Solidarity with the workers as we struggle, capital wants us to feel like we are struggling alone. I know that because Dr Wolff laid my story out properly in the first half. ✋🤞✌️
Low wage workers have been priced out. If you haven't inherited or purchased a home a few decades ago you are in real trouble. Our government (and corporate overlords) think you will continue to be a wage slave with or without a home and are too greedy to provide sufficient public housing which would allow people to work the low wage jobs and be safely housed.
@@Illuminated7 What are you talking about? Public Housing? Can you read? Can you follow a line of thought or are you ADD? Take your Adderall and re-read what I posted then respond.
Wage slavery???? Slavery is against the law and has been since 1865. That you have nothing to offer that anyone wants to buy is who's fault? That FDR gave you the gift of fiat and the socialists gave you dependence and the public gave you all the things you wanted...all of which failed, while labor priced themselves out of the market is whose fault? You should go to California, they have "public housing" at $500,000 a unit, plus you would get food stamps and Medicaid...no job required.
@@Illuminated7 Nope not brilliant, just a bitter Russian ex pat elite that lost everything to communists and had to run to the USA to live. She never really got over it.
Standing by a country means standing by the principles that govern that country. The point being made here is that the founding principles of the USA... markets and private property are causing the downfall of the USA.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel." -Samuel Johnson Fuck the President, fuck this country. Stand by poor, working class, and oppressed people.
@@cassiedevereaux-smith3890 That was a reference to a specific political party, so the phrase is out of context and doesn't have the meaning you think it does.
Just remember that patriotism is now used as an opportunity for war to distract and deepen the divide of the struggle for economic justice and democracy.
@@georgefurman4371 When no one knows what any of the words mean and everyone has an echo chamber to hide in "division" is the obvious result. You have met the enemy and they is YOU!!!
Your guest has really hit on the importance of the private-state collaborations created early on, in the part they played in the making of the mess of our "civilization".
Actually, civilization made a mess of itself...since it changed the paradigm of "necessary cooperation" to "selective cooperation" to favor genetic transfer and improve the probability of success of one's lineage since being in "control" provided an advantage that facilitated those ends and nothing has changed. You would think the consistency of this history would have made an impression by now...and who knows, you may get to experience that whole "survival" thing for real in the coming days.
@@Illuminated7 it's not about proving anything, Capitalism has run it's course and is obsolete. What part of unsustainable, species/planet destroying do you not understand? It is only degenerates who do not think 100 years ahead. If you are not governing for the future of your children and grandchildren then you are a literal degenerate.
@@Illuminated7 There is no such thing as environmentally conscious capitalism. The answer is reorganizing communities into indigenous eco-villages. Michael Dowd has a RUclips channel called thegreatstory, he lays out very clearly what ecologist, anthropologist, and economist have know about our predicament since the 1970's, it is hard to accept that we have been consuming extreme capitalist propaganda for 80 years.
@@Illuminated7 If human beings always had to wait for something better to pop up, humanity would still not even be in the stone age, because everybody still would be crawling around searching for food and the rest of the time would be sitting and waiting for something better to come. Capitalism developed because some people saw opportunities other did not see and acted. That attitude was behind three revolutions from the Renaissance: 1. The scientific rev. 2. The political rev. 3. The industrial rev.
Union Soildarity is the only thing that truly keeping Unfettered Capitalism held back, as long as Unions make sure they have power, people can't be gotten rid of so easily.
Labor unions have lost power for a fundamental reason, and that reason is that it takes way fewer workers to create the things that people consume. This is what it means when worker productivity goes up and up. And in the USA all those gains in productivity have gone into the pockets of a billionaire class that doesn't give a crap about the USA... except as a market.
What you're forgetting is that Thatcherism and Reaganism smashed the power of the unions around the Western World. What you might not know or have forgotten is that a lot of people welcomed it. I'm Australian and we got tired of Unions holding society to ransom with opportunistic strikes. Every holiday at least one of the unions threatened some sort of industrial action. Baggage handlers, air refuelers, airline cabin crews were among the worst. Over in the building trades we used to have all sorts of actions. One year back in the 1970s the electricians simply went on strike and just waited until the power stations shut down.
@@blogintonblakley2708 I get your point up to a certain degree. I'm an engineer and work in automation - robots & production machinery are among what I have done for a significant part of my working life. I have had that bullshite line that people like me cost other people their jobs. At times YES, when you upgrade a production system there might fewer jobs, *but that is not always true.* WHEN companies do upgrade and INVEST its very rare that they then shut shop and go somewhere else. The jobs that remain actually become more secure. If you are a worker in any western company for the past 40 years and management DOES NOT upgrade. Then your job is at risk. if you are in a company where they are investing in new automated plant automation then your job is usually secure. Most job loses were through retirement or attrition (people who just moved on). Plus most of the tasks that get automated away are jobs people don't like doing. Tasks that get automated are tasks that are repetitive. Where there is a real problem with automation is the utterly false assumption by managers that *workers need less skill.* They actually need to LEARN more skills. The easiest example to give from my experience is welding robots. I can program robots to do almost anything. My grandfather taught me to arc weld when I was about 13. BUT I CAN'T out program a welding robot compared to someone who was formally trained as a welder. NONE of the robot engineers can. So what happens with robotic welding is that the welders have to learn the basics of programming or at leat how to adjust exisitng programs. They don't need to learn how the robots communicate with master control systems that's my job. The don't need to learn how to configure the robot to do welding - that's my job. But when it comes to getting the robot to weld parts together so that the new part is what its supposed to be - THAT'S THEIR JOB. So there's a lot of misunderstanding about manufacturing and jobs. There's also another aspect. When companies don't upgrade to maintain their production machinery, which accountants love to do because they just hate letting engineers spend money, one of 2 things eventually happens. 1) It breaks down and broken machinery costs money. Wages still have to be paid, bills still have to be paid and there's the cost of fixing things. And if companies are stupid enough (and many are) machinery eventually catastrophically fails and it can't be fixed. 2) Other manufacturers will simply pass you by with more efficient production and just as likely *higher quality production.* Its sounds obvious but you'd be amazed how many economists, accountants and business managers don't get is that *newer, upgraded or well maintained machinery makes better parts.*
@@tonywilson4713 I think you might be misunderstanding my point to some extent. No matter how you slice it automation means one of two things.. labor prices decrease... (marginal costs decrease is another way of putting it) or skills required to compete increase. Usually it's both. Now if labor prices decrease it necessarily means that labor's political influence decreases as well. And if skills needed to compete increase... well that is going to leave behind those who aren't inclined or capable of adapting to the requirements. Which means a lot of disaffected laborers where you once had normal consumers capable of participating in society. Since these decision are not being made in a democratic way, but are instead being made in the interests of a relative few, you get societal conflict as wealth pools away from the middle class and social mobility stagnates. All of this is reflected in the loss of power of industrial unionization. Police and teachers unions are doing fine... but those workers who worked in manufacturing have lost almost all power in the USA due to the loss of manufacturing to offshoring and automation.
@@tonywilson4713 I'm sorry but it wasn't Thatcherism or Reaganism that destroyed unions. The reasons for the decline of unions are as I've said. What Reagon and Thathcer did was a coup de grace. Strong unions force political solutions as they did when FDR was forced to concede to the Wobblies. The destruction of unions was a long project that stretched out over the decades after FDR was no longer the president. Many people don't like the political power of strikes... However it's not a like or dislike kind of thing. Look at what has happened since unions were castrated... the rise of corporate power has had no check. So, like many things that irritate it's easy to dismiss the necessary role those irritants play... until big pharma is forcing vaccines and mask on everyone for their own profit.
