Go to our sponsor betterhelp.com/ee to get 10% off your first month, and talk to a licensed therapist today.
@upvotecomment2110
Жыл бұрын
The Left's Equality plan 1. Print Money 2. Borrow money 3. Pay off other people's problem (college loan and Ukraine)
@Mike-zx1kx
Жыл бұрын
Your start picture show Greenland wrong. It are part of the Kingdom of Denmark. If it were not your percentage would soon be correct!
@theX24968Z
Жыл бұрын
one thing you forgot to mention is something known as "the elephant curve". much of the inequality comes from outsourced parts of the economy.
@kieranrollinson8750
Жыл бұрын
DUDE!!!!!!!!!!! WEALTH HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH MONEY!!!!!!!! FOR EXAMPLE, MOST OF THE WEALTH IN THE WORLD CONSISTS OF STOCKS/SHARES FROM COMPANIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! IF THE TOP 500 COMPANIES WERE LIQUIDATED THEN HALF OF THE WORLD'S ENTIRE WEALTH WOULD DISAPPEAR INTO NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@OGDailylama
Жыл бұрын
You know who else feels inequality actually means something? Monkeys that get fed a complete diet when their mates get only grapes... #JustSayin
@Tobi-ci3ns
Жыл бұрын
No mention of rent seeking, which I believe is the real issue. More and more, the money of the rich is not going towards investments in producing value, but instead into investments into creating monopolies via acquiring land, lobbying for anti-competitive legislation, and aggressive business tactics to shut down competition by undercutting prices or buying out any competitors. This isn't producing value for anyone, as it's draining money away from the productive parts of the economy and into an increasingly swollen parasitic rent seeking class.
@erich1394
Жыл бұрын
this comment is worth more than the video. nicely put! very succinct.
@jaideepshekhar4621
Жыл бұрын
This comment is U N D E R R A T E D. VERY well put!
@obliviouz
Жыл бұрын
I'm sorry but this is completely counter-factual. Your comment might have some validity in the days of Ma Bell or railway tycoons, but look at the richest people today and they're effectively all innovators: Facebook which effectively kickstarted social media, Tesla which kickstarted the EV industry, Amazon which revolutionised online shopping (and deliveries and has one of the world's best supply chains). Time and again, the *most* successful are still innovators and inventors, not established players.
@JaimeWarlock
Жыл бұрын
I am a strange libertarian in that I believe that land and infrastructure should be the domain of government. In other words, government should own the land and charge rent for it's use. In balance though, I don't believe in an income tax or sales tax. Governments should not be allowed to own individuals or tax them directly.
@jaideepshekhar4621
Жыл бұрын
@@obliviouz All of them are established players wth.
@GabrielSantosStandardCombo
Жыл бұрын
The biggest issue with inequality has to be residential property, which is horded by the wealthy and effectively extracts the wealth from middle class. The hypothetical example of investing in industry sounds fine, but outbidding for extra residential units is also seen as an investment, with deteriorating outcomes in the current economic system. Property for farming might have been the important thing in the past, but now, having a room to sleep in is a struggle for many. I'm surprised this was not addressed in the video.
@trenomas1
Жыл бұрын
Thank you. When you consider lobbying, superpacs, and the fact that we can't eat factories and planes, Wealth concentration only serves the wealthy. This system gets in the way of every basic need a human has.
@zibbitybibbitybop
Жыл бұрын
A major factor in runaway house prices in some places is simply supply constraints, though. You could make the argument that the rich would want to limit housing construction in order to drive rent and sale prices up, but if there were more property being built, there'd be an absolute larger pool of property for them to own. I think NIMBYs blocking construction and governments stupidly enforcing rent controls are as much at fault here for the housing issue as rich investors eating half the property on the market. It's a complex matter.
@trenomas1
Жыл бұрын
@@zibbitybibbitybop airbnb is a major constraint, so is the rental market. You're kinda right that increased supply is needed, but it doesn't have nearly the same impact as one human owning the housing for hundreds.
@dingusdingus2152
Жыл бұрын
Hoarded. A horde is a bunch of barbarians. A hoard is an accumulation of stuff.
@mrkekson
Жыл бұрын
Also don't forget laws, our government for one make laws what make them wealthy, straight up damaging our healthcare (life expectancy) education (chance to get out poverty) and economy (companies not made wont make profit, again get out of property). So whiles it can be seen as a pure eco problem, it has a lot to do with corruption too caused by that eco interest.
@Ves189
Жыл бұрын
As far as i understand it, the point is: If there is too much concentration of wealth on the top, it will lead for investments also to be concentrated in areas where high profit margins can be achieved, which are then likely luxurious goods or expensive real estate e.g.. This seems to lead to a situation where the economy becomes more and more focused on the needs of the few wealthy while ordinary people only get as much as is needed to produce these goods, while the surplus or profits go again to the wealthy to finance their lifestyle. So over time investments into stuff that would help ordinary people become less attractive overall.
@apc9714
Жыл бұрын
I would say is the spending of the people of the top driving investments in those areas and not the other way around. If the spending was more bottom heavy, more investments would go into normal goods and away from luxury
@bodaciouschad
Жыл бұрын
@@apc9714 You just paraphrased OP, but applied reverse casaulity to reach the opposite conclusion. Wages fell, the wealthy grew wealthier through investment, this created a feedbakc loop where investors offered betetr servcies to the wealthy who owned shares in their businesses and fewer businesses catered to the common man who progressively owned less and earnt less- and *then you claimed that the problem is the poor don't spend enough.* No, the issue was allowing for the disproportionate accumulation of wealth by assets relative to earnings that encouraged the shift away from a middle class to a lower, lowest and upper class system.
@acevaver5425
Жыл бұрын
The problem is globalization and centralization. That's what capitalism does. It consolidates power so it's easier to make a decision, ie. Legislative branch vs. Executive branch. A powerful executive branch is easily corruptible, and a vast legislative branch leads to poor continuity. The worst part, is neither forces has extensity to prevent the external migration of wealth, without some form of protectionist and mercantile policies. I find that the biggest issues of today result from a laissez-faire ideals. People are so used to personal freedom that we forget why we have government in the first place, it's to maintain a standard of justice, and prevent wars. The populace, unhinged, can be just as vile and cruel as the nobility, so having a common ground both for economics, social etiquette, and politics are a necessary measure to prevent the extremes of either. In fact, you can even force a standard of wealth, anyone with asset worth more than they can possibly use should be forced into retirement, this way, not only can the youth grow in a flourishing society, their son and daughters will also have the same opportunity to build the same wealth without having to rely on their fathers. It will allow everyone to make mistakes, grow, and compete. Progress don't come from wrangling out a dry sponge so your son and daughter is filled to bursting that they can't move, but allowing everyone an opportunity to fight for it. And with a flourishing economy, even if your son and daughter won't be forced to retire, at least, they won't ever starve.
@neeneko
Жыл бұрын
Which is likely to get worse as we see more and more automation and AI systems. The thing that keeps middle and lower class people in the economy is that the people with the most wealth need their labor. The less of that labor they need, the less money has to flow to them, and the more can be kept in the wealthier part of the economy.
@meltedyakkystick3891
Жыл бұрын
I get what you mean by this. In theory it makes perfect sense, but in reality the line between people's needs and desires is actually pretty fuzzy. Opportunity exists for average people because of this fuzziness. If billionaires want people to build private jets and rockets they need those people to go to school to learn how to do that. It's necessary for people to be granted opportunities to advance the economy.
@jonhudson8770
Жыл бұрын
Resentment towards income inequality in Western nations is about the stagnation of the median wage, not the existence of multi-billionaires. Most people are fine with a few getting fabulously wealthy as long as they're moving up too. But when the top is the only segment with wealth growth, the average folks feel exploited.
@FlanPoirot
Жыл бұрын
then they're idiots. it is not fine for a small minority to accumulate more and more and more wealth. having a few individuals with that amount of monetary power is... dangerous. we don't have to be a communist hellhole and make everyone earn the same regardless of what they add but when a single individual has more money than entire nations you know they will start doing things that are good for them but not so much for everyone else
@Saidan79
Жыл бұрын
Absolutely. The wages in the United States, and surely in many other place, have been increasing much slower than the cost of housing, for example; there are also other trends that due to their blatant unsustainability have over the last few decades decreased our quality of life and living standards in general. I remember that only a few decades ago you frequently had millionaires living as neighbors of "regular" people on an average street because the "regular" people had comfortable access to enough resources to live just great and jealousy was therefore a rare thing. Nowadays rich people have been consolidating in terms of where they live so much that they occupy entire streets or even districts, right behind the 10 feet tall walls, security systems and guards.
