Maybe this little thumbsucker needs to pull his head out of this Ayn Rand Fantasy Books and read something other than Uncle Milty Freedman or that Austrian quasi-fascist guy.
Amazing how anyone can take these little creeps seriously.
Hey, go live on a concrete slab somewhere in the ocean, okay? The rest of us would love it if you left. Hey, what happens when the workers on the concrete slab revolt? You're going to be very badly outnumbered...
Here we go again; The "Dumb Kid" with his "How The World Works" fantasy land La La videos, and his worship of make believe.
According to this little miscreant, everything in our society would be fine if we let corporations do whatever they want; if we let the rich gobble up ever last penny; and it our government did nothing but run courts and prisons.
I had these opinions too---I really did---back when I was 14. Then I grew up. I suggest this little creep do the same.
@bnannylv from reading your post, it looks like you haven't grown; learn to write. take a few classes in economics before you start talking. the economy is not a zero-sum gain but, i'm sure you wouldn't know what that means.
most of everything the government invested in have sank like all the solar companies, education, and the housing (fannie mae and freddie mac). so, other stuff should the government invest in? over-paid union contractors to build roads (which lobbies for money to)?
@deathlogic1 Yeah, no doubt, just like our interstate highway system, ARAPANET and the Internet that followed from it, the scientific studies informing of us of things that no private company would ever want us to learn, etc.
Without "the government", I would not have been able to write this. Nor would I have ever attended college or started my own business---which I did in 1993. And when dirtbags don't pay me, "the government" is what provides me with a non-violent way to get my money back
2) funding research and subsiding industries is not one of the same.
3) government funded studies is not without biases.
4) there are private companies that research things like underwriters laboratories, consumer reports, and insurance company (they have a interest in mitigating risk).
5) why cant you write this? youtube is a private company, you own the pc....
6) you can pay for college, nothing really stopping you.
why do we need the middleman of government to build our better future? the cartoon characters in that town could just tell the wheelbarrow guy to hit the road and pool their money together on their own
One thing you missed out was that she claimed externalities don't show up on balance sheets, when they actually do. If you own a nuclear plan, there is a liability (can't remember what its called) to consider the probably risk of a meltdown and the costs should it occur.
let's just show our children the story of stuff, story of cap and trade, story of bottled water, story of cosmetics and all her other f-cking stories... that way they don't learn anything... all leftist propaganda, brainwashing children. my only hope is that they sleep through this video. are we in the soviet union? the REAL story of broke: we are broke!! no money for green energy or any energy!!
Annie seriously misjudges how much green energy costs if she thinks 5 billion can hit two million people. Maybe, but it wouldn't be nearly enough to make a noticeable difference in lives or electric bills of anyone. BP, by themselves spends more than that per year in green energy, and most people don't even know about it.
Sorry I did not get this. Your argument is that the deficit problem is not created by the rich because even if we confiscated all the resources of the top 400 rich men America would still be left with 300 billion dollars deficit out of the 1.6 trillion?. In other words 0.00016% (400/250.000.000) of the American population is responsible for 81% of the deficit (1.3/1.6 per 100), while 99.99984% (100%-0.00016) would be accounted for 19% of the deficit (300 billions/1.6 trillion)?
The targeted tax cuts she's describing-- such as the $40Billion worth of 'targeted tax cuts' Republicans gave to the petroleum industry last year, most of which for a 100% deduction on special equipment for 'fracking' -- ARE nothing less than public subsidization of private investment. These subsides also shift a greater share of the tax burden to everyone else. ALL the benefit is returned to private investors, who realize greater profits on the products these companies sell in the world market.
@AlaskaFinal Do you know that Christianity is correct? The world around us reveals that G-d DOES exist, and the historical evidence reveals that Jesus Christ really did come to this earth and there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ really did physically rise from the dead. Jesus is coming again and the signs of the end times that were foretold in the Bible are coming to pass.
@HowTheWorldWorks She says: "A subsidy is a giveaway to give some companies a lift over others". You say "A subsidy is actually taking money via taxation from one company (or person) and giving it to another company (or person).
Giving some companies money ("a giveaway") (and taking it away from others) obviously gives them a competitive advatage = "a lift over others".
@HowTheWorldWorks liberals love making words have such broad definitions that the words become meaningless. You should see what they are doing to the word 'rape'.
I was passing my old elementary school recently. It just so happened that they were having a fire drill. It looked like there were more teachers than students. I wish I had my camera with me.
When I watch these critiques, I always expect a lot of cursing and a sanctimonious attitude...
but then I realize that that's all I got from Bill Maher, Michael Moore, the Amazing Atheist, etc.
Great video Lee, keep showing these misguided liberals that you don't have to be a condescending bully (or have an accompanying cartoon like the other videos you critique) to inform people.
I'm simply amazed! This screwball lady's videos are being shown to kids in schools?!? Oh my gosh, we're doomed! This lady actually said there's plenty of money to go around. Is she living in China, I'm pretty sure I was hearing English. My kids will never attend a public school, I simply will not allow them to be brainwashed by complete loads of leftist dogma that is apparently now the only thing public school teaches these days. Shouldn't she be hung for lying or something, or put to sleep?
There are a few good points, but overall this critique is just claiming that all subsidies are inherently bad without demonstrating why. I hear that argument a lot, but fail to understand why subsidizing certain industries, like renewable fuels, would be so terrible. I just don't buy that subsidies are what causes lobbying and corrupt politicians, as the video states. And saying Private Property Rights would "protect the environment" is ignoring the reality of large-scale industrial pollution
@henryblume "I hear that argument a lot, but fail to understand why subsidizing certain industries, like renewable fuels, would be so terrible."
Because then companies are no longer getting their money based on consumer choice. You then transfer the choice of what individuals want to do with their money to politicians, who then hand out the spoils to the highest bidder. Politicians become corrupt because they have something to sell. There is a clear motive for it.
@henryblume "And saying Private Property Rights would "protect the environment" is ignoring the reality of large-scale industrial pollution"
How? If a factory is polluting the air of a city, then they need to be held accountable. This problem of industrial pollution started when the government stopped defending our private property rights in the late 1900s. You don't need these boards of bureaucrats to make new rules every day.
@henryblume And what's funny is that even they aren't effective with their thousand page documents on how your business needs to be run. They're just stifling competition in markets with this problem by getting legislation that supports a certain business (Usually the larger ones who can get in good with board members) and making the cost of starting a business too high to be feasible/profitable in any manner.
@henryblume Also, there is no need to prop up renewable energy. Transition into new eras of technology happens without government intervention. If an energy source that is more efficient is found then it will be used because it will be the cheapest on the market. Currently oil/natural are the main fuels to fill that void. That will change when those fuels become more scarce and more costly in turn. Consumers and producers will move to new fuels once this happens.
@TheMoriMaster Well, before they do get to costly and scarce, the earth will already be gone.
I guess you dont believe in global warming, and i wont even start debating that, but that is the most inportant reason there is to invest in green energy.
@TheMoriMaster Secondly, the only thing that is costly when it comes to most of the renewable energy sources are building the infrastructure for it, after that youl be : 1) have this done and be ready when the oil are used up 2) save money every year considering the costs of maintenance and materials that comes with the fossil fules and (continuing)
Im not saying subsidues is the way to do it, but it sure is worth it to invest in it, it would also set a GREAT example on China as well as pressure them to follow with you.
Keep doing these videos, HowTheWorldWorks! I love the constructive critique you do instead of all-out flame wars that happen in other videos.
I agree with Annie though in the sense that the US doesn't need to protect against thast non-existent threat they always invest in or spending in wars with political or economic motivations (especially oil) that have no end. For example just as the Iraq War ended (which in the first place started only because the US wanted Iraq's oil) Libya started.
Waiting for someone to make the "The spending doesn't work because it's NOT ENOUGH and the right people aren't in charge of this central planning!" rebuttal.
Dont you know education spending has one purpose much like the video you critiqued. ITS CALLED INDOCTRINATION.Great video by the way. This is why I think we need a libertarian president, end entitlements+end special interest+end government intervention domestically and abroad+end foreign aid = end government spending. Heres my take on education if someone doesn't want to go to school than dont force them. More than half my high school class failed to graduate and the majority of that dropouts
She wants REAL subsidies for her pet projects and doesn't want to allow "evil oil" to write off the same expenses that every single manufacturing business in America does. THERE ARE NO FUCKING OIL SUBSIDIES ! Ethanol on the other hand, gets 60 BILLION a year in tax payer money in a real subsidy. But then she probably approves of that.
