All this sounds a lot like thechildischly-naive fascistoid propaganda about mental illness that's very popular lately.
A close friend of mine was a waitress at an event for a medical company once and she told me they basicly talked in terms of consumergoods "sell, sell, sell!"
But off-course these people like most people who talk about drugs in the terms used in the documentary live the kind of spoilt little lives where mental illness only occurs in television and film.
@Lois3691 That was a very all or nothing argument you posted. I'll give you a counter anecdote, that is as personal to me as your rant was to you.
My brother was diagnosed with ADHD as a child and was given Ritalin to squash this mental illness of being bored by school lessons and desirous strong stimuli. After years of being in a medicated stupor much of his days, he rejected Ritalin, but unfortunately by then he had started a new habit of self-medicating that continues to this day,
@riethc Sorry to hear that!! He is not sick the Education system is obsolete , He can kick the habit naturally or chemically with natural drugs ,plants , All children are evolving to survive the times coming. Luckly we still have the internet for now. peace and love .
Obviously what's really wrong here is that there are a lot of pampered crybabies who just want to live their happy lives without having to be confronted with anybody for whom live is not a pleasure-ride. Unfortunantly some of these people work in the wellfare sector and just like the jokers in this docu, they obviously think people are children who don't know when something is wrong with them or not.
This off-course stems from the problem that it's always healty people who have decided who is sick solely on the basis of the question: "does this persons behaviour bother me ?". Now that people with psychiatric problems can live better lives their trouble saddly is not over, because the medication only softens the disease; the medical world sadly still can't heal a genetic problem.
So since they used to aknowledge an illness so they could put sick people away, now all those sick people are emancipated enough to demand help, the healty folk just reverse what they think is their decission and deny an illness in the hope that all these sick people go away to suffer in silence
In other words: if you've been in a state for 3 months where just being awake is acute pain without there being any apparent reason why you should feel this way, or if you've had 3 psychoses in the space of 3 years and your brain is so damaged that you can't go to the bakers without it leaving you completely exhausted,
or if those clever genes have given you an overwhelming urge to lick all doorhandles and put your hand in all boiling kettles because they seemed to think this would ensure their procreation, these good smart healty people will tell you that you are not ill, you are not suffering, you don't need any help, this is all completely normal.
There is so much willfully ignorant biased propaganda in this film I wouldn't know where to start. It's like a tsunami of horse shit. I think this guy learned a lot about how to infuence the masses when he made The Century Of Self(which is a great film btw) that he decided to put them to use. On you and me no less! ;-)
There is so much willfully ignorant biased propaganda in this film I wouldn't know where to start. It's like a tsunami of horse shit. I think this guy learned a lot about how to infuence the masses when he made The Century Of Self(which is a great film btw) that he decided to put them to use. On you and me no less! ;-)
The sickest part about things like prozac is that it's killing off the Einsteins in the world. Look at the geniuses of the past. da Vinci, Einstein, Tesla, Van Gough etc... if they were alive today they would have been prescribed a pill, dumbed down, and complacent.
The last lever of Government control??Who controls the Government. We have a Central Bank just like America's 'Fed'. Printing money causes all the problems.
I feel I need to add that psychiatrists seem to be in bed with the pharma industry. It sounds ridiculous that a check list that hits 50% of the population has for solutions... medication!
It's not random. The same can be said for worshiping the market. The bankers benefited from the new philosophy proposed of leaving everything to the market.
Business interests dictate how society is organized.
You should read the debate about the new DSM, because the situation isn't that simple as you think it is. A great number of psychiatrists say that the DSM system should be abandoned, because it's too machine-like and not adapted to different cultures, leads to over-medication and the fact that the suffering is a normal part of human experience.
@Renegen1 Or maybe they work with the pharmas because that's the only solution they've allowed themselves. If they refuse to ask WHY a patient is feeling depressed, then prescribing talk therapy isn't possible. That only leaves meds.
its really boiling down to it people, either your with them or your with us, of course buissness' want to see us as a simpler mind, cause we are then easier to punch into thier number crunching machines, more people voted for american idol then at the 2000 presidential elections, its called conformity, and thier one thing that comes to mind when i think about conformity and that sheep.
What Jerome Wakefield fails to realise was that was the point from the start- controlling people is the whole point of negatiove freedom- positive freedom ideas are supressed by drugging.
