Except, that when enough people vote for a certain outcome, read Ron Paul's revolution, the polictical process HAS to notice the change. Of course they will hire media to minimalize but, as more people jump on for the change even large organizations as the Republican party will Have to allow the voice or lose the vote and when the number gets large enough, even they can't ignore it.
@NewFrambian So long as the majority of men are content with voting for the lesser of two evils, no real headway will ever be made. I am an Oathkeeper and Ron Paul supporter because he is the only candidate whom I do not see as an enemy of the Constitution and the People. But I hold out more hope that the dollar will crash and gov't will overreach causing a massive backlash by the people and a rejection of the idea that previous generations could take upon debt in our names.
Until the number of special interest groups multiplies ridiculously and there is an economic collapse as a result. Then voters begin to wake up and vote for lower taxes. It just takes them a long time to learn this lesson.
As usual, economists argue simple models to explain complex things. Thats why they never seem to be able to understand anything of common sense in real life. Also, they are one of those special interest groups - academics.
He's counting votes as if it was the popular vote on a national level. In reality we have an electoral college and so this is not quite accurate but I see his point of rational ignorance.
@barbourjohn He talking about elected officials in general, not the president. You know the senate and congress. They are elected by votes to the best of my knoledge. And this is exactly what happens and why republians or democrats don't actually cut spending. I see your point of rational ignorance and raise you two.
@mmeb83 It's a good video and I understand it's just an illustration. Each district will have its own rules and constituency. Most things never should have been allowed to get to the national level. Two things did this: The commerce clause and the slavery problem. After that, the floodgates opened. It's part of our history and we just have to live with it.
@barbourjohn Agreed. But like slavery, it doesn't mean it won't change. Let's hope more people understand the problem and work to fix it by making certain powers left to the states while protecting individuals rights.
@barbourjohn Do you know that Christianity is correct? The world around us reveals that G-d DOES exist, and the historical evidence reveals that Jesus Christ really did come to this earth and there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ really did physically rise from the dead. Jesus is coming again and the signs of the end times that were foretold in the Bible are coming to pass.
here in nz special interest groups and lobbying is very much illegal! we see it as corruption, the corruption of officials in russia that america is always denouncing is just small scale lobbying.
I like the animation. It sorta helps the layman understand how this works. But it needs to illustrate that the tax money doesn't just flow to one particular politician in one circumstance. More importantly, it could show someone who is not competing with slave labor in or from third world countries. Show us defense contractors, pharmaceuticals, banks, PPO's, fossil energy conglomerates, and THEIR politicians. That out of the pipeline could cut spending enough pay THEIR debt in 20 years or less.
@hybridmcgee - I think LearnLiberty should DEFINITELY do a video on the military-industrial complex. Maybe one on the economics of special interests during wartime might be a way to approach that topic.
@StateExempt I agree that we need to look further into this specific item first and foremost since it has dramatically influenced our political environment over the last 50 years. Eisenhower warned us about this. We have had the intelligence community spending a lot of time and money surveilling, recruiting, extorting and eliminating officials and citizens in this country and others to procure and protect specific economic interests.
@StateExempt Milton Friedman video lectured on military biz on the 'tube somewhere - he gave them a darn good roasting in his usual clear socratic style.
@jontycampbell - Alright thanks for the heads up. I think it should be on LibertyPen somewhere or within the favorites of MinnesotaChris so it should be easy to find I hope.
I want subsidies for food because it makes a food surplus so that we don't starve like a lot of other countries do when we have a couple bad years in a row.
@AllOtherNamesTaken2 actualy a lot of farm subsidies pay people to not produce usable croops or like the wonderful bio fule subsidies to throw something like 30% of our corn away to make around 2-4% of our gas (not sure on the exact numbers). which is actual making poor people around the world starve. Its not like they set up a supper food reserve someplace with that money
@AllOtherNamesTaken2 I know. I would prefer it if we didn't have bio-fuel subsidies, and the issue with which type of subsidies to give farmers gets complicated (whether we should enforce scarcity to raise the price of food or to pay the farmers more than their crops are worth).
This is exactly why policies and viewpoints should turn into laws and regulations at the lowest possible level of government. The founders expressed grave concern that a republic could have problems if it was too large. I think we've hit that point. We need to start taking things out of the feds and ship them to the states and localities. I'm not saying the US should dissolve, just that only those policies that must be at the federal level should be there. Dept. of Edu doesn't need to exist.
It actually works by an electoral college. So your vote could be important to winning your state. You dont need a Majority of the popular vote to win the presidency. Do a video on how horrible the First Past The Post voting system is flawed and corrupt.
Wow, this guy just immediately jumped to the conclusion that his hypothetical farm subsidy policy was inefficient. No reason why, not detail just BAM. Not very deep thinking before assuming the situation is wholly negative.
@colddrake80 it's a 2 minute video not a thesis, it’s not an attack of farmers that was merely an example. Have a look in to it yourself, you may change your mind about what is really best for the farmers and everyone else.
I just wanna say that as a farmer, I find this a complete untrue generalization of how the business works. Only certain farms growing certain things receives those, quite unfairly too. For instance, here in california, we don't get subsidies for growing lettuce or salad crops. I just wanted to say it's stupid and unfair to just use the word "farmer". You're throwing us all in the same pile. -.-
@Lovemy1911a1@Lovemy1911a1 You don't even know where you live. Since 1920 everyone can vote in your country that's democracy and it's the reason of the recessions, current mess and why top 1% robs ordinary people of their wealth search for noblist Krugman "inequality-trends-in-one-picture" article Plus they making you poorer everyday since 1913 -introduction of FED lewrockwell(dot)com/paul/paul334.html
@fafura13 Wrong a Democracy a government runs by the will of the majority. Now the USA is rapidly heading in that direction but it is still a republic. Thats why we have the electoral collage and each state has 2 senators no mater there population. In a real democracy we would vote directly on laws themselves or elect people based on a majority vote and replace the senate with something devided by pop. I dont like the FED ether but facts are facts & this is not a democracy it just isnt.
@Lovemy1911a1 U have representative democracy,everybody can vote right?&the vote of majority counts,doesn't it?Since 1913 (probably worst year in US history-introduction of FED&income tax) the U.S.Senate has been elected directly by the voters, rather than being appointed by the state legislatures.It's more a democracy than a republic.Anyhow majority vote is the problem,as Marx noted:"Democracy is the road to socialism"Did u know half Americans are already on some kind of welfare??
@fafura13 yes I know how America is becoming a welfare state & thats one step away from a dictatorship. But that is why it is important for people to understand the truth about things & you are alowing the socialist to change the nature of the country by repeating this lie we are a democracy. The majority vote does not always count like how Bush won the ellectoral colage but lost the popular vote & why sould CA &ND both get 2 senators CA has 30X the people thats not very democratic now is it
@Lovemy1911a1 Best way is compare it to socialist UE. All countries (just like ur states) are independent and choose their leaders by majority vote. Then those leaders camouflage under UE ("federal gov. in ur case) to rob and enslave ppl that have chosen them. So what is the cause of the problem if not manipulated by media&socialists majority vote? How is that socialists&democrats sit in ur gov.(including Obama-he was chosen by democratic majority wasn't he?) & ruin the country?
@fafura13 Yes you are mostly right & part of why this is all happening is because people think we are a democracy & abandoning the pricipals of the republic. Thats why I want to make sure people understand the government & what made it great. But you are wrong about Obama he may have one the majority vote but he is president because he won the electoral colage thats what counts. However your right about him ruining the country
@fafura13 Refusing to vote because you think that one vote couldn't make a difference is naive. Excuse me for wanting a say in the future leaders of my country.
@16SarahE If you are voting for total strangers who promise you stuff but you have to pay for it and then give them total power to control your life is simply naive,dont you agree? Of course unless you vote for libertarians who want to give you freedom in decision making regarding your life and money.
@fafura13 That's why I immerse myself in the political process and research the guys running for President so I know exactly what I'm voting for. The way they live their lives outside of the political spectrum and how much freedom they will give me is what I'm voting about. That way, they won't be total strangers to me. Also, I look at the way they eat their string cheese.
PS: The entirety of this comments page is just people arguing... The danger of posting political videos on the internet.
@16SarahE If that's the case, you're probably doing the right thing. However majority who really decides on who is elected, doesn't :(
And that's why the politics and economics of democratic countries go down the drain.. Socialist Hitler won in democracy.
"Democracy...while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide"John Adams
The biggest reason is each Senator has their own state's projects they want funded, so they wind up having to TRADE most of their votes with other Senators, for their projects. Senators almost never get to vote their conscience for what's best for the country, so THAT'S why wasteful spending never gets cut.
kindof reminds me of when (whoever they are) keeps changing the retirement age limit. They tell us they base it on criteria about lifespan. Lifespan hasn't changed except fot the worst.
