Youtube comments of Econ Lessons (@EconLessons).
-
97
-
83
-
81
-
68
-
Listen all! Harris is a not Trump vote with a better chance than Biden. Why?
1) Educated and idealistic.
2) Harris could get the female vote (In Polish, we say, "solidarność jajników," which means "solidarity of the ovaries" - Do you think Trump can go against that, when women unite for a greater cause? (no, Clinton was not that because she was Machillinan)
3) Harris' ethnicity is Indian, Jamaican, African, and White. Many people of color might not even vote if Biden is in the race, but Harris, yes.
4) Many people like me are independent, and I want to see the world better in the future, but Trump is not the way. They will vote for Harris just because of the Orange issue.
Allan Lichtman suggests a Plan B: Let Biden get the nomination, then release the delegates to Harris.
Is Harris my dream President? No, I would rather see Jake Broe, for example. However:
I do not want someone saying they are a "strong leader". I want someone who is idealistic and wants to make this world a better place. That would be Kamala Harris.
I am a former Conservative Republican, now Independent, and will vote with those who support Ukraine.
65
-
59
-
59
-
57
-
56
-
56
-
52
-
49
-
48
-
45
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
40
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
34
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
29
-
28
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
The Non-interventionist Ron Paul, who claims to be from the Austrian School of Economics of Ludwig Von Mises, ignores the fact that Ludwig Von Mises volunteered to defend against Russia. “Ron Paul is featured on Russian RT propaganda TV for his economic and Geopolitical criticism of the United States. In contrast, Elie Wiesel writes, “We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. ". Ron Paul's economics is not really for free market economics as he claims because it is freedom for 'his people', for some people but not for other people. For me, that is not true freedom and liberty for all. What would his stance have been in 1861 or 1941? For me, free classical liberal economics means people are free, all people, not just some people.
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
No one will ever be satisfied with healthcare because we all want to be 21 forever and feel like we are 21 forever. But the reality of life is we all grow old and pass from this world. Health care is an unlimited good. We all want more now. We want someone to fix the machine of our body. But consider this: The longest-lived people in the world are those who are modest in diet and exercise and take care of themselves. The issue with the US is everyone wants to treat the symptoms more than root causes, insurance, and medical bills like crazy. A free market in healthcare would see a dramatic reduction in cost. In Poland for example, I pay about 300 dollars for what would cost 5000 dollars in the US. I pay in the private system. I think the best treatment I have ever received was adipose stem cells. I paid in cash. I would never get this with any insurance. Some people are naive in thinking the best treatments are covered under government insurance and come in a pharmaceutical. Yes, sometimes it does, but I would like to see more people in the US, eating organic, growing their own food, exercising, being skinny taking vitamins, etc. We can all do this. Then we could afford more medicine for all. But people in the US consume painkillers for example, that maybe there are better ways to treat the issue. Further, if we want better healthcare for all, cut the military 99%. Just have a national guard and give up the empire.
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
I appreciate your perspective and respect your point. However, I am skeptical if BRICS will ever be gold-backed. If it does, in essence, becomes gold certificates that can be redeemed or traded at any bank for physical gold, meaning John Smith or Ivan Kuznets can walk up to a bank in Anytown, Russia or India, or anywhere in the world, and get species or a bag of gold, then I will lessen my skepticism. However, this is not happening. The Russian currency, being less than a penny, is almost worthless; is Moscow going to champion a universally accepted medium of exchange if their own house is not in order? There might not even be Russia as we know it in ten years. And the acid test is: what do you personally trade and hold, dollars or another form of currency? The dollar has issues yes. But the problems are relative compared to Brazil or Russia or China etc. Therefore, I am going with the United States, not these countries that have questionable economic transparency.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Russia will lose. However, they will certainly try. Russia's plan is to control resources such as oil, gas, and minerals, which translate to wealth. Then people that they Russify. They do not have to do everything themselves, but with the help of 1 billion pro-axis Indians, 1 billion pro-axis Chinese, and other bad actors, they can purchase the skills and equipment to make a dark place. Remember not to underestimate the Russians. Being big has disadvantages, but they already occupy 17,098,242 square kilometers of the landmass, which means they must be taken seriously.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
