My accountant friend said the problem social security ran into is that there is no dedicated fund, but SS Taxes are in fact being put in the general fund category.
I was right there with you Paul when you said Sanders is not a Socialist. Then you lost me when you attempted to describe socialism. I believe you described what is called "State Capitalism," where the Government Bureaucrat replaces the private owner and assumes his/her role. Capitalism is still in place, workers simply have a different boss. The key fundamental of Socialisms critique of Capitalism was the employer/employee relationship. Socialisms final solution was to have employees own the business/factory or modes of production and eliminate the single private owner of capital, who exploits employees labor to obtain a profit. Essentially, the goal was to bring Democracy into the workplace, where people spend most of their adult lives, giving each employee one vote as joint owners of the company. This allows the workers to decide what to produce, how to produce, where to produce, and what to do with the surplus. Under this system, I doubt the workers would vote to move their jobs to China, pollute their community, or pay one employee 300 times more then the lowest paid employee. This is why the elites hate/fear Socialism so much. It cuts off their power at the head. These elites would do whatever it takes to resist socialism. Fascism is usually the oligarchs last weapon of choice, when propaganda fails. But others, such as Otto Von Bismarck and Roosevelt, enacted a type of welfare state to keep the socialist at bay and maintain the capitalist system. This is why we need social Democrats like Sanders, to create policies like Universal Health care, public Colleges, and a progressive tax system to act as a relief valve to curb some of capitalisms harmful externalities. If not, we get Fascism.
You are so stupid. Just like every socialist before. For exemple the workers are so bad at taking decisioms that they will bankrupt their own factory in a couple of years. They never reinvest. They would take all profit out. I have seen it first hand with farms in ROMANIA. WHEN GOVERMET GIVE WORKERS THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION. THOAE FARMS ARE FIRST BANCRUPT. EVEN A FAMILY WITH 2 PEOPLE IS HARD TO MAKE IT WORK. WHAT ABOUT 200 WORKERS EVERYONE WITH HIS OWN MIND.
@@cristianion2056 I never said I was a Socialist did I? I just chose to educate myself on it to see what all the fuss is about. Based on your response, its clear you know very little about socialism. Romania had to rapidly industrialize first, then let Capitalism run its life cycle before falling under its own weight, and then it can talk about socialism. You see, socialism can only be realized after Capitalism has run its course and is crushed under its own weight.
Good calls. This guy is just part of the Cults of Celebrity. Front to back and a little in the kitchen, he ain’t got no reason to get the folks really noticing, cuz we’d be talking about treason. As in, what you gonna do with them trees son? Turn em into money? Maybe thou shalt kno west the rest…?
To put it in J. Stiglitzs words: „it is not about taking everything from the wealthy! It is about making Society more equal and stabile in order to create a sustainable humanity“. I think that this is way better than fascistm, especialy when you look to the historical outcomes of fascism.
I‘m curious if the trending extreme inequality is spliting America and taking a growing portion of Americans out of social and political involvements. The country performs at suboptimum?
We try to say that all "men" are created equal, but that is not the case. If you start out poor your chances of accumulating a lot of money while someone else starts out with dad's fortune , things are neither fair nor equal. The rich justify that by calling it the "death tax."
And that is life. The way it should be. Accept inequalities as inherent to life including animal life. Equality is a rebellion against nature based on the evil passions of man such as envy, greed and jealousy. Accept your fate and live with it while trying to do the best out of your lot. Thumbs down on the pretense of "equality".
So i started poor. More poor than you for sure living in a socialist country. Now WORKING IN A CAPITALIST COUNTRY I MAKE IT. I HAVE MY HOME AND PLANING TO BUY SECOND. WHY YOU WANT MY MONEY. YOU ARE GREDY
31minutes in. Yes, but on the green new deal and carbon tax, wouldn't a carbon tax cause an economic incentive in alternative energy development? And I think a carbon tariff would be a lot harder to implement than a carbon tax. Maybe not harder to get approved but harder to accurately and effectively implement. It's easier to put a direct tax on energy, gasoline and electricity, and tie a unit of energy or a volume of fuel to a direct amount of co2 that it emits into the atmosphere than a shoe or a cell phone, or an automobile.
He has learned to have less faith in markets. He must becoming Irish and European. Oh, we tend to have a good society and far more fair and effective that the US.
Ok so you are not a liberal and you label everything you hate as Keynesian. Trump is not a Keynesian. We are living in a Neo-Liberal economy, Milton Friedman's type of economy. The last Keynesian economy was in the 1970s. Try to read a little Samuelson or Galbraith history economy. That will help you to identify what kind of economy we are living in and to make a better judgement on economist.