This was better than your Story of Stuff critique, and you raised some good issues, but I still think there are few problems with your response:
(1) No, more money does not necessarily equal better students, but money could be put into researching effective ways to spend grant money.
(2) If subsidies never happen, surely the mega-corps will continuously crush the smaller innovative companies until the world gets screwed up (big oil trying to stop renewables)?
Again you say that the spending on the disputed areas are more then military spending and yet you don't state or show how much military spending was or is projected to be. Education spending hasn't worked because we spend it wrong.
The list at 4:59 has Medicaid highlighted not military spending of any kind. So how does that have anything to do with what she said? This question is not rhetorical, because I really hope there is an answer.
I don't know where that chart came from at 2:44 but it's a lie. I went to a magnet school that was little know and my class sizes weren't that small in middle school. My first grade class was about 15 students. Just so you know, I was in school at the time that this chart covers. Also I don't just base this on personal experience. My class sizes in middle and elementary school were below published state average at the time. I want to say the national average too. but I can not fully remember.
her most basic flaw is the idea that subsidies create jobs. In order to subsidize one sector of the economy capital must be confiscated from another sector. This means the companies who were taxed now no longer have the revenue with which to expand their production base and hire new employees. Even if the government transferred the wealth with 100% efficiency the best you could expect is a net gain/loss of zero. Of course we know better bureaucrats dont work for free.
also, saying they can "give" 6 million more people a college education... jesus! we already have an economy where there are 10 qualified applicants for every job opening, not counting college grads that have never worked a day in their life but have that 50 thousand dollar piece of paper that says they can do it. all that's going to happen from having more college grads is make jobs like burger flipper at mcdonalds require a BS to even be considered.
god i hate it when these liberal wackos start crying about educational spending. college is just a big business now days. look at the cost of tuition then look at the quality of the education you get even in the "serious" classes. hell, i spent an entire semester playing flash games on my laptop and made an A in the classes i was in, never opened a book, never wrote a note. its a joke. they should have just given me a diploma and a bill. would have saved a lot of time
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
When you say you're "against all subsidies" you give the game away. This is just another libertarian dog-and-pony show. The first source... you guessed it... is a libertarian magazine Second source... a libertarian think tank. It might be worth a watch if you had used independent sources. You did not. You limited your sources to a reflect a political ideology. Your "debunking" process is bogus. Even you user-name is misleading. It should be "HowTheLibertarianWorldWorks."
@sheltercrow Dude, the first website source was "the Hill," I cited the CBO twice, and gpoaccess. Moreover, you said nothing that was actually wrong about anything I said after you just blatantly lied about my sources.
@HowTheWorldWorks What's funny is the Reason source compiled data found from Govt. sources (NCES for example) and made a chart out of that data. This isn't data derived from Reason's own research group.
Hey. I was wondering about the statement you made about how the amount of money we spend on education has little to no effect on our test scores.(at least I thought you claimed this.) The sources are really slow on my pc and I was wondering if the scores that were compared were SAT scores. If they were, I believe that that is kind of misleading seeing as a greater percentage of students take that test instead of the "elite" potentially contributing to flatlining test scores.
@HowTheWorldWorks You do realize that only investing money into something (like education) doesn't guarantee that it's going to improve. You need to change other factors that are working against that thing you are investing in. For example, you first need to improve the quality of teaching, then you need to raise conciousness in children of how important is for them to study and lots of more factors. Simply giving money to education won't fix those problems. Different approach is needed.
@cw3le Funding for the Department of Education has doubled in the last 10 years. I haven't seen any real improvement to warrant the extra investment. You are very correct, throwing money at a problem doesn't fix the problem.
@sheltercrow Name an independent source, just one. There is no such thing. He even uses the Gov. data, which is no better or worse, but surely not Libertarian in nature. Just because someone has a political ideology doesn't mean their facts are wrong. Whether someone is a Socialist or Libertarian two plus two still equals four.
Don't mind Lee Doren and his propaghanda talk. You're so right.
Clearly, people who don't want control over every aspect of our life cannot be trusted. They're so obviously motivated by their own self-interest, that every fact or idea they convey is automatically incorrect.
What we need are more big government, Republicrat Demopublican party apparatchiks, to tell you why you should trust them with more power and more of your money. They have much less reason to lie.
He caught her on the definition of "subsidy" but big deal, it doesn't make her points invalid.
He asks "What does she want to do with this money?". When she gives her answer, he doesn't actually address what she says. He just dismissively says "no more subsidies".
He commented that she didn't address many aspects of the budget, and that's fair enough, she focused mostly on military spending.
@Jinsun202 - You missed the point when he said no more subsidies. He meant no more picking winners and losers. She's just against her special interests being chosen as losers. She's still for picking winners and losers, inanely. Also, the fact is that even when her interests are chosen as winners, many still manage to fail, and her suggestion is inanely to throw more cash at the problem. What is the definition of insanity?
"I don't agree with subsidies of any kind for any company". That's a rather asinine and sweeping statement. What about socially necessary services which are needed to fight against social exclusion? Such as subsidies for bus companies to run services or routes for disabled, elderly, or students or people that live in sparsely populated or isolated areas?
Private property rights are not a good way to protect the environment because they only protect people who are able to file a lawsuit showing a direct link between a company's action and damage to their life or property. They do not protect future generations, animals. people who can't afford to sue, or people affected by events that certain practices make more likely, but do not directly cause.
There are many problems that are killing us. But a large part of the problem is trully Obamacare. He promised us two things. 1. That it would add a dime to our deficit. 2. That we'd have 48 hours to look it over online before he signed it into office.
But what really happened? 1. It cost an initial 500 billion in the first year, and subsequent years have cost over 1 & 1/2 trillion!
2. He signed it into law less than 24 hours after saying we'd have 48 hours to look it over online.
It's because the government keeps trying to provide things they shouldn't be like education, clean environment, etc. that we're broke. Education is handled on a state, city and county level. Not a federal level.
Subsidies are wrong. But there is a difference between subsidies and private military contracts. The US military signing a contract or agreement with a private corporation to provide a resource or build something for them, isn't bad at all. It's actually beneficial to all. Because the military having a private company do that, strengthens the economy. And the military gets what they need to do their job. Plus, it saves a lot of tax dollars in the long run.
@HowTheWorldWorks Who protects the private property rights that are suppose to protect the environment? The government, and you are going to need a large government entity at that, if you want any real environmental justice.
Dude your video is horrendous. You respond to everything she says with "no subsidies no subsidies no subsidies". You say the govt caused "most of those pollution problems to begin with". Such as? This woman would destroy you in a debate.
...when they were all flooded out for the dam's existence. Now with water being such a beneficial resource, you would think they'd say "build more, it creates a lake for the wildlife and more and more can live there because there's water there to support large numbers!" But no. They moan and complain until they get what they want. Which ultimately comes down to mankind's demise, because we won't be able to progress!!! Most of them seem to be hypocrites.
How is it that people like Leonard believe that oil will bring the ruin of mankind, but it will at the same time, NEVER sustain us?! It's an oxymoron! It's either one, or the other! Besides, the cleanest, most massive power source, does more good that bad for the environment! Hydro-power dams! They are a brilliant idea, primarily used constructed during the 20th century. That environmentalists shot down years later, saying that they were cause wildlife to lose their homes...
It's not the animals I care about when building a Dam, it's the pollution caused during construction and the displacement of HUMANS after the creation of it. Look at the Three Gorges Dam. It can provide clean power to 1/3 of China yet about a million villagers were displaced and the Yangtze was incredibly polluted for quite a while and still is.
Yeah, if it was just a couple species of animals, build away. But it's not that simple.
@DarkZerkerX The pollution created by a few years of construction of any given dam is a very small price to pay compared to the immense amount of pollution that would be created by building a coal or nuclear power plant. The Hoover Dam for example took 3 years I believe? To construct. It's expected to last up to 500 years! Rather impressive clean yet renewable, energy. As for displacement of people. Mankind acclimates very quickly to changes of environment. So what's the problem?
@realworldbycj Yes, but you also forget the cost and the villagers, many of which have lived on that land for many generations (in the case of Asia and Europe). I'm not against Hydro-power. I think it's the way of the future at the moment. However, we cannot ignore the costs of hydro-electric dams.
