Economic growth has stalled. Let's fix it | Dambisa Moyo
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 окт 2024
- Economic growth is the defining challenge of our time; without it, political and social instability rises, human progress stagnates and societies grow dimmer. But, says economist Dambisa Moyo, dogmatic capitalism isn't creating the growth we need. As she shows, in both state-sponsored and market-driven models, capitalism is failing to solve social ills, fostering corruption and creating income inequality. Moyo surveys the current economic landscape and suggests that we have to start thinking about capitalism as a spectrum so we can blend the best of different models together to foster growth.
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more.
Find closed captions and translated subtitles in many languages at www.ted.com/tra...
Follow TED news on Twitter: / tednews
Like TED on Facebook: / ted
Subscribe to our channel: / tedtalksdirector
Capitalism isn't creating wealth right now because of corporatism, big corporations influencing state policy to squash completion in the markets. True Capitalism is the free trade of goods and services through voluntary interaction, and healthy competition is what provides the best service for the lowest price. It's the only system man has created that raises people out of poverty and keeps them out.
+Daniel Bostock well the biggest missing piece here is the 'informed consumer'.
informed consumer make informed choices. Thats why companies spend more money advertising product then developing and making in put together.
+nothingtosee
"Some people get more money than others"
as long as there's no fraud or force, what's the problem?
Monopolys form because of state regulation.
There an excellent presentation called "the truth about Monopolys by Stevan molyneux".
It's well worth a watch.
I'm sure Stefan would love to have you on his show to discuss your arguments.
I advised someone to watch his presentation about monopolies, if you have any arguments to discredit the arguments in the presentation , that would be great.
If a drug addict wants to buy drugs, what business is that of yours? If that drug addict wants help, what business is that of yours?
If you want to help a drug addict who wants to be helped, then help in. Don't claim that it's the responsibility of everyone else to get involved.
Freedom of choice has proven to be the most effective system to raise people standard of living.
Daniel Bostock Any rational system of morality is concerned / claims responsibility for outcomes. Denying responsibility is a silly way out. That way I can say that it's moral for me to go by when your child is getting beaten to death by a gang. After all, I'm not immediately effected by the outcome / externality of that interaction, so why should I care about you?
Imagine that you know that organizing a society in a certain way would reduce drug addiction. Would it be more moral to construct such society? Well, according to Molyneux it's not, because if you really listen to him, he defines morality as anarcho-capitalism, that is a system with maximum negative liberty / negative rights (freedom from). If that society does not have maximum negative liberty, then such society is immoral despite it possibly having more positive liberty (capacity to). It's deontology 101. That is an act itself is immoral independent of its outcomes; a system itself is immoral independent of its outcomes.
This is the epiphany of anti-science and dogmatism.
This is really an old subject, and I think it's rather silly to argue that either positive or negative liberty is the only thing that matters for maximizing well-being of a society. Sometimes more negative liberty leads to more positive liberty. But sometimes, you need to sacrifice negative liberty (your freedom from something) to gain positive liberty (your capacity to do something). E.g., you put yourself in a lockdown rehab you sacrifice your freedom from choice restriction (negative liberty) to gain capacity to have a better life (positive liberty).
Growth hasn't stalled for the rich... and that's the problem. They're taking it all. But apparently they want a new French Revolution style result for them. I'm fine with that.
MrJotaieb lowering corporate taxes.. cause that hasn't been tried for decades now and backfiring... now, the problem is that the true small businesses don't get the same tax loop holes/subsidies that the big rich corporations do. That's something we need to more properly address
I do agree that minimum wages should be based on the cost of living in a region, that makes sense.
And I agree with increasing taxes on higher earners and taxing capital gains tax more.
But none of that gets solved so long as money in politics rules. The bribes continue and nothing changes.
MrJotaieb Effective corporate tax rates. Go look at the EFFECTIVE corporate tax rates. What they actually pay after all the loop holes and subsidies. You'll be disgusted at how many big corporations, some of the largest on the planet, pay almost nothing in taxes or even get money every year from the government despite making "record profits" every year.
And we're hysterical for a reason.. because it's destroying our democracy.
+The God Emperor Context is too hard for some people to grasp I guess
+MrJotaieb I think on local elections in America, basically any election smaller than the presidency 95% of the election winners are the ones who spend more money, and more money in politics for America is a problem do a little research into it
+The God Emperor for the greater good!
Let me be the first to say that this title is obnoxious
+doodelay Earned an immediate downvote.
