you gentiles are Pathetic Always take some jew and make him god or Messiah just like the jesus and kerl marx and know this noam chomsky did you ever wondering why is this all your biggst gods and messiah and your intellectuals from right and left are jewish and you wonder how we the jews call are self the chosen people dont diss this
comment in 100 yreas from know your kids will things that holly histroy just like your Fathers Though't even the arebs belive in a jewish idea of god
The Rothschilds are enslaving the People of the US via the fraudulent criminal conspiracy known as the illegal, unConstitutional Federal Reserve. The entire US government is now simply a puppet of the Rothschild banking dynasty.
“End the Fed”
Every political candidate must be evaluated based upon this single all telling crucial issue. You are either with the People or you are with the Rothschilds and their agents, the international bankers.
FUCK Noam Chomsky. People act like this asshole is above reproach because he's a leftist Jew and an intellectual. This bastard has shown support for Hamas and Hezbollah, hates the nation he lives in, and time and time again has advocated a foreign policy that would ass-fuck us. This fucker isn't right about everything, people. If he were a true intellectual and gave 2 shits about anything other than hearing his own monotone voice, he'd be telling Americans to vote Libertarian.
@oldstock1607 Dude, real new's just pisses you off, try Fox New's and be Happy echo, echo, aw, the sound of my own voice is so lovely, don't you think? echo, echo...;-)
@mrbigtruth34 Yeah, I completely agree. I don't hate my nation, and America is not my nation, either. But oldstock claimed that Chomsky does hate the US. The claim is highly objectionable. I chose, however, not to question its truthfulness, but rather its normative relevance. It was intended as sarcasm on my part.
An example is this. It is like a bad child telling her parents she can do whatever she wants because she is human and it is not right to put a chain on a human being. Her harm is she is causing disrupt to society by protesting against what is the overall good for humanity.
@MrAlienlovechild i see.ya had me goin there.i mean whats natural about slavery???oh well,theres no shortage idiot,wacko,left fielders on the net here.tomo someone will come along thats NOT BEING SARCASTIC about this.peace!
@MrAlienlovechild slavery is natural??people tickle me.i tell ya whats natural,thats to choke the life out of your enslaver the very first fuckin chance you get,piss on his dead carcass then get out of dodge.thats whats natural!!!
There are no social organizations for liberals separate from the establishmentarian democratic party, that would teach these skills. Most of what passes for social activism in the past 30 years is just a mass market charity campaigns like live aid that encourage consumer activism, which is fairly passive. It also appears to be a problem in all the english speaking countries.
Unions aren't for the workers and never have been!They are a political entity that collects money from un-suspecting members only to flex it's power in a manner like the soviet pulit bureau,ignoring the will of most of it's members.I know the argument that runaway gangster companies and management would take advantage of employee's if not for the union,but who ever said employee's have a say in anything concerning a private company anyway!They don't
This interviewer doesn't listen. chomsky said banks should "consider stakeholders, not just shareholders" not that they should "consider stakeholders, not just CONSUMERS". What the interviewer said is wrong and makes no sense.
I find it hypocritical how the private sector protests about government involvement in business when times are good, but when times are bad government involvement in the form of tax (our) payers money is fantastic
I hope those pricks from Goldman Sachs spend the rest of their days in federal prison!
free markets don't exist, it's a myth. look at the massive subsidies given to the US agribusiness, big pharma, high tech industry. massive tax relief to big business etc...look at the BAILOUT. capitalism left on it's own without govt money, well we'd be in a depression.
All Marxism is tautological. Capitalism is bad because Capitalism Is Not. It's based on property rights but according to Marx this enables expropriation of property thru labour.
Then he ignored proving the basis of this fallacious and flippant theory even though it is the basis of all his ramblings on historical evolution leading to class warfare through conflict between labour and capital and then expropriation of alleged expropriating monopolists-so Marx was laissez-faire!
"Then he ignored proving the basis of this fallacious and flippant theory"
He uses the sum of human history as proof
His 2 favorite words are FOR EXAMPLE
Your have somehow reduced (trained to bye fox news) the entire argument to 'Marxism' V.S. 'Capitalism'
Chomsky never said he was a Marxist or even Anti-Capitalist
All he said is that the deregulated US economic policy of the last 40 years has caused extreme consolidation of wealth and frequent/severe economic collapses.
SO any point you are trying to make about Marxism or Marx is the definition of irrelevance since Chomsky never brings it up and nobody cares about it.
Millionthusername, you are an dumbshit. Yes, competition is good for markets, very fucking brilliant work, remembering the first sentence from the first day of econ 101. Chomsky is not ignorant of economics, he simply rejects your view, as I can see it is a typical US conservative view. Go read, "The Peoples History of the United States," or at least stop watching Glenn Beck.
"Chomsky is not ignorant of economics, he simply rejects your view, as I can see it"
How would you know if he's ignorant of economics or not given that you're obviously ignorant of economics?
"As I can see it"
And can YOU see anything? Being a lapdog to the utter verbal diarrhoea which Chomsky spouts in this video you should be ashamed of yourself and your idol. I think everyone with half a braincell should see this video & see the self-contradictory nonsense from 'intellecuals.'
I think we really need to consider legalizing online casino and poker like the UK did, and did it well. I promise it will not corrupt the moral fiber of the US people. In fact I'll bet on it:) if someone would like to have a real constuctive conversaton on the subject, look me up.
This guy has a world recognized intellectual and thinker and your faul comment on him isn't going to change that. It is amazing that the Us claims to be a democracy and doesn't allow workers to organize themselves or strike!
He's a communist. He blames the gross distortions in the financial and health care markets on what shred of freedom there is left in this world as opposed to the massive looting, regulation, control, bumbling, and idiocy of central planning.
Supposedly an antiwar "anarchist," he urged people to vote for Obomba whose predator drones kill civilians.
He can't even give the most basic economic analysis without revealing his utter ignorance or intentional blindness of the facts.
Oh come on, farcical insistence will not make things so. Health care costs have NOTING to do with regulation when compared to profits made. Which company do you work for? Aeatna, Blue Cross? GEEZE try not to be so transparent.....
healthcare cost has a lot to do with the lack of regulation coupled with a lot of liability suites. I dunno its exploitation of the legal system and just insurance companies with a monopoly wanting to make as much money as possible. Its bankrupting the country yes we need to socialize healthcare.
You obviously do not understand anything about economics.
You do not understand state control of health care. When you learn something and have something to say, let me know.
You are just leaving numerous comments here without any substance.
Do you understand what a market is? Do you understand what a price is? Do you understand that introducing force into markets hampers those markets? Do you understand that competition lowers prices and increases quality?
Sorry to waste your time with a banal youtube response.
Government didn't cause problems in the financial and health care markets ... bad management and corporate misconduct did (Problems in these markets btw extend beyond ledger sheets, to real people without health care and who've lost substantial capital.) Can you explain how he's blaming this on "freedom?"
He is extremely critical of Obama and hardly supported him. He's made it clear that Obama is carrying on the same legacy of his predecessors especially in foreign policy and even financial policy. If you were at all familiar with his work you would know this. (Which is why I'm saying you don't know what you're talking about.)
I think it's amusing you're calling one of the most cited men in modern history ignorant. It's like calling Plato and Freud ignorant. Who are you??
That's what I said. Go look it up. Find the video. I didn't say he supports all his policies. Don't put words in my mouth.
I'm criticizing him as I would anyone. Sorry, but he isn't "Plato". And if he were, I would still criticize him for being ignorant of economics or a demagogue. I don't know which, but he's one or the other since he doesn't tell the truth.
Sorry to demean your point of view. Maybe you're right, if the markets were left to their own devices things would be different. But I think in the case of health care, coming from an open market position is the wrong thing to do. According to the doctrine that costs should be determined through demand and subsequent competition within the market, prices would be extremely high (as they currently are) NOTHING has a greater demand than the need for health care.
