What a bunch of nonsense, he talks about the business cycle as if it was just there for no apparent reason. But we live in a world of causality. The Boom causes the Bust, and something must have caused the Boom. And the cause is easy money: artificially low interest rates, government guaranteed housing credit, you name it.
It's startling how a rational minded person can't get the concept of cause and effect into his thick skull.
I'm not saying he's not talking some sense. But his idea of solving the problems is no where near ambitious enough, to solve the problems of our market system.
Why is it that intellectuals and economers are so afraid of talking about actual change, rather than just strategies for prolonging mankinds suffering..
Although Jews dominate such fields as Physics, Psychology, Computer Science, Chess, etc. there is no area in which their domination is more predominant than in Economics (28 Nobel Laureates since 1970 !).
The consequence of this domination ? An economic system which is grossly unfair. Where most are losers but, where some, are spectacular winners (guess who ?). A world carrying more debt than it can ever now repay. Loss on national sovereignty & the development of a Fed on a global scale.
I 24yrs old I took ecnon in hs and ever knew what they were talking about, I stay updated to the news and even still only had a basic cavemanesq idea of our economic system. Also I'm a young philosopher (due to money matter self tought so far) and this video has changed my life I really understand the basics of econ now in a way thI feel I can manage my money and add energy to my enconomic life. I took notes the whole time. THANK YOU SOOO MUCH FOR THE BLESSNG :-)
he and all other people in favor of government intervetion forget one major factor : the price of each action. In order to "slow down GDP growth in the good years" and "invest " in the bad years, you need to hire a LOT of people who may be corrupted, may waste your money etc. and what for? to "decrease the amplitude" - BUT at what cost? and what bad would happen if we just left the aplitude untouched by government officials?
@mindOFAlibertarian Slowing down GDP in the good years means in this case having a budget surplus (government collects more money than it spends). In the lean years, government could collect less money than it spends by using the surplus. No extra hiring necessary. The good idea is the help smooth out the business cycle, which will occur in any case.
I guess it's worthwhile that these smart people are thinking in these directions, it's maybe a good thing that solutions are on record
On the other hand, I can't help feeling that these ideas - otherwise brilliant - are built around the assumption that those in charge are looking for ways to make things better for the majority. I don't believe this is the case, I don't believe the evidence can any longer support this assumption, in fact if anything the exact opposite appears to be the case
@lawchristopher Yeah me too. Only a true philosopher can convey a message that a 14 year old can understand especially when the message encapsulates some of the most complex statistical and stochastic measurements/evaluations. I'm gonna go read his book, he came across as a deep thinker. Glad you enjoyed it too. Peace!
I can't concentrate because he looks like a guy i did a lot of drinking with and played a lot of punk and heavy metal with. He's too cool to look like an intellectual!
The reason why people are not trusting economists as before is that they stick to the same old premises and can't see out of their own box - so starting a talk accepting business cycles as part of the world we gotta live in is not relieving at all ;)
@chapulinaaa Do you want physicists to give talks where they pretend that gravity doesn't exist? Business cycles or economic cycles are a well established phenomenon. If you are waiting for economists to come up with a model or a theory that doesn't discuss or at least acknowledge business cycles then you're waiting for some kind of economics that doesn't even dwell in reality.
If you are waiting for some kind of "Eureka!" moment basic economics, you'll be disappointed.
@Wintermutate Business cycles are not like gravity, that we just gotta live with. They are the result of a terrible system, not an unbendable rule. Acknowledging they exist at the moment is necessary, treating them as ever-lasting truths is madness. Very little in the field of economics represents deep truths about how the world works. I'm waiting for the eureka moment, not sure it will come from economists at this pace...
@chapulinaaa Whether or not you think we need to live with them, they exist, and existed long before any economist was even looking for them. Business or economic cycles are a consequence of human behavior. It is impossible to have a useful economics discussion when you can't talk about a fundamental occurrence.
Like any human behavior, they can probably be mitigated (ironically, this is most of what Sedlacek talks about, and you still criticize), but to eliminate them completely? Doubtful
@Wintermutate ... and you reinforce my point ;) Well, it's good to know that there are people looking through different angles, I just wish there weren't so many stuck at one... Good luck!
@Wintermutate U are completely right. That is actually what he wants to show by using the Pharaoh story from the bible: Cycles have been around a long time, due to nature (harvest!!!) and human psychology ...
@whahas Interesting point, however, how do we solve this problem? Just take the farmers products away and, with the money we take from the millionaires, ship it to places where people are hungry? MAn this sounds good but coming from someone who obviously has a laptop and internet, this taking away riches should commence with himself ...
@whahas Man, this is not really what I meant, I just indicated that there are certain facts such as unpredictability, risk, etc. that make a cyclic motion of the economy "natural". Of course we can and should minimize this as much as possible. Just please don´t pretend is that easy, someone would already have done it, if it were ...
However, u raise an interesting point. Indeed there is much perversity in the world, when a country exports food, and yet part of its population hunger
@whahas When you say "stable money supply" do you mean that no one lends or borrows money, that the money supply is tied directly to a resource like gold, or what?
In any case, business cycles would still exist, though without credit and lending, they might be less pronounced. People are still going to make decisions about when and how to spend and invest, and human instinct is to spend when times are good and save when times are lean. Which is fundamentally what creates business cycles.
@Wintermutate Good question. What I mean with a 'stable money supply' is an economy where the amount of money is related to the amount of goods of services provided in that economy. No, I don't mean linked to gold, money shouldn't have intrinsic value, only exchange value / buying power.
Money is in essence a legal agreement and that's one of the reasons it shouldn't be centralized at all.
Historically, of course, it is a system enforced on the population. Do you agree on that?
@Wintermutate In any case Monetary Reform is necessary, because why do we need Government debt?
I'd rather have a government that can print money without debt and have inflation then a government that borrows money into existence, creating inflation ánd the need for interest payments!
Although Government spending money into existence has worked in the past, the danger of politicians abusing that power is also great, especially if they can use it to win votes...
