty dang well. I mean, aside from the fact that their hyper financing created a bubble that's bursting. If we can learn from the Chinese, and their hyper over-financing, we can create a new system that might actually work and solve the problems that communists and socialists want addressed. Oh, except the whole nonsense of "providing everything we need so we can spend all our time on art" horseshit. That cannot happen without slavery: so you'd be immoral for wanting it.

[@oobrocks]

The problem since 1980 has complete embrace of greed by corps. When i heard "the co made profit but not as much as "analysis predicted" and the stock fell, explains everything

[@tysonkoch468]

I wish people would read basic economics concepts and theories before making blanket statements about what political economic system is best suited for America. "Rhetoric doesn't replace reality"

[@XOPOIIIO]

@@awawawacm7120 No, they're not. They are dumb in economy.

[@Matt-ww9wv]

It always was inevitable. Those that think otherwise simply don't yet understand the consequences of innovation on what is economically viable. They are unfortunately people that would likely advocate in defense of feudalism or slavery if they lived during such times when they were economically dominant strategies.

[@XOPOIIIO]

Just learn facts.

[@katherandefy]

The ubiquity of depression ... bingo. Thanks so much for the eloquence of Yanis’ clip! Also yes we’re going to capito-socialism, if we’re fortunate. Resources and commodities are shared while the rich race to the top. Success is great but we have problems of economy but more than that.... many other looming disasters to head off. And those with the most now find themselves well over their heads not just politicians and bureaucrats and public servants and health professionals and scientists but the wealthy themselves. They have a number of looming unsolved problems, unintended consequences they need help with. It’s a real crunch we’re all in here together with. Jacque Fresco was right.

[@carrdoug99]

The only part of this very good video that I strongly disagree with, is the idea that our current model is not "true" capitalism. More specifically, why it's not true capitalism. It's not capitalism for one reason, and that is large companies pay no real cost for failure. Beyond that capitalism, true capitalism, has one goal. To maximize profits for the least number of individuals as possible, period. The "true" capitalism described in the video where everyone has access to opportunities, and the band plays within a framework is regulated capitalism. We better learn the difference as our ancestors who survived the great depression did.

[@jizburg]

But this is true capitalism, money and power attracts money and power, the only goal is higher shareholder value, and if buying a few politicians to let you polute the lokal water reservoar is cheaper than taking care of the toxic waste your petro cemical plant spews out then that is what the true capitalist will do.

[@carrdoug99]

@@jizburg Soo..you completely agree with my comment?

[@alejandrobailon1761]

I think that in the future we'll need to automate everything that can possibly be automated and impose heavier taxes on corporations without the opportunity of using tax heavens. Then the government could maintain the people displaced with those taxes in exchange of community jobs, as scholarships to young and adult people to keep studying, funding research projects and other things. That way people could move out of mega cities to smaller cities as jobs would no longer be a concern and studying could be done online, settlements as the soviets krushkovas could be built to provide affordable housing and progress could still be made with a capitalist economy, a highly educated population and the incentive of still having a better quality of life to the people who owns the corporations without sacrificing the well being of those displaced. I know it sounds very optimistic, but I think it might be doable.

[@zacharydavis4398]

Thank you for spending the time to create and share this content 🙏🏾

[@nevermind342]

Insanely important to distinguish what definition of socialism you’re using. If it’s the Leninist definition of socialism then nothing is applicable and the answer is no. If it’s the historic definition of essentially “industrial democracy” then yeah we have a real conversation going

[@Alistair-gi3bx]

Is no one else hung up by the fact that he keeps saying lions live in the jungle?

[@SolntsaSvet]

Even more so by him using the "lion analogy" in the first place (smells like "good old times" when Social Darwinism was super popular).

