Gary you cover the economic effects of inequality really well - what's missing here is that there is an effect on democracy too as when the rich get richer they become more powerful and democracy will reduce as they move to protect their power and wealth by influencing politics. You see this with the Conservative party and increasingly Labour too which has moved away from being a party funded by the membership and unions under Corbyn. The last two prime ministers were chosen by a few thousand Conservative party members and it is these people who will make political decisions relating to inequality.
There are so many comments popping up all over the socials criticising Labour for stuff they haven't done because they weren’t in power. 14 years of Tory destruction and you're having a go at Labour?
Gary doesn’t reply to comments but highlights financial analysis to making people aware of the causes of financial decadence and financial inequalities. Gary exposes the issues but not the solution. The real issue is a failed political system that calls itself democratic dating back to Cromwell. Time to move on utilizing modern technology, therein lies the solution.
Gary can speak for himself in the uploads, butI would say he does indeed touch on solutions, he outright states that we need democratic reforms, even revolutionary reforms for workers. It's old technology. It's been suppressed. Time to reclaim it.
I have no idea why it took so long for the algorithm to show you to me! But now that it has, I’m so grateful. I’m sharing your videos with everyone in my life who I think would be willing to watch them lol I wanted to thank you so much for communicating these messages so clearly and with such obvious expertise, passion, and commitment. Thank you again from Canada and I hope your journey in Japan is a safe and restorative one. I am assuming you probably won’t be reading this comment, as it’s on an older video. That being as it is, I still wanted to express my profound gratitude for all you do. And if you don’t see this, at least it will give your channel a bump in the algorithm 😉
It's scary how much farm land and homes they're buying up each year in cash usually overpaying as well which drives up prices for everyone. Pension funds are doing this as well. Makes you wonder what's going to be left in 5-10 years time
Its worse than that. The NHS is being carved up by corporations. The food producers. Clothing. Every aspect of our life is owned by big business corporations. This is what he is actually talking about. 🌹
Yes, there’s a lot of smaller farms being bought up solely for their carbon offsets. Corporates are taking them out of production and consequently closing local stores, schools and communities in general.
Without sounding like a sycophant Gary is one of many cerebral and conscientious people we produce here in East London. I’m from just up the road in South Woodford. Add into the mix a streetwise awareness and you have a very formidable individual. Long may he prosper and continue his posts..
Really? Do you not think it’s just a repackaged 70’s Labour dogma? Yes he wears a beanie, and has that “one of the people” aesthetic, but i haven’t seen much on policy detail and proper analysis 🙏🏼
Never heard any politician tell it like this, possibly because they don't understand, care,or maybe its just their aversion to truth and the problems that come from an informed herd.
That is true but in order to oppose selling off public assets you probably need an ideology which implicitly rejects the universalism of the new left AND the new right. You have to basically say “the British governments responsibility is to the well being of the British people to the exclusion of others”. And to “progressive” leftists, liberals and free market globalists that is basically a heresy
There's about 70 million people living here, full of assets. Once the suicide pill gets legalised, we can become organ harvesting capital of the world.
Nope. To reverse the Cantillion Effect caused by QE, one cannot let just the purchasing power of the money pumped into the economy and accumulated overwhelmingly by the asset wealthy be eroded by inflation. But that is exactly what the BOE and the Treasury, and other central banks are doing. In particular, the BOE are only reducing what is held on their balance sheet. In effect, that's an accounting exercise, leaving the £800 million of assets in the pockets of the Asset Wealthy, which they are spending on buying more assets, and crowding out the ALICEs of those markets - the (A)sset-(L)imited, the (I)ncome-(C)onstrained, and the (E)mployed. What's worse, the BoE is not allowing the Bonds they purchased from the Dealer Banks to keep them afloat during Covid to mature. They are selling them back to the dealers at a discount. So the post-Covid K-shaped income recovery is being entrenched, with the incomes of the ALICEs being depleted as their purchasing power is also being eroded, whilst the passive incomes of the Asset wealthy continue to appreciate in quantity and value. The only way to reverse this increasing spread between the two groups is tax the asset wealthy. This will reduce the money supply in real terms, and not just in nominal accounting-exercise terms. And those who got most of the stimulus will bear the cost. Not the ALICEs who got very little. In fact, all QE has proven is that the 1) financial capitalism of today is replicating the mistakes of the past in entrenching rentierism and unproductive investment. 2) people hear what they want to hear, and don't always know what they are being told isn't true, and 3) not disincentivising rentierism is a political choice that will impoverish ordinary people, and destroy real economic growth by reducing the resilence of the economy as a whole, whilst politically and economically disenfranchising the ALICE majority. Too much rentierism creates economic instability and prohibits wealth creation amongst those who need it the most.
The people that call this politics of envy are slugs for salt.. they will either realise they’ve been wrong and brainwashed or be king of the ashes.. keep doing what your doing Gary your one of our beacons of hope to one day make change to this country ✊🏼
@@oliverp3545it's worse than that, it's people who are living well not realising they are the poor who just haven't had the tide of shit that is "rent seeking" lap at thier door.
I got the "you're just envious of the rich" put-down from a young, aggressive get-rich-quick guy. The kind who's hunting for some hot investment (like the start of a ponzi scheme), so he can get his.
Thank you for another awesome video. We need to talk to our young in this country and teach them this stuff because they're not going to get taught this stuff in school and it will be them and their children that'll be impacted the most by this and by then it'll be too late to reverse the situation. Educate the young now!! 👏🏻 💪🏻👏🏻
As an American, I can say that a huge amount of his argument is not only direct applicable to the states but I have personally observed some of it. We appear to be in the same boat; hello neighbors.
Another lucid and brilliant video, Gary. Everything you say about the U.K. Directly applies to the U.S. as well. There has been a long standing, bipartisan blob, corporate media, ruling elite, consensus that class and inequality are not discussed or debated. Once enough people wake up and unite, we can not be divided and conquered anymore.
Just finished your book. Amazing journey you’re on. Amazing!! A must read. I worked for the construction company who put the steel deck floors into Canary Wharf. 80’s was a boom. With 91 crash the company was sold off by its parent Trafalgar House. I lost my mind and then my job. Man there are many others with similar trajectories but in different scenarios and less “extreme” than yours but with common driving factors. And consequences. The desire for money ( security in my case and the need to pay off a mortgage with double digit interest rates. ) Thanks Maggie. and the fear of loosing everything. Chasing that whale…. .
The system is built on an idea that people like Gary could never get into power. The whole purpose of the parliamentary system to protect of the super rich.
7:02 That the main purpose of money is determining distribution of real resources is self-evident if you think about it at all. Because whenever anyone suggests a society without money, the first question asked will be some version of "But how would you manage/determine distribution of stuff?" (e.g. access to the best places to live.)
Way back, my Dad suffered terribly during the great Depression, growing up in London. He had time to deeply consider 'what the hell was going on?' What caused this? Major Douglas formed a political party 'Social Credit'. Their main policy plank was that money is created as a debt. Which requires more debt in order to repay it. Dad saw the craziness of that straight away. When Dad and Mum emigrated to New Zealand in 1949, Dad joined the NZ Social Credit party. It enjoyed moderate success for a decade or two, then fizzled out. Sabotaged from within and without. Thatcherism could also be called "neo-liberalism" and here in NZ it's called Rogernomics, after Roger Douglas, a politician who "reformed" NZ's economy by utterly wrecking it. We are still living with the carcass of that rotten period of economics. And worldwide debt levels are catastrophic. At all levels, from personal debt to international debt. Will the pyramid scheme collapse one day soon? I'd love to hear from Gary about the creation of money as a debt, and the fragility of our international financial/monetary systems.
