Clark argues forcefully for inheritance of economic success. But “hereditary” doesn't mean “genetic”, least of all when his own research is based in part on bequests of real material wealth! We can say that economic advance is cumulative across generations: nothing succeeds like success. But Greg admits the constant replenishment of the wealthy from the ranks of the less well-off. Even he’s less convinced then he purports to be: “... probably genetics or socialisation… er, mainly” (!)
Clark presents a consistent argument, but dangerous at the same time. Clark is likely to associate poverty to genetics and to conclude that people are not all equal ... or at least that there are people more equal than others ...
If this disgust you, well, you can always study Marx or Weber.
This theory of "the capitalist gene does not seem absurd at all. For example, countries like England and Germany have always had success in industry and commerce. The Jews are known for their flair for business. China, a communist dictatorship, is one of the most competitive countries in the world (-.-'undeniable facts).
Well, he is not wrong at all. One big question posed to economists is why some people get rich and others do not.
I think we've all thought about this: there are people who simply cannot (because they have no capacity) develop. However, say (or even think) this is politically incorrect. "People are all the same, the differences are in our minds."
Economic growth ends. Population growth ends. Species ... include tool-making walking talking primate species ... go extinct.
The capitalists rob from the future in order to increase today's wealth. Unfortunately (with the credit crisis, climate change, etc.) that "future" has become the present world.
HIGH-larious. Capitalists make all the energy and elements around us available. Aluminum is the most common element in the Earth, but until we had electric furnaces to smelt the ore we had no access to it. Everything from coal to oil, fission to geothermal, solar to efficient, RTS power lines was made available by free enterprise, what Marx called capitalism.
The socialist redistribution of the U.S. mortgage market will end and we will again vault to the top.
The original idea is that humankind must make peace with Nature or Nature will eradicate humankind with the same sort of casual indifference as it eradicated the dinosaurs.
The Bible represents humankind in an extremely negative and quite accurate manner. Capitalism works so very well because it appeals to the basest character traits of humankind.
Unfortunately, capitalism has trashed the Earth and pushed the planet on a trajectory which will render it inhospitable to civilization's survival and ultimately to humankind's extinction.
That's the price humankind will pay for its foolishness.
Ever consider writing for an Al Gore Shockumentary?
Seriously, the Bible is accurate. Agreed.
Let me ask: Is it inherently evil to want to provide some security for yourself, spouse & children? This question never seems to be raised & answered by the "Capitalism is Evil" crowd.
Further, why do you insist that the expression of freedom in economics is likewise a curse? Do you believe in freedom in other endeavors?
Finally, who will be the arbiter of what is good or bad in human behavior?
It is inherently evil to "provide security" for your children while destroying the planet which makes your child's life possible. Security without survival is worthless.
"Freedom in economics" is a curse because the economy is a subset of the ecology. Everyone must keep in mind the most fundamental principle of economics:
No humans = No economy
As to what decides what is good and bad in human behavior: Nature will decide. Extinction happens.
Your first point is a false dichotomy: the Either/Or Fallacy.
Your second point is nonsensical. Genuine economics are based upon free-will human choices. If not, you have slaves working under a tyranny. Do you support the latter?
Your third point avoids the question. The human beings you seem to detest must still choose a leader who will then decision-make for them. Common sense says this leader will suffer from all the human flaws. Experience tells us they will probably be worse than average.
ha ha ha I really shouldn't waste my time with such foolishness. Perhaps you can clarify your concept of "destroying the planet". World population or life expectancy does not seem to have suffered as a result of this supposed destruction...
The fact that you are blind to the future consequences of present actions might explain your delusional state.
This world is already suffering from the ill impacts of climate change, resource depletion, infrastructure degradation and the collapse of civilization.
Billions of humans are already suffering, billions more will soon join them.
Also ... perhaps you haven't noticed ... things aren't quite so rosy in the United States of America, either.
Help me understand! I asked for specifics and you gave none--just vague and meaningless generalities like the "collapse of civilization".
I'm trying to allow you to present your views so you can be taken more seriously on youtube. Why aren't things so rosy in the USA? Explain how the "ill effects of climate change, resource depletion, infrastructure degradation (which I believe is not exactly related)" have caused suffering in the USA?
Dumbass--help me! Have you read any of these books? I have read Mr. Clark's, which he discusses in this video. I am indeed serious. No one dies in the US from starvation, from malaria, from the plague. So tell me about the suffering. How is the "destroying of the planet" that you suggest cause a civilization to collapse. I assume you are referencing the US, after your comment. BE SPECIFIC, IF YOU ARE CAN!!
The world is bigger than the United States of America ... except perhaps for a person such as yourself who cannot possibly see beyond the end of your own nose.