@@GlobalDrifter1000 Alan Greenspan was the bubble master, but Paul Krugman and Keynsian economics provide all of the liquid soap that makes it possible. Market manipulation, socialism, and Central Banksters ARE the problem. Free Market Capitalism and Austrian economics are the way reality works. We haven't had real Free Market Capitalism for a century. We keep slipping further and further over the edge towards socialism and the Keynsian Utopia of Economic Collapse.
As an Economics teacher I think your economics is spot on Paul, but your political bias is absolutely appalling as well as your host. Just by his question, "what is it going to take to beat Donald Trump in November?" Go ahead and put either one of your losers (Joe or Bernie) up against Trump. You're smarter than this Paul.
William Roark why should a liberal biased to Democratic candidates be appalling? I assume from your comment that you’re biased to Republicans. Should I be appalled that someone differs from me in political persuasion?
Mr Krugman, you live in a different world. Social Security- it's broke, inefficient, and regressive. It takes from the poor to give to the rich. If people could invest SS like their own money, it would make 7% over the long haul. The post office is one of the worst run institutions- UPS & Fedex operate much better because they can hire & fire the people they need to. Same with Amtrak, the VA, the national highway system, NASA, FDA and many others. So with that record of success, you want a takeover of healthcare and education?
It's our job to understand what causes the slump, and how to get back. Now, forecasting it depends on understanding the future movements of a lot of variables, which is not easy to do, especially because expectations play a big role, and they shift way too fast. Looking back it is possible to understand the chain of events that led to a crisis, but forward it is really hard. Still, although the profession was aware that a banking crisis could lead to a demand shortfall, few people noticed banks were underregulated and exposed to systemic risks, especially that the housing bubble could severely affect banks. You can point that to a fail of observation from macroeconomists. Still, although the machanics of the shortfall looks quite similar to the great depression, our better understanding nowadays made the crash less dramatic than the great depression. Some progress at least.
My accountant friend said the problem social security ran into is that there is no dedicated fund, but SS Taxes are in fact being put in the general fund category.
I was right there with you Paul when you said Sanders is not a Socialist. Then you lost me when you attempted to describe socialism. I believe you described what is called "State Capitalism," where the Government Bureaucrat replaces the private owner and assumes his/her role. Capitalism is still in place, workers simply have a different boss. The key fundamental of Socialisms critique of Capitalism was the employer/employee relationship. Socialisms final solution was to have employees own the business/factory or modes of production and eliminate the single private owner of capital, who exploits employees labor to obtain a profit. Essentially, the goal was to bring Democracy into the workplace, where people spend most of their adult lives, giving each employee one vote as joint owners of the company. This allows the workers to decide what to produce, how to produce, where to produce, and what to do with the surplus. Under this system, I doubt the workers would vote to move their jobs to China, pollute their community, or pay one employee 300 times more then the lowest paid employee.
This is why the elites hate/fear Socialism so much. It cuts off their power at the head. These elites would do whatever it takes to resist socialism. Fascism is usually the oligarchs last weapon of choice, when propaganda fails. But others, such as Otto Von Bismarck and Roosevelt, enacted a type of welfare state to keep the socialist at bay and maintain the capitalist system. This is why we need social Democrats like Sanders, to create policies like Universal Health care, public Colleges, and a progressive tax system to act as a relief valve to curb some of capitalisms harmful externalities. If not, we get Fascism.
You are so stupid. Just like every socialist before. For exemple the workers are so bad at taking decisioms that they will bankrupt their own factory in a couple of years. They never reinvest. They would take all profit out. I have seen it first hand with farms in ROMANIA. WHEN GOVERMET GIVE WORKERS THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION. THOAE FARMS ARE FIRST BANCRUPT. EVEN A FAMILY WITH 2 PEOPLE IS HARD TO MAKE IT WORK. WHAT ABOUT 200 WORKERS EVERYONE WITH HIS OWN MIND.
@@cristianion2056 I never said I was a Socialist did I? I just chose to educate myself on it to see what all the fuss is about. Based on your response, its clear you know very little about socialism. Romania had to rapidly industrialize first, then let Capitalism run its life cycle before falling under its own weight, and then it can talk about socialism. You see, socialism can only be realized after Capitalism has run its course and is crushed under its own weight.
Good calls.
This guy is just part of the Cults of Celebrity. Front to back and a little in the kitchen, he ain’t got no reason to get the folks really noticing, cuz we’d be talking about treason. As in, what you gonna do with them trees son? Turn em into money? Maybe thou shalt kno west the rest…?
To put it in J. Stiglitzs words: „it is not about taking everything from the wealthy! It is about making Society more equal and stabile in order to create a sustainable humanity“.
I think that this is way better than fascistm, especialy when you look to the historical outcomes of fascism.
I‘m curious if the trending extreme inequality is spliting America and taking a growing portion of Americans out of social and political involvements. The country performs at suboptimum?
We try to say that all "men" are created equal, but that is not the case. If you start out poor your chances of accumulating a lot of money while someone else starts out with dad's fortune , things are neither fair nor equal. The rich justify that by calling it the "death tax."