+216trixie in 40 sec actually :-)
Failing growth and social ills is not the failure of capitalism but the failure of government.
growth isn't sustainable.
growth isn't sustainable.
+Stevie Wonder why is it not sustainable. if its not why has it yet to stop.
Right now population is the biggest determiner of growth so along and we don't stop having kids we will keep growing.
+MEll ............. conservation of mass and energy.
Dude, I'm fairly left but we didn't experience an economic disaster in 2008, we delayed one. The economy will collapse before it gets better.
***** I'm talking 50% unemployment globally and empty saving accounts overnight bad.
Right on
@@yudax5057 Didn't expect to be right so soon 😭
@@EcstasyTiger this isn't even it dude, the bubble hasn't burst yet
Purely empirical arguments. "We have seen X". Did she ever reflect why we need economic growth in the first place?
+busTedOaS Indeed. She fails to mention almost everything that matters on the subject. How about starting with explaining how the money that the economy is run with comes in to play in the first place. And what consequences that has. The reason we need organic growth is because the design of digital money requires it.
Klas K
I agree. Fix the money, fix the economy.
State capitalism is known better by its other name "fascism" or "national socialism". However, if you use that term people thinking about WWII racism etc.
I didn't much appreciate Dr.Moyo in this talk, but I came here because I read her book "the problem with aid". Its a brilliant book and very accessible even for people that don't have an economics background. I would recommended to people who are interested in the topic
Same reason
Or we could admit the possibility that just maybe it is unreasonable to expect the economy to grow larger forever? Oh I know I'm crazy.
wow, someone with an IQ higher than room temperature!
+Unauthorized Expression Craaazy talk!
+Unauthorized Expression BURN THE WITCH !
+Unauthorized Expression Wow, you're such a stupid and lazy commie!
The economy will never stop growing because improving efficiency is itself a form of growth, and people will never stop inventing new things. It is true that when a country reaches a certain level of development growth slows down, but it will never stop entirely until we solve every field of science and invent every possible invention, or I guess if we wipe ourselves out or get hit by a giant asteroid.
Exhausting some resource is possible, and this would cause the global economy to contract, but it would stabilize at some point and continue to improve from there. If we ran out of energy and got forced back into plowing fields with oxen, we would still have more advanced plows, tools, etc. than we did before the industrial revolution.
why the dislikes? these statistics must be discussed, and logical reform must be made!
jesus - some stuff is just wrong. economic growth doesnt automatically create vertical mobility in societies. this is an old paradigma, which just didnt hold up to reality
monetising intrinsic motivation like paying families to send their children to school are very short sighted gains... Studies have shown as soon as you stop paying them, even the children who went to school before - eager to learn - are NOT going anymore. The intrinsic motivation is killed by money.
infinite growth on a finite planet is a dream
"Someone who believes that something can always grow without being in harmony with it's enviroment, is either a fool or an economist." - David Atenborough
later in the presentation she actually has a good point.
Economic growth has stopped because now we seriously need a growth of some sort in consciousness...
If we are going to fix anything let's fix ourselves first.
We should have the priority not the system...
How refreshing to see such a *_beautiful_* and *_intelligent_* woman finally given a platform to express herself. Seems all the man-children here just can't handle strong independent women.
Don't worry Dambisa, the *_real men_* have got your back. I liked the video without even listening, because I respect you as a person *not* an object.
Kind Regards,
Wyatt Nite
+Wyatt Nite This. This b8 is actually gr8. I r8 8/8!!
+Wyatt Nite amazing comment
+Wyatt Nite that's not an argument
+Wyatt Nite May be try listening too.
+Wyatt Nite Always makes me smile.
Step one: Get rid of the Monetary system !!!!
+DubTurd Sounds goodish. Also sounds utopian
John Malkovich
Thanks for that. Why do you think it isn't utopian to have a no money system?
+DubTurd
How do you calculate the value of finite resources w/o a monetary system?
John Malkovich
They can be.
+DubTurd Credit system!
Capital, labor and productivity are NOT the pillars of economic growth. Capital, labor, productivity and 'freedom' are the pillars. Productivity has been climbing steadily over the last few decades. Labor has not declined and there are more people than ever with college degrees. The fiat money creation of the world's central banks has created a virtually infinite supply of 'capital', that is not the issue. If capital, labor and productivity were the only pillars, we would have no problems. The ingredient that has been missing is the freedom of the free market, and that freedom has in fact been declining steadily. And guess what? So too has our economic growth! This is small wonder.
