Prof Wolff's Critique of Obscene Wealth - Economic Update
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2024
- Prof. Wolff explains why extreme wealth like those of billionaires is harmful, unproductive and undemocratic. Having billions of dollars is never justified.
"We live in a society that produces, promotes and celebrates obscene wealth. And here's the irony. We are poorer as a country because of it." - Richard Wolff
This is a clip from S11 E45 of Economic Update: " Class Struggles in the US Today"
Watch the full episode on our TH-cam channel at • Economic Update : Clas...
You can also listen to this show on our website or as a podcast on your favorite podcast player.
______________________________________________________________________________________
We make it a point to provide the show free of ads. Please consider supporting our work.
Become an EU patron on Patreon: / economicupdate
Become a monthly donor via our website: www.democracya...
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Check out the NEW 2021 Hardcover edition of “Understanding Marxism,” with a new, lengthy introduction by Richard Wolff!
www.democracyatwork.info/books
“Marxism always was the critical shadow of capitalism. Their interactions changed them both. Now Marxism is once again stepping into the light as capitalism shakes from its own excesses and confronts decline.”
Check out all of d@w’s books: "The Sickness is the System," "Understanding Socialism," by Richard D. Wolff, and “Stuck Nation” by Bob Hennelly
www.lulu.com/sp...
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Want to help us translate and transcribe our videos?
Learn about joining our translation team: bit.ly/2J2uIHH
Jump right in: bit.ly/2J3bEZR
Follow us ONLINE:
Patreon: / economicupdate
Websites: www.democracyat...
www.rdwolff.com
Facebook: / economicupdate
/ richarddwolff
/ democracyatwrk
Twitter: / profwolff
/ democracyatwrk
Instagram: / democracyatwrk
Subscribe to our podcast: economicupdate....
Shop our Store: bit.ly/2JkxIfy
The billionaires are standing on the shoulders of giants. The giants are the scientists, engineers and the workers who made all of this possible.
I'd sooner say they're giants standing on the shoulders of ordinary people, thousands upon thousands buckling under the weight of holding each one of them up...
The billionaires are standing on the cadavers of Americans who fell prey to the genocidal profiteering schemes that the .1% oligarch donors do to the 99.9% with the help of all of Congress and both parties, which they own.
These are all fair assessments, my comrades. There is plenty of room at the table for all of us to dine on the rich.
These people are absolutely sinister.
scientists and engineers that work on dangerous conditions to cut costs for Musk, or that have to work beyond what is healthy, so they can deliver the outrageous and unrealistic schedules that Musk sells to investors. Lets not even go into how Bezos employees are treated, thats like a Saw scenario.
The examples Mr. Wollf listed are the causes of the obscene of capitalism which ignored the contributions generated by Labours.
Just spread his work. Share this video everywhere.
Simple but excellent explanation!
no one could have said it better: billionaires = obscene gross inequality
This has NOTHIING to do with preaching against wealth!
I love your insightful videos! They are so spot on. I have learned much from you!
Salute to Prof Wolff.
Great example! professor
The metaphor wasn't the best I think but I agree
Can we talk about co ops
Marx is actually still gay!
Prof. Wolff seems to be incurably tendentious.
Vote Professor Wolff for POTUS 2024 and 2028. 🙏
Problem solved! 👍
I wonder how different the world would be if the top 10% were willing to put as much effort into making the world a better place as they do ensuring that no one else can.
Being that they got to their position, that's probably not going to happen. It hasn't yet, that I know of.
You're voicing your opinion on this platform that a Billionaire create... HAHAHAHA
@@brandono7003 Thanks for helping prove their point 👍
@@ProleDaddy that the brave make things people want and we trade money in exchange for what we want. It's the greatest system in the world. I love it.
More like the top 1%..but ya.
They get rich because of their ability to SQUEEZE the best out of ACTUALLY talented people for the LEAST amount of investment.
The capitalist profit motive in a nutshell.
I call concentrated wealth 'centralized power' because that's what it is.