On a sort of related note, kind of fun fact. Did you know that the water behind the Three Gorges Dam is 175 meters deep? Kind of awesome.
@DarkZerkerX The cost is yet another small price tag for "clean energy" which is what environmentalists want, is it not? Plus, I have personally lived in a 3rd world country where the people at times didn't want to be relocated, but it's the the greater good. So why not? Why is it that we are searching for something negative in all this, when the greater good far out weighs the bad? It's as though we don't want something unless it does literally, nothing but good for everyone.
@DarkZerkerX Now sure, that's the ultimate good. But Thomas Edison is famous for saying "I didn't fail one thousand times. I found one thousand ways how NOT to make a light bulb. I only need to find ONE way to make it work!" Yet the only thing we can see in our exploration for clear renewable energy that benefits ALL, is the negative! Why?!
Why do we always have to be such pessimists? Can't we find the good in something that's not perfect?
@realworldbycj I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. I look at the bad and the good. I hate looking at only the good because the bad will still be there.
@DarkZerkerX Look, we both know that the only realistic way to save mankind from destruction is to not do anything that helps us progress. Because the technology we need to have in order to have clean renewable energy that does nothing bad to anyone or anything, simply does not exist. We do the best we can with what we have. But we can't complain too much about things we cannot change. It's like complaining about whether conditions when there's nothing we can do to change them.
@realworldbycj We still need to be aware of whatever side effects that hydroelectric or any sort of other fuel source has. If the side effect involves the native people, they should be well informed and allowed to make that decision. You don't give somebody a pill with only the labels of what it does and not any of the side effects. And you certainly don't force that pill down somebody else's throat without their INFORMED consent.
@DarkZerkerX I understand your point. But your analogy doesn't make any sense because in one example you're saying that pills can hard you physically, and in the other you're saying that dams do the same. When that isn't accurate. A dam is a structure constructed on a site of land. Yet, your body is ingesting something unknown. The analogy hold no validity. Sorry. Plus, they were all informed years ago that they would have to relocate. Again, small sacrifice for greater good.
@realworldbycj Again, I understand your point but there's still sacrifice. Nobody should be booted off their own land without their willingness to do so. They should be given an informed decision with the pros and cons before decision rather than forcibly booted off, even if it was years in advance.
@DarkZerkerX Ok, understood, I agree for the most part. But what if they're literally the only thing holding construction back? I am from a town/city where no one really likes change. It has truly out grown it's self here. Traffic is terrible, and due partly to that, the economy here is struggling. I myself didn't want to leave my home town, let alone the house I grew up in when the time came. But I had to accept that it was for the greater good of my family.
...But I just also don't think that forcing everyone to have solar powered homes and getting rid of all the oil companies is the answer either! Contrary to her belief, NOT all Americans want to put solar power in as their soul power source. Because people who RENT can't do that. And not all landlords are willing to install them. Plus, I believe that if you wanna "go green", go for it! I support that. But don't force me to just because YOU believe it's the right thing.
I agree that subsidies are not the answer. Leonard is as you put in Story of Stuff Critique, is indoctrinating what SHE wants to see happen. That in a sense is the corruption she is talking about. Example: She says that we need to stop giving teaching false hoods. Yet, every time she makes a new video, it tells little kids HER point of view. Rather than putting the actual unbiased facts into play.
Now, I don't think that all the bailouts that Bush and Obama gave, were the right thing to do...
1. I hate critics. It's the cheapest and least creative way to get famous.
2. He misses the point, like he's doing it on purpose, by showing unrelated facts or facts that don't actually contradict the original message but represented as such.
3. Nobody's perfect, and, we need a big picture to see the whole problem, not just some data that tells us - "This is not possible/wrong/there's no money for it" - that's mind-shrinking.
@MykolaKindrat 1. I guess you hate yourself since your critiquing a critique.
2. What did you think the point of her video was?
3. "we need a big picture to see the whole problem, not just some data that tells us" You admit that you would rather believe an indoctrinating video than facts.
See, the problem with people is that they automatically assume that more money invested in something means better something. For example, if I invest more money into buying more Street Fighter 4 guide books, most people will automatically assume that it improve your Street Fighter game skills. The truth is that buying more guide books will not improve your skills. But real incentives, such as tournaments with cash prizes, will.
okay, no more subsidies, yes we get it, good idea. what you should have critiqued is when she mentions subsidising 'renewable energy and energy efficiency projects', because that is exactly what the government has just attempted and sadly utterly failed to do: Solyndra and 'Retrofit Ramp Up', costing a combined $1b and yielding practically no results.
also, when you say 'many of those environmental problems where caused by government to begin with' (10:45), what exactly are you talking about?
I don't like the assumption of job creation in her video. She talks about creating 100,000 new jobs but what about the old jobs that are destroyed? What would the net job creation look like, and honestly until this was implemented how would we really know?
@31guitar I'm not arguing government efficiency, but rather the video's assertion that somehow buying up quantities of land could prevent air or water pollutions that spread beyond property boundaries.
4:20 As you mention 700 billion is not over 50%, but there is more funds dedicated to war/military interests not included in that 700 as described in "Tax Dollars At War" on youtube.
Why are there so many Keynsian buffoons in the media? Most people I know in real life are Austrian, if they have any economic opinion at all. Keynsian economics is like believing that the earth is flat, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. How could any self-respecting individual believe that junk?
to manipulate the rest of society. If you don't believe me, I think you should take up a few political science and history courses at a respected institution of higher learning, and then post non-bias videos challenging Annie Leonard and the rest of human civilization who actually want future generations of human beings and other species of organisms to grow up in a decent unpolluted world
@casualdissent I will take your advice on the works of Bastiat, but I never said I was against government regulation. I believe the state plays a pivotal in the management of our nation. No one can argue the amount of changes American has experienced for the better. I am suggesting that we need to continue the changes for the benefit of the majority of the human race and not the minority. We should not be naive or give in to the interest of a few who look to exploit the masses so-
@tar2185 they can maintain their life styles. I am not jealous of what another person posses, I could honestly careless. I am more so concerned about the state our society, and the earth maybe in by the time my daughter's generation takes control.
@tar2185 When you say that you're against moneyed elites and pollution, then I agree. When you say that the cure is more government control, then I disagree. I'm against the problems you identify, but I don't think that the government can prevent them. Corporations, for example, are enabled and protected by state controls, and it was the state that first created their legal entity; more controls and regulations empower them, not us.
@beefflavouredbolloks This reminds me of when Sun Chips rolled out their new fully recyclable bag, and recalled it shortly thereafter because the material was too loud. It's like people want to be green and all that, but when it comes to actually affecting their lives, other things are more important.
RSA animate has also gone against the grain and according to you "how the world works." Why don't you deconstruct their videos and challenge them on their views? The truth is you can't because they are brilliant professors who have actually deconstructed "how the world works," and actually present some similar basic arguments that Ms. Leonard presents. The truth is the world we live in is schematically created by men with certain interest. There interest are realized because they figure out how-
Most of what RSAnimate uploads has little to do with ideology, but every now and then you can find them making the usual arguments for state-centric politics, basically in the form of identifying a problem with the contemporary world, and then implying that the solution is necessarily more government involvement, with no effort made at connecting the dots. That's a tool of the reform crowd in general, who think that all of society's problems have to be solved by the state.
You say class sizes are decreasing? Sorry to go against the statistic analysis you are using to support your video, but class sizes have actually increased in New York City! The reason America has fallen behind in the education race is the fact that we have to teach to test, not teach to create the next great thinkers. If you don't believe me on that comment, I challenge you to sit in a New York City classroom for a school year and then do an overall study on the education system also text books
I want to know, when was education the job of the fed to pay for? I always knew it to be the job of state and local governments to fund education. I am still waiting for somebody to get it right.
Thank you so much Lee, I am a 17 year old in high school (I actually turn 18 in about 15 minutes). I was writing a research paper in government class and I used many of the sources you posted links to. I discovered you about a year ago. You converted me from republican to Libertarian. You are awesome.
you're arguments are horrible.. what do you want to do finally? let the stock traders earn a lot of money and continuing financing the oil companies'? you're born in the wrong century
@FindThisWorld You act as if trader is a "four letter word." Traders enable millions to work by allowing a company to go public, and if the company does well, people invest in it, making the traders money, which causes more people to invest in the company, which raises more capital for the company, which in turn allows more people to be hired. If your idea of traders is Wall Street (the movie) then you have a LOT to learn, lol.