I agree. There are some situations where growth is paramount. And there are others where growth is unwanted. What he is talking about here is the decline in birth rates being noticed in many countries around the world including America. When it comes to birth rates, countries want to see a stable birth rate or (given the correct circumstances) an increasing birth rate. What a country doesn’t want to see is a birth rate in decline, particular if that declining birth rate continues for quite a number of years. The way our society works they way it does is because the distribution of a country’s population within certain age brackets follows a certain pattern that is essential to keep society working the way we have become accustomed to. At the base of the population distribution graph are the babies and children up to say 18 yo. Typically, people in this age group do not contribute much to society. In the middle of the graph you have people aged 18 to 65. This is the portion of the population that contributes most to keeping society running. People between the ages of 30 and 50 are typically the greatest contributors. At the top of the population graph are those people who have retired from work and the elderly. Like the very young group, this group does not contribute significantly to keeping society going. In fact, this group requires support just like the young children group. Ideally, for society to continue to function, you want the middle group and the young group to be of roughly similar sizes. This means, that as generations in the working middle group grow older and retire, people from the bottom younger children group enter into the workforce to take their place. To maintain a stable population (no growth, just keeping the population the same), any country needs a birth rate of 2.1. 2.1 means that every female has to give birth to on average 2 children to maintain a stable population - two children to replace the mother and father when they die. If a country’s birth rate starts to decline (America’s is currently 1.6), that means fewer children are being born. If the decline in birth rate occurs over many years, that means that there will be significantly fewer children for several generations. The problem is this, with a decline in birth rates resulting in fewer children, that population distribution graph I was talking about earlier, well the bottom portion of that graph starts to shrink. This won’t result in any drastic problems immediately. However, as the entire population grows older, we start to see generations of people moving out of the productive working group on the population group and into the retirement and elderly group. The productive working class of the population starts to shrink as there aren’t enough people from the young children group (which is now dramatically smaller because of persistent low birth rates) graduating into the productive working class to take over the jobs that were being performed by the retiring generations. The smaller productive work force must provide everything society needs to function with less workers as well as supporting a growing elderly population while also trying to find time to bring up a young family. If the difference between the number of retiring workers and the number of new workers entering society to take their place is sufficiently great, the resultant stress on society as a whole could be profound. Society would no longer be able to support itself as there just aren’t enough new workers to replace the old workers retiring. If low birth rates became a feature for several generations, the resultant effect on society and its ability to support itself and thrive would be extraordinary. The point Richard is trying to make is that no advanced economy wants to see birth rates that are in decline, particularly if the decline looks like it will persist over many years. Ideally, in America, if you just consider birth rate and nothing else (like COVID-19, wealth inequality, political stagnation and ineffectiveness, climate change, rising geopolitical tensions etc), government and other institutions should be figuring out how to encourage families to have more kids in order to avert a possible future societal crisis.
M C Smith Nonsense. Capitalism does not "depend" on inequality, it simply reflects the inequality (of talent, skill and ambition) that natually exists among people.
@@clarestucki5151 you are deluding yourself. The US has generated so much wealth and abundance for the elite and yet crime is rising, people are sicker than before, the wages have been stagnant for decades, mental illness is on the rise in all demographics but especially young, and the average worker can no longer afford to buy a home or even have children. Those are material realities that are getting harder and harder to ignore, and it is physically unsustainable. This is what happens when a profit motive is the only guiding principle for our economy and how our society is structured. It will get much much worse
You make some great points when it comes to the loss of working class jobs in America, particularly manufacturing jobs. I agree that corporations have been profit driven in moving working class jobs overseas to take advantage of significantly cheaper labour costs which of course results in greater profits for companies who follow this practice. However, in a capitalist society where continued company market growth and continued company profit growth is expected year over year, what other choice did companies have but to move working class jobs from America where labour costs were high to another costs where labour costs are lower. The other benefit corporations realise by moving American labour jobs overseas to take advantage of cheap labour is that the company can continue to manufacture it’s products at a lower cost thereby keeping the retail price of the final product competitive with similar products manufactured by foreign companies. As I understand things, a developing country is able to offer cheap labour because living standards are considerably beneath a developed country’s living standards. As the developing country begins to grow, living standards steadily improve. With the improvement in living standards comes a higher cost of living. Companies are gradually growing and seeing higher profits. To maintain the development of the country and in response to growing competition from other companies,, companies see the need to pay a higher labour wage, which offsets the higher cost of living and keeps the development of the country going until it becomes an advanced economy. At which point, companies within the newly emerged advanced economy, following the capitalist trend set by American companies and companies of other advanced economies around the world, and started shedding (or will have already shed) its working class jobs (for which wages are now very high and uncompetitive) to newly developing countries with cheap labour. It seems to me that any developing country that embraces capitalism will, if successful in its quest to become an advanced economy, is destined to shed its working class jobs as the country nears the end point of its transformation. This is due to: - The nature of capitalism requires that companies grow market share and grow profits. If labour costs are significantly cheaper somewhere else it is a given that the cheaper labour will be utilised to reduce costs, maximise profit and maintain the company’s products competitiveness with other similar products by other companies through keeping product costs down and therefore maintaining a competitive retail price. - I don’t see how any nation that makes the transition from a developing economy to an advanced economy can avoid losing a fair proportion of its working class to labour jobs in newer developing nations. Is there a solution?
The german professor makes a great point about china's military budget and their global infrastructural programmes. They are clearly not looking for war.
Here is a safe, easy way to resist the corruption that is trying to destroy you: join a credit union! Untether your life and finances to banks. A credit union a partnership of other people like yourself. It doesn't matter if your credit union is regional or small. You can still live your life with your $ and directly support a community too. Banks will never look out for you-a credit union does.
These programs really bring me up, educating me while appreciating hearing someone who accurately describes the current state of affairs. On a side note, pay attention to the sounds around you. Look up. Pay attention to the dots. The dots. The ceiling. The ceiling. Roof. Strange waves in the air. And the dots. Oh yeah, another thing: pay attention to the sounds. And verbally proclaim the following question out loud as if you want to be heard by everyone around you: ' "Was it worth it?" Ask those "strange sounds and voices" whether it will be worth it when the persecuted come together and force the individuals associated with the causation of said persecution and suffering to 'run.' ...To run far. And keep running. ...It's their only hope. And they'll run over and over and over...
The resurgence of labor, of leftish pastors like bishop barber and efforts to awaken Christians that act in line with the sermon on the mount all raise hope. Nomiki Konst has a great interview on christians working to deprogram rightwing christianity. scandinavian countries are enjoying a bit of a baby boom from the pandemic as reported by Jacobin.
As much as I enjoyed this weekend's professional football games, I was utterly floored to see a huge stadium packed to gills with screaming fans, none of whom I saw were wearing masks! The ignorance and/or denialism filling those stadiums was mind-numbing to me. Am I missing something? As an old man, I feel compelled to question my own rationality. I just don't "get" it!
Yes. You're missing a few things which have nothing at all to do with "anti-vaxxer denial": 1) Masking outdoors has always been unnecessary (multiple studies back this up); 2) If you're already vaccinated, what are you afraid of? The vaccine protects YOU against severe illness & death; not others; 3) Mild Omicron signals the endemic phase, and it's time to get back to living life instead of cowering in fear.
That people would risk their lives for a game tells you what's really wrong with this country. We are a sad bunch who have been conned into wanting material things. That keeps Americans from taking a really hard look at what their country has and will become.