In reality the true political power of the corporate class is subjective. Is based in the acceptance of said subjective power. While the true objective power is in the immense majority of workers capacity , but not yet realized that they can on a concerted effort stop the wheels of the system , the economy, in a single day if agreed. One single day will make the powers that be, fear and tremble at the decision to use the power they have by on a daily basis having their hands on the wheels of the economy.
@@georgefurman4371 But it doesn’t happen. So that should tell us something: either the majority of people don’t care about changing society, or they simply don’t know how to for reasons outside their power. I think the latter is true. We’re not telepathic animals, and let’s not forget these monopolies are in part very responsible for creating the framework wherein you’d need telepathy to bring about this desired change of which you speak. Frankly, your line of reasoning reminded me a little of how Kanye West thought that slavery was a choice. But I think you outlined it well, so there’s that! :)
@@LucBoeren so you think the working people of this nation are completely different than those in the first decades of the 1900s. Those that mobilized massively and made the corporate class tremble world wide, not only in this country. But in this nation they were organized and knew what they wanted and forced the new deal using the power I mentioned. The only power that can force again the hand of those in charge of the system. What is the difference besides lacking unions. ?
@@LucBoeren let's remember that the communications capacity available in the present are far more reaching than the past. I think you underestimate the conscience of the people and their capacity to comprehend. As well as overestimate the subjective power of the dominant class and the state. Social movements happen in unexpected manner usually and more the consequential once. The right is capable to mobilize a significant amount of deranged fascists but the left can't because of the reasons you argue???
Professor Wolff, TH-cam only allows 1 thumbs up or I would push it until I would need a bandage. 1 out of a thousand people are leaders but before anyone is has a reason to lead or to follow a leader they need to hear something that will get them off the couch and into the streets. Your economic updates have woken up a lot of people.. this video is giving a voice to how many feel. Thank you.
Just spread his work. Share this video everywhere.
Yes, Richard Wolff has awakened many and we should also thank Bernie Sanders for making socialism popular again. There are also some really good You Tube channels on socialism. My list is: Democratic Marxist, Marxist Paul, Socialism for All, Second Thought, Professor Paul Cockshott...
Elon, Bill, Jeff and Mark. All four letter words and obscene indeed.
I prophesy that in the next twenty years these names will become slurs. "Jesus Christ, Bill. HOW ON EARTH COULD YOU BE SO MUCH OF AN ELON?"
@@thedevilsadvocate8766 Yes. Another example is how so few boys these days are named Adolf.
For me they are Elon Adolf, Bill Adolf, Jeff Adolf and Mark Adolf ....
I wonder how rich they would really be if they had to truly pay for everything they and their companies benefit from society. Let's quantify the use/upkeeping/stand by of public infrastructure connected to their businesses, police and fire, all public education of their employees, social services used by their workforce because they do not pay adequate wages, and anything else tied to the public sector. I'm sure their BS corporate tax rate is far lower than everything else.
*99 Year Old Survivor of Dec 7th, 1941 said,* _"A lot of people say, 'Thank you for your service.' My comment is that/yeah, 'You are worth serving for!'_
I am going to have to remember that!
Thank you for your work as always
Just spread his work. Share this video everywhere.
I recently watched a movie retelling the story of the guy who invented the intermitent windshield wipers. It was gut wrenching the way Ford shamelessly duped him, stole his invention & made billions of it while fighting him in court, discrediting him, threatening him in every way possible including bodily harm. He was a man of principles & devoted his life to righting the wrong he was caused; in the process, he lost his family, his job as a university professor & they destroyed whatever little they had left. And this is a good example of what Prof. Wolff discusses.
You got the name of that guy or of that docu? I would love to look for that documentation and also see it.
People who can't think for themselves want powerful authority figures to think for them, which explains why concentrated wealth is so keen to dumb-down the public, and why the public is so keen to believe in people who have nothing but contempt for them.