@Wintermutate ... Therefore I state that Austrian and Keynesian models both have some credibility.
The Keynesian model as stated in the presentation can only work without government debt, because deficit spending would increase the government debt, unless it's all paid from savings, which is unlikely because of the interest payments due on the government debt.
Austrian has some points in that Central banks make banks function as kartel-like.
How does this differ from the Ron Paul "no government, no FED - the market sorts itself out quickly somehow" philosophy? It does not seem that his way plans ahead or do any precautionary actions.
They both agree about the printing of new money though.
It's quite different from Ron Paul. Ron Paul believes essentially that you should allow the market to sort itself out, which on a macro level is better than our recent behavior, but not nearly as useful as if we had simply done the right thing. Government policy during the 2000s *could* have put us in line for a very painless and short recession, but instead we have the worst situation that most living people have ever seen.
ALSO, keep in mind that being completely hands off to the point where you're not regulating pollution or quashing monopolies, etc has some very serious long term consequences to society as a whole. Just because GDP is growing at a healthy clip doesn't mean you're not living in a polluted wasteland or that all wealth isn't being diverted into the hands of a few people who control the levers of government and industry. There is more than one way to borrow from the future...
Capitalists quantifying economies by good by and evil is like advocating that shark should feed themselves humanely. All that has ever matter to capitalism is the conditions that guarantees the reproduction of production/consumption.
@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 To the extent that a government or any other higher level institution is doing to dabble in manipulating the economy, they should be doing so with the aim of blunting the business cycle. The market doesn't care if growth swings wildly up and and down, but human beings need stability. Whatever policies exist should seek to deliver that stability.
@mikeye9 Actually, Bush just ruined OUR economy. The rest of the world ruined its own economy.
This current downturn is either going to be deeper or longer lasting than it would have been if government had never been involved, and an order of magnitude worse than it would have ever been with sound policies in place.
We shot all our bullets inflating the economic bubble of the 2000's, and now we've got to deal with a downturn and a bunch of debt that we shouldn't even have, at the same time.
@mikeye9 Also, it's a bit of a simplification to blame it all on Bush. Sure, he started the expensive wars, and sure, he wanted the unnecessary tax cuts, but Congress went along, and the Federal Reserve kept interest rates low even in the face of an obvious bubble economy.
Our policy was 180 degrees reversed from where it ought to have been. I believe that the events of 9/11 and the sapping costs of health care caused us to treat our economy like it was in recession when it wasn't.
@mikeye9 no for example Sweden, where Im living is doing grea. Our economy is growing at a steady and good pace. Because of doing what this guy says, at the core level. Transparency also was a big thing, to be able to see the situation clearly.
@CognosSquare That's exact opposite of "eating all grain" - if at most successful years you invest = "timetravel" physical resources (or call it "energy") to the future, which might not be successful, then you actually comply to that biblical principle.
But what he told us in vid was opposite - it's not OK to invest all in good years, because we need to save something in a barn. And here's the difference - we shouldn't save _money_ - but resources bought for money, so spend all money @ bad years
By lowering taxes and raising spending during a time of economic growth, we ate all the grain, and borrowed more (from our future selves). What we did wasn't wise investment, it was merely consumption. The housing bubble, etc didn't last. That wealth was never real.
Now we are faced with the bill not only for our current consumption, but our past consumption, with interest, and we are required to pay it off when we are least equipped to do so.
@Wintermutate Look, I won't continue because I don't have time and YouTube isn't really convenient from writinf long comments.
I just want to note that there are a lot of contradictions here, even in your last statement. "The wealth was never real" - so it wasn't really a "good years" period? I know what bubble is, but how does it relate to this whole cycle concept?
And again about spending - spending _money_ - we just established it wasn't "eating grain", didn't we? Now we go back to zero.
@ArchSaur Fundamentally, the economy wasn't as good as the GDP indicated. Fundamentally it was still growing, but we helped it along by throwing gasoline on the fire. There's no contradiction at all. We spent tomorrow's resources today, and now it's tomorrow, and we're reaching a point where tomorrow isn't going to lend us any more resources, so now we've got to pay for today without the resources that we already spent.
True investment would have been taking our prosperity and investing it in education, or research, or economic infrastructure. However, that still would not have provided us with insulation from a downturn in the business cycle. In order to accomplish THAT we would have needed to raise taxes, cut spending, raise interest rates, etc. P.S.-- the method for "time travelling" resources to the future is called "saving" not "investing."
@Wintermutate That's where you are exactly wrong! Saving _money_ is not the same as saving _resources_, that's my point. Saving money is exact opposite of saving resources! Unless you only thing about your country, and thus think you can get resources for money at any time you need, but I'm talking about global economy here. There's no external source to it - you cannot print earth money and buy resources from Mars, or something like this.
@ArchSaur I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make here. Yes, money is merely an abstraction and not itself a true resource, but saving it is nonetheless saving resources. If you spend borrowed money now, you can use it to encourage people to spend their time or effort doing something they might not have done otherwise, but by doing so you're pulling them away from other activities that might have had more intrinsic value. Because you do that with debt, the implication is that
(cont'd) in the future, the people from whom you borrowed will now have even more money, which will allow them to buy future resources, which will ease their own needs. Lenders of money are loaning you their past work to do your present work with the expectation that in the future, you'll do even more of their work for them.
Of course you can't buy more resources now than what exist now, but you CAN buy more resources now than what would be available if you didn't borrow from the future.
How appropriate that he should base his argument on a work of fiction, The pharoah's dream in the story of Joseph of all things! Just goes to show that economics is not a science but a web of opinion and sophistry, and as such suffers from the same defects as the religion he draws on.
How much value is left from those savings after 7 years of inflation? If those savings were "invested" to offset the loss in purchasing power due to inflation then that would be contributing in the growth in the GDP through spending rather than saving for a down economy.
the state has no monopoly on monetary policies - those are set by national banks which are allmost all held privately - they lend governments and memebr banks money (with out collateral) - the have lisence to print/create any anount of money they want - i think they should loan at negative interest -as even if loans are defaulted on it makes no difference -they just print/create moe
Anyone whos saying "the bibles fake blah blah blah" didnt get what he's saying. He's not stating that its true or not, he's taking examples of economic writings (which are true, like he says) and gives them as examples. That cannot be debated, because its inevitable.
