Is Technology Killing Capitalism?

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.พ. 2025

ความคิดเห็น • 844

  • @peterfmodel
    @peterfmodel 5 ปีที่แล้ว +37

    I have worked in the IT/Financial Services industry for over 20 years and I have observed how the best brains spend an enormous amount of time in creating complex financial products, which effectively general no economic growth and makes its money by fees or ticket clipping. We all know that society tends to be more interested in hand held devices which allow them to send pictures of their lunch to their friends, rather than send people to mars, or building a high speed rail network across the US, or even maintaining existing infrastructure. At the other end of the food chain I am seeing people `making more and more money by simply clipping tickets, though the use of micro-fees, share trading for the purpose of short term gain, or the ability to twist the movement of money in such a manner which allows an individual to gain a monitory benefit, but does not affect the movement of money in any positive manner.
    I am not certain if market capitalism is dead, but the focus society has now will cause significant structural issues. By moving from a form of economic growth based on the building of factories, infrastructure or anything which has an economic multiplier effect, results in a reduction in the GDP per person. From a society point of view this is not healthy.
    Japan has created a solution to this issue and I feel, while western economist always claim is a disaster, for the local Japanese its not. GDP per person in japan contains to rise, mainly by maintaining a positive organic economic growth coupled with a reduction in population. This is sustainable, but from a financial services point of view is very bad, as there is not as much opportunity to generate non-productive revenue from fees and ticket clipping. The developing world has no issue, as its purely focused on building factories and infrastructure, although as wealth increases it may fall into the western developed world trap. Time will tell, but I see some significant disruptions in the western developed world coming soon, if not already.

    • @gregorysagegreene
      @gregorysagegreene ปีที่แล้ว

      It's a parasite, which has been eating real world reality from the inside out for some time.

  • @admirallightningbolt
    @admirallightningbolt 5 ปีที่แล้ว +270

    What a bizarre intro between a husband and wife hahaha. You would've thought they just met

    • @somefuckstolemynick
      @somefuckstolemynick 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      You mean the intro where she directly addresses the camera (us) and explicitly mentions they already know each other?

    • @ycnexu
      @ycnexu 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Thanks for pointing this out. Hilarious!

    • @info781
      @info781 5 ปีที่แล้ว +22

      She gave him that look that said, "you were supposed to take out the garbage last night, but you forgot, so I did it. "

    • @MrDeicide1
      @MrDeicide1 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      They both look gross

    • @Missmmmmmmmmmm
      @Missmmmmmmmmmm 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      MrDeicide1 shit mentality

  • @Kiwigd
    @Kiwigd 4 ปีที่แล้ว +31

    Man it must be some deep conversations at the family get-together with these two wonderful minds and Brett and Heather.

    • @shohamziner
      @shohamziner 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      who's Heather, another sibling?

    • @SATULAL
      @SATULAL 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Eric's brother is Brett Weinstein and his wife is Heather Heying, herself a very astute person about all things just like Eric, Brett and Pia.

    • @no_special_person
      @no_special_person 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@shohamziner Heather is Brett winestines wife, they have a podcast (Brett and Heather) called the dark horse podcast

    • @jonathankey6444
      @jonathankey6444 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      I’d pay a lot of money to be invited to thanksgiving

  • @Jonx97
    @Jonx97 8 ปีที่แล้ว +42

    This TH-cam channel is a fucking goldmine! To all those involved with this institute, thank you so much for doing this!

    • @ouss
      @ouss 7 ปีที่แล้ว

      they are commie scam

  • @jayw6034
    @jayw6034 7 ปีที่แล้ว +21

    I'm glad people are *seriously* trying to understand what is happening in the world. And others aren't categorically dismissing them.

    • @tuckerbugeater
      @tuckerbugeater ปีที่แล้ว

      @@mariem6735 looks like they're failing

  • @thomasm2806
    @thomasm2806 5 ปีที่แล้ว +303

    this is why i love being a plumber. unlimited work and jobs, cheap training, software only helps me, great pay, no political correctness on a jobsite flooded in sewage, and tons of poo jokes. yay.

    • @dallasboringnews7157
      @dallasboringnews7157 5 ปีที่แล้ว +16

      You had me at poo Jokes

    • @samueln300
      @samueln300 5 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      wait till AI matures lol

    • @thomasm2806
      @thomasm2806 5 ปีที่แล้ว +24

      @@samueln300 all good by me. I can afford to be part time. I already take the winters off. No wife, no kids, no mortgage, no debt, currently in thailand being a beach bum. yay, plumber wins again.

    • @billwhitacre703
      @billwhitacre703 5 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      @@thomasm2806 Ha, I'm not at the beach, but I enjoy my job as a coal miner.

    • @josephpereira6754
      @josephpereira6754 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      2050 robotoilets are only for sure safe investment- pass that, posthuman economics is difficult to guess

  • @dava00007
    @dava00007 7 ปีที่แล้ว +197

    I write work instructions for a living, I can confirm that most office work tasks could be automated.

    • @creig2kd
      @creig2kd 6 ปีที่แล้ว +15

      dava00007 just about everything we do to earn a living can be automated

    • @tearlelee34
      @tearlelee34 5 ปีที่แล้ว +14

      @Dick Fageroni Tesla layoffs: More than 1,000 in Fremont, Palo Alto, Lathrop
      Automaker details recently announced job cuts, which will begin in March. In addition, the next generation Giga Factories will course correct. Will the factories require humans yes fewer.
      The 21st century model for Capitalism:
      How do we invest more capital to have less people work for us. The goal of capitalism now is economic growth without job growth. Identity Politics is dead we are all subject to the 21st growth model.

    • @shaneoriordan8988
      @shaneoriordan8988 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@tearlelee34 are you in favour of identity politics?

    • @cosmosity1693
      @cosmosity1693 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      maybe 80% is, but the problem is that the other 20% becomes much more valuable in an economy which optimized to do repetitive work. This is because the repetitive work subsidized the non-repetitive work. So corporations can get big by focusing on the 80% generating tons of capital that were really meant as subsidies for humans to also do the nonrepetitive work while being ready to execute nonrepetitive work. They are effectively destroying the existence of complex processes which are rarely repetitive by removing these subsidies from humans disabling them from being able to do these complex activities. Therefore, free google translate should be illegal and payment should be required so Google can hire 100,000 translators to accelerate the effective new nonrepetitive translation.

    • @tearlelee34
      @tearlelee34 5 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      @@shaneoriordan8988
      “Now it’s time for our generation to define a new social contract.”
      -Mark Zuckerberg
      It’s REALLY about ensuring the the gears of commerce continue to work. As more and more AI and robotics replaces human labor, we must realize that humans may largely become unnecessary in large numbers.
      Identity politics is dead all labor is essentially standing in line at the edge of the cliff. Capitalism or the market does not value labor:
      Sam Harris:
      th-cam.com/video/F_ZSeHiix50/w-d-xo.html
      Automated Economy Explained:
      th-cam.com/video/OEkT14RBzDI/w-d-xo.html&list=PLLoU3h6MRmgzQU5yR7V7exNXd3UNNbBfg&index=129
      We are in the middle of negotiations race, politics abandon it this is a labor class, consumer issue which requires honest conversation and a plan.

