 And he gets worse because he goes from a monopoly to what? And you can blame that on capitalism, but you can get the same, you can get exactly the same result if you have people trade because they flip a dice. So if you took 100 people, let's say give 100 people $10 each, and then they had to trade with each other. If I, you flip a coin and I flip a coin, and if it's, we flip a coin, if it's heads, you get a dollar. And so that's your game. Heads gives you a dollar. If you play that out till it concludes, what happens is some people lose, let's say 10, they have $10, they lose 10 times in a row. Well, then what happens? That's zero. Well, they can't trade anymore. So what happens is that people lose at different rates, but if you lose enough, even if it takes you 100 trades to lose all your money, as soon as you hit zero, you're done. If you play that out to its conclusion, even though it's random, completely random, the trading, one person ends up with all the money and everyone else ends up with zero. And so that I'm a member of a name. I mean, this is terrible. I can't tell you how much, how terrible this is. It's, it's, it's really, really bad because this plays into every anti-capitalist idea that's out there. Capitalism is just flipping coins. The distribution of wealth is not determined by ability. It's not determined by production. It's not determined by ingenuity or applying reason to a problem. It doesn't enhance the world. It doesn't enhance other people. It's a zero sum world. And therefore, if it's a zero sum world and it's all based on luck, then why is it wrong to redistribute wealth? Why is it wrong to regulate people? Why is it wrong to control people? But the whole essence of trade, the whole essential aspect of trade is the trade as a win-win relationship. It's a win-win transaction. Both parties are better off. That doesn't exist in monopoly and that doesn't exist in flipping a coin. And by giving up on the most important feature of capitalism, which is entrepreneurship and trade, production and trade, that's what, that's the most, from an economic perspective. I'm not even talking about the philosophy, the morality, and the politics of capitalism, just from an economic perspective. The two important features of capitalism are production and trade. And yet, for Jordan, they don't exist. There's just an algorithm out there, flipping coins, people getting money, and he can predict how the money will be distributed at the end of the game. And how did new money show up? How did new wealth appear? Where did that come from? And who gets that? What's the physics formula to allocate that? I mean, it's hard for me to express how frustrated I am at this, because millions of people are going to watch it. Millions of people are going to watch it. And it's just wrong. And he is portrayed out there as a defender of markets, as a defender of capitalism. And later on, he'll say a wonderful market saw. But he's just given this, which is undermined everything he says later on. People think of him. He's got the millions of followers. All right, let's see. Let's keep going here. We'll get to Joe Rogan. And you'll see what Joe Rogan has to say about the world. Oh my God. God. It's so frustrating. It's so frustrating. And I understand why he won't have me on the show, given what he says about economics. Native Canadian family, West Coast Indian family, Native family, and this particular culture had a tradition, part-life, and they had the same problem in their culture. And the problem was that some of the big chiefs over some period of time would end up with like all the stuff, all of it. And now. But how did they end up with all the stuff? And again, if you don't differentiate with capitalism, then people assume that this is the same way the capitalists get all the stuff. The chiefs got all the stuff because they had the political power to take all the stuff. The chiefs got all the stuff because they confiscated all the stuff. They stole all the stuff. They took all the stuff. They didn't trade for all the stuff. It's not that this chief them with some free market where the chiefs landed up with all the stuff. It's a zero sum world in which they had the gun, political power, and took it all. And he's saying this is just like capitalism. This is what happens. All these systems are the same. And he's ignoring the fundamental principle, difference between them. And thus undermining and undercutting any support he might provide capitalism leader on. That wasn't good because, well, for obvious reasons, you know, it would destabilize the society. That's in some sense the least of the problem. And so they evolved this mechanism. They'd have these big celebrations that rich people would put on where status was determined by how much of that wealth you would give away. Right, right. And that was the potlatch. Yeah, yeah, they had to do it. Well, that's philanthropy, right? People really look very highly, very wealth and gain. Yeah, well, then I haven't, this might be a biased sound. So the whole idea philanthropy is you've stolen all the stuff from all the people, and you give some of it back and you to appease them so they don't rebel against you. They don't slaughter you. And philanthropy in the modern time is the same way, you know, you accumulate a lot of money for no reason other than how much Joe Rogan has earned. But obviously it's all being luck and so on. God, I mean, these are wealthy people, both Jordan and Joe Rogan have earned a lot of money through their