As a former truck driver, I have seen with my own eyes what Prof. Speaks of. How many times have I driven through rural parts of this country, seen a wal-mart being built, and watched the local stores close one by one because of lower prices at w-m
And now in one town in Florida it was on the news that the municipal government decided to open its own store for the local population that was too small for retailers to bother with. Turns out that the store is pretty profitable, and the people pretty happy wiht it. It was funny because at the end the Mayor took pains to point out "but this isn't socialism". Uh, sorry dude, but it most certainly is.
@@SamKGrove I think it’s the fact that it is democratically built and owned that makes it socialistic whereas the use of profits to construct new aspects of said store would make it capitalistic.
@@SamKGrove Anything govenrment owned directly is usually called socialism. LOTS of government operations make profits, thats just more money than the operation pays out. Hell, the TAX system is profit when there is a surplus, the government can then spend it where it likes. They certainly probably don't CALL it 'profits' because like the revenue stream from parking tickets or parking meters it simply goes into general revenue and is spent on something, because I doubt its enough to really lower taxes. But I'll just change the word 'profit' and call it a surplus or whatever the government parlance woudl be.
@@mikearchibald744, according to Marx and most leftists, profits are theft of worker produced value, therefore, the aim of socialism was to eliminate money and profits. It would be better to just call it a local government enterprise. We have good examples of socialist enterprises in the US such as much of the primary education system which does not operate for profit. The VA medical system operates in a similar fashion.
Wolff: Socialism is largely a taboo subject in most universities. Patrick: But I went spoke at many universities and they all support Hillary Clinton Huh? On what planet does supporting Hillary Clinton make you a socialist? When has Hillary Clinton advocated for socialist concepts like worker cooperatives or work place democracy? Never... Clinton is a textbook capitalist.
My forehead is bruised from how hard I face palmed hearing that. But you can't really expect a guy who has a giant painting behind him where MLK is sitting next to Milton Freedman to know basic ideological differences between socialist and neo-liberal
It doesn't matter if Wolff went to an Ivy League school and has taught in universities for decades ever since, this guy has watched the entire Prageru library and if he says that higher education is a commie factory, then he must be right! And if that doesn't convince you, just know Richard Wolff has owns for-profit businesses, what a hypocrite pinko stinko
So is Bernie better? A man who was a “ professional student” most his life and only became rich from his campaigning promotions? He is an irresponsible idiot who couldn’t even manage his own life and be an adult and yet he can manage a country?!🤣🤣🤣🤣
Amazing how badly informed some people are. Guess if you are wealthy can afford to be ignorant about things such as socialism and class struggle. Good discussion though
the problem is a lot of people claim they are socialists and marxist but they don't know anything about it unlike Wolff. That's a big problem because these people literally want to destroy the country in the name of their cause even though they don't know anything about it in a lot of cases. Wolff is right they are just bitter and angry and that's their politics nothing else.
The problem with the hedge funds is the managers get rich from other people's deposits. Before you get any money back on your investment you have to pay his salary, and these guys don't live cheap as you can see from there homes and cars they use your money to make millions and then you are lucky to get back 6% a year after you pay the manager millions.
His point stands: the US government injected more liquidity into the economy after the pandemic than at any time in history. There's a war in Europe for the first time since Jugoslavia, but this time it concerns the biggest gas producer in the world and largest energy provider to Europe by far. Both aren't capitalism's fault and there's no proof that any marxist country would've done better than we are now
@@vitorfernnandes it wasn't even true back then, nothing is expensive except middle class can't afford house anymore XD. It got from bad to worse since then, thats all.
Agreed. Or rather they are the ONLY arguments left to someone who has not taken the time or trouble to actually become acquainted with the ideas that his interlocutor is speaking about before engaging in the ‘debate’ (this was no debate.) Its too bad because an actual educated debate would have been interesting. Missed opportunity. I appreciate thinkers and people who are willing to at least learn about an opposing point of view enough to engage thoughtfully about it. That is completely missing here, on the side of the host.
He was reacting, not arguing. He made his arguments later. Richard's democratic socialist enterprise scheme will work under capitalism. What's the problem? The down side is that these enterprises will select a leader anyway, its human nature.
@@Savantjazzcollective I disagree strongly that it's "human nature". And even if it was, humans constantly defy their natural instincts. Hardly anything humans do nowadays could rightfully be considered "natural".In addition, managers and leaders are absolutely acceptable in worker coops. The difference is that managers and leaders in coops have their jobs at the mercy of their fellow workers. If the workers feel like the managers and leaders do a poor job, they have the power to get rid of them. That's a crucial distinction. There is tons of evidence of the efficacy of worker coops, both in competitiveness and their ability to deal with price gouging and many other issues. One of the biggest obstacles preventing Worker Coops from emerging as a competitive alternative to the traditional authoritarian workplace is banks' unwillingness to lend capital to people either wanting to start a coop or buyout the company they work in. Solutions could be federal/government funding as was proposed by Jeremy Corbyn in the UK (Yes, he lost the election, but the idea is still valid), or the creation of a Worker Coops bank system, which already exists in some places. In any case, one of the things Americans are very proud of (which legitimately is admirable) is that they have the freedom of choice in almost any scenario. There are a thousand varieties of ketchup from just as many brands, hundreds of flavors of ice cream and cars to choose from. But an alternative to the traditional (and I would argue outdated) authoritarian workplace? No sir. America, and the rest of the western world, seems to be getting more and more ready for the possibility of at least imagining alternatives, and I think that's a good thing. But for us to have that freedom of choice, there has to be the alternative. The sector of Worker Coop jobs needs to actually exist as a broad, accessible alternative, and that means that we have to be ready to spend some money to develop the sector.
@@GuitarLoverX are you really positing that 200,000 years of evolution has not instilled in everybody a natural sense of heirarchy? Virtually every sentient or semi-sentient organism on the planet is based on a hierarchical family unit and ecological sytem. This is fact, I dont see how you can refute this....? Banks do lend to individuals who do co-op enterprises, they are called 'share holders'. By the sounds of it, you want industry to be run like goverment? But how effective is goverment? They are the least effective/efficient manifestation of human will to ever exist, unless its mass murder ofcourse...
@@Savantjazzcollective Did you... even read what I wrote? It really doesn't sound like you did. I addressed pretty pretty much everything you just said. 200.000 years of evolution has embedded in us a lot of things that we, despite this fact, do not live by any longer. Because society dictates that some natural behaviors are not suited for large scale societies with a lot of people other than ourselves. What separates us from the cells and organisms you speak about is our ability to transcend our natural instincts for better alternatives. One of these things could be hierarchies. As I wrote in my earlier response, hierarchies are welcome in worker coops, but they function differently than in traditional workplaces. Furthermore, there's no universal law that just because nature has for thousands of years favored hierarchies for the benefit and necessity of our species survival that we therefore must have hierarchies in our workplaces. This is a construct being perpetuated by people who are either ignorant of alternatives, or people who would rather that you were. What I want is for there to be an alternative to the traditional authoritarian method of structuring a workplace. I like democracy. It's one of the pillars of western society, and almost all of us hold it as a fundamental reason why your way of organizing society is superior to those of authoritarian regimes like China and North Korea. One of the main reasons most of us in theory like democracy, is the mentality that since government will make decisions that will affect us all, we must all have a say in who makes the decisions. If that was a mentality most people really held, as in REALLY held, it should have been instituted in the workplace a long time ago, since that is where most of us spend 5 out of 7 days of the week, all the best hours of the day. There are lost of evidence for the efficacy of worker coops, like I mentioned before. Many. One of the key ones for me personally is that worker satisfaction increases significantly. I believe that a happy worker is a productive worker, and that is one of the reasons I believe that the sector should be further supported by governmental and financial institutions.
@@zamzuir9491 Still the point stands. In order to have a fruitful conversation and not a banal exchange of immutable opinions you need to actually consider the points that are being made.
@@zamzuir9491 letting the other finish speaking without interrupting ist THE BASIC RULE in every conversation! independently if its an interwiew, a debate, a conversation at family lounch table, etc.... ITS COMMON SENSE AND BASIC CIVILIZED EDUCATION
Amazon held Zappos hostage and priced all the same products and sold them for a loss until Zappos agreed to be purchased by amazon. Now all of theirs products are more expensive than Zappos sold them for.
@@clumsyclicker3199 Wait till you are screwed over. Then complain to your mirror and get your answer. Of course, this doesn’t apply if you are a psychopath.
Still shouldn’t throw the baby out with the bath water. But, just goes to show you the logical trajectory of monopolistic behavior, and the importance of competition. They begin by what’s called dumping so that they can Be the preferred supplier to the demand. Amazon is an oligopoly, and the same way they came into threaten Walmart’s position in the market, another company can come in and put Amazon in check. It’s not ideal, but at least there’s hope in that case. And you as a consumer have a choice. When the government is the sole supplier of all good and services, you’re looking at a monopoly. Communist economies promise prosperity, and an improved standard of living, but that’s a marketing scheme to attract demand. Once the means of production have no alternatives, the part elite no longer have to compete for your business. Even with the oligopolies we gave in the States, we’re still in a far off better position-short and long run.
I've lost substantial respect for Patrick Bet David due to his irrational and baseless arguments. It appeared he was simply presenting unfounded ideas, which Wolff meticulously and calmly debunked. This demonstrates the often encountered arrogance and unfounded superiority associated with capitalism, where affluent individuals erroneously believe their wealth grants them superior intellect or entitlement. Observing this interaction was like watching a debate between an uninformed individual and an expert. Bet David demonstrates a glaring lack of understanding of economic systems and the philosophical foundations of capitalism, unable to differentiate genuine economic theories from political talking points. His contributions are limited to clichés and uninformed opinions that he repeats without genuine understanding. I am completely serious when I say that Richard Wolff’s comprehension of these intricate subjects is immensely superior to that of Bet David. Moreover, once Bet David realized that Wolff didn’t advocate for government as a solution or a replacement for capitalism, he seemed to lose all his ground, appearing as lost as a baby in the woods.
I think Richard Wolf's response to Patrick regarding the decision-maker was excellent and something to think about. As Mark Twain said -- It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." Thank you for exposing us to this dialogue so we can come to our own conclusions as it is "one to grow on."!!
Well the problem is there so many people on the left, Who convinced themselves that the left owns the patent on intelligence and education so that they can't be challenged because they're the "educated" party
99% due to government intervention, you have the FDA and a couple of other government orgs that make it IMPOSSIBLE for new companies to come up due to "standards" that can not be met by the new companies trying to get up and going. Than if you manage to navigate the legal system the big companies will utilize the government to crush those companies or force them to release drug information to the larger companies. True capitalism the government would not have a hand in who is the winner and loser. creating and ALLOWING more competition. But socialism dies with competition hence why you need regulation.
@@macruizphotography I've heard this argument before but was never really provided proof of government intervention, can you maybe provide a source where you got this information? Also are you proposing the economy runs like a Social Democratic society or Market Socialism?
@@macruizphotography not 99%.. intellectual property rights gives you exclusive rights to the drugs manufacturing, creating a monopoly for the first few years.
Presumably when that video was made the GOVERNMENT hadn't injected 40% of all the money that's ever been put in circulation in the space of 1 year. Let's ignore that, "capitalism has failed me." 🤣
@@willnitschke that was kinda important under capitalism. Otherwise Stonk markets would have crashed and poor billionaires would have lost their billions of dollars. So the Trump Government had to inject $1.5 trillion to save the billionaires.
@@nawjoghschool2714 Stock Markets have 'crashed' champ. The market is down around 30% from it's peak. So your talking point is a bit retarded isn't it? 🤣
You are spot on I was about to make a comment about that too. I can give Patrick an example of price gouging. Ginger snaps I use to buy them for 89 cents a box not it’s almost 2 bucks. Rich people although the buy cheap but usually if something goes up it a about a couple dollars difference but to us it s a big deal.
@@Aggie63 he wanted an example. And i can see it in Australia: the oligopoly of the supermarket chains, Woolworths and Coles (and Aldi recently joined - German company). These two corporations have driven out the small business companies and have driven up the prices. My girlfriend even works at Coles and she sees herself the price increases. Not too mention they underpay their staff.
@Chad Wick Harway I find enjoyment in the fact that these two people have identified you as less than worthy of responding to. 😂🤣 Oh, how the unknowledgeable are always quick to prove what they lack.
Well, you can’t satisfy everyone. So make more money? If you can’t, then that’s something you have to accept. Survival of the fittest, and if you ain’t fit, you ain’t surviving!
@@123mcgarrigle Maybe not, but I choose to believe that empathy exists for a good reason. We may not be able to satisfy everyone, but we can sure try to help those in need. Helping those on the bottom, is like the tide. It raises all boats.
If it's an "ism" it was designed by someone who has an agenda and it has been weaponized. Social scientists quit mere observation and began designing programs to manipulate outcomes centuries ago. Very little in the way of innovation is allowed to occur which is not being studied by social engineers and technocratic scientists under control of their monied interests. I didn't hear much of real matter discussed in this "debate". Propertarianism is far beyond the scope of these subject
@@JohnKobaRuddy Comunism is not a clear ideology of Christ... But I would definitely argue communism is reliant on the public's view of new testament teachings.
Patrick is never afraid to engage with people way over his head. He reminds me of one of these crypto bros and everyone can be an entrepreneur types. There is nothing concrete to back up what he’s saying but he says it passionately. makes for good content.
Yep, as someone who swims in US politics daily for 22 years, he’s rather shallow in his understanding of politics and economics! It’s bro level understanding in some parts which is sad when he uses it to challenge a distinguished professor who’s very knowledgeable on those topics!
Lol collectivists and centralizers are knowledgable in 👌 because just the mere fact that they deny history is an incredible ignorant hubris of itself. Also while you all smell your own farts through a wine glass you are making an appeal authority fallacy argument which is just typical of academic lefties. Your title means squat if you are a marxist propagandist that denies the atrocities committed in its name and make excuses for modern dictators while wagging your finger at the Us. Good try though.
I agree with everyone here so far. I appreciate the willingness to engage with completely different points of view and to present viewers with these different points of view. I have a lot of respect for that.
Nothing concrete? Besides capitalism raising billions out of poverty, increasing freedom, and working so well at improving quality of life that most countries in the world adopted it.
@@CousinBowling No one said capitalism had no merits, but what they are saying is that there are better systems to replace capitalism and to some extent they have already been tried in the form of cooperatives, and they seem to work
I just watched your discussion and was astounded that two human beings could be so in opposition to the other philosophically, and yet so gracious to each other. Virtually every other channel invites hatred, closes minds and devolves into finger pointing screamfests. Well played the both of you gentlemen.
I watch a lot of YT content where this congenial form of discussion is the norm. It’s there if you search for it. But you’re very right, there’s far too much screaming & outrage in our culture, and an inability to communicate with those of differing ideologies.
We just witnessed the largest transfer of wealth in history from the working class to coorperations. With the dystopian lockdowns apple, Amazon, Walmart ect. are thriving while millions of small businesses go under.
@@someonewhoisnotretarded3708 how did capitalism not play a large roll in that? Lobbyists buy politicians just like any other commodity and then politicians enact laws that favor the rich. I know people say that's just cronyism but no way, wealth and power consolidation are inherent in a capitalist system.
@@heyzoocifer1392 lol the government mandated shutdown and destruction of small businesses is the complete opposite of a free market thats a ridiculous argument.
Patrick claims to have an admiration of capitalism, but when you can't even acknowledge that Walmart and Amazon have reduced competition in some ways that disproportionately affect small businesses, it seems like your admiration is of wealth and power, not spirited competition.
Case in Wolff’s point: The END GOAL is to be the last one standing or majority stake to control the capitalist landscape where there’s EFFECTIVELY the only choice, and using availability heuristic to claim ‘none have happened yet or not happening now’ is a flagrant disregard of economic history (ex: Standard Oil).
Richard Wolff has helped me get passed the two party system.. and honestly has moved me to the left a little.. I say that as someone who traditionally leans slightly right.
Good. I think we should all stop worrying about left and right, because ultimately we are living in a time of desperate need. Fuck the two parties, fuck both the wings. We need the whole damn bird, my brother.
Yes, two parties in a democratic system turn out to push the society to more extrem standpoints, we could have predicted that but regardless of how we ended up in this predicament, let us finally make some improvements to the system which benefit everyone except the 1%
I think that Patrick did got him in one point. Richard was arguing about the classical problem with monopolies, that they absorb the market so they can then rise up the price. But modern monopolies are less about rising the price and more about controlling the market because they learned that the price doesn;t matter the moment you are the only supplier and if you rise the price you invite discontent from the public and that opens you to scrutiny. But if you monopolize while keeping the price low you'll get rich because even if it's worth pennies, the fact that you are the sole provider makes you rich
@@iampuff7 that only lasts for so long as they look for other ways to prevent raising the price, like lobbying against raising of minimum wage and finding supply chains in other countries that have much less regulation - see: Cargill & Nestle And the price of something being low isn’t enough of a benefit to consumers vs the negative impacts.
I think Patrick was arguing the wrong side 1 in a socialist society you still have the same monopolies you do in today's capitalism. There is actually very little difference. The Corona Virus proved that who had to close up shop? All the Mom and Pop shops, Who was allowed to stay open and boosted sales through the roof to the point that they could barely keep product on the shelves? The Monopolies. Do you really think the Virus can tell the difference between Al's Diner and Mc Donalds? You have to be a special kind of stupid to believe that. Do you really believe the Virus can tell the difference between a regular elective surgery and an abortion? If so you probably believe that January 6th was an armed insurrection. It was except the citizens going into the capital weren't the ones that where armed
@@kevinlewis9151 I would argue that in a socialist society if there's an objective need for a sector of the economy to be monopolized that's a clear indicator that it is a sector that needs to be decommodified
@@iampuff7 Arguably we are already in a socialist society and the socialistic imbalance is what the socialist are pointing at and calling it capitalism and claiming it is the bad part of capitalism, when it is truly the socialistic wing that the socialist have created and cater to.
I went back to college in my late 40's and I was suprised at how they still teach the most worthless information still. It was a total waste even though I passed the classes. It was all about making money on tuition and book sales. Sad
@@JohnDoe-gc1kt You know why corporations used to require college degrees.It is because they have been trained at another company, and it is that expirience that gets them the job. More companies now see a college degree as a drawback, and view them as injdocterinated troublemakers who they must deprogram to make functioning individuals. Some of them becomes HR problems. So they prefer selftaugh ambitious people who made it without degrees. And connections and clientlists of course. Lawyers for instance is poached because of their roaster of clients that will follow. And then network, like for instance below average lawyers like Biden and slip and fall at wallmart lawyer Nadler, they can be made partners because of their "expirience", which is codeword for a powerful network they can use to influence for the lawfirm. Think about it, do you need a collegedegree to be a secretary or paperpusher? You could find computergeek kids, who are dropouts doing that job better, and train them yourself. .
yes the host is in denial because he has tied his self worth with capitalism: in other words the host has emotional childhood issues and unaware of it.
Tiago Schardong Pires , if a person in power uses/influences government for their own benefit they -by definition- are not a practicing Capitalist. A Capitalist using their power for government intervention/benefits is an oxymoron.
The government serves big capitalists because they are more interested in serving themselves. If legislators were not corrupt, lobbyists would not have any influence.
Reuben Thomasson , okay, I'll concede that a person who acquires capital can use said capital to buy policies but, the definition of Capitalism is that of a free market without a central authority having the power to dictate/set prices and policy as they-not the market- see fit. And thus, by definition, that person is not participating in Capitalism but something else entirely.
Richard wolff was 9-11 when his dad told him black people weren’t getting a fair shake. This was the 1950s when redlining was very much alive and well. Appreciate the honesty his dad shared with him rather than giving him nonsense like “they’re not working hard enough” 🙄
As a former Ny’er I can tell you that my Black friends were redlined well into the 90’s. They couldn’t even use the public swimming hole. Rockland County.
@jimmie159 What does it have to do with honesty? His father didn't believe the nonsense that black people were living like that because they were not working hard enough. He gave him the nonsense that he did believe that they were living like that because of Capitalism and didn't give him the fact that without Capitalism, their lives would have been way worse.
