Peter Schiff Doesn't Understand The Nature Of Regulation

[halvepupose1]

dgslop when the dollar is devalued 10 fold by the end of the decade and the economy is a dead cat will you atleast concede that your 'regulated' markets cannot overcome the fundamental forces of central banking. Have you ever even cracked FA Hayek's work? I don't understand how you could possibly think that men are more powerful than nature and can build a house on top of a foundation made of gelatin. Why are you so resoundingly confident that central banking is not the root problem?

[dsglop]

@halvepupose1 LOL! Yeah, the REAL crash is always down the road. Forget about the fact that interest rates on T-Bills have been plummeting through the worst recession on the Great Depression- which was caused by austrian policies- and that the US economy is strengthening significantly, you love your cult leader and he can't humiliate himself enough for that to change.

[itsthekush]

Great video, maybe a slight bias but it's good that you mentioned there are good and bad sides to regulation. Totally agree with the example used though, and your assertion of a "libertarian fantasy" that the private sector is infallible. I often ask libertarian free market types "whats the dollar value of quality of life and sustainability?". Gotta tread the fine line of moderate economics.

[richardmcmurry]

Yes, they're a bit simpler than what they used to be in the 90's, but there is still some learning curve when you're thinking and creating 3D images. But for what you're animating, it wouldn't take up much memory. Good luck!

[richardmcmurry]

As professional animator, I see a number of your videos, as short animated movies. I think you have an uncanny gift for explaining environmental/political issues to simpletons such as myself. Keep up the good work!

[dsglop]

@richardmcmurry Thanks! Although I said it like a joke, I have been thinking of taking an animation course.

My understanding is that technology has made basic animation fairly simple. Is this true?

[richardmcmurry]

Dan, have you ever thought of turning this into a 3d animation? This would be awsom!!

[dsglop]

@richardmcmurry As soon as I become an expert animator.

[AustrianEconomics101]

I'm afraid it's you who doesn't come close to Peter's understanding of the economy.

[dsglop]

@AustrianEconomics101 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!

You cult kids are hilarious! Why should I take you seriously with comments like this? Pathetic.

[FreeMarketFTW]

@AustrianEconomics101 I agree, he's a dumbass lol.

[dsglop]

@FreeMarketFTW Yes, Peter Schiff is an extreme dumbass. I'm glad you agree.

[Mijamott]

I watched the whole video, and Peter Schiff was never even mentioned or quoted. Sorry, but you did not make any case against Peter. You did however demonstrate an excellent use of the strawman tactic. That aside, I do have a real question for you. For what reason did the Alberta gov't step in to dictate how drilling would proceed in the forced pools?

[dsglop]

@Mijamott HAHA!!! It's funny when you guys say "strawman" as if it's a debate ending ending point.

The Alberta government has a royalty interest in most fields. They want our oilfields to be developed in the most efiicient manner, which the private sector is incapable of doing on their own. That, in case you missed it, is the real point of this video. The video response goes over more points you probably missed.

[studentofmises]

@dsglop If the Alberta government knows how to exploit the oilfieds much more efficiently than the private sector, then why doest the government do it self? Why would the government allow for potential errors to occur since it knows best?

[dsglop]

@studentofmises Why can't you see the difference between government setting basic rules and central planning?

[studentofmises]

@dsglop So what you're say is that the private sector which knows where and how to find the oil, develop and build all the parts from scratch that make up the machines to extract the oil are incapable of efficiently extracting the oil with out the help of people that have no concept of doing it on their own? So if govt is incapable of doing the work themselves how would we know that are implementing the correct regulations? And what is the difference b/t govt regulations and central planning?

[dsglop]

@studentofmises You are completely missing the point. One person can mess up the entire pocket- which may have dozens of developers on it- by draining it too quickly. No one but the government has the power to prevent one person from damaging the resource. That is 100% different from the government needing (or wanting) to develop the resource themselves.

[studentofmises]

I see ur point if we are talking about govt owned land bc they can make their own rules.But the same rules would apply if it were on private land.The land owner wouldnt want to risk losing money from any oil company that would pay fees to siphon his oil.So the land owner would make sure that oil companies follow his rules as well as take insurance from them so to cover for any damages they may cause.Y do u feel people are incapable of resolving their own issues without the help of govt?

[dsglop]

@studentofmises Everything you're saying is based on assumption. In reality, some oil companies WILL drain the resevoir improperly. People do NOT turn into oilrield engineers just because someone is drilling on their land.

