Real Estate Saves Capitalism Then Bursts - China Next?

[tooltalk]

There's a housing bubble in China - that's an inevitable consequence of gov't central planning.

[ThePhilBest]

@tooltalk You are exactly right. In this era of rampant creation of credit - by government - SOME cities, in the USA, Canada, and Germany, have managed to NOT have a house price bubble. This is because there is a "right to develop land" without regulatory obstruction and delays. These bubbles are caused by 2 factors - government expansion of credit combined with official "rationing" of the supply of urban land. David Harvey seems to not understand this.

[DoelGr]

this is bullshit,people move in the range of options that they have,the options are made out of rulles that a gorvements sets(laws,policies)the job of the real estate is not to save the economy,real estate is just like other sectors of the economy,gorvements and banks are using it each for the same purpose cause the most common loan is to buy a house...again its the gorvement and the policies nothing more nothing less,thats the only problem...

[capslockbandit]

@cayetanoluis Rather than let the government say "battleships or nothing" I would prefer the market choose, and let the best techs surface on merit, sans central planning. If the govt didn't tax us to design massive weapons of war its true the development of such projects would be slowed minus the stimulus of the govt. This is a good thing; you have more money in your pocket to direct more efficiently than bureaucrats to projects more valuable than weapons alone.

[capslockbandit]

@cayetanoluis There are billions of examples of government inefficiency, as they are shielded from market signals (profits, losses). Markets are more efficient than governments because of this. When a gov't directs (ie redistributes) wealth into say military or medical research they may very well produce great advancements, but its value is eroded by taxation and government waste. Check out Moore's law, our technological advancement is not dependent on the govt at all.

[MSmochalicious1]

He is missing the important points of where the banks get their money from to lend to developers and the consumers. In addition, how the banks benefits from creating thirty year mortgages and real estate scams. He mentions making homeownership easier for blacks and immigrants and fails to mention the real purpose for devising the sub prime mortgages. The focus is on the division between the wealthy and the working class consumers.

[EconCat88]

I visited the world's largest mall in China last week...the place is a ghost town and part of it is now being demolished. Other parts of the mall have water damage from shoddy construction.

[akkonburike]

I recently read some of Harvey's work and was so (O_o) disgusted. Yes, his writings have good parts: The good old insights from the left.

But Harvey borders on hypocrisy: He paints EU/US based globalization as a diffuse & self-propelling process whereas China is practicing neo-imperialism instead; His books aren't accessible (to working people) etc etc. Also, Harvey's ecstatic celebration of the generation of 68 is abhorrent (the 'generation-of-68' opened the door for neo-liberalism T_T).

[KnipeRealty]

Great Video. Thanks!

[240kankan]

Thanks a lot .

[CescoPisicoli]

Excellent interview!

[ThisIsNotPictureTube]

smart guy

[Christ724]

David Harvey is great! His insight is extremely valuable. Although I don't agree with everything Marxists say, they do offer and interesting perspective in their critique of capitalism.

[Christ724]

@Christ724 *an

[borderlord]

Great interview!Bring this chap back for more!

[1971SuperLead]

I wonder how poor people need to get before they eat the rich.

[schmoukiz]

Of course China's gonna go the way of Soviet Union, because socialism simply doesn't work.

But let's not spoil host's dreams and blame capitalism for another communist failure.

Thank God that Cuba and North Korea were more faithful to Marxist doctrine and are way better off than "heretic" China now!

[Cookaloka]

@schmoukiz

You have no idea what Socialism is do you? Socialism is giving power to the working people and havign the working class gain control of industry.

Communist failure?

1. There are no Communist states, it's impossible. Communism aims for a stateless, classless society where property is commonly owned by everyone.

2. China is mostly capitalist now. "Socialism" with Chinese characteristics was to turn the Chinese economy from a state capitalist one to a market capitalism

Juche

[schmoukiz]

@Cookaloka The difference between me and you is you read about communism and think it's cool, I've lived under it and know it's not.