@mariametko What are you talking about? The lifespan of the average person is constantly going up. They say children born in 2007 will live longer than every generation before. When they invented social security you were suppose to die before you could qualify for it, now people on average can get 15-20 years of social security checks.
Also, while I agree with the general idea that one voter alone can't affect the outcome of a national (Presidential) election, his voting example ignores the reality of the Electoral College that make the potential deciding pool much smaller. The outcome of a national election can hinge on one state - the smallest being Wyoming - or, in the event of a tie outcome that throws it to the House, a single congressional district - the smallest, again, being Wyoming, which has 495K people.
@kjhuang I disagree with the voting pool shrinking. In a majority vote wins situation. Politician would only concentrate in racking up the vote in highly populated areas favorable to them. If those were the rules Bush and Gore would have spent all their time racking up votes in Texas and New York. Where as in the electoral college it makes campaigning more strategic and spreads out the attention areas get. Rural areas that would get ignored now get attention.
@ShamanMcLamie First of all, if politicians are campaigning in mostly big states that's because that's where most of the people are. And why shouldn't the government pay attention to the needs of most of the people? Isn't that democracy? I'm not saying that rural areas should be ignored; I'm all for helping rural areas as well, but I don't see why they should get a disproportionately larger share of attention.
@ShamanMcLamie Second of all, when was the last time rural areas in Nebraska or North Dakota or California or Texas or Montana or Utah got any attention from presidential candidates? Rural states don't get any attention at all under the Electoral College because 1. they're almost always uncompetitive and 2. even if they were competitive, they're usually small. The majority of action is in swing states, and within swing states in swing areas, which may or may not be rural.
@kjhuang Your correct about those States. But it's those states own fault they get less attention. They completely bank with one side or another in every election. Their satisfied enough with either candidate. And as you said how the attention is distributed is not determined by population, but by their swing state status. I can see a decent chance that Iowa or New Hampshire could decide the next election, or not at all. And once again places that normally wouldn't get attention do.
@ShamanMcLamie IA and NH are too small to decide elections unless it's really close, which yes, 2012 could be. In any case, I think if the Electoral College were abolished candidates would naturally continue to focus on swing areas. So Democrats might campaign in Austin, TX and Republicans in Bakersfield, CA whereas right now they would never need to visit those cities. So in a way getting rid of the Electoral College could encourage candidates to widen their reach.
@kjhuang Use a 2012 interactive electoral map. With how lines are drawn it isn't unlikely. I'd like to get to the real root of the problem is the Federal government is doing far more than it's suppose to be. Many of the big important originally state and local only issues. The smaller and more local the government the better it is at adhering to the peoples needs. Once again the federal government was only intended to be for common defense interstate issues.
@kjhuang The main reason it is difficult to pass controversial Legislation is to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. People go to Texas not to be Californians. People move to Alaska not to be Floridians, people move to New York not to be Ohians. Would you want the rule of another state, or just city (and remember urban life is far different then rural life telling you what to do. Making all the decisions. States allow for diversity and our strength is from diversity.
@ShamanMcLamie Third of all, rural areas currently do get a disproportionate share of attention, though not because of the Electoral College, but because of the structure of the U.S. Senate. And it sucks. Rural Senators routinely block a bunch of things that the rest of the country wants. How is that fair?
@kjhuang First of all it was purposely intended for large and sweeping legislation to be difficult pass. A simple majority should never cut it. I find it dangerous to have the 51% telling the 49% what to do. Second if you have majority rules a small handful of urban areas will define policy for the entire country. You also have to remember America is a massive and diverse country. There were secessionist threats from North and South over a variety of issues before the Civil War.
@ShamanMcLamie Alright, we'll have to disagree; I think a simple majority is fine for most things. And my attitude is that if certain areas feel strongly enough about irreconcilable differences to secede, they should have every right to do so.
@kjhuang There are reason we are one country and why secession is bad. The United States was created, One for a common defense, you think we'd have survived as 13 separate countries. The second was to deal with interstate law and protect individual rights, Slavery would have survived a lot longer in an independent South. Third and most forgotten was it created a massive free trade zone. Free trade always has a net benefit to a society. It opens up goods and creates free competition.
The idea of dispersed costs/concentrated benefits is just the way government naturally works and has to work, whether it's run by Ron Paul or Bernie Sanders. Saying that government shouldn't have dispersed costs/concentrated benefits is like saying lions shouldn't eat meat or bones shouldn't have calcium.
This is based on proportional representation and one election district. Which is seldom the case. Further; the concentration of benefits and dispertion of costs are much more relevant when studiying distributive politics (district demand models, swing voter models) than deficit spending. Deficit spending can be due to institutional "locked situations", where veto players veto oposing proposition as the status quo is more favorbale (Veto Player Model). In short, this video contributed little,
@DiggingNorway - This video did a nice job summing up the general hurdles with reigning in special interests according to public choice analysis. It is not supposed to be a documentary.
but what if thousands think "my vote wont make a difference" this is the mentality that stops a lot of people. But if thousands or millions of people vote instead of thinking this then wouldn't they make a difference?
How will you sort out the options when you vote? I suggest that before you get caught up with anyone, including Obama, et al that you FIRST go to this web page (Get - The - Book . com) and grab a copy of a great book that few folks know about, read it, and then vote in a manner that will actually get this country a good President.
I think an important point is also the inherent selfishness of the human being. You want what's best for the society until it adversely affects you. That is the problem in Greece now. Everyone wants to fix the problems but no one is willing to quit their cushy public sector job to do it. Everybody agrees that more taxes should be paid as long as it's not them. Massively cutting spending loses you votes. And that's thee nub and crux of it.
“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.” – Frédéric Bastiat
People say they want to cut spending, but they only mean in a broad sense. When they start to get down to details you can't cut anything without causing a stink.
@dragonsder This is why democracy works better the less people there are in the country. With fewer voters, social pressure to do the right thing starts to trump personal self interest because it's harder to remain anonymous about your votes. Ideally, the best democracy is that of one (a single person), or perhaps the family level.
@drewmandan Agreed. I've often said that democracy works great for choosing pizza toppings at a party, but it is ultimately disastrous when applied to entire national economies and systems of governance.
Lobbying which is nothing less than bribery should be against the law. We have elected representatives from every state and the right to vote. Let those who run for office have the same amount of "free" air time & press, such as debates, etc. That way it would be fair & informative. Nobody should be able to win an election based on money. If they want your vote then they must stand for what the majority wants & needs. Not based on bribes you pay them to do "favors" for you once they get elected.
So Powell is suggesting we should not vote because we are not going to make a dramatic impact? I don't need my life to be a movie, I know I can't "Tip the Balance" That's the point, we're a large group of people, and social movements make a difference.
When white women were second class citizens and most black people were property, the number of people voting sure was important, wasn't it?
No. He's explaining the Political Interest Paradox (colloquially known amongst libertarians as "the TEA Party Syndrome"). That is, why state spending and control tends very strongly to grow over time, even when people vote in office holders who campaign as wanting to cut spending.
The whole "learnliberty" thing is undoubtedly a project of the ultra-reactionary Koch Brothers. Their project is correctly described as one of neo-feudalism - subordinating the middle class into a state of poverty, destitution, and misery, so that they can function as cheap labor and/or groveling paupers for the likes of David Koch, Pete Peterson, et al. This is likewise the project of the contrived "libertarian" pseudo-movement, though most of its adherents are admittedly duped fanatics.
The implicit claim here is that money is metaphysically real; money is manifestly not metaphysically real. Property, plant, and equipment is real; the welfare of the population (e.g., the General Welfare, as described in the preamble of the constitution), is real. What isn't real are the nominal financial assets of the Wall Street parasites. Maybe look at the difference between real and fictitious capital, Ben, and you'll not make such idiotic videos/statements.
So is the farmer subsidy helping or hurting the average American. Or neutral. And if the spending is deficit spending which some are saying has bankrupt the United States does that factor into the avg American being hurt? Are we bankrupt?
They hurt... they cause too much disruption.. Subsidies are taken and NEVER used for forming.. They go to coprorations that make it impposible for little guy to compete for the big guy...
Protectionism is always destructive. It affects domestic consumers and taxpayers negatively by some combination of increased prices and/or increased tax burdens, and affects foreign producers negatively. This is especially egregious when it's the food prices going up, and the foreign producers are some of the poorest farmers in the world.
Google Bastiat's famous text, The Candlemakers' Petition. He makes a much better case for free trade than can any YouTube comment. -
In short, what's happening is that the US government has promised more money than exists in the known universe, and hundreds of millions of people are planning their careers, families and retirements around the assumption that that money will be available in full and on time.