By drugging the people that hold these ideas until they take medication and return to the simple model of life within the negative freedom society structure, it was the point from the beggining. All been played.
That's neagtive freedom society- positive freedom ideas are supressed
The market demans us to be individuals, entreprenuers, to try our own things to expand, be brave and act freely.
Then the market, like evolution, will trough consumers, natural selection, select out the ideas and concept that works so we can build from them.
In fact the entire concept of normality in Psychology is one interwind with the ideals od the statist social democratic statis governemnt we have today. It is better for their central planning
That fails to take into account a very basic aspect of human nature: tribalism. We are tribal animals, solidarity is in our nature. The same goes with Big Stories, idealism, common causes. These of course are not static, but clash ferociously, just as tribes clash.
To reduce the tribal aspect of humans to mere individualistic "belief" in the "god of the market" is is absurd. And anti-scientific.
No it's not, it's the same process as evolution. It's simplicity doesn't make it anti-scientific, only that much harder to understand.
Solidarity is part of our nature too, but it is only important from an individual perspecitve - how does my helping others help me?
To not understand that what matters is only our individuality is kind of absurd. Then you don't understand what drives humans. We have no collectivist mindset.
You'd be correct if the "trougher" - Smith's invisible hand - was genuinely powered by consumers; but too often it's powered by the producers. Take the iPad - was it developed as what the majority wanted, or did Apple develop it and then tell its customers that they wanted it? And then there's the conspiracy theories of New Coke, supposedly a tool to increase normal Coke consumption. And similarly, Cadbury ceased Wispa bars, and then engineered a "Bring back Wispa" campaign to rejuvenate sales.
Of course, the point of all this is that the producers - especially companies with big power - are manipulating the markets, so that they're less about what people want to buy, and more about what the companies want to make.
This is where the free market capitalism = democracy idea falls down. The argument was that "public-interest" Governments were often acting in personal interest - maybe they sometimes were. But in the free market, the power-wielders are ALWAYS acting in personal interest.
It's definetly not democracy, it is so much better. For instance it doesn't have the inherit problem of rongful representation of demand that democracy has where 51% and 99% are just as important "wants". It doesn't have the negative externalties where you can shift responsibility and the consequences onto others. The market actually has something that relates to expertieze and importance.Democracy is so much worse than the free market
Government seldom act in public interest. The market has to
but markets commit terrible evils such as arm sales and actions which are hamrful to the environment, i agree with your view of all wants and opinions being eqaul and thats a huge drawback from democracy, but the market will never change the world it will jsut leave to stangnation.
Arm sales is a good thing, as long as you arm the people and not the government.
Envoirmental problems come from lacking direction from the judicial system (who could be free market and competing as well). You're not supposed to be able to shift cost to other people, externalties must be dealt with.
The market is the vechicle that will ultimately solve the envoirmental problem. The Governments are doing bad, they are against nuclear and tried to pick ethanol as a winner, one more they are out
@vetromaster The liberal economy system is the best we got. It has its' problems like anything human but by any measure and given some time, it outperforms any other system. The more liberalized the better, on all front.
Unfortunately most people on Youtube, where the libertarian movement is over-represented tend to say that laws are too strict, that there is too much hindrance etc. From a first hand experience in an international project tied to multi-country export and import I'll tell you that they are not too stict, nor too complicated, and the only place there is such hindrance are those newly liberalized countries, where the internal market functions in a major part thanks to nepotism, not laws.
I meant libertarian-tending liberal economy, ok people. Look at what happened in 2008, maybe it didn't hit you, but it had surely hit me, because I graduated in 2008.
It's all a conspiracy, companies guess market demand and then the customers choses. It takes years of research and tons of surveys to decide how to develop the product, and then people have to like it as well. People don't just react to what happens, they don't buy whatever is on tv, the snakeoil salesman always loses out in the long run.
You can not manipulate people to buy shit on a can, they know better.
unfortunately the unregulated market leads to just that - an incredible amount of shit in the can + the heavy artillery of public relationships cabinets, with a little excellent things, very little, in fact not so sufficient to cover all the costs of the free market system. Both systems should be used, and unless both are we're in for a very hard ride, much harder than the ride which happened in newly liberalized countries.
@vetromaster newly liberalized countries are doubling their standard of living in less than a decade. You're insane if you really want to use that as an example.
The market can regulate itself, or rather, we the people can regulate the market - instead of the government. That works much better, which economic history and theory tells us.