  • @tristanmoller9498
    @tristanmoller9498 5 ปีที่แล้ว +152

    Is this Andrew Yang’s friend Andrew quotes every now and then saying: “we never knew capitalism was going to be eaten by its son, technology”

    • @fustian
      @fustian 5 ปีที่แล้ว +15

      indeed

    • @dallasboringnews7157
      @dallasboringnews7157 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Hey at least capitalism is pro-choice

    • @josephpereira6754
      @josephpereira6754 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Victimless crimes tend to not mix Church and State (Im a LDS Mormon Transhumanist Freemason neurotheologist the latter in the sam harris vein

    • @fairalways
      @fairalways 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      There is a nexus of ideas of which this is one. The ideas of Yuval Noah Harari are also a part of the futuristic conversation.

    • @TheMilwaukeeProtocol
      @TheMilwaukeeProtocol 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Would a Horus and Osiris metaphor be relevant here?

  • @bjarnesegaard5701
    @bjarnesegaard5701 7 ปีที่แล้ว +36

    Weinstein is very interesting to listen to. Here you really get the depth of the problem sphere we are facing right now and new system approaches are needed.

    • @phrispirit
      @phrispirit 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Hopefully you mean his mindset, which is deep and confused. He has no clue.

    • @lachlanbell8390
      @lachlanbell8390 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      If you thought this went deep, go have a listen to the first episode of the podcast he started recently, where he spent 3 hours discussing our civilisation's deepest problems with Peter Thiel. I can't think of anyone who rivals either of them in terms of being interesting to listen to. They're operating on a different level to most everyone else.

  • @intboom
    @intboom 4 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    The save/load and copy/paste functions in applications like word and excel have already turned the physical into the theoretical. The efficiency increase caused by not having to employ hundreds of people per business to write, rewrite, file and store physical documents seems to have simply not been takej into account by anyone, despite it theoretically being measurable. Arguably it could be said to be responsible for wage stagnation.

  • @indiablackwell
    @indiablackwell 5 ปีที่แล้ว +364

    We basically watched two smart married people go through foreplay

    • @tookie36
      @tookie36 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      indiablackwell I wanna watch part 2 😂

    • @chrisc7265
      @chrisc7265 5 ปีที่แล้ว +20

      @@tookie36 if you thought the hair on Eric's head was thick ...

    • @tookie36
      @tookie36 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Chris C 😂

    • @rexherrold
      @rexherrold 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@chrisc7265 HAHAHA

    • @TheMilwaukeeProtocol
      @TheMilwaukeeProtocol 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Exactly.
      It's my favorite.

  • @ShoesMagoo
    @ShoesMagoo 6 ปีที่แล้ว +14

    Mr. Weinstein, the new model has already been imagined in the form of the collective works of R. Buckminster Fuller and Jacques Fresco. Peter Joseph has a lecture series which encapsulates these ideas and systematizes them into the paradigm of a natural law, resource-based economy. Please consider having a sitdown discussion with him on this subject.

  • @fusion9619
    @fusion9619 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    You two talking about being economists... I was supposed to be an economist. Out of college, I couldn't find a job in my actual field. If I had been willing to do retail (banking, insurance) , there was no shortage of available jobs. But I wanted to actually use what I learned in college, and those retail jobs shouldn't have required a degree. So I ended up becoming a math teacher. It's definitely not a full utilization of my abilities... but at least its fun. You two wondering how people become economists - I'll tell you how. Nepotism or "friendships." When you have connections, you can be in positions that build experience. If you don't, you're on the outside, and you're not allowed in.

    • @user-qi3rm2wr5m
      @user-qi3rm2wr5m 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      True, I hope you enjoy teaching thlugh. College does not provide connections. But I wonder if you could search on the internet about websites like LinkedIn, where you can build connection with people.

  • @depro9
    @depro9 8 ปีที่แล้ว +40

    Nikola Tesla said this would happen eventually. Tesla said it would take a while & humanity had the struggle through capitalism to learn from it. He said robots would do the laborious work of humanity freeing us from drudgery. He made the first true working robot in 1898. It was also the first device to use an "AND logic gate" to function aka a computer.

    • @phrispirit
      @phrispirit 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Unfortunately, capitalism has never existed in this world. Perhaps the closest it has come was the 99 years of Hong Kong under the British "rule"and 19th century US.

    • @soberanisfam1323
      @soberanisfam1323 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@phrispirit and socialism has never been tried

    • @apove1814
      @apove1814 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Soberanis Fam - um not true . Working great in Europe right now while they watch us suffer enjoying the fact we exaggerate “socialism” to be this “monster” making them appreciate life as they watch our Capitalism circus ruin our lives

    • @nescius2
      @nescius2 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      its not possible - word robot first appeared in 1920 czech sci-fi play... but of course I am again completely ignorant of a fact that Nikola Tesla created time machine and invented everything.

    • @harshitmadan6449
      @harshitmadan6449 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@apove1814 Europe ain't socialist

  • @rujotheone
    @rujotheone 5 ปีที่แล้ว +56

    She is actually his wife. Damn!
    These guys should consider acting

    • @EMDEEW
      @EMDEEW 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      This is zo bizar!

    • @jwelda1
      @jwelda1 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      There are a lot of non nefarious reasons they could have chosen to do it this way. Given all the talks I’ve seen Eric give I’m going to give them both the benefit of the doubt that this was done for a good reason. Though at this point now that they are “caught” I think it would be better for him to publicly address the reason for this setup as it could be used to try to discredit him in the future.

    • @jwelda1
      @jwelda1 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      It’s like he wanted his anthropogenic capitalism article on edge in video form because it’s almost word for word the same. Maybe he has some agreement with them not to publish it elsewhere and therefore setup this “interview”

    • @quinntolchin3080
      @quinntolchin3080 5 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Alacrity dude you are totally overthinking this, she seems to be an intelligent woman and clearly she wanted to avoid that topic and just focus on a more professional toned conversation. It is a non-issue.

    • @willek1335
      @willek1335 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@jwelda1 "caught"? It's in the description.

  • @jamessgian7691
    @jamessgian7691 6 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    As technology continues to replace all repetitive tasks, creative tasks will need to expand to take over the economy. Podcasts, videos that entertain and inform, blogs and writing- all these things are growing as the market shifts from practical, repetitive tasks to creative, individual or group tasks.
    This will be harmful to society if the creative expressions are not feeding each other toward higher culture, but rather level the expressions down to lower levels of creative power.
    This should allow for the revival of the artisan, the funding of Michelangelos that might have been lost in recent years to repetitive survival work rather than being discovered.
    Market economics can and will adapt to the new technology.

    • @lachlanbell8390
      @lachlanbell8390 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      It's possible you're right, but you haven't identified *how* market economics can and will adapt. Simply making the claim is meaningless, it's by no means self-evident.

    • @willroman3595
      @willroman3595 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      I’m years late responding, but the educator Robert Hutchins argued that America’s robust industrial power, having liberated men from most economic slavery, along with its democratic political life, had generated an opportunity for the nation’s culture to rival that of Ancient Greece, so long as the population took it upon themselves to absorb a proper liberal arts education during their spare time. If they failed to do this, human behavior and morality would likely degenerate. Man must be made to think and to make meaningful cultural contributions.
      The details of a functioning creator-economy are beyond my understanding, but as we enter an era where labor takes up less of our time, it’s certainly something to revisit.
      That’s why I’ve started reading The Great Works of the Western World, a collection of keys books - milestones in the West’s epistemological and cultural development - that Hutchins oversaw the publication of.

