Wow this is actually really good. I'm really into "crowd" bank systems now, and this is totally related with this video. Something that I do not like is that here in Brazil there is no investment in small business because it is REALLY REALLY HARD to open one! I mean, you guys from US can open a business in 2 days right? Do you know how many you need here? At least 90 days! And while that you need to pay the rent, accounting firm (at least R$ 500 per month), and other horrible thinks... The government is the worst partner ever, he is never there for you, he does nothing for you and gets your profit (not your balance, your profit).
+Xano Trevisan Kothe You can at least start removing yourself entirely from the traditional banking paradigm with Bitcoin. Check out BTCPop for Bitcoin crwdfunding also.
Interesting. I thought a growing economy like Brazil would be way more business friendly. What are your thoughts on crowd sourcing large projects? I agree that it is a really cool idea for small businesses but I don't think that his experiment could build an economy because the structure does not facilitate large projects. Global population is on the rise and the point of these larger projects are economies of scale. You simply can't get that with an economy of small businesses only.
Well maybe I don't like money and I don't like having to apply myself and I dont like growing up! Maybe life was more fun when we were innocent and less aware and blasé with the world!
+abschussrampe The financial industry dictates financial rules and holds most of the wealth of the country with their profits rising dramatically over the past couple decades, they are not dumb, they are doing exactly what makes "them" the most money. But if by "we" you mean all the rest of us who allow for such gross economic injustice then yes, you are correct - "we" are dumb.
But it is only "implode-ready" for "all the rest of us," not for the handful of rich that create the rules and control the game. A perfect example of this is the recent economic crash of 2008. Over $700+ billion went to bail out large corporations and the wealthy while the average person - "we" - lost their homes and jobs by the tens of thousands. So no, they are not "dumb," though I can think of a few other adjectives that I rather not use here =[
Then just get everyone to be extremely frugal with their money. If everyone sustains rather than competes then the market would crash, jobs would be lost, and the world would be in utter chaos. it's...it's beautiful
Imagine if we had strict rules that only allowed politicians to get funding only from crowdsourcing from their district individuals with max cap per person. They would then finally be looking out for the best interests of their constituents rather than corporate or elite benefactors.
If I'm understanding this correctly, we've reached a point where scamming money out of people is an easier way to accumulate money than actually doing something in exchange for it.
Best economics Big Think video in a while. I've been on the edge of making a decision between democratic socialism and this digital, new world capitalism for a few months now. I think this video made me realize how great capitalism can and should be.
Along time ago I for six months I worked for a plastic manufacturer. There were 3rd generation workers. They were so backwards it was like stepping back in time 20+ years. They brought other companies that had newer better products because they had no idea how do anything new. They made alot of profit at the time but they are no longer in business. Great talk. Thanks
"It sounds like communism, I know that..." that's the problem right there. This guy always has some great stuff to say but says it in such a way that it never has wide appeal. If he were part of a big corporation they'd provide him with a coach who would help him refine his message in a way that appeals to the masses so he could actually be successful in shaping the future.
So let me get this straight... Pizza will take the place of currency. OK, sounds good. As an added benefit it will make it easier to keep track of your money by using a PIE chart.
Some communities ( i think in Belgium for exemple ) have created their own currency in order to create a ''small''-yet diversified'- economy between small local businesses that helps them grow/survive
Yeah, this guy is not a fan of details, apparently. The same about Google selling Boston Dynamics. Learn the exact circumstances? Screw that! Let's make BIG conclusions based on some general musings about how to make the world nice!
A great bakery used this 120 for 100 deal to subsidize their move and purchase a building. They were a hot business. I wouldnt see many businesses being seen this hot
Valeant Pharmaceuticals is a textbook example of a company with a scorched earth business model. They do no pharmaceutical research; they just buy, as Rushkoff says, companies that do. However, Valeant isn't buying companies for their research, they're buying them for their patent portfolios. Once they own the patent on a drug, they jack up the price on it. In the face of a recent 90% drop in its share price and multiple government investigations into its shenanigans, Valeant has lately tried to paint itself as having turned over a new leaf by adding an activist investor to their board and by saying that their days of jacking up drug prices are over. The root problem with Valeant, however, is not their corporation decision-making, it's their entire business model. It's simply untenable and several analysts (with whom I agree) consider Valeant to be "un-investible".
He's right about one thing, the dividend tax does discourage paying dividends. What he's forgetting is the corporate income tax is applied to profits before it goes to dividends. Reinvesting the money into the corporation to make it bigger (and therefore a higher share price since the company is worth more), the capital gains tax only takes effect. The dividend tax is effectively 45% or so, when you take into account the corporate income taxes. Unfortunately the reason why we have this problem in the first place is because the government decided to micromanage businesses, his solution is basically let's micromanage businesses into another direction, personally, we should get rid of the micromanagement. First, corporations do not pay taxes. They pay NO TAXES. You, as a customer of various corporations, are the ones that pay the taxes. Raise corporate taxes, corporation raise prices. So, abolish the corporate income tax, dividend tax, and capital gains tax. Then people have a choice, they can invest in growth stocks that may sabotage their future for high share price now (but it could also pay off too...), and dividend stocks. When you really think about business taxes, you realize that the business doesn't really pay those taxes, the shareholders and the customers pay it.
I know why it sounds appealing. It isn’t new. Businesses worked that way out of necessity when our country was being built. Start a grocery store and barter for inventory for the things you can and make arrangements with the big city supermarket for the rest. It isn’t practical in most communities because it isn’t necessary. Consumers don’t care about local produce or or paying for pizza on any kind of scale. Do I buy the pizza that tastes bad now for $6, or prepay $100 in pizza even if I’ll get 25 $4 pizzas that taste better on some future date. Almost everyone will buy $6 cardboard because THEY DON’T CARE ABOUT YOUR NEW BATHROOM. It is nice to think about, and I encourage people to try, but I’m not optimistic. To keep someone with more capital from swooping in and decimating your business that is already balancing on a razors edge of agreements and voluntarily forfeited profits, a government dome will be necessary, and we’ve seen how all top-down communist governments eventually choose to maintain control.
you kinda sorta need both, you need some companies to buy, develop and sell companies and you also need new business ideas, the reason why you need the big parental companies is that they have the resources to give a new idea platform they otherwise wouldn't have gotten because of lack of resources, for new ideas,you need proper education, not a business model, ideas come out of brain, not a business model
The people running these companies make tons of money. Claiming "it doesn't work" won't change that. You won't convince them that their billions of dollars don't exist. Do you take issue with the morality of their actions? List the immoral actions that would concern consumers and offer a pragmatic solution.