@lennardr.4387
Жыл бұрын
People do care about multi-billionaires because it simply feels unfair. Extreme wealth concentration creates imbalances of power and undermines social cohesion.
@87stevan
Жыл бұрын
@@lennardr.4387 Sod off commie.
@oldvlognewtricks
Жыл бұрын
Ambitious to beg the question that the existence of multi-billionaires isn’t the direct result of, or doesn’t share a mutual cause with, stagnation in the median wage. The largest employers in the US - off the top of my head: Walmart, Amazon, etc. - just so happen to also happen to have famously terrible pay and working conditions… and they magically turn their owners into billionaires. And once they’re billionaires they magically sprout habits like union busting, lobbying against minimum wage increases and all kinds of other totally random and not at all causally related characteristics. It’s perhaps possible for billionaires and fair wages to coexist, but billionaires sure do seem to expend a lot of their time and resources to avoid paying fair wages.
@diegovideco
Жыл бұрын
Talking from the perspective of "billionaires adding value to the economy" (by consuming or investing) sidesteps completely the problem of inequality. Just because more profits are produced doesn't mean that they will be distributed equally, on the contrary, that mostly happens under the principle of exploiting workers as much as possible (and in doing so paying them as little as possible). Yes, a billionaire might incentivize thousands of jobs by buying a jet, but the fact that profits go to the (already wealthy) employers and not the employees is not taken into account in the example.
@Gabriel-pk8lw
Жыл бұрын
The thing is that most of those high industries are indeed quite well paid.
@theBear89451
Жыл бұрын
I like to pay as little as possible for KZitem. Am I exploiting billionaires? If the investment makes production more efficient, new wealth is created out of thin air. The new wealth is then split between buyer and seller. Let's say someone invests in a way to watch TV more efficiently. The difference between streaming and cable was split between the buyer and seller, let's as 50/50, with steaming costing half of cable to produce. Cable is $100. Streaming is $75. $25 goes to watcher and $25 goes to producer. In this hypothetical, a 50/50 split creates wealth inequality.
@_ata_3
Жыл бұрын
@@Gabriel-pk8lw high industries that belong to rich people and that don't pay their workers enough.
@diegovideco
Жыл бұрын
@@Gabriel-pk8lw Just as an example: not the miners that produce the raw materials for the circuits, nor the communities of people whose water get poisoned during such operations.
@diegovideco
Жыл бұрын
@@theBear89451 You are confusing buyers and sellers with owners/employers and workers/employees. It's not the same thing at all. Buyer-seller relationships doesn't explain where wealth accumulates, nor why. Owner-worker relationships on the other hand explains much more, like how value is produced and who produces it (in a very real-material way, the worker) and who gets to own the product of the labor (the owner, because they already own the capital, the factory, the land, etc.: "money makes money"). And you need to think of the consequences of the feedback loop implied by such a way of production (not just a single round).
@laughingman7882
Жыл бұрын
Something has bugged me about this channel for a long time and I finally found it. I imagine it's a by product of the way economics is taught but EE point blank endorsed trickle down economics. Didn't use the name but flat out described them in a positive light
@slop123456789
Жыл бұрын
EE teaches Keynesian, Neoliberal pseudoscience and labels it economics.
@JohnClarkW
Жыл бұрын
@@slop123456789 You mean Friedman, who is the father of Neoliberal Economics, and inspired trickle down. Keynes held nearly the opposite view of economics.
@JohnClarkW
Жыл бұрын
Sadly, most people educated in western countries are likely to have been indoctrinated in the Friedman style Neoliberal Economics, which was the basis of trickle down economics. Krugman at times seem extreme the other way, but none of his policies lead to millions of people living in poverty, unlike Friedman.
@metalsabatico
Жыл бұрын
Economics is not a science period lol.
@charlesriley6618
Жыл бұрын
Trickle down economics is a political catchphrase. It's not even a real belief.
@D4PPZ456
Жыл бұрын
The primary issue with inequality is downstream from politics. The economic impact is felt when a small percentage of the country owns soo much of the nation's wealth that any form of taxation is basically just a tax directed at them. When this is the case, they tend to use their wealth to pass things like tax cuts at increasing frequency. Eventually, policies designed to suit their interests start to hurt the working man, and this also starts impacting their bottom lines. When this occurs, rather than using their power to pass policies that would fix the problem, they call it a failing nation and move their resources and labour to greener pastures.
@Master-ls2op
Жыл бұрын
problem is people so not understand the taxes. we also have allot of corruption in politics.
@D4PPZ456
Жыл бұрын
@@Master-ls2op The government is far from perfect. There's a legitimate argument to be made that some of the money would be better in the hands of the people, but there are a number of examples in history where the people in power reduced state taxation soo far due to their class interest that it lead to the downfall of their entire society. When it serves their interests people are willing to sacrifice the wellbeing of others, even when it's demonstrably a bad idea for everyone (including themselves).
@theBear89451
Жыл бұрын
I think politics are secondary. I would rate zero-sum-ish situations as primary. For example, home square foot per capita is at an all time high in the US, but because of inequality homes create an inequality feedback loop.
@jonathan2847
Жыл бұрын
If people had votes relative to the taxes they paid this would solve this problem.
@JAN0L
Жыл бұрын
Did you know that Sweden has more billionaires per capita than US?
@zch7491
Жыл бұрын
He did everything to defend the status quo besides say "trickle down"
@charlesriley6618
Жыл бұрын
Trickle down is not a real economic theory or political philosophy.
@alexchaput5146
11 ай бұрын
Kinda missed the point there Charlie. I’m sure this guy is funded by some big wigs. What a shame
@adrs1380
Жыл бұрын
Reality check: getting enough to eat is still the main preoccupation of billions of people. A few billionaires buying planes (or whatever else) won't solve it because those millionaires own the plane factories and make sure to pay miserably small salaries to the workers.
@ronblack7870
Жыл бұрын
the workers in those factories have no problem getting food. the people needing food are in africa . they don't build planes. they are ruled by dictators and or super corrupt politicians.
@TheBooban
Жыл бұрын
Don’t exaggerate. We 8 billion and not billions of us are starving. But it would be better if we are fewer so don’t complain about birth decline.
@ozymandias8523
Жыл бұрын
@@CheapSushithey are mostly in poor countries where they don't even know what a billionaire is.
@ethanszotko6284
11 ай бұрын
You’re both uneducated
@user-rd5nc1nb9f
11 ай бұрын
not a single person in the US suffers from famine. You cant compare the US population with that of the Congo. And yes private planes do make a difference, the more complex the production process and the more technically advanced the RandD needed, the wider the pool of people who profit from it is. people who arent rich don't consume a lot nor do the consume complex to produce goods.
@jgp6574
Жыл бұрын
betterhelp forces you to sign up for multiple sessions before even trying it. the lowest they go is about $60 per session, but you need to sign up for at least 4. so you do the math. most people are depressed and stressed because they are poor. we cant afford rent. we certainly can't afford mental health treatment.
@mykeprior3436
Жыл бұрын
Im a failure that will never own a home and be a rent slave for life. Sorry about that, 60$ please.
@nathanielroach6559
Жыл бұрын
If you look at the data, almost all social problems track with with relative poverty, not absolute poverty. When you look at statistics like crime, life expectancy, infant mortality, obesity, mental health outcomes, substance abuse, youth delinquency, social cohesion (and on and on) you are better off in a poorer, more equal country than a rich unequal one. Inequality within communities matters more than how rich each individual in the community is. That's why you see so many social problems in a wealthy country like the US. Source: Richard Wilkinson & Kate Pickett, 'The Inner Level'
@goddessoftacos4005
Жыл бұрын
I think this is the best take I've read in this comment section. Perfect, and thank you for the source! So glad there's writing on this.
@nielskorpel8860
Жыл бұрын
And this is what it would look like, for economics explained not to talk around the real problems in the room.