  • @ArtworkAnon
    @ArtworkAnon 7 ปีที่แล้ว +161

    Dude is FIRE.

    • @dilanf7012
      @dilanf7012 6 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      Agreed - incredible perspective being shared.

    • @mahead
      @mahead 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      He uses the same old trick: he feeds you some valid information, only to hook you with some utter bs in the end (I've noticed central banking and soros. UBI on the other hand I am buying, but then why unemployment of robomen is a problem)

    • @lachlanbell8390
      @lachlanbell8390 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      @@mahead You failed to identify why anything mentioned is "utter bs". Ironically enough, Eric's words in this interview were far easier to understand than your comment, which I can't parse with 100% confidence.

  • @carbon1479
    @carbon1479 6 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    This is where I think his brother Bret has some great ideas - including that we need to take a much more complex look at valuation and externalities. It seems like our culture has created what we call capitalism out of a very specific pool of competing goals. Those goals, from the 18th thru the 20th century brought us out of dire poverty and also, by money to medicine and technology, greatly decreased infant mortality. We had some of the previously untouched externalities of that game come into focus, especially environmental ones, in the late 20th century. We can also see that game, as a distribution system, heading off a cliff or at least going out of the sight of human capacity as machines will dominate us at the tasks that are necessary to run it. If this ends up in Hunger Games it'll be for a dogmatic lack of imagination and apish desire to dominate one another - and that is a real threat because it seems like a slight majority out there have plenty of both. The bigger issue is we need to figure out when a game is spent, when a thing that was a good thing is past its sell-by date, and then figure out what new train is going through or could be routed through the human condition as a positive organizing force. If we end us slaves to ideology and don't exercise that sort of vision this won't end well.

  • @oscarbauer1322
    @oscarbauer1322 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The income gap increases in the US over the last 40 years have been caused by two factors, NAFTA and immigration. In the mid 1980”s my home town had a large tractor factory with 9500 workers on the floor all making $20 per hour. After NAFTA, the company began importing the majority of their parts and now the factory has 900 employees making $15 per hour, but the factory still outputs the same amount of tractors. During the same time my father was making $15 per hour at a union meat packing plant. With the arrival of cheap labor from other countries the company shut down this plant and opened other non-union plants and now 35 years later pays $12 per hour. Imagine if the US hadn’t brought in 50 million low wage workers over the last 30 years? People like to talk about how the population would have aged and we wouldn’t have had enough workers. What would have happened was the jobs that could have been automated would have been, workers would be in higher skilled jobs to support the automation and wages would have gone up. The only reason politicians and businesses people get behind immigration is that they are part of the elite class and they know more low skill employees means lowers wages and more money flowing upward to their upper class.

  • @TheSchev
    @TheSchev 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    The deep issue is that creativeness can be taught be taught by teaching "about" creativity by teachers who are not creative. Creativity can only be demonstrated by the creative, so, the concept of education itself is obsolete.

    • @dallasboringnews7157
      @dallasboringnews7157 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I think the deeper issue is lazy people who don't want to work are trying to program AI to be creative. Eric Weinstein is too brilliant to be an economist. He should go back to work at the LHC

  • @JakeJJKs
    @JakeJJKs 6 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    I love how he gets smiley eyes when he mentions one of his favorite movie is Kung Fu Panda. (Don't worry, Eric. It wasn't the only thing I took away from this video.)

  • @MrGTO86
    @MrGTO86 7 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    The interviewer and Eric were really good here. This was great.

    • @Captain_MonsterFart
      @Captain_MonsterFart 7 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      That's because she works with him and understand what he's talking about.

    • @drewconlin9452
      @drewconlin9452 7 ปีที่แล้ว

      Noam Musk wtf does that have to do with anything?

    • @jesperburns
      @jesperburns 7 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      Drew... isn't that blatantly obvious?
      "They were really good together"
      "Yeah duh because they're married"...

    • @satchboogie2058
      @satchboogie2058 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      They look so awkward on their interactions, look how sweaty his neck is.

    • @dcfincher
      @dcfincher 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Satch... fat boys sweat. It's what they do.

  • @jlindsay
    @jlindsay 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Design patterns are defined by Repetitive Behavior(s) that improve productivity in practice, where as Anti-Patterns are defined by Repetitive Behavior(s) that decrease productivity in practice. The funny part is, all design patterns become anti-patterns if abused, or miss-applied. If Capitalism was a deign pattern, I'd say capitalism excels when buying or selling property ie trading, but can easily become an anti-pattern when gambling or inventing new technologies.

  • @HexoNerd
    @HexoNerd 6 ปีที่แล้ว +23

    That's my kind of power couple. #goals

  • @daaronk
    @daaronk 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    post scarcity anarchism and people like fresco, fuller, etzler,rifkin etc have been hip to this for decades.. i mean even marx talked about this... it will get much worse before it gets better though ... just look at the way the systems shaking up .... the endgame is yet unknown, but it seems Wallerstein's divergence is getting closer

  • @maxheadrom3088
    @maxheadrom3088 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    6:22 Teaching, in itself, is one of those tasks that are not repetitive - particularly the most important period of a human learning journey, pre-escol to 10yo. Those teachers should be the ones with the best wages and the most demanding training. It's around those formative years (that start even before pre-school) that we develop the understandings (getalts) that will allow us to see new things in the future or, in other words, to be creative. When we move to high-school, we start to be able to compartimentalize psychology work from training and teachers don't need the expertise kindergarten teachers need to have in psychology. That expertise, however, is far more scarce than knowing what a high school teacher needs to know. I could teach Math, Physics and even History to a high school class - I consider myself absolutely incompetent to teach small children properly - even though I could be an entertaining teacher to a few of the kids, that's not the work of such teachers. The work of small children teachers is to undo the knots in both those kids with difficulties and the brightest ones.
    Now ... back to our story.

  • @shmookins
    @shmookins 6 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    This man excites me and scares me simultaneously- which is how life should be, really.
    Good man.

    • @qstunrr
      @qstunrr 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Shadow Heart Exactly. Exactly this hahaha

  • @mickeypang
    @mickeypang 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Topics such as this seem to be the most pressing important issues of our society, surely in need of more consideration, while in pop culture we get overwhelmingly distracted by issues of the self and identity.

  • @GAMLAPATTE
    @GAMLAPATTE 6 ปีที่แล้ว +15

    Would have been a good idea to start by defining the word capitalism

    • @dallasboringnews7157
      @dallasboringnews7157 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Heres your definition:
      War + war = profit

    • @rv706
      @rv706 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@TH-cam304s: if you put no limitations on it, that's what capitalism naturally tends to

    • @saturngenesis1306
      @saturngenesis1306 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@rv706 ?

  • @tuncalikutukcuoglu8800
    @tuncalikutukcuoglu8800 5 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    When I saw the title "is technology killing capitalism" I hoped he would be speaking about destructive and exploitative technologies like industrial fishing or farming. But no, if I understand him correctly, he is talking about software technology (i.e. artificial intelligence) that replace especially repetitive tasks to create millions of jobless people.

