Marcus Crassus, the richest man in Roman history, used to show up to burning houses with his privatized fire brigade (there was no Roman fire dept), but he only agreed to put out the fire and save the possessions of the owners if the owners sold their land to him. The most "successful" entrepreneurs have destabilized civilizations for thousands of years. When too much profit is funneled into the hands of too few individuals, it eventually becomes unsustainable. FYI, Crassus died when he hired a private army to invade the Parthian empire (a glory-seeking vanity project). His son was killed in the fighting and Crassus was captured. The Parthians, well aware of Crassus' wealthy reputation, poured molten gold down his throat.
Hairee Lee it’s not a good analogy, and quit often people who best understand how to manipulate a system are contracted or become the solution to that system.
Christopher G it is true if only they want to change the system, the argument here is that they never wanted to rock the current system that made them extremely wealthy.
Realitybites Jock Honestly that my main issue with Anands argument. It’s basically circular reasoning, and unfalsifiable. Billionaires use charity, and “do gooding” to maintain their power, and launder their character. No mater what evidence you provide the the contrary, Bill gates trying to end malaria, saving arguably hundreds of thousands of children’s lives by minimizing simple issues like diarrhea. Buffet, Gates, Zuckerberg pledging away 99% of their wealth when they die, the owner of Whole Foods taking a dollar salary, and donating all of his stock options to various charities. Numerous wealthy people opening schools that operate differently and have excellent results etc. All you have to do is restate his original premise, with no evidence to the contrary. Yeah, they do that to benefit themselves. It’s really bad logic. Never mind the fact that you could make the argument that, taxing their wealth may produce far worse outcomes. The government uses a lot of money it collects invading countries like Iraqi, Afghanistan, Syria, etc. Defence spending constantly grows. it uses our taxes to collect information about its own citizens unconstitutionally. Public schools in the US cost tax payers far more money per student than other countries with worse results. The list goes on.
Christopher G but that’s the point. These people have lobbied to reduce government resources then blame them for its failures. It’s a pillar of neoliberalism. Starve them of power and funding to discredit its ability. Defense is another pillar. Defend the consolidation of capital. Those people who will give away their money when they are dead means nothing today, by that time the damage is done.
You might also enjoy the work of Mark Blyth, a political economist with a very credible narrative for why populism is now a structural feature of our current age. #Bernie2020
WOW! i think i just found my new mentor and superhero! ANAND 2024!!! why are there not more sane and authentic guys like Anand running for top political positions? what is wrong with this idea?
Because in our current system, it's rare for someone that can inspire AND work hard to get elected, like an AOC, that can actually WIN without corporate backing. So those that RUN come to it by bowing at the corporate throne.
Excellent interviewer and asking questions as clearly as Anand's thoughts. I usually don't buy books but I bought Anand's. He is the original thinker unlike these self help gurus and thought leaders that pander to flavor of the day.
This is the BEST talk they're ever done.This is a Bernie supporter who never states it except this way-but demonstrating why you must vote for the candidate who will work for these ends.
I recall Anand once mentioning that the city of San Francisco has over 400 billionaires but upwards of 4,000 homeless individuals. Clearly, billionaire philanthropists either don't have the ability or desire to solve a most basic societal need.
13 yrs ago I took a masters degree class in philanthropy at USC. The one thing I learned is that great majority of giving doesn’t go to those who need it the most. Most philanthropy benefits the wealthy
The continuation of Philanthropy is FINE: it just needs to be taken out of the equation that makes it even PARTLY NECESSARY for the poorest among us to have a decent life.
Anand G. picks up where other scholars like Lawrence Lessig (who rails against big money in politics) and Thomas Frank (whose work is a strong critique of neoliberalism) leave off ... and runs further down the field. He's done the scholarship but also brings some serious street smarts to the table. Lessig is a Boomer; Frank is an Xer; Anand G. is a millennial. It's giving me a little bit of hope for the trajectory we might follow in the future.