First, I love Sweden and doing my thesis on Knut Wicksell a Swedish economist. This is the nature of complex capitalistic economies we all rely on each other, nothing wrong with that, comparative advantage. However, it will not melt down, humans have a knack for mitigation and problem solving. But lets say it does, worst case, and I am talking dystopian, I think Sweden can be 100% food independent, right? So much land, and good land and so few people. They could get food from Ukraine, Poland or Italy or Spain or other place. Once you have houses and food and gas from Norway, your life is pretty good. Bikes are pretty easy to mitigate, many bikes made in Italy and France still, and if not, bikes still exist and can be repaired. Clothes, you can make your own clothes. We do. We grow our own food. You do not need a lot to be happy. People did it for 10,000 years. Growing food and making clothes are pretty easy things and life when it is simply is often happier. But it will not come to that. Nothing is going to collapse. There might be some inconveniences at best but other countries are stepping up. Many things are made not in China any more. My GoPro I film with is made in Thailand. The world adapts and changes.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@waynekirsner thank you for the reply, sorry if I rebutted too hard. Yes if I were to create the video again I would have done it differently and with more polish. I teach and am in school and the images alone too most of the time. I would have polished the script better and my understanding is evolving. However, the conceptual framework is right. Q of money was not the issue in the intermediate term. Further, interest rates understood as too low or too high or too much credit or too little are relative terms. These in themselves only have meaning in relation to the natural rate of interest, something which Knut Wicksell 1898 and Mises 1912 interpreted further. In modern term Woodford 2003 and the Fed/US model R*. It is this framework the DSGE model and monetary policy operate. Understanding the rates relationship to the in natura rate and how it affects the capital structure if the subtle point people miss. Further, there are multiple natural rates and multiple equilibriums. The money supply was not the key. I know Friedman and Schwartz in 1963 interpreted it though this lens, but the quantity of money was not the issue. It was the interest rate, which is an intertemporal price gave wrong signals and distorted the capital formation process. The Q theory of money is long-term. That is why Wicksell's theory was needed. That is relative interest rates. To over simply like people do will lead to wrong conclusions, like the money supply expanded or contracted too fast. It was about a price. Prices matter. Specifically, the price of interest, the marginal productivity of capital in a barter ratio world compared to the real world of monetary economics.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Aging, so what. Older people are wiser, less wasteful, and reckless, do not commit crimes, and tend not to be addicted like many youths. I live in Florida, and tons of peaceful, productive old people are upgrading their homes and passing wisdom to their families, in contrast with the addictive young on the street. They are filling jobs the young do not want to do. Employers love them as youth are often flighty with work and the older take it serious. We all age but continue to be productive and contribute, and assets/capital are passed on to the next generation. Medical is just a redistribution effect from the old to the caretakers, the young. So when old need care assets and wealth is transferred. Most important, why would this slow the economy when technology provides a passive boast continual boast.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I hear what you are saying, friend. But The largest oil producer is the United States, and we are the largest consumer. Canada, the EU. These are the countries we are talking about. China does consume and lot, and if Russia and China want to have their little club, it is basically barter and does not significantly affect my world. The Saudis still produce a lot of oil. Not as much as the US, but still a lot. They will not go against the US as they have everything to lose. Maybe they do depart at some point. So what. By then, the world will continue on an upbeat track of diversifying away from them with alternative energies and locations. Gulf Coast Oil has a lot of oil, and so does Canada's green energies, I think nuclear is the way to go.
Note: Much of the negative narrative about collapse and doom is spread by libertarians who unknowingly have become Russian repeaters, like Ron Paul or let's call them, Mises people. I used to think highly of them, but they took some wrong turns, IMHO. I like the leadership and ideals of someone like Ronald Reagan, and people today like him. In contrast, people who have become Russian repeaters, which is spreading talking points about how bad the US has become, have to look at the data more closely. Crime is down here, the dollar is strong, no unemployment, and home ownership is up. Many good things, but the negative picture is being spread to swing the election in 2024 to the person who will help Moscow out indirectly. It is just a thought.
I know Russians that use the dollar in Russia. Every time I travel and travel a lot, the dollar is accepted in any country. No one country I have ever traveled to accepts Ruble except Russia.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I understand free trade causes change and it is not always for the best for individuals personally. Yet as a whole the world does benefit in most cases.
