The Argument From Demotivation: A Lazy Joke [AntiBullshitMan]

[joshuabiere1107]

I would consider my self a pro free market person. I definently agree with you though. I think the reason alot of supression or lack of increase in the working classes income occurs because of this. I do think though certain amounts of inheritence should be allowed. However you are right when someone inherits extreme amounts of money and does not know the value of labor it can not end up good.

[joshuabiere1107]

I would definently consider my self a pro free market person. However I strongly agree with you on this point. I think alot of the reasons the middle class and working class have seen supression of wealth is do alot to the inheritence of the extremely wealthy.

[Weeth]

@AntiBullshitMan: I'm not sure how "bulletproof" that driver's license analogy is. A driver's license is not a fungible good. Rather, it is a certificate with the specific purpose of conveying information that is particular to an individual (namely, identity and driving competence). It serves no purpose, and thus is of no use, to anyone other than the original carrier.

[soundofgeek]

The 'demotivation' argument ("why bother to work at all if you can never make more than a million bucks a year anyway?") is equivalent to saying "why bother to live at all if the sun is eventually going to go out anyway?"

Funnily enough, I've never yet known anyone to seriously propose the latter argument.

[Weeth]

@soundofgeek: If the Sun is going to burn out in a billion years, that affects precisely zero human beings alive right now. More importantly, there is no effort required to receive the benefits of the Sun (other than walking outside). Most importantly, this means that you do not need to confer any benefits to the Sun in exchange for its benefits. In other words, it is a one-way process.

[Weeth]

@soundofgeek (continued): Money, on the other hand—assuming free markets—must be obtained through voluntary trade in which no party engages without mutual benefit. This means the amount an individual is payed is not at all arbitrary. In fact, compensation accurately reflects the amount of value that an individual is contributing to society. Thus, when you place a limit on compensation, you are effectively placing a limit on how much value individuals can place on other individuals.

[soundofgeek]

@Weeth

"compensation accurately reflects the amount of value that an individual is contributing to society"

The individuals who created the GFC received billions of dollars' 'compensation' (salaries, bonuses etc) for so doing. Your statement is absurd, and your entire argument completely ignores the abuses and excesses which characterise recent economic history.

At this point it's fairly clear that you and I are too far apart in viewpoint to communicate meaningfully. Good day to you, sir.

[Weeth]

@soundofgeek: First of all, did you just "Good day, sir" me? Really?

Alright, by GFC I assume you're referring to the global financial crisis?

If so, I implore you to re-read my original comment. I chose my words very deliberately. Specifically, the part where I said "assuming free markets". Unless, of course, you are willing to argue that the financial industry in America, with the Federal Reserve, SEC, copious amounts of congressional regulations and GSEs, etc., represents a free market.. ?

[Weeth]

You appear to be conflating Corporatism with Free-Market Capitalism. They are not the same and if you fail to acknowledge the distinction between the two then yes, you are right, it will be very difficult for us to "communicate meaningfully".

[soundofgeek]

@Weeth

So your entire argument doesn't work under the current economic system? Unfortunate.

[Weeth]

@soundofgeek: In no way does the veracity of any of my fundamental points depend on the current nature of America's economic system.

Having said that, when you argue that Free-Market Capitalism promotes an arbitrary and unjustifiable allocation of value in society—and when you do so by pointing to something like the U.S. financial industry—I think it's useful to bring up the fact that the financial industry is the most heavily regulated industry in America.

[ahypnos]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but... CEOs aren't punished for bad decisions, they get paid a huge amount of money and leave the company, wandering off to pastures just as green [due to their status and networks], this being the worst case (noncriminal) scenario.

[DhuggaMan]

Have you watched Chomsky's take on Capitalism? There are some good vids here on you tube of him debunking standard defenses of it effortlessly.

[AntiBullshitMan]

Saw most of it ages ago. Haven't kept up with any of his newer clips, assuming there are any circulating at all. He's fast approaching "that age" where most great minds I've admired tend to throw it all away on account of some fallacious epiphany.

[DhuggaMan]

Trust me man, he hasn't lost a step. Strongly recommend his newer stuff. See my faves for a quick start if you wish.

[IntellectualRubbish]

This is just inhuman, now instead of 16 private jets they can only afford one, oh the horror, the horror.

Pretty much my conclusion as well that the people who would benefit from this but are still opposing it seam to do so because they think that one day they might be in the position of the uber rich.

[mikeSrayS]

Interesting...so what do you guys think of all these self-proclaimed "anarcho-capitalists" running around?

[AntiBullshitMan]

They're massive cunts. What else.

[mikeSrayS]

LOL!! Yea, this is true. Most of the ones i've run into are devout adherents of Rand, quote her all the time...

[UnhappyTestTubeBaby]

I think I've said more than enough over recent weeks. And I'm aware of how lopsided it is for you to make videos and for me to just comment on them. I'll drop the issue until I can figure out how to make my own vids. I've just got my computer up and running (it was down for while) so I don't have any excuses.

