I'm not a libertarian, but I appreciate the view. I am and always have been an an-cap. For me the only good government is self representation and self rule. I recently realized that tyranny requires a significant population of small minds who promote it and protect it. They are the unteachable. Every failure is simply a reason to add more tyranny to the recipe. No experience can jolt them out of their fairy tale of "the state." That scares the hell out of me. Politics will not solve man's problems. Only man can divorce himself from the decrepitude of the actively corrupting state. While he is still subject to it's malfeasance, he at least can make his own mind up about reality.
Tom Woods is one of the reasons I am not a Republican anymore, but a Libertarian. TY Tom for all you do in educating people. Notice, I said educate, not indoctrinate. :)
Sara Skywalker I started to answer thinking your question was simple, but I decided to do some research and i’m really glad you asked that question. indoctrination is actually more complex than I thought. I think “educate” is kind of self-explanatory, you’re giving people information so they can make conclusions based on the information. “Indoctrination” is more interesting though. It is teaching people in such a way that causes them to reject differing opinions without giving them a fair consideration, and to accept similar positions or positions of certain leaders uncritically. A great tool for indoctrination is vilifying the opposition. i’m sure you’ve seen those “man on the street“ interviews where they tell somebody the opposite position of their favorite politician, and the person agrees with it. And then when you tell them that their hero actually thinks the opposite, you can see the wheels turning for the first time. That’s when you’re shaking their indoctrination a little bit. libertarians analyze positions based on principles of freedom and probably no two libertarians think exactly alike. Each of them can come to different conclusions on different positions based on different interpretations of libertarian principles. The only exception to that rule is that every libertarian agrees with Milton Friedman, LOL
@Sara Skywalker There is a greater crossover with self described Republicans and self described Libertarians than with Democrats and the like to be sure, but there are stark differences. As far as I have been able to glean, Republicans speak of Liberty but it is also conveniently forgotten with talks of patriotism, military exploits, government programs/spending, etc. Libertarians speak of Liberty and mean it. Basically, Republicans talk a big game about small government, individual Liberty, etc., but do nothing that heads in any direction that actually secures Liberty. Republicans and Democrats often want the same fundamental thing, but differ on where to go. For example with government spending, they both love to do it, but they differ greatly on where to spend it. Libertarians tend to question the whole idea entirely. I thought I was a staunch Conservative that loved freedom, Liberty and the Constitution (and I still do) but I never really understood what that meant. Once you dive into rights, economics and pretty much everything Woods brings up, it is hard then to conflate those beliefs/desires with Republicans as they are. I still say they're "better" than Democrats in that regard, but a longer road still takes you to the same place in the end.
@@bryanb.386 You are right, even though he got so much, he believed that somehow if socialist doesn't get taken over by those who want power , it will be paradise.... he never seen the fault in his vision.
tom woods is real as it gets... wears his heart on his sleeve and hes a savage... the podcast is great and even on his email list you get some gems... tom dilorenzo is amazing too, i hope he did a new speech at this event..ive already seen all his online speeches.....
Mark Kregel he rarely starts confrontations with people. at worst he uses a bit of pointed sarcasm, not even toxic even when hes targeted by random online hater groups.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Long overdue. I subscribed to Murray Rothbard's private letter back in the late 1970's. I watched when Lew Rockwell joined the newsletter, which was then re-named The Rothbard Rockwell Report. I watched the formation of the MIses Institute. These great persons devoted their lives and their fortunes to bringing the profound truths of libertarianism to the masses. I have witnessed a tireless and unending struggle to get this message out.. Their gifts to our country and to the world are of historic measure.Tom Woods ,this speech is one of your finest 45 minutes. Over the years, I purchased all of your books. You are a welcome and wonderful prodigy of the founders of the liberty movement.Thank you all.
carpe diem jonah Have you told your story? Why not write a long form article that details the changes you have seen in the decades. Sounds fascinating.
carpe diem jonah are you in contact with some of the people in that circle? Outsiders, just people who understood the importance and implications of Rothbard?
carpe diem jonah Yeah, I’d legitimately be interested in hearing that. I just got into the Mises stuff recently, and I’d love to hear your thoughts on how it’s changed in the past.
Johm eaglehart Capitalism is not corporatism. That’s not Free Markets. If your family was starving, and putting your twelve year old son to work for 12 hours a day was the difference between starvation and living another season, would you send your kid to school? We don’t have to contemplate that because of capitalism.
@@dalef9441 Free market capitalism died long ago if there ever was such a thing. Monopoly capitalism is what you have today. The monopolist gains his power through business manipulation not through invention or creativity. The capitalist profit quest does not necessarily produce the correct investment instead it drives toward the biggest return on investment.
liberal democracy without society will lead to corporatism, there is always people in government that makes it impossible to reduce the size, big governments end up with corporatistic companies inside the nation, in the end national debt and huge income differences.
@@alfredkwaak The US is an Imperialist Empire. It's Military commands (Africa Command, Southern Command, Europe Command, Northern Command, Pacific Command and Central Command) show that the American ruling class considers itself to be top dog as the World's most powerful Imperailist Empire.
I met Lew at a Mises gathering in Houston in 2011 when I was still in college. I was expecting to just say hello to him, but he ended up talking to me for several minutes and we even walked out of the banquet hall together still in conversation like we had known each other for years. He was very humble and I still greatly appreciate the time he took to speak to me.
Unsung Heroes... They did what they did not for to be seen but to be. They are actually the lucky ones, who were able to find that path, the most beautiful pearl are not the ones found and then made necklace for every eyes to see and admire, its the ones who were never found kept intact in the biggest oyster hidden at the deepest and darkest spot in the vast sea. Their beauty is only avail to be seen by those who are willing to pay with vigorous effort and their precious time. Gin,
I was #57 to dislike it. He is fundamentally wrong and won't ever wake up to reality. A very intellectual halfwit who knows nothing outside this sick civilization. as much as I respect him for upholding unorthodox views, I can't help but deplore his ignorance and arrogance when it comes to what he didn't study - the 99.98% of human history predating civilization.
@@jackharper6746 Thank you jack. That was a very long-winded bunch of nothing. I do get the idea that you disagree with what is being said but you have said nothing in rebuttal. I award you no points.
@@nicosmind3 Taxation has been around since at least the time of Julius Caesar. How do you fools propose to build roads and interstate highways without some kind of tax? If Wall Street can't purchase and privatise the street outside of the Wall Street firms what makes you think they can do it across the country?
@Umh Chud Some were built as turnpikes as can been seen in Connecticut since you can find a number of roads called turnpike. ie Tolland turnpike Its been a long time since anyone collected a toll on them. Since they went bankrupt a long time ago. The tolls on the CT Turnpike (I-95 I-395) and Parkways were removed after an accident at a toll both with a gasoline tankers killed multiple people. Texas has been building a number of toll roads only to have them go bankrupt or unfinished.
@Umh Chud The highway is an example of capitalists wanting to have their cake and eat it to. Good highways to transport goods and provide services are necessary but the bosses don't want the cost coming out of profits. After all they consider tax money to be THEIR MONEY.
@Umh Chud I'm sure if the promised returns are guaranteed by the capitalist government, like state bonds issued in lieu of taxes, they will build more. I sure you'd like a road privatized in front of you home that requires a transponder to charge you every mile or two so that some company can make a profit out of owning roads.
@13:31 his wage may increase because he has a desirable skill, but purchasing power remains tied to the value of that remuneration. Plus, any "purchasing power in wage" the forklift provides would substantially benefit the owner of the forklift, not the laborer driving it.
The reality is that the poverty-destroying benefits of economic liberalism are even greater than these figures would suggest because the poorest people in the world today aren't only better off because of free markets, they are largely existent because of them. If the world had never discovered economic liberalism, not only would we have created far less wealth, but we would also have been unable to achieve a population of even remotely close to the c.9b people we have around today.
I appreciate the shout-out to Will Grigg. I find myself missing him all the time. He is probably my favorite libertarian. He was an amazing writer and orator. I recommend anyone unfamiliar to read his blogs, and listen to his podcasts. Such a shame we lost him.
The "device that turns desert air into water" headline was actually just a start-up scam. It either didn't work or wasn't able to produce more than a few drops of water over 24hrs or something. The headline got them tons of funding though and the fact that it was a scam didn't make headlines.
@15:40 - the average earning of drug running increased 100% when competiting companies where eliminated. Point being, just because there was an increase doesn't mean it was desirable, especially if when the growth normalizes, the rebound makes the poorest even poorer in the worst of times, even if the ACCESS to a better standard of living increases in the best of times, it says nothing of the proletariat's (i.e. those having only their labor,) ability to pay for it. This is a velocity problem.