[@FranciscoJesus9]

It’s easy to say such things as they said when you don’t run a company. Owning and directing and company means hustle and struggle and just because you’re a businessman with a company doesn’t mean you are rich and most common people usually misunderstand that. Just because you’re a company owner doesn’t mean you have great profit or even profit at all, so therefore you can pay well…

[@Dekubud]

They are talking about large businesses, not about small businesses. However, I feel that someone should think twice about hiring if they can't provide a decent salary. If you don't make enough profits or project your finances well enough to pay your employees well, maybe you shouldn't be a business owner. In fact, maybe starting a coop would be a better idea, since they are more resilient anyway.

[@TheFallinhalo]

@@Dekubud not to mention not having enough to pay well may even be a indicater their not raking in the customers because their not offering something the customer even wants or needs. there are thos ebuissness that offer nothing of intrinsic value and easily go out of buissness. besides many of these people dont understand, if wages are increased all around, mor epeople will have more to spend and that will in turn increase his buissness, either balancing him out while getting people what they need to get by, or Increase his profits. Money curcilation.

[@XOPOIIIO]

@@Dekubud People like you deserve to live in Venezuela or North Korea.

[@matthewkopp2391]

The USA has had government economic interventionism since its founding, and every government has intervened. So we simply have the perpetual myth of "free markets". The real question would be who does the government intervene in favor of. Does this intervention infringe on the rights of its citizens. Asked this way citizens rights have been infringed by industries who pollute, out source, extract wealth with out concern for the citizenry etc. Unlike the revolutionaries who were fighting against tyrannical monarchies we are facing absolute unaccountable corporate tyrannies.

[@i.m.gurney]

Valuable thoughts, thanks, keep it up (y).

[@i.m.gurney]

I have already signed up, yes I am aware we are all unsure what the foliage of this new tree will turn out like, I do feel we have a reasonable sense of the root & trunk format, with some interesting ideas starting to show for branch layout.

[@johnslugger]

What a horrible country we have here. Why are millions of brown people storming the boarders trying to get into a racist country full of inequality. THINGS THAT MAKE YOU GO "HUMMMM

[@samporter-bridgessmuggling1255]

End of which type of capitalism? money capitalism, population capitalism, ideology capitalism, land capitalism, or since capitalism?

[@saturationstation1446]

solution : a capitalism in which money can not be used as a tool of control. a bank-less economy with a single currency for all and a UBI for every human. equal housing (for the most part, an equal amount of space or apartment types of buildings available for all) equal education and equal healthcare. all human needs should be met to a high standard before we can make profits on anything

[@tusker2418]

There aren't different types of Capitalism. However, there are different stages of Capitalism. We're in the late-stage, Finance/Imperialism form.

[@leviathan-supersystem]

???? Socialism isn't when the government does things. There's no capitalist-socialist system. It's either the workers own and control the company or they don't. Then we must talk about if commodity production, even if the work is democratized, should continue.

[@achubbs8641]

I think when they say "capitalist-socialist system" they're referring to some sort of Market Socialism with the predemoniance of co-ops and community-driven ventures like CLTs and Credit unions alongside some turbocharged version Social Democracy and Keynesianism; progressive wealth taxes, nationalised public utilities, maybe a bit of UBI, and all that jazz, in place of the current system.

[@Piglover1221]

@Awawawa CM if workers wanted to become bosses they would have. Workers love to think they can be the boss until it becomes time to be the boss.

[@badge5575]

Nad we don't need a centralized planned economy we need a free market

[@tusker2418]

Ooof, so you've fallen for the Wolff arguement. Can you answer a question for me? How do worker co-ops avoid the same profit generating drives that Individual Capitalists fall prey too? Marx theorizes that the system of Capitalism itself creates Monopolization and Profit Seeking. The actions of Capitalists are inherently rational given the system we have. To assume that a Worker Co-Op would behave irrationally is fundamentally wrong. I agree that a Co-Op has plenty of benefits and would be better for those in the Co-Op, but they would be under the same pressures of Capital as Individual Owners and will act in the rational way individuals do.