Maybe communism works in Fairyland, maybe it did miracles for Martians. On planet Earth, it's been tried for a century, with different nations that total one third of world population and half the land and resources. It produced over 100 million deaths. I believe the sample group for the experiment was enough for +medium IQ people to conclude it's a bad idea.

[Cookaloka]

@schmoukiz

You'ved lived in a classless, stateless community society structured upon common ownership of the means of production, free access to articles of consumption, and the end of wage labour and private property in the means of production and real estate? No?

100 million deaths? Where did you get these figures from? The black book of Communism?

[repo4sale]

China's Real Estate Bubble will be 400% the size of the American Bubble! The deaths and riots will make Rodney King Los Angeles riots look like a Picnic! I think it will be worst than the North Africa Riots like Libya, Syria, Egypt, really bad!!!

[nihilozero]

The vocal audio of your guest could have been a little better in this video. Just a heads up. Otherwise... keep up the good work. Cheers.

[capslockbandit]

Real capitalists would have rates set by the market and let most of these over-leveraged idiots fail. Individuals and corporations should be responsible for the bets that they make instead of being bailed out by the government. If the market were allowed to work interest rates would rise dramatically, less houses would be built, and the lenders would evaluate each project with greater scrutiny, funding only the best, lowest risk projects, removing the conditions for a bubble.

[capslockbandit]

The government controls,creates, and inflates housing bubbles and then somehow paradoxically when they fail it is capitalism's fault? Having the government dominate this industry is hardly capitalist, and should be left to the free market. The US has what 20 million vacant homes? They would not have been built without 0% interest rates and free money from the government. Real estate speculation is not saving global capitalism. That's silly.

[VolcanicPenguin]

"where is the demand that isn't based on debt"

nowhere cause of how all the money is created out of debt!

[juliaisafilmbuff123]

@26Keano Capitalism has nothing to do with government intervention in the market. In fact, capitalism would fall apart in two seconds if government wasn't there propping it back up again.

[joao27pt]

Excellent post. Exposed so clearly and very informative.

Excellent job Real News Network.

[choobie12]

It is likely big players that play with fiat currency is not a good combination for china, stuff like that doesn't work good. Companies should expand in china except controlling supply will not work there like it works here, china is not big company driven, therefore big companies should take a balanced approach. This residential boom can be assured to be successful by investing in automation technology as this concentrates wealth and makes it possible to move to the denser cities.

[ytgv3fc7]

you know, instead of speculating people can stop seeking cash-flow, stop using paper money, and just STORE money as gold, silver, long-lasting tangibles until they are needed. You can't force a market in 10 to 20 years to be what you want it to be but you can hold things which are in value under all conditions so that you are ready at the time to invest, spend, use no credit, create no bubble & not be lured into a bubble.

[tangent272]

More from this guy please.

[kmarinas86]

What saves capitalism can be summarized as two things: Growth and Decay.

[Kohler794]

@kmarinas86 Kind of like how the natural world operates.

[Christ724]

@26Keano Then capitalism has never existed, ever.

[asphyxiafeeling]

More Marxist BULLSHIT. No thanks!

[ZSwierczynski]

I actually read this book, its a quite opening from a different viewpoint.

[jjcale1111]

@26Keano Could not have said it better.

[RedGaribaldi]

David Harvey talks a lot of sense. His recent book "The Enigma of Capital and the Crises of Capitalism" is brilliant.

His online (and free) course on Marx's Capital is also excellent if you are not familiar with Marx's work.

Many thanks once again Paul Jay and TRNN.

[ThePhilBest]

@RedGaribaldi Karl Marx was right under conditions of urban land owning oligopolies. "Automobility", roads, and "freedom to build", was what broke this stranglehold and democratised property ownership. It is urban growth constraint - a government policy - that has caused rapid capital gains and wealth transfers and cyclical volatility to return. In China and India it is not "policy" per se, but corrupt officials. David Harvey does not understand this.

[xardas411]

Another crackpot liberal professor... how about less bias and put some republicans on interview once in a while

[greggh]

@xardas411 He's not a "liberal" professor. He's a Marxist professor.