Once you seize the means of production you become a capitalist, engrossed with the urge to maximize profit,..... our rolls define our actions. Ken Bowd
+Playster more like it will never happen unless the current establishment is replaced. There are movements that are attempting to change that... but most of the older generation have given up hope of changing the system and spend a good deal of time telling the younger generation to give it up and let the world be poisoned and slip into collapse.
Why would a bank invest in building, marketing, and maintaining an app only to give half the amount in loans? Banks make money on loans. The more they loan, the more they make. Why would they choose the less profitable, more costly way to do business for some kind of "sense of community"? Similarly, why would a grocery store buy more expensive local farmer's market leftovers rather than truck in their own produce? Why do you think they ship their own produce? Could it be because it's cheaper than buying from the locals???
Your confusing Capitalism with Corporatism. What you describe is one form that Capitalism could (and in an Ideal system should) take and what you describe as the "Bad" is Corporatism, which is an effect of the Collusion of the State with Corporations (Regulatory Capture - look it up) other than that, great point you are making!
I'd link this to a resource economy where we move away from money and trade with our knowledge and skills etc... and share what we already have. And create a circular economy instead of a throw away society.
It doesn't matter how many small businesses start or how many times we improve technology anymore. Efficiency and over population is the biggest threat to all populations. Wealth was only ever generated by exploiting someone else. There will always be a need for an underclass to exploit. The only drive any individual will ever have is to try and get as far above that underclass as they can. Sad, really.
Yes it makes sense, but we also need to know how value is measured with money in the end, given that the world's wealth in gold is limited ? And how to do that if we are speaking in terms of crypto currency for example, which currently only holds real value via traditional currency.. unfortunately. lol
Thank you for this video! Very interesting content. I only find it strange why this model is related to the 13th century.. the example mentioned (going to South America and enslaving people and taking their precious metals) is not historically accurate as Europeans only arrived here in the late 15th century..
In his book “Life Inc.” he explains how in the 13th century corporations started as a method both to give big merchants the means to stay in power and for aristocrats (and most importantly, to monarchs) to get a bigger cut of the profits from the increased commerce, I enjoyed both the book and this video but I think he should have given more explanation in this video
I would never invest money in a pizza shop in exchange for pizza, because the pizza I receive in exchange for my money is: 1) Worth less than the money. 2) Guaranteed to depreciate in value very quickly. I suppose I might be able to sell my interest in the pizza (before claiming it, so the pizza is fresh) to someone else for slightly more than it cost me, but that seems like more work for less income than simply doing a little overtime in my regular job.
"You need to be selling something. You need to be making money in an ongoing way. ... I know that's heresy." This should really tell you something about the way the economy is run
This was beautiful! To hear this! It's sad that he has such negativity about communism because many systems where created with the people in mind but because power seeks to maintain its self at the detriment to the people its seeking to serve all systems become useless and violent. Amen to this man. This will go in to my favorite videos!!
So by extrapolation ...if Google was going to buy a company with hot patents for $100 million, then the purchasee should set up a system where Google must pay $50 million out of pocket and crowd fund $50 million to prove that "the people" really want Google to own the company. How can this make sense?
bucchi But then the video presented that Google was becoming more like an investment firm - which is basically a large bank without checking accounts. The same principles would need to hold true for purchases and loans against company capital.
+Michael Winter in that case they were talking about Google's move towards being a holding company rather than a technology company. Which is has done, Google has become alphabet which holds all of Google's assets
Why crowd source at all or borrow from the bank either? Save your profits and once you have saved enough you expand. No profits to save? Why you expanding then?
We shouldn't be looking at corporations as bad vs. start-ups as being good. Corporations can leverage truly enormous amounts of capital and investment to improve their services. While start-ups often have the freedom and advantage of being small-scale that allows them to be truly revolutionary and innovative The real question for start-up founders and tech entrepreneurs is this: do they really value their own vision of how they want their good/service to be used by society? Or do they just want to create and patent something that becomes successful enough that they can sell it for a lot of money, and then either move onto something else or live a life of luxury.Not all entrepreneurs want to have to run their businesses indefinitely, and the incentive of some massive tech giant buying up your start-up can be a good thing sometimes. Otherwise some start-ups may never have existed
I study philosophy and economics. This guy seems to only study philosophy and you can not analyze financial statements with philosophy and understand long term corporate goals and cash flows.
The biggest problem with developed economies today is that they have created so many costs due to the fact that everyone wants to make as much money as possible. The best economic healing would occur if there was a widespread movement to live on less income by eliminating and reducing expenditures. This would be so unpopular because it would cut revenues for so many businesses, but in the long run the cost of doing business would go down and people would be able to do more within narrower margins. This is necessary because population has grown and continues to grow. What's more, we need to be gaining trees instead of losing ever more of them to development, so large commodities like cars, big houses and commercial buildings, big roads, highways, and parking lots, etc. etc. should be downsizing to ensure the economy doesn't turn the planet more and more into developed, dry desert. So the question becomes how to move in the direction of a broadly down-sized economy without generating more suffering and poverty. This is already happening as more and more people choose to live without driving and down-size their expectations of living space. It's business that is failing to take on the challenge because they still operate in terms of more square footage for generating more revenues, etc. If businesses would broadly down-size, they would lose revenues at first but eventually money would be worth more and people would need to rely on it less to satisfy their needs. This is hard to imagine for modern consumers who equate money-spending opportunities with happiness, but if you think carefully you realize that your happiest moments are when you feel no interest or pressure to shop or buy anything because you are experiencing happiness without doing so. Once you realize that spending is actually motivated by artificial dissatisfaction and desires caused mostly by media, advertising, and peer-pressure; the value of a down-sized economy that prioritizes environment, health, and happiness over money-based commerce becomes clear. In fact, the whole point of capitalism was always to evolve into ever-lesser dependency on money and business; only social-capitalist ethics took over when the shift began to occur due to fear of a future without sufficient economic security provided by economic growth.
