DEVIL’S ADVOCATE: Ben Shapiro vs. Skyler Turden Debate Socialism! | Louder With Crowder

and carbon-based fuel is the most efficient source of energy although second hold on a second ring ring Angela Merkel oh it's for you she says that's bullsh alright thanks for glad to be with you last installment did was with Jordan Peterson a lot of feedback people really enjoyed it wanted to get some more prominent conservatives on the show just to talk about you know most pressing issues – the most requested person was our necks yes and the topic we'll be discussing today here in devil's advocate is basically the merits and the drawbacks of socialism he's the host of the Benjamin Shapiro program on The Daily Caller thanks for your time Benjamin absolutely skylark heard uh-oh thank you free shit you being here so obviously we'll be talking about socialism if someone is very popular at your shows where I do a lot of you know QAS and you're very popular in conservative circles and far-right circles and all tried circles I've heard a lot of this you know socialism is evil socialism is theft I wanna know why you believe that to the case I've heard you talk about it because obviously in principle I mean will be agree that in principle it's good you know Old Testament talks a lot about not oppressing the poor giving to the poor often the rich are portrayed as villains because of their greed so I was a descendant of the Jewish people and faith who we're not agree that helping the poorest among us is is a moral immoral mission sure I mean that's called charity but what is not moral is stealing money for me to give to somebody else on the part of a government the points a gun at me that's that's not an actual thing and the Bible doesn't talk about that in any way did the Bible and if we want to talk about the biblical dictates with regard to charity yeah there's Emily Newton Hebrew I mean there's master there's master Shanee there's true there's pan like that like there there's a bunch of different aspects of Jewish law that talked about charity but they are all relegated to the the realm of private charity meaning that it's more about my obligation to give charity and less about your rights to my money so we're supposed to recognize that wealth belongs to God but my wealth does not belong to you in the in the biblical view sure well I was using ignore as a moral sort of using as a moral deem I don't really want to get off on sort of the metaphysical and God and that kind I don't want to get into God's definition of what's necessarily moral but the idea that as a society its moral to help the poorest among us especially when we look at systemic right oppression of the poor as we see we're not just talking about a level playing field right we're talking about a playing field where the middle classes is shrunken dramatically we're talking about you know wages have not kept up with inflation the rich keep getting richer that gap keeps widening so there's a system in place which to me yeah none that's true no that's no that's actually true is the problem so actually the middle class in the United States the upper middle class was about 12% of the population of the United States in 1979 and by 2014 that was 30 percent of the American population so the disappearance of the middle class folks talk about is really the middle class becoming upper-middle class and the standard of living for everyone in the United States has risen dramatically since 1979 one of the favorite statistics folks like to cite here is they say that there's been wage stagnation in hourly wages since 1979 adjusted for inflation well that's true it also doesn't not entirely obviously because it was you know minimum wage laws which we'll get to in a bit well the fact is yeah we do that in a second but the fact is that the wage stagnation that has taken place does not take into account additional benefits which is 30 to 40 percent on top of the salary it doesn't take into account the different way that we count households then we used to it also doesn't take into account the fact that you can get more stuff for the same inflation adjusted dollar than you could in 1979 you have a nicer fridge now than he did in 1979 and it costs you basically half of what it would have in 1979 an inflation adjusted dollars so if you're getting twice as much stuff for the same buck now that means that you're basically twice as rich as you would have been in 1979 and for anyone who disagrees I would recommend you go back to 1979 and live in 1979 and see whether your standard of living is the same whether you enjoy it well now we're getting back into the meta economist Benjamin Shapiro if we'll have a time-traveling machine let's try and keep it in you know reality like you say fax fax don't care about your time-traveling machine what about homes what about homes you know what about retirement middle-class family today is much more difficulty affording a home you know if you go back to the 50s you could live in a single income household and have the vehicle have a home retire at a reasonable age that's not the case now who really cares if you have you know Frigidaire in your kitchen well I mean I've got a couple of things about this one homes in the United States have radically increased in size over time so homes back in the 1950s you can see this when you go check them out much smaller than the homes that are being built now to the increase in home prices is really because of this massive urbanization that's happened where people are rushing into massive cities and these cities are heavily zoned so that's created an incredible shortage of housing in major liberal cities you're not seeing the same sort of housing shortages in places that don't have those same sort of zoning regulations places like Dallas places in the middle of the country you're mostly seeing it in Seattle LA San Francisco New York places where