People don't want others to think them, but cognitive dissonance is the worse pandemic ever to effect us. Just look at eating meat... we all know dogs and cats are sentient beings, but because of cognitive dissonance, we all say cows are food and they aren't sentient beings... just one major example, but happens daily with how we humans ignore facts and go on feelings alone...
@@user-rb7ns9yj5y Inducing people to go on their emotions and not the self-discipline needed to think things through, is one way how people are dumbed-down. Just because people have emotions doesn't mean they have to uncritically accept them.
@@petersepall2590 that is human nature and the ruling elite figured out long ago how to take advantage of that. Edward Bernays coined the term public relations to make propaganda sound nicer...
@@user-rb7ns9yj5y Yup, and propaganda sounds better than emotional manipulation.
America has been dumbed down to the point of unrecovable ignorance.
Professor 'Big Dick' Wolf spitting some serious bars as usual. Love you, man!
🤣😂👍👍👏
Just spread his work. Share this video everywhere.
This was utter trash.
First we start with "Rich man bad because it hurts my feelings!" which isn't an argument.
Then we progress to the non-sequitur of "because business requires labor therefore profit is stolen from workers and they should have more" which is rooted in the debunked labor theory of value that no serious economist today would put forward as correct since it was discredited over a century ago by the likes of Carl Menger and Eugen von Bohm Bawerk. The people who did the work were fully compensated. The fact that other people come along later and get benefits from that doesn't mean that the previous workers were robbed.
Next we arrive at the notion that people are just "giving" money to the likes of Musk and Bezos, which is wrong as most of their wealth is tied up in stock valuations. You're not "giving" them money when their assets go up in value. Stock buyers do that.
Then we progress to the analogy to people putting down sand bags as if Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos (the guys who were contributing hundreds of thousands of dollars into early ventures and ideas that could have just as easily failed as become successful) were just the same as ordinary workers, which they are not. He's outright lying when he tries to paint this as doing the same work. He's outright lying when he claims that it is just luck.
Then we progress to emotional nonsense about economists being worth more than the contributions of Bezos/Musk, which is a fundamental misunderstanding of how value is subjective. Funny how in a story about being an economist, Richard Wolff fails at an Econ 101 concept. I wonder why that is? Probably because he's a hack, not a prize winning economist.
And in usual fashion, we end up with the economically illiterate appeal to democracy because feelings paired with a zero sum fallacy to go with it.
Shame on you Richard Wolff for lying, misleading and misinforming people with this trash.
@@ExPwner " I can find no better person to quote than Ha-Joon Chang, Reader of Political Economy of Development at University of Cambridge:
What this [answer] is about to say will undoubtedly disturb many people, both intellectually and morally. Many of the myths that they have taken for granted or even passionately believed in will be challenged, in the same way, that many of my own assumptions were challenged in the process of researching it. Some of the conclusions may be morally uncomfortable for some readers. Of course, I claim no moral superiority for the arguments put forward. I hope, however, to reveal some of the complexities surrounding these issues which have long been obscured by ahistorical and often moralistic arguments.
With that out of the way, let's begin the answer.
There are four major problems with free markets.
1) The free market is not an objective reality, but is just another social institution that is supported by a "rights-obligations framework". In other words, we as a society define what a free market is. For 18th century slave-owners, the free market meant the freedom to buy and sell human beings. For the 19th century industrialists, the free market meant the freedom to coerce children to work dangerous jobs and to pay men and women a pittance for 16 hours of work per day. The abolition of slavery, while a direct assault upon the freedom of the market, restored the humanity of the slaves. Thus, the definition of freedom defines what kinds of freedoms a market can provide and still be considered a free market. That is, is a market without slavery, child labor, workplace safety laws, maternity leave, and the sale of political offices considered a free market? Therefore, we see that one of the problems of free markets is the inability to define what it really is. And any definition of free-market assumes a particular rights-obligations framework that delineates what rights and obligations actors in the market possess. Thus, there is technically no such thing as THE free market.
Note: Despite my above argument, for the rest of the answer, I will use the term 'free market' as conventionally understood - a market with minimal state intervention.