Free trade lika two tubs of water.
Do not think of it as two bathtubs, One hot and one cold. When one gets hot the other gets colder when you open the values, think of it when you open the values between the two tubs. Rather think of it in another way, that is Comparative advantage, David Ricardo, a third pipe opens that brings hot water into both tubes.
It brings change and this is an opportunity for you. Yes even me when I am consulting I complain the high paid skills jobs go to India for example in IT, but that means I have the opportunity to do something else. I want to be ahead of the curve. I could be a capitalist and find a way to profit from markets opening up.
I also think some jobs will always be outsource resistant. Anything local, even as simple as growing food in your backyard. The days of 9 to 5 and pensions when out twenty years ago. With a dynamic, fluid, open mind, we have to adapt to the world around us instead of getting upset (too) at large scale demographic and economic changes we have little say over.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@timtebone1843 Very detailed reply, and thank you. The Federal Reserve's control of money is one of my favorite topics. If there was not Fed the world would be a better place in terms of equality, I think. Many economists have noted the redistribution effect of monetary policy. However, the Stockholm school economist believed a way around this in simple terms, was through redistribution from the government to some extent. Maybe not all the members of the Stockholm school but they were aware of this issues. Until the world gets better in terms of monetary theory and policy, the best we personally can do is not go into debt personally. Even if the US debt to GDP increases and it is an anchor and drag for economic growth, that does not mean it has to affect you. Even under communism in Eastern Europe, people made money in capitalistic ways. People in the countryside in particular were better off than people in the cities for this reason. In the countryside, if you have self-sufficiency, you were well off. My school of thought, I wish I could be Austrian but they are a little extreme on some views so if I were to categories myself maybe I would be Wicksellian, taking into account his latter writings. Wicksell was a capitalist but also pragmatic about some issues as monetary policy and wealth.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Why would you do a job you were not feeling like you are helping others and getting some feeling of worth with reference to others? Humans are not one-dimensional beings. We do need to 'toil' sometimes, but most people find their way in this life and find 'work' as opposed to 'toil' that is congruent with their value systems and their world view. Since people by their nature are innately good, more people than not, resolve this dilemma of scarcity in a way the is good for them and others. For example, I teach economics. However, I could use my brain to make money in ways that would not be benefiting the common good but only me, and it would be a lot more lucrative. But I am not going to do it. I do not think you would do it also, even if it were legal and even accepted. Most people satisfy other people's needs in a positive way, rather than a negative way. Work is not the meaning of life. However, to help others and yourself, done in a free market, a market where individuals choose their work is better than a society where you do not have free choice. In some ways work and scarcity makes us self reflective and try to be more humble better humans.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I hope you are right about the downturn. The Russian people and the Russian oligopoly led by Putin had an implicit agreement, that is, stay out of the way of Moscow's empire building and you can fly beneath the radar and the Duchy of Moscowa will not bother you personally. Things are changing and "Catching Fire" I hope.
First, excellent comment.
Second, Yes Dnipro was a great place before Russia stepped in. Your wife is lucky to have lived there before Russia. Nice countryside around it. Maybe the city is industrial soviet but the countryside was great. My view is, Dnipro is part of Ukraine as agreed by Russia, Ukraine, the US etc. based on a signed document. The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances December 1994.
If someone feels Russian in Dnipro they have the right to leave and go to Russia. Just like if someone in South Korea feels like they are North Korean, they have the right to leave and go to North Korea.
Third, Just as a side note, you can grow 100% of your Food on 1/3 an Acre. Check out Robin Greenfield or Curtis Stone, they do it on less. I on 1/10 an acre grow a lot and could on 1/3 grow, all with some exceptions. That is a lot of land. I have a USDA license and worked in the farming industry for years now. 1/3 acre is a lot.
When I was in Russia in the 1990s, it was primitive but livable. But Russians in the 1990s had the right to be proud of getting rid of oppression. Now, I would be ashamed to be in Russia for allowing a dictator to rule my country.