IT'S FUNNY WHEN THE PHONE RINGS AND YOU SEE THE NUMBER IT MEANS YOU ARE GOING TO HELP OR WORK .. AND THEN YOU MAKE A CALL FOR HELP BIZZY ! I DON'T CALL ANYONE .. WHY MAKE MYSELF MAD A LOSE MY DAY
Exactly at 12:00 minutes: the more laws instead of just handling situations, the worse things get, the more difficult life and work gets. The more rules, aka laws, the more low IQ people will run things in workplaces, so you hardly can work there any more, more mobbing, more group-agreement, more shit, more pain, etc.
@17:50 exactly, if you have to convince someone they are better off when they themselves don't experience the benefit, perhaps you trying to sell a system of basic needs that must be sold because the reality is that 90% of Americans don't feel any more economically free then 100 yrs ago. And that, is truely sad.
One point. I think you're wrong about Rothbard. For men like him, selling out is NOT the easiest thing in the world, because they value integrity and their principles. At least, that's how I interpret such actions.
I have read some Chicago economists and only started on my Austrian journey, could someone please tell me what functions the state has (if any) under a Austrian system, thank you.
Austrians school of economic tought mainly only predicts the effects of the state, and they are all bad. Take of that what you will. Or, studies what happens in a given circumstance, trough praxeology. Libertarians then make conclusions of that what the state should do. Wich is the least possible. Protect property rights, however you like. It can be argued that's the one role government should have. But even that can be argued away. Mostly because, in any given state, it's always the government that is the biggest breaker of property rights. But also, that a reasonable argument can be made, that it can be done with voluntary systems. And even further than that, voluntary systems are the only moral ones, doesn't matter if they work or not. So that's how it should be done, because it's right. It's just a happy coincidence, that it would ensure the most prosperity to all of all possible alternatives.
Austrian school has a flaw, the complex theories loose their meaning , and thus separating the markets of the common people and the money in the financial sector. Capitalism can't survive without state.
@@alfredkwaak The main things libertarians and all capitalist economist want is a toothless labor movement. As long as no one purses "collectivist" goals they can keep counting their profits.
Everything he’s praising can be traced back to human labor. He’s just affirming Abraham Lincoln’s quote: "Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." All the capital in the world couldn’t make a toothpick. Only human labor produces.
Kids are cute and cute kids are given money Egypt= carpet factory= five yr olds part of education is working in factory= bus loads of tourists= giving money to the cute kids= feeding their families( i hope). I know this cause i experienced it in egypt while on tour There ya go.
Lots of people will not give credit to others or to the one who did something helpful and valuable. They prefer to not see it or to lie. Ungrateful ingrates maybe?
@@beatsNstrings With a turkey, a party and discussions of the class struggle past, present and future. We may have to schedule it around comrades and friends work schedules.
I love Tom Woods. He's an excellent speaker and an overall good guy. His descriptions of the ingrates were spot on. I wish we had someone similar in the UK. Shame he's a Catholic. Sorry Tom. I just don't understand it.
Pwecko Geezuz. Obviously because I wondered why YOU bothered to diss Tom for being a catholic, duh. Being a catholic isn’t antithetical to being an anarchist. He is only helping people so who gives a fuck about his religion?
I have an idea which is that Libertarians should hire their own. Conservatives have their own work environments liberals have theirs. We should have our own as well! It wouldn't just be altruistic it would also be logical in that we could work with like minded people. We would gain a reputation of looking out for people and become a force to be reckoned with.
a capitalist cant afford such romanticism. whatevers most efficient. however, everyone should avoid letting SJWs anywhere near their operation. they are like trojan horses
beatsNstrings Yes Sjws are the worst. I'm in the process of eliminating them off one by one. Still selecting Libertarians over others if qualified would help to strengthen our forces.
@22:17 you might afford to pick out whatever you want, most cant. 500 dentist, ophthalmologist, doctor's, and auto repair shops around and I can't afford to go any of them. Way to go capitalism. See the system works fine, I'm just one of those lazy workers, who can't find the extra 20hrs id need in a day to advance my education, skill and social network to to a status that might precipitate greater opportunity.
That's because inflation and political cronyism plus taxation has been transferring your wealth away from you. Social control of the means of production did that to you. And they don't even control all of it. Just taking 30% of your avg earnings gave them the power to do that. Egyptian slaves only had pay 20% in taxes.
Kim O'Brien doesn’t seem likely Kim is trying to get into North Korea Cuba or Venezuela any time soon try maybe just get a skill that serves your fellow man instead of spewing disproven propaganda that will get your fellow man killed
@@michaeltevis1180 George Washington and Abraham Lincoln got their fellow man killed. Maybe you should move to Canada or the UK if you aren't already from there and tell us about how your rights come from God and the graciousness of King and Queen. You wouldn't want to be ungrateful to George III and Jeff Davis now would you?
@@michaeltevis1180 I have plenty of skills. People such as yourself think Kirchhoff's laws should be rewritten to provide the middle class a regulatory exemption from having to set up the simultaneous equations.
says the person using a saturnian symbol and he thinks its about farmers and workers. thehuntingcall.com/2018/10/31/the-saturnian-sickle-and-the-babylonian-hammer/
I'm watching this now, and I just made a video pertaining to Bernie Sanders saying very similar things to what Tom Woods is saying here. Weird coincidence.
Blah blah blah Tom with the same words. Great words, but does not ever get to the mainstream. Same people in power, same socialist agenda, same financial manipulation. Give us a Ron Paul 2.0!
The argument presented is essentially that all the progress that coincided in time with an economic system some erroneously call capitalism should be attributed to capitalism and that those who fail to make this inference are grotesquely ungrateful for the provisions of capitalism. This is a dumb argument probably intended to convince the dummies in the audience. Capitalism doesn't spur technological progress to which the speaker attributed said progress. Capitalists, by and large, don't have the enormous capital it takes to fund the basic science or open ended inquiries needed to invent new technology. It's just way to risky. New technology comes from socialism, from the state, usually by way of the defense department in recent times. Capitalists then take that technology, take the fruits of the investments made by the public, and turn it into consumer products for people or governments. The public is largely ignorant of their true ownership of new technologies, but if they did and demanded a return on their investment they wouldn't be ingrates, just normal people. Socialists who do demand a return on their investments are no more ingrates than a stockholder who wants a share of dividends.
@@Will_Moffett The truth is that innovation tends to drop when governments intervene. This is because instead of actual incentives, false incentives are provided, so that resources that might be better spent are not. In addition, the minute government gets involved, costs are inflated because there's no way to tell what they *should* be. Typically the private sector can get things done faster and cheaper. Have you really considered the economic calculation problem? Or are you just batting for your own personal sentiment? Or are you politicking on behalf of your own "group?"
@@Thea_MojaveOutliersWhipmakers Almost all the major technology has been developed initially by the government precisely because, when innovating, there is no way to tell what the costs should be. Private businesses can't carry that kind of risk. Cell phones, microchips, satellite tech, containerization, jet engines, the internet, pharma, robotics...all the research and development for these and most all other tech is paid for with tax dollars. Have you ever bothered to lookup how much government money has been poured into Tesla? These are empirical, falsifiable claims I am making. The world isn't what you think it is. You've got it backward.
@@Will_Moffett Tesla. Hahaha! That's a good one! Okay, so in other words, you don't know what the economic calculation problem is, nor how it works (and how it doesn't work). You don't mention "price" at all, or what it is nor how it works. Too, it would appear you are unfamiliar with "regulatory capture." It seems to me the biggest cost risk to private business is precisely the large government we currently have, and indeed, that cost IS often prohibitive, such that it curtails growth or at least deforms it, and such that it prevents the start of new businesses (which typically come with new ideas) who must otherwise meet those costs before they so much as do the first thing to begin the actual business of starting a business. My advice is to study up. You've made a vast claim here, and you've presented it as if it's foregone, leaving your audience with the heavy task of doing a huge amount of research just to refute your comment here on RUclips (in other words, we'd all have to repeat ourselves, despite that you didn't listen the first time). The rest of us would be better served if you did your own studying before you make claims, especially the claim that "These are empirical, falsifiable claims I am making." I would hazard a further guess that you're not familiar with history, and that you're counting on others to be in the same boat and daunted by the task of doing the work it takes to understand what's happened such that we've arrived in our modern day. Since I can SEE that you don't actually know what you're talking about, it occurs to me that you have some OTHER agenda for commenting here besides "setting the record straight." I wonder what that is. In any case, it is my belief that it is incumbent upon each of us to do our own research and thinking, and to exercise skepticism in the face of grand claims such as yours. The difference between you and me is that you have vouchsafed a bunch of conclusions, whereas I have offered suggestions about where to look so that a body can come to his or her OWN conclusions.
