Western free market system infected with anti-market non compete agreements , ie unions,govt. contracts,monetary interventionism-keynes/galbraith .Currently socialist believe let us decide, we know best,everyone wins.This a proven falsehood as market capital moves to punish socialist monetary policy.The law needs to ensure there are no secret agreements .Like it or not ,Competition in a free open market is the only thing that establishes value.
Although he speaks with understanding of the current situation of the financial markets, he does carry with him a tone of communist thought (as he says so in the video). His ideas may be good in theory but what about the issue of natural human greed, corruption, and strife? You can change a political system, but such inherently human issue will still be manifest will they not? Also, who leads as oversight of such communities?
Saw that no-one responded to you yet but I feel your questions do warrant answers.
A) "what about the issue of natural human greed, corruption, and strife?"
These are traits that are always bound to pop up on a person by person basis, but with an economic system founded primarily on cooperation and democracy, the effects of these could be tremendously lessened.
B) "who leads as oversight of such communities?"
Everyone actually. They are run via deliberative democracy - thus no leaders
@MsSexySocialist@MsSexySocialist Thanks for responding!! IS there a good source to read up on this concept that you would recommend? Like a website or something?It sounds interesting but would like to know more. K thanks again MsSexySocialist
You can actually find a pretty good resource of info on my own page which has several videos and documentaries on different subjects related to the system
The basic idea is that both the state and corporations are just two sides of the same coin as they both have monopolies on productive property and resources -and that these would be better managed in the future through a system of common pool resources (common ownership) and directly-democratic/cooperative self-management
@MsSexySocialist : Thanks again. I will check out your youtube channel and get more informed. I like to have more of an idea of what I am for or against before I make such a stance.
There are so many who read a little about an ideology that seems to fit them, sign up to it, but then not bother to examine the counter-arguments to their adopted position.
This seems to have become especially prevalent in the age of the internet - with two sides frequently attacking the other without any real understanding of where the other side actually stands.
" The commons were more sustainable than the free-markets" ??? Why is it that people aren't moving out of the cities and moving into the forests? hahaha
@g4macdad I despise Beck since his head is pushed way up the asses of anyone associated with Israel.
If you had read my first comment decrying the Jew Benjamin Creme, you would have understood that.
Seeing how you're just a youthful, easily distracted, gullible shithead who's devoted to "new age guru's" like Raj who promise terrific new ideas that have never been thought of, I can understand why you missed that.
By the way, I bought gold at $550/oz, it's now $1600.
And it was probably GoldLine. The fact that you don't know the difference actually makes you the goyim that ZIONISTS use you for. You have earned it, MORON!
Why do you keep associating me w/FOX?I depsise FOX news, they are a propaganda arm for Israel and her war making that wipes out her enemies while using the stupid US Goyim to do the dirty work.
The exposure of Murdoch is proof of them pulling the media strings here & in London.
Trust me, the Zionists DO NOT like people buying gold since it can't be inflated away like their FRN's.
Moreover, it is usually out of the reach of banks making it difficult to seize.
Was income tax invented in 2008? What year during Obama's term, were income taxes raised? How many jobs, and what growth has been attributed to the Bush tax cuts? How much does business owners pay into Social Security?
Raj is a good man. He is not Maitreya or the Antichrist. There is no god or antichrist or satan. Wake up and stop making this man out to be evil. He's much more intelligent and hard working than you are!! I wish him well and hope he can make a positive change for the world.
@marcaltus1977 how can you say he is more hard working than me... you do not know me. He may very well be intelligent, but his views here are wrong. He is judging the success of the economic system by its carbon sequestering results. I would think that human lifespan, child mortality rates, per capita income, people to land ratios, number of leasure hours would be a more merited way to assess economic systems.
@marcaltus1977 Informative rebuttle. Thanks. May I suggest your read freidman's book "capitalism and freedom". I am glad we could have such an informative debate.
@daobagua I may not be an economist, but I have studied economics at a REAL university (not Pheonix or online garbage). I am familiar with Friedman and Hyack and the Chicago School of economics. I say Raj's book is solid because most of it is just a re-hash of the great economists of the past couple generations all together in one volume. I was disappointed that Raj said so little about his own ideas. I look forward to a sequel where he comes up with original ideas. But it was solid.
@marcaltus1977 I am sorry, but that was not my criticism. My criticism is that you just told me to go read a book, but never confronted my argument. The book may be great, perhaps you could give me a demo.
I completely disagree with you. The best example a socialistic or communistic society is North Korea. Their leader (Mr. Kim) is a perfect example of human nature. Those that are in power are fat and happy. Rest of the people live in starvation. Your most productive people do only what is barely necessary. The end result; the people are poor and starving to death without exception. You have to reward individual productivity to be successful. Its a fact you cannot change.
I've only watched this short vid. It would help if he stopped refering to the free market, which does not exist in reality today. I think he could be more clear by acknowledging that human history is predominantly the story of fascism with short blips of socialism which are brutal and short blips of something close to a free market which breaks down quickly since the powerful elite can't stand having a fair playing field for everyone and people get lazy and give up their freedom over time.
@SteveXnycperformance THere is no true free market. The Interest, fee's, and fractional reserve banking are apart of the free market and are necessary for it to work. Stop being utopian.
The problem with Mr. Patel, socialism and its brother (communism) is the fact that it seems to always work on paper. Unfortunately, the socialist architect never figures one ingredient which makes socialism fail every single time it has been tried in modern history, and that my friends, is human nature which is always self severing. The best economic model ever tried and succeeded has been the American model of free enterprise which actual does compensate for human nature, don't work, no eat
@benzobug Capitalism has run it race, it is now dying. The free roam of corporations to control basic necessary human needs is the major point of FAIL with the current model of capitalism. There has never been a purest government. Thus, anyone that claims the purest model has already lost ground. It is truly on our part to use the functional forms of government, and throw out that which is failing. On a side note, free market capitalism has lost all ethical integrity. Greed is the new king.
1) If you think that Patel advocates the revival of an authoritarian socialist macroeconomy (such as the USSR or China today) here in the West, then please just get out of here.
2) He has good reason to berate our economic model. The "free enterprise" system is largely just a good tool for the rich to keep themselves rich (and to suppress the poor, even if its unconscious).
3) However, Patel calls for communal action against this wage-tyranny, and nothing else.
Then how did the common man in western countries become so prosperous if it is only the rich man gets richer. Its a a obvious fallacy and is often reinforced by data comparing household income instead of per capita income. In US during last 30 years household income rose by 6% but per capita by 51%.
Also there are much more people in to 20% households (about triple) and far more people in the top households works. In fact unemployed make a significant % of bottom 20%.
They often don't take into account transfers by welfare.
There is significant movement between the classes.
In the US Young people represent large % of the bottom 20%, and 3/4 are not there anymore 20 years later. Also about the same amount of the top 20% is not in it 20 years later.
Sustained monopolies are only created with government help. Its called crony capitalism.
Also commune - prv. owner will have a better reason to take care of what he has then a community.
Communal economies usually don't last. Look into American history and this becomes very apparent and for obvious reasons. I think Raj Patel found is economics degree in a breakfast cereal box!
Raj, you blathering idiot, you said that those communities which had MORE autonomy performed BETTER than those with LESS autonomy, that does not sound like "proto-communism" it sounds like a glowing endorsement of property rights and free markets.
@heiloreilly If an area is enclosed then autonomy reflects a landlords ability to freely manage his property. Similarly in a commonwealth where people can use something like a library or park as a group resource shared by the community; then autonomy reflects a small decentralized collective working together to manage the shared asset. Autonomy by default doesn't depend on a monad of a single individual. More to the point Patel is arguing to leave 3rd world nations to their own devices.
+1 lol on 'that may sound like proto-communism, but it turns out that its tremendously effective'. Oh really? I guess we will have to recall all the history books and reissue new 'corrected' ones. What a laugh. I guess when a guy talks like this he doesn't have to rely on keeping his statements correlated with reality.
Raj raj, lets see how you would enjoy living in a forest community, you anti-consumptionist hypocrit.