The interviewer does not get the message that Anand Giridharadas is trying to express, He ignores what Anand says and moves on to another subject without acknowledging it.
57:50 - "You can't fight for the people below, without cramping the style of the people standing on their necks." Fucking right. Another (less graphic) version of this sentiment that I've heard is to "prioritize marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort".
Anand most assuredly deserves credit for having moved the ball somewhat during this election cycle. Everyone who watches and GETS THIS, even a little bit, will be marginally closer to voting for Bernie.
15:02 I really did not appreciate the celebration of Cheryl Sandberg at one of my Northwestern University reunions because part of her success was working for Facebook. I only wish I had had this story at that time. I really focuses the bad feeling I had back in 2011.
I'm needing to mark a specific statement about "Authors testimonies to Parliament in the Netherlands..." as a reference for search on the topic, since I've never heard of it, publicly expressed as often that is. Good to know, anyways. Statement made @1:00:08
U want one example of a philanthropist? Dan Price from Gravity. Problem is he is not a rich man anymore but he enabled economic stability for his employees and in doing so that 40 children were born. That is truly an example of philanthropism at its core, when u are willing to reduce your way of life to share your profits with your employees. That's structural change
41:39 "...good way to spend..." Of even better... recognize that you're on the road to excessive wealth and dismantle the concentrating effects of your enterprise. Turn your enterprise into a workers' cooperative. You hired a bunch of people to get to know the business and run it well, who is the world would be better to shepherd your vision along than those people? A workers' cooperative would flatten the concentrating effect and probably make the workers vastly happier with more control over a huge part of their lives.
Huh? what kind of statement is that? Are you aware we CHOSE to fly right by the moon, and all the way to MARS? Not going somewhere is NOWHERE proof of "forgetting" how to get there.
Anand is a great observer and a very eloquent writer/speaker, but we need solutions. I wonder what would be his opinion on direct representative democracy described in the book "The silver bullet for a Failed System."
30:21 "How do you starve government from funding . . " Modern Monetary Theory says ALL U.S. government spending is not funded by federal taxes but rather by a vote of Congress. So, in reality, there is not any problem funding whatever Congress has a will to accomplish.
30:51 The only place where all the benefits made clear from Modern Monetary Theory work is for sovereign governments with their own floating currency such as the U.S., but not the EU and not states, cities or private citizens. The federal government does not have the same constraints as private citizens.
He's right. It the predators(i.e. elites) pretending to help the victims they predate on(i.e. the public). It's like a street pimp who pretends to "love" the victim he traffics. Just terrible...
Is this phenomenon not just an extension of the college Fraternity system? It seems the similarities are substantial, and the predicate to the "good ol' Boy" plutocracy of today. Eliminate Frats and you drive a stake in the heart of plutocracy.
Anand is funny and poignant. He makes serious points for a better society. America's winner takes all mentality can only end in one place: upheaval. Its up to us to envision a different ending.
With all due respect, I disagree. I've watched a bunch of Anand interviews and talks at this point, and this guy gets more details stories, and expansions of his thoughts than any other interview I've seem him do so far
Anand needs to do a better job of pointing out that Obama is the poster boy for the winner takes all careerism & that Trump is his true legacy ~ just sayin'
Oh Yes@@91toinfinity, i am aware just how long the insidious neo'liberal agenda has been at work. The culprits that we can point to as its evil architects include Obama with his recent shallow public pronouncements. His attempts at shaming the general public are an attempt to cover up his complicity. Asshole Trump is Obama's legacy of narcissistic careerism & greed. They are both damaged & dangerous humans.
@ you're annoying. You can clearly see my subsequent comment rectifying my original one. And how can Obama be the culmination when Bush Jr., Clinton, Reagan, Nixon (I can go on) built the empire of corporate greed. Makes no sense to bring up one President. They all paved the way.