@justforfun6363
11 ай бұрын
Now i started thinking abt who funds this yt channel
@Mersoh
7 ай бұрын
@nathanielroach6559 In what poor and "equal" country is crime, life expectancy, infant mortality, substance abuse, and youth delinquency at all better than in western less equal countries? Are you referring to (ex-)communist states?
@nathanielroach6559
7 ай бұрын
@@Mersoh I'll be honest with you, I never tried to find the poorest most equal country. You don't need to. If you look at all countries on a graph with social problems, any and all social problems, against inequality and the picture is plain. And I'm not into engaging with people about whether measures are communist or not. I'm interested in what works and I won't be drawn into that kind of scare mongering.
@kekero540
Жыл бұрын
It isn’t about wealth it is about owning the means to create more wealth. Unless you have those means you have no real power and no real means of attaining a much greater degree of wealth.
@superduper9357
Жыл бұрын
One of the things that freezes the inequality gap n place is that we don't have real capitalism. We have 'crony capitalism' where those with extreme wealth (not someone who has managed to save $1mln their pension) are able to influence the rules of the game to limit competition.
@erich1394
Жыл бұрын
Accumulation of power inevitably leads to this IMO - the world is a game where, when you get 100 points, you get to change one rule. It quickly cascades until you end up with a "crony" version of just about anything.
@shaunsensei6948
Жыл бұрын
EXACTLY!! You'll have people say capitalism is inherently "crony" but they need to learn some economics and history to understand how that is not the case. The big businesses and rich billionaires all love government cause well government is a monopoly and if they are on your side nothing is going to change that. In a true capitalistic society these things would never arise. I am not advocating for removal of government but instead that governent should focus only on law and military.
@Emdiggydog
Жыл бұрын
Unfortunately the evidence suggests that more unrestrained capitalism leads to monopolies, rent seeking behaviour, and the crushing of competition.
@erich1394
Жыл бұрын
@@frostbyte1987 capitalism is an economic theory, whereas human greed is a fact of life. We're damned if you do, damned if you don't - the concentration of wealth and power is never justified, yet occurrs in pretty much every society. I see capitalism as one manifestation of a darker side of humanity that tends to show up whenever there are things to horde or people to dominate.
@j.l.stanford1754
Жыл бұрын
That's just regular capitalism
@Jibbzz
Жыл бұрын
Income inequality in the US and Canada is pretty damned scary.
@cato451
Жыл бұрын
Reminds me of an old saying:”the U.S. has the richest poor people in the world.”
@theBear89451
Жыл бұрын
Only because other countries don't have a way to track their richest.
@ByronBillings
Жыл бұрын
I'd argue that if your nation has an inflationary currency (as all modern economies do), then your economy does become a zero-sum game, as wealthy people are forced to store their wealth in assets, which drives up the cost of essential assets for the rest of the population. And since wages (how poorer people make money) are always lagging behind these assets, it leads to more and more inequality over time, which is exactly what we are seeing.
@theBear89451
Жыл бұрын
The problem is people are thinking of economy as ONLY zero-sum.
@the11382
Жыл бұрын
People in the middle class often own a house and/or a car. I guess it makes sense that inequality rises more when less people own houses and cars.
@obliviouz
Жыл бұрын
No. There is not a (in long timeframes) finite amount of resources. You can grow food, and better more innovative processes can grow more food from the same area of land and inputs, for example.
@ByronBillings
Жыл бұрын
@@obliviouz It is not the ability to produce resources that is the problem. We could easily build millions more houses, and grow enough food to feed the whole world many times over. However, with an inflationary economy where the wealthy are trying to protect their wealth via hoarding assets, such things are kept artificially scarce in order to protect said wealth. Houses are not built via zoning schemes in order to keep house prices constantly rising (ahead of inflation), and farmers are paid by the government not to produce too much food.
@ByronBillings
Жыл бұрын
@@the11382 Yep, as assets become more concentrated at the top, and the poor are taxed further and further via inflation, since they are the last to use newly created currency, inequality must rise.
@neoluyorabi
Жыл бұрын
AZNM9T is more favorable with government and it will probably be the one that government institutions will rely on. Still worth holding both.
@titolovely8237
Жыл бұрын
remember in the 90s where homer simpson was considered a lower middle class worker, but happened to own a home, 2 cars, had 3 kids, and a stay at home wife? yea.... that's how far living standards have degraded. most ppl dont understand that the vast majority of ppl in the US now live at or very near poverty levels, but it doesnt visibly show because of access to credit, but really most ppl are dirt poor.
@mister_chispa
Жыл бұрын
I have always found the premise of the "Economic problem" that people have unlimited desires, very naive.
@ClassicMovies589
9 ай бұрын
Economics student here.Mind telling why
@person880
Жыл бұрын
The inequality itself isn't the issue. The issue is that we have all sorts of disadvantaged, poor, disabled, homeless, and other vulnerable people in the world whose needs are nowhere near to be being met, all while a few people get ridiculously wealthy. If the basic needs of all people were taken care of, and then a few people got really rich, we could at least be fine with that. Our productivity has skyrocketed in recent years, yet wages remain stagnant, labour laws are not any better for employees, we don't work fewer hours or have better paid leave, many people live on the fringe of homelessness and medical bankruptcy, we have developed an insane dependence on cars, we are attached to employer-sponsored healthcare, we have rising living costs, etc. Rich people might improve things when they spend money, but that money was earned on the backs of regular people who now have to wait for some minor amount of wealth to "trickle down" on them.
@eat_ze_bugs
Жыл бұрын
This is what happens when regular people in highly developed nations get complacent and the rich sees it as an opportunity to make more money by exporting jobs to maintain or reduce operational costs. The wealthy, and the poor & middle class from developing countries love it, it's a win-win solution on a global level. It's only the poor & middle class of wealthy nations that are getting screwed and they are the minority.
@logans3365
Жыл бұрын
Trickle down doesn’t exist, as you stated it is the working man who created the value that was used to buy the plane, it was the working man who built the plane, and it is the working man who lost all the value and resources of the plane, there is only exploitation here.
@supercommie
Жыл бұрын
My personal opinion is that a lot of societal issues pertaining to resentment and hate toward immigrants and minorities of all sorts can be attributed to the fact that 26 people own half the world's wealth. Humans have an innate expectation of meritocracy, and when you show them the wealth distribution curve of the current society(you can't tell them that it's the actual curve though or their bias will kick in), nearly all of them will tell you this curve is unfair and not a reflection of a society that is meritocratic.
@user-rd5nc1nb9f
11 ай бұрын
really depends who you ask. If you are actually a believer of meritocracy, seeing the top portion owning the most by far is just what makes sense and what you would want and expect
@FattrTV
Жыл бұрын
The inequality issue comes down to 2 things. The only way wage workers were ever able to build wealth is investment over a life time. That is not possible anymore, but to stock buy backs, instead of dividends. And the second reason is after a point, wealthy people no longer spend their money on anything beyond influence. After you buy everything you want all that is left in power, influence, and gaining importance. All this waffling around with all these factors are just pointing people attention and anger away from the real issue, there is NO way to for the normal masses to participate in politics due to not being allowed to accumulate wealth over a period of time.
@nielskorpel8860
Жыл бұрын
If what you say is true, that politics only comes to those who have managed to accumulate wealth.... ... then those who can't could never participate in politics, and they could never get out of their predicament. That doesn't sound good.
@Youcanatme
Жыл бұрын
Kind of have the feeling this channel is going less in deapth and becoming one of the channels who say alot without saying much.
@g.zoltan
Жыл бұрын
So the conclusion is that... Inequality can be good as it drives investment, so the rich get richer and the poor get richer. Inequality can be bad if top earners spend their money on consumption rather than investments.
@drwalka10
Жыл бұрын
Even if money is spent on consumption ... it helps everyone below the rich
@ordinaryperson-my7qr
Жыл бұрын
@@drwalka10yeah but investment is better way of doing it than consumption
@ilyamarfeara1226
Жыл бұрын
I kinda don't understand, how can the poor get richer when the rich also get richer ? It's feels like money are infinite or something. Thus making money worthless overtime ? Drives inflation or something like that ? Or it's just the numbers that goes up with no actual value ?
@manekrit2417
Жыл бұрын
Thing is consumtion of essentials should be treated like investment. If you spend on social housing decreasing homelesnees you increase productivity of previously homeless people. Universal Healthcare, housing and education is best investment in society.