@@jpcoleman3408 Can you expand your eloquent answer by naming a few non-Capitalist countries where blacks enjoy life so good that American blacks are in substantial numbers moving there?
@@rexnemovi6061there are no non capitalism nations. Not China, not any nation in Europe, not Russia, not North Korea. That's the issue! You are uneducated (not blaming you. It's systematic) about what capitalism, neo-capitalism, liberalism, neo-liberalism, fascism, neo-fascism, socialism, communism and anarchy are about. They don't teach it in schools. At least not properly so the debates always are based on perception and opinion, not on truth.
Father made 100k per month in Iran and he says he comes from a poor family. Wealth isn't just material wealth. It's also is early education, habitus, social networks (not the internet kind) etc. those are all advantages. Everybody can win the lottery, but not everybody at once. Regarding monopolies raising prices: Pharmaceutical industry. I don't understand how Richard could forget about that one.
@@MrJpmoneypants huh? the same pharma corps that made the laws regulating their sector are the same ones (as much as any other industry) that are anti free market. They don’t want to compete with China and etc. Y’all capitalist drones are crazy bro. 🤣
Ok this debate was respectful but this dude really said “monopolies can’t arise without the help of the government” and “Amazon isn’t a monopoly” yikes....
Its not there yet. Because Amazon STILL has competition but it has not been made illegal to compete w amazon yet. Thats his 'Jeff B going to Washington DC' point is Jeff can get laws set in place to make it illegal to try and compete w Amazon or Wal mart, etc. And w this Gov. forced virus shutdown the Government jus made Wal Mart and Amazon MUCH stronger kicking competition to the curb. If this shutdown is ever over with and a bran new grass roots On Line retail company rises from the asses and actually starts to compete w these companies again and the Gov uses its many leverages to shut down this new on line competitor. Then that monopoly is now official.
You can compete with Amazon, just find a more efficient/cheaper way of selling products. They won't remain dominant forever. That's the beauty of the C-word
So you're saying that Amazon rose without government help? Amazon is the ultimate result of a mixed - economy, it couldn't exist without government intervention.
P.S. I can say Amazon isn't a total monopoly, because I can aquire all the goods I seek, without ever having bought anything from Amazon personally. Same for Wal-Mart. Can't hardly remember the last time I was in a Walmart.
@@mattf2545 Having Govt help or receiving state or Govt subsidies is not crossing the line of monopolies. The building of the rail road in the mid 1800's got Govt subsidies. Its when the Govt makes it illegal or forcefully shuts you down when say an Amazon doesn't like that you are actually taking away from their business. We are not there yet for those specific companies but mid virus shutdowns we have taken a big step in that direction. Plus Big Tech is about as close as anyone is making it illegal or impossible to compete w a FB or a Twitter. We actually saw that when a sight got taken down jus for being an alternative to Twitter and its censoring polities. They got forcfully run outta business real fast.
Patrick needs to do more research. He seems to enter interviews with "this is how I define things and you must too" attitude. He honestly thought Hillary Clinton was not a capitalist? Embarrassing
That point with Hillary is exactly when I knew how out of touch Patrick was on the topic. Still, I applaud him for having Mr. Wolff on and having a good conversation.
Totally. Patric was heavily relying too much on the per usual typical pro-capitalism talking points he just involuntarily learned to rebuttal with “received opinion” countering that he’s been brainwashed to say when in reality the topic is WAY TOO COMPLEXED WITH SO MANY LAYERS AND MOVING PARTS it’s impossible to counter with received option counter talking points that can and were shot down in one or two sentences by Richard. I personally think Patrick walked away from this one with the realization it’s a VERY VERY CHALLENGING topic once you have an expert in ANY Economic structures that have ever been used in the existence of humanity. That man is smart as hell its rare to witness his knowledge
yet u can see he's literally closing up instead of opening up, n resorting to debating tactics to shut off the matter. his arguments are fragmented a lot of times. pressing to tiny point, losing overview, very lawyer like, only to win not to find truth. which made his program a show, an entertainment (exactly how he defined/named it). not worthwhile if you are looking for something more than entertainment which to be honest isn't too much either.
@@neomonkeyking you're not making an argument that is addressing my points. You're just saying "false". Confidently telling someone that they're wrong doesn't make you right. That's lazy.
If you actually understood the alternatives of children in Indonesia, you'd understand why you shouldn't have a problem with it. Child labor is the natural state of humanity.
Mr UnFausted if you actually understood colonialism you understand that it didn’t have to and doesn’t have to be that way. It’s amazing how people always point out ways in which the system sucks but never say: “the system sucks.” Lol.
@@marcuscape3301 What about those 1st years in office when the Dems had the house and the senate? Name a policy he tried to implement for black folks that got shot down by the Republicans... We would give him an A for effort but what did he even attempt to do?
WiseOneD is declared the winner 🥇 in this debate that's why I'm a black republican. Democrat dont do nothing but pass gay rights, high health care need I mind you force you to have it and pass marijuana laws witch I can agree with only there marijuana laws republican didn't want to legalize marijuana but I'm a republican who supports marijuana completely.
@@marcuscape3301 It is not the problem of the US people, but Obama's problem. If someone promise something, he must be avare of the situation and the difficulty of said words... Every politician on this PLANET need an statement where he declare that if his promise turn to lie, all his assets should be confiscated... And then run for political campaign...
Finally I found another person who thinks like me. For some reason, it gives me the impression after watching the comments section is that Americans are pretty dense and are filled with propaganda. Btw are you also a follower of proff wolff comrade?
Patrick looks like a fool here. He has no rebuttal and keeps shifting his argument Ex. when Wolff was explaining workers co-op, Patrick then ask "Do you own a business"
It’s almost as if when Patrick feels his intelligence is threatened he has to tell himself that he’s the only sane one and proceeds to ask Wolf random childhood questions like he’s diagnosing some mentally disabled person lol. He rationalizes that he doesn’t need to challenge his own beliefs because he somehow knows he’s right beforehand. It’s a dangerous paradox
Thank you immensely for offering the podcast session with Dr. Wolf. It was incredibly informative, remarkably civil, profoundly intellectual, and exceptionally respectful. This session played a pivotal role in showcasing just how easily attainable and utterly normal it is to have such discussions.
@David Martin care to elaborate. And while you're at it.... please explain the alternative universe in which it makes sense to have a gigantic painting that has MLK sitting next to Milton "greed is good" Freedman?
@David Martin Oh come on: the host clearly has childhood emotional issues, clear as day. You seem to suffer from denial, just like the host, because you identify yourself with him (making yourself the same as). That's a childhood trauma you have, which makes you use labels that you don't even understand.
@@ottrovgeisha2150 he sure doesn't know his dick from his elbow.... but his childhood trauma actually has happened and shouldn't be made light of, the man has struggled to get where he is.
Let me just remind you that Karl Marx essential scientific work is NOT the "manifesto", but DAS KAPITAL, all volumes ! This fact was unfortunately not mentioned in the interview.....best regards..
Marx works are not scientific. There is no real science in his works, it was just poor made philosophy.. His observation was wrong on so many levels and his predicsions were wrong. First example, he belive that capitalism will be falling and will start revolution in most modern industrial powers like Britain or France. Nothing like that happen. Marx claim that industralisation and capitalism will make working force poor, nothing of that happened. Avarange levels of lining standards were getting better and better before WW1! His beloved revolution starts in backward Russia which was fedual society and start in middle of war crisis. Also so called revolution was a coup finaced by Germany, where Lenin was just a agent of Germans. Communists need terror and 5 years of civil war and chaos to be succsessful. And still when they try implement communist ideology of Marx it faild. They were foced to implement some of free market solutions into Soviet economic system.
@@horatio8213 The boom bust cycle is merely a cycle of failures and restarting it. If your car turns off on the highway and you stop and are able to restart it, it still failed, and no amount of restarts prove otherwise, they just prove it constantly fails.
You should thank the government for taxing and regulating those businesses out of existence... The only businesses that can stay affloat with all of the bureaucratic red tape are the multi-million dollar corperations
Most of that still exist here in European cities. And there are Amazon unions. Coincidence? I think not. @B M if anything you say was true, explain Europe. There's regulations that help small businesses and regulations that help big businesses (and hurt small ones). In the USA there's so much corruption that the only regulations that pass are of the latter type.
I love how poor the average American's understanding of the term "socialism" is. We dont want a totalitarian dictatorship. We want workers to have a say in their workplace, and we want productive, full time workers in our society to not live in poverty. We want basic things that we CAN afford so that everyone can live a good life.
@@McMuffinV2 try it with 100 workers all giving their two cents... 100 ideas.. who's stuck w the bill during bankruptcy? these ideas work when everything goes right the second they don't and people dont want any accountability on the back end. we should all have equal opportunities but there won't be equal outcomes that just how things work. what's the incentive to do anything more than the bare minimum? all of this displaced anger about capitalism is from the inability to separate mass conglomerates from your local plumber down the street. do you think about how scaling works? who can scale to fit the demands of 330 million people. not a company that has 3 partners it will be a company thats already a massive conglomerate. the power will just become more and more and more centralized. these theories sounds amazing on paper but in the end they have always ended in concentration of power even more so than capitalism. what you should be talking about is a monetary system that is based upon constant inflation. look at when the dollar started losing spending power and started changing 1972 (a year after we went off the gold standard). we wouldn't be having this convo if wages hadn't stagnated. thats shitty policy and moving away from the dollar being tied to gold and into a debt based credit system. thats what needs to be fixed. we change over to a new system where "Everyone owns their workplace (wolff talks about this in many interviews)" but they will just be furthering a mass debt based system that inevitably collapses taking everyone with it.
@@user-gc1wj8tt2p you do realize that in Spain one of the biggest companies in the entire country is a worker co-op right ? Oh wait you didn't ..........
@@user-gc1wj8tt2p dictatorship? Venezuela has elections So does Cuba or another example with Huawei technologies one of the largest telecommunication companies in the world is also a worker co op. Also China has many local district council's where people vote . I could give many examples
I'm glad I've seen this, Prof Wolff destroyed his every arguement, when he couldn't respond any more he starts to talk about personality, if he ran a business, who does the cook etc. These are strawman arguements bought out when you can't disagree with the points raised.
@@JoseGarcia-vi3pu Pretty sure he explained how monopolies are not reliant on government to exist, but they're built into capitalism. Why would Amazon jack up prices? They can just exploit their labour. Which they could do more of but for government regulations, minimum wage legislation, worker's rights legislation, etc.
@@cockoffgewgle4993 thats your explanation. I want to hear his. He contradicted himself. By 1 hand he says Amazon is not in a position to jack up prices. Then he can't explain why walmart never jacked prices. You cant say "why would they jack up prices" because he brought that up not pat.
i love how done with this BS wolff looks after half an hour of "socialism is wen goberment big and no iphone" and "hillary is the marxisms and trump is the freedum"
Too bad Wolff and his followers are slow when it comes to their idiotic economic model. 33:54 Patrick's prediction was correct Wolff's prediction proven false. grow.acorns.com/how-many-americans-became-millionaires-in-2020/
The way I get what the interviee is saying, Amazon is creating the reputation of selling cheaper products, get others out of business, becoming the only seller, causing a monopoly. That is how I get it.
Yes but Amazon is totally in bed with the government and the CIA. And that's not capitalism. Amazon pays no taxes and gets a big refund! The majority of businesses don't get those sweetheart deals.
@@roseagain2 Agree, "amazon" is an example of cronie capitalism. They shouldn't get special govt treatment, that helps them have an unfair advantage over their competitors and small businesses.
@@roseagain2 Hence the point he made that the rich have a disproportionate amount of influence on the government and thus feeding into a system that advantages the rich and disadvantages the poor. At least that's my understanding of what he meant, I could be wrong.
@@davemacgyver573 yes, sadly _globalist cronyists_ are confused for free-market capitalism. Can't really debate the subject accurately with people when their definitions are confused. It's a fair subject to debate.
Patrick Bet-David; I usually enjoy most of your interviews and the diversity of topics. I have also seen many of Dr. Wolff's lectures etc. Therefore, in appreciating both of your work, I believe I was an unbiased viewer. I don't think you were responding to the core Richard's points and distracted yourself from reaching far deeper into the conversation points.
life is a struggle ,it doesn't matter the system,, their is no system that eradicates poverty there is no system that improves everyones life equally ,there is no system that does not have a ruling class or a rich class,, people don't like other people telling them what to do,,there is no such thing as freedom,,even in the ultimate of wolfs fantasies 40% still have to do what the other 60% foist upon them,,and even the 60% are not 100% in agreement with all the details,, capitolism is a bunch of mini dictatorships controllled by a bigger dictatorship,, comminsim is one big dictatorship,,socialism is a veriation of communism,,,people dont like to be told what to do,,people do like to be told what to do!
@@timmyspov That is why I used the words responding to and not asking...if that is you implying that I was saying it was supposed to be some sort of polite interview only. I am well aware it was a debate; however, a debate is a conversation. One from two people such as Patrick and Richard I would assume has a point of exploring and hashing out understandings. I feel these were not found by Patrick interjecting onto the surface of some of the discussion topics with, for example, "what is overpriced on Amazon?!" Give me one example of an item that's overpriced..!"rather than following the deeper discussion about the structure of the company, how it got there, and what are it's surrounding effects presently and in the future.
@@humility-righteous-giving I agree with that. There is probably no system that will ever be completely equal, without problems or without some people trying to take over someone or something else. However, some of those facts probably point more to our own habits and ideas that need addressing more than any unconcious system we attempt to implement and conduct our interactions through. Nor would I accept that just because there is no perfect system to rolling over and just accepting whatever that current system is when there are obvious improvements/changes that can be tested.
@@lizthor-larsen7618 No they are not, I am trying to be as objective as possible. Read the top voted comment, Patrick got BODIED in this debate. Wolff is very much a higher intellect than Patrick, I am sorry to say. At least the debate stayed relatively civil.
@@BenjaminNuttinYahoo The video is literally called "Heated Debate On Capitalism". If you can't see that Wolff was using kid gloves in this debate you are the low IQ one. As I said at least it stayed civil, I would have called Patrick on his stupid arguments multiple times.
wolff makes the rounds pretty regular in all kinds of spaces... but yes, as the other fella said, fair play. ideas should be debated, if we are so evovled(not sure we are, but there's always hope)
Agreed, and even if I strongly disagree with his claimed beliefs (Note: Not facts!), he's MUCH more reasonable than a Shapiro-type or some other "gotcha!" sociopath conservative.
Thanks Patrick for this video with Richard Wolff. Will recommend this to friends. I learned a lot listening to your discussion and arguments on so many different topics. Kudos as always and wish you continued success and nothing but the very best.
@@thomasnilsen2755 Oh wow, as someone who was already at least a bit familiar with his work (specifically those alongside Stephen Resnick published 20-30 years ago now), and as someone who was never floored by them. I actually watched him here and saw someone a bit more aware of the failures of wild Marxist revisionism that he seemed more a proponent of years ago. He’s maybe a bit more a humanist in his older years. What points or positions did you find so repulsive though, my friend?
Wolff is not a respectable guy. Maybe you missed the point that he promotes an ideology that has made piles of dead corpses in its wake at every turn and try. Not to mention that Rich gets his history wrong over and over again and just makes shit up. If you think I'm just talking shit, in so many of his other videos he continues to pretend that America has a Capitalist economy, when in reality America is mired in an Mixed economy.
@@Objectivityiskey "he promotes an ideology that has made piles of dead corpses in its wake at every turn and try." I don't think so. He explained near the end that socialism for the 21st century is not really about the government [as it has been in the past]. It's about democratizing the enterprise. No more piles of dead corpses.
I'll tell you what amazon has raised the price on. They charge so much to sell. They have raised the fees so much. Amazon is not on the business to sell products. They are on the business to sell a platform to sellers so that they can sell a product. They almost have a monopoly on that now.
@Nota Bene I purchase things all the time. Guess what, when I see I can get a price cheaper somewhere else, I buy from the other guys and this is quite often. So this idea that Amazon is a monopoly is simply not true. What people don't understand is that it's not always about price anyway. There is a triangle in business. Quality, price and customer service. Pick Two. Amazon I would argue has good prices and fairly good customer service (this can debated) and their quality of products ranges greatly. Other companies can be higher priced but can offer better customer service or better quality. It's not always about lower prices.
respect for him. even if i think communists are delusional and are wrong in almost everything, it is good to hear their points of view, because this social issue comes back over and over, it shows there is a real problem that needs to be solved in our societies, people feel left out and unhappy, i think kids should have a fair start, but it does not mean we have to lower all to the lowest standards and pretend it is fine
It doesn’t take guts to interview wackos! This douche actually wanted to debate Jordan Peterson! What a clown😆 he just wants the notoriety, write a book, and make some cash. A true capitalist pig. Lmfao
1:03:25 PBD asks, “have you ever ran a business?” while Professor Wolffe is already mid point. Prof Wolffe completes a brilliant point, to which PBD responds, “have you ever ran a business?” 😐🙃 These listening skills?... not so good.
It was a bit of a desperate attempt to find something to grab hold of and wrestle Wolff to the ground - that intent unfortunately signifies much of this conversation
Yeah, this bugged me too. Especially since the only purpose of this question was to dismiss Wolff's argument regardless of what he answered. If Wolff had said that he had never run a business, then Patrick would have dismissed his arguments saying he was naive or an ivory tower theorist. If Wolff said that he had run a business (which ended up being the case), then Patrick gets to call him a hypocrite for taking part in the system he is criticizing. It's such a clearly bad faith question that Patrick used the second he felt out of his depth. Wolff had just finished laying out his vision of socialism, the thing this whole conversation was supposed to be about, and Patrick interrupts him with an irrelevant question he can use as an ad hominem "gotcha" no matter how Wolff answers.
Richard Wolff is wrong when he states that free-market results in monopolies and that Adam Smith even stated so. That's not what Adam Smith stated. According to the "The real Adam Smith He might be the poster boy for free-market economics, but that distorts what Adam Smith really though" web page: The context of Smith’s intervention in The Wealth of Nations was what he called ‘the mercantile system’. By this Smith meant the network of monopolies that characterized the economic affairs of early modern Europe. Under such arrangements, private companies lobbied governments for the right to operate exclusive trade routes, or to be the only importers or exporters of goods, while closed guilds controlled the flow of products and employment within domestic markets. Thus, what Adam Smith criticized were government-enforced monopolies. Adam Smith never mentioned that free-market led to monopolies.
Here we have a pupil learning from a professor. The fact the pupil is the rich man in the conversation shows how wealth has little to do with intelligence.
The pupil whose proud his daddy was rewarded by a literal murderous monarch with control over makeup factories that where only there because the CIA overthrew the democratically elected government for trying to make their oil industry into a public good. His father would have poor in the US just like he was poor in Germany because he got to be rich not under capitalism but some monarchists fusion. Of course he probably had to flee because they were Christian but the reason he had anything in Iran (I’d stake money on this) was because his family was already connected and wealthy with the monarchy. We’re educating the fucking aristocrat here.
@@masinissaibrahimi5569 Superior to the democratically elected government he overthrew with the help of the United States or the autocratic regime that overthrew him?
@@noble7461 You rather have an economically illiterate individual as long as THe US DoEsN't InvOlvE ItSelF. The authority of the Shah was a lot better than the gibberish I see these days where the can barely afford a chicken. Nationalization of anything...is foolish.
What marxist idiots fail to recognize is they usually hate business & especially big business but in communism which socialism breeds you end up with 1 big business - the gov’t. It will always lead that way. And any business will generally take from one off kilter part of the business that makes more money and give it to a sector that is a malignant producer. Why it always ultimately fails. It is too easy to take good parts of the ship to plug the holes of the faulty parts of the ship. There is not a mechanism for failure of a business in marxism the govt simply tells you what to produce, at what cost, what cost to sell it At, what to pay their workers. How could that ever work out without there being some kind of profit to use to grow that business either in simply extra production lines or other areas of business itself.😊marxism produces just as much of a rich class usually the govt workers as capitalism and the others are truly serfs and poor. It’s amazing looking at past marxist examples. What’s also amazing both capitalists & marxist usually agree that people are cut throat in capitalism. But capitalists see peoples nature as cut throat and egocentric which is why capitalism works. One will always care about themselves and their own before others. But marxist seem to think that making the utopia you hear about will magically get rid of or they will eliminate those types of people that are cut throat and care mostly for theirs and their own. But it’s human nature and it will never be gotten rid of. He talks about the workers being the owners & producers & we all sit down & agree what to produce & sell & at what cost. Such a utopia how are the people ever gonna agree on anything to even get started let alone make money and then what they will want to profit for themselves which actually boils back down to human nature & ones own desires about caring more about their pain & desires than the jackass that disagrees with them across the table. If it wasn’t human nature capitalism wouldn’t work so good & you would have to have a different system.