A "wealth tax" is a good thing to help reduce income inequality, but it's not a way to fund anything. One way to look at it is that any money you have is from government spending (the only other source of money is counterfeiting) that has not yet been collected as taxes. A federal government debt is a private sector saving, a good thing. axioms: 1. The extent to which you can fix or improve something will be limited by how well you understand how it works. 2. Everybody, with no exceptions, holds false beliefs.
"A "wealth tax" is a good thing to help reduce income inequality, but it's not a way to fund anything. " Seriously? So, 12.5 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR won't "FUND ANYTHING"? That's simply a lie or ludicrous thinking.
@@Brooke95482 - I would hope that you are not advocating that a means to stop the rich from standing on the necks of the poor is to print more money. Happy to talk about such possibilities AFTER we get the rich off the necks of the poor, and pay a FAIR taxation (pre-Reagan), with loopholes and tax havens closed.
@@brianmi40 The pre-Reagan marginal tax rate of 80% caused stupid behavior (Oil depletion drilling allowance, REITs, & other tax shelters) that just burned money. Then there was an optimum CEO pay amount because any higher compensation package just went to taxes. Those may be desirable? Hopefully there's a smarter way. Note the current $2T spending bill has no "payfor". see: theintercept.com/2020/03/27/coronavirus-stimulus-package-spending/?The%20Intercept%20Newsletter
@@Brooke95482 - don't have time to argue more than one of those: NO, the highest the tax rate ever was in the USA was in '52 and '53, at 92%, coming out of WWII. So it is a BALDFACED LIE to claim that: "there was an optimum CEO pay amount because any higher compensation package just went to taxes" You get one LIE and I'm done with you when you put forth a second one. You've now used your one up. Since i don't have time to research the other claims, I will simply counter that the event of the Reagan Tax Cuts, and "end of Big Government" have led to something much worse even IF all of those other claims were somehow true: The creation of a wealth class beyond any historical proportions in this country, and their subsequent ABUSES combined with the impacts of initiatives by people like the Koch brothers to go way way upstream, and poison the waters even back in college for multiple generations of THOUGHT, leading to thinking such as "government CAN'T solve our problems only Private Enterprise can", and resulting in a common erroneous mistrust of government, which has directly led to things such as Trump's election, a rise of Fascism and a real risk to the continued success of our Democracy are WELL WORSE than any of those things you listed. Because for one, we have WAY WORSE tax shelters and havens than back then. And nothing about drilling allowances nor REITs ever posed a threat to the continuance of our Democracy.
WHEN Someone Creates Poverty, It Means that Is a Really Poor Man. In other Words, He Can't Think because of Heart and Brain Lack. Don't Waste Your TIME to Became Rich, FIND WHAT YOU HAVE LOST BEFORE DYING, TO STAY WHAT YOU REALLY ARE SINCE YOU WERE BORN. DO YOU REMEMBER? It Not, Ask Your MUM. Have a Good One, Ciao.
The rich are giving us fish and feel good about it instead of making sure each one of us including them get a rod and reel. The rich can keep their boat and still ensure there is access to a rod and reel for all. And it’s unlikely but their boat might have to be a foot shorter. Not feet or yards but a foot shorter. Read the book “ the life you can save” it spells out the actual finances. It’s appalling how rich they are, they couldn’t spend it all in 100 lifetimes.
It's strange how anyone could publish a book, in 2018, on the subject of economic inequality and only make reference to Bernie Sanders twice in that book. Also, those two references were only in passing. Weird.
To be fair 8 million is such a small amount compared to 1 Billion dollars. For instance. If you were to make $5000 dollars a day since the day Columbus sailed to America. You wouldn't be a billionaire and you would still have less money than Jeff Bezos makes in a week.
@@thecoleslaa5761 yes..1 million seconds=11.5 days..1 billion sec=31.5 years...I got the math yet 8 million is more than any regular person will ever earn cause if you earn $50k/yr for 20 years you will have earned $1 million...and 1 trillion sec=31,500 years....