Hey Tom, You are making a lot of generalizations here about Socialists. Not fair and not accurate. Is this a comedy act or truly an educational talk on that subject, I guess it's both. Anyway, I wish people were less entrenched for "their side" and would truly consider the whole pie. No offense, but there does sound like some prejudice and anger there for you. I enjoyed your talk on the Covid 19 situation and I agree that there should be much more questioning of how it's been handled. I am a liberal democrat and I don't agree with some of what my political party is saying, and you're right, it's a very tough subject to bring up if you disagree with friends who are very loyal to the whole covid19 protocol. I did text the Covid19 talk to a couple of my liberal friends, and one of them wouldn't even listen to it, there we go again with "entrenched". WE ALL COULD BE A LOT MORE OPEN TO OPINIONS THAT WE DISAGREE WITH, OR THINK WE DISAGREE WITH. FIRST, YOU HAVE TO HEAR THE SIDE TRULY, THEN MAKE UP YOUR MIND, and that is hard to do for many people. Please, anyone replying to this comment, go easy and try to be somewhat objective.
"Less child labor than ever, a reason to celebrate." That is NOT an unmitigated good! Children working means that children learn how to work, learn to become productive laborers. How many children learn that skill in our progressive age? Mostly child labor is to be considered an evil only when that labor is so hard that it injures or kills children and/or when that labor prevents learning the three R's. If more children were working today there would be a lot less illiterate graffiti to clean up.
@@TomWoodsTV Actually only child factory and mine labor is what is outlawed in the US on a federal basis through the fair labor standards act of 1938 and local or state laws. This was passed during the great depression when the labor movement was winning strikes. Those who live on family farms and work as farm laborers with their parents are not necessarily included in the prohibition of child labor. Also working in retail is also allowed for minor children as long as machinery is not involved.
Exactly I never understood the concern for child labor. Even kids doing chores around the house they are technically working. Kids for thousands of years were created specifically for labor the idea child labor is bad seems relatively new.
Chores yes. Jobs hell no. All they ' learn' is to be tired obedient time clockers. And exactly how do you squeeze in the 3 Rs in a day as a kid eith a job? Kids absolutely wouldn't have the energy. The 3 Rs can be accomplished by 9th grade. After that, kids should have skill options like university or trades. What they teach in 2 year colleges can be done in high school. Then kids actually can grow, learn and have a trade by 18 or 20. Children working only teaches them how to force themselves through suffering, stress and strain . You're a place driver who knows nothing about kids, but some people dont mind lower class people dying of old age at 30 either.
This is what I imagine public speaking is like if you're trying to stretch a two page essay to a ten page essay. This man said like two things, both of which are short sighted.
@23:08 yes, you would have to be deranged if you really thought that people who critique the system are jealous of what you have. You are a terrible person.
One needs only read the Communist Manifesto to see that Marx paid homage to capitalism for preparing the way for socialism. You can also read Lenin's "Imperialism the Highest Stage of Capitalism" where he makes the point that monopoly capitalism has prepared the way for socialism.
I thought he might have given us his views on Marx and Engels high praise for capitalism. Given how broad the term “socialist” is as used by the Austrian School I have no idea who he referring to in the first part.
Tim Bo perhaps you should just think of it as all socialists. The right don't make the same distinctions as the left. In other words, it's all socialism so long as the one underlying premise is true: you believe the state competently taxes and redistributes the collected wealth of the population, and that it is fair and right that the government holds that responsibility. Us on the right want limited administrative government and almost no tax state, or at most a low tax low regulation, localized government state. Apologies if you know these things already bud, it seems to me you touch on a talking point which both sides often talk about with such severe polarity that it becomes a case of talking past one-another. To summarize, the right do recognize what the left regards as the different forms of socialism, but often disagree with the description or not respect any aspect of socialism on the fundamental level.
Hi Tim. A good working definition of socialism might be that from Frédéric Bastiat. “Now, legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways. Thus we have an infinite number of plans for organizing it: tariffs, protection, benefits, subsidies, encouragements, progressive taxation, public schools, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed profits, minimum wages, a right to relief, a right to the tools of labor, free credit, and so on, and so on. All these plans as a whole - with their common aim of legal plunder - constitute socialism.” Since the Left has avoided defining, except by a theoretical definition that no country has ever attained, and have abandoned supposedly good examples of until the country fails (e.g. Venezuela), for any argument for an against, we must abandon the Left's "living" definition of socialism for one that is grounded in principles rather than practice. Hence, Bastiat's definition is a helpful tool. He expounds further in his book The Law, if further detail is needed.
@@chbrules The march to workers power begins with the trade union struggle and then the workers organized as a political party to take state power as the dictatorship of the proletariat. That is still the direction the Cuban revolution has taken as they reach out to the workers of the world through their programs of solidarity without any political preconditions in health care, disaster relief and with construction workers.
@UCb9-kmcz53Dp6gQ-kNkqCsg So cars are now assembling themselves? Trucks and trains are driving themselves? The greater the concentration of capital the more powerful the workers become. The transition of thousands of poor Chinese peasants into industrial workers increases the power of the world proletariat. A computer is merely a tool like a socket wrench. In some places you must provide your own hand tools that however doesn't make you plant owner. Since your not an industrial worker you wouldn't know that. So unless you can hire a bunch of people to use your computers or work as a hedge fund manager owning a single computer means absolutely nothing. At best maybe you can become a cockroach capitalist operating a lemonade stand.
It is a bogus comparison juxtaposing how good a typical modern poor person lives compared to a king of yore and then expecting gratitude as a default stance. Not only does it profess a profound ignorance of who we are as socio-biological beings, it also could easily be reconstructed to further show why such inequities are scandalous. Socio-biological beings understand themselves not in absolute terms compared to arbitrary points in history, but always in relative terms grounded in the present. This is not a flaw, but necessary to our function as a social species. We live in the now, judge and are judged based not on the opportunities afforded bygone ancestors, but on our current opportunities. To construct your false comparison is to distort the reality that it is not advantageous to any surviving entity to base current judgments on outdated data. One could just as easily show all the more egregious the injustice that millions in this world still live as if they were alive 100, 200, 500 years ago and there are the likes of Bezos, Zuckerberg, Gates, Buffett and the others. Of course all this misses the point that many socialists are as concerned about our entire socioeconomic political system as they are income inequality. They point to how hierarchical control in a free market can act as oppressive as any government, especially when you layer in social status.
Read up on Rothbard’s writings, I’ll just say it flat out. Man Economy and State with Power and Market is college level reading that’ll tackle the concepts and concerns in any mind. Historic events of standards of quality of life in contrast from centuries ago compared to now aren’t arbitrary. That’s a massive shift in increased things like positive changes in life expectancy, new technologies, new career fields, etc. If you’re focusing on the redistribution of wealth through means of force of all things, then your window of appreciating things in the world and of philosophy is too tightly wound up and linear. What’s outdated is regurgitated theories based on dictatorial economic methods of control which merely repeat onto themselves in an endless cycle, always causing the miseries of life they purport to solve.
I am surprised that something as vague as this attack on socialism is considered scholarship. You need only read a few pages of The Condition of the English Working Class by Engles to learn how Irish Immigrants lived with pigs in their flats as a source of income. Plus outside of here I have never heard of human hibernation in the sense of what bears and other animals do for the winter. Families sleeping together and avoiding unnecessary activity yes hibernation no besides bear also get fat for the wintertime because even bears require an extra energy supply for the winter. For those who don't know who these various libertarian professor genius' are with their newsletters and their differences this talk spent little time on them preferring to issue accolades and awards with a little criticism. Just as the introduction of the speaker requires a list of academic awards . Like most of academia one rises in prestige with an increase in awards.
@Kim O'Brien After 100 years of mankind's experience with destructive and murderous Communist tyrannies and quasi dictatorships in Asia, Europe, South America, and Africa your (proudly) using and showing Hammer and Sickle is an abominable case of cynical political pornography.