[@foxhauck3993]

Wow! Thank you so much for producing quality content on this perspective. Society as a whole can benefit from these discussions

[@ProssperityMagnetPhilippines]

Socialism is the cornerstone of the Scandinavian nations of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. They all adhere to socialist policies that combine free-market capitalism with extensive public works, including free healthcare, free education, a comprehensive welfare state, and high percentages of unionized workers. This approach essentially combines the collective nature of communism with the private ownership and competitiveness of capitalism.

[@Matpeixelegal]

It's crazy to think that Finland made universal suffrage possible (1906) before the country even became industrialized (60's). Their socialist capitalism (or vice and versa) is a parameter that every country should pursue. I can't see a communist world happening in the same planet that billionaires rule almost everything we use on our daily basis, but Finland shows us that we can definitely get near that

[@1n1cit3r]

None of those countries is socialist

[@XOPOIIIO]

No they're not, there is capitalism in Scandinavia. Learn what you're trying to talk about.

[@andyespinozam]

So, think about the cycle of energy and how it's not possible to make an eternal machine. And then comes this idea of having a company where all outcomes should be good. I don't think it works that way.

[@kofiamoako3098]

The inequality at the top is not caused by extraction, its caused by innovation that makes the working class more or less irrelevant. Amazon for eg is replacing malls but they don't employ nearly as much as the malls do. Penalizing innovation won't work, neither will regulation that isnt in the direction of normal incentives like tax redistribution. You need to be more pessimistic about the problem. Its not a greed thing, its a -you can't do much anymore cause the machine is more competent therefore you have little value. The problem is deeper than we'd like to think.

[@tony1449]

Okay who creates that innovation?

[@kofiamoako3098]

@@tony1449 those who have an incentive to. Anyone who has the capacity and or the means or can employ these has an incentive to innovate because there's the promise of profit. So ths employee with the idea or the employer who has that smart employee on contract an entrepreneur- these are the innovators

[@kofiamoako3098]

@Kevin Jeffries apologies. By extraction, i was referring to the supposed hoarding of value by those at the top from those at the bottom. What would crudely be described as theft. Dont get me wrong that phenomenon is rife as there are rent seekers all across. But it does not explain or fully account for the growing inequality. My point being; the rich are getting richer not because they are taking from the poor, but because they are by virtue of innovation producing a majority of the value created by productive systems. I.e. the labour of the workers doesnt form a significant portion of value created as most of the value is created by technology owned by the rich.

[@kofiamoako3098]

@Kevin Jeffries well there's another dangerous feedback loop that will create even more inequality. The thing is research for innovation is a predominantly hit and miss. Often the research doesn't produce anything tangible or profitable. The regular entrepreneur who borrows to fund innovation is wiped out if his research is unsuccessful. But the rich slob with deep pockets has a cushion of capital that enables him to iterate and build on failures increasing their chances of success. That how you end up with millionares owing all the innovation. Even if the garage genius is successful with their new thing they would sell to transfer the risks of further development that are associated with building a viable business case for the pdt and rationally so.

[@kofiamoako3098]

@Kevin Jeffries here's another way to look at it. We'd be better off if it was a case of 'theft'. Because then redistribution would be a good idea. The problem is much worse if it's a case of productive capacity because then even equalizing the outcome does not remove the advantage of the innovators so value will reskew in favour of those at the top. And talent and creativity arent exactly widespread. Its way more scary

[@Manos_P_]

Wow, i did not expecting Varoufakis at all, i like him very much indeed, but many people around me in Greece do not appreciate hin at all, although every thing he is saying is fully backed up with well arguments...

[@mertonhirsch4734]

Wealth itself seems to be a problematic quantity. Someone may have a high standard of living, but zero net wealth. Technically, you don't need any wealth to have a high standard of living, and ANY net wealth means that all of your needs have been met since wealth is only what's left over after you have met your obligations, needs and even wants. Income is also problematic since capital gains are a form of income for which the basis has already been taxed at the income rate in the first place. In effect, if someone pays 40% to the government on their wages, then the government has already taken 40% of all of their future capital gains as well. You are not just taxed on your income, but effectively you are also taxed on all of the earning potential of that income. Plus, a significant percentage of capital gains over time merely match inflation. I am not sure that long term capital gains should be taxed at all, but maybe we tax short term capital gains really high like 50% to keep people from manipulating markets. My family has had negative wealth and positive wealth, and it did not affect our standard of living. Plus, do we count things like being invested in social security and medicare, or life insurance as wealth? Seems those things should be counted. Also, if your company is giving you benefits, they are paying for them with money that would have been yours, but most people get far less out of health insurance than they put in. Most people nearing retirement age have half a million or more in probable social security and medicare benefits.