I call that the "Buffet Argument" - OMG, how can Buffet advocate for higher taxes that will IMPACT HIM? or the "Sanders Argument" - OMG how can Bernie own THREE HOMES and advocate that there should not be BILLIONAIRES. Both are STUPID ARGUMENTS. The fact that you have benefited under the current system doesn't make it impossible to recognize and point out the deficiencies of that system. Try to learn to focus on the argument. Bullshit like $8 Million of anything is the typical distraction they want you to focus on. It's like Trump doing all this bullshit during his press conferences: he does it so that the press will spend time chasing entirely new false statements he's made, instead of continuing to focus on the ACTUAL DAMAGE THAT IS HAPPENING.
The most depressing shit in your life is being invited to the Dutch Parliament to testify and give your opinion because the Dutch Parliament want to be better at upholding the laws????? Indonesia!!! Invite this person, get him to testify! Listen to him!! Wait that might offend people
@@dharyalrasheed557 Well, if you're making a rhyme, I dig it... though unfortunately it doesn't work with the way he pronounces his name. (The "hid" part rhymes with the "hid" like what someone did when they were playing hide and seek.) But yes! Shahid is fucking amazing, and I'm so excited to vote for him again in November. Lots more around the country, too!
Anand is a great observer and a very eloquent writer/speaker, but we need solutions. I wonder what would be his opinion on direct representative democracy described in the book "The silver bullet for a Failed System."
Dude is a god of logic, metaphor, contrast, and so many other linguistic and argumentative elements. The man is a godsend.
That line about arsonists reinventing themselves as fire fighter. DAMN.
Marcus Crassus, the richest man in Roman history, used to show up to burning houses with his privatized fire brigade (there was no Roman fire dept), but he only agreed to put out the fire and save the possessions of the owners if the owners sold their land to him.
The most "successful" entrepreneurs have destabilized civilizations for thousands of years. When too much profit is funneled into the hands of too few individuals, it eventually becomes unsustainable.
FYI, Crassus died when he hired a private army to invade the Parthian empire (a glory-seeking vanity project). His son was killed in the fighting and Crassus was captured. The Parthians, well aware of Crassus' wealthy reputation, poured molten gold down his throat.
Hairee Lee it’s not a good analogy, and quit often people who best understand how to manipulate a system are contracted or become the solution to that system.
Christopher G it is true if only they want to change the system, the argument here is that they never wanted to rock the current system that made them extremely wealthy.
Realitybites Jock Honestly that my main issue with Anands argument. It’s basically circular reasoning, and unfalsifiable.
Billionaires use charity, and “do gooding” to maintain their power, and launder their character.
No mater what evidence you provide the the contrary, Bill gates trying to end malaria, saving arguably hundreds of thousands of children’s lives by minimizing simple issues like diarrhea. Buffet, Gates, Zuckerberg pledging away 99% of their wealth when they die, the owner of Whole Foods taking a dollar salary, and donating all of his stock options to various charities. Numerous wealthy people opening schools that operate differently and have excellent results etc.
All you have to do is restate his original premise, with no evidence to the contrary.
Yeah, they do that to benefit themselves.
It’s really bad logic.
Never mind the fact that you could make the argument that, taxing their wealth may produce far worse outcomes.
The government uses a lot of money it collects invading countries like Iraqi, Afghanistan, Syria, etc. Defence spending constantly grows. it uses our taxes to collect information about its own citizens unconstitutionally. Public schools in the US cost tax payers far more money per student than other countries with worse results. The list goes on.
Christopher G but that’s the point. These people have lobbied to reduce government resources then blame them for its failures. It’s a pillar of neoliberalism. Starve them of power and funding to discredit its ability. Defense is another pillar. Defend the consolidation of capital. Those people who will give away their money when they are dead means nothing today, by that time the damage is done.