2) As others have already mentioned, free markets face problems such as:
Externalities - These are unintended effects of certain activities that are not included in the prices of the goods or services. Externalities can be good, but a lot of them are really bad. For example, the most common and pervasive form of externalities is environmental damage. When cars, factories, and thermal power plants spew out all those dangerous gases, the environmental costs of the effects are not included in the prices of fuel, factory-made goods, and electricity. This means that prices are "wrong", and are therefore distorting the market. The problem with the free market is that calculating these externalities is a very difficult task for individual consumers or firms, and it generally requires governments to step in and lay down environmental regulations.
Information asymmetry - Free markets function under the assumption of smooth flow of all information between producers and consumers. This would have been possible when the size of the market was restricted to the village or the neighborhood. In a globalized market, it is very difficult to bring in transparency in a free market system, since the size of the market prevents the full and easy flow of information. The consumer of cheap clothes in the USA has no idea about the working conditions of laborers who produced these clothes in the sweatshops of Bangladesh. Similarly, the consumer of McDonald's' burgers has no clue about the mistreatment of cows. Thus, the government has to step in to convince producers to provide full (and accurate) information about their products. The issue of GM labeling is a very good example of this.
Power asymmetry - This problem appears in many different facets. Unchecked free markets can lead to the formation of oligopolies controlled by gigantic corporations. The reason why that's so is that as a firm size increases, its average costs start to come down, making it easier to exploit economies of scale - that is, profit margins are higher at higher production levels. But the problem of large corporations is the unchecked power of money that can prevent the entry of new players into the market, and unfairly rig the economy in favor of them by "lobbying" politicians.
In the social sphere, the free market can have a more insidious effect on social inequality. Free markets assume that all participants in the market have equal opportunities. However, that is very often not the case. Most societies had (and many still have) very rigid hierarchies where some groups of people are considered to be inferior to others, and therefore excluded from availing opportunities that are normally available to others. Examples include the African-Americans in the USA, the Dalits in India, women in almost all countries, ethnic and religious minorities in most African and Asian societies, tribal groups across the world, people with disabilities, etc. A freely functioning market would allow only those who already have opportunities to do well, and the rest would be either forced to take up inferior opportunities or live with no opportunities at all. A slave has no opportunity to really educate himself or develop skills, nor can he or she participate freely in the market as an actor rather than as a commodity. Similarly, women are generally paid much less than what men earn for the same work that they do. As I mentioned above, whenever social movements called for equal economic opportunities, the opposition was usually in the name of free markets. And the opposition was right - abolishing slavery and child labor, and paying women wages equivalent to men's is very costly, and cuts into profits. Thus, unless the government intervenes, such economic discrimination that arises as a by-product of social discrimination will not change.
Public goods - A lot of goods and services that come under the category of public goods cannot be dealt with by the free market alone. Some examples are the military, firemen, ambulances, infrastructure development, high courts, police, public offices, etc. These essential services cannot be done by private firms. There are too many problems with leaving them to the free market. There would be issues of competition between different police firms or military firms or a lack of oversight and public accountability and control over these services. Some people may argue that more services like education and healthcare, and even strategic industries, can be added to the list of public goods, and they're certain is a very good case for it. At the end of the day, the government has a certain role to play in the economy in order to preserve public order and promote public welfare.
There is some truth in this, about us celebrating obscene wealth. But then it is also what creates growth, so its not all true. I rather billionaires have it then corrupt politicians that waist it and abuse it to create more of their own wealth. Naturally then billionaires abuse the system by flawed political structures to increase their opportunities against the normal people. And there is where the biggest problem is. How money can influence politics against the normal workers. So rich people are not the direct problem, its the politics of bad incentives.
No one should be a billionaire in my humble opinion. Let that wealth be spread among the workers, not the CEOs or corrupt politicians.
@@reddoggie554 it isn't humble. You're completely right.
@@Octoberfurst I partially agree with what u say. But only partially. As there is a reason that why many companies can perform like this, and it mostly ends up being because of legislation that affords then these possibilities.
