Niall Ferguson | The Utopian Myth of Equality |
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ย. 2024
- In this historic short, Niall Ferguson dismantles the secular left's obsession with the notion of equality. He shows why the idea of absolute equality is both impossible to define and impossible to achieve.
Ferguson also identifies western civilisation's (if it still exists) major adversaries: Radical Islam, Communist China and cultural self-loathing.
You can find the full conversation here: • Cold War II, Climate C...
#Equality #Communism #Freedom #Liberty
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conversations feature John Anderson, former Deputy Prime Minister of Australia, interviewing the world's foremost thought leaders about today's pressing social, cultural and political issues.
John believes proper, robust dialogue is necessary if we are to maintain our social strength and cohesion. As he puts it; "You cannot get good public policy out of a bad public debate."
If you value this discussion and want to see more like it, make sure you subscribe to the channel here: / @johnandersonmedia
And stay right up to date with all the conversations by subscribing to the newsletter here: johnanderson.n...
Follow John on Twitter: / johnandersonac
Follow John on Facebook: / johnandersonac
Follow John on LinkedIn: / john-anderson-ao
Support the channel: johnanderson.n...
Website: johnanderson.n...
Podcast: johnanderson.n...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Follow Niall on Twitter: / nfergus
Follow Niall on Facebook: / niallcferguson
Niall's website: www.niallfergus...
I am a science teacher in high school and I was have a discussion on equality with one of our English teachers. He sayid we should have equal outcomes in society. I asked him if all of his students made the same grade. Of course not he said, they don't all put forth the same effort. He did not see the connection.
So sad he did not see the correlation! Hopefully one night he will have an epiphany
Myopia
That's why he was self-selected by his intellect to be an English teacher. We all have our limitations.
Marxists would never argue for equality of outcome. They argue for control of the means of production.
Most teachers have no business teaching. They’re worse than boat anchors and the statistics prove it.
0:25 Rather than trying for equality of outcomes it's "better to focus on freedom and you'll get reasonable degrees of equality of opportunity." Exactly.
No freedom is never permission to do anything and whatever is immoral. Rev Martin Luther Kings says in his letter ftom Birmingham Jail an immoral law is no law at all.
Until criminal politicians in Washington DC have to adhere to the same laws as us peasants- there is no equality.
Prove me wrong.
@@aaabaaab3945 So we should allow the criminal politicians to legislate equality of outcomes? How does that work? Your point is not an argument that equality of outcome is a more favorable condition.
One wonders how much this generation would have achieved if they were as preoccupied with their own achievement and ability as they are with everyone else’s.
Envy is a curse
Brilliantly stated
There are three 'E's that are a problem in varied proportions. Together they are pathologically synergistic.
These three are
Ego
Envy and
Entitlement Mentality
Each of these has been touched on already in this short thread before my comment. I don't think it is just pure coincidence that these specific things would become evident to critical thinkers pondering the broader topic.
The much tougher thing of course is what should people do with regard to these problems upon realization how much of a threat to civilization they actually pose.
@@paulrevere2379 and where did you copy and paste that from, mate? 🙄
@@Papa1Smurf1 Not your standard compliment, but I will accept it with a word of encouragement.
I began to identify these issues years ago. I did not coin the term Entitlement Mentality but it accurately describes the newest of the three issues.
So far as I know, I am the only one who frequently includes them together.
I am also involved in resisting various broader social pathologies, those things that bring down civilization at the level of large group dynamics in contrast to these which are at the personal level.
There is no similar mnemonic that I know of for those bigger (numerically, not qualitatively) society/government dynamics, but I wish there were. If I discover such a thing by someone better at words than I am then I hope I will not be negligent to give them credit.
For me, I am not looking for any. I simply wish for people to be more mindful of virtue and all that goes with it. Standing up for things virtuous is an even better position to take in our present age when most virtuous things are under attack.
Our battle is not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers
isn't it great to see a very sensible, informative, and 'no nonsense' conversation by 2 good thinkers.
you call these two good thinkers? you might want to think about that (if you can)
Good thinker? Isn't Anderson just a former deputy PM of Australia with a TH-cam channel?
All people should be treated equally under or before the law. However, in life, there's no such thing as equality. Some people are more capable and/or ambitious than others. You can't legislate that away; it's a fact of life as old as mankind.
The major problem in our society is aspirational people who don't have the abilities to fulfill their personal aspersions, their the ones who are really dangerous, they are unable to accept their limitations and project their disappoint on to the world by demanding it's destruction.
Or is it possible that they see the cards are stacked against them and no matter what effort they put fourth they will always be working to line the pockets of the grotesquely rich. Y’all don’t want a socialist state, then pay folks an ethical and dignified wage and history’s little experiment won’t have to repeat itself.
