Ex-City Trader Exposes Capitalism: Gary Stevenson Explains Why We're Trapped In This Mess
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 พ.ค. 2024
- He went from working-class east Londoner to Citibank's most profitable trader. He made his millions by predicting that inequality dooms our economic model.
We discuss his bestselling new book - The Trading Game: A Confession - and why our economic model dooms us to falling living standards, and unless we can get our act together, fascism will triumph.
Please like, subscribe - and help us take on the Establishment media here: / owenjones84
Please like, subscribe - and help us take on the Establishment media here: www.patreon.com/owenjones84
Outstanding content, Owen. Didn't know about this guy, but am already a HUGE fan. Thank you.
Who are the “Establishment media”?
Everyone should grift on patreon for their money. But only in a revolutionary socialist way of course. 😂😂😂
Media that promotes Capitalist Neoliberal Doctrine in all its forms. @@CatfishGumbo
Establishment media is media that promotes/ excuses the Capitalist Neoliberal Doctrine macroeconomic fallacies.
I can listen to Gary all day. He’s an absolute treasure - I’ve certainly been spreading the message at every opportunity
Wholly agree and I've been doing the same
Diagnosing a terminal cancer as a series of seasonal colds is the PERFECT analogy for capitalism damn
No it's not.
@@John-wf5ifgot a better one?
Oh ha ha. Check my comment above. That’s a great line.
@@pgl0897 of course he hasn’t. He hasn’t had an original thought in his life.
It wasn't an analogy for capitalism, it was an analogy for the incorrect diagnosis of the causes of poor economic performance by those who fail to see the effects of inequality (by those who ignore distribution in their economic models).
Book is an absolute banger. Finished it in two days. We need these guys in politics , not Tony Blair clones being parachuted into safe seats
We don’t need the UK to become a socialist mess
Owen Jones and Gary Stevenson, you are both amazing. Thank you so much for continuing to expose the truth. More and more people are listening, as a result people will demand real change!!
Demanding change won't do anything. The only way to change the world's financial trajectory is for the masses to apply force, as the only way the elites will comply with demands from the common classes is by being forced to do so.
By voting for Change UK? 😊
yeah yeah, but the alterabtives are 10x worse thou, been there done that
No they won't
Sunak was talking about the importance of math. Heres some simple math logic. 2010 - 2019 UK billionaires doubled from low 20's to mid 50's in a span of 10 years. 2020 - 2023 (to Oct 23) UK billionaires increased from mid 50's to 177 in a span of less than 3.5 years. Let that sink in. Do the math Sunak.
He will see this as a measure of success, I'm not entirely sure if it's heinous or blind indifference, but everyone he knows is getting richer so I'm pretty sure he thinks the roaring 20s are real
The Tories/ Conservatives will never change, its politics have always been to benefit the very top.
Govt by People's Referenda:
Peaceful Occupation of our Capitals until it's installed, or run Mascot Candidates
Make it an annual event on Oct 14
Or YOU can continue to ask why no one is doing anything
*YOUR CALL*
Owen and Gary - 2 of this country's greatest voices at the moment 🎉
They certainly love the sound of their own voices
@Redsleather WTF are you on about.
@Redsleather Unlike your hero's Fartage, BJ or Tice.
If you like listening to soft tosh then yeah
Owen is awful
I mentioned Gary's Economics to a work colleague a few years back when he was just about to buy a house and have kids. His reaction was so dismissive I was a bit stunned. He's now taken on loads of responsibility and hours to make ends meet and it's just going to get worse. It won't take much to push him under and he's on probably £50-60k. It's kinda crazy the blind faith that people have in our political and economic system and leaders.
Remember he can still sell the property's. Yeah it's kind of shitty to do but they do have an asset
What’s wrong with hard work?
Exactly what Gary was talking about. @keithparker1346
@Shimra8888 nothing but you shouldn't have to kill yourself just to keep a roof over your head. Kinda the point Gary is making.
Out of curiosity, what do you suggest your friend would have been better off doing? Putting a family and buying a home on hold?
Time isn't promised. If you wait until the wealth inequality gap closes, you will be waiting for your entire life.
Not being argumentative here, just genuinely curious about what you think your friend should have done?
We need the Gary's of this world to keep us informed now more than ever.
Except he won't tell you the truth. For example, where are the trillions the workers have paid the socialist welfare state.
Gary's what?
If you are talking about taxation, that has been paid, Since 1971 it has been deleted on receipt from the UK Monetary Base. Taxation is no longer a prerequisite for government expenditure. Taxation isn't redistributed by government, that is a political fallacy, not a macroeconomic fact. I agree with the fact that the Ultra rich should be taxed to bring down inequality that is at ridiculous levels. The Capitalist Neoliberal Doctrine has caused economic carnage.