It is a 3 year old arguing with his (maybe long gone) parents who did him wrong. He is projecting it onto mr Wolff, that's where his condescending attitude comes from.
Hello, I really enjoyed this podcast. It is refreshing to see 2 people with different viewpoints have a civil discussion. Please consider having Richard back again in the future with a more in-depth conversation. thank you.
Whether or not you chose to identify with a label doesn't mean that there isn't an "ism" to describe your beliefs.... but i see your point that labels distract from the issues, if thats what you ment
@@chenzomutumbo9140 well, i'll put it this way, i have no faith in capitalism or communism (or any particular spiritual sect although i have faith in god). I don't get the allure of communism at all, or marx, he seemed to me, not that i've read a lot, he seemed like he wanted to be godlike himself, replace everything with his own beliefs, including god, that's a very European thing that infiltrates just about any ism they touch.
Straight truth. Its all bullshit, a way to divide us into different camps. Too distracted too ever peek behind the curtain. Probably scared the hell out of us if we ever did.
At 40:00, In my anecdotal experience (not trying to make a point here, just adding to Wolff's words), Wolff is completely right about the mindset of the youth in colleges. Most of us haven't read the communist manifesto, most of us don't watch the news, except for headlines we see on social media, and most of us aren't extremely versed in economic theory. Before Bernie came around and started talking about democratic socialism, most college students probably wouldn't have started calling themselves socialists because we don't know much about socialism, other than the textbook definition we read in our high school history class. However, we are struggling college students putting ourselves into massive amounts of debt while trying to juggle jobs and school. We're stepping into the workforce and finally understanding that if we're poor now, having a financially successful future can be close to impossible. How do we save when every penny of our income goes to rent, medical bills, or food? How do we get hired for better paying jobs before we have our degree or before we've gained 5 years of experince in the field somehow? Perhaps the degree we pursued will never give us a high paying job, like teaching. What if a student gets pregnant and now has devote the next 18 years of their life to raising a kid successfully while completing their education and advancing their career? I'm not proposing any solutions to this, but with factors like these, plus the abliity to share ideas through social media, college students have begun to understand that the rich hold the power in our society; America is run by the corporate party, not the republican or democrat party. (I'm looking at you: lobbying, super PACs, private news networks, etc) I also will agree that, at least in my college career, my professors are teaching more progressive ideas, usually social issues. None of my professors have said anything like "down with capitalism" or something, but there have been some discussions about racism, income inequality, and gender. I attend a community college. Edit: Wolff goes on to mention half the things I've said here in better words ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Don't forget to also read Adam Smith's 'Theory of Moral Sentiment.' Capitalism goes off the rails when considering 'The Wealth Of Nations' without its companion.
If your professors said "Down with Capitalism" what would your response have been?? You hide the message when it may be not be well received.. Socialism is the last step before Communism..Only the leaders live well under Communism...Both Socialism & Communism destroy progress & innovation..
@@rackets7991 Hmm, I think I'd partly agree with my professor because I agree with the statement: "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism." However, I understand your point about capitalism driving innovation. I'd still like innovation in America, but I'd like the good of society and ethics to be factors in that innovation, not purely profit. Walmart is a prime example of the kind of capitalism I'd like to see the end of, or at least competently regulated. I respect that you don't want to see a communist dictator put in charge, and I agree. My dislike of capitalism does not mean I just want one or many leaders to come and make decisions for me and my community. That's what's happening already in America with the rich and the poor, as I mentioned in my original comment (lobbying, super PACs, private news networks, as well as privatized health care). And yes, I suppose I was "hiding my message." I was trying to avoid sharing my views too strongly, because I just wanted to share my little anecdote that related to Dr. Wolff's words, not get into a debate. I'm still learning about politics and I'm trying to pinpoint what policies I want to support and why. I'm no expert. Edit: Maybe it would be good to clarify that I don't think capitalism is black and white; There are cases of individuals trying to live ethically under capitalism and there are companies that support that goal as well. Perhaps I shouldn't go so hard in supporting the statement "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism," but I think it still applies, especially if we're talking about big corporations like Walmart or Amazon.
It's Gwen I appreciate you sharing a fresh prospective from the youths. If I may ask, can you give me a little clarification. While yes corrupt relationships between corporations and politicians seems to be the root of the demise of this country from my point of view. This guy proposes co-op work systems as a remedy in hopes that the government will then see people as individuals. And does not propose any dismantling of government systems. Or maybe I missed something. But how will addressing the symptom and not the cause produce any real results. It sounds like he’s pandering to the inexperienced and disadvantaged with a fantasy promise that will turn into a nightmare real fast. I’m a few generations ahead of you guys and we also had to put in the ground level work, to gain the experience, in order to open doors for better opportunities. Of course capitalism doesn’t work when you are starting from the bottom, Of course it doesn’t work when lobbyists have the politicians (who are supposed to represent the people) on the payroll. Is it that the younger generations are more interested in leveling the playing field to make it easier for them? Rather than addressing the actual cause for the wages vs expenses gap? Or maybe I just completely misunderstood?
And this was supposed to be his anecdotal evidence that socialism is being widely spread to students across the country... hilarious! I'm in school now (decent sized state university) and there is ONE socialist professor at my school (social sciences). Even my critical theory professor refers to Marxism as a utopian fantasy.
@@converge1993 Marxism isn't even utopian, he never describes a utopia either, Marx just laid put a few ideas he thought would make lives better for people.
@@Tp_hedgelinghog lol, like forced labour camps?.. oooh yay.. marx's communist manifesto is a utopian fantasy that assumes that poor people will be happier and more free in a society ruled by a single over-arching government that dictates how wealth is distributed, regardless of merit or input. It's considered utopian because it's claims are baseless and completely unproven, nay, disproven.
@@jimmythepyrofpv1797 none of those things you claim to be in the manifesto is in the manifesto. Nothing about an overreaching government, nothing about splitting wealth. Please read the Manifesto before you make an idiot out of yourself on the internet.
@@Tp_hedgelinghog Question 17: What will be your first measure once you have established democracy? Answer: Guaranteeing the subsistence of the proletariat. Question 18: How will you do this?Answer. I. By limiting private property in such a way that it gradually prepares the way for its transformation into social property, e. g., by progressive taxation, limitation of the right of inheritance in favour of the state, etc., etc. II. By employing workers in national workshops and factories and on national estates. III. By educating all children at the expense of the state. Question 19: How will you arrange this kind of education during the period of transition? Answer: All children will be educated in state establishments from the time when they can do without the first maternal care. Question 20: Will not the introduction of community of property be accompanied by the proclamation of the community of women? Answer: By no means. We will only interfere in the personal relationship between men and women or with the family in general to the extent that the maintenance of the existing institution would disturb the new social order. Besides, we are well aware that the family relationship has been modified in the course of history by the property relationships and by periods of development, and that consequently the ending of private property will also have a most important influence on it. Question 21: Will nationalities continue to exist under communism? Answer: The nationalities of the peoples who join together according to the principle of community will be just as much compelled by this union to merge with one another and thereby supersede themselves as the various differences between estates and classes disappear through the superseding of their basis - private property. Question 22. Do Communists reject existing religions? Answer: All religions which have existed hitherto were expressions of historical stages of development of individual peoples or groups of peoples. But communism is that stage of historical development which makes all existing religions superfluous and supersedes them.
Remember the company decade ago where the owner decided to compensate all including himself the same payroll? The company excelled. Apart from payroll, the owner had control of the total profit where the payroll was a fraction of total net profit. He was smart, keeping all employees happy whilst making bank far more than his labor pay. Think bout it.
maya maya hmm wanting to have a say over our lives and a say over work definitely makes us lunatics! Go back to your CIA lies kid it’s about as much as you can handle
@@longanddeadly Youre right. Some of these idiots actually believe that if a rich person is making money that it means he is only doing so because he is taking it from someone who is poor. Our system is not perfect but I would much rather live in a system that allows for upward mobility for those that are willing to work hard or be innovative, than I would a system that keeps everyone at the same level and completely destroys ambition and innovation in the name of "Fairness" and "Equality."
@@darrenhergert8801 Yes, and not only no upward mobility. But communism/socialism necessitate the middle class move down to low. By centralizing power into the government, you guarantee the people who do work hard enough to be middle class will have to be government boot lickers after a small pot, or go down low. Whereas in capitalism the pool of wealth is infinite as it is not centralized. No one stops you from coming up with a great idea and creating value, that's how we all move up together.
@@nomeca961 Excerpt from Einstein's letter to Anna George De Mille "Men like Henry George are are rare unfortunately. One cannot imagine a more beautiful combination of intellectual keenness, artistic form and fervent love of justice. Every line is written as if for our generation. The spreading of these works is a really deserving cause, for our generation especially has many and important things to learn from Henry George. With friendly greetings, A. EINSTEIN" One of MLK's most frequently quoted passages from scripture was "The Earth is the Lord's and the Fullness Thereof," which he spoke about in an explicitly georgist way constantly as well as being a hard advocate for UBI paid for through LVT. They're both Georgists, MLK in action, Einstein in both name and action.
21:35 as someone who just lost their father a month ago, what you told him here was so awesome to hear. You can really tell the kind of person you are saying things like that, unless you are really pulling the wool over our eyes of course but you come across completely genuine when you say things like this. 👍
@@pyotrbagration2438 thanks, I just keep reminding myself of how blessed I was to have had a father like mine and all the good memories we made together.
Wolff: “Part 1: Competitor lower the prices in order to monopolize the market by crashing the competition. Part 2: Once most of the competition is out, they will increase the prices.” Patrick: “that is not true I bought everything cheaper on Amazon than on other places, tell something is overpriced on amazon?” He needed some drawings to understand something as simple as this. Amazon is not overcharging things at the moment because they are executing part 1, they are just crushing other competitors.
It is raven easier than that Amazon already did it to diapers.com I know I was buying diapers from diapers.com back then because they were cheaper than everywhere else. In 2017 Amazon shut it down and once they were closed they raised the prices to match Walmart and Costco instead of keeping the diapers.com price
Pricing will stay relatively low because anyone can become gated on Amazon and sell on there themselves. That's part of the reason they are successful. It's also attractive to sellers because you can ship to their distribution centerz before it even sells and they will take care of shipping, which they can do at a cheap rate, which also serves to keeping prices low. Now if you want to say the American government shouldnt run post offices on Sundays for only Amazon, or that perhaps they shouldn't have paid 0 in taxes, those are rational views. They are not however some kind of horizontal monopoly that can could artificially raise prices. There's tons and tons of places to buy and sell online.
Patrick expected Richard to guesstimate that there were only a couple dozen millionaires in the United States because of his critiques of capitalism. When Wolff guessed 4 million, and it only ended up being 500k, it threw off the argument he was trying to make, and made Wolff's position even more palatable. I must say that I was surprised that only 500k Americans earn 1 mil each year. Thats only .3% of American adults earning that much. That is almost the 1% within the 1%. I don't know how anybody could use that as evidence that anybody can become a millionaire.
There an millions of millionaires. Millionaire only means you are worth several million. MAKING over a million dollars a year is a complete different level.
@@marques41 yeah and that’s a dumb argument. “If 0.1% of the population can do something, why can’t the other 99.9% do it too”, was not the sound argument that the guy thought he was making.
Reminds me of RUclipsrs who do videos on the chemical reactions in certain cooking processes, and why chefs get it wrong in theory but right in practice. The practitioner doesn't always understand the exact mechanics behind why something works, and even if they're not always equipped to explain it.
@@fishhuntadventure And even if he started as an orphan beggar with 0$, they'd find some reason to hate him. They'll simply say that it was given to him, because he is a white male. Basic crab mentality.
@@korpen2858 Why are you now desperately wanting to change the topic? Well, because you know where your smug sanctimony leads. It's nowhere nice. So what's your solution there? Feel morally superior and let the kids die?
@@willnitschke you present a dilemma that's based on an outright fabrication. when Korpen points out your lie, you attack them instead of their argument and then proceed to double down on your false dilemma. children are often at increased risk of mortality due to workplace hazards. you're the one who wants kids to die.
Patrick my friend... You do AMAZING mob interviews for ENTERTAINMENT purposes... But you are OVER your pay grade with Richard Wolff. We are talking about one of the MOST brilliant economic minds of the 21st century. I certainly appreciate the debate but we are talking community college RUclipsr vs Road Scholar LOL. The argument you are trying to make with "Name me one item that is over priced" it's just so dim witted even for a simple mind like myself to pick out.
@@rherna01 it kinda shows his shallow depth of knowledge just looking at the painting behind him the has MLK sotting next to Milton "greed is good" Freedman, as if they agreed on ANNNNYTHING.
Pats a grifter and hack.. Can't believe people take this idiot as a serious person.. He should stick to gimmick mob videos cuz he's way outside his safespace here Wollf destroyed his moronic talking points.. Lazy ass couldn't even do his homework says a lot about him
Very rare nowadays, but it provides so much value. The funny thing is, despite conflicting ideologies, we all want the same things, we just think we get them in different ways.
@@tofuteh2348 isn't that, realistically, how we get when we are confrontinga concept that we have yet to see the wisdom in? It gets uncomfortable. A person less professional would let their ire rise and keep pressing with their point trying to overtake their opponent so they can be on top. That's the ego in it's full glory. But it seems the more we believe deeply in our conviction the less ego that shows up because given an opportunity we can always defend our point with more opinions and facts. It's those who start to feel their own viewpoint is being threatened by opposing wisdom that the ego rises. That's how I see it anyway.
@@MIGR711 DING DING DING! Socialists, anarchists, and non-authoritarian communists all acknowledge that basically EVERY capitalist defender is complicit in the crimes against humanity it requires to function, and THIS is why they see themselves in the despicable rich exploiters. You don't EARN a million dollars, you TAKE it from the folks who helped your company earn it.
The host is discredited and stupid. Why should I sell above a certain point when my work force and tax breaks are given via the middles class tax receipts. These are the stupid fools that have wrecked the economy. He is dumb!
I don’t know how many times I noticed the other guy listening to Wolff and his response or counter expose the fact he wasn’t genuinely listening to him. The way he says “oh my god” or “come on Richard”vs giving what he was saying a chance only prolongs his close-mindedness. He will never understand any view but his own. It’s sad that most people are like that especially when discussing similar issues as Wolff and he discussed
Before this interview I was critical of socialism. I had heard of Professor Wolfe before but never took socialism seriously. After the interview I am more convinced that socialism is a possibility, maybe not the best but better than what we have now until we find something else. Richard Wolfe had a deeper understanding of history and economics than Patrick and backed up his points more so than the host.
Check out the soho forum debate, that’ll change your mind.
4 года назад+2
@@wesleymalutama3651 "What we have now isn't real capitalism." Market exchange + commodity production + waged-labor + boss/worker relations= capitalism.
57:35 actually we do have example of it today. Walmart will go into a town, drive out local business by offering lower prices and all that crap and then slowly raises them up to normal profitable levels. The whole thing behind Walmart and Amazons growth is to grow even if it costs them losses as long as the long term prospects of profit are good, it took what, a decade for amazon to be profitable? And for every 2 jobs Walmart creates it kills 3 jobs somewhere else.
and with the government sustaining it, that s closer to socialism than it is to capitalism. in communism, you could vote. but there was only one name on the ballot. in communism, eventually when it got bad, you could buy food. but there were only so many choices, not to mention standing in line for them...
you@@Ironborn4 I guess you guys here have never bought at walmart, helping to kill those jobs. Am I right? You don't agree with what happens, don't buy at walmart. That is the beauty of freedom, free market and capitalism. You are able to decide the diraction it takes. And if you say " most people wil buy because it's cheaper", than most people seem to like to express their free will and the Goverment has the power to control people's stupidity. If they don't, there again comes the beauty of freedom. None of that is possible in the "leftist-paradize" utopia, so all you can do is hope that the people in power are fair to you forever and ever. Wake up, mate
55:45 Walmart put a lot of smaller retail stores out of business. Amazon is doing the same thing. The options to buy a similar product elsewhere is shrinking. Richard Wolff is right in his assessment of how a monopoly is established. This is happening in real-time.
Rewind the clock 30 years or so and SEARS outlet store was the world biggest retailer but they eventually went out of business.. Richard Wolff policies would encourage monopology. Walmart and Amazon both uses the government to stay on top by lobbying for higher wages and etc.
How exactly would putting workers in control of their workplaces through either representative or direct democracy... encourage monopolies?@@Diabolical05
@@__hazel. Because everyone will naturally gravititate to the biggest corporation where they will make the most money and have the most job security. Startup or new businesses will practically cease to exist because in this market condition, nobody is going to want to risk their capital and hard earn money to start a business when the end outcome is that you will ultimately make the same amount or even less money vs someone who is working for walmart. Except the person that went to go work for walmart did not have to save, and risk capital to make as much as your business is making . People won't want to work for a small business or startup because even in this economic condition, most fail (7/10 new businesses fail within 7 months i think). Sooner or later, only the biggest name retail, autostore, technology will be left standing (Amazon, Walmart, Target, Apple, Android, Netflix, Google., Homedepot, Mcdonalds and etc). New technology or innovation will halt and cease to exist because again, nobody will have any incentive to create or start anything new. Everyone will work for the biggest brand already established.
wrong. Although within some industries, some companies try to get more market share, that does not mean they might have power over the market, there is mobility across markets and therefore capital is always attacked, that is how competition works. there is no empirical evidence to suggest that companies can "jack up" the prices as if this does not affect the signaling to the demand. supply and demand are profit side and as such there is no super power.
False The retail industry is one of the industries with the lowest barriers to entry, and since product differentiation is non-existent it's also one of the few industries with only price Competition. That means that as soon as Walmart even tries to raise the prices over marginal costs then Competition will flood the market
The Kochs have flooded the university system with pro capitalist economic programs and business schools. Idk where you get any marxism, in the 1990s most marxist programs disappeared when the USSR fell. I went to business school dont think we ever talked about Marx in class.
@sillybillybadboy I have some news for you: first off: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School#Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theory and en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Bolshevism (just have a skim over these to learn about cultural marxism) second: the so-called "oppressor/oppressed narrative" was created by Hegel, and it's called dialectical analysis (which is really useful for analysing a ton of stuff). Marx studied Hegel, this is where his idea of proletariat/bourgeoise comes from. the primary difference between Hegel and Marx is that Hegelian dialectics are more of an idealistic dialectic, but Marxism utilises more of a material dialectic. so, while it is true that Marxism did indeed influence critical theory, this is more because Marxism was one of the first, and most refined philosophies to thoroughly develop a material dialectical analysis of society. the only thing remotely Marxist about any of these "institutions" that you refer to is that some of them may have integrated some material dialectics into their analysis. but this certainly does not make them Marxist. And if I am correct in assuming that you got your opinion from Jordan Peterson (it at the very least sounds like the things he says on the matter), then I should also mention that Marxism and post-modernism are not compatible philosophies. To put it simply, Marxism is a modernist philosophy. while post-modernism heavily critiques modernism (hence the name). Peterson is a psychologist. When he talks about psychology, he knows what he is talking about and makes really good points. However, he is not a philosopher, nor a historian, nor a political scientist. when he starts talking about any of these subjects he clearly has no idea what the fuck he is talking about, and is wildly out of his depth. What do you mean by "That stopped working after the collapse of the Soviet Union"? class didn't stop existing after that. the dialectic didn't stop working. and as for the "the long march through the institutions" part. I would refer you to the links I provided at the top of this comment.
And why is that? Do you think the U.S government printing billions of dollars in stimulus money in order to give people free check; devaluing our currency has anything to do with that?