The presenter here refers to capitalism as if that is what we have in the world today. There is very little resemblance between a true free market and what passes for capitalism today. We have as the prime example, central banks centrally planning the interest rate, the price of money. This has immediate and absolutely devastating consequences upon the supply and demand for savings. Our state indoctrinated economists are of the notion that the world does not require savings, that this can be replaced with money printing. This has NOT been working and is in fact at the heart of the growing gulf of income disparity. (The super wealthy are the ones who are most able to take advantage of ultra low interest rates with which they can leverage their investments int he stock market.) Half of every economic transaction is money. If the money half is constantly manipulated by central planners, how can anyone with a straight face claim that our putative free market is actually free?
That is but one example. The manipulations and controls placed on the market are legion and massive. The state is akin to a gargantuan parasite sucking the blood from the economy. It grows to the point where it is on the verge of killing it's host and then backs off it's vampirism just enough to keep the host alive; all the while telling we who live in that world that the problems are somehow a failing in the host. I cry bullshit! The problem is the parasite!
+Peter Cohen
There was a guy called Martin Shkreli that acted just according to your free market rules. Is that the future you envision?
growth isn't sustainable per E=mc², thermodynamics and geometry.
+Duart CS blah blah blah
I concur with Dr. Moyo, and would add that ideologies outside of economics can also act against growth - economic, social, and otherwise.
In this riveting talk, economist Dambisa Moya points out the perils of capitalism and ask the governments, policy makers across the world to have the open-minded approach to re-build the world economy and push it towards the sustainable development. Asserting the corporate social responsibility, performance-linked incentives to a common man to perform their duties are some of the 'result-generating' ideas she suggests. Overall, she warns about the leaders and thinkers to move away from the ideological leanings and create a growth model that should be a mixer of several time-tested ideas. Highly recommended to students of economics, policy makers, politicians, thinkers and policy makers.
+Stevie Wonder bloody moron*
this was kinda unfocused and uncompelling :-/
if you asked me months ago, when i made the comment, i would have remembered enough to give you an answer.
She really didn't provide any new information, just pointed out a problem and gave a very broad, vague non-solution solution. By that i mean she said that economics should not be driven by political ideologies, which is a little silly since economics is driven by people who each have such ideologies and unless you live in an authoritarian state it should be driven by such. I dont really understand why she even talked tbh.
Dambisa Moyo is a beautiful black princess in her gown of orange ...her skin looks amazing in orange.
Money is debt, "economic" growth equals more debt.
And the extra dictionary on the shelf.
Statism is not the answer either. You can't fix the use of force with more force. Free markets are the only thing that have a proven track record. I don't agree with her opinions.
+Mark Niebauer you could add a dash of statism :p like you see in the middle, not full out China but somewhere in the middle as opposed to 0 state influence which funnily enough is quite the opposite to what we have now. The state intervenes in our lives more than ever, just not in an economic sense
It's all about correcting human behavior peacefully. The only answer. All Taxation is theft, period!
Mark Niebauer Pretty much. Taxation is a bandaid on a gaping gut wound.
Edit: Correction "IN a gaping gut wound."
It's amazing how much difference one letter can make. Haha.
No, factually and exactly, it is blatant theft. Period. It is nothing else.
How is taxation theft? The body politic agrees on some level of wealth which should be taken and collectively invested. Sure it's not a universally agreed upon rate and my explanation is fluffy, but to say that society collectively does not have a right to some of the resources of its individuals is kind of brash. A society which cannot collect any tax or fee is not a society that can exist and will fall into anarchy. Even the Koch Brothers want to pay some level of tax.
It took her ten minutes to get there, but I feel like her final message makes sense. Pursue economic policies that, regardless of what labels people might attach to them, have been empirically demonstrated to work.
Daniel you are correct. I think another big problem is that there are too many tax loopholes for corporation and they have huge bargain power to move their business elsewhere if the tax rate is not low enough. Countries are competing with each other to get rate as low as possible as a result everyone lose.
We need to start organizing a multinational corporate tax treaty similar to trade treaties like the NAFTA or TPP to force everyone to set a minimum corporate tax rate to prevent competition. if any of the member state violate to lower the tax rate will receive retaliation from all other member states. We can also force tax heavens such as Caymen islands, Burmuda to comply using various measure such as trade and capital restrictions. We need corporate tax to be higher and lower individual income tax.
