60 Second Adventures in Economics (combined)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 июл 2024
- Ever shaken an invisible hand? Been flattened by a falling market? Or wondered what took the bend out of Phillips' curve? David Mitchell helps reveal some of the great dilemmas faced by governments trying to run an economy - whether to save or spend, control inflation, regulate trade, fix exchange rates, or just leave everyone to get on with it and not intervene. You'll learn why Adam Smith put such a high price on free markets, how Keynes found a bold new way to reduce unemployment, and what economists went on to discover about the impact of policy on people's and businesses' behaviour - which may not always be entirely rational.
Playlist link - • 60 Second Adventures i...
Transcript link -
Free learning from The Open University - Economics www.open.edu/openlearn/money-m...
Study a free course on Managing my money at the Open University www.open.edu/openlearn/money-m...
Study R30 BA (Honours) Economics
www.open.ac.uk/courses/qualifi...
The Open University is the world’s leading provider of flexible, high-quality online degrees and distance learning, serving students across the globe with highly respected degree qualifications, and the triple-accredited MBA. The OU teaches through its own unique method of distance learning, called ‘supported open learning’ and you do not need any formal qualifications to study with us, just commitment and a desire to find out what you are capable of.
Free learning from The Open University
www.open.edu/openlearn/
For more like this subscribe to the Open University channel
/ @openlearn_ou
Like us on Facebook: / ouopenlearn
Follow us on Twitter: / oufreelearning
#OpenUniversity #Economy
0:00 The invisible hand/Adam Smith theory of free trade
1:14 The paradox of thrift
2:16 The philips curve
3:22 The principle of comparative Advantage
4:24 The impossible trinity
5:29 Rational choice theory
I actually have an economics exam soon, and stumbled upon this video during my free time...Ended up learning and understanding some key subjects...
Way to Go!
Wow, I'm studying for my economy final tomorrow. And I have to say, no other subject had managed to make me so frustrated as this one.
That's why I loved ap micro.
im studying for my social studies final tommorow and it is stressing me out too
This video has made the concepts on Economics very easy to understand
Aside from the assumption that government payment improves an economy (against most evidence), and the assumption that comparative advantage is undermined by free movement of people, and the ignorance of government action causes of the housing crisis; this is really quite good.
wow, wonder what ideology you subscribe to
The one that doesn't require guns to function
"The one that doesn't... function"
Keegan Idler Of course the economy would grow if we were allowed to sell poison and call it medicine, or sell diseased animal meat and not tell anybody it's bad.
Where the government steps in is to stop companies from making super-cheap, yet hazardous goods.
This is a system that cannot be disagreed with unless you somehow think that the dad in "All My Sons" was a hero.
Nathaniel Annunziata. Indeed. They are just here to serve us. Why without government I'm sure cereal would be made from hemlock. After all what consumer wants to live? Sure it's almost impossible to find food that tastes bad even though government doesn't regulate that, but that's because consumers want food that tastes good and we'd have lines around the block for chocolate covered rat poison. Because there is absolutely no mechanism known to man to keep quality controlled except men with guns threatening to lock innocent people in cages if they don't fork over their protection money.
Is this David Mitchell?
If it is I'm very happy :)
This was very interesting. I've taken economics already and though I read about The invisible Hand, Keynesian theory and all that it was very confusing to say the least. This actually helped me to understand it a lot better. Thank you!
Keynesian theory is a hoax. Austrian School is the only right.
This is a fantastic video simplifying the fundamental concepts of Economics. Well done OU.
I want to learn more about economics and this video helped. Although it was a bit too much information for me to swallow in such a short amount of time. I really enjoyed watching it nonetheless. :)
need more of these videos please, they're sooooo helpful :)
Very interesting video, great job
One note about the video is its definition of "inflation" assumes it to mean a rise in prices. The Austrian econ view defines it strictly as an increase in the money supply. The rise in prices is the negative symptom which happens later. Even if the rise of prices in good "X" does not occur after the increase in the money supply, it does not mean that there was "no inflation". You can fool the public into believing there is no inflation by carefully picking the basket of goods in the CPI index to be limited to commodities that haven't risen in price much(due to other factors like production becoming cheaper).
This video is great, thanks for sharing!
This is great! Had to watch it twice because I was laughing the whole way through the first time.