Anand is mesmerizing...just love his thoughtful arguments...he feels like an artist.
Isn't he...he charms...and then presents a cogent congruent premise......he's the pied piper...I'd follow him anywhere.....
I've seen many talks from Anand and this, in my opinion, is the best one so far!
SunDown he’s the best at articulating the point about plutocrats hoarding and taking advantage of rigging system!
@@audaxsports yes, he is!
What a treat to get to hear this unique voice speaking at length! I will be on the lookout for more of his insights.
Sheer brilliance! What a wonderful mind!
Amazing.... I thought I understood the problem of inequality. But Anand gives insights that I never saw... Thank you, Anand, so much.
Clear...concise....cogent....man I'd follow him anywhere!
One of the best conversations ever heard
You might also enjoy the work of Mark Blyth, a political economist with a very credible narrative for why populism is now a structural feature of our current age.
#Bernie2020
I would have to disagree. I do however enjoy pointing out the flaws in this guys Narrative
@@MrManifolder Thanks for the lead, I would appreciate if you could guide me with few more progressive people
I love this guy! It's so incredibly refreshing to hear the truth about anything these days.
Well said, “ too much power for a private, unelected individual...”
This is a deep critique of noblesse oblige.
WOW! i think i just found my new mentor and superhero! ANAND 2024!!! why are there not more sane and authentic guys like Anand running for top political positions? what is wrong with this idea?
Because in our current system, it's rare for someone that can inspire AND work hard to get elected, like an AOC, that can actually WIN without corporate backing. So those that RUN come to it by bowing at the corporate throne.
My most articulate super-hero
Excellent interviewer and asking questions as clearly as Anand's thoughts. I usually don't buy books but I bought Anand's. He is the original thinker unlike these self help gurus and thought leaders that pander to flavor of the day.
Anand is so right and so good in making his case!
The engine of continued taking. GREAT title for a new book. I would buy into that. Quotes from internationals would spark and hold my attention.
This is the BEST talk they're ever done.This is a Bernie supporter who never states it except this way-but demonstrating why
you must vote for the candidate who will work for these ends.
Such a good speaker
There a lot of reasons I like this guy - 24:33 is why I love the dude.
yes ahahaha
I recall Anand once mentioning that the city of San Francisco has over 400 billionaires but upwards of 4,000 homeless individuals. Clearly, billionaire philanthropists either don't have the ability or desire to solve a most basic societal need.
Billionaires are both a blessing and a curse on the world.
Great arguments I think !!! I've learned alot
I can't believe I watched more than hour long video on youtube
Kudos for doing so. It was worth it, I hope. :)
13 yrs ago I took a masters degree class in philanthropy at USC. The one thing I learned is that great majority of giving doesn’t go to those who need it the most. Most philanthropy benefits the wealthy
That's the way its designed in the first place. We are a Oligarchy, plutocracy, and fascist state.
The continuation of Philanthropy is FINE: it just needs to be taken out of the equation that makes it even PARTLY NECESSARY for the poorest among us to have a decent life.
Nothing new about these arguments, but well reported and eloquently stated by Anand.
Excellent video and I have been sharing this with everybody I know. lol
Anand G. picks up where other scholars like Lawrence Lessig (who rails against big money in politics) and Thomas Frank (whose work is a strong critique of neoliberalism) leave off ... and runs further down the field. He's done the scholarship but also brings some serious street smarts to the table. Lessig is a Boomer; Frank is an Xer; Anand G. is a millennial. It's giving me a little bit of hope for the trajectory we might follow in the future.
The interviewer does not get the message that Anand Giridharadas is trying to express, He ignores what Anand says and moves on to another subject without acknowledging it.
Amen!
This host clearly hasn't read the book
57:50 - "You can't fight for the people below, without cramping the style of the people standing on their necks."
Fucking right. Another (less graphic) version of this sentiment that I've heard is to "prioritize marginalized people’s safety over privileged people’s comfort".
