"of course the whole problem is that over the course of time unions have been granted privileges which the ordinary citizen has not." (Hayek from another interview on unions)
Es ist kaum glaublich, dass von rund 7 Milliarden Weltbewohner diese Sendung bis heute nicht mehr als 2.967 Zuschauer gesehen haben, geschweige denn verstanden etwas wovon die Rede war.
@The One...English Translation via Bing Translator: It is hardly believable that of about 7 billion inhabitants of the world have not seen this show more than 2,967 spectators, let alone understood something of what was the speech. Ya, es ist traugrig. (it is sad)
They are not socialists so i don't know what your point is. Why don't you call Trump out for driving farmers out if business through his tariffs and solving it by giving them 14 billion in federal hand outs? Furthermore, twice as many private sector jobs have been created under democrats since the 60s compared to republicans.
@@JoelLundqvist98 They were there for all the big recessions, so that's technically true. That stat has been debunked many times before. They underwent massive deficit spending and increased debt to extreme amounts to misallocate labor towards places where they should not have been allocated before. They gave people unsustainable jobs that could only be maintained thorough continuing increases in the money supply, which has resulted in a crash many many times.
Almost all economists do. Milton Friedman did and he was even more pro free market. They tend to see it as government correcting its own monster. It's really stupid to compare these ideas to the current UBI plan to Yang's modern on.
@@lessonstoliveforFriedman proposed a negative income tax not a UBI. So you only get money if you make less than X which over time should grow with inflation. The negative income tax should also incentivise people to work. Not the way unemployment benefits work. In which once you get a job that money stops even if the job pays less. Yang's idea is to give everyone 1000$ a month. So a billionaire gets it and a low income worker gets it. It doesn't incentivise you to work. It might cause inflation. Which would make 1000$ a month not enough.
Ethics is normative discipline. It is end and goal discipline, not about real science and means science. Little community ethics does not apply greater society ethics. But meanlingly atomic individually live survival is need not ethics but economic science. Do hun Kim.
![[#2024MAMA] BIGBANG (빅뱅) - 뱅뱅뱅 (BANG BANG BANG) + FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EQsYfiPR9uM/mqdefault.jpg)
he never got to know just how correct he actually was.
He knew. The world that took a long time to understand him.
Nearly finished reading "The Road to Serfdom" and wanted to know more about its author - great interview.
Awesome interview. Hayek is spry and the interviewer is top class.
A Brilliant Interview thank you very much for your intellectual between two sincere human beings
Such a lovely and professional man.
Is this guy the best interviewer ever??
no he's not
"of course the whole problem is that over the course of time unions have been granted privileges which the ordinary citizen has not." (Hayek from another interview on unions)
What a great interview!
Es ist kaum glaublich, dass von rund 7 Milliarden Weltbewohner diese Sendung bis heute nicht mehr als 2.967 Zuschauer gesehen haben, geschweige denn verstanden etwas wovon die Rede war.
@The One...English Translation via Bing Translator:
It is hardly believable that of about 7 billion inhabitants of the world have not seen this show more than 2,967 spectators, let alone understood something of what was the speech.
Ya, es ist traugrig. (it is sad)
29:10 This segment reminds me of Bane. "Peace has cost you your strength. Victory has defeated you.
This is the joe rogan podcast before the joe rogan podcast
Yep, Rosten was a really great interviewer it seems.
At 20:20, I believe Hayek is saying "pseudo science", not "purely science" as transcribed.
I think he said "purely pseudo science", hence the confusion, but you are still right since the transcription means the opposite.
Someone forward this video to AOC, and the millionaires Elizabeth warren and Bernie.
They are not socialists so i don't know what your point is. Why don't you call Trump out for driving farmers out if business through his tariffs and solving it by giving them 14 billion in federal hand outs? Furthermore, twice as many private sector jobs have been created under democrats since the 60s compared to republicans.
@@JoelLundqvist98 They are not socialists? Yes, you are right, they are straight up communists.
@@JoelLundqvist98 They were there for all the big recessions, so that's technically true. That stat has been debunked many times before. They underwent massive deficit spending and increased debt to extreme amounts to misallocate labor towards places where they should not have been allocated before. They gave people unsustainable jobs that could only be maintained thorough continuing increases in the money supply, which has resulted in a crash many many times.
@@JoelLundqvist98well, in Hayek's writings the sort of people with their ideas are usually deemed socialists, and I tend to agree with this.
For crissakes! It's not Friedrich _von_ Hayek, it's Friedrich Hayek.
So is Hayek advocating for a basic guaranteed (albeit low) income for widows and children?
Almost all economists do. Milton Friedman did and he was even more pro free market. They tend to see it as government correcting its own monster. It's really stupid to compare these ideas to the current UBI plan to Yang's modern on.
Hayden Van Meeteren how is hayeks and Friedman’s uni different from yangs?
@@lessonstoliveforFriedman proposed a negative income tax not a UBI. So you only get money if you make less than X which over time should grow with inflation. The negative income tax should also incentivise people to work. Not the way unemployment benefits work. In which once you get a job that money stops even if the job pays less. Yang's idea is to give everyone 1000$ a month. So a billionaire gets it and a low income worker gets it. It doesn't incentivise you to work. It might cause inflation. Which would make 1000$ a month not enough.
@@lessonstolivefor there r youtube videos which describes the difference. I believe rhat the NIT works better than UBI
Ethics is normative discipline. It is end and goal discipline, not about real science and means science.
Little community ethics does not apply greater society ethics.
But meanlingly atomic individually live survival is need not ethics but economic science.
Do hun Kim.
2:25 Karl who ?
menger
Carl Menger.
it's always fun to sit 50 years later and watch how a great mind is being interviewed, by a racist....
It appears America is ready for another FDR kind of president. Extreme inequality has brought homelessness and starvation to America urban centers.