Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Why Bad Economics Won't Go Away

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
2,506
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Jan 15, 2012

Why is it that people don't seem to learn from experience? It is clear that our existing Keynesian economic policies have failed miserably. We can compare controlled economies with those less controlled, and compare more regulated sectors of our own economy with those sectors that have fewer regulations. Logic and history are on the side of those economists who have advocated for free markets. Why do those who advocate sound economic policies continue to fail in substantially rolling back government intervention in the economy? It would seem so easy.

In this talk, delivered on December 1, 2011, at Hyatt Regency Hotel in Chicago, Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute, identifies the reasons people find the free-market idea so difficult to accept and why statist policies seem to make so much sense to them. He identifies why we have been losing this intellectual battle, and provides real solutions on how to make significant headway toward ending these bad economic policies, allowing us to achieve more freedom and prosperity.

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (23)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Of course McCain would have passed a stimulus bill - in fact he proposed his own $421 billion stimulus in 2009 but was voted down. The only 2012 candidates who opposed both the stimulus and bailout are Santorum and Paul, but Santorum was out of congress and didn't have to vote, and he voted in favor of the Medicare drug expansion so he has no fiscal discipline.

  • @justintempler

    And this whole time, all I did was add some input to Yaron Brook's theory as to why bad economics won't go away.

    Rationally connect to conversation, or stay out of it.

  • @justintempler

    Right, so I'm to understand that you can't actually find anything inaccurate in what I've said. So it's apparent you instead resort to throwing two baseless, and not too mention contradictory accusations at me (a. I have a "savior complex"; b. I'm doing "nothing" about the situation). And then, you end it by suggesting I stop trying to fix other people's philosophies all the while you are feebly trying to fix mine.

  • @HiciacetKolas "how you are going to "fix the philosophy." What is your plan to flood the universities with sound intellectuals..."

    Why do you have a "need" to fix the philosophy? Do you have a savior complex? or are you just using (what you see as) the futility of fixing philosophy as an excuse to do nothing?

    Stop trying to fix the philosophy in OTHER people.

  • @HiciacetKolas

    Typo: Meant to say "I'm not trying to diminish the value of a good philosophy." Though, I'm sure you understood what I meant.

  • @Berelore

    My entire point was that once economic statism is implemented, it practically becomes self-perpetuating. I'm trying to diminish the value of a good philosophy—it is necessary; all I'm saying is that does not appear to be enough to circulate good ideas. Atlas Shrugged was published over fifty years ago, and look how far down the road to statism the U.S. has gone.

  • @Berelore

    Alright, then tell me how you are going to "fix the philosophy." What is your plan to flood the universities with sound intellectuals when the system in place incentives statism? What incentives are you, or the ARI going to offer to counteract that? You are correct, everything I described is a derivative of bad ideas—but it also happens that these derivatives will make it virtually impossible to fix the philosophy.

  • Economics is not Rocket Science? ROFL

    It's 42 years after the Moon landing and economists can't figure out the planned obsolescence has been going on in cars for the last 40 years. What happened to the DEPRECIATION of all of those cars? The economists forgot about it. There were 200,000,000 cars in the US in 1995. At $1,500 in depreciation per car per year that is $300,000,000,000.

    How about mandatory double-entry accounting for EVERYBODY? When did economists suggest that?

  • @HiciacetKolas

    you just spent 4 full blocks of youtube comment to demonstrate that you missed the point of the video. If you fix the philosophy you solve the derivative problems. For example, Are you going to vote for the politician who says that we need to have a hands-off approach and allow the inefficient sectors of the market to liquidate? I'm assuming you are and so are many others because your philosophy supports rationality which allowed you to learn basic econ

  • Soooooo Agree! What the h_ _l are we teaching are children??!!!!! A pack of lies according to WHO?? What a great reason to end tenure!!!!!! End the educational experiment in America that is public education! Free the Market. Can we get an Ayn Rand Institute school system put in place? I'd be so in favor!!!!!!!!!

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more