No, you have it backwards. Competition drives down prices and improves quality. A monopoly or cartel which is implemented by force prevents the market from functioning. That's why a monopolist can charge above market rates.
If you prevent people from offering medical services by force, then you artificially narrow the market by driving out competitors.
What you are saying goes against human liberty and free enterprise and basic economics.
I think you are missing an understanding of history. We've had pure free markets with littel regulation in the past. The results were quite bad. There is a reason why we have a mix economy. You can throw in buzz words such as liberty and free enterprise, but we have free enterprise. You can start a company in the US if you're American with little to no barrier of entry besides the market itself. Corporations controling the state is not the state's doing its the corporations doing!!!
Free markets are not bad. A free market is the result of free people producing and exchanging voluntarily. Why do you think freedom, production, and exchange are bad?
If freedom is bad, then coercion is good? Explain why coercion is good. Explain who will do the coercing and who will do the obeying. Explain the penalties you'd like to inflict on people who do not wish to be your slaves. Or perhaps you wish to be the slave?
free markets don't exist, it's a myth. look at the massive subsidies given to the US agribusiness, big pharma, high tech industry. massive tax relief to big business etc...look at the BAILOUT. capitalism left on it's own without govt money, well we'd be in a depression.
The industry exploits this through coordinated tactics to control the market. AND btw they do this WITH the help of the government. If you knew something about this history of regulation in this country agencies in the past were notoriously infiltrated by corporate interests (wiki this). Chomksy mentioned how congress made it illegal for the government to negotiate lower costs for medicare.
Honestly dude, if you don't respond with something qualitative, then I'm not responding anymore.
This guy is supposed to be an anarchist intellectual. I find him to be neither.
He doesn't even know how to properly analyze anything, and like too many people today his means of discourse is obfuscation and lies.
He claims that "deregulation mania" is to blame for the financial crisis when the whole financial system is the result of regulation! It is created and sustained by the "democratic process" of ruling elites who hand out looting privileges to their buddies.
What are your qualifications to judge the analysis of the most quoted man on the planet?While I do not agree withChomsky on everything he says, for you just to say that you "find him to be neither" means nothing. Explicit examples would help. Our financial system is a tad more complex than to say "that it has been built on regulation" as a pat statement. Chomsky often examines the ruling elite and their policies. I would encourage you to investigate his talks further.Get real MillionthUsername
Unbelievably, he says health care costs are high because it's provided by what's left of the market. This is an outrageous lie! The gov't absolutely smothers the whole industry with regulation. The gov't pays half of all the costs. It add layers of bureaucracy and stifles competition.
Can't you understand basic economics and how prices are determined? Can't he? And he's supposed to be an "intellectual"?
you need to read a few of his book dude. I'm sorry but this guy is a professor with a PHD he is an intellectual. He certainly has the qualifications of one, and does the work of one. Therefore he must be one obviously. Are you even pursuing a bachelor's level education? It seems like you aren't.
Why don't you go shoot yourself? Chomsky is clearly of an abnormally LOW intelligence. In the same MINUTE he criticises the 'myth*' of 'rational choice' while then self-contradictorily** noting that the market isn't free but suffers under Mercantilist intervention against competition as is especially true with banking.
*(and of course the government can run aggregations of consumer choice imputing into profit signals better than can a system of voluntary exchange, that's not a myth)
"The economy has been punctuated by bubbles, financial crises, and public bailouts, currently reaching new highs. A few outstanding international economists explained and predicted these results from the start. But mythology about "efficient markets" and "rational choice" prevailed. This is no surprise: it was highly beneficial to the narrow sectors of privilege and power that provide the "principal architects of policy"
democracy gives others a vote on how i am allowed to live my life. it gives them the ability to vote to steal what i own. Democracy ALWAYS leads to the stripping away of freedoms be it social or economical.
What do we say about China's human rights violations in Xinjiang? Being the engine of world economy doesn't excuse China from its moral & political responsibilities. We have to be wary of any rising economic & political powers anywhere in the world. No country or individual in the world has the special right & privilege to do anything it/she/he wants to do just because it/she/he is politically & economically powerful.
you seem to assume that i have been misinformed about the massacre. you're making a fallacy. the issue is not the massacre. the issue is the conditions that precipitated the massacre. these conditions are unjust and should be addressed by the chinese govt. china is not only guilty of human rights violations inside its borders, it also tries to influence google and yahoo. it tries to block factual reports about what is happening inside china. it also tries to block some comments on you tube!
The conditions are almost identical to the kosovo war. Nato and the KLA provoked the Serbs to retaliate and the media put in a hysterical effort to demonize the Serbs. Under the banner of human rights they bombed the Serbs and occupied Kosovo. See, Nato occupied Kosovo for themselves under the pretext "for the human rights of the Kosovo Albanians". When the mainstream media started shouting "human rights" we are supposed to be extremely suspicious about it.
i agree that we have to be suspicious of mainstream media. but you know that being suspicious about them doesn't mean they're always wrong. but i wonder why most of mainstream media is silent about human rights violations inside & outside china. the burden of proof to justify their actions, are on the holders of power & not on those to whom power is applied. so i think that skepticism should be applied more on powerful states & not on mainstream media. the latter do not have armies and nukes.
well the mainstream media is the apparatus of the powerful state,(the US and the west) and i think they are very loud on China's problems as long as it serves their purposes.
And for imperialism, I simply cannot see anyone that is even close to US imperialism. The only war China fought after they got back on their senses is the war with Vietnam, with US backing. How many countries the US has invaded? We are occupying Iraq right now. The withdraw is a joke.
BTW I am not an apologist for China. I am saying it is simply another effort to punish anyone who is defiant, in this case: China. It has nothing to do with China's human rights record. If China is somehow in the US sphere whatever it did would be fine. Now it is on the other side whatever it does will be demonized. If you dun believe me, check China's invasion of Vietnam in 1979. China was an ally then so green light was given and no media buzz at that time.
well, i don't dispute historical facts. but i don't think there is a demonization of china (yet). the issue are human rights violations & imperialism. i don't have a political double standard about these issues because i am not a political pragmatist. human rights violations & imperialism are simply wrong (period). powerful states (failed or otherwise) are prone to abuse of power since the inception of civilization. we have to be ALWAYS critical & skeptical about them.
And the problem of being critical about others' abuses is that it helps to justify our own state's(assume we are both American) criminal action(under the cover of human rights). If the Kosovo war and the phone war on terror taught us anything, it is our state never cared about human rights. The media sees no benefit to reveal the lies by the state(their job is to maximize profit mainly through ads) so their action is to repeat party line. Kosovo is a good example. Nice conversation with u :P
"No country or individual in the world has the special right & privilege to do anything it/she/he wants to do just because it/she/he is politically & economically powerful."--Someone should tell the US government that. There is a lack of information regarding China. But, as China has bought up large amounts of US debt, I doubt the mainstream media will poke into much of the goings on in that country.
If that's true, then there's something wrong about mainstream media. We should prosecute mainstream media then if that's true. This is the scenario I fear would happen with the dependence of most countries on Chinese products. We need better economic safeguards to avoid this kind of economic monopoly now and in the future. Keynesianism must never be allowed to get the upper hand in economics. It is simply unsustainable.
How anyone can support a system which allows the wealth created from the labour of many to be concentrated into the hands of the few, is just absurd. Any economist of sound mind will tell you exactly what happens when purchasing power is removed from producer-society into the hands of minority stakeholders.
It's not rocket science. Why do you think our nations are being flooded with cheap foreign imports produced from cheap, exploited labour? Think about it.
Found a cool website, its at squidoo/economypolitics(Don't forget the other parts to the url) Its about the economy, gold, silver, fiat money, stocks, government, tips..etc. Check it out and help spread the website 2!