@HELLxYA Sadly those who were turned off by it will misinterpret your words as well. We've become so averse to anything that smacks of faith that we even reject opportunities to learn from it. Perhaps necessity will force us to learn. Peace to you
@TemporalOnline Indeed. I thought the beginning 7 years of plenty and 7 years of lean reference was spot on, but the latter ones felt unnecessary. Looking up his book, I realized that it's because his book is really about the history of economics, which was tied to religion, that he's doing this.
C'mon, don't get personal. I'm a non-believer myself and I haven't felt uncomfortable. Religion is deeply rooted into the culture - some have to fear the god to behave morally, some will behave morally without the gods help, the point is that we need some kind of rules/restrictions to make things, as he said - idiot-proof :)
@Jeridiculous Perhaps you missed the point, he was making an analogy. Later in the talk he actually made it a point to say that there was wisdom in the 'story' of Joseph and the king. (Which after hearing him explain a bronze age notion of the business cycle, was kind of hard to argue with.) He later on made the analogy that printing money and debt was akin to having the Ring of Power from Lord of the rings, surely he wasn't saying that wizards and hobbits are real. Hope this helps.
OK, three idiotic mistakes in the first two minutes. The events in chapter 32 were not a business cycle it was a government preparing for a natural disaster. Our current mess is NOT a business cycle it was grand theft and fraud in the financial sector. Fiscal policy is NOT imposing debt on other people it is how the government choses to spend money supporting economic activity. This may involve government borrowing from voluntary lender of taxation of profits or fees for service.
@kubaniski Hayek has only produced disasters like Chile and Argentina. Keyens pulled us out of the great depression. You have been fed BS by greedy people that want to excuse their rape of the economy, study the actual numbers and watch what happens to standard of living, GDP and unemployment when these policies are actually introduced. The facts are clear if you look at the hard numbers.
@miramichi30 No, a few families in Chile got very rich by selling off the countries enormous mineral and fishing resources to foreigners. The starvation and riots got so bad that the secret police had to imprison and murder tens of thousands of people and the leaders of the country were indited for crimes against humanity some executed by Chileans most exiled. General prosperity did not return to the country until a democratic government was restored and economic reforms were put in.
I swear ive learned more from watching these videos for the past couple months, then what ive been taught (and still learning) in school for the last 13 years of schooling lol
@OneSBeatz U and me both. This is the classroom of the future, bring ur notebook! Forgt the xpnsv colleges, they exist 2 perpetuate themselves. True wisdom can always be had for next to nothing! You know you've found real wisdom when you don't need a degree to understand someone. If a model is too complex to understand with a high school diploma then it really doesnt make sense! Glad to meet u!
Interesting - though what is the point of having bussiness cycles alltogether ?
As long as such cycles exist we have a dysfunctional system - why not create a system that makes sense instead - one that supports us all equally (instead of only half of the world!!!!) right here instead of enslaving us in time ?
Best to check out the Equal Money System proposal
ps - READ on equalmoney(dot)org - before responing - thanks
so forgiveness is the religious analog to a bailout.
but if we would all simply forgive ourselves, then perhaps we could end the entire debt system and then we could start again with a new system not based on sin(debt) which requires forgiveness but based on giving to each what we would like - an Equal Money System.
@cameronvcope it's just an analogy, economics evolved from philosophy, philosophy can and only works on examples, I also always take examples from Christianity, not because it ment to be so, but because it explains in plain words what I want to say. Economy is not predicated by religion, but, as an example we could use religion to predicate economy (I think best works on this topic are by Max Weber) Peace, may God be with you.
debt is sin literally because as was explained in the video, we cannot show mathematically that the debt we create will actually be equalized by paying it back in the future. Which is what we see when we look at the world economies, they are spiraling further and further into debt. we will have to forgive ourselves of our debts and each others debts if we are going to stop this spiraling.
@cameronvcope Those who are owed debt will not willingly pass up the money that is owed, and if debts are forcibly severed, then there will be no willingness or ability to loan in the future.
The reality of the situation is that we simply have to endure a much longer and deeper recession than if we had either engaged in sound economic policies, or if we had simply let "the invisible hand" take its course. There is no way to cheat the consequences of the poor decisions we have made.
yes there is no way to avoid the consequences of what we have created - though will we learn our lesson and create a new system so that as this one passes away we have a real solution that provides for all Equally, not based on debt but placing the value of money in Life itself
sorry but the men kind is not able to forgive or to trust. so a system, which is based on trust or forgivness, will not work. not today, not on earth.
a completely new system - not moneyless, but a complete redefinition of the value of money as back by Life itself. Life is what we all value, thus money is only a tool, and if used effectively can support Life if used in a way that support all Equally.
@cameronvcope I'm guessing you don't really understand this R.B.E. It's a system to optimize Science/Technology.
Help everyone in need without the worry of money holding us back...
google the venus project, it's very promising... Also a another money system to support everyone equally. Communist ? That's the only way I see it with money to be equal with everyone.
R.B.E is a purpose motive society. Money is a profit motive society.
I suggest to research and support Equal Money System that is based on the value of life and will bring dignified life for all living beings > equalmoney. org
@SuffocateJav90 Money is needed it isn't as simple as trading my 5 goats for your playstation/xbox/pc. Money denotes an imaginary value, with that imaginary value things become much simpler for trade and transactions. Through the use of this we can create a workable economic system but the problem is, is that we are very bad at managing money on a global scale. The guy in the video is saying that we need to be less greedy when we have the opportunity and save for the bad years, lessening them.
@SuffocateJav90 How would you do that? Can you please explain? It sounds to me like you are talking about barter, which is exchanging goods for other goods. Money has been invented because this system got too complicated.