it's difficult to build new buildings and where the government has mandated that you also build affordable housing tax you heavily created new regulations that's what's creating a serious pressure in that sphere right right so it's a it's the government's fault I just wanna make sure I have this this right so it's the government's fault that people cannot afford homes it's the government's fault or that peep that the the wage gap is actually increasing that the middle class is shrinking I know you say it's not but we look at the 1% who are wealthier than ever before and the rest of the population right that time oh no the wealth gap the the fact that there is a greater disparity between the top tax bracket the bottom tax bracket is true but the bottom tax bracket is a lot richer than it used to be and again one of the things that is a huge mistake folks make when it comes to analyzing economic issues is the suggestion that if you are in the top 1% you are always in the top 1% you started there you finish there you live there you died there there are people I've been in the top 1% I've been not in the top 1% people tend to get wealthier as they get older and so the upper tax brackets are disproportionately older than the lower tax brackets again that movement is suggestive of the facts that folks are earning more and less over the course of their lifetime it's not just like there's this ingrown cased of people who are born rich and stay rich inherited wealth accounts for very little of the the top tax brackets yeah well you know I I've heard this talked about a lot sort of class mobility so I think it's often referred to what I've noticed it seem you talk about going back to 1979 you talk about how these people will be wealthier down the line as they get older again we're kind of in the realm of meta economics right things that you feel will happen down the line but that's not what's happening with these people right now when you're talking about these people today in 2018 who can't afford to go to college who can't afford to purchase a home who can't afford health insurance right Oh Benjamin Shapiro of The Daily collars if his ideal world works out down the line these people will be great they'll be the next coax or whatever but today that's not the case well my deal worked out if my ideal world worked out what you'd have is lower prices and better products in virtually every area of American life from health care to colleges the fact is the government subsidies are one of the areas that's creating upward pressure and prices when you give a bunch of people subsidies to go to college what you are doing is generating additional supply or additional demand without additional supply that creates upward pricing pressure I mean this is a simple supply demand curve and the fact that folks on the Left don't seem to understand this they think that if you just dumped a bunch of money into free college education that this is going to somehow alleviate all of the all of the economic woes of a society that is already absorbing the cost of a bunch of college graduates who can't get jobs because they majored in silly things it's it's a little bit bewildering and in fact it's really interesting a lot of the socialist countries that socialists like to talk about the the quad you know the quote-unquote socialist countries of Scandinavia they have a lot more heavily regimented idea of what colleges should be for I mean if you look at Sweden if you look at Switzerland there's a lot more tracking people who are going to colleges or vocational schools based on the vocation they wish to pursue liberal arts majors in in Scandinavia significantly less of the college population than in the United States because they feel like if they're gonna get the government to sponsor college degrees at least you should come out with some marketable skills okay so it's interesting you point to a lot of these candidate event countries and we talked about that on my program quite a bit Denmark Sweden Norway so it sounds like you'd be okay with sort of moving toward the more socialist model they use in those countries that are really quite successful we've heard obviously senator Sanders and people like Cortez talking about says a lot of people said there are no successful socialist country I would point to well I mean and and this has become the favorite the kind of favorite tool of quote-unquote socialists today's to pick countries that have built their entire wealth based on capitalism and then have placed on top of that capitalism some redistribution of systems then call this country socialist that's not a socialist country a socialist country is a country that uses abolition of profit as a tool and nationalization of property as a chief tool and public ownership of the means of production as the chief tool of wealth production and distribution that's not actually what happens in Denmark or Norway or Switzerland or Sweden or any of these countries which is why the prime minister of Denmark suggested back in 2015 when Bernie Sanders kept jabbering about Denmark being a socialist country went to Harvard Kennedy School government he said we're not a socialist country or a capitalist country all of these supposedly socialist countries ranked around or higher than the United States and the Heritage Foundation free economic Freedom Index than the United States does which would suggest that these are these are not actually countries that are focused sincerely on regulation of business above all and redistribution of property through the means of brigham a jump in there I think it's important that we you know the economic freedom index like we're talking about there Canada was higher than the United States for a little longer even though they have a universal health care plan so it sounds to me like you're okay with sort of the model that we see the Nordic model so then would we