Anand most assuredly deserves credit for having moved the ball somewhat during this election cycle. Everyone who watches and GETS THIS, even a little bit, will be marginally closer to voting for Bernie.
The host keeps uses individual names to praise billionaires, Anand keeps away from them... Funny to watch
He's playing devil's advocate.
15:02 I really did not appreciate the celebration of Cheryl Sandberg at one of my Northwestern University reunions because part of her success was working for Facebook. I only wish I had had this story at that time. I really focuses the bad feeling I had back in 2011.
Universal daycare wouldn't cost anywhere near as much as paying dad enough so mom can stay home.
Holy damn, this host guy is all about dragging an endorsement for 'good billionaires' out of Anand.
I'm persuaded....
Saw him on TV Ontario.
Amazing how he reveals the whole propaganda system at work in America and Canada.
I'm needing to mark a specific statement about "Authors testimonies to Parliament in the Netherlands..." as a reference for search on the topic, since I've never heard of it, publicly expressed as often that is. Good to know, anyways.
Statement made @1:00:08
U want one example of a philanthropist? Dan Price from Gravity. Problem is he is not a rich man anymore but he enabled economic stability for his employees and in doing so that 40 children were born. That is truly an example of philanthropism at its core, when u are willing to reduce your way of life to share your profits with your employees. That's structural change
41:39 "...good way to spend..." Of even better... recognize that you're on the road to excessive wealth and dismantle the concentrating effects of your enterprise. Turn your enterprise into a workers' cooperative. You hired a bunch of people to get to know the business and run it well, who is the world would be better to shepherd your vision along than those people? A workers' cooperative would flatten the concentrating effect and probably make the workers vastly happier with more control over a huge part of their lives.
The line about forgetting how to do something..We also forgot or lost the data on how to get to the moon
Huh? what kind of statement is that? Are you aware we CHOSE to fly right by the moon, and all the way to MARS?
Not going somewhere is NOWHERE proof of "forgetting" how to get there.
Plutocrats gonna plute.
Very good
Anand is a great observer and a very eloquent writer/speaker, but we need solutions. I wonder what would be his opinion on direct representative democracy described in the book "The silver bullet for a Failed System."
30:21 "How do you starve government from funding . . " Modern Monetary Theory says ALL U.S. government spending is not funded by federal taxes but rather by a vote of Congress. So, in reality, there is not any problem funding whatever Congress has a will to accomplish.
30:51 The only place where all the benefits made clear from Modern Monetary Theory work is for sovereign governments with their own floating currency such as the U.S., but not the EU and not states, cities or private citizens. The federal government does not have the same constraints as private citizens.
Best ever seen
I have no problem with people getting rich. But I resent paying tax on my $50000 a year and subsidizing billionaires.
He's right. It the predators(i.e. elites) pretending to help the victims they predate on(i.e. the public). It's like a street pimp who pretends to "love" the victim he traffics. Just terrible...
Now that's a functional government at 1:00:00 i.e . The Dutch
Is this phenomenon not just an extension of the college Fraternity system? It seems the similarities are substantial, and the predicate to the "good ol' Boy" plutocracy of today. Eliminate Frats and you drive a stake in the heart of plutocracy.
The interviewer is so stuck up on conservative vs liberal debate. Gee, open your mind and see what the hell is happening out there.
He's paid to do that.
damn right
Says the firefighter to the arsonist
@9:30
"Pls... Give me one example of a good billionaire... Pls.. Plss...."
Anand is funny and poignant. He makes serious points for a better society.
America's winner takes all mentality can only end in one place: upheaval. Its up to us to envision a different ending.
This host is so... Clueless and uncharismatic. I breathe with relief as soon as he stops overwhelming his guest with his droning
With all due respect, I disagree. I've watched a bunch of Anand interviews and talks at this point, and this guy gets more details stories, and expansions of his thoughts than any other interview I've seem him do so far
Anand needs to do a better job of pointing out that Obama is the poster boy for the winner takes all careerism & that Trump is his true legacy ~ just sayin'
You're silly to think this issue started with Obama. It's been a problem for decades.