Much of the 'information' on covid provided by the government and corporate media exists to promote big pharma profits and facilitate a power grab for the super rich, not to promote public health. They knew there was never much of a chance to eliminate the disease from the world population but didn't want to let a good crisis go to waste and so sold false hope.
The German guy has a good point. If we would just train ourselves to quit consuming so much (stop eating, stop wearing clothing, stop building housing, stop driving cars, etc.), it would be very beneficial to the environment and the earth would be much nicer!! Of course, that would cause certain problems, but what the hell, who cares???
I studied it like this: Winston Churchill memoir THE GATHERING STORM, he mentioned European birthrates in 1920 after WWI and called it the War Cycle. I was taken aback that a great leader callously calculated that newborns would be soldiers in WWII which he saw as a continuation of WWI. Big topic.
Thank you very much for the effort you put into your videos. I was curious whether you are familiar with Ha-Joon Chang and his book "Bad Samaritans" and if yes, what is your take on his version of the history of capitalism and its development. I am studying economics at college and although we discuss the shortcomings of Free trade and Free market in our class(for example, 1 of 32 page slides was dedicated to "why markets fail"), professors rarely seem to take it seriously. Watching your videos and doing my independent research helped me be a more skeptical about things I was being taught in college and free market and free trade is certainly one of the thigns that are almost worshipped. Thanks for your response if you read this!
Who can have children with both parents working 40+ hours a week? Childcare costing more than $1,000 a MONTH? So monthly expenses: rent, $1k+, health insurance $1,500k, childcare $1-$1,500k, that’s already >$3k and we haven’t talked about basic essentials, car insurance, utilities, car repairs, etc. The only people I know who are having kids are military families who are paid at the cost of living & have health insurance.
I’ve thought of this a lot, and I don’t want to see the day he’s gone. He has his faults but he’s genuine and a true humanitarian, as much of one can be in our corrupt authoritarian government
Once the rational players have their plans and emergent approaches up and running they will pop the bubble of the existential threat to us all including those laboring under their own unsustainability and delusional thinking.
@@petersepall2590 yes, true true true. The main and only actual advantage of those rational among us is a view to future. The ability to see and put planned approaches together and in motion to in the end arrive in a planned for place, improved and stronger than at the start. A world free of US control of the currency system will call it's debt forcing the wholesale closure of military bases and occupation now financed by those who are potential victims. Iran knows and no longer has to suffer simply for existing. Being now members of the emergent systems able to do without dollars and free of the sanctions the US has been free up till now to impose, yada yada yada.
We need to keep GROWING population, when we are already trashing the environment with our bacteria-like consumption and wastefulness? We'd be well served if we had about HALF the number of people we already have, IMO.
The problem is an ageing population. China has played with curbing population growth in the past and it didn't turn out too well for them. If you were going to reduce the population you'd essentially need to genocide the elderly to avoid systemic collapse, so given that we've come to the agreement that genocide is not cool, I think it's better to focus on consumption. The earth can absolutely support the existing population, it just can't support the wasteful excesses of modern capitalist economies.
Thank you for the great analysis and conversation, for me when you fully realize and accept the scope of where we are you are left with no other logical conclusion that the end is near. At this point, I've lost any hopeium I have left.
Enough of Bernie Sanders. For all his talk, In the end he always supports the establishment democratic candidates, and he let his presidential campaign supporters down big time.
Very good Richard... just the kind of information needed by folks! Keep up the good work. btw do you sell your books as online downloads please? I'm in Aotearoa New Zealand and I think as regards shipping, downloading is the way to go. I don't like purchasing from Amazon. I also prefer D@Work to get the proceeds directly rather than book depository or some other org, Cheers Brian
I'll answer where this is all going as nobody ever says it: Human extinction. It's a matter of when and not if and that may be why so many greed mongers are taking wild risks. Rats in the bilge feel the ship sinking but they don't voice it, they don't tell the other rats, rather, they climb over each other's backs to get the last scape.
@@drunkensailor112 So, are you saying that the 2000 billionaires residing in other countries are different??? Number of billionaires by region 2019 North America...834 Europe...847 Asia ...758 Middle East .....172 Latin America and the Caribbean...140 Africa....41 Pacific ...33 You were saying about inequality????
@@jgalt308 you only look at the wealthy. Inequality is the very rich against the very poor. I live in the Netherlands on a slightly above average salary. 36 hours is full time in our company and I can easily get by with 24 hours while living alone and I get 10 weeks off per year on pay. Even if there is inequality in my country. The lower and middle incomes such as myself don't have it that bad.
In the 1700s American colonists saw the effect the first multinational corporation (East India Trading Co) was having on India and the Crown. They showed their displeasure by having a Tea Party in Boston. William Dalrymple traces the history.
Don't forget the colonists were very busy in the 1700 taking everything away from the people who lived here thousands of years before the colonists....colonialism was the beginning of global take over....
@@jgalt308 No the point of the Boston Tea party was a push toward private property... The idea that the gains created should be retained by those who create them. The irony is that we've merely created a different kind of feudalism here. So under capitalism, the gains are taken by owners, not retained by the workers that create the gains. Further proof that markets are a failure as a way to create a stable healthy society. {waits for the inevitable non responsive evasion typically seen from this commenter)
Now why would the already identified "willfully ignorant, functional illiterate" expect a response, when he has failed to respond to the simple question asked. Prof Wolff has already shared his understanding of this as being the result of a tax on tea. ( false ) Nor does his irrelevant response address any aspect of the history being cited, that is alluded to in the initial comment, regarding the economic effects, while babbling about free markets, and the "reasons" for the various actions taken by the crown after 1763 and the resistance of the colonists to them. ( this being one and all about free markets ) You mean cheaper tea? That effect? (which I'm pretty sure would be covered in the book) Nor am I aware of any "tea growers" in the "colonies" but why quibble.
@@jgalt308 Like I said, you can't respond to what I say. Instead you do your best to distract from the truth of what I say. Arguing in good faith means understanding the issues. You can't argue in good faith or from knowledge so you resort to word salad responses and cut and paste. The opposite of impressive.
Most common jobs in America CASHIER Nat'l average salary: $10.84/hr FOOD PREPARATION WORKER Nat'l average salary: $11.38/hr JANITOR Nat'l average salary: $11.60/hr BARTENDER Nat'l average salary: $11.64/hr SERVER, RETAIL SALES ASSOCIATE, STOCKING ASSOCIATE, LABORER BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO GETS OUR JOBS, WHAT MATTERS IS WHO SHIP THEM OUT & WHY IS IT ALLOWED? TOP RECIPIENTS OF AMERICAN JOBS: European Union 5.7 mil China 7.3 mil Japan 1.3 mil South Korea 1mil United Kingdom 1mil COUNTRIES MOST OUTSOURCED TO: Philippines India
I love these videos, but, please, someone tell him to pull down the back of his jacket when he sits for the camera so it doesn't hunch up around his ears. I know it's a small cosmetic thing, but it really annoys me when people don't know to do this
Interesting comments. A private "medical system" (Tower Health) shut down 2 hospitals in our county some time in December 2021. Brandywine Hospital and Jennersville Hospital. This makes no sense in the midst of a medical crisis.
The extensive resistance to pandemic policies from the working people, is a massive event of no confidence in the ruling elite and their system that works on disunity and distrust. People then are looking for alternative systems that develop unity and trust. Chinese success in pandemic polices is due to the long relationship of trust and unity of the people with the communist party.