Putin has significantly held back the economic development of Russia. If Putin had not been in power, Russia would be like Switzerland. But since he is in power, it looks like his country has a close connection to North Korea.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
You are correct that inflation is a subtle tax. Instead of taxing people to pay the debt, they can inflate it. However, the target set is 2% inflation. We are currently at 3.2%. This is not even 50%, 20%, or even 10%. Therefore, it is more likely that the Fed is operating on the theory that inflation stimulates little demand and keeps people spending. However, I discuss this in my video. People will buy what they need when they need it. Unless there is an exceptional case of inflation or deflation, I'm afraid I have to disagree with the price stabilization idea. If prices need to rise or fall based on supply and demand, they should. I tend to agree that we spend too much, and we should have some balanced budget amendment, perhaps on a 4 or 6-year cycle. However, in times of geopolitical crisis, these would be suspended. During peacetime, we need to not have price stabilization policies. If prices need to fall they should fall.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
My clothes are made in Vietnam, my camera Thailand actually, my food, I grow or buy locally, cars, many in the USA or Japan, my gasoline often is from the gulf coast off of Texas, my furniture and dishware made in Europe, computer, probably China, but the software Finland, my appliances made in America, nothing I have is made in Russia. I bought that one Scythe a few years ago only because I wanted to test it, and it made claims, but the thing is a piece of junk. Nothing produced in Russia.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Yes, I could have done the video in a different way. If I had more time I would have made it with professional polish and with animations or cartoons or illustrations and data and graphs. However, since I am working on my Ph.D. I have little time, so I thought I would film it in an exotic looking place and 'wing it'. However, I felt I had gaps in what I wanted to express, so I filled it in with slides, which are too fast. Perhaps, people will pause the video on certain quotes. I would have perhaps organized it different also. However, the underlying premise holds. If you look at the freedom index it shows a reasonable correlation to how much economic freedom a country has and how much wealth is generated. Freedom gives people the chance to self actualize easier and use their brains to find the best ways to help each other. It is no coincidence that the freedom index supports what Adam Smith wrote in his book Wealth of Nations. Others can give elaborate systematic presentations with polish videos but the objective truth is there is a lot of evidence that free markets, capitalism, free movement of labor and capital and free trade leads to the wealth of nations. About the mic I use, it is a Zoom H1. Nice for the price. I do some EQ and compression. I had to edit only when a car drove by. If you are doing indoor recording I have another recommendation. Thank you for the comment if you have any other questions about economics please let me know.
2
-
I also add in the environment in the video that Poorer regions tend to be in hot, humid areas without deciduous forest areas or isolated and can not take advantage of trade routes.
Yes there is/was exploitation, but weighed against other factors I do not think it was as much as simply the climate. For example, as tragic as these stories are, e.g Congo, this country was not on a rapid growth trajectory before the Europeans arrived. It is not a reflection of the people, but rather the land, has a difficult climate.
In contrast, England is almost an ideal climate Zone 8 or 9 growing, with isolation for protection but also proximity for trade.
But even this country was conquered many times.
Ireland was totally exploited but once it connected to free markets, the EU it became rich.
Poland was totally destroyed, partitioned, it lost millions of people, and then it had communism where the Soviets extracted wealth. But in a few years after the markets opened up and trade, hundreds of years of historical economic exploration magically was replaced by wealth. Poland went from having nothing in the shops and the cities in ruin with millions gone, to a rich country in a matter of years.
The best think humanity can do is respect and honor the past than the suffering of the people of humanity and not forget what happened. All humanity, especially the rich need to improve these poor countries through encouraging sustainable agriculture and entrepreneurship coupled with free markets.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Money and power do shift. But I do not think it will shift to Russia, given the world events. I have greater confidence in the people living in the EU and US because the system here is so free, and freedom and transparency help innovation. In Russia, it is corrupt. You need to know someone to do anything. People flee Russia and do great things in free countries, but people that stay in Russia live quiet lives of desperation. If anything, I see Russia as it is today not existing in a few years and more power shifting to free, democratic, transparent, just countries. Sure, we could have a better monetary policy in the US, but to lose it to countries like Russia, no way. Not a chance.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Freedom - Justice - Equality - The social virtues
I am certainly not a dogmatic libertarian. I am not extreme. However, I just believe in the idea of justice. I believe the best way to achieve that is more freedom with a socail safety net.