Also, I am quite certain that you are incorrect in claiming that "NO ONE dies in the US from starvation, maliaria, the plague." You better check on that again.
As to the collapse of civilization ... aren't you at all familiar with the last 10,000 years of human history? Read Jared Diamond.
You referenced that things were disastrous in the US. I said, give me an example. You said, the world is bigger than the US."
I said, no one dies of starvation et al. You said I'm wrong. But you provide no evidence.
I have read Jared Diamond more carefully than you, I'm sure. You imply the imminent collapse of the US civilization. Dare I ask for evidence, YET AGAIN??
You are an imbecile. I hope you are not a US citizen and don't have a vote.
You are not speaking in a rational manner. Your words are emotional and display a lack of reasoning skills which I would associate with the self-deluded.
As it turns out, I am a US citizen and do vote. I suppose it is safe to assume that your side lost in the last election.
You say that you have read Jared Diamond ... you must not have comprehended whar you read. Read it again.
As to bad things happening in the USA, read a newspaper. Any newspaper.
DMathew, you think those words are emotional? They were purely rational. YOu continue to show yourself to be an ass. "Read a newspaper". You are incapable of constructing a coherent response. You are not to be taken seriously, and, by the responses I see to you, you generally are not. Let me say some emotional words, since I cannot encourage you to engage in a rational argument: You are a hypocrite and liar in addition to being a moron. "Your side" is squandering its ill gotten gains.
I believe I will go back to my fully paid for house in a comfortable suburb enjoying my considerable net worth I earned after pursuing an advanced degree. You, on the other hand, go back to your doomsday scenarios that comfort you so, instead of having to face the reality of your present. "humankind goes extinct" ha ha being accused of delusions by someone like you is laughable. Go away now.
Bitch, you confuse me. So the US is collapsing, not the entire world? Then leave! Now! Don't you worry about me. I would mention that (a) the US' extermal debt/GDP is lower than most; and (b) I believe we are on the cusp of a backlash that will sweep the socialists such as yourself from control of the levers of government, but why bother? Go. Shoo. Leave. PS--loony conservatives like me generally have our wealth not in paper money but in gold bars buried in the back yard.
Finally, those who bury gold in their back yard should keep in mind that archeaologists often recover these from the ground ... evidently the owners did not survive long enough to retreive and utilize their buried treasure.
Now you are going to lose everything and have nothing. Your gold won't save you and your guns won't either.
All fact-less claims, bitch, dbitch1024. I am not mistaken. Oh, yeah, I'm not a loony conservative. You think I'm going to tell you where my wealth is, bitch? My investment advice isn't free--1% of assets under management, bitch. But there's a minimum ,so there's nohing for you. Little bitch.
Emotionality, irrationality, anger ... the death cry of conservativism. You are all the Republican party has left so that political party is going the way of the Whigs.
Old angry white people ... greedy-stupid and delusional and so busy polishing their guns that they cannot see beyond the end of their nose.
Contempt, laughter, ridicule. I am neither conservative, Republican, white, old or greedy. Or angry, stupid or delusional. And how can I polish my guns when they're buried in the back yard? Bye, bitch.
Clark argues forcefully for inheritance of economic success. But “hereditary” doesn't mean “genetic”, least of all when his own research is based in part on bequests of real material wealth! We can say that economic advance is cumulative across generations: nothing succeeds like success. But Greg admits the constant replenishment of the wealthy from the ranks of the less well-off. Even he’s less convinced then he purports to be: “... probably genetics or socialisation… er, mainly” (!)
davepx 1 year ago
Clark presents a consistent argument, but dangerous at the same time. Clark is likely to associate poverty to genetics and to conclude that people are not all equal ... or at least that there are people more equal than others ...
If this disgust you, well, you can always study Marx or Weber.
MmalaMaletaM 2 years ago
This theory of "the capitalist gene does not seem absurd at all. For example, countries like England and Germany have always had success in industry and commerce. The Jews are known for their flair for business. China, a communist dictatorship, is one of the most competitive countries in the world (-.-'undeniable facts).
MmalaMaletaM 2 years ago
Well, he is not wrong at all. One big question posed to economists is why some people get rich and others do not.
I think we've all thought about this: there are people who simply cannot (because they have no capacity) develop. However, say (or even think) this is politically incorrect. "People are all the same, the differences are in our minds."
MmalaMaletaM 2 years ago
Economic growth ends. Population growth ends. Species ... include tool-making walking talking primate species ... go extinct.
The capitalists rob from the future in order to increase today's wealth. Unfortunately (with the credit crisis, climate change, etc.) that "future" has become the present world.
dmathew1024 3 years ago
HIGH-larious. Capitalists make all the energy and elements around us available. Aluminum is the most common element in the Earth, but until we had electric furnaces to smelt the ore we had no access to it. Everything from coal to oil, fission to geothermal, solar to efficient, RTS power lines was made available by free enterprise, what Marx called capitalism.