[PraiseShemp]

A blind believer in the false religion of "free markets" once wound up telling me that criminals contribute to the "free market" whether they want to or not, and that lives destroyed by criminals and/or the "free market" are acceptable casualties -- because the "free market" corrects itself -- eventually -- maybe.

He lost me right then and there.

[trick0171]

Excellent vid. I think free market capitalism is one of the most dangerous political philosophies that exist today. It is to a degree promoting natural selection within civilization. Those with the best causal chances get promoted (as "deserving"), while those with the worst causal chances get rejected.

[UnhappyTestTubeBaby]

Thanks for making this. I've made a few comments to you in the past. I'm one of the ones defending capitalism and am happy to take my lumps for doing so.

The license analogy doesn't quite work because it doesn't represent resources. Its just a check in a checkbox on a form somewhere that doesn't mean much to me. I understand where you're coming from though. I think we both want a meritocracy but we have diffferent ideas about how it could or should work.

[UnhappyTestTubeBaby]

I've left many comments (too many...) trying to promote an understanding of the fundamentals. I haven't yet gotten much of a direct reply to that except from Joe (EconomicStability) whom I can't fully endorse. Regardless, leaving a string of comments isn't terribly effective - there is still a large void of understanding between the two camps.

What's with the dramatic lighting? methinks you have a budding ambition to be a film maker.

[AntiBullshitMan]

I wouldn't call it dramatic, just dimmer.

It's been tricky to get the lighting right during the daytime for me given my camera's constant shifting of the contrast on its own somehow. I'm sure you've noticed my some of daytime vids have been way too bright in the past, so I'd rather play it safe and just keep them dimmer.

[metaldave9]

i am complacent

[chrisficki]

The morons don't know, or understand, the history of this country. We stopped the Robber Barons twice before and we can do it again. This time is going to be different, but helping the morons understand the situation is critical. Thanks for making videos trying to educate Americans about the realities of our economic system. You and Gary are providing a valuable public service with these types of videos.

[AntiBullshitMan]

Thanks for the support. I should point out that I am nowhere near Gary's level of insight when it comes to the overall intricate nature of the American system. But regardless, one would have to wear a blindfold to see this system as having a built in fairness mechanism.

[YogiToad]

role out the guillotine!! I want fountains of blood and a rough blood thirsty crowd,kill the martyred too,fuck'm all,Were is the piss boy!? Off with his dick,both heads must go! Where are the cartographers,coiffures and ladies in waiting?! May non escape the whispers of the Scarlet Pimpernel.

[DoNotGod]

very nicely done

these free market economic fundamentalists are just as logically vacant and pitiful as their religious counterparts... the simple truth that systems have to be engineered to do useful, productive, or quality work is just so obvious. Like any "engine" the economic engine needs a governor/regulator to keep it steady and sustainable.

these are sad sick humans who would choose a useless freedom over fairness.

[AntiBullshitMan]

And we're surrounded by them for the most part... I know I am.

Scary stuff.

[UnhappyTestTubeBaby]

I believe you miss one of the main points of the free market position.

Engineering a complex system is easier said than done. There are numerous economic examples of this but the principle is true for any complex system. Take the environment - after many years and countless man-hours we have many models of the global environment but seldom can they agree with much consistancy. We just get a general feel for where things are going - enough to stir thoughts and concerns but little more.

[UnhappyTestTubeBaby]

The free market philosophy is more akin to a self-organizing phenomena such as evolution. No one can forsee where it is going or what adaptations will benifit them. Can you image what would have happened if the monkeys thought they could engineer their own evolution? We'd probably still be up in the trees.

Arguing for heavy regulation or strong central planning, 'engineering', makes sense only if you're commited to a static system.

[AntiBullshitMan]

Analogizing the market to evolution is one hell of a stretch.

The only specific argument I've been presented with when it comes to the supposed non-necessity of the kind of regulation Gary and I are pushing for, is the argument from demotivation, which I just addressed. I'd love it if someone were to point out some other particular faults with this kind of regulation that would outweigh the current faults at hand, but so far I've gotten nothing.

[UnhappyTestTubeBaby]

I thought I just made a point. Obviously we don't see eye to eye. I'll make one last try.

Money isn't what motivates everyone - the freedom to chase our own desires is. I don't think billionaires are in and of themselves significant. They only are when they use their clout to sway legislation or are led into poor investment by false signals from our meaningless money.

If you're out to stop fraud and corruption - I support you. If you want to steer the economy or fiddle with the money - I can't

[UnhappyTestTubeBaby]

I can even support some limited inheritance tax. But we have very different ideas about the effect of bundles of money.

It doesn't matter whether a pile of cash is in a few hands or spread amongst many. Sometimes it will be one case, sometimes the other. It doesn't matter from my perspective so long as what works works, and what doesn't is allowed to fail.

[UnhappyTestTubeBaby]

Our civilization is built up generation by generation and brick by brick. If you say you'll confiscate everyones bricks as soon as they're done with them, whats to stop them from just blowing them all as soon as they feel they don't have many miles left on the ticker? And don't tell me you can figure out where the bricks should be better than everone else. If you can, I'll voluntarily invest in you.

You can't control who creates the wealth. What you can do is influence how they dispose of it.