@@jefflawrence5835 I quite agree that a lot of people in our society have the cards stacked against them, but they are rarely the people screaming about the inequalities in life, the section of society I'm talking about are those who get a lot of the breaks, such as being born into moderately well off families and get to go to higher education and then complain about it all!
The spiteful mutants
What a truly briliant conversation by two men of incredible intellect . Thank you.
Thomas Sowell also has some excellent interviews about this same subject.
He sure does. Come to think of it Sowell has excellent interviews about a lot of subjects. The mans work is impeccable.
Yes, it is a classic sad point of reality that no matter what situation you are born into, or aspire to and may or may not reach, there will always be people better off above and below you on the "equality" pyramid. What can you do, except to recognize this very puzzling conundrum and live a modest material existence, remain a small target for those poverty stricken wretches searching for someone to scold, remain materially anonymous, so people above you will ignore you and people below you materially will not notice you.
Says the Aryans who spread a virus and used its impact on the Americas to dominate. A new world is born boy, and you will know your place in it barbarian!
Depressingly true. Skulking mediocrity in keeping one's head below the parapet and not being ostentatious or having gratuitous displays of wealth and especially silent of contra popular opinions to the woke narrative.
Thats largely why they say people over thirty really don't get involved in political activity. You look at something like climate change and most of those people are young people, in particular young women. This article doesn't seem like a rationale to placate YOU, but to keep you and I from joining women, minorities, or other groups who are TRYING to even the playing field by rejecting them and sayign "what you ask is not possible". Because of course part of that 'white privelege' is the assumption that equality of some measure exists and we benefit from it, and the rest shouldn't expect it. For US we already largely have that. So again, a cop pulls me over for a vehicle infraction, I don't have MUCH fear I'm going to end up dead-unless I lose and start screaming or something. But thats exactly what Black Lives Matter is fighting for, they are saying "when we get stopped by a cop we shouldn't be a afraid for our lives". Which is a pretty reasonable measure of equality. Two weeks ago an african student was killed, and the bodycam 'not available'.
So to lots of people this is NOT 'hypothetical'. You dont really give any examples, I don't know if you mean that "we don't all get to be millionaires but we don't all get to be bums", which is true but I don't think the biggest issue with equality.
Very wise.
@DnB and Psy Production Yep that is what I said.
wow, such an important discussion for the whole of humanity to hear.
th-cam.com/video/Mh9I56J3f4Q/w-d-xo.html Howdy?
Niall is a genius and a very wise man we should be listening to in the US and UK
Human variation, be it physical, psychological or spiritual, is the spice of life. It’s ironic that those who preach “diversity” want us all to be the same.
We must dump the term "equality".
It's fairness , a fair playing field.
"A fair go". The Aussie "Fair go".
@@buildmotosykletist1987 equality of opportunity is expected to have different outcomes from a diverse population - it equity thats the issue- single level outcomes are forces or lied about . all people have different skills and levels - you all cannotcome first in the race .
@Life Is Good people are not born equal , they have inherited traits , some good , some bad. to say my disabled daughter was born equal of an able person is a pi$$ take.
As for nurture then more able gifted parents can have a benficial effect on their offspring ( assuming they're dealt an even card) .
responsibility and common sense. are factors of both nature and inheritance.
you can still be unlucky too
@@buildmotosykletist1987 I like it.
@Life Is Good It's just not true. We are not born "equal".
Agree! Living in a "ideological bubble" is not reality.
This was a good interview. I disagree with most of the points politically, but this is the kind of rational, non-inflammatory discussion that helps advance the conversation.
Should be titled “the Myth of Equity “
When an incompetent politician promises that you will be better off under his leadership and his redistributionist policies and you believe him and vote for him you will find that he is not only incapable of redistibuting but that he is capable of becoming extremely wealthy and making his friends so , as well.
I smile when younger people pontificate about other countries.
Norwegian here, we actually have some of the lowest corporate tax rates in the world, our wages make up for high taxation rate on income and sale tax, but that being said is it worth it? That is something that needs to be discussed but if you question the current status quo paradigm you get attacked as a radical.
Scandinavian countries dont spend much on defence and that's one reason you can spare more cash for oth3er things.
@@srisivaraman8063 That is true, and because we are a free society we don't need to spend much on internal security apparatus either so we can invest all this wealth in new business, education and welfare instead (or waste it on climatechange NGO's quotas lol). Maybe this will change with Russia/China alliance?
You have oil money.. changes everything.. doesn't count for the rest of us.