@@maria8809ttt Oh that bit. Yep you could choose the Weimar republic solution and print to pay. Causes inflation. Inflation increases the debts, because the big debts are inflation linked [Pensions].
@@adenwellsmith6908 Don't be silly, that's not how OMF works.
"It is naive to believe we can give tons of money to the rich and not make everyone else worse off."
Unfortunately, naivety doesn't come into it if the decision to give it is made by the people who receive it.
Seeing you two together gives me hope
Me too!
Owen should interview Mark Blythe, author of " austerity , the history of a bad idea" and get his opinion of Labour's economic plans
Labours economic plans are based on winning votes.
I bet Mark Blythe has no answers on how to win an election
Blythe is phenomenal. So is Richard Wolff and Yanis. They are the economists we should be listening to, not the current clowns in place.
@@MikBak1814 Yanis is great, don't argue with you there. Really incisive guy
@@MikBak1814 You're so right. Richard is the greatest teacher I never had.
Thinking about house prices a lot lately has been so bad for my mental health. I'm a millennial renter in London and it's been keeping me awake at night.
Try not to let the b's grind you down.
You should be absolutely fuming
Leave London. Much cheaper up north.
@@rob19632 At this point, I think moving away from all my friends, family, support network and job is the only viable home ownership solution but I don't feel great about pricing local northern people out of their own towns. It's not a sustainable solution
@@rob19632 leave where you were born and “move up north” rather than stay and fight
Yeah fine sometimes that’s what’s needed and sometimes it’s ok to fight
The greatest collab of all time!
Yes indeed 😀
Yes. Owen, Gary, cat.
He explains it very easily
What Gary Stevenson is missing is the simple fact that it is all planned. He is fighting thin air.. he sees the problem but misunderstands the problem all at the same time... Wealth redistribution polices of the UN and climate change agenda that is destroying systems from within... THAT IS THE PLAN!!!!
😂😂😂😂
After you announced that you’d left the Labour Party I wondered how long it would take for you to get together with Gary. Great stuff Owen!
And go Gary. 😀
Owen interviews Gary in 2022 as I recall.
This guy is a hero! He is the Bill Nye explainer for the economy.
he literally doesn't understand macro economics, or even micro, he just knows how to day trade with capital
@@BestInTheWest-in1xx I think his young and naive eyes took a fresh look at the establishment and came up with a radically different interpretation that, from all appearances, seems to explain the data much better than previous doctrine. He seems to imply he was #1 in his class at LSE. That means his performance was evaluated by the literal people that define macroeconomics, and they said he was the best. He understands the ideas in the textbooks just fine, and he just explained to us why they are limited and misguided. If you didn't understand how he started with more accepted views and then peeled away the support for those ideas bit by bit, I think you might need to watch again.
@@BestInTheWest-in1xx anything to back up that claim?
A few years ago i helped out at a church serving a cooked breakfast to the homeless. As much as i found the guys stories about how they became - and stayed - homeless very interesting, it was also fascinating talking to the people volunteering. They all voted conservative and believed in charity rather than taxation to help the poor. I found this deeply problematic but struggle to put it into words why that is.
We definitely need more discussion of this key division point. I see the same here in U.S. within my family & relatives. It is difficult to understand the nuances of the way ideology & religion plays into the equation but I think it needs to be addressed because it is the core struggle of our time.
The growth of the charity sector is the privatisation of the welfare state. Think about how they operate - CEOs often on large salaries, advertising on TV. Imagine an equitable society where we don’t need charity OR welfare.
They believe in charity so they can sleep at night and look themselves in the mirror, they don’t believe in taxation because they’re fundamentally selfish and can’t admit it. Nothing wrong with progressive taxation. They may also think, potentially justifiably, that taxes will go up for high income earners. However even these are not the people to tax. It’s the super-rich that need taxing. No-one needs £100m+.
Great insight! I think the biggest nugget was around minute 28, when Gary said that the wealthy will eat the middle class, not because they are evil, rather because they have no other choice as to where to invest their money.
This needs to become mantra, because it supports the idea that smart government regulation is essential to the long term viability of the economy for people in every wealth class.
Sure, in theory, the wealthy could invest in creating new capital infrastructure, but this is much more work and much riskier and probably less profitable, especially in the short term, than just buying existing assets.
As Marx himself said, capitalism is not the "enemy" of socialism. It is actually its shadow. There is nowhere that capitalism can go where it will not be haunted by its own shadow. That's the thing that so many people don't understand.
@@john.premose Ha! Was just going to reference Marx in reply to Adamroable's comment. It's not about government regulation. Is Keynesian economics better than neoliberalism? Of course. We have the data to prove that. But it will always lead us to the same crisis, a crisis that Marx carefully outlined nearly 200-years ago now.