The socialist redistribution of the U.S. mortgage market will end and we will again vault to the top.
somercet1 3 years ago
Capitalism makes all of these things but they will not last. The world which capitalism built isn't designed to last forever.
Something really terrible is going to happen to humankind in the 21st century.
dmathew1024 3 years ago
dm, besides quoting Marx, do you have any original ideas?
ConservativeAnthem 3 years ago
The original idea is that humankind must make peace with Nature or Nature will eradicate humankind with the same sort of casual indifference as it eradicated the dinosaurs.
dmathew1024 3 years ago
Well, at least you have moved onto Genesis. Well done.
ConservativeAnthem 3 years ago
The Bible represents humankind in an extremely negative and quite accurate manner. Capitalism works so very well because it appeals to the basest character traits of humankind.
Unfortunately, capitalism has trashed the Earth and pushed the planet on a trajectory which will render it inhospitable to civilization's survival and ultimately to humankind's extinction.
That's the price humankind will pay for its foolishness.
dmathew1024 3 years ago
Ever consider writing for an Al Gore Shockumentary?
Seriously, the Bible is accurate. Agreed.
Let me ask: Is it inherently evil to want to provide some security for yourself, spouse & children? This question never seems to be raised & answered by the "Capitalism is Evil" crowd.
Further, why do you insist that the expression of freedom in economics is likewise a curse? Do you believe in freedom in other endeavors?
Finally, who will be the arbiter of what is good or bad in human behavior?
ConservativeAnthem 3 years ago
It is inherently evil to "provide security" for your children while destroying the planet which makes your child's life possible. Security without survival is worthless.
"Freedom in economics" is a curse because the economy is a subset of the ecology. Everyone must keep in mind the most fundamental principle of economics:
No humans = No economy
As to what decides what is good and bad in human behavior: Nature will decide. Extinction happens.
dmathew1024 3 years ago
Your first point is a false dichotomy: the Either/Or Fallacy.
Your second point is nonsensical. Genuine economics are based upon free-will human choices. If not, you have slaves working under a tyranny. Do you support the latter?
Your third point avoids the question. The human beings you seem to detest must still choose a leader who will then decision-make for them. Common sense says this leader will suffer from all the human flaws. Experience tells us they will probably be worse than average.
ConservativeAnthem 3 years ago
ha ha ha I really shouldn't waste my time with such foolishness. Perhaps you can clarify your concept of "destroying the planet". World population or life expectancy does not seem to have suffered as a result of this supposed destruction...
anbalbach 2 years ago
The fact that you are blind to the future consequences of present actions might explain your delusional state.
This world is already suffering from the ill impacts of climate change, resource depletion, infrastructure degradation and the collapse of civilization.
Billions of humans are already suffering, billions more will soon join them.
Also ... perhaps you haven't noticed ... things aren't quite so rosy in the United States of America, either.
dmathew1024 2 years ago
Help me understand! I asked for specifics and you gave none--just vague and meaningless generalities like the "collapse of civilization".
I'm trying to allow you to present your views so you can be taken more seriously on youtube. Why aren't things so rosy in the USA? Explain how the "ill effects of climate change, resource depletion, infrastructure degradation (which I believe is not exactly related)" have caused suffering in the USA?
anbalbach 2 years ago
Enire books have been written about these subjects. You should read them.
As to the condition of things in the USA ... seriously, are you asking this question?
People are born. People die.
Civilizations arise. Civilizations collapse.
The USA was created. The USA will be destroyed.
This is life. Nothing is immortal. Nothing is eternal. Everything that lives also dies.
Humankind has merely accelerated the process like an alcoholic drunk driver.
dmathew1024 2 years ago
Dumbass--help me! Have you read any of these books? I have read Mr. Clark's, which he discusses in this video. I am indeed serious. No one dies in the US from starvation, from malaria, from the plague. So tell me about the suffering. How is the "destroying of the planet" that you suggest cause a civilization to collapse. I assume you are referencing the US, after your comment. BE SPECIFIC, IF YOU ARE CAN!!
anbalbach 2 years ago
The world is bigger than the United States of America ... except perhaps for a person such as yourself who cannot possibly see beyond the end of your own nose.
Also, I am quite certain that you are incorrect in claiming that "NO ONE dies in the US from starvation, maliaria, the plague." You better check on that again.
As to the collapse of civilization ... aren't you at all familiar with the last 10,000 years of human history? Read Jared Diamond.
dmathew1024 2 years ago
PLEASE! SAY SOMETHING SPECIFIC!
You referenced that things were disastrous in the US. I said, give me an example. You said, the world is bigger than the US."
I said, no one dies of starvation et al. You said I'm wrong. But you provide no evidence.