be okay with a universal healthcare program or a single-payer because if you look at these countries that you just said right are not socialist but then if we're trying to mind it here in the United States people say oh that's socialized health care Universal socialist right so the program can be socialist but the question of communes hire a country socialist because it has a socialist program in medicine that's that's a little bit silly I mean it's like suggesting that you who have a job and you bring home money to your family and then you redistribute the money among members of your family you have a joint bank account with your wife this means you're a socialist no you're a capitalist who is who uses socialist methods of redistribution in your own home it's the same thing with Norway or Denmark then we have to look at the efficacy of those programs we also have to look at the rights of the people that are being violated by those programs do you have a right to your own use of Labour's you have a right to the the product of your labor do you have a right to the alienation of your labor and then we also have to look at whether any of those even if you believe that it didn't violate rights you'd have to look at whether those programs were adaptable to the United States which typically they have not been because the reality is that in places like Sweden or Norway or Switzerland what you have particularly in a place like Norway right is a really really high level of cultural homogeneity you know a high level of capital that exists that doesn't exist in the United States and quite the same way so it's Mike's fault that's one make sure that's what it's the fault of the blacks know that it is the fault of cultures that are not its culture that's right I forgot what the alright that's the Norwegians ask the Norwegians have significantly curtailed immigration from the Islamic world specifically because they're having problems of cultural assimilation I probably have a really good conversation because they have a higher higher literacy rate they have more public education there and of course their populace is generally healthier because they have socialized health care and they spend less on health care their population is healthier and has been healthier for decades because they don't need as much crap as Americans to virtually all wealth generation that happened in the Nordic countries preceded the socialist redistribution systems that people like Bernie Sanders Elizabeth Warren of kasnia Cortes loved Norway was actually ranked higher in terms of relative health to the United States in the 1960s and 70s than it is now and that's because again these are countries with very high levels of social capital a tremendous work ethic sure a certain level of egalitarianism between men and women that goes back generations that was not established by radical feminism and what you've seen is actually a lot of difficulty in a similar similar immigrants in Nordic countries there's a great book called debunking utopia by nima Sun and Angie that's that's totally worth reading on this he's an actual Iranian immigrant to Norway and he talked specifically about the shortcomings of immigration in these places it turns out that it's much easier to become employed as an immigrant in the United States than it is in in Nordic countries yeah well they also do have better bitter healthcare outcomes overall was a lower percentage of their GDP being spent per average person so I was also pretty important let me ask you well care system is a disaster area but that's that's largely to do with governmental regulation no not the blacks it's about it's not about any particular race obviously it's about a mishmash of regulation and deregulation that has created some of the worst of all possible worlds although the United States still leads the world when it comes to five-year cancer survival rates for example so if you can afford health care in the United States it's still the best health care in the world Benjamin Shapiro really color are you a Nazi okay we're gonna move on so I've read that you have made the claim that capitalism is like consensual sex socialism is rape and the one thing I think that's interesting right now that we're talking about is sort of where the line is first if I disagree if it's democratic socialism when we're talking about the public consenting by a vote and I know you're gonna say not everyone goes along with it but that's true of any law passed right democratically we have all kinds of look that you'll never get a hundred percent of people to agree on a law but in this case we're talking about socialism versus capitalism do we really think that's that's a fair comparison that it's like non-consensual sex versus rape and where do you draw the line I mean it seems to me like you enjoy some some social programs some socialism is okay you use public roads if I'm not mistaken roads are the public roads and public goods generally our non-rival wrists and non-excludable that's what makes them public good so it's not quite the same thing right now you're talking about everybody's access to a road that everyone can use and I can't exclude you from use of that Road in the same way that the military is non-rival wrists and and non-excludable that's the definition of a public good that's not the same thing as alienation of my labor so the question really is your rights you know when it comes to sex you have the right to consent or not to consent when it comes to how I use my labor I have the right to consent or not to consent and you voting to remove my right to consent or not consents does not alienate the right it just means that you're violating it that's interesting that you know you bring that up ray talking about the right to work but what about what about the right for example of people who are working to be in healthy conditions to be in at least a