@Visfen After the Opec crisis and ever since, the IMF and western nations imposed very strict and liberalized policies on indepted African countries with hopes that there would be an African economic lion on the way, much like what happened with the East Asian economic tiger. We're still waiting for that lion. If anything, history has tought us that there is no be all end all economic system that can be applied to any society like a perfect formula. We should never limit ourselves to just one.
That is absolutely true, again I wasn't making a point against the liberal system, I was making a point that a liberal system as envisioned by current economist has led us to a repetition of 1929 crisis, only less severe, because the governments had much more power, oversight and foresight over the IFC and the banks in general. Had they not given bailouts to AIG, the entire Scandinavian economy would have been in jeopardy, much like what happened in Iceland.
@vetromaster It's not the liberal policies that has lead to the current collapse. It was government policy which distorted the market. Just like in 1929.
Especially the FED with their lowering of interest rates and the fiscal stimulus have further made sure that the economy is going down an unsustainable investment pattern.
@Visfen Haha, wut? You might want to learn a thing or two about economics. Hell, learn everything. First developing countries are doubling their standard of living because they are catching up. They are merely adapting the technology that's already available in the west. Check Solow's equation that explains where growth comes from.
Second, the developing economies of Asia are ridiculously protectionist and government controlled.
@Renegen1 No they are not, they are much more liberalized than they were before. And in fact, the places where the controls are, are the places where the economy is doing worse off.
And the reason they are catching up is because they are liberalized, otherwise they would be stuck, which you see in most African countries.
Only in your world would China be considered liberalized. Can you even define it? You have shown by not understanding growth that you know nothing of economics. Keep reading grasshopper.
China's economy for example is dominated by state owned firms and the government uses subsidies and a low currency to stimulate the export sector.
@Renegen1 *sigh* Look at where in China the economy is growing. It's the export oriented free trade areas.
Compare that to the domestic economy, which is still stangant and planned.
I don't understand growth? Look at all the tiger economies, what do they have in common? It sure as hell isn't a communist party in charge and state firms. Look at which industries that are subsidied and tell me how they are doing....
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. China's export economy is extremely subsidized, it is low profit, high capacity. They are more concerned about jobs than profits etc
Did you ever hear about China's 5 year plans? Of course not. The government has a say in everything.
As for the tiger economies, (even China), they all adopted the same economic model of Japan after WW2. Export growth abroad, protectionism at home.
You wouldn't know because your sources are very narrow.
@Renegen1 In what are you suggesting it is subsidized? Because it's not and the profits are not low, I know that because I evalute some of the investment opportunities over there. The P/E nubmers are very low.
Do you know about the failure of the 5 year plans? The only thing that has made any progress in China is the free trade areas
Yes, they protected some infant industries at first, the explenation is completely post hoc ergo propter hoc. I was first when they liberated the market it worked
@Renegen1 I actually know exactly where you're coming from, your point of view is certainly not that extraoridnary or unique, it's quite common among laymen, people who have watched a couple of documentaries or someone who have taken a class or two in economics.
I've done a little more than that. So I think the neuances that sometimes are brought upwith things like for example infant industries is completely debunked when we look at which industries were protected and which ones survived.
I am a professional economist... and you have continuously avoided my questions.
From your own bio, you HAVE only taken a class or two in economics, since you are in engineering.
Not only that, but do you really live in Sweden? It's a very socialist country, successful, but socialist. It's easy to complain when you're so protected as there. You might be more in tune with reality if you lived in the USA with 10-20% unemployment.
@Renegen1 You mean, you have a degree. In order to be a professional, you have to actually know what you're talking about.
You think taking classes is the only way to learn something? I study engineering because I know economics, what would be the point in studying something I already know?
Yes, Sweden is a very controlled economy, which has proven to be non-successful. An average of 2% growth, going from the richest to not even in the top10.
@Renegen1 A little under 10% unemployment have been the natural unemployment level in Sweden for quite some time. Further, if Sweden was a state in the US we would be the poorest state, if we were a minority, we would be the poorest minority (nominal gdp vs rdp)
Traditionally natural unemployment has been far lower in the US.
Now on the other hand, the market isn't given the chance to self correct, instead it's being postponed and worsened by pushing the correction into the future by stimulus
@vetromaster Lets for once use the word control, because that is usually what people mean when they say "regulation" (the market can regulate itself, nobody is in support of a lack of regulation).