    • @micksburg
      @micksburg 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      We are going to eliminate technology from agriculture not expand it....its expansion is killing us...i say this as a farmer

    •  4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Automation is a myth. Technology is created and people work in compliment. Creating new types of jobs which technology then replaces again and so on. What these charlatans are doing is threatening you with the idea of being permanently unemployed so that you vote for ubi (socialism). Ubi makes you a ward of the state, or in this case, a ward of software conglomerates. These tech companies need you to sit on your ass at home and stay online so that they can continue to leech off advertisers and user data for even cooler ways of displacing white collar workers and retrieving voter data! Neither of these people care about what's best for you they care about setting a long term agenda that suits them.

    • @relight6931
      @relight6931 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @ Automation is a myth? You do know you can write a few lines of code and automate whole job titles.
      That there are factories that used to employ thousands, but now produce more product for less cost with twenty.
      Automation is a myth, in 2020. Jesus, do you serach google by typing "why automation is a myth" or do you never leave echo chamber you stumbled on 4 years ago. I am actually curious of your answer.

    • @mlgpro2241
      @mlgpro2241 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @ Nigga u dumb

    • @xymaryai8283
      @xymaryai8283 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      exploitative industrial overproduction wouldn't kill capitalism, thats capitalism working perfectly. you could argue the same for the working class being shifted out by software, but the big contradiction that causes it to actually kill capitalism is that workers have to be supported by wealth distribution when the bulk of jobs, the repetitive ones, are gone. Capitalism is either gonna fall into an technocracy, or the fundamental structure will have to be taken into the hands of the workers. Either way, Capitalism is dying, and it can't be saved. Unless the rich sacrifice billions of workers.

  • @iRoxC
    @iRoxC 6 ปีที่แล้ว +17

    Did mans just cite Kung Fu Panda in the middle of academic discourse?

    • @dallasboringnews7157
      @dallasboringnews7157 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I just tweeted him about Monster's Inc haha

    • @ecchen1
      @ecchen1 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Need to teach people how to teach themselves.

    • @OurNewestMember
      @OurNewestMember 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      No, it was toward the beginning.

  • @vonneely1977
    @vonneely1977 8 ปีที่แล้ว +82

    See also CGP Grey's "Humans Need Not Apply." When humans are replaced with automation we lose customers but not consumers. Capitalism cannot handle more than a certain percentage of unemployed consumers, and automation will continue to increase that percentage forever. Simply put the existing model cannot be sustained with the current rules-set. We need to seriously start coming up with a new one before it collapses entirely.

    • @donnamaco1
      @donnamaco1 6 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      th-cam.com/video/4mkRFCtl2MI/w-d-xo.html Resourced Based Economy Peter Joseph

    • @clubadv
      @clubadv 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      chbrules you are right for the most part. I used to think the way to you that free market can correcr, but i have been presented with hypotheticals that clearly cross the threshold of capitalisms ability to adjust.
      Also, Scandinavian countries follow a more socialistic model (called nordic socialism), with a higher per capita GDP than even America (the hybrid capitalist socialistic nation). Maybe that is why they dont need a minimum wage?

    • @shake6321
      @shake6321 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Johm eaglehart
      even as a libertarian / crypto anarchists i am a HUGE fan of george and his land tax. however, i am not sure if that gets us to where we want to be. a country like Venezuela owns the main resources and it is not really helping the citizens. plus, i have been trying to wrap my head around how one taxes land in a world with bitcoin. what happens when people an buy or sell without the Government knowing what the sale price was?
      i think AI may simply be an extinction level event with no real solution.

    • @shake6321
      @shake6321 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      amer shakir --
      Glad to have a rational discussion with someone on youtube.
      I enjoy reading the ideas you presented. I have been thinking about a completely Ancap Decentralized world and a lot of the ideas you mentioned would not compute in that type of society.
      however, in a hybrid society with "some" coercion (Government Confiscation) a land tax would seem reasonable. That being said, I do not think the revenue you derive from a land tax is enough to provide for a Military and a UBI. Additionally, as the price of land goes higher and higher the goods and services derived from it get more expensive. In essence, you raise the price of goods so as to collect money for the "poor" but the poor now have to pay more for goods.
      Instead of having ZERO dollars to pay for something that cost $5 the poor now have $5 to pay for something that costs $10. They still do not have enough...
      Ultimately, the government CANNOT give value to something that has no value. If we do reach a point in time when robots make many humans obsolete those humans will have to rely on Charity or simply die off.
      The Land Tax makes a lot of sense to combat our current system of taxation. I think it is better to tax land than to tax labor. People who own land because they inherited it from ancestors or because the Government stole it on their behalf get a first mover advantage by doing nothing productive.
      "I think government would just calculate the land value tax by auctioning off empty land parcels and then using that data to fill in the rest of the land value map. I would like to see the government create its own money, that it would require the land value tax be paid with. The demand for land would create the demand for the money. Government should stop collecting taxes in banker created money. A less volatile money supply would make land assessments easier to stay on top of."
      This is very interesting idea. I have also been thinking about a way to give "Government Money" value in a world in which we have Crypto Currencies. Government having a monopoly on money used to Buy land or pay taxes would be one such way for the Government to retain some power. However, with this centralized power will come corruption. The Government / Bankers will again sell land to the "well connected" by printing up tokens and giving it to their friends...
      "Capital is expensive because labor is expensive. If technology makes labor free then capital will also be free. "
      I tend to believe the same thing; however, I am not 100% this is true. What you are basically saying that if we take any cost to its root then all of it has to do with labor. I will to ask an economist if this is true. ultimately, I think energy or Time are the real costs, not human labor. thus, even if labor is $0 their is energy cost and time cost that is greater than $0.
      "Government collects the land rent and distributes a large portion of that out as a citizens dividend, everyone now has money with which to buy what the robots produce, problem solved."
      As i mentioned earlier I do not think this solves the problem. I think you are robbing peter to pay peter. I think the land tax is great in order to fund Basic Government (Military, police, Fire department, etc etc). I am not sure if a land tax gets you a UBI.
      There are 4 way to make money: Land, Labor, Capital or Information.
      If AI gets rid of Labor and a Land Tax gets rid of Land, then your entire economy would be built on Capital and Information.
      I do not know if that a great world or if that turns into a complete shit show with billions dying off...

    • @shake6321
      @shake6321 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      A lot of makes sense. Some of it does not.
      The UBi portion does not since that is a service that is not making the land more valuable; thus, you are increasing costs without providing an equal amount of Value.
      I did some additional research on LVT and what I didnt like was that people who bought land to either hold or build small houses would have to pay the same amount of tax as someone with a mansion or highly productive land.
      Furthermore, I am most interested in a land tax to pay for Military since it seems like a logical connection. After all, the military is the one protecting the land.

  • @HakWilliams
    @HakWilliams 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you for coming. I hope you will come again later at home.