Listen lady,
The problem is fractional reserve banking.The problem is the commodity futuresmodernization act of 2000.The problem is keynesian style central banking.The problem is chroni-capitalism.The problem is labor market regulations.The problem is shadowy institutions like the Counsel on foreign relations, Bilderberg and the TC.The problem is there's no seperations between commercial amd investment banks.
The problem is we gave the corperatocratie to much space for expansionisme, but its time to get it back.
"The people get whatever government they deserve"-alan watts
Increasing exploitation of resources is not the core of economic growth. Exhausting a natural resource is more of a limited, short-term (years, decades, whatever) boost which temporarily allows for elevated levels of consumption. Innovative strategies to improve growth rates will improve the efficiency of various economic processes, for example by improving worker skill levels or increasing information availability. While in some cases innovation allows for the exploitation of new resources, true development through innovation is better viewed as something happening *in addition to* the development of the resource economy.
Even if you are concerned about our use of a resources, you should still view improvements in education, information, and productivity as positives, because these allow for more efficient use of existing resources. This allows for economic growth without actually having to extract more resources.
She is focusing on the ills of corporatism. Government bail-outs to big business helps monopolies thrive, and the destruction of entire industries helps drive Americas labor force down the drains. Free Market=More competition, which effectively increases wages for everyone.
+MsDozana No it doesn't do that. No one is entitled to wealth. In a capitalist spiciest, what you do with your time and effort determines your stature and class. Capitalism allows for class mobility, unlike the system in which we live in today. And your correct, capitalism is based off greed. Greed is good in the market place, stimulating competition and raising wages for the average person with no special skill sets.
+MsDozana capitalist society*
+MsDozana What stopping people from maximizing profit is the government telling people how much they can earn. Look everything exists for a reason. the government for all its good or bad provided some inherent benefit to early civilization.
I think alot of people are rapidly seeing government as useless. I would much rather govern myself in a free market.
If a company i dont like is selling something i wont buy it. If its something i need then since there are no copyright laws without government lets someone else make it cheaper.
IF your business only had short term resource management then it will fail.
If the business does damage to the environment then you should be able to sue them for damages.
A true free market you should be vocal and call out any negative aspects to a business practices.
Using a government to force people to comply never works in the long term.
Giovanni Lacala "free markets" are a myth. Let's be honest here.
The point is, that this way of thinking won't solve any problem(s)...
Wild capitalism and deregulated free market lead to income and wealth inequality- Great speech.
Massive State regulation of the markets and a wealth fare state lead to wealth inequality. Healthy competition and free trade lead to a better standard of living. Every country to embrace capitalism raises its people out of poverty and keeps em out. Hong Kong (has no natural recourses) chilli, India and China and grow as they free up the markets. The west was built on free trade and competition. people get the best service for the lowest price.
+Daniel Bostock You obviously misinterpreted my comment. I was talking about WILD capitalism, the one they have in the US, compared to a healthier capitalism, like the one they have in Norway.
She always has the best ppts in her talks. Love her insights.
DONALD TRUMP 2016
Yeah my man! Drumpf 4 prasiodent! Go Drumpf, our savior. Drumpf, son of Gezis!
+belialpt It's funny how you are conditioned to believe that everybody who is not supporting Drumpf must be a lefty. First of all: I doubt you truely understand what a lefty is. Of course the American school system is designed to make sure that you will never do. if you would understand economics and sociology you'd not support Drumpf. Because that person is a perversion of the very system you hate. He is Super-Hillary. Corrupt to the bone. He is the super villain trunping the other super villains. While it was/is funny to watch.- I admit that - Drumpf supporters who look for change and honesty fail to identify and support the only candidate out there who truely represents their social class and their social interests. Drumpf is a symbol for everything that's wrong in America. The real life superhero who is fighting for you against the system isn't as flashy.
+Yellow King ...and your point is? I am metropolitan elite? Thank you! Never before has anyone said that to me. Got a little tear in my eye.
Can't a market just correct?
no privatization no capitalism 💃
The one word lacking in this talk was the one word essential for going forward which is 'sustainability'. Sustainable economic growth is more important than simply economic growth. To achieve 7% sustainable economic growth has not been achieved. We have had short periods of economic booms that have exceeded 7% but none have been sustainable.
The other issue about growth not covered in the talk is how the current growth is being achieved. The growth isn't from an increase in human labour, but rather in the replacement of human labour with automation or outsourcing that labour to lower cost human labour, so for low wage countries who seem to be having a 'growth' in labour are merely the result of the transfer of existing labour from a high wage market to a low wage market, but not an overall net gain for the world. Again migration of labour is not a sustainable growth as eventually the source of that migration will dry up.
