Why Bad Economics Won't Go Away by Yaron Brook
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ม.ค. 2025
- Why is it that people don't seem to learn from experience? It is clear that our existing Keynesian economic policies have failed miserably. We can compare controlled economies with those less controlled, and compare more regulated sectors of our own economy with those sectors that have fewer regulations. Logic and history are on the side of those economists who have advocated for free markets. Why do those who advocate sound economic policies continue to fail in substantially rolling back government intervention in the economy? It would seem so easy.
In this talk, delivered on December 1, 2011, at Hyatt Regency Hotel in Chicago, Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute, identifies the reasons people find the free-market idea so difficult to accept and why statist policies seem to make so much sense to them. He identifies why we have been losing this intellectual battle, and provides real solutions on how to make significant headway toward ending these bad economic policies, allowing us to achieve more freedom and prosperity.
This talk is so refreshing! I feel like my basic question, "What is wrong with people?" is answered. I feel much calmer.
Glad to here it.
8 years later: Oh look, it's happening again.
I agree wholeheartedly on the need to teach philosophy (epistemology and metaphysics) so that individuals have a logical framework that allows them analyze information rationally. After that's established, we need to teach basic economic principles. Yaron is correct to say that the real fight is getting people to accept reality first and you can't do that if you reject reason.
+legacyns1 how is metaphysics going to help to improve the logical framework and rationality of humans? i dont get it, most of the social "sciences" dont even apply the cientific methodology correctly, i think that we should improve the quality of science methodology, if you in fact want to raise critical thinking
Introduction
Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of existence, being and the world. Arguably, metaphysics is the foundation of philosophy: Aristotle calls it "first philosophy" (or sometimes just "wisdom"), and says it is the subject that deals with "first causes and the principles of things".
It asks questions like: "What is the nature of reality?", "How does the world exist, and what is its origin or source of creation?", "Does the world exist outside the mind?", "How can the incorporeal mind affect the physical body?", "If things exist, what is their objective nature?", "Is there a God (or many gods, or no god at all)?"
@legacyns1 absolutely! Too many primacy of consciousness advocates out there. Leads people to be secondhanded followers who need philosopher kings to rule over them and interpret god/society's wishes.
Another example of Yaron hitting the nail on the head. The underlying problem behind everything wrong with this country is PHILOSOPHY.
In England, you can wait a6 month for an MRI, more then a year for operation and when you are hospitalize you are put 6 in a room for 2 and even in the corridor where you die from infection and lack of care.
ask our self:
1.is it moral to steal from you to help another? (taxes)
2.how can healthcare be a right if you need some one to provide it? - lets say you can't find a DR who is willing to help you, can the government put a gun to his head and make him treat you? isn't that slavery?
Great talk.
I'm not entirely sure why people are really hell bent on inflation. US inflation was at its highest in 1980 at about 13%. It's never gotten anywhere close to that since, yet people are still talking about inflation constantly?
Historical data suggests there's nothing to worry about, so I'm not sure why this talk about inflation constantly?
P.s, Great video, love all the work Ayn Rand Institute produces
Excellent video.
@Berelore
My entire point was that once economic statism is implemented, it practically becomes self-perpetuating. I'm trying to diminish the value of a good philosophy-it is necessary; all I'm saying is that does not appear to be enough to circulate good ideas. Atlas Shrugged was published over fifty years ago, and look how far down the road to statism the U.S. has gone.
@HiciacetKolas
Typo: Meant to say "I'm not trying to diminish the value of a good philosophy." Though, I'm sure you understood what I meant.
I would agree that the ethics of altruism has been a major force in perpetuating ignorance in regards to economics, but I think it also important to mention another huge factor... Our own 'Democratic' system.
Basically, who are people going to vote for during hard times? Are they going to vote for the politician who says that we need to have a hands-off approach and allow the inefficient sectors of the market to liquidate...
Cont....
economy." Instead, they are going to take the advice of the economist who says, "you can salvage the economy through a degree of central planning." Because this is the most "pragmatic" for the economist and the politician.... It will guarantee the politician votes from his constituency, and it will guarantee the economist more clout, more power, and more 'success' in his profession. Thus, in this way, people appear to have a tendency toward statism.
I know. If there is an Ayn Rand Centre there must surely be a Ralph Wiggum Centre as well. Only in America.
Now, I havent yet seen all of it. But some of his claims seem wrong. FDR was in office from 1933. 24.9% unemployment. And by the end of the 1930ies it was 19%. And the debt to gdp ratio of greece is around 161 vs 72 in USA. So saying that usa is just a few years away from Greece seems wrong. And kinda undermines his credibility. Whats up with this? What am I not seeing?