  • @MrStosh12345
    @MrStosh12345 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    The economic problem -sometimes called basic or central economic problem - asserts that an economy's finite resources are insufficient to satisfy all human wants and needs. It assumes that human wants are unlimited, but the means to satisfy human wants are limited. Economics revolve around these fundamental economic problems.
    An assumption often made in mainstream neoclassical economics (and methods that try to solve the economic problem) is that humans inherently pursue their self-interest, and that the market mechanism best satisfies the various wants different individuals might have. These wants are often divided into individual wants (which depend on the individual's preferences and purchasing power parity) and collective wants (which are the wants of entire groups of people). Things such as food and clothing can be classified as either wants or needs, depending on what type and how often a good is requested.
    The economic problem is the problem of rational management of resources or the problem of optimum utilization of resources. It arises because resources are scarce and resources have alternative uses.
    Three questions arise from this:
    • What to produce?
    • How to produce? &
    • For whom to produce?
    What to produce?
    'What and how much will you produce?' This question lies with selecting the type of supply and the quantity of the supply, focusing on efficiency.
    e.g. "What should I produce more; laptops or tablets?"
    How to produce? Capital goods or consumer goods
    'How do you produce this?' This question deals with the assets and procedures used while making the product, also focusing on efficiency.
    e.g. "Should I hire more workers, or do I invest in more machinery?"
    For whom to produce?
    'To whom and how will you distribute the goods?' and 'For whom will you produce this for?' arises from this question. This question deals with distributing goods that have been produced, focusing on efficiency and equity.
    e.g. "Do I give more dividends to stock holders, or do I increase worker wages?"
    LULZ!

  • @jdg7327
    @jdg7327 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    So what to do about it? Leveraging repetitive task to technology exponentially increases productivity. True that lots of people will lose their jobs, but then what? This has been true since time immemorial whenever new technology emerges. Those who can't cope with the time simply falls of. The best way to benefit from technology all the while decreasing those who will get dispossessed is essentially through education. Not the factory-producing education/schools, but those that produce innovators.

  • @InlightmediaUk
    @InlightmediaUk 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    How about Cooperativism and an Open Market? By open market I mean that the market of a certain place is open but when you come from the outside you have to adhere to the rules and regulations of that specific system. If the system will be lacking something it will open itself more to competition from outside but will normally give priority to local production.

  • @DrEhrfurchtgebietend
    @DrEhrfurchtgebietend 6 ปีที่แล้ว +35

    He needs to have a chat with Tomas Sowell.

    • @johnyf.q.8043
      @johnyf.q.8043 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Sowell has a bit of an "Austrian Heritage" in him meaning that he can raise very hard problems for mathematics to solve with a bit of Praxeology.

    • @armstrong2052
      @armstrong2052 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      His knowledge and descriptions of statistics is godlike.

    • @creig2kd
      @creig2kd 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Dr.Ehrfurchtgebietend TheVenusProject.com

  • @arlieferguson3990
    @arlieferguson3990 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Total automation makes repetitive work obsolete. There is a term for the kind of society he's talking about: it's a "post scarcity society"

  • @gfsrow
    @gfsrow 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Very sensible voice. We need persons in government with hard skills (economics, mathematics, physics), instead of only lawyers and political scientists.

    • @daemon1143
      @daemon1143 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      We have never needed political 'scientists'.

  • @kenw.simpson1007
    @kenw.simpson1007 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    No - corruption is killing capitalism.

  • @tomski2671
    @tomski2671 6 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    Brilliant people will be the death of us.
    Whatever you think you know, you don't know nearly enough.
    Let these problems be resolved bottom up, not top down.

    • @apove1814
      @apove1814 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Tom Ski - right!!!

    • @relight6931
      @relight6931 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      While I understand what you are saying very well... I don't understand how would you implement a system in which all change emerges amongst the workers, gets tested locally for a few years then gets adopted by majority and scaled up.. You think a worker has time to innovate?

  • @kevinward3261
    @kevinward3261 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    this guy is literally amazing. every interview is jam packed with dope insight. its crazy, and hes not elitist.

    • @phrispirit
      @phrispirit 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      He speaks well, but his view is very pessimistic. He doesn't even realize that Capitalism doesn't even exist at this moment. To the extent partial Capitalism exists, we will flourish. We need to get rid of the "geniuses" in government except to enforce individual rights. This US economy is nowhere near Capitalism.

    • @saturngenesis1306
      @saturngenesis1306 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@phrispirit It may be all too precious a quibble, but Capitalism denotes precisely such a system; a government interposing on behalf of Capitalists. It's a term of opprobrium, making capital itself paramount as a new, propulsive force. It's neither novel nor sufficient to transform the world; we're not rich, dynamic & interconnected merely because we stacked 'brick on brick.' I'd more often counsel 'free markets,' instead, as a liberating & enfranchising alternative that would duly reward productive behavior.

  • @oleedee888
    @oleedee888 5 ปีที่แล้ว +14

    "no known educational system that imparts this ability". I think he means Art school.

    • @AdEPTErik
      @AdEPTErik 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Oleedee this is the best comment on this page!!!!!!
      So laughable that a math genius has been taught, and can even invent, such abstract and useful constructs, and yet cant come on a show that has humanities and philosophical based ideas central to it (human economics) and speak in everyday language that fosters understanding for even the most uneducated viewers. Undereducataed people need to see this stuff, and vote accordingly. He, his wife, his brother and his wife, and all their kids, are awesome people but even Brett and Heather who chose the biological route, get tied up in knots when it comes to simple sociology and philosophy because they were taught that these subjects were trivial and didnt pay as well.
      He needs more art based hermeneutics and less heterodox LOL
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics

    • @____uncompetative
      @____uncompetative 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@AdEPTErik PoMo = PooP

  • @noveltycross1
    @noveltycross1 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    They introduced the Ai that was gonna replace my position. I smacked it down in speed and quality. Test. And the cost of producing the AI is starting to weigh heavier than it is to continue my employment.

  • @hosseinturner3813
    @hosseinturner3813 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Jacques Ellul stated this in his book "The Technological Society" back in the 1960s.

  • @clarkd1955
    @clarkd1955 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    This is one of the most intelligent and substantive person’s opinion I have ever listened to. Thank you so much.

  • @spetruzify
    @spetruzify 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The problem with his approach to economics is that he completely looks past the market distortion by government. There's a willful ignorance of central banking at the core of his analysis. He also somehow he finds "rent-seeking behavior" everywhere but the place it actually exists in bulk: licensing and taxation.
    As for technology displacing jobs, this has been panicked over since at least the 19th century. He does this trick where he basically says "well this time it's different because software could replace more things". No. Apply deductive reasoning. If there were magic food-printers that dropped down from the sky tomorrow, displacing most food-workers but giving us endless supplies of cheap or free food, would we be better or worse off? This goes back to Bastiat's brilliant satirical piece, Candlemakers's Petition. bastiat.org/en/petition.html

  • @mrtriffid
    @mrtriffid 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    At 16:10, he asks this question (I'm paraphrasing): How do we pass the "ability" to "create" to others without destroying the "capacity" for creative/original thinking? This assumes that there is something common to all acts of creative thinking. That there some kind of ethereal quality that is shared by ALL creativity (e.g. artistic, mechanical, mathematical, political, etc.). This is a false and unwarranted assumption which is central to the dubious concept of "meritocracy."
    Creativity is as much social as it is personal. You insure society remains creative by insuring that it remain free and that it provides sufficient opportunities for creative/independent behavior to its members. Or, better put, that the members of society establish and maintain those opportunities for themselves.