That's why the US is a service economy now and ruled by the Military Industrial Complex. This is why the war drums are constantly beating, because the US economy relies on weapons sales.
existentially necessary growth arises from using interest to lure the means of exchange into circulation (aka money as a public utility). Interest (usury) demands inflation and growth. Until this issue is tackled both periodic default, crisis, wealth concentration will plague societies. this topic is covered in das geld syndrome (the money syndrome). it also covers a price stable means to replace the use of interest rate controls by a CB to maintain the velocity of money (ie commerce).
The sociological ramification of capital flight are as Dr. Wolf says, capitalists thought that if not them it would be the Russians, Germans or the French or the British capitalists who would invest in Asia driven by competition that American capitalists took advantage of the phase of economic development the underdeveloped economies were becoming. What it meant for the American working class was the beginning of a deskilling process of workers, as production was moved, creating a redundant working population that would also serve as a competitive background for the reduction of wages of the working class began to take shape, and offsetting the displacement of workers by automation, the working day increased as did worker productivity. Capitalists are extracting more surplus-value from workers through a scheme of external worker competition for jobs that lowers wages, and by an internal process of extending the working day and labor output through automation. A double blow to the working class that position workers in a bad spot when the economic order undergoes other shocks and tools are applied to correct a crisis or prevent one from happening work to fix the financial side of the economy at the expense of the social side of the economy, endless policies that bail out capitalists at the expense of workers. This interplay between competition and automation defines the nature of the American class struggle, as a dramatic power play for ultimate owner and the distribution of the economic surplus. Two economic forces make necessary a working class opposition to the onslaughts of capitalist competition and the use of automation for private consumption can only be fought back by a massive strike waves and social boycotts of the specific monopoly corporations in charge of the political life of the country, to break the international competition among capitalist rival nations, and to break the monopoly formations domestically by finding work in alternative industries and spending your money on alternative products, this to weaken the international strangle hold corporations have on American workers, but the ultimate conquest is political power and workers need a political voice(s).
I believe that it's better to have fewer children for some years at least, until the human population decreases a few billion. Because humans need stuff and that means polution. The masses of the world should be considered citizens of the world if we try to produce more people in the interest of making more Nationals, more religious groups etc, it will be too much for the ecosystem.
As a counter to your argument, if the world birth rate continues to drop, we will find ourselves in a situation where there is a very large retired portion of the population. Having a large retired population requires a large population of workers to support the retired/elderly class. If the current low birth rate continues, sure eventually there will be less people in the world. But the breakdown of the population by age will have a very large, if not the largest, group as retired/elderly and no longer able to contribute to society. Because of the low birth rate, there are not enough people of working age to support the elderly, support the children and support society. Society will literally not have enough people of the right age group to support society - food production, manufacturing, government, housing - every industry that we have come to rely on for our standard of living will be unable to match the demands of a society that simply has too many elderly and young and not enough workers. To keep the population steady (no growth) you need every woman to have 2 children each year (the 2 children being the population replacements for their parents when their parents die). The US rate is currently at one of its lowest points in history 1.6 children for every woman. If this were to continue, or worse drop further, the resultant effect on the distribution of ages in the US population could lead to the scenario I alluded to above where there is a lack of people between the ages of 18 and 60 who are physically and mentally capable of working to provide everything a society needs to remain prosperous. A prolonged decline in birth rates would place a huge stress on future society that would take generations to recover from. If it recovers at all.
@@markbourne4623 When you factor in the environmental problems caused by a large human population: toxic pollution, depletion of fresh water, intensification of droughts, floods and heat waves which are leading imminently to the collapse of large scale agriculture; one must conclude the population is not sustainable. The collapse of our civilization will inflict its suffering on everyone, the weak , and the elderly falling first.
Nothing changes until real people can choose pragmatic alternatives. Somehow, there never are any. Occupy Wall Street was a cry for help. Those people saw no pragmatic alternatives available to them, including a path to creating pragmatic alternatives.
Hulu Justified, that what we get now. no income no job no assets what;s left ? Justified on Hulu, entrataining and depressing we all live on the RESevation
Your initial discussion about US population seems to assume that population growth is inherently a good thing. As an economist do you seriously think that unlimited growth in a finite world is even possible? If not, what do you think the US' or world's carrying capacity for homo sapiens is? In other words, what is the optimum human population for our planet? And no, I am not advocating for coercively regulating population. If people were properly educated about population dynamics, and were not reliant on having many children to ensure someone would look after them in old age, I believe most would make rational decisions on how many kids to have.
Solidarity with the workers as we struggle, capital wants us to feel like we are struggling alone. I know that because Dr Wolff laid my story out properly in the first half. ✋🤞✌️
Strength to you! Educate as many as you can. Recruit as many as you can!!
Tens of millions of us in the USA Today
The topical cases of the B.O.P. Backwards on purpose.
Thank you for the informative analysis Mr Scheidler was definitely worth listening to.
Low wage workers have been priced out. If you haven't inherited or purchased a home a few decades ago you are in real trouble. Our government (and corporate overlords) think you will continue to be a wage slave with or without a home and are too greedy to provide sufficient public housing which would allow people to work the low wage jobs and be safely housed.
@@Illuminated7 What are you talking about? Public Housing? Can you read? Can you follow a line of thought or are you ADD? Take your Adderall and re-read what I posted then respond.
Wage slavery???? Slavery is against the law and has been since 1865.
That you have nothing to offer that anyone wants to buy is who's fault?
That FDR gave you the gift of fiat and the socialists gave you dependence
and the public gave you all the things you wanted...all of which failed,
while labor priced themselves out of the market is whose fault?
You should go to California, they have "public housing" at $500,000 a unit,
plus you would get food stamps and Medicaid...no job required.
Once again, a "willfully ignorant, functional illiterate" insists upon demonstrating
his condition.
@@Illuminated7 Nope not brilliant, just a bitter Russian ex pat elite that lost everything to communists and had to run to the USA to live.
She never really got over it.
Ayn Rand collected social security checks.
In the time of crisis of our nation, I hope everyone understands how extremely lucky we are to be gifted with this guy.
My favorite weekly update!
*“Patriotism means to stand by the country, not (to) a President”*
_Theodore Roosevelt_
Standing by a country means standing by the principles that govern that country. The point being made here is that the founding principles of the USA... markets and private property are causing the downfall of the USA.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel." -Samuel Johnson
Fuck the President, fuck this country. Stand by poor, working class, and oppressed people.
@@cassiedevereaux-smith3890 That was a reference to a specific political party,
so the phrase is out of context and doesn't have the meaning you think it does.
Just remember that patriotism is now used as an opportunity for war to distract and deepen the divide of the struggle for economic justice and democracy.
@@georgefurman4371 When no one knows what any of the words mean and everyone
has an echo chamber to hide in "division" is the obvious result. You have met the
enemy and they is YOU!!!
Your guest has really hit on the importance of the private-state collaborations created early on, in the part they played in the making of the mess of our "civilization".
Actually, civilization made a mess of itself...since it changed the paradigm of
"necessary cooperation" to "selective cooperation" to favor genetic transfer and improve
the probability of success of one's lineage since being in "control" provided an
advantage that facilitated those ends and nothing has changed.
You would think the consistency of this history would have made an impression
by now...and who knows, you may get to experience that whole "survival" thing
for real in the coming days.
Who knows, indeed.
If possible, please have this guest on a future program in which he can expand on his ideas. He is very articulate and informative.
Here's more from him: ruclips.net/video/x3wSTyHTG90/видео.html
@@SvalbardSleeperDistrict Thank you
Thank you for this show! Loved the guest. I hope we'll see more perspectives of intellectuals and scholars on the current crises in future shows!