Propping up wasteful industries is just one way in which that government continues to add to its debt, and make more people more dependent upon money that they will never be able to pay out.
This would do nothing. How do you stop job offers with strings attached. How do you stop all influence from these groups. You can't.
The solution is to deny the power to the political process. That's the reason our constitution as written to give only those powers expressly expressed to the gov't. Shame we didn't live up to it, now we're on a road to oblivion, with hardly any solutions to restore what was a sound policy.
@NativeNewMexican Removing money from political campaigns will go a long way. Each politician wants to be reelected, they kiss ass to private interests for money to fund that next election year and get reelected. Politicians do want nice retirements but it will be quit a blow for them not to be helped with continuing their political power.
You believe that public funding would prevent private interests from interfering with elections? REALLY? You're going to deny them the ability to fund their own election with their own money? If not, then the interest groups just need to launder it into the politicians' account. The interest group can contact the advertising agency and media outlet and gets special consideration. The interest group gets news stations to spin for their candidate. BTW, removing power works 100%
@NativeNewMexican Lets completely remove government power that is not listed in the constitution. shitty roads, the water unclean, no worker's safety regulation, child labor, no FBI, no CDC, eleven to sixteen hour work days with no breaks, no regulating wall street, no public schools, no invading other countries or having military bases in other countries, no driver's registration, no protection from faulty products, no food regulation, and no regulating drugs. You believe that works? Really?
You believe that gov't is the one and only way that needs can be achieved? (The FBI is constitutional as is the CDC)
Let's take a look at child labor laws. Do they do _anything_? No. Productivity is what made it so that children didn't have to work. PERIOD. Look at what child labor laws have done in Bangladesh.
Yes, not only do I believe it works, almost 100% of the time it has been proven to work when tried. Compare _ANY_ public institution with a private equivalent. Mises.org
Respond to this video... It should probably noted that we both want the similar things and have different views how to achieve them. Let us save our sarcasm for those that want to continue the corruption of the system. Both of our arguments have advantages and faults, but are steps in the right direction.
@LancePoint9 I encourage you to watch all of the videos on this channel, then watch all of the videos from mises and maybe even all the videos from libertypen. I'll try to cut back on the sarcasm.
@NativeNewMexican While we're exchanging recommendations, I recommend The Young Turks who are progressives that comment on a variety of issues. I'll look up your suggestions and see. I would also recommend looking at productivity in the united states and wages from the sixties to now. I welcome your insight on the issue.
I've watched the Young Turks and on a regular basis they say things that are profoundly false. Pick a couple of your favorites for me if you would and I'll post a comment on them.
Re: wages vs. productivity: Would I see that gov't is forcing employers to spend more and more money on tax prep, regulation compliance, unemployment, medicaid, medicare, etc that instead of being in the hands of the employee are diverted? The average wage would be 81% higher if there were no taxes.
@NativeNewMexican try Obama Didn't Change CIA After Bush\ How Rick Perry Got Rich On The Job\ Firms Spent More On CEOs Than Taxes\ and GOP: Cut FEMA, First Responders & Hurricane Hunters. As to taxes, find the wage trend for the top ten percent since the sixties and the stock market. Taxes are not the reason wealth is being diverted from the employees.
Taxes are most certainly a huge reason that wealth is diverted from employees. It's not even debatable. That statistic 81% isn't made up, it's real. Perhaps there's also some CEO shenanigans, but seriously, how many CEO's do you think there are? Most employees don't work under a CEO in any form at all. It's _not_ CEO pay. The biggest theft of wealth by far has been gov't inflationary policy and the FED.
@NativeNewMexican Taxes overall have been dropping in recent decades, what specific taxes and programs are causing this? As to the FED, I agree there.
@LancePoint9 either an approval system (check everyone who you think would be a good candidate) or the ranking system (rank the candidates in how much you would like to see them elected)
this would allow people to do things like
3 votes to Bob Barr
5 votes to Barack Obama
2 votes to John McCain
or something along those lines.
It would be up to the states. The federal government doesn't get to decide how the states conduct their voting.
In Kansas, we would just need to pass a law, I think.
@LancePoint9 it would better reflect the will of the voters.
when you have the current system of voting, people will vote like this
"I really agree with Ralph Nader, I sort of agree Bill Clinton, but I REALLY don't agree with George Bush, so I'm not going to 'waste my vote' by voting for Ralph Nader"
in the current system people don't vote for who they do want, they vote against who they don't want.
@LancePoint9 it would better reflect the will of the voters.
when you have the current system of voting, people will vote like this
"I really agree with Ralph Nader, I sort of agree Bill Clinton, but I REALLY don't agree with George Bush, so I'm not going to 'waste my vote' by voting for Ralph Nader"
in the current system people don't vote for who they do want, they vote against who they don't want.
Oh my god, you're right. I have some searching to do. Maybe you're right and corporations and the wealthy should get tax breaks and tax subsidies while the income gap widens and American workers' quality of life goes downhill and their health care is an outrageous unaffordable rip off.
@StateExempt How civil of you. Sorry, I'm a left-winger and only wish to shit on your beliefs. I believe in single-payer health care, in reduction of defense spending and increase in social spending, in taxing the fuck outta the wicked greedy Koch Bastards and millionaires. I believe in labor unions, 3 week vacations mandated by law for all workers, more paid sick leave 32 hour work weeks, and a living Wage!!
@StateExempt Yeah last I checked I pay taxes too and the 'someone else' you talk about is making enough to pay a bit more. They're making so much more because people are working for those companies and not getting paid too much at all. But I know you're cool with below subsistence wages. Fuck the poor, it is their fault and the rich deserve every penny that get.
@StateExempt it would appear that @s2Cents doesn't have a clue how libertarians think and in your responses you continue to let him perpetuate many false statements about libertarians.
I wish that I had been here to assist you in demolishing his irrationality.
I believe in making alternative energy (solar/wind/geothermal/hydrogen) a national priority!! Ultimate goal: get off dependence on foreign oil and nuclear
There needs to be a reaffirmation of the Geneva Conventions. Ban torture, water-boarding, extraordinary rendition,"private security contractors". Restoration of the Magna Carta, Habeas Corpus and presumption of innocence. No warrantless eavesdropping. Reaffirmation of the Bill of Rights in general. ALL of the rights
@S2Cents - I cannot think of anything that has improved after government made it a priority, but everything in that second paragraph I totally agree with.
@StateExempt yesh the government pisses me off too brother. But here's somethings they do more or less decently or not terribly: 1. The FAA. Crashes are a rarity here, thanks to equipment safety tests and massively successful air flight controlling. 2. Medicaid: private sector insurance companies make money by ditching their customers when they get very sick. Medicaid picks up the castoffs. 3. Social Security: What if Mr. Bush had succeeded in privatizing SS before the market crash?
@S2Cents 1. The FAA gets MORE funding after every plane crash. And I highly doubt that airline companies are okay with letting multi-million dollar aircraft crash to pieces. 2. Medicaid has more fraud and unfunded liabilities than the private sector ever will. And if insurance companies really worked the way you say they did, then no one would go to them since they would know ahead of time that they will rip them off. Besides: watch?v=3WnS96NVlMI
@S2Cents - 3. Social Security now owes over 15 trillion in unfunded liabilities, and besides that private accounts deliver greater returns with less money: watch?v=sMGAi8aGeYM
And the stock market makes a 10% gain over every ten year period anyway so even if there is a crash for a couple years the loss can be recouped later on or avoided altogether if the person is nearing retirement by switching to less dynamic investments as they get older.
# Can you imagine how many old people would be working at WalMart, since their SS would have been cut in half? And did you know that before SS, thousands of older Americans simply starved to death?
# SCHIP: Healthcare insurance for children who would not otherwise have it – enormously preventive of school absence, long-term illness, loss of physical and mental development
# The CDC: How do we know that the virulence of H1N1 is less than expected? Who is telling the world the world pork is safe
@S2Cents - No I can't. They would mostly be on private retirements that deliver more than the current system already gives.
SCHIP: If you are poor, you should not be having kids at other people's expense.
CDC: Why do we need a regional sovereign to supply that data and why would pork sellers kill their own customers? And do you think we could live without UL?
# How do we know whether an illness is H1N1 or not? It’s all the CDC.
# School hot lunch programs: For many children, their only serious nutrition all day every day. What industry would do it?
# The Soil Conservation Service: though bureaucratic, there is no private industry comparable. How vastly different would America be without the wetlands your dad and a thousand like him have created.
# Head Start: kids from homes that have seriously dysfunctional emotional and learning environments CONT.
@S2Cents - If you hold that people already vote themselves into giving money to such a program then what makes you think they will refuse to donate to private charity to deliver the same need?