1971 was a huge change. Under the Bretton Woods System of fixed exchange rate prior to 1971 governments were limited in their spending capacity by the value of the Gold held by the central bank. This was because the outstanding stock of money that the central bank would issue was proportional to its gold reserves, if a government wanted to spend more, it had to reduce the money held by the non-government sector using taxation and/or bond sales. That system came to an end in 1971. Nixon abandoned gold convertibilty and ended the system of fixed exchange rates. Once governments started to adopt the Fiat currency system and flexible exchange rates in 1970s, all spending caps and debt limits that had some operational significance under the Bretton Woods System became irrelevant.
These governments always have an unlimited capacity to spend in their own currencies: that is they can purchase whatever they like, as long as there are goods and services for sale in that currency they issue. At the very least, they can purchase all idle labour and help put it back to employment at a decent wage, and back to productive use. This 'fundamental principle' was spelled out even in a Deutsche Bank report : 'Unlike any corporate, government or household, a central bank has no reason to be bound by its balance sheet or income statement. It can simply create money out of thin air (a liability) and buy an asset or give the liability (money) out for free. Moreover, a flexible exchange rate means that governments no longer have to constrain their expenditure to meet the central bank requirements to sustain a fixed parity against a foreign currency. This, is of course, dose not apply to countries that are part of the EMU :they effectively use a foreign currency, much like a state government in, say, the US or Australia and thus they do face the risk of insolvency. Deutsche Bank, helicopters 101: Your Guide to Monetary Financing 15th April 2016.
The need of private sector wealth became irrelevant with the Monden Monetary System. That is why the Capitalist Neoliberal Doctrine was created and applied using macroeconomic fallacies to make private sector capital 'look' like it was not only required but essential. This went hand in hand with political policies, laws, media, central banks and financial authorities etc all giving analysis through the narrow lence of the capital Neoliberal Doctrine, all on behalf of the Ultra wealthy, at the expense of everyone else. It needs governments being complisit to stay in place.
Capitalist Neoliberal Doctrine. That's the problem. Wealth extraction from the workforce.
Socialism isn’t the answer though
@@RobinHarris-nf4yv People who advocate for socialism almost certainly don't agree with you on what it means.
@@someonenotnoone I advocate for socialism and do agree. Can you elaborate?
@@MikBak1814 You advocate for something you think can't work? What?
@@someonenotnoone I have no clue what you're talking about. I asked you a simple question: can you elaborate on "People who advocate for socialism almost certainly don't agree with you on what it means."?
Gary Stevenson is the only person in the country with laser focus on the root cause
Are you serious?
Stevenson WAS the root cause! The man was quite happy to make £2 million a year. Where’s that money now I wonder? If he hates the cause so much, I’d assume he’s given it all away…. Yeah right’ A total hypocrite
Not convinced he holds all the answers though in terms of the economy, as he seems to be caught up in the "we have to balance the budget" mythology. I suspect, as an ex(?) trader, he hasn't quite got beyond "the market knows best" dogma - although I 100% agree about taxing the billionaire class.
@@anncothromoir1018 I am yet to hear a single answer, excepting the 'tax the rich' mantra. He's just monetising his exposition on misery!
I did my masters thesis on QE in a German Uni at 50 yrs old after working in banking during 2008/09 crisis. I took the argument QE didn’t work ever and looked into QE for people, Helicopter money for example. QE needs to distribute into the economy where it is spread around and not kept with the rich and propping up old establishments.
@@Magpie314 in very simple terms, the effect of helicopter money would be similar to a lump sum tax cut by the government, financed by money instead of bonds, in each case, the policy move is a cash rebate to households. One can therefore analyse the effects of helicopter money on demand as one would tax cuts . In another sense, helicopter money is an alternative to quantitative easing, where the Bank gives the money spent on QE directly to households. Helicopter money can be viewed as a hybrid between monetary and fiscal policy. If the recipients of [helicopter money] do not expect it to be reversed (in present discounted value terms) in the future, this would, at a given price level, represent an increase in the real net wealth of the private sector. Because base money does not have to be redeemed ever, it does not constitute an effective liability of the state.
Therefore households do not expect the money to be taxed back to repay debt, and so raise their spending. Consequently helicopter money has a ‘pure fiscal effect’. As long as expansion in the money supply is not expected to be fully reversed, then demand will increase. However in order for Helicopter Money to reach the desired effect, citizens need to understand that the money invested in the economy is nonrecurring. Once that’s understood citizens would increase their consumption and therefore improve and increase the GDP. However, if that understanding is non-existent, citizens would hoard that money, and Helicopter Money would not have any influence on the economy.
@@alias8945❤
@magpie314 the poor need enough money to buy assets, we're not talking a hundred or two here and there.
