A Recipe for the Next Great Depression | Thomas J. DiLorenzo

[pvisserandorra]

The biggest mistake of FDR was picking Truman as his VP in his last term.

[furyofbongos]

Lesson #2 was learned quite thoroughly, actually. Or more likely they knew what they were doing completely so there was no lesson to learn. Mr Di said it himself: privatized profits with socialized risk. That lesson was learned long before the S&L crisis, which was merely the application of that old lesson.

[TheWorldFarOff]

HATE CRIME: In proper English it would be "hateful crime," in practice it's THOUGHTCRIME, as envisioned in George Orwell's 1948 novel: "Nineteen Eighty-Four," which had been tentatively entitled: "The Last Man in England." In Daytona Beach, NEWSPEAK is thriving. The new police station, which is on rural land (the old place was in junkie town) is the "Law Enforcement Center."

[TheWorldFarOff]

AGONY IN CRISIS (Go to your gynecologist and scream: "Barbara!") Marines don't represent the citizens of the United States. They are part of an homoerotic cadre of international criminals who will be brought before the bar of justice. [Dispatching queers {a.k.a. marines} to the Orient doesn't frighten the Chinese...]

[Caretika]

I love the opening music, very good video. I now follow the Mises institute..Good stuff.

[cmcphee]

The thick, dark clouds in the beginning are perfect.

[phospholipasec]

Yeah!  Up yours Krugman.

[koloss999]

Sometimes I pause and think if we've made a mistake somewhere when as the speaker did, we accuse even nobel prise winners of blatant ignorance when it comes to economic matters.

But really the WW2 argument is just the classic econ 101 broken window fallacy in other clothing so at least in this case I think it's warranted.

[Elasaltaculos]

That people would trust the only institution in society that doesn't obey by the laws of supply and demand (read: the government) to fix the state of the economy is beyond my comprehension.

People will believe anything they are told, so long as it has some apparent authority behind it.

[mark24six2]

greed is a byproduct of a lucid dream, carrot on a stick.....

[pairunoyd]

AWESOME!

[ForTehNguyen]

blaming greed is like blaming gravity for plane crashes

[llothar68]

No greed is a trained "skill" in the capitalist society. There is no greed gene in humans DNS

[jaffijoe]

Can you cite some peer-reviewed studies to back this claim?

[icouce]

You sir, are no student of human psychology/nature, but you are, however, dead wrong. Among the Yanomamo Indians of the Amazon, the number one cause of death amongst men is murder. Take a wild guess why? -- competition for scarce resources. Some of them have evidently developed the notion that if one strong enough and willing to kill, one can get wealthy by taking it from someone else. You're not suggesting they've received capitalist training are you? (That's a rhetorical question.)

[clarkewi]

The law of the jungle. Humanity has to evolve beyond that.

[jaffijoe]

Nice Thomas Woods quote. One of my favorites.

[velation]

"It just goes to show that winning a Nobel prize doesn't mean you know a damn thing about economics."

Qft.

[soundmoneyfan]

except for Hayek :)

[WOLF333999]

DiLorenzo strikes again.

[livegems]

Dude, the recent Wall Street greed IS different: it was a new way to steal money, via derivatives, the internet, etc.

[Jaycephus01]

Greed is greed. Unless the motivations of people have changed all of a sudden, then nothing is different. You're confusing method with motive. Derivatives were just a way to package a bank's assets (mortgages) and sell them to others, & it was a product a LOT of people wanted to buy. Wall Street was the middle man. The world was looking for the best return on investment, and everyone thought the American homebuyer was a safe bet. I'd say Greed isn't even the right target. Try Stupidity.

[livegems]

Just work together using govt money to ride out the bump. Lol.

[Jaycephus01]

To what are you referring?

Who should work together, how, and to what purpose?

What govt money? The govt doesn't have money. The govt TAKES money. And right now, they're not even taking just OUR money. They're taking our children's money and our grandchildrens money, and our great-great grandchildren's money.

I do hope that there are a few of you people ticked off enough to go to a tea party this April!

[spikeslawson]

You're not laughing. I think you missed Livegems' joke.

[emeraldzell]

very well presented, and he makes his case very well.