Why would a private landowner want his own wetlands destroyed and why would the soil conservation service want to keep the same land if it was never their land to begin with?
Head start would be better off under a market based system in which providers would be competing for the vouchers of students.
# The Department of Motor Vehicles: how many mistakes have you had on your car registrations or titles?
# E911 commissions: how long does it take an ambulance or fire truck to reach you if a child who can call 911 can’t tell the operator an address? When I first came to Washington, there was simply no way to know. People died.
# University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics – known around the world for ground-breaking medical research.
# Open meetings laws for city, county, and state government office – nothing like it at all in the private sector. But if public officials make decisions without notifying us, they can get in big trouble.
# Free public libraries – which most nations simply don’t have.
# Public health services – how many lives have been saved by free or low-cost immunizations? Show me something analogous in the private sector.
@S2Cents - Do you think these politicians actually care what people have to say at these meetings? And how is this and issue in the market if you can simply switch providers of a given good or service?
As for libraries, I am against copyright altogether.
Why would we expect the same tax dollars that go to health services to be less efficiently used if private providers were allowed to use the same money?
@StateExempt I just cribbed those examples from a website. You may have a good point or 2. NO MATTER.
It must be nice living in your simple Manichaean fantasy of the EVIL GOVERNMENT vs. the good and all knowing all providing -cue the organ music ~FREE MARKET~! Nice religion that right-wing libertarianism is.
I like how *realistic* some of your ideas are. I'm not against lost causes tho. You wingers will accomplish little more than screw-up America even more Tea Bag style
@StateExempt haha. I beg to differ about right-wing libertarianism being a contradiction in terms. Oh sorry -capital- L Libertarianism. Your god is the mythic Free Market with it's magical invisible hand vs. the dread "State".
@StateExempt Alright' enough of this. My heart isn't even in it. I will never convert. But oddly enough to you I might vote for Paul if he's an option. Or somebody actually progressive on the Green ticket. I suppose you think Obama is a liberal. That's funny.
@StateExempt One more thing.. I was doing some reading and this remark actually came back to me. So you don't believe Libertarianism is anywhere on the left-right political spectrum? It is neither left or right-wing...
@S2Cents - It depends on the spectrum one is talking about.
I am more familiar with the Nolan Chart, though I would not necessarily endorse "The World's Smallest Political Quiz" that has made that chart mainstream.
In the context of left and right, I view Left as wanting little or no government intervention in personal behaviors (such as drug use), but wanting more government involvement in economic matters. The Right favors no market intervention, but want "family values" imposed by law.
@S2Cents The "invisible hand" is a documented fact of market dynamics, and you fucking anti liberty statists think the state can allocate resources more efficiently than the market? It's been proven bullshit time and time again.
@StateExempt You've been civil. I'm going to delete that. I have to go now. Appreciate your civility and efforts. I believe you to be a truly caring and thoughtful citizen trying to inform himself on the issues and support which policies he deems to be best for his country. In a democracy we cannot all agree with one another. I wish I could move to Denmark. Finland's OK. I would like to have health care like the English, Japanese, Canadian , Australian French vac time
Throughout history, Adam Smith observed, we find the workings of "the vile maxim of the masters of mankind": "All for ourselves, and nothing for other People." He had few illusions about the consequences. The invisible hand, he wrote, destroys the possibility of a decent human existence "unless government takes pains to prevent" this outcome, as must be assured in "every improved and civilized society."
@S2Cents - Smith had a lot to learn, but at least he was smart enough to realize that the presence of goods and services anywhere arises primarily from self-interest.
CONT. It destroys community, the environment, and human values generally—and even the masters themselves, which is why the business classes have regularly called for state intervention to protect them from market forces.
@S2Cents - That sounds like government in a nutshell.
Letting people choice from a variety of willing providers of a given good or service without legitimized theft (free enterprise) leads to precisely the opposite.
@S2Cents - Just to top it off though, I do not think governments are intentionally malicious or that participants in a free market are totally benevolent. I simply think everything government does now is either unnecessary or can be better handled by the latter.
Another economist brainwashed by money....
23lFrench 2 days ago
That farmer in the green shirt must be a giant.
turdferguson9725 3 days ago
Except, that when enough people vote for a certain outcome, read Ron Paul's revolution, the polictical process HAS to notice the change. Of course they will hire media to minimalize but, as more people jump on for the change even large organizations as the Republican party will Have to allow the voice or lose the vote and when the number gets large enough, even they can't ignore it.
NewFrambian 3 days ago
@NewFrambian So long as the majority of men are content with voting for the lesser of two evils, no real headway will ever be made. I am an Oathkeeper and Ron Paul supporter because he is the only candidate whom I do not see as an enemy of the Constitution and the People. But I hold out more hope that the dollar will crash and gov't will overreach causing a massive backlash by the people and a rejection of the idea that previous generations could take upon debt in our names.
dlstb 2 days ago
Until the number of special interest groups multiplies ridiculously and there is an economic collapse as a result. Then voters begin to wake up and vote for lower taxes. It just takes them a long time to learn this lesson.
As usual, economists argue simple models to explain complex things. Thats why they never seem to be able to understand anything of common sense in real life. Also, they are one of those special interest groups - academics.
astro7894 3 days ago
Can anyone make out all the books on his desk?
jontycampbell 1 week ago
He's counting votes as if it was the popular vote on a national level. In reality we have an electoral college and so this is not quite accurate but I see his point of rational ignorance.
barbourjohn 1 week ago in playlist Political Science Playlist
@barbourjohn He talking about elected officials in general, not the president. You know the senate and congress. They are elected by votes to the best of my knoledge. And this is exactly what happens and why republians or democrats don't actually cut spending. I see your point of rational ignorance and raise you two.
mmeb83 1 week ago
@mmeb83 It's a good video and I understand it's just an illustration. Each district will have its own rules and constituency. Most things never should have been allowed to get to the national level. Two things did this: The commerce clause and the slavery problem. After that, the floodgates opened. It's part of our history and we just have to live with it.
barbourjohn 1 week ago
@barbourjohn Agreed. But like slavery, it doesn't mean it won't change. Let's hope more people understand the problem and work to fix it by making certain powers left to the states while protecting individuals rights.
mmeb83 1 week ago
@mmeb83 Exactly. Let's do it.
barbourjohn 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@barbourjohn Do you know that Christianity is correct? The world around us reveals that G-d DOES exist, and the historical evidence reveals that Jesus Christ really did come to this earth and there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ really did physically rise from the dead. Jesus is coming again and the signs of the end times that were foretold in the Bible are coming to pass.
marionetemanJ 1 week ago
weird ass ring
imtonasty 1 week ago
The background music is annoying.
YouTumult 1 week ago
@Sandvik83 You hit the nail on the head
cluther1114 2 weeks ago
here in nz special interest groups and lobbying is very much illegal! we see it as corruption, the corruption of officials in russia that america is always denouncing is just small scale lobbying.
KiwiTomCrawford 2 weeks ago
@KiwiTomCrawford It's illegal? Wow, really? Does NZ have a constitution of some kind? Is price controls and wage floors illegal too?
jontycampbell 1 week ago
Unless you vote for Nader in Fl. then you can change the election lol
Ron paul for secretary of Treasury
TyZi187 3 weeks ago in playlist Favorites
Awesome vid.
SirTenenbaum 3 weeks ago
I like the animation. It sorta helps the layman understand how this works. But it needs to illustrate that the tax money doesn't just flow to one particular politician in one circumstance. More importantly, it could show someone who is not competing with slave labor in or from third world countries. Show us defense contractors, pharmaceuticals, banks, PPO's, fossil energy conglomerates, and THEIR politicians. That out of the pipeline could cut spending enough pay THEIR debt in 20 years or less.
hybridmcgee 3 weeks ago
@hybridmcgee - I think LearnLiberty should DEFINITELY do a video on the military-industrial complex. Maybe one on the economics of special interests during wartime might be a way to approach that topic.
StateExempt 2 weeks ago
@StateExempt I agree that we need to look further into this specific item first and foremost since it has dramatically influenced our political environment over the last 50 years. Eisenhower warned us about this. We have had the intelligence community spending a lot of time and money surveilling, recruiting, extorting and eliminating officials and citizens in this country and others to procure and protect specific economic interests.
hybridmcgee 2 weeks ago
@StateExempt Milton Friedman video lectured on military biz on the 'tube somewhere - he gave them a darn good roasting in his usual clear socratic style.
jontycampbell 1 week ago
@jontycampbell - Alright thanks for the heads up. I think it should be on LibertyPen somewhere or within the favorites of MinnesotaChris so it should be easy to find I hope.