[@azamai]

Universal basic income and free rent sounds like "Jungle Dream".

[@davidferguson5861]

Can you imagine the bum piss flowing through the streets if we get UBI?

[@mf--]

@@davidferguson5861 maybe you havent heard but LA already smells like bum piss.

[@jamesgavin6171]

@@mf-- and shit, dont forget about that in San Francisco.

[@kotogray8335]

A song writer once said, "If there's a new way, I'll be the first in line. But it better work this time!"

[@slabby7]

Dave Mustaine

[@roxannamarinak3156]

This is an excellent program to teach us what is really going on

[@charlessmyth]

The problem is that certain and fundamental classes of property become attached to hold-outs and rent-seekers, which creates a variation of the "tragedy of the commons", which necessitates that the profits are privatized and the losses are socialized.

[@p0rnany0ne]

What will happen when you don’t need human labor? Or corporations find ways to do things with minimal human labor? And the majority of people are unemployable But things are still being made and a consumer base is still needed

[@DanDeLeoninthefield]

The result is luxury communism.

[@flyingkite2972]

@@DanDeLeoninthefield no lol, the result is famine and death.

[@al2642]

Basic u iversal income, and basic universal wage cap for all, are the key. Tech and scientific knowledge are the only things that CREATE new wealth for mankind.

[@user-nf9xc7ww7m]

Many, especially rich, don't have wages or salaries. They live off investments.

[@al2642]

@Awawawa CM that's a damn interesting reply. I'll think about it

[@SolntsaSvet]

@@user-nf9xc7ww7m Sure. But proportinately speaking it's not that "many", though (coz most people are not rich).

[@johnslugger]

What a horrible country we have here. Why are millions of brown people storming the boarders trying to get into a racist country full of inequality? THINGS THAT MAKE YOU GO "HUMMMM"?

[@XOPOIIIO]

Thomas Sowell summarized it pretty well, listen him.

[@mickzen7100]

If extreme right politics are allowed to prevail and all regulation of markets is removed, capitalism, will like the ultimate conclusion to a game of monopoly, end when all the money and resources are owned by a single player - usually the bank. The central bankers seem to be heading towards world domination, with no recognition of the co dependance of producer and consumer, or social and environmental responsibilities. With the developments of this year it would seem they are within reach of such a goal - I feel the longer we take to steer the course of our journey in a more equitable direction, the harder it will become, with as little as a year or so before it becomes almost impossible. The corporate media needs to be made to tell the truth in order to awaken the masses, before we are all overtly enslaved. We need to get back the happy medium of a more balanced centre ground.

[@Cosmodjinn]

5:00 Best of the speakers IMO.

[@billykobilca6321]

Absolutely. ... he was spot on

[@Isomoar]

@John Smith ^ Found one whose deep In the bubble! 😂👆

[@khumomatlakane2009]

@John Smith lmao leave that right wing cult

[@alephii]

That is true, in 40s there were much more freedom and less state... The State intervention in peolple's life increased along the decades, including the welfare state, and the chance of someone to do better than his parents decreased and inequality increased.. The solution for that: more welfare state and more State intervention! Of course! Lets attack the problem with the thing that caused the problem in first place! Genious! Most people have this good intention, but unfortunaly this people don't realise what really causes the problem! Way to naive! That is the way for strong States to rise and the power get more and more concentrated... The "democracy" illusion in this century! Please, wake up before is too late! There isn't only two sides! Good and evil! If someone say that something should not be provided by the state that doesn't mean that this thing should not be provided at all! Let's really think big! Take responsabilities (oops, that is a bad word for this "only rights" generation...)