And the gov owns over 80% of the oil and gas mineral rights in this province. The vid response explains why this is a good deal for the people of this land.

[studentofmises]

But u r implying that errors never occur under govt regulations.The gulf spill is just one example and it was done under govt regulations. Errors will occur no matter what.But my point is that it would be better handled under private hands.If u owned the land and understand the correct way to drill for oil you would make sure that the oil companies that r leasing on ur land are working it how u understand is the correct way or u would tell them that they can no longer drill.

[dsglop]

@s First of all, no I'm not. Second of all, the BP disaster was caused by a private company cutting corners (allowing their BOP to go into disrepair and not cementing properly). Third of all, this is a real world example of your ideology failing,. It happened, and now doesn't due to gov intervention. Your fantasy of everyone becoming very smart, vigilant and well behaved doesn't trump reality; nor does your stubborn desire to be right. Do not come back here to repeat your ideology yet again.

[richardbrowification]

Who was it that determined the best and most efficient way to extract oil? Was it the politicians or the bureaucrats? No, it was almost certainly the oil industry itself, as nearly all regulation is drafted and sold to the government by those within the industry, usually to benefit a few at the expense of others.

[dsglop]

@richardbrowification Another ignorant cult member who is all of a sudden an expert on the oilfield.

Just because it doesn't fit your ideology doesn't make it untrue.

[bct2702]

That was a very lengthy way of saying that oil fields are an instance of the tragedy of the commons.

One potential solution to the problem of the tragedy of the commons is contracts and trade associations. A small number of oil companies could contract with each other to efficiently manage the resources of a particular field. Alternatively, a large number of companies could join to form a trade association which sets its own (non-governmental) regulations.

[dsglop]

@bct2702 It really amazes me how you people think that you're experts on everything just because your ideology demands it. Sorry, but just because you wish they'd co-operate doesn't mean they will. The video response explains it further.

[MISSTER543210]

You seem to have a tremendous amount of knowledge in the oil industry. Why don't you go out and put your ideas and suggestions to work? You might become very wealthy, and famous. Not to mention the fact that you'd be also creating job opportunities for other people, and improving the oil industry by making it more efficient. Just a thought.

[dsglop]

@MISSTER543210 For all you know, I could be an oil company owner. Either way, this isn't ground breaking stuff, it's mundane fact. All I did was apply it to my hobby of making fun of Pete and his cult.

[whatsthisish]

wow... this video and a great deal of the posts attached to it are so rife with logical fallacies that it's embarrassing.

ps: ya. go ahead and say that Im a stupid idiot and because its so obvious that I am, and that it's an indisputable fact.

pps: I realize that this post is in fact ad hominem and a straw man attack (how ironic?), but how am I to address something cogent when the dialogue is so perverse?

[dsglop]

@whatsthisish HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You cult members are hilarious the way you think just saying "logical fallicy" is a debate winner for you.

You people are just sad.

[DanMorin007]

@whatsthisish Don't waste your time with someone who has no understanding of the free market. This guy is using a very specific case of an industry already heavily regulated, and explaining how regulations help to get around the problems of regulations. For instance, the government is forcing several businesses to "share" a patch of oil, and then regulate how they should share, however forget to mention that the government is prohibiting access to other oil patches.

[dsglop]

@DanMorin007 Wow you people are stubborn. Free markets weren't able to produce oilfields in the most efficient way possible. And the vid I made right after this makes yet another point regarding how ignorant your black and white world view is.

[GPracers]

My private property is my labor. The taxes, fees and excessive regulation is slowly killing it. How many people do you employ? Why is it that so many employers I talk to are complaining about regulations when people like yourself who probably don't employ anyone think government intervention and regulation is so great. I spent 12 years in the federal government and it was the most wasteful and inefficient company I have ever worked for.

[dsglop]

@GPracers Yes, an inane, cultish rant is a great counter argument to a specific example.

Great job.

[casienwhey]

hey dogslop, how come you never show your face on your videos?

[dsglop]

@casienwhey Who would want a bunch of stupid cult members talking to them on the street?

[GPracers]

All the financial regulations in the world didnt stop Bernie Madoff. Even after calls and complaints to the government regulators. The DMV, Post Office, Department of Education, Social Secuirty, Medicare. All bankrupt government programs. All government does is add fees and taxes in the name of regulation to give a bunch of pencil pushes a nice federal pension and suck more money out of the private sector. Our planet is not going to live or die based on what we small stupid humans do.