Found a cool website, its at squidoo/economypolitics(Don't forget the other parts to the url) Its about the economy, gold, silver, fiat money, stocks, government, tips..etc. Check it out and help spread the website 2!
A lot of dumb people posting here. Chomsky is one of the world's most brilliant minds. Is the dismissive attitude a result of the inability to focus throughout the interview or the inability to understand what he's talking about?
"You gotta love all the Freudian language He tells you over and over that he has absolutely no idea what he is talking about.
"i don't think anybody knows" "my guess is" etc. Way to go, Professor of Linguistics. LOL"
It's called honesty, which is more than one can ask of the so-called "experts" who managed to get just about everything wrong. Way to go, economists and business leaders. LOL
The free-market "libertarians" are nutty here on the internet.
Of course workers can manage themselves better than owners and managers. They are the ones doing the actual work while owners and managers do nothing but boss people around. Fuck them.
And the "libertarians" can complain all they want. We can see that society is bettering itself towards real democracy little by little, and I speak not of bull shit politics that occur in the "mainstream".
The workers can manage the plants better than the managers, and the workers should be involved in the bailout? Chomsky is a senile ideologue. Doesn't this so-called news network have a socialist ECONOMIST to interview about the economy?
I support labor movement. Funny, in our city's Chinatown, labor moves very fast and you see very few beer bellies. Many, but not all, USA workers want max pay and min work. People need ideologues who support their interests. The reckoning is coming. Invest in China to hedge your job loss.
Chomsky is one of the most subversive scholars who has documented the Vietnam war, along with almost every other war that has been during his lifetime.(by subversive I mean factual) I'm sure when he says "peacetime", he means something like "the peacetime of not being truthfully threatened in meaningful violent contest". The Vietnamese war doesn't compare with ww2 or the civil war on scale. Scenarios like Vietnam to define wartime and peacetime would mean were almost always in a wartime period.
The period between 1945-1975, in which Keynesian economics was the norm, was the greatest period of growth, highest wages, highest unionization, highest welfarism, highest shared prosperity, etc. for Western Europe and North America. In France it's known as Les Trente Glorieuses ("the thirty glorious ones").
It was followed by what's called the era of neoliberalism or "free markets," which has seen less innovation, less growth, more speculation, and the dismantling of unions and regulations.
If you think a so-called "Era of Neoliberalism" really took place, you must be living under a rock. Chances are that you aren't aware of the range and scope of SEC law, and regulation like Sarbanes-Oxley. Lemme guess: NAFTA is free trade, right?
Keynesian economics? You've got to be kidding. What, are you a Paul Krugman fan-boy?
Keynesianism is defunct. Austrian economics is REAL economics.
I was reporting what Chomsky has written about neoliberalism. I agree mostly. To answer your questions in reverse order--no, NAFTA was not actual free trade. It was free capital flow and labor arbitrage. I don't think your example of Sarbanes-Oxley can compare to, for example, Gramm-Leach-Bliley. And the supposed great "range and scope" of the SEC is a risible statement, my God. (Hello, Bernie Madoff.)
And Keynesianism, far from being defunct, is resurgent.
Haha. Austrian School economics is REAL economics, huh? Please tell me some notable, reliable Austrian School econometric models. There aren't any! Let me guess, you're a Mises fan-boy?
peace-time : 1945-today. the vietnam war was a major war but it was not a total war like WWII. Because during total warfare, we switch to ressource-based economy wich dosen't even compare to capitalistic peace-time economy.
It's hard for me to explain clearly hope I helped.
No the capitalistic economy is based on profit, wich is based on scarcity. A ressource-based economy means: what can we produce? and then we just do it, without thinking about the money. It's what communists were trying to achieve.
Still doesn't make sense to me. I wouldn't be able to make a profit without resources. Resources are the foundation of creating profit, as well as one of the main reasons why we seek profit- to acquire different forms of resources. I don't see how you can separate resource from any economic system.
Of course you need ressources. but it's not based solely on ressources for example: we still use oil when we have the technology to build electric cars. In a ressource based economy nobody would use oil anymore, we woulve switched to geothermal electricity long long time ago. But oil is rarer than electricity... so were still there. If we were in a world war right now, we would switch to ressourced based economy, and the switch to electricity would be made out of necessity to be as good as possi
Yeah I understand that which is why I quoted "free market". It is the general opinion that the market is free and that makes our market different, when in reality it is manipulated.
@DonkeyofHeaven My friend, no one has control of the market. It is akin to a headless chicken running around with no control. We just have to wait for the heart to stop beating.
recent times have shown that profit is based on anything but resources...inflated debt, passing on that debt between different financial institutions, inflated product value due to brand value...its unhealthy and in the final analysis stupid, but its whats been going on since the late eighties.
what i do not understand about the left is that they rail about dysfunctional government, like chomsky saying that regulation is usually taken over by the industry it's supposed to regulate, yet he thinks we need more regulation and more government to fix it.
unions help the lives of foreign workers willing to work for 1/10th the price that we are.
chomsky is obviously a smart man but he is just wrong when it comes to economics
look up the recovered factories in Argentina. They've been able to increase wages, expand the workforce, increase production and donate material to community projects. Sure sounds profitable to me.
"These are businesses with people -- we don't measure them solely on the basis of profits or losses," Abelli says. "These companies have social worth."
because thats exactly what works in america. Everyone has a job! Who gives a shit if they can survive! At least they have peasant buddies to work with.
The people who work there, the community its in, etc. so if a Coke plants destroying the fresh water supply in India were accountable to the public stake holders what might happen? They might be shut down.
It is worse in the US. The reason being is that the media is corporate and they control the message. Corporations (seeing as they seek profit) are at odds with the overall public interest. As such Unions are unfairly vilified and used as an excuse for Free -Trade agreements and Globalization as a whole.
I just think he knows a lot. He has written more than 100 books and he's old so he must know a lot about the history of presidents. For me, in my own life, I have only read "manufacturing consent" and much of what he speaks about makes sense to me. like Democracy, in where we find conflict with other nations making a Democracy a real one and not like ours where only a few people run the state and the president is just a figuer head.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
mojorasol
You are correct, Chumpsky (that is not a typo, it is what I call him) is a formidable opponent in a debate, as is any sophist (which Chumpsky is) worth his keep.
Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman.. and other right-wing heroes are TRUE Sophists. Their arguments are not logical. Chomsky's argument are based upon scientific evidence. That Human beings, much like any other animal, are selfish (Self Interested) but in being selfish are also proponents of Altruistic Individualism. Ayn Rand and other individuals with little understanding of human behavior believe that objectivity through self interest is the ONLY driving force (which is factually incorrect).
Over the past 30 years we have had anything but a free economy - we did not have capitalism in any sense. Chomsky couldn't be more wrong look to Bretton Woods II. If you view money as human capital and roll backwards through the banking cartel and into the Federal Reserve System I think you will find the reason human capital has been devalued so greatly, and find the reasons we have one individual recieveing a $200MM bonuses. You will find the facts my friend. Good Luck.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Gore Vidal must be running out of money. Is that OK? Can we put a video on Youtube and make up a reason to ask for money from viewers here? I thought that was against the rules.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
This guy is a linguist and writes books about how Marxism is just dandy (despite the fact that it failed everywhere it's ever been implemented, and left human misery and suffering in its wake.)
In other words . . what in the hell does he know about economics?
I think what he was saying is that Chomsky doesn't "write books on Marxism" because he is, politically speaking, NOT A MARXIST.
That aside, he's one of the most intelligent scholars on earth and has been studying politics, economics and international relations for decades. His work in all fields has been cited more times than any other living person. He's 8th all time, behind Freud. I trust him more than a talking head on TV.
You should inform yourself about someone before you attack them.