@@Octoberfurst this is not possible without first establishing a government of decent and moral human beings.
The electric car was a thing, long before the internal combustion car. They were preferred because they didn't frighten the horses. Batteries have been around a long time to. I don't see what Elon musk has brought to us at all. It all seems like idol worship to me.
In 2006, a documentary called 'Who Killed The Electric Car' was released. I remember Motorola showcased a fully electric car in 1994.
Not only cars. Dallas had an electric public transportation system in the 1930s and a local electrified commuter train system. The oil companies had something to say about that. I remember seeing the trolly tracks downtown as a kid. Some of the trolly wires were even still up.
I think Ford was producing biofuel cars back in like the thirties or something mad. But obviously there were reasons they didn't catch on..
@@MCJSA "Back in the dawn of the Automobile Age, General Motors began systematically buying streetcar lines and then shutting them down, leaving millions of Americans without viable public transportation options. Its motive? To ensure a market for its still-novel personal transportation technology."
- CBS
SICK
@@danielhutchinson7073 Ford made cars with chassises of hemp. Wonder what will happen in 2022..?
@@SleekMinister Yep. That is Capitalism, the system that always makes sure that you have "choices".
who makes the cars, its not mr musk, who designs the cars, not mr musk, who came up with the idea, not mr musk, what does mr musk do, right now he is the head of marketing
The people that own the company's make the most money , way it's been way he will allways be .
Gluttony is a VIRTUE to Amerikans... 🎯
Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg...
Substantive human rights confederation economy
As always thought provoking!!!
this specious argument is b.s. that community should have made their town council accountable to the community; everyone coming together organized by town hall (government) or getting together by themselves (anarchy?); this is not a good analogy
That's why any country needs Common Prosperity. Only China is doing it. But, others predictably will follow in different form, just like BRI and lockdown against Covid-19. As Xi said, there is no best system but better system. So, the key is if one can make that system better.
Billionaires should be illegal. I think I’ll make a video about this.
Thank you Thank you!!! Minimizing others needs to go out of fashion. No it needs to be shameful. What happened to shame? Went out of fashion I guess.
Can't know how I stopmed onto this. All in all Awesome content 🥇😎. I also have been watching those rather similar from mStarTutorials and kinda wonder how you guys create these vids. MStar Tutorials also had cool information about similiar money making things on his vids.
Elon musk didn't even design it he just bought out the design/name from the creator.
Putting the filthy and stinking in the awful word of, rich.
What would it take to awaken Us...?
Righteousness people!
As is the rest of the World...
Thank you🌎✊🌹🗽
heard this argument all the time. the professor has a point but falls upon further scrutiny. Yes, there may be people or institutions that invented that technology like the internet,, computers, and electric cars. But those entrepreneurs like Bezos and Musk were the ones who made it available for the public. They risked their time and effort to make it possible. They introduced a whole new kind of industry wherein like-minded entrepreneurs will start to compete which will benefit the masses most.
How do we measure success?
This may haveca lot to do with what late author Jim Marrs wrote about in the Masters and Serfs section of his books. Nano technology tied to the overthrow Jim wasn't able to get to as his health declined.
Donald Suiters
Not only "a poorer country", but a poorer human race on earth
Professor God Bless you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well who said fast Food workers are only worth minimum wage? I thought it was created so the person with farm or now law service couldn’t pay teenagers $5 a day for labor because they ride tractor or ride/push a mower. Free market should dictate the wage for both sides of the table. Stop working for places not paying at least living wage. Healthcare should not be tied to a job.
But it's the "free market" that decides what fast food workers are worth in the first place. And I can't see it working for "both sides of the table" because the whole point of the free market is to NOT put constraints on capital; that's why is called free, free as in unregulated and those on the other side of the table are the bosses who have every intention to pay themselves as much money as they can from the company's profits while paying their workers as little as they can get away with.
If you think of sex or have it too much we call that being a sex addict, and recommend seeking help.