I thought that the reason for Amazon destroying their competition was because Amazon lowered their prices to a point that the competition couldn’t possibly compete with. I once bought the same book for 99p on Amazon that was being sold on independent booksellers - online and offline - for much more than that. Even if you are against Amazon or Walmart, if you’re on a budget you end up having to go to the corporations because you have to. Even though you’re technically making a choice to go to Amazon and wallmart, you are still being forced to go to the corporations because they lowered their prices. Even if you really want to frequent the small businesses, you’re still forced to go to the bigger places with the amazing discounts.
@@MrJdouble1998 100%. I would NEVER LISTEN to him. He literally looks like a CHILD with ideas that he thinks he came up with. How does this man have 4 PhDs?
Interesting that after severe pressure, Richard guessed 4 M earn over $1 million, but Patrick corrected to 0.5 M. So the system is even worse than Richard thinks.
Lmao, I know - I love how he’s so excited to be like “500 Hundred Thousand millionaires last year....” ahhh out of 150 million broski... that’s even a lower percentage compared to Prof Wolff’s 4 million guess. And it was so hilarious to see Patrick try to bait him into answers... those were the weakest attempts at “gotcha” questions I’ve seen. I’m pretty sure Patrick was betting on Wolff saying 100 people were millionaires... Patrick, I’m pretty sure, even said “it’s not like it’s 50...” God... totally thick as a board. I’m actually surprised Wolff just didn’t dummy him on the math on that one. I would have been a lot more savage.
@@capitalexotics not 500k millionaires but 500k people who made over a million in income last year. 11.8 million households in America have a net worth over $1 million or about 3% of the population.
0.5m people earning $1m, as opposed to 1m people, means the system is better than he thinks, not worse. The more people there are earning significantly more than the average wage means there are significantly more people living in poverty to compensate.
Prof. Wolff convinced me of his argument several years age, I wish I had come across him a long time ago, If we can get past the brain washing from school what he points out makes so mush sense. It really is a no brainier . Thank you Prof.
Kaladar Chandra as someone studying ecnomics, v2 in particular should be required reading. Whether you agree with marxist theory or not, volume 2 of capital is one of the most insightful books ever written about capitalism.
. Monopolies are impossible without the coercion of government forces. . Fortune 500 companies typically survive only 30 years or so before being replaced by disruptive innovation. (See Schumpeter)
Mergers can happen resulting in monopolies without government involvement. Unfortunately even in an Ayn Rand world monopolies would still exist. Neither side has the perfect answer. You just are lying to yourself thinking you have the perfect answer.
@@2drealms196 Mergers happen with government involvement too. So much for the Sherman Act. Strange that we didn't see everyone do mergers during Carnegie times. There was still plenty of competition, and tons of ma and pa shops, a lot more so than today. Why was that? could it be that as long as there is money to be made in a market with demand, especially one where there's tons of money to be made, there will always be competition? Just going by human nature, I don't think everybody wants to just merge and work for somebody else, or not do their own different thing because its easier to be a simple employee instead of an owner. It also can't be that mergers are always economically beneficial. How many mergers were made to make General Motors what it is today? And they aren't doing good at all. Don't assume to know how a real free market will look like today, if we haven't even had free market capitalism since 1916, you just come off as pretentious.
@Alejandro Pollier I think Ayn Rand's capitalism utopia would fall apart just like socialism/big-government. I do agree with her ethical and non-initiation of aggression.
@Abassi Adroa the magic money which massively devalues the fiat currency we are so inadequately reimbursed with for our exploited labor, isn't capitalism fun?
i'm confused that there's actually so many socialist on here.. what's stopping you to become one? what's stopping you to start a business for yourself? that's the beautiful thing about this system you don't actually have to "serve/work for someone" as long as you provide a service people want you can do whatever you like! That's freedom, that's ownership of your own life both as consumer and producer. The reason this feels more and more out of reach in the west is because of Crony Capitalism which is fundamentally different and where truly the rich get richer and the poor get poorer because of special treatment that the government deals out and who's allowed to survive and who's not! plus they print money creating inflation which again affects the poor working class the hardest paying taxes already trying to save away what you can in a stupid savings account which you learned in school to then get double taxed in the value drop of inflation. the problem always has and always will be the government and their overreach into free trade between free people making their own choices.
@BRI336 ALBANY Polluted the drinking water that killed my grandmother for starters. Not to mention the insane amounts of co2 which is projected to kill anywhere from 300 million to 3 billion people by 2200, per the 1-tonne rule. Not to mention the fact that they have used child labor, low wages, and have exploited the natural resources of "poor countries." The social costs of all of this btw, has resulted in something known as overaccumulation. That being a wealth bubble created through the inability to spatial fix, a lowering rate of profit, an increasing ratio in compensation between unproductive and productive labor, a decreasing ratio of profit to surplus-value, an increasing government subsidy rate to the top 350 firms (by sale), and financialization(massive leveraging) of our economy. What this means is slowed growth, increased exploitation of workers and consumers, an overreliance on debt-based consumption, and rapidly dropping social mobility, culminating in a series of depreciation(similar to the great depression). So, yeah I think that the people at the top of the economic hierarchy have exploited people to get there and will continue to do so, even if it drives us into extinction. I do not hate Bezos, nor any rich person. They are simply actors in a system that incentives certain behavior. It's about the system, not the individual. Also, any dollar someone has but didn't work for, I a dollar someone worked for, but didn't get. Finally, I only buy stuff from local worker-coops, except for my phone and computer. But, that's only because they are necessities and there are no small producers. Calling hypocrisy on someone for taking part in a system that they have no other choice but to participate in, btw, is pretty stupid.
@BRI336 ALBANY do you think those 26 people worked harder than the 3.9 billion? Do you think those 26 actually produced 2,150,000,000,000.00 dollars in wealth? The obvious answer, and the empirically correct one btw, is no. Stop being such a submissive person. You can do better than to lick the boots of a bunch of people who have economic interests that are directly opposed to yours.
@BRI336 ALBANY Booklicker-Someone who seeks favor or goodwill in a servile, degraded way. I'm even going to address the garbage you said after that. It's all extremely ahistorical, ignorant of geopolitics, political theory, economics, and sociology. Not to mention it's extremely anti-intellectual. I'd be interested in getting your opinion as to why "academia tries to sell it here."
SADLY, you barely scratch the surface of how the world is truly run...start with the Black Pope (just below the Pure Bloodlines), the 3 Sovereign Empire/City-States used to rule the world (Vatican City: religion, Inner City London: Money and Big Business and Washington DC (formerly Little Roma) the Industrial Military Complex) and the World Capital that was built in Astana, Kazakhstan about 15 years ago, with the goal of uniting the Countries and Religions of the world over the next 300 to 500 years. Also, you should know that the Obelisk symbolizes past and present! If you didn't know or answered a tall penis, you really are less than. The obelisk is little more than a tall Pillar ith a Pyramid on the top, you know that Pyramid on the back of the dollar bill : ))) YES. The world is like any business, nothing ever goes perfectly and is always a work in progress and you want to control everything in your business! We live in a world filled with very complex constructs that are specifically designed to provide the illusion of choice and freedom while they (the Company) maintain full control over all that truly matters to them and like any business, they don't want competition if they can help it. Forget what they taught you, but realize that we do need control, just good control...and life is better than ever for more than ever and we will get better yet...but sadly, they need to be able to control us, and most of us should like that because we don't do anything wrong. This should protect us from the TRASH that is raised by BAD parents...They build the kids, like a contractor building a house, that has little if any emotional foundation, like a house with a 1" thick foundation, that they can't build any type of real-life on, so when they try to build a life on the weak emotional foundation, it crumbles and destroys all for themselves and humanity.
You arrogant morons. Educated beyond your mental capacity. Socialism and Communism have literally killed hundreds of millions and people. I will fight you degenerate malcontent slobs to the death. Wolff thinks everything is binary. Rich or poor. The reality is many people live excellent fulfilling lives in the middle. Wealth isn’t static. You can be rich one day and poor the next. These people like Wolff don’t live among the common population. They only have ideas, no real life experience. Then they form a society of bubbleheads at universities that extol their general ignorance and lack of life experience. Absolute out of touch lunatics
One minute in and I'm already shaking my head at this host. His question of "tell me one thing that's overpriced on Amazon" shows how woefully ignorant (or blatantly misleading) he is. It's not about overpricing. It's that Amazon and other large-scale businesses actively drive out their competition by undercutting their prices temporarily. They get in price wars in order to drive their competition into the ground.
Amazon has their own products, but they also create tons of small self employed businesses. Instead of big box stores, Amazon is just the fulfillment center for tons of these small businesses. Everyday people now easily create and run their own businesses, by using Amazon fulfillment.
@@AMOFOUR4x yeah. Too bad it just happens to create wealth for one man, by destroying small businesses, forces millions of people out of job, leaving them no choice to work at Amazon warehouse at $12 an hour
You want one example? Ebay. Their fees started out fair, and now they're ridiculous. You want another example? Paypal. Same thing. Fees used to be small, and now they're 10x what they used to be, once they got rid of the competition. Want another example? Amazon. Not in terms of fees, but they put every other small guy out of business, by hosting their products, learning that they sell, and then promoting their own versions of that product. Predatory. Shall I go on?
And guess what? That's why fewer people use Ebay today. I never use it. If I want to buy something used, I go on offerup and usually find tons of things. amazon itself sells used items. Otherwise, newer items are cheap on Amazon or Walmart or wherever. So your example doesn't work. When Ebay raised fees and it became harder to use, people found alternatives and left. Nobody I know uses Ebay anymore.
andybaldman lets not forget that Amazon sells its service as the platform provider and distributor as well. For the retailers, that service has a price, and that there is no competition to keep that in check.
@Know One Yep, change is scary when it results in worse products that cost people more. Keep defending a system that endorses that. Then turn on your TV and look at the world it creates.
Explain to me why did this random millionaire thought it was a good idea to debate an actual economist about Capitalist Vs Socialism, he got destroyed, is he like a secret Socialist that poses as a Capitalist just so he can get bodied in every debate?
Not a socialist by any means, but Patrick really did not have any counter arguments for the guy. Frankly the commie made some very good and well articulated arguments for the questions he was given.
An "actual economist" who cannot provide one working example of his ideas being successful in practice. This is why our univerities are pumping out demoralized, disenchanted "graduates" by the masses.
![DEBATE: Will China or the USA COLLAPSE first? [MUST WATCH]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VjhTweywZpw/mqdefault.jpg)
![DEBATE: Will China or the USA COLLAPSE first? [MUST WATCH]](/img/tr.png)
As a former truck driver, I have seen with my own eyes what Prof. Speaks of. How many times have I driven through rural parts of this country, seen a wal-mart being built, and watched the local stores close one by one because of lower prices at w-m
And now in one town in Florida it was on the news that the municipal government decided to open its own store for the local population that was too small for retailers to bother with.
Turns out that the store is pretty profitable, and the people pretty happy wiht it. It was funny because at the end the Mayor took pains to point out "but this isn't socialism". Uh, sorry dude, but it most certainly is.
@@mikearchibald744, if it makes profit, then it's not socialism.
As for Walmart, well, customers always prefer lower prices.
@@SamKGrove I think it’s the fact that it is democratically built and owned that makes it socialistic whereas the use of profits to construct new aspects of said store would make it capitalistic.
@@SamKGrove Anything govenrment owned directly is usually called socialism. LOTS of government operations make profits, thats just more money than the operation pays out. Hell, the TAX system is profit when there is a surplus, the government can then spend it where it likes.
They certainly probably don't CALL it 'profits' because like the revenue stream from parking tickets or parking meters it simply goes into general revenue and is spent on something, because I doubt its enough to really lower taxes.
But I'll just change the word 'profit' and call it a surplus or whatever the government parlance woudl be.
@@mikearchibald744, according to Marx and most leftists, profits are theft of worker produced value, therefore, the aim of socialism was to eliminate money and profits.
It would be better to just call it a local government enterprise.
We have good examples of socialist enterprises in the US such as much of the primary education system which does not operate for profit. The VA medical system operates in a similar fashion.
Wolff: Socialism is largely a taboo subject in most universities.
Patrick: But I went spoke at many universities and they all support Hillary Clinton
Huh? On what planet does supporting Hillary Clinton make you a socialist? When has Hillary Clinton advocated for socialist concepts like worker cooperatives or work place democracy? Never... Clinton is a textbook capitalist.
My forehead is bruised from how hard I face palmed hearing that.
But you can't really expect a guy who has a giant painting behind him where MLK is sitting next to Milton Freedman to know basic ideological differences between socialist and neo-liberal
It doesn't matter if Wolff went to an Ivy League school and has taught in universities for decades ever since, this guy has watched the entire Prageru library and if he says that higher education is a commie factory, then he must be right!
And if that doesn't convince you, just know Richard Wolff has owns for-profit businesses, what a hypocrite pinko stinko
So is Bernie better? A man who was a “ professional student” most his life and only became rich from his campaigning promotions? He is an irresponsible idiot who couldn’t even manage his own life and be an adult and yet he can manage a country?!🤣🤣🤣🤣
Amazing how badly informed some people are. Guess if you are wealthy can afford to be ignorant about things such as socialism and class struggle. Good discussion though
the problem is a lot of people claim they are socialists and marxist but they don't know anything about it unlike Wolff. That's a big problem because these people literally want to destroy the country in the name of their cause even though they don't know anything about it in a lot of cases. Wolff is right they are just bitter and angry and that's their politics nothing else.
25:20
This aged like milk after the $GME scandal. Hedge funds do not want people to join their rich club...
Hedge funds rely on people joining their "rich club".. without new membership there would be no hedge funds.. believe it or not, they're not all bad..
The problem with the hedge funds is the managers get rich from other people's deposits. Before you get any money back on your investment you have to pay his salary, and these guys don't live cheap as you can see from there homes and cars they use your money to make millions and then you are lucky to get back 6% a year after you pay the manager millions.
@@jimmythepyrofpv1797 sure thing they said that same for Epstein :)
@@Dulika63 lol, yep there's loads of rotten ones too
That's because Pat is a boot licker. Richard participates in capitalism but he understands economics
Man his argument that “nothing is expensive today” has aged like milk over the last two years.
"today" - "last two years"
His point stands: the US government injected more liquidity into the economy after the pandemic than at any time in history.
There's a war in Europe for the first time since Jugoslavia, but this time it concerns the biggest gas producer in the world and largest energy provider to Europe by far.
Both aren't capitalism's fault and there's no proof that any marxist country would've done better than we are now
@@vitorfernnandes it wasn't even true back then, nothing is expensive except middle class can't afford house anymore XD. It got from bad to worse since then, thats all.
That was before Biden got in and gave hundred plus billion to Ukraine and racked up a tens of trillions worth of debt.
@@thierry1026 healthcare, childcare, education
"Oh my god" and "Come on Richard" are not arguments.
Agreed. Or rather they are the ONLY arguments left to someone who has not taken the time or trouble to actually become acquainted with the ideas that his interlocutor is speaking about before engaging in the ‘debate’ (this was no debate.)
Its too bad because an actual educated debate would have been interesting. Missed opportunity.
I appreciate thinkers and people who are willing to at least learn about an opposing point of view enough to engage thoughtfully about it. That is completely missing here, on the side of the host.
He was reacting, not arguing. He made his arguments later. Richard's democratic socialist enterprise scheme will work under capitalism. What's the problem? The down side is that these enterprises will select a leader anyway, its human nature.
@@Savantjazzcollective I disagree strongly that it's "human nature". And even if it was, humans constantly defy their natural instincts. Hardly anything humans do nowadays could rightfully be considered "natural".In addition, managers and leaders are absolutely acceptable in worker coops. The difference is that managers and leaders in coops have their jobs at the mercy of their fellow workers. If the workers feel like the managers and leaders do a poor job, they have the power to get rid of them. That's a crucial distinction.
There is tons of evidence of the efficacy of worker coops, both in competitiveness and their ability to deal with price gouging and many other issues.
One of the biggest obstacles preventing Worker Coops from emerging as a competitive alternative to the traditional authoritarian workplace is banks' unwillingness to lend capital to people either wanting to start a coop or buyout the company they work in.
Solutions could be federal/government funding as was proposed by Jeremy Corbyn in the UK (Yes, he lost the election, but the idea is still valid), or the creation of a Worker Coops bank system, which already exists in some places.
In any case, one of the things Americans are very proud of (which legitimately is admirable) is that they have the freedom of choice in almost any scenario. There are a thousand varieties of ketchup from just as many brands, hundreds of flavors of ice cream and cars to choose from.
But an alternative to the traditional (and I would argue outdated) authoritarian workplace? No sir.
America, and the rest of the western world, seems to be getting more and more ready for the possibility of at least imagining alternatives, and I think that's a good thing.
But for us to have that freedom of choice, there has to be the alternative. The sector of Worker Coop jobs needs to actually exist as a broad, accessible alternative, and that means that we have to be ready to spend some money to develop the sector.
@@GuitarLoverX are you really positing that 200,000 years of evolution has not instilled in everybody a natural sense of heirarchy? Virtually every sentient or semi-sentient organism on the planet is based on a hierarchical family unit and ecological sytem. This is fact, I dont see how you can refute this....? Banks do lend to individuals who do co-op enterprises, they are called 'share holders'. By the sounds of it, you want industry to be run like goverment? But how effective is goverment? They are the least effective/efficient manifestation of human will to ever exist, unless its mass murder ofcourse...
@@Savantjazzcollective Did you... even read what I wrote? It really doesn't sound like you did.
I addressed pretty pretty much everything you just said.
200.000 years of evolution has embedded in us a lot of things that we, despite this fact, do not live by any longer. Because society dictates that some natural behaviors are not suited for large scale societies with a lot of people other than ourselves. What separates us from the cells and organisms you speak about is our ability to transcend our natural instincts for better alternatives.
One of these things could be hierarchies. As I wrote in my earlier response, hierarchies are welcome in worker coops, but they function differently than in traditional workplaces. Furthermore, there's no universal law that just because nature has for thousands of years favored hierarchies for the benefit and necessity of our species survival that we therefore must have hierarchies in our workplaces. This is a construct being perpetuated by people who are either ignorant of alternatives, or people who would rather that you were.
What I want is for there to be an alternative to the traditional authoritarian method of structuring a workplace.
I like democracy. It's one of the pillars of western society, and almost all of us hold it as a fundamental reason why your way of organizing society is superior to those of authoritarian regimes like China and North Korea.
One of the main reasons most of us in theory like democracy, is the mentality that since government will make decisions that will affect us all, we must all have a say in who makes the decisions.
If that was a mentality most people really held, as in REALLY held, it should have been instituted in the workplace a long time ago, since that is where most of us spend 5 out of 7 days of the week, all the best hours of the day.
There are lost of evidence for the efficacy of worker coops, like I mentioned before. Many. One of the key ones for me personally is that worker satisfaction increases significantly. I believe that a happy worker is a productive worker, and that is one of the reasons I believe that the sector should be further supported by governmental and financial institutions.
You must learn to listen to the person you are interviewing...
It's a debate mate, not an interview. It's right on the title.
@@zamzuir9491 Still the point stands. In order to have a fruitful conversation and not a banal exchange of immutable opinions you need to actually consider the points that are being made.
@@zamzuir9491 letting the other finish speaking without interrupting ist THE BASIC RULE in every conversation! independently if its an interwiew, a debate, a conversation at family lounch table, etc.... ITS COMMON SENSE AND BASIC CIVILIZED EDUCATION
Patrick is on point,his interviewed many prominent people around the world, how many have you done lol
Capitalists dont listen, they only give commands.
Amazon held Zappos hostage and priced all the same products and sold them for a loss until Zappos agreed to be purchased by amazon. Now all of theirs products are more expensive than Zappos sold them for.
The term for Target, Walmart, Amazon is closer to oligopoly. They kinda got stuck in a debate of semantics using the term monopoly.
Sriram Udhayakumar you’re missing the point
@@clumsyclicker3199 care to spare me some billions so I can start?
@@clumsyclicker3199 Wait till you are screwed over. Then complain to your mirror and get your answer. Of course, this doesn’t apply if you are a psychopath.
Still shouldn’t throw the baby out with the bath water. But, just goes to show you the logical trajectory of monopolistic behavior, and the importance of competition. They begin by what’s called dumping so that they can Be the preferred supplier to the demand.