[xardas411]

This guy is full of shit. Real estate is not always speculation, its a place for people to live. Immigration to the US keeps real estate up

[ytgv3fc7]

@xardas411 your location & cost of living is ALWAYS speculation. You can't be sure how/when your cost of living will be shoved up or down depending on local industry and you can't be sure how expensive it is to get to work in time + energy (or money if properly measured, which it isn't using paper money). You certainly need to speculate about your NEXT move to find work in another city. Nothing about real estate, even just a home, is devoid of speculation at any time

[Cookaloka]

@26Keano

Capitalism

- An economic system in which the means of production are privately owned and operated for profit.

We do have capitalism. EVERYWHERE.

[ytgv3fc7]

@Cookaloka the means of production are privately owned: no. We do not have that. We have corporate-government ownership which is Fascism, not Capitalism. We have capitalism nowhere but the illicit drug-market.

[LazarusCato]

@ytgv3fc7 capitalism will eventually evolve into fascism - it's inevitable, the accumulation of capital leads to an accumulation of power.

[ytgv3fc7]

@LazarusCato left to itself it will but we can do more. By having only personal actions on the capitalist system, an intermediary of anti-fraud measures and finally a collectivist allocation on top of that, we can defeat the problem. This is the same as how cells can co-operate to make multi-cellular life yet there must be an immune system intermediary to ensure invaders & failures are destroyed. Accumulation is not the problem: fraud is. Accumulation on its own can be safe.

[LazarusCato]

@ytgv3fc7 I like that analogy.

[VolcanicPenguin]

@Cookaloka

thank you!

[nesNYC]

@Cookaloka I disagree. We have Fascist Corporatism everywhere NOT free market capitalism.

[captcrais101]

@nesNYC Fascist corporatism is the definition of Free market captialism. Free Market is a BS term.

[capslockbandit]

@Cookaloka Yes and capitalism is adding to its impressive resume by pulling another few billion people out of poverty over the past few decades. Capitalism is everywhere because it works. But what about free markets? We have those NOWHERE. It has been demonstrated repeatedly by history that free people working in their own self interest produce by far the most wealth when property rights are respected and markets are as free as possible. Expanding inefficient government is not the solution.

[Cookaloka]

@capslockbandit

Really? Is that why billions are still starving and malnourished all over the world? Is that why the wealthy are getting ever wealthier and corporations are earning ever more money? Is that why nations that have newly embraced capitalism such as China and the former Soviet Union are seeing growing gulfs between the rich and poor and in the case of the former Soviet Union, the implosion of entire economies that was so bad, most have not recovered to their pre-collapse level.

[capslockbandit]

@Cookaloka Billions still starve yes, but look at the areas that have developed - they used to starve now they eat very well. One of my biggest motivations to become wealthy is so that I can help as many people as possible, I aim not to steal from the rich but to make everyone richer. Different goals you and I. And re your question about free markets, I believe that corporations should be completely responsible for their actions and that some regulations are needed (ie Glass-Steagall).

[lordblazer]

@capslockbandit

You are operating within a system where you must realize. That well simply put not everyone can be rich. Not even a majority. That's the way people chose it to be especially in America. Where one party doesn't even want a stable middle class. It says a lot. Soo Essentially if you have millions then there must be others who have nothing. Currently we are middle class, and as such we are still quite fortunate, and a minority within our species because of it.

[lordblazer]

@capslockbandit

most humans are poor, barefoot, and pregnant. Dying of preventable diseases due to the sick system we chose to keep. In a system where the US produces enough food to feed the world three times over. We choose a system that allows that food to rot as it isn't economic viable to give it away for free.Though corruption all over the world is to blame for the state of the world, but the system isn't innocent from it as the current status quo encourages corruption.

[capslockbandit]

@lordblazer But why bemoan the system that created all that wealth and food in the first place? It is better to help others from surplus than be a beggar yourself. No economic or political system is perfect, but the best we have discovered for creating wealth and raising the quality of life for the greatest number of people is the one almost everyone in these comments is pissing on. We both want the same thing, just very different ways of going about it.