Very true, when stimulus is injected in the lower ecomomy, it has to feed through societie. The currency works its way up via productive means. That feeds the middle class, and in turn moves to the top class. The difference is the currency is now productive and aids growth. Bottom's up! 😉
This is based on the flawed assumption that governments want to help the poor and middle. They don't! 😮😮😮😮
What i got from this is that there is two economies in any country.
The economy of bankers and the stock exchange and the real economy of the average Joe.
When the media talk about the economy doing well, what they mean is the stock exchanges that are propped up by investment banking that is fueled by debt.
When people have less percetage of their pay cheque to spend as disposable income because they have a larger larger percentage of debt payments, then it looks great for the investment banking and the stock exchange.
But, the money that is making this economy grow is coming from the other economy.
This is why we live in a parallel world where high streets are closing because the average Joe has less money to spend, but tje stock exchange is growing at all time highs.
The media and politicians intentionally focus on the stock exchange economy as the real economy has been collapsing for years.
Can’t get enough of Gary at the minute. I’m gobbling up his content like the greedy child of a FinTech CEO gobbling up assets
We’re buying the book now! If you’re rich, buy an extra copy and give it to someone for their birthday! Barb
The crash was totally mathematically predictable ….. When house prices rose 300% from 1997 to 2007 , it was energised by unsustainable amounts of borrowing, the lenders were quids in, people paying 3 times more for the same thing. The Big Short film says it all.
It's how they rob the sovereigns, peotect the wealth, while the central banks absorb the losses. Round two is on its way. This will be the mother of all crisis.
Brilliant chat. Gary should be on all our news channels. Straightforward, knows the chaotic situation. Would Love to see him challenge Rees Mogg, Hunt etc.. his story is remarkable, real and proven.
Can you really see that happening? Last time Gary was on the BBC there was nearly a technical fault! 😅😅😅😅
I was wondering when we'd get this interview. The book's amazing, never thought I'd enjoy a book with any focus on financial systems.
I really don't understand why we're not hearing politicians advocating taxing the wealthiest. I wonder if people worry that talking about wealth distribution is too complicated, but Gary shows we can communicate about this using plain speech, and make it really accessible.
I remember going to a talk by Steve Keen at Newham council and what struck me was how little economics Labour leaders understood. The Tories who do understand enough can just pipe themselves and their buddies money through asset inflation and contracts and the opposition are clueless.
The ability to borrow at next to zero is the biggest force of inequality. If the rich can borrow unlimited amounts of money to buy up all the assets what chance do people forced to pay 25% APR have? Look at what Michael Saylor is doing with bitcoin, issuing convertible notes to buy up the limit asset to then raise more. That was done with real estate since the limits to borrowing were unleashed by the economically minded of the boomer generation. If one person can issue debt in unlimited amounts when another can't you get inequality. A wealth tax will be a temporary fix so long as that is the case.
The killing of building societies was another big factor. Let's cut the banks and mortgage backed securities out and only allow the state to lend mortgages. This is something that could start on a local level.
This is the best interview I’ve heard in a long time! Thank you Owen and Gary. ♥️♥️
Q: The most vital Question is WHY will the Government NOT work with people like Gary? A: Because they don't want to find solutions, they allegiances are to the status quo alone. Parliament is void of VISION and the People Perish.
politicians are already bought off by people with far more money than Gary, sadly. The UK has entered into an American form of politics where money counts for everything. There *never* used to be a race for funding by politicians in the UK: everything was publicly funded, but obviously that's another part of the British system that has been destroyed by 14 years of engineered negligence by the Tories.
Because he is a scamming Bull****ter with zero actual points and no ideas.
Here in Spain, we are witnessing the same issues, growing inequality and increasingly powerful extreme-right parties.
Gary needs to be household name.
The other Gary did that, unfortunately not in a goof way.
Oh he is!
Some amazing points in this interview. I would add, the assets of the super rich are usually fixed, and cannot be "moved abroad". Look at what happened to Abramovich when the UK Gov decided to "tax" him (freeze/take his assets). Chelsea football club is still in London as far as I know! there is literally nothing stop us rebalancing our economy - except the will to make it happen.
Well said. All I'm hearing from Labour supporters is excuse making as to why nothing can be done
Meanwhile, the Green Party is proposing a wealth tax on multi-millionaires and billionaires, and mass investment in public services...
Gary Stevenson - the awakening! The Trading Game ❤ Thank you
The crux of the problem is that those who have the power and control to increase taxes on the super rich, are the super rich and will never shoot themselves in the foot. It will take societal collapse, huge increases in crime and disorder to finally wake up those obstinately obsessed and compulsively driven to increase their wealth, power, social status and ever- expanding egos whatever the cost.
And what do you think an increase in taxes will do?
They will pack their cash and go abroad.
The complete system has to be changed, not some of its pieces.
The problem is as you already noted, the rich have no problem with that system, they will be more than happy to hold a luxury feast on your bones, so, of course they will fight against any changes that might treaten their wealth.