Amazon is an oligopoly, and the same way they came into threaten Walmart’s position in the market, another company can come in and put Amazon in check. It’s not ideal, but at least there’s hope in that case. And you as a consumer have a choice.
When the government is the sole supplier of all good and services, you’re looking at a monopoly. Communist economies promise prosperity, and an improved standard of living, but that’s a marketing scheme to attract demand. Once the means of production have no alternatives, the part elite no longer have to compete for your business.
Even with the oligopolies we gave in the States, we’re still in a far off better position-short and long run.
This guy has so much patience to deal with someone who's not listening
PBD represents the majority of the Capitalism world. Brainwashed too hard.
I've lost substantial respect for Patrick Bet David due to his irrational and baseless arguments. It appeared he was simply presenting unfounded ideas, which Wolff meticulously and calmly debunked. This demonstrates the often encountered arrogance and unfounded superiority associated with capitalism, where affluent individuals erroneously believe their wealth grants them superior intellect or entitlement. Observing this interaction was like watching a debate between an uninformed individual and an expert. Bet David demonstrates a glaring lack of understanding of economic systems and the philosophical foundations of capitalism, unable to differentiate genuine economic theories from political talking points. His contributions are limited to clichés and uninformed opinions that he repeats without genuine understanding. I am completely serious when I say that Richard Wolff’s comprehension of these intricate subjects is immensely superior to that of Bet David. Moreover, once Bet David realized that Wolff didn’t advocate for government as a solution or a replacement for capitalism, he seemed to lose all his ground, appearing as lost as a baby in the woods.
Which one you talking about?
@@nathaliediedrichs3306 Lol exactly what I was thinking.
@@nathaliediedrichs3306 Lol exactly what I was thinking.
I always appreciate when two people with diffrent opinions can be respectful to one anorher
In today's political landscape that doesn't happen too often.
In Cuba communist you can only talk about communism!
@@aidamatokko7027 I hope that doesn't happen here. Do people at least talk crap about communism in private?
Well said Conor Holloway, well said. I completely agree.
@@scallywag870 it’s not the communism that’s the problem, it’s the authoritarianism.
I think Richard Wolf's response to Patrick regarding the decision-maker was excellent and something to think about. As Mark Twain said -- It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." Thank you for exposing us to this dialogue so we can come to our own conclusions as it is "one to grow on."!!
But nobody is more of a fool than a commie.
@@chrisbova9686 Yes, bootlickers like you.
It seemed like that point got across to Patrick. I wouldn't be suprised if it was something that stuck with him.
@@chrisbova9686 Please excuse me everyone.... My dog got loose... He's a little loopy sometimes
Well the problem is there so many people on the left, Who convinced themselves that the left owns the patent on intelligence and education so that they can't be challenged because they're the "educated" party
I think the pharmaceutical industry is a decent example of monopolies jacking up prices today.
99% due to government intervention, you have the FDA and a couple of other government orgs that make it IMPOSSIBLE for new companies to come up due to "standards" that can not be met by the new companies trying to get up and going. Than if you manage to navigate the legal system the big companies will utilize the government to crush those companies or force them to release drug information to the larger companies.
True capitalism the government would not have a hand in who is the winner and loser. creating and ALLOWING more competition. But socialism dies with competition hence why you need regulation.
@@macruizphotography I've heard this argument before but was never really provided proof of government intervention, can you maybe provide a source where you got this information?
Also are you proposing the economy runs like a Social Democratic society or Market Socialism?
@@zed6740 patent laws, restrictions on foreign suppliers to create competition, FDA red tape..
@@zed6740 all US law
@@macruizphotography not 99%.. intellectual property rights gives you exclusive rights to the drugs manufacturing, creating a monopoly for the first few years.
Please bring prof Wolff back, I'm still watching on repeat for past year
"Nothing is overpriced today!!"
😂 That didn't take too long to age poorly 😂
Presumably when that video was made the GOVERNMENT hadn't injected 40% of all the money that's ever been put in circulation in the space of 1 year. Let's ignore that, "capitalism has failed me." 🤣
@@shadeaquaticbreeder2914Not big on grammar are you?
I don't understand why he didn't just say "insulin".
@@willnitschke that was kinda important under capitalism. Otherwise Stonk markets would have crashed and poor billionaires would have lost their billions of dollars. So the Trump Government had to inject $1.5 trillion to save the billionaires.
@@nawjoghschool2714 Stock Markets have 'crashed' champ. The market is down around 30% from it's peak. So your talking point is a bit retarded isn't it? 🤣
For a wealthy man, nothing expensive. For some, who is disabled, old and live on monthly $732.00 are able to see the bloody price increase!!!!
You are spot on I was about to make a comment about that too. I can give Patrick an example of price gouging. Ginger snaps I use to buy them for 89 cents a box not it’s almost 2 bucks. Rich people although the buy cheap but usually if something goes up it a about a couple dollars difference but to us it s a big deal.
@@Aggie63 he wanted an example. And i can see it in Australia: the oligopoly of the supermarket chains, Woolworths and Coles (and Aldi recently joined - German company). These two corporations have driven out the small business companies and have driven up the prices. My girlfriend even works at Coles and she sees herself the price increases. Not too mention they underpay their staff.
@Chad Wick Harway I find enjoyment in the fact that these two people have identified you as less than worthy of responding to. 😂🤣 Oh, how the unknowledgeable are always quick to prove what they lack.
Well, you can’t satisfy everyone. So make more money? If you can’t, then that’s something you have to accept. Survival of the fittest, and if you ain’t fit, you ain’t surviving!
@@123mcgarrigle Maybe not, but I choose to believe that empathy exists for a good reason. We may not be able to satisfy everyone, but we can sure try to help those in need. Helping those on the bottom, is like the tide.
It raises all boats.
"Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor" Mark Blyth
Or rugged individualism for the rest.
If it's an "ism" it was designed by someone who has an agenda and it has been weaponized. Social scientists quit mere observation and began designing programs to manipulate outcomes centuries ago. Very little in the way of innovation is allowed to occur which is not being studied by social engineers and technocratic scientists under control of their monied interests. I didn't hear much of real matter discussed in this "debate". Propertarianism is far beyond the scope of these subject
"Socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the poor," Dr. Martin Luther King Jr
La ϟϟ erm no! Capitalism was a Jewish English thing communism was the ideology of Christ
@@JohnKobaRuddy Comunism is not a clear ideology of Christ... But I would definitely argue communism is reliant on the public's view of new testament teachings.
Patrick is never afraid to engage with people way over his head. He reminds me of one of these crypto bros and everyone can be an entrepreneur types. There is nothing concrete to back up what he’s saying but he says it passionately. makes for good content.
Yep, as someone who swims in US politics daily for 22 years, he’s rather shallow in his understanding of politics and economics!
It’s bro level understanding in some parts which is sad when he uses it to challenge a distinguished professor who’s very knowledgeable on those topics!
Lol collectivists and centralizers are knowledgable in 👌 because just the mere fact that they deny history is an incredible ignorant hubris of itself. Also while you all smell your own farts through a wine glass you are making an appeal authority fallacy argument which is just typical of academic lefties. Your title means squat if you are a marxist propagandist that denies the atrocities committed in its name and make excuses for modern dictators while wagging your finger at the Us. Good try though.
I agree with everyone here so far. I appreciate the willingness to engage with completely different points of view and to present viewers with these different points of view. I have a lot of respect for that.
Nothing concrete? Besides capitalism raising billions out of poverty, increasing freedom, and working so well at improving quality of life that most countries in the world adopted it.
@@CousinBowling No one said capitalism had no merits, but what they are saying is that there are better systems to replace capitalism and to some extent they have already been tried in the form of cooperatives, and they seem to work
I just watched your discussion and was astounded that two human beings could be so in opposition to the other philosophically, and yet so gracious to each other. Virtually every other channel invites hatred, closes minds and devolves into finger pointing screamfests. Well played the both of you gentlemen.
I watch a lot of YT content where this congenial form of discussion is the norm. It’s there if you search for it. But you’re very right, there’s far too much screaming & outrage in our culture, and an inability to communicate with those of differing ideologies.
We haven't had capitalism since the 1920s
Wow. What the hell is he talking about. Governments created fb, Twitter and others to manipulate the masses. Government.
You can't compare government to business. Its absurd. Businesses require efficiency. Group think is not efficient.
true that
We just witnessed the largest transfer of wealth in history from the working class to coorperations. With the dystopian lockdowns apple, Amazon, Walmart ect. are thriving while millions of small businesses go under.
And that is the fault of capitalism... how?
@@someonewhoisnotretarded3708 its definitely not.
@@someonewhoisnotretarded3708 how did capitalism not play a large roll in that? Lobbyists buy politicians just like any other commodity and then politicians enact laws that favor the rich. I know people say that's just cronyism but no way, wealth and power consolidation are inherent in a capitalist system.
@@heyzoocifer1392 Less so than in any other system.
@@heyzoocifer1392 lol the government mandated shutdown and destruction of small businesses is the complete opposite of a free market thats a ridiculous argument.
Patrick claims to have an admiration of capitalism, but when you can't even acknowledge that Walmart and Amazon have reduced competition in some ways that disproportionately affect small businesses, it seems like your admiration is of wealth and power, not spirited competition.
Case in Wolff’s point:
The END GOAL is to be the last one standing or majority stake to control the capitalist landscape where there’s EFFECTIVELY the only choice, and using availability heuristic to claim ‘none have happened yet or not happening now’ is a flagrant disregard of economic history (ex: Standard Oil).
Well said
He runs a pyramid scheme.
Expectations of him should be pretty low.
@@domenicgalata1470 I didn’t realize that. Lol. I’ll have to take a look.
@@Sloimer - Multi Level Marketing = ‘pyramid scheme’ with another word
Richard Wolff has helped me get passed the two party system.. and honestly has moved me to the left a little.. I say that as someone who traditionally leans slightly right.
Yeah right, preaches the bat shit crazy Marxist... 🤣😅😂
Good. I think we should all stop worrying about left and right, because ultimately we are living in a time of desperate need. Fuck the two parties, fuck both the wings. We need the whole damn bird, my brother.
Left right it became too political and destructive
@@mamindhive Yeah, "crazy" and "sane" make more sense.
Yes, two parties in a democratic system turn out to push the society to more extrem standpoints, we could have predicted that but regardless of how we ended up in this predicament, let us finally make some improvements to the system which benefit everyone except the 1%
Damn, Patrick got bodied in this debate. Wolff dominated the whole time during the conversation
I think that Patrick did got him in one point. Richard was arguing about the classical problem with monopolies, that they absorb the market so they can then rise up the price. But modern monopolies are less about rising the price and more about controlling the market because they learned that the price doesn;t matter the moment you are the only supplier and if you rise the price you invite discontent from the public and that opens you to scrutiny. But if you monopolize while keeping the price low you'll get rich because even if it's worth pennies, the fact that you are the sole provider makes you rich
@@iampuff7 that only lasts for so long as they look for other ways to prevent raising the price, like lobbying against raising of minimum wage and finding supply chains in other countries that have much less regulation - see: Cargill & Nestle
And the price of something being low isn’t enough of a benefit to consumers vs the negative impacts.
I think Patrick was arguing the wrong side 1 in a socialist society you still have the same monopolies you do in today's capitalism. There is actually very little difference. The Corona Virus proved that who had to close up shop? All the Mom and Pop shops, Who was allowed to stay open and boosted sales through the roof to the point that they could barely keep product on the shelves? The Monopolies. Do you really think the Virus can tell the difference between Al's Diner and Mc Donalds? You have to be a special kind of stupid to believe that. Do you really believe the Virus can tell the difference between a regular elective surgery and an abortion? If so you probably believe that January 6th was an armed insurrection. It was except the citizens going into the capital weren't the ones that where armed
@@kevinlewis9151 I would argue that in a socialist society if there's an objective need for a sector of the economy to be monopolized that's a clear indicator that it is a sector that needs to be decommodified
@@iampuff7 Arguably we are already in a socialist society and the socialistic imbalance is what the socialist are pointing at and calling it capitalism and claiming it is the bad part of capitalism, when it is truly the socialistic wing that the socialist have created and cater to.
I went back to college in my late 40's and I was suprised at how they still teach the most worthless information still. It was a total waste even though I passed the classes. It was all about making money on tuition and book sales. Sad
So ask yourself why so many corporations require a college degree
What was your degree in and did you finish?
@Shiela Horne I did the same thing and until I can get into a job using my degree, it's basically worthless!
Same here after going back at 32. Id blown through the course material(s) and did most of it with a gratuitous eye roll.
@@JohnDoe-gc1kt You know why corporations used to require college degrees.It is because they have been trained at another company, and it is that expirience that gets them the job. More companies now see a college degree as a drawback, and view them as injdocterinated troublemakers who they must deprogram to make functioning individuals. Some of them becomes HR problems. So they prefer selftaugh ambitious people who made it without degrees. And connections and clientlists of course. Lawyers for instance is poached because of their roaster of clients that will follow. And then network, like for instance below average lawyers like Biden and slip and fall at wallmart lawyer Nadler, they can be made partners because of their "expirience", which is codeword for a powerful network they can use to influence for the lawfirm. Think about it, do you need a collegedegree to be a secretary or paperpusher? You could find computergeek kids, who are dropouts doing that job better, and train them yourself. .
I don’t know in how many ways Richard has to explain that the government serves the big capitalist.
yes the host is in denial because he has tied his self worth with capitalism: in other words the host has emotional childhood issues and unaware of it.
Tiago Schardong Pires , if a person in power uses/influences government for their own benefit they -by definition- are not a practicing Capitalist.
A Capitalist using their power for government intervention/benefits is an oxymoron.
The government serves big capitalists because they are more interested in serving themselves. If legislators were not corrupt, lobbyists would not have any influence.
@@Saskmopar What is this libertarian doublespeak?
Reuben Thomasson , okay, I'll concede that a person who acquires capital can use said capital to buy policies but, the definition of Capitalism is that of a free market without a central authority having the power to dictate/set prices and policy as they-not the market- see fit.
And thus, by definition, that person is not participating in Capitalism but something else entirely.
Richard wolff was 9-11 when his dad told him black people weren’t getting a fair shake. This was the 1950s when redlining was very much alive and well. Appreciate the honesty his dad shared with him rather than giving him nonsense like “they’re not working hard enough” 🙄
As a former Ny’er I can tell you that my Black friends were redlined well into the 90’s. They couldn’t even use the public swimming hole. Rockland County.
@jimmie159
What does it have to do with honesty? His father didn't believe the nonsense that black people were living like that because they were not working hard enough. He gave him the nonsense that he did believe that they were living like that because of Capitalism and didn't give him the fact that without Capitalism, their lives would have been way worse.
@@rexnemovi6061...such bs from you!
@@jpcoleman3408
Can you expand your eloquent answer by naming a few non-Capitalist countries where blacks enjoy life so good that American blacks are in substantial numbers moving there?
@@rexnemovi6061there are no non capitalism nations. Not China, not any nation in Europe, not Russia, not North Korea. That's the issue! You are uneducated (not blaming you. It's systematic) about what capitalism, neo-capitalism, liberalism, neo-liberalism, fascism, neo-fascism, socialism, communism and anarchy are about. They don't teach it in schools. At least not properly so the debates always are based on perception and opinion, not on truth.
Father made 100k per month in Iran and he says he comes from a poor family. Wealth isn't just material wealth. It's also is early education, habitus, social networks (not the internet kind) etc. those are all advantages. Everybody can win the lottery, but not everybody at once.
Regarding monopolies raising prices: Pharmaceutical industry. I don't understand how Richard could forget about that one.
Except pharmaceutical industry is not a byproduct of free market capitalism, it’s a byproduct of government intervention. So the opposite
@@MrJpmoneypants huh? the same pharma corps that made the laws regulating their sector are the same ones (as much as any other industry) that are anti free market. They don’t want to compete with China and etc. Y’all capitalist drones are crazy bro. 🤣
@@MrJpmoneypants proving richards point abt the fall guy
American Pharmaceutical Companies have BRAINWASHED America! HOW is it POSSIBLE to ADVERTISE “Drug Addiction” on Television?
@@MrJpmoneypantsbig pharma lobby do control the government. Proving Prof Wolff’s point here
Ok this debate was respectful but this dude really said “monopolies can’t arise without the help of the government” and “Amazon isn’t a monopoly”
yikes....
Its not there yet. Because Amazon STILL has competition but it has not been made illegal to compete w amazon yet. Thats his 'Jeff B going to Washington DC' point is Jeff can get laws set in place to make it illegal to try and compete w Amazon or Wal mart, etc. And w this Gov. forced virus shutdown the Government jus made Wal Mart and Amazon MUCH stronger kicking competition to the curb. If this shutdown is ever over with and a bran new grass roots On Line retail company rises from the asses and actually starts to compete w these companies again and the Gov uses its many leverages to shut down this new on line competitor. Then that monopoly is now official.
You can compete with Amazon, just find a more efficient/cheaper way of selling products. They won't remain dominant forever. That's the beauty of the C-word
So you're saying that Amazon rose without government help?
Amazon is the ultimate result of a mixed - economy, it couldn't exist without government intervention.
P.S. I can say Amazon isn't a total monopoly, because I can aquire all the goods I seek, without ever having bought anything from Amazon personally.
Same for Wal-Mart. Can't hardly remember the last time I was in a Walmart.
@@mattf2545 Having Govt help or receiving state or Govt subsidies is not crossing the line of monopolies. The building of the rail road in the mid 1800's got Govt subsidies. Its when the Govt makes it illegal or forcefully shuts you down when say an Amazon doesn't like that you are actually taking away from their business. We are not there yet for those specific companies but mid virus shutdowns we have taken a big step in that direction. Plus Big Tech is about as close as anyone is making it illegal or impossible to compete w a FB or a Twitter. We actually saw that when a sight got taken down jus for being an alternative to Twitter and its censoring polities. They got forcfully run outta business real fast.
Patrick needs to do more research. He seems to enter interviews with "this is how I define things and you must too" attitude. He honestly thought Hillary Clinton was not a capitalist? Embarrassing
That point with Hillary is exactly when I knew how out of touch Patrick was on the topic. Still, I applaud him for having Mr. Wolff on and having a good conversation.
She used the government to create her riches. That is hardly a capitalist endeavor.
He never said Hilary wasn't a capitalist. He was equating the elite education institutions with left-leaning political candidates.
Or...create a new paradigm.
Yes he needs to educate himself sad display.
Patric was very umcomfortable. You can see that the professor view point shakes or challenges his beliefs at his core
Totally. Patric was heavily relying too much on the per usual typical pro-capitalism talking points he just involuntarily learned to rebuttal with “received opinion” countering that he’s been brainwashed to say when in reality the topic is WAY TOO COMPLEXED WITH SO MANY LAYERS AND MOVING PARTS it’s impossible to counter with received option counter talking points that can and were shot down in one or two sentences by Richard. I personally think Patrick walked away from this one with the realization it’s a VERY VERY CHALLENGING topic once you have an expert in ANY Economic structures that have ever been used in the existence of humanity. That man is smart as hell its rare to witness his knowledge
@@hardstyle8184 false. watch again.
@@neomonkeyking The only falsehood is know it all like you
yet u can see he's literally closing up instead of opening up, n resorting to debating tactics to shut off the matter. his arguments are fragmented a lot of times. pressing to tiny point, losing overview, very lawyer like, only to win not to find truth. which made his program a show, an entertainment (exactly how he defined/named it). not worthwhile if you are looking for something more than entertainment which to be honest isn't too much either.
@@neomonkeyking you're not making an argument that is addressing my points. You're just saying "false". Confidently telling someone that they're wrong doesn't make you right. That's lazy.
Richard - "My sneakers are made by children in Indonesia.."
Patrick - "I don't see a problem with that."
🤮
If you actually understood the alternatives of children in Indonesia, you'd understand why you shouldn't have a problem with it. Child labor is the natural state of humanity.
@@mrunfausted7746 so youre fine with your children doing it?
Mr UnFausted if you actually understood colonialism you understand that it didn’t have to and doesn’t have to be that way. It’s amazing how people always point out ways in which the system sucks but never say: “the system sucks.” Lol.