@Rosencrantz17
Жыл бұрын
@@ilyamarfeara1226 Don't think of money like it's a resource. Rather think of it as "the meter of value", with sales really just being points where value is measured between two people (or a person and a corporation) and an exchange is made. You're not exchanging money for something, you're exchanging the work you did to earn that money for something, with the money you pay measuring how much work you're exchanging for the good. That being said, it is important for money to be a relatively stable metric. We don't really want it to be a good store of value, because then people will hoard it and watch its value go up as money becomes scarce. At the same time, we want it to be stable enough in the moment that people will agree to use it for their transactions - those "measurements" from before. But everything that gets added to the economy adds value. It's not a zero sum game, everyone's work - be it in organizing labor, investing in new endeavors, securing investments, building something, designing something - makes the pie bigger. The theory being is that the rich and poor can both get richer if the new pie is distributed in some part to everyone.
@Jump-2-the-moon
Жыл бұрын
Ending felt a little abrupt. What is the key takeaway from this video?
@AceTriggerz
Жыл бұрын
I have gripes with how things are structured paywise. All the people who actually know how to do the work at the company I work at are the lowest paid, and the highest paid people are people who can direct from a higher level. If all the lower tier workers left, that would be it, the company wouldnt function. If all the executives left, the company would just go on as usual. We literally have people directing the company who do not know the area they are directing in, despite that the company I work for is one of the largest in the country I live. This is while regular workers live in a city that has an average monthly rental rate of 2500, and we are making 50-65k gross income (so like 40-50k net).
@erich1394
Жыл бұрын
Yep. An we're increasingly monitored and controlled via metrics that completely miss the point because nobody who knew anything was allowed in the room when those metrics were pulled out of some narcissistic vampire's asshole.
@Aerrow62
Жыл бұрын
Its the inflation and tax thievery and discrimination by tax authority that causes issues. Equality isn't simply about making similar income but similar treatment and respect.
@chrissscottt
Жыл бұрын
It's surprising how so many people who had the good fortune to be born healthy and intelligent into a wealthy society seem so disgruntled.
@ferdinanddaratenas3447
Жыл бұрын
Equality is a false idol that doesn't exist in nature, never did and never will. Many people value things like national stability and strength, tradition or individual freedom over equality. Equality is not an intrinsic universal value nor should. Life is change and competition by default. You have to work with nature, not against it. Poverty, however, is definitely a problem for society that should be mitigated as much as possible. In other words, I couldn't care less how much more money Elon Musk makes compared to myself, but I care about having my basic needs met. If you have a problem with other people being more successful, you should work on your jealousy to become humble. It's a spiritual problem, not an economic one. The marxists tried to control society for the sake of equality and they made everybody miserable and hungry across five continents. Never again.
@VeryIntellijent
Жыл бұрын
@@ferdinanddaratenas3447 Most people are not looking for equality of outcome, but rather basic fairness. Analysis shows that the poorest people pay the highest % of their income as tax, and the percentage decreases the higher you go. That's BS. This is because of the taxes on the basic essentials of life and the unnecessarily complex systems that enable the rich to use loopholes for their own benefit. Nobody is arguing about working with nature and not against it - but calling out the BS that is modern day inequality IS natural. You think if 99 neanderthals had just enough to meet their basic needs, whilst 1 neanderthal was thriving in riches, the 99 neanderthals would be content with that and let them be? You seem to be mistaking humans natural capacity and desire to rectify perceived injustices, especially when to the detriment of themselves and those they care about, as being unnatural.
@priceprice_baby
Жыл бұрын
@@ferdinanddaratenas3447people don't want equality for the purposesnof taking rich people down though, that's a strawman argument rich people use to avoid scrutiny. They want a system where the checks and balances are in power to ensure the rich aren't using their powerful position to cement further power for themselves and instead resources are going towards making the ladder to success easier.
@Aerrow62
Жыл бұрын
@ferdinanddaratenas3447 You are contradictory in every statement. Your moot point is basically that equality and fairness is not natural and we should follow the nature and not expect better. Which immediately invalidates the second half of what you wrote. Poverty and famines are natural. Should we normalize them? There is no legal system in nature. Should we go with kangaroo courts and natural justice? What about agriculture? That thing is artificial too. Nature's only values is kill or be killed and might makes right. So even the values you speak of like national stability and strength are not natural. How about competition by all means? In nature competition means elimination of the opponents. Should we allow Apple and Microsoft to go after each other's facilities and bomb each other? Your fundamental point doesn't hold. Human progress at this point is entirely artificial and self determined. Same is true for all our values. If nature doesn't agree, it can take a hike. I prefer a fair and honest society over wild nature any day. To be fair I never said absolute equality; not because it's unnatural; but because it's impractical. All I want is decentralized structures and overly powerful megalomaniacs put their place in society; for normal people to be treated equally and fairly by the very system they fund with their taxes. I don't think that's too much to ask for. I don't care how much money Elon made if he didn't influence jobs, my 401k and my ability to speak my mind out in public. Unfortunately money brings power and power corrupts. If Elon's fickle mind can bankrupt an entire region of families, I would definitely want some checks and balances.
@oldvlognewtricks
Жыл бұрын
“Starts”… and “Now”… as if it hasn’t objectively been a clear and growing problem for the past fifteen years. It takes a resurgence in the labour union movement and price gouging and record profits triggering inflation not seen in a generation for you to start to notice?
@camiloguzman1801
Жыл бұрын
This is why there's a paradox that could not allow post consumer, post scarcity societies. Because not all people can't be rich at the same level or have the same income level, but if more people are helped to grow out of a Bad situation, it would be better for everyone.
@davidk.d.7591
Жыл бұрын
I think post scarcity societies can only happen when we achieve a certain level of technology. We have recently started scratching the surface. Things like AI and robotics, space mining, increased globalization could, if fully developed and properly managed, theoretically create a post scarcity society. It would be a longshot though and many things would have to align. Even if we solved the labour part with AI and some how many the transition from capitalism, which would be likely but very difficult and slow, wed still have to manege to get countries like the US and China to agree to exchange essential resources that only they produce at no cost.
@naniyotaka
Жыл бұрын
@@davidk.d.7591 Too much ifs… Thing is, we will never have post scarcity as long as we have capitalism because scarcity is its very core.
@doggo6517
Жыл бұрын
@@naniyotaka Are you high? Scarcity is at its highest in non-capitalist societies. Only free markets produce abundance.
@nielskorpel8860
Жыл бұрын
@@davidk.d.7591 How do you plan to ensure that all humans retain a claim to a slice of the economic output, if their labour is no longer valued? How do you plan to ensure that humans remain empowered to pursue their project -- and maybe work towards social good -- in a world full of machines intelligent enough to do all human labour -- and undermine all those human projects. In short, how is this post-scarcity world of yours, not a dystopia? If you have a good answer to that question, then you make me a much more optimistic person about the future.
@AnymMusic
Жыл бұрын
8:18 that's the thing, they don't spend it. The money's almost all in stocks that get used for easy dividends. 7:40 you fail to mention here that those tiers already exist. You can make poorer people richer, by making the ultra ultra wealthy a bit poorer a.k.a more people in the middle, instead of a majority at the bottom
@JustinHalford
Жыл бұрын
And they borrow against their investments to never trigger capital gains.
@TheBooban
Жыл бұрын
@@JustinHalford Which is why there should be a wealth tax like in Sweden. But not like how you think. Like this: the total value of all your stocks are taxed. Even if you don’t sell or it goes down. But very, very little, like 0.005%. So folks like Elon will have to pay, but he won’t mind because it is very small. Everybody is taxed like this but everybody is happy.
@JustinHalford
Жыл бұрын
@@TheBooban totally agree. The trick is to have a system to transparently monitor assets and minimize offshore shelters
@DudW2
Жыл бұрын
Know this is a literal economic channel, but inequality will always be present because of endless growth model of business and investment. I feel it will inevitably led to over concentration of wealth as the only businesses that can grow are businesses that are virtual monopolies.