[lordblazer]

@capslockbandit

you missed my last message I typed to you please read that before typing. I am not only bemoaning. And I am not bemoaning or complaining. I am just stating the simple truth, and along with that I am stating in that truth we must elevate others as we rise, but eventually this system will collapse, and that is when we must work the hardest to ensure a better future. Wealth is indeed being concentrated into the hands of the few. history repeats. no complaining here. just truth.

[lordblazer]

@capslockbandit

also how is stating these truths being a beggar. in essence it is time to change our economic system if this is the result of it. In fact it was changed in the 20th century for very similar reasons as it became glaringly obvious that wealth must be evenly distributed or economies and societies stay unstable. with that being said do what you can now to help, and as you move up continue to elevate others. I think you should save your "lecture" for some of the other posters here.

[capslockbandit]

@lordblazer The beggar line was purely anecdotal. I don't presume to lecture either, I wasn't even going to comment on this video, I just get shocked sometimes how wrong academics can be and the level of bias on this channel. The entire global system is going to change dramatically in our lifetimes, the time-frame depends on us. I want the sustainability and medical tech ASAP so I will work hard and invest in it. This planet can be paradise for all humans if we make it so.

[ytgv3fc7]

@lordblazer the USA does not even come close to feeding half the world if all the food it made was given away. No one ever at any time produces 3 times the world's food - that sham has been exposed 100 times by the UN.

[lordblazer]

@capslockbandit

with that being said. fly as high as you can, and pull as many people as you possibly can upward, and be ready to work hard to make a change in our society. This is also my long term plan if I ever get to gain wealth within my lifetime. I will be using to to leave this world better off than when I was born into it. :D

[capslockbandit]

@lordblazer Thanks for the interesting replies. I think you are in error in assuming everyone cannot be rich. The majority of people alive today have infinitely more potential and wealth than any king of old. We are collectively much richer, and live better than 20 years ago. Technology funds this advancement (look at cell phones and computers) and free markets fund and produce the technology. I don't think this system will last 40 more years, but to make it we need freedom not redistribution.

[daveruda]

@capslockbandit I dont think we are better of than 20 years ago. Born poor stays poor now. A significant part of the population is unemployed..esp young people. My parents could quit scool at 16 and start working, have an apartment, raise a family if they liked. There has been no big gains for a majority of the populations in the "free market" era since Reagan. Wealth is redistributed to a concentraded private power elite. Why is that ok but not redistribute down instead?

[capslockbandit]

@daveruda It is okay because most (not all) of the rich that you hate got rich by helping others via their personal greed. Greed was their primary motivation, but this greed made them care about people they never would have before and made them work very hard to raise their standard of living. There was little coercion and force involved just free people contracting for mutual benefit, this is the opposite of the government stealing wealth and redistributing it as bureaucrats see fit.

[daveruda]

@capslockbandit its not some fantasy world were a new computer equals better quality of life. History shows how some of them got rich by stabbing or scratching the right peoples backs. They used other peoples labour to get rich, they exploited and corrupted governments that install dictatorships and use military force to steal other peoples resocurces. Global poverty have improved mostly as a result of internal policies in China and increased elseware...dont protect someting this rotten!

[capslockbandit]

@daveruda In the real world making ourselves collectively smarter with better computers and keeping us alive much longer with new and advancing medical technology and increasing our wealth is very important and has a profound impact on quality of life. Free education for everyone is available on the web. If you think this has no effect on the quality of life of the people of this planet you are very wrong. I own thousands of products in my house, 0 produced by the government.

[capslockbandit]

@daveruda I have no delusions that there are corrupt and unethical capitalists but lumping them all together is fallacious and it is disingenuous to advocate the very behavior you are against as the solution, ie exploiting them and stealing by force. I will protect this "rotten" system, much like I do democracy because they are the least flawed systems we've discovered that benefit the greatest number of people.

[capslockbandit]

@daveruda "I dont think we are better of than 20 years ago" Says the guy through his advanced computing technology that only would have been considered a ridiculous and impossible sci-fi pipe dream just 20 years ago. Billions pulled out of poverty and more every day. I don't even know how you can argue things are not better than 20 years ago when you live and are surrounded by the example.