@@rosswatson9144 Oil only accounts for 10% of State Revenue, it is small businesses that fuel Norway, we are not Venezuela, Qatar or Saudi Arabia, keep coping. We take care of our private economic sector with low corporate taxes. You need to fix you.
Keep questioning - eventually you will sow the seeds of doubt in enough people which will germinate into a force for change. Stay strong - better to be a seen as a 'radical' than not being true to yourself.
I always enjoy listening to Niall Ferguson - he always provides an eloquent and measured analysis. Good channel Mr. Anderson; keep up the good work!
Matthew 25 gives the best example of equality (the parable of the talents)
What analysis? I heard several assertions but never any analysis.
@@yobrant I can’t help you.
@@reginaford8575😊😅😮😢🎉😂❤
First and foremost it is how you define inequality. I know rich people (in money) who are very unhappy, I know poor people (in a western sense, that is having little money but still having good health care and all the basics met) who are spiritually minded and perfectly happy. Peace of mind is priceless and cannot be paid for in cash.
To people terrified by independent judgment, equality is a good place to temporarily hide. But, as Rand said, man's life requires accepting the risk of knowledge.
Humans can either be free or equal. Not both. If they are free, they will not be equal. And equality can only come by force.
Why can't I be free yet still view other people as my equal (in the sense that we are all human beings worthy of respect)?
Equality is the promotion of mediocrity. This idea is already deeply embedded in the West and this conversation feels like it needs to catch up with what has already happened.
Equality is possible if you lower the bar enough; the lowest common denominator is serfdom.
It's embedded in the cultural zeitgeist but not, nor will it ever be in the world of business and finance, even in the West. At some point seriousness kicks in.
He is right about everything in this clip. Our self hating is the biggest threat.
Muggeridge was intrigued by socialism when he was younger and actually went to Russia to see for himself. Unlike some, he was not shown what the Government wanted him to see but saw what the reality was for himself.
The main problem of the West is the disconnection of our educational system from real life. Teachers and professors who just teach without having any connection or responsibilities in our communities remain in the realm of abstraction. A person who never has had any entrepreneurial experience, has never had the reality of being a soldier, a fireman, a policeman, an ER medic and has no other friends other than academics, will most likely lose traction with society's needs, worries and real preoccupations.
Ideologies are usually born at universities and then passed down to rest of the educational system, journalism and politics. Equality (of outcome) is the predominant idea behind all the socialist attempts in recent decades and still lingers on in our temples of learning.
History tells us that modern science, which is the well-spring of modern technology, arose out of competition with Islam. That competition was intensified by a competition between the nations during the age of exploration which brought the western hemisphere within the Western orbit, and a successful competition in the Indo-Pacific region. Portugal, Spain, France, England, the Dutch Netherlands all achieved world wide empires that lasted until the Catastrophe of the 20th century. Islam contributed nothing to this.
no. wrong. where do you get these ideas??
@@bicycleutopia "no. wrong. where do you get these ideas??" Really? What kind of argument is that? Are you just negating what people are writing?
Abstracting (selective focusing) from the evidence of the senses is mans basic method of survival. Man is not a brute animal, dependent only on the concrete knowledge of here and now. And common sense is good only for small things. It cant solve complex problems. Abstraction is a learned skill, made much easier and quicker with a teacher. Education is not job training or social adjustment.
Comprachicos-Ayn Rand
Teaching Johnny To Think-Leonard Peikoff
@@JRobbySh Modern science is the product of Aristotle's discovery of scientific method applied by post-Renaissance thinkers as systematic induction ,measurement, and experiment by Francis Bacon, Newton, etc.
Leap of Logic-David Harriman
Vote for a politician that redistributes wealth and you'll end up with a poor population and rich politicians.
So true’. Look around
Equality ultimately means everyone is the same.
We are not, and neither should we be.
By being different gives different points of view. It is up to the decision makers to decide what is best, and when. If they get it wrong, and they will from time to time, that then helps inform the next decisions.
It's a messy way of doing things, and may make decisions slower in the short term. We have seen with authoritarian regimes that when they get it wrong it goes horribly wrong. And woe betide anyone for disagreeing with the policy.
I can understand equality under the law, though that is probably a myth also. There should be inclusivity as everyone can contribute.
Some places and people will not agree with that. As we have found when the West has tried to impose its values on other countries, it often does not go well !
th-cam.com/video/Mh9I56J3f4Q/w-d-xo.html Howdy?
How exactly would one assure “fairness “ In ALL things ? It is the nature of life to have different circumstances. Only thorough complete force is it possible to keep people at the same “level “ and then who exactly is in charge of checking that ? Whoever is in charge is then “ahead” of everyone .