@@dersozialismussiecht4005 Every Latin American country in the 20th century was subjected at least once to a US Marine corp invasion or a CIA organized Military coup and dictatorships. Thousands were murdered and disappeared. When the last civilian puppets in Vietnam crossed Kennedy he green lighted an ARVN military coup which killed the Diem brothers in the back of a US Made ARVN APC. The Made in USA bloody Dictator Syngman Rhee in South Korea had to be rescued by the US CIA and flown to Hawaii were he spent the rest of his worthless life drinking Coca Cola on the beach.
He needs to read "the way to outdo England without fighting her" by Henry Charles Cary. As Lincoln's economic adviser he identifies the enemy exactly as the "wealthiest of British free trade capitalists". Oh, the vineyard example, they were starving in prehaps the most free market there is. The problem being the velocity of trade, not any labor influence on market. This guys arrogance is so offputting.
Comparing 3rd world countries to advanced nations is ridiculous - unless you have a capitalistic agenda, furthering income disparity in those advanced nations.
Why are the 3rd world countries not advanced? You know it? You say "because of the evil capitalism" right??? But this is WRONG!! And I know the right answer! There is no free market capitalism and tons and tons of SOCIALISM on those countries!!
+Preston Bishop Those "advanced nations" were in the same condition of modern 3rd world countries just scant few generations ago. Economic development follows a predictable trajectory. The default condition of humanity is poverty, the mechanism most effective at unleashing human productivity and increasing standards of living is the free enterprise system.
The problem is his fallacious connection of all of the benefits of modern life to capitalism. Everything he mentions is the product of technological advancement, not necessarily a particular economic system. China has made significantly faster progress in these areas than anyone else. And, what kind of system do they have??🤔
Almost all of the progress China made was achieved after planned economy was switched to mixed and private enterprise was allowed. It's not surprising, that smaller economies grow quicker. If I have 1 factory and I build another I double my production. Yet if I have 1000 and I build 1 factory I don't even increase it by 1%.
Capitalism fosters technological innovation because of market competition. If you wanna keep making money, you gotta offer something to the consumers your competitors don't have which requires innovation. Or.. you have an idea that will solve a problem for large portion of society, you get the money from a bank or an investor who thinks you have a good idea and a good business model. He lends you the money, you develop your idea and put it out there in the market, either people will buy it and make you and your capitalist backer rich or people will not like it and you go out of business. This is how we went from the rotary phones to the big bulky hand held phones, to the Nokia 3210 to the Blakcberry to Iphone. The same principles apply to almost every product and services you pay for. But in a command economy, you're almost restricted in what you can do because the government has a monopoly of the economy. Only what the government wants to produce gets produced. Yes, they have made great progress but they only did so after they reformed their economy from socialism/communism to a mixed economy with a heavy tilt towards socialism. If they haven't introduced capitalism into their system, they wouldn't have made any progress. Even today China has not made any innovations with regards technology. Everything they have has been copied or adapted from Western innovation. This points towards how much control the government still has on their private industries. Innovation gets stifled by government control.
@@akshaysingh4712 Yes, there is some truth to that. But, more than anything else, capitalism breeds greed, corruption, and rigged systems that undermine capitalism itself.
Tldr: "Everyone who doesn't agree with mises U is ungrateful and ignorant. Everyone who agrees with me and that unfettered market capitalism alone is responsible for the technological advances and standard of living we enjoy is awesome."
How to win friends with divisive titles. I’ve come to the conclusion that libertarians hide their anger and personal sense of injury under ideology. I used to
867 5309 That obviously makes me an ingrate. Sorry to question your god. Yes - it is right to utilise divisiveness for the purposes of persuasion. Who wouldn’t think that? An ingrate obviously
Everyone knows for fast material progress from 1800's. Does it imply that people should stop changing society? If people acted like that from 1800's we would still have slavery, serfdom, unequal rights of women, large-scale imperialism, property census when voting etc. - all that influenced economy. To say that those who advocate changes are "deranged, sick, ungrateful persons" -- just because of fast economic progress -- is irrational, but strangely uncivil and vulgar too.
So you took from the speech that people who want to make changes and improve things are sick and ungrateful? But I said we ourselves want to change and improve things; am I calling us sick?
If you want to change something, acknowledge it first. If it's incredible, profound, and shatters the status quo for the incalculable benefit of billions, then yes, anyone who dismisses it out of hand is deranged, sick, and ungrateful.
~~ "...today's poor are better off than the poor of 1800 by a factor of 10..." ?? Gimme a break. FACTOR in inflation in Ah-murka the past coupla centuries, and that's the only reason we're now making "the big buck$" -- we're better off today cause we're making an average of $100 per day as opposed to $3.00 a day in 1800 ?? I dont think my G-parents would agree with that a$$inine a$$e$$ment -- they died in the 1940's and '50's, and never made more than a few $$ a YEAR, but lived a purty good life in Meigs County oHIo. -- Capitalism in an unnecessary evil when folk are left to themselves, and very little $$ is required to live a life when there's no middle men holding out their hand$....
Try some socialism while it still lasts - North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela. If you survive the experience then check out former East Block capitals that look better than Paris after 30 years w/o socialism.
It's not capitalism that causes problems, its taxation and interest. People confuse our economy with capitalism zd m, it's not. Our economy is an interest/credit/ debt economy. When you add in in interest , debt/poverty becomes a consequence.
Hilarious viewing. Porcine lines quite remarkably North American on the chap, reminding me, not unhappily, of an elephant seal. Less happily, but more queerly, does the developed world’s singularly closest cousin to outright anarchic coarseness and icy self-obsession ( MURICA ! ) harbouring such venomous foes of ( gasp ) ‘ socialism ‘ ! One might fairly anticipate the Inuit to work themselves up into a frenzy over the surfeit of noise and suburban hubbub. Heavens above !
After 5 years this is still relevant
december 2024
I'm not a libertarian, but I appreciate the view. I am and always have been an an-cap. For me the only good government is self representation and self rule. I recently realized that tyranny requires a significant population of small minds who promote it and protect it. They are the unteachable. Every failure is simply a reason to add more tyranny to the recipe. No experience can jolt them out of their fairy tale of "the state." That scares the hell out of me. Politics will not solve man's problems. Only man can divorce himself from the decrepitude of the actively corrupting state. While he is still subject to it's malfeasance, he at least can make his own mind up about reality.
The state, just like Society is a belief just like a God is.
It does not exist as an entity.
Tom Woods is one of the reasons I am not a Republican anymore, but a Libertarian. TY Tom for all you do in educating people. Notice, I said educate, not indoctrinate. :)
What's the difference?
Sara Skywalker I started to answer thinking your question was simple, but I decided to do some research and i’m really glad you asked that question. indoctrination is actually more complex than I thought. I think “educate” is kind of self-explanatory, you’re giving people information so they can make conclusions based on the information. “Indoctrination” is more interesting though. It is teaching people in such a way that causes them to reject differing opinions without giving them a fair consideration, and to accept similar positions or positions of certain leaders uncritically. A great tool for indoctrination is vilifying the opposition. i’m sure you’ve seen those “man on the street“ interviews where they tell somebody the opposite position of their favorite politician, and the person agrees with it. And then when you tell them that their hero actually thinks the opposite, you can see the wheels turning for the first time. That’s when you’re shaking their indoctrination a little bit. libertarians analyze positions based on principles of freedom and probably no two libertarians think exactly alike. Each of them can come to different conclusions on different positions based on different interpretations of libertarian principles. The only exception to that rule is that every libertarian agrees with Milton Friedman, LOL
@Sara Skywalker There is a greater crossover with self described Republicans and self described Libertarians than with Democrats and the like to be sure, but there are stark differences.
As far as I have been able to glean, Republicans speak of Liberty but it is also conveniently forgotten with talks of patriotism, military exploits, government programs/spending, etc. Libertarians speak of Liberty and mean it. Basically, Republicans talk a big game about small government, individual Liberty, etc., but do nothing that heads in any direction that actually secures Liberty. Republicans and Democrats often want the same fundamental thing, but differ on where to go. For example with government spending, they both love to do it, but they differ greatly on where to spend it. Libertarians tend to question the whole idea entirely.
I thought I was a staunch Conservative that loved freedom, Liberty and the Constitution (and I still do) but I never really understood what that meant. Once you dive into rights, economics and pretty much everything Woods brings up, it is hard then to conflate those beliefs/desires with Republicans as they are. I still say they're "better" than Democrats in that regard, but a longer road still takes you to the same place in the end.
I preferred to call myself classical liberal.
Or classical liberal
Only 27k views in a year. It is so sad. Great talk!!!
His public speaking skill is truly phenomenal.