[@Isomoar]

@John Smith That'd be neither side... The idea that there are even sides in this is kind of laughable they're both as insane as each other in their own way. Both pro corporate both culture war fanatics & both not remotely left wing in anyway... Search Secular talk on youtube & you'll see.

[@AndreiHognogi]

The logo animation at 0:02 glitches when the black circle reaches to the left of T

[@Dcioutsourcing]

Bravo Tim, hope you feeling better..

[@mabi9731]

More people need to see this!

[@trancendedsoul]

This is profoundly brilliant. I like having social welfare provided it is fixed to expand and contract with the economy. This forces the government to protect the economy and the people or loose reelection all in one. I highly doubt we will have to worry about a lack of capitalism. Socialism will continue and grow into capitalism. There is no way around it. I just hope tyranny does not follow. This is everyone's biggest fear! We know technology could save us or slaughter us all so it is more important than ever before to prevent abuse of power and over reach of corporate/government/technocratic oligarchy. Protect the constitution and bill of rights while also advancing our technology to benefit the world both at home and abroad for all humans of all races and cultures.

[@indecision3835]

Worry about a Lack of capitalism?

[@therongjr]

John Fullerton: "It's not that hierarchy is bad . . . " Anarchists: "Yes, hierarchy *is* bad."

[@andyfriederichsen]

Marxists: "Any hierarchy is bad and needs to be torn down."

[@fowlae4414]

@@andyfriederichsen Except that Marxists states have some of the most oppresive hierarchies in the modern day.

[@andyfriederichsen]

@@fowlae4414 And that's why Marxism does not work. Hierarchies are inevitable and yet anarchists and Marxists still never learn.

[@davidlodge681]

What is so difficult, at the conceptual level at least of a socialist system for the infrastructure of civil society anda capitalist one for those things that are not essential to the pursuit of a meaningful life? We can decentralise most things with our technology and allow democratic influence to regulate their local area whilst ensuring an overall system that supports that variation within the limits acceptably set for the betterment of all.

[@patriciahuyler4605]

Yanis focuses on the most salient aspects of our problem. I think he's an exceptionally brilliant and moral person.

[@Dinofaustivoro]

Democratize all means of production, aka: every firm is a coop. No big state, a big net of democratic unions.

[@Matt-ww9wv]

That's a good starting point. I'm in favor of more anarchist economic reform towards market socialism for where the world currently stands. Still, it's important to recognize there are still weaknesses to that means of regulation. I believe the positives outweigh it, however, especially in areas that are needed most by normal citizens.

[@johncole2744]

As someone who is opposed staunchly to socalisim, i take no issues with voluntary coops as long as they remain decentralized. Centralizing most of anything is bad and leads to coercion .Holarchy is and interesting business model that flattens traditional hierarchy. Anyway... Market competition = accountability.

[@brucefrykman8295]

i like to sleep in till noon, have a couple of beers for lunch an then a have a long siesta at work so I'm ready for another night of partying. How does this work in your Utopia? Are the unions armed?

[@XOPOIIIO]

You can't steal what you didn't create and sustain it.

[@garrett3883]

This was a nice view in to the more left ideas. I'm serious, you guys made some good points.

[@kinngrimm]

Depending on how far back you look, those "left" idears were also within the right mainstream. From all i read Adman Smith, Lincoln both would be leftist by current standards. Just like the democrats in the US once had supported the KKK and now do not anymore, did the republicans support several concepts of social justice which they now do not anymore.

[@johnslugger]

What a horrible country we have here. Why are millions of brown people storming the boarders trying to get into a racist country full of inequality? THINGS THAT MAKE YOU GO "HUMMMM"?

[@XOPOIIIO]

They're good, just not sensible.

[@lauraw.7008]

I’m noting all the empty sky-scrapers in New York owned by billionaires. And farmland in our nation owned by corporate and foreign entities. We are correct to not believe the American dream of hard work will automatically result in uplifting one’s family. AND we need to ensure we don’t go to an authoritarian leader who says, “Only I can fix this.”