Absolutely fantastic guest! Thank you, professor Wolff for today's show. Capitalism is doomed...
Promises, promises.
@@Illuminated7 it's not about proving anything, Capitalism has run it's course and is obsolete. What part of unsustainable, species/planet destroying do you not understand? It is only degenerates who do not think 100 years ahead. If you are not governing for the future of your children and grandchildren then you are a literal degenerate.
Let’s hope so 🤞🏻😟
@@Illuminated7 There is no such thing as environmentally conscious capitalism. The answer is reorganizing communities into indigenous eco-villages. Michael Dowd has a RUclips channel called thegreatstory, he lays out very clearly what ecologist, anthropologist, and economist have know about our predicament since the 1970's, it is hard to accept that we have been consuming extreme capitalist propaganda for 80 years.
@@Illuminated7 If human beings always had to wait for something better to pop up, humanity would still not even be in the stone age, because everybody still would be crawling around searching for food and the rest of the time would be sitting and waiting for something better to come. Capitalism developed because some people saw opportunities other did not see and acted. That attitude was behind three revolutions from the Renaissance: 1. The scientific rev. 2. The political rev. 3. The industrial rev.
You are the best America has! Thank you for your courage and truthfulness.
There are worse jobs now compared to the jobs we had in the 1990s, like Gig economy jobs that pay less than minimum wage.
I make same $ I made in 1993.
So good listening about perspectives regarding China!
Cool, great guest!
From the motherland of fun and laughter
Kudos to Mr. Fabian Sheidler!
Good conversation with professor Richard wollf.
excellent guest.
Union Soildarity is the only thing that truly keeping Unfettered Capitalism held back, as long as Unions make sure they have power, people can't be gotten rid of so easily.
Labor unions have lost power for a fundamental reason, and that reason is that it takes way fewer workers to create the things that people consume. This is what it means when worker productivity goes up and up. And in the USA all those gains in productivity have gone into the pockets of a billionaire class that doesn't give a crap about the USA... except as a market.
What you're forgetting is that Thatcherism and Reaganism smashed the power of the unions around the Western World.
What you might not know or have forgotten is that a lot of people welcomed it.
I'm Australian and we got tired of Unions holding society to ransom with opportunistic strikes. Every holiday at least one of the unions threatened some sort of industrial action. Baggage handlers, air refuelers, airline cabin crews were among the worst. Over in the building trades we used to have all sorts of actions. One year back in the 1970s the electricians simply went on strike and just waited until the power stations shut down.
@@blogintonblakley2708 I get your point up to a certain degree.
I'm an engineer and work in automation - robots & production machinery are among what I have done for a significant part of my working life.
I have had that bullshite line that people like me cost other people their jobs. At times YES, when you upgrade a production system there might fewer jobs, *but that is not always true.* WHEN companies do upgrade and INVEST its very rare that they then shut shop and go somewhere else. The jobs that remain actually become more secure.
If you are a worker in any western company for the past 40 years and management DOES NOT upgrade. Then your job is at risk. if you are in a company where they are investing in new automated plant automation then your job is usually secure. Most job loses were through retirement or attrition (people who just moved on).
Plus most of the tasks that get automated away are jobs people don't like doing. Tasks that get automated are tasks that are repetitive.
Where there is a real problem with automation is the utterly false assumption by managers that *workers need less skill.* They actually need to LEARN more skills. The easiest example to give from my experience is welding robots. I can program robots to do almost anything. My grandfather taught me to arc weld when I was about 13. BUT I CAN'T out program a welding robot compared to someone who was formally trained as a welder. NONE of the robot engineers can. So what happens with robotic welding is that the welders have to learn the basics of programming or at leat how to adjust exisitng programs. They don't need to learn how the robots communicate with master control systems that's my job. The don't need to learn how to configure the robot to do welding - that's my job. But when it comes to getting the robot to weld parts together so that the new part is what its supposed to be - THAT'S THEIR JOB.
So there's a lot of misunderstanding about manufacturing and jobs.
There's also another aspect. When companies don't upgrade to maintain their production machinery, which accountants love to do because they just hate letting engineers spend money, one of 2 things eventually happens.
1) It breaks down and broken machinery costs money. Wages still have to be paid, bills still have to be paid and there's the cost of fixing things. And if companies are stupid enough (and many are) machinery eventually catastrophically fails and it can't be fixed.
2) Other manufacturers will simply pass you by with more efficient production and just as likely *higher quality production.*
Its sounds obvious but you'd be amazed how many economists, accountants and business managers don't get is that *newer, upgraded or well maintained machinery makes better parts.*
@@tonywilson4713 I think you might be misunderstanding my point to some extent. No matter how you slice it automation means one of two things.. labor prices decrease... (marginal costs decrease is another way of putting it) or skills required to compete increase. Usually it's both.
Now if labor prices decrease it necessarily means that labor's political influence decreases as well. And if skills needed to compete increase... well that is going to leave behind those who aren't inclined or capable of adapting to the requirements. Which means a lot of disaffected laborers where you once had normal consumers capable of participating in society.
Since these decision are not being made in a democratic way, but are instead being made in the interests of a relative few, you get societal conflict as wealth pools away from the middle class and social mobility stagnates.
All of this is reflected in the loss of power of industrial unionization. Police and teachers unions are doing fine... but those workers who worked in manufacturing have lost almost all power in the USA due to the loss of manufacturing to offshoring and automation.
@@tonywilson4713 I'm sorry but it wasn't Thatcherism or Reaganism that destroyed unions. The reasons for the decline of unions are as I've said. What Reagon and Thathcer did was a coup de grace. Strong unions force political solutions as they did when FDR was forced to concede to the Wobblies. The destruction of unions was a long project that stretched out over the decades after FDR was no longer the president.
Many people don't like the political power of strikes... However it's not a like or dislike kind of thing. Look at what has happened since unions were castrated... the rise of corporate power has had no check.
So, like many things that irritate it's easy to dismiss the necessary role those irritants play... until big pharma is forcing vaccines and mask on everyone for their own profit.
Great episode! Much love to those all at Democracy at Work!
Growth isn't always good. True for population too.
I agree. There are some situations where growth is paramount. And there are others where growth is unwanted. What he is talking about here is the decline in birth rates being noticed in many countries around the world including America.
When it comes to birth rates, countries want to see a stable birth rate or (given the correct circumstances) an increasing birth rate. What a country doesn’t want to see is a birth rate in decline, particular if that declining birth rate continues for quite a number of years.
The way our society works they way it does is because the distribution of a country’s population within certain age brackets follows a certain pattern that is essential to keep society working the way we have become accustomed to.
At the base of the population distribution graph are the babies and children up to say 18 yo. Typically, people in this age group do not contribute much to society.
In the middle of the graph you have people aged 18 to 65. This is the portion of the population that contributes most to keeping society running. People between the ages of 30 and 50 are typically the greatest contributors.
At the top of the population graph are those people who have retired from work and the elderly. Like the very young group, this group does not contribute significantly to keeping society going. In fact, this group requires support just like the young children group.
Ideally, for society to continue to function, you want the middle group and the young group to be of roughly similar sizes. This means, that as generations in the working middle group grow older and retire, people from the bottom younger children group enter into the workforce to take their place.
To maintain a stable population (no growth, just keeping the population the same), any country needs a birth rate of 2.1. 2.1 means that every female has to give birth to on average 2 children to maintain a stable population - two children to replace the mother and father when they die.