+discountconsulting "the whole point of capitalism was always to evolve into ever-lesser dependency on money and business" You're wrong as hell but go ahead and try to prove that. Capitalism is about greater and greater dependency on money and business.
Money and business were just supposed to be means to the end of achieving the greatest levels of efficiency and productivity. It was known that greater efficiency and abundance would lead to price declines (deflation) and growing economic independence as more people would be able to satisfy economic needs more easily with less effort and money. What happened, however, is that the interest of maintaining control over the population and the economy superceded the willingness to allow freedom to undermine inflationary-growth and so the New Deal, Keynsian socialism, corporatism, and other forms of economic intervention and control were implemented to avert the free market's natural evolution into more or less permanent recession/depression (which Marx thought would culminate in a communist revolution).
The violence of the current economy is appalling. I think Big Think should suggest additional ways to improve the economy. What I'm seeing is force, fraud and coercion are what we are calling economy and finance.
You want to keep the money locally then you keep business and factories small. You don't allow them to make retail monopoly like Walmart and allow one outside the community business sell every type of product (cloths, food, toys and etc.).
We need our tax policy to reflect exactly what you are saying. In other words, the current GOP tax plan is *exactly* the wrong thing. If we stop taxing active income and increase the tax on passive income, we as a country will encourage work, and discourage merges and sales of companies.
I told people for years that when say you buy some beans for 5$, it was actually 2$ for government, 2$ for the store and 1$ for guy producing them... that guy invested 80c to get it so he only earned 20c...
There might be a need for a fundamentally different economic/political system now that technology has advanced so quickly. But one person or a team of people shouldn’t design the new systems, everyone should. Not out of some moral position but because that will give the best possible system. It’s the same principle why Gradient Descent can write code better than you. The best way to do things naturally come about when you let people do the things themselves. If every individual takes a vote in a system that is best for themselves, then you will output a system that is the best system to suit everyone’s needs, maybe? Douglas Rushkoff, if you ever get to read this, I think we both know crypto currencies are the answer to this problem. The lasting legacy of Crypto won’t be currencies, but new systems . Like Charles Hoskinson said, “We’re in the system making business”.
The bank idea is cool in that it lowers the pizzeria's cost of capital, but banks already have risk models in place, and I don't really think it lowers the banks risk exposure due to proof of concept. The additional locations could still fail due to a bad location, mismanagement of resources, etc.
Also, I've read elsewhere that in aggregate businesses haven't been investing all that much, but this could be just a blip. We aren't far removed from the Great Recession and it's generally the case when profits decline (or become losses) that the first thing many businesses reduce is spending on research and development. So, the current period could be nothing more than a result of decisions made 5-8 years ago and aren't necessarily reflective of what will happen in the not too distant future. Finally, I'm not sure why he mentioned Google (Alphabet), Uber and Amazon as bad business models. Uber may lose out to 'driverless cars' but they would still have a market with people who can't afford to buy driverless cars and probably with tourists as well. Also, driverless cars could still be at least another 20 years before they become widespread.
This won't work in revitalizing dead areas of the country. Those areas need more direct investment. But for other areas that are either growing or mantaining vibrance, this could indeed work. I like the community investment aspect ofnitof it
Im going to send this to the Walmart's president and you people should too. I had this same idea of doing farmer markets or community reunions with music and food from the local people I KNEW IT WAS A GOOD IDEA!!! Walmart has now more visits than the church 😨 and it's becoming the go to place for community socialism even if they dont really talk to each other. How do I know this? Because I work in a Walmart.
As much as I like the guy, he uses wrong examples. Google as a company is doing mostly the same. The Alphabet is just a new organising layer to separate different businesses and make it clearer for stakeholders (especially shareholders). It does not necessary change the capital or labor allocation in a significant way.
+Caellum …and that statement is ridiculous. Google provides tremendous value to the society and - here is the "buying" part - reinvests a significant part of their profits into some very ambitious projects from which we may benefit even more. The examples he should focus on, are financial institutions or hypermarkets. I don't think Alphabet fits here.
Generally I don't agree with this guy. But in this video he made several good points. I lived through the dotcom bust. Basically, successful entrepreneurs would build businesses then sell them. Soon after the business would go out of business. The reason was obvious once the entrepreneur and visionary leaves the business the business is blind. This is another reason why socialism fails because their goal is to remove the capitalist from the business. He should have mentioned GE they were notorious for not creating value in recent years and now their business is failing apart. Part of the problem was the tax code incentivized increasing stock value rather than profits. This is what happens when socialism interferes with capitalism. If the tax code was changed as he mentioned in the video a lot of the damage done by the government would be repaired.
in anglo countries, specially middle of north america there are so many liabilities, so many law suits... It's hard to believe a parking lot doing farmer's market....
Why would the bank care about your proof of concept, or whether the community likes your business? That doesn't pay employees, or shareholders. Almost stopped watching after that.
He said what is needed to solve the whole ordeal. Just remove corporate tax and decrease dividend taxes. And keep capital gains at or about 1/3 of profit/loss. This will incentivise processes that are sustainable.
The crowd funding idea is really neat. But let's say it's 50.000 divided by 100 dollar "pizza shares": That's still 500 people. You're going to have to do some legg work there. IDK exactly what the customer base of a pizzeria needs to be to keep it running, but maybe it's just not 500 regular people. 500 who, in this economy, have 100 dollars lying around. In most places, this will not work because, as he said, Walmart has been there for 3 decades. So, a pre-requisite of this working is that your community is still doing OK. The share size of 100 dollars sounds about right. Lower, and you hit the point where your 20% pizza tax is not going to be cost effective. Higher, and you have customers who can buy pizza at your place for so long that you're just not going to make any money. If you have 500 customers who are willing to pay - that's 500 people who are going to eat for free at your place at least 10 times, right? So, if everyone is eating for free in January how are you supposed to pay the rent in that month?