[@Banefane]

If you were rich with a high standard of living, would you share "scraps" with less wealthy that you earned from the government, e.g. by paying significant less taxes? Do you think one should depend on "scraps" that the wealthy might share?

[@billybobwombat2231]

Youve got the biggest socialised institution in the world, US military, then add roads , schools , coast guard etc.

[@cosmicrider5898]

@Uncle Joe i assume you are being satirical as you affectionatly call yourself uncle joe just as the chinese call their dictator uncle xi..

[@NicholasSalay]

If you want more socialist domestic institutions and are willing to divert military resources to that end.. why dont you just lower the us military budget in favor of those institutions then? You’d end up hiring people specially equipped to handle them.

[@Bmc19234]

@Uncle Joe I don't know if are an American but are both parties in our government have been trying to privatice these institutions.

[@cosmicrider5898]

Yupp its not socialism if its in the governments interest tf do people think taxes are.... Dont forget social security ,tax cuts for the wealthy , the fact that corporations are classified as people and have the same rights...

[@billybobwombat2231]

Public money funds these institutions, thus its a socialised business model, if it was funded by private finance as in health insurance it would be deemed a capitalist system, its pretty basic.

[@user-ev2ge4pc7t]

"Many of the most important things in American life had to be taken from the powerful and given to the many. It’s time that we reclaim that heritage again." What does he mean by this, what does he want to do?

[@entropicpedro]

Anything from seizing and distributing the means of production to more regulation of the free market

[@filmjazz]

The New Deal; progressive taxation system with increasing rates as income goes up which effectively put a cap on wealth. There should be a limit on how wealthy a person can get, after which they are declared a “winner of capitalism,” and then they must start giving back to the country that collectively created the conditions for their success. Someone as wealthy as Jeff Bezos should not exist. He and the people who defend his “freedom” to get that rich by exploiting everyone else and the country that gave him the opportunity in the first place, always incorrectly believe that he “did it alone.” Wrong, the collective efforts of millions of people built, sustained, and defended the once great country that allowed him to win the game. It’s delusional, unethical, and just plain wrong for him to believe, and regular people to argue in favor of, him being allowed to keep all of the spoils above a certain level. After a certain point, very early on in his business, it was the workers, the people who built the infrastructure he relies on, and the government who protected him who got him where he is today. Now he’s just a robber baron extracting value created by others.

[@mickzen7100]

@@filmjazz Well put - you hit the nail on the head there

[@ViratKohli-jj3wj]

Commie Chinese

[@ViratKohli-jj3wj]

@@filmjazz not only Bezos, but also Elon Musk who is richer than Jeff Bezos

[@TheMaexxi]

this needs WAY MORE audience!! a lot of people in the middle class aren't properly educated about this, and that is a threat to the majority of population on earth...

[@christopherestrada2474]

It is quite sad that it takes the middle class getting involved for there to be an issue. In other words, if the middle class were well off then no one would give a shit about the lower class.

[@varyolla435]

"Change" is the universal constant. It is ubiquitous in nature as well as in human civilizations. Thus current economic models can not by definition remain static. All things evolve over time and thus even market-based economies will see changes in their structure as inequities and abuses come to light and people clamor for corrections to occur. It inevitable as surely as the Sun pops over the horizon in the east each day.

[@shinlanten]

*_"We are 2nd in the world, in wealth inequality, after the Russian federation"_* I thought South Africa would be number 1 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[@DomR1997]

It's hard to have wealth inequality when you murder all the poor people. Sorry, allow all the poor people to murder each other.

[@mallardofmodernia8092]

@@DomR1997 dont give the 1% any ideas

[@icecold7184]

You have to have some rich people and stratification to be really unequal

[@kimobrien.]

@@icecold7184 The capitalist are already thinking about launching another World War in the drive to defeat their world market competition with the threats made against China.

