I read Basic Economics, and what really stood out to me was subsidisation: subsidising some product or service means that consumers will do something else rather than what they would do naturally, rather than what they want to do, the money would not be spent on exactly what they want if at a natural price! So, in effect, subsidisation makes people do what they would not do naturally or ideally!
I just started reading Conflict of Visions. It is not easy reading. What is an important concept that I have learned? Chapter One: The Role of Visions is well defined. It makes you realize the roots from where thought and action, and eventually policy sprouts. Chapter Two: Constrained and Unconstrained Visions describe contrasting frameworks of human institutions but also include moral principles. In the Constrained Vision Thomas Sowell says, "In practice, people on many occasions 'sacrifice their own interests... ' to such intervening factors as devotion to..." But I may resort to reading the Summary and Implications at the end of each chapter. I am not sure how far I will get in the book if I try to read its entirety. But seeing your video has inspired me. THANK YOU!
You are welcome. Glad you are reading A Conflict of Visions! So far it is the best book I have come across by Thomas Sowell but also the hardest to read (much more philosophical than most of his books). The Summary and Implications sections are indeed the most concise parts of Thomas Sowell books which helps us best understand what his conclusions from his research are. I reviewed A Conflict of Visions last year so if want you can use that as a supplement to understanding the many ideas discussed in that book: ruclips.net/video/0v3IGi8s-a8/видео.html.
@theBear89451 Oh, I watch that channel from time to time. I saw this video a while back and remember that he argues there are six values that conservatives, liberals and libertarians each put a different emphasis on.
One thing he shows very clearly is how just about every country persecutes their own different minorities in many similar manners and some minorities overcome the adversity and other do not. The minority itself is responsible for their success or failure in the end. Culture matters.
@Brit Johnson, and the group that is persecuting them is often shooting itself in the foot as it is incentivizing its most productive people to leave the country (e.g. Indians/ Pakistanis in Uganda under Idi Amin).
I mostly agree with Sowell on social programs, but even for me he goes slightly too far as he opposes Milton Friedman's idea of a negative income tax. He is a great economist and historian but on things like crime and foreign policy (e.g. Iran fearmongering) he is hit and miss. Is there a specific social program that you are thinking about where the benefits outweigh the costs?
Both Milton and Sowell agree that a Negative Income tax is better than the current Welfare system, but both also want no government interference. The poor are trapped by the current system. Milton believes the Negative Income allows the poor to get necessary funds while still allowing them to seek work… But the important thing to realize is that racism was decreasing before the passing of Welfare as poor minorities were turning to productive work to start their adult lives. The current US system subsidized fatherless homes and got more of them, but the problem didn’t end there. Fatherless homes result in ten times more criminal youths, with homocide being the greatest cause of death and birthed a new type of culture. I don’t think it benefited poor people at all. It was the cruelest of experiments and it failed spectacularly. The path to hell is paved by people uninterested by the costs of their virtue signal.
@jsbrads1 Both Milton and Sowell want a limited amount of government interference as they are part of the Chicago school of economics, not Austrian, which favours a little bit of government interference in banking. You make a good point about the Welfare state's effect on poor minorities. I remember that another point in Black Rednecks and White Liberals Thomas Sowell brought up was that black poverty was decreasing faster in the twenty years before the Great Society programs were instituted than the twenty years after. And there are indeed a lot of virtue signalers, who do not really care about the huge costs that their government experiments lead to. A large percentage of the past three generations have been put at a great disadvantage without having two parents in the home.
![Learning Screenplay Story Structure - Eric Edson [Full Version - Screenwriting Masterclass]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/iywvNIWKbPI/mqdefault.jpg)
![Learning Screenplay Story Structure - Eric Edson [Full Version - Screenwriting Masterclass]](/img/tr.png)
What is one important concept you have learned from Thomas Sowell? Let me know!
