Capitalism, socialism & democracy in the age of technological disruption - 49th St. Gallen Symposium
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 июл 2024
- Prof. Niall Ferguson, Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and the Center for European Studies, Harvard University
Followed by a conversation with Lord Griffiths of Fforestfach, Chairman of the St. Gallen Symposium
"You don't have to be right. You just have to be fashionable at the time." : This quote will become one of Prof. Ferguson's most enduring of many worthwhile quotes.
The human species is without doubt the most gullible of all. We are repugnant. It may be that we have a large percentage of counter instinctive individuals that simply don’t wish to continue their line. About time in my opinion. Practical works for me. Love
You all prolly dont care at all but does any of you know of a tool to log back into an Instagram account??
I somehow lost my password. I appreciate any tips you can offer me!
@Jaxson Jake Instablaster =)
Niall is a superstar - no other historian comes close today in providing expert analysis on economic history. We are endowed with economic clowns that comment on CNN and BBC. Niall, keep the flag up and continue with the honest analysis
Well said.
Niall I have read your books many times
Listened to your conversations
Brilliant
I see cultural of a given region as the most important
This is the only thing I think you get wrong
I have thought you are the most brilliant mind of our time Plus Ayaan. Blessings be
Life Liberty n Justice for all
Called it Capitalism or Socialism anyone with More Productivity and competition Will Win✌️✌️✌️✌️
Empire, my father left India to settle in Kenya and paid tax to British tax authorities. But he never went to Britain. Small businesses were a source of revenue collection scheme during this colonial period. I've got receipts to prove it.
Great stuff Sir.
Well done professor!
Niall be on the beam!
Great presentation.
Could I get a definition of 'socialism' as meant/perceived in the polls?
I wish I could read the slides :-(
BOOM, Nialled it!
At 50:18 Ferguson summarises his argument that it was the superiority of Western institutions that was the main reason for the Great Divergence not factors like colonisation. I view his key point that “the divergence of incomes continued after colonisation” with distrust and suspicion. Economist Utsa Patnaik calculated that the British Empire drained a total of 45 trillion dollars during the period 1765-1938, therefore, this would have significantly stunted the economic growth of post-colonial India. Yes it is important to consider factors such as Western institutions being supposedly superior. However, money drained from colonies would have significantly impacted the growth of these colonies post-imperialism. Meaning that Ferguson’s point is largely invalid.
Utsa Patnaik is a Marxist Economist. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licence_Raj stunted the economic growth of India. Export led growth led to the rise of East Asian economies, South Korea was devastated by the Korea war it was one of the poorest countries in the world has become one of richest.
Fantastic supple thinker who is so open as well. Bravo Niall
Great speech.
I love Niall
I admire Prof. Fergusson for his defense of Western values, and I am a capitalist, but there is certainly room within a capitalist (market economy) country for some socialism. In the U.S. we have the remnants of the New Deal still extremely popular and necessary. Yet there have always been a fair number of Conservatives and Libertarians in the U.S. who have been trying to dismantle the New Deal. If one could imagine the U.S., or any other country, with untrammeled capitalism, one would be wise to study the Gilded Age in the U.S. and the London economy of Chare's Dickens time. Not a pretty picture.
I adore Niall!
Ferguson is amazing as usual!
Tripe. Erudite and self congratulating, true.
Bernie is popular with college students because he says he'll cancel all their debt. In 1980, a student of mine said he was going to vote for Reagan because Reagan said he would get government out of people's lives, which in his mind meant that Reagan would make pot legal.
That student debt cancellation bill will never get passed
29:30 Ireland?!! - has Corporation Tax of a mere 12.5%
Niall Furguson should embrace the pronunciation that rhymes with "Nile" so as not to be confused with Neil Ferguson.
Someone PLEASE explain to Prof. Ferguson that Socialism ≠ Communism, he doesn't seem to understand this basic point.
Often it's well meaning legislation that ends up doing harm. Things like minimum wage and rent control mostly just hurt poor people
This guy is way off the mark,, the point is not to equate the idea of modern socialism with the original definition because thats not what the people want. But they do want, and it will be very necessary for capitalism to survive is a return to more even wealth distribution. For capitalism to continue to thrive we need a vibrant and prosperous middle class spending money. The only way to grow this is either by immigration or raising the income and situations of the poorer people so they too can join the middle class.
that’s why they want mass migration. it’s this huge diabolic and inhuman “machine” that is calling them. A machine that thrives by eating countries, peoples, cultures and the richest of the earth.
we have to get lost to get found, universal basic income, lets evolve, please.
Willy willy bum bum
What would he say about China today?
The higher the marginal tax rate, the slower the economic growth? Slower for whom, the rich, while everyone else stalls or goes backward?
Prof. Ferguson says younger voters lean towards socialism. As income inequality reaches extreme, the growing disenfranchised majority-millenials and base may turn to socialist politicians in the US.
No doubt a great historian and philosopher of history but I believe it's very daring of him to try to wage in as an economist.
The most elegant way of explaining economics and politics if only our politicians could speak this way
Brewster would not be amused
Social Justice is problematic on may levels - for me the most problematic is "who decides'? Who decides what; is and isn't, who decides; when and how, etc essentially "Social Justice" is a euphemism for Lynching and Mobbing - in an online context. Lets name it for what it is so there is no confusion.