Population increases since 1960s mean that the idea of growth is ridiculous. The 'boat' hasn't changed in size, but there are more of us in it, and now the rich have bought 85% of the boat space and resources.
Great interview. Here's a simple, practical policy. Increase CGT for 3rd or 4th properties to 100%.
"But people won't invest in property - prices will tank"
Yeah, that's the point. These property "investors" are rent-seeking speculators cornering the market in essentials. They must be stopped
This would attack the middle class, who are already under attack. This issue is not small Landlords but large land owners. All change must bring the middle classes along.
In Australia losses on investment properties are tax deductible, and CGT receives a 50% discount (as do all other assets).. Check out how thats working for Young people-not so well.
The argument for distribution is not a moral one, it's a structural one. A nation with broader levels of distribution is more structurally resilient, it's capable of taking a knock, shocks can be absorbed without large swathes of a nations population starving to death. A nation with high levels of inequality is structurally fragile, like glass, all it takes is a tap and it falls apart. There's a famous line from one of Adam Smiths letters about 'there being an awful lot of ruin in a nation' which I agree with, but even that principle only goes so far. Arguably, you could say that if the well to do have a great deal of wealth, they can choose to employ people through hard times to stall complete economic collapse... but when was the last time someone of means decided to make an investment fully in the expectation of not getting that wealth repaid back with surplus... especially in a market which seems more focused on maximising short term profits by the day. It just doesn't happen, and right now the market feels like it is expecting a very serious crash to not be far away, and everyone is looting as much as they can to lock away in offshore luxury bolt-holes before it does.
I do think the idea of economists being blind to this inequity is a bit of youthful inexperience showing through. These things don't just happen, we have centuries of economists who have confronted these issues with all sorts of different models being proposed, Keynesianism itself grew out of those discussions. If the education you have received does not reflect that breadth and diversity of views, then probably the better question to be asking is does that reveal an agenda do you think? Have these concerns been masked deliberately? ...certainly wouldn't be the first time in history such a thing was done, highly selective education... be kind of like an Architect only educated to produce speculative flats for housing developers... or a doctor only educated to prescribe anti-depressants and do hair and body implants.
"More structurally resillient" give me a G7 example.
@@OnlineSafety-ng7et ...erm... I can't tell if you're joking or not, but ok, let's just look at the UK and US. The UK response to covid was to step in with direct relief, final numbers are fuzzy, probably no more than around the £400 billion mark in total to be paid off by taxes over the next twenty years or so. They did this because they recognised that a surprisingly large number of people in the country were living pay check to pay check with no savings, and if they didn't provide support and chose to lock the country down, all of those people wouldn't be able to earn money, and would default on their repayments, rents, whathaveyou. That is scary because the global financial collapse in 2008 was triggered by a large number of people defaulting on debts in the sub prime mortgage markets, so if a lot of people default at the same time, it can destabilise markets to terrifying effect. Broadly, given the context, this was the right thing to do, where it fell down is that it socialises the cost. If you create and hand out a lot of money to people at the bottom, it goes to paying debts and rent, and so accumulates at the top end of society without any mechanism to redistribute (because the markets are in effect closed). As this was an emergency measure, it should have then been taken back from the top end of society (summed to zero), instead it's part of our national debt to be paid for by whoever carries the highest tax burden, so as it stands, it's massive payday for people at the top, paid for on the public purse (and will be paid for by the youngest, national debt is a tax on future generations). If wealth in this country was more fairly distributed, most of this wouldn't have been needed and we wouldn't have the situation we have now.
In the US, the Trump Administration, did pretty much none of this. By mid 2020, the US had collapsed into recession and was suffering not only a great many deaths, but around 35 million Americans had lost their jobs as businesses collapsed, couldn't buy food and were being evicted from there homes. From the outside, it genuinely looked frightening for a while because the fundamentals upon which an economy is built were simply collapsing, and while yeah, that starts at the bottom, i.e. the poorest, the longer that went on, the higher and higher the threshold rose of people being severely impacted. Without action, that contagion could have spread throughout the entire economy, complete collapse in aggregate demand, complete collapse in supply chains, complete collapse in all fundamental markets, cats and dogs living together, etc...