With this talk of diversity and inclusion which are exactly the opposite how can anyone achieve equality. But the terms inclusion means to exclude the majority of people so how is that inclusive and equal.
> How exactly would one assure “fairness “ In ALL things
Leftists will keep trying until everyone is dead.
The inequality I suffer under is my parents were able to buy cheap, undeveloped lake lot property and build a dream vacation home over the years. I don't have that option. There's no properties left today... so I would have to do 20 times better to do just as well...
Child 1: "I'm stronger than you are, nerny nerny noo."
Child 2: "Then you can help me carry all the lollies they gave me to equalize us."
Child 1:"Only if you pay me half your lollies."
Child 2: "But then we won't be equal anymore."
Observer: "Aye, there's the rub."
However "equal" people may appear internally, the entire notion of "equality" is turned on its head when external conditions and events are taken into account: political, social, economic and cultural events vary across time and from one geographic area to another; physical conditions - including appearances beyond race - affect both perceptions and genuine abilities. Even the notion of equal opportunity cannot be perfectly achieved. Yes, we must try to be as fair and equitable as possible, but sometimes, pure luck or chance intervene despite individual effort. Learning to cope with life is an important skill.
What would have been the benefit of the opportunity of a state-subsidized music education to Bill Gates? He wanted computers. Always ask, opportunity to whom and for what?
In the 1980s we had a head of state who practiced equality of outcome ethos. Prices of items were made the same across the country. Many of the elite and the rich in the country were either shot to death or were imprisoned (let the blood flow, the youth would cry out). High achieving individuals fled the country.
At the end of his 19 years reign, poverty and hardship were the equality of outcome he delivered. And oh, he, his friends, family and the people he ruled the country with became very rich.
What country?
@@deniseforsythe8965 Ghana 🇬🇭 under J. J. Rawlings
Problem is, society is so complex that on one hand, there's an incredible pressure to correct all gender and racial disparities while simultaneously, the degree of crony capitalism and extreme wealth inequality is increasing
The Scandinavian countries do have high taxes, but one should keep in mind that all citizens pay high taxes, and therefore the tax systems in these countries are probably more regressive than the United States, where low-income individuals typically pay no taxes.
"Equality of outcome" is finally found only in the graveyard.
Socialism, equality etc is essentially a religion. It has its prophets and priests, its holy writ, its “true church” in the form of political parties, and its vision of a heaven on earth 🌍!
Alex Greer -is socialism is a religion -a religion of envy preached by the gospel of despair and worshipped by the less successful in any society .Do you want a heart surgeon selected on the basis of equality or one selected on the basis of medical competence !!! Equality if opportunity is not the same as equality of outcome -intelligence is inherited -and not equally inherited.
The constant focus on an unachievable equality of outcome only prevents equality of opportunity from ever being achieved.
Awesome commentary from the best: Niall Ferguson
0:35 Niall "We know more and more from the people who work on human genetics that ability is not equally allocated." True, very true, it has always been true. Therefore, if you want a world that is humane, you need to devise a system that can humanely accommodate a very broad range of human abilities, not just the smartest.
How do you define “humane?”
Your point being?
Talking about 'genetics' sounds so pompous. I enjoy Ferguson's writing, but his understanding of science is shaky. Putting too much faith in certain branches of science such as genomics is simply superstitious and ideological.
@@deniseforsythe8965 How about: possessing moral and intellectual advancement enough to be motivated by concern with the alleviation of the suffering of others.
@@charlesdevilliers5387 Point being, for instance, an economic policy that seeks to export to the lowest wage country possible all of the jobs that American's of modest intellectual ability my be able to support themselves and their families, might not be a humane economic policy for anyone involved in the transaction - including the low wage workers over seas.
If we are equal we are not free. If we are free we are not equal.
Part of the challenge from within is the regulatory environment that continues to grow. As Hayek opined in a television interview “there is no better way to enslave a people than to enmesh them in a fine set of regulations”.
And yet a lack of regulation has led to polluted rivers, land, sky … of misuse and abuse. A middle way is needed.
The lessons were not learnt about accountability. No bailing out of banks, no bailing out big businesses, no illegal wars, if there is not enough money to fund programs cut them. Few things should be free.
the rot starts with 'equality of opportunity'. What does this even mean? If you have no talent in sports the football scouts will not invite you to trial for a professional team - where is the equality of opportunity? It all about aptitude and ability.
Free to be rejected or fail in the attempt - yes, it's a fairly meaningless concept. Window dressing, basically. Or delaying the inevitable outcome.
