I remember reading a paper somewhere that class mobility in my country is decreasing i.e. poor people are less likely to move up/rich people are less likely to slide down the class ladder. As an average person, I can definitely see resentment and conflict building up in my society. The government is trying to "unite" us with national movements/propaganda etc, but I'm afraid it's not working.
It is common for people to claim that income or wealth inequality causes civil unrest but in reality it is a lack of upward mobility that makes people angry. People don't care about the lives of the ultra wealthy, they just want their own lives to get better and for their children to have the opportunity to succeed.
Cronyism is not the only problem with inequality. There is also a huge psychological price to pay. That psychological frustration of perceived unfairness, leads people to make irrational and harmful decisions, while negatively affecting society in general.
Paul Coman I believe this is because people do not believe they can change their class. If you were to head back to the sixties (with far fewer government economic policies), you would see a huge shift in how people perceive their class. You would hear far more people saying “I’m going to hit it big someday” than “those boomers stole all the jobs.” I personally blame the pro-redistribution media for many of these social changes. The corrupt businessman has been a trope in movies and TV for years.
I'm a high school student in South Africa and recently in my Economics class my teacher had a class discussion with us after the World bank released a report stating that SA remains the most unequal country in the world. Wish i watched this video b4 to add more to the discussion
Do you think that if everyone worked equally hard that there wouldn't be winners and losers and some rich and poor. Some people have more built in advantages than others. And some people are immoral actors and get and stay rich that way. I met a guy who has a plug at the US Mint where he gets mint paper and he can print official Federal reserve notes from the comfort of his own home, and there is no machine that can catch him because it is real money. He is already rich from real estate. So he can make himself an extra $500,000 by printing money and funneling it through a cash business within one month. Not all rich people get there through hard work. Wake up from your fantasy
smilyle Also, that very concept is against Austrian economics and is instead brought about by government - the action of printing money (not backed by anything mind you) creates inflation. You’re right, not everybody gets their money legitimately. But don’t you dare call it a failure of the free market.
Says the fundamentals of economics. Which would you rather have right now. A bank account in Switzerland with 100,000,000 dollars that you can never access, or a car, house, and family? If you don't consider material goods as what matters, and you view faith, activities, or friendship as more important - then that is still a matter of consumption.
For sake of argument, we consider 100% free-market capitalist economy is the most efficient way to run the economy, still in a system where few people have unlimited purchasing power and all other people just meeting their daily requirement from working 9-5 is not the fairest system on planet earth. it is massively an unfair system. if all the people in a free-market capitalist system can get out of poverty, there is no question that it is an unfair system.
Seems like you positioned your argument to be fair vs efficient. I think most governments will choose efficient. Even if for example the American economy is unfair. It's highly efficient. The people at the bottom of the totem pole still live better comparatively to the rest of the world's poorest people. Is it fair that the person living on 20K a year can still get a subsidized home and montarey benefits to support food? In Haiti the poorest people don't have that luxury, and it is a luxury. "Fair" is relative and cross sectional. We can always change the system or add regulation to protect people or stimulate growth. It's not the best system but it's what we have.
Capitalism and Socialism are different modes of production. No matter what you chose to call a society or economy to fit your narrative, it doesn't change what mode of produciton is in place. So just stop with this "not real X" bs it's very non scientific and ignores defenitions.
Puglosipher There are two proposed ways to stop cronyism. There is the left-wing way; redistribute wealth so they cannot pay off the politicians. As is demonstrated on this channel, savings and profit motive create wealth and disincentivizing savings will stop most - if not all - wealth creation. And there is the right wing way; make the government as small as possible to prevent *any* possible illegal payments. This allows the free market to thrive and wealth creation to run rampant (in a good way).
I remember reading a paper somewhere that class mobility in my country is decreasing i.e. poor people are less likely to move up/rich people are less likely to slide down the class ladder.
As an average person, I can definitely see resentment and conflict building up in my society. The government is trying to "unite" us with national movements/propaganda etc, but I'm afraid it's not working.