We have never had free markets. We have had constant manipulation, government
intervention and monopolistic/predatory behaviour of large corporations.
Studying Economics is more interesting in this way :D Thanks a ton!
Hi
Are u alive?
@@mianrafi1530 apparently not...f
I think that the thing with economics is that there are way too many people challenging each other, some with a solid foundation and others with no idea or a poor understanding of what they are talking about but who, however, are the ones holding to their opinions the strongest. But it's RUclips, I doubt there are actual people commenting here who know what they're talking about.
The OU is conducting a survey investigating how people use our free content. The aim is to provide a better free learning experience for everyone. If you are interested in giving your views please copy and paste this link into your browser - bit.ly /ouytsurvey - (you will need to remove the space before /ouytsurvey in order for the link to work)
sweet video for quite a number of concepts !
humorous yet educational
Awesome story and animation is genius.
Please do more on economics or cap markets!!! Thanks!
Another reason to love David Mitchell
wonderful video thanks
I agree completely. When discussing a social science, one must start somewhere, and these days it's safe to assume national economies that are mostly free with a certain amount of government interference. As long as we remember we've made such assumptions -- and don't try to apply the result to, say, North Korea -- we stand a good chance of actually figuring some things out.
how do I know which software to make this video please!
Holy shit! Did I just find a very informative and unbiased explanation of different economic beliefs and theories? WTF youtube, are you feeling sick?
At 1:29, for a single frame, the bag labeled "primarc" becomes "primark" before moving on to the next scene. Why?
We need more videos like these. Even if they're a decade old.
I use your videos to learn interesting facts (I love how you put the content in a funny and simple way), and sometimes share it with friends
This is great. It would be better for the students of other language if the subtitle were added to the vedio
good sample and animation
Another terrific video!
Hi, this is brilliant, i work for an NGO in TUNISIA interested in economy, can i share your video after putting subtitles in arabic, please respond,
Kind Regards - Mouna seddik
Is it possilbe to have these videos with spanish subtitles?
Advantage? Are nations only factories?
SO PERFECT ! *.* *.*
Interesting videos, rather enjoyable and informative, even if obviously biased. I would like to offer one point of contention: the explanation of "the invisible hand" is anachronistic. It is not representative of Adam Smith's use of the term, but how it was used by later economists. Adam Smith only uses the term in "The Wealth of Nations" to describe the benefits of spending within the domestic economy rather than foreign ones.
***** It is wise to invest for a country to invest in its domestic economy, but there is a thing as too much. Take China as a example. The Chinese government basically funding domestic construction and giving direct invest into supposedly private businesses. From the outside, it look like they have no problem with unemployment, debts, and other economic issues experienced by the Western nations. In reality, most of the newly constructed buildings stood empty for years, most workers earn pennies on dollars, and the debt was pretty much hidden in artificially lowering the Chinese Yuan. Two months ago, the Chinese stock market finally experienced a crisis as the state spending could no longer support the economy growth. It was likely the Chinese economy was going to fail like the US did in 1929, but the Chinese government only avoid it by threatening to imprison anyone who attempted to sell their stocks.
Not sure that the video expressed it in this way. Seemed to not mention intra or inter-national spending and just spending in general. Seems to me the invisible hand says no government spending at all though....
I don't know if that was exactly what Keynes said...
The problem has never been taxing, but the fact that Government doesn't know how to stop spending during good times. They are supposed to be acting in a counter-cyclical manner, yet governments only seem to know how to spend money, therefore they inadvertently act in pro-cyclical a manner.
great video
Is that David Mitchell?
SOOOOOOOO HELPFUL THNKS :)
holy hell im confused
It's easy. Heaven is #holy. Hell is the other place.
Well, just a slight correction: Adam Smith wasn't advocating for free markets and saying that they work best when left alone, rather he was explaining what was occuring.
who is the animator/s for this series. I love it and want to find more from the artist!
noticed there are 6 of them, plus intro and outro?
One very important factor missing from this is private property and voluntarism vs force (slavery). People have inherent rights to own themselves and the fruit of their labor (property).
Keynesian economics makes perfect sense, if you consider saving in conjecture. Nobody does, though (mainly, governments)
amezing vidieo👌👌👌👌👌
Please do Ricardo's law of rent - is I feel this issue is central to the issues we are facing today in high house prices and low economic growth
But I'd also like him to expand on Rent, with rent seeking. That's an even bigger one which is occurring for the past 40 years in almost all industries and in certain areas organizational structures.