I'm sick of communism! It has failed repeatedly!! It is immoral & is responsible for the murder of millions of people, which didn't even help with your plan to curb population growth. (communists can't even do that right!)
Elinor Ostrom is NOT at odds with free-market principles, she is simply against the homogenization of social norms internationally. Common-pool self-management doesn't mean 'no private property rights'.
Raj, you're playing for the same team as the free-marketeers, but you're cheering for the opposition.
Many people who favor the free-market don't favor it in the closed-minded: '1 model of property-rights' outlook, but actually recognize the role of market-networks in innovating property rights.
Hey Raj, Do you think aspartame, hi-fructose corn syrup, and pesticides should be in foods? Do you use fluoride toothpaste and do you drink city water with fluoride in it? Do you support Monsanto and GMO foods? Do you support the H1N1 vaccine? Do you think we should be a NWO? Do you think we should have all cash ran through the RFID-CHIP? These are the questions we need to hear answered.
This guy's racial prejudice against "whites" is coloring his logic. But his biggest problem is he can't see the injustice of collectivism. There is nothing good or just or moral about big government. Obviously he has no love for liberty.
i believe nothing this man says and that's all he is a man he act's so freely saying he is the messiah. that will have a stutter. look at other interviews with him having no stutter. he thinks he will have everyone fooled with his bad acting and cockiness.
I beg proponents of any anti-capitalist cause to reexamine what the "market" actually is. Naturally we've all formulated some notion of what the abstract term means...bu broadly speaking it is simply freedom for individuals to exchange. The obverse would be coercive allocation. The positive results we've arrived at have been through the proper incentives being in place for individuals being able to pursue their values without intruding on others through force. remove markets and we'll starve.
To me he says a whole lot of nothing, bla bla bla, but he not once said how or what to do anything. i doubt he has grown one speck of food in his life or made anything useful. ibet he cribbled vague and nonsensical ideas on paper alot and ate alot of food grown by others. I bet he wouldnt have a clue how to feed himself. and he expects us to believe he knows how to do things hahaha what a stuttering babbling fool.
You bet, you doubt, you think ... But are you sure that you really know him? This video is just an excerpt of full lenght video. On the right side you have information about what he speaks. I think that you didn't listen to him very carefully so probably this is the reason why you heard only babbling. It's also possible that you're not educated so you didn't understand anything.
right you moronic little twat. ive done an honors thesis on basically the same stuff. AND i have heard his other stuff, even watched his colbert show interview as well. AND it IS as i described it babbling nonsense ALL TALK no action.
Furthermore, I'm sure he is an ok average guy. BUT I don't NEED to personaly know him to know if what he says is all glam and gliter with no substance or not.
@jonson11122 you didnt even present any argument. idiot, and neither did that moron patel. Atleast i mentioned 1 actual thing to do aka solar powered stoves for africa to save wood on the savvannah to prevent deforestation and dessertification.
all u and patel do is flap your lips spouting meaningless buzz words, and insults in your case. u uneducated worm.
@DorianGrayism i congradulate you sir on your fully functional BS buzz word detector, where some lip flappin fool spews words that have no meaning or solid solutions
@jonson11122 your an uneducated fool. your comments so what a fool u are. u insult me then you cry like a spoiled baby that i insult you back. u are a worthless waste of food
@jonson11122 Ah what refreshment to see one sane head in the midst of madness. Have you read his books? Or perhaps perused his other videos? If so (and i hate to lead ye on like this) but what are your views on not only his framing of the problem but his suggested solution. Lets try to have a saner debate m8:)
@spyked1 I am always for sane debate. But then you need at least two sane people. :) Yes I perused other his videos, but I didn't read his books (only first chapter of his latest book). But just if you watch videos you can see his simple and reality based ideas about current problem. Of course I see his solution as only possible way to deal with todays problems. While thinking about this new mental approach towards economy I came also to new ideas on how to look and deal with it....
@spyked1 For example: 1.we work and live to be creative and to share goods and services to each other 2. our mistake is that today we live and work for money 3.money is just a means to exchange goods and services 4. the focus of economy should be on goods and services and not on money as first goal 5.you can't do anything usefull with money 6. to enrich our lives we need to be creative and be focused on distributing the goods and services 7. workers must be seen as contributors and not as costs
@spyked1 8. basic needs must be offered and distributed to everyone 9. the purpose of economy is first to take care for food and to distribute it to everyone 10. when poor people are given rights to feed themselves (to return land to them) then people are more satasfied 11. poor people will not have so many children anymore 'cos they would not look on children as rich people see on money (poor people see on children as guarantor for their age and maybe to become rich) - overpopulation solved
u r right he is nothing but a socialistic babbling fool buzzing his buzz words but doesnt have 1 constructive comment on what or how to do things.
& the fish quote he "condemned" is actually what to do. its more than teaching how to fish duh obviously they can do that. but it actually refers how to do lots of stuff better like using equipment they dont know about, using better tools, to more effiecent preservation of resources. such as solar cooking in africa to save wood so forest isnt lost
Jesus Christ definitely is not a historical person. At least this guy Raj Patel actually exists. Academics have been polite not to cast light on this (Jesus not existing) for fear of offending gullible "believers".
Horrible speaker.. Forest communities???These are very primitive communities and not comparable to our society. Well, then lets just rely on them for our technical innovations that will meet the challenges of the modern world. Will just depend on them for our medical innovations, elite research institutions and technology. I am almost sick to my stomach by people who bash markets through means that have been produced by the free market (i.e. affordable access to internet for the masses).
Pointing to the flaws of markets which are wasting recourses faster then the earth can produce them shows how inefficient and ultimately dangerous it is. Learning from primitive communities that share and don't waste and destroy the recourses that sustains them has a legitimate basis. With technical innovations we could adopt and adapt our way of living to something that can be sustainable which is clearly not the case now. We are both intelligent enought to change and dumb enough to do nothing
LOL don't you understand? If you noticed I was replying to people using their words so they know what I was referring to. That's it. I forgive your misunderstanding. On a side note I am sure you will agree with, it's funny how these arrogant people know so little about where many of the ideas we use today came from. If they learned before they open their mouths the wouldn't seem foolish to those of us that actually know and respect how those ideas came about and where we got them from.
Are you serious? Do you not get it? Must I spell it out for you? It's really very simple. The "forest people" can live that way for 1000 years and not waste or destroy the resources which sustains them. There is an equilibrium. A balance that they have that we could adapt to fit our culture. We can not continue on the same path of environmental destruction and wasting resources that we have been and expect the human race to survive as we know it. Very simple to comprehend.
@freesk8 Let me introduce you to him - then you can tell me what YOUR qualifications on the topic are: Patel received a B.A in Philosophy, Politics and Economics, from Oxford, a Masters Degree from the London School of Economics and gained his PhD in Development Sociology from Cornell. He has been a visiting scholar at Yale and the University of California, Berkeley. Patel worked at the World Bank, World Trade Organization and the United Nations.
You are making an ad hominem argument. Even those with impeccable credentials are wrong now and then. And the UN is socialist.
I accused him of being a socialist, and not understanding the free market.
What you need to do, is to cite Patel advocating a position that is contrary to central socialist or collectivist ideas. Or you need to show that he understands how the free market works.
Wow, Patel and I both went to Cornell and have MBA's! I wonder if we were in Ithaca at the same time?
Hmmm. I am not saying you must listen to him because of his credentials...but wondering why I would listen to freesk8 on the interwebs over someone I respect?
If you only listen to people you respect, you may miss part of the truth.
I listened to him, and am pointing out that his philosophy is collectivist, and that this philosophy has failed hundreds of times when applied to govt.
Feel free not to listen to me, but understand that if you have a general policy of believing people because of their credentials you are at risk of falling in to the same kinds of delusions that experts are prone to fall in to.
Here is what he says in the video that show me he does not understand free markets:
"Liberty and free markets are illusory."
He also does not understand the tragedy of the commons, because he advocates managing land communally.
Then he confuses govt with the free market by saying that groups of private people working together to manage forests is not the free market, when it is much more free market than govt ownership is.