Oh Yes@@91toinfinity,
i am aware just how long the insidious neo'liberal agenda has been at work. The culprits that we can point to as its evil architects include Obama with his recent shallow public pronouncements.
His attempts at shaming the general public are an
attempt to cover up his complicity.
Asshole Trump is Obama's legacy of narcissistic careerism & greed.
They are both damaged & dangerous humans.
@@airmark02 okay I see where you're coming from. I agree.
@@91toinfinity yes
...no more cult of personality worship for these damaged human beings the likes of a Trump or an Obama ~ etc...
@ you're annoying. You can clearly see my subsequent comment rectifying my original one. And how can Obama be the culmination when Bush Jr., Clinton, Reagan, Nixon (I can go on) built the empire of corporate greed. Makes no sense to bring up one President. They all paved the way.
1:03:52 omg what a beatiful voice. would marry this lady just to hear het talk to me. :P
A "wealth tax" is a good thing to help reduce income inequality, but it's not a way to fund anything. One way to look at it is that any money you have is from government spending (the only other source of money is counterfeiting) that has not yet been collected as taxes. A federal government debt is a private sector saving, a good thing.
axioms:
1. The extent to which you can fix or improve something will be limited by how well you understand how it works.
2. Everybody, with no exceptions, holds false beliefs.
"A "wealth tax" is a good thing to help reduce income inequality, but it's not a way to fund anything. "
Seriously?
So, 12.5 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR won't "FUND ANYTHING"?
That's simply a lie or ludicrous thinking.
@@brianmi40 Google "Modern Monetary Theory".
@@Brooke95482 - I would hope that you are not advocating that a means to stop the rich from standing on the necks of the poor is to print more money.
Happy to talk about such possibilities AFTER we get the rich off the necks of the poor, and pay a FAIR taxation (pre-Reagan), with loopholes and tax havens closed.
@@brianmi40 The pre-Reagan marginal tax rate of 80% caused stupid behavior (Oil depletion drilling allowance, REITs, & other tax shelters) that just burned money. Then there was an optimum CEO pay amount because any higher compensation package just went to taxes. Those may be desirable? Hopefully there's a smarter way. Note the current $2T spending bill has no "payfor". see: theintercept.com/2020/03/27/coronavirus-stimulus-package-spending/?The%20Intercept%20Newsletter
@@Brooke95482 - don't have time to argue more than one of those:
NO, the highest the tax rate ever was in the USA was in '52 and '53, at 92%, coming out of WWII. So it is a BALDFACED LIE to claim that:
"there was an optimum CEO pay amount because any higher compensation package just went to taxes"
You get one LIE and I'm done with you when you put forth a second one. You've now used your one up.
Since i don't have time to research the other claims, I will simply counter that the event of the Reagan Tax Cuts, and "end of Big Government" have led to something much worse even IF all of those other claims were somehow true:
The creation of a wealth class beyond any historical proportions in this country, and their subsequent ABUSES combined with the impacts of initiatives by people like the Koch brothers to go way way upstream, and poison the waters even back in college for multiple generations of THOUGHT, leading to thinking such as "government CAN'T solve our problems only Private Enterprise can", and resulting in a common erroneous mistrust of government, which has directly led to things such as Trump's election, a rise of Fascism and a real risk to the continued success of our Democracy are WELL WORSE than any of those things you listed.
Because for one, we have WAY WORSE tax shelters and havens than back then. And nothing about drilling allowances nor REITs ever posed a threat to the continuance of our Democracy.