Forgive me, for it is a francicism, I was using French language to think,speak and write for 7 years, so it's a little hard to notice those barbarisms in my speech.
The widely used clip from Kilroy-Silk is interesting and look suspiciously like something created on purpose to convince people that Prozac is either good or bad. I dont know
This has been flagged as spam show
A Brilliant Documentary - Does anyone know name of the piece of Music that comes in around 6:50.
ludwigvonsteampole1 1 day ago
Comment removed
ludwigvonsteampole1 1 day ago
Comment removed
ludwigvonsteampole1 1 day ago
Comment removed
ludwigvonsteampole1 1 day ago
I think Lois3691 needs medicating.
TheBrutalDeluxe 9 months ago
5:45 - 6:05 I think Curtis needs medicating.
RPFS2008 9 months ago
All this sounds a lot like thechildischly-naive fascistoid propaganda about mental illness that's very popular lately.
A close friend of mine was a waitress at an event for a medical company once and she told me they basicly talked in terms of consumergoods "sell, sell, sell!"
But off-course these people like most people who talk about drugs in the terms used in the documentary live the kind of spoilt little lives where mental illness only occurs in television and film.
Lois3691 9 months ago
@Lois3691 That was a very all or nothing argument you posted. I'll give you a counter anecdote, that is as personal to me as your rant was to you.
My brother was diagnosed with ADHD as a child and was given Ritalin to squash this mental illness of being bored by school lessons and desirous strong stimuli. After years of being in a medicated stupor much of his days, he rejected Ritalin, but unfortunately by then he had started a new habit of self-medicating that continues to this day,
riethc 7 months ago
@riethc Sorry to hear that!! He is not sick the Education system is obsolete , He can kick the habit naturally or chemically with natural drugs ,plants , All children are evolving to survive the times coming. Luckly we still have the internet for now. peace and love .
mate6mty 1 month ago
Comment removed
Lois3691 9 months ago
Comment removed
Lois3691 9 months ago
Obviously what's really wrong here is that there are a lot of pampered crybabies who just want to live their happy lives without having to be confronted with anybody for whom live is not a pleasure-ride. Unfortunantly some of these people work in the wellfare sector and just like the jokers in this docu, they obviously think people are children who don't know when something is wrong with them or not.
Lois3691 9 months ago
This off-course stems from the problem that it's always healty people who have decided who is sick solely on the basis of the question: "does this persons behaviour bother me ?". Now that people with psychiatric problems can live better lives their trouble saddly is not over, because the medication only softens the disease; the medical world sadly still can't heal a genetic problem.
Lois3691 9 months ago
So since they used to aknowledge an illness so they could put sick people away, now all those sick people are emancipated enough to demand help, the healty folk just reverse what they think is their decission and deny an illness in the hope that all these sick people go away to suffer in silence
Lois3691 9 months ago
In other words: if you've been in a state for 3 months where just being awake is acute pain without there being any apparent reason why you should feel this way, or if you've had 3 psychoses in the space of 3 years and your brain is so damaged that you can't go to the bakers without it leaving you completely exhausted,
Lois3691 9 months ago
or if those clever genes have given you an overwhelming urge to lick all doorhandles and put your hand in all boiling kettles because they seemed to think this would ensure their procreation, these good smart healty people will tell you that you are not ill, you are not suffering, you don't need any help, this is all completely normal.
Lois3691 9 months ago
Comment removed
Lois3691 9 months ago
Comment removed
Lois3691 9 months ago
There is so much willfully ignorant biased propaganda in this film I wouldn't know where to start. It's like a tsunami of horse shit. I think this guy learned a lot about how to infuence the masses when he made The Century Of Self(which is a great film btw) that he decided to put them to use. On you and me no less! ;-)
JetsonMaximus 10 months ago
There is so much willfully ignorant biased propaganda in this film I wouldn't know where to start. It's like a tsunami of horse shit. I think this guy learned a lot about how to infuence the masses when he made The Century Of Self(which is a great film btw) that he decided to put them to use. On you and me no less! ;-)
JetsonMaximus 10 months ago
The sickest part about things like prozac is that it's killing off the Einsteins in the world. Look at the geniuses of the past. da Vinci, Einstein, Tesla, Van Gough etc... if they were alive today they would have been prescribed a pill, dumbed down, and complacent.
vargulf19 11 months ago
very good documentary not many know about it-many changes in the world right now
i am concerned for my children and the world
44mariaros 1 year ago
I wonder why?