[dsglop]

@GPracers Yes, there are examples of regulation failing, therefore we must do away with all regulation- because there was no crime before governments tried to stop them.

[azwack24]

this was a really stupid video. Schiff isn't saying get rid of ALL regulation, he is saying that there is just too much regulation and too much government, which is like you like to say, a fact.

Now if you owned a business, you would really know what too much regulation is about. Try hiring someone or have your tax files filled out, there's a reason why your legal bills are so high every time, and it's not the hourly rate the lawyer is charging. It's all the nonsense they have to go through.

[dsglop]

@azwack24 HAHAHA!!!!

Pete and his stupid culy (you) are constantly going on about how the private sector does everything better. You're wrong.

Now stop pretending that you losers have the answer to everything and get a clue.

[xcvsdxvsx]

a libertarians response to this would be as follows. With out government intervention into the free market consumers would have had a real education growing up instead of 19 years in a government brain washing facility. This would have empowered them to make responsible decisions when entering into the market place, which would result in a conscious choice by consumers to purchase from companies which engage in ethical business practices.

[dsglop]

@xcvsdxvsx Yeah, that'll work brilliantly.

[pirucreek]

peter schiff would see no problem with regulating the field, if it benefits the field/environment and not government.

[crazypants88]

Wow this video fails on it's very premise. Libertarians are not against regulation, it's the monopoly and abuse on the power to regulate that libertarians oppose. Libertarians contend the market could more easily regulate itself since if they would be corrupted, like the state has been, no one would use their services, but the state doesn't have to worry about that since it's a coercive monopoly.

Also the oil industry is about as far from a free market as the banking industry is.

[DorianGrayism]

I don't really see how you can say that this is not a property rights issue. If you have drained a pool of Oil inefficiently and therefore decreased the economic productivity of another person's land then wouldn't that be a cause of action?

[iiorblivionii]

Overall, I think that libertarians shouldn't sing the tune that "the market" will magically fix everything, it's got to be smart people *in* the market who come up with ways to fix problems like this. We have to admit it's a tough problem. But we feel that the benefits (practical and moral) of moving regulation to the free market are high, so it's worth trying to figure it out.

[iiorblivionii]

Glad we can both be open minded. I think I got a hypothetical one for you:

Getting everybody to agree not to overdrill will never work because the one who breaks the agreement wins, right?. (aka market failure) What if you're a large insurance company, and you offer to insure each small company against draining the pool, contingent on them not overdrilling? A company would be much less likely to break rank, because they know if others break rank and the pool drains, they won't get their payout.

[dsglop]

@iiorblivionii Nope. Said insurance policy could easily be rejected.

there's more to the story, which will be explained in a video to be uploaded in the next few hours.

[iiorblivionii]

@dsglop But why *would* they reject it? Your whole premise is that this situation is bad for the small drilling companies, right? If I were one of them, I'd be afraid that the pool might drain. I'd want to make sure I get (Full Benefit - Low Premium) if there's no drain, or (Minimum Benefit + High Payout) if there is a drain.

But perhaps the reasons for rejecting are in this video coming up, in which case no need to respond, I'll try to check back on that.

[iiorblivionii]

To the extent that we get defensive or deny these tough questions, I'd have to agree with you that we can live in a bubble (like any group). But I take this as more of a challenge, which I appreciate. Us libertarians need to be on point with tough questions like this.

[dsglop]

@iiorblivionii Best comment yet.

[johammbass]

Of course, the private sector is not ideal, however, the government practically always performs worse and all of its regulations have negative consequences. Since when has the Canadian healthcare been in the red?

[dvalukis]

Not all regulations ARE created equal. Over the last 20 years free markets have said that they want their corporations to be environmentally friendly... aka "green". Companies don't change their broadcasting logo (NBC) to the color green because of government regulations. Over the last 30 or so years consumers have become health conscious, demanding that their food not be filled with artificial flavors, pesticides, etc... Entire sections of grocery stores are devoted to this market segment.

[natritious1]

the private sector is better than the government because it relies on voluntary interaction and not violence

[uglyguido]

You should do a why do people laugh at libertarians series!