It is common for people to claim that income or wealth inequality causes civil unrest but in reality it is a lack of upward mobility that makes people angry. People don't care about the lives of the ultra wealthy, they just want their own lives to get better and for their children to have the opportunity to succeed.
The reason we go the poverty in the first place is because of government intervention
Cronyism is not the only problem with inequality. There is also a huge psychological price to pay. That psychological frustration of perceived unfairness, leads people to make irrational and harmful decisions, while negatively affecting society in general.
Paul Coman
I believe this is because people do not believe they can change their class. If you were to head back to the sixties (with far fewer government economic policies), you would see a huge shift in how people perceive their class. You would hear far more people saying “I’m going to hit it big someday” than “those boomers stole all the jobs.”
I personally blame the pro-redistribution media for many of these social changes. The corrupt businessman has been a trope in movies and TV for years.
I'm a high school student in South Africa and recently in my Economics class my teacher had a class discussion with us after the World bank released a report stating that SA remains the most unequal country in the world. Wish i watched this video b4 to add more to the discussion
All ur videos are amazing...
Great video quality! Keep up the good work!
How about work ethic inequality
Do you think that if everyone worked equally hard that there wouldn't be winners and losers and some rich and poor. Some people have more built in advantages than others. And some people are immoral actors and get and stay rich that way. I met a guy who has a plug at the US Mint where he gets mint paper and he can print official Federal reserve notes from the comfort of his own home, and there is no machine that can catch him because it is real money. He is already rich from real estate. So he can make himself an extra $500,000 by printing money and funneling it through a cash business within one month. Not all rich people get there through hard work. Wake up from your fantasy
smilyle
Hmm.
Have you reported him for literally printing money?
Cause I’m pretty sure that’s illegal.
smilyle
Also, that very concept is against Austrian economics and is instead brought about by government - the action of printing money (not backed by anything mind you) creates inflation.
You’re right, not everybody gets their money legitimately.
But don’t you dare call it a failure of the free market.
Great video. Thanks!
The list of the richest people is still changing. It's not a permanent state.
'Since it is what we consume that actually matters', says who?
Says the fundamentals of economics.
Which would you rather have right now. A bank account in Switzerland with 100,000,000 dollars that you can never access, or a car, house, and family? If you don't consider material goods as what matters, and you view faith, activities, or friendship as more important - then that is still a matter of consumption.
For sake of argument, we consider 100% free-market capitalist economy is the most efficient way to run the economy, still in a system where few people have unlimited purchasing power and all other people just meeting their daily requirement from working 9-5 is not the fairest system on planet earth. it is massively an unfair system. if all the people in a free-market capitalist system can get out of poverty, there is no question that it is an unfair system.
Seems like you positioned your argument to be fair vs efficient. I think most governments will choose efficient. Even if for example the American economy is unfair. It's highly efficient. The people at the bottom of the totem pole still live better comparatively to the rest of the world's poorest people. Is it fair that the person living on 20K a year can still get a subsidized home and montarey benefits to support food? In Haiti the poorest people don't have that luxury, and it is a luxury. "Fair" is relative and cross sectional. We can always change the system or add regulation to protect people or stimulate growth. It's not the best system but it's what we have.
There’s definitely been more people sent to the lower class than people sent to the upper class.... don’t let him fool you
"cronyism not capitalism" oh no, not this again
Puglosipher "this is not real socialism" are u one of those 😂
Capitalism and Socialism are different modes of production. No matter what you chose to call a society or economy to fit your narrative, it doesn't change what mode of produciton is in place. So just stop with this "not real X" bs it's very non scientific and ignores defenitions.
Puglosipher define what capitalism is for u ?
At it's most basic form Capitalism is a mode of production in which the means of production is privately owned.
Puglosipher
There are two proposed ways to stop cronyism.
There is the left-wing way; redistribute wealth so they cannot pay off the politicians. As is demonstrated on this channel, savings and profit motive create wealth and disincentivizing savings will stop most - if not all - wealth creation.
And there is the right wing way; make the government as small as possible to prevent *any* possible illegal payments. This allows the free market to thrive and wealth creation to run rampant (in a good way).