[edro9494]

Abraham Delano Messiah Obama... that is great! lol

[RichardRoy2]

Oh, that's funny. And dirty. Obama sets the tax rate higher for people earning above a certain amount, then, through inflation, puts everyone not currently in that braket, into that braket. And, voila, soak the rich becomes soak everyone. Oh, this is as dirty as Keynesian taxation through inflation.

[DasGuntLord01]

It IS taxation through inflation... and THEN taxation....

[blummedia]

Thank you people!

[MadBadVoodo]

Five Stars!!

[danoking69]

Truth! Share! Care! Expose! Help!

Thx for the vid!

[astoria3011]

Since we have a minimum wage, we should also have maximum wage and bonus law for executives. That way, profit of the company will be distributed in more fair way and middle class will be empowered. I'm sure more people will be happier. Who needs $100 million / year in salary and bonus (excluding capital gain from personal investment) to make a good living? I only need maybe $5 million / year or so.

[astoria3011]

And who are all those greedy corporate executives making more money than A-Rod or LeBron? Who do they think they are? They aren't that good. It's much more difficult to become a top MLB or NBA player than a corporate executive. They are stealing money from their employees.

[StrafingMoose]

Not really. "Money" is not a finite commodity. Even a free market monetary system could expand the money mass as to accomodate the results of productivity of both, employees and CEOs. Problem with central banks, expansion of money mass is always greater than what's actually being produced, hence, inflation.

[UEAdmiral]

Here's a better alternative, astoria3011: get rid of the minimum wage laws. That'll increase employment.

[pvisserandorra]

@UEAdmiral So would the revocation of the emancipation proclamation, but we are supposed to be civilized.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra What is civilized about preventing people from associating in a completely voluntary manner? The minimum wage laws create a hurdle of productivity over which an individual has to jump in order to get a job. If you're not worth the minimum wage to an employer, you won't be employed. Wages are determined by the marginal productivity of the individual.

On your note, the emancipation proclamation is no longer necessary. It is obvious to everybody that slavery is a horrendous crime.

[pvisserandorra]

@UEAdmiral Ask the 11 year old girl making Hanes under wear in India, or where ever. If thats what you want for your children? Free markets only benefit the rich. watch?v=pTIfY9SmJdA&feature=gr­ec_browse

You think having the highest poverty rate in the US in 50 years is an endorsement of the US model? Selfish fuck! Thank your mom or dad for the gift of your wealth, you could have been born where the girl was.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra I have just watched the video you suggested. My heart goes out to that girl, and all those that face such a life. Anybody that beats a person without having contracted to do so should be prosecuted and go to prison. If she contracted to follow the other regimentation, I have no objection. We gotta do what we gotta do to get by in a world of scarcity.

Alas, 500 characters is very limiting in what I can explain. You should embark on your own learning path. Start at Mises.org

[pvisserandorra]

@UEAdmiral Only the rest of the world deals with scarcity, well with the exception of debt. Contracting to be beaten? What planet are you from? She needs a job, and you buy her (or some equals) goods. You don't have to do that. Scarcity, I agree but the US doesn't want to deal with it talk about it or act on it. Why do you think the US military exists? It certainly wasn't needed until the Truman doctrine. Not sure you need 500 words to describe human slavery, whatever YOU want to call it..

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra Everybody deals with scarcity. That's the reason for prices: prices reflect their comparative scarcity, and nigh everything has a price. There's a price for food that you and I pay every day. We're using scarce resources. And we're acquiring them by pleasing our fellow man in the form of labor or other services. Scarcity is omnipresent. it's everywhere in varying amounts. In fact, you can say that other areas of the world have less than we do 'cause we outbid them. We offer more.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra Now, I don't know where you're dragging the military in from, but I'll tell you what I think of that too: the military should be virtually disbanded. Terrorism should be a police issue, not a war. Our military is so overblown that we cannot even account for huge sums of spending: nobody knows where the money went--it's crazy!

We should absolutely bring our boys home. Department of Defense should be true to its name, and not act like the Dept. of Offense and Occupation.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra I decided to address more the "contract to be beaten" and slavery bit. Listen to Defending the Undefendable by Walter Block on Mises.org. I live on Earth. Boxers contract to be beaten up as part of their job. They do so voluntarily. Nobody has a right to hurt another person without a contract to do it. People may enter into such an agreement voluntarily. In some cases, it is better than the alternative, such as prostitution or starvation. Still, no contract, no right to harm.