If a country’s birth rate starts to decline (America’s is currently 1.6), that means fewer children are being born. If the decline in birth rate occurs over many years, that means that there will be significantly fewer children for several generations.
The problem is this, with a decline in birth rates resulting in fewer children, that population distribution graph I was talking about earlier, well the bottom portion of that graph starts to shrink. This won’t result in any drastic problems immediately. However, as the entire population grows older, we start to see generations of people moving out of the productive working group on the population group and into the retirement and elderly group. The productive working class of the population starts to shrink as there aren’t enough people from the young children group (which is now dramatically smaller because of persistent low birth rates) graduating into the productive working class to take over the jobs that were being performed by the retiring generations.
The smaller productive work force must provide everything society needs to function with less workers as well as supporting a growing elderly population while also trying to find time to bring up a young family. If the difference between the number of retiring workers and the number of new workers entering society to take their place is sufficiently great, the resultant stress on society as a whole could be profound. Society would no longer be able to support itself as there just aren’t enough new workers to replace the old workers retiring. If low birth rates became a feature for several generations, the resultant effect on society and its ability to support itself and thrive would be extraordinary.
The point Richard is trying to make is that no advanced economy wants to see birth rates that are in decline, particularly if the decline looks like it will persist over many years. Ideally, in America, if you just consider birth rate and nothing else (like COVID-19, wealth inequality, political stagnation and ineffectiveness, climate change, rising geopolitical tensions etc), government and other institutions should be figuring out how to encourage families to have more kids in order to avert a possible future societal crisis.
A shrinking population is good for the environment
@@jimwacker6582 this is a very reductionist take. You're not taking into account other factors and circumstances.
Capitalism depends on inequality and all the disgruntled being blind to the cause and kicking down.
M C Smith Nonsense. Capitalism does not "depend" on inequality, it simply reflects the inequality (of talent, skill and ambition) that natually exists among people.
@@clarestucki5151 you are deluding yourself. The US has generated so much wealth and abundance for the elite and yet crime is rising, people are sicker than before, the wages have been stagnant for decades, mental illness is on the rise in all demographics but especially young, and the average worker can no longer afford to buy a home or even have children. Those are material realities that are getting harder and harder to ignore, and it is physically unsustainable. This is what happens when a profit motive is the only guiding principle for our economy and how our society is structured. It will get much much worse
@@lors3987 you said mc smith was 'deluding' himself, then wrote a lovely paragraph showing why he (or she) is exactly right.
@@tjaaw No, Lors replied to Clare, not M C Smith.
Wonderful guest, very.astute.observations..thank you, Prof. Wolff
Great segment Wolff!
I like Fabian Schiedler a lot. I couldn't agree more. You should have him on again.
Bernie has become very good at saying what leftists have been thinking for about 8 years now.
WE ARE WITNESSING THE UNRAVELING OF AMERIKKKA BEFORE OUR VERY EYES ... GREAT TALKING POINTS PROFESSOR WOLFF AS USUAL 💪🏾🌄👍🏾❤️
Don't kid yourself. This is a worldwide ecological, economic collapse.
This was amazing.
Excellent and clear presentation. Thank you!
You make some great points when it comes to the loss of working class jobs in America, particularly manufacturing jobs. I agree that corporations have been profit driven in moving working class jobs overseas to take advantage of significantly cheaper labour costs which of course results in greater profits for companies who follow this practice.
However, in a capitalist society where continued company market growth and continued company profit growth is expected year over year, what other choice did companies have but to move working class jobs from America where labour costs were high to another costs where labour costs are lower.
The other benefit corporations realise by moving American labour jobs overseas to take advantage of cheap labour is that the company can continue to manufacture it’s products at a lower cost thereby keeping the retail price of the final product competitive with similar products manufactured by foreign companies.
As I understand things, a developing country is able to offer cheap labour because living standards are considerably beneath a developed country’s living standards. As the developing country begins to grow, living standards steadily improve. With the improvement in living standards comes a higher cost of living. Companies are gradually growing and seeing higher profits. To maintain the development of the country and in response to growing competition from other companies,, companies see the need to pay a higher labour wage, which offsets the higher cost of living and keeps the development of the country going until it becomes an advanced economy. At which point, companies within the newly emerged advanced economy, following the capitalist trend set by American companies and companies of other advanced economies around the world, and started shedding (or will have already shed) its working class jobs (for which wages are now very high and uncompetitive) to newly developing countries with cheap labour.
It seems to me that any developing country that embraces capitalism will, if successful in its quest to become an advanced economy, is destined to shed its working class jobs as the country nears the end point of its transformation. This is due to:
- The nature of capitalism requires that companies grow market share and grow profits. If labour costs are significantly cheaper somewhere else it is a given that the cheaper labour will be utilised to reduce costs, maximise profit and maintain the company’s products competitiveness with other similar products by other companies through keeping product costs down and therefore maintaining a competitive retail price.
- I don’t see how any nation that makes the transition from a developing economy to an advanced economy can avoid losing a fair proportion of its working class to labour jobs in newer developing nations. Is there a solution?
Thank you
I like your article! Your English is beautiful and easy to understand!
The working class has no country. Workers of the world unite!
The german professor makes a great point about china's military budget and their global infrastructural programmes. They are clearly not looking for war.
He's not German.
Here is a safe, easy way to resist the corruption that is trying to destroy you: join a credit union! Untether your life and finances to banks. A credit union a partnership of other people like yourself. It doesn't matter if your credit union is regional or small. You can still live your life with your $ and directly support a community too. Banks will never look out for you-a credit union does.
The guest speaker spoke the truth about the current world situation. He should be congratulated for having the courage to do so.
Superb.
These programs really bring me up, educating me while appreciating hearing someone who accurately describes the current state of affairs. On a side note, pay attention to the sounds around you. Look up. Pay attention to the dots. The dots. The ceiling. The ceiling. Roof. Strange waves in the air. And the dots. Oh yeah, another thing: pay attention to the sounds. And verbally proclaim the following question out loud as if you want to be heard by everyone around you: '
"Was it worth it?" Ask those "strange sounds and voices" whether it will be worth it when the persecuted come together and force the individuals associated with the causation of said persecution and suffering to 'run.' ...To run far. And keep running. ...It's their only hope. And they'll run over and over and over...
The resurgence of labor, of leftish pastors like bishop barber and efforts to awaken Christians that act in line with the sermon on the mount all raise hope. Nomiki Konst has a great interview on christians working to deprogram rightwing christianity.
scandinavian countries are enjoying a bit of a baby boom from the pandemic as reported by Jacobin.
Lewis Mumford, Fritjof Capra, and Derrick Jensen writings are worthy supplements to Scheidler’s work.
As much as I enjoyed this weekend's professional football games, I was utterly floored to see a huge stadium packed to gills with screaming fans, none of whom I saw were wearing masks! The ignorance and/or denialism filling those stadiums was mind-numbing to me. Am I missing something? As an old man, I feel compelled to question my own rationality. I just don't "get" it!
Yes. You're missing a few things which have nothing at all to do with "anti-vaxxer denial": 1) Masking outdoors has always been unnecessary (multiple studies back this up); 2) If you're already vaccinated, what are you afraid of? The vaccine protects YOU against severe illness & death; not others; 3) Mild Omicron signals the endemic phase, and it's time to get back to living life instead of cowering in fear.
So do I ...
That people would risk their lives for a game tells you what's really wrong with this country. We are a sad bunch who have been conned into wanting material things. That keeps Americans from taking a really hard look at what their country has and will become.
when everyone around you is losing their heads, check yours.