The world grew to 2 billion in 1927. It is expected to reach 8 billion in 2023. That is less than 100 years to quadruple the population on the planet (the primary source of economic growth), however, astounding as that sounds, that is only a 1.5% human growth rate. Human ingenuity can be attributed to increases in productivity but to believe that it can sustain 7% economic growth and make up the 5.5% shortfall and that is assuming that scales of inefficiency are not even taken into account, it is quickly and easily to see that regardless of what model or changes one does to capitalism, 7% is not and has not been sustainable in this now global market. It can achieve that rate for a limited time in a limited patch of land on this planet (assuming it has the natural resources) but on a global scale, the math doesn't add up.
growth isn't sustainable.
Lol its not just stalled, its about to crash.
With no survivors.
+xxuncexx oh, every generation has this "the world is about to end" prophecy. This is ours. IMO unimpressive
TheAzet89
This generation has internet, technology and the ability to look back at you old people.
+TheAzet89 examples?
+xxuncexx (1) David Stockman, previously Director, US Office of Management and Budget quoting report from CITI February 26, 2016 “Citi: Here Comes a Global Recession" (2) Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, former asst. sec. to the U.S. Treasury "The Financial System Is A Larger Threat Than Terrorism" March 8, 2016 (3) JP Morgan, March 6, 2016 ”Sell stocks on 'eventual' recession: JPMorgan" (4) "BIS (Bank of International Settlements) warns of 'gathering storm' for global economy as markets lose faith in central banks”Business International Times, March 7, 2016, (5) Jan 5, 2016 Richard Fisher, ex-Dallas Fed chair and member of the FOMC, “What the Fed did - and I was part of that group - is we front-loaded a tremendous market rally, starting in 2009.It’s sort of what I call the “reverse Whimpy factor” - give me two hamburgers today for one tomorrow.” (6) Jan 5, 2016 Marc Faber, International Investor, “Recession is Coming.” (7) Chinese exports fell by 11.2 percent year over year in January. (8) Chinese imports have now plunged for 15 months in a row. (9) India, exports were down 13.6 percent on a year over year basis in January. (10) Japan, exports declined 8 percent in December on a year over year basis, while imports plummeted 18 percent. (11) Japanese GDP growth has gone negative.For the sixth time in six years, (12) U.S. factory orders have fallen for 14 months in a row, (13) The Restaurant Performance Index in the United States has dropped to the lowest level that we have seen since 2008. (14) This month the Baltic Dry Index fell below 300 for the first time ever. (15) According to CNN, 67 oil and gas companies in the United States filed for bankruptcy during 2015. (16) The number of job cuts in the United States skyrocketed 218 percent during the month of January according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas. (17) Since March 2008, central banks have cut interest rates 637 times and they have purchased a staggering 12.3 trillion dollars worth of assets. There is not much more that they can do, and now the next great crisis is upon us. (18) David Levy Forecasts a Global Recession in 2016, Barron’s December 19, 2015, Michael Pinto CNBC, January 15, 2016 “A recession worse than 2008 is coming”, (19) The Telegraph March 14, 2016 “Global recession risk rises to 30pc this year, warn Morgan Stanley”
economic growth is at direct conflict with maintaining a habitable planet.
I disagree. "Growth" is an exponential process. 7% growth is a doubling every 10 years. It's not possible to sustain a positive exponential process of any rate. "Social ills" are not going to be addressed by maintaining economic growth. More capitalism to fix capitalism is not going to do anything less than increase capitalism. "Political uncertainty" can be fixed by economic growth? Population problems too? The environment as well? Delusional.
Capitalism isn't broken, people understanding of capitalism is broken.
+Daniel Bostock It became broken when the political system was purchased. That was the last of the brakes. There's nothing stopping the wealthiest now except for the replacement political party responding to "let them eat cake".
Daniel Bostock Great. Good for you. I mean that. If you are still "there" and ready to make peace with it, because you understand it better, then great. I've only subscribed to it all my life, had two businesses, worked in accounting, and yet, know nothing about it. So I'm supposed to be jealous of your higher understanding of economics? No thanks. But it's still good for you. I do wish I could still live there. Must be nice. I don't begrudge you making peace with it. We all gotta do what we gotta do, right?