  • @societalwisdom9930
    @societalwisdom9930 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    Eric speaks in the beginning as though the singular central principle of Capitalism is a labor market. Granted, markets are pivotal to Capitalism. But what those markets specifically are have little effect on the success or failure of Capitalism. Capitalism requires ownership and investment (i.e. capital) to produce. What is produced shapes market(s) and in turn is shaped by the markets. The technologies which concerns him will change markets. That is what always happens and in the short term it large portions of the population are displaced possibly causing temporary (in historical timeframes) severe discomfort and discord. Eventually stability emerges from the development of evolved markets. This is not to claim nor dismiss the problem that could arise with a lack of economic social stability. It is only to attempt to highlight the reality of the concern. Otherwise how can it be properly considered?

    • @relight6931
      @relight6931 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      What if markat regulates itself back to a new normal which means all humans without property or levarage are just cheap unwilling organ donors. You should have just been a better capitalist. Humanity ultimatively losing a gamr of Monopoly with iteslf.
      It can be as ugly as you can't even imagine or it could be beautiful, but requires serious work towards organizing conceptualizing it in advance. Instead of hoping for "invisible hand of the market" to work in any other way then to maximise the potential profit for the owner.
      I for one would never think that stopping the progress itself, aka actual technical and scientific work and invention is a way to go, especially with 8 billion, we don't have a choice, although I reckon that number will soon go down fast, but we are trully entering realms here which we have proven over and over we are not adapted or wise enough for.

    • @societalwisdom9930
      @societalwisdom9930 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Re Light
      “humans without property or leverage are just cheap unwilling organ donors.” To explain the explicit impossibility of such a scenario would require a lengthy conversation beginning from fundamentals that I’m unwilling to undertake through this medium of exchange.

    • @societalwisdom9930
      @societalwisdom9930 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Re Light capitalism is not a political axiom. It is an economic system. It has been adopted due its seeming congruence with the chosen political axiom.

  • @joshwhalen17
    @joshwhalen17 7 ปีที่แล้ว +133

    Kung Fu Panda.

    • @timothymcaleer6480
      @timothymcaleer6480 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I was amazed he was able to draw out such a profound message from that movie and explain it so succinctly

    • @FrancoJ-c7p
      @FrancoJ-c7p 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Timothy McAleer Kung fu Panda is a fuking classic. Fantastic movie.

    • @khylaldana2757
      @khylaldana2757 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yeah.

  • @RickDelmonico
    @RickDelmonico 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Never attribute to randomness that which can be adequately explained by chaos.

  • @SamsonZoomBespoke
    @SamsonZoomBespoke 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    machines have not been able yet to compete with a suitmaker. If it ever does it will not impart the confidence, self esteem and motivation for change, that Shakespeare mentioned in Richard the 3rd

    • @nescius2
      @nescius2 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      that is a valid point, from what little I heard, it seems that AI are already able to do better estimations than expert humans in some cases, but still not good enough to be able to put together Tesla car

  • @commandersprocket
    @commandersprocket 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    This has been clear for more than a decade, if you read Kurzweil's "The Singularity is Near" and can extrapolate the effects of automation on the economy.

    • @phillipbridge5009
      @phillipbridge5009 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Oh you mean the guy who wants to bring his dead Father alive again, clearly fully sane.....

  • @AntonShields
    @AntonShields 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Once again Eric shows his amazing attention to detail and better understanding of the plight that Technology holds for us. He is correct it is a very interesting time where algorithms are subtly and incrementally altering human behavior, yet at the same time changing our economic platform to uncharted territories. We need more conversations like this to broaden the understanding of what’s to come. A more informed society for better or worse will be more effective if changes are needed.

  • @FlavioRicardodaSilva
    @FlavioRicardodaSilva 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    I think that a better name for the study of "how economists think about things" is "philosophy of economics" not "economics of economics".

  • @erniereyes1994
    @erniereyes1994 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Anyone who says or paraphrases the phrase "We're witnessing the end of..." are uniquely always wrong and typically don't have any idea what they're talking about 🤔

  • @conw_y
    @conw_y 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    6:00 "we may crowd out the self-teaching modality" - Crowd out? Or expand in a virtuous cycle? Does planting trees crowd out trees? Does having children crowd out children? Let a thousand flowers bloom.

  • @OurNewestMember
    @OurNewestMember 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Excellent discussion.
    But I repeat the question she asked, "what's different this time?" Technology inherently seeks to change productivity (eg, of repetitive tasks). So this is not an aberration of technology or a shift of capitalism -- this is a new problem set caused by shifts in productivity.
    And can we not argue that the market is already working on this problem?
    For example, many people earn income publishing their unique personality using TH-cam's technology without relying on a traditional "repetitive" skill set (eg, journalism/broadcasting education).
    Technology consolidates capital, but simultaneously redistributes it.
    I don't think we're lamenting "the end of capitalism" but rather the present distribution of in-demand inputs (eg skills) and outputs (eg income)
    Edit: here's an interesting example from the turn of the century: the music "industry" decreased 40% yet technology gave more creators access to sales: th-cam.com/video/392B71DgBCY/w-d-xo.html

  • @blakeeverett6267
    @blakeeverett6267 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Why is everyone so concerned about automation? Is it the gap between now and overabundance? Or the disruption of systems of control? I assumed that was the point of this video through the lens of economics, but I’ll I saw in the comments were petty squabbles over intellectual ideals. Thoughts?

    • @grantapalooza998
      @grantapalooza998 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      I think most people are worried how the vast majority of the population will deal with this. I mean during the industrial revolution people went from working on farms to factories and it disrupted and caused chaos. But eventually everything settled and worked out because people could transition to factory work.
      I think the major difference now is almost all jobs we do could be automated which is great to me. But I think it's unrealistic to think most of the population could transition to being programers or engineers. Another thing is I believe people want to prepare for this next technological revolution but we're not seeing anybody take notice that it's going to happen. And next thing you know all low level jobs are gone(not all but alot) so how will that college student earn money if there's no low level work to pay for education

    • @blakeeverett6267
      @blakeeverett6267 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Grant bucy great points and I agree it will be a difficult transition especially in countries like the United States that larger percentage of the population are employed by the transportation industry. So the question is what do we do with these people who maybe unable or unwilling to pivot into a new career? Many people suggested a UBI which is a loaded topic in itself how do you fund it? Is it even a good idea? I think the issue a little deeper then that and that automation undermines our entire monetary incentive scheme. Will capitalism work in the long run if they’re no clear way for a majority of the population to earn money? And how will that effect the rest of the system? Will money have any value if it’s highly concentrated in one place and no go reason to circulate? On a lower level though we could put high taxes on automation based on how many workers are displaced to slow the process down and fund some ubi structure. I just haven’t seen any good ideas to solve the issue that I see as a fundamental issue with a consumer based economy where labor is obsolete.

  • @Monopolist91
    @Monopolist91 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    wow, perhaps obvious, buti never thought of comparing inflation to weather, in the sense it's more or less prevalent depending on location. for a guy who coined the phrase intellectual dark web, eric may be the most underrated and refreshing member.

  • @piperfree4271
    @piperfree4271 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    I wonder what the good old milton would have said about the coming challenges to the free market imposed by technology.
    Do you guys think basic income and expanding the social net will solve the problem?

    • @masterpalladin
      @masterpalladin 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Mr. Gandalf job training to get people employed in what can still be available in a few decades……..ubi ensures enough for basic needs, it'll just recirculate back to the r economy anyway

  • @ChispyReddit
    @ChispyReddit 8 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    We're part of a greater network of stratification and we have to surround it with order. The Singularity.