[@johnslugger]

@@kimobrien. The rich are not Sympathetic at all! They are simply AFRAID of the Angry Hoards coming for their heads. That is why the richest men all want to go into SPACE TO GET AWAY from the violence and the guns coming for them! As soon as the poor blacks and whites stop being divided by the media and the schools and the think-tanks that run them. When the poor of all races and creeds gets together then the shit will hit the fan for the rich! The violence the richest created by hoarding 95% of the cash liquidity supply.

[@soundknight]

Good discussion but quite a bit generalised and light in examples with direct evidence.

[@XOPOIIIO]

That's what socialist agenda is all about.

[@princeamu]

That was so eye opening. Thank you

[@adempc]

We don't know how our system really works. We don't know how our civilization really works. In fact, we don't know how civilization works in general. The phenomenon of civilization needs to be better studied, maybe this takes thousands of more years, maybe we can simulate it better and better and learn from that. But we need to get on top of some patterns that we currently don't see well, don't respond to with policy and behavior, and will ultimately be destroyed by, like it has happened in the past. But also, should it be discovered there are indeed individuals that do understand how our civilization works - the real nuts and bolts of humanity over time.. and if they are found to actively be engaged in the harm of long-term humanity.. well, they need to be rinsed from the face of the planet, their seed destroyed, their seed's seed destroyed.. the point of law and policy should be to benefit long-term humanity - whenever we plan or think to do anything, we must ask, does this benefit the children? Does it benefit all the children or just some? I don't think we can do it. I don't think this current iteration is mature enough, and I don't think we possess the amount of love and discipline that is required.

[@geoengr3]

New to-do list item: sharpen pitchfork

[@anthrogurl4484]

55 year old “middle class” single woman w/ a Masters degree. I live paycheck to paycheck, can’t buy a house, no savings, have the cheapest car I could find, & cannot afford my student loan payments. At my age, I know I’m relegated to juggling bills for the rest of my life, which is highly stressful. Exhausting.

[@dewaldt8104]

What's your masters degree in?

[@anthrogurl4484]

@@dewaldt8104 Anthropology

[@pushinp157]

@@anthrogurl4484 Well that explains why you're struggling. If you never went to college and got a trade or straight up picked a different and marketable major, you'll actually be living like a middle class American. Also money management would help drastically too.

[@anthrogurl4484]

@@pushinp157 I would despise working in accounting or marketing or finance. I actually think the problem is devaluing certain professions & not offering adequate compensation. I work in higher education & love what I do. I just wish it paid better. Also, unless a degree is very specific to a profession (nursing, K-12 education, doctor), most companies don’t actually care what your degree(s) is in. It just so happens that my interest is in working with college students. If everyone took a mercenary view about college majors, all we’d have are business people & other high paying professions (law, medicine, etc.). Who would educate your kids? You? Most people have neither the time nor expertise to do that. I think our society has incredibly screwed up priorities. Just look at celebrity culture. While I certainly enjoy music & movies, the obscene amounts of money involved seems inflated. Is Keeping Up with the Kardashians more important than your child’s health, well-being & education? Now, I don’t expect to become wealthy in higher ed, but I do think it should be compensated better, but just like corporations, many higher ed institutions (even public ones) pay a shit ton of money to top administrators & pay crap wages to most everyone else. College isn’t job training. It’s way more.

[@pallaciccione7885]

@@pushinp157 why should a scientist study economics

[@DomR1997]

The union I was in was basically "you either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain". They didn't get involved unless management asked them to, if you reached out to them their response was always "we don't really handle that", the contract gave us fewer protections than our states workers rights (like half a week of sick time and no ability to earn more), and they not only screwed us in the contract negotiations but then only paid us for one week of picketing instead of the two we did by literally lying about what day the strike started (I should know, I was out there every day on the line). I know there are great unions, but frankly, I'd rather not join one after the last experience. It was a cluster fuck of contradictions and bold faced lies that everyone had become too apathetic to even do anything about.