The drop in unemployment was dispite of FDR not because of him.
The Greece statemant is true. USA deficit in 2013 was 680 billion dollars. The treasury spend 680 billion dollars more than they earn...... ef they keep doing that then the dept to gdp will eventually be 161... even more.
Haukur Hauksson You cannot just state the drop in unemployment was despite FDR without adequate data and argument to back that up. The fact is that unemployment did drop during FDR's presidency.
Cont...
Economists are generally going to be attracted to the economic theory that is going to provide them the greatest clout-they want political power, academic rank, societal importance, and a stable job giving economic advice. And which economic theory provides this: Laissez-faire Capitalism or Keynesianism? Obviously Keynesianism.... Few politicians are going to listen to the advice of an economist who will say "there is nothing that you, as a political organization, can do to help the....
Cont....
Or are they going to vote for the politician who makes grand promises-the politician who says that they are going to do everything in their power to make sure the recession is as short and painless as possible, the politician who promises citizens that he can deliver economic prosperity? I think it's pretty obvious who they are going to vote for. And this has the consequence of propagating faulty economics.
All is great, but I don't understand (apart form the Zionist factor-which appear to be tribal, ethnocentric and collectivist in nature; please note that international militarism has interventionist factor to it) why Ayn Rand Institute has problems with accepting Ron Paul? I see you fully agree with him on all economic premises (spending, taxation, inflation, government regulations) plus on basic philosophical principles (RP individualism vs. statism of neo-cons).
@justintempler
And this whole time, all I did was add some input to Yaron Brook's theory as to why bad economics won't go away.
Rationally connect to conversation, or stay out of it.
Yaron Brook is actually from Israel, so he has a slight accent.
What empirical evidence is that?
@Berelore
Alright, then tell me how you are going to "fix the philosophy." What is your plan to flood the universities with sound intellectuals when the system in place incentives statism? What incentives are you, or the ARI going to offer to counteract that? You are correct, everything I described is a derivative of bad ideas-but it also happens that these derivatives will make it virtually impossible to fix the philosophy.
Yeah, it's unfortunate isn't it. There's no way to fix this, I think we're too far gone. But at least by him doing talks like this, it makes people who want to learn, learn (like me)
@HiciacetKolas
you just spent 4 full blocks of youtube comment to demonstrate that you missed the point of the video. If you fix the philosophy you solve the derivative problems. For example, Are you going to vote for the politician who says that we need to have a hands-off approach and allow the inefficient sectors of the market to liquidate? I'm assuming you are and so are many others because your philosophy supports rationality which allowed you to learn basic econ
"You're right, his speech impediment is completely irrelevant"
Good. Now since you have nothing else to say, run along.
Yes, there is a point. you just didn't get it. no hard feelings, i was a Marxist ones... search Milton fridman (free to choose), Walter block, Ayn rand. it's not about utopia its about common sense. EVERY thing the government does is wrong even if they have GOOD intentions. they are a monopoly therefore there is no competition -schools, health care, etc. only the market can decide costs and even tho we are selfish the end result is better for every one.
Hope you cross to the side of reason,
Stating someone has an accent does not make that person a troll or a commie.
He has both a speech impediment and an accent. It takes nothing away from the content of his words. Move on.
@justintempler
Right, so I'm to understand that you can't actually find anything inaccurate in what I've said. So it's apparent you instead resort to throwing two baseless, and not too mention contradictory accusations at me (a. I have a "savior complex"; b. I'm doing "nothing" about the situation). And then, you end it by suggesting I stop trying to fix other people's philosophies all the while you are feebly trying to fix mine.
"RHOTACISM" doesn't mean speech impediment. It means accent or speech impediment.
I've made my case for it being an accent. And I've heard people speak Hebrew. Some of them sound like Yaron, some sound French, some sound like Netanyahu, etc.
"SO Irrationally rand cultist you can't believe a randite can have a speech impediment." It would mean nothing if he had a speech impediment. The issue here is that you're smearing. What the hell does it matter if you're right? ROFL
cont...I can't believe how his pro-life or state vs federal position, his individual position on religion, or international policy rationalism, could be a real problems for you to make you try to smear him (elsewhere). Ron Paul is the best thing with a real ideoligal and political leverage that has happened to America and objectivist movement since the death of Ayn. So, don't try to monopolize the ideas. Don't wait for perfect Messiah. Take your chance. help Ron Paul get elected!