humane conditions are these laws that you support you know workers rights know what I'm getting into unionization or collective bargaining I like what they're bargaining better than in fact if again if you want to use these favorite socialist countries as examples you know places like Denmark and Norway ik have have much more use of collective bargaining by by unions for work conditions than they have regulation from the top down because that allows the workers to actually negotiate with the employers on what work conditions should look like I don't have a problem with private unions getting together collectivizing and then you know negotiating with with management but I'm not a big fan of the idea of a top-down cramdown that happens from a government entity that rarely knows how a business runs and again prevents people from actually using their labor as they see fit just not when it's public roads police or military got it I just want to make sure that I'm clear on it's not excludable goods well let's talk about that none rival it's not excludable College then that's a great example you know you have rising to it if you have a 30 if you have a classroom of 30 people let's say eight years ago and it's twenty thousand a semester today that could be as high as thirty five thousand a semester if you look at the rates the inflation you look at how much college loans cost still 30 people in that classroom you're not talking about adding more people at that point so we could apply a lot of these rules as far as non-rival it's non-excludable know not college the use of a college because the use of professors does prevent other people from using the professor's professors do not have an unlimited number of people that they can teach they have time commitments they for grading papers they have to they have that there are only so many hours in the day that is by nature rival risk and it is also excludable in the sense that if you don't pay for the college you don't have a right to use the college that's not the same thing as a road where anyone can use the road and there's not a police officer they are it's not like a toll road police officers not there to prevent you from actually using the road the same thing is certainly not true of a college campus if you walk into a college campus today without paying tuition sat down and started taking classes then you would quickly be removed no I can tell it doesn't happen I do it do it all I sit in on classes all the time and I do not get removed and you know I'm very grateful for professors who are open-minded enough to allow people are going to learn because I think they're the heroes of our country teachers of all ages of all stripes and they don't get appreciated enough when we're talking about like we've said thirty people in a classroom what if what about limited amount of pupil let's say colleges can we just set a certain amount of colleges and say okay this is the sign-up sheet after this we're Philip so it becomes an unrivaled or not excludable and not all colleges but could we do that and make that I'm not sure well now you're actually limiting the supply so what you'd actually want to do is have a free-market system where supply meets demand where there are a number of people who want to go to college and now you have people competing for that dollar without federal subsidies to major in stupid things and then you can get a loan I mean uh I had no problem getting a law school loan my wife had no problem getting a medical school loan because these are actual careers that you can pay back the money you are gonna have a little bit more of a problem if you're a Gender Studies major and you want to get a loan for a Gender Studies major from a bank there's no collateral and the chances of you getting a job outside of a Gender Studies professorial are pretty low you're practicing law today I've been havin for a while actually there's a you know I think steven crowder used to practice law for him for a little while but he turned out to be just an awful client so I say it turns out that was a really useful degree right while we're throwing jabs out there I think that you're not being honest when you make it seem as though the only people who can't afford college are people who are taking these you know these more sort of niche degrees there are plenty of people out there who own Applied Sciences we can't afford school we don't know right that's the thing if we're going to talk about placing a priority as a society because we all have values I would seem to me that it'd be better spent on education health care than the military-industrial complex that's ok different strokes so what about public schools right there definitely rival was excludable don't fit the definition of public goods would Benjamin Shapiro Daily Caller is completely abolish public education I have some severe questions about whether we should actually be be utilizing public education as opposed to local private schools in parochial schools so I think the public school system has turned out to be in large measure a disaster I also do think that there is a difference between a small community deciding that they want to put together a local school and the federal government ramming down on people across the nation what exactly federal standards should be because again the levels of agreement inside a small cohesive community are a lot higher than they are across a country of 330 million people with diverse viewpoints and cultures and and decisions to make about education okay so I think you didn't really answer my question what would you do with public schools yeah your choice you get rittany we don't have a federal department education is up demolish the federal that yes we should have polished the federal Department of Education yes what was that exactly because colleges yeah okay what's fascinating in the United States is after you