You should consider reading his book. He makes a very well substantiated case for the Commons and shows (very explicitly) that the phenomena tragedy of the commons develops overwhelmingly by the intrusive forces of privatization.
I have a question...The Free Market is Free in relation to what? If one says, " Tis free based on the voluntary nature of the system, i.e., people voluntarily exchange "money" (shells, paper, shite, what have you) for voluntarily provided goods and services. Really? This is all well and good in terms of non-essential services and goods, but what of essentials? Why not just see a need and meet it?
These "commons" types of governance work quite well in very small communities in much the same way that communism can. This is because everybody in this setting knows what everybody else has done and is doing. The threat of being socially or physically removed from these small societies for not contributing their share, etc., is often enough to counteract most of the worst aspects of human nature. On any relatively large scale these social orders just plain don't work well.
What you say has merit, but it is no excuse to give up on attempts to make socialism work in the modern world. Workers cooperatives have proven to be very effective, in Spain they actually produced that country's first computer chips and high-tech electronics. If it's true that the commons can only function effectively on a small scale, entire cities can be divided into semi-autonomous units operating under a kind of federal arrangement. There are ways to make it work.
I admire your optimism. I'm actually a great fan of the true employee-owned business model as long as it is well chartered. These tend to do quite well for the employees and customers in a competitive market. It's when competition is artificially eliminated by government-mandated monopolies and silly "leveling the playing field" measures that things historically go down the crapper.
I couldn't have said it better myself. It's not at all hard to figure out why we are hearing more of this. It's relatively simple and is as close to being an empirical truth as you can get. This quote sums it up for me
A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. "Max Planck"
I just hope we have a world left for the next generation.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Tragedy of the commons. Look it up.
Give a man a fish - teach a man to fish. This guy completely missed the point. That proverb does not imply that you need to give large amounts of cash to teach people to fish, nor does it imply you need to rely on the "white man." Why do these lefties always bring race into their argument?
Another tip to anyone watching. Never hold your nose this far in the air or you will look like a pompous ass.
I'm talking about specific work that deals with specific issue! This is not appeal to authority, it is directive to complete scientific work that deals with empirical evidence rater than some ungrounded ideas like the ''tragedy of the commons myth''.
If it was not an appeal to authority you wouldn't have mentioned the Nobel Prize.
Ungrounded? Have you never seen public housing projects? Have you never seen someone drop trash on a public sidewalk? People take better care of their own property. That's common sense.
To destroy "tragedy of the commons" she would have to compare those collective villages to identical free market villages. I don't think she did that. A good economist always asks, "Compared to what?"
White men have been trying to impose the 'free market' model onto developing countries for a long time now, which is why he said that.
The tragedy of the commons is based on a thought experiment, not actual data. Even then, it is the self-interest of the individual that ruins the commons; if anything this means the libertarian ideal of self-interest is the problem.
You have a video calling Obama - a moderate Democrat - a socialist.
It's true, but why mention skin color. Why not mention some other common arbitrary physical characteristic like "Men with nose hair?" Because they need a characteristic that will force us into different groups & turn us against each other. Divide & conquer.
Moderate democrat? I guess it depends on who you compare him to.
Self-interest is not the unique thing that ruins the commons. Every living thing in every economic system has self-interest. The nature of ownership makes the difference.
Correction, white men have not been trying to impose the "free market" model on others, because most white men don't understand what the free market really is. It has nothing to do with our current government.
You are very right in that todays "free markets" have little to do with good government.
Those few which today have almost unconceivably huge "liberties" should be deprived of the "wealth" which should have never been granted to them to begin with.
If overall welfare isn't collective, global welfare, then it's just egocentric bullshit ...eventually rich bastards driving others into war by instigating fear right from the shelf, even paying their patriotism for it, yukk.
eirefrance, I just did. I think it's ridiculous to use an example from the aftermath of Communism to argue that property rights cause coordination breakdown. When people have become completely dependent on one system & that system breaks down, they are likely to have extreme difficulty adapting to any new system.
I agree that patents & copyrights as they exist today are not good. Not because they involve rights holders, but because they require the initiation of force by the state.
The "Free market" is just people voluntarily exchanging goods and services for goods and services. To suggest that Freedom doesn't entail a free market is ridiculous.
Also, there's no such thing as a "hidden cost" when there isn't an exchange of money involved. The value of anything is whatever people are willing to pay for it.
what ? I was questioning a comment not the video. Or are you saying the comment said quite the opposite ... sorry if we are just having a misunderstanding.
if goods and services and exchange of said goods and services is not involved, then absolutely there is no value involved. Monetary value is purely subjective, its whatever people are willing to pay for it.
To suggest that the free market, and all of the contextual human issues surrounding it, is "just people voluntarily exchanging goods and services for goods and services" is ridiculous.
Saying that what we have are "free markets" is just as ridiculous as saying that Soviet Russia was a perfect socialist community, or that China has a purely communist economy. Look up ANY definition of what a free market is and it will be obvious that we don't, nor have we ever had, a free market. We have a MIXED economy! That is one of the FIRST things that people learn in Economics 101. Blaming our current crisis on some non-existent "free market" couldn't be more ridiculous.
The liberties of a deliberate few, but FREE (financial monopolies) are what is wrong today... and those are contrary to any definition of democracy, not to forget the freedom of nations which today are being economically repressed and bought out due to them being put under some sort of debt which never was real to begin with.
The freedom of one is the constraint of another, an insight which liberals and egocentrics most all the time ignore.
None of what you describe deals with free markets in the slightest. As I correctly said in my previous comment, we don't have, nor have we ever had, a free market, and neither does any other country in the world right now. All of the things that you describe are symptomatic of our current economic system, which is neither socialist nor laissez-faire, but is rather a mixed economy that has degenerated into a corporatist plutocracy. You should do more reading about what the free market really is.
If I am not mistaken, Big Finance gets away with all this worst of all shit that has accumulated so far in terms of power to manipulate people, oppress them and instigate war... it is exactly because the number one "market" that rules our ecenomies is free, but not free as in beer, but free as in "to do as it pleases".
Now your idea of free markets may be different, but I really can't grasp the overall soundness of it. Instead, I see it leading to what we have today, which is not good.
It's true that these corrupt corporations and financial big shots are able to do whatever they please without having to worry about any consequences, but they are only empowered to those ends by non-market forces: state-supplied advantages and barriers to entry for new competitors, unfair advantages that they lobbied hard for, advantages and privileges that would never be afforded to them in a free market. It's precisely because we don't have a free market that this has happened, as this is a...
....product of private interests colluding with government authorities, something that completely disqualifies this from being able to be considered a free market.
So you're basically saying that if these mega corporations had no regulation they would no longer hold the monopoly of power, but... what? Somehow they would fall back into obscurity and become just another competitor on the free market...?
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Mega corporations have always lobbied extensively to pass laws and regulations that make an otherwise level playing field a hill that they're the kings of.
Yeah, I've played monopoly. What does that have to do with the free market?
I support your "free market" idea as an ambition; trade should be as free as possible.
Barriers that benefit only a few market participants are to be as low as possible.
But, barriers to protect those in need or worthy of protection should not be, e.g. patents should not allow big business to constrain the shit out of everyone.
Markets should only be free for as long as those who participate do not excessively corrupt it or use their liberties to the detriment of most everyone else.
I agree, except that I think that barriers that benefit only a few participants should be non-existent. The most attractive aspect of a true free market is an unlimited capacity for open competition, as this puts business completely at the mercy of the will of the consumer. Also, patent law is a violation of the free market as well!
Another beautiful thing about the free market is that it is uncorruptable as long as it is allowed to be free.
Neither would I agree that the "consumers" will reflects the will of the people, nor do believe that humanity thrives through competition as its main tenet... in other words the goals you hold so high are most certainly not what I believe people hold "dear".
At least for patens... we're about in the same boat.
I must strongly object to what you call the beauty about free markets, because ...if anything is corruptible, then it is freedom.