David Mitchell!!
Wonderful
Can anyone explain what he meant in the Comparative advantage section where the limitations are that the people would rather move to where the money is, how does that spoil the logic of comparative advantage? please help thanks!
***** i got that part, is just that the limitations of the theory they stated that nowadays the money move instead
+natasha The people move to follow the money and this invalidates Ricardo's theory, when the people move too according to this presentation. But I went and looked up flaws to Comparative Advantage and did not see this listed. In fact it listed labor mismatch as a flaw and labor is not easily moved.
It doesn't. It is just an added corollary. If you want to see the full results of adding labor to the theory of comparative advantage, see Paul Krugman's "New Trade Theory" a summary of the work in international economics which won him the nobel prize
Paul Krugman, lol
Great video oncece more!! Does anyone know where could I get the script? Thanks in advance!!
Hi Marisol, you should be able to get all the individual transcripts here www.open.edu/openlearn/society/politics-policy-people/economics/60-second-adventures-economics
I'll try to make some activities with this because the material is really worth to work with it over and over again.
Your video seems to be very first-class. I will come again to view some more of them real soon.
+The House of Jokes Have you viewed more of them now, or did you lie?
+The House of Jokes TELL US DAMIT
Dangerous assumption in this video:- . - That governments 'create jobs' when the reality is there is an equal argument that they 'destroy jobs' by entering the market to redirect resources that the market would otherwise use by competing with the private economy on an unfair basis because of the government's exemption from risk of bankruptcy that does not restrain them from paying higher prices. The reslultant effects are government can always win against the private bidders for goods and services.
They are talking about lending. Even if you are a private business you borrow money from a bank, the bank borrows that money from the government. The more money there is out there the cheaper it is to borrow some. Leads directly to the trinity problem. Its also the main problem with the Federal Reserve as I understand it.
The governments create jobs when they reallocate unused resources (i.e. portion of rich unused savings). It's basically a redistribution of wealth.
Yes, it is a redistribution of wealth just as any welfare payments are. The problem is that if a government concentrates on redistribution rather than production which is the essence of wealth creation in the first place it reduces the economy's capacity to benefit all of those in the economy.
Yet that seems to be the focus of many economists who take their eye of the ball and start concentrating on the fringes of policy rather than the critical wealth producing policies which will result in less capacity to help the fringe areas. You see this in countries where large quantities of aid has been sought from the world community and their governments concentrate on increasing that aid rather than increasing growth. This leads to lower wealth and a downward spiral of dependency.
There are no such 'rich unused savings'. Savings are re invested or lent out and don't sit in an unused account under someone's bed or mattress doing nothing.
With "private economy", you mean the corporations bigger than many national states??
I mean the economy that is either a corporation, private or public owned company, organisation or individual.
Private economy is other than the politically elected government sector which does not have to comply with all of the regulations governement make for that private sector. No matter what the size.
The last two segments were the closest to being obnoxious Austrian school political cartoons. "Economics is HARD ... better to just let those with economic advantage keep their collective boot on the necks of the rabble. That's simple."
Especially since acolytes of the Austrian school are fully confidant about which of those two groups they belong to.
very good go on
That was good (with the exception of the fifth).
This is actually a decent presentation of "mainstream" neoclassical economic concepts that you would hear in introductory undergraduate economics courses. But it should be pointed out that the dichotomies and arguments presented in this video are exclusive to capitalist economies (you can replace the term "the economy" with "a capitalist economy" and it would have the same meaning). As such, many of the issues discussed are only applicable to capitalist market and mixed economies and can not be universalized to describe pre-capitalist economies and hypothetical post-capitalist economies (such as socialism).
principles like comparative advantage and the invisible hand are not exclusive to capitalist economies as you suggest. You can certainly apply them to any economy of sufficient scale (this includes what you describe as pre-capitalist and post-capitalist) So in effect, you aren't making much sense here beyond blind verbosity.
Some of the issues presented are applicable to capitalism... Are sort of insinuating that socialism does not have issues? This is a question.
How bad, and how big are the issues applicable to socialism?
If you want to compare both systems, you need to look at issues and advantages for both, not just one of them.