@lewisroach8723
Жыл бұрын
I think the inequality only matters now because so many people have a full time job but cannot comfortably or stably afford shelter, utilities and basic food. Even if the job they do is considered barely worth having as a job, and even with the consideration that some people who are a lot smarter or have contributed a lot more with their job should have more wealth and afford more luxuries, someone who does a full time job that by definition someone must need doing otherwise the job would not exist, should have reliable and stable access to a lockable bedroom even if kitchen and washing are communal, and enough food to not starve even if poor nutrition will cut their lifespan a bit. It sounds strange but i've seen areas where a crate full of luxury goods like gadgets, tools, accessories, ornaments etc. are owned by people struggling to pay their bills but looking at the actual costs, the luxuries barely matter at all in terms of paying bills because the shelter/food/utilities cost so much by comparison. I already feel like i'm not explain it well but at the very least, I know i'm not particularly smart, I don't expect i'll ever be in one of the increasingly narrow field of jobs people recommend to make large salaries, but as long as I keep doing a job, I would like at some point like to be able to live somewhere in my country because I chose to live there, and not have to worry about losing money each month even if I do nothing but commute to and from work, house and a grocery shop, and watch internet videos for entertainment after dinner.
@nathanbond8165
Жыл бұрын
The ancient Greek and Roman philosophers would disagree with you the world owes you nothing and you deserve nothing!!!!! I'd actually for most people even the poorest of the poor people that live in a modern civilized Western Society enjoy The Preserves that was once only available to royalty yes life is hard, and you have to work very hard and oftentimes can barely get by I grew up in a very poor family on government assistance with food stamps the whole nine yards 9 yards but you know what we were very happy because we were not obsessed with material things I as an adult and not rich by any measure in fact I would be considered probably the Working Poor but as the Working Poor I live in a studio apartment with modern refrigeration air conditioning and a 55in flat screen LCD television and full internet access in my little humble apartment I have more entertainment and power than the mightiest of Kings just a couple hundred years ago!! Everything in life is relative and you will know No Greater Joy than the day that you stop comparing yourself to what you have versus what others have!! If you are a male and you've ever been inside of a locker room and I've seen what other males have been endowed with by Nature as far as the size of their genitals then you understand that life is not fair and men are in fact not created equal not created equal!!!!!!!!!!❤❤❤❤❤
@lewisroach8723
Жыл бұрын
@@nathanbond8165 Having basically unlimited entertain as a distraction is fine and all but is it really that much of a privilege if you don't know where you'll be living in two months or are too hungry to pay attention to it? You are trying to say that what i'm talking about is privilege but if you had a studio and you had food stamps that you had the level of stability that i'm talking about - as long as you kept working you would get food and shelter. Also isn't that a contradiction if you're saying the world owes you nothing but you are receiving government assistance?
@nathanbond8165
Жыл бұрын
@@lewisroach8723 I think we're talking on two different philosophical levels of course food and shelter is important but every person must earn their keep!!!! Otherwise the entire system falls apart as I stated before all forms of government are evil be they capitalist or be they socialist or be they Nazis etc etc etc but here in this reality they are a necessary evil have you ever asked yourself the question why are you here what is your purpose? Perhaps all of this is ultimately meaningless and it doesn't matter or perhaps you are here and I am here for a reason all of that I'm saying is that all forms of government are imperfect and have blood on their hands
@PremierCCGuyMMXVI
Жыл бұрын
Watching these types of videos make sad and anxious because I want enough money just to have a nice house and stable job and the idea of living in poverty is one thing that scares me.
@muumia4
Жыл бұрын
If few people hold most of the funny money then at some point it ceases to be money.
@Ishkur23
Жыл бұрын
"A riding tide lifts all boats" is only good news to people with boats.
@krox477
Жыл бұрын
Why we have so much importance to wealth and nothing to human well-being
@justinmiller1118
Жыл бұрын
Global inequality is not as much of a problem for a society as domestic/national inequality. You can have 2 independent countries with radically different levels of wealth, and they can work well together. There is a natural tendency to "catch up". But domestic inequality causes massive social strife, and there is a growing tendency towards "rent seeking" and feudalist tendencies unless the government cracks down on it.
@morganoox3838
Жыл бұрын
Pretty soon a full time job wont even pay enough to have a safe place to live, let alone any holidays or luxury items like electricity. When a third or half the country is basically enslaved, working for just enough for the lost basic life, things might get dark. Really dark.
@male_maid5951
Жыл бұрын
i feel like another part of the problem, atleast for millennials and younger is actually hidden at 7:49 - Rent is basically wealth made by taking money from the economy .
@logans3365
Жыл бұрын
All wealth is made by taking it from others under capitalism, your options are to exploit others or be exploited.
@MatsueMusic
Жыл бұрын
Ever since COVID and GameSpot stock market issues, the “economy” to me is a game. Money is meaningless and valueless intrinsically and the only value it has is due to the players that benefit from the abstraction it creates between the “haves” and “have nots”. Essentially blinding everyone but the most financially literate from ways to make wealth, grow wealth, keep wealth, while those that already have it can create a fly wheel of prosperity on the backs of billions of people and their time, labour, and bodies. Money is an abstraction layer because it simplifies the interface between resources and the people that need them. It allows governments, companies, and the capitalist to interact with workers and consumers without needing either side to understand the details of prohibitively complex supply chains, technology, and their impacts on people and the planet. This is one of a dozen reasons we live in a world that is burning literally, philosophically, morally, economically, and socially.
@dirtydangler
Жыл бұрын
". Essentially blinding everyone but the most financially literate from ways to make wealth, grow wealth, keep wealth," I was broke two years ago, now i'm living comfortably working part time, It's not societies fault you aren't competent and don't see improving your skills as a net gain.
@rathelmmc3194
Жыл бұрын
Money is a futures contract on labor.
@MatsueMusic
Жыл бұрын
@@dirtydangler nice ASSumption about people. Even those that struggle to make ends meet and work 3 jobs should somehow also find the time to learn finance. Or, a single mom taking care of kids and working should also be studying finance so she can find all the loop holes that she could use. Also, the point isn’t “improving skills” it’s knowing the unknown. Immigrants for example who gain citizenship after travelling from a third world may not even know to look for social security, grants, or other benefits available to them.
@MatsueMusic
Жыл бұрын
@@rathelmmc3194 hahahah. Awesome. Hope you don’t mind me using that.
@shaunsensei6948
Жыл бұрын
@@MatsueMusic Yes they need to learn finance, can't excpect to do well FINANCIALLY while having no knowledge of FINANCE.
@borisivanov2806
Жыл бұрын
When considering the topic of equality, I believe it better to establish a Human Standard, a set of annual $ that would ensure the stability of basic requirements being met, according to the standard of living in the country. The measure of how poor or rich the people are is then to be compared with that Standard, with the deviation showing the actual inequality/fairness.
@The_Midnight_Bear
Жыл бұрын
The average would differ wildly from what is actually needed in various regions, within many countries.
@drwalka10
Жыл бұрын
Good luck getting people to come to an agreement on what the amount of $ is. You're clearly living in a dream ... wake up
@artemo.shapovaloff5577
Жыл бұрын
BS. Who would supply this so-called standard, huh?)) seriously?)
@orionguevera
Жыл бұрын
@@drwalka10ur not getting it , it doesnt take the government to establish that number… me and you can , and unless everyone is getting the amount that is set , there are protests, refusal to work , thats not a dream thats a union
@indrickboreale7381
Жыл бұрын
Human Standard would be a bad idea, because goverments of countries that would need it the most would just ignore such regulation and treat it as "western degeneracy"
@sishita1809
Жыл бұрын
Your videos have gone down in quality. It started with posing 4 questions but never really directly answered them. The insights & takeaways get buried in noise. Don't feel like I learnt anything new / nothing stuck with me. Sincere feedback.
@artofthereal
Жыл бұрын
The problem I have noticed is "debt-ability"... our economy is based around our ability to go into debt, not our ability to earn money, therefore, prices will become increasingly out of line with wages, until implosion.
@Promethalus
Жыл бұрын
reminds me a little bit about the video done a few months back, on the possibility of an economy that runs just for the wealthy, producing and providing services only for them, but everyone else just lives one minimum government subsidies
@allenaxp6259
Жыл бұрын
Inequality is a complex problem with no easy solutions. However, there are a number of things that can be done to address it, including: Investing in education and job training: This will help to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to succeed in the workforce. Enacting policies that favor the poor and middle class: This includes policies such as raising the minimum wage, expanding access to healthcare, and providing affordable housing. Reforming the tax system: This includes closing tax loopholes for the wealthy and making sure that everyone pays their fair share of taxes. Promoting social mobility: This means creating opportunities for people from low-income families to move up the economic ladder.