This quote demonstrates which of the two systems is more inclusive and pluralistic "One difference between libertarianism and socialism is that a socialist society can't tolerate groups of people practicing freedom, but a libertarian society can comfortably allow people to choose voluntary socialism." -David Boaz
You contradict yourself. If you want a better environment (which you seem to want), than subsidies can help companies that DON'T hurt the environment.
@thewholekeyboard "Then subsidies can help companies that DON'T hurt the environment."
And you trust politicians to decide which are the "good companies" and which ones are the "bad companies" by taking money out of your pocket and giving it to whom they want? Really?
She might be exaggerating by claiming that we aren't broke and there's "plenty of money", but she's making a valid point that a lot of money could be saved and directed for right causes instead of being "donated" to corporate interests that don't benefit the society. The only ideological differences between you and her is that she supports subsidies for things that benefit the society. If subsidies and socialism are so bad, then how would you explain the success of other countires, e.g. China?
The concept of the EPA (i.e. - Environmental Protection Agency) was supposed to insure citizens protection from blatant harmful business practices. That branch of the government has been, consistantly, on the fiscal budget cut list...the failure to the EPA to perform it's function is self-evident. The source of the deficiet you keep speaking of was derived from derivitives established by banking industries, who turned to hold the tax-payers accountable. Do you support corporate personhood? O.o??
@EvolutionNeverHappen 'Communism = murder and evil'? Pure communism has no government. At all. Socialism does, and that's what Marx advocated as a step towards communism—but of course, the nations that try it always get stuck on socialism. TL;DR: Stalinism ≠ communism.
@LeGrugkbdst 1 Abolition of property. 2 A heavy progressive/graduated income tax. 3 Abolishment of the right of inheritance. 4 confiscation of property of all emigrants/rebels. 5 Centralization of credit in the hands of the STATE, by means of a national bank with STATE capital and an exclusive MONOPOLY. 6 Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the STATE. 7 extensions of factories/instruments of production owned by the STATE.
@LeGrugkbdst Do these sound like they can be maintained without a government? Can a govt. willing to deprive people of their belongings through coercion and violence be benevolent enough not only to redistribute them equitably, but to also disavow its own claim to power in the end? Many of the atrocities perpetrated by the soviets and chinese were in accordance with the C-manifesto.
LEE: Good video, funny how Annie goes back to the leftist well again, acting as if federal, state & local $ for education have been cut. They have not, they are many times the rate of inflation, class sizes are much smaller, yet test scores are flat. She doesn't focus on that because it undermines her big-govt paradigm. I'm also skeptical of govt ventures into "clean"energy. Efficiency mandates on appliances largely failed & ethanol is a complete failure. Good job my friend!
Funny, I found this critique to be nonsense. Yes, both democrats and republicans are equal idiots because both believe that _government_ will solve their problems one way or another. The republicans believe there should be no government except by corporation - lawless stupidity that forgets history. And, while the wealth of the upper 1 % is nothing compared to the deficit, their decision-making authority and influence is absolutely disproportionate, thus rendering all subsequent arguments moot.
Mommy's little boy does "Pretend Economics".
Maybe this little thumbsucker needs to pull his head out of this Ayn Rand Fantasy Books and read something other than Uncle Milty Freedman or that Austrian quasi-fascist guy.
Amazing how anyone can take these little creeps seriously.
Hey, go live on a concrete slab somewhere in the ocean, okay? The rest of us would love it if you left. Hey, what happens when the workers on the concrete slab revolt? You're going to be very badly outnumbered...
bnannylv 1 day ago
Here we go again; The "Dumb Kid" with his "How The World Works" fantasy land La La videos, and his worship of make believe.
According to this little miscreant, everything in our society would be fine if we let corporations do whatever they want; if we let the rich gobble up ever last penny; and it our government did nothing but run courts and prisons.
I had these opinions too---I really did---back when I was 14. Then I grew up. I suggest this little creep do the same.
bnannylv 1 day ago
@bnannylv from reading your post, it looks like you haven't grown; learn to write. take a few classes in economics before you start talking. the economy is not a zero-sum gain but, i'm sure you wouldn't know what that means.
most of everything the government invested in have sank like all the solar companies, education, and the housing (fannie mae and freddie mac). so, other stuff should the government invest in? over-paid union contractors to build roads (which lobbies for money to)?
deathlogic1 1 day ago
@deathlogic1 Yeah, no doubt, just like our interstate highway system, ARAPANET and the Internet that followed from it, the scientific studies informing of us of things that no private company would ever want us to learn, etc.
Without "the government", I would not have been able to write this. Nor would I have ever attended college or started my own business---which I did in 1993. And when dirtbags don't pay me, "the government" is what provides me with a non-violent way to get my money back
bnannylv 1 day ago
@bnannylv
1) no one really owns the internet.
2) funding research and subsiding industries is not one of the same.
3) government funded studies is not without biases.
4) there are private companies that research things like underwriters laboratories, consumer reports, and insurance company (they have a interest in mitigating risk).
5) why cant you write this? youtube is a private company, you own the pc....
6) you can pay for college, nothing really stopping you.
deathlogic1 12 hours ago
@bnannylv
7) why do you need a government to start a business? trade was conducted before there was government.
8) enforcement of contract and personal protection was the main reason for people to give up some rights to form a government (john hobbs)
deathlogic1 12 hours ago
why do we need the middleman of government to build our better future? the cartoon characters in that town could just tell the wheelbarrow guy to hit the road and pool their money together on their own
bowserhsu 2 days ago
i think its funny that everyone with a youtube channel thinks they know better then the next guy... including this one.
codybrucewilliams 3 days ago
One thing you missed out was that she claimed externalities don't show up on balance sheets, when they actually do. If you own a nuclear plan, there is a liability (can't remember what its called) to consider the probably risk of a meltdown and the costs should it occur.
Trepur349 5 days ago
Annie Leonard the retard... I must quote the gangsters would say FORGETABOUTIT!
AbsolutelyMadeinUSA 5 days ago in playlist Liked videos
let's just show our children the story of stuff, story of cap and trade, story of bottled water, story of cosmetics and all her other f-cking stories... that way they don't learn anything... all leftist propaganda, brainwashing children. my only hope is that they sleep through this video. are we in the soviet union? the REAL story of broke: we are broke!! no money for green energy or any energy!!
AbsolutelyMadeinUSA 5 days ago in playlist Liked videos
Annie seriously misjudges how much green energy costs if she thinks 5 billion can hit two million people. Maybe, but it wouldn't be nearly enough to make a noticeable difference in lives or electric bills of anyone. BP, by themselves spends more than that per year in green energy, and most people don't even know about it.
TheAJOlding 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sorry I did not get this. Your argument is that the deficit problem is not created by the rich because even if we confiscated all the resources of the top 400 rich men America would still be left with 300 billion dollars deficit out of the 1.6 trillion?. In other words 0.00016% (400/250.000.000) of the American population is responsible for 81% of the deficit (1.3/1.6 per 100), while 99.99984% (100%-0.00016) would be accounted for 19% of the deficit (300 billions/1.6 trillion)?
elpablonicolas 1 week ago
Comment removed
elpablonicolas 1 week ago
The targeted tax cuts she's describing-- such as the $40Billion worth of 'targeted tax cuts' Republicans gave to the petroleum industry last year, most of which for a 100% deduction on special equipment for 'fracking' -- ARE nothing less than public subsidization of private investment. These subsides also shift a greater share of the tax burden to everyone else. ALL the benefit is returned to private investors, who realize greater profits on the products these companies sell in the world market.
PostSurgeOperative 1 week ago
I fucking hate this woman. I would love to see her run over by a solar powered Prius.
stebecool 1 week ago
@stebecool
I don't get it, are you trying to kill her, or just give her a mild rubber burn?
AlaskaFinal 1 week ago
make a good video yourself then.
eatbachelorchow 2 weeks ago
Spills were due to the Government? Dude... come on!
djkenny 2 weeks ago
fuck subsidies.. fuck foreign aid.. fuck bail outs... fuck war... fuck tax loop holes.. :P
88roro11 2 weeks ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks
12:54 SOLYNDRA
ALFTUBE50 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
ALFTUBE50 2 weeks ago
Solyndra was a good investment if ur the GOV.
1. Waste of Money
2. Tax payers get no return
3. Obama gets no heat from the press
TyZi187 2 weeks ago
@TyZi187
4. don't forget, no new jobs.
AlaskaFinal 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlaskaFinal Do you know that Christianity is correct? The world around us reveals that G-d DOES exist, and the historical evidence reveals that Jesus Christ really did come to this earth and there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ really did physically rise from the dead. Jesus is coming again and the signs of the end times that were foretold in the Bible are coming to pass.
marionetemanJ 1 week ago
Your definition of subsidy is intentionally narrow.
maemorri 3 weeks ago
@maemorri No genius. It is the actual definition of a subsidy. The only one that makes any sense and is descriptive.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 weeks ago 6
@HowTheWorldWorks She says: "A subsidy is a giveaway to give some companies a lift over others". You say "A subsidy is actually taking money via taxation from one company (or person) and giving it to another company (or person).
Giving some companies money ("a giveaway") (and taking it away from others) obviously gives them a competitive advatage = "a lift over others".
Don't see any difference
orionweissnix 2 weeks ago
@HowTheWorldWorks liberals love making words have such broad definitions that the words become meaningless. You should see what they are doing to the word 'rape'.
anime1973 5 days ago
Nice job.
I was passing my old elementary school recently. It just so happened that they were having a fire drill. It looked like there were more teachers than students. I wish I had my camera with me.
tommag82 3 weeks ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks
lol Epa makes this country great. Fantastic quote.
TheDerpable 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When I watch these critiques, I always expect a lot of cursing and a sanctimonious attitude...
but then I realize that that's all I got from Bill Maher, Michael Moore, the Amazing Atheist, etc.
Great video Lee, keep showing these misguided liberals that you don't have to be a condescending bully (or have an accompanying cartoon like the other videos you critique) to inform people.
All you need to be, is right.
Falstad007 4 weeks ago in playlist HowTheWorldWorks Critiques
Comment removed
Falstad007 4 weeks ago in playlist HowTheWorldWorks Critiques
I'm simply amazed! This screwball lady's videos are being shown to kids in schools?!? Oh my gosh, we're doomed! This lady actually said there's plenty of money to go around. Is she living in China, I'm pretty sure I was hearing English. My kids will never attend a public school, I simply will not allow them to be brainwashed by complete loads of leftist dogma that is apparently now the only thing public school teaches these days. Shouldn't she be hung for lying or something, or put to sleep?
df0x1977 4 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
There are a few good points, but overall this critique is just claiming that all subsidies are inherently bad without demonstrating why. I hear that argument a lot, but fail to understand why subsidizing certain industries, like renewable fuels, would be so terrible. I just don't buy that subsidies are what causes lobbying and corrupt politicians, as the video states. And saying Private Property Rights would "protect the environment" is ignoring the reality of large-scale industrial pollution
henryblume 1 month ago
@henryblume "I hear that argument a lot, but fail to understand why subsidizing certain industries, like renewable fuels, would be so terrible."
Because then companies are no longer getting their money based on consumer choice. You then transfer the choice of what individuals want to do with their money to politicians, who then hand out the spoils to the highest bidder. Politicians become corrupt because they have something to sell. There is a clear motive for it.
TheMoriMaster 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@henryblume "And saying Private Property Rights would "protect the environment" is ignoring the reality of large-scale industrial pollution"
How? If a factory is polluting the air of a city, then they need to be held accountable. This problem of industrial pollution started when the government stopped defending our private property rights in the late 1900s. You don't need these boards of bureaucrats to make new rules every day.
TheMoriMaster 1 month ago
@henryblume And what's funny is that even they aren't effective with their thousand page documents on how your business needs to be run. They're just stifling competition in markets with this problem by getting legislation that supports a certain business (Usually the larger ones who can get in good with board members) and making the cost of starting a business too high to be feasible/profitable in any manner.
TheMoriMaster 1 month ago
@henryblume Also, there is no need to prop up renewable energy. Transition into new eras of technology happens without government intervention. If an energy source that is more efficient is found then it will be used because it will be the cheapest on the market. Currently oil/natural are the main fuels to fill that void. That will change when those fuels become more scarce and more costly in turn. Consumers and producers will move to new fuels once this happens.
TheMoriMaster 1 month ago
@TheMoriMaster so we burn all the oil as quickly possible, simply because it is the easiest way for the rich to get richer?
totaltotalmonkey 3 weeks ago
@totaltotalmonkey the rich get richer and the poor get richer... faster than the rich do. That's capitalism.
quantumG 2 weeks ago in playlist HowTheWorldWorks Critiques
@TheMoriMaster Well, before they do get to costly and scarce, the earth will already be gone.
I guess you dont believe in global warming, and i wont even start debating that, but that is the most inportant reason there is to invest in green energy.
Porkusido 3 weeks ago
@TheMoriMaster Secondly, the only thing that is costly when it comes to most of the renewable energy sources are building the infrastructure for it, after that youl be : 1) have this done and be ready when the oil are used up 2) save money every year considering the costs of maintenance and materials that comes with the fossil fules and (continuing)
Porkusido 3 weeks ago
@TheMoriMaster 3) (cont) regain massive respect internationally for being environmentaly friendly.
Im not saying subsidues is the way to do it, but it sure is worth it to invest in it, it would also set a GREAT example on China as well as pressure them to follow with you.
Porkusido 3 weeks ago
Keep doing these videos, HowTheWorldWorks! I love the constructive critique you do instead of all-out flame wars that happen in other videos.
I agree with Annie though in the sense that the US doesn't need to protect against thast non-existent threat they always invest in or spending in wars with political or economic motivations (especially oil) that have no end. For example just as the Iraq War ended (which in the first place started only because the US wanted Iraq's oil) Libya started.
PantherPictures 1 month ago
"the epa" LMFAO
retownsend 1 month ago
Waiting for someone to make the "The spending doesn't work because it's NOT ENOUGH and the right people aren't in charge of this central planning!" rebuttal.
kmelfina 1 month ago
if you tied her arms to her side she couldn't talk.
1WEEBLE1 1 month ago
Dont you know education spending has one purpose much like the video you critiqued. ITS CALLED INDOCTRINATION.Great video by the way. This is why I think we need a libertarian president, end entitlements+end special interest+end government intervention domestically and abroad+end foreign aid = end government spending. Heres my take on education if someone doesn't want to go to school than dont force them. More than half my high school class failed to graduate and the majority of that dropouts
DrunkenGodMode 1 month ago
She wants REAL subsidies for her pet projects and doesn't want to allow "evil oil" to write off the same expenses that every single manufacturing business in America does. THERE ARE NO FUCKING OIL SUBSIDIES ! Ethanol on the other hand, gets 60 BILLION a year in tax payer money in a real subsidy. But then she probably approves of that.
TheThunderduck 1 month ago
This was better than your Story of Stuff critique, and you raised some good issues, but I still think there are few problems with your response:
(1) No, more money does not necessarily equal better students, but money could be put into researching effective ways to spend grant money.
(2) If subsidies never happen, surely the mega-corps will continuously crush the smaller innovative companies until the world gets screwed up (big oil trying to stop renewables)?
Pe0ads 1 month ago
@Pe0ads mega corps are already crushing small companies due to lobbying and regulations.
DustedDom 1 month ago
Why don't you just make your own video instead of "critiquing" someone else? I would love to critique your video.
Fknhrny 1 month ago
@Fknhrny becuse the truth needs to be told.
aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot 1 month ago in playlist HowTheWorldWorks Critiques
#OWS for kindergarden.
MeibukanMaster 1 month ago in playlist HowTheWorldWorks Critiques
Again you say that the spending on the disputed areas are more then military spending and yet you don't state or show how much military spending was or is projected to be. Education spending hasn't worked because we spend it wrong.
rebirtheternal 1 month ago
The list at 4:59 has Medicaid highlighted not military spending of any kind. So how does that have anything to do with what she said? This question is not rhetorical, because I really hope there is an answer.
rebirtheternal 1 month ago
Comment removed
rebirtheternal 1 month ago
I don't know where that chart came from at 2:44 but it's a lie. I went to a magnet school that was little know and my class sizes weren't that small in middle school. My first grade class was about 15 students. Just so you know, I was in school at the time that this chart covers. Also I don't just base this on personal experience. My class sizes in middle and elementary school were below published state average at the time. I want to say the national average too. but I can not fully remember.
rebirtheternal 1 month ago
@rebirtheternal You are an idiot
TheWhatupsun 1 month ago
her most basic flaw is the idea that subsidies create jobs. In order to subsidize one sector of the economy capital must be confiscated from another sector. This means the companies who were taxed now no longer have the revenue with which to expand their production base and hire new employees. Even if the government transferred the wealth with 100% efficiency the best you could expect is a net gain/loss of zero. Of course we know better bureaucrats dont work for free.
xcvsdxvsx 1 month ago
also, saying they can "give" 6 million more people a college education... jesus! we already have an economy where there are 10 qualified applicants for every job opening, not counting college grads that have never worked a day in their life but have that 50 thousand dollar piece of paper that says they can do it. all that's going to happen from having more college grads is make jobs like burger flipper at mcdonalds require a BS to even be considered.
fakiir 1 month ago
god i hate it when these liberal wackos start crying about educational spending. college is just a big business now days. look at the cost of tuition then look at the quality of the education you get even in the "serious" classes. hell, i spent an entire semester playing flash games on my laptop and made an A in the classes i was in, never opened a book, never wrote a note. its a joke. they should have just given me a diploma and a bill. would have saved a lot of time
fakiir 1 month ago
annie leonard is a major wack job!
thrashdouche21 1 month ago
I'm getting this odd feeling Lee is against subsidies...
shatwood 1 month ago
Maybe there is a communist nation who could welcome Annie Leonard to inspire idealism.
spunkitydoda 1 month ago
Lee Doren, do you have a website or something? What books do you recommend to read? I read Thomas Sowell's book, Basic Economics. It was awesome.
TinoForever 1 month ago
It makes me cringe that I used to believe these kinds of 'good will' videos in my early 20s, and that some people still believe them as adults.
Thanks for researching this stuff, Lee. You're doing a great job.
LibertyDownUnder 1 month ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
When you say you're "against all subsidies" you give the game away. This is just another libertarian dog-and-pony show. The first source... you guessed it... is a libertarian magazine Second source... a libertarian think tank. It might be worth a watch if you had used independent sources. You did not. You limited your sources to a reflect a political ideology. Your "debunking" process is bogus. Even you user-name is misleading. It should be "HowTheLibertarianWorldWorks."
sheltercrow 1 month ago
@sheltercrow Dude, the first website source was "the Hill," I cited the CBO twice, and gpoaccess. Moreover, you said nothing that was actually wrong about anything I said after you just blatantly lied about my sources.
HowTheWorldWorks 1 month ago 43
@HowTheWorldWorks What's funny is the Reason source compiled data found from Govt. sources (NCES for example) and made a chart out of that data. This isn't data derived from Reason's own research group.
Draanor 1 month ago
@HowTheWorldWorks
Hey. I was wondering about the statement you made about how the amount of money we spend on education has little to no effect on our test scores.(at least I thought you claimed this.) The sources are really slow on my pc and I was wondering if the scores that were compared were SAT scores. If they were, I believe that that is kind of misleading seeing as a greater percentage of students take that test instead of the "elite" potentially contributing to flatlining test scores.
MsCriticism 1 month ago in playlist More videos from HowTheWorldWorks
@HowTheWorldWorks You do realize that only investing money into something (like education) doesn't guarantee that it's going to improve. You need to change other factors that are working against that thing you are investing in. For example, you first need to improve the quality of teaching, then you need to raise conciousness in children of how important is for them to study and lots of more factors. Simply giving money to education won't fix those problems. Different approach is needed.
cw3le 3 weeks ago
@cw3le Funding for the Department of Education has doubled in the last 10 years. I haven't seen any real improvement to warrant the extra investment. You are very correct, throwing money at a problem doesn't fix the problem.
HumbleWillis 2 weeks ago
@sheltercrow Name an independent source, just one. There is no such thing. He even uses the Gov. data, which is no better or worse, but surely not Libertarian in nature. Just because someone has a political ideology doesn't mean their facts are wrong. Whether someone is a Socialist or Libertarian two plus two still equals four.
KayamaTakeru 1 month ago
@sheltercrow How about posting an argument rather than a mere ad hominem attack?
MrHarrytoor 1 month ago
@sheltercrow Liberal punks, fuck off.
CoolCidd1981 1 month ago
@sheltercrow STFU you lying piece of left liberal democrat shit.
TWSceptic 1 month ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks
@sheltercrow
Don't mind Lee Doren and his propaghanda talk. You're so right.
Clearly, people who don't want control over every aspect of our life cannot be trusted. They're so obviously motivated by their own self-interest, that every fact or idea they convey is automatically incorrect.
What we need are more big government, Republicrat Demopublican party apparatchiks, to tell you why you should trust them with more power and more of your money. They have much less reason to lie.
PanzerDivisionBOM 1 week ago
Dear Annie is a bit of a looney.
AkaiTsukiShimitsu 1 month ago
I like the fact that her example of a good subsidy is a guy with a solar panel, just reminds me of Solyndra.
BillyJoe1305 1 month ago 9
He caught her on the definition of "subsidy" but big deal, it doesn't make her points invalid.
He asks "What does she want to do with this money?". When she gives her answer, he doesn't actually address what she says. He just dismissively says "no more subsidies".
He commented that she didn't address many aspects of the budget, and that's fair enough, she focused mostly on military spending.
Jinsun202 1 month ago
@Jinsun202 - You missed the point when he said no more subsidies. He meant no more picking winners and losers. She's just against her special interests being chosen as losers. She's still for picking winners and losers, inanely. Also, the fact is that even when her interests are chosen as winners, many still manage to fail, and her suggestion is inanely to throw more cash at the problem. What is the definition of insanity?
Slipknotyk06 1 month ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks 2
"I don't agree with subsidies of any kind for any company". That's a rather asinine and sweeping statement. What about socially necessary services which are needed to fight against social exclusion? Such as subsidies for bus companies to run services or routes for disabled, elderly, or students or people that live in sparsely populated or isolated areas?
Jinsun202 1 month ago
Private property rights are not a good way to protect the environment because they only protect people who are able to file a lawsuit showing a direct link between a company's action and damage to their life or property. They do not protect future generations, animals. people who can't afford to sue, or people affected by events that certain practices make more likely, but do not directly cause.
dipositroniumhydride 1 month ago
This guy is an idiot. I gave him a shot to make since and he failed..
chullin25 1 month ago
Forgive me, I messed up the spelling in that last comment. I meant to say "That it wouldn't" not "That it would." Apologies!
realworldbycj 2 months ago
There are many problems that are killing us. But a large part of the problem is trully Obamacare. He promised us two things. 1. That it would add a dime to our deficit. 2. That we'd have 48 hours to look it over online before he signed it into office.
But what really happened? 1. It cost an initial 500 billion in the first year, and subsequent years have cost over 1 & 1/2 trillion!
2. He signed it into law less than 24 hours after saying we'd have 48 hours to look it over online.
realworldbycj 2 months ago
It's because the government keeps trying to provide things they shouldn't be like education, clean environment, etc. that we're broke. Education is handled on a state, city and county level. Not a federal level.
realworldbycj 2 months ago
Subsidies are wrong. But there is a difference between subsidies and private military contracts. The US military signing a contract or agreement with a private corporation to provide a resource or build something for them, isn't bad at all. It's actually beneficial to all. Because the military having a private company do that, strengthens the economy. And the military gets what they need to do their job. Plus, it saves a lot of tax dollars in the long run.
realworldbycj 2 months ago
@HowTheWorldWorks Who protects the private property rights that are suppose to protect the environment? The government, and you are going to need a large government entity at that, if you want any real environmental justice.
pgdevil 2 months ago
Dude your video is horrendous. You respond to everything she says with "no subsidies no subsidies no subsidies". You say the govt caused "most of those pollution problems to begin with". Such as? This woman would destroy you in a debate.
acemma25 2 months ago
As always, an honest, idiot-exposing critique. Keep up the good work man!
09jake12 2 months ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks 35
Comment removed
09jake12 2 months ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks
Comment removed
09jake12 2 months ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks
You're missing the critique on "The Story of Bottled Water"...
fraanz1706 2 months ago
...when they were all flooded out for the dam's existence. Now with water being such a beneficial resource, you would think they'd say "build more, it creates a lake for the wildlife and more and more can live there because there's water there to support large numbers!" But no. They moan and complain until they get what they want. Which ultimately comes down to mankind's demise, because we won't be able to progress!!! Most of them seem to be hypocrites.
realworldbycj 2 months ago
How is it that people like Leonard believe that oil will bring the ruin of mankind, but it will at the same time, NEVER sustain us?! It's an oxymoron! It's either one, or the other! Besides, the cleanest, most massive power source, does more good that bad for the environment! Hydro-power dams! They are a brilliant idea, primarily used constructed during the 20th century. That environmentalists shot down years later, saying that they were cause wildlife to lose their homes...
realworldbycj 2 months ago
@realworldbycj
It's not the animals I care about when building a Dam, it's the pollution caused during construction and the displacement of HUMANS after the creation of it. Look at the Three Gorges Dam. It can provide clean power to 1/3 of China yet about a million villagers were displaced and the Yangtze was incredibly polluted for quite a while and still is.
Yeah, if it was just a couple species of animals, build away. But it's not that simple.
DarkZerkerX 2 months ago
@DarkZerkerX The pollution created by a few years of construction of any given dam is a very small price to pay compared to the immense amount of pollution that would be created by building a coal or nuclear power plant. The Hoover Dam for example took 3 years I believe? To construct. It's expected to last up to 500 years! Rather impressive clean yet renewable, energy. As for displacement of people. Mankind acclimates very quickly to changes of environment. So what's the problem?
realworldbycj 2 months ago
@realworldbycj Yes, but you also forget the cost and the villagers, many of which have lived on that land for many generations (in the case of Asia and Europe). I'm not against Hydro-power. I think it's the way of the future at the moment. However, we cannot ignore the costs of hydro-electric dams.
On a sort of related note, kind of fun fact. Did you know that the water behind the Three Gorges Dam is 175 meters deep? Kind of awesome.
DarkZerkerX 2 months ago
@DarkZerkerX The cost is yet another small price tag for "clean energy" which is what environmentalists want, is it not? Plus, I have personally lived in a 3rd world country where the people at times didn't want to be relocated, but it's the the greater good. So why not? Why is it that we are searching for something negative in all this, when the greater good far out weighs the bad? It's as though we don't want something unless it does literally, nothing but good for everyone.
realworldbycj 2 months ago
@realworldbycj
The people should have a say in it. If the majority of those who will be relocated say it's fine, then have at it. But if not, no right to do so.
DarkZerkerX 2 months ago
@DarkZerkerX Now sure, that's the ultimate good. But Thomas Edison is famous for saying "I didn't fail one thousand times. I found one thousand ways how NOT to make a light bulb. I only need to find ONE way to make it work!" Yet the only thing we can see in our exploration for clear renewable energy that benefits ALL, is the negative! Why?!
Why do we always have to be such pessimists? Can't we find the good in something that's not perfect?
realworldbycj 2 months ago
@realworldbycj I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. I look at the bad and the good. I hate looking at only the good because the bad will still be there.
DarkZerkerX 2 months ago
@DarkZerkerX Look, we both know that the only realistic way to save mankind from destruction is to not do anything that helps us progress. Because the technology we need to have in order to have clean renewable energy that does nothing bad to anyone or anything, simply does not exist. We do the best we can with what we have. But we can't complain too much about things we cannot change. It's like complaining about whether conditions when there's nothing we can do to change them.
realworldbycj 2 months ago
@realworldbycj We still need to be aware of whatever side effects that hydroelectric or any sort of other fuel source has. If the side effect involves the native people, they should be well informed and allowed to make that decision. You don't give somebody a pill with only the labels of what it does and not any of the side effects. And you certainly don't force that pill down somebody else's throat without their INFORMED consent.
DarkZerkerX 2 months ago
@DarkZerkerX I understand your point. But your analogy doesn't make any sense because in one example you're saying that pills can hard you physically, and in the other you're saying that dams do the same. When that isn't accurate. A dam is a structure constructed on a site of land. Yet, your body is ingesting something unknown. The analogy hold no validity. Sorry. Plus, they were all informed years ago that they would have to relocate. Again, small sacrifice for greater good.
realworldbycj 2 months ago
@realworldbycj Again, I understand your point but there's still sacrifice. Nobody should be booted off their own land without their willingness to do so. They should be given an informed decision with the pros and cons before decision rather than forcibly booted off, even if it was years in advance.
DarkZerkerX 2 months ago
@DarkZerkerX Ok, understood, I agree for the most part. But what if they're literally the only thing holding construction back? I am from a town/city where no one really likes change. It has truly out grown it's self here. Traffic is terrible, and due partly to that, the economy here is struggling. I myself didn't want to leave my home town, let alone the house I grew up in when the time came. But I had to accept that it was for the greater good of my family.
realworldbycj 2 months ago
...But I just also don't think that forcing everyone to have solar powered homes and getting rid of all the oil companies is the answer either! Contrary to her belief, NOT all Americans want to put solar power in as their soul power source. Because people who RENT can't do that. And not all landlords are willing to install them. Plus, I believe that if you wanna "go green", go for it! I support that. But don't force me to just because YOU believe it's the right thing.
realworldbycj 2 months ago
I agree that subsidies are not the answer. Leonard is as you put in Story of Stuff Critique, is indoctrinating what SHE wants to see happen. That in a sense is the corruption she is talking about. Example: She says that we need to stop giving teaching false hoods. Yet, every time she makes a new video, it tells little kids HER point of view. Rather than putting the actual unbiased facts into play.
Now, I don't think that all the bailouts that Bush and Obama gave, were the right thing to do...
realworldbycj 2 months ago
If I recall correctly, you said she agreed in front of all those people but your attempts to set up a debate with her after the fact were futile.
DaDestroyer1986 2 months ago
1. I hate critics. It's the cheapest and least creative way to get famous.
2. He misses the point, like he's doing it on purpose, by showing unrelated facts or facts that don't actually contradict the original message but represented as such.
3. Nobody's perfect, and, we need a big picture to see the whole problem, not just some data that tells us - "This is not possible/wrong/there's no money for it" - that's mind-shrinking.
MykolaKindrat 2 months ago
@MykolaKindrat 1. I guess you hate yourself since your critiquing a critique.
2. What did you think the point of her video was?
3. "we need a big picture to see the whole problem, not just some data that tells us" You admit that you would rather believe an indoctrinating video than facts.
fbibarbie 2 months ago
See, the problem with people is that they automatically assume that more money invested in something means better something. For example, if I invest more money into buying more Street Fighter 4 guide books, most people will automatically assume that it improve your Street Fighter game skills. The truth is that buying more guide books will not improve your skills. But real incentives, such as tournaments with cash prizes, will.
kokocipher 2 months ago
Comment removed
kokocipher 2 months ago
Again, when you invest in a non-competitive market (government education), no progress will be made.
kokocipher 2 months ago
Please tell me there is a Critique of this video!
byinfluence04 2 months ago
okay, no more subsidies, yes we get it, good idea. what you should have critiqued is when she mentions subsidising 'renewable energy and energy efficiency projects', because that is exactly what the government has just attempted and sadly utterly failed to do: Solyndra and 'Retrofit Ramp Up', costing a combined $1b and yielding practically no results.
also, when you say 'many of those environmental problems where caused by government to begin with' (10:45), what exactly are you talking about?
neurocrater 2 months ago
If her video was thin on substance yours was positively monomolecular. We get it, you don't like subsidies.
chrisgrant85 2 months ago
I don't like the assumption of job creation in her video. She talks about creating 100,000 new jobs but what about the old jobs that are destroyed? What would the net job creation look like, and honestly until this was implemented how would we really know?
curzmg 2 months ago
@31guitar I'm not arguing government efficiency, but rather the video's assertion that somehow buying up quantities of land could prevent air or water pollutions that spread beyond property boundaries.
nicholaspayneable 2 months ago
Could You explain how you protect air quality and waterways with private property rights?
nicholaspayneable 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@nicholaspayneable People take care of their own land. The Government is seriously inefficient
31guitar 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
4:20 As you mention 700 billion is not over 50%, but there is more funds dedicated to war/military interests not included in that 700 as described in "Tax Dollars At War" on youtube.
aliasmask 2 months ago
Why are there so many Keynsian buffoons in the media? Most people I know in real life are Austrian, if they have any economic opinion at all. Keynsian economics is like believing that the earth is flat, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. How could any self-respecting individual believe that junk?
koahzvika 2 months ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks
Targeted Tax cuts..........Solyndra.....GE
pitchmod 2 months ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks
to manipulate the rest of society. If you don't believe me, I think you should take up a few political science and history courses at a respected institution of higher learning, and then post non-bias videos challenging Annie Leonard and the rest of human civilization who actually want future generations of human beings and other species of organisms to grow up in a decent unpolluted world
tar2185 2 months ago
Comment removed
casualdissent 2 months ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks
@casualdissent I will take your advice on the works of Bastiat, but I never said I was against government regulation. I believe the state plays a pivotal in the management of our nation. No one can argue the amount of changes American has experienced for the better. I am suggesting that we need to continue the changes for the benefit of the majority of the human race and not the minority. We should not be naive or give in to the interest of a few who look to exploit the masses so-
tar2185 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@tar2185 they can maintain their life styles. I am not jealous of what another person posses, I could honestly careless. I am more so concerned about the state our society, and the earth maybe in by the time my daughter's generation takes control.
tar2185 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@tar2185 When you say that you're against moneyed elites and pollution, then I agree. When you say that the cure is more government control, then I disagree. I'm against the problems you identify, but I don't think that the government can prevent them. Corporations, for example, are enabled and protected by state controls, and it was the state that first created their legal entity; more controls and regulations empower them, not us.
casualdissent 2 months ago
@tar2185 Where you starved of oxygen at birth? You leftist psychotics like the idea of no pollution spreading wealth etc.