+HaploidCell One potential solution to the last problem would be to spread out the return of pizza repayment. That is to say, to grant pizza credits cumulatively on a monthly basis (Just like a normal loan). Further, if you make the credits only apply to pizza and not Soda, you could still make profits off of items like that.
The problem with this argument is not that it is socialist, anti-capitalist, anti-large corporation, etc... I think the major issue here is scaling. His 'experiment' only applies to small towns. Highly micro-perspective. You can probably create value and spread the wealth through a town helping a pizza shop expand, but if you are planning on financing a larger project say like build a highway or new housing development, getting public investors to invest without having the regulation that comes from the financial markets like Nasdaq or NYSE, etc. will result in FRAUD. The reason the system is this rigid is that when we put a ton of capital in entrepreneurs hands with little oversight that comes from financial markets, they defraud us. This is why investors require major oversight and banks are really anal with loans. One thing that can't be ignored is greed and the temptation of fraud. I mean, he knows that, right? Nevermind. Maybe not. He thought that the Americas were conquered in the 13th century so I guess if he can't fact check history, doubt he understands financial markets.
I see the problem in the underlying layer, research and development by corporate titans. It is cheaper and a safer bet to buy new ideas. Digital Economy ??...? This is just a means of communication, not a wealth or job generator. It harvests existing wealth. Production is highly automated and labour is sourced in foiegn labour markets. It is withering as the latest fad. While many analyze the gini, it is equally evident there is deflation in the lower half of the economy. Those involved in the consumption are facing rising prices as annual income rises but the prices are falling in the lower segment (deflation). A handful of department chains are caught in this phenomenon, the must price low enough to keep their volume high and in doing so profit becomes an opportunity cost. Ken Bowd When there is no food on tables or roofs overhead, priorities will align. Oh I know, lots of homeless people keep a cell phone. It is their final tie to better times for a hundred bucks a month. This is a tenth of a roof over head which costs a thousand bucks in Canada. The homeless are in survival mode and will be where the next socio economic turn over begins. The French revolution needed the printing press to become popular. Currently the digital reach is global. Ken Bowd
Communism? Where did that come from? This is the exact opposite of communism. I'm telling the manager of my local supermarket to start a farmer's market. Great video.
A customer pledging $100 dollars isn't necessarily wanting to expand the location if you tell them they're getting essentially $120 worth of pizza in return. I could be them wanted $20 worth of free pizza.
The reason why profits / investment is decreasing... has to do with the fact that all the places where you could grow the economy easily have already been grown. There are no longer massive railroads to build across the nation. We've laid all the fibre optic cables we need. We aren't sending people abroad into the frontiers of civilisation...
He got point ... make sense . Uber driver is Medicare and uber worth over 100 billion ???? First when I start driving for UBER it was 15% cut for uber in 3 Years uber takes 30% of the Driver’s income
Want to get Smarter, Faster?
Subscribe for DAILY videos: bigth.ink/GetSmarter
I like the point about Walmart bankrupting communities. It destroyed so many small towns.
I agree, but I wish that consumers were able to resist giving their money to Walmart in the first place.
Can you name one town that was destroyed by Walmart?
Wow this is actually really good. I'm really into "crowd" bank systems now, and this is totally related with this video. Something that I do not like is that here in Brazil there is no investment in small business because it is REALLY REALLY HARD to open one! I mean, you guys from US can open a business in 2 days right? Do you know how many you need here? At least 90 days! And while that you need to pay the rent, accounting firm (at least R$ 500 per month), and other horrible thinks... The government is the worst partner ever, he is never there for you, he does nothing for you and gets your profit (not your balance, your profit).
+Daniel Hernandez This video has nothing to do with mutual banking.
+Xano Trevisan Kothe You can at least start removing yourself entirely from the traditional banking paradigm with Bitcoin. Check out BTCPop for Bitcoin crwdfunding also.
***** Hi Deltron, it was comment in the video.
+ReM4rk you're welcome anyway? wow
Interesting. I thought a growing economy like Brazil would be way more business friendly. What are your thoughts on crowd sourcing large projects? I agree that it is a really cool idea for small businesses but I don't think that his experiment could build an economy because the structure does not facilitate large projects. Global population is on the rise and the point of these larger projects are economies of scale. You simply can't get that with an economy of small businesses only.
Kinda sad how he has to tell us these absolutely common sense things because we are dumb about our economy :/
Well maybe I don't like money and I don't like having to apply myself and I dont like growing up!
Maybe life was more fun when we were innocent and less aware and blasé with the world!
+abschussrampe The financial industry dictates financial rules and holds most of the wealth of the country with their profits rising dramatically over the past couple decades, they are not dumb, they are doing exactly what makes "them" the most money. But if by "we" you mean all the rest of us who allow for such gross economic injustice then yes, you are correct - "we" are dumb.
But it is only "implode-ready" for "all the rest of us," not for the handful of rich that create the rules and control the game. A perfect example of this is the recent economic crash of 2008. Over $700+ billion went to bail out large corporations and the wealthy while the average person - "we" - lost their homes and jobs by the tens of thousands. So no, they are not "dumb," though I can think of a few other adjectives that I rather not use here =[
Then just get everyone to be extremely frugal with their money.
If everyone sustains rather than competes then the market would crash, jobs would be lost, and the world would be in utter chaos.
it's...it's beautiful
Adam lol thanks granpa, tell me more stories of how great measles was.
Imagine if we had strict rules that only allowed politicians to get funding only from crowdsourcing from their district individuals with max cap per person. They would then finally be looking out for the best interests of their constituents rather than corporate or elite benefactors.
I LOVE that
If I'm understanding this correctly, we've reached a point where scamming money out of people is an easier way to accumulate money than actually doing something in exchange for it.
+kieran10202 That took you a while to figure that out.
***** not as long as it's taking certain people standing in the way of doing something about it
We've come almost full circle. Soon we'll be back to just taking shit by force.
It's the american dream. And it's contagious.
EXACTLY!