"Libertarian socialist" is an oxymoron; like military intelligence and social distancing.
Orwell
My favourite oxymoron is rap music.
@@bryanb.386 You are right, even though he got so much, he believed that somehow if socialist doesn't get taken over by those who want power , it will be paradise.... he never seen the fault in his vision.
@@michelforgues7759 what do call you a group of black people?
tom woods is real as it gets... wears his heart on his sleeve and hes a savage... the podcast is great and even on his email list you get some gems... tom dilorenzo is amazing too, i hope he did a new speech at this event..ive already seen all his online speeches.....
"wears his heart on his sleeve" means "an unapologetic asshole." And you wonder why the Romonovs were shot...
Mark Kregel
Did you just advocate for shooting Tom Woods?
Mark Kregel you must be a grotesque socialist ingrate
Mark Kregel he rarely starts confrontations with people. at worst he uses a bit of pointed sarcasm, not even toxic even when hes targeted by random online hater groups.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Long overdue. I subscribed to Murray Rothbard's private letter back in the late 1970's. I watched when Lew Rockwell joined the newsletter, which was then re-named The Rothbard Rockwell Report. I watched the formation of the MIses Institute. These great persons devoted their lives and their fortunes to bringing the profound truths of libertarianism to the masses. I have witnessed a tireless and unending struggle to get this message out.. Their gifts to our country and to the world are of historic measure.Tom Woods ,this speech is one of your finest 45 minutes. Over the years, I purchased all of your books. You are a welcome and wonderful prodigy of the founders of the liberty movement.Thank you all.
carpe diem jonah Have you told your story? Why not write a long form article that details the changes you have seen in the decades. Sounds fascinating.
carpe diem jonah are you in contact with some of the people in that circle? Outsiders, just people who understood the importance and implications of Rothbard?
carpe diem jonah
Yeah, I’d legitimately be interested in hearing that. I just got into the Mises stuff recently, and I’d love to hear your thoughts on how it’s changed in the past.
The title of the lecture, bravo :)
What a fantastic speech! Really love the appreciation of the other Libertarians.
Simple: legal egalitarianism is easily sacrificed for personal greed. Power and influence, material wealth without work, moral fiat, etc.
Johm eaglehart Capitalism is not corporatism. That’s not Free Markets. If your family was starving, and putting your twelve year old son to work for 12 hours a day was the difference between starvation and living another season, would you send your kid to school?
We don’t have to contemplate that because of capitalism.
@@dalef9441 Free market capitalism died long ago if there ever was such a thing. Monopoly capitalism is what you have today. The monopolist gains his power through business manipulation not through invention or creativity. The capitalist profit quest does not necessarily produce the correct investment instead it drives toward the biggest return on investment.
liberal democracy without society will lead to corporatism, there is always people in government that makes it impossible to reduce the size, big governments end up with corporatistic companies inside the nation, in the end national debt and huge income differences.
@@alfredkwaak The US is an Imperialist Empire. It's Military commands (Africa Command, Southern Command, Europe Command, Northern Command, Pacific Command and Central Command) show that the American ruling class considers itself to be top dog as the World's most powerful Imperailist Empire.
Gotta love Mises University
I met Lew at a Mises gathering in Houston in 2011 when I was still in college. I was expecting to just say hello to him, but he ended up talking to me for several minutes and we even walked out of the banquet hall together still in conversation like we had known each other for years. He was very humble and I still greatly appreciate the time he took to speak to me.
Tom rules! As always...
Unsung Heroes...
They did what they did not for to be seen but to be.
They are actually the lucky ones, who were able to find that path, the most beautiful pearl are not the ones found and then made necklace for every eyes to see and admire, its the ones who were never found kept intact in the biggest oyster hidden at the deepest and darkest spot in the vast sea.
Their beauty is only avail to be seen by those who are willing to pay with vigorous effort and their precious time.
Gin,
How did I live 30 years without knowing such a fantastic human being exists?
Same reason nobody checked for antibodies before handing out vaccines...
4:26 - rudeness, selfishness and being unappreciative are the worst human qualities. Tom Woods definitely leveled up.
37 ingrates disliked the video
Yes, but it is hilarious that their are 37, miserable, salty, triggered ingrates out there
I was #57 to dislike it. He is fundamentally wrong and won't ever wake up to reality. A very intellectual halfwit who knows nothing outside this sick civilization. as much as I respect him for upholding unorthodox views, I can't help but deplore his ignorance and arrogance when it comes to what he didn't study - the 99.98% of human history predating civilization.
@@jackharper6746 oh, yeah! The pre-10000 BC, those were the good times. Who needs bread anyways, am I right?
@@jackharper6746
Thank you jack. That was a very long-winded bunch of nothing. I do get the idea that you disagree with what is being said but you have said nothing in rebuttal. I award you no points.
END THE FED
Taxation is theft
@@nicosmind3 Taxation has been around since at least the time of Julius Caesar. How do you fools propose to build roads and interstate highways without some kind of tax? If Wall Street can't purchase and privatise the street outside of the Wall Street firms what makes you think they can do it across the country?
@Umh Chud Some were built as turnpikes as can been seen in Connecticut since you can find a number of roads called turnpike. ie Tolland turnpike Its been a long time since anyone collected a toll on them. Since they went bankrupt a long time ago. The tolls on the CT Turnpike (I-95 I-395) and Parkways were removed after an accident at a toll both with a gasoline tankers killed multiple people. Texas has been building a number of toll roads only to have them go bankrupt or unfinished.
@Umh Chud The highway is an example of capitalists wanting to have their cake and eat it to. Good highways to transport goods and provide services are necessary but the bosses don't want the cost coming out of profits. After all they consider tax money to be THEIR MONEY.
@Umh Chud I'm sure if the promised returns are guaranteed by the capitalist government, like state bonds issued in lieu of taxes, they will build more. I sure you'd like a road privatized in front of you home that requires a transponder to charge you every mile or two so that some company can make a profit out of owning roads.
@13:31 his wage may increase because he has a desirable skill, but purchasing power remains tied to the value of that remuneration. Plus, any "purchasing power in wage" the forklift provides would substantially benefit the owner of the forklift, not the laborer driving it.
Well, he had at least the purchase power to EAT, and mostly importantly, survive and progress in wealth through time.
Fantastic as always. Great job, Tom!
My condolences for the loss of your father. God Bless
The reality is that the poverty-destroying benefits of economic liberalism are even greater than these figures would suggest because the poorest people in the world today aren't only better off because of free markets, they are largely existent because of them. If the world had never discovered economic liberalism, not only would we have created far less wealth, but we would also have been unable to achieve a population of even remotely close to the c.9b people we have around today.
I appreciate the shout-out to Will Grigg. I find myself missing him all the time. He is probably my favorite libertarian. He was an amazing writer and orator. I recommend anyone unfamiliar to read his blogs, and listen to his podcasts. Such a shame we lost him.
Brilliant! Rational ammunition baby
Rob F Another great speech from Tom Woods
He talks about his dad with the same reverence I use with mine. Simple common sense is gone in modern America.
I 💗 mises, and I appreciate all y'all do!
Napoleon Bonaparte considered ingratitude to be the worst trait of a person.
The "device that turns desert air into water" headline was actually just a start-up scam.
It either didn't work or wasn't able to produce more than a few drops of water over 24hrs or something. The headline got them tons of funding though and the fact that it was a scam didn't make headlines.
@15:40 - the average earning of drug running increased 100% when competiting companies where eliminated.
Point being, just because there was an increase doesn't mean it was desirable, especially if when the growth normalizes, the rebound makes the poorest even poorer in the worst of times, even if the ACCESS to a better standard of living increases in the best of times, it says nothing of the proletariat's (i.e. those having only their labor,) ability to pay for it. This is a velocity problem.
I love how free market intellectuals in the US don’t mince their words, what a great title to this video.
A classic Tom Woods speech.
Listening to this on Thanksgiving.
I always thought it was odd that Friedman acolyte, Thomas Sowell, completely ignored and never mentioned Ron Paul during the 2012 campaign.
Yeah, Sowell, the atheist, just like Friedman
IT'S FUNNY WHEN THE PHONE RINGS AND YOU SEE THE NUMBER IT MEANS YOU ARE GOING TO HELP OR WORK .. AND THEN YOU MAKE A CALL FOR HELP BIZZY ! I DON'T CALL ANYONE .. WHY MAKE MYSELF MAD A LOSE MY DAY
Exactly at 12:00 minutes: the more laws instead of just handling situations, the worse things get, the more difficult life and work gets. The more rules, aka laws, the more low IQ people will run things in workplaces, so you hardly can work there any more, more mobbing, more group-agreement, more shit, more pain, etc.