Redistrabution is what killed middle class and paid what we didnt want. Want poor pay them get more.
But you forget as ppl get older in US, they get more pro capitalistic and against socialism.
Revoke Article 50....
Soviet Union is the wrong example the correct one would be China
This is so bleeding obvious that the reason Ferguson ignores becomes equally obvious.
It is Deng Xiaoping's free enterprise of the 1980s to the present day that has provided the dynamism that we are actually referring to when we talk about China as a successful country. State-owned industry alone, aka communism, could never have delivered the 10% annual growth rate we've seen in the past decades.
China is state capitalist.
Capitalist socialism vs socialist capitalism.
Democracy and Socialism is the same thing.
Both Democracy and Socialism are dependent to the Government.
That's why Democracy\Socialism failed everywhere.
Learn what Democracy did to Rome.
With Socialism you eventually run out of other peoples money ---- a problem
Am I to presume you are referring to the 'socialism' practised by the banks and corporations (bail-ins, bail-outs, tax breaks, money laundering, tax evasion, tax avoidance, etc.)?
@@view1st I would have to say if the wealthy paid more taxes and there is ie better money distribution so it isn't horded and the working poor dont hold more of the financial burden that wouldn't be a problem. Socialism as it's perceived now with the working class paying more than the wealthy than yes eventually it will collapse.
collective rights and minority rights don't go hand in hand in the same basket if he just stopped for a second and thought about it.
What about Ukraine?
Were google searches a thing in Thatcher's premiership?
Not very much is defined here. What does it mean to be an American socialist? Is it the socialism of Marx? The socialism of Sweden? What?
He doesn’t consider social democrats socialists. Well I don’t consider government bailouts and handouts to big business capitalism. I don’t consider government funded R and D that made computers, the internet, gps, WiFi, touchscreen, and basically every component in our phones possible, capitalism.
I'm proud to be Gen z and not a millennial.
Your sound is bad check it out
Great lecture! Politicians like Bernie & AOC are so clueless they can't even accurately describe themselves. They're social democrats, not socialists.
You, like Prof. Ferguson, don't understand that Socialism ≠ Communism.
But what would happen if capitalist countries didn't do all they could to undermine or outright destroy socialist and communist countries? Maybe all the fall of the Soviet Union shows is that capitalism is better at destroying systems other than its own, than the other way around.
Prof. Ferguson criticizes AOC and Bernie for calling themselves "socialists" when they advocate for social democratic policies. However, the political reality in America is that Republicans will call any Democrat a "socialist," regardless of their policy positions. I wish American politics was smart enough to use terms like "social democrat"... but it isn't.
Did Niall attend Trump's Social Media gathering?
No. Did you?
we dare to criticize China for trying to re-educate one million of its Uighur muslims to stem radicalisation by Muslim extremists. Meanwhile the west has been bombing numerous middle eastern countries, killing millions and causing a massive refugee crisis also in the effort to curb Muslim extremists. Kinda hypocritical if you think about it.
Very few economists stand the test of time because they are UNSCIENTIFIC. A load of old tosh here and just further evidence that economists haven’t got a scooby. What they don’t understand is familial and community endeavour, when you destroy that you destroy economic endeavour.
Adam smith stood the test of time very well. And recent innovation needs a lot more resources and investment than a community or family can produce.
Nial was quite dishonest in this speech.
So socialism is bad except when Wall Street and the rich need to be bailed out for their mistakes--and then socialism for them is OK?
It‘s a waste of time. 52 minutes of nothing. Abstract „-ism“s. Few people even understand what those „-ism“s at all. Try any of Chalmers Johnson‘s interviews; a 3-minute short clip has more information and wisdom that Ferguson, who seems to have the power to put any insomniac to sleep in a couple of minutes.
Can’t stand how he cherry picks his data and examples. To be a conservative intellectual you have to be dishonest.
are the data true or not true...
Nail ferguson out of date ,put in garbeg ,fake intlectull
Learn to spell idiot.
Niall aservent of his lord,betrail of his past,poor Scotland,shame on you.his words are rubish,nonsence
I watched the disgusting and revolting and insulting behavior of the over self approving Mr, Ferguson in his interview with Geoffery Sachs where he displayed a viscious and revolting behavior interview towards Mr. Sachs, who unlike Ferguson with flat out insulting behavior towards Sachs. The difference? Sachs was involved in the actual transition of Russia from communism to vulture crony capitalism which has not served Russia well. Meantime what real world experience has Ferguson had, other other than viciously insulting attacks upon others that disagree with him? Bugger all. No real world experience, just ivory tower analysis and nasty commentary from ha;;;owed halls of Harvard. To be honest I find him to the least introspective and honest economists in the entire field, a man likely suffering from bipolar disease or narcissism and overly fond of his trite commentary and unrealistic thoughts.
Though I really admire Niall I'm disappointed to see him conflate socialism with communism.
Socialism - by definition - "a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism."
@@kellyfj Can you cite where you read said "definition"?
@@glsapp23 lmgtfy.com/?q=socialism+definition
He lied about China.