I don't understand economics and the whole money system that well, but from this lecture it seems that if we just remove debts (not allow loans), we'd have a better economy and these crises wouldn't occur. At least not as much.
I would actually much rather see a world without money. It's created out of nothing, and only support the elite banks and corporations. The worst thing is this system is wasteful, and don't care about problems, because problems = chance to make more money.
@RazClaw No, we would struggle without debt, like this economist has said, in the poor times (when our harvests are not sufficient to feed us). What is bad about our system is, like ke has said, "The Ring" which is the money printing machine.
I agree with him that monetary and fiscal policy are like the one ring. Governments (and "impartial experts" such as those controlling central banks) should not have a monopoly over money; should not be able to control interest rates; and should not be able to go into debt.
It's a pity that he didn't take his one ring analogy seriously! These powers are too much for anyone to resist, so should be "destroyed" (not given to governments)... yet he says that deficit spending is legitimate.
seems like crap. economics with morality will never mix and that's good. those examples he brought up with the ancients is mostly fiction and in the case with Aristotle it was merely his musings and was never acted upon.
Amen Brother...thank you Tomáš Sedláček. Although I am sure most of our leaders, including Tim Geithner, who would say you cannot reduce our complex society to that of ancient Egypt, I believe in the ppl of this country you will find a thankful audience.
This is a little like finding your tumor denign. All we need to do now is convince our leaders to move the energy we created, and they have squandered back into the store houses, and we'll be fine. So easy? (yea, right!)
making the mistake of thinking a country is rich because they borrowed money, like many governments today
bloorwestreno 3 months ago
Man I love this guy! Such a nerd!
Sic7777 4 months ago
i'd hate to be standing right in front of this guy while he's talking. good way to get your eyes poked out.
star999nine 4 months ago
@star999nine That explains why Czech politics are accused to be blind for some topics... ;-)
Sic7777 4 months ago
What a bunch of nonsense, he talks about the business cycle as if it was just there for no apparent reason. But we live in a world of causality. The Boom causes the Bust, and something must have caused the Boom. And the cause is easy money: artificially low interest rates, government guaranteed housing credit, you name it.
It's startling how a rational minded person can't get the concept of cause and effect into his thick skull.
rustyrusky 4 months ago
@rustyrusky But he does talk about all that--more so in the GoogleTalks lecture. He gets an hour there.
ThisSentenceIsFalse 4 months ago
dumb keynesian nonsense, (you don't know a good year from a bad year)
so all they ever do is contract supplies of everything, and hoard it.
And it never seems to get put into the economy..
if any thinks it does (please show me where)
decreasing amplitude in a so called "business cycle" = FALSE SCARCITY
Wehrhaus6Television 4 months ago
I'm not saying he's not talking some sense. But his idea of solving the problems is no where near ambitious enough, to solve the problems of our market system.
Why is it that intellectuals and economers are so afraid of talking about actual change, rather than just strategies for prolonging mankinds suffering..
selvmordspilot 6 months ago
Although Jews dominate such fields as Physics, Psychology, Computer Science, Chess, etc. there is no area in which their domination is more predominant than in Economics (28 Nobel Laureates since 1970 !).
The consequence of this domination ? An economic system which is grossly unfair. Where most are losers but, where some, are spectacular winners (guess who ?). A world carrying more debt than it can ever now repay. Loss on national sovereignty & the development of a Fed on a global scale.
JSavic 7 months ago
@JSavic Marx was a Jew
roobs456 5 months ago
I love RSA
greedyvagabond 7 months ago 2
I 24yrs old I took ecnon in hs and ever knew what they were talking about, I stay updated to the news and even still only had a basic cavemanesq idea of our economic system. Also I'm a young philosopher (due to money matter self tought so far) and this video has changed my life I really understand the basics of econ now in a way thI feel I can manage my money and add energy to my enconomic life. I took notes the whole time. THANK YOU SOOO MUCH FOR THE BLESSNG :-)
greedyvagabond 7 months ago 2
brilliant
Theworldforacountry 7 months ago 2
We need Sauron.
Scientisticsoviet 7 months ago 7
economic adviser are like sports analyst... both totally useless. Unless he is a billionaire ... he is a scammer. IMO
mba2ceo 7 months ago
The reason that the finance world of today know worse than Joseph in ancient Egypt is unrestrained greed.
tinsh0es 7 months ago
he and all other people in favor of government intervetion forget one major factor : the price of each action. In order to "slow down GDP growth in the good years" and "invest " in the bad years, you need to hire a LOT of people who may be corrupted, may waste your money etc. and what for? to "decrease the amplitude" - BUT at what cost? and what bad would happen if we just left the aplitude untouched by government officials?
mindOFAlibertarian 7 months ago
@mindOFAlibertarian Slowing down GDP in the good years means in this case having a budget surplus (government collects more money than it spends). In the lean years, government could collect less money than it spends by using the surplus. No extra hiring necessary. The good idea is the help smooth out the business cycle, which will occur in any case.
service878 7 months ago
@service878 Well said.
Scientisticsoviet 6 months ago
as a bipolar, i take offense....i am no where near as crazy as most economists ;)
bmbenblog 7 months ago 3
@bmbenblog nor do we cause as much grief and / or damage!
whahas 7 months ago
I guess it's worthwhile that these smart people are thinking in these directions, it's maybe a good thing that solutions are on record
On the other hand, I can't help feeling that these ideas - otherwise brilliant - are built around the assumption that those in charge are looking for ways to make things better for the majority. I don't believe this is the case, I don't believe the evidence can any longer support this assumption, in fact if anything the exact opposite appears to be the case
tangent272 8 months ago
I love this guy's analogies!
lawchristopher 8 months ago
@lawchristopher Yeah me too. Only a true philosopher can convey a message that a 14 year old can understand especially when the message encapsulates some of the most complex statistical and stochastic measurements/evaluations. I'm gonna go read his book, he came across as a deep thinker. Glad you enjoyed it too. Peace!