StateExempt 3 days ago
@hybridmcgee Great idea for a longer video. A director's cut if you like.
jontycampbell 1 week ago
RON PAUL
215datdude 1 month ago in playlist Favorites 27
I want subsidies for food because it makes a food surplus so that we don't starve like a lot of other countries do when we have a couple bad years in a row.
AllOtherNamesTaken2 1 month ago in playlist Favorites
@AllOtherNamesTaken2 actualy a lot of farm subsidies pay people to not produce usable croops or like the wonderful bio fule subsidies to throw something like 30% of our corn away to make around 2-4% of our gas (not sure on the exact numbers). which is actual making poor people around the world starve. Its not like they set up a supper food reserve someplace with that money
Lovemy1911a1 1 month ago
@AllOtherNamesTaken2 I know. I would prefer it if we didn't have bio-fuel subsidies, and the issue with which type of subsidies to give farmers gets complicated (whether we should enforce scarcity to raise the price of food or to pay the farmers more than their crops are worth).
AllOtherNamesTaken2 1 month ago
Ron Paul for President.
vonGleichenT 1 month ago in playlist Favorites
This is exactly why policies and viewpoints should turn into laws and regulations at the lowest possible level of government. The founders expressed grave concern that a republic could have problems if it was too large. I think we've hit that point. We need to start taking things out of the feds and ship them to the states and localities. I'm not saying the US should dissolve, just that only those policies that must be at the federal level should be there. Dept. of Edu doesn't need to exist.
TG1212able 1 month ago
It actually works by an electoral college. So your vote could be important to winning your state. You dont need a Majority of the popular vote to win the presidency. Do a video on how horrible the First Past The Post voting system is flawed and corrupt.
TyZi187 1 month ago in playlist Favorites
@TyZi187 First Past the Post has advantages and disadvantages as does all voting systems.
Malusregnum 1 month ago in playlist Favorites
Wow, this guy just immediately jumped to the conclusion that his hypothetical farm subsidy policy was inefficient. No reason why, not detail just BAM. Not very deep thinking before assuming the situation is wholly negative.
colddrake80 1 month ago
@colddrake80 it's a 2 minute video not a thesis, it’s not an attack of farmers that was merely an example. Have a look in to it yourself, you may change your mind about what is really best for the farmers and everyone else.
wispa2 1 month ago
The paradox of American politics is that everyone wants increased spending on a program by program basis, and decreased taxes.
SirPwn4lot 1 month ago
I just wanna say that as a farmer, I find this a complete untrue generalization of how the business works. Only certain farms growing certain things receives those, quite unfairly too. For instance, here in california, we don't get subsidies for growing lettuce or salad crops. I just wanted to say it's stupid and unfair to just use the word "farmer". You're throwing us all in the same pile. -.-
SissyNekoBoi 1 month ago in playlist Favorites
Damnit! Why won't the video load?
MetaKnight964 1 month ago
If this would've been a black guy it would almost sound like rap music.
TWSceptic 1 month ago
THE US IS NOT A DEMOCRACY! ITS A REPUBLIC! Why does no one understand this. Words f@*king mean things so stop just swaping them around
Lovemy1911a1 1 month ago in playlist Favorites
@Lovemy1911a1 @Lovemy1911a1 You don't even know where you live. Since 1920 everyone can vote in your country that's democracy and it's the reason of the recessions, current mess and why top 1% robs ordinary people of their wealth search for noblist Krugman "inequality-trends-in-one-picture" article Plus they making you poorer everyday since 1913 -introduction of FED lewrockwell(dot)com/paul/paul334.html
fafura13 1 month ago
@fafura13 Wrong a Democracy a government runs by the will of the majority. Now the USA is rapidly heading in that direction but it is still a republic. Thats why we have the electoral collage and each state has 2 senators no mater there population. In a real democracy we would vote directly on laws themselves or elect people based on a majority vote and replace the senate with something devided by pop. I dont like the FED ether but facts are facts & this is not a democracy it just isnt.
Lovemy1911a1 1 month ago
@Lovemy1911a1 U have representative democracy,everybody can vote right?&the vote of majority counts,doesn't it?Since 1913 (probably worst year in US history-introduction of FED&income tax) the U.S.Senate has been elected directly by the voters, rather than being appointed by the state legislatures.It's more a democracy than a republic.Anyhow majority vote is the problem,as Marx noted:"Democracy is the road to socialism"Did u know half Americans are already on some kind of welfare??
fafura13 1 month ago
@fafura13 yes I know how America is becoming a welfare state & thats one step away from a dictatorship. But that is why it is important for people to understand the truth about things & you are alowing the socialist to change the nature of the country by repeating this lie we are a democracy. The majority vote does not always count like how Bush won the ellectoral colage but lost the popular vote & why sould CA &ND both get 2 senators CA has 30X the people thats not very democratic now is it
Lovemy1911a1 1 month ago
@Lovemy1911a1 Best way is compare it to socialist UE. All countries (just like ur states) are independent and choose their leaders by majority vote. Then those leaders camouflage under UE ("federal gov. in ur case) to rob and enslave ppl that have chosen them. So what is the cause of the problem if not manipulated by media&socialists majority vote? How is that socialists&democrats sit in ur gov.(including Obama-he was chosen by democratic majority wasn't he?) & ruin the country?
fafura13 1 month ago
@fafura13 Yes you are mostly right & part of why this is all happening is because people think we are a democracy & abandoning the pricipals of the republic. Thats why I want to make sure people understand the government & what made it great. But you are wrong about Obama he may have one the majority vote but he is president because he won the electoral colage thats what counts. However your right about him ruining the country
Lovemy1911a1 1 month ago
Not true. One vote makes a difference.
16SarahE 1 month ago
@16SarahE You're so naive..
fafura13 1 month ago
@fafura13 Refusing to vote because you think that one vote couldn't make a difference is naive. Excuse me for wanting a say in the future leaders of my country.
16SarahE 1 month ago
@16SarahE If you are voting for total strangers who promise you stuff but you have to pay for it and then give them total power to control your life is simply naive,dont you agree? Of course unless you vote for libertarians who want to give you freedom in decision making regarding your life and money.
fafura13 1 month ago
@fafura13 That's why I immerse myself in the political process and research the guys running for President so I know exactly what I'm voting for. The way they live their lives outside of the political spectrum and how much freedom they will give me is what I'm voting about. That way, they won't be total strangers to me. Also, I look at the way they eat their string cheese.
PS: The entirety of this comments page is just people arguing... The danger of posting political videos on the internet.
16SarahE 2 weeks ago
@16SarahE If that's the case, you're probably doing the right thing. However majority who really decides on who is elected, doesn't :(
And that's why the politics and economics of democratic countries go down the drain.. Socialist Hitler won in democracy.
"Democracy...while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide"John Adams
fafura13 2 weeks ago
Another libertarian, professional and insightful.
Cheers my friend, drop the knowledge.
Spjungen 1 month ago
What about inflation? I also find it odd to use decades old statistics.
telephone3409 1 month ago in playlist Favorites
@telephone3409 lewrockwell(dot)com/paul/paul334.html
fafura13 1 month ago
The biggest reason is each Senator has their own state's projects they want funded, so they wind up having to TRADE most of their votes with other Senators, for their projects. Senators almost never get to vote their conscience for what's best for the country, so THAT'S why wasteful spending never gets cut.
gilbet 2 months ago
kindof reminds me of when (whoever they are) keeps changing the retirement age limit. They tell us they base it on criteria about lifespan. Lifespan hasn't changed except fot the worst.
mariametko 2 months ago in playlist Favorites
@mariametko What are you talking about? The lifespan of the average person is constantly going up. They say children born in 2007 will live longer than every generation before. When they invented social security you were suppose to die before you could qualify for it, now people on average can get 15-20 years of social security checks.
ShamanMcLamie 2 months ago in playlist Favorites
Also, while I agree with the general idea that one voter alone can't affect the outcome of a national (Presidential) election, his voting example ignores the reality of the Electoral College that make the potential deciding pool much smaller. The outcome of a national election can hinge on one state - the smallest being Wyoming - or, in the event of a tie outcome that throws it to the House, a single congressional district - the smallest, again, being Wyoming, which has 495K people.
kjhuang 2 months ago
@kjhuang I disagree with the voting pool shrinking. In a majority vote wins situation. Politician would only concentrate in racking up the vote in highly populated areas favorable to them. If those were the rules Bush and Gore would have spent all their time racking up votes in Texas and New York. Where as in the electoral college it makes campaigning more strategic and spreads out the attention areas get. Rural areas that would get ignored now get attention.