I've always invested all of my money in pizza.
Same here
+JustOneAsbesto Pizza price always goes up over time
LeFlyingSaucer
It's all thanks to the pizza.
+JustOneAsbesto Very solid business plan.
+JustOneAsbesto
"Look... Luigi..."
Best economics Big Think video in a while. I've been on the edge of making a decision between democratic socialism and this digital, new world capitalism for a few months now. I think this video made me realize how great capitalism can and should be.
I dont see why democratic socialism and the digit1al age economy are incompatible.
Listen to Andrew Yang
Agreed. This is a brilliant video.
I feel like you should rewatch this video and listen next time.
So how's it going? We got digital feudalism as capitalism always results in feudalism. All it did, was replaced kings & queens with capitalists.
3:38 ~ "We have to increase the tax on Capital Gains and decrease the tax on Dividends."
Hear, Hear!
Along time ago I for six months I worked for a plastic manufacturer. There were 3rd generation workers. They were so backwards it was like stepping back in time 20+ years. They brought other companies that had newer better products because they had no idea how do anything new. They made alot of profit at the time but they are no longer in business. Great talk. Thanks
"It sounds like communism, I know that..." that's the problem right there. This guy always has some great stuff to say but says it in such a way that it never has wide appeal. If he were part of a big corporation they'd provide him with a coach who would help him refine his message in a way that appeals to the masses so he could actually be successful in shaping the future.
So let me get this straight... Pizza will take the place of currency. OK, sounds good. As an added benefit it will make it easier to keep track of your money by using a PIE chart.
love it
Tine Woodbe deep dish please
Waka waka waka.... :-D
It all sounds great until you get shafted by Big Pepperoni.
Some communities ( i think in Belgium for exemple ) have created their own currency in order to create a ''small''-yet diversified'- economy between small local businesses that helps them grow/survive
I'd like to learn more. Could you post the link?
13th century going to the americas? right...
Vikings
He was clearly describing the Spanish colonization, not the vikings.
Yeah, this guy is not a fan of details, apparently. The same about Google selling Boston Dynamics. Learn the exact circumstances? Screw that! Let's make BIG conclusions based on some general musings about how to make the world nice!
The Spanish colonisation of the Americas was the late 15th century early 16th century....
glad i'm not the only one that noticed the date being way off. 13th century economics is not at all what he's talking about. 17th century yes.
A great bakery used this 120 for 100 deal to subsidize their move and purchase a building. They were a hot business. I wouldnt see many businesses being seen this hot
Valeant Pharmaceuticals is a textbook example of a company with a scorched earth business model. They do no pharmaceutical research; they just buy, as Rushkoff says, companies that do. However, Valeant isn't buying companies for their research, they're buying them for their patent portfolios. Once they own the patent on a drug, they jack up the price on it.
In the face of a recent 90% drop in its share price and multiple government investigations into its shenanigans, Valeant has lately tried to paint itself as having turned over a new leaf by adding an activist investor to their board and by saying that their days of jacking up drug prices are over. The root problem with Valeant, however, is not their corporation decision-making, it's their entire business model. It's simply untenable and several analysts (with whom I agree) consider Valeant to be "un-investible".
See, I don't always agree with this guy but this video is so much better! Less accusations and more fundamental business knowledge. I like this one.
Resource Based Economy for the win! Economies should manage resources, not horde them!
He's right about one thing, the dividend tax does discourage paying dividends. What he's forgetting is the corporate income tax is applied to profits before it goes to dividends. Reinvesting the money into the corporation to make it bigger (and therefore a higher share price since the company is worth more), the capital gains tax only takes effect.
The dividend tax is effectively 45% or so, when you take into account the corporate income taxes.
Unfortunately the reason why we have this problem in the first place is because the government decided to micromanage businesses, his solution is basically let's micromanage businesses into another direction, personally, we should get rid of the micromanagement.
First, corporations do not pay taxes. They pay NO TAXES.
You, as a customer of various corporations, are the ones that pay the taxes. Raise corporate taxes, corporation raise prices. So, abolish the corporate income tax, dividend tax, and capital gains tax.
Then people have a choice, they can invest in growth stocks that may sabotage their future for high share price now (but it could also pay off too...), and dividend stocks.
When you really think about business taxes, you realize that the business doesn't really pay those taxes, the shareholders and the customers pay it.
I know why it sounds appealing. It isn’t new. Businesses worked that way out of necessity when our country was being built. Start a grocery store and barter for inventory for the things you can and make arrangements with the big city supermarket for the rest. It isn’t practical in most communities because it isn’t necessary. Consumers don’t care about local produce or or paying for pizza on any kind of scale. Do I buy the pizza that tastes bad now for $6, or prepay $100 in pizza even if I’ll get 25 $4 pizzas that taste better on some future date. Almost everyone will buy $6 cardboard because THEY DON’T CARE ABOUT YOUR NEW BATHROOM. It is nice to think about, and I encourage people to try, but I’m not optimistic. To keep someone with more capital from swooping in and decimating your business that is already balancing on a razors edge of agreements and voluntarily forfeited profits, a government dome will be necessary, and we’ve seen how all top-down communist governments eventually choose to maintain control.
OMG! I was talking to my friend about this. I was trying to tell her this is why Local Reach isn't growing like it did in the beginning.
I LOVE THE PIZZERIA IDEA! That kind of economic plan would be great for 'real' entrepreneurs. Thank you
i recommend a paper by the bank of england: "Banks are not intermediaries of loanable funds - and why this matters"
"Look, Luigi..."
fukn lol!
you kinda sorta need both, you need some companies to buy, develop and sell companies and you also need new business ideas, the reason why you need the big parental companies is that they have the resources to give a new idea platform they otherwise wouldn't have gotten because of lack of resources, for new ideas,you need proper education, not a business model, ideas come out of brain, not a business model
The people running these companies make tons of money. Claiming "it doesn't work" won't change that. You won't convince them that their billions of dollars don't exist.
Do you take issue with the morality of their actions? List the immoral actions that would concern consumers and offer a pragmatic solution.