The problem we now face is moral hazard. There is no motivation for wealth distribution because if the worst happens, governments will step in to support the people as they should... which means that the wealthy have the government over a barrel, if bad things happen, they get a huge payday (despite the clear risks to society)... so why would they do anything to change that... which is pretty much the exact polar opposite of what figures such as Adam Smith argued for.
what Gary describes is essentially why Starmer and the Labour party can't fix Britain's economic problems. The last 40-50 years of neo-liberal economics, Reagan-Thatcherism, regulatory and legislative capture by the rich have basically bankrupted nations and funneled the wealth to the global rich/banker class. Britain is broke. It has residual wealth from empire, and a stupidly expensive property market, that is keeping it as one of the top economies based on the faulty GDP metric which counts non-productive debts and negative economic outcomes as positive (for some, virtual, academic entity). Unfortunately, after one or two years of Labour, it will become obvious to everyone that the situation is not being fixed, like it wasn't fixed by Brexit, and that will usher in even more reactionary politics as people search desperately for a way out of the downward spiral that will never come until we overhaul and replace the system we're all involved in. How that happens, and how bad things get beforehand (WW3? A massive global reset. Replacement of national currencies by central bank digital/crypto currencies, etc.) is yet to be determined.
Well, why do you think that they and their buddies pushed the situation so far ulmot to a direct conflict with Russia?
Exactly for this reason, they want to extend the life of this system trough cheap ressources and extra market. And if that does not work out, at least they hope to weaken their economical opponents.
We are not that far away from WW3, about which Russia tried to warn these id...ts multiple times, but it seems that they are so desperate that they are even willing to take a risk at it.
The plan is quite simple, they want to repate the US version of WW2, where they came out with untouched infrastracture, while half of the world was destroyed and needed their goods.
Thus, they try to initiate a conflict between some major countries or unions like 1. Nato and EU vs Russia, 2. AUKUS and Taiwan, Japan, Philipines, etc vs China 3. South Korea vs North Korea.
Once they start the war, they will supply their "friends" with goods and give credits, the economy will grow and they will be abble to pay back the debt and keep their power and status.
So no, they are not going to replace currency, we will have a major war in the next 5-10 years, the question is only when and how big.
Absolutely - we need to provide the positive story the actions needed to reduce the inequality between us. Thanks guys!
What positive story? The welfare state has looted 20% of the workers income. All that wealth is gone. In its place is debt, and debt is negative wealth. It's not positive its dire.
The problem is Capitalist Neoliberal Doctrine. Not the welfare state.
@@maria8809ttt Really. Where are the trillions the SOCIALIST welfare state has taken from people for their old age?
@@maria8809ttt The socialist welfare state, at least you admit, is socialist.
it's got a 16 trillion pound debt. 30% of tax goes on the debts.
Austerity, wealth inequality, lack of investment, pensioner poverty, low take home pay are the direct consequences.
Socialism caused it.
The answer is jubilee according to the original definition where the government cancels all debt and equalizes the economy. Gary is basically saying what Michael Hudson says but in a more down to earth language.
Thank Reagan and Thatcher for where we are.
That is ridiculous. Most poor have very very little of both debt and income. You'll be forgiving all the upper class owners, who can then yet again put themselves in debt against their now freehold millions of assets to buy middle class and failing wealthy assets up. I personally know countless people who can't even get debt to be forgiven, yet all rich people have some debt. And how do you stop the rich leveraging but allow the poor and middles to invest in housing, or a small business for their future? You can't
@@dxfifa Of course you can, you just don't understand what debt forgiveness means, the idea of jubilees is that when the wealthy get too rich and powerful, and most of what they own is debt, when it's forgiven, it's gone. BTW, housing is a necessity of live and should not be allowed to become investments, that is part of what is causing the problems, all the necessities like housing, water, and all utilities have been financialized and everyone is paying a portion of what they have, every month, to the 1% at the top. You will own nothing and be happy!
Britain's last best hope was Corbyn. Having allowed him to be backstabbed, things are looking pretty bleak.
There will be more Corbyn's please g.! Never before have we seen the hypocrites so clearly!
I will not be voting for any politician who has not had the morality to call for a ceasefire in Gaza weeks ago!!
@@michellenorris8471Corbins, without the apostrophe, please.
One bird, more than one birds.
One Corbin, more than one Corbins.
The apostrophe either makes it "Corbin is" or it denotes possession, that something belongs to Corbin. 😊
Same thing happened to Bernie Sanders in the US.
@@mandyharewood886 Thank you, & it's 'Corbyn.'
@@mandyharewood886 "Corbyns", without the i please
Also check out The Rhodes Center Podcast with Mark Blyth. The most recent episode called "How asset managers came to own everything and you failed to notice" discussing how asset management firms are screwing public services over, water companies and schools in Kent.
Blyth's a powerhouse. I've been following him for ages. Professor at Brown too, so he's someone on the inside, among the elites, hopefully stirring things up a bit. I prefer Yanis Varoufakis for his economic analysis, especially as it relates to Europe, but we'd solve all of the world's problems by instituting just 5% of either of the men's policies.
The media has more opportunity to profit with the far right than the socialist left. Who do you think the newspapers will back?
Regardless, great to see Gary here. His book really is top notch, and the audio book is jokes too.