    • @Ausbos5
      @Ausbos5 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      fuckin a

    • @jaishu123
      @jaishu123 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      why?

  • @darelboyer6764
    @darelboyer6764 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    I get the impression that Eric isn't using a colloquial definition of Capitalism - i.e. an economic system based on private property rights where the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned and operated for individual profit.
    Under that definition, I don't see any evidence that Capitalism is dead, dying, or in any way threatened by technological progress.

    • @sterlingveil
      @sterlingveil 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      I think you're just not forecasting far enough ahead. If you accept his claim that market failures will begin to dominate more and more of the economy then there will come a time when most people cannot afford to eat. At that point (and probably before), people will either mobilize the state to save them or, if the state is not sympathetic to their plight, they will violently resist the technocratic elites. It is this second scenario that certainly signals the death of capitalism.

    • @jorgegomez524
      @jorgegomez524 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      I think he meant that capitalism is on the verge to stop serving its purpose to humans, as an aggregate identity, so when the moment comes it will in fact kill capitalism. capital comes from capital, and capital is value of human efford and ingenuity, at that moment it will be meaningless.

  • @melissakelly4133
    @melissakelly4133 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    More like this please Eric and Pia.

  • @thesimulacre
    @thesimulacre 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    9:37 umm... Actually applying math to some areas where's either been intentionally overlooked or obfuscated.

  • @DoctorEnigma01
    @DoctorEnigma01 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    She obviously fell in love with his rugged good looks

  • @chuckdayiii
    @chuckdayiii 6 ปีที่แล้ว +18

    I am okay with a brilliant person interviewing their brilliant spouse. I am less okay with them not mentioning that fact.

  • @BLUEGENE13
    @BLUEGENE13 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    tech killing capitalism is exactly what Marx said hundreds of years ago, some skepticism is in order i think.

  • @AndreaDavidEdelman
    @AndreaDavidEdelman 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    It’s not loops it’s work, repetitive intellectual work can now be automated. It’s not the death of capitalism, it’s the evolution. We need UBI to feed people who will have no jobs.

    • @0thepyat0
      @0thepyat0 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      The defining factor of a loop is the habit of repeating. I'm not sure where the intellect comes into that equation. Loops or repetitive work quickly become the antithesis of intellect.

    • @AndreaDavidEdelman
      @AndreaDavidEdelman 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@0thepyat0 I don’t remember what this was

  • @Cotictimmy
    @Cotictimmy 7 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    Have become a fan of Eric after seeing him on the Rubin Report. I like his subtle and humane approach to all our problems and conflicts. A thoroughly decent genius. P.S. I think he is married to the interviewer.

    • @wowomah6194
      @wowomah6194 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Ed R. Better than being paid fort by the Cock brothers, amirite?

  • @jalexwheeler7751
    @jalexwheeler7751 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    How would a technological "utopia" differ from any other form of "utopia" ever proposed?

  • @8radr
    @8radr 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Most people agree mankind tends to want to solve problems. Rent seeking is resting from solving problems. Innovation, problem solving, is hard work. Both are amoral. Rent seeking slows progress down. If we are progressing to our doom, rent seeking is not so bad.

  • @thesimulacre
    @thesimulacre 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    I don't know all the nomenclature, but I hope that despite that I can sit down and work with this guy some time

  • @andrewlankford9634
    @andrewlankford9634 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    4:15 Huh? Last article I read about AI systems that do medical diagnoses is that they actually aren't outperforming real experts unless the rules of the contest are unrealistic. If I'm sick, I'm going to find the best living breathing specialist I can. Whether or not that medical professional is living a fulfilling life with a great career, I could not say, but chances are he is pretty darn wealthy. How many homeless medics are out there on the street begging for a buck because they couldn't be the foremost expert in their field? Bizarre argument.
    I can't renounce the thinking that the point of technology is to be an economic multiplier, although just about any technology can be weaponized. I don't blame the technology. I blame the darker sides of human nature.
    I would say the same thing about capitalism. If people's morals are f***ed up, then capitalism is not better and no worse than they are.

  • @nicholasmacinnis1486
    @nicholasmacinnis1486 7 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    His claim that the "global economy is self-regulated" is false. Self-regulation is predicated on the fact that it is void of manipulation - a virtue our current economy has yet to attain (one can also argue this is unattainable all together). Our manipulation's reach is almost limitless, likely far beyond the capacity of human management.

  • @brianjoyce9742
    @brianjoyce9742 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    This was my first hint of Eric Weinstein in the world. I would ask him pretty much anything and value his answer. Whether I would understand, would be of my problem. His NO snippet done, in reaction to, shutting down police is outstanding, and inspiring.

    • @Scathingly
      @Scathingly 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Brian Joyce - If, as you say, you might not understand his answers to your question(s) while simultaneously saying that you would value his answer, how can you legitimately value that which you don't understand.

    • @brianjoyce9742
      @brianjoyce9742 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Scathingly ---I like research and learning. Never challenged never growth. Try it and grow mentally, every challenge you conquer. Good day and thx for asking. Always wonder if people read comments

    • @Scathingly
      @Scathingly 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Brian Joyce - Oh, dear, did you miss the question? Must've cuz you didn't answer. You may very well do your research--fine lad that you are--but until such time as you verify his answers, you're prematurely saying you value his answers. Yes, you're absolutely right. Some people just don't read the comments. Hmmmm.

    • @Scathingly
      @Scathingly 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @ Brian Joyce (got cut off)...his answers, it's a tad premature to value his answer(s). Of course, you're right, some people don't read before they respond.

    • @brianjoyce9742
      @brianjoyce9742 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Scathingly Not sure what your point is, but won't need research either. Be well

  • @marklittlewood2418
    @marklittlewood2418 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    If technology is going to dominate the production of wealth which ism would you prefer to take care of the people

  • @DrKnowsMore
    @DrKnowsMore ปีที่แล้ว

    Failure of our economic system may have been accelerated by technology, but was put in place by Nixon in the 1970s when he took us off the gold standard and divorced government spending from any kind of accountability. The result is that hard work is not rewarded because saving is not rewarded, in fact saving is punished. The system necessarily has to fail because it's built on a flawed premise which isn't that you can just continue borrowing forever and borrowing to pay back what you borrowed. It creates a situation in which, because there is no accountability, those seeking power can simply utilize the seemingly bottomless pockets of the public treasury to incentivize certain people to vote for them. This failed to take into account, however, that there have to be people producing real good and real output in order for all of us to survive. Those people are being burdens to support a greater and greater number of people without getting ahead of themselves, the system is edging ever closer to collapse. The United States with a Powerhouse when hard work and effort were rewarded as opposed to what is now rewarded, which is the exploitation of the system

  • @johnsavage6628
    @johnsavage6628 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Capitalism is killing itself. What is capitalism? The making and selling of a product in a free and open market where demand sets the price. We have none of these. Capitalism has to give way to the needs of the people. People need affordable products. Cars, medical care, housing, and food make this impossible. Automation should be used to make cheaper products, and people need to be taken out of the cost of products. Thus a universal guaranteed income is needed. People's main role is as consumers. People don't have money to buy products what then? People prime the well. You give people money they will use it. Too few people have all the money an economy will suffer. This what we have now, plus the suppression of innovations. The electric vehicle is a prime example, The EV companies are refusing to make self charging vehicles. Refusing! Kids are making self charging vehicles. So, what now? A good question!! Scotty beam me up, please!