Capitalism is not nirvana, but in my opinion, despite some issues it has done far better then any other system so far, in particular socialism.
*****
You misunderstand me, I am not claiming that socialism will be devoid of problems. My point is, contrary to the way modern economics presents itself, the principles and laws it describes are not universal like natural laws, but are social laws meaning they only describe phenomena that exists in capitalist or market-oriented economies.
Evan Freethy
Comparative advantage can be applied to different economic systems, yes; but the invisible hand is exclusive to market economies where there is a dichotomy between free and regulated/controlled markets. It would be taking the concept out of context to apply it to a pre-capitalist gift economy, or to a planned socialist economy or to the Marxist notion of communism - where markets either don't exist or aren't the dominant mode of distribution.
The economics is based on capitalism
What r u saying
Adam Smith the father of economics is also the father of capitalism
So other system can be part of political science or sociology but no economics
muy interesante este video
Excuse me... does anyone know a good, un-biased book on economics I could buy to get me started? About the same reading level as Hutton's 'The state we're in' would be nice. Thanks.
"Economics in One Lesson," by Henry Hazlitt. Incredibly clear and concise. The Lesson itself is given in the first chapter, while all the following chapters describe how the Lesson can be applied to various economic problems. One wouldn't have to even read the whole book to get a sense of its power. I was shaken by it after only the first few pages, as I suddenly began to see some of its farther-ranging implications.
R-800 Cheers. Is it un-biased?
Goat Gruff No such thing as an "unbiased" econ book. Econ has to be taught from some perspective or worldview that is bound to be at odds with other schools of thought. You may have to read a couple different books from a couple of different ways of thinking to get a really well rounded idea of the major approaches to economics. "Economics In One Lesson" is a great book though and very easy to read.
Richmond Vernon Well, I've already started by ordering Hazlitt's book (amusingly, Haslet in the UK is a form of low, low grade spam -but never mind that).
So give me another, please. Something for balance
Thanks for the help btw.
Tim Don Ooh! Go on.....
A very fun video.
lol, i don't even know why i'm watching this, but it's a good video
This is a very entertaining and informative, and--while obviously slightly right-wing, video--its also meant to be something to push the viewer to look into the smarter literature. Good vid for what it is!
It's not economics by nature is right wing aside from keynes but watever lol
Bác nào có tâm có thể làm Sub việt cho clip này được không? Vì có nhiều chỗ em không hiểu :
Is it just me or does everything make more sense and sound simpler when it's explained with a British accent
David Mitchell!!!:D
Adam Smith just cared about the dexterity of people, he mentions it like 1000 times in his book.
Yep, it's him. It says so in the description.
Haha: Mark Corrigan gives us a taciturn and deflating lesson in Economics!
It is true though, and people act accordingly in the biggest part. As it is, you would most likely care about your kid and do stuff to make it better for it (pay for college, for example), yet you would not think to sacrifice yourself for the good of your kids generation.
You left out an important aspect of Keynes' theory: Governments need to bank money in good times and use the banked money to goose the economy in bad times. The problem we're seeing today is that government is trying to goose the economy with borrowed money and it isn't working.
He also said that inflation isn't real
Well he did mention that. But I agree that today in good times we need to be banking that money to pay off this debt. We in the USA can blame Bush for spending so much money on something that does nothing for the economy and now that we are deep in debt we cannot afford to save but we still need to anyway and are only spending more (poor Obama). The libertarian party is the only way my friend... STOP THE WARS.
What is meant by equilibrium in 'the invisible hand'? Does it only mean Demand=Supply but that idea is not plausible in real world where every moment need is created and destroyed.
Equilibrium in economics means when supply and demand are the same, and the prices are at the exact right level relative to supply and demand. In an equilibrium, there is no pressure for price changes.
Teaching logical follies Awesome !
Although totally free markets may sound like a good idea, it seems to work better when there is just enough regulation to maintain some measure of balance.
yes, and of course lack of regulation has been the source of many scandals and fraud- and even the great depression in the 1930's... before the SEC was formed as oversight.
Umm... Keynes didn't think that way because he saw that "we're all gonna die anyways" he thought that way because he believed the economy to be a relatively closed cycle.
I have the exact same question.
Taking an economics class this year, not looking forward to it . sigh
Good to know Bill Phillips from New Zealand was a good Economist cause I can't imagine he had much luck hunting Crocodiles in a country that doesn't have any.