[pvisserandorra]

@UEAdmiral A contract to be beaten, and what remedies do the poor have if the rich don't deliver? They have no resources, and certainly by definition the wealthy will include lawyers, because that's the way the corporate nanny state is set up. The premise that people would agree to be beaten is a ridiculous one. No one would agree to it willingly. The idea that problems of the free market are its employees is idiotic. Read Corporate nanny state (free on web). Also Cornered, by Barry Lynn.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra Of course if one party does not keep the contract, the contract is void and the poor man walks away with option to prosecute. Also, in a free market, legal aid will be much cheaper and sometimes free. Right now, costs are artificially high because of BAR Association monopolies granted by gov't. And such a premise is not ridiculous. Already I've mentioned the boxer, part of whose job is the possibility of being beaten--badly. If starving, I'd take a beating in trade for food too.

[pvisserandorra]

@UEAdmiral That is naive at best. The concept of turning everything into capital is another ridiculous premise. The oil companies benefit from extracting oil, but pay no price for pollution, road construction, traffic problems, or health consequences of oil's use. Once it is gone it is gone, and has been turned into capital under the your model. But that causes a whole set of problems of its own. There is no sustainability in a purely capitalist model, because there is no incentive for it.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra I do not suggest turning everything into capital. That's a page out of Keynesianism. However, the costs you cite: pollution, health issues, traffic issues, all are absoluting infringements upon another's rights, and thus are prosecutable under law. They're clearly hurting people, and they're open to lawsuit to cease and desist, or conduct themselves in a way that does not so infringe. Simple concept here.

[pvisserandorra]

@UEAdmiral As for taking a beating for food. Really? 3 times a day? How humane is that? Have you no sense of pride or morality? Have you no decency sir? Have you no decency?

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra I prefer personal injury to death by starvation if those are my only choices. I suspect you would as well if put into the position. It is not immoral to interact with another in a purely voluntary manner. Do you condemn gays as immoral? Or roughness in the bedroom as immoral? Of course not. Voluntary interaction between consenting parties that does not violate another person's rights cannot be immoral.

[pvisserandorra]

@UEAdmiral Here you are truly naive. Farmers cant sue Monsanto for littering their fields with Patented Biologically Modified Corn. Monsanto has too much money, and so many staff lawyers that a farmer, even one with a big farm, cant risk litigation. They have to pay, even though Monsanto is wrong. The concept of litigation against much rich adversaries is unrealistic. If you have not been involved in litigation, you will have to take my word for it.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra Yes, the current legal system disproportionately favors the rich. You must not assume present conditions to exist in a land without the state. Such conditions would be far less significant with competing courts of justice; courts that, if justice is not done within, would soon go out of business for lack of patronage.

Patents, by the way, are a product of the state. Patents treat ideas as a scarce good, when in fact ideas are more like air: everywhere and freely available.

[pvisserandorra]

@UEAdmiral Wealth and power are not going to fold because you propose an idea. You're points to me are beginning to assume I am ignorant and getting repetitive. You figure out a way to get rid of the elite establishment and we can talk again. Otherwise this is an exercise in mental self gratification.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra If you wish to draw our exchange here to a close, very well. But allow to me pose one more idea for consideration. You cite repeatedly, and I agree, that the elite exploit the government to stay rich. What, pray tell, do you think would happen if they didn't have the gov't to lean on? Nobody with the force of law to say "You there! Stop competing!" Somebody is going to beat them by pleasing the public better, and the elite fortunes will tumble. For business, boycott is scary.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra After skimming Conservative Nanny State I find myself in agreement. That book clearly illustrates the problems of exploitation and expansion of gov't power. Obviously, the solution is NOT more gov't (i.e. minimum wage). That is why I and others of like mind advocate ever more limiting of and ideally the rapid abolition of the state, and embracing free market capitalism, where everybody interacts on a voluntary basis, and law breakers are dealt with accordingly.