Child labor in moderation is what's missing in this country
Just commenting to help the algorithm.
A brilliant man. And a brilliant talk.
@17:50 exactly, if you have to convince someone they are better off when they themselves don't experience the benefit, perhaps you trying to sell a system of basic needs that must be sold because the reality is that 90% of Americans don't feel any more economically free then 100 yrs ago. And that, is truely sad.
One point. I think you're wrong about Rothbard.
For men like him, selling out is NOT the easiest thing in the world, because they value integrity and their principles. At least, that's how I interpret such actions.
Mr. Wood’s opening remarks could not have been topped by Bob Newhart
"this device turns desert air into drinkable water" - somebody call Thunderfoot.
The headline rules out anyone but the choir
I have read some Chicago economists and only started on my Austrian journey, could someone please tell me what functions the state has (if any) under a Austrian system, thank you.
Austrians school of economic tought mainly only predicts the effects of the state, and they are all bad. Take of that what you will. Or, studies what happens in a given circumstance, trough praxeology. Libertarians then make conclusions of that what the state should do. Wich is the least possible.
Protect property rights, however you like. It can be argued that's the one role government should have. But even that can be argued away. Mostly because, in any given state, it's always the government that is the biggest breaker of property rights. But also, that a reasonable argument can be made, that it can be done with voluntary systems. And even further than that, voluntary systems are the only moral ones, doesn't matter if they work or not. So that's how it should be done, because it's right. It's just a happy coincidence, that it would ensure the most prosperity to all of all possible alternatives.
@@Tenebrousable Still in all you just described communism a stateless co operation of humankind. .
Austrian school has a flaw, the complex theories loose their meaning , and thus separating the markets of the common people and the money in the financial sector. Capitalism can't survive without state.
@@alfredkwaak The main things libertarians and all capitalist economist want is a toothless labor movement. As long as no one purses "collectivist" goals they can keep counting their profits.
@@kimobrien. why do you work? Is for the purpose of losing money?
my heart just jumped happy and sad at the mention ofwill grigg.
The point, starting at 21:30, is damning. Life gets better.
Everything he’s praising can be traced back to human labor. He’s just affirming Abraham Lincoln’s quote: "Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." All the capital in the world couldn’t make a toothpick. Only human labor produces.
You mean human action, of which labour is a part.
Not according to Paul krugman. Didn’t you hear you can just print things into existence
19:08 It almost sounds like a tragedy of success
But $3 a century ago had the same buying power that $33 does now.
Yeah, and that's .govs' fault.
Kids are cute and cute kids are given money
Egypt= carpet factory= five yr olds part of education is working in factory= bus loads of tourists= giving money to the cute kids= feeding their families( i hope).
I know this cause i experienced it in egypt while on tour
There ya go.
Lots of people will not give credit to others or to the one who did something helpful and valuable. They prefer to not see it or to lie. Ungrateful ingrates maybe?
I wonder how ingrates celebrate thanksgiving day
rag on chris columbus for being a violent subjugating psychopath basically
@@beatsNstrings With a turkey, a party and discussions of the class struggle past, present and future. We may have to schedule it around comrades and friends work schedules.
What's dental work?
teeth?
I really like the title
I love Tom Woods. He's an excellent speaker and an overall good guy. His descriptions of the ingrates were spot on. I wish we had someone similar in the UK. Shame he's a Catholic. Sorry Tom. I just don't understand it.
Pwecko He’s not hurting anyone so why would you care if he is a catholic?
867 5309 As I said, I just don't understand it. I didn't suggest that he was hurting anyone. Why would you care that I care?
Pwecko Why would you bother to say such things?
867 5309 Why would you bother to respond?
Pwecko Geezuz. Obviously because I wondered why YOU bothered to diss Tom for being a catholic, duh. Being a catholic isn’t antithetical to being an anarchist. He is only helping people so who gives a fuck about his religion?
#HybernationNation
#Covid19
#PoliticizedPandemic
#Trump2020
#BringBackManufacturing
square dancing conventions? lol this guy is hilarious!
Guy should just run for president already
I have an idea which is that Libertarians should hire their own. Conservatives have their own work environments liberals have theirs. We should have our own as well! It wouldn't just be altruistic it would also be logical in that we could work with like minded people. We would gain a reputation of looking out for people and become a force to be reckoned with.
a capitalist cant afford such romanticism. whatevers most efficient. however, everyone should avoid letting SJWs anywhere near their operation. they are like trojan horses
beatsNstrings Yes Sjws are the worst. I'm in the process of eliminating them off one by one. Still selecting Libertarians over others if qualified would help to strengthen our forces.
Shhhhh youre speaking openly as if we have real freedom of association
beatsNstrings What are you talking about?
saying online that you are in the process of firing people for their political views could get you some negative consequences id imagine
Sooo good! And funny.
His Father was a bad ass!
@22:17 you might afford to pick out whatever you want, most cant.
500 dentist, ophthalmologist, doctor's, and auto repair shops around and I can't afford to go any of them. Way to go capitalism.
See the system works fine, I'm just one of those lazy workers, who can't find the extra 20hrs id need in a day to advance my education, skill and social network to to a status that might precipitate greater opportunity.
That's because inflation and political cronyism plus taxation has been transferring your wealth away from you.
Social control of the means of production did that to you.
And they don't even control all of it.
Just taking 30% of your avg earnings gave them the power to do that.
Egyptian slaves only had pay 20% in taxes.
i want to play chess with you Tom :D
Very little to almost zero content but instead a long list of good guys vs bad ungrateful guys.
Kim O'Brien doesn’t seem likely Kim is trying to get into North Korea Cuba or Venezuela any time soon try maybe just get a skill that serves your fellow man instead of spewing disproven propaganda that will get your fellow man killed
@@michaeltevis1180 George Washington and Abraham Lincoln got their fellow man killed. Maybe you should move to Canada or the UK if you aren't already from there and tell us about how your rights come from God and the graciousness of King and Queen. You wouldn't want to be ungrateful to George III and Jeff Davis now would you?
@@michaeltevis1180 I have plenty of skills. People such as yourself think Kirchhoff's laws should be rewritten to provide the middle class a regulatory exemption from having to set up the simultaneous equations.
Kim O'Brien wouldn’t want to live by the rights that Stalin or Bernie Sanders either
says the person using a saturnian symbol and he thinks its about farmers and workers.
thehuntingcall.com/2018/10/31/the-saturnian-sickle-and-the-babylonian-hammer/
I'm watching this now, and I just made a video pertaining to Bernie Sanders saying very similar things to what Tom Woods is saying here. Weird coincidence.
No, it's not weird. They are both anti-neo-con.
Blah blah blah Tom with the same words. Great words, but does not ever get to the mainstream. Same people in power, same socialist agenda, same financial manipulation. Give us a Ron Paul 2.0!
if only Tom were magic, I’m sure he would make that happen. but alas, he just gives this speech.
The argument presented is essentially that all the progress that coincided in time with an economic system some erroneously call capitalism should be attributed to capitalism and that those who fail to make this inference are grotesquely ungrateful for the provisions of capitalism.
This is a dumb argument probably intended to convince the dummies in the audience. Capitalism doesn't spur technological progress to which the speaker attributed said progress. Capitalists, by and large, don't have the enormous capital it takes to fund the basic science or open ended inquiries needed to invent new technology. It's just way to risky. New technology comes from socialism, from the state, usually by way of the defense department in recent times. Capitalists then take that technology, take the fruits of the investments made by the public, and turn it into consumer products for people or governments. The public is largely ignorant of their true ownership of new technologies, but if they did and demanded a return on their investment they wouldn't be ingrates, just normal people. Socialists who do demand a return on their investments are no more ingrates than a stockholder who wants a share of dividends.
Can you spell "defense contractors?"
@@Thea_MojaveOutliersWhipmakers Yeah, the corporate socialism is run through the defense spending primarily.
@@Will_Moffett The truth is that innovation tends to drop when governments intervene. This is because instead of actual incentives, false incentives are provided, so that resources that might be better spent are not. In addition, the minute government gets involved, costs are inflated because there's no way to tell what they *should* be. Typically the private sector can get things done faster and cheaper. Have you really considered the economic calculation problem? Or are you just batting for your own personal sentiment? Or are you politicking on behalf of your own "group?"