All money is created as debt because that's what money is. All "financial instruments" have an "asset" and a "liability". Someone owns the asset and someone has the liability. The fact that someone "owes" you something is your asset and their liability. Gold, for example is not a "financial instrument". It is a commodity with inherent exchange value. Imagine you are a new government. You have £0. You want to create £1, what do you do? You create £1, an asset, and £1 of "national debt", the liability. Essentially you're taking what you have, which is zero, and splitting it into +1 and -1, which = zero. When you go to a bank and take out a loan its YOU that creates the money. When you sign a loan agreement, you have created an asset and a liability. All the bank does is buy the asset (the loan agreement) from you. From Proffesor Richard Werner: "Banks don't lend money. At law, it's very clear, they're in the business of purchasing securities. That's it. So you say okay, don't you confuse me with all that legalese, no, I want a loan. Fine! Here's the long contract, here's the offer letter and you sign. At law it's very clear you have issued the security, namely a promissory note, and the bank is going to purchase that. That's what's happening. Put it in layman's terms what does that mean? It means that what the bank is doing is very different from what it presents to the public that it's doing. What we call a deposit is simply the bank's record of its debt to the public "
Thank you for spreading this message man. Read your book, and i am generally interested in finance. But the way you explain this, opened my eyes. Keep it up
Taxing the super-rich is incredibly challenging due to their mobility and resources, enabling them to relocate to tax-friendly countries, utilize offshore trusts, and employ top legal and accounting experts. Moreover, they often exploit corruption to obstruct national and global efforts aimed at curbing their wealth, influencing policymakers and manipulating regulations to their advantage. Tackling this issue requires addressing both their mobility and the corruption that enables their evasion tactics. Furthermore, the intricate, often symbiotic relationships between the corrupt political class and the super-rich further complicate efforts to implement effective taxation measures. These relationships go beyond mere financial influence, extending to social circles, intermarriages, and aspirations for upward mobility. Members of the political elite may seek to align themselves with the super-rich for personal gain, whether through access to wealth, social status, or future career opportunities. This interconnectedness can result in policies that favor the interests of the wealthy over the broader population, perpetuating systemic inequality and hindering meaningful reforms. Addressing this issue requires not only combating corruption within government institutions but also challenging the entrenched power dynamics that reinforce these relationships.
The super-rich are physically mobile but their "tax base" is fixed. Its you & me & the land of the country. Basically you tax the income at source, before it goes anywhere else. Lets say you live somewhere with a 15% tax. You get taxed at 40% in the UK and you get a 40% tax credit so you don't pay another 15% where you are. Currently you pay 0% tax here and 15% where you are. That has to end.
That's true. All the fancy taxation schemes have loopholes built-in on purpose, so that the rich can avoid basically paying any taxes. While the rest either cannot use them as they are salaried (so they already gets the after tax amount) or it's made this way so that it's only getting beneficial to use from a certain threshold that only the top 1% reach
@@evildrome Won't work, as these people will just move away. It has happened in EVERY country that tried to tax the rich, they move away, unless they are denied a passport, and/or to transfer the money abroad. So it can't be done. The best one can do is to make sure the state is not vasting tax money. And now they spend a lot on things that should never be allowed. It's a great idea that the state should do everything for us but who wants to live like in the Soviet Union? Very very few, that's for sure.
I Was thinking something similar. Or is it just the a lie they have spread to justify them not being taxed . If they want to sell there stuff in a market ,shouldn't they pay for access to that market ?
@@cryptoslacker-464 Well we all “pay for access”, as the business pay VAT on their sales, and the people working for the company pay taxes on their salaries plus all kinds of fees etc etc. The issue with not paying tax on the profit is the fact that global companies deduct losses in country towards the profit in another. This practice needs to be looked at for sure. How many jobs has Amazon itself cost most western countries? No one knows.
I love how you explain seemingly complex concepts in a very simple and snackable manner. The worst thing is that the poor and middle class has been programmed to believe that taxing the rich is somehow bad/ communism... That's a not a conincidence, but it's hard to reverse
And as you have said before the argument of "they will just leave" is nonsense as there wealth is in assets and as Russian Oligarchs have shown even when banned from the nation it is exceptionally hard and for most of their assets impossible to get rid of them without huge loses. And a recent LSE paper showed that if you want more rich people living in your nation what attracts them most is not the taxes but how much they'd like to live there. I.e. clean streets, activities, beautiful architecture, the centre of music and fashion etc.
Their money is in assets. The wealth is the asset. Its (monetary) value, relative to the productive labour that creates wealth has been inflated. When Marx wrote Das Capital, money had labour value through the gold standard. The price of gold was related to the human effort in finding it & digging it up. We should think about what, if anything, gives money its value now.
Gimme a link to the LSE paper, Alex, pretty please. 😇 Or are you referring to the LSE news article "Britain’s super rich unlikely to move to ‘boring’ and ‘culturally barren’ tax havens". If so, I'll read that. 😊
Absolutely right that it’s all really about distribution. I was once asked for my definition of Politics by a Professor of politics. My definition was (and is) it’s all about the distribution of power and wealth. If you want a definition of economics, just flip it round.
Totally agree with this, but as a voter in the UK I don't know who to back to make this happen. Trusting the parties is hard to do and most seem out to serve themselves...
Here in the UK it’s a matter of one step at a time. What has to happen right now is that you vote for whichever progressive party candidate (Liberal Democrat/ Labour/ Green) is most likely to beat any other party in your constituency. Then once a progressive party is in power you and everyone you know have to send letters and letters and petitions to your MP for a more proportional/ democratic electoral system (look up the campaign for electoral reform). Once the system of Government is made better it will be easier for you to know who to back to get the change you want.
The UK Ship of State is not a Taxi that can turn on a sixpence. The UK's turning circle is large, and it's engines are more like those of the MV Dali right now - suspect, poorly maintained, and in need of repair. The postwar years or so have been a big psyop, where the insecurities of the British establishment have steered this country into even more troubled waters than the UK faced after World War II. And unless everyone else wakes upto that fact, nothing much will change. We have to be the change we want to see in the world, and voting is only a very small part of that, but still important. Voting alone won't change things. We have to stop believing absurdities before we can stop committing atrocities on ourselves and others. Just a thought.
Gary doesn’t reply to comments but highlights financial analysis to making people aware of the causes of financial decadence and financial inequalities. Gary exposes the issues but not the solution. The real issue is a failed political system that calls itself democratic dating back to Cromwell. Time to move on utilizing modern technology, therein lies the solution.
Thank you. We need more people like Gary. We also need to consider a future where TH-cam tries to hide Gary and the likes message .... for now it seems the Billionaires are not worried about this messaging.
Super interesting perspective about money being a relative resource and politics of power. It feels like you're touching the core problem of inequality and making it accessible.
I don't understand how you can spell it out for everyone in such a way and the Labour party offers no actual alternative to addressing the wealth inequality gap. Given it's an election year, it would be useful to hear your perspective on how we could vote / what party looks the most likely to address the issues you raise. I'm 26 and pretty much everyone I know is very disengaged with politics, but I guess the only way on going about making a change is by spreading the word. Love the content Gary!
We cannot Vote our way out of this in our First Past the Post system. I would say if one party puts it as a Manifesto Promise to introduce Proportional Representation vote for them other than that vote to prevent either Tory Blue or Tory Red from gaining a Working Majority, gotto break this 2 Wings of the same Bird Cancer.
@@thegrowl2210 Honestly i think we gotta force it by breaking the backs of a working majority of the Two Cheeks of the same Ass Parties so we can get a party in the running who will?
When you try to take power away from the 3 media barons that control all UK media they will mobilise and destroy your political party. You can explain things like Gary does until your voice gives out but when every red top and TV news and other YT talking head is telling the working and middle classes that the party are communists who want to stop them becoming wealthy, you will not get the votes. To deny this is to argue that voters will never vote irrationally and against their own interests. Something no one can be serious about given even the past decade.
Gary I love the way you explain Economics so easy to understand. I think the money should go to health care and social services. I am promoting your website as much as I can
99%+ of people, including the rich, don’t realise the existing class war against working people because our culture can’t deal with the idea of class. This is the dark side of liberalism, held firmly by the centre left and right. That your success is predominantly a function of your choices and not only does the market work, it SHOULD work. The ideology is so omnipresent we don’t even see it. Like Gary, I did economics at a good uni and bought into all this. It took the GFC and losing my job to start questioning things. The message needs to be wall to wall and populist.
We understood this for 200 years. Then after the postwar economic boom things got radically better for the working class and the class war was forgotten. But not by elites, who reignited it in the late 70s.
In my opinion, it’s less that people can’t deal with class and more work is valued strangely. The biggest thing our society has forgotten is that there is a certain amount of risk that is tied to high value jobs. If you want something consistent chances are you won’t earn a lot doing it. Inversely, there -are- consistent paying jobs that disproportionally pay a handsome salary. CEOs come to mind. I’m not saying that their job is easy, but can you really say that a CEO works 400 to 1000 times harder than a floor employee? What sort of risk does a CEO take on when they inherit a Fortune 500 company with a golden parachute handy if things go bad? Does a football player or a singer provide significantly more value than a high school teacher? There are highly visible discrepancies in the way our economy values work and people are getting fed up with getting crumbs when others take huge chunks of the cake.
one of the major benefits of leaving the uk (for 6 months or more) is that it enables you to realise just how powerful the omnipresent tory/neoliberal propaganda machine that permeates every corner of that nation is...simply because you are no longer having it pumped into your life. That realisation is as revealing as it is depressing. the (very) depressing part is that, now, you can see right through it, see how carefully crafted the machin'es output is, see the endless flow of (invariably wealth serving) attacks/robberies that it blinds your fellow citizens from even suspecting are happening, let alone sees them demanding an end to and/or immediate, independent and serious investigation into ! You see how it covers the ruinous corruption/crimes again and again with the same old alibis/cover stories which are always built around the same two carefully selected concepts: 'blundering' and 'incompetence'. And then you come to realise the real reason such a contrived fuss is made around "the spread of misinformation" and it's 'inherent dangers' .