"Seize the means of production"
Once you seize the means of production you become a capitalist, engrossed with the urge to maximize profit,..... our rolls define our actions. Ken Bowd
@@KenBowd it can but it’s not necessarily the case. Not doing it requires reprioritize for use value instead of profit value and some planning.
Awesome video. Contributes to my understanding, and helped me to not be so pessimistic about the future of the economy.
It will never happen under our current political climate
+Playster more like it will never happen unless the current establishment is replaced. There are movements that are attempting to change that... but most of the older generation have given up hope of changing the system and spend a good deal of time telling the younger generation to give it up and let the world be poisoned and slip into collapse.
No but this is happening... people are taking the world back. Slowly but surely.
Why would a bank invest in building, marketing, and maintaining an app only to give half the amount in loans? Banks make money on loans. The more they loan, the more they make. Why would they choose the less profitable, more costly way to do business for some kind of "sense of community"?
Similarly, why would a grocery store buy more expensive local farmer's market leftovers rather than truck in their own produce? Why do you think they ship their own produce? Could it be because it's cheaper than buying from the locals???
“Think Bitcoin, not Uber!”… well that aged like fine milk. 😂
Your confusing Capitalism with Corporatism.
What you describe is one form that Capitalism could (and in an Ideal system should) take
and what you describe as the "Bad" is Corporatism, which is an effect of the Collusion of the State with Corporations (Regulatory Capture - look it up)
other than that, great point you are making!
Corporatism IS capitalism. In every instance it is how capitalism has worked in practice.
I'd link this to a resource economy where we move away from money and trade with our knowledge and skills etc... and share what we already have. And create a circular economy instead of a throw away society.
Not sure why he claims Google is worse than ebay. Adsense, adwords, youtube, and Android OS are all transaction facilitators.
It doesn't matter how many small businesses start or how many times we improve technology anymore. Efficiency and over population is the biggest threat to all populations. Wealth was only ever generated by exploiting someone else. There will always be a need for an underclass to exploit. The only drive any individual will ever have is to try and get as far above that underclass as they can. Sad, really.
Yes it makes sense, but we also need to know how value is measured with money in the end, given that the world's wealth in gold is limited ? And how to do that if we are speaking in terms of crypto currency for example, which currently only holds real value via traditional currency.. unfortunately. lol
You do wanna sell your business if someone offers you 20 billion dollars for it.
Thank you for this video! Very interesting content. I only find it strange why this model is related to the 13th century.. the example mentioned (going to South America and enslaving people and taking their precious metals) is not historically accurate as Europeans only arrived here in the late 15th century..
In his book “Life Inc.” he explains how in the 13th century corporations started as a method both to give big merchants the means to stay in power and for aristocrats (and most importantly, to monarchs) to get a bigger cut of the profits from the increased commerce, I enjoyed both the book and this video but I think he should have
given more explanation in this video
In other words, a "nation of shopkeepers", not of artisans.
great way to communicate something that is beyond my comprehension - will get the book! thanks Big Think
many of these same arguments apply to small-scale capitalism versus large scale capitalism. Is "big" always better than small, or vice versa?
One of my favorite videos from Big Think
I would never invest money in a pizza shop in exchange for pizza, because the pizza I receive in exchange for my money is:
1) Worth less than the money.
2) Guaranteed to depreciate in value very quickly.
I suppose I might be able to sell my interest in the pizza (before claiming it, so the pizza is fresh) to someone else for slightly more than it cost me, but that seems like more work for less income than simply doing a little overtime in my regular job.
"You need to be selling something. You need to be making money in an ongoing way. ... I know that's heresy."
This should really tell you something about the way the economy is run
Companies would have to invent something new and novel. What hasn't already been invented though?
Using " Communism" to save Capitalism in USA. I love it!
Describe a dystopia. Propose a utopia.
Things aren't that bad. Things won't be that good.
And vice versa.
The whole Xth century thing would be a lot less confusing if there was a 0th century, am I right?
What if the companies shut down the internet by destroying net neutrality? Does the extraction method begin to work again at that time?
This was beautiful! To hear this! It's sad that he has such negativity about communism because many systems where created with the people in mind but because power seeks to maintain its self at the detriment to the people its seeking to serve all systems become useless and violent. Amen to this man. This will go in to my favorite videos!!
So by extrapolation ...if Google was going to buy a company with hot patents for $100 million, then the purchasee should set up a system where Google must pay $50 million out of pocket and crowd fund $50 million to prove that "the people" really want Google to own the company. How can this make sense?
+Michael Winter that point is specifically referring to the role of a bank at a local level
bucchi But then the video presented that Google was becoming more like an investment firm - which is basically a large bank without checking accounts. The same principles would need to hold true for purchases and loans against company capital.
+Michael Winter in that case they were talking about Google's move towards being a holding company rather than a technology company. Which is has done, Google has become alphabet which holds all of Google's assets
I don’t get why it’s the bank’s burden to force the pizzeria to crowd source when the pizzeria can do it in their own choice.
Why crowd source at all or borrow from the bank either? Save your profits and once you have saved enough you expand. No profits to save? Why you expanding then?
Love the supermarket/farmers market idea.
We shouldn't be looking at corporations as bad vs. start-ups as being good. Corporations can leverage truly enormous amounts of capital and investment to improve their services. While start-ups often have the freedom and advantage of being small-scale that allows them to be truly revolutionary and innovative The real question for start-up founders and tech entrepreneurs is this: do they really value their own vision of how they want their good/service to be used by society? Or do they just want to create and patent something that becomes successful enough that they can sell it for a lot of money, and then either move onto something else or live a life of luxury.Not all entrepreneurs want to have to run their businesses indefinitely, and the incentive of some massive tech giant buying up your start-up can be a good thing sometimes. Otherwise some start-ups may never have existed
Europeans were in South America in the 13th century? This professor just *made* history!
I study philosophy and economics. This guy seems to only study philosophy and you can not analyze financial statements with philosophy and understand long term corporate goals and cash flows.
Think god one that thinks...
there is one big factor sir.. Risk!!
The people with the power to do this simply don't care to.
