Freedom and Capitalism | Exploring Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand | Episode 7

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 พ.ย. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 30

  • @justifiably_stupid4998
    @justifiably_stupid4998 4 ปีที่แล้ว +15

    28:28 I like this definition of a Monopoly.
    "Market protected from competition by government."
    Clear and concise.

    • @ssoonnyymm
      @ssoonnyymm 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @john cake is bookface a polymono?

  • @brianwade8649
    @brianwade8649 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    2 minutes in and I already know I'm going to love this.

  • @BlackDiasporaFamily
    @BlackDiasporaFamily 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Mr. Binswanger is full of knowledge with age comes wisdom.

  • @ytuber971
    @ytuber971 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Fantastic interview thank you.

  • @marvinvoorhees
    @marvinvoorhees 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    ¡Muy buena entrevista y discusión! Me habría gustado escuchar qué piensa Harry Binswanger sobre el problema de la Pobreza Extrema. Considero que esta es un área que el capitalismo puro no puede solucionar, la pobreza extrema es un lugar muy difícil de escapar con sus propios medios, pero no sé que postura tenga Harry.

  • @timjung640
    @timjung640 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    What makes something evil is that it destroys productive values. Ideas themselves can't be evil. It's actions that can be evil. Ideas may seed evil, but those same ideas are also often not acted upon because the holder of those ideas recognizes or sense an error in those ideas and thereby hesitates. He may also change his mind in regards to those ideas. It's only when he acts on those ideas that he becomes evil.

    • @johngleue
      @johngleue 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      It's the ideas behind actions that are evil. I agree with you that to be good requires action taken in reality but the ideas you choose to embrace and the decisions you make will either be pro-life or anti-life and they will stem from ideas.
      Ideas can be pro-life or anti-life. You can understand and recognize that an idea is evil and irrational and not act on it but there are definitely good ideas and bad ideas.

  • @guilhermesilveira5254
    @guilhermesilveira5254 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Capitalism is freedom. Read Ayn Rand, Hayek and Milton Friedman.

    • @oscard.fernandezj.3096
      @oscard.fernandezj.3096 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      She was a friend of von Mises. Hayek and Friedman had "gray zones" for the welfare state.

    • @guilhermesilveira5254
      @guilhermesilveira5254 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@oscard.fernandezj.3096 The 1955 book The Decline of American Liberalism is very good.
      Carl Snyder was a rational economist.
      Brooks Adams was an anti capitalist writer.

    • @guilhermesilveira5254
      @guilhermesilveira5254 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@oscard.fernandezj.3096 i know about Hayek and Friedman. But both were in general good.

    • @Jazzper79
      @Jazzper79 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Hayek and Milton Friedman are not for laissez-faire

    • @guilhermesilveira5254
      @guilhermesilveira5254 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Jazzper79 i know that.

  • @DeeperWithDiego
    @DeeperWithDiego 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    So, you guys are not going to cover Aesthetics?

  • @ColoredGlass777
    @ColoredGlass777 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Could you please enact the closed captioning feature for this video and any other video you post 💖

  • @bretnetherton9273
    @bretnetherton9273 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Reality is not two there can be no primacy. "Awareness is known by awareness alone," is the sole irreducible axiom of reality..

  • @guilhermesilveira5254
    @guilhermesilveira5254 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Read Leonard Read

  • @guilhermesilveira5254
    @guilhermesilveira5254 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Read Gary Becker.

  • @periteu
    @periteu 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    How to finance government without legal extortion (8:28) (9:10) (10:00)

  • @ssoonnyymm
    @ssoonnyymm 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Read Leonard Peikoff

  • @micchaelsanders6286
    @micchaelsanders6286 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    25:20

  • @sathyath84
    @sathyath84 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    12:00 to be precise, the bank notes are not printed by governments, but instead by central banks, which are also private establishments. And it supposed to be that way since the beginning to maintain their independence. So you can think of central banks acting like congress for monetary systems.
    Unfortunately, due to different school of thoughts, throughout history central banks sometimes have been compromised and used by governments to fund their operations whenever they needed something done. And the worst of all in economic history, can be seen in 2020. And when the central banks get in bed with government, then yes, we can assume there's no difference between currency printed by a private central bank and printed by government. And that's another area where capitalism regressed even further into stateism.
    Because when central banks were totally independent, they supposed to be having no other agenda but to maintain currency supply in the market to always be healthy and stable to accommodate the growth in the economy. But whenever central banks were used by government to fund their operations and fiscal policies, that's a neo-communistic way to run a country, because government is and have always been, the biggest spender of the entire economy.