Will do Gary. Thank you for the constant education. I do hope Labour eventually listens to you and governs for the long-term rather than keeping the status quo out of fear of media criticism. They fear taxing the rich, which is so infuriating and cowardly.
@@111dddcca well it wasn't because everytime the tax on the rich has dropped GDP has also dropped. Less investment equals smaller growth. Therefore lowering your income is only going to decrease investment in the country.
And think how much better we would have done without that confiscatory taxation. Essentially you are saying that government and bureaucrats are better asset allocators than private individuals. And the evidence of all of history is that that is emphatically not the case.
@@stevenfarrall3942 well seen as GDP was growing quicker when the tax was higher. I'd say that is a great indicator that the government was better at allocating that money, as they invested it in the country to improve it, whereas a rich person invests for themseleves to make money, so they will just buy stocks which unless it's the initial sale it does nothing for the economy or they buy housing, which just increases the price of housing which means people are spending less in the economy and more on housing constricting the economy. Not to mention investment is pre tax meaning that high taxes incourage investment so let's say you are correct and the rich person is a better allocator well high taxes forces them to allocate. Whereas low taxes will make them take the money out of the economy.
Bless you, Gary! Thank you for spreading the word of the burn! (Even though you back track near the end.) Beyond being a 'relative resource' money is an ideology. Burning it has a power way beyond a rational analysis of the economic outcomes. You'd be very welcome to come do it for real at our next event and find out for yourself. Xx
Best one yet. Clear, concise, compelling, easy to visualise. Really good to hear economic definitions of "money", and what it actually is. To further articulate what's going on, it might help to use the full word when talking about working, middle, and upper "class". It's "classification". We are classified and ascribed value according to wealth. Not according to intrinsic worth as humans. We are all "classifications" within a system that is inherently anti-human in nature. One that's based on perpetual growth through cruelty. One that's not compatible with democracy. And is now eating democracy, sucking it into the void at the centre of unaddressed individual pathologies.
Our congress has no idea how we Americans are feeling, we individuals are fed up with this treasonous administration. I feel for people with disabilities for not getting the help they deserve... Thank you Sarah Hudson.. imagine i invested $4,000 and received $6,550 in 4days.
Same here, I operate a wide - range of investments with help from my financial advisor. My advice is to get a professional who will help you, plan and enhance your management skills. For the record, working with Sarah Hudson, has been an amazing experience.
As a beginner, it's essential for you to have a mentor to keep you accountable. I'm guided by a widely known crypto consultant, same Sarah Hudson mentioned here
Multiple streams of income should be applied because from the CNCB quarters recently their newscaster made it known that If you don't find a means of multiplying your income you will wake up one day to realize you didn't plan well
I really appreciate your sentiment. Your economics does mostly check out in this video (if we take it at face value under rational consumer behaviour), however the problem is one of overconsumption and expectation. We see overconsumption on everyone's part, even right down to the lowest earners of which I have been one for the majority of my life. If you gave money to everybody it would just get spent on pointless stuff. People don't know how to make money work for them. You give everyday people more money it will flow right back into the hands of people who are more skilled and educated in how to use money, most people would just buy more liabilities and further feed those who provide them. Additionally most people (not all) are only struggling because they believe they deserve so much more than they produce, contribute or earn. It seems to me unfruitful to bang the drum of inequality and instead just teach people about how to be more productive, better manage themselves and the realty that they are living way beyond there means. We will always have the rich and the poor because this allows for us all to move along that measure (with which we live in one of the most optimistic times for that). Inequality will always exist and we should want it to stay that way. Its a far better reality than equality. It provides scope for movement, change and growth. Its not perfect but is a better alternative than equality which breeds stagnation and the death of beneficial reward mechanisms. There of course are many rich people who use there wealth with greed in mind, as do many middle and lower class people. We accept this realty because the benefits of having massively wealthy people benefits us to a greater extent than that of having none even with the greedy buggers factored in. I understand what your saying because I understand the basic economics underpinning the rational of your argument, however it fundamentally misses the greater and more powerful behavioural implications at play, unfortunately what your mostly achieving is the fuelling of hate and division which will lead to greater economic hardship. There is still a wide open window for people to change there living standards through genuine education and discipline. Is it fucking hard, Yes. Should it be hard. Yes. Do rich people have some material things a bit easier. Yes. Would you act differently if you were rich? Probably not.
Gary, I hope you will find this relevant. In my country on the renting issue we always here "if you're to hard on the landlords, then there won't be any and there will be less housing" I thihnk there premise is that the exiting home owners would just AirBnB or speculate, and therefore the housing stock would not be used for living. But if we regulate around those things, then "if" they were to all exit the housing market, houses would be cheaper and hopefully people needing a pace to live will have one.
Now to mitigate damage I'd say vote for just about anyone who's not a tory and is likely to win, but voting is not the end of the story. None of the existing parties will meaningfully change this system as things stand. Big changes come from educating, agitating, organising, etc.
@@garethhhhh but presumably it could be if we could put enough pressure on - was interested to see who Gary thinks would give the ideas the most welcome reception…
Labour will win the next election and with their current platform will fail to solve the country’s problems. This will leave them open to attack and they’ll need to either pivot to less orthodox solutions or they’ll be a 4-5 year one time government.
I guess now it's time you should dive into Austrian economics to better understand the evil side of mainstream keynesian milton fridman economics. Highly suggest to everyone to read the book or watch the documentary ,The Shock Doctrine (rise of disaster capitalism) by Naomi Klein. You may also want to check what a guy named Saifedean Ammous has to say.
Yeah bro, love Gary. But I'd be very suprised if he makes it to 2025. Especially how quickly hes gaining traction. This mans got his finger right on the pulse.
great video, quick, crunchy, controversial, but going over everything relevant in a deep enough way that is still understandable. and it does not end up in a bunch of superficial clockbait bullshit. really smart stuff. i'm shure this kind of content will increase your reach and your following further. more power to you💪
Isn’t giving 16k to everyone the same as the job retention scheme? In one of your other videos about the flow of money you made the case for that money ending up with the rich, wouldn’t it just flow back to them?
During COVID, people's ordinary income went to zero. This would be money on top of your ordinary income. Also, that'd why he talked about burning the money. The impact of the rich losing the money is as important if not more important than ordinary people gaining it
Perhaps we should return to Biblical principles as found in the Tora. Jews were not allowed to practice usury and even assets that were acquired had to be returned to the original owner every 50 years or jubilee in order to keep a check on the accumulation of wealth at the expense of others.
@@plagiarisedwords The problem with the Covid furlough scheme is that it was 80 % of your income so rich people got more than poor people. Also rich people had drop in discretionary spending like holidays meals out etc. which offset any drop in income. Poor people didn't really experience a drop in outgoings.
@plagiarisedwords Burning money is a nonsensical suggestion to be honest. Removing the ability of the gov/central bank to print money IS the only solution. Everything else is just mental masturbation no different from what MMT proponents spew. You stop the bleeding and not plaster over it.
This sums it up... Bank of England MULTI MILLIONAIRE Governor in 2021/2022 said "people should not ask for increase in pay. They can do better in other ways, by working more!"
If you gave £16k to everyone they would just spend it on stuff owned by the really rich and the wealth would just transfer back to the really rich and society would be left with high inflation as people compete for stuff and on the back of that demand the really rich put the prices up to offset their loss. Better the money was destroyed or the government found an asset that was hard and scarce to anchor the currency.
@@christurner1937And then you tax them again! You should look at the results of the studies that gave regular payments to poor people. They made wise choices-ate better food, got the car fixed, went to the dentist-supporting the local economy, could take time off from the low paying job to go interview for a better paying one. Poverty is a lack of cash, not a lack of character. And poor people know better what they need than those who think they are above them.
mate, I absolutely love your videos. I think you can very quickly put to bed this 'politics of envy' argument personally by saying that you are one of the rich, and these changes will impact you negatively. however, despite this, you are campaigning for us as the bottom and middle.
Interesting stuff, Garry, good work. I'm so disillusioned with politics and government, seems we need some serious change. Looks like this could be what you are discussing. A beacon of hope, man! Thanks for your work.
Hello Gary I wonder whether you have heard of zakat an annual 2.5 percent tax on wealth that practising Muslims have to pay and transfer to the poor. Instead of inheritance tax a British version of wealth tax may be beneficial for the economy.
Burn the money! A policy I can get behind. The MMT people say this is what happens anyway: the government spends money into existence and taxes it out of existence.