@@Thea_MojaveOutliersWhipmakers Almost all the major technology has been developed initially by the government precisely because, when innovating, there is no way to tell what the costs should be. Private businesses can't carry that kind of risk. Cell phones, microchips, satellite tech, containerization, jet engines, the internet, pharma, robotics...all the research and development for these and most all other tech is paid for with tax dollars. Have you ever bothered to lookup how much government money has been poured into Tesla? These are empirical, falsifiable claims I am making. The world isn't what you think it is. You've got it backward.
@@Will_Moffett Tesla. Hahaha! That's a good one! Okay, so in other words, you don't know what the economic calculation problem is, nor how it works (and how it doesn't work). You don't mention "price" at all, or what it is nor how it works. Too, it would appear you are unfamiliar with "regulatory capture." It seems to me the biggest cost risk to private business is precisely the large government we currently have, and indeed, that cost IS often prohibitive, such that it curtails growth or at least deforms it, and such that it prevents the start of new businesses (which typically come with new ideas) who must otherwise meet those costs before they so much as do the first thing to begin the actual business of starting a business.
My advice is to study up. You've made a vast claim here, and you've presented it as if it's foregone, leaving your audience with the heavy task of doing a huge amount of research just to refute your comment here on RUclips (in other words, we'd all have to repeat ourselves, despite that you didn't listen the first time). The rest of us would be better served if you did your own studying before you make claims, especially the claim that "These are empirical, falsifiable claims I am making." I would hazard a further guess that you're not familiar with history, and that you're counting on others to be in the same boat and daunted by the task of doing the work it takes to understand what's happened such that we've arrived in our modern day. Since I can SEE that you don't actually know what you're talking about, it occurs to me that you have some OTHER agenda for commenting here besides "setting the record straight." I wonder what that is.
In any case, it is my belief that it is incumbent upon each of us to do our own research and thinking, and to exercise skepticism in the face of grand claims such as yours. The difference between you and me is that you have vouchsafed a bunch of conclusions, whereas I have offered suggestions about where to look so that a body can come to his or her OWN conclusions.
Fascinating. I’m a bit miffed today. A girl I know got a nice gift last night, with only a number to reply, and no response.
Hey Tom, You are making a lot of generalizations here about Socialists. Not fair and not accurate. Is this a comedy act or truly an educational talk on that subject, I guess it's both. Anyway, I wish people were less entrenched for "their side" and would truly consider the whole pie. No offense, but there does sound like some prejudice and anger there for you.
I enjoyed your talk on the Covid 19 situation and I agree that there should be much more questioning of how it's been handled. I am a liberal democrat and I don't agree with some of what my political party is saying, and you're right, it's a very tough subject to bring up if you disagree with friends who are very loyal to the whole covid19 protocol. I did text the Covid19 talk to a couple of my liberal friends, and one of them wouldn't even listen to it, there we go again with "entrenched". WE ALL COULD BE A LOT MORE OPEN TO OPINIONS THAT WE DISAGREE WITH, OR THINK WE DISAGREE WITH. FIRST, YOU HAVE TO HEAR THE SIDE TRULY, THEN MAKE UP YOUR MIND, and that is hard to do for many people.
Please, anyone replying to this comment, go easy and try to be somewhat objective.
👍👍
Well that was better than I expected.
Title got me like 😅
"Less child labor than ever, a reason to celebrate." That is NOT an unmitigated good! Children working means that children learn how to work, learn to become productive laborers. How many children learn that skill in our progressive age? Mostly child labor is to be considered an evil only when that labor is so hard that it injures or kills children and/or when that labor prevents learning the three R's. If more children were working today there would be a lot less illiterate graffiti to clean up.
Depends how you define children. Teens != children
Of course that is what I meant: the kind of distasteful child labor people naturally think of when the term is used.
@@TomWoodsTV Actually only child factory and mine labor is what is outlawed in the US on a federal basis through the fair labor standards act of 1938 and local or state laws. This was passed during the great depression when the labor movement was winning strikes.
Those who live on family farms and work as farm laborers with their parents are not necessarily included in the prohibition of child labor. Also working in retail is also allowed for minor children as long as machinery is not involved.
Exactly I never understood the concern for child labor. Even kids doing chores around the house they are technically working. Kids for thousands of years were created specifically for labor the idea child labor is bad seems relatively new.
Chores yes. Jobs hell no. All they ' learn' is to be tired obedient time clockers. And exactly how do you squeeze in the 3 Rs in a day as a kid eith a job? Kids absolutely wouldn't have the energy.
The 3 Rs can be accomplished by 9th grade. After that, kids should have skill options like university or trades. What they teach in 2 year colleges can be done in high school. Then kids actually can grow, learn and have a trade by 18 or 20.
Children working only teaches them how to force themselves through suffering, stress and strain .
You're a place driver who knows nothing about kids, but some people dont mind lower class people dying of old age at 30 either.
fundamentally wrong, thus, by extension, wrong on all counts. poor chap
Unable to give reasons?
There are private bath-houses for men like this to meet discreetly.
He supports them, hypocrite
great title lol
To entendendo nada mas to aqui e ja dei um Like
40:00
7:25
This is what I imagine public speaking is like if you're trying to stretch a two page essay to a ten page essay. This man said like two things, both of which are short sighted.
@23:08 yes, you would have to be deranged if you really thought that people who critique the system are jealous of what you have.
You are a terrible person.
One needs only read the Communist Manifesto to see that Marx paid homage to capitalism for preparing the way for socialism. You can also read Lenin's "Imperialism the Highest Stage of Capitalism" where he makes the point that monopoly capitalism has prepared the way for socialism.
I thought he might have given us his views on Marx and Engels high praise for capitalism. Given how broad the term “socialist” is as used by the Austrian School I have no idea who he referring to in the first part.
Tim Bo perhaps you should just think of it as all socialists. The right don't make the same distinctions as the left. In other words, it's all socialism so long as the one underlying premise is true: you believe the state competently taxes and redistributes the collected wealth of the population, and that it is fair and right that the government holds that responsibility. Us on the right want limited administrative government and almost no tax state, or at most a low tax low regulation, localized government state.
Apologies if you know these things already bud, it seems to me you touch on a talking point which both sides often talk about with such severe polarity that it becomes a case of talking past one-another.
To summarize, the right do recognize what the left regards as the different forms of socialism, but often disagree with the description or not respect any aspect of socialism on the fundamental level.
Hi Tim. A good working definition of socialism might be that from Frédéric Bastiat.
“Now, legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways. Thus we have an infinite number of plans for organizing it: tariffs, protection, benefits, subsidies, encouragements, progressive taxation, public schools, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed profits, minimum wages, a right to relief, a right to the tools of labor, free credit, and so on, and so on. All these plans as a whole - with their common aim of legal plunder - constitute socialism.”
Since the Left has avoided defining, except by a theoretical definition that no country has ever attained, and have abandoned supposedly good examples of until the country fails (e.g. Venezuela), for any argument for an against, we must abandon the Left's "living" definition of socialism for one that is grounded in principles rather than practice. Hence, Bastiat's definition is a helpful tool. He expounds further in his book The Law, if further detail is needed.
@@chbrules The march to workers power begins with the trade union struggle and then the workers organized as a political party to take state power as the dictatorship of the proletariat. That is still the direction the Cuban revolution has taken as they reach out to the workers of the world through their programs of solidarity without any political preconditions in health care, disaster relief and with construction workers.
@UCb9-kmcz53Dp6gQ-kNkqCsg So cars are now assembling themselves? Trucks and trains are driving themselves? The greater the concentration of capital the more powerful the workers become. The transition of thousands of poor Chinese peasants into industrial workers increases the power of the world proletariat.
A computer is merely a tool like a socket wrench. In some places you must provide your own hand tools that however doesn't make you plant owner. Since your not an industrial worker you wouldn't know that. So unless you can hire a bunch of people to use your computers or work as a hedge fund manager owning a single computer means absolutely nothing. At best maybe you can become a cockroach capitalist operating a lemonade stand.
It is a bogus comparison juxtaposing how good a typical modern poor person lives compared to a king of yore and then expecting gratitude as a default stance.
Not only does it profess a profound ignorance of who we are as socio-biological beings, it also could easily be reconstructed to further show why such inequities are scandalous.
Socio-biological beings understand themselves not in absolute terms compared to arbitrary points in history, but always in relative terms grounded in the present. This is not a flaw, but necessary to our function as a social species. We live in the now, judge and are judged based not on the opportunities afforded bygone ancestors, but on our current opportunities. To construct your false comparison is to distort the reality that it is not advantageous to any surviving entity to base current judgments on outdated data.