The biggest problem with developed economies today is that they have created so many costs due to the fact that everyone wants to make as much money as possible. The best economic healing would occur if there was a widespread movement to live on less income by eliminating and reducing expenditures. This would be so unpopular because it would cut revenues for so many businesses, but in the long run the cost of doing business would go down and people would be able to do more within narrower margins. This is necessary because population has grown and continues to grow. What's more, we need to be gaining trees instead of losing ever more of them to development, so large commodities like cars, big houses and commercial buildings, big roads, highways, and parking lots, etc. etc. should be downsizing to ensure the economy doesn't turn the planet more and more into developed, dry desert.
So the question becomes how to move in the direction of a broadly down-sized economy without generating more suffering and poverty. This is already happening as more and more people choose to live without driving and down-size their expectations of living space. It's business that is failing to take on the challenge because they still operate in terms of more square footage for generating more revenues, etc. If businesses would broadly down-size, they would lose revenues at first but eventually money would be worth more and people would need to rely on it less to satisfy their needs. This is hard to imagine for modern consumers who equate money-spending opportunities with happiness, but if you think carefully you realize that your happiest moments are when you feel no interest or pressure to shop or buy anything because you are experiencing happiness without doing so.
Once you realize that spending is actually motivated by artificial dissatisfaction and desires caused mostly by media, advertising, and peer-pressure; the value of a down-sized economy that prioritizes environment, health, and happiness over money-based commerce becomes clear. In fact, the whole point of capitalism was always to evolve into ever-lesser dependency on money and business; only social-capitalist ethics took over when the shift began to occur due to fear of a future without sufficient economic security provided by economic growth.
+discountconsulting "the whole point of capitalism was always to evolve into ever-lesser dependency on money and business" You're wrong as hell but go ahead and try to prove that. Capitalism is about greater and greater dependency on money and business.
Money and business were just supposed to be means to the end of achieving the greatest levels of efficiency and productivity. It was known that greater efficiency and abundance would lead to price declines (deflation) and growing economic independence as more people would be able to satisfy economic needs more easily with less effort and money.
What happened, however, is that the interest of maintaining control over the population and the economy superceded the willingness to allow freedom to undermine inflationary-growth and so the New Deal, Keynsian socialism, corporatism, and other forms of economic intervention and control were implemented to avert the free market's natural evolution into more or less permanent recession/depression (which Marx thought would culminate in a communist revolution).
The violence of the current economy is appalling. I think Big Think should suggest additional ways to improve the economy. What I'm seeing is force, fraud and coercion are what we are calling economy and finance.
You want to keep the money locally then you keep business and factories small. You don't allow them to make retail monopoly like Walmart and allow one outside the community business sell every type of product (cloths, food, toys and etc.).
We need our tax policy to reflect exactly what you are saying. In other words, the current GOP tax plan is *exactly* the wrong thing. If we stop taxing active income and increase the tax on passive income, we as a country will encourage work, and discourage merges and sales of companies.
I told people for years that when say you buy some beans for 5$, it was actually 2$ for government, 2$ for the store and 1$ for guy producing them... that guy invested 80c to get it so he only earned 20c...
There might be a need for a fundamentally different economic/political system now that technology has advanced so quickly. But one person or a team of people shouldn’t design the new systems, everyone should. Not out of some moral position but because that will give the best possible system. It’s the same principle why Gradient Descent can write code better than you. The best way to do things naturally come about when you let people do the things themselves. If every individual takes a vote in a system that is best for themselves, then you will output a system that is the best system to suit everyone’s needs, maybe?
Douglas Rushkoff, if you ever get to read this, I think we both know crypto currencies are the answer to this problem. The lasting legacy of Crypto won’t be currencies, but new systems . Like Charles Hoskinson said, “We’re in the system making business”.
Originally, it was about what the business offered. Now it seems more about the business as the product.
The bank idea is cool in that it lowers the pizzeria's cost of capital, but banks already have risk models in place, and I don't really think it lowers the banks risk exposure due to proof of concept. The additional locations could still fail due to a bad location, mismanagement of resources, etc.
Change is inevitable. Not if, when. Those ahead of the change will lead.
Also, I've read elsewhere that in aggregate businesses haven't been investing all that much, but this could be just a blip. We aren't far removed from the Great Recession and it's generally the case when profits decline (or become losses) that the first thing many businesses reduce is spending on research and development.
So, the current period could be nothing more than a result of decisions made 5-8 years ago and aren't necessarily reflective of what will happen in the not too distant future.
Finally, I'm not sure why he mentioned Google (Alphabet), Uber and Amazon as bad business models. Uber may lose out to 'driverless cars' but they would still have a market with people who can't afford to buy driverless cars and probably with tourists as well.
Also, driverless cars could still be at least another 20 years before they become widespread.
This won't work in revitalizing dead areas of the country. Those areas need more direct investment. But for other areas that are either growing or mantaining vibrance, this could indeed work. I like the community investment aspect ofnitof it
I was with him until the final 30-40 seconds. How is either paradigm or approach "communism"?
He lost me there too. It wasn't even "government does more stuff".
Im going to send this to the Walmart's president and you people should too. I had this same idea of doing farmer markets or community reunions with music and food from the local people I KNEW IT WAS A GOOD IDEA!!! Walmart has now more visits than the church 😨 and it's becoming the go to place for community socialism even if they dont really talk to each other. How do I know this? Because I work in a Walmart.
Wow. An actually useful Big Think.
As much as I like the guy, he uses wrong examples. Google as a company is doing mostly the same. The Alphabet is just a new organising layer to separate different businesses and make it clearer for stakeholders (especially shareholders). It does not necessary change the capital or labor allocation in a significant way.
+Jan Klosowski He's saying Google are just buying, not giving.
+Caellum …and that statement is ridiculous. Google provides tremendous value to the society and - here is the "buying" part - reinvests a significant part of their profits into some very ambitious projects from which we may benefit even more. The examples he should focus on, are financial institutions or hypermarkets. I don't think Alphabet fits here.
Let me guess...Google employee?
@@pacflip10 Nope. Sorry for not fitting your model. Any actual arguments?