I think that if society wants to make trade offs, we could decrease military spending radically. This is a drain on our society and ironically decreasing our preparedness to defend ourselves as it holds society back. That means because we funnel so much money in conventional weapons - we put ourself in the future at a severe disadvantage as we are not living to our potential in terms of education and technology that is the real edge.
I understand your comment about poor children. Many people believe they achieve success in life because of themselves. This is pure ego. Yes we do achieve things in the context of our cultural.
However, in a free society there are countless people who have risen up above poverty. Many of my friends. My friend from Kenya lived is living better than most Americans. My wife grew up in a village and she is super educated. It is what you do with your innate gifts rather than material gifts.
Material security once achieved, is the door that people can do anything. In this modern society you can just log onto a computer go to the library. Again, I grow my own food on little land.
Many American kids grow up in well manicure HOA DR. Horton communities and are slackers. In contrast, there are legions of children that grow up in blocks of flats and villages that are chess players and scholars.
The material poverty of the East is less than the spiritual poverty of the East.
After you have the basics, of food, which almost everyone has in a free economy, most too much, the rest is up the get the message out - the message of entrepreneurism - of a classical education rather than focus society's energies on a redistribution of wealth.
About family, I disagree. I see people as innately good. If people are innately good the more most will start be altruistic. The selfish genes are evolving away. The genes know they can not exist in a world of selfishness. So selfish people do not reproduce as much as lets say the Amish.
I often say I do not have the wisdom and that is why I do not dig my heels in politically. However, I would say this: There are three main societal virtues, Freedom - Justice - Equality. Only justice if the ultimate good. You can never have too much of the Summa Bonum. You can have too much freedom because you do not want to be showing R rated movies to children. You can have too much equality because life is monochrome and it drains the incentive out of most. However, justice you can not have too much of. This is what Marx wanted and this is what Adam Smith wanted. They are two philosophies that take very different approaches. Smith was a moral philosopher remember.
That being said people have gone back and forth where on the spectrum of freedom and equality does justice rest. And further how do you achieve this in a society.
I would have to agree with Friedrich Nietzsche's idea that society is an abstraction which does not exist. Rather what there is is an aggregation of free will individuals and society is the end observable story. The story should be written by individuals organically.
Thank you for the comments, I know I am a little rambling, but I think we understand each others and I can respect your viewpoint.
.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I think the US spends way too much money on defense and, to a large part, has created the debt as it is the largest discretionary item on the budget. In these times, I am glad we have defensive superiority, though. I do not think the US represents an empire in the traditional sense. We no longer incorporate territory and certainly do not do it through conquests. We exert spheres of influence, but this is often to control bad actors worldwide. Without the US idealism and Ronald Reagan-type policy of defending and standing up for the rights of the oppressed, the world would be worse off. Yes, the US is not perfect at all. But I would rather live in this imperfect democracy, a republic, than under a dictator. People have no idea how bad it is to live under that. There will be a time when oil is no longer the chief commodity of the world. That time is, in my opinion, sooner than some think. But even if crumbling weak Dictators in Russia ally with a Kingdom like the Saudis, people will not stop using dollars. Canada has oil, and they are not going to use a Ruble Saudi-based currency, and neither am I. It does not add up. These are talking points by what is called "Russian Repeaters". They want to make the US the bad guy and Russia to create an alternative. But they have it backward. I live in the US and thank God in heaven for this blessing. A world where the Saudis, Russia, and China have more power and throw in North Korea is not a place you want to be. Do not listen to these YouTube economists; they border on conspiracy-like ideas. But the US Dollar has an infrastructure so set up that it will be a long time before people use something else in a major way.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Richard Werner I have corresponded with he is an original thinker.
The first step to phase out the Federal Reserve would be to allow competing currencies recognized as legal tender. Right now, the Federal Reserve has a monopoly on the most important commodity in the market, that is money. Only Federal Reserve notes are legal tender and its appreciation and depreciation is not taxed as an asset. It is simply a medium of exchange. If we had something like we had in the free banking era of the 1800s where anyone could issue currency than the market would regulate the money supply. For example a many could issue currency, much like they issues credit cards. Of course if the currency were to be accepted better would be to have it back by something, like gold. This is very abstract unless you look into the free banking era, a time when the business cycles were less and growth was higher.