look actually look at the best schools in the United States they are all at the upper level where supply and demand dictates the quality of the education America's college system is a very very good college system by any global measure America's high school and junior high and elementary school systems are by and large not and the only good elementary and junior high and middle school and and high schools are the ones that exist in communities that spend not only more resources but have parents who are are usually dedicated to high levels of education in their children regardless of income right so this is right we avoid we say cultural right we don't want to actually say like Jewish families and Asian families and not the blacks right that's what's going on okay I got you it sounds so you think all schools should be private basically K through 12 college that's it is that your solution I think that would be a good start and I think that if you are going to have a public school system then it should be as minimal as possible and it should be designed at the local level and again I think local communities deciding what they want is a lot better than then massive communities deciding what they want I sort of abide by Montesquieu's rules on this the devolution of authority to the lowest possible level is the best way of achieving any sort of consensus well you know that brings me it's interesting enough that brings me to my next point you just talked about smaller communities are the people who should be building schools from the ground up okay so we privatize all schools right how many public school no no longer K through 12 or college so you know you can you can but you can listen you can have public schools but the public schools have to be done at the local level where the level of consensus is a lot higher than across the country okay so we're talking about communities where they have consensus and you just said that they perform higher in certain communities right communities with families right maybe dad you stay in the house but we don't want to get into the racial stuff what about kids whose parents can't afford just send them to school we're talking about those private schools or they're in a community where they don't have a community have the resources for it so they're deprived of an education because their parents poverty and that brings us back to isn't that again what we see a system that perpetually keeps the rich rich and the poor poor especially education well number one this is one of the beautiful things about religious education in particular is that the amounts of charity that exist in private school systems for for people who are going to religious schools extraordinarily high it is also true that when it comes to people who don't have opportunities available for their kids we need folks making responsible decisions about how to raise their children and whether to bear those children in the first place whether to get pregnant in the first place but if a parent isn't able to take care of their kids usually the if you're not willing to do what you need to do to educate your kid then you know we ought to talk about whether you should be in control of that child in the first place yeah a bench bench Bureau dealer called advocate for eugenics apparently now that's where we've gone so what we're talking with this is the school and we're talking about we're talking about the economy and capitalism versus socialism great school education sounds to me like you're okay with a system that like we just talked about sort of keeps the poor poor and the rich rich here's the thing which I want the 1% is the number that's earner I know people don't like to talk about the 1% but big corporations right they make their money what we're talking about systemic oppression and I think education factored into that this is capitalism versus socialism I've heard your argument morally speaking they make their money off of exploiting those at the bottom of the economy to me that's nonsensically outrageous and immoral if we're comparing to economic systems one that says all right we have to place priority have to we have to determine what we value as a society education healthcare or one that says it's a determine what we value as a society the ability for the wealthiest people in the world to get wealthier at the expense of others sounds like that's what you're advocating privatize schools I'd like to know I'd like to know how the wealthiest people in the world get wealthy at the expense of poor people who have no money in the first place particularly when you see that statistically literally half the world's population has been raised out of poverty since 1980 specifically because of free markets capitalism and private property rights yeah well this is a problem of the right that salt right in the right wing today it's sort of it's this autistic view of the world and that you know if you have an iPhone fine you don't have to worry about any more right technologies that's not what really matters I'm talk about people you know get out in the street right talk with these people see how people are living in the United States I don't think you understand the point it's not about how much money the poor have I'm not saying that the rich are mugging them in an alleyway they're not getting rich off of the poor's money they're getting rich off of exploiting their labor right this is because the rich owned the means that since the Industrial Revolution they own the means of productions where do we don't want that to go to the government but we want it to be in the hands of a few people who get billion-dollar bonuses while the while the poor can't even get a living wage of $15 an hour sure they make $7 people on planet earth the poorest people on planet earth live in one of two systems either a system that does not guarantee private property ownership