Chomsky doesn't even say he is qualified to determine if the stimulus will work. That being said, he then makes a conjecture based on what he knows. The man is a linguistics professor. You or who ever you were addressing this to should pay attention to his exact words
as much as anyone. dont forget we are in this mess due to the resposible work of all those economic experts. theydid it on purpose anyway. it wasnt a mistake. it was all predictable.
i meant chomsky knows as much as any "expert" on economics.
one strategy to attack him instead of the arguments is always to say hes an expert on language, why should we listen to what he has to say about anything else.
hes not just a linguist but a historian ad just pretty darn honest and smart and hes sone a lot of work to back up what he says. its all in print.
you can hate, but you cant deny, hes a formidable opponent if you focus on the issue and dont result to name calling.
I'm just stating the fact that like you, Hugo Chavez is also greatly inspired by Chomsky's work. It's only logical that Chavez's "achievements" in Venezuela would meet with your approval. Aren't you proud that a leader with a similar mindset is bringing Chomsky's ideas to fruition? Why would you be ashamed?
This has been flagged as spam show
you gentiles are Pathetic Always take some jew and make him god or Messiah just like the jesus and kerl marx and know this noam chomsky did you ever wondering why is this all your biggst gods and messiah and your intellectuals from right and left are jewish and you wonder how we the jews call are self the chosen people dont diss this
comment in 100 yreas from know your kids will things that holly histroy just like your Fathers Though't even the arebs belive in a jewish idea of god
ehudnold9 6 months ago
Whats wrong with rational choice? Forgive me for sounding naive, youtube. lol. But I'm talking about bounded rationality, of course.
mrzipdisk 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Rothschilds are enslaving the People of the US via the fraudulent criminal conspiracy known as the illegal, unConstitutional Federal Reserve. The entire US government is now simply a puppet of the Rothschild banking dynasty.
“End the Fed”
Every political candidate must be evaluated based upon this single all telling crucial issue. You are either with the People or you are with the Rothschilds and their agents, the international bankers.
This is the new American litmus test.
Lentenlands 11 months ago
thankyou noam!!!!!!!
annao67 1 year ago
most worker don't want to be involved in bureaucratic management roles
rubinglen 1 year ago
Unionization?
That's just satanic!
People working together, trying to change the power structure and increase their quality of life and input into the economic system?
That's down right satanic
People need to realize that they are merely the means to an end------use once and dispose
metalreign81 1 year ago
@metalreign81
Or in the case of most workers
use many times, mistreat, exploit, and then discard when old and useless
metalreign81 1 year ago
@metalreign81 Hahaha. Downright satanic but also deeply un-American!
Cabronosidad 8 months ago
FUCK Noam Chomsky. People act like this asshole is above reproach because he's a leftist Jew and an intellectual. This bastard has shown support for Hamas and Hezbollah, hates the nation he lives in, and time and time again has advocated a foreign policy that would ass-fuck us. This fucker isn't right about everything, people. If he were a true intellectual and gave 2 shits about anything other than hearing his own monotone voice, he'd be telling Americans to vote Libertarian.
oldstock1607 1 year ago
Comment removed
Yogaboarder 11 months ago
@oldstock1607 Dude, real new's just pisses you off, try Fox New's and be Happy echo, echo, aw, the sound of my own voice is so lovely, don't you think? echo, echo...;-)
Yogaboarder 11 months ago
@Yogaboarder Come with something relevant, and this time, try not to remove it immediately after you write it, cocksucker.
oldstock1607 11 months ago
@Yogaboarder Awwwwww.......pppfffffttt, pfffttttt (that's the sound of jizz shooting out of my dick to your super original comment.
oldstock1607 5 months ago
@oldstock1607 What's wrong with hating the nation one lives in?
Pomme843 8 months ago
@Pomme843 u wouldn't be watching this if you hated your nation.....you don't like what your government is doing....its not the same
mrbigtruth34 6 months ago
@mrbigtruth34 Yeah, I completely agree. I don't hate my nation, and America is not my nation, either. But oldstock claimed that Chomsky does hate the US. The claim is highly objectionable. I chose, however, not to question its truthfulness, but rather its normative relevance. It was intended as sarcasm on my part.
Pomme843 6 months ago
@oldstock1607 You sound quite enlightened yourself.
Ermal8711 5 months ago
@Ermal8711 thanks.
oldstock1607 5 months ago
An example is this. It is like a bad child telling her parents she can do whatever she wants because she is human and it is not right to put a chain on a human being. Her harm is she is causing disrupt to society by protesting against what is the overall good for humanity.
heartlessvietboy 1 year ago
i love this man
W0KD 1 year ago 2
@MrAlienlovechild i see.ya had me goin there.i mean whats natural about slavery???oh well,theres no shortage idiot,wacko,left fielders on the net here.tomo someone will come along thats NOT BEING SARCASTIC about this.peace!
dempsey981 1 year ago
@MrAlienlovechild slavery is natural??people tickle me.i tell ya whats natural,thats to choke the life out of your enslaver the very first fuckin chance you get,piss on his dead carcass then get out of dodge.thats whats natural!!!
dempsey981 1 year ago
There are no social organizations for liberals separate from the establishmentarian democratic party, that would teach these skills. Most of what passes for social activism in the past 30 years is just a mass market charity campaigns like live aid that encourage consumer activism, which is fairly passive. It also appears to be a problem in all the english speaking countries.
Dameocrat 1 year ago
wheres part 1?
FukCommando 1 year ago
Unions aren't for the workers and never have been!They are a political entity that collects money from un-suspecting members only to flex it's power in a manner like the soviet pulit bureau,ignoring the will of most of it's members.I know the argument that runaway gangster companies and management would take advantage of employee's if not for the union,but who ever said employee's have a say in anything concerning a private company anyway!They don't
Doughnutchef 1 year ago
This interviewer doesn't listen. chomsky said banks should "consider stakeholders, not just shareholders" not that they should "consider stakeholders, not just CONSUMERS". What the interviewer said is wrong and makes no sense.
kelly980 1 year ago
I find it hypocritical how the private sector protests about government involvement in business when times are good, but when times are bad government involvement in the form of tax (our) payers money is fantastic
I hope those pricks from Goldman Sachs spend the rest of their days in federal prison!
70greenedi 1 year ago
free markets don't exist, it's a myth. look at the massive subsidies given to the US agribusiness, big pharma, high tech industry. massive tax relief to big business etc...look at the BAILOUT. capitalism left on it's own without govt money, well we'd be in a depression.
longdog33 1 year ago
@longdog33
Yes, I know. The state destroys free markets. That's why it exists.
That being the case, your last sentence makes absolutely no sense
at all.
By capitalism you must mean state-capitalism not free market
capitalism, so what you're saying is a tautology. Yes, it's true that
without gov't fiat money the gov't subsidized banking cartel would
have collapsed. No kidding.
And we are in a depression now, so I don't know what you mean there.
You understand that it is fiat money, right?
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
@MillionthUsername
All Marxism is tautological. Capitalism is bad because Capitalism Is Not. It's based on property rights but according to Marx this enables expropriation of property thru labour.
Then he ignored proving the basis of this fallacious and flippant theory even though it is the basis of all his ramblings on historical evolution leading to class warfare through conflict between labour and capital and then expropriation of alleged expropriating monopolists-so Marx was laissez-faire!
Nintendomanwill 1 year ago
@Nintendomanwill
"Then he ignored proving the basis of this fallacious and flippant theory"
He uses the sum of human history as proof
His 2 favorite words are FOR EXAMPLE
Your have somehow reduced (trained to bye fox news) the entire argument to 'Marxism' V.S. 'Capitalism'
Chomsky never said he was a Marxist or even Anti-Capitalist
All he said is that the deregulated US economic policy of the last 40 years has caused extreme consolidation of wealth and frequent/severe economic collapses.
herbzilla12 1 year ago
@herbzilla12
SO any point you are trying to make about Marxism or Marx is the definition of irrelevance since Chomsky never brings it up and nobody cares about it.
herbzilla12 1 year ago
Millionthusername, you are an dumbshit. Yes, competition is good for markets, very fucking brilliant work, remembering the first sentence from the first day of econ 101. Chomsky is not ignorant of economics, he simply rejects your view, as I can see it is a typical US conservative view. Go read, "The Peoples History of the United States," or at least stop watching Glenn Beck.
mistermoen 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Chomsky is not ignorant of economics, he simply rejects your view, as I can see it"
How would you know if he's ignorant of economics or not given that you're obviously ignorant of economics?