Much of the 'information' on covid provided by the government and corporate media exists to promote big pharma profits and facilitate a power grab for the super rich, not to promote public health. They knew there was never much of a chance to eliminate the disease from the world population but didn't want to let a good crisis go to waste and so sold false hope.
Thank you 🌎 ✊️ 🌹 🗽
The German guy has a good point. If we would just train ourselves to quit consuming so much (stop eating, stop wearing clothing, stop building housing, stop driving cars, etc.), it would be very beneficial to the environment and the earth would be much nicer!! Of course, that would cause certain problems, but what the hell, who cares???
Retired, quit consuming
Another informative piece thank you Prof. 15:51 LOL true.
Dude I really love this guy. Wolff for prez yall
I studied it like this: Winston Churchill memoir THE GATHERING STORM, he mentioned European birthrates in 1920 after WWI and called it the War Cycle. I was taken aback that a great leader callously calculated that newborns would be soldiers in WWII which he saw as a continuation of WWI. Big topic.
Thank you very much for the effort you put into your videos. I was curious whether you are familiar with Ha-Joon Chang and his book "Bad Samaritans" and if yes, what is your take on his version of the history of capitalism and its development. I am studying economics at college and although we discuss the shortcomings of Free trade and Free market in our class(for example, 1 of 32 page slides was dedicated to "why markets fail"), professors rarely seem to take it seriously. Watching your videos and doing my independent research helped me be a more skeptical about things I was being taught in college and free market and free trade is certainly one of the thigns that are almost worshipped. Thanks for your response if you read this!
Who can have children with both parents working 40+ hours a week? Childcare costing more than $1,000 a MONTH? So monthly expenses: rent, $1k+, health insurance $1,500k, childcare $1-$1,500k, that’s already >$3k and we haven’t talked about basic essentials, car insurance, utilities, car repairs, etc. The only people I know who are having kids are military families who are paid at the cost of living & have health insurance.
a labor shortage is also a consumer market shortage in the long run
That was an especially good show.
The Market looks really bad
*shrugs* Even when it's 'booming' today we have tent cities. Modern Hoovervilles. This market serves a class, not everyone.
State and capital are intertwined and have this Dynamic that cannot stop
When Bernie is gone he will leave a hole which I fear will never be filled.
Yeah, Bernie dug a hole and threw socialism in it. He's worse than useless.
I’ve thought of this a lot, and I don’t want to see the day he’s gone. He has his faults but he’s genuine and a true humanitarian, as much of one can be in our corrupt authoritarian government
Hysterical
Once the rational players have their plans and emergent approaches up and running they will pop the bubble of the existential threat to us all including those laboring under their own unsustainability and delusional thinking.
If the rational players aren't overwhelmed by the irrational ones before they are able to do that.
@@petersepall2590 yes, true true true. The main and only actual advantage of those rational among us is a view to future. The ability to see and put planned approaches together and in motion to in the end arrive in a planned for place, improved and stronger than at the start. A world free of US control of the currency system will call it's debt forcing the wholesale closure of military bases and occupation now financed by those who are potential victims. Iran knows and no longer has to suffer simply for existing. Being now members of the emergent systems able to do without dollars and free of the sanctions the US has been free up till now to impose, yada yada yada.
ABOLISH CITIZEN'S UNITED❗🤔
We need to keep GROWING population, when we are already trashing the environment with our bacteria-like consumption and wastefulness? We'd be well served if we had about HALF the number of people we already have, IMO.
I feel you. No kidding..
Totally agree.
True. Be wary of billionaires who agree with you though. Their "solution" is genocide.
The problem is an ageing population. China has played with curbing population growth in the past and it didn't turn out too well for them. If you were going to reduce the population you'd essentially need to genocide the elderly to avoid systemic collapse, so given that we've come to the agreement that genocide is not cool, I think it's better to focus on consumption. The earth can absolutely support the existing population, it just can't support the wasteful excesses of modern capitalist economies.
Critical thinking is what's needed, so good thinking!!! We (the USA) always grows it's population through immigration. Simple.
Amazing book... worth reading
US is an irony and it deserves it's outcome from constant poor choice. If the majority can only critically think. 🤷
Both political parties have turned their backs on the continuation of the human race.
orsom overvieu .Thanks Fabrian
Thank you for the great analysis and conversation, for me when you fully realize and accept the scope of where we are you are left with no other logical conclusion that the end is near. At this point, I've lost any hopeium I have left.
Great...👍
Enough of Bernie Sanders. For all his talk, In the end he always supports the establishment democratic candidates, and he let his presidential campaign supporters down big time.
Twice!!!!!!
Isn't the problem that we are fighting algorithms, not mental constructs to be reasoned with?
the gun is amided at our head, not our foot.
imagine, most people you meet are not worth knowing
Yes!! Exactly! All the low wage workers are locked up on the border, and everyone complains about a labor shortage. It's crazy!!
Very good Richard... just the kind of information needed by folks! Keep up the good work. btw do you sell your books as online downloads please? I'm in Aotearoa New Zealand and I think as regards shipping, downloading is the way to go. I don't like purchasing from Amazon. I also prefer D@Work to get the proceeds directly rather than book depository or some other org, Cheers Brian
Dr. Wolff: Thanks for slugging away at it one day at a time.
Centrist’s hate Bernie!
Ironically, globally speaking, he IS a centrist.
Thank you .... the most direct language on HOW we are destroying the planet.
Workers of the world unite viva the revolution ✌️🌎
Nobody left to do construction work
I love that Fabian Scheidler looks a member of Kraftwerk, and has the electric piano to match 😂
Lockdown has so many variations! Thank you again, Prof. Wolff!
You don't hear about the Opioid Problem the Media is silent!
How dare you attack the pharmaceutical industry you anti-vaxxer!
:p
I'll answer where this is all going as nobody ever says it: Human extinction. It's a matter of when and not if and that may be why so many greed mongers are taking wild risks. Rats in the bilge feel the ship sinking but they don't voice it, they don't tell the other rats, rather, they climb over each other's backs to get the last scape.
A rat can swim for 3 days.
Good,
You extrapolate these problems globally, but inequality isn't anywhere near American levels anywhere in Europe, or even most of Asia.
@@drunkensailor112 So, are you saying that the 2000 billionaires residing in
other countries are different???
Number of billionaires by region 2019
North America...834
Europe...847
Asia ...758
Middle East .....172
Latin America and the Caribbean...140
Africa....41
Pacific ...33
You were saying about inequality????
@@jgalt308 you only look at the wealthy. Inequality is the very rich against the very poor. I live in the Netherlands on a slightly above average salary. 36 hours is full time in our company and I can easily get by with 24 hours while living alone and I get 10 weeks off per year on pay. Even if there is inequality in my country. The lower and middle incomes such as myself don't have it that bad.
Western civilization?
Sounds like a great idea. We should try it some time.
Nice to have a 500 year perspective on growth being finite - the end of the growth curve is extinction.
We are not shooting ourselves in the foot. I'm not doing any shooting. Someone else is shooting my foot.
In the 1700s American colonists saw the effect the first multinational corporation (East India Trading Co) was having on India and the Crown. They showed their displeasure by having a Tea Party in Boston. William Dalrymple traces the history.
Don't forget the colonists were very busy in the 1700 taking everything away from the people who lived here thousands of years before the colonists....colonialism was the beginning of global take over....
You mean cheaper tea? That effect???
@@jgalt308 No the point of the Boston Tea party was a push toward private property... The idea that the gains created should be retained by those who create them. The irony is that we've merely created a different kind of feudalism here. So under capitalism, the gains are taken by owners, not retained by the workers that create the gains.