Google: laughs in trillion dollar market cap and more cash in the bank than most nations gdp.
Generally I don't agree with this guy. But in this video he made several good points. I lived through the dotcom bust. Basically, successful entrepreneurs would build businesses then sell them. Soon after the business would go out of business. The reason was obvious once the entrepreneur and visionary leaves the business the business is blind. This is another reason why socialism fails because their goal is to remove the capitalist from the business.
He should have mentioned GE they were notorious for not creating value in recent years and now their business is failing apart. Part of the problem was the tax code incentivized increasing stock value rather than profits. This is what happens when socialism interferes with capitalism. If the tax code was changed as he mentioned in the video a lot of the damage done by the government would be repaired.
in anglo countries, specially middle of north america there are so many liabilities, so many law suits... It's hard to believe a parking lot doing farmer's market....
Why would the bank care about your proof of concept, or whether the community likes your business? That doesn't pay employees, or shareholders. Almost stopped watching after that.
Capital doesn't care where it comes from. One check for million dollars from one millionaire or one million one dollar checks from one million people.
He said what is needed to solve the whole ordeal. Just remove corporate tax and decrease dividend taxes. And keep capital gains at or about 1/3 of profit/loss. This will incentivise processes that are sustainable.
The crowd funding idea is really neat. But let's say it's 50.000 divided by 100 dollar "pizza shares": That's still 500 people.
You're going to have to do some legg work there.
IDK exactly what the customer base of a pizzeria needs to be to keep it running, but maybe it's just not 500 regular people. 500 who, in this economy, have 100 dollars lying around. In most places, this will not work because, as he said, Walmart has been there for 3 decades. So, a pre-requisite of this working is that your community is still doing OK.
The share size of 100 dollars sounds about right. Lower, and you hit the point where your 20% pizza tax is not going to be cost effective. Higher, and you have customers who can buy pizza at your place for so long that you're just not going to make any money.
If you have 500 customers who are willing to pay - that's 500 people who are going to eat for free at your place at least 10 times, right? So, if everyone is eating for free in January how are you supposed to pay the rent in that month?
+HaploidCell One potential solution to the last problem would be to spread out the return of pizza repayment. That is to say, to grant pizza credits cumulatively on a monthly basis (Just like a normal loan). Further, if you make the credits only apply to pizza and not Soda, you could still make profits off of items like that.
Sodas are, indeed, the product with the highest profit margin in gastronomy (if I recall correctly).
Didn't think of that. Thanks.
The problem with this argument is not that it is socialist, anti-capitalist, anti-large corporation, etc... I think the major issue here is scaling. His 'experiment' only applies to small towns. Highly micro-perspective. You can probably create value and spread the wealth through a town helping a pizza shop expand, but if you are planning on financing a larger project say like build a highway or new housing development, getting public investors to invest without having the regulation that comes from the financial markets like Nasdaq or NYSE, etc. will result in FRAUD. The reason the system is this rigid is that when we put a ton of capital in entrepreneurs hands with little oversight that comes from financial markets, they defraud us. This is why investors require major oversight and banks are really anal with loans. One thing that can't be ignored is greed and the temptation of fraud. I mean, he knows that, right? Nevermind. Maybe not. He thought that the Americas were conquered in the 13th century so I guess if he can't fact check history, doubt he understands financial markets.
Love that pizzeria idea! Would love a community based free market.
Lauren Brown I second that ✔✔✔✔✔
I see the problem in the underlying layer, research and development by corporate titans. It is cheaper and a safer bet to buy new ideas.
Digital Economy ??...? This is just a means of communication, not a wealth or job generator. It harvests existing wealth. Production is highly automated and labour is sourced in foiegn labour markets. It is withering as the latest fad. While many analyze the gini, it is equally evident there is deflation in the lower half of the economy. Those involved in the consumption are facing rising prices as annual income rises but the prices are falling in the lower segment (deflation). A handful of department chains are caught in this phenomenon, the must price low enough to keep their volume high and in doing so profit becomes an opportunity cost.
Ken Bowd
When there is no food on tables or roofs overhead, priorities will align. Oh I know, lots of homeless people keep a cell phone. It is their final tie to better times for a hundred bucks a month. This is a tenth of a roof over head which costs a thousand bucks in Canada. The homeless are in survival mode and will be where the next socio economic turn over begins.
The French revolution needed the printing press to become popular. Currently the digital reach is global.
Ken Bowd
Good video about what companies can do better instead of fearing their investors.
Woody Allen from Annie Hall talks about digital business.
Communism? Where did that come from? This is the exact opposite of communism. I'm telling the manager of my local supermarket to start a farmer's market. Great video.
Nathan Pen Communalism is what it's called, it sounds like communism, even if it's completely unrelated.
The whole problem with his crowd-funded pizza shop is when all those investors come for their $120 in free pizza in the first month.
A customer pledging $100 dollars isn't necessarily wanting to expand the location if you tell them they're getting essentially $120 worth of pizza in return.
I could be them wanted $20 worth of free pizza.
Value creation, wealth creation, and thinking in a practical rational way about economics, let's call it benevolent capitalism.
Conscious Capitalism is already a thing
My word. This man needs to practice these ideas, we need to see these happen.
Amazing ideas!!👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
The reason why profits / investment is decreasing... has to do with the fact that all the places where you could grow the economy easily have already been grown. There are no longer massive railroads to build across the nation. We've laid all the fibre optic cables we need. We aren't sending people abroad into the frontiers of civilisation...
Awesome ideas. Thank you!
Nice guy I'm sure . He clearly doesn't go to the same pizzerias and markets as me . I think maybe it's time we brought back the term Bourgeois .
Rushkoff passed his economy test so well the stock market cashed for 15 minutes
I want Bell Labs back after this video.
It's just terrible that anyone would confuse any of that with communism. None of that had anything to do with communism or even socialism.
- amen brother
This needs A LOT more views. This is Leonardo Da Vinci style forethought.
He got point ... make sense . Uber driver is Medicare and uber worth over 100 billion ???? First when I start driving for UBER it was 15% cut for uber in 3 Years uber takes 30% of the Driver’s income
It is called bate and switch.