[ytgv3fc7]

@capslockbandit the military funded most of what's in your computing & cell phones, the market (not a free market) was secondary & controlled from day 1.

[capslockbandit]

@ytgv3fc7 Yes but the market would have produced the same technology at a fraction of the cost. Just because the govt can commandeer billions and dump it on NASA or the military and then some some small percentage actually produces valuable tech does not mean it is the best choice for our society. Battleships are the perfect example, billions and the resources to construct them, now we have an armada. But this doesn't show anything about what we COULD have had or built instead, in its place.

[ytgv3fc7]

@capslockbandit no, the market wouldn't have bothered to build it at any cost - the market was stable without those levels of innovation. The market doesn't seek automatic improvement & in some cases there has not been improvement either. Depends on the situation with computing. The market can easily seek to keep us all at barter-trades with no automation & decide that's stable. You can't decide, at any time, a market would do something better, cheaper or at all.

[Cookaloka]

@capslockbandit

What do you mean when you say that markets should be as "free" as possible"? Do you mean that companeis should not be regulated and so they would be able to do whatever they wanted?

Exactly. We need a government that works for the people. A government of the working class.

[ytgv3fc7]

@capslockbandit "by pulling another few billion people out of poverty over the past few decades. "

Fraud.

Most of those people were not poor before, they were well taken care of in their needs then they were robbed BY capitalists.

Ethiopia is a good example.

[BroBroDude]

@Cookaloka Conflationism

- Categorical criticism of all systems of private ownership which is actually criticism only applicable to corporatist, state-controlled systems of private ownership

[captcrais101]

@Cookaloka captalialism is regulated. we have corporatism which is not regulated.

[Delisle4]

HOLY SHIT!!!!

This next crash with China is going to make the other crash at the end of 2008

look like children's birthday party. Buckle up!!!

[DeePhlat]

Because of the default political spectrum made by popular news media, when I watch interviews of people who are actually leftists and Marxists and not right-centrist democrats, in the back of my head I feel like this must not be objective news but more of a fringe AM radio show that airs at 2 in the morning. In other words, propaganda affects me quite a bit subconsciously .

[malorkayel]

Step 1, this guy proves China is surpassing USA.

Step 2, Fear monger, calling for catastrophe on China. "OMG, they built a new mall and no one is in it" lol

My proof your country is going to fail because my country failed, is fail lol

[StraussBR]

@malorkayel

The moment China, wich is a export based economy, looses it`s main market, (the U.S) they themselves will enter in a depression, unemployment will skyrocket and a credit bubble will follow

that`s economics 101, every economist knows that

[malorkayel]

Economics 101 led to the bailouts. There will always be a need for manufacturing and export. Even broke@ss America will still need goods.

Yes, China will fail AFTER America and the European Union fail, but by then China would have been the world#1 economy.

How come he doesn't talk about Europe begging for China influx of investment bailout?

[LazarusCato]

@malorkayel I'm not so sure China will fail, yes it will in our western-neoliberal-capitalist sense, but I have the suspicion that China will be able to go inward and return to it's Maoist roots with relatively ease.

[ytgv3fc7]

@StraussBR wrong: China can consume its own production affordably with no export market required. All exporting nations can, including my own, Canada. We don't need USA exports to live whatsoever. It's a slavery-myth to keep us American slaves via NAFTA.

[ytgv3fc7]

@malorkayel China built 4 entirely giant cities which are entirely empty. That's a sign of bubble-failure.

[LazarusCato]

@ytgv3fc7 or future planning?

[optionsupdate]

david harvey is a communist/marxist i think

[slobomotion]

Uprated, favorited and shared. This clip is so good, I had to keep pausing it and sliding back to re-listen to stuff. I urge you to do a segment on the depression of 1920-22. No one remembers it and it was as bad as '29. The bigs were allowed to fail and it was very painful but quickly over without any fiddling. Carry on.

[CaptainBluebear08]

love Harvey, he is a great connaisseur of Marx. See his talks here on YT.

[heckler73]

@CaptainBluebear08

Or go to his website where he has an entire course reading Marx's "Capital vol.1".

He definitely is a refreshing counter-balance of economic thought.