wufwugy
New member
Great video
Also like this one
Also like this one
-
Features
3 myths about capitalism
- Thread starter wufwugy
- Start date
Duke Leto
Deleted
2nd video is unmitigated BS.
The reason Europe was recovering faster was higher Government spending on the military buildup leading up to the war.
You need to stop hanging out with Libertarian Econ bloggers, wuf, they're bad for you.
The reason Europe was recovering faster was higher Government spending on the military buildup leading up to the war.
You need to stop hanging out with Libertarian Econ bloggers, wuf, they're bad for you.
When I attended university I ended up living with a few people taking a philosophy degree, one of whom was very politically active, and had an unlimited number of friends who were equally as active. After friending many of them on Facebook I started to notice the constant stream of 'anti-capitalist' posts that coincided with a fundamental misunderstanding of real political or economic theory, and went without any type of historical context.
The main issue is that people are really fucking dumb and don't like spending their free time thinking. If they did then they would constantly uncover fallacies amongst their own beliefs, including their beliefs about things like capitalism. But the reality is they meet a friend, and they meet that friends friends, and everyone agrees capitalism is 'bad' without any underlying foundation, and the belief is parroted infinitum. It's to the point where 'capitalism bad' is a meme that's spread like wildfire in way not dissimilar from Christian belief, or any other random incoherent thought that we fucking dumb people latch on to.
The main issue is that people are really fucking dumb and don't like spending their free time thinking. If they did then they would constantly uncover fallacies amongst their own beliefs, including their beliefs about things like capitalism. But the reality is they meet a friend, and they meet that friends friends, and everyone agrees capitalism is 'bad' without any underlying foundation, and the belief is parroted infinitum. It's to the point where 'capitalism bad' is a meme that's spread like wildfire in way not dissimilar from Christian belief, or any other random incoherent thought that we fucking dumb people latch on to.
Duke Leto
Deleted
That's NOT the problem with these videos, rousseau. If we were just talking about depending free market structures and pure competition from the real far left wackjobs who think 2% interest on a mortgage is "usury" (I know a few) that would be one thing.
They're basically pushing an agenda of radical financial deregulation and lazziez faire. The first video flat out lies in claiming that government intervention caused the financial crisis, the second flat out lies about what macroeconomic historians think caused and ended the depression.
It's a crock of shit and I am deeply disappointed in wuf for falling for and sharing it.
They're basically pushing an agenda of radical financial deregulation and lazziez faire. The first video flat out lies in claiming that government intervention caused the financial crisis, the second flat out lies about what macroeconomic historians think caused and ended the depression.
It's a crock of shit and I am deeply disappointed in wuf for falling for and sharing it.
wufwugy
New member
I believed it until I researched it. The correlation with recovery and fiscal expansion you want to see doesn't exist
Duke Leto
Deleted
You know what?
Fine.
I said I was swearing off PD in the old forum and that ought to apply here.
Suffice to say I have ZERO confidence in your econ research abilities.
Fine.
I said I was swearing off PD in the old forum and that ought to apply here.
Suffice to say I have ZERO confidence in your econ research abilities.
wufwugy
New member
You have misrepresented what the first video claimed about the role of government in the crisis and "macroeconomic historians" do not think what you claim. Some do, but some isn't all. Regardless, the data does not support it at all
- - - Updated - - -
You care more about my reiteration of an ideology. Whenever I don't do it, it's "poor, poor wuf". Seeking the opinions of the most credible sources is not hard at all, and it's really all you or I could do. Just because I don't like what credible sources say doesn't mean I can ignore them
- - - Updated - - -
The difficulty of experimentation in social sciences allows people to consider themselves credible when they aren't. We all do it, myself included. Opinions about economics should be more like opinions about physics i.e. "Oh you think this? Well what does the data say and how does the theory fit?" But we don't do that because it's peoples' lives (emotions run high) and the lack of experimentation doesn't allow for swift vanquishing of wrong ideas
boneyard bill
Veteran Member
Totally wrong. Most of Europe had recovered from the Great Depression before the military build-up began.
And the rest of the video is also spot on. Hoover specifically condemned laissez-faire in those exact words, and he intervened aggressively. Roosevelt doubled-down on most Hoover's policies just as Obama has doubled down on most of Bush's policies.
boneyard bill
Veteran Member
Neither video makes any specific recommendations on de-regulation so I don't know where you get that idea. In the first video he did specifically explain the effects of existing regulations although not in any detail, of course, in a 3-minute video.
Any idiot can figure out that war is destructive, not productive, and a moron can figure out that if you conscript 11 million men into the military that unemployment will decline. But the claim that WW II got us out of the depression is about as non-sensical as you can get. Have economists made such claims? Yes. But they don't make any more sense just because a few economists happen to be idiots.
laughing dog
Contributor
Did you look at data from this planet?
boneyard bill
Veteran Member
I'm really surprised to see you post these videos. They do not conform to the kinds of things you have been posting, but apparently you have been researching the subject.
I must say that when I was in college in the early '60's both my econ profs and American history profs stated up front that Hoover was an interventionist and that FDR did not get us out of the GD. These guys were liberal Democrats, and the econ prof was definitely a Keynesian, but they didn't distort the record. So it seems really surprising to me that these myths continue and are still apparently be taught at the university level.
You have two problems with regulations. First of all, you have the problem that often have unintended consequences, particularly insofar as they distort market signals and therefore create the wrong incentives. The second problem you have is that of selective enforcement. There are something like 30,000 pages of SEC regulations alone. And that was before Dodd/Frank. And the you have numerous other regulatory bodies that I can't even remember all of them or even their initials. Meanwhile, the major Wall Street Banks are losing civil suits all over the case for fraudulent behavior, but no criminal law suits have ever been filed. If you're not going to enforce the laws against fraud, what's the point in massive regulations of less serious behavior?
This isn't to say that there should never be any regulations at all. Of course, fraud should not be permitted, and we need neutral regulations just like we regulate which side of the street people should drive on. But on balance regulations on the economy have probably been harmful and perhaps even very harmful.
laughing dog
Contributor
Um, they did if they really made those claims.
Canard DuJour
Veteran Member
1) That pro-capitalism is pro-business. Because, really, "the point of capitalism is to make sure
" businesses have to compete -"vigourously"- so businesses hate capitalism which is really just about protecting consumers from businesses conspiring with big government etc2) That capitalism "generates" unfair income distribution. Because, really, it just rewards the productive, hard-working etc, stopped watching there, pointless facile polemic that won't convince anyone who doesn't already want to believe this kinda stuff.
wufwugy
New member
Yes, I was blown away when I saw how poorly the data correlates governmental fiscal expansion with recovery. All this time, I'd been listening to guys who have been leaving academia for political activism (*cough* Krugman *cough*)
laughing dog
Contributor
What data are you referring to?
wufwugy
New member
As usual, I couldn't find it again. The topic bounces around the econ blogosphere on a regular basis though. I don't bookmark links to show others. I merely state that to be up on what the credible arguments are, you have to be up on the econ blogosphere. I already know from the past that nobody reads the links I have posted, so I don't bother anymore. I thought maybe some short videos by active professors for this thread would interest people, but I guess not
Underseer
Contributor
I'm too lazy to watch right wing drivel. Did they try to blame the depression on FDR? I love it when they claim FDR caused the depression.