What socialist left? I hope you're really not thinking Labour are socialist left
@@keithparker1346 Yup, the only voice of socialism remaining in the current version of Labour is a fast-receding, faint echo.
Not just that, the big money behind media will prop up the far right as an alternative because they do not want the taxation-left to be the narrative the working class will learn about.
@@keithparker1346 Not labour, unfortunately. The best voices of the left are currently on TH-cam. Sometimes they're tolerated on TV but they definitely dont have the same financing that right wing provocateurs currently have.
Manufacturing Consent. Noam Chomsky. All you need to know about media is contained in that seminal work.
Karl Marx explained the inevitability of the concentration of capital in an economy where the means of production was held in private hands, i.e., capitalism, a very long time ago!
That's not capitalism, that's marxisme. Real capitalism would give everyone a chance. We nevr saw real capitalism.
Ah right 😂@@Bilangumus
@@Bilangumus I’m pretty sure we did and we’ve moved on, let’s do something else now
Unfortunately Marx didn't have a solution that worked , It just made things worse.
@@rob19632 Perhaps his solution wasn't allowed to happen? Like Jeremy Corbin wasn't allowed to happen!
UK food bank usage has exploded the past 13 years, FTSE 100 at all time highs and living standards plummeting. So appreciate you both revealing the misdirected BS! ,
Gary Stevenson is such an interesting guy love hearing from you.
Great to hear you two aces in conversation
Great guest. Great interview. Many thanks to you both. 🖖
My favourite interview you've done yet.
A wonderful interview. And insight from someone who actually has learned and experienced from the ground up.
Don't forget this is not just about housing and other assets - it is also about public services. When you see your taxes go up but the potholes in your road remain and your hospital waiting lists get longer (and are left wondering why your taxes are up but the services are actually worse!), this is because a greater proportion of your taxes are being spent on the interest on the loans (bonds) the government took out around the COVID years, and guess who one of the biggest beneficiaries of that interest is..
The only possible way to get ourselves OUT of this system that demands infinite growth on a finite planet would be to make it financially worthwhile for people to SHARE the jobs we would agree we NEED to have done and work much LESS. There is no other way out that doesn't in one way or another result in chaos, misery, death and destruction.
So true and just as Marx and Engels outlined nearly 200-years ago. We still haven't heeded their warnings.
You are both lovely fine gents! I listen to & watch everything possible both of you do! Saves us. Great stuff for humanity.
I sincerely hope that a Labour government will have the courage to start properly taxing the corporations and super-wealthy.
Me too. It is not going to happen though.
You kidding! The ex banker Reeves has nothing to offer but the same failed Tory illiterate economics with extra helpings on squeezing the disabled and vulnerable.
It's not even off the radar
haha. Haha! So funny. Their Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer is ex HBOS and has Tory policies praising Thatcher. Keep crossing your fingers you plonker.
LOL. Don’t waste your energy on the inevitable disappointment that is coming your way. They are clearly stating they won’t as they see it as political suicide.
Didn't Karl Marx predict this malarkey over a 100 years ago? "Capitalism will destroy itself without any need for outer intervention."!
Capitalism, however we define it, might have it's flaws but free exchange of goods between citizens without interference of governments is what's pushed us as a humanity to its grateness so we'd have to think of some sort of balance here
No your wrong are you happy to be a Globalist slave. Have you herd of the 15 minit city's??
The problem isn’t so much capitalism, but the rampant abuse of capitalism as a model by a select few with too much influence and power.
@@DanielEdwards- do you think Capitalism is finished? OR you happy for the Ritch to get Ritch while renting is rising faster than wage growth?
@@johniepatterson3746 I think the direction wealth is flowing needs to be reversed. Like most things, moderation is important. Rich people are just getting fatter wallets. Unfortunately capitalism encourages the greedy among us. In the UK particularly I would say the class system exacerbates the situation, particularly with the wealthy classes believing they’re entitled to everything and anything.
Gary, read your book on Transatlantic flight, picked it up at Manchester Airport. It kept me absolutely engrossed until I landed in Toronto. Refreshingly real and wonderful depiction of the main characters. Never had a flight so entertaining.
Holy moly what a combo in this ep
The rich may like to pay Gary to manage their money, but they'll definitely pay government to ignore such messages.
Beautifully put! 😮😮😮😮
You two are great, nice to see you both do a video together.
Future PM & Chancellor for the nation 👍
Own and Gary for PM ....that's the alternative we need
Poor guy has to repeat his back story each time, he’s not here to talk about his upbringing. He’s here to talk about state of the world.
Not everyone has heard him or of him. Have a little understanding of that please.
Thanks guys for the eye opening conversation
Thanks, all so true and well put, keep doing what you're doing ❤
You can’t have infinite growth in a finite system.
