Comments
  1. Mark Hamilton & Yanis need to have a secret personal meeting! They could talk about the Melian Dialogue, a fulcrum era of history when man lost his weak grip on acheiving civilization, among endless other things!

    We have a solid plan that from now on lets our species correct our course, to finally live the rich & joyful lives we are born for.
    😂👍🏽👏🏻💟💥✌🏾

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OkxjnnBL7V8

  2. .Since another socialist hasn't given us an ethical path to socialism,  here is another Solution:

    A logarithmic income tax that stays within districts and states; States set a minimum wage adjusted annually to keep Pace with inflation. States set up retirement plans and medical coverage for their citizens.  A national VAT ( with an exception for food and shelter) for a reasonable UBI; a tax on publicly traded companies, a luxury tax and a tax on capital gains from Wall Street goes to International infrastructure, nuclear power and policing the world, to be budgeted by the House and Senate.

  3. Last paragraph of chapter XI of the first book of "The Wealth of Nations", by Adam Smith;

    "His employers constitute the third order, that of those who live by profit. It is the stock that

    is employed for the sake of profit which puts into motion the greater part of the useful labour

    of every society. The plans and projects of the employers of stock regulate and direct all the

    most important operations of labour, and profit is the end proposed by all those plans and

    projects. But the rate of profit does not, like rent and wages, rise with the prosperity and fall

    with the declension of the society. On the contrary, it is naturally low in rich and high in poor

    countries, and it is always highest in the countries which are going fastest to ruin. The interest

    of this third order, therefore, has not the same connection with the general interest of the

    society as that of the other two. Merchants and master manufacturers are, in this order, the

    two classes of people who commonly employ the largest capitals, and who by their wealth

    draw to themselves the greatest share of the public consideration. As during their whole lives

    they are engaged in plans and projects, they have frequently more acuteness of understanding

    than the greater part of country gentlemen. As their thoughts, however, are commonly

    exercised rather about the interest of their own particular branch of business, than about that

    of the society, their judgment, even when given with the greatest candour (which it has not

    been upon every occasion) is much more to be depended upon with regard to the former of

    those two objects than with regard to the latter. Their superiority over the country gentleman

    is not so much in their knowledge of the public interest, as in their having a better knowledge

    of their own interest than he has of his. It is by this superior knowledge of their own interest

    that they have frequently imposed upon his generosity, and persuaded him to give up both his

    own interest and that of the public, from a very simple but honest conviction that their

    interest, and not his, was the interest of the public. The interest of the dealers, however, in any

    particular branch of trade or manufactures, is always in some respects different from, and

    even opposite to, that of the public. To widen the market and to narrow the competition, is

    always the interest of the dealers. To widen the market may frequently be agreeable enough to

    the interest of the public; but to narrow the competition must always be against it, and can

    serve only to enable the dealers, by raising their profits above what they naturally would be,

    to levy, for their own benefit, an absurd tax upon the rest of their fellow-citizens. The

    proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order ought

    always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having

    been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most

    suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men whose interest is never exactly the same

    with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the

    public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it."

    A few lines here and there should be retextualized to take into account the global nature of today capital, but one can get the gist of it thinking globaly instead of locally.

  4. I'm sorry, but you were Minister in a country in debt and asked for change without repaying those who lend you the money… That's not right.
    I know it might be counter-intuitive, but you should first become an economical power and THEN change the system… From the top.

  5. Andrew Yang for US president in 2020. He doesn't have all the answers, and he's not a savior, but he would help us get started moving in the right direction. $1000 a month for every American and affordable healthcare, these two solutions alone would put power back in the hands of people. People would still be responsible for finding work and meaning in their life, but $1000 a month would certainly take the edge off for millions. And it would send billions of new money into local economies, creating a multiplying effect on new and existing local businesses. If there's another candidate who has ideas that would get America headed in a more positive direction more quickly, please let me know. I don't see one. Yang2020.com for answers to many of your questions.

  6. Totally unregulated capitalism is a terrible idea yes, but all of this "inequality" talk doesn't mean anything. We should strive for a system that allows for upward mobility. We live in such a a system. Not everyone born poor will stay so and not everyone born rich will stay so. What's that saying? Equality of opportunity and not equality of outcome? I'm poor. Very poor, but I don't want a system that pays the same for excellence as it does for incompetence. I want a system that rewards innovation and hard work. I don't want everyone to end up equal regardless of what they do. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

  7. Most of the disadvantages coming with today's capitalism result from giving the power of regulating it to only a few. And only the government and its corpo friends take advantage of that. So the title is wrong: its regulated capitalism that makes people less happy than they could be in unregulated capitalism

  8. Religion can help people find purpose and help each other. Even with the scary extremist terrorists, there are great acts of good that religion does.

  9. Excellent summary. You don't have to be a Marxist to agree with Yanis' analysis of the trouble we are in.

  10. More people are able to have more and live a happier life with unregulated capitalism. The problems you have with capitalism is when the government starts putting its nose in the business of business. The people who cry that it is unfair are the people who are not willing to work hard enough for what they want to achieve. Then whip out the victim card saying that it isn't fair that they don't have the same amount of success as rich person "A".

    Instead of finding out how to make a better mousetrap these people cry that isn't nat fiar that the good mouse trap works so well. Look at How Europe has treated successful companies in the past. Microsoft. They made too good of an operating system that it was not fair that they tied their own browser to the operating system they must separate it. Even though you could already download and install Mozilla. Look at google now they are saying that Google has to much share of the search and that people are too dependant on it. SO they have to look for ways to extort money out of them by making up new laws that will "Redistribute the wealth". You are wrong that unregulated capitalism is bad. It has made more people rich than any socialist or communist government ever dreamt.

    Then you have this Former Finance minister of Greece. IS that the company that is having to be propped up by the EU because it is so far in debt? And you want to take the advice of someone who cant handle their own finances?

  11. comes across as a 'silly' presentation that sounds more like he's trying to sell me something (like that life sucks, I guess) – most of the people in 'my world' are happy with they're lives – not buying, find a different ear

  12. Actually hunter-gatherers lived very peaceful egalitarian lives. The powerful could not dominate others with brute force

  13. The problem is over-regulated capitalism, delegation of individual responsibility and a lack of education (due to the former). Capitalism is the most fair system in the world and if the average citizen wasn't a selfish asshole we'd have more Elon Musk style companies over private banks or tax-subsidized big oil.

  14. It finally makes sense why the Greece was/is so poor. They picked this know-nothing to lead their finances. How about learning economy 101 before leading a country? Isn't that a novel idea?

    I know that communist manifesto gives an illusion of knowledge and do-goodery, but one should try and find out the basics of the basics of economy, just to be on the safe side. More so if you plan to lead economy of a country and even more if you should be given a face time on Big Think.

  15. And the haves convince the have nots that you, and everybody else with have a brain, are leftist or water melon or jews or kuffar or sinner or redneck or communist or kaffer or muslim or space cowboy

  16. Opinions are like assholes everyone has one. There is no perfect system of government.
    you will always have someone who wants to control it at the expense of everyone else.

  17. I feel that Yanis Varoufakis is the Noam chomsky of our generation.
    He is just so on point with his criticism of capatalism and how it could be tweaked.
    Sadly the vast ammount of brainwashed dummies out there instanty think "soviet socialism" when ever they hear someone say that capitalism may be flawed in any way…

Leave a Reply

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