I read Basic Economics, and what really stood out to me was subsidisation: subsidising some product or service means that consumers will do something else rather than what they would do naturally, rather than what they want to do, the money would not be spent on exactly what they want if at a natural price! So, in effect, subsidisation makes people do what they would not do naturally or ideally!
True! As resources are scarce subsidies redirect them to alternative uses different than what people would have chosen otherwise naturally.
@@TheAvidReaderBookReviews What I meant to emphasise is that: subsidisation is inefficient to wants and needs, which I feel people overlook!
I just started reading Conflict of Visions.
It is not easy reading.
What is an important concept that I have learned?
Chapter One: The Role of Visions is well defined. It makes you realize the roots from where thought and action, and eventually policy sprouts.
Chapter Two: Constrained and Unconstrained Visions describe contrasting frameworks of human institutions but also include moral principles. In the Constrained Vision Thomas Sowell says, "In practice, people on many occasions 'sacrifice their own interests... ' to such intervening factors as devotion to..."
But I may resort to reading the Summary and Implications at the end of each chapter. I am not sure how far I will get in the book if I try to read its entirety.
But seeing your video has inspired me.
THANK YOU!
You are welcome. Glad you are reading A Conflict of Visions! So far it is the best book I have come across by Thomas Sowell but also the hardest to read (much more philosophical than most of his books). The Summary and Implications sections are indeed the most concise parts of Thomas Sowell books which helps us best understand what his conclusions from his research are.
I reviewed A Conflict of Visions last year so if want you can use that as a supplement to understanding the many ideas discussed in that book: ruclips.net/video/0v3IGi8s-a8/видео.html.
For an alternative view of the same conflict, you might like ruclips.net/video/0Ab-tdJazoo/видео.html
@theBear89451 Oh, I watch that channel from time to time. I saw this video a while back and remember that he argues there are six values that conservatives, liberals and libertarians each put a different emphasis on.
One thing he shows very clearly is how just about every country persecutes their own different minorities in many similar manners and some minorities overcome the adversity and other do not. The minority itself is responsible for their success or failure in the end. Culture matters.
@Brit Johnson, and the group that is persecuting them is often shooting itself in the foot as it is incentivizing its most productive people to leave the country (e.g. Indians/ Pakistanis in Uganda under Idi Amin).
I like Sowell, but he is a bit extreme. There are many social programs where the befits outweigh the costs, but he does not give any of these credit.
I mostly agree with Sowell on social programs, but even for me he goes slightly too far as he opposes Milton Friedman's idea of a negative income tax. He is a great economist and historian but on things like crime and foreign policy (e.g. Iran fearmongering) he is hit and miss. Is there a specific social program that you are thinking about where the benefits outweigh the costs?
Both Milton and Sowell agree that a Negative Income tax is better than the current Welfare system, but both also want no government interference. The poor are trapped by the current system. Milton believes the Negative Income allows the poor to get necessary funds while still allowing them to seek work…
But the important thing to realize is that racism was decreasing before the passing of Welfare as poor minorities were turning to productive work to start their adult lives. The current US system subsidized fatherless homes and got more of them, but the problem didn’t end there. Fatherless homes result in ten times more criminal youths, with homocide being the greatest cause of death and birthed a new type of culture.
I don’t think it benefited poor people at all. It was the cruelest of experiments and it failed spectacularly.
The path to hell is paved by people uninterested by the costs of their virtue signal.
@jsbrads1 Both Milton and Sowell want a limited amount of government interference as they are part of the Chicago school of economics, not Austrian, which favours a little bit of government interference in banking. You make a good point about the Welfare state's effect on poor minorities. I remember that another point in Black Rednecks and White Liberals Thomas Sowell brought up was that black poverty was decreasing faster in the twenty years before the Great Society programs were instituted than the twenty years after. And there are indeed a lot of virtue signalers, who do not really care about the huge costs that their government experiments lead to. A large percentage of the past three generations have been put at a great disadvantage without having two parents in the home.
Programs like what? The welfare state destroying the black family?