It's amazing how often people think that the government somehow needs the tax money to pay for things, when the same government can simply print more money. The real issue is with where that money goes, and what impact it has - as you point out, the essence of taxation is reducing the supply of money in the economy, and a sensible tax policy is aimed at reducing excess accumulation of money by the very rich (to the general social and economic benefit of everyone, including the rich...).
@@emjay9688but when a rediculous amount is produced too fast and, as you say, is disproportionately distributed to the Uber wealthy, then some rebalancing needs to happen just as fast. There’s too much money floating around at present and taxation on the Uber wealthy is a major mechanism to help regain balance. Without taxation as an emergency measure, the fire of inflation will continue to rampage.
@@emjay9688but the rich also rebalance government debt by buying government debt (Bonds) - if government tax the wealthy extensively then they would be limiting their debt purchase...
@@markturner5534even if you see government bond sales as debt, which it isn't really because the state is the money issuer, the decrease in 'debt' purchase would necessarily be exactly offset by tax taken. More tax taken less debt to sell.
I'm a 70yr old Brit Socialist, I have never Envied a rich person, I feel sorry for them, To wake, every morning with the thought that "I MUST" get something, anything, something another human hasn't got, I awake wondering how the day will play-out, will it be good or bad, you know Normal stuff, That's why I don't care about them,
Rich people don't think like this otherwise they would be poor. Poor people have an insatiable thirst for buying expensive brands to look rich which digs themselves into living pay check to pay check.
@@MrSpiderman1321 I am poor and never bought expensive-brand anything in my life. i am worried about never ever owning any property while i pay heaps of my money to greedy, hoarding landlords decade after decade. i worry about being able to afford groceries or bus tickets to get to work. i worry about being in crippling debt for my entire adult life. my friends worry about feeding their kids or not being able to afford their education. we all worry about not being able to ever stop working until we die, or being in crippling medical debt in our elderly years. take an empathy check for heaven's sake. villifying poor people for their decisions and saying they're poor because they chose to be is one of the oldest class-stratifying falsehoods of all time. if you think poor people are in poverty because they buy avocado toast and holidays, then i'm afraid you are falling for some solid propaganda. go find your local food bank and meet some peopke there, find out how many of those are pursuing a vuitton handbag. they can't afford ****ing tomatoes.
Gary, I’m mostly finished listening to your audiobook. What can I say just incredible piece of work. And you add so much to it hearing it in your voice, and the impressions!! I do have a question though. Part 4 section 7 when you’re talking about losing harry. Does it cut very briefly to Harry’s voice? It doesn’t sound like you doing an impression and it doesn’t sound like you normally. Is that harry? I’ve looked online for answers but can’t find any. As I said amazing work. Best thing I’ve listened to ever, hands down.
Wealthy will fight back to protect their wealth and most western countries are only surviving because of the quantitive easing corruption. We will always have conservative/Republican parties in power of democracy happy to undermine higher taxation policies and the wealthy take full advantage of that. Also as a politician you talk about higher taxation not many wealthy families will vote or donate to them.
That last part is crucial, party donors will dry up for established parties so Gary’s ideas will never make it into policy with them. Needs to be a self sufficient smaller party or grassroots campaign or something ..
Hello Gary how do I convince the middle class to vote for taxing the rich when A) they think it’s them even after explain that they wouldn’t be part of this and B) they often hit me with well the rich (companies) will leave the country?
You persuade them to watch these videos. Gary explains things in a "counter narrative " way, in other words, he takes the popular talking points and explains how that is wrong. Choose three videos that state your point. I suggest this one. 🌹
@@Jeff-q4u I’m afraid it’s not that simple, I’ve read Gary’s book and watched his videos for sometime, but if you try to apply some of Gary’s points to the conversation it’s like talking to a “get brexit done” voter, to arrogant to consider anyones point of view other than their own. It’s a shambles these people vote for who they like, rather than polices and for life of me I can not work out why, they are educated and well paid people, but lack any critical thinking skills/common sense.
@@dwane3950 I understand you perfectly. I personally dislike and distrust anyone who votes for the tories because of my upbringing (I grew up in the 80s when Maggie was in power) I do understand. My only suggestion can be do it slowly. When they make a statement that can be debunked, correct it then say nothing, don't get involved with tit for tat counter arguments. You might never bring them around. What you can do, the only thing you can do, is state your position and hold steadfast to it. Good luck 🌹
Money is like shit, if you spread it around it helps things grow. If you pile it up, it stinks.
😂😂
Haha 😂
"Money is like manure. You have to spread it around or it smells." - J. Paul Getty
@@DrSanity7777777 I knew it wasn't an original thought. I prefer the updated version I wrote.
@@Grandude77more contemporary, init.
Money is not a real resource, it is the resource we use to determine the distribution of real resources. ✊🏻👊🏻💚
Yes, it's only the medium of exchange. But if you don't have it, you can't play.
Gary you cover the economic effects of inequality really well - what's missing here is that there is an effect on democracy too as when the rich get richer they become more powerful and democracy will reduce as they move to protect their power and wealth by influencing politics. You see this with the Conservative party and increasingly Labour too which has moved away from being a party funded by the membership and unions under Corbyn. The last two prime ministers were chosen by a few thousand Conservative party members and it is these people who will make political decisions relating to inequality.
Gary does comment a lot on this. Watch his other posts.
There are so many comments popping up all over the socials criticising Labour for stuff they haven't done because they weren’t in power. 14 years of Tory destruction and you're having a go at Labour?
+1 he does. He understands the relationship between money and power
Gary doesn’t reply to comments but highlights financial analysis to making people aware of the causes of financial decadence and financial inequalities. Gary exposes the issues but not the solution. The real issue is a failed political system that calls itself democratic dating back to Cromwell. Time to move on utilizing modern technology, therein lies the solution.
Gary can speak for himself in the uploads, butI would say he does indeed touch on solutions, he outright states that we need democratic reforms, even revolutionary reforms for workers.
It's old technology. It's been suppressed. Time to reclaim it.
I have no idea why it took so long for the algorithm to show you to me! But now that it has, I’m so grateful.
I’m sharing your videos with everyone in my life who I think would be willing to watch them lol
I wanted to thank you so much for communicating these messages so clearly and with such obvious expertise, passion, and commitment. Thank you again from Canada and I hope your journey in Japan is a safe and restorative one.
I am assuming you probably won’t be reading this comment, as it’s on an older video. That being as it is, I still wanted to express my profound gratitude for all you do. And if you don’t see this, at least it will give your channel a bump in the algorithm 😉
It's scary how much farm land and homes they're buying up each year in cash usually overpaying as well which drives up prices for everyone. Pension funds are doing this as well. Makes you wonder what's going to be left in 5-10 years time
Its worse than that.
The NHS is being carved up by corporations.
The food producers.
Clothing.
Every aspect of our life is owned by big business corporations.
This is what he is actually talking about.
🌹
Yes, there’s a lot of smaller farms being bought up solely for their carbon offsets. Corporates are taking them out of production and consequently closing local stores, schools and communities in general.
So that we are reliant on the coming processed food they will sell us.
Without sounding like a sycophant Gary is one of many cerebral and conscientious people we produce here in East London. I’m from just up the road in South Woodford. Add into the mix a streetwise awareness and you have a very formidable individual.
Long may he prosper and continue his posts..
I am increasingly impressed. Wish more people would watch you. Your clarity and perspicacity is truly impressive.
Really? Do you not think it’s just a repackaged 70’s Labour dogma? Yes he wears a beanie, and has that “one of the people” aesthetic, but i haven’t seen much on policy detail and proper analysis 🙏🏼
What was 70 s dogma? Most people who would be old enough to remember or understand that are probably in boot hill...
Never heard any politician tell it like this, possibly because they don't understand, care,or maybe its just their aversion to truth and the problems that come from an informed herd.
@@lawrencebywater2112 lolz. perhaps you should look into his background
@@lawrencebywater2112
His policy is 'tax wealth'. It's pretty straight forward. I'm not sure how much detail you need.
This channel is the best. Keep it going Gary
The problem with Thatcherism is that you eventually run out of assets to sell to overseas investors so that they can rip off British consumers.
Just the NHS left...
That is true but in order to oppose selling off public assets you probably need an ideology which implicitly rejects the universalism of the new left AND the new right. You have to basically say “the British governments responsibility is to the well being of the British people to the exclusion of others”. And to “progressive” leftists, liberals and free market globalists that is basically a heresy
There's about 70 million people living here, full of assets.
Once the suicide pill gets legalised, we can become organ harvesting capital of the world.
We call it Thatcherism, but we really should call it for what it was, Milton Friedman( ism)
@@billB101 Friedrich Hayek.
@garyseconomics is this not what quantitative tightening is doing? The BOE's plan is to "burn" £100bn between Oct 2023 and Sept 2024.