I have read Jared Diamond more carefully than you, I'm sure. You imply the imminent collapse of the US civilization. Dare I ask for evidence, YET AGAIN??
You are an imbecile. I hope you are not a US citizen and don't have a vote.
anbalbach 2 years ago
You are not speaking in a rational manner. Your words are emotional and display a lack of reasoning skills which I would associate with the self-deluded.
As it turns out, I am a US citizen and do vote. I suppose it is safe to assume that your side lost in the last election.
You say that you have read Jared Diamond ... you must not have comprehended whar you read. Read it again.
As to bad things happening in the USA, read a newspaper. Any newspaper.
dmathew1024 2 years ago
DMathew, you think those words are emotional? They were purely rational. YOu continue to show yourself to be an ass. "Read a newspaper". You are incapable of constructing a coherent response. You are not to be taken seriously, and, by the responses I see to you, you generally are not. Let me say some emotional words, since I cannot encourage you to engage in a rational argument: You are a hypocrite and liar in addition to being a moron. "Your side" is squandering its ill gotten gains.
anbalbach 2 years ago
Aren't you a bitter sore loser?
You cling so desperately to your delusions because that is that you have and all that you will ever have.
Maybe Sarah Palin will wink at you and make you a happy person. Otherwise you are going to have a bleak future.
Grwoth ends. America colapses. Civilization ends. Humankind goes extinct.
That's the future. Accept it, reject it ... it doesn't matter in the least. Reality need not conform to humankind's wishful delusions.
dmathew1024 2 years ago
ha ha ha. America's collapsing--please leave now!
I believe I will go back to my fully paid for house in a comfortable suburb enjoying my considerable net worth I earned after pursuing an advanced degree. You, on the other hand, go back to your doomsday scenarios that comfort you so, instead of having to face the reality of your present. "humankind goes extinct" ha ha being accused of delusions by someone like you is laughable. Go away now.
anbalbach 2 years ago
You seem to confuse your own precarious circumstances with the rather much more bleak condition of the United States of America and humankind.
Your money will become worthless and your nation will collapse and you will have nothing whatsoever.
That's the future and it is bleak.
Have you heard about America's $12 trillion debt, $60 trillion unfunded liabilities, and reliance upon China's welfare for our nation's survival?
Your dreamworld will end in your lifetime.
dmathew1024 2 years ago
Bitch, you confuse me. So the US is collapsing, not the entire world? Then leave! Now! Don't you worry about me. I would mention that (a) the US' extermal debt/GDP is lower than most; and (b) I believe we are on the cusp of a backlash that will sweep the socialists such as yourself from control of the levers of government, but why bother? Go. Shoo. Leave. PS--loony conservatives like me generally have our wealth not in paper money but in gold bars buried in the back yard.
anbalbach 2 years ago
You are some sort of stupid troll, aren't you?
a. You are mistaken.
b. You are delusional to the point of insanity.
Finally, those who bury gold in their back yard should keep in mind that archeaologists often recover these from the ground ... evidently the owners did not survive long enough to retreive and utilize their buried treasure.
Now you are going to lose everything and have nothing. Your gold won't save you and your guns won't either.
Such a sad little conservative.
dmathew1024 2 years ago
All fact-less claims, bitch, dbitch1024. I am not mistaken. Oh, yeah, I'm not a loony conservative. You think I'm going to tell you where my wealth is, bitch? My investment advice isn't free--1% of assets under management, bitch. But there's a minimum ,so there's nohing for you. Little bitch.
anbalbach 2 years ago
Emotionality, irrationality, anger ... the death cry of conservativism. You are all the Republican party has left so that political party is going the way of the Whigs.
Old angry white people ... greedy-stupid and delusional and so busy polishing their guns that they cannot see beyond the end of their nose.
dmathew1024 2 years ago
Contempt, laughter, ridicule. I am neither conservative, Republican, white, old or greedy. Or angry, stupid or delusional. And how can I polish my guns when they're buried in the back yard? Bye, bitch.
anbalbach 2 years ago
If you aren't those things you represent them and their thought processes well.
If you aren't those things you aren't anything at all.
How can I argue with a ghost? I won't argue with a ghost.
dmathew1024 2 years ago
You can't argue, period. I am someone who understands what made this country great. Yet again, I am one up on you.
anbalbach 2 years ago
I'm impressed!
Thank God the Republican party is filled with people such as yourself. No one it has enjoyed so much success recently.
dmathew1024 2 years ago
John Nash the man who had the greatest effect on game theory was
a. Mistaken
b. Delusional to the point of insanity.
/watch?v=Jam-8i_vbcA&feature=related John Nash is his own words
edavej 2 years ago
talk about behavioral economics!
HopefullyAnonymous 3 years ago