099749 1 year ago
The last lever of Government control??Who controls the Government. We have a Central Bank just like America's 'Fed'. Printing money causes all the problems.
jonnyy40 1 year ago
wow religion in the middle age fucked our mind up with hell/heaven, now to add them, here comes pharmaceutical corps.
Valdris1987 1 year ago
all them pill poppers, people are becomming such pussies
irishgeal1 1 year ago
I am not a robot, I am a human being!
onedollarwill 1 year ago
"Community Vibrancy Index"
You couldn't make it up. I'd call it Orwellian... but no, it's something else.
Treblaine 2 years ago
Outstanding documentary. Gathers so many facts and historical tidbits and puts them together so it is easier to see the whole picture.
beta447 2 years ago 3
I feel I need to add that psychiatrists seem to be in bed with the pharma industry. It sounds ridiculous that a check list that hits 50% of the population has for solutions... medication!
It's not random. The same can be said for worshiping the market. The bankers benefited from the new philosophy proposed of leaving everything to the market.
Business interests dictate how society is organized.
Renegen1 2 years ago 15
@Renegen1
You should read the debate about the new DSM, because the situation isn't that simple as you think it is. A great number of psychiatrists say that the DSM system should be abandoned, because it's too machine-like and not adapted to different cultures, leads to over-medication and the fact that the suffering is a normal part of human experience.
vetromaster 1 year ago
@Renegen1 Or maybe they work with the pharmas because that's the only solution they've allowed themselves. If they refuse to ask WHY a patient is feeling depressed, then prescribing talk therapy isn't possible. That only leaves meds.
LordBifford 1 year ago
4:02 That dude pulled a Heath Ledger ;)
rbekers26 2 years ago
its really boiling down to it people, either your with them or your with us, of course buissness' want to see us as a simpler mind, cause we are then easier to punch into thier number crunching machines, more people voted for american idol then at the 2000 presidential elections, its called conformity, and thier one thing that comes to mind when i think about conformity and that sheep.
dodgedart74 2 years ago
SOMA
leeroynaggins 2 years ago 20
What Jerome Wakefield fails to realise was that was the point from the start- controlling people is the whole point of negatiove freedom- positive freedom ideas are supressed by drugging.
By drugging the people that hold these ideas until they take medication and return to the simple model of life within the negative freedom society structure, it was the point from the beggining. All been played.
That's neagtive freedom society- positive freedom ideas are supressed
099749 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
loosewireconnection 2 years ago
"If human freedom is = 0, then crime would not exist"
- Yevgeny Zamyatin
Not2Sane 2 years ago
Simpler humans are not closer to the markets view of humans
Visfen 2 years ago
How so? Seems the market will like a simpler human. Simpler human, simpler consumer. Easier to manipulate and control, as MIND CONTROL SLAVES!
SpitColor 2 years ago 2
You don't understand even what the market is.
The market demans us to be individuals, entreprenuers, to try our own things to expand, be brave and act freely.
Then the market, like evolution, will trough consumers, natural selection, select out the ideas and concept that works so we can build from them.
In fact the entire concept of normality in Psychology is one interwind with the ideals od the statist social democratic statis governemnt we have today. It is better for their central planning
Visfen 2 years ago
That fails to take into account a very basic aspect of human nature: tribalism. We are tribal animals, solidarity is in our nature. The same goes with Big Stories, idealism, common causes. These of course are not static, but clash ferociously, just as tribes clash.
To reduce the tribal aspect of humans to mere individualistic "belief" in the "god of the market" is is absurd. And anti-scientific.
mfamelis 2 years ago
No it's not, it's the same process as evolution. It's simplicity doesn't make it anti-scientific, only that much harder to understand.
Solidarity is part of our nature too, but it is only important from an individual perspecitve - how does my helping others help me?
To not understand that what matters is only our individuality is kind of absurd. Then you don't understand what drives humans. We have no collectivist mindset.
Visfen 2 years ago
You'd be correct if the "trougher" - Smith's invisible hand - was genuinely powered by consumers; but too often it's powered by the producers. Take the iPad - was it developed as what the majority wanted, or did Apple develop it and then tell its customers that they wanted it? And then there's the conspiracy theories of New Coke, supposedly a tool to increase normal Coke consumption. And similarly, Cadbury ceased Wispa bars, and then engineered a "Bring back Wispa" campaign to rejuvenate sales.
nedbh 2 years ago
Of course, the point of all this is that the producers - especially companies with big power - are manipulating the markets, so that they're less about what people want to buy, and more about what the companies want to make.