If you eat too much sugar or fatty food we call that an unhealthy diet. We recommend going on a diet and seek help.
If you are obsessed with money, and acquire much more than you'll ever need we call that the American entrepreneur spirit. It is the system that is sick and it should seek help.
Yeah, well, USA is working on fixing it. It doesn't recommend seeking help anymore if you're a sex addict or overweight, and whoever thinks so is engaging in x-shaming, for which seeking help is recommended ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
'''''Billionaires (Ballooners ) are not made by inventions....................................''' Professor you deserve 10 Nobel Prizes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Epic
Thank you Proff Wolff! You opened my eyes again!
But that is how things stand in a capitalist society where equality does not have a mention, and misery commands the rest especially during the Covid 19 years.
💯💯💯💯
I'd like you to address the idea of abolishing the Stock Market. That is how billionaires are created, and financial speculation runs rampant. Any surprise TSLA went up 50% right before Musk sold a million shares?
What did we do before there was a stock market?
Free market is an oxymoron in the USA.
Wealth that can’t be spent in a thousand lifetimes serves no real purpose. There’s no appreciable difference in your quality of life between $1 billion and $10 billion so I really can’t see how that would serve as motivation.
False. That wealth does not need to be spent when it can (and is) loaned out and put to productive use.
Imagine making $16,000 an hour. It would take 40 yrs of working 50 hr weeks to reach a net worth of $1 billion (accounting for taxes and typical living expenses along the way).
These billionaires are becoming to greedy for capitaliism ! They are digging their own grave and don t even realise it
Why digging your own grave? Explain to me.
🍅🍅🍅
karl marx was wrong, henry george was right.
discuss.
How about making an actual point and not just stating an opinion without any logic to back it up??
@@user-rb7ns9yj5y if you dont know the point of and nature of that debate already then you are not educated enough to partake, im afraid you are now disqualified and muted.
Haha! Henry's georgism is just stolen work.... I mean poorly cited work from, and not limited to, Thomas Paine and David Ricardo. Not to mention that his whole tax on the land "being more fair and just" system was heavily influenced by Thomas Jefferson's work on property rights.
In other words, I'm an anime watching nerd and I can see past your " intelligent and a far more Superior being than you pleebs" you are just virtue signaling. No better than a shitlib.
@@coreyhumphrey1899 i see u mentioning george's influences and your ad-homs but i see no argument against it whatsoever. u have now been disqualified and muted.
@@coreyhumphrey1899 Henry George was pretty down to earth, but still a big bore. What I remember is him emphasizing that the cost of a house has a strong relationship with material and labour. Makes me think about the history of the Metropolitan polce..
After thinking about price theory, I realized that labour is more grounded in the baseline, as in cost, and utility more in the roof, because you always have to do _some_: work to acquire a good, whether it be a stiff upper lip, researching prices, or physically moving the thing, and noone questions any of that, so you have to affix labour at all times - "We're practically _giving_ it away; it's a steal", but the utility of a thing is more frivolous, not least because the longer you keep most things, the more they decrease in value - a house falls apart, a piece of machinery becomes obsolete, a foodstuff degrades; the only thing that makes prices rise over time is if the utility is getting you a one night stand.. You have to pay through the nose for that, and if the goal is a marriage, you buy a diamond, not a Picasso - hawkers and merchants were always considered low -- in Rome derogatorily called the "equestrians", in India placed one caste above dock workers, and regularly beat up in Russia --- in Arabia, to this day, you will see people literally shouting in your face to sell a turtle ---- one man drew a knife on me in a medina neighbourhood with a 1m street, wherein we saw a bunch of men with AKs standing in a circle, in a tiny square (Tunisia 2005 ca.). We were robbed on the beach and lived on loaf our whole vacation.. Anyway.. Noticed how Marx, and all of the usual suspects for that matter, proudly reaches for a gun in his famous picture? a pedophile in Norway was called the Pocket Man
www.dailysabah.com/feature/2016/02/19/handkerchiefs-the-secret-language-of-love