If a small number of executives are causing the problem by diverting funds for their own use, then it's likely that many more industries would led by corrupt management. He's implying that business management in general is corrupt, and requires a harness from the government.
I don't really know much about economics, but if there is a problem in an industry, than it will be thrown out of business by it's competitors (because they're not fit, they don't survive).
This is BS. If GM ran its business better they wouldn't be in trouble. They should have been more focused on producing energy efficient cars. Thats what the people want. And thats why nobody's buying. Let the cards fall...
@DarthConnis9999 Never mind that it was all this Darwinism in the market during the eight years of the Bush administration that brought the economy to this point, eh bud?
@DarthConnis9999 Tax rates have shrunk since Eisenhauer's administration when some high earners could be taxed at 90%. At this time tax rates are at historical lows.
I'll give a few examples. Mortgages: Clinton the bastard, deregulated thereby making it risky, could be sued, for banks to deny sub prime borrowers, under Capitalism the markets regulate themselves. Haliberton, was contracted for the Iraq war, because it was Cheneys company there were no bids, under Capitalism there would have been competition. The BIG one is the bailouts. It was a bailout for the rich, wealth redistribution, Capitalism means the ability to fail. etc etc etc...
I have in no way contradicted myself. There is nothing free about gov't forcing lenders to lend to the unqualified. Big gov't doesn't work. Just because the word is used doesn't make it so. Example, patriot act (very unpatriotic), north american free trade agreement (managed trade ie free trade for the rich, restricted trade for the rest), etc.
By the way, the story that this crisis is about banks lending to unqualified people is a lie. Lots of people have worked their whole lives and still found themselves unable to pay because of job loss or health care costs that they couldn't afford.
Also, home equity was the only way most working americans have created any source of wealth for themselves.
The bubble had to burst eventually, and the decline of real wealth for the average american showed itself.
@dianarose13 Those high health care cost problems are their own fault. It's their own responsibility to find adequate health care, since the health care is all about their own health.
@DarthConnis9999 Not their fault. I'm sure they would prefer to pay only a tiny amount but they have to pay what the provider demands. Therefore it's the health care provider's fault that health care costs are so high.
@jwberrie Well, that's what a free market is for. In a free market, there are plenty of providers, and it's highly unlikely that all of them are too expensive. Wouldn't a provider go out of business if its prices were too high? No, they want to maximize the number of customers.
Another ignoramus down below. Yeah sure 8 years of Capitalism. Try 100+ years up till 1913 when the 17 amendment was passed thereby giving the federal gov't more power than the state. Since then it has been one folly followed by another. The fact that we're still functioning is a testament to the strength and brilliance of checks and balances. In the last several decades we've added health care, subsidies, and major increase in gov't intervention in the market.
Why the rash of idiots on this video? Honestly don't come across your kind very often. Most realize the superiority of the US markets due to CAPITALISM. And the fact that US has almost abandoned capitalism recently is THE reason our economy is in free fall. Probably some gov't idiot getting paid to spread disinformation.
The US has not almost abandoned capitalism. The US has privatized almost everything.
The far right wing neocon ultra capitalists just had 8 years of capitalism. Capitalism has failed. That is the problem.
In a democracy we would have a mixed economy. Our country is the most capitalistic country in the industrial world, and the workers have no health care and are losing jobs and homes by the millions. Capitalism bails out the rich crooks.
"Societies as a whole" don't vote on individual things. You vote on package deal A or package deal B. One of the major reasons Obama was elected was to stop the wars. The majority of people wanted that, but they had a choice between war all over and slightly less war in Iraq and more in Afghanistan. The majority consistently does NOT get represented. When people pay for things they vote directly. IPod did well because many people "voted" for it. Not because we voted gov who liked it.
Fascism is not an economic system... If anything the world is brainwashed with the idea that capitalism is perfect. And if you still have not head the US is not capitalistic, it is a mixed economy.
Is, and it IS also on the brink of complete collapse. Under the surface a revolution is brewing. People are waking up and they're pissed. Pissed about the theft, lies, and loss of freedom. The time is coming when you will have a choice to make, life or freedom.
Fascism is a system that leads to the nationalization of the market, and therefore hinders capitalism.
Capitalism is not perfect, nothing is, but it is much less corrupted than a fascist system that leads to the socialism/nationalization of the economy. I did not say fascism is an economic system, but rather it affects the economic system.
The US is a fascist state at the moment. The US is meant to be capitalistic. With all the corruption it is now a mixed economy. I did not say otherwise.
i am going to unsubscribe after seeing this moron on your channel, is he really an economist? he is a fool. why try to separate yourself from mainstream news if youre just going to spew their garbage??
The world is not defined by two choices. To say that we have to either put big companies under government control or let them fail is not in anyway the only realistic choices. If I may, I would call these to choices extremes and would advocate a balancing between the two. Now Obama's decision might not work, but it's the right idea of blending the two extremes so that less people have to suffer and hopefully everyone will benefit.
You are soooooo right.... Cars reached their peak in the 1950's. Its time for thinking again.... Stop making cars, let the car companies fail and stop adding lanes on top of lanes and start building a better intrastucture.
Fascism or revolution, you decide. The U.S. is going to fall apart. If you bail out the banks and nationalize all of the major industries you still have to substantially raise taxes. If you let them all fail, as he said you would have a massive depression, and increase in taxes, devaluation of the currency etc. So fucked if you do, fucked if you don't. No matter how many windmills they build and how many times the hopeless consumer slaves scream Obama this place is going to burn.
U know, what goes up must come down. I say let every big gigantic fuck dive nose down so we can start collecting pieces and put them on the right place!!
When they preach socialism, practice socialism, and institute socialism guess what they're socialists. Half wit! Socialism is responsible for more death and destruction than any other political system of the 20th cent. I realize I'm much smarter than you but come on this isn't rocket science here.
You are not much smarter, you are a fucking FNC educated idiot! People here talk about the concept, the motherfucking concept of socialism, now how many people socialist dictatorships killed in the past doesn't matter because they don't a want societies similar to that. You are the idiot for failing to distinguish between national socialism and socialism, between concepts and their implementation, you throw Mao, Stalin and all of them together, quote them and yell at people to 'WAKE UP'. What?
Quotes from Mao: Socialism must be developed in China, The Ill Wind of Opportunism is Falling, the Righteous Wind of Socialism Is on the Rise, Socialist revolution aims at liberating the productive forces. The change-over from individual to socialist, collective ownership in agriculture and handicrafts and from capitalist to socialist ownership in private industry...
It's easy for the few rich Libertarians to say "let it burn, let it all fall down." Their asses are covered. At least until the rest of us rise up, breach their defenses (and gated communities), and eat them for supper....Yum yum! Technocrat stew! Pass the goddamn butter!
From Canada, well, here in the US Libertarian is interpreted different. The Libertarian Party about as close to our Founding Fathers as you get. Belief in small gov't, very little gov't spending, constitution, etc. What made America great.
I remember the good old days when a business would fail if it was managed poorly. Nowadays it doesn't matter what you do as long as you employ a great number of people, the government will bail you out. So much for free market, governments are now in the auto business as well as banking.
Are those "thumbs down" from people who don't like the truth or from idiots who actually thing the American government was not always engaged with the economic sector?
MarquisdeBarrabas-Thank you for the compliments on my imagination.
Maybe you should re-read my comment again and take a moment to think about the heart of the message and not focus so intently on the individaul words.