@theBear89451
Жыл бұрын
The irony is some of these things actually increase wealth inequality. Just look at the COVID response.
@spaghettiking7312
11 ай бұрын
Inequality has been a problem for a while now. It's just that it is getting to the point that it can't be ignored that ordinary people cannot live decent lives any longer, and that struggle soons turns to resentment, intolerance and discussion.
@neilcook1652
10 ай бұрын
The two are not connected, forget the wealthy and focus on how the majority can make a decent living
@JoshuaGold1
Жыл бұрын
I love how multifaceted this video is. You don't just say inequality equals bad always, nor do you say that the rich just spending is always good.
@user-zb8ss9xb1b
Жыл бұрын
Can you please do a video on the independence of central banks? Thanks & keep up the great work! 😊
@JohnDoe-gg6kc
Жыл бұрын
Its a quick video, they are not independant, lol.
@user-zb8ss9xb1b
Жыл бұрын
@@JohnDoe-gg6kc :) Knowing EE though, he'll go on a few interesting related tangents to explain other things and the videos will eventually be 20 minutes.
@cianmartin7185
Жыл бұрын
@@JohnDoe-gg6kcthey'll get you on for that episode so
@samarter5627
Жыл бұрын
The central bank of most countries is independent from government to a degree. Even though central banks are created by government legislation, Governments are not allowed to interfere with the monetary policies made by the central bank.
@FirstLast-vr7es
Жыл бұрын
Things in the US are objectively getting worse. Inflation is rampant across the board, but middle & lower class wages haven't kept up for decades, unlike upper class wages. Tuition and healthcare are absurdly expensive and houses and cars are increasingly unaffordable. Manufacturing left for Asia, and took working class jobs with it. Crime and gun violence are up, likely (at least partially) because of all that. Government spending is out of control, and corruption is rife. People are getting increasingly angry, and I think we're headed for something...unpleasant. And the US isn't alone here.
@markaberer
Жыл бұрын
This is my favorite topic in economics! Thanks for this video. It would be great if you could do a follow up video to dive deeper into it!
@Saarth_
Жыл бұрын
Can you do a video on the impact of inequality on inflation? And what does it mean for income in inflation adjusted terms?
@rusticbox9908
Жыл бұрын
Watch part 1
@McJamEs209
Жыл бұрын
An Economist job is to be able to keep our financial system legit and preventing it from being a pyramid scheme.
@roscojenkins7451
Жыл бұрын
Im heavily invested in the guillotine industry. I put my life savings in its production really taking off
@rickyspanish4792
Жыл бұрын
Shut up and take my money!
@szymonbaranowski8184
Жыл бұрын
inequality is not a problem 0.1% of hoarders is problem as always monopolising our common resources and capital
@amellie2
Жыл бұрын
"inequality is not a problem, inequality is problem" how genius
@DrSpooglemon
Жыл бұрын
There is a lot of talk around about minimum income(minimum wage, UBI) but I think the best strategy is to set a maximum income and everything else would fall in line behind that. If the CEO and the share holders can only take so much or if what they take has to be set in a ratio with worker pay then we wouldn't need to talk about minimum wage. Very few people are making 7 figures all by themselves - the overwhelming majority of high earners work in corporations and/or are shareholders. A few simple rules set by government would have a ripple effect throughout society. Of course, the government is controlled by the same people who control the corporations, so...
@drwalka10
Жыл бұрын
Your wrong and ignorant
@theBear89451
Жыл бұрын
Bill Gates has a big house, but is there any other resource he is hording? Most of his net worth is speculative value.
@BTrain-is8ch
Жыл бұрын
@@chase-warwick Elon's income is low because in proportion to his wealth it's low. It's not a tax avoidance strategy. It's just a consequence of having far more wealth than income. It happens even to normal workers (who are properly preparing for retirement) as at some point the growth of your portfolio exceeds the growth and amount of your annual income.
@major3041
Жыл бұрын
We should make entertainment more affordable to keep masses' minds off economic inequality
@Thessalin
Жыл бұрын
Oh! We could have dozens of circuses in every city! And give out loaves of bread at the circuses! That'll satisfy those dirty pleabian poors.
@direstr7768
Жыл бұрын
A yes the hollywoo way
@shaunsensei6948
Жыл бұрын
I don't know what you are smoking, hollywood has extremely leftist commie/socialist views and a hatred for billionaires even tho some of them are billionaires.
@bcc5084
Жыл бұрын
In Western democracy, slavery comes in a different form
@haruhisuzumiya6650
Жыл бұрын
Golden gilded chqins
@OGDailylama
Жыл бұрын
You know who else feels inequality actually means something? Monkeys that get fed a complete diet when their mates get only grapes...
@TheLeafyo
9 ай бұрын
You work 60 hour weeks to barely afford rent to the landlord who spends the money you made on the luxury car you built. What a time to be alive.
@varungulavane5253
Жыл бұрын
Can you make a video on ecological economics? I am not an Economics major but I like your channel. But, I have found information on that theory on other channels and your take would be interesting.
@marvinamann4969
Жыл бұрын
An important distinction has to be made between Wealth and Income inequality. Income inequality can be a good thing, as it is a great motivator. Wealth inequality is mostly driven by inheritance and leads to inefficient allocations
@Roel93
Жыл бұрын
There is nothing wrong with inheriting great wealth. The family is the primary group structure. The government, the community and society are secondary. They should not be allowed to interfere in family matters.
@senor2930
Жыл бұрын
I like the derivative of that! Let us strip the old money families if their wealth & distribute it among everyone! Too bad, this would never happen unfortunately, because the old money families are old money for a reason, they control governments....
@zachjones6944
Жыл бұрын
@@Roel93 The Family is a faulty functional unit. How many incompetent children inherit wealth?
@eat_ze_bugs
Жыл бұрын
@@zachjones6944 Those incompetent children will be at the mercy of the free market and that is good news for the common man.
@haruhisuzumiya6650
Жыл бұрын
@@eat_ze_bugsexplain Elon Musk then
@Nphen
Жыл бұрын
An important concept is almost glossed over at the 7:47 mark. He says "adding value" vs "taking value" which means industrial vs finance capital. Banking & finance has become a scammers' industry, including (especially) cryptid currencies. Banking should be boring & low-profit. A public institution, like a Post Office Bank, could offer consumer & business credit on standard terms, like a 1.5% mortgage (1 per citizen), no matter what prevailing rates are. Hedge funds? No purpose. Ban them. Break up real estate cartels that are vacuuming up entire communities & raising rent. Give the public the means to mortgage those properties from auction, with guaranteed jobs cleaning up neighborhoods, forests & farms.
@theBear89451
Жыл бұрын
No, most public institutions cannot offer a higher quality product at a lower price than private.
@joshuaerkman1444
Жыл бұрын
The central economic question has been invalidated. The real economic relationship between happiness and money is limited. It almost entirely disappears over 1 million dollars and is gone or negative over 10 million. Most happiness is gained by the time your making 100k.
@theBear89451
Жыл бұрын
It's even worse. Self deletion rate negatively correlates to country's GDP.
@dfv2060
Жыл бұрын
Yeah it's pretty annoying that such an influential social science is based on a statement that isn't actually...you know..true
@Viperzka
Жыл бұрын
The real problem with inequality is that we have enough resources to feed everyone and house everyone and others healthcare to everyone, but it's tied up in the bank accounts of billionaires who are given an extremely outsized role in the economy. We need to do a much better job of distributing the fantastic wealth that our society is creating. The UN has a plan to end global poverty. It is easy to accomplish if the developed world was willing to put a slightly higher tax burden on its most wealthy citizens. Instead we let children die because it would be "immoral" to make Bezos pay his fair share. Billionaires didn't get this rich solely through their own hard work so they don't deserve to keep all of the wealth that is generated.
@jonathan2847
Жыл бұрын
Jeff Bezos made his wealth adding value to the economy. Bernard Arnault made his wealth taking value from the economy. Ultimately it depends on if the use of capital is in areas that provide long term value and advancement. We need to differentiate today between these 2 billionaires, becuase how people make wealth matters.
@childofaether8733
Жыл бұрын
Not every anti-billionaire person is an idiot it seems. Kudos to you.