because there is no actual governmental system to guarantee private property ownership or to a system where private property ownership does not exist and the government owns the means of production and does not operate in even state capitalistic fashion but operates for the quote unquote good of the workers when that happens poor people emerge this is what's happened in Venezuela that's what happened in the USSR is what happens in Cuba is what happened in North Korea or alternatively it's what happened in places like Somalia or Sudan again the idea that rich people are somehow exploiting labor unless you can show how they're doing so by pointing a gun at somebody or using another government gun to point at somebody free alienation of Labor is a is a fundamental human right your decision to work for a given wage is your decision and no one's forcing you into it it's this simplistic reductive you know on the spectrum view of how the world works we're not just talking about how much money people have in there we're talking about a system right now that doesn't frankly allow poor people to become the next Pope brother or the Walton family you know the what Walmart is probably one of the biggest one of the biggest recipients of welfare in the country because they don't even pay their people living wage C I mean what we're talking about capitalism it's totally cool to bail out banks it's totally cool to make sure that oil companies get subsidies but once we cross the line into education that's where we draw the line now you're on your own that's that's that yeah that's not capitalism subsidies to Walmart is not capitalism that state sponsored that state sponsored mercantilism essentially it's it's really closer to economic fascism and the Minaya greed that Walmart would be actually forced by the labor market to pay its workers more if you did not have the government picking up the the food stamps on the other end that is a supplementation of wages by the federal government toward businesses like Walmart I don't believe that big businesses should be receiving subsidies from the federal government any more than I believe that individuals generally should be receiving subsidies from government so oh okay so if well my welfare just didn't exist if EBT cards just didn't exist Walmart would pay $15 an hour is that a fact mr. Mehta economist well they would in fact have to raise their wages because people cannot work for a non living wage or they would be dead by definition do you think Walmart cares if you die in a gutter they don't care they can't get you to work I mean if they've they got no one to stock the shelves cuz you're dead in the gutter I do think Walmart Kerris yeah I don't think I don't think they care I think they automate and this is a problem we see now with it was new technology listen there aren't the same kind of jobs for people not everyone's gonna be a Harvard lawyer not everyone's gonna be a Harvard lawyers wife /dr right some people actually have to go out there and work on the assembly line and make the nice things that you enjoy but that becomes automated and these people get left behind right that's we have 7 million unfilled jobs in the United States right now 7 million unfilled jobs in the United States right now and essentially record low unemployment so I'm failing to see the millions of people who are desperately missing a job other than folks who probably should move out of communities where factories died 25 years ago oh yeah so that's their solution just I move it's not my problem really well no it's the fact is that America was built by people who are moving America was built by folks who crossed an ocean and left behind property ownership and family to build a new life and then it was built by people who cross the Appalachians to go and stake out claims in the middle of nowhere and try to build a farm at risk of death so yes I think that you driving 20 miles down the turnpike to get a job fracking as opposed to being in a town where there are no jobs it's probably a worthwhile endeavor so there we go to fracking and well you don't think that's a moral imperative to make sure that we deliver a world that our children can inherit you just saw the reasoning is significantly less damaging to the environment than any other form of drilling and natural gas is significantly better for the environment than a variety of other forms of carbon-based fuel yeah what about solar what about wind what about doing what German has done the only options aren't natural gas or oil yeah solar will no nuclear well nuclear power powers all France and we could do that but people on the Left don't like nuclear power because they are scared of things that really have not happened yeah cuz Chernobyl is just a figment of my maniacal than the idea that Walmart would start doubling its pay if the government which is powered itself for decades on nuclear power is is a worse example of nuclear power than a poorly constructed Russian atomic facility mm-hmm yeah which also doesn't make a whole lot of sense as to why your guys in bed with them right with him Russians Oh trumped in bed with Russia yeah oh that's tax Chernobyl on it I don't know I don't know what huh yeah well that too listen he's a babbled a lot of people and he's having them he's having the ladies you know piss on the fur mica and videotaping it my point is listen I mean right now we're taught you guys were the party of Red Dawn right I thought we were talking about capitals but all of a sudden your buddy buddy with the Chernobyl guys Rush honey explain that one well a couple things one I'm not sure when the left decided that they were anti-russian that's been funny since Barack Obama pledged flexibility in 2012 did nothing when they invaded Ukraine and cry I did nothing when there's gravity Syria yeah so there's that and then as far as the actual policy listen presidents from