Kobe29261 4 months ago
this guy is slightly mad....entitlements didn't come overnight they have been building since the the new deal
VOTE RON PAUL
asg102 8 months ago
did he say genesis ? gnite !
twistedbass15 8 months ago
Maybe we should expel the Government out the economy.
ZyV 8 months ago
I can't concentrate because he looks like a guy i did a lot of drinking with and played a lot of punk and heavy metal with. He's too cool to look like an intellectual!
erfmufn 8 months ago
The reason why people are not trusting economists as before is that they stick to the same old premises and can't see out of their own box - so starting a talk accepting business cycles as part of the world we gotta live in is not relieving at all ;)
chapulinaaa 8 months ago
@chapulinaaa Do you want physicists to give talks where they pretend that gravity doesn't exist? Business cycles or economic cycles are a well established phenomenon. If you are waiting for economists to come up with a model or a theory that doesn't discuss or at least acknowledge business cycles then you're waiting for some kind of economics that doesn't even dwell in reality.
If you are waiting for some kind of "Eureka!" moment basic economics, you'll be disappointed.
Wintermutate 8 months ago
@Wintermutate Business cycles are not like gravity, that we just gotta live with. They are the result of a terrible system, not an unbendable rule. Acknowledging they exist at the moment is necessary, treating them as ever-lasting truths is madness. Very little in the field of economics represents deep truths about how the world works. I'm waiting for the eureka moment, not sure it will come from economists at this pace...
chapulinaaa 8 months ago
@chapulinaaa Whether or not you think we need to live with them, they exist, and existed long before any economist was even looking for them. Business or economic cycles are a consequence of human behavior. It is impossible to have a useful economics discussion when you can't talk about a fundamental occurrence.
Like any human behavior, they can probably be mitigated (ironically, this is most of what Sedlacek talks about, and you still criticize), but to eliminate them completely? Doubtful
Wintermutate 8 months ago
@Wintermutate ... and you reinforce my point ;) Well, it's good to know that there are people looking through different angles, I just wish there weren't so many stuck at one... Good luck!
chapulinaaa 8 months ago
@Wintermutate U are completely right. That is actually what he wants to show by using the Pharaoh story from the bible: Cycles have been around a long time, due to nature (harvest!!!) and human psychology ...
lllorenz 8 months ago
@lllorenz We do not have a food problem in this world, we have a distribution problem.
There is enough food in this world for everyone if we all had our fair share.
Today, Money is seen as a resource, a goal, in stead of a tool.
Consumerism and Creditism are eating this world.
whahas 7 months ago
@whahas Interesting point, however, how do we solve this problem? Just take the farmers products away and, with the money we take from the millionaires, ship it to places where people are hungry? MAn this sounds good but coming from someone who obviously has a laptop and internet, this taking away riches should commence with himself ...
lllorenz 7 months ago
@whahas Man, this is not really what I meant, I just indicated that there are certain facts such as unpredictability, risk, etc. that make a cyclic motion of the economy "natural". Of course we can and should minimize this as much as possible. Just please don´t pretend is that easy, someone would already have done it, if it were ...
However, u raise an interesting point. Indeed there is much perversity in the world, when a country exports food, and yet part of its population hunger
lllorenz 7 months ago
@Wintermutate Science has proven that gravity is a natural phenomenon, where the business cycle is cultural. It's human design.
Furthermore, the correlation between the creation of Money as Debt through Credit and the Business Cycle is striking.
They are a consequence of human behavior, not or nature, and thus it can be changed.
Gravity is created by the magnetic field of e.g. the Earth.
What creates the business cycle?
What would happen if we had a stable money supply?
whahas 7 months ago
@whahas When you say "stable money supply" do you mean that no one lends or borrows money, that the money supply is tied directly to a resource like gold, or what?
In any case, business cycles would still exist, though without credit and lending, they might be less pronounced. People are still going to make decisions about when and how to spend and invest, and human instinct is to spend when times are good and save when times are lean. Which is fundamentally what creates business cycles.
Wintermutate 7 months ago
@Wintermutate Good question. What I mean with a 'stable money supply' is an economy where the amount of money is related to the amount of goods of services provided in that economy. No, I don't mean linked to gold, money shouldn't have intrinsic value, only exchange value / buying power.
Money is in essence a legal agreement and that's one of the reasons it shouldn't be centralized at all.
Historically, of course, it is a system enforced on the population. Do you agree on that?
whahas 7 months ago
@Wintermutate In any case Monetary Reform is necessary, because why do we need Government debt?
I'd rather have a government that can print money without debt and have inflation then a government that borrows money into existence, creating inflation ánd the need for interest payments!
Although Government spending money into existence has worked in the past, the danger of politicians abusing that power is also great, especially if they can use it to win votes...
whahas 7 months ago
@Wintermutate ... Therefore I state that Austrian and Keynesian models both have some credibility.
The Keynesian model as stated in the presentation can only work without government debt, because deficit spending would increase the government debt, unless it's all paid from savings, which is unlikely because of the interest payments due on the government debt.
Austrian has some points in that Central banks make banks function as kartel-like.
Luckily for us, there is a new model that...
whahas 7 months ago
Make these louder please!
Danmega2 8 months ago 4
Agreed... An RSAnimate is a great idea...
chadsowash 8 months ago
How does this differ from the Ron Paul "no government, no FED - the market sorts itself out quickly somehow" philosophy? It does not seem that his way plans ahead or do any precautionary actions.
They both agree about the printing of new money though.
CognosSquare 8 months ago
@CognosSquare
It's quite different from Ron Paul. Ron Paul believes essentially that you should allow the market to sort itself out, which on a macro level is better than our recent behavior, but not nearly as useful as if we had simply done the right thing. Government policy during the 2000s *could* have put us in line for a very painless and short recession, but instead we have the worst situation that most living people have ever seen.
Wintermutate 8 months ago
(cont'd)
ALSO, keep in mind that being completely hands off to the point where you're not regulating pollution or quashing monopolies, etc has some very serious long term consequences to society as a whole. Just because GDP is growing at a healthy clip doesn't mean you're not living in a polluted wasteland or that all wealth isn't being diverted into the hands of a few people who control the levers of government and industry. There is more than one way to borrow from the future...