Would a global currency and unified static interest rate solve the perfect trinity problem?
Yes but it would bear other problems are we are seeing with the Euro.
Marcus Pacheco Problem is that places in good financial standing like America or Asia don't want to do that because they will be severely dragged down by Africa/Medit. places in worse standing.
Just look at the Euro
The whole euro crisis only exists because other currencies exist. a global currency would make lots of the problems it faces disappear
I studied economics and I found them hard to grasp. This is well explained but still, the concepts just baffle me. Too big and complicated and yet there are strict rules.
Is this Mitchell?
I am almost certain that the voiceover work has been done by the brilliant David Mitchell.
Gold and Silver solves inflation because its a finite near fixed supply.
With no inflation, then the invisible hand can truly make its comeback.
That sounds like David Mitchell.
If you can live a happy life for half a dollar a day, then you can take whatever pleases you the most.
an entry to marxian economics is missing,rest is perphecto..!
Not sure that works for a modern western society as a whole, but DEFINITELY as an individual you should go for the job that you enjoy, regardless of money
The free market ends with Sweeney Todd.
Also, where is Sam Vimes's Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness?
You totally skipped talking about the supply of money in the Philips Curve section.
Matt Carroll they only had a short amount of time
The video is fun to watch but I am confused :/
David Mitchell?
Is the voice actor the guy from The Peep Show??
If I can do a job I like for a dollar a day, or a job I dont, for 100, which one will I actually take?
On paper theory always falls flat on its face when you introduce the human element. Even if your economic theories are correct, self interest lures people away from the rules in favour of short term personal gains. Even if they come at long term costs to society.
An example of an important rule is the segregation of speculative and retail bank accounts, which stops glorified professional gamblers placing bets with other people's deposits. This was put in place after the great depression to prevent a repeat of that horror story, and yet people got greedy and eventually got it removed. A matter of years later, we got another great depression style crash.
Did they put the rule back in place? Of course not. They're too addicted to their money heroine to limit their supply, even if the risk involved is killing the economy. Which means the banks will be bailed out again and again and again... because every time they mess up, it puts our deposits at risk and they need to be saved. Which just encourages them to take even greater risks, because they know corporate socialism is in place to provide them with free money when the bets go wrong.
Economic theory knows the answer to this problem, but human self interest prevents it from being fixed. Banking wasn't always this unstable, it was enabled and is maintained for the maximisation of short term profits.
Man you are stupid, this whole concept of capitalism is that society can benefit from people's lust for short term profit.
Btw stop thinking like a consumer life doesn't revolve around your savings
Correct, what you describe is called crony capitalism, its corruption of the humans.
THAT IS NOT THE INVISIBLE HAND. in wealth of nations smith used the metaphor as an argument against free capital flow and in theory of moral sentiments to describe the way landlord should distribute his profits to his workers (as if everyone had an equal share of land)
You may have it backwards. The invisible hand is the guiding force that gets people to do what is in the best interest of society, because it is in their best interest
Smith never said what is quoted in this video and I challenge anyone to find where he said it in this context. In fact you will only find the term Invisible hand 2 times in all of his writings.
This idea if thr Invisible hand is a modern day idea.
yes
On to the second point, which is the idea that savings decreases the constrains on lending. That is, that "fractional reserve" system constrains banks by limiting the amount they can lend, thus more savings equals lower interest rates.
While there is some truth to this, banks are not in any way constrained in their ability to make loans based on savings. Savings take money out of the productive economy and does not offset the lack of spending that results.
MV=Py
Money x Velocity=Price x Quantity.
Savings reduces M and unless V goes up (which has been historically constant) or P falls (again historically P is hard to move and often happens out of sync with a decrease in M) Which leaves quantity which must fall (increasing unemployment).
When people save the governments response should be to balance the equation though increased spending. If people decide to deploy funds in savings, the government should decrease M by increasing taxes or selling of securities (savings).
AND OMG, falling wages (due to increased unemployment) do not encourage business to hire more people. Business are coin operated. They don't hire unless there is an increasing demand. Increased unemployment means more people with less money!
Taxes aren't about paying for spending, they are about maintaining the equation MV=Py.
Taxes are for fulfilling certain government duties, like national defence
Amen