@@talkingrefugees3845 My children go to public school; that is child labor.
Facts “Obama promised hope and change and delivered neither”.
You do realize there was a republican congress and senate for most of his presidency right?
@@marcuscape3301 What about those 1st years in office when the Dems had the house and the senate?
Name a policy he tried to implement for black folks that got shot down by the Republicans...
We would give him an A for effort but what did he even attempt to do?
@WiseOneD notice @Marcus Cape ain’t got shit to say now 😂🤣
WiseOneD is declared the winner 🥇 in this debate that's why I'm a black republican. Democrat dont do nothing but pass gay rights, high health care need I mind you force you to have it and pass marijuana laws witch I can agree with only there marijuana laws republican didn't want to legalize marijuana but I'm a republican who supports marijuana completely.
@@marcuscape3301 It is not the problem of the US people, but Obama's problem. If someone promise something, he must be avare of the situation and the difficulty of said words... Every politician on this PLANET need an statement where he declare that if his promise turn to lie, all his assets should be confiscated... And then run for political campaign...
Wolff was very patient with this guy
Finally I found another person who thinks like me. For some reason, it gives me the impression after watching the comments section is that Americans are pretty dense and are filled with propaganda.
Btw are you also a follower of proff wolff comrade?
Most people wouldve punched Patrick in the face for asking stupid questions and then immediately answering it against himself.
@@xchazz86 🤣🤣🤣
Really? I bet you studied political science, social science or some other useless degree
@@AnemosFPV at least he didnt study some bullshit degree like marketing or corporate public relations.
Patrick looks like a fool here. He has no rebuttal and keeps shifting his argument Ex. when Wolff was explaining workers co-op, Patrick then ask "Do you own a business"
It’s almost as if when Patrick feels his intelligence is threatened he has to tell himself that he’s the only sane one and proceeds to ask Wolf random childhood questions like he’s diagnosing some mentally disabled person lol. He rationalizes that he doesn’t need to challenge his own beliefs because he somehow knows he’s right beforehand. It’s a dangerous paradox
It's literally the tu quoque fallacy. When you have nothing left to say, just vaguely gesture at alleged hypocrisy
Bro. An 8 year old would out debate patrick.
And the "Ha, you critique capitalism, yet participate in it... curious," argument is one of the most pathetic things you can say to a person
The business question is valid.
Thank you immensely for offering the podcast session with Dr. Wolf. It was incredibly informative, remarkably civil, profoundly intellectual, and exceptionally respectful. This session played a pivotal role in showcasing just how easily attainable and utterly normal it is to have such discussions.
2:28 Prof. Wolff just won, KO first round.
@David Martin care to elaborate.
And while you're at it.... please explain the alternative universe in which it makes sense to have a gigantic painting that has MLK sitting next to Milton "greed is good" Freedman?
@David Martin Oh come on: the host clearly has childhood emotional issues, clear as day. You seem to suffer from denial, just like the host, because you identify yourself with him (making yourself the same as). That's a childhood trauma you have, which makes you use labels that you don't even understand.
@David Martin whered ya go... i was ready to have my eyes opened to reality of this universe I live in???
@@ottrovgeisha2150 he sure doesn't know his dick from his elbow.... but his childhood trauma actually has happened and shouldn't be made light of, the man has struggled to get where he is.
Are you doing what is known as a 'soy face' in your picture?
Let me just remind you that Karl Marx essential scientific work is NOT the "manifesto",
but DAS KAPITAL, all volumes ! This fact was unfortunately not mentioned in the interview.....best regards..
This guy’s head would be exploded just reading the first chapter of Volume 1 lmaooo
Marx works are not scientific. There is no real science in his works, it was just poor made philosophy.. His observation was wrong on so many levels and his predicsions were wrong. First example, he belive that capitalism will be falling and will start revolution in most modern industrial powers like Britain or France. Nothing like that happen. Marx claim that industralisation and capitalism will make working force poor, nothing of that happened. Avarange levels of lining standards were getting better and better before WW1! His beloved revolution starts in backward Russia which was fedual society and start in middle of war crisis. Also so called revolution was a coup finaced by Germany, where Lenin was just a agent of Germans. Communists need terror and 5 years of civil war and chaos to be succsessful. And still when they try implement communist ideology of Marx it faild. They were foced to implement some of free market solutions into Soviet economic system.
@@horatio8213 The boom bust cycle is merely a cycle of failures and restarting it. If your car turns off on the highway and you stop and are able to restart it, it still failed, and no amount of restarts prove otherwise, they just prove it constantly fails.
@@javiervalenzuela8284 Then socialism is a car that never run without failure.... Every success of socialism was paid in catastrophic losses.
@@horatio8213 capitalism is only failure. Except for a few that does not matter for humanity
It's easier to fool someone than to convince him he is being fooled.
Who is the fooled in this situation?
Exactly! To me it is astounding that people will, and seemingly want to, believe a lie way before the truth!😳😢
Thats why Patrick's PHP company thrived!!!
@@TrumpsEarBandage Not Rizo's point. Secondly, Wolff is most certainly someone who has traded truth for prejudice.
@RED PILL PORTAL No one has a higher claim over your life and property than you do ! Any other system is Tyranny!
I grew up in the 70s. We had a neighborhood grocery neighborhood hardware store locally owned places to buy clothes etc. ALL OF THAT IS GONE NOW
You should thank the government for taxing and regulating those businesses out of existence...
The only businesses that can stay affloat with all of the bureaucratic red tape are the multi-million dollar corperations
It will only get worse now with $15 minimum wage proposals and required healthcare benefits. People don’t think.
@@bm421 100% agree
@@bm421 I recommend you to recommend it to others, *Econ Clips* on youtube
Most of that still exist here in European cities. And there are Amazon unions. Coincidence? I think not.
@B M if anything you say was true, explain Europe. There's regulations that help small businesses and regulations that help big businesses (and hurt small ones). In the USA there's so much corruption that the only regulations that pass are of the latter type.
I love how poor the average American's understanding of the term "socialism" is. We dont want a totalitarian dictatorship. We want workers to have a say in their workplace, and we want productive, full time workers in our society to not live in poverty. We want basic things that we CAN afford so that everyone can live a good life.
@@user-gc1wj8tt2p I own my own business with 3 partners.
@devvewulk couldn’t agree with you more!
@@McMuffinV2 try it with 100 workers all giving their two cents... 100 ideas.. who's stuck w the bill during bankruptcy? these ideas work when everything goes right the second they don't and people dont want any accountability on the back end. we should all have equal opportunities but there won't be equal outcomes that just how things work. what's the incentive to do anything more than the bare minimum? all of this displaced anger about capitalism is from the inability to separate mass conglomerates from your local plumber down the street.
do you think about how scaling works? who can scale to fit the demands of 330 million people. not a company that has 3 partners it will be a company thats already a massive conglomerate. the power will just become more and more and more centralized. these theories sounds amazing on paper but in the end they have always ended in concentration of power even more so than capitalism.
what you should be talking about is a monetary system that is based upon constant inflation. look at when the dollar started losing spending power and started changing 1972 (a year after we went off the gold standard). we wouldn't be having this convo if wages hadn't stagnated. thats shitty policy and moving away from the dollar being tied to gold and into a debt based credit system. thats what needs to be fixed. we change over to a new system where "Everyone owns their workplace (wolff talks about this in many interviews)" but they will just be furthering a mass debt based system that inevitably collapses taking everyone with it.
@@user-gc1wj8tt2p you do realize that in Spain one of the biggest companies in the entire country is a worker co-op right ? Oh wait you didn't ..........
@@user-gc1wj8tt2p dictatorship? Venezuela has elections So does Cuba or another example with Huawei technologies one of the largest telecommunication companies in the world is also a worker co op. Also China has many local district council's where people vote . I could give many examples
I'm glad I've seen this, Prof Wolff destroyed his every arguement, when he couldn't respond any more he starts to talk about personality, if he ran a business, who does the cook etc. These are strawman arguements bought out when you can't disagree with the points raised.
This wasn't "heated" at all. Very amicable. No need for the clickbait.
How did he destroy his argument of being able to have a monopoly without government help? Or why Amazon hasn't jacked up prices?
@@JoseGarcia-vi3pu Pretty sure he explained how monopolies are not reliant on government to exist, but they're built into capitalism.
Why would Amazon jack up prices? They can just exploit their labour. Which they could do more of but for government regulations, minimum wage legislation, worker's rights legislation, etc.
@@cockoffgewgle4993 thats your explanation. I want to hear his. He contradicted himself. By 1 hand he says Amazon is not in a position to jack up prices. Then he can't explain why walmart never jacked prices. You cant say "why would they jack up prices" because he brought that up not pat.
Love it. Wasn’t what I was expecting. Was so much fun and educative
i love how done with this BS wolff looks after half an hour of "socialism is wen goberment big and no iphone" and "hillary is the marxisms and trump is the freedum"
this shit causes me physical pain
bet looked even more hapless and uninformed next to the wolff
Too bad Wolff and his followers are slow when it comes to their idiotic economic model.
33:54 Patrick's prediction was correct Wolff's prediction proven false.
grow.acorns.com/how-many-americans-became-millionaires-in-2020/
@William Jefferson Colin did you read the article? It answers your rebuttal
you are clueless. why do you think we are having shortages now? maybe because people have incentive now to stay unemployed?
The way I get what the interviee is saying, Amazon is creating the reputation of selling cheaper products, get others out of business, becoming the only seller, causing a monopoly. That is how I get it.
Yes but Amazon is totally in bed with the government and the CIA. And that's not capitalism. Amazon pays no taxes and gets a big refund! The majority of businesses don't get those sweetheart deals.
@@roseagain2 Agree, "amazon" is an example of cronie capitalism. They shouldn't get special govt treatment, that helps them have an unfair advantage over their competitors and small businesses.
@@roseagain2 Hence the point he made that the rich have a disproportionate amount of influence on the government and thus feeding into a system that advantages the rich and disadvantages the poor. At least that's my understanding of what he meant, I could be wrong.
@@davemacgyver573 yes, sadly _globalist cronyists_ are confused for free-market capitalism. Can't really debate the subject accurately with people when their definitions are confused. It's a fair subject to debate.
That's called crony capitalism. A fair free market system by definition is free of the government.
Patrick Bet-David; I usually enjoy most of your interviews and the diversity of topics. I have also seen many of Dr. Wolff's lectures etc. Therefore, in appreciating both of your work, I believe I was an unbiased viewer. I don't think you were responding to the core Richard's points and distracted yourself from reaching far deeper into the conversation points.
Interesting I thought this was a debate NOT an interview!!
life is a struggle ,it doesn't matter the system,, their is no system that eradicates poverty there is no system that improves everyones life equally ,there is no system that does not have a ruling class or a rich class,, people don't like other people telling them what to do,,there is no such thing as freedom,,even in the ultimate of wolfs fantasies 40% still have to do what the other 60% foist upon them,,and even the 60% are not 100% in agreement with all the details,, capitolism is a bunch of mini dictatorships controllled by a bigger dictatorship,, comminsim is one big dictatorship,,socialism is a veriation of communism,,,people dont like to be told what to do,,people do like to be told what to do!
He’s not a good interviewer. He never asks good questions
@@timmyspov That is why I used the words responding to and not asking...if that is you implying that I was saying it was supposed to be some sort of polite interview only. I am well aware it was a debate; however, a debate is a conversation. One from two people such as Patrick and Richard I would assume has a point of exploring and hashing out understandings. I feel these were not found by Patrick interjecting onto the surface of some of the discussion topics with, for example, "what is overpriced on Amazon?!" Give me one example of an item that's overpriced..!"rather than following the deeper discussion about the structure of the company, how it got there, and what are it's surrounding effects presently and in the future.
@@humility-righteous-giving I agree with that. There is probably no system that will ever be completely equal, without problems or without some people trying to take over someone or something else. However, some of those facts probably point more to our own habits and ideas that need addressing more than any unconcious system we attempt to implement and conduct our interactions through. Nor would I accept that just because there is no perfect system to rolling over and just accepting whatever that current system is when there are obvious improvements/changes that can be tested.
Goddamn, the intellectual mismatch here is astonishing.
I disagree. They are very equally matched.
@@lizthor-larsen7618 No they are not, I am trying to be as objective as possible. Read the top voted comment, Patrick got BODIED in this debate. Wolff is very much a higher intellect than Patrick, I am sorry to say. At least the debate stayed relatively civil.
@@marshallmccord1352 Agreed. Patrick is tough, but Dr. Wolff is more knowledgeable than Patrick.
@@BenjaminNuttinYahoo The video is literally called "Heated Debate On Capitalism". If you can't see that Wolff was using kid gloves in this debate you are the low IQ one. As I said at least it stayed civil, I would have called Patrick on his stupid arguments multiple times.
Patrick is very bright, but not an intellectual.
Whatever you think of Patrick Bet-David at least he was one of the few people prepared to give Dr. Wolff a platform.
Absolutely fair play to him, and he was a gentleman about it too, very kind and respectful.
wolff makes the rounds pretty regular in all kinds of spaces... but yes, as the other fella said, fair play. ideas should be debated, if we are so evovled(not sure we are, but there's always hope)
Agreed, and even if I strongly disagree with his claimed beliefs (Note: Not facts!), he's MUCH more reasonable than a Shapiro-type or some other "gotcha!" sociopath conservative.
@@vazzaroth What kind of beliefs you think is not a facts in this interview?
sort of amazing that that's where we're at, but fair enough..
Thanks Patrick for this video with Richard Wolff. Will recommend this to friends. I learned a lot listening to your discussion and arguments on so many different topics. Kudos as always and wish you continued success and nothing but the very best.
Not bad, this video. I'd also suggest Jimmy Dore's interview with Peter Joseph of the Zeitgeist films and The New Human Rights Movement book.
It's hard to believe Wolfe is educated completely wrong on most positions
@@thomasnilsen2755
Oh wow, as someone who was already at least a bit familiar with his work (specifically those alongside Stephen Resnick published 20-30 years ago now), and as someone who was never floored by them. I actually watched him here and saw someone a bit more aware of the failures of wild Marxist revisionism that he seemed more a proponent of years ago. He’s maybe a bit more a humanist in his older years.
What points or positions did you find so repulsive though, my friend?
There are no monopolies and nothing is overpriced... I'd like to live in his planet.
In all fairness. Patrick did ask him several times and he really couldn't give any good answer.
Government and union leaders greed overpriced products
-- You are aware that there are socialists that don’t believe in governments, right?
@@anapaulapedro7025
"You are aware that there are socialists that don’t believe in governments, right?"
Oxymoron.
You do. Name a few monopolies then.
hats off for doing this, I respect both hosts on this to the max
Wolff is not a respectable guy. Maybe you missed the point that he promotes an ideology that has made piles of dead corpses in its wake at every turn and try. Not to mention that Rich gets his history wrong over and over again and just makes shit up. If you think I'm just talking shit, in so many of his other videos he continues to pretend that America has a Capitalist economy, when in reality America is mired in an Mixed economy.
Objectivityiskey tell me more of this piles of dead bodies as you call it
Well there's only one "host" a host is the one who hosts an event.
@Michael Murphy Hong Kong is about Freedom You moron.
@@Objectivityiskey "he promotes an ideology that has made piles of dead corpses in its wake at every turn and try." I don't think so. He explained near the end that socialism for the 21st century is not really about the government [as it has been in the past]. It's about democratizing the enterprise. No more piles of dead corpses.
I'll tell you what amazon has raised the price on. They charge so much to sell. They have raised the fees so much. Amazon is not on the business to sell products. They are on the business to sell a platform to sellers so that they can sell a product. They almost have a monopoly on that now.
Emerson Lopez , Amazon is too greedy
Amazon is becoming THE franchise for retail.
@@Luvothrsmor22 Amazon franchise globally
Name a cheaper US-based retailer.
"What is overpriced on Amazon?" well I mean all it takes is a cursory browsing through AliExpress to see that its pretty much everything
Try searching for liquid hand sanitizer or face masks.
Yep
Except you need to buy a 100pc inventory plus market and labor costs?
@Nota Bene I purchase things all the time. Guess what, when I see I can get a price cheaper somewhere else, I buy from the other guys and this is quite often. So this idea that Amazon is a monopoly is simply not true. What people don't understand is that it's not always about price anyway. There is a triangle in business. Quality, price and customer service. Pick Two. Amazon I would argue has good prices and fairly good customer service (this can debated) and their quality of products ranges greatly. Other companies can be higher priced but can offer better customer service or better quality. It's not always about lower prices.
Can you name a cheaper american based company?
Patrick has guts that he is asking Zizek & Dr. Wolf on his show....respect man
respect for him. even if i think communists are delusional and are wrong in almost everything, it is good to hear their points of view, because this social issue comes back over and over, it shows there is a real problem that needs to be solved in our societies, people feel left out and unhappy, i think kids should have a fair start, but it does not mean we have to lower all to the lowest standards and pretend it is fine
Patrick was too deep in his shallowness in this
It doesn’t take guts to interview wackos! This douche actually wanted to debate Jordan Peterson! What a clown😆 he just wants the notoriety, write a book, and make some cash. A true capitalist pig. Lmfao
@@ortizdr81 How confident ignorant are you to not know that it was Jordan Paterson who chickened out from debating with Wolff?
I guess a lot.
better than mafia bosses
1:03:25 PBD asks, “have you ever ran a business?” while Professor Wolffe is already mid point. Prof Wolffe completes a brilliant point, to which PBD responds, “have you ever ran a business?” 😐🙃
These listening skills?... not so good.
@gary grine The point, I believe, is that experiences and training differ. People can have the same training but different experience or vice-versa.
It was a bit of a desperate attempt to find something to grab hold of and wrestle Wolff to the ground - that intent unfortunately signifies much of this conversation
SO the professor has not run a business so he cannot know what he's talking about. "Smart" people are really dumb most of the time.
@@continuouslylearning6152 Book and theory smart are leeches nothing more nor less!
Yeah, this bugged me too. Especially since the only purpose of this question was to dismiss Wolff's argument regardless of what he answered.
If Wolff had said that he had never run a business, then Patrick would have dismissed his arguments saying he was naive or an ivory tower theorist.
If Wolff said that he had run a business (which ended up being the case), then Patrick gets to call him a hypocrite for taking part in the system he is criticizing.
It's such a clearly bad faith question that Patrick used the second he felt out of his depth. Wolff had just finished laying out his vision of socialism, the thing this whole conversation was supposed to be about, and Patrick interrupts him with an irrelevant question he can use as an ad hominem "gotcha" no matter how Wolff answers.
Richard Wolff is wrong when he states that free-market results in monopolies and that Adam Smith even stated so. That's not what Adam Smith stated.
According to the "The real Adam Smith He might be the poster boy for free-market economics, but that distorts what Adam Smith really though" web page: The context of Smith’s intervention in The Wealth of Nations was what he called ‘the mercantile system’. By this Smith meant the network of monopolies that characterized the economic affairs of early modern Europe. Under such arrangements, private companies lobbied governments for the right to operate exclusive trade routes, or to be the only importers or exporters of goods, while closed guilds controlled the flow of products and employment within domestic markets.
Thus, what Adam Smith criticized were government-enforced monopolies. Adam Smith never mentioned that free-market led to monopolies.
Exactly. Wolff is talking out of his ass.
Here we have a pupil learning from a professor. The fact the pupil is the rich man in the conversation shows how wealth has little to do with intelligence.
The pupil whose proud his daddy was rewarded by a literal murderous monarch with control over makeup factories that where only there because the CIA overthrew the democratically elected government for trying to make their oil industry into a public good.
His father would have poor in the US just like he was poor in Germany because he got to be rich not under capitalism but some monarchists fusion. Of course he probably had to flee because they were Christian but the reason he had anything in Iran (I’d stake money on this) was because his family was already connected and wealthy with the monarchy.
We’re educating the fucking aristocrat here.
@@OpiatesAndTits Dude...the Shah was objectively superior
@@masinissaibrahimi5569 Superior to the democratically elected government he overthrew with the help of the United States or the autocratic regime that overthrew him?
@@noble7461 You rather have an economically illiterate individual as long as THe US DoEsN't InvOlvE ItSelF. The authority of the Shah was a lot better than the gibberish I see these days where the can barely afford a chicken. Nationalization of anything...is foolish.