The global economy had grown for centuries. The assumption that the economy will grow is one of the reasons, if not the main reason, for all of the modern wonders we now see.
Yes - a lot of horrors came with it. But a lot of horrors happened before it.
She is spot on to worry about it.
So her conclusion is "we shouldn't be dogmatic" about how to run an economy, but instead "give the power to the state to regulate it" Hmmm... anyone see the contradiction? This woman needs to study Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek. The reason China is booming is because they're learning from Hong Kong and shedding and leaving their socialist dogma behind. Their markets are opening like never before and consequently more people have risen from poverty in China alone in the last decade than in the rest of the world combined. It's why as of recently they've also discontinued their one child policy.
"we can't have an illimited growth in a world with limited ressources" that's not from me but damn this make sens !!!
Never-mind that pursuing non-natural resources as energy, innovating how industries power themselves, in itself is economic growth in that it creates new industries. Constraining ourselves to the idea that we must remain dependent on current fuels and resources is itself detrimental to growth.
should I buy a xbox1 or a ps4?
Ps4 m8
she has some controversial but good columns on project syndicate
I have a review of her book Dead Aid on my channel. Don't belittle Moyo she knows what she's talking about.
Fluff talk, 8 minutes in and she hasn't said anything of substance
+el'hotdog BIG 10-4
B/c she was still constructing the conceptual framework through which she was going to illustrate her thesis
Thanks for the breakdown! A bit off-topic, but I wanted to ask: My OKX wallet holds some USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (air carpet target dish off jeans toilet sweet piano spoil fruit essay). How can I transfer them to Binance?
We need corporations to pay tax. Tax only in work income is insufficient. In manufacturing there will be more and more automation. Robots will build the robots that produce. If corporations owns the plants and robots there will be nothing left for society to work. There is more and more people. Most of them have a low standard and room for improvement. Corporations owning the market have to pay tax.
She has no idea how things actually work and why this stalling happens, as shows this statement of hers:
_"In order to create sustainable long term growth"_
You can't do that ! Constant growth is impossible in a finite universe ! The only thing that grows past a certain age in humans is cancer. Let's take lessons from that. She is presenting 200 years old ideas which are the very reason it cannot work anymore. This system is based on infinite growth, the real challenge is to switch to a system based on sustainability and economic equilibrium, a system that doesn't require humanity to destroy everything it touches !
Broad minded ? She's the opposite of that !
And by the way, first time I fully agree with a question from this guy, infinite groth is an ideology worst than Nazism.
+Adrien Perié Ignoring EU economy (don't tell her it's bigger than the US one) also shows that she's not exactly broad minded
+Adrien Perié Growth can happen infinitely as a system becomes more efficient. Growth will obviously slow down as it becomes harder to get more and more efficient, but at a certain point the size of the global economy will be sufficient to meet everyone's needs, at which point growth doesn't matter. Global GDP per capita right now is like $11,000. If you divide that up evenly everyone is poor by Western standards. Without more growth, we will be forced to face unacceptable levels of poverty and suffering.
"Growth can happen infinitely as a system becomes more efficient"
That's the opposite of the truth, the exact opposite.
I invite you to watch "3 questions, what do you propose" by Peter Joseph to understand that. I'm not going to teach you basic economics here. Jack C
You can't just summarize it? That tells me you don't really understand the argument. Let me guess, it goes like: "we will run out of resources, the end."
+Jack C
"That tells me you don't really understand the argument." It should tell you I'm busy, and don't have the time it takes to teach you just how much you don't know about economy to believe that efficiency is a positive factor in improving economic growth while the most important factor in maintaining economic growth is inefficiency, the very opposite.
How about quitting your silly attitude of telling me I don't understand the argument I'm giving against the silly idea you presented and try and learn something from a much smarter man than you are when it comes to economics, and just watch the video. Or don't, but then don't go around talking economy when you don't know the first thing about economy because people will call you out on your bullshit, people like me. Comprende ?
This kind of growth is possible!
#itsnotoverutilweallwin
She said "state-capitalist" when referring to China. Those words came out of her mouth. @5:36
This disqualifies her her opinion on it's own not to mention the rest of the rot she is blowing.
Time to walk away, people. If TED is going to continue to insist upon giving the stage to flat-earthers, they've lost their credibility.
+MsDozana uh... me...
India's growth is regressing? Great. You did not even feel the need to do your homework before the talk!
India is growing with a +7% rate since 2014. Fastest in the whole world.