own skill and talent and entrepreneurial capabilities. And yet this is the level at which they understand. And then philanthropy is just done in order to appease the people so they don't rebel against these rich guys who've taken all the stuff. And this is just how society is supposed to function. This is how this is the model, you know, example, but I don't think so. And if it is, it's biased towards entrepreneur conservative types who you would think in the parody sense would be the least likely to do this. I haven't met anyone who has a vast fortune whose primary concern is isn't what the hell can I do with all this money that's beneficial as fast as possible. They're not sitting around thinking, I need another super yacht that now look, there's going to be people like that, you know, but, but I haven't met any of them. You met Jeff Bezos? No, I haven't. I haven't met Bezos. What is Joe Rogan got against Bezos? But as he's got a couple, I'm sure he does. I'm sure he does. But like, I'm pretty happy about the fact that he's building rocket ship. Good for Jordan Peterson. She once in a while, he says something and you go, yes, I'm pretty happy is building, you know, spacecraft as well. And you need billions and that actually takes a lot of capital. Yes, you know, and the other thing that there's a couple of other things about capitalism that are worth thinking about one is he hasn't said anything about capitalism until now, by the way, not a word about capitalism until now. But there's another thing she's talked about all these other systems, communism, tribalism, all systems of force and coercion, all systems of zero sum economics. And now he's saying there's nothing about capitalism. So what he's saying is everything I've said before is capitalism. So angry. All the evidence suggests that relatively free markets are the best way to make the absolutely poor richer. That's so relatively few markets. Why? Yes. I mean, maybe absolutely free markets would make them even richer. Not an inequality issue. But notice that what's good about capitalism is helping the poor just that while they're not starving, and that's something we've lifted more people out of poverty in the last 15 years than in the entire course of human history. Can I pause you for a second now? Okay, now we're going to get a Joe Rogan rant. Brace yourselves. Brace yourselves because you remember Joe Rogan at some point during the campaign supported Bernie Sanders. So you know, this is his Bernie Sanders take on economics. It's about at the level of economic understanding that Boone has. Oh, one point that I forgot. I read this the other day that where Karl Marx is buried, they have to charge money because they have to maintain. And they need to maintain it, which makes sure that's true. Because I read that and I was like, is that real? My daughter once bought me a 50% off Karl Marx doll, which I thought was just ridiculous. And she bought it for that reason. She told me it's so funny. It was so funny. Capitalism. Here we go. Here's when people start talking about capitalism, and we talk about capitalism uplifting poor people. One of the issues that a lot of people have in this country is when you ship jobs overseas and you ship companies start manufacturing things over essentially pennies on the dollar. I mean, it's one of the great contradictions to the progressives in America that they complain about capitalism on a fucking iPhone because if you knew where that iPhone was, if you went down to the factory where that iPhone was manufactured, you'd be heartbroken. If you went further to where the minerals are dug out of the ground and the Congo, you know, let me just, let me just say, I'll stop him here. I could comment on everything he's going to say, but God, you would not be heartbroken if you went to where they manufacture the iPhones. Indeed, you'd be heartened if you had a heart and people who've actually done it rather than just sit at home comfortably in wealth and complain about these things. If you actually went to the factory in China and then went, talked to the workers and actually then went to the place where the worker came from. Maybe they're a little village in rural China where they grew up and saw the life they lived there. You would be heartened by the fact that the workers in the factories of the making the iPhones in China, whose lives are significantly better off than what they used to be and are going to be significantly better off in 10, 20 years if they're allowed to, you know, because of constraints and freedom that are coming in China, significantly better off than a path to success, not a path to prosperity, not a path to not starving, not a path to economic independence. As individuals, forget China, forget that you hate China, forget that it's fascist, just at the individual level. It's just not true, but you see when people like Joe Rogan say it over and over and over again, and the left says it over and over again, and economics professors say it over and over again, and modelists say it over and over again, and they all say it over and over again, then we start believing it. There's a great Ted Talk, which I recommend. God, I don't remember her name. She's an Asian correspondent for NPR, so a typical leftist NPR correspondent who spent a lot of time in China, lived in China, and reported from the factories and went to the factories and talked to the women who worked in the factories and wrote about it and did a Ted Talk about it and wrote a book about it, and