Nope. To reverse the Cantillion Effect caused by QE, one cannot let just the purchasing power of the money pumped into the economy and accumulated overwhelmingly by the asset wealthy be eroded by inflation. But that is exactly what the BOE and the Treasury, and other central banks are doing. In particular, the BOE are only reducing what is held on their balance sheet. In effect, that's an accounting exercise, leaving the £800 million of assets in the pockets of the Asset Wealthy, which they are spending on buying more assets, and crowding out the ALICEs of those markets - the (A)sset-(L)imited, the (I)ncome-(C)onstrained, and the (E)mployed. What's worse, the BoE is not allowing the Bonds they purchased from the Dealer Banks to keep them afloat during Covid to mature. They are selling them back to the dealers at a discount. So the post-Covid K-shaped income recovery is being entrenched, with the incomes of the ALICEs being depleted as their purchasing power is also being eroded, whilst the passive incomes of the Asset wealthy continue to appreciate in quantity and value. The only way to reverse this increasing spread between the two groups is tax the asset wealthy. This will reduce the money supply in real terms, and not just in nominal accounting-exercise terms. And those who got most of the stimulus will bear the cost. Not the ALICEs who got very little.
In fact, all QE has proven is that the 1) financial capitalism of today is replicating the mistakes of the past in entrenching rentierism and unproductive investment. 2) people hear what they want to hear, and don't always know what they are being told isn't true, and 3) not disincentivising rentierism is a political choice that will impoverish ordinary people, and destroy real economic growth by reducing the resilence of the economy as a whole, whilst politically and economically disenfranchising the ALICE majority. Too much rentierism creates economic instability and prohibits wealth creation amongst those who need it the most.
The people that call this politics of envy are slugs for salt.. they will either realise they’ve been wrong and brainwashed or be king of the ashes.. keep doing what your doing Gary your one of our beacons of hope to one day make change to this country ✊🏼
Alot of people are ladder kickers, always wanting themselves to be better off for others to be worse off.
@@oliverp3545it's worse than that, it's people who are living well not realising they are the poor who just haven't had the tide of shit that is "rent seeking" lap at thier door.
I got the "you're just envious of the rich" put-down from a young, aggressive get-rich-quick guy. The kind who's hunting for some hot investment (like the start of a ponzi scheme), so he can get his.
Thank you for another awesome video. We need to talk to our young in this country and teach them this stuff because they're not going to get taught this stuff in school and it will be them and their children that'll be impacted the most by this and by then it'll be too late to reverse the situation. Educate the young now!! 👏🏻 💪🏻👏🏻
Quality as always Gary. You’ve earned yourself one of those biscuits mate.
Go on, have two: there's hard work and there's good work and doing both should be doubly rewarded.
As an American, I can say that a huge amount of his argument is not only direct applicable to the states but I have personally observed some of it. We appear to be in the same boat; hello neighbors.
I'm currently reading your book. It's incredibly fascinating and well written. Well done
Thank you for this education.
Another lucid and brilliant video, Gary. Everything you say about the U.K. Directly applies to the U.S. as well. There has been a long standing, bipartisan blob, corporate media, ruling elite, consensus that class and inequality are not discussed or debated. Once enough people wake up and unite, we can not be divided and conquered anymore.
In Australia too
Just finished your book. Amazing journey you’re on. Amazing!! A must read. I worked for the construction company who put the steel deck floors into Canary Wharf. 80’s was a boom. With 91 crash the company was sold off by its parent Trafalgar House. I lost my mind and then my job. Man there are many others with similar trajectories but in different scenarios and less “extreme” than yours but with common driving factors. And consequences. The desire for money ( security in my case and the need to pay off a mortgage with double digit interest rates. ) Thanks Maggie. and the fear of loosing everything. Chasing that whale…. .
Imagine if, instead of Hunt, we had Gary as Chancellor.
just for starters we would be getting a honest person for a liar which could only be for the better
Does Gary really care though?
Perhaps not Chancellor, certainly inner circle of advisers. Improvement on Dominic Cummings and the rest. Or House of Lords; I’d support that.
He cares more than you ever have done or you ever will..... because you done sweet F.A!!
The system is built on an idea that people like Gary could never get into power. The whole purpose of the parliamentary system to protect of the super rich.
Awsome video Gary, yet again. Bravo
Spot on. Keep it up Gary.
7:02 That the main purpose of money is determining distribution of real resources is self-evident if you think about it at all. Because whenever anyone suggests a society without money, the first question asked will be some version of "But how would you manage/determine distribution of stuff?" (e.g. access to the best places to live.)
Why not learn what money is and its purpose? This way you won't be so easily scammed?
Way back, my Dad suffered terribly during the great Depression, growing up in London. He had time to deeply consider 'what the hell was going on?' What caused this?
Major Douglas formed a political party 'Social Credit'. Their main policy plank was that money is created as a debt.
Which requires more debt in order to repay it. Dad saw the craziness of that straight away.
When Dad and Mum emigrated to New Zealand in 1949, Dad joined the NZ Social Credit party. It enjoyed moderate success for a decade or two, then fizzled out.
Sabotaged from within and without. Thatcherism could also be called "neo-liberalism" and here in
NZ it's called Rogernomics, after Roger Douglas, a politician who "reformed" NZ's economy by utterly wrecking it.
We are still living with the carcass of that rotten period of economics.
And worldwide debt levels are catastrophic.
At all levels, from personal debt to international debt.
Will the pyramid scheme collapse one day soon?
I'd love to hear from Gary about the creation of money as a debt, and the fragility of our international financial/monetary systems.
Cool man 😊
All money is created as debt because that's what money is.
All "financial instruments" have an "asset" and a "liability".
Someone owns the asset and someone has the liability.
The fact that someone "owes" you something is your asset and their liability.
Gold, for example is not a "financial instrument".
It is a commodity with inherent exchange value.
Imagine you are a new government. You have £0.
You want to create £1, what do you do?
You create £1, an asset, and £1 of "national debt", the liability.
Essentially you're taking what you have, which is zero, and splitting it into +1 and -1, which = zero.
When you go to a bank and take out a loan its YOU that creates the money.
When you sign a loan agreement, you have created an asset and a liability. All the bank does is buy the asset (the loan agreement) from you.
From Proffesor Richard Werner:
"Banks don't lend money. At law, it's very clear, they're in the business of purchasing securities.
That's it. So you say okay, don't you confuse me with all that legalese, no, I want a loan. Fine! Here's the long contract, here's the offer letter and you sign.
At law it's very clear you have issued the security, namely a promissory note, and the bank is going to purchase that. That's what's happening.
Put it in layman's terms what does that mean?
It means that what the bank is doing is very different from what it presents to the public that it's doing.
What we call a deposit is simply the bank's record of its debt to the public "
Thank you for spreading this message man. Read your book, and i am generally interested in finance. But the way you explain this, opened my eyes. Keep it up
Taxing the super-rich is incredibly challenging due to their mobility and resources, enabling them to relocate to tax-friendly countries, utilize offshore trusts, and employ top legal and accounting experts. Moreover, they often exploit corruption to obstruct national and global efforts aimed at curbing their wealth, influencing policymakers and manipulating regulations to their advantage. Tackling this issue requires addressing both their mobility and the corruption that enables their evasion tactics.
Furthermore, the intricate, often symbiotic relationships between the corrupt political class and the super-rich further complicate efforts to implement effective taxation measures. These relationships go beyond mere financial influence, extending to social circles, intermarriages, and aspirations for upward mobility. Members of the political elite may seek to align themselves with the super-rich for personal gain, whether through access to wealth, social status, or future career opportunities. This interconnectedness can result in policies that favor the interests of the wealthy over the broader population, perpetuating systemic inequality and hindering meaningful reforms. Addressing this issue requires not only combating corruption within government institutions but also challenging the entrenched power dynamics that reinforce these relationships.
The super-rich are physically mobile but their "tax base" is fixed.
Its you & me & the land of the country.
Basically you tax the income at source, before it goes anywhere else.
Lets say you live somewhere with a 15% tax. You get taxed at 40% in the UK and you get a 40% tax credit so you don't pay another 15% where you are.
Currently you pay 0% tax here and 15% where you are.
That has to end.
That's true. All the fancy taxation schemes have loopholes built-in on purpose, so that the rich can avoid basically paying any taxes. While the rest either cannot use them as they are salaried (so they already gets the after tax amount) or it's made this way so that it's only getting beneficial to use from a certain threshold that only the top 1% reach
@@evildrome Won't work, as these people will just move away. It has happened in EVERY country that tried to tax the rich, they move away, unless they are denied a passport, and/or to transfer the money abroad. So it can't be done. The best one can do is to make sure the state is not vasting tax money. And now they spend a lot on things that should never be allowed. It's a great idea that the state should do everything for us but who wants to live like in the Soviet Union? Very very few, that's for sure.