@@noble7461 I mean, involvement is not always pernicious.
It would be great to see Richard Wolff have a discussion with Thomas Sowell.
It would be great to see Wolf get so heavily owned.
@@zeenuf00 It would be great to grow up
Hot damn that would be great!
Noam chomsky vs Thomas sowell is the real intellectual super bowl
@Steing Groburf would chumsky be a fraud in your opinion? How so?
I loved the spirit of this interview...respect, humor, kindness. Thanks to both.
Don't ever thank a Marxist, wtf is wrong with you?
What marxist idiots fail to recognize is they usually hate business & especially big business but in communism which socialism breeds you end up with 1 big business - the gov’t. It will always lead that way. And any business will generally take from one off kilter part of the business that makes more money and give it to a sector that is a malignant producer. Why it always ultimately fails. It is too easy to take good parts of the ship to plug the holes of the faulty parts of the ship. There is not a mechanism for failure of a business in marxism the govt simply tells you what to produce, at what cost, what cost to sell it At, what to pay their workers. How could that ever work out without there being some kind of profit to use to grow that business either in simply extra production lines or other areas of business itself.😊marxism produces just as much of a rich class usually the govt workers as capitalism and the others are truly serfs and poor. It’s amazing looking at past marxist examples. What’s also amazing both capitalists & marxist usually agree that people are cut throat in capitalism. But capitalists see peoples nature as cut throat and egocentric which is why capitalism works. One will always care about themselves and their own before others. But marxist seem to think that making the utopia you hear about will magically get rid of or they will eliminate those types of people that are cut throat and care mostly for theirs and their own. But it’s human nature and it will never be gotten rid of. He talks about the workers being the owners & producers & we all sit down & agree what to produce & sell & at what cost. Such a utopia how are the people ever gonna agree on anything to even get started let alone make money and then what they will want to profit for themselves which actually boils back down to human nature & ones own desires about caring more about their pain & desires than the jackass that disagrees with them across the table. If it wasn’t human nature capitalism wouldn’t work so good & you would have to have a different system.
And overactive imagination...
everything is overpriced today, 200, 300, 500, 1000 % and and more related to the cost of production...
ANTI CAPITALISM/MARXISM Has a History of Failure so Blatant that Only an Intellectual Can Evade or Ignore it. One lives well as a MASTER BS'er........
This was amazing. Thanks for having these conversations!
Jfc....this is like watching a 3 year old argue with a PhD. In any discipline.
I feel bad for Richard to deal with this.
LMFAO!! XD
It is a 3 year old arguing with his (maybe long gone) parents who did him wrong. He is projecting it onto mr Wolff, that's where his condescending attitude comes from.
David Martin ah yes, boomer Marxists.
@David Martin What makes you think so exactly?
Hello,
I really enjoyed this podcast. It is refreshing to see 2 people with different viewpoints have a civil discussion. Please consider having Richard back again in the future with a more in-depth conversation. thank you.
i don't believe in any ism but I know what we live in just sucks the life out of people.
Whether or not you chose to identify with a label doesn't mean that there isn't an "ism" to describe your beliefs.... but i see your point that labels distract from the issues, if thats what you ment
Thats late stage capitalism mate
@@Theorychad99 it has never been easier for a human to become rich than it is in current day America
@@chenzomutumbo9140 well, i'll put it this way, i have no faith in capitalism or communism (or any particular spiritual sect although i have faith in god). I don't get the allure of communism at all, or marx, he seemed to me, not that i've read a lot, he seemed like he wanted to be godlike himself, replace everything with his own beliefs, including god, that's a very European thing that infiltrates just about any ism they touch.
Straight truth. Its all bullshit, a way to divide us into different camps. Too distracted too ever peek behind the curtain. Probably scared the hell out of us if we ever did.
At 40:00, In my anecdotal experience (not trying to make a point here, just adding to Wolff's words), Wolff is completely right about the mindset of the youth in colleges. Most of us haven't read the communist manifesto, most of us don't watch the news, except for headlines we see on social media, and most of us aren't extremely versed in economic theory. Before Bernie came around and started talking about democratic socialism, most college students probably wouldn't have started calling themselves socialists because we don't know much about socialism, other than the textbook definition we read in our high school history class.
However, we are struggling college students putting ourselves into massive amounts of debt while trying to juggle jobs and school. We're stepping into the workforce and finally understanding that if we're poor now, having a financially successful future can be close to impossible. How do we save when every penny of our income goes to rent, medical bills, or food? How do we get hired for better paying jobs before we have our degree or before we've gained 5 years of experince in the field somehow? Perhaps the degree we pursued will never give us a high paying job, like teaching. What if a student gets pregnant and now has devote the next 18 years of their life to raising a kid successfully while completing their education and advancing their career? I'm not proposing any solutions to this, but with factors like these, plus the abliity to share ideas through social media, college students have begun to understand that the rich hold the power in our society; America is run by the corporate party, not the republican or democrat party. (I'm looking at you: lobbying, super PACs, private news networks, etc)
I also will agree that, at least in my college career, my professors are teaching more progressive ideas, usually social issues. None of my professors have said anything like "down with capitalism" or something, but there have been some discussions about racism, income inequality, and gender. I attend a community college.
Edit: Wolff goes on to mention half the things I've said here in better words ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Thank you, Gwen, I wondered about college youth perspective and so appreciate your clarity and completeness.
Don't forget to also read Adam Smith's 'Theory of Moral Sentiment.' Capitalism goes off the rails when considering 'The Wealth Of Nations' without its companion.
If your professors said "Down with Capitalism" what would your response have been?? You hide the message when it may be not be well received.. Socialism is the last step before Communism..Only the leaders live well under Communism...Both Socialism & Communism destroy progress & innovation..
@@rackets7991 Hmm, I think I'd partly agree with my professor because I agree with the statement: "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism." However, I understand your point about capitalism driving innovation. I'd still like innovation in America, but I'd like the good of society and ethics to be factors in that innovation, not purely profit. Walmart is a prime example of the kind of capitalism I'd like to see the end of, or at least competently regulated.
I respect that you don't want to see a communist dictator put in charge, and I agree. My dislike of capitalism does not mean I just want one or many leaders to come and make decisions for me and my community. That's what's happening already in America with the rich and the poor, as I mentioned in my original comment (lobbying, super PACs, private news networks, as well as privatized health care).
And yes, I suppose I was "hiding my message." I was trying to avoid sharing my views too strongly, because I just wanted to share my little anecdote that related to Dr. Wolff's words, not get into a debate. I'm still learning about politics and I'm trying to pinpoint what policies I want to support and why. I'm no expert.
Edit: Maybe it would be good to clarify that I don't think capitalism is black and white; There are cases of individuals trying to live ethically under capitalism and there are companies that support that goal as well. Perhaps I shouldn't go so hard in supporting the statement "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism," but I think it still applies, especially if we're talking about big corporations like Walmart or Amazon.
It's Gwen I appreciate you sharing a fresh prospective from the youths. If I may ask, can you give me a little clarification. While yes corrupt relationships between corporations and politicians seems to be the root of the demise of this country from my point of view. This guy proposes co-op work systems as a remedy in hopes that the government will then see people as individuals. And does not propose any dismantling of government systems. Or maybe I missed something. But how will addressing the symptom and not the cause produce any real results. It sounds like he’s pandering to the inexperienced and disadvantaged with a fantasy promise that will turn into a nightmare real fast. I’m a few generations ahead of you guys and we also had to put in the ground level work, to gain the experience, in order to open doors for better opportunities. Of course capitalism doesn’t work when you are starting from the bottom, Of course it doesn’t work when lobbyists have the politicians (who are supposed to represent the people) on the payroll. Is it that the younger generations are more interested in leveling the playing field to make it easier for them? Rather than addressing the actual cause for the wages vs expenses gap? Or maybe I just completely misunderstood?
When the host brought up Hillary Clinton I knew he didn’t know who he was talking to😂😂
And this was supposed to be his anecdotal evidence that socialism is being widely spread to students across the country... hilarious! I'm in school now (decent sized state university) and there is ONE socialist professor at my school (social sciences). Even my critical theory professor refers to Marxism as a utopian fantasy.
@@converge1993 Marxism isn't even utopian, he never describes a utopia either, Marx just laid put a few ideas he thought would make lives better for people.
@@Tp_hedgelinghog lol, like forced labour camps?.. oooh yay.. marx's communist manifesto is a utopian fantasy that assumes that poor people will be happier and more free in a society ruled by a single over-arching government that dictates how wealth is distributed, regardless of merit or input. It's considered utopian because it's claims are baseless and completely unproven, nay, disproven.
@@jimmythepyrofpv1797 none of those things you claim to be in the manifesto is in the manifesto. Nothing about an overreaching government, nothing about splitting wealth.
Please read the Manifesto before you make an idiot out of yourself on the internet.
@@Tp_hedgelinghog Question 17: What will be your first measure once you have established democracy?
Answer: Guaranteeing the subsistence of the proletariat.
Question 18: How will you do this?Answer. I. By limiting private property in such a way that it gradually prepares
the way for its transformation into social property, e. g., by progressive taxation,
limitation of the right of inheritance in favour of the state, etc., etc.
II. By employing workers in national workshops and factories and on national
estates.
III. By educating all children at the expense of the state.
Question 19: How will you arrange this kind of education during the period of transition?
Answer: All children will be educated in state establishments from the time when
they can do without the first maternal care.
Question 20: Will not the introduction of community of property be accompanied by the
proclamation of the community of women?
Answer: By no means. We will only interfere in the personal relationship between
men and women or with the family in general to the extent that the maintenance of
the existing institution would disturb the new social order. Besides, we are well
aware that the family relationship has been modified in the course of history by
the property relationships and by periods of development, and that consequently
the ending of private property will also have a most important influence on it.
Question 21: Will nationalities continue to exist under communism?
Answer: The nationalities of the peoples who join together according to the
principle of community will be just as much compelled by this union to merge
with one another and thereby supersede themselves as the various differences
between estates and classes disappear through the superseding of their basis -
private property.
Question 22. Do Communists reject existing religions?
Answer: All religions which have existed hitherto were expressions of historical
stages of development of individual peoples or groups of peoples. But
communism is that stage of historical development which makes all existing
religions superfluous and supersedes them.
Remember the company decade ago where the owner decided to compensate all including himself the same payroll? The company excelled. Apart from payroll, the owner had control of the total profit where the payroll was a fraction of total net profit. He was smart, keeping all employees happy whilst making bank far more than his labor pay. Think bout it.
Earth to Patrick: Hillary Clinton is not a socialist 😂
Maybe not, but she's nuts
@@kevindanielpg and socialists are nuts!
She is a crook
Tax cheat, mass murderer, embezzeler, fraudster, liar ad infinitum..did I leave something out?
maya maya hmm wanting to have a say over our lives and a say over work definitely makes us lunatics! Go back to your CIA lies kid it’s about as much as you can handle
Amazon vs. Walmart shows that capitalism works? Okay, my dude...
Haha I mean he's not wrong. It works at making like 6 people (Bezos and the Walton family) richer than half the world lol.
It does. Competition.
@@cl9826 Wealth is not a zero sum game. Other people dont owe you shit because youre alive.
@@longanddeadly Youre right. Some of these idiots actually believe that if a rich person is making money that it means he is only doing so because he is taking it from someone who is poor.
Our system is not perfect but I would much rather live in a system that allows for upward mobility for those that are willing to work hard or be innovative, than I would a system that keeps everyone at the same level and completely destroys ambition and innovation in the name of "Fairness" and "Equality."
@@darrenhergert8801 Yes, and not only no upward mobility. But communism/socialism necessitate the middle class move down to low. By centralizing power into the government, you guarantee the people who do work hard enough to be middle class will have to be government boot lickers after a small pot, or go down low. Whereas in capitalism the pool of wealth is infinite as it is not centralized. No one stops you from coming up with a great idea and creating value, that's how we all move up together.
This guy has two socialists enshrined in the painting behind him, Albert Einstein and MLK Jr.
mlk and einstein were both georgist
@@quibblesc they were socialists
@@nomeca961 Excerpt from Einstein's letter to Anna George De Mille
"Men like Henry George are are rare unfortunately. One cannot imagine a more beautiful combination of intellectual keenness, artistic form and fervent love of justice. Every line is written as if for our generation. The spreading of these works is a really deserving cause, for our generation especially has many and important things to learn from Henry George.
With friendly greetings,
A. EINSTEIN"
One of MLK's most frequently quoted passages from scripture was "The Earth is the Lord's and the Fullness Thereof," which he spoke about in an explicitly georgist way constantly as well as being a hard advocate for UBI paid for through LVT.
They're both Georgists, MLK in action, Einstein in both name and action.
@@quibblesc Bruh, they were Socialist, they said so themselves. We're not exactly interpreting subtle signals or anything here.
@@quibblesc Einstein - why socialism, Underrated essay give it a read.
21:35 as someone who just lost their father a month ago, what you told him here was so awesome to hear. You can really tell the kind of person you are saying things like that, unless you are really pulling the wool over our eyes of course but you come across completely genuine when you say things like this. 👍
Sorry for your loss bro, hope you are doing well.
@@pyotrbagration2438 thanks, I just keep reminding myself of how blessed I was to have had a father like mine and all the good memories we made together.
Wolff: “Part 1: Competitor lower the prices in order to monopolize the market by crashing the competition.
Part 2: Once most of the competition is out, they will increase the prices.”
Patrick: “that is not true I bought everything cheaper on Amazon than on other places, tell something is overpriced on amazon?”
He needed some drawings to understand something as simple as this. Amazon is not overcharging things at the moment because they are executing part 1, they are just crushing other competitors.
kcotte59 Amazon becomes a monopoly. I really don’t understand how something so simple has become really hard to understand for some people.
If amazon starts rising prices competitors can join the market and undersell unless the government has something to do with it.
It is raven easier than that Amazon already did it to diapers.com I know I was buying diapers from diapers.com back then because they were cheaper than everywhere else. In 2017 Amazon shut it down and once they were closed they raised the prices to match Walmart and Costco instead of keeping the diapers.com price
Pricing will stay relatively low because anyone can become gated on Amazon and sell on there themselves. That's part of the reason they are successful. It's also attractive to sellers because you can ship to their distribution centerz before it even sells and they will take care of shipping, which they can do at a cheap rate, which also serves to keeping prices low. Now if you want to say the American government shouldnt run post offices on Sundays for only Amazon, or that perhaps they shouldn't have paid 0 in taxes, those are rational views. They are not however some kind of horizontal monopoly that can could artificially raise prices. There's tons and tons of places to buy and sell online.
Not so. Zappos, ebay & many other online Co.s competing with Amazon are thriving.
Patrick expected Richard to guesstimate that there were only a couple dozen millionaires in the United States because of his critiques of capitalism. When Wolff guessed 4 million, and it only ended up being 500k, it threw off the argument he was trying to make, and made Wolff's position even more palatable.
I must say that I was surprised that only 500k Americans earn 1 mil each year. Thats only .3% of American adults earning that much. That is almost the 1% within the 1%. I don't know how anybody could use that as evidence that anybody can become a millionaire.
There an millions of millionaires. Millionaire only means you are worth several million. MAKING over a million dollars a year is a complete different level.
I think the arguments was to say that if 500k are able to do something, maybe 1M are too. Then 2M, then... So why can´t everyone be rich?
@@marques41 yeah and that’s a dumb argument. “If 0.1% of the population can do something, why can’t the other 99.9% do it too”, was not the sound argument that the guy thought he was making.
@@themeerkat6034 everyone could play an instrument but they don't. The same way they can be a millionaire but they don't
@@marques41 Just because you say it doesn’t make it true.
Thanks Patrick for bringing Richard to your show, I really enjoyed every second of it. ❤
@@jimbobb3509 delusional alternative to reality... about as practical as the transgender nonsense.
@@jimbobb3509 Ah, ad hominem. That sure cleared things up!
Thank you very much for your well argued contribution, sir.
I grew up in Iran too! One thing I didn’t see as much was medical bankruptcies! Or companies selling people water, electricity!
Watching Wolff explain basic supply/demand to a guy somehow worth close to 200 million is great
Remember this guy comes from a wealthy family in Iran. He is not some self made businessman
Reminds me of RUclipsrs who do videos on the chemical reactions in certain cooking processes, and why chefs get it wrong in theory but right in practice. The practitioner doesn't always understand the exact mechanics behind why something works, and even if they're not always equipped to explain it.
Imagine thinking you can restructure the whole system from top to bottom and believe it's going to work.
@@playerjoe that’s myopic and reeks of privilege theory. He is self-made by any definition of starting from zero; nobody gave it to him as you imply.
@@fishhuntadventure And even if he started as an orphan beggar with 0$, they'd find some reason to hate him. They'll simply say that it was given to him, because he is a white male. Basic crab mentality.
I think Wolf fumbled some points. Also I think it’s crazy that the host is okay with child labor from Indonesia.
What's your solution there? Feel morally superior and let the kids die?
@@willnitschke Let me ask you something. Whenever child labour became illegal in the west, was that a bad thing?
@@korpen2858 Why are you now desperately wanting to change the topic? Well, because you know where your smug sanctimony leads. It's nowhere nice. So what's your solution there? Feel morally superior and let the kids die?
@@willnitschke you present a dilemma that's based on an outright fabrication. when Korpen points out your lie, you attack them instead of their argument and then proceed to double down on your false dilemma. children are often at increased risk of mortality due to workplace hazards. you're the one who wants kids to die.
Patrick my friend... You do AMAZING mob interviews for ENTERTAINMENT purposes... But you are OVER your pay grade with Richard Wolff. We are talking about one of the MOST brilliant economic minds of the 21st century. I certainly appreciate the debate but we are talking community college RUclipsr vs Road Scholar LOL. The argument you are trying to make with "Name me one item that is over priced" it's just so dim witted even for a simple mind like myself to pick out.
Pat really gives away the game with his inane questions
@@gwills9337 I respect his hustle. Guy is trying to make a buck for himself - can't hate on that. But like you said, guy TOTALLY shows his cards LOL
Latinos love communism lol
@@rherna01 it kinda shows his shallow depth of knowledge just looking at the painting behind him the has MLK sotting next to Milton "greed is good" Freedman, as if they agreed on ANNNNYTHING.
Pats a grifter and hack.. Can't believe people take this idiot as a serious person.. He should stick to gimmick mob videos cuz he's way outside his safespace here Wollf destroyed his moronic talking points.. Lazy ass couldn't even do his homework says a lot about him
“The slave force will eventually get tired of it”. That’s a fucking fact.
I LOVE two people of opposite opinion being able to talk calmly and respectfully for 1 hour and 20 minutes, I applaud.
Thanks to both of these men, wish more interviews were this interesting.
Very rare nowadays, but it provides so much value. The funny thing is, despite conflicting ideologies, we all want the same things, we just think we get them in different ways.
Idk the interviewer just seemed more interested in having gotcha moments and being a little condescending
really? i was hoping for something to explode and someone losing a limb or two.
@@tofuteh2348 isn't that, realistically, how we get when we are confrontinga concept that we have yet to see the wisdom in? It gets uncomfortable. A person less professional would let their ire rise and keep pressing with their point trying to overtake their opponent so they can be on top. That's the ego in it's full glory. But it seems the more we believe deeply in our conviction the less ego that shows up because given an opportunity we can always defend our point with more opinions and facts. It's those who start to feel their own viewpoint is being threatened by opposing wisdom that the ego rises. That's how I see it anyway.
Why does the host think that a person who pays a bully to bully is not a bully?
?
Because he is the guy who pays a bully😉
@@MIGR711 DING DING DING! Socialists, anarchists, and non-authoritarian communists all acknowledge that basically EVERY capitalist defender is complicit in the crimes against humanity it requires to function, and THIS is why they see themselves in the despicable rich exploiters. You don't EARN a million dollars, you TAKE it from the folks who helped your company earn it.
The host is discredited and stupid. Why should I sell above a certain point when my work force and tax breaks are given via the middles class tax receipts. These are the stupid fools that have wrecked the economy. He is dumb!