"As I can see it"
And can YOU see anything? Being a lapdog to the utter verbal diarrhoea which Chomsky spouts in this video you should be ashamed of yourself and your idol. I think everyone with half a braincell should see this video & see the self-contradictory nonsense from 'intellecuals.'
Nintendomanwill 1 year ago
I think we really need to consider legalizing online casino and poker like the UK did, and did it well. I promise it will not corrupt the moral fiber of the US people. In fact I'll bet on it:) if someone would like to have a real constuctive conversaton on the subject, look me up.
sunpokerdotcom 2 years ago
Unions are supposed to protect the workers and make sure they are taken care of.
But who regulates the unions? I think there are some significant details here that the common man(like myself) are missing from this equation.
OsvaldoPaese 2 years ago
@OsvaldoPaese
Unions are the "common man" moron.
posuerbuster 2 years ago
This guy has a world recognized intellectual and thinker and your faul comment on him isn't going to change that. It is amazing that the Us claims to be a democracy and doesn't allow workers to organize themselves or strike!
68generation 2 years ago
He's a communist. He blames the gross distortions in the financial and health care markets on what shred of freedom there is left in this world as opposed to the massive looting, regulation, control, bumbling, and idiocy of central planning.
Supposedly an antiwar "anarchist," he urged people to vote for Obomba whose predator drones kill civilians.
He can't even give the most basic economic analysis without revealing his utter ignorance or intentional blindness of the facts.
MillionthUsername 2 years ago
Oh come on, farcical insistence will not make things so. Health care costs have NOTING to do with regulation when compared to profits made. Which company do you work for? Aeatna, Blue Cross? GEEZE try not to be so transparent.....
cincishaman 2 years ago
"Health care costs have NOTING to do with regulation"
Wow. That's a great of ignorance. Thanks.
Why don't you share with us your insight into how regulation has nothing to do with costs.
MillionthUsername 2 years ago
healthcare cost has a lot to do with the lack of regulation coupled with a lot of liability suites. I dunno its exploitation of the legal system and just insurance companies with a monopoly wanting to make as much money as possible. Its bankrupting the country yes we need to socialize healthcare.
lordblazer 1 year ago
You obviously do not understand anything about economics.
You do not understand state control of health care. When you learn something and have something to say, let me know.
You are just leaving numerous comments here without any substance.
Do you understand what a market is? Do you understand what a price is? Do you understand that introducing force into markets hampers those markets? Do you understand that competition lowers prices and increases quality?
Apparently not.
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
You have no idea what you're talking about, in case no one has told you.
ngober 2 years ago
@ngober
How lame. You don't have an argument, so why are wasting my time?
Chomsky continually displays his ignorance of economics. All this man does is lie. I've never even heard him make a distinction. He's a joke.
MillionthUsername 2 years ago
@MillionthUsername
Sorry to waste your time with a banal youtube response.
Government didn't cause problems in the financial and health care markets ... bad management and corporate misconduct did (Problems in these markets btw extend beyond ledger sheets, to real people without health care and who've lost substantial capital.) Can you explain how he's blaming this on "freedom?"
ngober 2 years ago
@ngober
"Government didn't cause problems in the financial and health care markets"
You cannot be serious.
The gov't controls both the financial system and the health system. You ought to acquaint yourself with history and the law in these areas.
How do you not know these things? How does Chomsky not know?
MillionthUsername 2 years ago
@MillionthUsername
He is extremely critical of Obama and hardly supported him. He's made it clear that Obama is carrying on the same legacy of his predecessors especially in foreign policy and even financial policy. If you were at all familiar with his work you would know this. (Which is why I'm saying you don't know what you're talking about.)
I think it's amusing you're calling one of the most cited men in modern history ignorant. It's like calling Plato and Freud ignorant. Who are you??
ngober 2 years ago
@ngober
There is a video where he says to vote for Obama.
That's what I said. Go look it up. Find the video. I didn't say he supports all his policies. Don't put words in my mouth.
I'm criticizing him as I would anyone. Sorry, but he isn't "Plato". And if he were, I would still criticize him for being ignorant of economics or a demagogue. I don't know which, but he's one or the other since he doesn't tell the truth.
MillionthUsername 2 years ago
@MillionthUsername
Sorry to demean your point of view. Maybe you're right, if the markets were left to their own devices things would be different. But I think in the case of health care, coming from an open market position is the wrong thing to do. According to the doctrine that costs should be determined through demand and subsequent competition within the market, prices would be extremely high (as they currently are) NOTHING has a greater demand than the need for health care.
ngober 2 years ago
@ngober
No, you have it backwards. Competition drives down prices and improves quality. A monopoly or cartel which is implemented by force prevents the market from functioning. That's why a monopolist can charge above market rates.
If you prevent people from offering medical services by force, then you artificially narrow the market by driving out competitors.
What you are saying goes against human liberty and free enterprise and basic economics.
MillionthUsername 2 years ago
I think you are missing an understanding of history. We've had pure free markets with littel regulation in the past. The results were quite bad. There is a reason why we have a mix economy. You can throw in buzz words such as liberty and free enterprise, but we have free enterprise. You can start a company in the US if you're American with little to no barrier of entry besides the market itself. Corporations controling the state is not the state's doing its the corporations doing!!!
lordblazer 1 year ago
Liberty is not a buzz word.
Free markets are not bad. A free market is the result of free people producing and exchanging voluntarily. Why do you think freedom, production, and exchange are bad?
If freedom is bad, then coercion is good? Explain why coercion is good. Explain who will do the coercing and who will do the obeying. Explain the penalties you'd like to inflict on people who do not wish to be your slaves. Or perhaps you wish to be the slave?
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
free markets don't exist, it's a myth. look at the massive subsidies given to the US agribusiness, big pharma, high tech industry. massive tax relief to big business etc...look at the BAILOUT. capitalism left on it's own without govt money, well we'd be in a depression.
longdog33 1 year ago
The industry exploits this through coordinated tactics to control the market. AND btw they do this WITH the help of the government. If you knew something about this history of regulation in this country agencies in the past were notoriously infiltrated by corporate interests (wiki this). Chomksy mentioned how congress made it illegal for the government to negotiate lower costs for medicare.
Honestly dude, if you don't respond with something qualitative, then I'm not responding anymore.
ngober 2 years ago
@ngober
Yes, of course, in the face of state control, people lobby the state. But a state controlled market is not a free market.
Chomsky never makes this basic distinction.
MillionthUsername 2 years ago
no, millionthusername. You truly have no idea of what you're saying. Please just shhh.
lordblazer 1 year ago
@ngober
Explain to all of us how the health care industry and the financial industry are FREE MARKETS then, if that's what you think.
Why don't you explain what the STATE is and what they do to these industries.
You could spend some time doing research and then get back to us.
Tell us what a "regulation" is and what a "mandate" is and what a "license" is.
You could try to start a free market bank or insurance company and tell us what the STATE does. You could write us from PRISON.
MillionthUsername 2 years ago
You're really all over the place aren't you. Freaking education in this country.
Take care MillionthUsername.
ngober 2 years ago
This guy is supposed to be an anarchist intellectual. I find him to be neither.
He doesn't even know how to properly analyze anything, and like too many people today his means of discourse is obfuscation and lies.