@hhhhhhhvvk
Жыл бұрын
I'm surprised by the statement that it starts to becoming a problem, when it's a long lasting issue, which probably will never be resolved due to human greed.
@erich1394
Жыл бұрын
Things that seem impossible are often shown to be possible. Chin up and try to believe in humanity - we're flawed and shitty but also pretty cool. Someone once said "People are generally good as long as you don't ask too much of them."
@hhhhhhhvvk
Жыл бұрын
@@erich1394 that sound like something that the 1% would say. there's enough evidence to not believe in humanity. you can either believe in yourself or into individuals, who wan't to break the loop. but since the game is rigged, you can only change as much as it's allowed. all that comes from the greed.
@erich1394
Жыл бұрын
@@hhhhhhhvvk I work at Walmart and I used to do industrial sales. I pretty much get along with 90% of the people who come through the door at Walmart - not so much in my previous line of work. Individuals are generally fine until you get into elite classes. The degree to which the elite self-propagandize is amazing. They're pretty cut off from the real world - hence the empathy gap. And we uphold this separation on a structural, violence-backed level. Nonetheless I have to believe that humanity's got a shot because my one-on-one human interactions tell me that there are a lot of good (and sometimes misguided) people out there.
@KingLarbear
Жыл бұрын
Also, we have to remember that people don't make much in poorer countries but things don't cost as much either, as they find resources from within versus exploitation of poorer nations
@TheOne2Know
Жыл бұрын
Asking what the optimal level of wealth inequality is to produce the most equal distribution of prosperity in all classes is the purest distillation of economist thinking i can think of lol
@CarFreeSegnitz
Жыл бұрын
7:50 “..everybody is better off…” Try telling that to people who are working multiple jobs and still can’t make ends meet.
@dqh6429
Жыл бұрын
Compare them to people working in third world countries or compare them to people who were in that situation decades ago. Their current life, while still a struggle, is better. That’s the point of “everybody is better off”; the point wasn’t, everyone is better off to the point of no struggles.
@artemo.shapovaloff5577
Жыл бұрын
advise them to upgrade their skills and search for another better job)
@emptyshirt
Жыл бұрын
At least the air, soil, and water have persistent chemical pollution now, so future generations could be poorer that our ancestors could have ever imagined.
@_ata_3
Жыл бұрын
Video filled with assumptions an partial "truths".
@amymason156
10 ай бұрын
Adding wealth to the global economy only makes the world richer when the input is extraterrestrial, this is the big problem with industrial economies. Before industry, most of the input into the economy came from the sun, now it mostly comes out of the ground. So most of the wealth we've added since the industrial revolution has been at the expense of the planet we live on, and the economic growth and increase in our standard of living goes along with things like noise, light, and other pollution, big toxic pits, mass extinctions, expanses of asphalt and concrete and other miseries most people see no direct benefit from but much indirect suffering. In many ways we were better off when we used the wind for transportation, because at least it didn't require burning coal and drilling for oil to keep goods moving. If we want to avoid strife from inequality the most important thing is to transition back to using energy that comes from outer space.
@majidjaved1995
Жыл бұрын
Awesome video. TL;DR: The global pandemic caused a setback in reducing global extreme poverty levels, reversing a decade's worth of progress. Meanwhile, the world's richest individuals became even wealthier, with 1.2 percent of people owning 47.8 percent of the world's wealth. Over 2.8 billion adults, more than half of the global adult population, have a net worth of less than $10,000. While inequality is a complex issue, a concentration of wealth can potentially benefit others by stimulating industry and creating more opportunities. Historically, advancements in technology and industry have led to improved living standards for many. However, for the first time in 250 years, economic progress may be reversing due to global debt, which now exceeds $300 trillion. While economists have not been overly concerned about the debt until recently, it poses challenges to reducing inequality and maximizing prosperity for all. Wealthy individuals can contribute to economic growth by either spending their money or investing it in industries that add value to the economy. However, excessive consumption at the top and the concentration of wealth can lead to resource misallocation. Additionally, global debt is mainly owned by households and corporations, which, if managed effectively, can provide necessary capital for worthy projects. However, decisions on lending and resource allocation should not be controlled by a small group of people. An optimal level of inequality motivates innovation and hard work but too much inequality can hinder progress and waste resources.
@mirkovicaleksandar9071
6 ай бұрын
Until 5:40 i did not know how serious CR7 solarium burnt skin is :o
@HemonDey
Жыл бұрын
The discussion is incomplete without consideration of the resources this planet can (or can't) provide for an ever expanding economy. It is briefly touched on with the personal airplane example (where resources can be instead reallocated to drive growth instead of basically burning the money), but in reality extends to all aspects of the economy in the world we know today. Inequality of wealth is one thing, but inequality in the level of emissions or energy use are important aspects to consider as well - it is no surprise that the biggest polluters in the world today are the top 1%! This counterpoint is necessary to see the entire equation that take externalities like resource depletion and pollution, and eventually for everyone to pay for their fair share of what they use and what they pollute.
@Wormopera
Жыл бұрын
Very good example of problems with inequalities, in sanctioned countries, the middle class and lower class just go lower and upper class go higher(because they still have more dollars and money)
@gregs3845
Жыл бұрын
From today's Washington Post: "This year’s report - “The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2023” - also found that nearly 30 percent of humanity, or roughly 2.4 billion people, lacked access to adequate food in 2022, while an even greater number - 3.1 billion people - were unable to afford a healthy diet." I dunno man, while numbers had been moving in a positive direction is it anything more than creative accounting to say that the degree of inequality at any time during the 20th and 21st century has not been problematic?
@AndrewGeierMelons
Жыл бұрын
If billionaires are only doing these lavish spending things like private jets... Why are they not doing lavish spending things like windmills, solar farms, building schools and hospitals, paving roads, etc. The billionaires need to consume in order to get the economy moving in order to make even more money still? But the economy is limited by energy, land, labour, and capital; how much can be produced. The more these billionaires build things to help keep the economy moving, the more stuff is produced. The more stuff is produced... The more they can own and consume. Why are we not getting the ball rolling with that stuff? They build these hundred million dollar houses with no one living in them... How, asides from upkeep, does this generate value?
@appateticgamer9956
Жыл бұрын
This video is essentially propahanda for trickle down economics, ask any American who jas a job before reagan and after him
@DannyBoy443
Жыл бұрын
Its still crazy how besides a few robber barrons who really made quick hard working connections when they were young men, the US didn't really get wealthy until like the 1950s lol.
@liberalcynic
Жыл бұрын
10:10 this is a fundamental ontologically flawed assumption: there are limits to desires. Desires may be greater than resources but desires are not necessarily infinite.
@undercoverduck
Жыл бұрын
Give this video's sponsor a quick internet search and you'll quickly see why any channel accepting their sponsorship ought to be met with disdain and distrust going forward. It's one thing to accept money from a company that makes shoddy headphones. It's a whole other deal to trifle with something as precarious as mental health.
@PhillKaggitz
Жыл бұрын
They don't care, and somehow they would blame it on colonialism
@undercoverduck
Жыл бұрын
@@PhillKaggitz Oh yeah I'm well aware. I'm just trying to warn people and lower the clickthrough rate so he sees as little revenue from this dangerous stunt as possible. If my comment(s) gain enough attention he might even fear for his future reputation and monetization, and make him think twice next time around. It's a long shot but a man can dream and I can't sit idly by regardless.
@RickterBeek
Жыл бұрын
@@PhillKaggitzUnfortunately to be expected from an economist. The very real harm they do to others isn't a point of interest as long as there's personal financial gains to be made.
@RickterBeek
Жыл бұрын
Just to help people along: if you append your search query with "University of Maastricht" one of the first hits should be an article (in English) explaining everything wrong with BetterHelp. You shouldn't touch this company with a stick.
@RickterBeek
Жыл бұрын
@@undercoverduckMoney is the only thing they'll answer to, so going after that flow of money is indeed the most prudent counteroffensive.
@temptemp563
Жыл бұрын
Hmm, for once I don't come away from this EE video thinking I understand the issue any better than I did before. All I got was, "it's complicated ... mate." Which it is, I suppose.