Further proof that markets are a failure as a way to create a stable healthy society.
{waits for the inevitable non responsive evasion typically seen from this commenter)
Now why would the already identified "willfully ignorant, functional illiterate" expect
a response, when he has failed to respond to the simple question asked. Prof Wolff has
already shared his understanding of this as being the result of a tax on tea. ( false )
Nor does his irrelevant response address any aspect of the history being cited, that
is alluded to in the initial comment, regarding the economic effects, while babbling about
free markets, and the "reasons" for the various actions taken by the crown after 1763
and the resistance of the colonists to them. ( this being one and all about free markets )
You mean cheaper tea? That effect? (which I'm pretty sure would be covered in the book)
Nor am I aware of any "tea growers" in the "colonies" but why quibble.
@@jgalt308 Like I said, you can't respond to what I say. Instead you do your best to distract from the truth of what I say.
Arguing in good faith means understanding the issues. You can't argue in good faith or from knowledge so you resort to word salad responses and cut and paste.
The opposite of impressive.
Eye opener for us i INDIAN.
Most common jobs in America
CASHIER Nat'l average salary: $10.84/hr
FOOD PREPARATION WORKER Nat'l average salary: $11.38/hr
JANITOR Nat'l average salary: $11.60/hr
BARTENDER Nat'l average salary: $11.64/hr
SERVER, RETAIL SALES ASSOCIATE, STOCKING ASSOCIATE, LABORER
BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO GETS OUR JOBS, WHAT MATTERS IS WHO SHIP THEM OUT & WHY IS IT ALLOWED?
TOP RECIPIENTS OF AMERICAN JOBS:
European Union 5.7 mil
China 7.3 mil
Japan 1.3 mil
South Korea 1mil
United Kingdom 1mil
COUNTRIES MOST OUTSOURCED TO:
Philippines
India
I love these videos, but, please, someone tell him to pull down the back of his jacket when he sits for the camera so it doesn't hunch up around his ears.
I know it's a small cosmetic thing, but it really annoys me when people don't know to do this
Interesting comments. A private "medical system" (Tower Health) shut down 2 hospitals in our county some time in December 2021. Brandywine Hospital and Jennersville Hospital. This makes no sense in the midst of a medical crisis.
Merges , big corporations, hospitals buying up the smaller hospitals creating monopolies.
Does Wolff have any solidarity with the Canadian truckers?
The extensive resistance to pandemic policies from the working people, is a massive event of no confidence in the ruling elite and their system that works on disunity and distrust. People then are looking for alternative systems that develop unity and trust. Chinese success in pandemic polices is due to the long relationship of trust and unity of the people with the communist party.
That's why the US is a service economy now and ruled by the Military Industrial Complex. This is why the war drums are constantly beating, because the US economy relies on weapons sales.
Love the Hip Hop beat proff
existentially necessary growth arises from using interest to lure the means of exchange into circulation (aka money as a public utility). Interest (usury) demands inflation and growth. Until this issue is tackled both periodic default, crisis, wealth concentration will plague societies.
this topic is covered in das geld syndrome (the money syndrome). it also covers a price stable means to replace the use of interest rate controls by a CB to maintain the velocity of money (ie commerce).
The sociological ramification of capital flight are as Dr. Wolf says, capitalists thought that if not them it would be the Russians, Germans or the French or the British capitalists who would invest in Asia driven by competition that American capitalists took advantage of the phase of economic development the underdeveloped economies were becoming. What it meant for the American working class was the beginning of a deskilling process of workers, as production was moved, creating a redundant working population that would also serve as a competitive background for the reduction of wages of the working class began to take shape, and offsetting the displacement of workers by automation, the working day increased as did worker productivity. Capitalists are extracting more surplus-value from workers through a scheme of external worker competition for jobs that lowers wages, and by an internal process of extending the working day and labor output through automation. A double blow to the working class that position workers in a bad spot when the economic order undergoes other shocks and tools are applied to correct a crisis or prevent one from happening work to fix the financial side of the economy at the expense of the social side of the economy, endless policies that bail out capitalists at the expense of workers.
This interplay between competition and automation defines the nature of the American class struggle, as a dramatic power play for ultimate owner and the distribution of the economic surplus. Two economic forces make necessary a working class opposition to the onslaughts of capitalist competition and the use of automation for private consumption can only be fought back by a massive strike waves and social boycotts of the specific monopoly corporations in charge of the political life of the country, to break the international competition among capitalist rival nations, and to break the monopoly formations domestically by finding work in alternative industries and spending your money on alternative products, this to weaken the international strangle hold corporations have on American workers, but the ultimate conquest is political power and workers need a political voice(s).
I believe that it's better to have fewer children for some years at least, until the human population decreases a few billion. Because humans need stuff and that means polution. The masses of the world should be considered citizens of the world if we try to produce more people in the interest of making more Nationals, more religious groups etc, it will be too much for the ecosystem.
As a counter to your argument, if the world birth rate continues to drop, we will find ourselves in a situation where there is a very large retired portion of the population. Having a large retired population requires a large population of workers to support the retired/elderly class. If the current low birth rate continues, sure eventually there will be less people in the world. But the breakdown of the population by age will have a very large, if not the largest, group as retired/elderly and no longer able to contribute to society. Because of the low birth rate, there are not enough people of working age to support the elderly, support the children and support society. Society will literally not have enough people of the right age group to support society - food production, manufacturing, government, housing - every industry that we have come to rely on for our standard of living will be unable to match the demands of a society that simply has too many elderly and young and not enough workers.
To keep the population steady (no growth) you need every woman to have 2 children each year (the 2 children being the population replacements for their parents when their parents die). The US rate is currently at one of its lowest points in history 1.6 children for every woman. If this were to continue, or worse drop further, the resultant effect on the distribution of ages in the US population could lead to the scenario I alluded to above where there is a lack of people between the ages of 18 and 60 who are physically and mentally capable of working to provide everything a society needs to remain prosperous.
A prolonged decline in birth rates would place a huge stress on future society that would take generations to recover from. If it recovers at all.
@@markbourne4623 When you factor in the environmental problems caused by a large human population: toxic pollution, depletion of fresh water, intensification of droughts, floods and heat waves which are leading imminently to the collapse of large scale agriculture; one must conclude the population is not sustainable. The collapse of our civilization will inflict its suffering on everyone, the weak , and the elderly falling first.
Why do we NEED to maintain our population? Wouldn't a smaller birth-rate be somewhat of an advantage?
Not foolish, it's evil.
I am in strong protest 15 mins for any guests are way too short.
Half of our population will call this fake news, unfortunately.
Nothing changes until real people can choose pragmatic alternatives. Somehow, there never are any. Occupy Wall Street was a cry for help. Those people saw no pragmatic alternatives available to them, including a path to creating pragmatic alternatives.
This broadcast is brilliant terrifying at the same time... 😐😬
A metaphysician would call this moment in history a cusp...
Hulu Justified, that what we get now.
no income
no job
no assets
what;s left ?
Justified on Hulu, entrataining and depressing
we all live on the RESevation
Your initial discussion about US population seems to assume that population growth is inherently a good thing. As an economist do you seriously think that unlimited growth in a finite world is even possible? If not, what do you think the US' or world's carrying capacity for homo sapiens is? In other words, what is the optimum human population for our planet?
And no, I am not advocating for coercively regulating population. If people were properly educated about population dynamics, and were not reliant on having many children to ensure someone would look after them in old age, I believe most would make rational decisions on how many kids to have.
👍✌️