"Neither would I agree that the "consumers" will reflects the will of the people"
Why not? Who are the consumers? Everyone is a consumer. Every time someone makes a purchase, they express their opinion about what goods and services ought to be provided, how they are to be provided, and for what cost. An OVERWHELMINGLY larger number of people buy things than vote in elections, and they do it CONSTANTLY, so I argue that it is far more representative of the people than any democratic process.
(cont'd) "nor do believe that humanity thrives through competition as its main tenet"
I agree. Certainly competition is not it's main tenet. Cooperation is it's main tenet. Competition does, however, provide the means to accelerate progression while simultaneously enabling a greater responsiveness to the wants of the people.
"...if anything is corruptible, then it is freedom."
I COMPLETELY disagree! If anything is corruptable, then it is CONTROL! Power corrupts. Period.
"We are not all consumers because that is not the only role we assume in our lives. Just because all of us consume stuff at times, doesn't turn us into consumers for a lifetime."
Yes it does. If you ever buy things, you are a consumer. That is just a BASIC economic term...
"Being a consumer, striving for individual welfare isn't the only social role we play, if even important at all."
I never said it was the only social role, but it is important. Striving for individual welfare ...
Western free market system infected with anti-market non compete agreements , ie unions,govt. contracts,monetary interventionism-keynes/galbraith .Currently socialist believe let us decide, we know best,everyone wins.This a proven falsehood as market capital moves to punish socialist monetary policy.The law needs to ensure there are no secret agreements .Like it or not ,Competition in a free open market is the only thing that establishes value.
9avedon 2 weeks ago
It seems like maitreya has a stuttering problem
georgecarlinspelled 2 months ago
Although he speaks with understanding of the current situation of the financial markets, he does carry with him a tone of communist thought (as he says so in the video). His ideas may be good in theory but what about the issue of natural human greed, corruption, and strife? You can change a political system, but such inherently human issue will still be manifest will they not? Also, who leads as oversight of such communities?
jgoltz37 5 months ago
@jgoltz37
Saw that no-one responded to you yet but I feel your questions do warrant answers.
A) "what about the issue of natural human greed, corruption, and strife?"
These are traits that are always bound to pop up on a person by person basis, but with an economic system founded primarily on cooperation and democracy, the effects of these could be tremendously lessened.
B) "who leads as oversight of such communities?"
Everyone actually. They are run via deliberative democracy - thus no leaders
MsSexySocialist 3 months ago
@MsSexySocialist @MsSexySocialist Thanks for responding!! IS there a good source to read up on this concept that you would recommend? Like a website or something?It sounds interesting but would like to know more. K thanks again MsSexySocialist
jgoltz37 3 months ago
@jgoltz37
No worries
You can actually find a pretty good resource of info on my own page which has several videos and documentaries on different subjects related to the system
The basic idea is that both the state and corporations are just two sides of the same coin as they both have monopolies on productive property and resources -and that these would be better managed in the future through a system of common pool resources (common ownership) and directly-democratic/cooperative self-management
MsSexySocialist 3 months ago
@MsSexySocialist : Thanks again. I will check out your youtube channel and get more informed. I like to have more of an idea of what I am for or against before I make such a stance.
jgoltz37 3 months ago
@jgoltz37
Good stance to take.
There are so many who read a little about an ideology that seems to fit them, sign up to it, but then not bother to examine the counter-arguments to their adopted position.
This seems to have become especially prevalent in the age of the internet - with two sides frequently attacking the other without any real understanding of where the other side actually stands.
Peace.
MsSexySocialist 3 months ago
" The commons were more sustainable than the free-markets" ??? Why is it that people aren't moving out of the cities and moving into the forests? hahaha
goodatbasebal 7 months ago
Blah Blah Blah!, this guy is just another communist (like the Jew Benjamin Creme who's pushing him) trying for another bloody attempt at it.
Liberty, Guns and small governments are the way to peace and prosperity.
dgl1962 8 months ago
@dgl1962
Anyone who speaks intelligently, sounds like "BLAH BLAH BLAH" to you, because you are a fucking RETARD.
g4macdad 6 months ago
@g4macdad That's would be a great retort for a 12 year old, now explain in detail how I was wrong.
dgl1962 6 months ago
@dgl1962
Elinor Ostrom and Vandana Shiva have all the answers an intelligent person would need.
Retards like you need to stick to Fox "News" or Glenn (the dolt wrangler) Beck. ROTFLMAO. Wanna buy some GoldLine and AmWay you hillbilly FUCK?
g4macdad 6 months ago
@g4macdad I despise Beck since his head is pushed way up the asses of anyone associated with Israel.
If you had read my first comment decrying the Jew Benjamin Creme, you would have understood that.
Seeing how you're just a youthful, easily distracted, gullible shithead who's devoted to "new age guru's" like Raj who promise terrific new ideas that have never been thought of, I can understand why you missed that.
By the way, I bought gold at $550/oz, it's now $1600.
Who's the dumb fuck now?
dgl1962 6 months ago
@dgl1962
And it was probably GoldLine. The fact that you don't know the difference actually makes you the goyim that ZIONISTS use you for. You have earned it, MORON!
g4macdad 6 months ago
@g4macdad No, it was Blanchard.
Why do you keep associating me w/FOX?I depsise FOX news, they are a propaganda arm for Israel and her war making that wipes out her enemies while using the stupid US Goyim to do the dirty work.
The exposure of Murdoch is proof of them pulling the media strings here & in London.
Trust me, the Zionists DO NOT like people buying gold since it can't be inflated away like their FRN's.
Moreover, it is usually out of the reach of banks making it difficult to seize.
dgl1962 6 months ago
@dgl1962
The problem is MORON, GoldLine is NOT "gold". Jeez you people are RETARDED! Go buy some AmWay.
g4macdad 6 months ago
@g4macdad Are you huffing glue?
Goldline sells gold, they are a gold dealer to those wishing to buy bullion.
Also, starting off a sentence with "the problem is moron" makes you the moron.
I'm beginning to think that you're a 12 year old.
dgl1962 6 months ago
@dgl1962
GoldLine is a SCAM you retard. So is AmWay.
You have shown yourself to be a clueless MORON too many times, to be taken seriously.
g4macdad 6 months ago
@g4macdad "Goldline is a scam"? Are you implying that Goldline is selling fake gold?
dgl1962 6 months ago
@dgl1962
GoldLine is run by Zionists, who laugh every time a GOYIM like you watches Fox "News," and buys the typical Teabag Koch Brothers propaganda.
You DESERVE it all, anyway.
g4macdad 6 months ago
@g4macdad Name the Zionists that run Goldline.
dgl1962 6 months ago
@dgl1962
Rupert Murdoch
g4macdad 6 months ago
@g4macdad Murdoch (FOX) doesn't own goldline.
Murdoch only gets money from them for their advertising.
With your logic, Rupert Murdoch owns Toyota & Kotex as well "since they advertise on FOX".
I've never seen anyone with such a complete disdain for facts and logic as you do.
Grow up
dgl1962 6 months ago
@dgl1962
GoldLine sells "gold" at a 180% markup.
Back on topic.
Was income tax invented in 2008? What year during Obama's term, were income taxes raised? How many jobs, and what growth has been attributed to the Bush tax cuts? How much does business owners pay into Social Security?
GROW A FUCKING BRAIN!
g4macdad 6 months ago
@g4macdad So you're claiming that goldline sells gold (now at $1600.) at $2,880. per ounce?
You're so full of shit that your eyes are probably brown!