[TheUnmaskedMagician]

I laugh at Alex Jones 

[604johny]

Wow so much ignorance from dsglop yet again. No real libertarians are calling to get rid of government and none of them are saying pure capitalism with no government is a perfect system. There's no perfect system, if there was one we would have adopted it long time ago. The fact is that capitalist society with limited government powers which protect individual rights and property is the best system out there. The issue you discuss is a property rights issue and could be resolved in court.

[moybutter]

dsglop, this is the first video of yours that I agree with except for the last 60 secs. Libertarians don't believe in lawlessness. States can deal with infringements on another persons property, or protect 3rd parties without it going to the Federal level. It is the central planning over every facet of our lives that I have a serious problem with.

[dsglop]

@moybutter Please read the video description.

[Homer177]

American Libertarians are wannabe Robber Barons. As for Peter Schiff..well by now it's obvious he's just another business criminal who sells snake oil to his customers in the form of penny stocks.

[crazypants88]

@Homer177 Yes cause people's characteristics obviously effect the validity of their arguments, that's why when bad people say 2+2 is 4 their obviously wrong...

[cjnewson88]

I hope the later referrals to 'libertarians' in your video was a shortcut for your earlier description of "libertarian extremist", because classic libertarians, although believing smaller government interference and more business freedoms, wouldn't move to the extreme which you have displayed

[dsglop]

@cjnewson88 Limited government is one thing, but anything close to anarchowhatever is rather crappy.

[cjnewson88]

@dsglop I wholly agree. although in slight contrast to your video, there have been cases where government regulation based on government incompetence have done more damage than good. The gulf oil spill can be used as one of these examples. Although I don't believe this caused it, it was indeed a factor ( if you know anything about James Reason's accident causation, you'll know what I mean ) - watch?v=xdZ5LCNmvFQ - interview with Shepard Smith and Judge Napolitano

[dsglop]

@cjnewson88 Although I didn't watch your video, I happen to know that the BP disaster was the result of corners being cut. The Blow out preventer was not maintained properly and it failed. A working BOP would have prevented it.

There were also issues regarding rushing the cement job.

[cjnewson88]

@dsglop Which is why I mentioned Reason's accident causation. Yes, you are correct, however accidents are never caused by last minute balls up, there are a host of sins of omissions and commissions which add up to increase the likelihood of accidents occurring. Government regulation was one of them. If you get some time, you can watch that video. All I am saying is although I am of the opinion of business freedoms, I also believe in regulation, but too much is just as harmful as too little.

[dsglop]

@cjnewson88 Did you know that Judge Napolitano is a truther? Yes, he came out on the Alex Jones show and said that the US gov was behind 911. I just thought you might like to know that.

[cjnewson88]

@dsglop I'm not sure about 'truther' per se, but I have seen him mention new world order a couple of times, and I know hes rather chummy with alex jones and his idiots, which is disappointing I admit, however some of what he says, although a little extreme, does make some good points in regards to the role of government and the impacts of over-regulation.

[dsglop]

@cjnewson88 I regret to inform you that the "judge" is a ridiculous little man

watch?v=slao9HZntME

Apparently building 7 couldn't have come down the way the government said it did.

[cjnewson88]

@dsglop I never said he was perfect, believe me I'm the last person to stand by a truther, I am just simply saying some of his non-conspiracy theorist ideas make sense; such as the role of government in private sector and the implications of over-regulation

[BrotherAlpha]

@WONDOCTORJ "Bottom line, is if they don't do it right, and they pollute my water well, I will sue the shit out of them, and end up owning half their oil company."

Firstly, if you sue them, you are using a socialist justice system.

Secondly, how well do you think you will do when they have millions of dollars to spend defending themselves. Hell, they don't even have to win in court, they just have to last long enough till you go bankrupt.

[WONDOCTORJ]

@BrotherAlpha #1 suing them is using a republic justice system.

#2 their millions of dollars won't dispute the fact that they contaminated your well water, if the judges stuck to a constitutional based republic system.

#3 -ignorance is bliss.....see ya at the food riots.

[BrotherAlpha]

@WONDOCTORJ

#1 There's no such thing.

#2 You will need lawyers. That costs money. You will need to convince the judge the company was responsible for the water being contaminated. That means you need scientists to study the facts. That costs money. The company will have a lot more of both who will say the water is either not contaminated or they were not the responsible party. They will be able to bankrupt you.