President President Trump's rhetoric on Russia is not good I mean I'm not a defender of President Trump on his rhetoric with regard to Vladimir Putin I've thought that it's awful throughout but his activity with regard to Russia has been significantly harder on Russia than anything the Obama administration remotely approached so you seem to discuss economics a lot we just talked about resources so let's take let's not talk about nuclear right away right or nuclear is your previous iteration called it that's always a good sign when someone can go to go to Yale and come out and not pronounce the most basic of words maybe you knew some people who spent time with at Harvard I don't know so let's take that off of the table here even if we're talking about natural gas if we're talking about coal any of these it still is a finite resource right capitalism does not have any there's no moral imperative to move to something that's renewable if something that is a more toxic alternative let's not say horrible for the Americas let's go with what you say right say ok fracking is better than then then the typical kind of extraction methods fro all right listen let's get let's give you that it's still a finite resource there's no profit motive to move to something more healthful for the environment until it runs out well I mean there has been a profit motive to to move to more helpful technologies for the environment considering the significantly higher gas mileage that we get now than we used to in the 1970s and what was the what was the profit motive there presumably government subsidization vehicles that use less Phil they use less fuel now as government subsidy it's the same thing that people the Conservatives they all tried to complain about Tesla government subsidies the government stepped in and offered incentives for more fuel-efficient cars it was not it was not mere subsidies alone it was it was also the fact that there was high demand as oil prices rose for smaller vehicles when oil prices go down there's less demand for for smaller vehicles when oil prices go up there's more demand for smaller vehicles also the left has been complaining about the idea of peak oil for some decades now and we've not yet reached peak oil plus with regard to technological development what I love to see whoever cracks the code on renewable cheap energy is going to make more money than anyone history of humankind the big problem here is that Solar is simply not capable of generating the amounts of energy necessary to power entire civilizations and carbon-based fuel is the most efficient source of energy although I can hold on a second ring-ring Angela Merkel oh it's for you she says that's bullshit all right I burn a bra they've got is they've been using solar and wind for years they they move their entire energy dependents to renewable resources well Germany is taking an enormous amount of actual gasoline and natural gas from Iran so that's that's not completely true they've converted all of their energy all their national energy to solar or wind Germany I mean there's not a good time I took government intervention right I know it's not the military I know it's not I know it's not the police force right we're on board of that but I'll be honest with you mr. Durden I don't know that much about the the German energy situation so I will have to check that out and get back to you no shocker no shocker Benjamin Shapiro avoids learning about Germany and their current affairs let me ask you Benjamin here before we go to you I know you're a busy man in today's day and age the person who screams the loudest and his most hyperbolic I get it it was more popular so I know you have a platform you've a lot to do any how what closing thoughts would you have for the audience I want to make sure they understand you would privatize all schools K through 12 colleges not offer a welfare EBT to the poorest among us not want us to convert to renewable energy and you're ok with some 1% getting richer while the poor stagnate I want to make sure they have excellence now by the way I would mention you know justjust from a quick Google search er but the share of renewable electricity in in Germany represents as of 2017 about 35 percent of their total consumption so the idea they've converted entirely to solar wind is just not true well I don't know what you're bringing up it's probably write your own Daily Caller link so after this we can we can you know go back and check check it out but I know that they actually had it as a national order to make sure they move entirely to renewable check your source but is there anything that you I want to make sure that I understand if I've gotten anything incorrect for the audience because they'll make up their own mind everything as much as humanly possible we should devil if we should devolve my authority to the local level we should ensure that people have the freedom to use their use their labor as they see fit and keep their property as they see fit and we should also have a thriving social capital we should also have a thriving non governmental belief in one another that's the other part of this that is required it's not just pure libertarianism and free markets you actually do have to have a virtuous people that is crafted by a civilization steeped in the idea of right and wrong pure capitalism alone is better than pure communism and pure socialism alone a virtuous people is necessary however for freedom to truly coexist with a thriving and virtuous society that's the other part that we never talk about but I think that it's sort of important to note would you like to talk about time you want to grab a couple minutes to talk about that I want to make sure Hollis I know you were you know I'm not going by I'm not going by a cue cards here I'm going by right the old noggin but I wanna make sure all and let me look this up yeah hold on virtuous in