ShamanMcLamie 2 months ago in playlist Favorites
@ShamanMcLamie First of all, if politicians are campaigning in mostly big states that's because that's where most of the people are. And why shouldn't the government pay attention to the needs of most of the people? Isn't that democracy? I'm not saying that rural areas should be ignored; I'm all for helping rural areas as well, but I don't see why they should get a disproportionately larger share of attention.
kjhuang 2 months ago
@ShamanMcLamie Second of all, when was the last time rural areas in Nebraska or North Dakota or California or Texas or Montana or Utah got any attention from presidential candidates? Rural states don't get any attention at all under the Electoral College because 1. they're almost always uncompetitive and 2. even if they were competitive, they're usually small. The majority of action is in swing states, and within swing states in swing areas, which may or may not be rural.
kjhuang 2 months ago
@kjhuang Your correct about those States. But it's those states own fault they get less attention. They completely bank with one side or another in every election. Their satisfied enough with either candidate. And as you said how the attention is distributed is not determined by population, but by their swing state status. I can see a decent chance that Iowa or New Hampshire could decide the next election, or not at all. And once again places that normally wouldn't get attention do.
ShamanMcLamie 2 months ago
@ShamanMcLamie IA and NH are too small to decide elections unless it's really close, which yes, 2012 could be. In any case, I think if the Electoral College were abolished candidates would naturally continue to focus on swing areas. So Democrats might campaign in Austin, TX and Republicans in Bakersfield, CA whereas right now they would never need to visit those cities. So in a way getting rid of the Electoral College could encourage candidates to widen their reach.
kjhuang 2 months ago
@kjhuang Use a 2012 interactive electoral map. With how lines are drawn it isn't unlikely. I'd like to get to the real root of the problem is the Federal government is doing far more than it's suppose to be. Many of the big important originally state and local only issues. The smaller and more local the government the better it is at adhering to the peoples needs. Once again the federal government was only intended to be for common defense interstate issues.
ShamanMcLamie 2 months ago
@kjhuang The main reason it is difficult to pass controversial Legislation is to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. People go to Texas not to be Californians. People move to Alaska not to be Floridians, people move to New York not to be Ohians. Would you want the rule of another state, or just city (and remember urban life is far different then rural life telling you what to do. Making all the decisions. States allow for diversity and our strength is from diversity.
ShamanMcLamie 2 months ago
@ShamanMcLamie Third of all, rural areas currently do get a disproportionate share of attention, though not because of the Electoral College, but because of the structure of the U.S. Senate. And it sucks. Rural Senators routinely block a bunch of things that the rest of the country wants. How is that fair?
kjhuang 2 months ago
@kjhuang First of all it was purposely intended for large and sweeping legislation to be difficult pass. A simple majority should never cut it. I find it dangerous to have the 51% telling the 49% what to do. Second if you have majority rules a small handful of urban areas will define policy for the entire country. You also have to remember America is a massive and diverse country. There were secessionist threats from North and South over a variety of issues before the Civil War.
ShamanMcLamie 2 months ago
@ShamanMcLamie Alright, we'll have to disagree; I think a simple majority is fine for most things. And my attitude is that if certain areas feel strongly enough about irreconcilable differences to secede, they should have every right to do so.
kjhuang 2 months ago
@kjhuang There are reason we are one country and why secession is bad. The United States was created, One for a common defense, you think we'd have survived as 13 separate countries. The second was to deal with interstate law and protect individual rights, Slavery would have survived a lot longer in an independent South. Third and most forgotten was it created a massive free trade zone. Free trade always has a net benefit to a society. It opens up goods and creates free competition.
ShamanMcLamie 2 months ago
The idea of dispersed costs/concentrated benefits is just the way government naturally works and has to work, whether it's run by Ron Paul or Bernie Sanders. Saying that government shouldn't have dispersed costs/concentrated benefits is like saying lions shouldn't eat meat or bones shouldn't have calcium.
kjhuang 2 months ago
This is based on proportional representation and one election district. Which is seldom the case. Further; the concentration of benefits and dispertion of costs are much more relevant when studiying distributive politics (district demand models, swing voter models) than deficit spending. Deficit spending can be due to institutional "locked situations", where veto players veto oposing proposition as the status quo is more favorbale (Veto Player Model). In short, this video contributed little,
DiggingNorway 2 months ago
@DiggingNorway - This video did a nice job summing up the general hurdles with reigning in special interests according to public choice analysis. It is not supposed to be a documentary.
StateExempt 2 months ago
People around the world keep lining up to get an American visa. I guess they all just want to get poorer.
bixntram 3 months ago in playlist Favorites
So, is there a solution? or a way-ahead to a solution? Or are we stuck within a system that is doomed to economic oblivion?
DeserveLiberty 3 months ago in playlist Favorites
@DeserveLiberty Yes, we are stuck in a system that's doomed to oblivion. It's called socialism.
bixntram 3 months ago in playlist Favorites 10
but what if thousands think "my vote wont make a difference" this is the mentality that stops a lot of people. But if thousands or millions of people vote instead of thinking this then wouldn't they make a difference?
SKATEyD3STROY 3 months ago
voting doesnt matter. "they" have already chosen and hand-selected "their" candidate which makes voting a waste of time
ArchaicReality 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How will you sort out the options when you vote? I suggest that before you get caught up with anyone, including Obama, et al that you FIRST go to this web page (Get - The - Book . com) and grab a copy of a great book that few folks know about, read it, and then vote in a manner that will actually get this country a good President.
TMIAmerica 3 months ago
I think an important point is also the inherent selfishness of the human being. You want what's best for the society until it adversely affects you. That is the problem in Greece now. Everyone wants to fix the problems but no one is willing to quit their cushy public sector job to do it. Everybody agrees that more taxes should be paid as long as it's not them. Massively cutting spending loses you votes. And that's thee nub and crux of it.
Sandvik83 4 months ago 53
@Sandvik83 well said
mites7 1 month ago
Sooo, all politicians are doing the slicing scheme from Superman 3?
Rensune 4 months ago
lobbying...an evolution to corruption?
amaloznaz1993 5 months ago
@amaloznaz1993 No, legalization of it.
“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.” – Frédéric Bastiat
LordShandor 4 months ago
People say they want to cut spending, but they only mean in a broad sense. When they start to get down to details you can't cut anything without causing a stink.
dragonsder 5 months ago 35
@dragonsder This is why democracy works better the less people there are in the country. With fewer voters, social pressure to do the right thing starts to trump personal self interest because it's harder to remain anonymous about your votes. Ideally, the best democracy is that of one (a single person), or perhaps the family level.
drewmandan 3 weeks ago
@drewmandan Agreed. I've often said that democracy works great for choosing pizza toppings at a party, but it is ultimately disastrous when applied to entire national economies and systems of governance.
rmcdaniel423 3 weeks ago
Lobbying which is nothing less than bribery should be against the law. We have elected representatives from every state and the right to vote. Let those who run for office have the same amount of "free" air time & press, such as debates, etc. That way it would be fair & informative. Nobody should be able to win an election based on money. If they want your vote then they must stand for what the majority wants & needs. Not based on bribes you pay them to do "favors" for you once they get elected.
kokonutbaby1 5 months ago
they feel it now, dumbass
tomjamisonfrazier 5 months ago
So Powell is suggesting we should not vote because we are not going to make a dramatic impact? I don't need my life to be a movie, I know I can't "Tip the Balance" That's the point, we're a large group of people, and social movements make a difference.
When white women were second class citizens and most black people were property, the number of people voting sure was important, wasn't it?
strangeyoungman 5 months ago
@strangeyoungman
No. He's explaining the Political Interest Paradox (colloquially known amongst libertarians as "the TEA Party Syndrome"). That is, why state spending and control tends very strongly to grow over time, even when people vote in office holders who campaign as wanting to cut spending.
PanzerDivisionBOM 5 months ago
this was a suggestion for donald trump by mac miller
LadyBr1Br1 5 months ago
why didnt he use big business as an example instead of farmers ?
The5thAveMonster 5 months ago
@The5thAveMonster The vast majority of farm subsidies go to big business. ADM and Cargill are some of the largest businesses in America.
Ragnarokgn 5 months ago
The whole "learnliberty" thing is undoubtedly a project of the ultra-reactionary Koch Brothers. Their project is correctly described as one of neo-feudalism - subordinating the middle class into a state of poverty, destitution, and misery, so that they can function as cheap labor and/or groveling paupers for the likes of David Koch, Pete Peterson, et al. This is likewise the project of the contrived "libertarian" pseudo-movement, though most of its adherents are admittedly duped fanatics.
offsprng46 5 months ago
The implicit claim here is that money is metaphysically real; money is manifestly not metaphysically real. Property, plant, and equipment is real; the welfare of the population (e.g., the General Welfare, as described in the preamble of the constitution), is real. What isn't real are the nominal financial assets of the Wall Street parasites. Maybe look at the difference between real and fictitious capital, Ben, and you'll not make such idiotic videos/statements.
offsprng46 5 months ago
So is the farmer subsidy helping or hurting the average American. Or neutral. And if the spending is deficit spending which some are saying has bankrupt the United States does that factor into the avg American being hurt? Are we bankrupt?