Wintermutate 8 months ago
@Wintermutate very interesting.
CognosSquare 8 months ago
Capitalists quantifying economies by good by and evil is like advocating that shark should feed themselves humanely. All that has ever matter to capitalism is the conditions that guarantees the reproduction of production/consumption.
dysesthesiaAethiopi1 8 months ago
@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 To the extent that a government or any other higher level institution is doing to dabble in manipulating the economy, they should be doing so with the aim of blunting the business cycle. The market doesn't care if growth swings wildly up and and down, but human beings need stability. Whatever policies exist should seek to deliver that stability.
Wintermutate 8 months ago
So Bush ruined the world economy.
mikeye9 8 months ago
@mikeye9 Actually, Bush just ruined OUR economy. The rest of the world ruined its own economy.
This current downturn is either going to be deeper or longer lasting than it would have been if government had never been involved, and an order of magnitude worse than it would have ever been with sound policies in place.
We shot all our bullets inflating the economic bubble of the 2000's, and now we've got to deal with a downturn and a bunch of debt that we shouldn't even have, at the same time.
Wintermutate 8 months ago
@mikeye9 Also, it's a bit of a simplification to blame it all on Bush. Sure, he started the expensive wars, and sure, he wanted the unnecessary tax cuts, but Congress went along, and the Federal Reserve kept interest rates low even in the face of an obvious bubble economy.
Our policy was 180 degrees reversed from where it ought to have been. I believe that the events of 9/11 and the sapping costs of health care caused us to treat our economy like it was in recession when it wasn't.
Wintermutate 8 months ago
@mikeye9 no for example Sweden, where Im living is doing grea. Our economy is growing at a steady and good pace. Because of doing what this guy says, at the core level. Transparency also was a big thing, to be able to see the situation clearly.
CognosSquare 8 months ago
Let's see the tea baggers put that in the constitution, rather then just slam on the breaks for the democrats.
choobie12 8 months ago
Comment removed
choobie12 8 months ago
Investing all money is not same as eating all grain at good year.
This talk has a lot of questionable parts.
ArchSaur 8 months ago
@ArchSaur investing is "timetravelling energy into the future", i think he would say.
CognosSquare 8 months ago
@CognosSquare That's exact opposite of "eating all grain" - if at most successful years you invest = "timetravel" physical resources (or call it "energy") to the future, which might not be successful, then you actually comply to that biblical principle.
But what he told us in vid was opposite - it's not OK to invest all in good years, because we need to save something in a barn. And here's the difference - we shouldn't save _money_ - but resources bought for money, so spend all money @ bad years
ArchSaur 8 months ago
@ArchSaur
By lowering taxes and raising spending during a time of economic growth, we ate all the grain, and borrowed more (from our future selves). What we did wasn't wise investment, it was merely consumption. The housing bubble, etc didn't last. That wealth was never real.
Now we are faced with the bill not only for our current consumption, but our past consumption, with interest, and we are required to pay it off when we are least equipped to do so.
Wintermutate 8 months ago
@Wintermutate Look, I won't continue because I don't have time and YouTube isn't really convenient from writinf long comments.
I just want to note that there are a lot of contradictions here, even in your last statement. "The wealth was never real" - so it wasn't really a "good years" period? I know what bubble is, but how does it relate to this whole cycle concept?
And again about spending - spending _money_ - we just established it wasn't "eating grain", didn't we? Now we go back to zero.
ArchSaur 8 months ago
@ArchSaur Fundamentally, the economy wasn't as good as the GDP indicated. Fundamentally it was still growing, but we helped it along by throwing gasoline on the fire. There's no contradiction at all. We spent tomorrow's resources today, and now it's tomorrow, and we're reaching a point where tomorrow isn't going to lend us any more resources, so now we've got to pay for today without the resources that we already spent.
Wintermutate 8 months ago
@ArchSaur (cont'd)
True investment would have been taking our prosperity and investing it in education, or research, or economic infrastructure. However, that still would not have provided us with insulation from a downturn in the business cycle. In order to accomplish THAT we would have needed to raise taxes, cut spending, raise interest rates, etc. P.S.-- the method for "time travelling" resources to the future is called "saving" not "investing."
Wintermutate 8 months ago
@Wintermutate That's where you are exactly wrong! Saving _money_ is not the same as saving _resources_, that's my point. Saving money is exact opposite of saving resources! Unless you only thing about your country, and thus think you can get resources for money at any time you need, but I'm talking about global economy here. There's no external source to it - you cannot print earth money and buy resources from Mars, or something like this.
ArchSaur 8 months ago
@ArchSaur I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make here. Yes, money is merely an abstraction and not itself a true resource, but saving it is nonetheless saving resources. If you spend borrowed money now, you can use it to encourage people to spend their time or effort doing something they might not have done otherwise, but by doing so you're pulling them away from other activities that might have had more intrinsic value. Because you do that with debt, the implication is that
Wintermutate 8 months ago
(cont'd) in the future, the people from whom you borrowed will now have even more money, which will allow them to buy future resources, which will ease their own needs. Lenders of money are loaning you their past work to do your present work with the expectation that in the future, you'll do even more of their work for them.
Of course you can't buy more resources now than what exist now, but you CAN buy more resources now than what would be available if you didn't borrow from the future.