Keep hoping for some Marxist creep like Raj and quit sending me your nitwit lies based upon baloney.
dgl1962 6 months ago
@dgl1962
Why are you avoiding the main topic for trivial garbage?
g4macdad 6 months ago
@g4macdad Run along and stay in an arena of your contemporaries by debating some 12 year old.
dgl1962 6 months ago
@dgl1962
You cannot answer even ONE of my questions. PATHETIC.
g4macdad 6 months ago
if communities in Africa or south america are better off without free market why impose it to them?
to rob them?
well, yes
truthmouthpiece2 8 months ago
define free idiot!
snarfeater 8 months ago
is this dude on coke? sure has a lot of energy
nothadnotbad 10 months ago
mabus
rollinherwall 11 months ago
Raj is a good man. He is not Maitreya or the Antichrist. There is no god or antichrist or satan. Wake up and stop making this man out to be evil. He's much more intelligent and hard working than you are!! I wish him well and hope he can make a positive change for the world.
marcaltus1977 11 months ago
@marcaltus1977 how can you say he is more hard working than me... you do not know me. He may very well be intelligent, but his views here are wrong. He is judging the success of the economic system by its carbon sequestering results. I would think that human lifespan, child mortality rates, per capita income, people to land ratios, number of leasure hours would be a more merited way to assess economic systems.
daobagua 10 months ago
@daobagua Whatever. Go read Raj's book, The Value of Nothing. SOLID economics.
marcaltus1977 9 months ago
@marcaltus1977 Informative rebuttle. Thanks. May I suggest your read freidman's book "capitalism and freedom". I am glad we could have such an informative debate.
daobagua 9 months ago
@daobagua I may not be an economist, but I have studied economics at a REAL university (not Pheonix or online garbage). I am familiar with Friedman and Hyack and the Chicago School of economics. I say Raj's book is solid because most of it is just a re-hash of the great economists of the past couple generations all together in one volume. I was disappointed that Raj said so little about his own ideas. I look forward to a sequel where he comes up with original ideas. But it was solid.
marcaltus1977 9 months ago
@marcaltus1977 I am sorry, but that was not my criticism. My criticism is that you just told me to go read a book, but never confronted my argument. The book may be great, perhaps you could give me a demo.
Best Regards.
daobagua 9 months ago
Casimirpyahoocom
I completely disagree with you. The best example a socialistic or communistic society is North Korea. Their leader (Mr. Kim) is a perfect example of human nature. Those that are in power are fat and happy. Rest of the people live in starvation. Your most productive people do only what is barely necessary. The end result; the people are poor and starving to death without exception. You have to reward individual productivity to be successful. Its a fact you cannot change.
benzobug 1 year ago
I've only watched this short vid. It would help if he stopped refering to the free market, which does not exist in reality today. I think he could be more clear by acknowledging that human history is predominantly the story of fascism with short blips of socialism which are brutal and short blips of something close to a free market which breaks down quickly since the powerful elite can't stand having a fair playing field for everyone and people get lazy and give up their freedom over time.
casimirpyahoocom 1 year ago
FREE MARKET DOESNOT EXSIST IF ONE ENTITY IS PRINTING/CREATING THE MONEY/MONOTARY SYSTEM WITH INTEREST, FEE`S AND FRACTIONAL RESERVE BANKING.
TRUE FREE MARKET shot the middle man(bankers).
SteveXnycperformance 1 year ago 7
@SteveXnycperformance THere is no true free market. The Interest, fee's, and fractional reserve banking are apart of the free market and are necessary for it to work. Stop being utopian.
Tougemaster06 4 months ago
The problem with Mr. Patel, socialism and its brother (communism) is the fact that it seems to always work on paper. Unfortunately, the socialist architect never figures one ingredient which makes socialism fail every single time it has been tried in modern history, and that my friends, is human nature which is always self severing. The best economic model ever tried and succeeded has been the American model of free enterprise which actual does compensate for human nature, don't work, no eat
benzobug 1 year ago
@benzobug Capitalism has run it race, it is now dying. The free roam of corporations to control basic necessary human needs is the major point of FAIL with the current model of capitalism. There has never been a purest government. Thus, anyone that claims the purest model has already lost ground. It is truly on our part to use the functional forms of government, and throw out that which is failing. On a side note, free market capitalism has lost all ethical integrity. Greed is the new king.
TheBabblon 1 year ago
Fuck you guys only see black or white, he DOES NOT promote communism!
How dumb can you get ? seriously. Listen to his fucking words, read his freaking book, open your narrow mind...
God...
mamadousako 1 year ago
Wow...so many ignorant comments!
1) If you think that Patel advocates the revival of an authoritarian socialist macroeconomy (such as the USSR or China today) here in the West, then please just get out of here.
2) He has good reason to berate our economic model. The "free enterprise" system is largely just a good tool for the rich to keep themselves rich (and to suppress the poor, even if its unconscious).
3) However, Patel calls for communal action against this wage-tyranny, and nothing else.
Schrumhead1224 1 year ago 6
@Schrumhead1224
Then how did the common man in western countries become so prosperous if it is only the rich man gets richer. Its a a obvious fallacy and is often reinforced by data comparing household income instead of per capita income. In US during last 30 years household income rose by 6% but per capita by 51%.
Also there are much more people in to 20% households (about triple) and far more people in the top households works. In fact unemployed make a significant % of bottom 20%.
serialkiller1990 7 months ago
@Schrumhead1224
They often don't take into account transfers by welfare.
There is significant movement between the classes.
In the US Young people represent large % of the bottom 20%, and 3/4 are not there anymore 20 years later. Also about the same amount of the top 20% is not in it 20 years later.
Sustained monopolies are only created with government help. Its called crony capitalism.
Also commune - prv. owner will have a better reason to take care of what he has then a community.
serialkiller1990 7 months ago
@Schrumhead1224
3) Like unions or some new approach?
killer3596 7 months ago
@Schrumhead1224 Their afriad of the world being equal and balance. People dont want true justice for all, world wide
Zoharpineal 6 months ago
St-st-st-st-op st-st-st-uttering, p-p-p-please.
bigtard 1 year ago
Communal economies usually don't last. Look into American history and this becomes very apparent and for obvious reasons. I think Raj Patel found is economics degree in a breakfast cereal box!
AussieAustrianBlog 1 year ago
Raj, you blathering idiot, you said that those communities which had MORE autonomy performed BETTER than those with LESS autonomy, that does not sound like "proto-communism" it sounds like a glowing endorsement of property rights and free markets.
heiloreilly 1 year ago
@heiloreilly If an area is enclosed then autonomy reflects a landlords ability to freely manage his property. Similarly in a commonwealth where people can use something like a library or park as a group resource shared by the community; then autonomy reflects a small decentralized collective working together to manage the shared asset. Autonomy by default doesn't depend on a monad of a single individual. More to the point Patel is arguing to leave 3rd world nations to their own devices.
Xtraeme 1 year ago
+1 lol on 'that may sound like proto-communism, but it turns out that its tremendously effective'. Oh really? I guess we will have to recall all the history books and reissue new 'corrected' ones. What a laugh. I guess when a guy talks like this he doesn't have to rely on keeping his statements correlated with reality.
Raj raj, lets see how you would enjoy living in a forest community, you anti-consumptionist hypocrit.
tothemax01 1 year ago
EPIC LOL @ this guys voice and manner. If he stuck his nose any higher in the air he'd break his neck.
tothemax01 1 year ago
I'm sick of communism! It has failed repeatedly!! It is immoral & is responsible for the murder of millions of people, which didn't even help with your plan to curb population growth. (communists can't even do that right!)
wesson1968 1 year ago
Elinor Ostrom is NOT at odds with free-market principles, she is simply against the homogenization of social norms internationally. Common-pool self-management doesn't mean 'no private property rights'.
Raj, you're playing for the same team as the free-marketeers, but you're cheering for the opposition.
Many people who favor the free-market don't favor it in the closed-minded: '1 model of property-rights' outlook, but actually recognize the role of market-networks in innovating property rights.
FreiheitKampfer 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey Raj, Do you think aspartame, hi-fructose corn syrup, and pesticides should be in foods? Do you use fluoride toothpaste and do you drink city water with fluoride in it? Do you support Monsanto and GMO foods? Do you support the H1N1 vaccine? Do you think we should be a NWO? Do you think we should have all cash ran through the RFID-CHIP? These are the questions we need to hear answered.
todzilla73 1 year ago
This guy's racial prejudice against "whites" is coloring his logic. But his biggest problem is he can't see the injustice of collectivism. There is nothing good or just or moral about big government. Obviously he has no love for liberty.
jscottupton 1 year ago
I'd vote for him for President
CLea0830 1 year ago
i believe nothing this man says and that's all he is a man he act's so freely saying he is the messiah. that will have a stutter. look at other interviews with him having no stutter. he thinks he will have everyone fooled with his bad acting and cockiness.