KidSheIeen 5 months ago
@KidSheIeen
They hurt... they cause too much disruption.. Subsidies are taken and NEVER used for forming.. They go to coprorations that make it impposible for little guy to compete for the big guy...
xMaXiMuSx 5 months ago
@KidSheIeen
Protectionism is always destructive. It affects domestic consumers and taxpayers negatively by some combination of increased prices and/or increased tax burdens, and affects foreign producers negatively. This is especially egregious when it's the food prices going up, and the foreign producers are some of the poorest farmers in the world.
Google Bastiat's famous text, The Candlemakers' Petition. He makes a much better case for free trade than can any YouTube comment. -
-
PanzerDivisionBOM 5 months ago
-
- As for the debt...
In short, what's happening is that the US government has promised more money than exists in the known universe, and hundreds of millions of people are planning their careers, families and retirements around the assumption that that money will be available in full and on time.
Propping up wasteful industries is just one way in which that government continues to add to its debt, and make more people more dependent upon money that they will never be able to pay out.
PanzerDivisionBOM 5 months ago
People like you are the reason economics is called the Dismal Science.
moviesontheweb 6 months ago
this sounds like a good reason to remove money from politics so that cutting spending will not decrease the politician's money for their campaigns.
LancePoint9 6 months ago
@LancePoint9
This would do nothing. How do you stop job offers with strings attached. How do you stop all influence from these groups. You can't.
The solution is to deny the power to the political process. That's the reason our constitution as written to give only those powers expressly expressed to the gov't. Shame we didn't live up to it, now we're on a road to oblivion, with hardly any solutions to restore what was a sound policy.
NativeNewMexican 6 months ago
@NativeNewMexican Removing money from political campaigns will go a long way. Each politician wants to be reelected, they kiss ass to private interests for money to fund that next election year and get reelected. Politicians do want nice retirements but it will be quit a blow for them not to be helped with continuing their political power.
LancePoint9 6 months ago
@LancePoint9
You believe that public funding would prevent private interests from interfering with elections? REALLY? You're going to deny them the ability to fund their own election with their own money? If not, then the interest groups just need to launder it into the politicians' account. The interest group can contact the advertising agency and media outlet and gets special consideration. The interest group gets news stations to spin for their candidate. BTW, removing power works 100%
NativeNewMexican 6 months ago
@NativeNewMexican Lets completely remove government power that is not listed in the constitution. shitty roads, the water unclean, no worker's safety regulation, child labor, no FBI, no CDC, eleven to sixteen hour work days with no breaks, no regulating wall street, no public schools, no invading other countries or having military bases in other countries, no driver's registration, no protection from faulty products, no food regulation, and no regulating drugs. You believe that works? Really?
LancePoint9 6 months ago
@LancePoint9
You believe that gov't is the one and only way that needs can be achieved? (The FBI is constitutional as is the CDC)
Let's take a look at child labor laws. Do they do _anything_? No. Productivity is what made it so that children didn't have to work. PERIOD. Look at what child labor laws have done in Bangladesh.
Yes, not only do I believe it works, almost 100% of the time it has been proven to work when tried. Compare _ANY_ public institution with a private equivalent. Mises.org
NativeNewMexican 6 months ago
Respond to this video... It should probably noted that we both want the similar things and have different views how to achieve them. Let us save our sarcasm for those that want to continue the corruption of the system. Both of our arguments have advantages and faults, but are steps in the right direction.
LancePoint9 6 months ago
@LancePoint9 I encourage you to watch all of the videos on this channel, then watch all of the videos from mises and maybe even all the videos from libertypen. I'll try to cut back on the sarcasm.
NativeNewMexican 6 months ago
@NativeNewMexican While we're exchanging recommendations, I recommend The Young Turks who are progressives that comment on a variety of issues. I'll look up your suggestions and see. I would also recommend looking at productivity in the united states and wages from the sixties to now. I welcome your insight on the issue.
LancePoint9 6 months ago
@LancePoint9
I've watched the Young Turks and on a regular basis they say things that are profoundly false. Pick a couple of your favorites for me if you would and I'll post a comment on them.
Re: wages vs. productivity: Would I see that gov't is forcing employers to spend more and more money on tax prep, regulation compliance, unemployment, medicaid, medicare, etc that instead of being in the hands of the employee are diverted? The average wage would be 81% higher if there were no taxes.
NativeNewMexican 6 months ago
@NativeNewMexican try Obama Didn't Change CIA After Bush\ How Rick Perry Got Rich On The Job\ Firms Spent More On CEOs Than Taxes\ and GOP: Cut FEMA, First Responders & Hurricane Hunters. As to taxes, find the wage trend for the top ten percent since the sixties and the stock market. Taxes are not the reason wealth is being diverted from the employees.
LancePoint9 6 months ago
@LancePoint9
Taxes are most certainly a huge reason that wealth is diverted from employees. It's not even debatable. That statistic 81% isn't made up, it's real. Perhaps there's also some CEO shenanigans, but seriously, how many CEO's do you think there are? Most employees don't work under a CEO in any form at all. It's _not_ CEO pay. The biggest theft of wealth by far has been gov't inflationary policy and the FED.
I'll check out the videos.
NativeNewMexican 6 months ago
@NativeNewMexican Taxes overall have been dropping in recent decades, what specific taxes and programs are causing this? As to the FED, I agree there.
LancePoint9 6 months ago
We need a system in which people can vote multiple times
Shonenut213 6 months ago
we need an approval voting system.
or really any voting system other than a 1 per person tally
it's pretty much the worst voting system.
darris321 6 months ago
@darris321 Check out the ranking system of voting. Makes the most sense of anything I've ever heard
Kruezoraxe 6 months ago
@darris321 What system would you recommend and how would you argue it constitutionally?
LancePoint9 6 months ago
@LancePoint9 either an approval system (check everyone who you think would be a good candidate) or the ranking system (rank the candidates in how much you would like to see them elected)
this would allow people to do things like
3 votes to Bob Barr
5 votes to Barack Obama
2 votes to John McCain
or something along those lines.
It would be up to the states. The federal government doesn't get to decide how the states conduct their voting.
In Kansas, we would just need to pass a law, I think.
darris321 6 months ago
@darris321 How would this be an advantage?
LancePoint9 6 months ago
@LancePoint9 it would better reflect the will of the voters.
when you have the current system of voting, people will vote like this
"I really agree with Ralph Nader, I sort of agree Bill Clinton, but I REALLY don't agree with George Bush, so I'm not going to 'waste my vote' by voting for Ralph Nader"
in the current system people don't vote for who they do want, they vote against who they don't want.
darris321 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LancePoint9 it would better reflect the will of the voters.
when you have the current system of voting, people will vote like this
"I really agree with Ralph Nader, I sort of agree Bill Clinton, but I REALLY don't agree with George Bush, so I'm not going to 'waste my vote' by voting for Ralph Nader"
in the current system people don't vote for who they do want, they vote against who they don't want.
darris321 6 months ago
You so-called libertarians like the KOOCH Bastard Brothers hardly say a word on run away military spending.
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - You've got some searching to do.
As for the Koch brothers, I wish I could get a check from them to point out the obvious too.
StateExempt 6 months ago
@StateExempt
Oh my god, you're right. I have some searching to do. Maybe you're right and corporations and the wealthy should get tax breaks and tax subsidies while the income gap widens and American workers' quality of life goes downhill and their health care is an outrageous unaffordable rip off.
Kill Yourself.
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - Learn Liberty has some pretty interesting videos on those other topics too:
watch?v=vDhcqua3_W8
watch?v=ChEImWVj_kY
watch?v=W8SLIt7xZxU
StateExempt 6 months ago
@StateExempt How civil of you. Sorry, I'm a left-winger and only wish to shit on your beliefs. I believe in single-payer health care, in reduction of defense spending and increase in social spending, in taxing the fuck outta the wicked greedy Koch Bastards and millionaires. I believe in labor unions, 3 week vacations mandated by law for all workers, more paid sick leave 32 hour work weeks, and a living Wage!!
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - Each economic proposal you have listed seems to illustrate that Liberalism = make someone else pay for it.
As for accusations of selfishness and greed...
watch?v=oIeiFheHTOI
This is what I advocate: watch?v=PGMQZEIXBMs
StateExempt 6 months ago
@StateExempt Yeah last I checked I pay taxes too and the 'someone else' you talk about is making enough to pay a bit more. They're making so much more because people are working for those companies and not getting paid too much at all. But I know you're cool with below subsistence wages. Fuck the poor, it is their fault and the rich deserve every penny that get.