I don’t know how many times I noticed the other guy listening to Wolff and his response or counter expose the fact he wasn’t genuinely listening to him. The way he says “oh my god” or “come on Richard”vs giving what he was saying a chance only prolongs his close-mindedness. He will never understand any view but his own. It’s sad that most people are like that especially when discussing similar issues as Wolff and he discussed
Wolff was lying and spewing nonsense. There is nothing to gain from a sophist.
Before this interview I was critical of socialism. I had heard of Professor Wolfe before but never took socialism seriously.
After the interview I am more convinced that socialism is a possibility, maybe not the best but better than what we have now until we find something else.
Richard Wolfe had a deeper understanding of history and economics than Patrick and backed up his points more so than the host.
What we have now isn't real capitalism.
Check out the soho forum debate, that’ll change your mind.
@@wesleymalutama3651
"What we have now isn't real capitalism."
Market exchange + commodity production + waged-labor + boss/worker relations= capitalism.
@@nut913 yeah, epstein's strawmanning and lack of knowledge on socialist policies was astounding
Rohin M and the fact that epstein never responded to anything and just spit out prewritten talking points
57:35 actually we do have example of it today. Walmart will go into a town, drive out local business by offering lower prices and all that crap and then slowly raises them up to normal profitable levels. The whole thing behind Walmart and Amazons growth is to grow even if it costs them losses as long as the long term prospects of profit are good, it took what, a decade for amazon to be profitable? And for every 2 jobs Walmart creates it kills 3 jobs somewhere else.
and with the government sustaining it, that s closer to socialism than it is to capitalism.
in communism, you could vote. but there was only one name on the ballot.
in communism, eventually when it got bad, you could buy food. but there were only so many choices, not to mention standing in line for them...
@@BobvsBob wtf are you talking about? Did you have a stroke when formulating this thought?
dont shop at walmart go somewhere else if you dont like it. walmart a big corporation because they get customers so it's fair
@@alexspurr124 that's the point. There is no where else to go but Wallmart because they used unfair business practices to kill all the competition
you@@Ironborn4 I guess you guys here have never bought at walmart, helping to kill those jobs. Am I right? You don't agree with what happens, don't buy at walmart. That is the beauty of freedom, free market and capitalism. You are able to decide the diraction it takes. And if you say " most people wil buy because it's cheaper", than most people seem to like to express their free will and the Goverment has the power to control people's stupidity. If they don't, there again comes the beauty of freedom. None of that is possible in the "leftist-paradize" utopia, so all you can do is hope that the people in power are fair to you forever and ever. Wake up, mate
55:45 Walmart put a lot of smaller retail stores out of business. Amazon is doing the same thing. The options to buy a similar product elsewhere is shrinking. Richard Wolff is right in his assessment of how a monopoly is established. This is happening in real-time.
Rewind the clock 30 years or so and SEARS outlet store was the world biggest retailer but they eventually went out of business.. Richard Wolff policies would encourage monopology. Walmart and Amazon both uses the government to stay on top by lobbying for higher wages and etc.
How exactly would putting workers in control of their workplaces through either representative or direct democracy... encourage monopolies?@@Diabolical05
@@__hazel. Because everyone will naturally gravititate to the biggest corporation where they will make the most money and have the most job security. Startup or new businesses will practically cease to exist because in this market condition, nobody is going to want to risk their capital and hard earn money to start a business when the end outcome is that you will ultimately make the same amount or even less money vs someone who is working for walmart. Except the person that went to go work for walmart did not have to save, and risk capital to make as much as your business is making
. People won't want to work for a small business or startup because even in this economic condition, most fail (7/10 new businesses fail within 7 months i think). Sooner or later, only the biggest name retail, autostore, technology will be left standing (Amazon, Walmart, Target, Apple, Android, Netflix, Google., Homedepot, Mcdonalds and etc). New technology or innovation will halt and cease to exist because again, nobody will have any incentive to create or start anything new. Everyone will work for the biggest brand already established.
wrong. Although within some industries, some companies try to get more market share, that does not mean they might have power over the market, there is mobility across markets and therefore capital is always attacked, that is how competition works. there is no empirical evidence to suggest that companies can "jack up" the prices as if this does not affect the signaling to the demand. supply and demand are profit side and as such there is no super power.
False
The retail industry is one of the industries with the lowest barriers to entry, and since product differentiation is non-existent it's also one of the few industries with only price Competition. That means that as soon as Walmart even tries to raise the prices over marginal costs then Competition will flood the market
Patrick: "colleges are full of Marxists"
Also Patrick: *proceeds to talk about Trump and Hillary*
The Kochs have flooded the university system with pro capitalist economic programs and business schools. Idk where you get any marxism, in the 1990s most marxist programs disappeared when the USSR fell. I went to business school dont think we ever talked about Marx in class.
😂😂😂
I wish the colleges around me were full of marxists, you cant even study marxists economic theory in any university near me
@sillybillybadboy no, that's what capitalism is.
@sillybillybadboy I have some news for you:
first off: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School#Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theory
and
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Bolshevism
(just have a skim over these to learn about cultural marxism)
second: the so-called "oppressor/oppressed narrative" was created by Hegel, and it's called dialectical analysis (which is really useful for analysing a ton of stuff). Marx studied Hegel, this is where his idea of proletariat/bourgeoise comes from. the primary difference between Hegel and Marx is that Hegelian dialectics are more of an idealistic dialectic, but Marxism utilises more of a material dialectic.
so, while it is true that Marxism did indeed influence critical theory, this is more because Marxism was one of the first, and most refined philosophies to thoroughly develop a material dialectical analysis of society.
the only thing remotely Marxist about any of these "institutions" that you refer to is that some of them may have integrated some material dialectics into their analysis. but this certainly does not make them Marxist.
And if I am correct in assuming that you got your opinion from Jordan Peterson (it at the very least sounds like the things he says on the matter), then I should also mention that Marxism and post-modernism are not compatible philosophies. To put it simply, Marxism is a modernist philosophy. while post-modernism heavily critiques modernism (hence the name).
Peterson is a psychologist. When he talks about psychology, he knows what he is talking about and makes really good points.
However, he is not a philosopher, nor a historian, nor a political scientist. when he starts talking about any of these subjects he clearly has no idea what the fuck he is talking about, and is wildly out of his depth.
What do you mean by "That stopped working after the collapse of the Soviet Union"? class didn't stop existing after that. the dialectic didn't stop working.
and as for the "the long march through the institutions" part. I would refer you to the links I provided at the top of this comment.
Many prices on Amazon have tripled this year....
And why is that? Do you think the U.S government printing billions of dollars in stimulus money in order to give people free check; devaluing our currency has anything to do with that?
@@Diabolical05 so the prices of Amazon increased sure to inflation. Blaming the government again as opposed to the business who raised the price...
@@Diabolical05 Oh ok... so it's people having money that is the problem? How strange.
I thought that the reason for Amazon destroying their competition was because Amazon lowered their prices to a point that the competition couldn’t possibly compete with. I once bought the same book for 99p on Amazon that was being sold on independent booksellers - online and offline - for much more than that. Even if you are against Amazon or Walmart, if you’re on a budget you end up having to go to the corporations because you have to. Even though you’re technically making a choice to go to Amazon and wallmart, you are still being forced to go to the corporations because they lowered their prices. Even if you really want to frequent the small businesses, you’re still forced to go to the bigger places with the amazing discounts.
@Jon Cumberbatch either you are or you are not a monopoly
Dang, I'm surprised Patrick kept this up 😂 I'm glad he did tho. Richard has a good way of words.. easy to digest
You should bring on Nick from revolutionary black network 👍🏼✅
🤦🏾♂️
Ya. He's got some entertainer in him.
40:58 very true
He looks completely insane.
@@MrJdouble1998 100%. I would NEVER LISTEN to him. He literally looks like a CHILD with ideas that he thinks he came up with. How does this man have 4 PhDs?
When someone day's "I'm curious", they are not.
Is that some kind of hegelian dialectic?
Interesting that after severe pressure, Richard guessed 4 M earn over $1 million, but Patrick corrected to 0.5 M. So the system is even worse than Richard thinks.
Lmao, I know - I love how he’s so excited to be like “500 Hundred Thousand millionaires last year....” ahhh out of 150 million broski... that’s even a lower percentage compared to Prof Wolff’s 4 million guess.
And it was so hilarious to see Patrick try to bait him into answers... those were the weakest attempts at “gotcha” questions I’ve seen. I’m pretty sure Patrick was betting on Wolff saying 100 people were millionaires... Patrick, I’m pretty sure, even said “it’s not like it’s 50...”
God... totally thick as a board. I’m actually surprised Wolff just didn’t dummy him on the math on that one. I would have been a lot more savage.
@@capitalexotics not 500k millionaires but 500k people who made over a million in income last year. 11.8 million households in America have a net worth over $1 million or about 3% of the population.
Bret Roberts that still fits into the range of the expected capitalist class warfare
0.5m people earning $1m, as opposed to 1m people, means the system is better than he thinks, not worse. The more people there are earning significantly more than the average wage means there are significantly more people living in poverty to compensate.
@@capitalexotics Sounds to me like you were watching the whole interview waiting for your own gotcha moment.
“CEO’s get fired more than employees!”
🤦♂️ If you’re this delusional, what can someone even say to you??
And why is that not correct? The vast majority of businesses fail over 10 years. Or is this just arse pain from a nitwit? 🤣
@@willnitschke lol wow. you totally missed the context 😂
Prof. Wolff convinced me of his argument several years age, I wish I had come across him a long time ago, If we can get past the brain washing from school what he points out makes so mush sense. It really is a no brainier . Thank you Prof.
Teach your children.
Read Marx das capital.
Kaladar Chandra as someone studying ecnomics, v2 in particular should be required reading. Whether you agree with marxist theory or not, volume 2 of capital is one of the most insightful books ever written about capitalism.
@@dediguise0018 at the end of the day, he is a world renowned economist and probably along with smith the most groundbreaking economist of all time.
.
Monopolies are impossible without the coercion of government forces.
.
Fortune 500 companies typically survive only 30 years or so before being replaced by disruptive innovation. (See Schumpeter)
Mergers can happen resulting in monopolies without government involvement. Unfortunately even in an Ayn Rand world monopolies would still exist. Neither side has the perfect answer. You just are lying to yourself thinking you have the perfect answer.
@@2drealms196 Mergers happen with government involvement too. So much for the Sherman Act. Strange that we didn't see everyone do mergers during Carnegie times. There was still plenty of competition, and tons of ma and pa shops, a lot more so than today. Why was that? could it be that as long as there is money to be made in a market with demand, especially one where there's tons of money to be made, there will always be competition? Just going by human nature, I don't think everybody wants to just merge and work for somebody else, or not do their own different thing because its easier to be a simple employee instead of an owner. It also can't be that mergers are always economically beneficial. How many mergers were made to make General Motors what it is today? And they aren't doing good at all. Don't assume to know how a real free market will look like today, if we haven't even had free market capitalism since 1916, you just come off as pretentious.
monopolies own the government.
@Alejandro Pollier I think Ayn Rand's capitalism utopia would fall apart just like socialism/big-government. I do agree with her ethical and non-initiation of aggression.
@@lawrencemiller3829 So what parts of Ayn Rands capitilist utopia would not work? give us an example.
I came for PBD, but man this professor has good points and he was incredibly patient with Patrick’s out of touch retorts.
He really didn’t. Wolff is a liar and Marxist lunatic.
Yeah, OK, CEOs "get fired" with a golden parachute worth millions, even if they ruin a company. Cmon Patrick, you cannot be serious
@John Smith And when Obama runs a Shadow govt and Biden gets kickbacks for selling our country out we feel the pain!
@@soniag4516 Always a bozo who wants to bring up politics into things
@Abassi Adroa the magic money which massively devalues the fiat currency we are so inadequately reimbursed with for our exploited labor, isn't capitalism fun?
Wonder if CEO's would be better if they didn't know there would be a golden parachute were they to be fired for failure
i'm confused that there's actually so many socialist on here.. what's stopping you to become one? what's stopping you to start a business for yourself? that's the beautiful thing about this system you don't actually have to "serve/work for someone" as long as you provide a service people want you can do whatever you like! That's freedom, that's ownership of your own life both as consumer and producer.
The reason this feels more and more out of reach in the west is because of Crony Capitalism which is fundamentally different and where truly the rich get richer and the poor get poorer because of special treatment that the government deals out and who's allowed to survive and who's not!
plus they print money creating inflation which again affects the poor working class the hardest paying taxes already trying to save away what you can in a stupid savings account which you learned in school to then get double taxed in the value drop of inflation. the problem always has and always will be the government and their overreach into free trade between free people making their own choices.
26 people own the same amount as 3.9 billion people. Yeah, think about that...
*sharpens guillotine*
@BRI336 ALBANY Polluted the drinking water that killed my grandmother for starters. Not to mention the insane amounts of co2 which is projected to kill anywhere from 300 million to 3 billion people by 2200, per the 1-tonne rule. Not to mention the fact that they have used child labor, low wages, and have exploited the natural resources of "poor countries." The social costs of all of this btw, has resulted in something known as overaccumulation. That being a wealth bubble created through the inability to spatial fix, a lowering rate of profit, an increasing ratio in compensation between unproductive and productive labor, a decreasing ratio of profit to surplus-value, an increasing government subsidy rate to the top 350 firms (by sale), and financialization(massive leveraging) of our economy. What this means is slowed growth, increased exploitation of workers and consumers, an overreliance on debt-based consumption, and rapidly dropping social mobility, culminating in a series of depreciation(similar to the great depression). So, yeah I think that the people at the top of the economic hierarchy have exploited people to get there and will continue to do so, even if it drives us into extinction. I do not hate Bezos, nor any rich person. They are simply actors in a system that incentives certain behavior. It's about the system, not the individual. Also, any dollar someone has but didn't work for, I a dollar someone worked for, but didn't get. Finally, I only buy stuff from local worker-coops, except for my phone and computer. But, that's only because they are necessities and there are no small producers. Calling hypocrisy on someone for taking part in a system that they have no other choice but to participate in, btw, is pretty stupid.
@BRI336 ALBANY do you think those 26 people worked harder than the 3.9 billion? Do you think those 26 actually produced 2,150,000,000,000.00 dollars in wealth? The obvious answer, and the empirically correct one btw, is no. Stop being such a submissive person. You can do better than to lick the boots of a bunch of people who have economic interests that are directly opposed to yours.
@BRI336 ALBANY What an ignorant comment. I'm just flabbergasted. Patrick should be ashamed of the community he's cultivating.
@BRI336 ALBANY Booklicker-Someone who seeks favor or goodwill in a servile, degraded way. I'm even going to address the garbage you said after that. It's all extremely ahistorical, ignorant of geopolitics, political theory, economics, and sociology. Not to mention it's extremely anti-intellectual. I'd be interested in getting your opinion as to why "academia tries to sell it here."
I've seen quite a few interviews of Richard Wolff & this was the best. Patrick always asks the best questions & he has a great accent, as well! 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
@Narges Segran The left for the most part in the us is corrupt, they are criminals. Peace, bro.
@Narges Segran Sorry. I wish you well. 🙂
SADLY, you barely scratch the surface of how the world is truly run...start with the Black Pope (just below the Pure Bloodlines), the 3 Sovereign Empire/City-States used to rule the world (Vatican City: religion, Inner City London: Money and Big Business and Washington DC (formerly Little Roma) the Industrial Military Complex) and the World Capital that was built in Astana, Kazakhstan about 15 years ago, with the goal of uniting the Countries and Religions of the world over the next 300 to 500 years.
Also, you should know that the Obelisk symbolizes past and present! If you didn't know or answered a tall penis, you really are less than. The obelisk is little more than a tall Pillar ith a Pyramid on the top, you know that Pyramid on the back of the dollar bill : ))) YES.
The world is like any business, nothing ever goes perfectly and is always a work in progress and you want to control everything in your business!
We live in a world filled with very complex constructs that are specifically designed to provide the illusion of choice and freedom while they (the Company) maintain full control over all that truly matters to them and like any business, they don't want competition if they can help it.
Forget what they taught you, but realize that we do need control, just good control...and life is better than ever for more than ever and we will get better yet...but sadly, they need to be able to control us, and most of us should like that because we don't do anything wrong.
This should protect us from the TRASH that is raised by BAD parents...They build the kids, like a contractor building a house, that has little if any emotional foundation, like a house with a 1" thick foundation, that they can't build any type of real-life on, so when they try to build a life on the weak emotional foundation, it crumbles and destroys all for themselves and humanity.
The diversity and quality of Patrick's interviews are incredible.
He really ought to let Prof Wolff speak though, because Patrick could afford to learn a thing or fifty :)
Valuentainment came from every walk of life!
@@citizennobody5518 what realities?
@@citizennobody5518 A lot of this was above Patrick's head.
You arrogant morons. Educated beyond your mental capacity. Socialism and Communism have literally killed hundreds of millions and people. I will fight you degenerate malcontent slobs to the death. Wolff thinks everything is binary. Rich or poor. The reality is many people live excellent fulfilling lives in the middle. Wealth isn’t static. You can be rich one day and poor the next. These people like Wolff don’t live among the common population. They only have ideas, no real life experience. Then they form a society of bubbleheads at universities that extol their general ignorance and lack of life experience. Absolute out of touch lunatics
love to see a debate where people still generally treat each other with respect
Respect??? Middle …. …. .. yle
One minute in and I'm already shaking my head at this host. His question of "tell me one thing that's overpriced on Amazon" shows how woefully ignorant (or blatantly misleading) he is. It's not about overpricing. It's that Amazon and other large-scale businesses actively drive out their competition by undercutting their prices temporarily. They get in price wars in order to drive their competition into the ground.
yes, Patrick is a kind of an idiot. but a rich idiot, so we have to take him seriously! smh
Amazon has their own products, but they also create tons of small self employed businesses. Instead of big box stores, Amazon is just the fulfillment center for tons of these small businesses. Everyday people now easily create and run their own businesses, by using Amazon fulfillment.
Amazon is a great model, also created more jobs and wealth. It’s simply genius idea...
@@AMOFOUR4x yeah. Too bad it just happens to create wealth for one man, by destroying small businesses, forces millions of people out of job, leaving them no choice to work at Amazon warehouse at $12 an hour
So what? That is brilliant. You wouldn't monopolise an industry if you could? Give me a break.
You want one example? Ebay. Their fees started out fair, and now they're ridiculous. You want another example? Paypal. Same thing. Fees used to be small, and now they're 10x what they used to be, once they got rid of the competition. Want another example? Amazon. Not in terms of fees, but they put every other small guy out of business, by hosting their products, learning that they sell, and then promoting their own versions of that product. Predatory. Shall I go on?
And guess what? That's why fewer people use Ebay today. I never use it. If I want to buy something used, I go on offerup and usually find tons of things. amazon itself sells used items. Otherwise, newer items are cheap on Amazon or Walmart or wherever. So your example doesn't work. When Ebay raised fees and it became harder to use, people found alternatives and left. Nobody I know uses Ebay anymore.
so why dont you all go to China or Venezuela?
"Meh, that's all due to regulatory capture. Also, network effects don't exist!" (/me larping as a smooth-brained lolbertarian)
andybaldman lets not forget that Amazon sells its service as the platform provider and distributor as well. For the retailers, that service has a price, and that there is no competition to keep that in check.
@Know One Yep, change is scary when it results in worse products that cost people more. Keep defending a system that endorses that. Then turn on your TV and look at the world it creates.
This was one of your bests by far! Thank You.
Explain to me why did this random millionaire thought it was a good idea to debate an actual economist about Capitalist Vs Socialism, he got destroyed, is he like a secret Socialist that poses as a Capitalist just so he can get bodied in every debate?
Because millions of subs and his employees made him think he's right even when he's wrong.
Not a socialist by any means, but Patrick really did not have any counter arguments for the guy. Frankly the commie made some very good and well articulated arguments for the questions he was given.
@@alexperalta8145 he has plenty of free lectures online
@@alexperalta8145 Maybe you should listen to more “commies” then. We’re not all pink-haired reactionary idiots you know.
An "actual economist" who cannot provide one working example of his ideas being successful in practice.
This is why our univerities are pumping out demoralized, disenchanted "graduates" by the masses.