He claims that "deregulation mania" is to blame for the financial crisis when the whole financial system is the result of regulation! It is created and sustained by the "democratic process" of ruling elites who hand out looting privileges to their buddies.
Chomsky, get real.
MillionthUsername 2 years ago
What are your qualifications to judge the analysis of the most quoted man on the planet?While I do not agree withChomsky on everything he says, for you just to say that you "find him to be neither" means nothing. Explicit examples would help. Our financial system is a tad more complex than to say "that it has been built on regulation" as a pat statement. Chomsky often examines the ruling elite and their policies. I would encourage you to investigate his talks further.Get real MillionthUsername
cincishaman 2 years ago
Read my other comment. Examples abound.
Unbelievably, he says health care costs are high because it's provided by what's left of the market. This is an outrageous lie! The gov't absolutely smothers the whole industry with regulation. The gov't pays half of all the costs. It add layers of bureaucracy and stifles competition.
Can't you understand basic economics and how prices are determined? Can't he? And he's supposed to be an "intellectual"?
It's a joke. He's just an ignorant commie.
MillionthUsername 2 years ago
Comment removed
ngober 2 years ago
you need to read a few of his book dude. I'm sorry but this guy is a professor with a PHD he is an intellectual. He certainly has the qualifications of one, and does the work of one. Therefore he must be one obviously. Are you even pursuing a bachelor's level education? It seems like you aren't.
lordblazer 1 year ago
The most inane comments. How old are you?
You think Chomsky knows what he's talking about because he's a professor? He is demonstrably ignorant of economics.
MillionthUsername 1 year ago
have you read any of his research?
lordblazer 1 year ago
@lordblazer
Why don't you go shoot yourself? Chomsky is clearly of an abnormally LOW intelligence. In the same MINUTE he criticises the 'myth*' of 'rational choice' while then self-contradictorily** noting that the market isn't free but suffers under Mercantilist intervention against competition as is especially true with banking.
*(and of course the government can run aggregations of consumer choice imputing into profit signals better than can a system of voluntary exchange, that's not a myth)
Nintendomanwill 1 year ago
@Nintendomanwill
Chomsky is correct
"The economy has been punctuated by bubbles, financial crises, and public bailouts, currently reaching new highs. A few outstanding international economists explained and predicted these results from the start. But mythology about "efficient markets" and "rational choice" prevailed. This is no surprise: it was highly beneficial to the narrow sectors of privilege and power that provide the "principal architects of policy"
Your rebuttal was incoherent Drivel
herbzilla12 1 year ago
@Nintendomanwill
I get you a little better now, I saw your channel.
You WORSHIP capitalism and your WORSHIP of capitalism has PERMANENTLY DESTROYED you ability to use rational thought.
Facts bounce off of your mind like pennies bounce off a stone.
herbzilla12 1 year ago
Part one isn't even to be found doing a youtube search on the complete title. So I guess you haven't even posted it?
gunthaarz 2 years ago
I got part 1 from the Real News Network website. I just typed in Noam Chomsky & all of the interviews came up.
LucaBratze 2 years ago
Part one is under the title "Chomsky on Geithner".
hugoegbert79 2 years ago
@gunthaarz part 1 is " chomsky on geithner"
thefullmonte2003 2 years ago
Try beginnning the Titles with "Part 1 of.." etc.
gunthaarz 2 years ago
you really must post these in a way so that it is possible to find part 1 first ...
gunthaarz 2 years ago
Paul Jay is the man mass respect
vandall 2 years ago
Comment removed
yangenator 2 years ago
Noam Chomsky doesnt know crap about economics
ADlibertyRP 2 years ago
thanks for explaining why you think that...
Pomeray8 2 years ago
Nice ad hominem and a profound hatred of democracy on display there - democracy gives equal voice to all.
TDWP077 2 years ago
democracy gives others a vote on how i am allowed to live my life. it gives them the ability to vote to steal what i own. Democracy ALWAYS leads to the stripping away of freedoms be it social or economical.
ADlibertyRP 2 years ago
What do we say about China's human rights violations in Xinjiang? Being the engine of world economy doesn't excuse China from its moral & political responsibilities. We have to be wary of any rising economic & political powers anywhere in the world. No country or individual in the world has the special right & privilege to do anything it/she/he wants to do just because it/she/he is politically & economically powerful.
bebopbopbebop 2 years ago
clearly the uighurs massacred over a hundred people under daylight using clubs and knives, if the mainstream media is honest they will tell you that
one of chomsky's main efforts is to teach people thinking critically about the media, it seems he failed in ur case
stirrrrrr 2 years ago
you seem to assume that i have been misinformed about the massacre. you're making a fallacy. the issue is not the massacre. the issue is the conditions that precipitated the massacre. these conditions are unjust and should be addressed by the chinese govt. china is not only guilty of human rights violations inside its borders, it also tries to influence google and yahoo. it tries to block factual reports about what is happening inside china. it also tries to block some comments on you tube!
bebopbopbebop 2 years ago
The conditions are almost identical to the kosovo war. Nato and the KLA provoked the Serbs to retaliate and the media put in a hysterical effort to demonize the Serbs. Under the banner of human rights they bombed the Serbs and occupied Kosovo. See, Nato occupied Kosovo for themselves under the pretext "for the human rights of the Kosovo Albanians". When the mainstream media started shouting "human rights" we are supposed to be extremely suspicious about it.
stirrrrrr 2 years ago
i agree that we have to be suspicious of mainstream media. but you know that being suspicious about them doesn't mean they're always wrong. but i wonder why most of mainstream media is silent about human rights violations inside & outside china. the burden of proof to justify their actions, are on the holders of power & not on those to whom power is applied. so i think that skepticism should be applied more on powerful states & not on mainstream media. the latter do not have armies and nukes.
bebopbopbebop 2 years ago
well the mainstream media is the apparatus of the powerful state,(the US and the west) and i think they are very loud on China's problems as long as it serves their purposes.
And for imperialism, I simply cannot see anyone that is even close to US imperialism. The only war China fought after they got back on their senses is the war with Vietnam, with US backing. How many countries the US has invaded? We are occupying Iraq right now. The withdraw is a joke.
stirrrrrr 2 years ago
I'll add as an aside that the US has almost 800 worldwide military bases. The US is also building the largest (1 billion USD) embassy in Islamabad.
Pomeray8 2 years ago
America has bought Pakistan.
ouijaboy666 2 years ago
And also the mainstream media/government use phrases like "instability in the region" and "restore democracy."
Pomeray8 2 years ago
can also add
installing the biggest thief in Pakistan history as the head of the state
force Pakistanis to fight each while killing tens everyday using missiles launched from drones
stirrrrrr 2 years ago
BTW I am not an apologist for China. I am saying it is simply another effort to punish anyone who is defiant, in this case: China. It has nothing to do with China's human rights record. If China is somehow in the US sphere whatever it did would be fine. Now it is on the other side whatever it does will be demonized. If you dun believe me, check China's invasion of Vietnam in 1979. China was an ally then so green light was given and no media buzz at that time.
stirrrrrr 2 years ago
well, i don't dispute historical facts. but i don't think there is a demonization of china (yet). the issue are human rights violations & imperialism. i don't have a political double standard about these issues because i am not a political pragmatist. human rights violations & imperialism are simply wrong (period). powerful states (failed or otherwise) are prone to abuse of power since the inception of civilization. we have to be ALWAYS critical & skeptical about them.
bebopbopbebop 2 years ago
And the problem of being critical about others' abuses is that it helps to justify our own state's(assume we are both American) criminal action(under the cover of human rights). If the Kosovo war and the phone war on terror taught us anything, it is our state never cared about human rights. The media sees no benefit to reveal the lies by the state(their job is to maximize profit mainly through ads) so their action is to repeat party line. Kosovo is a good example. Nice conversation with u :P
stirrrrrr 2 years ago
"No country or individual in the world has the special right & privilege to do anything it/she/he wants to do just because it/she/he is politically & economically powerful."--Someone should tell the US government that. There is a lack of information regarding China. But, as China has bought up large amounts of US debt, I doubt the mainstream media will poke into much of the goings on in that country.
Pomeray8 2 years ago
If that's true, then there's something wrong about mainstream media. We should prosecute mainstream media then if that's true. This is the scenario I fear would happen with the dependence of most countries on Chinese products. We need better economic safeguards to avoid this kind of economic monopoly now and in the future. Keynesianism must never be allowed to get the upper hand in economics. It is simply unsustainable.
bebopbopbebop 2 years ago
Back down nutsmokers...Chomsky clearly owns your asses! Respec' to da Noam aiiii!
mrwhippy40 2 years ago 24
How anyone can support a system which allows the wealth created from the labour of many to be concentrated into the hands of the few, is just absurd. Any economist of sound mind will tell you exactly what happens when purchasing power is removed from producer-society into the hands of minority stakeholders.
It's not rocket science. Why do you think our nations are being flooded with cheap foreign imports produced from cheap, exploited labour? Think about it.
epiphany55 2 years ago 18
This has been flagged as spam show
paste this to 2 other videos
go to your channel and see your comments
JUST DO IT IT SCARY
SuperBlergh 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Found a cool website, its at squidoo/economypolitics(Don't forget the other parts to the url) Its about the economy, gold, silver, fiat money, stocks, government, tips..etc. Check it out and help spread the website 2!
Anythingwilldo41 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Found a cool website, its at squidoo/economypolitics(Don't forget the other parts to the url) Its about the economy, gold, silver, fiat money, stocks, government, tips..etc. Check it out and help spread the website 2!
Anythingwilldo41 2 years ago
A lot of dumb people posting here. Chomsky is one of the world's most brilliant minds. Is the dismissive attitude a result of the inability to focus throughout the interview or the inability to understand what he's talking about?
ashcroftbrian 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You gotta love all the Freudian language He tells you over and over that he has absolutely no idea what he is talking about.
"i don't think anybody knows" "my guess is" etc. Way to go, Professor of Linguistics. LOL
Of course if you're an austrian you already knew that he was an imbecilic fool.
bugsbugmenot 2 years ago
"You gotta love all the Freudian language He tells you over and over that he has absolutely no idea what he is talking about.
"i don't think anybody knows" "my guess is" etc. Way to go, Professor of Linguistics. LOL"
It's called honesty, which is more than one can ask of the so-called "experts" who managed to get just about everything wrong. Way to go, economists and business leaders. LOL
cayetanoluis 2 years ago
jeez has this guy taken macroecon 101?
Honkyrappa 2 years ago
This guy is nuts! No wonder there is so many young people with distorted views.....
bcm9091 2 years ago
Comment removed
08bknapp 2 years ago
The free-market "libertarians" are nutty here on the internet.
Of course workers can manage themselves better than owners and managers. They are the ones doing the actual work while owners and managers do nothing but boss people around. Fuck them.
And the "libertarians" can complain all they want. We can see that society is bettering itself towards real democracy little by little, and I speak not of bull shit politics that occur in the "mainstream".
bootleg42 2 years ago
So much anger and hatred..
If you think managers and owners do nothing, you have a serious lack of understanding about how the real world works.
AminCad 2 years ago 2
The workers can manage the plants better than the managers, and the workers should be involved in the bailout? Chomsky is a senile ideologue. Doesn't this so-called news network have a socialist ECONOMIST to interview about the economy?
forwardmover 2 years ago
chomsky is one of the biggest supporters of the labor movement
kwballzandy 2 years ago
I support labor movement. Funny, in our city's Chinatown, labor moves very fast and you see very few beer bellies. Many, but not all, USA workers want max pay and min work. People need ideologues who support their interests. The reckoning is coming. Invest in China to hedge your job loss.
forwardmover 2 years ago
He supports labor? So what? So does the local tavern / beer peddler. Supporting someone just because they support you is codependence.
forwardmover 2 years ago
lol... I love your tinfoil hat, it goes well with your tinfoil brain
Ullbritt 2 years ago
Did he just say greatest peace-time growth was between 1950-~1970? What happened to the Vietnam War? Could someone clarify what he meant by that?
greenstone09 2 years ago
Chomsky is one of the most subversive scholars who has documented the Vietnam war, along with almost every other war that has been during his lifetime.(by subversive I mean factual) I'm sure when he says "peacetime", he means something like "the peacetime of not being truthfully threatened in meaningful violent contest". The Vietnamese war doesn't compare with ww2 or the civil war on scale. Scenarios like Vietnam to define wartime and peacetime would mean were almost always in a wartime period.
xaoslegend 2 years ago
The period between 1945-1975, in which Keynesian economics was the norm, was the greatest period of growth, highest wages, highest unionization, highest welfarism, highest shared prosperity, etc. for Western Europe and North America. In France it's known as Les Trente Glorieuses ("the thirty glorious ones").
It was followed by what's called the era of neoliberalism or "free markets," which has seen less innovation, less growth, more speculation, and the dismantling of unions and regulations.
tintintabulations 2 years ago
If you think a so-called "Era of Neoliberalism" really took place, you must be living under a rock. Chances are that you aren't aware of the range and scope of SEC law, and regulation like Sarbanes-Oxley. Lemme guess: NAFTA is free trade, right?
Keynesian economics? You've got to be kidding. What, are you a Paul Krugman fan-boy?
Keynesianism is defunct. Austrian economics is REAL economics.
immanent 2 years ago 3
immanent,
I was reporting what Chomsky has written about neoliberalism. I agree mostly. To answer your questions in reverse order--no, NAFTA was not actual free trade. It was free capital flow and labor arbitrage. I don't think your example of Sarbanes-Oxley can compare to, for example, Gramm-Leach-Bliley. And the supposed great "range and scope" of the SEC is a risible statement, my God. (Hello, Bernie Madoff.)
And Keynesianism, far from being defunct, is resurgent.
tintintabulations 2 years ago
Sarbanes-Oxley was one of the most expensive burdens ever placed on the financial sector.
AminCad 2 years ago
NAFTA means no trade barieers & subsidies
it's not supposed to be more than that
bullbunnies 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I too would rather listen to and Austrian economist rather than Chomsky.
return135 2 years ago
Haha. Austrian School economics is REAL economics, huh? Please tell me some notable, reliable Austrian School econometric models. There aren't any! Let me guess, you're a Mises fan-boy?
WhatIsToBeDone85 2 years ago
peace-time : 1945-today. the vietnam war was a major war but it was not a total war like WWII. Because during total warfare, we switch to ressource-based economy wich dosen't even compare to capitalistic peace-time economy.
It's hard for me to explain clearly hope I helped.
MA453 2 years ago
Still not clear to me, isn't the capitalistic peace-time economy based on resources? What economy isn't based on resources?
greenstone09 2 years ago
No the capitalistic economy is based on profit, wich is based on scarcity. A ressource-based economy means: what can we produce? and then we just do it, without thinking about the money. It's what communists were trying to achieve.
MA453 2 years ago 3
Still doesn't make sense to me. I wouldn't be able to make a profit without resources. Resources are the foundation of creating profit, as well as one of the main reasons why we seek profit- to acquire different forms of resources. I don't see how you can separate resource from any economic system.
greenstone09 2 years ago
Of course you need ressources. but it's not based solely on ressources for example: we still use oil when we have the technology to build electric cars. In a ressource based economy nobody would use oil anymore, we woulve switched to geothermal electricity long long time ago. But oil is rarer than electricity... so were still there. If we were in a world war right now, we would switch to ressourced based economy, and the switch to electricity would be made out of necessity to be as good as possi
MA453 2 years ago
All systems are capitalistic.
Capital = means of production. These means can be any tool, from hammers to tractors to humans are workers.
What we have is a "free market".
drewd1987 2 years ago
Drewd, we don't have a "free market", we have a market controlled primarily by the wealthy class for the benefit of the wealthy class..
DonkeyofHeaven 2 years ago 13
Yeah I understand that which is why I quoted "free market". It is the general opinion that the market is free and that makes our market different, when in reality it is manipulated.
drewd1987 2 years ago
@DonkeyofHeaven My friend, no one has control of the market. It is akin to a headless chicken running around with no control. We just have to wait for the heart to stop beating.
HardHouseMusic4Me 1 year ago
recent times have shown that profit is based on anything but resources...inflated debt, passing on that debt between different financial institutions, inflated product value due to brand value...its unhealthy and in the final analysis stupid, but its whats been going on since the late eighties.
blakiplops 2 years ago 2
a search for "republic windows and floors" results in only two results, both transcripts of this interview
a little help?
KentAllard 2 years ago
if poor Argentines can do it successfully...
KentAllard 2 years ago
damn he is getting very old. he can have a few years from my life.
shankyxyz 2 years ago
Thanks for the video. Chomsky is the man.
fathead8489 2 years ago
what i do not understand about the left is that they rail about dysfunctional government, like chomsky saying that regulation is usually taken over by the industry it's supposed to regulate, yet he thinks we need more regulation and more government to fix it.
unions help the lives of foreign workers willing to work for 1/10th the price that we are.
chomsky is obviously a smart man but he is just wrong when it comes to economics
balomas69 2 years ago
Well we can dream about a future fantasy world where everything is perfect and complain about this one not being it.
Or we can work with the world we have today, so that means using the state which can be compelled to be democratic.
KentAllard 2 years ago
and somehow community run factories that are actually competitive is not part of some future fantasy world.
i would love to see examples of this being successful in our modern world.
the state can also be compelled to be tyrannical through democratic means. i guess we've forgotten the bush years already
balomas69 2 years ago
look up the recovered factories in Argentina. They've been able to increase wages, expand the workforce, increase production and donate material to community projects. Sure sounds profitable to me.
KentAllard 2 years ago
"These are businesses with people -- we don't measure them solely on the basis of profits or losses," Abelli says. "These companies have social worth."
because thats exactly what works in america. Everyone has a job! Who gives a shit if they can survive! At least they have peasant buddies to work with.
balomas69 2 years ago 2
I dont see what there s to disagree about with this Abelli fella
KentAllard 2 years ago
you're my hero
balomas69 2 years ago
"the state can also be compelled to be tyrannical through democratic means. i guess we've forgotten the bush years already"
I dont remember there being anything democratic there
KentAllard 2 years ago
thanks for proving my point
balomas69 2 years ago 2
what does he mean by public stake-holders exactly?
wilburnforce 2 years ago
the public.
The people who work there, the community its in, etc. so if a Coke plants destroying the fresh water supply in India were accountable to the public stake holders what might happen? They might be shut down.
KentAllard 2 years ago
everyone should check out "economyincrisis . org" and see what's really happening in this economy
charr05 2 years ago
The amount of animosity towards unions here in Canada is very high. Is it similar amongst the Us populace?
adventurenox 2 years ago
It is worse in the US. The reason being is that the media is corporate and they control the message. Corporations (seeing as they seek profit) are at odds with the overall public interest. As such Unions are unfairly vilified and used as an excuse for Free -Trade agreements and Globalization as a whole.
PierreElliottTrudeau 2 years ago
I just think he knows a lot. He has written more than 100 books and he's old so he must know a lot about the history of presidents. For me, in my own life, I have only read "manufacturing consent" and much of what he speaks about makes sense to me. like Democracy, in where we find conflict with other nations making a Democracy a real one and not like ours where only a few people run the state and the president is just a figuer head.
Hack2much 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
mojorasol
You are correct, Chumpsky (that is not a typo, it is what I call him) is a formidable opponent in a debate, as is any sophist (which Chumpsky is) worth his keep.
chucky8787 2 years ago
Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman.. and other right-wing heroes are TRUE Sophists. Their arguments are not logical. Chomsky's argument are based upon scientific evidence. That Human beings, much like any other animal, are selfish (Self Interested) but in being selfish are also proponents of Altruistic Individualism. Ayn Rand and other individuals with little understanding of human behavior believe that objectivity through self interest is the ONLY driving force (which is factually incorrect).
PierreElliottTrudeau 2 years ago 4
yn Rand, Milton Friedman.. and other right-wing heroes are Sophists. I can agree with that.
Chumpsky is a master sophist.
He does not lie much, just mis-represents the truth.
chucky8787 2 years ago
Over the past 30 years we have had anything but a free economy - we did not have capitalism in any sense. Chomsky couldn't be more wrong look to Bretton Woods II. If you view money as human capital and roll backwards through the banking cartel and into the Federal Reserve System I think you will find the reason human capital has been devalued so greatly, and find the reasons we have one individual recieveing a $200MM bonuses. You will find the facts my friend. Good Luck.
badonkadonk34 2 years ago
past 30 some years vs. Bretton Woods.
Woods wins.
KentAllard 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Gore Vidal must be running out of money. Is that OK? Can we put a video on Youtube and make up a reason to ask for money from viewers here? I thought that was against the rules.
GreatSatan1 2 years ago
We need real check and balances in every sector of our political economy, so how can this be achieve, anyone?
OTTEN2007 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This guy is a linguist and writes books about how Marxism is just dandy (despite the fact that it failed everywhere it's ever been implemented, and left human misery and suffering in its wake.)
In other words . . what in the hell does he know about economics?
Strontium9T 2 years ago
Chomsky writes books about Marxism to the same degree that you write sensible youtube comments... that is to say it doesn't happen.
UltimateHater1 2 years ago
So you're saying that Noam Chomsky is qualified to determine if the stimulus will be effective or not? Are you actually saying that?
Strontium9T 2 years ago
I think what he was saying is that Chomsky doesn't "write books on Marxism" because he is, politically speaking, NOT A MARXIST.
That aside, he's one of the most intelligent scholars on earth and has been studying politics, economics and international relations for decades. His work in all fields has been cited more times than any other living person. He's 8th all time, behind Freud. I trust him more than a talking head on TV.
You should inform yourself about someone before you attack them.
aewester 2 years ago
Chomsky doesn't even say he is qualified to determine if the stimulus will work. That being said, he then makes a conjecture based on what he knows. The man is a linguistics professor. You or who ever you were addressing this to should pay attention to his exact words
sands134 2 years ago
as much as anyone. dont forget we are in this mess due to the resposible work of all those economic experts. theydid it on purpose anyway. it wasnt a mistake. it was all predictable.
mojorasol 2 years ago
i meant chomsky knows as much as any "expert" on economics.
one strategy to attack him instead of the arguments is always to say hes an expert on language, why should we listen to what he has to say about anything else.
hes not just a linguist but a historian ad just pretty darn honest and smart and hes sone a lot of work to back up what he says. its all in print.
you can hate, but you cant deny, hes a formidable opponent if you focus on the issue and dont result to name calling.
mojorasol 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I flagged this video for "mass advertising".
GreatSatan1 2 years ago
I see Hugo Chavez is also quite fond of him.
Strontium9T 2 years ago
meaning what? because someone you dont approve of likes him, hes not ok listen to? seems shallow to me..
thescreamingid 2 years ago
I'm just stating the fact that like you, Hugo Chavez is also greatly inspired by Chomsky's work. It's only logical that Chavez's "achievements" in Venezuela would meet with your approval. Aren't you proud that a leader with a similar mindset is bringing Chomsky's ideas to fruition? Why would you be ashamed?
Strontium9T 2 years ago
Chavez also likes sex and the good life -> quick, to the monastery.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
anyone else going to see noam in strassbourg next weekend?
vainprop 2 years ago