I Was thinking something similar. Or is it just the a lie they have spread to justify them not being taxed . If they want to sell there stuff in a market ,shouldn't they pay for access to that market ?
@@cryptoslacker-464 Well we all “pay for access”, as the business pay VAT on their sales, and the people working for the company pay taxes on their salaries plus all kinds of fees etc etc. The issue with not paying tax on the profit is the fact that global companies deduct losses in country towards the profit in another. This practice needs to be looked at for sure. How many jobs has Amazon itself cost most western countries? No one knows.
I love how you explain seemingly complex concepts in a very simple and snackable manner. The worst thing is that the poor and middle class has been programmed to believe that taxing the rich is somehow bad/ communism... That's a not a conincidence, but it's hard to reverse
It dosn't exactly help when people talk about class warfare.
Gary you are a legend! Thank you for being a true voice of the people on these complex financial matters! 👊🏻
Thanks Gary....informative as always. Keep banging that drum.
Thank you for keeping your spirits & your dedication up.
And as you have said before the argument of "they will just leave" is nonsense as there wealth is in assets and as Russian Oligarchs have shown even when banned from the nation it is exceptionally hard and for most of their assets impossible to get rid of them without huge loses. And a recent LSE paper showed that if you want more rich people living in your nation what attracts them most is not the taxes but how much they'd like to live there. I.e. clean streets, activities, beautiful architecture, the centre of music and fashion etc.
Their money is in assets. The wealth is the asset.
Its (monetary) value, relative to the productive labour that creates wealth has been inflated.
When Marx wrote Das Capital, money had labour value through the gold standard. The price of gold was related to the human effort in finding it & digging it up. We should think about what, if anything, gives money its value now.
@@ethelminigold is money everything else is debt. JP Morgan said that a long time ago.
Gimme a link to the LSE paper, Alex, pretty please. 😇
Or are you referring to the LSE news article "Britain’s super rich unlikely to move to ‘boring’ and ‘culturally barren’ tax havens". If so, I'll read that. 😊
@@robinmorritt7493 The trouble is, when the rich move in, the first thing to go is things that don't make money, like culture and arts...
@@daveturner4134 I confess I tend to see things the other way round.
Brilliant! Thank you for taking the time to explain this.
Absolutely right that it’s all really about distribution. I was once asked for my definition of Politics by a Professor of politics. My definition was (and is) it’s all about the distribution of power and wealth. If you want a definition of economics, just flip it round.
Yep, power, wealth, information. You can swap any two for the third.
We need more people like you in society! 🙏🥰
Totally agree with this, but as a voter in the UK I don't know who to back to make this happen. Trusting the parties is hard to do and most seem out to serve themselves...
Here in the UK it’s a matter of one step at a time. What has to happen right now is that you vote for whichever progressive party candidate (Liberal Democrat/ Labour/ Green) is most likely to beat any other party in your constituency.
Then once a progressive party is in power you and everyone you know have to send letters and letters and petitions to your MP for a more proportional/ democratic electoral system (look up the campaign for electoral reform).
Once the system of Government is made better it will be easier for you to know who to back to get the change you want.
The UK Ship of State is not a Taxi that can turn on a sixpence. The UK's turning circle is large, and it's engines are more like those of the MV Dali right now - suspect, poorly maintained, and in need of repair. The postwar years or so have been a big psyop, where the insecurities of the British establishment have steered this country into even more troubled waters than the UK faced after World War II. And unless everyone else wakes upto that fact, nothing much will change. We have to be the change we want to see in the world, and voting is only a very small part of that, but still important. Voting alone won't change things. We have to stop believing absurdities before we can stop committing atrocities on ourselves and others. Just a thought.
Thanks, that's sound advice
Gary doesn’t reply to comments but highlights financial analysis to making people aware of the causes of financial decadence and financial inequalities. Gary exposes the issues but not the solution. The real issue is a failed political system that calls itself democratic dating back to Cromwell. Time to move on utilizing modern technology, therein lies the solution.
great video yet again
Thank you. We need more people like Gary.
We also need to consider a future where TH-cam tries to hide Gary and the likes message .... for now it seems the Billionaires are not worried about this messaging.
More of his what?
Super interesting perspective about money being a relative resource and politics of power. It feels like you're touching the core problem of inequality and making it accessible.
I don't understand how you can spell it out for everyone in such a way and the Labour party offers no actual alternative to addressing the wealth inequality gap. Given it's an election year, it would be useful to hear your perspective on how we could vote / what party looks the most likely to address the issues you raise. I'm 26 and pretty much everyone I know is very disengaged with politics, but I guess the only way on going about making a change is by spreading the word. Love the content Gary!
We cannot Vote our way out of this in our First Past the Post system.
I would say if one party puts it as a Manifesto Promise to introduce Proportional Representation vote for them other than that vote to prevent either Tory Blue or Tory Red from gaining a Working Majority, gotto break this 2 Wings of the same Bird Cancer.
Proportional representation is the only way forward. But what party that has won under FPTP will propose that?
@@thegrowl2210 Honestly i think we gotta force it by breaking the backs of a working majority of the Two Cheeks of the same Ass Parties so we can get a party in the running who will?
When you try to take power away from the 3 media barons that control all UK media they will mobilise and destroy your political party. You can explain things like Gary does until your voice gives out but when every red top and TV news and other YT talking head is telling the working and middle classes that the party are communists who want to stop them becoming wealthy, you will not get the votes. To deny this is to argue that voters will never vote irrationally and against their own interests. Something no one can be serious about given even the past decade.
Thanks for all your hard work Gary. This subject is one that every working person needs to know about or we’re screwed
We must protect this man at all fucking costs. If they make him disappear we must do everything we can to protect him.
I agree I don’t want to see another ‘Assange’ here!
Gary I love the way you explain Economics so easy to understand. I think the money should go to health care and social services. I am promoting your website as much as I can
Thanks for sharing FET and AMSAPHM9💯
I am also AMSAPHM9 Holders 🚀
AMSAPHM9 is still extremely undervalued
It is funny that not everyone knows about AMSAPHM9
this is only crypto project that I see has real use
AMSAPHM9 is still extremely undervalued
Gary thank you to be so honest- you are awesome Bro.
Well said Gary. I hope the politicians are listening 🙏🙏🙏🙏
Politicians are there to keep it the same way. The system is working well for them.
Very clear concies very good video ❤❤❤
99%+ of people, including the rich, don’t realise the existing class war against working people because our culture can’t deal with the idea of class.
This is the dark side of liberalism, held firmly by the centre left and right. That your success is predominantly a function of your choices and not only does the market work, it SHOULD work.
The ideology is so omnipresent we don’t even see it. Like Gary, I did economics at a good uni and bought into all this. It took the GFC and losing my job to start questioning things.
The message needs to be wall to wall and populist.
We understood this for 200 years. Then after the postwar economic boom things got radically better for the working class and the class war was forgotten. But not by elites, who reignited it in the late 70s.
In my opinion, it’s less that people can’t deal with class and more work is valued strangely. The biggest thing our society has forgotten is that there is a certain amount of risk that is tied to high value jobs. If you want something consistent chances are you won’t earn a lot doing it. Inversely, there -are- consistent paying jobs that disproportionally pay a handsome salary. CEOs come to mind. I’m not saying that their job is easy, but can you really say that a CEO works 400 to 1000 times harder than a floor employee? What sort of risk does a CEO take on when they inherit a Fortune 500 company with a golden parachute handy if things go bad? Does a football player or a singer provide significantly more value than a high school teacher? There are highly visible discrepancies in the way our economy values work and people are getting fed up with getting crumbs when others take huge chunks of the cake.
one of the major benefits of leaving the uk (for 6 months or more) is that it enables you to realise just how powerful the omnipresent tory/neoliberal propaganda machine that permeates every corner of that nation is...simply because you are no longer having it pumped into your life.
That realisation is as revealing as it is depressing.
the (very) depressing part is that, now, you can see right through it, see how carefully crafted the machin'es output is, see the endless flow of (invariably wealth serving) attacks/robberies that it blinds your fellow citizens from even suspecting are happening, let alone sees them demanding an end to and/or immediate, independent and serious investigation into !
You see how it covers the ruinous corruption/crimes again and again with the same old alibis/cover stories which are always built around the same two carefully selected concepts: 'blundering' and 'incompetence'. And then you come to realise the real reason such a contrived fuss is made around "the spread of misinformation" and it's 'inherent dangers' .
what is gfc
We are sleep walking into agenda 2030 and the Davis plan.... 🤦🏼♀️
Will do Gary. Thank you for the constant education. I do hope Labour eventually listens to you and governs for the long-term rather than keeping the status quo out of fear of media criticism. They fear taxing the rich, which is so infuriating and cowardly.