#3 If you believe money doesn't matter in lawsuits, then you are ignorant

[WONDOCTORJ]

@BrotherAlpha THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS A REPUBLIC JUSTICE SYSTEM??????????? OK, YOU ARE A MORON,WE ARE DONE TALKING.

[BrotherAlpha]

@WONDOCTORJ There isn't. Republic is a form of representative democracy. Unless you are arguing any justice system in a republic is a "republic justice system", in which case, you are totally missing the point. (And you are using a terms you won't find in many places.) A socialist justice system is a justice system in which the costs are paid for by the government through taxes and individuals have equal access to justice.

And you are still ignoring the effects money has on justice.

[trainwreckable1]

@WONDOCTORJ - lmao, XD... google - I am an American conservative shitheel

[khallmeyer]

Libertarians believe strictly in property rights. In this example you seem to be very confident that you can prove without doubt that pumping in a certain manner will create a void thus draining oil from the competitors share. This is a clear property rights issue which could be handled by the companies in arbitration or negotiation with no need for government intervention. Since companies are margin based the last thing they will tolerate is a competitor essentially stealing their investment.

[SPQRomantic]

@khallmeyer Obviously this never happened before the government intervention.

[BrotherAlpha]

@khallmeyer "This is a clear property rights issue which could be handled by the companies in arbitration or negotiation with no need for government intervention."

You honestly believe two companies would be able to negotiate settlement without a socialist justice system? Why would the company that was "cheating" stop if there's no government to force it to?

[khallmeyer]

@BrotherAlpha What would stop them? Being sued for violating property rights that's what. No intelligent business owner wants to put their business at risk of a lawsuit, If they do they will surely find themselves out of business. Unless of course the government gets involved and bails them out. Oh wait that's exactly what's going on in the world today. Government intervention in capitalism is what causes the problem not capitalism.

[BrotherAlpha]

@khallmeyer "What would stop them? Being sued for violating property rights that's what."

How would anyone sue them without a socialist justice system and a government to back up the verdict?

[dsglop]

@khallmeyer As I knew you guys would, you missed the point completely. This has nothing to do with property rights. The oilfield will ultimately yield less oil if it is not depleted efficiently. Everyone is a loser when they don't do it right.

[khallmeyer]

@dsglop First off without having any facts, evidence or articles its difficult for me to get any real insight into the situation. I realize you're suggesting that this regulatory practice proves that regulation in cases is more efficient than the free market. My main point is if regulation is to exist at all it should be done at the local level. There is absolutely no need for a double layering of government. It is inefficient and ineffective.

[dsglop]

@khallmeyer I live in Calgary, which is one of the oil capitals of the world. Although I don't have a link to them, there are many people here who need to know about this stuff to do their jobs. None of them believe in some stupid alternate theory. There is no austrian school of resevoir engineering.

[Amadeus5150]

@dsglop I can't speak for the others here because I'm not libertarian, but the example you made was really about property rights and most libertarians would be fine with that regulation because government enforcing property rights is one of their core pillars to their ideology.

Anarcho capitalist would 100% disagree though.

[dsglop]

@Amadeus5150 As has already been explained in the comments, everyone who is saying this is about property rights has missed the point. As I explained in the video, more oil and gas is left in the ground when you don't exploit it properly. Without enforced co-operation, everyone loses.

[BrotherAlpha]

@dsglop Fishing rights are similar. You will have two companies or countries trying to get as many fish as they can, thereby destroying the fish stocks, thereby hurting everyone's future.

[donovan93123]

I like how all you conspiracy-theorist neo-liberals follow Peter Schiff when his knowledge or info corroborates your ideas... but when his info doesn't support your ideas.. you bash him..

funny...

FREE-MARKET IS THE ONLY WAY FOR AMERICA..

if you want socialism go elsewhere.

[anubis2814]

@donovan93123 This guy is Canadian, He doesn't have to go anywhere

[MegaPoppadom]

hello there! Cheers for the upload dude.

[Pentazoid111]

More people aren't going to take you seriously if you keep strawmanning libertarians. Most libertarians I talk too never said that the free market is always perfect, just that it is better equip than the government to resolved various issues.

[dsglop]

@Pentazoid111 Note that I said "libertarian extremists/anarcho capitalists/volunteerists/what­ever you want to call yourself."

[SchittReport]

peter schiff doesn't understand the nature of anything. period.

welcome back btw!

[jacobromu]

ah! this is the prisoner's dillemma for n players!