@Viviko
Жыл бұрын
The problem I see with this issue is in how we define “equal”. A lot of the folks arguing inequality (income, wealth, etc…) is concerning are only looking at outcomes. That is, they look at how Person A is 100x wealthier/earns more/etc… than person B and ignore the fact that Person A invented a new product, started a compsny, etc… while person B just worked at mcDonalds and drinks all night after work. When you are just looking at one data point (outcomes), it does look bad. But when you look deeper, it is also that actions and activities are unequal in value (I.e. inventing/stsrting an organization is more valuable than working the bare minimum and goofing off afterwards).
@theBear89451
Жыл бұрын
Yes, if people concentrated on unequal starting points or luck, they would get a lot more support.
@shaunsensei6948
Жыл бұрын
I really hope the commies get their own country and let all us normal people live in peace(but they won't obv they will try to impose communism on us also because 1 they don't like freedom and 2 communism is a stateless society and they can''t accept another country having it's own values). I also hope they don't return back after their economic model fails again and come crying and scream how that was not real communism.
@rabidsminions2079
Жыл бұрын
Businesses constantly getting a discount on wage rise through the minimum wage always increasing by a lower amount than the pretend official inflation rate keeps the lowest paid going backward in real terms to the point that a couple on the minimum wage are living in poverty here in Australia. Woolies profit increased by 14 % on the year before but minimum wages increased by 5.75% when the inflation rate was 7.8% earlier this year.
@manwiththeredface7821
Жыл бұрын
15 minute long video uploaded 11 minutes ago and commenters be like "well explained".
@DrSpooglemon
Жыл бұрын
Do you even know what 'lag' is?
@jasonpatrickries
Жыл бұрын
I noticed the same thing.
@highwayman6805
Жыл бұрын
Love this man. Just posting to feed the algorithm.
@undercoverduck
Жыл бұрын
This video's sponsor is not to be trusted. It's a shame this channel is accepting sponsorship from them as it severely damages their reputation.
@Bobylein1337
Жыл бұрын
About the start of the video: I mean yea, investments in industries can increase lifes of everyone but why do those investment funds first need to be exploited from the workers, to be reinvested?
@JuiceExMachina
Жыл бұрын
Wow the analogy at 5:29 actually worked really well, even though im not into football/soccer at all.
@jdzajdza
Жыл бұрын
That soccer example is such a WOKE example. That is why we have this nonsense of oppress people. Poor example
@_ata_3
Жыл бұрын
"Inequality is a complex subject." Proceeds to make a football analogy between "good players" and "bad players".
@NLuck-eh5cd
Жыл бұрын
@@_ata_3 It's a pretty good analogy, actually. Some players are objectively much more skilled than others - some of that is natural talent, some of it is luck, and most of it is how much time they've devoted to studying and practicing in one very specific field. These skilled players make contracts in the millions, while Buddy Joe from the beer league probably has to pay to play. If the teams are broken up, then the skill level evens out a lot, but the wealth gap remains. This is pretty analogous to industrialized nations and industries, and relatively non-industrialized areas.
@_ata_3
Жыл бұрын
@@NLuck-eh5cd You curiously missed being born out of rich parents or in a rich country or both.
@somnorila9913
Жыл бұрын
1:10 I'm not sure it's quite like that. I remember hearing something in some video or something about this that said most technologies and discoveries are because of public money. So at the level of a State, money from taxes, thus the results of common effort, of the average Joe pretty much. Because research and exploration is not a safe bet. Like even the current most out there developments, such as going back in to space, we see the titles but we don't read the book. As the companies doing all that are doing it on mostly governmental money. Reason for why i am a supporter or taxing the rich more, why i think that progressive tax rates are good approaches, kind of like those examples regarding fines being correlated to the offender wealth so it has overall same deterring effect or same punishment sting. Like there are those examples of big companies moving money around and having plenty of lawyers and economists finding and exploiting kinks in the armor of the law sort of speak. Just to pay as little taxes as possible. Yet same companies couldn't be what they are without the societal framework and infrastructure that is build and maintained by the State. This building takes time and is compounded over time, so if you manage to disturb that through lobbying, corruption or whatever, you get holes in the whole system that overtime may even bring everything on its knees. Like take the communication networks for instance. How many companies kept up with times in regards of technology, you know speeds and whatnot, if the market was already under them and had no proper competition anymore? That's why areas that catch up later ended being way better in regards of overall speeds and price. I mean, where i'm from i get gigabit residential for like 10$ monthly. Areas from US or other first to the party places have it a bit different.
@TinyGiraffes
Жыл бұрын
The problem is not that the rich are rich, the problem is that they syphon larger proportions of wealth for themselves. Record profits and firing 10% of the company.
@rathelmmc3194
Жыл бұрын
Rich people don't siphon wealth. You can say they siphon income, but not wealth.
@rmtab6511
Жыл бұрын
Big issue is that, in real terms, wages are stagnant, but prices keep rising. Productivity has risen, but the the only ones benefitting from that are the capitalists who own the companies. Developing economies see explosive growth, but only so long as the labour stays cheap. As soon as wages rise out of the pitifully-low bracket, factories are moved off to the next undeveloped country.
@_ata_3
Жыл бұрын
Global income inequality since the 1820 has increased overall. The modest trend in the last decade was just a slight reduction that doesn't account for the total inequality capitalism has produced historically and which is going back on track. Where do you think rich people / rich countries get their wealth from?
@rathelmmc3194
Жыл бұрын
That's because for the first time in human history real wealth was created.
@_ata_3
Жыл бұрын
@@rathelmmc3194 What's this shinny new "real wealth" you are talking about buddy? 😂
@mamotalemankoe3775
Жыл бұрын
@@_ata_3industrialization, did you not watch the video? Look just say "capitalism bad" and go watch channels that cater to your demeanor like second thought and such.
@rathelmmc3194
Жыл бұрын
@@_ata_3 Factories, office buildings, corporations as realized and protected entities, etc.
@theBear89451
Жыл бұрын
Go back even further. Cavemen were the most equal in terms of capital ownership.
@rustoeki
Жыл бұрын
Really struggled not to say "trickle down" there.
@SpinningSideKick9000
Жыл бұрын
Ain't no way. The first minute is about trickle down economics LOL
@ppeak-jm6nx
Жыл бұрын
Inequality is not a problem on it own it is a poverty that is.
@drwalka10
Жыл бұрын
Poverty is relative
@atomicwinter7926
Жыл бұрын
"Just stop being poor" - the girl with some entertaining videos...
@williamduke1756
Жыл бұрын
Yes it is. Because money usually means power and if inequality is high, so is the power imbalance. And the higher the power imbalance, the more corrupt a country and/or its government eventually becomes.
@dw620
Жыл бұрын
@@drwalka10 Poverty can be absolute and relative. The former is MORE important.
@manekrit2417
Жыл бұрын
Inequality drives poverty, because there are politics involved. Wealthier people have more political power and insentified to keep evebody poorer thus reletively making them richer.
@blafonovision4342
Жыл бұрын
Talking about wealth in a global context ignores the fact that some geographies generate capital at much greater rates than others.
@finerio
Жыл бұрын
Inequality has *always* been a problem, comrade
@shaunsensei6948
Жыл бұрын
"comrade" jesus.
@petenewman16
Жыл бұрын
You could call this channel "Lucid Economics". Love it.
@scottgrindrod
Жыл бұрын
Economists trying to justify billionaires: "Guys, the economy isn't a zero sum game." Me: "Ok, then why is it possible for central banks to use monetary policy, *LITERALLY* controlling the amount of currency in play, to effect the economy?" Economists: "Uhhh, uhhhh, that's different!"
@SP95
Жыл бұрын
Central Banking Is Socialism.
@Michael_Collins_I
Жыл бұрын
I feel this explanation missed the mark on wealthy people hoarding money. Yes, when they spend money on jets, mansions and yachts, it creates some employment and money can trickle down. However, money is a representation of energy and resources, including human resources. When money is concentrated on high value personal consumables, that means less energy and resources are available to the rest of the economy and society. Hoarding money is also hoarding energy and resources from the economy and the rest of the population.
@theBear89451
Жыл бұрын
No, the wealthy may consume excess resources, but also may not. That's the point of the video.
@Michael_Collins_I
Жыл бұрын
@@theBear89451 The video claimed wealthy people spending money on high value personal items stimulates the economy. This may be true, but the negative affects of hoarding resources greatly outweighs the stimulus.
Пікірлер: 1,6 М.