And that is life. The way it should be. Accept inequalities as inherent to life including
animal life. Equality is a rebellion against nature based on the evil passions of man such as envy, greed and jealousy. Accept your fate and live with it while trying to do the best out of your lot. Thumbs down on the pretense of "equality".
So i started poor. More poor than you for sure living in a socialist country. Now WORKING IN A CAPITALIST COUNTRY I MAKE IT. I HAVE MY HOME AND PLANING TO BUY SECOND. WHY YOU WANT MY MONEY. YOU ARE GREDY
KRUGMAN'S PESSIMISM CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE .
THERE IS CERTAINLY A CHALLENGE AHEAD . pww
Slim Shady on the deckline.
Lol I feel the same way about Verizon I refuse to do business with them !
31minutes in. Yes, but on the green new deal and carbon tax, wouldn't a carbon tax cause an economic incentive in alternative energy development? And I think a carbon tariff would be a lot harder to implement than a carbon tax. Maybe not harder to get approved but harder to accurately and effectively implement. It's easier to put a direct tax on energy, gasoline and electricity, and tie a unit of energy or a volume of fuel to a direct amount of co2 that it emits into the atmosphere than a shoe or a cell phone, or an automobile.
He has learned to have less faith in markets. He must becoming Irish and European. Oh, we tend to have a good society and far more fair and effective that the US.
pk is 100% right. now bring on the zombie commenters!
Their shoes let down the whole show too bad
bad fashion. really unforgiveable.
They look comfortable. My type of shoe.
Today’s elbow patches for the modern Academic- shabby shoes.
Ha hahaha
This guy, and his Keynesian economics has caused all the Bubbles that are now popping. This guy is wrong about almost everything.
great analysis!
Ok so you are not a liberal and you label everything you hate as Keynesian. Trump is not a Keynesian. We are living in a Neo-Liberal economy, Milton Friedman's type of economy. The last Keynesian economy was in the 1970s. Try to read a little Samuelson or Galbraith history economy. That will help you to identify what kind of economy we are living in and to make a better judgement on economist.
@@mireillelebeau2513 you are well read, and in my opinion accurate in your assessment. I also listen to Prof Mark Blyth.
Allen Greenspan was the bubble master. I believe you must misunderstand Keynesian.
@@GlobalDrifter1000 Alan Greenspan was the bubble master, but Paul Krugman and Keynsian economics provide all of the liquid soap that makes it possible. Market manipulation, socialism, and Central Banksters ARE the problem. Free Market Capitalism and Austrian economics are the way reality works. We haven't had real Free Market Capitalism for a century. We keep slipping further and further over the edge towards socialism and the Keynsian Utopia of Economic Collapse.
As an Economics teacher I think your economics is spot on Paul, but your political bias is absolutely appalling as well as your host. Just by his question, "what is it going to take to beat Donald Trump in November?" Go ahead and put either one of your losers (Joe or Bernie) up against Trump. You're smarter than this Paul.
William Roark why should a liberal biased to Democratic candidates be appalling? I assume from your comment that you’re biased to Republicans. Should I be appalled that someone differs from me in political persuasion?
I am glad that you were wrong
Mr Krugman, you live in a different world. Social Security- it's broke, inefficient, and regressive. It takes from the poor to give to the rich. If people could invest SS like their own money, it would make 7% over the long haul. The post office is one of the worst run institutions- UPS & Fedex operate much better because they can hire & fire the people they need to. Same with Amtrak, the VA, the national highway system, NASA, FDA and many others. So with that record of success, you want a takeover of healthcare and education?
Krugman has a poor economic track record and doesnt understand the role of government.
@@IronMaidenDoD start a haters club.
@@rd264 "by 2005 or so, it will become clear the internets impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine" paul krugman, 1998
@@IronMaidenDoD can you imagine being wrong at least once? does it make you wrong forever? your comment implies it does..
Why on earth do they ask economists to predict the future? Remember all those economists warning about the impending crash of 2008? No? Exactly.
If they really know what they are doing, then we wouldn't have a crash would we?
@@whiterice7466 Economists can't predict the future, but they often have very good ideas about how to REACT to economic downturns.
It's our job to understand what causes the slump, and how to get back. Now, forecasting it depends on understanding the future movements of a lot of variables, which is not easy to do, especially because expectations play a big role, and they shift way too fast. Looking back it is possible to understand the chain of events that led to a crisis, but forward it is really hard.
Still, although the profession was aware that a banking crisis could lead to a demand shortfall, few people noticed banks were underregulated and exposed to systemic risks, especially that the housing bubble could severely affect banks. You can point that to a fail of observation from macroeconomists. Still, although the machanics of the shortfall looks quite similar to the great depression, our better understanding nowadays made the crash less dramatic than the great depression. Some progress at least.