As I always understood it, equality of opportunity meant across groups of people with comparable aptitude and ability. Not a soul on earth wants the un-coordinated, ungainly and clumsy to have their fair shot at getting to the top of the ballet world. I appreciate your doggedness in pursuit of clear thinking but in my view you're much too literal-minded here.
great conversation 👌
One thing that is not explored here but,is important is why redistribution seems to work pretty well in Sweden but didn’t work in the UK in the 1970s. There are subtleties here. Sweden actually taxes the great bulk of people - those who earn amounts close to the median income very highly and this is used to provide services accessible free of charge or at low cost to all. They don’t tax those who very wealthy very highly - no inheritance tax, low capital gains taxes.
If one day the earth planet is run by AI where all jobs for humans will be replaced by AI, ppl have to survive by universal income from the government, perhaps that’s the era of equalising opportunities and equalising outcomes too. But for now I agreed with equalising opportunities but hard to guarantee equalising outcomes, I think the society would be lack of dynamic and creativity.
Taxation is always coercive.
Since taxation is unfortunately necessary, taxation should be minimized.
Out of the crooked timber of humanity nothing straight can be made.
thank you for this video. i must admit that, even though i am almost 50 years old, i am not well versed in the history of economics...so i myself am one to feel inclined to support massive redistribution of wealth policies. I would love for you to make a video explaining in detail why, as Dr. Ferguson stated, redistribution through heavy taxation policies do not in fact make a society better. It is so strange to me that the idea that massive taxation on the rich to be redistributed via social programs to help everyone have a chance to live better lives could be a bad thing.
And when you take into account what Dr. Ferguson points out - that talent, aptitude, and abilities etc. are not equally distributed at birth or even the result of the person who possesses these assets hard work - it seems even more appropriate to put massive tax requirements on people who hit somewhat of a genetic lottery and are therefore able to get jobs that make over $500k a year to level the playing field...rather than simply allowing them to use their natural-born abilities to earn enough money to buy a new $2 million 10,000 sq ft because their old 7,000 sq foot home wasn't big enough for their massive 3 person family...or for them to take their kids to Disney for the 5th time that year.
So in other words: penalize those who are born with above average traits?? Discrimination on the basis of genes, in an attempt to make everyone just average?
Oh that sounds like a wonderful idea
@@senglomein5766 hello. So if by “penalize” you mean creating tax laws that prohibit some people from using their disproportionate amount of income to live like kings due to - as Dr. Ferguson stated - unearned and therefore unmerited abilities and advantages - while the rest of the people less fortunate have to struggle to figure out how to feed their families….then…yes…”penalizing” them seems like it could make society better…granted it would be at the expense of limiting rich people to only owning 3 homes big enough for 5 families instead of 10 and limiting them to only one $100k car instead of 5. I’m not sure how they will make it but hopefully they will be able to take advantage of some new social programs to make ends meet.
Where's the intensive to better oneself if you know you'll be given handouts no matter what you do? Why have a job with responsibilities & stress when you know others will demand bigger handouts ?
there is no such thing as " equality of opportunity". Each of us are in a unique place in space and time. Nobody is born with the same opportunities or abilities. The environmental factors are equally unique even among siblings.
So saying that equality of opportunity is a goal everyone can agree with is not only naively stupid but inherently unobtainable. Same with equality of outcome. No matter what you do, nobody will end up with exactly the same results.
In fact, the world would be a much better place if we banned the word equality from the language as it does not exist in the real world. People get so upset because we are not equal when that will never be reality has caused untold misery in the world. Racial and cultural disparity hustlers prey upon the stupidity and jealousy of people to manipulate them into the politics of envy. This is what caused the Russian and French revolutions which caused massive death and suffering and the rise of oppressive regimes that continuously sought to root out enemies until everyone was under suspicion and oppressed. We are approaching that in western civilization with disparity politics, group grievances and reparations for alleged crimes committed over a century ago.
The word ‘diversity’ should also be banned
Don't know any programs that work primarily on equality of outcomes... or policies. Every program or proposed program I've worked in (have worked in a welfare office) was simply to keep people, barely, out of destitution. No one simply passed through people to high incomes who did not meet requirements or educational standing or ability. All the employment programs were entry level positions after which people were expected to make their own way. So this is a bit of a false flag. It's obvious at the street level that radical approaches would fail to even get out of the gate and be obvious failures, visible for miles to anyone with a working set of eyes.
Wow Niall Ferguson terrific
China isn't capitalist, it is statist with a modified free-ish market interface module without the constraint of rule-of-law or even rudimentary good faith. Win - win is not in their lexicon. Hegemony is their only creed.
China is a prime example of a society that has succeeded despite not being run on a capitalist system. This really irks the US and so they target China every opportunity they can like any narcissist.
Excellent men.