[pvisserandorra]

@UEAdmiral Free markets without control deliver a world of extreme wealth and extreme poverty, and disproportionately so. Having your face smashed in exchange for eating is not the kind of life I wish on anyone. You are envisioning a world where 80% of the population is in essence disposable, worth nothing. How are you so sure you won't be one of them? Maybe you should read some more Dickens.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra This is where your economic illiteracy is harming you. The extreme disparities in incomes are a result of state intervention, not capitalism. I direct you to the 1800s in America: the state, for the most part, stayed out of things, and across the board, life improved for everybody without exception. Costs went down, incomes went up. There were depressions brought on by fractional reserve banking (allowed by the state), which set the stage for the Fed in 1913, which erodes us now.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra And before you raise the point of slavery's existence in the 1800s, I submit to you that conditions would have been that much better if the slaves were free acting individuals. Prosperity does not come from the exploitation of people. This is evident today, as we are becoming less prosperous by the day the more the state taxes and spends away our future. Were they free to improve their situation, they'd have done so, and benefited their neighbors at the same time.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra Furthermore, the poverty rate in the US is a product of government. Don't you find it odd that the more the gov't does to fight poverty, the more of it we get? It is BECAUSE the free market is being disrupted that we are having our current woes. The solution is not more compulsion, but more individual freedom. The model followed by the US in the last century has been the Keynesian interventionist and inflationist one. The true model of economics is best learned at Mises.org

[pvisserandorra]

@UEAdmiral The Keynesian part I agree with, but Tea Party ideals are the same ones that have been enforced by the EMF on countless third world countries for their exploitation, and the model was the same one forced on Chile, for the act of wanting to nationalizing ITT's phone system. the effect was hardly an endorsement of "Chicago" economics. The economic part had little to do with anything other than US gangster activities all over the World. US consumes far more resources than it should.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra There are two sides to the Tea Party. You have the Palins and the Ron Pauls. I'm a Paulite. As such I'm a great critic of the Palin side of the Tea Party. There are definitely some ignorant and racist components over there, and I do not agree with them.

Yes, we consume too much in America. We took out loans from other countries to buy their goods. It was stupid and helped put us in this mess, but that's what our overlords wanted us to do. Gov't is the cause of that.

[pvisserandorra]

@UEAdmiral So if you exclude the racists and bigot, do you elect anyone? I doubt it. Your views are marginal at best. Ron Paul is at least pragmatic about some of the problems of the US, but the idea that you get to take the crazies for voting purposes and abandon them later is fraud at best.

[UEAdmiral]

@pvisserandorra Yes, the views are marginal and unpopular. We're working on that. In the meantime, we're addressing what we can, and trying to educate those with similar views. It's like "see, we agree on this, but you know, to be truly consistent you also have to admit this other thing." Believe it or not, we're winning people over. 50 years ago, all the libertarians in the world would fit into a single room, and often would meet thusly. Now? There's thousands of us, and growing daily.

[swingdocta]

Idiot moron idiot douche you astoria.

They are stealing money from their employees? Moron, corporations give benefits, tuition assistence, medical insurance etc, on top of paying their employees the market wage or salary. Of course execs are going to make a shitload of money, their jobs are more valuable and require more skill than any low skilled job

[swingdocta]

What you propose is more of a unionized labor structure. Have fun with that! i've dealt with unionized employers, its probably some of the worst experiences anyone can go through.

[Jaycephus01]

What do you mean 'a more fair way'? Did the company's janitor earn $500,000,000 for the company last year? No, and because of minimum wage and unions, it's even possible the janitor was overpaid. Let's do a little math. 5 million * the number of working-age citizens = more than a Quadrillion. That's over 70 times our GDP. In other words, the average American doesn't produce 5 millon worth of goods or services. If you want to be 'fair' it might be possible that some execs need to paid MORE.

[astoria3011]

I guess you are the one who is left out and unemployed because of the minimum wage law. I'm very sorry for that. I guess minimum wage law should be lifted and you should be making $2 / hr. Don't give up your job search.

[slickbtk]

Its funny how ignorant people can be. Here in florida they started raising the minumum wage about 2 years ago, what happend was a sharp increase in all the fast food joints amoung other things around here. Now although a lot of these 16 year old kids at mcd's think they are getting more money, they are now paying more for the same things that they are more prone to buy anyway like fast food and clothing and what not. you dont understand that everyone pays for increased production costs

[Orion602]

+ until production (and jobs) moves to asia

[delyshBB]

"fairness" through taxation is hilarious. like paying more as a person for the same services or even less is fair. it's making me LOL.

[Y3rMawm]

great video!

[AR15Truther]

Privatize profits Socialize losses. :(

He really points out that "they" are doing this on purpose without really saying it outright. A lot of that going around.

Goverment giving grants to non profits that want bigger goverment how Ironic.