all right speak is a synonym for white but let me allow no yeah good so it's you said you want to discuss this it's necessary what do you mean by virtuous maybe that makes all of us make sense just let's waive the virtuous wand right well again you mentioned at the very beginning of this interview actually the idea that the Bible mandates that people give charity I agree with the basic idea that a as John Adams put it our Constitution is fit only for a moral and religious people meaning that you need people are committed to the idea of helping one another outside of government or people are going to do is you've done and call for an increase of government to fill every life gap there are certain areas of socialism that are destined to fall down almost immediately there are other areas of socialism that are destined to fall down over time but it remains an attractive solution to folks who refuse to acknowledge that there is social network and that there's a social safety net in a social network existing outside of government alone if you believe the government is the only guarantor of fairness you are going to end up in the socialist camp if you believe that is the is the chief guarantor of a hand-up and in that forming thriving social bonds is the is the necessary adjunct to a free society then you're gonna be more in favor of individual freedom yeah I uh I don't know that I agree with that but I appreciate that you know you bolstered your claim by quoting old dead white guys I notice that's a real constant and I think that's gonna be doing your party wonders in the midterms and future elections so it seems like okay as long as everyone's a moral person and find this whole this whole capitalism thing will all work out just provide your time everybody else that everybody has to be and that everybody has to be a moral person but you do have to have enough moral people in a society to help fill in the gaps where capitalism does not solve problems for everybody widows orphans people who can't take care of themselves okay so capitalism would work at people tomorrow it just hasn't been done right it just hasn't been done correctly yeah assuming that assuming that people are amoral assuming people are amoral capitalism works better than any other system in the history of planet Earth assuming that people are moral capitalism still works better than any system in the history of planet Earth if you actually want the best of all available systems what you need is capitalism combined with a moral and virtuous people it's just my neck is sore from the rigidity you're so rigid capitalism or all social if no one's talking about Vanessa you go to Venezuela you don't go back to Denmark and Sweden in Norway right we're talking about a blended economy as many of the successful economies out are out there that no they're not called the United States of America between socialism and capitalism and we already have that here in the United States the conversation really comes down to what degree you draw the line at roads and military and the police force industrial complex I say let's toss education health care into the mix but let's let the rest of people decide Benjamin Shapiro it's the Benjamin Shapiro program if I'm not mistaken did I miss anything are you good bro that's where it is man go for it all right and I'm sure you've got a lot to do I'm sure you've got some people to harass they're in a college campus and they're a viral video out of it scarlet urn I hope it's been illuminating for everyone out there and I think next time I don't know who have on next time exactly but I think we'll be discussing feminism in rape culture but right now I need to take a hot bath

  1. In this latest Devil’s Advocate, we again explore the dark side of SJW arguments. This time Tyler debates Ben Shapiro on the merits of socialism. Let us know your thought in the comments!

  2. I'm only a few minutes in and I have to say that the Bible does say it's ok for the government to tax us for whatever reason they want. When the Frances asked Jesus about taxes he asked them who's face is on the coin. Caesar's they said. Then Jesus said give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God. It isn't fun, nor do I like it but it is what it is. Put your Faith in God and he will provide. Don't put your Faith in the false god of financial society. Pretty sure that's what happened to a lot of people during the great depression.

  3. Shapiro so close to believing in total freedom… except morally… the gov needs to force people to be moral. Sounds real moral. Let's get some more laws on the books!

  4. Better debate than any presidential debate I've seen in my life. Both of these guys are more qualified to be president than our last 4 presidents put together.

  5. I'm too distracted by Skyler's cool vibes to catch the questions – but Ben's answers are definitely insightful.

  6. I like Shapiro, but recently someone said, "Why is Ben ok with male genital mutilation, but female genital mutilation by Muslims are bad?" I have never thought about this, but, I'm stumped. Has he ever addressed this? Is it just the reason why that matters?

  7. this is the first of the devil's advocate videos i have watched. and i need to make sure i understand the point. is it actual discourse or entertainment? it is great satire of liberals but it isn't great debate. usually playing devil's advocate gives you the chance to look at the other side with a genuine open mind; i don't see this in the skit. you did entertain ben shapiro, he had to hold in laughter so many times. so i must say that if you are trying to entertain, good job. if you were trying to actually play devil's advocate all you did was make a caricature of the left. this will be the first lwc video that i watched from start to finish i will not be clicking the like button on.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *