Greed With John Stossel part 4 of 6

[mmgmom]

Ambition and greed are two separate things.

[Acroniscopi]

@mmgmom my ambition is to make 110 million dollars in a year. Am i greedy?

[MrALEXisBORING]

capitalism is part of the current problem by allowing people to by passing further cororate benfits over human civil rights dont even bother trying to reply to this negativly when i c the fat cats of the usa and the world market florish while 99% of the county's populace goes unemployed and homeless id say that greed is kiling us all so do u wanna die?

[thequickster9]

@MrALEXisBORING That will be Corporatism. The idea of which the government give privileges to big corporations. Such as bailing them out and lending money with low interest. Capitalism is the free market idea of where people can freely sell and buy depending on the consumer . Capitalism gives everyone opportunity. The aristocrats in a capitalistic country got rich by selling goods/services. Making a good cheaper and better and getting blamed for their wealth they make by selling these good.

[MrALEXisBORING]

theres a difference between wanting to be productive and being greedy u can tell that this was made before the obvious influx of greed in this country and the bail out plans

[gothnate]

That woman is all about some boxes. lol

[AngelDiceII]

I cannot believe anyone would try to defend communism. It has failed for over a century. Get a real job and and live in the real world and you will hate communism.

[blackhole73]

@AngelDiceII Hey if you didn't know soviet union was not communism. There has never been true communism in the world yet. If there was this world would be a better place. Capitalism fails. In few years this whole country will collapse.



[Elkapan]

Self-interest has nothing to do with the mode of production, or necessarily our social relations within it. Are you telling me labour which substitutes the additional interest of the community, for that of the capitalist - who hoard the value among themselves and shareholders of fictituous capital claim that labour - that we are somehow better off? In a communist society, self-interest would still prevail but the value of our production would be our own, and benefit the community directly.

[jermitts]

@Elkapan the value of production in a communist society is not your own, it's the community's. Did you miss that in communism 101? There is no innovation in a socialist or a communist society, and thus no furtherance of technology. If you're wanting to live in a cave, then I guess that would be great for you.

[Elkapan]

@jermitts are you telling me there isn't a money system in a communist society? If there is monetary value, which directly represents the labour-power extracted, then there is self-interest, in the accumulation of that value. Only the products and property are that of the community. Or did you miss that when you have shit for brains? And Marx expounded on innovation, if you work direct for the community, you are not alienated from your production or you workers - it would for advancement of man.

[zeekle]

Bring capitalism back - end corporate welfare!

[moonfairymagic]

I think it's sad that people think everyone is motivated by self interest and that motivation is only driven by self interest. I am motivated to work to have a food on the table and a roof over my head, my needs. Many people work hard not to be the best or to make the most money but to enjoy their job and live a happy healthy life. Why should people who want the latter mean less than the former?

[ToastMasterGuy]

@moonfairymagic Of course we're all fueled by self motivation. That's just biology for yah.

[dusenberg]

what are the songs at 3:14 and 5:57?

[arivas713]

Someone need to SUB or DUB this in multiple language so that we can give this to other peoples.

[kurthanson2005]

Obama the "community organizer" needs to watch this.

[Uprising771]

captialism is also the reason why America produces nothing (the American flag is made in China), and the reason why all US politics are controlled by corporations, and the reason why the private prison indutrial complex has turned the justice system into a pile of corruption..

[lockdown260]

@Uprising771 Production isn't where the money is anymore. Name any country that produces our stuff and tell me you want to live there

[blackhole73]

@Uprising771  Couldn't agree more.

[casinohijack]

No matter which ever way you look at it its just not balanced. Climbing the corporate ladder is not a balanced deal for everyone we have proven time and time and time again that we can not lift up there fellow man out of poverty with this system in place. People need more happy healthy fruitful lives where they do not have to worry about having a roof over there head or a meal on the table or even free energy. We should work towards giving that to everyone with technology we can. Greed we cant.

[lockdown260]

@casinohijack Of course it's not a balanced deal; That's why it works. If you have skills you tend to win more . If you don't you tend to lose more. The one thing people don't seem to get is that if the poor had the know how to get and stay out of poverty they would not be poor. Giving them their living hood breeds only laziness,dependence and it stifles their creativity. All things which contribute to their continuing poverty.

[casinohijack]

@lockdown260 It works hu? I guess it works if your the RIch? As far as if the poor knew more or had skills, there not supposed to know about anything nore are they supposed to have any skills. Thats what keeps them enslaved in poverty. If they were ever gave any real education on how things really work in this world they would rise up against it and change it. Thats why america is being dumbed down so it can keep producing poor people who are dumb enuf to keep taking these low wage jobs.

[lockdown260]

@casinohijack Bullcrap. They ARE supposed to know something. Them NOT having skills is the EXACT reason they are poor. Poor people in the 3rd would embrace capitalism because unlike your so called "good intentions" free markets have done nothing but make their people richer. It's happening in India , China and Africa as we speak.

You are the one who needs to learn how things really work.

[rung3000]

this has a really invisible hand and pencil feel to it

[FRSFreeStateES]

As the Character Gordon Gecko said in the movie Wall Street. Greed for a lack of a better word is good. Greed is what drives our economy to do better. What keeps our competition going in America. That gives us choice.

[lord86maverick]

the greedy nigger took 2 dollars 2:25

[phantomsuccour]

I love my greed!!!!! MMmmmmmmm!!! feels so good!! But honestly, this piece by Stossel makes SOOOOOO much sense!!!! Why should I be ashamed to say I want to be rich!! why!! And I'll come up with something valuable in the process.

[MrKiromunist]

Damn this is better than Friedman's "Free to Choose", Stossel is a genius !

[misdelivery]

How outdated - as if self interest and loving kindness for one's fellow man are mutually exclusive and cannot exist in tandem. Another example of the dumbing down of America.

[cjbos81]

5:20 If this guy ends up being a millionaire one day, will he deserve to be punished for his success?

[stealthwolf1]

You don't understand capitalism. Capitalism is built upon the idea of human nature and our desire to get ahead and get more. Communism depends on a fantasy world where everyone loves each other and is willing to sacrifice to make it work. Go ahead, try and make it work, but human nature and greed will always mess that system up just like what happened in the USSR

[macchappy]

@jimeeroquai THATS THE POINT, CLIMBING THE FUCKING LADDER PUTS FOOD ON THE DAMN TABLE, IF THERE WAS NO LADDER, NOBODY WOULD HAVE ANYTHING YOU DICKLESS FUCK STAIN!!!

[XHAWK77X]

@macchappy I agree, but I think you went overboard on the insults. also, fuck is a verb, and cannot stain something.

[umbilicaltapeworm]

@jimeeroquai is it not more practical to do for yourself rather than to expect someone else to do for you?

[theemergenceofgreed1]

The Emergence Of Greed /watch?v=CjJE2R4sNUU

[therealallpro]

stossel is leave huge bits out. Like the fact that capitalism will always lead to corporatism unregulated. Ron Paul make this point a lot.

[vindician]

@therealallpro Ron Paul has never said that. Capitalism does not lead to corporatism, it is the expansion of government that leads to corporatism. Without a big government, corporatism can't exist. Only a big government can enforce the laws, edicts, regulations and taxes that is corporatism. The notion that capitalism leads to corporatism is false, and Ron Paul has never said that.

[therealallpro]

@vindician

first I like how you know ever single thing that Ron Paul has said. Second, yes it simple does. It just does. Look at history. When was wealth disparity the worst in capitalism? Before the Great Depression and certain banking, monopoly, oligopoly laws. I approve of the free market but everything in moderation.

[vindician]

@therealallpro I know Ron Paul and I know he wouldn't say that, because he is an ardent and outspoken advocate of capitalism. You tell me when he has said that capitalism invariably leads to corporatism. And your argument "yes it does, it simply does", doesn't exactly suffice. And If you think that wealth disparity was worse before now, and think that the decreased disparity is due to central banking and federal regulation, you're seriously mistaken, as you are about Ron Paul.

[therealallpro]

@vindician

The problem is you have the burden of proof, since I hold the mainstream view among the public and the intelligentsia in the world. Which is the free market is good but needs some regulations.

[vindician]

@therealallpro First, there is no other field where the mainstream has been so consistently and utterly wrong as economics. Second, because of point 1, you have the burden of proof. The thesis I hold has in fact been proven right time and time again. Thirdly, you seem to assume that there are no rules on a free market. This is wrong, there is a very strong element of regulation on the free market. Lastly, you claimed capitalism leads to corporatism. Its up to you to prove that claim.

[therealallpro]

@vindician

To respond to your first claim, it's not only the public but the mainstream view among the educated that SOME regulation is required or else you have a violent system of economic bubbles. This ties into the second claim. Thridly the free market's self regulation rules are incomplete because for this objectives point of view you would need a market for everything. In some areas they are just to slow to develop. And to your last claim, there is a reason we have the moral hazard.

[vindician]

@therealallpro AGAIN, there is a strong element of regulation on a free market. Gov. regulations are exactly the ones that cause bubbles. It is incredible to me that this fact is still lost on so many, despite the enormous bubble that just burst. On a free market, bubbles wouldn't even be possible. Enforcing contracts and property rights can and is done by private institutions. The reason we have moral hazard are all those gov regulations you crave. So you haven't answered any of my claims.

[vindician]

@therealallpro Look, if you really want to debate this issue (which i don't think you do), please send me a private message on my youtube channel. The commentary field is way to narrow and restrictive to house an actual debate, hence it is called a commentary field.

[Krupification]

greed rules.

[atlasshrugged2u]

Talk about underpaid!!

Those are the ones that need to get paid the big bucks

[MarcellaMarrin]

These people are not gredy. Honorable ambiton is not greed. Stossel's aim is to equate good, community minded people morally with the predatory. Adam Smith used "invisible hand" only twice. He was a moral philosopher who was concerned with protecting ordinary citizens from the powerful and ruthless.

[businesswoman25]

badeend1277-what about people like Chris Gardner ? He had nothing but himself ! He is "rich" today!

[badeend1277]

somewhere along the line bill gates started out with 0. That maybe true. But bill gates had a good school, plenty of opportunities, etc while most poor people don't. Capitalism keeps the rich rich and gives the poor something to try and accomplish while waiting to get thrown in jail or get killed in their criminality filled poor neighborhoods... But hey that's just my rich man's oppinion

[TimeWarp66]

Why are school bad? They're run by the government.

Why are poor neighborhoods riddled with violence and crime? The governments war on drugs, government public housing, and the government welfare trap.

In capitalism, both the rich and poor get richer. The rich just get rich faster because they're already rich!

[Bimmyjond]

Greed is not the same as just acting in your own self-interest. People have to survive. Some people want comfort, and some people want everything.

[TimeWarp66]

@Bimmyjond

It's fine to want everything. In a free society the only way to get rich enough to purchase everything you want is by creating a good or service that helps your fellow man.

[ManBearPigWolf]

Greed is just acting in your own self-interest.

[QuartuvLarry]

Shouldn't call this show "Greed" but "Capitalism"

since the two are mutually exclusive.

[natdavi]

nah b/c a greedy capitalist won't hurt anyone

[gtavsmsg10]

6:20-6:35-couldn't agree with him more

[Bristecom]

"It's the people at the bottom who need capitalism most."

So true.

[Bigturns33]

Yes sir.

[manoman0]

@Bristecom - So very true.

[1963danno]

@Bristecom That way they can get crushed easier by the ones at the top

[fomastephanovitch]

The guy in the white is like Big Worm from Friday.

[sclf]

Yea who is the real John Stossel ?

[rollontg]

maybe be there more teachers like Mariate? i screwed up the spelling,lol

[dirtyhyde8]

People with the bowl experiment are stupid to kill the hen that lays golden eggs.

[acmedressform]

um hello, is it greed to want to get paid so you can pay your mortgage and eat?? Jeez this journalist has the subtlety of a sledge hammer.

[Writer01603]

Its greed for people to go about building several houses instead of the one they just own and live in, and they build it to sell it. One act of greed spawns another, everyone acting in their own self interest.

The definition of greed Stossel is talking about is, "Acting in one's self interest." There's another definition, "Acting in ones interest at the cost of anything and everything." That form of greed is bad, but not the greed people practice every day, and what stos is talking about.

[dtaijo174]

This is the best part.

[pr0gm3r]

Let us become greedy. ^__^

We are just pretends that we like people around us.

We are fake human being. because we're pursuing self-interest.

I will get as much as I can, with every method. and I won't let anyone get my money.

I will manipulate or brainwash other people so I get more and you get less.

[psycobetabuckdown]

Let us completely miss the point and ignore previous segments of the program and then post cynically on YouTube.

[ClumsyRoot]

The issue isn't how much money you make. The issue is what you DO with your money?

[quuaa1]

There was a CNBC feature on the richest 1% of the world. Near the end they showed that most of these people only leave family members relatively small amounts of their fortunes, the rest of it usually gets donated to charities.

[ClumsyRoot]

That's actually not surprising. But what do they do with the money while they have it?

[quuaa1]

When they die, that is.

[mus5599]

Yes, bad businesses do go out of business for giving poor products or services because no one would buy after realizing that they just wasted money on a poor product or service- like a shoe company going out of business for making shitty shoes. I agree with u.

But this philosophy should have NO ROOM in situations where the first purchase may cause death or injury like when a person buys food, medicine or toothpaste. That's why we have inspections of restaurants and the FDA.

[TubeUser2000]

Hi mus5599

While no one should die from a first purchase, it is not in the interest of the business for this to happen. Such a happening would effect brand, consumer confidence etc, probably leading to the businesses demise.

As for the FDA/regulation, we still see issues like infected foods and death by. FDA/regulation is not a 100% guarantee of safety. Even if a product is not defective, the person can still be harmed. For example a car, roller skates, or even choking to death on a pretzel.

[mus5599]

yes, no one wants to make deadly products, but it still happens tho. That's why we inspect every single restaurant. According to u, we should not inspect them bc their profit motive would not let them harm ppl.

Until the public is ware of the harmful effects of the product, MANY innocent ppl would have died- that's how we would know to avoid the product. A few inspections would prevent human deaths. It's not perfect, but it's better than no inspections and finding out the hard way.

[TheFreethinker71]

But regulations don't prevent people from dying from products-people die every year from salmonella in food even though the FDA has its regs on food products. People die every year from drug interactions despite FDA regs. You have to ask this question: is it in a company's best interest to make sure their product is safe or is it in their best interest to make products that harm people? Companies don't make any money on bad products because of lawsuits and bad press.

[mus5599]

u just said-its not in the co interest to harm ppl, and but it still happens.

from the time the unsafe product is released til it is deemed unsafe, many ppl die. obviously, the co missed something in internal inspections.

what is wrong with having a govt agency inspect the place too, which could catch what the company missed before the product hit the shelf?

Drug deaths still happen, but think of all the prevented ones. ur basically saying-helmets don't prevent body damage, so don't wear one

[thinkingrationally]

What's wrong with extra govt. regs is the extra cost and the extra time potential life-saving drugs take to get to people who need them due to the average $800M and 12 years it takes for FDA approval. You think just about the people who were saved from bad drugs, but what about those people who died waiting for the FDA to approve a drug that could save their life? It's easier to not approve a good drug than it is taking the heat for approving a bad drug-that's why the FDA is so painfully slow.

[mus5599]

1 takes too long for good drugs to be approved, too long for bad ones to be removed; ie, Vioxx we agree their, NEEDS fixing but its better than NO system, allowing anyone to sell cures from thin air-it used to be like that 100 yrs ago.

2 the point i made earlier about the reasoning for inspections of factories, eateries etc stands. u say its not worth the tax dollars to catch the mistake and ppl should die for us to find out its unsafe, i say its worth it to find out ahead of time so no1 dies

[Cyrus992]

Yes capitalism is the best system for the poor, but we must remember to...

LIMIT THE INTERVENTION OF GOVERNMENT!!!

[yadranko]

Let me just add to your statement: "With government intervention there is no real free market."

[Cyrus992]

yadranko:

Excellent. The only intervention is needed to make sure that theft and understandable laws are in place.

Look at Hong Kong and Singapore. There is less intervention than the US and it will be hopefully for Las Vegas!! Yes im gonna help Vegas!!!

[chica476]

@2:51 also called, "The gains from trade"

[mus5599]

And besides, how would people know about the product being unsafe or even deadly? When enough people die and the story is on the news, people will know then to avoid the product? Why do they have to die when we can have safety laws that benefit everyone? Do u think they will openly tell consumers the product is unsafe? Read up on Ralph Nader. Every position he holds is based on common sense; sometimes more regulation is better, sometimes less is.

[mus5599]

Look at all the food poisonings of peanut butter factories, toothpaste from China etc in recent times. EVERYONE agreed that more regulation, inspections etc. was needed. People died because the agencies responsible for checking these imports are underfunded and lack manpower because of the less-gov't-is-always-better philosophy. Conservatives ran the country, and look at America now. Needless regulations always get lobbied against. No one calls for more until shit goes wrong.

[jtandbear]

Who ever claimed "conservatives" are free market anymore? Their policies over the last 8 years proved otherwise. In a free market these peanut butter factories would go bankrupt and out of business, a much better punishment for poisoning people than more regulation. NOT EVERYONE agrees with this logic you use. Regulation keeps these bad businesses in business. If you want to pay taxes for the gov't that can fully monitor the peanut butter trade and all of the consumers, then God help us!!!

[mus5599]

I never said the gov't should monitor consumers. When I said everyone agreed there should be more regulation, I was referring to most members of both parties in Congress. Why do we have health inspections of EVERY restaurant in the U.S. on a regular basis??

By your logic, we shouldn't have restaurants inspected because ppl may get sick or die- and then we will know what places to avoid. Deaths can be avoided with regulations that benefits us all.

[punkofmudd]

but obviously everyone can't own a business. capitalism thrives on guaranteeing a working class/consumer market.

[mus5599]

he's giving you a very rigid choice with no middle ground- unrestricted capitalism or a welfare state.

I say invest in the poor. give them a hand up, not a hand out. help people so they can help themselves. It'll come back when they pay higher taxes from earning more income. I agree with Stossel on a lot of things. Money is a motivating factor, but it should have rules. take his beef example. They could make more $ by foregoing the health regulations that they opposed. read "The Jungle"

[ForTehNguyen]

If they wanted to stay in business they would make a quality and safe product like in this case fresh uncontaminated beef. IMO you dont need all these regulations. If people find out that they make an unsafe product they wont buy it. They don't buy it, the company dies. That in is natural regulation of the market.

Govt regulation can be fine, but most of the time its outdated. Consumers demand far more quality than what govt regulation requires. So what use the the current regulation?

[mus5599]

The example of the meat industry when The Jungle was written.. EVERY competitor in the game had unsanitary conditions to say the least. What is a consumer to do? There was no one selling meat saying, "hey, my meat is cleaner and has less chance of having rats and human fingers, so buy from me not the next guy." That is only one example.. with all the lobbying, not many excess egulations exist very long. Even Ben Stein said $20 mill in regulations would have prevented this econ. crisis

[fluff125]

The problem then was that we were poorer than we are today. So if someone tried to sell good quality meat but at a higher price, they wouldn't make any money. They would fail. Improvements in technology have made healthy meat affordable.

If you had imposed health standards on meat back then, many people would go hungry.

[mus5599]

Actually, this book horrified the public and forced politicians to quickly implement new health and safety laws. You obviously know nothing of this nation's history. No offense but you're making an argument that lacks logic. People did end up paying for the regulations and thought it was worth it after reading the Jungle.

And the problem wasn't the quality of the meat. It was the manor of preparation and the disgusting conditions of the warehouses.

[fomastephanovitch]

Obama doesn't have any sound beliefs, that's how you become successful in politics.

Malleability

[lebowzki]

Stossel ftw

[rescuemay]

I honestly don't understand why anyone would have a problem with Capitalism. You own yourself, you possess private property, and you can do what you want with it. It's freedom! Stossel is explaining this to everyone, what is there to hate on?

[metallica5044]

because some people seem to think that without the government involved in everything, everything would go to hell. People need to be informed that government is relatively unsuccessful in most of the things they do and just create more problems along the way.

[hellome133]

@rescuemay

Nobody knows that that is what advocates of capitalism advocate for. They simply assume that we are for evil corporations screwing us over. They see rich people getting richer and assume that they are doing so at the expense of the working class without realizing that everything is voluntary

[quincee33]

@rescuemay very well said. i live in Canada, and now more than ever, the gov't is making decisions for us that i should be making.....recently our Gov't banned Money For Nothing by Dire Straits from being played on radio... apparently one lady in Newfoundland complained the word "faggot" was is the song, even though the song was about hate or homophobia..... now certain toilets and light bulbs aren't good enough...smoking in outdoor places is being banned in some areas...bye bye freedom!

[conkpit]

@quincee33 What is wrong about Government passing laws or legislature to protect it's citizens? Is it not the responsibility of Government to protect the best interest of society? Why should homosexuals be labeled "faggots"? Why should a non-smoker jeopardize their own health for the pleasure of a nicotine addict? One's freedom can be another's burden.

[quincee33]

@conkpit there's ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG, except when the laws are friggin stupid....the song is not about a "faggot" .....and it was 1 person complaining.....Do you really wanna go there Mr. Liberal? Cuz i could go off on any number of things that offend me on TV......what if someone calls and complains about Herbert the Perbert being a pedophile? or Violent video games? Or the sexualization of young teens through song, fashion and TV? Gimme a break.....

[conkpit]

@quincee33 No, I don't wanna go there. One thing I do detest is Perberts[sic]with the name Herbert.

[quincee33]

@conkpit btw, Green Day have 2 songs that contain the word "faggot" or "fags" ........ Guess i'm gonna have to get them banned from Canadian Airwaves!

[conkpit]

@quincee33 Yes, ban those songs.

[quincee33]

@rescuemay sorry i meant the song WASN'T about hate or homophobia.

[ladofmad]

@rescuemay

I think people confuse free-market capitalism with corprotism and monopolies.

[gokebe]

@rescuemay

"I honestly don't understand why anyone would have a problem with Capitalism. You own yourself, you possess private property, and you can do what you want with it. It's freedom!"

it becomes a problem because the people 'at the bottom' have the hardest time owning things and keeping thm. Sure the freedom to own is there (which is good) but it costs to own, it's like a closed circle you have to have $ for the capitalism to work for you so the poor stay poor the rich stay rich.

[shamgar001]

@gokebe The poor stay poor because they keep making the same bad choices that made them poor in the first place.

[quincee33]

@shamgar001 You make waaaay too much sense for any Socialist to take note!

[gokebe]

@shamgar001

"The poor stay poor because they keep making the same bad choices that made them poor in the first place." consider this: The rich have means to get richer. A 24 millionaire can make another 1 million easy, a poor person will be forever making the first mil. Things like interest rates, stocks and bonds accumulate very slowly unless you have a million dollars to invest in them. The interest that comes off of a million dollars alone is equal to a poor person's living expenses.

[shamgar001]

@gokebe The rich person owning a million more dollars doesn't make it harder for the poor person to get some of his own.In fact, the more rich man invests in the economy, the easier it is for the poor man to find economic opportunity.

[xtremejohnny69]

@rescuemay It's because people have this romanticized idea of the working class being put down by "the man" but I can tell you as a poor person, I love capitalism lol

[Silvertaker]

@rescuemay The fact that there are more than enough resources in this world to provide for every single human being many times over, yet a small percent own nearly everything.

[rescuemay]

@Silvertaker Capitalism, using the price system, efficiently organizes all the necessary information to produce and distribute those resources to people around the globe. While the USA is not exactly a shining example of capitalism anymore, it is still a good example of how well a system of private property and price can solve logistical and distribution problems. As for why so many people are on food stamps, the US has been moving away from capitalism for about 100 years, maybe more.

[bjarnet3]

@rescuemay US when away from Capitalism as soon as the Federal Reserve System was created,,, Because Central Banking IS Central Planning. It is the 5th in the communist manifesto... And It will destroy societies.

"I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies" - Thomas Jefferson

[rescuemay]

@bjarnet3 yep I agree.

[pr0gm3r]

English, Philosophy, and Rhetoric are the fundamental skill to brainwash. Human are in the business in convincing other to follow power and control.

The Will to Power ^__^

[Naturyl]

Wow, did Ayn rand write this? Unbelievable...

[GetMeThere1]

Bill Gates didn't quite start off at "zero." He went to a private school as a kid--one of only a very few that actually had a computer where kids could learn programming.

[ch1kusoo]

did all those kids end up owning big corporations like MS?

[GetMeThere1]

I guess you have reading comprehension problems, since your comment is a non sequitor in relation to mine.

I'll repeat myself: It's incorrect to say that Gates "started from zero" given the information I provided in my original comment.

[TubeUser2000]

Depends on what each child wants to do in their life.

[ultrakool]

Karl Marx is Obama's friend.

[BloodJunkie11]

im sure President Obama thinks somewhat highly of him

[VariedInterest]

So did the Spanish Anarchist's.

[hint0122]

I know obama is a big fan.

[WestPhillyCat]

This is pure Milton Friedman.

[intelligentmeathead]

This video is true in so many ways.

[Demian164]

box maker.

[Catherine8here]

In Buddish, the middle path.

[Catherine8here]

I suppose it is about finding a balance. Greed can be used for good of all and then that makes it OK.

[howardbeale1976]

"Who's John Stossel?"

[Catherine8here]

Who are you?

[howardbeale1976]

My comment was in reference to the man in the video who said, "Who's John Stossel?" in a humorous way. Know what I mean? I'm aware of who John Stossel is, I did watch the video.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

An 80s Hall & Oates wannabe douchebag, naturally.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

You slept through that high school class, didn't you? Theodore Roosevelt's inspection commission that resulted from "The Jungle" only found the claim of a man falling into the vat of meat as "unsubstantiated," - all else fully reflected Sinclair's "fictional" account. Roosevelt was so concerned about the impact the report on western stock growers and European meat importers that he did not release the findings for publication. Again, so much for self-regulation of the meat industry.

[bmtimv]

You realize many of the larger meat companies were lobbying for tougher regulations of the meat industry at the time as well because it allowed them to reduce their competition. So the meat industries were using the regulations in a perverse way for their own self interest, you think that is a good thing? the FDA has been regulating food for years yet we still have many huge health problems with little solutions, so much for government regulations.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

Again with the American exceptionalism! America is not the world. The European Commission has tighter controls on food quality than the FDA, yet somehow the EU doesn't have the market concentration in their meat industry that the US has. As far as safety is concerned, note that that EU meat isn't banned from Japan & Korea (the latter currently rioting over having US beef shoved down their throats) because of safety concerns.

[bmtimv]

god damnit I hate always seeing straw man arguments propagated against me my point is not that simple. You know the eu too has their own food problems despite their regulations, I seem to remember in England there were two very serious Bobine illnesses in recent history, nothings perfect not even the EU nor the FDA.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

Precisely my point: nothing is perfect, things aren't black and white it's all a question of *degree.* It's just that the EC happens to regulate its food and meds better than the compromised FDA does. Recent case in point. Pressure from the Bush admin for the FDA to cut trial times under the guise of "incentive, competition & bringing more new drugs to market" gave us Vioxx. The same Vioxx that according to FDA's own numbers, killed some 27,000 people. So much for FDA oversight.

[bmtimv]

A point that is often never cited is the people drugs could have helped that are in process of being approved.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

Sorry, you need to rephrase - I have no idea what you just said. How can something be "often never cited"? What are "people drugs"? You're apparently a college student, but if you were ever in my class, I'd flunk you for your presentation. There is a difference between a trial run for experimental drugs and the wide distribution that comes with approved prescription medicines (aided in America by direct advertising to people who often don't know the difference between an aspirin and their ass).

[ilovestossel]

I know how to translate it into retardish for you.

"A point that is often never cited is..." This is an argument that few people mention.

"the people drugs could have helped"

There are people who are sick, and drugs that can help them."

"That are in the process of being approved"

But those people can't get those drugs, even if they're dying and have nothing to loose, because the government bans all new drugs.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

First of all, please learn how to spell in your native language. All that libertarian ideology undoubtedly elaborated itself in faulty homeschooling, in which the difference between "lose" and "loose" was never adequately explained to you. Secondly, as I've already stated, there is a difference between a trial run (equating to access for those whose medical options have run out) and mass-marketed availability ushered through direct to consumer advertising, as was the case recently with Vioxx.

[ilovestossel]

The FDA kills far more than that every year by the simple fact that new drugs are, by default, illegal.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

My Vioxx example is backed up by an article that first appeared in a medical journal "The Lancet" in 2000, which first raised questions about the drug's safety. In 2004, the FDA itself forced to admit that its inaction resulted in over 27,000 deaths from cardiac ailments. Your turn now: instead some broad Stossel-esque statement, back up your assertion with an independent medical study which states that appropriately lengthy FDA trials of new drugs actually result in more yearly deaths.

[VariedInterest]

The FDA regulates by collusion in the name of capitalism. You right libertarians don't seem to realize that the state and the government exist to shield the capitalist hierarchal structure, because they operate for profit instead of producing helpful cures, drug companies don't want to cure us. Objectivism is for addled scrotums who dont grasp the inherently authoritative nature of free market capitalism.

[thinkingrationally]

Profit motivates the drug companies to introduce new drugs that help people-you honestly think the government can do that better? So what if the person who invented penecillin did it to make money? We have great products and services because people were profit motivated. Without a profit motive, the economy stagnates. Fed-Ex started because the postal service said that overnight delivery couldn't be done. I think we know that THAT argument was complete BS!

[VariedInterest]

The irony of your user name amuses me.

[thinkingrationally]

That's a great response, but it lacks any kind of argument for more government regulation. Or do you not have an argument at all? You on the left crack me up! You say money and profit are the root of all evil, yet your response to the world's ills is to say that we need more money. So which is it?? Profit and money are evil or we need to make more money to fix the world? You cannot have it both ways.

[danoftherepublic]

lol, whenever people dont have a real argument, they use personal insults. See; "Keith Olbermann"

[BloodJunkie11]

I'm glad to see some liberals actually use logic for their arguments. Although I disagree with you, I'm just glad you aren't one of those people who can only curse for an argument.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

Two problems with your theory: 1) You can't sue them if you're dead from tainted beef 2) You don't have a chance in hell to carry on a lawsuit against the legal muscle possessed by Conagra, Cargill or Monsanto - who can drag out a legal battle for years. Bad press, negative attention can be "damage controlled" by hiring a public relations firm - after all, the Exxon Valdez debacle in Alaska didn't hurt Exxon's sales one bit.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

They care about themselves: read - they buy a congressman or a senator in Washington to make sure that tainted meat cannot be recalled by the USDA - only "voluntarily." Yep, the same people who wanted to "pasteurize" meat using low level nuclear radiation, and have it called "cold pasteurization." No one's talking about human love and kindness - how about some civilized regulation, instead.

[Libertarianist]

It's a damned good thing the goverment can't force me not to buy a steak. If acompany sold me bad meat, I could sue them for frad and any attributed pain and suffering, medical bills, lost wages, etc. That, and the negative attention the company would get from news media is more than enouh motivation for the company to provide a safe product by setting their standards higher than the government.

[LoonyRonPaul]

Libertarianist

I guess you've never heard of The Jungle by Upton Sinclair.

You should look it up - you might learn something other than the libertarian propaganda from right-wing think tanks like the Cato Institute.

[lgnewman]

LoonyRonPaul

It would not be within a business's interest to sell spoiled meat anyway. They would lose customers, hence decreasing sales and profit. It's not as if we are forced to purchase meat from a particular company, we have the right to choose where we want to make our purchases.

And btw, the Cato Institute is not a right wing think tank, it's a libertarian think tank. There is a big difference between conservatives and libertarians.