Near0503 1 year ago
Comment removed
blottero 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
RAJ GO AND FUCK YOURSELF
allblacks9100 1 year ago
I beg proponents of any anti-capitalist cause to reexamine what the "market" actually is. Naturally we've all formulated some notion of what the abstract term means...bu broadly speaking it is simply freedom for individuals to exchange. The obverse would be coercive allocation. The positive results we've arrived at have been through the proper incentives being in place for individuals being able to pursue their values without intruding on others through force. remove markets and we'll starve.
Mises85 1 year ago
is he gay ? im only asking
BestLoyalistMusic10 1 year ago
@BestLoyalistMusic10 he is most likely the bohemian grove style of gay. taking it in the ass for satan
halburd1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
don't get mad at each other and argue on youtube. because that means you're a douchebag. go out and LIVE!
Commentary1984 1 year ago
don't get mad at each other and argue on youtube. because that means you're a douchebag. go out and LIVE!
Commentary1984 1 year ago
To me he says a whole lot of nothing, bla bla bla, but he not once said how or what to do anything. i doubt he has grown one speck of food in his life or made anything useful. ibet he cribbled vague and nonsensical ideas on paper alot and ate alot of food grown by others. I bet he wouldnt have a clue how to feed himself. and he expects us to believe he knows how to do things hahaha what a stuttering babbling fool.
halburd1 1 year ago
@halburd1
You bet, you doubt, you think ... But are you sure that you really know him? This video is just an excerpt of full lenght video. On the right side you have information about what he speaks. I think that you didn't listen to him very carefully so probably this is the reason why you heard only babbling. It's also possible that you're not educated so you didn't understand anything.
jonson11122 1 year ago
right you moronic little twat. ive done an honors thesis on basically the same stuff. AND i have heard his other stuff, even watched his colbert show interview as well. AND it IS as i described it babbling nonsense ALL TALK no action.
Furthermore, I'm sure he is an ok average guy. BUT I don't NEED to personaly know him to know if what he says is all glam and gliter with no substance or not.
Something u obviously are unable to do. FOOL!
halburd1 1 year ago
Comment removed
jonson11122 1 year ago
@jonson11122 you didnt even present any argument. idiot, and neither did that moron patel. Atleast i mentioned 1 actual thing to do aka solar powered stoves for africa to save wood on the savvannah to prevent deforestation and dessertification.
all u and patel do is flap your lips spouting meaningless buzz words, and insults in your case. u uneducated worm.
halburd1 1 year ago
@halburd1
Lol. I thought I was the only one that seemed to think that he had nothing useful to say throughout this video.
DorianGrayism 1 year ago
@DorianGrayism i congradulate you sir on your fully functional BS buzz word detector, where some lip flappin fool spews words that have no meaning or solid solutions
halburd1 1 year ago
he acts and looks like Mr. Bean only he is brown and talks alot and holds his nose up higher
so he is supposed to be the anti christ? i doubt it.
halburd1 1 year ago
no horns?
EndTimeDelusion1 1 year ago
This topic is very important for today problems of hunger and poverty.
jonson11122 2 years ago
Don't be deceived by raj patel
megaman2160 1 year ago
I'm not deceived, I can think with my mind indenpendently. I accept ideas by my own decisions and conclusions.
And I say, that this topic is very important for todays problem of hunger and poverty.
jonson11122 1 year ago
@megaman2160
Very well spoken...
gregthesenior12 1 year ago
@megaman2160 Of course not... only fools are afraid of deceit:)
spyked1 1 year ago
he didnt even say anything he just babbled.
halburd1 1 year ago
@halburd1
Are you maybe uneducated?
jonson11122 1 year ago
nope but u are, you cant even seperate substance from babbling rhetoric.
halburd1 1 year ago
@halburd1
Your comments reflect what kind of person you are.
jonson11122 1 year ago
@jonson11122 your stupid douchebaggery reflects on what kind of moron you are.
halburd1 1 year ago
Comment removed
jonson11122 1 year ago
Comment removed
jonson11122 1 year ago
@jonson11122 your an uneducated fool. your comments so what a fool u are. u insult me then you cry like a spoiled baby that i insult you back. u are a worthless waste of food
halburd1 1 year ago
@jonson11122 Ah what refreshment to see one sane head in the midst of madness. Have you read his books? Or perhaps perused his other videos? If so (and i hate to lead ye on like this) but what are your views on not only his framing of the problem but his suggested solution. Lets try to have a saner debate m8:)
spyked1 1 year ago
@spyked1 I am always for sane debate. But then you need at least two sane people. :) Yes I perused other his videos, but I didn't read his books (only first chapter of his latest book). But just if you watch videos you can see his simple and reality based ideas about current problem. Of course I see his solution as only possible way to deal with todays problems. While thinking about this new mental approach towards economy I came also to new ideas on how to look and deal with it....
jonson11122 1 year ago
@spyked1 For example: 1.we work and live to be creative and to share goods and services to each other 2. our mistake is that today we live and work for money 3.money is just a means to exchange goods and services 4. the focus of economy should be on goods and services and not on money as first goal 5.you can't do anything usefull with money 6. to enrich our lives we need to be creative and be focused on distributing the goods and services 7. workers must be seen as contributors and not as costs
jonson11122 1 year ago
@spyked1 8. basic needs must be offered and distributed to everyone 9. the purpose of economy is first to take care for food and to distribute it to everyone 10. when poor people are given rights to feed themselves (to return land to them) then people are more satasfied 11. poor people will not have so many children anymore 'cos they would not look on children as rich people see on money (poor people see on children as guarantor for their age and maybe to become rich) - overpopulation solved
jonson11122 1 year ago
he is maytrella
leugim94 2 years ago 2
hes NOT "maitreya", hes nothing, no one will ever pay attention to him
galexy2far2c 1 year ago
u r right he is nothing but a socialistic babbling fool buzzing his buzz words but doesnt have 1 constructive comment on what or how to do things.
& the fish quote he "condemned" is actually what to do. its more than teaching how to fish duh obviously they can do that. but it actually refers how to do lots of stuff better like using equipment they dont know about, using better tools, to more effiecent preservation of resources. such as solar cooking in africa to save wood so forest isnt lost
halburd1 1 year ago
This guy stutters a lot.
PunkPoser123 2 years ago 2
lol yea reminds me of John Madden.
hoopz2598 1 year ago
If he is maitreya then he may well be antichrist. Get your bibles out. Jesus christ is lord
benalchemist74 2 years ago 2
Jesus Christ definitely is not a historical person. At least this guy Raj Patel actually exists. Academics have been polite not to cast light on this (Jesus not existing) for fear of offending gullible "believers".
Harinath1008 1 year ago
his Ideas are effective on a small scale... however, once a government starts regulating the processes the shit hits the fan...
our free will and our belief in government will eventually lead us to our own demise.
Bulldog22031 2 years ago
Horrible speaker.. Forest communities???These are very primitive communities and not comparable to our society. Well, then lets just rely on them for our technical innovations that will meet the challenges of the modern world. Will just depend on them for our medical innovations, elite research institutions and technology. I am almost sick to my stomach by people who bash markets through means that have been produced by the free market (i.e. affordable access to internet for the masses).
Krifko 2 years ago
Pointing to the flaws of markets which are wasting recourses faster then the earth can produce them shows how inefficient and ultimately dangerous it is. Learning from primitive communities that share and don't waste and destroy the recourses that sustains them has a legitimate basis. With technical innovations we could adopt and adapt our way of living to something that can be sustainable which is clearly not the case now. We are both intelligent enought to change and dumb enough to do nothing
moety2 2 years ago
Quit calling them primitive and I'll agree. You know the pythagorean theorem and Newtonian physics are still taught in our schools? WTF!
yowhatitlooklike 2 years ago
LOL don't you understand? If you noticed I was replying to people using their words so they know what I was referring to. That's it. I forgive your misunderstanding. On a side note I am sure you will agree with, it's funny how these arrogant people know so little about where many of the ideas we use today came from. If they learned before they open their mouths the wouldn't seem foolish to those of us that actually know and respect how those ideas came about and where we got them from.
moety2 2 years ago
Are you serious? Do you not get it? Must I spell it out for you? It's really very simple. The "forest people" can live that way for 1000 years and not waste or destroy the resources which sustains them. There is an equilibrium. A balance that they have that we could adapt to fit our culture. We can not continue on the same path of environmental destruction and wasting resources that we have been and expect the human race to survive as we know it. Very simple to comprehend.
moety2 2 years ago
This guy is a socialist.
Yuck.
He has no idea what the free market is.
freesk8 2 years ago
@freesk8 Let me introduce you to him - then you can tell me what YOUR qualifications on the topic are: Patel received a B.A in Philosophy, Politics and Economics, from Oxford, a Masters Degree from the London School of Economics and gained his PhD in Development Sociology from Cornell. He has been a visiting scholar at Yale and the University of California, Berkeley. Patel worked at the World Bank, World Trade Organization and the United Nations.
CityzenJane 2 years ago
You are making an ad hominem argument. Even those with impeccable credentials are wrong now and then. And the UN is socialist.
I accused him of being a socialist, and not understanding the free market.
What you need to do, is to cite Patel advocating a position that is contrary to central socialist or collectivist ideas. Or you need to show that he understands how the free market works.
Wow, Patel and I both went to Cornell and have MBA's! I wonder if we were in Ithaca at the same time?
freesk8 2 years ago
Hmmm. I am not saying you must listen to him because of his credentials...but wondering why I would listen to freesk8 on the interwebs over someone I respect?
CityzenJane 2 years ago
If you only listen to people you respect, you may miss part of the truth.
I listened to him, and am pointing out that his philosophy is collectivist, and that this philosophy has failed hundreds of times when applied to govt.
Feel free not to listen to me, but understand that if you have a general policy of believing people because of their credentials you are at risk of falling in to the same kinds of delusions that experts are prone to fall in to.
freesk8 2 years ago
I also don't listen to people who provide no proof, who are obviously ideologues themselves.
CityzenJane 2 years ago
So, now you are calling me names (Ideologue.)
More ad hominem.
Here is what he says in the video that show me he does not understand free markets:
"Liberty and free markets are illusory."
He also does not understand the tragedy of the commons, because he advocates managing land communally.
Then he confuses govt with the free market by saying that groups of private people working together to manage forests is not the free market, when it is much more free market than govt ownership is.
freesk8 2 years ago
You should consider reading his book. He makes a very well substantiated case for the Commons and shows (very explicitly) that the phenomena tragedy of the commons develops overwhelmingly by the intrusive forces of privatization.
TheDynamicPsyche 2 years ago
It is counter-intuitive that privatization, which eliminates the commons, could possibly create a tragedy of the commons.
I won't read his book, just as you would not read any book on Austrian Economics that I suggested.
Can you describe his argument for me?
freesk8 2 years ago
There never has been a free market. Pure propoganda.
humanist7117 2 years ago 5
Sure there has- you just haven't looked back far enough.
In this day in age, with all the tools it has at its disposal, the Government still can't effectively collect its "due" or regulate.
HBSchool 2 years ago
Very interesting thoughts coming from a man, who isn't neccesarily very far left, as most of whom i think is worth listening to.
Also i love the way he speaks, it is somewhat arrogant, but in a very humorous way.
Gufberg 2 years ago
I have a question...The Free Market is Free in relation to what? If one says, " Tis free based on the voluntary nature of the system, i.e., people voluntarily exchange "money" (shells, paper, shite, what have you) for voluntarily provided goods and services. Really? This is all well and good in terms of non-essential services and goods, but what of essentials? Why not just see a need and meet it?
BrutusBlackest 2 years ago 6
@BrutusBlackest AWESOME!
MilanTbay 2 years ago
These "commons" types of governance work quite well in very small communities in much the same way that communism can. This is because everybody in this setting knows what everybody else has done and is doing. The threat of being socially or physically removed from these small societies for not contributing their share, etc., is often enough to counteract most of the worst aspects of human nature. On any relatively large scale these social orders just plain don't work well.
Causa10bserver 2 years ago
What you say has merit, but it is no excuse to give up on attempts to make socialism work in the modern world. Workers cooperatives have proven to be very effective, in Spain they actually produced that country's first computer chips and high-tech electronics. If it's true that the commons can only function effectively on a small scale, entire cities can be divided into semi-autonomous units operating under a kind of federal arrangement. There are ways to make it work.
blackiron60 2 years ago
I admire your optimism. I'm actually a great fan of the true employee-owned business model as long as it is well chartered. These tend to do quite well for the employees and customers in a competitive market. It's when competition is artificially eliminated by government-mandated monopolies and silly "leveling the playing field" measures that things historically go down the crapper.
Causa10bserver 2 years ago
Hey I just saw this guy on the Colbert Report...
Cool stuff.
TurtleVVisperer 2 years ago
this has 250 views whereas lady gaga music videos have 10 million. Tells you about the majority of people's interests on youtube
haveNOuse4aNAME 2 years ago 3
I just wonder what they will think when they wake up in their material world and there isn't any more material left.
That's one of our problems we can't suck the life out of this planet it's all we have that will support life there is no place to go.
I have nice things, nice house, decent car, good computer and a good set of golf clubs what more do I need?
I am a conservative I don't buy anything unless I really need it.
CosmosPrivateer 2 years ago
I couldn't have said it better myself. It's not at all hard to figure out why we are hearing more of this. It's relatively simple and is as close to being an empirical truth as you can get. This quote sums it up for me
A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. "Max Planck"
I just hope we have a world left for the next generation.
moety2 2 years ago
And what "free markets" do you speak of, ignorant asshole?
KagarBeardtooth 2 years ago
Sounds like Eddie Izzard.
robzrob 2 years ago 3
@robzrob - Yeah, he does!
skeletonmom 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Tragedy of the commons. Look it up.
Give a man a fish - teach a man to fish. This guy completely missed the point. That proverb does not imply that you need to give large amounts of cash to teach people to fish, nor does it imply you need to rely on the "white man." Why do these lefties always bring race into their argument?
Another tip to anyone watching. Never hold your nose this far in the air or you will look like a pompous ass.
truthadvocate 2 years ago
Elinor Ostrom has been awarded the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences who's work totally destroys "Tragedy of the Commons'' !
Look it up.
organdva 2 years ago 3
Nobel Prize means nothing.
Mastikator 2 years ago
Your statement means nothing.
organdva 2 years ago 2
Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Mastikator 2 years ago
I'm talking about specific work that deals with specific issue! This is not appeal to authority, it is directive to complete scientific work that deals with empirical evidence rater than some ungrounded ideas like the ''tragedy of the commons myth''.
organdva 2 years ago 3
If it was not an appeal to authority you wouldn't have mentioned the Nobel Prize.
Ungrounded? Have you never seen public housing projects? Have you never seen someone drop trash on a public sidewalk? People take better care of their own property. That's common sense.
To destroy "tragedy of the commons" she would have to compare those collective villages to identical free market villages. I don't think she did that. A good economist always asks, "Compared to what?"
truthadvocate 2 years ago
kissinger, carter, roosevelt, al gore, now with Obama its official, the nobel peace prize is meaningless, not other nobel prizes necessarily.
paganiniGOGO 2 years ago 2
@truthadvocate, exactly. another point is the 'whiteness' of the originator of the quote, which 2 me is ironic.
l8rthen 2 years ago
White men have been trying to impose the 'free market' model onto developing countries for a long time now, which is why he said that.
The tragedy of the commons is based on a thought experiment, not actual data. Even then, it is the self-interest of the individual that ruins the commons; if anything this means the libertarian ideal of self-interest is the problem.
You have a video calling Obama - a moderate Democrat - a socialist.
In conclusion: you are an idiot. Go away.
totaldreck 2 years ago
It's true, but why mention skin color. Why not mention some other common arbitrary physical characteristic like "Men with nose hair?" Because they need a characteristic that will force us into different groups & turn us against each other. Divide & conquer.
Moderate democrat? I guess it depends on who you compare him to.
Self-interest is not the unique thing that ruins the commons. Every living thing in every economic system has self-interest. The nature of ownership makes the difference.
truthadvocate 2 years ago
Correction, white men have not been trying to impose the "free market" model on others, because most white men don't understand what the free market really is. It has nothing to do with our current government.
truthadvocate 2 years ago
@truthadvocate
You are very right in that todays "free markets" have little to do with good government.
Those few which today have almost unconceivably huge "liberties" should be deprived of the "wealth" which should have never been granted to them to begin with.
If overall welfare isn't collective, global welfare, then it's just egocentric bullshit ...eventually rich bastards driving others into war by instigating fear right from the shelf, even paying their patriotism for it, yukk.
realisoph 2 years ago
Tragedy of the anticommons. Look it up.
eirefrance 2 years ago
eirefrance, I just did. I think it's ridiculous to use an example from the aftermath of Communism to argue that property rights cause coordination breakdown. When people have become completely dependent on one system & that system breaks down, they are likely to have extreme difficulty adapting to any new system.
I agree that patents & copyrights as they exist today are not good. Not because they involve rights holders, but because they require the initiation of force by the state.
truthadvocate 2 years ago
The "Free market" is just people voluntarily exchanging goods and services for goods and services. To suggest that Freedom doesn't entail a free market is ridiculous.
Also, there's no such thing as a "hidden cost" when there isn't an exchange of money involved. The value of anything is whatever people are willing to pay for it.
migkillertwo 2 years ago
Are you to say that if currency is not involved than something is without value?
AxiomofDiscord 2 years ago 2
He said quite the opposite.
Mastikator 2 years ago
what ? I was questioning a comment not the video. Or are you saying the comment said quite the opposite ... sorry if we are just having a misunderstanding.
AxiomofDiscord 2 years ago
migkillertwo said that value is subjective. The value of any given good or service (or currency) is what they're willing to trade for it.
He said that value is based in opinion, not money.
Mastikator 2 years ago
if goods and services and exchange of said goods and services is not involved, then absolutely there is no value involved. Monetary value is purely subjective, its whatever people are willing to pay for it.
migkillertwo 2 years ago
To suggest that the free market, and all of the contextual human issues surrounding it, is "just people voluntarily exchanging goods and services for goods and services" is ridiculous.
eirefrance 2 years ago
Saying that what we have are "free markets" is just as ridiculous as saying that Soviet Russia was a perfect socialist community, or that China has a purely communist economy. Look up ANY definition of what a free market is and it will be obvious that we don't, nor have we ever had, a free market. We have a MIXED economy! That is one of the FIRST things that people learn in Economics 101. Blaming our current crisis on some non-existent "free market" couldn't be more ridiculous.
KagarBeardtooth 2 years ago 2
Well said!
freesk8 2 years ago
@KagarBeardtouth
You couldn't be more wrong.
The liberties of a deliberate few, but FREE (financial monopolies) are what is wrong today... and those are contrary to any definition of democracy, not to forget the freedom of nations which today are being economically repressed and bought out due to them being put under some sort of debt which never was real to begin with.
The freedom of one is the constraint of another, an insight which liberals and egocentrics most all the time ignore.
realisoph 2 years ago
None of what you describe deals with free markets in the slightest. As I correctly said in my previous comment, we don't have, nor have we ever had, a free market, and neither does any other country in the world right now. All of the things that you describe are symptomatic of our current economic system, which is neither socialist nor laissez-faire, but is rather a mixed economy that has degenerated into a corporatist plutocracy. You should do more reading about what the free market really is.
KagarBeardtooth 2 years ago
If I am not mistaken, Big Finance gets away with all this worst of all shit that has accumulated so far in terms of power to manipulate people, oppress them and instigate war... it is exactly because the number one "market" that rules our ecenomies is free, but not free as in beer, but free as in "to do as it pleases".
Now your idea of free markets may be different, but I really can't grasp the overall soundness of it. Instead, I see it leading to what we have today, which is not good.
realisoph 2 years ago
It's true that these corrupt corporations and financial big shots are able to do whatever they please without having to worry about any consequences, but they are only empowered to those ends by non-market forces: state-supplied advantages and barriers to entry for new competitors, unfair advantages that they lobbied hard for, advantages and privileges that would never be afforded to them in a free market. It's precisely because we don't have a free market that this has happened, as this is a...
KagarBeardtooth 2 years ago
....product of private interests colluding with government authorities, something that completely disqualifies this from being able to be considered a free market.
KagarBeardtooth 2 years ago
So you're basically saying that if these mega corporations had no regulation they would no longer hold the monopoly of power, but... what? Somehow they would fall back into obscurity and become just another competitor on the free market...?
Have you ever played monopoly?
yowhatitlooklike 2 years ago
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Mega corporations have always lobbied extensively to pass laws and regulations that make an otherwise level playing field a hill that they're the kings of.
Yeah, I've played monopoly. What does that have to do with the free market?
KagarBeardtooth 2 years ago
I support your "free market" idea as an ambition; trade should be as free as possible.
Barriers that benefit only a few market participants are to be as low as possible.
But, barriers to protect those in need or worthy of protection should not be, e.g. patents should not allow big business to constrain the shit out of everyone.
Markets should only be free for as long as those who participate do not excessively corrupt it or use their liberties to the detriment of most everyone else.
realisoph 2 years ago
I agree, except that I think that barriers that benefit only a few participants should be non-existent. The most attractive aspect of a true free market is an unlimited capacity for open competition, as this puts business completely at the mercy of the will of the consumer. Also, patent law is a violation of the free market as well!
Another beautiful thing about the free market is that it is uncorruptable as long as it is allowed to be free.
KagarBeardtooth 2 years ago
Neither would I agree that the "consumers" will reflects the will of the people, nor do believe that humanity thrives through competition as its main tenet... in other words the goals you hold so high are most certainly not what I believe people hold "dear".
At least for patens... we're about in the same boat.
I must strongly object to what you call the beauty about free markets, because ...if anything is corruptible, then it is freedom.
You cannot corrupt what you cannot do.
realisoph 2 years ago
"Neither would I agree that the "consumers" will reflects the will of the people"
Why not? Who are the consumers? Everyone is a consumer. Every time someone makes a purchase, they express their opinion about what goods and services ought to be provided, how they are to be provided, and for what cost. An OVERWHELMINGLY larger number of people buy things than vote in elections, and they do it CONSTANTLY, so I argue that it is far more representative of the people than any democratic process.
KagarBeardtooth 2 years ago
(cont'd) "nor do believe that humanity thrives through competition as its main tenet"
I agree. Certainly competition is not it's main tenet. Cooperation is it's main tenet. Competition does, however, provide the means to accelerate progression while simultaneously enabling a greater responsiveness to the wants of the people.
"...if anything is corruptible, then it is freedom."
I COMPLETELY disagree! If anything is corruptable, then it is CONTROL! Power corrupts. Period.
KagarBeardtooth 2 years ago
We are not all consumers because that is not the only role we assume in our lives.
Just because all of us consume stuff at times, doesn't turn us into consumers for a lifetime.
Being a consumer, striving for individual welfare isn't the only social role we play, if even important at all.
I believe, society would work much better without any money at all.
All the processes that work today do not work because of money, they work because people work and because machines do too.
realisoph 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"We are not all consumers because that is not the only role we assume in our lives. Just because all of us consume stuff at times, doesn't turn us into consumers for a lifetime."
Yes it does. If you ever buy things, you are a consumer. That is just a BASIC economic term...
"Being a consumer, striving for individual welfare isn't the only social role we play, if even important at all."
I never said it was the only social role, but it is important. Striving for individual welfare ...
KagarBeardtooth 2 years ago