This is where the free market capitalism = democracy idea falls down. The argument was that "public-interest" Governments were often acting in personal interest - maybe they sometimes were. But in the free market, the power-wielders are ALWAYS acting in personal interest.
nedbh 2 years ago
It's definetly not democracy, it is so much better. For instance it doesn't have the inherit problem of rongful representation of demand that democracy has where 51% and 99% are just as important "wants". It doesn't have the negative externalties where you can shift responsibility and the consequences onto others. The market actually has something that relates to expertieze and importance.Democracy is so much worse than the free market
Government seldom act in public interest. The market has to
Visfen 2 years ago
but markets commit terrible evils such as arm sales and actions which are hamrful to the environment, i agree with your view of all wants and opinions being eqaul and thats a huge drawback from democracy, but the market will never change the world it will jsut leave to stangnation.
manofempire 2 years ago
Arm sales is a good thing, as long as you arm the people and not the government.
Envoirmental problems come from lacking direction from the judicial system (who could be free market and competing as well). You're not supposed to be able to shift cost to other people, externalties must be dealt with.
The market is the vechicle that will ultimately solve the envoirmental problem. The Governments are doing bad, they are against nuclear and tried to pick ethanol as a winner, one more they are out
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
unfortunately both the command economy and liberal economy systems are unworkable.
vetromaster 1 year ago
@vetromaster The liberal economy system is the best we got. It has its' problems like anything human but by any measure and given some time, it outperforms any other system. The more liberalized the better, on all front.
Visfen 1 year ago
@Visfen
Unfortunately most people on Youtube, where the libertarian movement is over-represented tend to say that laws are too strict, that there is too much hindrance etc. From a first hand experience in an international project tied to multi-country export and import I'll tell you that they are not too stict, nor too complicated, and the only place there is such hindrance are those newly liberalized countries, where the internal market functions in a major part thanks to nepotism, not laws.
vetromaster 1 year ago
@vetromaster
I meant libertarian-tending liberal economy, ok people. Look at what happened in 2008, maybe it didn't hit you, but it had surely hit me, because I graduated in 2008.
vetromaster 1 year ago
It's all a conspiracy, companies guess market demand and then the customers choses. It takes years of research and tons of surveys to decide how to develop the product, and then people have to like it as well. People don't just react to what happens, they don't buy whatever is on tv, the snakeoil salesman always loses out in the long run.
You can not manipulate people to buy shit on a can, they know better.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
unfortunately the unregulated market leads to just that - an incredible amount of shit in the can + the heavy artillery of public relationships cabinets, with a little excellent things, very little, in fact not so sufficient to cover all the costs of the free market system. Both systems should be used, and unless both are we're in for a very hard ride, much harder than the ride which happened in newly liberalized countries.
vetromaster 1 year ago
@vetromaster newly liberalized countries are doubling their standard of living in less than a decade. You're insane if you really want to use that as an example.
The market can regulate itself, or rather, we the people can regulate the market - instead of the government. That works much better, which economic history and theory tells us.
Visfen 1 year ago
@Visfen After the Opec crisis and ever since, the IMF and western nations imposed very strict and liberalized policies on indepted African countries with hopes that there would be an African economic lion on the way, much like what happened with the East Asian economic tiger. We're still waiting for that lion. If anything, history has tought us that there is no be all end all economic system that can be applied to any society like a perfect formula. We should never limit ourselves to just one.
rappst 1 year ago
@Visfen
That is absolutely true, again I wasn't making a point against the liberal system, I was making a point that a liberal system as envisioned by current economist has led us to a repetition of 1929 crisis, only less severe, because the governments had much more power, oversight and foresight over the IFC and the banks in general. Had they not given bailouts to AIG, the entire Scandinavian economy would have been in jeopardy, much like what happened in Iceland.
vetromaster 1 year ago
@vetromaster It's not the liberal policies that has lead to the current collapse. It was government policy which distorted the market. Just like in 1929.
Especially the FED with their lowering of interest rates and the fiscal stimulus have further made sure that the economy is going down an unsustainable investment pattern.