she shows how much these factories have benefited and improved the lives of these Chinese and how evil it is to sit back at home and condemn this, and as a consequence of that, ultimately, if people follow this condemnation, you're basically condemning these people to poverty for the rest of their lives. They have to go backwards, backwards. There is documentation after documentation after documentation after documentation, sweatshops are good for the people who are there, and they disappear now because of your activism, but because they gain skills, they increase in productivity, and their wages go up. Now, I'm not justifying slavery, evil, I'm not justifying whipping people and chaining them to machines, any of that, but in terms of wages, voluntary transactions, sweatshirts have been proven time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time again to be hugely beneficial because they train people, they give them skills, and the reason they take the jobs is because the job is a better alternative than what they have, and they get wealthier from the job. Their wages go up over time, and ultimately sweatshops disappear. Even in China today, a lot of the very, very lowest paid activities are no longer done in China because China, the productivity of labor has gone up so much that you'd have to pay them a lot of money to do the work. Be devastated. That's the reality of capitalism. That's the reality of sending jobs overseas. The cure to that is a more even distribution of wealth within the company, meaning that the company would have to, and I'm not picking on Apple like any company needs, they would have to pay the people that work there a decent living wage with great benefits and health insurance and dental and all the stuff that people want and need in order to feel secure and safe, give them a great working environment, don't overwork them, and now how much money? Because the amount of money that Apple has put aside, and obviously I'm an Apple fan, I have an Apple phone right here, I'm not picking on that, but they are one of the richest companies that's ever existed on the face of planet earth, but how are they doing that? One of the ways they're doing that is by paying people very little to make their products that they sell for a giant amount of money. That is unbelievably ridiculous. I mean, it just really is. You know, the contribution of labor, in terms of assembling these iPhones is that is what allows Apple to make a fortune, and what would happen if Apple started paying all its workers much higher wages, much higher wages? What would happen if that was the case? I mean, they would have to charge a lot more for the iPhones and sell a lot less of those iPhones, and because they sold less of those iPhones, what would happen to the number of jobs that were available to assemble those iPhones? It would decline. A lot of those people would go out of business. Whenever you pay people artificially high wages, artificially high wages, whenever you pay people more than they are productive, what happens? You lose money on those employees and therefore you get rid of them. Now, we'll get to John Ford, the Ford example where Ford basically doubled wages of everybody at the Ford plant some year, but what Ford did when he doubled those wages? By doubling those wages, he attracted the most productive workers in the car industry, and he laid off the people who couldn't produce at five, whatever it was, I think five dollars an hour, I can't remember what the number was, five dollars a day, probably a day in those days. So what he did by increasing the wages was not just randomly increase wages, but increase wages for the most productive, and expected them to live up to their productivity. And he said he wanted to pay them so they could buy their own car, but that's not why he did it. You know, Jordan Peterson will talk about this. That's not how he did it, why he did it. Jordan will say it is, but it's not. He did it because he wanted to attract the best, most productive people to work at his factory. He wanted to be able to expect and demand from them extraordinary productive ability. I mean, the number of them who could buy the car would not make a dent in how wealthy Ford would be, would not make a dent in the sales of Ford. He did it because it was his, his rational interest. He did it because it was going to raise profitability. He did it by the way, because he was a master, and this is what made Ford so amazing. It was a master at increasing the productivity of labor. That's what the assembly line is all about. The assembly line is a way to get more productivity out of the people that you have. And as a consequence, you can pay them all because they become more productive. Thank you for listening or watching The Iran Book Show. If you'd like to support the show, we make it as easy as possible for you to trade with me. You get value from listening, you get value from watching, show your appreciation. You can do that by going to iranbookshow.com slash support by going to Patreon, subscribe star locals, and just making a appropriate contribution on any one of those, any one of those channels. Also, if you'd like to see The Iran Book Show grow, please consider sharing our content and, of course, subscribe. Press that little bell button right down there on YouTube so that you get an announcement when we go live. And for those of you who are already subscribers and those of you who are already supporters of the show, thank you. I very much appreciate it.