Much was spoken but little was said... She makes so many assumption, but never firmly addresses why we need growth? How much growth is good growth? Exponential? Linear? S-shaped?
But, honestly, if 91% of all new growth generated goes towards the richest 1%, why should I care about growth? If this incessant chase after growth is the major reason why virtually all ecosystems on this planet are in decline, why should I care about growth?
And how do you measure growth? GDP? A stay home mom contributes nothing to the GDP, but a day-care nanny does, even though both of them do practically the same thing. Cleaning up after oil spills actually boosts GDP... Get the picture?
What I hear is capitalism trying to reshape itself into something seemingly different, but with the same inherent flaws. I am now suspicious of her as a propagandist...
Take every generic, mainstream, common and unintelligent answer on the topic of growth. BANG. You've just heard it.
increasing capitalism among a capitalistic society is not going to work if it hasn't worked already. Saying China has a big income inequality like the US is an unfair argument since their economic growth has all been within the past ten to twenty years unlike here in the US hundreds of years. I follow her argument, she wants to focus the economy home but what she's proposing is simply very ideological and not realistic on an increase of capitalism. Nevertheless, a proposition from the government in their support for innovation may be one way to increase growth instead.
Most of the growth is currently taking place in developing nations.. "7% magic mark" while good there is nothing wrong with 5%.
Growth through government control? What B.S.
this woman should look up some ted talks that show economical growth folows social improvement and not other way around (hans roseling)
Ideology is the enemy of growth? So we should just give up our principles and all become the same kind of economy?
are there any good ted talks about income inequality and class division?
she said nothing about how to restarting growth
So stop the idea of centralising everything cause it's just creating distance between people and that gap of miscommunication is being used by giant corporations to influence governments.
May be decentralising markets, governments and people into a more local societies would help, how it is done in Scandinavian countries, were communes with a given budget solve local problems, which is more successful due to a connection with actual people not some economic units. Those communes then act together on the government in this way there's a bridge created between people and the central government to communicate. In order fort that communication to be clear people need to be educated and that's what Scandinavian countries internally invest in most. In such structure central government is more responsible for international issues.
How can you fix capitalism? Your efforts to do just that by destructively incompetent meddling non-stop is exactly what is wrecking it!
When are people gonna understand that capitalism, in any way or form, would never alleviate all of our current and most pressing global problems? Only a resource-based economy could achieve that because it relies on RESOURCES instead MONEY for creating and distributing goods to all the people on earth equally and without any shortage. But of course, an intelligent management of our earth's resources is something very strange and out of this world for economists and buisness people.
Well said but then people wouldn't be as controlled. The ruling class don't like that idea at all.
+Highway Phantom Yes, I understand, you're right. Big powerful people today rely on controlling people to keep the status quo going. But if enough people start realising that we can't live forever with an obsolete system and stand up for change and propose a new alternative like a resouce-based economy, then we might change our society. But unfortunately, it might not come as easy. As history teaches us, there always needs to be some sort of tragedy or castastrophy, a wake up call, for people to start thinking of change and alternative ways of doing things.
When the economy doesn't put way, way more attention to nature, ecological collapses will increase, together with wars and tensions within countries. Her blindness to not mentioning this aspect too much, is like allowing a tumor to grow while healing a patients flu.
We need more.
_More of what?_
It doesn't matter. We just need more. 3% more.
This started off interesting, but then what? What is the fix? This could have come from Microsoft's customer care..
This a ridiculous example of someone looking at something in the wrong way.
not an accident also largest economic growth like US and CHina also the biggest polluter on world...
Our economic system is actually dependent on growth. It's like a junky.
It is easy: Greenfield operations on the wide, wide greens and fields and forests
between Milky Way and Andromeda. This will allow our growth for long time.
Just read Limit of Growth and compare prediction with the world today. The world is even worse.
Oh look a lot of dislikes.... What is it that pissed you off now? Lol
she's a fucking moron.
+Dudley731 Move to a communist/socialist country and you'll understand why so many individuals see this for what it really is. Someone doesn't want to make America great again.
+Pac Oo and what does "making America great" mean......
Well, based on the current direction of the elections, you'll know in a few years. Granted you're not on your death bed.
nothing, go back to sleep.
Did she just say pay parents for inoculations?
We dont need economic growth, we need dynamic equilibrium, wath The Choice is Ours and th venus project proposal: Resource based economy
...that's it? This is just big-picture, pie in the sky stuff. Nothing that gets down to anything genuinely actionable.