WHEN Someone Creates Poverty, It Means that Is a Really Poor Man. In other Words, He Can't Think because of Heart and Brain Lack. Don't Waste Your TIME to Became Rich, FIND WHAT YOU HAVE LOST BEFORE DYING, TO STAY WHAT YOU REALLY ARE SINCE YOU WERE BORN. DO YOU REMEMBER? It Not, Ask Your MUM. Have a Good One, Ciao.
I'm starting to think most people don't want equality regardless of the country. That's the ugly truth to this conversation.
The rich are giving us fish and feel good about it instead of making sure each one of us including them get a rod and reel. The rich can keep their boat and still ensure there is access to a rod and reel for all. And it’s unlikely but their boat might have to be a foot shorter. Not feet or yards but a foot shorter. Read the book “ the life you can save” it spells out the actual finances. It’s appalling how rich they are, they couldn’t spend it all in 100 lifetimes.
"The rich are giving us fish"? Who's "us"? Do you mean us humans?
Anand is smart and sexy. Love to listen to this guy.
It's strange how anyone could publish a book, in 2018, on the subject of economic inequality and only make reference to Bernie Sanders twice in that book. Also, those two references were only in passing. Weird.
Woz U. STEM is great, but not the answer. STEM gave us nuclear weapons, Philosophy kept us from using them again for 75 years.
I will never donate again, no matter how rich I become.
Never want to feed into the charade.
Sushi Saim so true. We need to ignore philanthropy, it’s just another way to make money. Non profit doesn’t mean the directors don’t get paid.
just a small item...while he raises good points various websites state his net worth at $8 million...
To be fair 8 million is such a small amount compared to 1 Billion dollars. For instance. If you were to make $5000 dollars a day since the day Columbus sailed to America. You wouldn't be a billionaire and you would still have less money than Jeff Bezos makes in a week.
@@thecoleslaa5761 yes..1 million seconds=11.5 days..1 billion sec=31.5 years...I got the math yet 8 million is more than any regular person will ever earn cause if you earn $50k/yr for 20 years you will have earned $1 million...and 1 trillion sec=31,500 years....
Is he paying taxes though? That’s the crux of the talk, if he pays the set amount in taxes then he is participating like the rest!
I call that the "Buffet Argument" - OMG, how can Buffet advocate for higher taxes that will IMPACT HIM?
or the "Sanders Argument" - OMG how can Bernie own THREE HOMES and advocate that there should not be BILLIONAIRES.
Both are STUPID ARGUMENTS. The fact that you have benefited under the current system doesn't make it impossible to recognize and point out the deficiencies of that system.
Try to learn to focus on the argument. Bullshit like $8 Million of anything is the typical distraction they want you to focus on. It's like Trump doing all this bullshit during his press conferences: he does it so that the press will spend time chasing entirely new false statements he's made, instead of continuing to focus on the ACTUAL DAMAGE THAT IS HAPPENING.
The most depressing shit in your life is being invited to the Dutch Parliament to testify and give your opinion because the Dutch Parliament want to be better at upholding the laws?????
Indonesia!!! Invite this person, get him to testify! Listen to him!!
Wait that might offend people
"Traitor to your class philanthropy"...
So who's the next bad leader (with bad ideas) ?
Winner takes it all yet the losers grow more and more in numbers every year (including you and me)
That boy sounds like Charlie Kirk lmao
a person who has never created wealth themselves demonized those who have; the epitome of jealousy and envy.
Al blah blah blah and his ideas end in the same thing: take taxes to the extreme, more goverment spend....... wow what an original idea......
SHAHID BUTTAR for district 12!!
@@dharyalrasheed557 Well, if you're making a rhyme, I dig it... though unfortunately it doesn't work with the way he pronounces his name. (The "hid" part rhymes with the "hid" like what someone did when they were playing hide and seek.)
But yes! Shahid is fucking amazing, and I'm so excited to vote for him again in November. Lots more around the country, too!
Anand is a great observer and a very eloquent writer/speaker, but we need solutions. I wonder what would be his opinion on direct representative democracy described in the book "The silver bullet for a Failed System."