One could just as easily show all the more egregious the injustice that millions in this world still live as if they were alive 100, 200, 500 years ago and there are the likes of Bezos, Zuckerberg, Gates, Buffett and the others.
Of course all this misses the point that many socialists are as concerned about our entire socioeconomic political system as they are income inequality. They point to how hierarchical control in a free market can act as oppressive as any government, especially when you layer in social status.
Andrew Blacklock cool story bro
Read up on Rothbard’s writings, I’ll just say it flat out. Man Economy and State with Power and Market is college level reading that’ll tackle the concepts and concerns in any mind.
Historic events of standards of quality of life in contrast from centuries ago compared to now aren’t arbitrary. That’s a massive shift in increased things like positive changes in life expectancy, new technologies, new career fields, etc. If you’re focusing on the redistribution of wealth through means of force of all things, then your window of appreciating things in the world and of philosophy is too tightly wound up and linear. What’s outdated is regurgitated theories based on dictatorial economic methods of control which merely repeat onto themselves in an endless cycle, always causing the miseries of life they purport to solve.
I am surprised that something as vague as this attack on socialism is considered scholarship. You need only read a few pages of The Condition of the English Working Class by Engles to learn how Irish Immigrants lived with pigs in their flats as a source of income. Plus outside of here I have never heard of human hibernation in the sense of what bears and other animals do for the winter. Families sleeping together and avoiding unnecessary activity yes hibernation no besides bear also get fat for the wintertime because even bears require an extra energy supply for the winter.
For those who don't know who these various libertarian professor genius' are with their newsletters and their differences this talk spent little time on them preferring to issue accolades and awards with a little criticism. Just as the introduction of the speaker requires a list of academic awards . Like most of academia one rises in prestige with an increase in awards.
@Kim O'Brien After 100 years of mankind's experience with destructive and murderous Communist tyrannies and quasi dictatorships in Asia, Europe, South America, and Africa your (proudly) using and showing Hammer and Sickle is an abominable case of cynical political pornography.
@@dersozialismussiecht4005 Every Latin American country in the 20th century was subjected at least once to a US Marine corp invasion or a CIA organized Military coup and dictatorships. Thousands were murdered and disappeared. When the last civilian puppets in Vietnam crossed Kennedy he green lighted an ARVN military coup which killed the Diem brothers in the back of a US Made ARVN APC. The Made in USA bloody Dictator Syngman Rhee in South Korea had to be rescued by the US CIA and flown to Hawaii were he spent the rest of his worthless life drinking Coca Cola on the beach.
He needs to read "the way to outdo England without fighting her" by Henry Charles Cary. As Lincoln's economic adviser he identifies the enemy exactly as the "wealthiest of British free trade capitalists".
Oh, the vineyard example, they were starving in prehaps the most free market there is. The problem being the velocity of trade, not any labor influence on market.
This guys arrogance is so offputting.
Comparing 3rd world countries to advanced nations is ridiculous - unless you have a capitalistic agenda, furthering income disparity in those advanced nations.
Why are the 3rd world countries not advanced? You know it? You say "because of the evil capitalism" right??? But this is WRONG!! And I know the right answer! There is no free market capitalism and tons and tons of SOCIALISM on those countries!!
@@DanielSantos-cr5sx You're correct, Daniel.
+Preston Bishop Those "advanced nations" were in the same condition of modern 3rd world countries just scant few generations ago. Economic development follows a predictable trajectory. The default condition of humanity is poverty, the mechanism most effective at unleashing human productivity and increasing standards of living is the free enterprise system.
The problem is his fallacious connection of all of the benefits of modern life to capitalism. Everything he mentions is the product of technological advancement, not necessarily a particular economic system. China has made significantly faster progress in these areas than anyone else. And, what kind of system do they have??🤔
Almost all of the progress China made was achieved after planned economy was switched to mixed and private enterprise was allowed. It's not surprising, that smaller economies grow quicker. If I have 1 factory and I build another I double my production. Yet if I have 1000 and I build 1 factory I don't even increase it by 1%.
Capitalism fosters technological innovation because of market competition. If you wanna keep making money, you gotta offer something to the consumers your competitors don't have which requires innovation. Or.. you have an idea that will solve a problem for large portion of society, you get the money from a bank or an investor who thinks you have a good idea and a good business model. He lends you the money, you develop your idea and put it out there in the market, either people will buy it and make you and your capitalist backer rich or people will not like it and you go out of business. This is how we went from the rotary phones to the big bulky hand held phones, to the Nokia 3210 to the Blakcberry to Iphone. The same principles apply to almost every product and services you pay for.
But in a command economy, you're almost restricted in what you can do because the government has a monopoly of the economy. Only what the government wants to produce gets produced. Yes, they have made great progress but they only did so after they reformed their economy from socialism/communism to a mixed economy with a heavy tilt towards socialism. If they haven't introduced capitalism into their system, they wouldn't have made any progress. Even today China has not made any innovations with regards technology. Everything they have has been copied or adapted from Western innovation. This points towards how much control the government still has on their private industries. Innovation gets stifled by government control.
@@akshaysingh4712
Yes, there is some truth to that. But, more than anything else, capitalism breeds greed, corruption, and rigged systems that undermine capitalism itself.
Tldr: "Everyone who doesn't agree with mises U is ungrateful and ignorant. Everyone who agrees with me and that unfettered market capitalism alone is responsible for the technological advances and standard of living we enjoy is awesome."
sounds like a reasonable summary
Equinox : No. The “ingrates” are those that feel entitled to steal from others at gunpoint.
Oy vey thomas
How to win friends with divisive titles.
I’ve come to the conclusion that libertarians hide their anger and personal sense of injury under ideology. I used to
The most bizarre reaction ever to one of my speeches.
Samsgarden Your erroneous “conclusion” is based on the fact that YOU are one of the entitled ingrates Tom is referring to.
867 5309 That obviously makes me an ingrate. Sorry to question your god. Yes - it is right to utilise divisiveness for the purposes of persuasion. Who wouldn’t think that? An ingrate obviously
Most women are natural ingreates.
Ingreates?
Everyone knows for fast material progress from 1800's. Does it imply that people should stop changing society? If people acted like that from 1800's we would still have slavery, serfdom, unequal rights of women, large-scale imperialism, property census when voting etc. - all that influenced economy. To say that those who advocate changes are "deranged, sick, ungrateful persons" -- just because of fast economic progress -- is irrational, but strangely uncivil and vulgar too.
So you took from the speech that people who want to make changes and improve things are sick and ungrateful? But I said we ourselves want to change and improve things; am I calling us sick?
If you want to change something, acknowledge it first. If it's incredible, profound, and shatters the status quo for the incalculable benefit of billions, then yes, anyone who dismisses it out of hand is deranged, sick, and ungrateful.
~~ "...today's poor are better off than the poor of 1800 by a factor of 10..." ??
Gimme a break. FACTOR in inflation in Ah-murka the past coupla centuries, and that's the only reason we're now making "the big buck$" -- we're better off today cause we're making an average of $100 per day as opposed to $3.00 a day in 1800 ?? I dont think my G-parents would agree with that a$$inine a$$e$$ment -- they died in the 1940's and '50's, and never made more than a few $$ a YEAR, but lived a purty good life in Meigs County oHIo.
--
Capitalism in an unnecessary evil when folk are left to themselves, and very little $$ is required to live a life when there's no middle men holding out their hand$....
Obviously inflation is factored in to my figures.
Try some socialism while it still lasts - North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela. If you survive the experience then check out former East Block capitals that look better than Paris after 30 years w/o socialism.
It's not capitalism that causes problems, its taxation and interest.
People confuse our economy with capitalism zd m, it's not. Our economy is an interest/credit/ debt economy. When you add in in interest , debt/poverty becomes a consequence.
Hilarious viewing. Porcine lines quite remarkably North American on the chap, reminding me, not unhappily, of an elephant seal. Less happily, but more queerly, does the developed world’s singularly closest cousin to outright anarchic coarseness and icy self-obsession ( MURICA ! ) harbouring such venomous foes of ( gasp ) ‘ socialism ‘ ! One might fairly anticipate the Inuit to work themselves up into a frenzy over the surfeit of noise and suburban hubbub. Heavens above !
chbrules ...as well as all the synonyms for the word asshole.
You must not live in the US because we're the exact opposite of anarchism.
22:24 - my own mother is a sociopath. This is what a day in my life is like.
17:14 - *_Wow_*