It is no coincidence that the highest GDP growth the UK has had since WW2 was when we also had the highest tax rates on the rich.
Well it might be
@@111dddcca well it wasn't because everytime the tax on the rich has dropped GDP has also dropped. Less investment equals smaller growth. Therefore lowering your income is only going to decrease investment in the country.
And think how much better we would have done without that confiscatory taxation. Essentially you are saying that government and bureaucrats are better asset allocators than private individuals. And the evidence of all of history is that that is emphatically not the case.
@@stevenfarrall3942 well seen as GDP was growing quicker when the tax was higher. I'd say that is a great indicator that the government was better at allocating that money, as they invested it in the country to improve it, whereas a rich person invests for themseleves to make money, so they will just buy stocks which unless it's the initial sale it does nothing for the economy or they buy housing, which just increases the price of housing which means people are spending less in the economy and more on housing constricting the economy. Not to mention investment is pre tax meaning that high taxes incourage investment so let's say you are correct and the rich person is a better allocator well high taxes forces them to allocate. Whereas low taxes will make them take the money out of the economy.
GDP also counts unproductive financial trading as if it were productive, so it isn't a good measuring tool of productivity.
Very Good Gary well explained !
Bless you, Gary! Thank you for spreading the word of the burn! (Even though you back track near the end.)
Beyond being a 'relative resource' money is an ideology.
Burning it has a power way beyond a rational analysis of the economic outcomes.
You'd be very welcome to come do it for real at our next event and find out for yourself. Xx
I love you Gary, you radicalized me economically and I was already radicalized! ❤
Same exact experience here! Gary's dramatically shifted my understanding and views on economics in the past month.
Best one yet. Clear, concise, compelling, easy to visualise. Really good to hear economic definitions of "money", and what it actually is. To further articulate what's going on, it might help to use the full word when talking about working, middle, and upper "class". It's "classification". We are classified and ascribed value according to wealth. Not according to intrinsic worth as humans. We are all "classifications" within a system that is inherently anti-human in nature. One that's based on perpetual growth through cruelty. One that's not compatible with democracy. And is now eating democracy, sucking it into the void at the centre of unaddressed individual pathologies.
Our congress has no idea how we Americans are feeling, we individuals are fed up with this treasonous administration. I feel for people with disabilities for not getting the help they deserve... Thank you Sarah Hudson.. imagine i invested $4,000 and received $6,550 in 4days.
Same here, I operate a wide - range of investments with help from my financial advisor. My advice is to get a professional who will help you, plan and enhance your management skills. For the record, working with Sarah Hudson, has been an amazing experience.
As a beginner, it's essential for you to have a mentor to keep you accountable. I'm guided by a widely known crypto consultant, same Sarah Hudson mentioned here
Multiple streams of income should be applied because from the CNCB quarters recently their newscaster made it known that If you don't find a means of multiplying your income you will wake up one day to realize you didn't plan well
SHE'S MOSTLY ON TELEGRAMS APPS WITH THE BELOW NAME
ExpertHudson
That's her username
Preach Gary!
"Money is the resource which we use to determine the distribution of the real resources." (7:03) Well said!
I really appreciate your sentiment. Your economics does mostly check out in this video (if we take it at face value under rational consumer behaviour), however the problem is one of overconsumption and expectation. We see overconsumption on everyone's part, even right down to the lowest earners of which I have been one for the majority of my life. If you gave money to everybody it would just get spent on pointless stuff. People don't know how to make money work for them. You give everyday people more money it will flow right back into the hands of people who are more skilled and educated in how to use money, most people would just buy more liabilities and further feed those who provide them. Additionally most people (not all) are only struggling because they believe they deserve so much more than they produce, contribute or earn. It seems to me unfruitful to bang the drum of inequality and instead just teach people about how to be more productive, better manage themselves and the realty that they are living way beyond there means. We will always have the rich and the poor because this allows for us all to move along that measure (with which we live in one of the most optimistic times for that). Inequality will always exist and we should want it to stay that way. Its a far better reality than equality. It provides scope for movement, change and growth. Its not perfect but is a better alternative than equality which breeds stagnation and the death of beneficial reward mechanisms.
There of course are many rich people who use there wealth with greed in mind, as do many middle and lower class people. We accept this realty because the benefits of having massively wealthy people benefits us to a greater extent than that of having none even with the greedy buggers factored in. I understand what your saying because I understand the basic economics underpinning the rational of your argument, however it fundamentally misses the greater and more powerful behavioural implications at play, unfortunately what your mostly achieving is the fuelling of hate and division which will lead to greater economic hardship. There is still a wide open window for people to change there living standards through genuine education and discipline. Is it fucking hard, Yes. Should it be hard. Yes. Do rich people have some material things a bit easier. Yes. Would you act differently if you were rich? Probably not.
are you going to eat those biscuits mate... they've been on the table a while now.
I was literally gonna ask "what's with the sad little biscuits? "🤣
@@Jeff-q4u Or the other way about. You need less and less gold to buy them bits of (intrinsically valueless) paper.
Don't let the biscuits distract you that's how we end up in these situations
@@PHI77IP85 I listened mate, seriously, I can do both hear and see at once, I'm dead clever 😐
@@PHI77IP85 Ironically those look like Viscounts.
Gary, I hope you will find this relevant. In my country on the renting issue we always here "if you're to hard on the landlords, then there won't be any and there will be less housing" I thihnk there premise is that the exiting home owners would just AirBnB or speculate, and therefore the housing stock would not be used for living. But if we regulate around those things, then "if" they were to all exit the housing market, houses would be cheaper and hopefully people needing a pace to live will have one.
Hi Gary, fantastic channel. Who should we vote for mate? Who do you trust to implement or even entertain these ideas? I’m lost. Cheers
It's not on offer, no party supports it.
They all offer various levels of iniquity.
Remember, they're rich and are owned by the rich.
Now to mitigate damage I'd say vote for just about anyone who's not a tory and is likely to win, but voting is not the end of the story. None of the existing parties will meaningfully change this system as things stand. Big changes come from educating, agitating, organising, etc.
@@garethhhhh but presumably it could be if we could put enough pressure on - was interested to see who Gary thinks would give the ideas the most welcome reception…
Labour will win the next election and with their current platform will fail to solve the country’s problems.
This will leave them open to attack and they’ll need to either pivot to less orthodox solutions or they’ll be a 4-5 year one time government.
Good lad Gary
It's not an 'increase in the gold price'. It's a collapse in the 'price' of GBP.
Yeah, just takes more bits of paper to buy the same amount of gold.
Good call sir. 👍
A Song dynasty emperor did just that against Inflation and it worked if I remember correctly.
Great stuff, we need to be learning how to talk about economics - we've been fed so many lies for so long now.
Inequality has been rising since Thatcher. The rich use every situation to get richer. Austerity causes inequality.
Another great video gary!!!
KLF is gonna rock you
Justified !
Ha ha you beat me to it !
Oh dear, I'm so unoriginal 😂
Or the Old Gits on Harry Enfield..
Burnt a million
Thank you!
I guess now it's time you should dive into Austrian economics to better understand the evil side of mainstream keynesian milton fridman economics. Highly suggest to everyone to read the book or watch the documentary ,The Shock Doctrine (rise of disaster capitalism) by Naomi Klein.
You may also want to check what a guy named Saifedean Ammous has to say.
Evil evil Milton Fridman. Didn't he screw over South America in the 70's. He and the Chicago boys?
Crystal clear, and exactly what I believe too.
Tell em you aren't suicidal cause you are getting too close
Sad to say but that is a thought that has occurred to me too.
Yeah bro, love Gary. But I'd be very suprised if he makes it to 2025. Especially how quickly hes gaining traction. This mans got his finger right on the pulse.
great video, quick, crunchy, controversial, but going over everything relevant in a deep enough way that is still understandable. and it does not end up in a bunch of superficial clockbait bullshit.
really smart stuff. i'm shure this kind of content will increase your reach and your following further. more power to you💪
Isn’t giving 16k to everyone the same as the job retention scheme? In one of your other videos about the flow of money you made the case for that money ending up with the rich, wouldn’t it just flow back to them?
During COVID, people's ordinary income went to zero. This would be money on top of your ordinary income.
Also, that'd why he talked about burning the money.
The impact of the rich losing the money is as important if not more important than ordinary people gaining it
Perhaps we should return to Biblical principles as found in the Tora. Jews were not allowed to practice usury and even assets that were acquired had to be returned to the original owner every 50 years or jubilee in order to keep a check on the accumulation of wealth at the expense of others.