The chinese stock market is crashing and has been for a while. There's no evidence that their model works for the long term. Generally speaking, command economies fail. The EU's economic issues, especially for over-socialized countries like Greece and perhaps Spain and Ireland, are due to government growing too large and too invasive. The US government has lengthened the US "Great Recession" iunto an extended economic slump making the same sorts of mistakes.
The only time "corruption" is mentioned is in connection to the USA. This ignores an elephant in the living room. Corruption is the prime obstacle to economic growth around the world. Reform THAT and you already have something. The US problems with corruption, while real, are very pale compares to what most developing countries deal with.
The vast majority of the money that is going to developing countries thanks to the latest global-warming agreement, is going straight into the numbered bank accounts of the despots that run those countries.
But reform can't happen without also reforming the autocracies most people on Earth live under. That is a job for the people of those countries. An outside party can try to do this, but it requires force of arms and a long-term commitment to hanging around afterward, measured in decades. Even then, the people have to absorb the lessons learned or the reform fails.
or maybe we should replace the system that was designed to accomodate the first industrial revolution where a global information based market was unimaginable and the mathematical models they had available were laughable
if we are to create a viable analog we are trying to do the equivelant of controlling the society and the economics of the roman empire with the paleolithic model and then expect it to not collapse
in other words if we want to progress we have to do what humanity always did when it found a wall in its socioeconomic progress : abandon the old system and create a new one that is more advanced
have always economic to grow? how much ppl have to consum in 100 years? how much they have to pay in 100 years? the double?
what can she say without attacking capitalism?
why don't show up english instead ?
i can not listen to her -.- the amount of nonsense...
+Alarich Herzner care to elaborate?
+foodman well first of i have to admit that i am not a professional in economics by any means therefore the following is hardly more than an opinion: economic groth is not sustainable, therefore trying to achieve it is illusionary and intellectual people like her should focus on finding alternatives rather than waisting their time trying to save what can not be saved. Besides that the speech (and i did not listen to all of it) felt like propaganda/preaching rather than disscussion
Fix Capitalism? Let it go. Hands off. Oops, laissez-faire.
Learn from Nordic models, check out countries like Denmark and Norway. They are doing best so far.
Ha ha ha yehhe well we been retarded to long. It is a crise here to.
Maybe Switzerland is not the best location for this topic.
So the answer is extend and pretend.
I don't know how long we can keep this up for, but when we can no longer extend and no longer pretend, the poor of this world are going to come off worse.
I think the biggest problem is lazy money that is just sitting on a bank account, doing nothing good. What we need is to activate the money, put it in investments, this would be a good first step towards healthier capitalist society.
you know people do have to buy houses and save just incase youre in an emergancy
+Zia hussaini I'm not talking about little money like that. I'm talking about the big money being lazy.
Dont understand what youre saying 'little money''big money'?
+Zia hussaini I am talking about necessity. Regular people of course need to invest into their houses and all day living. Lazy money is about having so much money that you need not to invest it to live.
the way she interacted with the audience was so robotic and she had no expressions she needs to focus on her presentational skills
anyone reading this comment who is smart enough to understand that growth is fundamentally not sustainable should go troll the econ series at crash course.
if you work hard, you will make it, its just that lazy people want free rides
New technology is the great problem. And politic has to much influence on market to have economic modells. No safe investment any moore. 🤓
anyone else hearing "captalism"?
Why is she screeming and talking/looking so agressive? cant TED just turn the volume of the mic higher? chill out
***** What is the wtf for? You dont agree with me?
+hi hi I'm not sure what video you're watching, but the one above doesn't include any screaming or aggressive people.
Tasiyiwa Mapondera look at the thunmnail. She even looks agressive in there.
Im okay with the fact that you disagree. However, the fact that other people change your opinion bothers me. I quote: "No I don't. especially when people..." So the fact that other people possibly stereotype her as agressive, strenghens your ipinion?
Btw: I have never stereotyped people based on the fact that their a woman or being agressive.
***** I want to add to that: I haven't stereotyped people on those bases, however I do make assumptions. (everybody does)
so many conservatives in the comments.
Blaming West but still wearing and acting like them. What a paradox!
Here’s a problem we need to address. Why do economists think we can grow forever?
According to actual data, this isn't true.
hm she doesnt seem to answer to the questions ... sounds a lot like political talk
Pure propaganda in favour of the oligarchy. Contrary to what she calls for, her discourse is not open-minded at all and purely ideological I would say.