Yet Scandinavian nations have a higher quality of life. Capitalism run amok can be equally as corrupt as overpowering governments. The UK and north America are too culturally diverse and divisive for social- democracy to take root and fluorish.
Scandinavian countries are extremely free market capitalist, more so then the u.s. they have a higher tax that allows for citizens to have better health care but the government is extremely hands off when it comes to the business side of things.
Who treats their children equally? Exactly! There is no equality.. Set up laws and have thousands of lawyers (US)…. that’s the best you can do….
Redistribution only works in societies with high social cohesion. Unfortunately, experience seems to indicate that redistribution also tends to destroy social cohesion.
No one advocating ameliorative social equality policies ever suggested all humans are equal did they?
Nothing wrong with Finland! We are happy with free education and (almost) free health care and we do not mind paying slightly more tax for this kind of added equality! We usually top the World Happiness table😀
I wish all countries shared the same values. I don’t know why these shouldn’t be free along with decent affordable tenured housing for all and childcare where desired. These are the basics. Conflating the provision of these with economic mismanagement is an issue these ideologues are happy to partake in.
@@annon3173 The problem is that if the State provides 'free' education and 'free' healthcare and 'free' housing and 'free' childcare, then at any point the State can say 'no' to any one it takes a dislike to, for any reason or no reason. You are setting up an inequality between the provider (the State) and the providee (you and me). We saw this in Britain in the '60's and '70's where taxation reached 98% for some people. Or in Sweden where it reached 120%.
Just bought Neill‘s book Empire, v much looking forward to it.
It’s a very good read. Required reading for those demanding reparations.
No amount of taxation will make me a great opera singer.
The link to the full conversation in the description links to a different conversation. Would love to see the full conversation from whence this was taken. Does anybody have the proper link?
These types of discussion need to be informed by the working poor, lone parents and the sick and disabled as well as the elite - of both sexes. Finland has quality free education plus nearly free quality healthcare. I wish all countries shared the same values. I don’t know why these shouldn’t be free along with decent affordable tenured housing for all and childcare where desired. These are the basics of civilised societies. Conflating the provision of these with economic mismanagement is an issue these ideologues are happy to part take in. The welfare(sic), health, education and housing systems are unfit for purpose in english speaking countries - letting those who have never had the misfortune to rely on these systems dominate discussions about their necessity and provision is unconscionable. Having these in place facilitates social mobility as UK showed in 60s and 70s- dismantling economic safeguarding as the neocons did -has led to less social & economic mobility for most. Understanding the complexity of the barriers to economic mobility, plus the
overburden placed by blunt state sanctioned “solutions wanting a problem” placed on those driven to the margins, through the withholding of the basics, have to be lived with to fully comprehend them- in order to find workable, affordable, pragmatic solutions-that make economic as well as socially cohesive sense plus nurture better functioning, lower crime communities that enable all to contribute rather than many being excluded through bad design
I'd like to know when this conversation was held. It was uploaded on April 19th I see, but as Ukraine was not mentioned it must be older.
Outstanding
That title usually means "It might be inconvenient, and WE are equal, so let's just drop the subject."
How close was I?
Great questions
No such thing as equality in Nature. Balance yes. But everything else is unfair, unequal, competitive difference.
'By some measures, already a larger economy than the USA': By the basic and standard measure of PPP, China has been a bigger economy than the USA since 2016.
Remember that a democratic decision of today becomes law for tomorrow so the distribution starts with people that has had incentive to grow but rapidly faces a society that lives out of government tips and any destructive innovation is hindered. This spiral ends up in an extractive society.
if the student who doesn't study or even attend but is affirmative action then the student gets all A+ grades and now is equal and may be put in as president someday; nobody said the effort put in should be equal, the effort put in is the strong arm of the political group --- equality means some have lots of stuff and some have nothing, look at 3rd world countries, is that fair? i heard that they are going to change that so that all countries have the same stuff we have
The link to the full conversation is wrong.
Hay dude National Socialism was to a great degree about preserving the western cannon.
Equality of opportunity requires the imposition of equal outcome in the previous generation, it is a Trojan horse.
As the old saying goes: life/the world is unfair🤷♀️. Dont complain and cry about the system, learn to beat the system😌
If you require equality of outcome, how do you get those of the superior ability, drive and ingenuity to keep producing? And that problem is the course why communism or Socialism has never work anywhere
Equality just means everyone will be equally poor
Many Do not care as long as everyone is equal
'Winning the argument every generation' seems to require a propaganda bureau to repeat the same lessons at regular intervals.
Equality should only be applied before the judicial system and before God, Otherwise we are all different, there are those who are lazy, but want the same results of those who work hard and are creative, we might have been created equal, but that doesn’t mean we are equal.