@@plagiarisedwords The problem with the Covid furlough scheme is that it was 80 % of your income so rich people got more than poor people. Also rich people had drop in discretionary spending like holidays meals out etc. which offset any drop in income. Poor people didn't really experience a drop in outgoings.
@plagiarisedwords Burning money is a nonsensical suggestion to be honest. Removing the ability of the gov/central bank to print money IS the only solution. Everything else is just mental masturbation no different from what MMT proponents spew. You stop the bleeding and not plaster over it.
And we keep taxing the rich at high rates-make it a quarterly event if not annually.
this is unironically one of my favorite channels
Gary, for Christ sake eat the biscuits. They’ll go stale.
Also, unless they are consumed, the value of those biscuits in Gary's portfolio is going to drive a further increase in the wealth gap.
I don't know if he ever washes up but the Fairy Liquid isn't going down either.
Hes waiting til the stock price on biscuits fall! 😂
This reminds me of the screen in Theme Hospital where you have to reach a pay agreement for your staff before the biscuits run out
This sums it up...
Bank of England MULTI MILLIONAIRE Governor in 2021/2022 said "people should not ask for increase in pay. They can do better in other ways, by working more!"
If you gave £16k to everyone they would just spend it on stuff owned by the really rich and the wealth would just transfer back to the really rich and society would be left with high inflation as people compete for stuff and on the back of that demand the really rich put the prices up to offset their loss. Better the money was destroyed or the government found an asset that was hard and scarce to anchor the currency.
I'd pay mortgage or car or credit card bill. I won't waste it on clothes, holidays or botox.
Where do you get any evidence that people would not use it for training , paying off debt or many other things?
How many lottery winners stay rich?
And by paying debts off, you again are just transferring back the cash to the mega rich who lent you the money for the life you couldn’t afford.
@@christurner1937And then you tax them again!
You should look at the results of the studies that gave regular payments to poor people. They made wise choices-ate better food, got the car fixed, went to the dentist-supporting the local economy, could take time off from the low paying job to go interview for a better paying one.
Poverty is a lack of cash, not a lack of character.
And poor people know better what they need than those who think they are above them.
mate, I absolutely love your videos. I think you can very quickly put to bed this 'politics of envy' argument personally by saying that you are one of the rich, and these changes will impact you negatively. however, despite this, you are campaigning for us as the bottom and middle.
Gary, u should do the David McWilliams podcast
Interesting stuff, Garry, good work. I'm so disillusioned with politics and government, seems we need some serious change. Looks like this could be what you are discussing. A beacon of hope, man! Thanks for your work.
I certainly think we should stop foreign wealth buying our assets
Foreign wealth buys from the wealthy not from the asses...
Absolutely not, the country would collapse. And you'd be to blame.
@@Craig121000 what benefits do they bring? Just asset inflation, and that’s of no benefit
Find the billions to buy those assets, and buy them. Quit your yapping.
@@Craig121000 thanks for not answering the question
Thank you Gary for your efforts to equalise wealth distribution,
Hello Gary I wonder whether you have heard of zakat an annual 2.5 percent tax on wealth that practising Muslims have to pay and transfer to the poor. Instead of inheritance tax a British version of wealth tax may be beneficial for the economy.
The sikhs do a similar thing
@@lazylad8544 Yes my understanding is for Sikhs the rate is 20%.
Boom, mic drop! Love your content ❤
Burn the money! A policy I can get behind. The MMT people say this is what happens anyway: the government spends money into existence and taxes it out of existence.
It's amazing how often people think that the government somehow needs the tax money to pay for things, when the same government can simply print more money. The real issue is with where that money goes, and what impact it has - as you point out, the essence of taxation is reducing the supply of money in the economy, and a sensible tax policy is aimed at reducing excess accumulation of money by the very rich (to the general social and economic benefit of everyone, including the rich...).
@@emjay9688but when a rediculous amount is produced too fast and, as you say, is disproportionately distributed to the Uber wealthy, then some rebalancing needs to happen just as fast. There’s too much money floating around at present and taxation on the Uber wealthy is a major mechanism to help regain balance. Without taxation as an emergency measure, the fire of inflation will continue to rampage.
The OP has no wealth and is envious of those who do.
@@emjay9688but the rich also rebalance government debt by buying government debt (Bonds) - if government tax the wealthy extensively then they would be limiting their debt purchase...
@@markturner5534even if you see government bond sales as debt, which it isn't really because the state is the money issuer, the decrease in 'debt' purchase would necessarily be exactly offset by tax taken. More tax taken less debt to sell.
Your videos are so important
I'm a 70yr old Brit Socialist, I have never Envied a rich person, I feel sorry for them, To wake, every morning with the thought that "I MUST" get something, anything, something another human hasn't got, I awake wondering how the day will play-out, will it be good or bad, you know Normal stuff, That's why I don't care about them,
Rich people don't think like this otherwise they would be poor. Poor people have an insatiable thirst for buying expensive brands to look rich which digs themselves into living pay check to pay check.
There’s nothing to be proud being socialist
@@MrSpiderman1321 I am poor and never bought expensive-brand anything in my life. i am worried about never ever owning any property while i pay heaps of my money to greedy, hoarding landlords decade after decade. i worry about being able to afford groceries or bus tickets to get to work. i worry about being in crippling debt for my entire adult life. my friends worry about feeding their kids or not being able to afford their education. we all worry about not being able to ever stop working until we die, or being in crippling medical debt in our elderly years.
take an empathy check for heaven's sake. villifying poor people for their decisions and saying they're poor because they chose to be is one of the oldest class-stratifying falsehoods of all time. if you think poor people are in poverty because they buy avocado toast and holidays, then i'm afraid you are falling for some solid propaganda. go find your local food bank and meet some peopke there, find out how many of those are pursuing a vuitton handbag. they can't afford ****ing tomatoes.
I agree with this concept! Very insightful.
Thank you for sharing your knowledge, and for fighting for equality.
There's no such thing as equality.
@@Craig121000
In the UK? You're absolutely right - equality is a fading memory.
Gary, I’m mostly finished listening to your audiobook. What can I say just incredible piece of work. And you add so much to it hearing it in your voice, and the impressions!!
I do have a question though. Part 4 section 7 when you’re talking about losing harry. Does it cut very briefly to Harry’s voice? It doesn’t sound like you doing an impression and it doesn’t sound like you normally. Is that harry? I’ve looked online for answers but can’t find any.
As I said amazing work. Best thing I’ve listened to ever, hands down.
I think that might be an overdub in production to try and correct a mistake or something.
@@garyseconomics haha fair enough. There’s me thinking it had a deeper meaning. 😅
Wealthy will fight back to protect their wealth and most western countries are only surviving because of the quantitive easing corruption. We will always have conservative/Republican parties in power of democracy happy to undermine higher taxation policies and the wealthy take full advantage of that. Also as a politician you talk about higher taxation not many wealthy families will vote or donate to them.
That last part is crucial, party donors will dry up for established parties so Gary’s ideas will never make it into policy with them. Needs to be a self sufficient smaller party or grassroots campaign or something ..
You're the best person to ever explain the Cantillon Effect for folk who aren't econ geeks.
Joker was right all along
Another insightful video Gary. I’m intrigued as to how on an individual basis can I affect a change?
Hello Gary how do I convince the middle class to vote for taxing the rich when A) they think it’s them even after explain that they wouldn’t be part of this and B) they often hit me with well the rich (companies) will leave the country?
You persuade them to watch these videos.
Gary explains things in a "counter narrative " way, in other words, he takes the popular talking points and explains how that is wrong.
Choose three videos that state your point.
I suggest this one.
🌹
That's a good point as we have DelBoy types earning average salaries thinking they're the rich
@@Jeff-q4u I’m afraid it’s not that simple, I’ve read Gary’s book and watched his videos for sometime, but if you try to apply some of Gary’s points to the conversation it’s like talking to a “get brexit done” voter, to arrogant to consider anyones point of view other than their own. It’s a shambles these people vote for who they like, rather than polices and for life of me I can not work out why, they are educated and well paid people, but lack any critical thinking skills/common sense.
@@dwane3950 I understand you perfectly. I personally dislike and distrust anyone who votes for the tories because of my upbringing (I grew up in the 80s when Maggie was in power)
I do understand.
My only suggestion can be do it slowly.
When they make a statement that can be debunked, correct it then say nothing, don't get involved with tit for tat counter arguments.
You might never bring them around. What you can do, the only thing you can do, is state your position and hold steadfast to it.
Good luck 🌹
@@Jeff-q4u thank you for the advice 🥰
Excellent.
Hi Garry is it possible to get a meeting with uk government officials to share your ideas, iam assuming no
We need leaders who will listen and act on Gary's advice x
Thanks Gary, great stuff as always!
Thank you for this
A few words to support your priceless work.