Wintermutate 8 months ago
How appropriate that he should base his argument on a work of fiction, The pharoah's dream in the story of Joseph of all things! Just goes to show that economics is not a science but a web of opinion and sophistry, and as such suffers from the same defects as the religion he draws on.
colourmegone 8 months ago
How much value is left from those savings after 7 years of inflation? If those savings were "invested" to offset the loss in purchasing power due to inflation then that would be contributing in the growth in the GDP through spending rather than saving for a down economy.
manilaenglish 8 months ago
man is constantly tipping balances with his inclinations and counterfit ambitions, yet he is losing to his own rigged game (modern economy).
xjustamem0ryx 8 months ago
Google: The venus project or Resource based economy. INB4 its communism, do your research, our capatilist corporate system does not work.
superluminalthought 8 months ago
the state has no monopoly on monetary policies - those are set by national banks which are allmost all held privately - they lend governments and memebr banks money (with out collateral) - the have lisence to print/create any anount of money they want - i think they should loan at negative interest -as even if loans are defaulted on it makes no difference -they just print/create moe
MrIzzyDizzy 8 months ago
Anyone whos saying "the bibles fake blah blah blah" didnt get what he's saying. He's not stating that its true or not, he's taking examples of economic writings (which are true, like he says) and gives them as examples. That cannot be debated, because its inevitable.
HELLxYA 8 months ago
@HELLxYA Sadly those who were turned off by it will misinterpret your words as well. We've become so averse to anything that smacks of faith that we even reject opportunities to learn from it. Perhaps necessity will force us to learn. Peace to you
Kobe29261 4 months ago
RBE.. Resource Based Economy FTW!!!
kaxitaksi 8 months ago 4
I liked the talk overall, but I felt uncomfortable with the constant religious references.
TemporalOnline 8 months ago 3
@TemporalOnline Indeed. I thought the beginning 7 years of plenty and 7 years of lean reference was spot on, but the latter ones felt unnecessary. Looking up his book, I realized that it's because his book is really about the history of economics, which was tied to religion, that he's doing this.
swiftset 8 months ago
@TemporalOnline
C'mon, don't get personal. I'm a non-believer myself and I haven't felt uncomfortable. Religion is deeply rooted into the culture - some have to fear the god to behave morally, some will behave morally without the gods help, the point is that we need some kind of rules/restrictions to make things, as he said - idiot-proof :)
hols2000 8 months ago
I stopped watching when he talked about the Bible as if it were a history book
Jeridiculous 8 months ago 3
@Jeridiculous Perhaps you missed the point, he was making an analogy. Later in the talk he actually made it a point to say that there was wisdom in the 'story' of Joseph and the king. (Which after hearing him explain a bronze age notion of the business cycle, was kind of hard to argue with.) He later on made the analogy that printing money and debt was akin to having the Ring of Power from Lord of the rings, surely he wasn't saying that wizards and hobbits are real. Hope this helps.
Drixicon 7 months ago
R.B.E( Resource Based economy)
google it, it's the best ideal practical solution!!!
DoNotLaughAtMe 8 months ago 3
OK, three idiotic mistakes in the first two minutes. The events in chapter 32 were not a business cycle it was a government preparing for a natural disaster. Our current mess is NOT a business cycle it was grand theft and fraud in the financial sector. Fiscal policy is NOT imposing debt on other people it is how the government choses to spend money supporting economic activity. This may involve government borrowing from voluntary lender of taxation of profits or fees for service.
michalchik 8 months ago
Resource-Based Economyyy!!!
BenGenio 8 months ago 2
Unfortunately, a cartoon of this scenario would look suspicously like a dartboard.
alphamongrel 8 months ago
Keynes was a terrible economist, Hayek FTW!!!
kubaniski 8 months ago
@kubaniski Hayek has only produced disasters like Chile and Argentina. Keyens pulled us out of the great depression. You have been fed BS by greedy people that want to excuse their rape of the economy, study the actual numbers and watch what happens to standard of living, GDP and unemployment when these policies are actually introduced. The facts are clear if you look at the hard numbers.
michalchik 8 months ago
@michalchik Chile a disaster? Chile was lifted out of poverty by free market economics.
miramichi30 8 months ago
@miramichi30 No, a few families in Chile got very rich by selling off the countries enormous mineral and fishing resources to foreigners. The starvation and riots got so bad that the secret police had to imprison and murder tens of thousands of people and the leaders of the country were indited for crimes against humanity some executed by Chileans most exiled. General prosperity did not return to the country until a democratic government was restored and economic reforms were put in.
michalchik 7 months ago
Let's face it, the dollar is The Ring in this example, and the US is not resisting it very well.
SLRist 8 months ago
Thanks for reminding us how clueless economic PRiesthood is.
Out of all farcical jobs most of us have in order to justify broken economic theories, these clowns are champions and favorite of the Court.
MarkoKraguljac 8 months ago
I swear ive learned more from watching these videos for the past couple months, then what ive been taught (and still learning) in school for the last 13 years of schooling lol
OneSBeatz 8 months ago
@OneSBeatz U and me both. This is the classroom of the future, bring ur notebook! Forgt the xpnsv colleges, they exist 2 perpetuate themselves. True wisdom can always be had for next to nothing! You know you've found real wisdom when you don't need a degree to understand someone. If a model is too complex to understand with a high school diploma then it really doesnt make sense! Glad to meet u!
Kobe29261 4 months ago
Something that's not clear is how do we get out of the current situation? We could return to the old model, but that's a long term solution.
Alpinex105 8 months ago
Does this guy not understand that the bible is fiction?
judoyodan 8 months ago 3
Interesting - though what is the point of having bussiness cycles alltogether ?
As long as such cycles exist we have a dysfunctional system - why not create a system that makes sense instead - one that supports us all equally (instead of only half of the world!!!!) right here instead of enslaving us in time ?
Best to check out the Equal Money System proposal
ps - READ on equalmoney(dot)org - before responing - thanks
GabrielZamoraMoreno 8 months ago 8
so forgiveness is the religious analog to a bailout.
but if we would all simply forgive ourselves, then perhaps we could end the entire debt system and then we could start again with a new system not based on sin(debt) which requires forgiveness but based on giving to each what we would like - an Equal Money System.
cameronvcope 8 months ago 52
This has been flagged as spam show
@cameronvcope
isn't that what it means when Jesus said to 'love your neighbor as yourself" ?
cameronvcope 8 months ago 3
@cameronvcope - I agree!
clk211bu 8 months ago
@cameronvcope it's just an analogy, economics evolved from philosophy, philosophy can and only works on examples, I also always take examples from Christianity, not because it ment to be so, but because it explains in plain words what I want to say. Economy is not predicated by religion, but, as an example we could use religion to predicate economy (I think best works on this topic are by Max Weber) Peace, may God be with you.
neordinarus 8 months ago
@neordinarus
debt is sin literally because as was explained in the video, we cannot show mathematically that the debt we create will actually be equalized by paying it back in the future. Which is what we see when we look at the world economies, they are spiraling further and further into debt. we will have to forgive ourselves of our debts and each others debts if we are going to stop this spiraling.
cameronvcope 8 months ago 2
@cameronvcope Those who are owed debt will not willingly pass up the money that is owed, and if debts are forcibly severed, then there will be no willingness or ability to loan in the future.