Visfen 1 year ago
@Visfen Haha, wut? You might want to learn a thing or two about economics. Hell, learn everything. First developing countries are doubling their standard of living because they are catching up. They are merely adapting the technology that's already available in the west. Check Solow's equation that explains where growth comes from.
Second, the developing economies of Asia are ridiculously protectionist and government controlled.
Renegen1 1 year ago
@Renegen1 No they are not, they are much more liberalized than they were before. And in fact, the places where the controls are, are the places where the economy is doing worse off.
And the reason they are catching up is because they are liberalized, otherwise they would be stuck, which you see in most African countries.
Visfen 1 year ago
Only in your world would China be considered liberalized. Can you even define it? You have shown by not understanding growth that you know nothing of economics. Keep reading grasshopper.
China's economy for example is dominated by state owned firms and the government uses subsidies and a low currency to stimulate the export sector.
Have fun in your fantasy universe.
Renegen1 1 year ago
@Renegen1 *sigh* Look at where in China the economy is growing. It's the export oriented free trade areas.
Compare that to the domestic economy, which is still stangant and planned.
I don't understand growth? Look at all the tiger economies, what do they have in common? It sure as hell isn't a communist party in charge and state firms. Look at which industries that are subsidied and tell me how they are doing....
Visfen 1 year ago
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. China's export economy is extremely subsidized, it is low profit, high capacity. They are more concerned about jobs than profits etc
Did you ever hear about China's 5 year plans? Of course not. The government has a say in everything.
As for the tiger economies, (even China), they all adopted the same economic model of Japan after WW2. Export growth abroad, protectionism at home.
You wouldn't know because your sources are very narrow.
Renegen1 1 year ago
@Renegen1 In what are you suggesting it is subsidized? Because it's not and the profits are not low, I know that because I evalute some of the investment opportunities over there. The P/E nubmers are very low.
Do you know about the failure of the 5 year plans? The only thing that has made any progress in China is the free trade areas
Yes, they protected some infant industries at first, the explenation is completely post hoc ergo propter hoc. I was first when they liberated the market it worked
Visfen 1 year ago
@Renegen1 I actually know exactly where you're coming from, your point of view is certainly not that extraoridnary or unique, it's quite common among laymen, people who have watched a couple of documentaries or someone who have taken a class or two in economics.
I've done a little more than that. So I think the neuances that sometimes are brought upwith things like for example infant industries is completely debunked when we look at which industries were protected and which ones survived.
Visfen 1 year ago
I am a professional economist... and you have continuously avoided my questions.
From your own bio, you HAVE only taken a class or two in economics, since you are in engineering.
Not only that, but do you really live in Sweden? It's a very socialist country, successful, but socialist. It's easy to complain when you're so protected as there. You might be more in tune with reality if you lived in the USA with 10-20% unemployment.
Renegen1 1 year ago
@Renegen1 You mean, you have a degree. In order to be a professional, you have to actually know what you're talking about.
You think taking classes is the only way to learn something? I study engineering because I know economics, what would be the point in studying something I already know?
Yes, Sweden is a very controlled economy, which has proven to be non-successful. An average of 2% growth, going from the richest to not even in the top10.
Visfen 1 year ago
@Renegen1 A little under 10% unemployment have been the natural unemployment level in Sweden for quite some time. Further, if Sweden was a state in the US we would be the poorest state, if we were a minority, we would be the poorest minority (nominal gdp vs rdp)
Traditionally natural unemployment has been far lower in the US.
Now on the other hand, the market isn't given the chance to self correct, instead it's being postponed and worsened by pushing the correction into the future by stimulus
Visfen 1 year ago 2
@Renegen1 I work in finance btw.
Visfen 1 year ago
@vetromaster Lets for once use the word control, because that is usually what people mean when they say "regulation" (the market can regulate itself, nobody is in support of a lack of regulation).
Visfen 1 year ago
@Visfen
Forgive me, for it is a francicism, I was using French language to think,speak and write for 7 years, so it's a little hard to notice those barbarisms in my speech.
vetromaster 1 year ago
Handing power over to the banks and markets may have been a good idea at the time but look at them now.
lambspoo 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
Jupiman 2 years ago
The widely used clip from Kilroy-Silk is interesting and look suspiciously like something created on purpose to convince people that Prozac is either good or bad. I dont know
chrisp3001 2 years ago
The way Adam Curtis says "numbers" sounds like people that werea afraid of math in high school.
Dodec84 3 years ago