When you make statements like this and you don't draw a line to which extent this claims are healthy this is very dangerous. In response we can make a video clip The Utopian Myth of democracy when couple of hundred people control(financialy) everything.
Very interesting.
where is the foot traffic going?...east or west?
I grow weary of the growing conservative view that sees the world in terms of threats. No, not weary so much as, well, a feeling of being threatened by it.
If you just get rid of the State, everywhere, then there are no threats left, at least, none that cannot be overcome by the individual.
Niall is wrong about the means to equal outcomes; it doesn't matter whether it is coerced by government, or by the mob through democracy.
Interesting that Russia did not get a mention, especially as Putin has single handedly revived NATO, united Europe, highlighted the incredible power of the democracies and exposed the weakness of corrupt authoritarian systems and created a strong Ukranian identity that is essentially Western. This all appears to me to have breathed new life and a sense of purpose into a West that was in danger of losing its way.
Show the average Briton how life is in Finland, Denmark and Sweden, and suddenly they see virtually no homelessness, high standard of living, free healthcare much better than the UK, public transport that works and is cheap, clean streets, keen focus on environmentalism and strong sense of social cohesion. Yet there is a sensationalism in tarring thse socialist countries with communism. The liberals and conservatives have so demonized socialism that they will not look at these countries where socialism works, because it might undermine their grip on power in th UK
You'll never have socialism in the UK again. It can't happen now. You have to understand that for the working class they've seen their jobs either sent abroad or taken from them by immigrants. This is a serious point, we've done things such as take the textiles industry out of Leicestershire and transplanted into Bangladesh and then simultaneously taken serfs and peasants out of Bangladesh and dumped them into Leicestershire! That's one example, our relationship with much of the world now is one in which they export vagrants in the form of either cheap labour or beggars and then import British industry and foreign aid! Did we lose a war? Socialism is a globalist ideology and can't really be anything else, capitalism is the same but the latter are not infected with wokism to the same extent. People don't associate Tories with SJWS!
To be honest the things that have happened such as illegal migrants going into four star hotels at the taxpayers expense, grooming scandals, BLM toppling statues, terror attacks etc, and with the genuine fear of racial demographics going into the future which will become a major talking point! I believe that the disenfranchised white working class are far more likely in the near future to embrace nationalism, by which I mean ethno nationalism. They are afraid and angry. It's very unlikely that they'll ever embrace socialism again. The socialist if they want them would have to stop being seen as crusaders at war with straight white men which I'm afraid is how a lot of people see them these days.
There are many sound moral and practical reasons to oppose strictly equal outcomes, but TAXATION is NOT one of qualifications, for any country with a Sovereign national currency.
The process of redistributing wealth through government does not exist. If a person with financial wealth or other resource wealth distributes that for free directly to other people, that's distribution of wealth.
GOVERNMENT destroys the money it has previously created, when it collects taxes. Spending is issuing instructions to pay a recipient by adding numbers to their bank account, or mailing them a check to deposit which is the same thing.
Taxes is when the bank subtracts money from the bank account of the person with tax liabilities.
Those numbers can be credited back to the government's accounting spreadsheet, which means the government collected its own existing liabilities (dollars).
Collecting your own IOUs is meaningless.
In practicality, those IOUs are destroyed in the same manner those were originally created, by keystrokes on computer software, by changing numbers on spreadsheets, by doing arithmetic.
*It's all just a huge accounting system, a ledger* .
It's real, in the sense that accounting systems are real and meaningful, like your bank balance is meaningful, but it's not a tangible scarce resource from the perspective of the currency issuer govt, but YES money is a scarce resource from the perspective of the currency user.
There's still reasons to oppose certain giveaways.
A smart conservative just said, yes of course we should have totally free college for STEM fields, because we want to have a powerful nation of STEM graduates.
Let's STOP paying for subsidized degrees in advanced grievance studies with a specialty in sophisticated ways of complaining and generating agitation and misplaced anger, unless we can collectively agree that advanced complaining is a valuable career that we need a lot more graduates to better our society, by creating more hostility and anxiety.
THIS MEANS A NATION MAYBE ABLE TO CUT TAXES AND INCREASE SPENDING, SO LONG AS THE TOTAL SPENDING OF CONSUMERS AND BUSINESSES AND GOVERNMENT DOES NOT EXCEED THE QUANTITY OF AVAILABLE RESOURCES THAT ARE ABLE TO BE PRODUCED.
If you have lots of people wanting houses and a shortage of viable housing that people want to buy, there will be sharply competing bids driving up prices. If you have people driving and using a lot of gasoline or petrol for transportation, and your producing insufficient product, shortages will drive up commodity futures and commodity prices.