S2Cents 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@S2Cents - "'someone else' you talk about is making enough to pay a bit more."
Why should they if they make more by given great management that leads to products and services that other people want to buy?
"Fuck the poor, it is their fault and the rich deserve every penny that get."
Why?
StateExempt 6 months ago
@StateExempt it would appear that @s2Cents doesn't have a clue how libertarians think and in your responses you continue to let him perpetuate many false statements about libertarians.
I wish that I had been here to assist you in demolishing his irrationality.
NativeNewMexican 6 months ago
@StateExempt
CONT.
I believe in making alternative energy (solar/wind/geothermal/hydrogen) a national priority!! Ultimate goal: get off dependence on foreign oil and nuclear
There needs to be a reaffirmation of the Geneva Conventions. Ban torture, water-boarding, extraordinary rendition,"private security contractors". Restoration of the Magna Carta, Habeas Corpus and presumption of innocence. No warrantless eavesdropping. Reaffirmation of the Bill of Rights in general. ALL of the rights
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - I cannot think of anything that has improved after government made it a priority, but everything in that second paragraph I totally agree with.
StateExempt 6 months ago
@StateExempt yesh the government pisses me off too brother. But here's somethings they do more or less decently or not terribly: 1. The FAA. Crashes are a rarity here, thanks to equipment safety tests and massively successful air flight controlling. 2. Medicaid: private sector insurance companies make money by ditching their customers when they get very sick. Medicaid picks up the castoffs. 3. Social Security: What if Mr. Bush had succeeded in privatizing SS before the market crash?
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents 1. The FAA gets MORE funding after every plane crash. And I highly doubt that airline companies are okay with letting multi-million dollar aircraft crash to pieces. 2. Medicaid has more fraud and unfunded liabilities than the private sector ever will. And if insurance companies really worked the way you say they did, then no one would go to them since they would know ahead of time that they will rip them off. Besides: watch?v=3WnS96NVlMI
StateExempt 6 months ago
@S2Cents - 3. Social Security now owes over 15 trillion in unfunded liabilities, and besides that private accounts deliver greater returns with less money: watch?v=sMGAi8aGeYM
And the stock market makes a 10% gain over every ten year period anyway so even if there is a crash for a couple years the loss can be recouped later on or avoided altogether if the person is nearing retirement by switching to less dynamic investments as they get older.
StateExempt 6 months ago
# Can you imagine how many old people would be working at WalMart, since their SS would have been cut in half? And did you know that before SS, thousands of older Americans simply starved to death?
# SCHIP: Healthcare insurance for children who would not otherwise have it – enormously preventive of school absence, long-term illness, loss of physical and mental development
# The CDC: How do we know that the virulence of H1N1 is less than expected? Who is telling the world the world pork is safe
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - No I can't. They would mostly be on private retirements that deliver more than the current system already gives.
SCHIP: If you are poor, you should not be having kids at other people's expense.
CDC: Why do we need a regional sovereign to supply that data and why would pork sellers kill their own customers? And do you think we could live without UL?
StateExempt 6 months ago
# How do we know whether an illness is H1N1 or not? It’s all the CDC.
# School hot lunch programs: For many children, their only serious nutrition all day every day. What industry would do it?
# The Soil Conservation Service: though bureaucratic, there is no private industry comparable. How vastly different would America be without the wetlands your dad and a thousand like him have created.
# Head Start: kids from homes that have seriously dysfunctional emotional and learning environments CONT.
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - If you hold that people already vote themselves into giving money to such a program then what makes you think they will refuse to donate to private charity to deliver the same need?
Why would a private landowner want his own wetlands destroyed and why would the soil conservation service want to keep the same land if it was never their land to begin with?
Head start would be better off under a market based system in which providers would be competing for the vouchers of students.
StateExempt 6 months ago
# have benefited enormously
# The Department of Motor Vehicles: how many mistakes have you had on your car registrations or titles?
# E911 commissions: how long does it take an ambulance or fire truck to reach you if a child who can call 911 can’t tell the operator an address? When I first came to Washington, there was simply no way to know. People died.
# University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics – known around the world for ground-breaking medical research.
S2Cents 6 months ago
@StateExempt
# Open meetings laws for city, county, and state government office – nothing like it at all in the private sector. But if public officials make decisions without notifying us, they can get in big trouble.
# Free public libraries – which most nations simply don’t have.
# Public health services – how many lives have been saved by free or low-cost immunizations? Show me something analogous in the private sector.
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - Do you think these politicians actually care what people have to say at these meetings? And how is this and issue in the market if you can simply switch providers of a given good or service?
As for libraries, I am against copyright altogether.
Why would we expect the same tax dollars that go to health services to be less efficiently used if private providers were allowed to use the same money?
StateExempt 6 months ago
@StateExempt I just cribbed those examples from a website. You may have a good point or 2. NO MATTER.
It must be nice living in your simple Manichaean fantasy of the EVIL GOVERNMENT vs. the good and all knowing all providing -cue the organ music ~FREE MARKET~! Nice religion that right-wing libertarianism is.
I like how *realistic* some of your ideas are. I'm not against lost causes tho. You wingers will accomplish little more than screw-up America even more Tea Bag style
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - "I just cribbed those examples from a website."
So I just spent 10 minutes of my life responding to a cut and paste? What website is this?
"Nice religion that right-wing libertarianism is."
Right-wing Libertarianism is a contradiction in terms.
StateExempt 6 months ago
@StateExempt haha. I beg to differ about right-wing libertarianism being a contradiction in terms. Oh sorry -capital- L Libertarianism. Your god is the mythic Free Market with it's magical invisible hand vs. the dread "State".
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - I still do not see where the "right-wing" comes in. Not all people with an honest understanding of fiscal realities is a conservative.
"libertarianism" is for the Neal Boortz/Larry Elder types. "Libertarianism" is for the Ron Paul/Gary Johnson supporters in America.
StateExempt 6 months ago
@StateExempt Alright' enough of this. My heart isn't even in it. I will never convert. But oddly enough to you I might vote for Paul if he's an option. Or somebody actually progressive on the Green ticket. I suppose you think Obama is a liberal. That's funny.
S2Cents 6 months ago
@StateExempt One more thing.. I was doing some reading and this remark actually came back to me. So you don't believe Libertarianism is anywhere on the left-right political spectrum? It is neither left or right-wing...
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - It depends on the spectrum one is talking about.
I am more familiar with the Nolan Chart, though I would not necessarily endorse "The World's Smallest Political Quiz" that has made that chart mainstream.
In the context of left and right, I view Left as wanting little or no government intervention in personal behaviors (such as drug use), but wanting more government involvement in economic matters. The Right favors no market intervention, but want "family values" imposed by law.
StateExempt 6 months ago
@S2Cents The "invisible hand" is a documented fact of market dynamics, and you fucking anti liberty statists think the state can allocate resources more efficiently than the market? It's been proven bullshit time and time again.
itachi705 6 months ago
@itachi705 - Leave him be.
Judging from yesterday's dialogue that him and I had, I think he has had enough for now.
StateExempt 6 months ago
Comment removed
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - QED.
StateExempt 6 months ago
@StateExempt You've been civil. I'm going to delete that. I have to go now. Appreciate your civility and efforts. I believe you to be a truly caring and thoughtful citizen trying to inform himself on the issues and support which policies he deems to be best for his country. In a democracy we cannot all agree with one another. I wish I could move to Denmark. Finland's OK. I would like to have health care like the English, Japanese, Canadian , Australian French vac time
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - No worries, I thought itachi705 was a little hostile in the way he presented himself.
StateExempt 6 months ago
Throughout history, Adam Smith observed, we find the workings of "the vile maxim of the masters of mankind": "All for ourselves, and nothing for other People." He had few illusions about the consequences. The invisible hand, he wrote, destroys the possibility of a decent human existence "unless government takes pains to prevent" this outcome, as must be assured in "every improved and civilized society."
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - Smith had a lot to learn, but at least he was smart enough to realize that the presence of goods and services anywhere arises primarily from self-interest.
StateExempt 6 months ago
CONT. It destroys community, the environment, and human values generally—and even the masters themselves, which is why the business classes have regularly called for state intervention to protect them from market forces.
S2Cents 6 months ago
@S2Cents - That sounds like government in a nutshell.
Letting people choice from a variety of willing providers of a given good or service without legitimized theft (free enterprise) leads to precisely the opposite.
StateExempt 6 months ago
@S2Cents - Just to top it off though, I do not think governments are intentionally malicious or that participants in a free market are totally benevolent. I simply think everything government does now is either unnecessary or can be better handled by the latter.
StateExempt 6 months ago
Comment removed
S2Cents 6 months ago