  • @xenomorpheus7376
    @xenomorpheus7376 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    This man has depth. What he says on a global scale is not just frightening, but fantastic.

    • @phrispirit
      @phrispirit 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Fantastic is pretty close. He impresses me as a jumbled mess, mentally.

    • @dvonpache
      @dvonpache 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      He is a heartless egomaniacal technocrat VC always on a lookout to capitalize.

  • @TheFinnmacool
    @TheFinnmacool 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    So what I got from this is no one knows what to do because of special interests in the way and when it all fails economists will blame "models". Sad as hell.

  • @user-wp8yx
    @user-wp8yx 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I'm only a few minutes in, but it would be nice to have a definition of capitalism, so we know what it is we lost. This because different people seem to have different definitions of capitalism and it would be nice if we were all on the same page.
    I, for example, do not feel like we are in a capitalist system because it is very difficult to open a business due to regulation. That the regulation is not enforced or funded equally. That certain companies receive boons from the government. That a general laborer is not able to share in the fruits that the economy produces.
    This is not what Adam Smith envisioned. If all this is okay and technology is a problem. That's fine, but just let us know what definition of capitalism this gentleman is working off of.

  • @jeffsimoneaux5968
    @jeffsimoneaux5968 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    I. E. When the majority of the world places their asset value in crypto or digital currencies what will the government do to pay for itself. Printing more fiat money will simply magnify the problem and make it a self-fulfilling prophesy .

  • @mrtriffid
    @mrtriffid 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Correction to timing of reference below: at time 6:10.

  • @Hypotemused
    @Hypotemused 8 ปีที่แล้ว

    a lot of what he is saying is researched excellently by David Autor of MIT on Tech led unemployment.

  • @JamesScottGuitar
    @JamesScottGuitar 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Take away their purpose, take away their reason for living.
    AI is going to do this in ways unimaginable.

  • @user-sq3up1jo9l
    @user-sq3up1jo9l 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    whats the three dots?

  • @chineduamadi5958
    @chineduamadi5958 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    We're witnessing the end of the usefulness of money. Money was a necessicity for a level in the evolution of human conciousness - a level which we stayed much much longer at than was necessary. We came to accept the relevance of money as a universal mandatory rewuirement rather than what it actually is, which is a necessity imposed by the current state of our evolution in social conciousness.
    Now we're being dragged, kicking an screaming and unprepared, out of this state into a new state of social evolution where money is without any effective usefulness.
    Humanity was never designed to ration the resources of worlld through instrunents of fiat in the first place, else everyone would have been born with his own specific set of resources (land, water, heat, air, light, etc) from birth with the liberty to transact them with others. Capital Economics is not natural.
    Research the Resource based Economics by Jack Fresco. Its the only viable long term solution to the economics problem in the era we're entering.

    • @user-qi3rm2wr5m
      @user-qi3rm2wr5m 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Wow! You're right. Money is the currency by which we barter our surplus contributions to society. But because money is inherited, non-contributing people can have money, whereas other people can't begin contributing without money.

    • @chineduamadi5958
      @chineduamadi5958 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@user-qi3rm2wr5m great perspective. I agree.

  • @bearfoot843
    @bearfoot843 7 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    At the start it sounds like he says “Thanks, it’s creepy to be with you all again.”

  • @fabsmaster5309
    @fabsmaster5309 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Anytime you get a group together that starts talking about how they can figure out the solutions to everyone else’s problems, I start to get nervous, no matter how competent they are. In fact the more competent they are, the more nervous I get.

    • @relight6931
      @relight6931 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      That is a not an illogical fear. Maybe the more important factor then their ego telling them their solution proposed over all at once is a good idea, no matter as you say how competent they are, is how much resources they got to implent it.
      Good ideas spread.. Then again so do bad ones.

  • @krakenmetzger
    @krakenmetzger 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    My parents are economics professors, I can confirm this is how they behave in public. Until you give them alcohol.

  • @kamalpreetsingh1686
    @kamalpreetsingh1686 6 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    Capitalism and socialism will become irrelevant terms to understand future technological society .......I am totally agree.......

    • @phrispirit
      @phrispirit 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Neither is irrelevant. Capitalism would yield the best situation for all of us and Socialism has already shown to be the ultimate worst for humans. We have never HAD capitalism, but it needs to be allowed. The closest we've had was in the 19th Century US.

    • @soberanisfam1323
      @soberanisfam1323 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      @@phrispirit
      Repeating a lie over and over again doesn't make it true

    • @phrispirit
      @phrispirit 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@soberanisfam1323 What lie has been repeated?

    • @nescius2
      @nescius2 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@phrispirit thats obviously bs - ultimate worst? really? i can quickly think of worse systems, really bad ones which actually existed. 19th century US was great for everyone, as long as everyone was not black or asian... or the original native ;)

    • @phrispirit
      @phrispirit 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@nescius2 So, you don't know that most of the rest of the world during the 19th century had slavery? The US fought a really bad war to end the practice. After the civil war we had an unprecedented explosion of wealth and prosperity due to the free market; very close to true capitalism during that period.
      To the extent a country implements socialistic practices, it experiences misery, to that extent. The US is a victim of that. We have a mixed economy. The government makes changes toward socialist policy and the economy suffers. When they take away those controls, it does better! Its not very complicated. Unfortunately, those who support socialism try to blame the problems on "capitalism", when the problems are always due to governmental controls.
      Economics have little or nothing to do with Native Americans, per se. They lived outside the "white man's system" for the most part.

  • @m.monfils7016
    @m.monfils7016 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    If the path of least resistance to change in mass markets is to change as little as possible, then the path of no resistance to change at societal level is to change nothing at all, yet everything changes. Ive been working on this some 8 years now, I'm almost ready.
    I am a mass marketing strategist by profession, and you can find me on LinkedIn, if this interests you. Ive sent an Invite to Eric and I will look for you too.
    We can easily innovate our way out of this mess... if we want.

  • @DANIELlaroqustar
    @DANIELlaroqustar 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    i believe it was Slavoj Zizek that had quite the opposite opinion on the movie Kung Fu Panda he found it quite insulting actually but hearing Eric's view on the movie is interesting to say the least :)

  • @AnthonyGarcia-kr9vu
    @AnthonyGarcia-kr9vu 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Capitalism has kinda been suppressing technology.. There is an unhealthy addiction to consumerism and these new forms of entertainment.

  • @EvilMAiq
    @EvilMAiq 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Love the video and the concepts expressed, but I wonder if the title might be changed to something less... click-baity?

  • @BlakeEdwards333
    @BlakeEdwards333 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Wow, what a great conversation!

    • @bperez8656
      @bperez8656 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      You’re hot
      What’s your Instagram?

  • @369jwillow
    @369jwillow 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    This guy is a wonderful treasure trove of information.

  • @pwilburnsprint
    @pwilburnsprint 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I can’t un-notice that those three moles make an isosceles triangle.

  • @theacademyofgermanidealism6210
    @theacademyofgermanidealism6210 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Real income always increased....it is impossible for success of technology without real income increase