But how often do you practice what you preach?
Do you give your wages to homeless people?
Do you drive a car?
Have you driven a car?
Do you use only green electricity?
Because you will have to offset your emissions. And you will have to practice what you preach.
But suddenly the idea of being green isn't so appealing.
I don't say it so I don't do it.
beefflavouredbolloks 1 month ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks
@beefflavouredbolloks This reminds me of when Sun Chips rolled out their new fully recyclable bag, and recalled it shortly thereafter because the material was too loud. It's like people want to be green and all that, but when it comes to actually affecting their lives, other things are more important.
casualdissent 1 month ago
RSA animate has also gone against the grain and according to you "how the world works." Why don't you deconstruct their videos and challenge them on their views? The truth is you can't because they are brilliant professors who have actually deconstructed "how the world works," and actually present some similar basic arguments that Ms. Leonard presents. The truth is the world we live in is schematically created by men with certain interest. There interest are realized because they figure out how-
tar2185 2 months ago
@tar2185
Most of what RSAnimate uploads has little to do with ideology, but every now and then you can find them making the usual arguments for state-centric politics, basically in the form of identifying a problem with the contemporary world, and then implying that the solution is necessarily more government involvement, with no effort made at connecting the dots. That's a tool of the reform crowd in general, who think that all of society's problems have to be solved by the state.
casualdissent 2 months ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks
You say class sizes are decreasing? Sorry to go against the statistic analysis you are using to support your video, but class sizes have actually increased in New York City! The reason America has fallen behind in the education race is the fact that we have to teach to test, not teach to create the next great thinkers. If you don't believe me on that comment, I challenge you to sit in a New York City classroom for a school year and then do an overall study on the education system also text books
tar2185 2 months ago
Annie Leonard is obviously a brainwashed idiot.
henrycate 2 months ago 2
Yeah, all those even oil companies helping me drive to work in order to help my community out. How dare them.
shayne71 2 months ago
I want to know, when was education the job of the fed to pay for? I always knew it to be the job of state and local governments to fund education. I am still waiting for somebody to get it right.
kd5icr1967 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Thank you so much Lee, I am a 17 year old in high school (I actually turn 18 in about 15 minutes). I was writing a research paper in government class and I used many of the sources you posted links to. I discovered you about a year ago. You converted me from republican to Libertarian. You are awesome.
LEFT4BASS 2 months ago
Comment removed
LEFT4BASS 2 months ago
The dinosaur economy? The story of brainwashing propaganda for children.
cozyfoxstudio 2 months ago
you're arguments are horrible.. what do you want to do finally? let the stock traders earn a lot of money and continuing financing the oil companies'? you're born in the wrong century
FindThisWorld 2 months ago
@FindThisWorld You act as if trader is a "four letter word." Traders enable millions to work by allowing a company to go public, and if the company does well, people invest in it, making the traders money, which causes more people to invest in the company, which raises more capital for the company, which in turn allows more people to be hired. If your idea of traders is Wall Street (the movie) then you have a LOT to learn, lol.
HKUser92 2 months ago in playlist Top Videos HowTheWorldWorks
63 government worshipers hate the truth
QuartuvLarry 2 months ago
This quote demonstrates which of the two systems is more inclusive and pluralistic "One difference between libertarianism and socialism is that a socialist society can't tolerate groups of people practicing freedom, but a libertarian society can comfortably allow people to choose voluntary socialism." -David Boaz
weavermama 2 months ago
Again, Great Job Lee!
theknob1 2 months ago
You contradict yourself. If you want a better environment (which you seem to want), than subsidies can help companies that DON'T hurt the environment.
thewholekeyboard 2 months ago
@thewholekeyboard "Then subsidies can help companies that DON'T hurt the environment."
And you trust politicians to decide which are the "good companies" and which ones are the "bad companies" by taking money out of your pocket and giving it to whom they want? Really?
CarlosMarti123 2 months ago
don't just critique, could you also answer the same question as the story of stuff try to do? WHY DO WE GET BROKE?
yosefadjibaskoro 2 months ago
She might be exaggerating by claiming that we aren't broke and there's "plenty of money", but she's making a valid point that a lot of money could be saved and directed for right causes instead of being "donated" to corporate interests that don't benefit the society. The only ideological differences between you and her is that she supports subsidies for things that benefit the society. If subsidies and socialism are so bad, then how would you explain the success of other countires, e.g. China?
abenm613 3 months ago
lee, you are welcome to visit our page to view videos related to you.
SchittReport 3 months ago
The concept of the EPA (i.e. - Environmental Protection Agency) was supposed to insure citizens protection from blatant harmful business practices. That branch of the government has been, consistantly, on the fiscal budget cut list...the failure to the EPA to perform it's function is self-evident. The source of the deficiet you keep speaking of was derived from derivitives established by banking industries, who turned to hold the tax-payers accountable. Do you support corporate personhood? O.o??
mdlittle5466 3 months ago
I have no faith in capitalism nor communsim.
Capitalism = exploitation of worker
Communism = murder and evil
I lack a belief in the governments of the world.
EvolutionNeverHappen 3 months ago
@EvolutionNeverHappen 'Communism = murder and evil'? Pure communism has no government. At all. Socialism does, and that's what Marx advocated as a step towards communism—but of course, the nations that try it always get stuck on socialism. TL;DR: Stalinism ≠ communism.
LeGrugkbdst 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LeGrugkbdst 1 Abolition of property. 2 A heavy progressive/graduated income tax. 3 Abolishment of the right of inheritance. 4 confiscation of property of all emigrants/rebels. 5 Centralization of credit in the hands of the STATE, by means of a national bank with STATE capital and an exclusive MONOPOLY. 6 Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the STATE. 7 extensions of factories/instruments of production owned by the STATE.
weavermama 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LeGrugkbdst Do these sound like they can be maintained without a government? Can a govt. willing to deprive people of their belongings through coercion and violence be benevolent enough not only to redistribute them equitably, but to also disavow its own claim to power in the end? Many of the atrocities perpetrated by the soviets and chinese were in accordance with the C-manifesto.
weavermama 2 months ago
Education main spending should be on improving the whole education system rather than expanding.
GenghisThan 3 months ago
@GenghisThan Yeah. The only way I see that happening is if Joe Clark is awarded some type of legal immunity and placed in charge of education.
albatrossforlife 3 months ago
LEE: Good video, funny how Annie goes back to the leftist well again, acting as if federal, state & local $ for education have been cut. They have not, they are many times the rate of inflation, class sizes are much smaller, yet test scores are flat. She doesn't focus on that because it undermines her big-govt paradigm. I'm also skeptical of govt ventures into "clean"energy. Efficiency mandates on appliances largely failed & ethanol is a complete failure. Good job my friend!
UTubekookdetector 3 months ago
Funny, I found this critique to be nonsense. Yes, both democrats and republicans are equal idiots because both believe that _government_ will solve their problems one way or another. The republicans believe there should be no government except by corporation - lawless stupidity that forgets history. And, while the wealth of the upper 1 % is nothing compared to the deficit, their decision-making authority and influence is absolutely disproportionate, thus rendering all subsequent arguments moot.
baiyuantongbei 3 months ago