The reality of the situation is that we simply have to endure a much longer and deeper recession than if we had either engaged in sound economic policies, or if we had simply let "the invisible hand" take its course. There is no way to cheat the consequences of the poor decisions we have made.
Wintermutate 8 months ago
@Wintermutate
yes there is no way to avoid the consequences of what we have created - though will we learn our lesson and create a new system so that as this one passes away we have a real solution that provides for all Equally, not based on debt but placing the value of money in Life itself
cameronvcope 8 months ago
@cameronvcope
sorry but the men kind is not able to forgive or to trust. so a system, which is based on trust or forgivness, will not work. not today, not on earth.
lunainq 8 months ago
@lunainq
start with yourself first - we each create this world through what we accept and allow within ourselves.
if you do not trust yourself first and live accordingly, how can you ever trust another?
cameronvcope 8 months ago
@cameronvcope So inside the box.. or an moneyless system like the Resource Based Economy ( R.B.E)
DoNotLaughAtMe 8 months ago
@DoNotLaughAtMe
a completely new system - not moneyless, but a complete redefinition of the value of money as back by Life itself. Life is what we all value, thus money is only a tool, and if used effectively can support Life if used in a way that support all Equally.
cameronvcope 8 months ago
@cameronvcope I'm guessing you don't really understand this R.B.E. It's a system to optimize Science/Technology.
Help everyone in need without the worry of money holding us back...
google the venus project, it's very promising... Also a another money system to support everyone equally. Communist ? That's the only way I see it with money to be equal with everyone.
R.B.E is a purpose motive society. Money is a profit motive society.
Purpose motive>Profit motive
DoNotLaughAtMe 8 months ago
economics and history should be mandatory study for everyone, especially economists and politicians.
cruiscinlan 8 months ago
I suggest to research and support Equal Money System that is based on the value of life and will bring dignified life for all living beings > equalmoney. org
ValentinRozman 8 months ago
just need to find the drunk guy who has my precious and sober him up
millingtonjp 8 months ago
We should base our economy on tangible, real natural resources. NOT MONEY
SuffocateJav90 8 months ago
@SuffocateJav90 Money is needed it isn't as simple as trading my 5 goats for your playstation/xbox/pc. Money denotes an imaginary value, with that imaginary value things become much simpler for trade and transactions. Through the use of this we can create a workable economic system but the problem is, is that we are very bad at managing money on a global scale. The guy in the video is saying that we need to be less greedy when we have the opportunity and save for the bad years, lessening them.
Zk1f3r 8 months ago
@SuffocateJav90 How would you do that? Can you please explain? It sounds to me like you are talking about barter, which is exchanging goods for other goods. Money has been invented because this system got too complicated.
CraazeyBustard 8 months ago
@CraazeyBustard watch?v=4mkRFCtl2MI
sorry I'm a bit out of time here.
SuffocateJav90 8 months ago
I don't understand economics and the whole money system that well, but from this lecture it seems that if we just remove debts (not allow loans), we'd have a better economy and these crises wouldn't occur. At least not as much.
I would actually much rather see a world without money. It's created out of nothing, and only support the elite banks and corporations. The worst thing is this system is wasteful, and don't care about problems, because problems = chance to make more money.
RazClaw 8 months ago
@RazClaw No, we would struggle without debt, like this economist has said, in the poor times (when our harvests are not sufficient to feed us). What is bad about our system is, like ke has said, "The Ring" which is the money printing machine.
CraazeyBustard 8 months ago
you need that cartoonist to do one up for this guy
mike6459 8 months ago 100
It's Friday, let us all time travel tonight!
gargoylesama 8 months ago
I agree with him that monetary and fiscal policy are like the one ring. Governments (and "impartial experts" such as those controlling central banks) should not have a monopoly over money; should not be able to control interest rates; and should not be able to go into debt.
It's a pity that he didn't take his one ring analogy seriously! These powers are too much for anyone to resist, so should be "destroyed" (not given to governments)... yet he says that deficit spending is legitimate.
indledbap 8 months ago
The Fable of the Ants and the Grasshopper.
gargoylesama 8 months ago
interesting talk
2plus2make4 8 months ago
seems like crap. economics with morality will never mix and that's good. those examples he brought up with the ancients is mostly fiction and in the case with Aristotle it was merely his musings and was never acted upon.
neurel111 8 months ago
Amen Brother...thank you Tomáš Sedláček. Although I am sure most of our leaders, including Tim Geithner, who would say you cannot reduce our complex society to that of ancient Egypt, I believe in the ppl of this country you will find a thankful audience.
This is a little like finding your tumor denign. All we need to do now is convince our leaders to move the energy we created, and they have squandered back into the store houses, and we'll be fine. So easy? (yea, right!)
pjamesbda 8 months ago
What is this? $10,000 on the decor and $10 on the presentation equipment!
Get him a projector!
GreatGungHolio 8 months ago
OMG I HAVE NEVER BEEN FIRST .
rawrrdolll 8 months ago
@rawrrdolll you have sullied this comments section now
GreatGungHolio 8 months ago 2
@GreatGungHolio @chrisdrakekaka I just got excited. jeezzzz
rawrrdolll 8 months ago
@rawrrdolll Not even the RSA is safe from "first" hahah
chrisdrakekaka 8 months ago