[@mattsYT42]

Ralphs paying some people over $20 an hour and unions crippled out auto industry. Unions are garbage

[@wjomal3]

I call Bs. Who is the "they" you refer to? Why would you vote for a contract that, you say, gives you less?

[@icecold7184]

“The future will be more capitalist than the capitalism of today and the socialism will be more socialist than yesterday” Definitely makes ya think that maybe this can’t go one of two ways. You just have you use the best of both ideas.

[@johnslugger]

What a horrible country we have here. Why are millions of brown people storming the boarders trying to get into a racist country full of inequality? THINGS THAT MAKE YOU GO "HUMMMM"?

[@colinnewlands743]

People should be able to provide for their family with on stable, reasonably well paid job. USA are destroying that as a myth.

[@XOPOIIIO]

They are able.

[@HypocritesRoundTable]

Trillions offshore. Need to repatriate that cash into the system.

[@seanm4095]

They won't it's too profitable to have those resources offshore!

[@zacharydavis4398]

19:32 - 19:54 - 20:03 summed up in part the exacerbation of what was witnessed during 2016 - 2020 … that was one of the factors witnessed and in part was lead from the very top such as but not limited to the President at the time and his key team members

[@webbaron1]

I'd like to hear more ideas on how to create the changes needed to ensure the survival of our species. Is anyone else a fan of a Resource Based Economy? It's just so damned logical it almost hurts. Religion and greed is the only things stopping us (?). Cheers from Canada.

[@GivzzProductions]

unfortunately due to greed and consumeristic behaviors, a resource-based economy just isn't plausible (although I'm definitely be a fan of it haha). I feel like more and more people are losing touch with reality and what it means to live a good life. Sure fame and wealth and ownership is temping, but I see absolutely no intrinsic value in obtaining any of those.

[@webbaron1]

@@GivzzProductions, I would generally concur. But it's like the saying goes, "Be the change you'd like to see in the world". When enough people realize their own personal power (more Joe Dispenza, less Tony Robbins) it will hit a critical mass. That is my hope, anyways. Cheers.

[@stephenbailey9969]

The mixed economy is already here. For most people in the middle, it's about arguing over the amount of finetuning to increase opportunity and access. It's a question of pragmatic choices. It's the extreme Left and Right who want to break the current system and institute some abstract ideal. (Socialism or Libertarianism)

[@TimvanHelsdingen]

Blame the FED and keynesian economics.

[@entropicpedro]

I don't think the American govt. has ever followed Keynesian Economics to it's core.... Sure, in times of depressions and crises it comes to bail out companies and reduce taxes to stimulate consumption but in periods of Economic booms it fails to squeeze it in such as regulating consumption and higher taxes or whatever...

[@johnslugger]

AMEN TO THAT TIM, Friedrich Hayek had it right! What a horrible country we have here. Why are millions of brown people storming the boarders trying to get into a racist country full of inequality? THINGS THAT MAKE YOU GO "HUMMMM"?

[@demiggi]

Profound Truth within a 20 minute KZbin video - finally 'some' people who are not shying away from telling the story as it is, not as it is told to us since we were young.

[@claytonvanderhaar3772]

The lion analogy is the best one I have heard....well done

[@KainMalice]

No its not. It is incredibly stupid. By his logic, we should all be licking the boot of America, and thanking it for eating us.

[@klbaldauff]

Respectively disagree. The analogy is comparing an entire ecosystem to one species. That aside, lions have no empathy for their prey, if they are hungry they will hunt.

[@eifelitorn]

12:50 dam is that Bunk?

[@alexquinn5531]

"yeah capitalism is good actually, despite being the sole reason for all of modern problems"

[@adrielhernandez4073]

Eirc Weinstein's Take is very interesting (9:15). Ive never considered that the ruling class is also nervous about the future, and I did not know UBI came from silicon valley. That oddly give me a little hope for the future.

[@dbunnysport]

I am wondering what would we put in place to prevent companies just raising prices to high that the guaranteed income isn’t worth nothing leaving us where we kinda are now… ?