It's a combination of a Jewish accent and something else. Not quite sure what. But I suspect it's something Eastern-European. I have a friend with this exact accent.
I'd want him in office just so he could filibuster all the time.
FYB. He said Biden is our last, best hope.
I'm a fan of both Sam Harris and Ayn Rand. I see some similarity with their philosophy. I'm curious to know at what point they diverge. It seems like Sam's meta-ethics is in agreement with Ayn's (i.e., we can know an objective moral truth).
I'm a fan of Harris as well. I think he's right on the money with religion, Islam and gun control, but he's a "flaming" liberal in general.
Sam Harris is basically a utilitarian while Rand advocates rational egoism. So in ethics they are poles apart. Harris also wrote a book saying you don't have free will, while Rand proved you do. Harris's next book is about how as long as you don't believe in God it's okay to be religious. Some atheist. If you are a fan of both Harris and Rand, I think you don't understand Rand. Try reading her novels again with the Cliffs Notes. They're very helpful.
The Mystical Ethics of the New Atheists: www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2008-fall/mystical-ethics-new-atheists.asp
Right, they are, but unfortunately, Harris is a "flaming" leftist on virtually everything but gun control, whereas Rand was an anti-statist minarchist like myself. Harris also distinguishes himself from most card-carrying leftists by acknowledging that one doesn't get points for mere good intentions.
The idea of objective moral truth is practically the only thing that Harris and Rand agree on. Harris isn't even that much of an atheist.
The inflation thing is interesting. Krugman is being dishonest when he says the NUMBERS i.e. prices are not inflating, therefore there is no inflation. But when we are in a severe recession, demand is down, and numerical prices should be dropping like a rock. When they inflate the money supply in a severe recession the NUMBERS are basically the same, but the VALUE of the commodities are lessening. That IS inflation, because numerical price and VALUE are two different things. Krugman knows this, but he's a political piece of shit.
It's an accent. He's from Israel.
Hmmm, I've known plenty of Jews that don't sound like that. Anyway, I don't like it because it sounds stupid, not because of the identity of the person speaking it, but thanks for telling me why I don't like things.
You are mistaken, you see, you have the right premise, the one that every socialist have and that is the "grater good", "doing things to help people" the idea sound nice but the reality is not, good intentions DOES NOT EQUAL good results. the government can't do anything right because its a monopole - no competition only stagnation . i see from your comments that as i said you didn't understand or prefer to understand, so as one from there EU countries you so admire let me tell you a few things.
Sometimes he says 'r' in the hard form. Sometimes he uses a soft or trilled form. Sometimes it's a more guttural form. For instance, he says 'wohrk', not 'wowk' or 'wok'. At around 1:34 he says 'right' as any American would. I'm pretty sure you didn't listen to the video.
The way he pronounces the 'r' depends on a similarity to words (or letter relationships) in Hebrew that require a voiced uvular fricative.
Go read Free Market Revolution and learn something, you socialist troll.
I have heard other Israeli's speak. Some sound like him, some don't.
As for looking up rhotacism, I don't understand why you keep bringing that up. I knew about it before you mentioned it. It applies to a speech impediment or an accent, so repeating it over and over does nothing.
You are harping on this issue because it makes you feel better to smear someone who blasts your views to hell. The fact that you're completely wrong about it being an impediment just serves to back up my claim.
Last thing, why do you care that there is a gap between the rich and the poor, are you green with envy? if some one i willing to pay Ronaldo Millions to run and kick a ball why do you care? if some one is really rich, 9 out of 10 its because he created some thing people wanted and gleefully paid for it - that's a good thing. What free market will allow is competition where rich people wont be able to lobby the government to make them rich by putting laws to help them and hurt competitors.
the way he pronounces the 'r' is funny but distracting
That is probably not an accent. It sounds more like a minor speech impediment. Not that it makes any difference......
@HiciacetKolas "how you are going to "fix the philosophy." What is your plan to flood the universities with sound intellectuals..."
Why do you have a "need" to fix the philosophy? Do you have a savior complex? or are you just using (what you see as) the futility of fixing philosophy as an excuse to do nothing?
Stop trying to fix the philosophy in OTHER people.
You're trolling.
the last thing the jesus I have read of would not have wanted anyone to follow him. he wanted his fellow travellers to be his equals or greater than him. student or teacher Think think think
lol
wascley wabbit...
Its a Jewish accent, that's what annoys you
His accent is annoying.