Great interview. As a fairly wealthy person, like Gary, I agree with all of this. In the short term, Angela Rayner's quest to get every MPs tax returns in the open is the key. Tax returns should be in the public domain (like in Norway I think) and the rich should be proud to pay and not avoid. Simple fix and once it is all in the open, policy would evolve.
Rayner seems very dodgy about the council house stuff she was involved in...but I do agree in transparency
I’d be very interested to see Owen Jones’ tax returns, especially when he’s begging for money on here in spite of his own personal fortunes
@@Redsleather what personal fortune?
@@keithparker1346Jones has made over £1 million in book sales alone, excluding his pay from various journalism sources. The Guardian pay him over £40,000 a year, just for starters
Wow, I mean wow! Well done for grabbing this interview.
Keep it going guys , people need to understand, and we need a radical change 👍👍
Why on earth are you, gary and mick linch ect, not forming a political party that everyday people can get behind
Congratulations Gary on the success of your book 🙌👏👏. And thank you Owen for using your platform to introduce people like me to Gary - I first encountered him & his ideas through you and I use every opportunity given to me to encourage people to check him out 🙏🙏
Great interview Owen. This is the kind of content that needs to be shown on national television.
Fat chance 😂😂😂😂
Totally brilliant. Thank you Owen and Gary.
Listening to this. Already worked my 40 hrs this week. About to go into work tho. Not working 70hrs a week when it’s available is pretty much suicide.
???
What an amazing podcast. I totally get where Gary is coming from. Love it. Subscribed to both of you. Thank you for such great content
Absolutely correct. Sharing the wealth of the world is obviously the way to human betterment. The myth of trickle down is cruel and wrong. Lets keep sharing the truth.
Utterly awesome.
The takeaway point for me is that when the economy is top-heavy, the usual strategies for promoting growth only hasten the failure of the system, because all these strategies drive wealth upwards. Only rebalancing the economy can stimulate growth without exacerbating the crisis, and the only way to do that is to spend big on the public sector and borrow to build infrastructure.
This is what Reeves _et al_ simply don't understand.
Yeah, well done for just now figuring out what was known 250 and certainly 150 years ago.
@@john.premose What makes you think I only just worked it out,
Cretin.
@@john.premose Where did I say I'd only just worked it out?
You should try thought. It works better.
@@tonymurphy2624 it was implicit, and you did only just work it out but now you're pretending you didn't.
@@john.premose No, it really wasn't. That's your lack of facility with logical inference. That I said it was the takeaway from what he said does NOT imply this was not already my position.
If you're going to get into a battle of wits, you should consider arming yourself first. LRN2LOGIC.
Great interview!
Thats so true about the food bank service users. When Grenfell happened, the poorest, humblest people flooded out of their homes across London to assist, and the local government representatives were NO WHERE even by day 3.
Thank you, Gary Stevenson, you are a sharp man & I will be reading your book.
Get in 💪
Gary is the only honest economist in this space.
He is not. Mark Blythe, Richard Wolff, Yanis Varoufakis all come to mind.
Love you both keep exposing the truth thank you for calling out economic inequality
Because you didn't notice? What a joker!
A million a week passive income!!….mind boggling!
the book is brilliant. I devoured it in a couple of days, even with a bad cold. It's worth reading it again. Can't wait for the movie to reach even more people with the message.
We are being robbed and everyone's asleep! Makes my blood boil.
I asked would you have Gary on. Thanks Owen 😁
Thanks 🙏
Brilliant stuff!
Amazing talk. Very sobering. Thank you both!
But if the very people most negatively affected by inequality are also the same people believing the root of the problem is what the politicians and media are saying it is - immigration/immigrants - how is this cycle going to stop (before its too late to do anything about it)?
A rising sea lifts all boats UNLESS they are very firmly anchored to the seabed.. then they get swamped, sink and drown all the occupants..
Great discussion, wonderful to listen to thanks guys. Interesting to also think globally about these patterns of distribution, especially going forwards when competition for vital resources (like freshwater) is likely to become increasingly fierce.
Excellent interview..
Love you guys! Two very principled people, not afraid to stick their necks out! I have much respect for you both! 👏👏👏👏
Really enjoyed this interview, well done for getting your point across without confusion!
So many people think economics is such a difficult subject to understand, but Gary makes it simple.
Gary really enjoyed the audio book! Come to the south and I’ll buy a hard copy for a signature! 😉
Excellent interview. Now I hope you will interview Stephanie Kelton about her new film "Finding the Money"
These economic academics dominant the US Federal Reserve. Your guest’s example is so very true.
Love Gary's no face hoodie.
Don't take the gold!
The gold is not real.
Very deep.
I think what Gary is saying happened in Japan in the past 30 years. There's no middle class anymore, people can't afford to have family, and it's in the negative spiral...
Thanks Owen & Gary, I should be working atm!
Great interview. Great message.Great book