Perhaps you should check on people's channels before making determinations on what it is they're saying. You might find that they share your views, and you should really arm yourself with more than just Noam Chomsky.
1º - The great Noam Chomsky I use for the little anarchist/libertarian spammers, and it's more than they deserve. You don't want me to bring my daytime arsenal to YouTube.
2º - You first comment is composed of three sentences, two of which reveal a stunning ignorance of the history of capitalism. Just calling 'em like I see 'em.
MarquisdeBarrabas-By all means bring not only your daytime arsenal but also your night time, afternoon and evening arsenal as well. It would also be nice if you didn't insult people as it only makes you look weak. There is no reason to project you insecurities onto others.
My original statement stands, please show how it is ignorant with your all knowing wisdom. I'm sure you'll find you made unwarranted ussumptions.
When you say "always always" does that mean superduper?
It means I typed the same word twice, by accident.
I'll bring what I please, and you should be thankful with what little you get. I appreciate the 'insecurity projection' remark too. Quite telling.
Now, on why your original statements are idiotic:
As to the first statement: Governments have always helped out non-viable commercial enterprises: the Dutch and British East India Companies are two among many examples.
As to the third statement: Governments have been 'into banking' ever since kings had the monopoly of coinage. The first central bank, the Bank of England, was founded in the XVIIth century. As to the car industry: Rolls Royce, for instance, was state-owned until the late 1980's.
No need to bring the daytime arsenal, see - just the old history books.
MarquisdeBarrabas-Too bad you can't make the distiction between coinage and banking. Good of you to bring in royalty and kinship. Tell me did the US government always own GM, Chrysler and Ford? Forget the books and bring out the fleet, it appears you're going to need everything you have to explain why it is you make assumptions and then project your fears and insecurities onto others so that you have someone to act upon. I suggest you look into yourself and face whatever it is that bothers you.
And thieves have been around since before recorded history. That hardly justifies the position. If you compare a country with central banking to one without, and show the long term benefits of one over the other, then you can prove something.
MarquisdeBarrabas-So you have assumed that i reffered only to operations started by elitist ventures or backing there of.
Again with the name calling, why do you need to resort to such childish measures. Is your position so weak that that you have nothing else to go on? Try having a intelligent exchange of thoughts, you may learn something.
I've even given your previous comments with "thumbs down" a thumbs up so your views are not curtialed, i believe in freedom of speech.
MarquisdeBarrabas-I'm sorry, is that all you were trying to do all along is just insult me? For a minute there i thought you might actually have something to say, how unfortunate for you.
When you figure out why it is you need to insult people, you can appologize to yourself for your self loathing. For now i will take that hug, it will be a good start for, you seem to need a hug more than most. :-)
These poor "Real News" people do not understand what socialism or a free market is. Socialism is the workers controlling the means of production, not the state. A free market and socialism can only exist under anarchism, not statism.
Relativism, utilitarianism has brought so much mumbo-jumbo nonsense in the left. Its all about "what world do YOU want" and "what empirical methods can get it", all the while totally lacking principle in how to treat OTHERS in getting there.Its like a chart u'd see at a corporate board meeting where they draw a chart on how to get maximum profits, only now its maximum "utility".
(continued....) Cut dissentors off like middlemen - well why do THEY have to play by the rules of 'your experts' - don't they have any rights? Are children born subjected to these "maximum benefit schemes"? Are we slaves of economics professors and elected men and who gave them total control? To me its not about the sum trillion debt so much as what people who never did anything wrong - never bought the housing market price rigging, nothing, are gonna get.
This guy is a joke. A basic 101 World History class could show him how well Socialism works... Common sense shows a Bigger Government is not a Better Government, it's quite the contrary.
@fletchkoffner I took courses in college comparable to this mythical basic world history class you mention (not sure exactly why you capitalized this) but I learned no such thing. Did you hear this at Liberty University?
Quotes from Mao: "Socialism must be developed in China", "The Ill Wind of Opportunism is Falling, the Righteous Wind of Socialism Is on the Rise", "Socialist revolution aims at liberating the productive forces. The change-over from individual to socialist, collective ownership in agriculture and handicrafts and from capitalist to socialist ownership in private industry and commerce is bound to bring about a tremendous liberation of the productive forces."
Stalin Quoted Lenin"we have everything necessary to construct the complete socialism"
Stalin "World dictatorship can be established only when the victory of socialism has been achieved in certain countries" Stalin "t is possible for socialism to triumph at the outset in a small number of capitalist countries..."
A system? Yeah, were a system of debt. If the US had a healthy economy to begin with, there wouldnt be chaos if poorly managed companies went bankrupt. Instead we have the gov propping up/subsidizing corporations that grow like weeds, and kill off stable, smaller businesses with over taxation. The libertarian way: go local. If a company can grow/become global ON ITS OWN without help/tax benefits from the gov, but via the consumer, great.
The United States is not a fascist state, it is a plutocracy: in the U.S.A. wealth rules and in every election the wealthy pick their candidates and give them all the financial backing they need so that the politicians will serve their interests while in office. Obama is no exception to this - just look at how much corporate backing he received. The majority of the senate, the congress, the supreme court and the cabinet are also from a wealthy background - they serve the interests of the rich.
Yes, but when you add the tit-for-tat corporate backing/interests and the nationalism that is rabid in the states (particularly since 9/11), its fascism.
At the same time what is the real difference between Socialism and fascism? Who makes up the state in a socialist society? The ultra rich. Just a twist on words to hide the truth. They all are dictatorships and lead to oppression and death of the common man.
The differences between socialism and fascism are quite significant; compare Sweden to the USA. Sweden is the model of a socialist nation where they have college paid tuition, single payer national health care, paid family sick leave, paid maternity leave, minimum of 4 weeks paid vacation all guaranteed by law. The United States is a fascist nation where it is unlikely that we will ever have any of the those things because it doesn't benefit the corporations to give us those things.
You are correct in saying that socialism and fascism are VERY different (complete opposites in fact), but Sweden is NOT socialist.
It has some socialist entities within the society (not the state), but it is not socialism itself.
Socialism is when workers run their own affairs and real democracy prevails. Swedish society is more advanced than the U.S. in many of those aspects, but it is not socialist.
Exactly, Sweden is a social-democracy. To put it simply, that's as far to the left as you can go while still embracing a market economy.
Unfortunately, thanks to 'New Labour' governments and creeps like Sarkozy, social-democracy has been on the retreat all over Europe. Everything is being privatised, trains, healthcare, you name it. What a disgrace.
Too bad people like you don't know the history of socialism. Read the words of Lenin, Stalin, and Mao. They themselves supported and taught socialism. Don't be so damn lazy that you can't spend an hour or so googling these bastards and their quotes. WAKE UP!!!
All the progressives and socialists seem to be always sleeping! Hey you guys, wake the fuck up - we libertarians are here to tell you something really important and you don't even listen. this is so mean... ;)
Those were Communists. Absolute market control being paraded around as the unquestionable solution to all problems.
On the other end, where you most likely are positioned, is Capitalism. Absolute market freedom being paraded around as the unquestionable solution to all problems.
Socialism, is doing whatever policy is best suited to the needs of society. Whether thats increasing or reducing taxation and/or regulation.
Totalitarianism is a failure. Every 1st world country is Socialist...
You too damn lazy to read what I just posted? "By 1905 America had become the richest industrial nation in the world. With only 6 % of the earth's population, the American people were producing over HALF of almost everything--clothes, food, houses, transportation, communications, even luxuries." You're only half right on every 1st world country being socialist. And LOOK at the state of the world. We're slowly destroying ourselves as we adopt an already proven failure that is socialism.
You didnt post those words in either the comment I replied to, or any comment of yours I see here. Not that it matters, we(the US) havce had a Socialist country since George Washington made the first interference into the desires of the free market. Thank god he did, a free market would have led to the elite of Britain effectively owning our economy...
Also, the imbalance of trade is YET ANOTHER reason for the government to interfere into the free market to undo said imbalance...
-privatepadilla-The elite of Britain do own our economy. No one is that uneducated. You're a liar. Go cry over Mao and Hitlers death you sorry excuse for a human.
No, they dont, not in the way Im talking about. Im talking about literally having the economic strength to destroy or control the US. They dont have that kind of power.
As for crying over Mao and Hitlers death, that would be your job. Youre the one parading totalitarian policies around as if theyre perfect...
Im a sorry excuse for a human being? Because I wont accept over-simplifed economic policies?
1.They don't? what are we seeing right now? Congress was told if they don't pass the bailouts the sky would fall and everything would collapse. There is no question about whether they have the power or not, it's a fact that they do.
2. Still not ready what I write, huh. The constitution is perfect, our republic was perfect. Unfortunately nothing is impervious to evil corrupt men and their ideas(socialism/communism)
3. No because you support bastards like Mao, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pots.
1) No, Britains elite do not own and control our country. And whether or not the current US government has similar beliefs regarding economic policies isnt going to change that. Congress was told no such thing, they were told the truth.
2) I am reading what youre writing, but apperantly youre not... You didnt say anything to the effect of what you claimed to. Period.
3) I *DONT* support those idiots, you do, *YOU* do. They had over-simplified economic policies, just like *YOU*....
You are talking about Communism which is significantly different than Socialism. People who keep saying that socialism, communism and fascism are all of the same are simply uninformed.
The uneducated are fooled into thinking there's a significant difference. Socialist/Communists jumped ship when Communism got a bad name to Socialism, all the while propagating the lie that Socialism is different and hiding the fact that they'd used the two terms for achieving the same goals. You even know what nazi stands for? READ THE DAMN QUOTES I DIDNT MAKE THEM UP!!!
What the hell are you talking about? Which quotes refer to communism and socialism being the same? What? Communism and socialism are different concepts READ HISTORY!
Read my quotes. If you too stupid to understand or know who said them maybe that will explain why you say something so ignorant. NAZI TRANSLATED MEANS NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY OF GERMANY! All these Communist dictators were SELF proclaimed socialists.
so just to get you straight, you explain and compare political ideologies by QUOTING? :D
National socialism: The national socialist party of pre-WW2 Germany (NSDAP) translates National Socialist German Labor Party. Now that tells us what? Nothing. The nationalist element is something which socialist dictatorships didn't have.
It doesn't matter how much communist dictators viewed themselves as socialist, no one is here to discuss that Stalin had it all figured out and did everything right.
Do you not realize that the only difference between a dictatorship and democracy is how the government lies to you. Its called real politic. Make the masses of the people think they are in control.
Most people want to live their lives in comfort. Standing up to the government is not worth it to most. And even more believe that the United States is the best thing next to heaven and don't even want to see the truth.
So you are right, the government is determined by it's people. We determined the way the United States is now. All the corruption exists because we feel more freedom in driving a big car than controlling our own fates.
You are wrong about socialism. If you are talking about Marxism-Leninism and the Soviet model, then you are correct.
But real socialism (as understood by anti-Marxist radical leftists) has a base meaning of workers running THEIR OWN work. It means real democracy. It has nothing to do with states and dictatorship or whatever.
you are wrong, socialism was communism light and both were a con job for the select few mafia bolsheviks to steal eastern europe from their people. i lived thru and trust me they are starting the same shit in the US. we used to have a government owned car company in poland based on fiat (funny coincidence) and it was a hated piece of shit but there was choice since the gov killed the competition.
no it hasn't. the opposite has occurred- the concentration of state and corporate power over and against the working class. monopolization is the tendency of the system since day one when the land thieves took the continent from the natives.
capitalism = private ownership of the means of production.
Im excited about a collapse. The chaos is gonna be fun. And when it happens im gonna have fun watchin that shit on T.V. It's Venus Project Time. Oh hell yeah.
I agree that we shouldn't allow things that important to the entire society to be in the hands a few elite, but how is switching that to the government's control any different?
Once again the so called "Real News" comes out of the closet. These people are nothing more than shills for communism. These people deserve no donations or contributions, they deserve contempt and scorn because they are trying to steer this society into a unforgivable direction.
No, I'm a long long registered independent that values the Constitution above all because that is all separates us from tyranny. Both of of the phony parties are statist entities that need to be ousted from public office. Most of the public officials are too stupid and too disconnected from their main job of protecting the Constitution.
Instead we keep getting more new laws that pigeon hole us and rob us of our liberties & property. It is disgusting who people vote for. Read the Constitution.
bro, that's the problem- the values of the constitution are best kept alive by the people, not by clubs in power made by and for the ruling class.
the direct action and unadulterated voice of the multitude alone can preserve and energize a free society.
and those who ostensibly speak in our names and do the business of government in our place hold the seed of abuse and oppression. fuck that shit homes.
I hear you! Somalia is the prefect example for the magic of the free market, and the power of individualism. Look at how happy and prosperous the people are over there. No government sucking life out of them, free and responsible individuals working hard for their dreams to come true! If just the US could be like Somalia. WAKE UP PEOPLE, THE GOVERNMENT ONLY WANTS YOUR MONEY!!
That is what it is. It is not an anarchism because there are tribal governments that are involuntary and therefore coercive. To give them credit since the central government fell living standards have increased. However, it is is not an anarchism for the above reasons. Examples of anarchism were Spanish areas during the Spanish Civil War, the Paris Commune, etc.
I don't like to quote from wikipedia, but here goes:
"The Paris Commune (French: La Commune de Paris) was a government that briefly ruled Paris, from March 28 (more formally, from March 26) to May 28, 1871."
Please don't embarrass yourself anymore, and don't pollute YouTube with stupid shit like Somalia has a 'decentralized statism'.
Yes it was a voluntary government run by anarchists. Somalia is a decentralized statism. Just decentralization from a previous central government does not make it an anarchism.
American cars are good only for about 3 to 4 years, or just about the time it takes to pay them off. Then the body and chassis begin to fall apart. They are not well-built, world-class cars, such as the Germans produce. But, no matter what car you choose to buy, as a US taxpayer, you will end up buying a GM (even if you don't want or have one) thanks to the fascist policies of using taxpayer money to support private, for-profit corporations.
Depends on your point of reference. Fascism is corporatism. Whether the corporations take over the government, or the government takes over the corporations, it amounts to the same thing. The US gov't has long ago ceased representing anyone other than corporate interests. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
well, if your point of reference is this low America had a fascist-system for the past 100 years. Actually the US would have qualified much better for fascism under bush, because at least he claimed to be guided by god to fight for the greatest country in the world - which god may continue to bless - against evil foreign forces.
You are correct, the United States HAS had a fascist system for AT LEAST the past 100 years. And what standard do you use to rank the relative greatness of a country? What proof have you for your claim of the US being the greatest? Lived in any other country? Or is your claim as baseless as your reference to some mythical invisible man or the existence of evil?
You don't understand. I was trying to say that the US was much closer to fascism, because george bush's worldview was defined by the points I raised (greatest country, god guided & blessed, evil omnipresent foreign forces).
I personally am an atheist, non-us-citizen and have lived in many countries - thus I know there is no 'greatest' country.
The danger is in assuming that this was/is the extent and appearance of US fascism. The Dems have their own corporate backers, and are half of the problem, the Repubs just being the other (just more right wing) faction of the one (jingoist, militarist, welfare-for-the-rich) party. Both are factionalist, cliquish, and resist real change. Two crime families, two rackets. Real freedom does not limit us to such mean choices, but when corporate reps write our laws. And the exits are being sealed.
"But if it's so important, it should never have been in private hands in the first place"
If it wasn't so scary this quote would have made my day. This Wolff guy is a moron. Where does he see the government starting a revolutionary business like Ford did? Nope, it would never have been established because the govt. would be still too busy protecting its horse & wagon trade
what you are just using, computer, internet and nuclear energy - were all started in the state sector, its one of americas typical propaganda myths that only market competition drives development
just one aspect: a corporation under competition pressure doesnt have the freedom to explore risky research, you end up with baby step pseudo-improvements like exactly in the car business! no major progress in the car technology in about 100 years..
im from former communist gdr, the economy was a really bad (your car was ordered when you were born so it ll be available when u are 18 ^^) but it still developed high end car concepts and sold it to the west
the market is good at making developments available to the masses, it is not good, partly even counterproductive in research and development, the government can (and does) pitch different teams of researchers against one another just as well
...And yet, this guy is suggesting that there should be more government involvement inside of industry management?
DarthConnis9999 1 year ago
If a small number of executives are causing the problem by diverting funds for their own use, then it's likely that many more industries would led by corrupt management. He's implying that business management in general is corrupt, and requires a harness from the government.
I don't really know much about economics, but if there is a problem in an industry, than it will be thrown out of business by it's competitors (because they're not fit, they don't survive).
DarthConnis9999 1 year ago
sounds like more propaganda to me
nolajefferson 2 years ago
This is BS. If GM ran its business better they wouldn't be in trouble. They should have been more focused on producing energy efficient cars. Thats what the people want. And thats why nobody's buying. Let the cards fall...
nolajefferson 2 years ago
@nolajefferson Exactly! Darwinism in the market is better than the government "bailing out" failing companies.
DarthConnis9999 1 year ago
@DarthConnis9999 Never mind that it was all this Darwinism in the market during the eight years of the Bush administration that brought the economy to this point, eh bud?
jwberrie 1 year ago
@jwberrie No, "bud", I think it was the tax system that's been growing steadily for a lot longer than since 2000.
DarthConnis9999 1 year ago
@DarthConnis9999 Tax rates have shrunk since Eisenhauer's administration when some high earners could be taxed at 90%. At this time tax rates are at historical lows.
jwberrie 1 year ago
@jwberrie If tax rates are at "all time lows", then how could the government be so damned big?
DarthConnis9999 1 year ago
(cont)
I'll give a few examples. Mortgages: Clinton the bastard, deregulated thereby making it risky, could be sued, for banks to deny sub prime borrowers, under Capitalism the markets regulate themselves. Haliberton, was contracted for the Iraq war, because it was Cheneys company there were no bids, under Capitalism there would have been competition. The BIG one is the bailouts. It was a bailout for the rich, wealth redistribution, Capitalism means the ability to fail. etc etc etc...
randont 2 years ago
Deregulation IS free market capitalism. You're condradicting yourself.
dianarose13 2 years ago
I have in no way contradicted myself. There is nothing free about gov't forcing lenders to lend to the unqualified. Big gov't doesn't work. Just because the word is used doesn't make it so. Example, patriot act (very unpatriotic), north american free trade agreement (managed trade ie free trade for the rich, restricted trade for the rest), etc.
randont 2 years ago
Then it isn't DEregulation.
By the way, the story that this crisis is about banks lending to unqualified people is a lie. Lots of people have worked their whole lives and still found themselves unable to pay because of job loss or health care costs that they couldn't afford.
Also, home equity was the only way most working americans have created any source of wealth for themselves.
The bubble had to burst eventually, and the decline of real wealth for the average american showed itself.
dianarose13 2 years ago
1. Way to restate what I just said on deregulation.
2. So the sub mortgage crisis is a conspiracy and never happened, ok, lol.
3. Great, good thing they've created wealth and are now doing just fine, pfft, lol.
4. Just you wait till the next few bubbles, you ain't seen nothin yet.
5. I'm starting to suspect you're the same person posting on several different accounts.
randont 2 years ago
1. No I did not restate what you said, read what you wrote.
2. I said nothing about a conspiracy, I said that it has been a lie that the crisis was created by unqualified mortgage holders.
3. No, its not good that people have been relying on home equity.
4. I don't need to be told by someone like yourself that there are more problems coming.
5. You are obviously suspicious of anyone who has a different opinion than yourself.
dianarose13 2 years ago
@dianarose13 You are jumping to conclusions about your opponents' feelings.
DarthConnis9999 1 year ago
@randont The only way to create wealth is to WORK YOUR ASS OFF!
DarthConnis9999 1 year ago
@DarthConnis9999 That however is only if you want to create wealth for someone else.
jwberrie 1 year ago
@jwberrie What, working really hard?
DarthConnis9999 1 year ago
@dianarose13 Those high health care cost problems are their own fault. It's their own responsibility to find adequate health care, since the health care is all about their own health.
DarthConnis9999 1 year ago
@DarthConnis9999 Not their fault. I'm sure they would prefer to pay only a tiny amount but they have to pay what the provider demands. Therefore it's the health care provider's fault that health care costs are so high.
jwberrie 1 year ago
@jwberrie Well, that's what a free market is for. In a free market, there are plenty of providers, and it's highly unlikely that all of them are too expensive. Wouldn't a provider go out of business if its prices were too high? No, they want to maximize the number of customers.
DarthConnis9999 1 year ago
Another ignoramus down below. Yeah sure 8 years of Capitalism. Try 100+ years up till 1913 when the 17 amendment was passed thereby giving the federal gov't more power than the state. Since then it has been one folly followed by another. The fact that we're still functioning is a testament to the strength and brilliance of checks and balances. In the last several decades we've added health care, subsidies, and major increase in gov't intervention in the market.
randont 2 years ago
-privatepadilla-
Why the rash of idiots on this video? Honestly don't come across your kind very often. Most realize the superiority of the US markets due to CAPITALISM. And the fact that US has almost abandoned capitalism recently is THE reason our economy is in free fall. Probably some gov't idiot getting paid to spread disinformation.
randont 2 years ago
randont,
The US has not almost abandoned capitalism. The US has privatized almost everything.
The far right wing neocon ultra capitalists just had 8 years of capitalism. Capitalism has failed. That is the problem.
In a democracy we would have a mixed economy. Our country is the most capitalistic country in the industrial world, and the workers have no health care and are losing jobs and homes by the millions. Capitalism bails out the rich crooks.
Capitalism sucks!
nowellian 2 years ago
"Societies as a whole" don't vote on individual things. You vote on package deal A or package deal B. One of the major reasons Obama was elected was to stop the wars. The majority of people wanted that, but they had a choice between war all over and slightly less war in Iraq and more in Afghanistan. The majority consistently does NOT get represented. When people pay for things they vote directly. IPod did well because many people "voted" for it. Not because we voted gov who liked it.
sirellyn 2 years ago
Only the people that haven't taken one college
level economics class claim that this economic
crisis isn't a failure of the "ultra-capitalism" that
has developed in the U.S. over the last 30 years.
Capitalism works in it's simplest form of
private business ownership and investment,
but when we get things like toxic assets
investing and management, hedge funds,
private run disaster relief for the rich, private war contracting and huge corporate tax havens, it is capitalism out of control.
bigge525 2 years ago
This guy is an idiot. The system is corrupted. Why would we want to sustain an economy based on a corrupted system?
Let them fail! Let capitalism work. This video is based on more fascism brainwashing than anything else.
ayouraa 2 years ago
Fascism is not an economic system... If anything the world is brainwashed with the idea that capitalism is perfect. And if you still have not head the US is not capitalistic, it is a mixed economy.
brownnoice 2 years ago
Is, and it IS also on the brink of complete collapse. Under the surface a revolution is brewing. People are waking up and they're pissed. Pissed about the theft, lies, and loss of freedom. The time is coming when you will have a choice to make, life or freedom.
randont 2 years ago
Fascism is a system that leads to the nationalization of the market, and therefore hinders capitalism.
Capitalism is not perfect, nothing is, but it is much less corrupted than a fascist system that leads to the socialism/nationalization of the economy. I did not say fascism is an economic system, but rather it affects the economic system.
The US is a fascist state at the moment. The US is meant to be capitalistic. With all the corruption it is now a mixed economy. I did not say otherwise.
ayouraa 2 years ago
i am going to unsubscribe after seeing this moron on your channel, is he really an economist? he is a fool. why try to separate yourself from mainstream news if youre just going to spew their garbage??
oiuoiu988 2 years ago
The world is not defined by two choices. To say that we have to either put big companies under government control or let them fail is not in anyway the only realistic choices. If I may, I would call these to choices extremes and would advocate a balancing between the two. Now Obama's decision might not work, but it's the right idea of blending the two extremes so that less people have to suffer and hopefully everyone will benefit.
ajr5086 2 years ago
You are soooooo right.... Cars reached their peak in the 1950's. Its time for thinking again.... Stop making cars, let the car companies fail and stop adding lanes on top of lanes and start building a better intrastucture.
btigtime2 2 years ago
Wolff u r WAIST OF TIME !
TeslaGenius 2 years ago
Cheers.
jericomovie 2 years ago
Fascism or revolution, you decide. The U.S. is going to fall apart. If you bail out the banks and nationalize all of the major industries you still have to substantially raise taxes. If you let them all fail, as he said you would have a massive depression, and increase in taxes, devaluation of the currency etc. So fucked if you do, fucked if you don't. No matter how many windmills they build and how many times the hopeless consumer slaves scream Obama this place is going to burn.
Bacchusism 2 years ago 2
TOO BIG TO FAIL OR TOO SMALL TO SURVIVE?
U know, what goes up must come down. I say let every big gigantic fuck dive nose down so we can start collecting pieces and put them on the right place!!
Cyberbeem 2 years ago 3
obama will ruin the world
NYYROCK 2 years ago
The world is already ruined.
Tsukae 2 years ago 2
they´ll be selling these cars overseas more than at home.
malerror 2 years ago
You're talking about American cars?
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
Joseph Stalin 40 Million
Stalin Quoted Lenin "we have everything necessary to construct the complete socialism"
Stalin "World dictatorship can be established only when the victory of socialism has been achieved in certain countries"
Stalin "t is possible for socialism to triumph at the outset in a small number of capitalist countries..."
***IN HIS OWN WORDS!***
The between Socialism and Communism is the difference between cancer and advanced stages of cancer. It's still means death.
randont 2 years ago
Ever heard George W. Bush talk about 'democracy' and 'freedom'?
Ever heard a Hitler speech? Did you notice how often he talk of 'peace' and bringing peace to the world?
Do you believe politicians always stand up for what they say stand up for? Or only when they're 'reds', maybe?
You fucking moron.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
When they preach socialism, practice socialism, and institute socialism guess what they're socialists. Half wit! Socialism is responsible for more death and destruction than any other political system of the 20th cent. I realize I'm much smarter than you but come on this isn't rocket science here.
randont 2 years ago
You are not much smarter, you are a fucking FNC educated idiot! People here talk about the concept, the motherfucking concept of socialism, now how many people socialist dictatorships killed in the past doesn't matter because they don't a want societies similar to that. You are the idiot for failing to distinguish between national socialism and socialism, between concepts and their implementation, you throw Mao, Stalin and all of them together, quote them and yell at people to 'WAKE UP'. What?
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
Mao Tse Tung 49-78 Million MURDERED!
Quotes from Mao: Socialism must be developed in China, The Ill Wind of Opportunism is Falling, the Righteous Wind of Socialism Is on the Rise, Socialist revolution aims at liberating the productive forces. The change-over from individual to socialist, collective ownership in agriculture and handicrafts and from capitalist to socialist ownership in private industry...
***IN HIS OWN WORDS!***
randont 2 years ago
(cont) For that matter they were ALL marxists. Same damn thing. All are dictatorships once fully implemented.
randont 2 years ago
It's easy for the few rich Libertarians to say "let it burn, let it all fall down." Their asses are covered. At least until the rest of us rise up, breach their defenses (and gated communities), and eat them for supper....Yum yum! Technocrat stew! Pass the goddamn butter!
midplanewanderer 2 years ago
From Canada, well, here in the US Libertarian is interpreted different. The Libertarian Party about as close to our Founding Fathers as you get. Belief in small gov't, very little gov't spending, constitution, etc. What made America great.
randont 2 years ago
nwo...
jclayton59466 2 years ago 3
I remember the good old days when a business would fail if it was managed poorly. Nowadays it doesn't matter what you do as long as you employ a great number of people, the government will bail you out. So much for free market, governments are now in the auto business as well as banking.
vme02 2 years ago 3
You have a very vivid imagination.
Governments have always always been involved with the financial and productive sectors.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
Are those "thumbs down" from people who don't like the truth or from idiots who actually thing the American government was not always engaged with the economic sector?
Let's hope for the former.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
MarquisdeBarrabas-Thank you for the compliments on my imagination.
Maybe you should re-read my comment again and take a moment to think about the heart of the message and not focus so intently on the individaul words.
Perhaps you should check on people's channels before making determinations on what it is they're saying. You might find that they share your views, and you should really arm yourself with more than just Noam Chomsky.
vme02 2 years ago
1º - The great Noam Chomsky I use for the little anarchist/libertarian spammers, and it's more than they deserve. You don't want me to bring my daytime arsenal to YouTube.
2º - You first comment is composed of three sentences, two of which reveal a stunning ignorance of the history of capitalism. Just calling 'em like I see 'em.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
MarquisdeBarrabas-By all means bring not only your daytime arsenal but also your night time, afternoon and evening arsenal as well. It would also be nice if you didn't insult people as it only makes you look weak. There is no reason to project you insecurities onto others.
My original statement stands, please show how it is ignorant with your all knowing wisdom. I'm sure you'll find you made unwarranted ussumptions.
When you say "always always" does that mean superduper?
vme02 2 years ago
It means I typed the same word twice, by accident.
I'll bring what I please, and you should be thankful with what little you get. I appreciate the 'insecurity projection' remark too. Quite telling.
Now, on why your original statements are idiotic:
As to the first statement: Governments have always helped out non-viable commercial enterprises: the Dutch and British East India Companies are two among many examples.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
As to the third statement: Governments have been 'into banking' ever since kings had the monopoly of coinage. The first central bank, the Bank of England, was founded in the XVIIth century. As to the car industry: Rolls Royce, for instance, was state-owned until the late 1980's.
No need to bring the daytime arsenal, see - just the old history books.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
MarquisdeBarrabas-Too bad you can't make the distiction between coinage and banking. Good of you to bring in royalty and kinship. Tell me did the US government always own GM, Chrysler and Ford? Forget the books and bring out the fleet, it appears you're going to need everything you have to explain why it is you make assumptions and then project your fears and insecurities onto others so that you have someone to act upon. I suggest you look into yourself and face whatever it is that bothers you.
vme02 2 years ago
And thieves have been around since before recorded history. That hardly justifies the position. If you compare a country with central banking to one without, and show the long term benefits of one over the other, then you can prove something.
sirellyn 2 years ago
MarquisdeBarrabas-So you have assumed that i reffered only to operations started by elitist ventures or backing there of.
Again with the name calling, why do you need to resort to such childish measures. Is your position so weak that that you have nothing else to go on? Try having a intelligent exchange of thoughts, you may learn something.
I've even given your previous comments with "thumbs down" a thumbs up so your views are not curtialed, i believe in freedom of speech.
vme02 2 years ago
I keep insulting you and you keep coming back for more.
I don't know what to do with you. Do you need a hug or something?
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
MarquisdeBarrabas-I'm sorry, is that all you were trying to do all along is just insult me? For a minute there i thought you might actually have something to say, how unfortunate for you.
When you figure out why it is you need to insult people, you can appologize to yourself for your self loathing. For now i will take that hug, it will be a good start for, you seem to need a hug more than most. :-)
vme02 2 years ago
These poor "Real News" people do not understand what socialism or a free market is. Socialism is the workers controlling the means of production, not the state. A free market and socialism can only exist under anarchism, not statism.
overmind25 2 years ago 3
Relativism, utilitarianism has brought so much mumbo-jumbo nonsense in the left. Its all about "what world do YOU want" and "what empirical methods can get it", all the while totally lacking principle in how to treat OTHERS in getting there.Its like a chart u'd see at a corporate board meeting where they draw a chart on how to get maximum profits, only now its maximum "utility".
mak2675 2 years ago
(continued....) Cut dissentors off like middlemen - well why do THEY have to play by the rules of 'your experts' - don't they have any rights? Are children born subjected to these "maximum benefit schemes"? Are we slaves of economics professors and elected men and who gave them total control? To me its not about the sum trillion debt so much as what people who never did anything wrong - never bought the housing market price rigging, nothing, are gonna get.
mak2675 2 years ago 2
Rubbish.
bbburton 2 years ago 3
This premise assumes there is such a thing as "too big to fail."
MooseOfReason 2 years ago 2
This guy is a joke. A basic 101 World History class could show him how well Socialism works... Common sense shows a Bigger Government is not a Better Government, it's quite the contrary.
fletchkoffner 2 years ago 6
@fletchkoffner I took courses in college comparable to this mythical basic world history class you mention (not sure exactly why you capitalized this) but I learned no such thing. Did you hear this at Liberty University?
jwberrie 1 year ago
Good video, very comprehensive series of questions...
Just wish they were made available faster..
privatepadilla 2 years ago
How long did that take me 15min tops. GET OFF YOUR LAZY ASSES AND LEARN SOMETHING BEFORE YOU SPEAK, GOSH!!!
randont 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Quotes from Mao: "Socialism must be developed in China", "The Ill Wind of Opportunism is Falling, the Righteous Wind of Socialism Is on the Rise", "Socialist revolution aims at liberating the productive forces. The change-over from individual to socialist, collective ownership in agriculture and handicrafts and from capitalist to socialist ownership in private industry and commerce is bound to bring about a tremendous liberation of the productive forces."
randont 2 years ago
Comment removed
randont 2 years ago
Stalin Quoted Lenin"we have everything necessary to construct the complete socialism"
Stalin "World dictatorship can be established only when the victory of socialism has been achieved in certain countries" Stalin "t is possible for socialism to triumph at the outset in a small number of capitalist countries..."
(Cont)
randont 2 years ago
Richard Wolff sells Alarmistism......
Nothing is too big to fail....graveyards are full of "Irreplacable people"
UnderseaCaveman 2 years ago 2
A system? Yeah, were a system of debt. If the US had a healthy economy to begin with, there wouldnt be chaos if poorly managed companies went bankrupt. Instead we have the gov propping up/subsidizing corporations that grow like weeds, and kill off stable, smaller businesses with over taxation. The libertarian way: go local. If a company can grow/become global ON ITS OWN without help/tax benefits from the gov, but via the consumer, great.
MiranUT 2 years ago
Richard Wolff, the New School of COMMUNISM!!!
jaba987 2 years ago
what a load of CRAP! let it fail and let those who took risks pay for it!!!
jaba987 2 years ago 3
Ummmm ok? How do you say?
Propagandhi900 2 years ago
The United States is not a fascist state, it is a plutocracy: in the U.S.A. wealth rules and in every election the wealthy pick their candidates and give them all the financial backing they need so that the politicians will serve their interests while in office. Obama is no exception to this - just look at how much corporate backing he received. The majority of the senate, the congress, the supreme court and the cabinet are also from a wealthy background - they serve the interests of the rich.
blackiron60 2 years ago
Yes, but when you add the tit-for-tat corporate backing/interests and the nationalism that is rabid in the states (particularly since 9/11), its fascism.
MiranUT 2 years ago 3
Fascism is always plutocracy in disguise - we all know who truly benefits from it.
blackiron60 2 years ago 3
"Fascism should rightly be called corporatism as it is a merger of corporate and government power."
--Benito Mussolini
By that definition the USA is most certainly a fascism state controlled by the corporate interests.
ArcticSlicer 2 years ago 8
At the same time what is the real difference between Socialism and fascism? Who makes up the state in a socialist society? The ultra rich. Just a twist on words to hide the truth. They all are dictatorships and lead to oppression and death of the common man.
randont 2 years ago
"Who makes up the state in a socialist society? The ultra rich."
I think my brain just died a little.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
Yeah I know. It sounded hilarious. Silly right-wing'"free-market"-"Libertarians", lmao.
bootleg42 2 years ago 2
The differences between socialism and fascism are quite significant; compare Sweden to the USA. Sweden is the model of a socialist nation where they have college paid tuition, single payer national health care, paid family sick leave, paid maternity leave, minimum of 4 weeks paid vacation all guaranteed by law. The United States is a fascist nation where it is unlikely that we will ever have any of the those things because it doesn't benefit the corporations to give us those things.
ArcticSlicer 2 years ago
You are correct in saying that socialism and fascism are VERY different (complete opposites in fact), but Sweden is NOT socialist.
It has some socialist entities within the society (not the state), but it is not socialism itself.
Socialism is when workers run their own affairs and real democracy prevails. Swedish society is more advanced than the U.S. in many of those aspects, but it is not socialist.
bootleg42 2 years ago
Exactly, Sweden is a social-democracy. To put it simply, that's as far to the left as you can go while still embracing a market economy.
Unfortunately, thanks to 'New Labour' governments and creeps like Sarkozy, social-democracy has been on the retreat all over Europe. Everything is being privatised, trains, healthcare, you name it. What a disgrace.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
Too bad people like you don't know the history of socialism. Read the words of Lenin, Stalin, and Mao. They themselves supported and taught socialism. Don't be so damn lazy that you can't spend an hour or so googling these bastards and their quotes. WAKE UP!!!
randont 2 years ago
Yeah, WAKE UP!!
All the progressives and socialists seem to be always sleeping! Hey you guys, wake the fuck up - we libertarians are here to tell you something really important and you don't even listen. this is so mean... ;)
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
Those were Communists. Absolute market control being paraded around as the unquestionable solution to all problems.
On the other end, where you most likely are positioned, is Capitalism. Absolute market freedom being paraded around as the unquestionable solution to all problems.
Socialism, is doing whatever policy is best suited to the needs of society. Whether thats increasing or reducing taxation and/or regulation.
Totalitarianism is a failure. Every 1st world country is Socialist...
privatepadilla 2 years ago
You too damn lazy to read what I just posted? "By 1905 America had become the richest industrial nation in the world. With only 6 % of the earth's population, the American people were producing over HALF of almost everything--clothes, food, houses, transportation, communications, even luxuries." You're only half right on every 1st world country being socialist. And LOOK at the state of the world. We're slowly destroying ourselves as we adopt an already proven failure that is socialism.
randont 2 years ago
You didnt post those words in either the comment I replied to, or any comment of yours I see here. Not that it matters, we(the US) havce had a Socialist country since George Washington made the first interference into the desires of the free market. Thank god he did, a free market would have led to the elite of Britain effectively owning our economy...
Also, the imbalance of trade is YET ANOTHER reason for the government to interfere into the free market to undo said imbalance...
privatepadilla 2 years ago
-privatepadilla-The elite of Britain do own our economy. No one is that uneducated. You're a liar. Go cry over Mao and Hitlers death you sorry excuse for a human.
randont 2 years ago
No, they dont, not in the way Im talking about. Im talking about literally having the economic strength to destroy or control the US. They dont have that kind of power.
As for crying over Mao and Hitlers death, that would be your job. Youre the one parading totalitarian policies around as if theyre perfect...
Im a sorry excuse for a human being? Because I wont accept over-simplifed economic policies?
Ok...
privatepadilla 2 years ago
1.They don't? what are we seeing right now? Congress was told if they don't pass the bailouts the sky would fall and everything would collapse. There is no question about whether they have the power or not, it's a fact that they do.
2. Still not ready what I write, huh. The constitution is perfect, our republic was perfect. Unfortunately nothing is impervious to evil corrupt men and their ideas(socialism/communism)
3. No because you support bastards like Mao, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pots.
randont 2 years ago
1) No, Britains elite do not own and control our country. And whether or not the current US government has similar beliefs regarding economic policies isnt going to change that. Congress was told no such thing, they were told the truth.
2) I am reading what youre writing, but apperantly youre not... You didnt say anything to the effect of what you claimed to. Period.
3) I *DONT* support those idiots, you do, *YOU* do. They had over-simplified economic policies, just like *YOU*....
privatepadilla 2 years ago
You are talking about Communism which is significantly different than Socialism. People who keep saying that socialism, communism and fascism are all of the same are simply uninformed.
ArcticSlicer 2 years ago
The uneducated are fooled into thinking there's a significant difference. Socialist/Communists jumped ship when Communism got a bad name to Socialism, all the while propagating the lie that Socialism is different and hiding the fact that they'd used the two terms for achieving the same goals. You even know what nazi stands for? READ THE DAMN QUOTES I DIDNT MAKE THEM UP!!!
randont 2 years ago
What the hell are you talking about? Which quotes refer to communism and socialism being the same? What? Communism and socialism are different concepts READ HISTORY!
... and how the hell does nazism fit into that?
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago 3
Read my quotes. If you too stupid to understand or know who said them maybe that will explain why you say something so ignorant. NAZI TRANSLATED MEANS NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY OF GERMANY! All these Communist dictators were SELF proclaimed socialists.
randont 2 years ago
randont: the power elite can label themselves any way they like, but if their actions reveal them to be otherwise, their self labeling means nothing.
FriedDaisy 2 years ago
so just to get you straight, you explain and compare political ideologies by QUOTING? :D
National socialism: The national socialist party of pre-WW2 Germany (NSDAP) translates National Socialist German Labor Party. Now that tells us what? Nothing. The nationalist element is something which socialist dictatorships didn't have.
It doesn't matter how much communist dictators viewed themselves as socialist, no one is here to discuss that Stalin had it all figured out and did everything right.
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
Do you not realize that the only difference between a dictatorship and democracy is how the government lies to you. Its called real politic. Make the masses of the people think they are in control.
brownnoice 2 years ago
Democracy exists if the people want it to exist. Get your facts right, there is a difference.
ayouraa 2 years ago
Most people want to live their lives in comfort. Standing up to the government is not worth it to most. And even more believe that the United States is the best thing next to heaven and don't even want to see the truth.
So you are right, the government is determined by it's people. We determined the way the United States is now. All the corruption exists because we feel more freedom in driving a big car than controlling our own fates.
brownnoice 2 years ago
You are wrong about socialism. If you are talking about Marxism-Leninism and the Soviet model, then you are correct.
But real socialism (as understood by anti-Marxist radical leftists) has a base meaning of workers running THEIR OWN work. It means real democracy. It has nothing to do with states and dictatorship or whatever.
True socialism is true democracy.
bootleg42 2 years ago
you are wrong, socialism was communism light and both were a con job for the select few mafia bolsheviks to steal eastern europe from their people. i lived thru and trust me they are starting the same shit in the US. we used to have a government owned car company in poland based on fiat (funny coincidence) and it was a hated piece of shit but there was choice since the gov killed the competition.
jaba987 2 years ago
go start a nazi labour camp you fascist bastard! :)
AbtinX 2 years ago 2
i personally will never buy a hybrid car unless they can lower the price and make them go faster
BigZeb5 2 years ago
no it hasn't. the opposite has occurred- the concentration of state and corporate power over and against the working class. monopolization is the tendency of the system since day one when the land thieves took the continent from the natives.
capitalism = private ownership of the means of production.
mikezephyr 2 years ago
Im excited about a collapse. The chaos is gonna be fun. And when it happens im gonna have fun watchin that shit on T.V. It's Venus Project Time. Oh hell yeah.
LimeInTheCoconut21 2 years ago 2
Hopefully I'll have enough time to build the robots and my ship. I'm moving to the Kuiper belt.
DrFaustus1981 2 years ago
I agree that we shouldn't allow things that important to the entire society to be in the hands a few elite, but how is switching that to the government's control any different?
feralkevin 2 years ago 4
You have the LEGAL means to control your government at the local, state and federal levels.
Can you say the same about Big Money?
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
lol capitalist pig
Zao125 2 years ago
At least they're not running the country into the ground like the present US administration.
Republipuke or Democnt they have the same agenda, not following the rule of law and destroying the coolest country ever though up by mankind.
boots920 2 years ago
Once again the so called "Real News" comes out of the closet. These people are nothing more than shills for communism. These people deserve no donations or contributions, they deserve contempt and scorn because they are trying to steer this society into a unforgivable direction.
kmg501 2 years ago
holy shit. well if your a republican , thats calling the kettle black now isnt it?
kannibees 2 years ago
No, I'm a long long registered independent that values the Constitution above all because that is all separates us from tyranny. Both of of the phony parties are statist entities that need to be ousted from public office. Most of the public officials are too stupid and too disconnected from their main job of protecting the Constitution.
Instead we keep getting more new laws that pigeon hole us and rob us of our liberties & property. It is disgusting who people vote for. Read the Constitution.
kmg501 2 years ago
bro, that's the problem- the values of the constitution are best kept alive by the people, not by clubs in power made by and for the ruling class.
the direct action and unadulterated voice of the multitude alone can preserve and energize a free society.
and those who ostensibly speak in our names and do the business of government in our place hold the seed of abuse and oppression. fuck that shit homes.
mikezephyr 2 years ago
why call yourself 'independent' when you actually are a constitutionalists or libertarian?
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
voting doesnt work.
a rebellion is inevitable.
kannibees 2 years ago
Fiat money is flawed:
The only way to be free and independent from government and socialism is to be your own central bank, Gold and Silver.
boots920 2 years ago
:D I was waiting for you boots! Does the fiat still give you night terrors?
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
Not anymore if you save in gold and silver the central bank or should I say counterfeiters can't print the value of your savings into oblivion.
boots920 2 years ago 2
How incredibly practical.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
Both these men are morons and the reporter it lobbing dingers over the plate for him to hammer out of the park. Socialist pricks
Edgrot 2 years ago
N Korea needs some idiots like this, someone buy this cocksmoke a ticket .
jjrglobal 2 years ago
fuck it ...the bi-partisan approach doesnt work . capitalism cannot be reformed , it must be destroyed..
bring on mad max !! [:
kannibees 2 years ago
if you want to live that BIG MAN go visit IRAQ. a Land without Laws. Rule by violence.
bvrcrap56 2 years ago
us imperialism tore up iraq and rules by violence as much as hussein did.
mikezephyr 2 years ago
Better yet, let's all go to Somalia, where there is no government in place since 1992.
No there's a Libertarian utopia in action.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
im not sure whats your point .. are u comparing us to somalians?
somalia is what the United States will be in 100 years.
kannibees 2 years ago
My point is that Somalia has no government in place since 1992 and is a great place to do business.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
:D
I hear you! Somalia is the prefect example for the magic of the free market, and the power of individualism. Look at how happy and prosperous the people are over there. No government sucking life out of them, free and responsible individuals working hard for their dreams to come true! If just the US could be like Somalia. WAKE UP PEOPLE, THE GOVERNMENT ONLY WANTS YOUR MONEY!!
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
No it has tribal governments. It is a decentralized statism.
overmind25 2 years ago
"decentralized statism"
Now there's a desperate rationalization if I ever saw one.
Pray tell me, where is there no 'statism', just for the sake of having a term of comparison.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
That is what it is. It is not an anarchism because there are tribal governments that are involuntary and therefore coercive. To give them credit since the central government fell living standards have increased. However, it is is not an anarchism for the above reasons. Examples of anarchism were Spanish areas during the Spanish Civil War, the Paris Commune, etc.
overmind25 2 years ago
I don't like to quote from wikipedia, but here goes:
"The Paris Commune (French: La Commune de Paris) was a government that briefly ruled Paris, from March 28 (more formally, from March 26) to May 28, 1871."
Please don't embarrass yourself anymore, and don't pollute YouTube with stupid shit like Somalia has a 'decentralized statism'.
Thank you.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
Yes it was a voluntary government run by anarchists. Somalia is a decentralized statism. Just decentralization from a previous central government does not make it an anarchism.
overmind25 2 years ago
Anarchy and libertarianism are not the same thing. Baka.
MiranUT 2 years ago 2
If some goods/service providers are so important that, if they fail, they must be bailed out,
and if bail outs are bad,
they must not be allowed to fail,
thus they cannot exist in the 'free' market.
Right on, Mr. Wolff.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
American cars are good only for about 3 to 4 years, or just about the time it takes to pay them off. Then the body and chassis begin to fall apart. They are not well-built, world-class cars, such as the Germans produce. But, no matter what car you choose to buy, as a US taxpayer, you will end up buying a GM (even if you don't want or have one) thanks to the fascist policies of using taxpayer money to support private, for-profit corporations.
FRTothus 2 years ago 3
go easy on the f-bombs... because fascism it's not.
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
Depends on your point of reference. Fascism is corporatism. Whether the corporations take over the government, or the government takes over the corporations, it amounts to the same thing. The US gov't has long ago ceased representing anyone other than corporate interests. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
FRTothus 2 years ago 3
well, if your point of reference is this low America had a fascist-system for the past 100 years. Actually the US would have qualified much better for fascism under bush, because at least he claimed to be guided by god to fight for the greatest country in the world - which god may continue to bless - against evil foreign forces.
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
You are correct, the United States HAS had a fascist system for AT LEAST the past 100 years. And what standard do you use to rank the relative greatness of a country? What proof have you for your claim of the US being the greatest? Lived in any other country? Or is your claim as baseless as your reference to some mythical invisible man or the existence of evil?
FRTothus 2 years ago
You don't understand. I was trying to say that the US was much closer to fascism, because george bush's worldview was defined by the points I raised (greatest country, god guided & blessed, evil omnipresent foreign forces).
I personally am an atheist, non-us-citizen and have lived in many countries - thus I know there is no 'greatest' country.
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
The danger is in assuming that this was/is the extent and appearance of US fascism. The Dems have their own corporate backers, and are half of the problem, the Repubs just being the other (just more right wing) faction of the one (jingoist, militarist, welfare-for-the-rich) party. Both are factionalist, cliquish, and resist real change. Two crime families, two rackets. Real freedom does not limit us to such mean choices, but when corporate reps write our laws. And the exits are being sealed.
FRTothus 2 years ago
people have killed more people for god than any other religion
n8iveidiot13 2 years ago 2
You mean Christians have killed more people for god than any other religion. So true. Including each other.
MiranUT 2 years ago
"But if it's so important, it should never have been in private hands in the first place"
If it wasn't so scary this quote would have made my day. This Wolff guy is a moron. Where does he see the government starting a revolutionary business like Ford did? Nope, it would never have been established because the govt. would be still too busy protecting its horse & wagon trade
asalade 2 years ago 2
what you are just using, computer, internet and nuclear energy - were all started in the state sector, its one of americas typical propaganda myths that only market competition drives development
just one aspect: a corporation under competition pressure doesnt have the freedom to explore risky research, you end up with baby step pseudo-improvements like exactly in the car business! no major progress in the car technology in about 100 years..
random0815 2 years ago 2
im from former communist gdr, the economy was a really bad (your car was ordered when you were born so it ll be available when u are 18 ^^) but it still developed high end car concepts and sold it to the west
the market is good at making developments available to the masses, it is not good, partly even counterproductive in research and development, the government can (and does) pitch different teams of researchers against one another just as well
random0815 2 years ago
i am for Mad Max territory
peckiledorf 2 years ago
i think car companies need to start making mini-helicopters that run on vegetable oil
CocoaLuv22 2 years ago 2
Wiiiiiiii the Keynesian view.
I completly disagree with wolff, nothing is to big to fail!
Let it burn baby burn.
entotrefirelol 2 years ago 4
5:40
What's wrong with that argument is that it pretends we are not a system.
Welcome to civilization, my Libertarian friend.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
he's a marxian economist.
mikezephyr 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Let me guess.... A Country whose government is corrupt and whose land Justice is an illegal immgrant....
Whoever finds the world, finds a corpse....
This world is full of lies and it is lifeless.... So do not be surprised if injustice, oppression and poverty run amuck.
Turn to Him who is Our Life; turn to Him who is Our Truth....
Jesus Christ, the Son of God and the Savior of the World....
billionaireby16 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
amen
highwaysong007 2 years ago