That's more inflexible than the question of manufactured goods, in most cases.
There's more reasons to oppose strict equality. The USSR couldn't compel people by fear of being poor and hunger for financial status. People in the party competed for political status. Workers might slack off, so GOVT FORCE and TERROR became necessary to get people to work.
The title of this episode doesn't really correctly indicate its content. Niall says that by some definitions the Chinese economy is already the world's largest but doesn't say aye or nay to this. He should. Measured on a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis IMF estimates of GDP showed China overtaking the US as number one in 2014, during the Obama-Biden administration in the US. The difference between the two was not great and Chinese dominance may not have been achieved until a year or so later, which would still have been during the Obama-Biden administration. Today, it is undisputable: Chinese GDP is greater than US and Mexican GDP combined and only a little inferior to the three USMCA countries combined. Niall shouldn't give any credence to international rankings of economies that are market-exchange-rate (MER) based, although it seems that he does.
Since most ultra rich make most of their income from capital gains and dividends and the Scandinavian countries tax rates on this income is about the same as the US the ultra rich in Scandinavia don't pay higher taxes than ultra rich Americans. In fact the taxes on Capital gains and dividends in California is higher than most other countries.
On several lists of economic freedom, the US is maybe 17th. But the US has the most entrepreneurial culture.
A straw discussion. Few would demand equality of outcomes. That outcomes will become unbalanced is to be expected, and that is a reason for socially democratic government: to enact laws, taxation, anti-monopoly, in order to re-balance the distribution of outcomes when they become dangerous for democratic institutions. Examples of the latter condition abound, today. In my country, the USA, what democracy it may have once had is shattered. What remains is government by wealthy oligarchs. They avoid the use of force by means of media control, media they own. Americans are poorly informed, especially about what our government does abroad. Their attention and activism is diluted by "identity" issues such as abortion-access and by outrages that occur almost daily in our communities, shootings and other crimes done out of racial hatred and increasingly difficult conditions of life, unemployment, inadequate housing and healthcare. People suffer while arms merchants, bankers, and favored corporations flourish. The institutions of government are prostituted. Warring is continuous, while the threats of climate catastrophe and nuclear war go unheeded.
Here is a start in descending order of importance:
Educate - remind - the youth of today of the great achievements of the West and the traits of individuals that made it so. The London Olympics' opening is a good start.
Keep reproducing like rabbits to avoid an aging population that relies on immigrants as caretakers and unskilled labour, like Japan and Taiwan today.
Increase immigration - but with rigorous screening. Nigeria, Philippines, Uganda - English speakers, mostly.
China, Taiwan (then companies can send them to China, as they work for Western companies).
No mention of exploitation - a good current example would be Amazon and how it treats its employees. Shouldn't this be part of this little armchair chat?
I look at my country England and I think about equality of opportunity. Then I look at our political system. All or almost all of our prime ministers in the past 40 years have come from two universities and one class. Almost all of our MPs are from one class and are university graduates. Clearly there isn’t equality of opportunity as I think your purporting. The trouble is we aren’t getting equality we’re getting equality with some more equal than others as a famous person once said.
Word.
hmm wonder if higher taxation and more socialism might work in a population of folks who tend to work harder and more competently than say a country with a lazier population? One can't assume that people taken together as groups are equally competent and virtuous as well.
The 1970s Britain was nowhere near as bad as what came later. We had free higher education, at point of need as the saying goes, but it was supposed to be paid for through the higher taxation when the graduates got higher paying jobs. What we have seen since then is an educational disaster. To begin with we have failed to produce workers that the NHS for example needed and have become dependent on workers from elsewhere in Europe. At the same time we have too many people taking useless courses. But worst of all is we have let CRT take over first education and then everything else. It is a fundamentally Marxist ideology abusing the race card to indoctrinate generations to hate the west and ignore the evils of socialism that we have seen from the killing fields of Cambodia, to the starvation in China and now in North Korea to people getting shot in the back trying to escape over the Berlin wall. they call the democratic centre racist and whitewash racist Marx completely. They have been allowed to gain control of just about every education syllabus and taken over all major spheres of influence so we have CRT laws, CRT media, CRT media and even CRT advertisements. The laws on hate speech are all basically CRT laws that prohibit freedom of speech on many issues and only allow the CRT WOKE agenda to be heard.
They let this dude work at Stanford?
Isn't equality of outcome the definition of pure socislism/communism? Such a policy would be terrible for productivity since no financial incentive to study/work hard. Plus this ideal always seems to end up in a one party dictatorship.