A simpler solution would be to make a commodity standard, like Gold. If Gold was money, than it does not matter who issues the notes as long as they had gold to back it up. This creates a stable monetary base, it restrains government spending and gives a confidence in the price mechanism of the market. As it stands now with non-neutral fiats currency, the first receivers have an unjust advantage.
However, because of fiscal spending out of control the US could not go on the gold standard, so a better path might be to allow competing currencies as money. Bitcoin is classified as a taxable asset, not money. I would like to do some videos on this.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Smith was a moral philosopher and if you read Wealth of Nations and his Theory of Moral Sentiment then you understand his point of view. Every person makes an action or choice with reference to another unless they are sociopathic. Read for example, Part I, Section I, Chapter III: Of the manner in which we judge of the propriety or impropriety of the affections of other men by their concord or dissonance with our own - in his book - Theory of Moral Sentiment or Part I, Section II, Chapter V: Of the selfish passions. Economic incentives are part of human motives and action but it is a not a singular incentive that drives people. Humans are more complex, think of Maslow. Adam Smith's unintended consequences of individual action, on the whole, is not based on sociopathic greed, but when people pursue their own self-interest in a rational way with reference to others. You seem to have a particular counter-culture (including anti-religion) agenda motivated by perhaps ego, rather than objectivity. I would suggest you revisit Adam Smith's wealth of nations, in the context of this own life and other writings. Trust me, you do not want the alternative of capitalism, such as anarchy or Marxism.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jeffbguarino You are correct. I was living in Poland during the transformation to the EU. Poland is an excellent place, I would live there again and might. Yes correct about the Russian language...There are a lot of people who speak Spanish in Eastern Connecticut, but that does not mean it should belong to Spain? Your logic is correct. Enjoy Canada, it has a lot of nature. We love going there. Putin is of questionable intelligence. Putin lived in a building in St. Peterburg - the Kupchino neighborhood- that I speculate his flat had lead paint that is Pb -- as well as, As, Cd, Zn, Ni, Cu, Hg in the water from ecological contamination from the Northern section of the city and the water pipes of the building. It is surrounded by heavy industry and pollution. I do not know what effect that had on his mental development, but he is not functioning at a high level. As a leader, he has led Russia into a dark time economically because of lower brain function. What amazes me is people follow him and obey him to their own end. As a Russian, I would get out or work actively for democratic reform, not simply obey.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I could create a whole series of videos on this Nerfgunsandpancakes :) First, Ukraine will prevail as light wins over darkness. But remember the concept of creative destruction, this was written about by Joseph Schumpeter, the Austrian economist 100 years ago. This posits that innovation leads to the obsolescence of existing economic structures and you are right that things will shift and some jobs not lost but displaced.. Hence, creating opportunities for new forms of economic activity. Artificial Intelligence can be analyzed through the lens of creative destruction to examine its effects on world economies. Consider all these positive effects of AI!
Increased Productivity: This is my biggest point, AI automates routine tasks, thereby increasing efficiency and productivity. This not only benefits individual firms but also has a multiplier effect on the overall economy.
Innovation: AI-driven analytics and problem-solving capabilities can lead to breakthroughs in various sectors, from healthcare and education to transportation and energy. This fosters a culture of innovation, generating new industries and economic opportunities.
Global Competitiveness: Countries that invest in AI technology may gain a competitive advantage on the global stage, attracting more investment and creating high-value jobs. This is what I mean when I say comparative advantage.
Resource Optimization: AI algorithms can optimize the use of resources, reducing waste and enhancing sustainability, which in the long term can contribute to economic stability.
Data-Driven Decision Making: AI's ability to analyze big data allows for more informed decision-making, leading to better allocation of resources and improved public and private sector governance.
Customization and Personalization: AI enables the customization of products and services to individual needs, creating new market niches and expanding consumer choice, which can stimulate demand and economic activity.
Supply Chain and Logistics: AI can significantly streamline supply chain and logistics, reducing costs and time, thereby making markets more efficient.
Increased Consumer Surplus: Advanced AI technologies may lead to a decrease in costs of goods and services, increasing consumer surplus and overall well-being.
AI can be understood as a form of creative destruction based on the history of economics. While it may displace certain jobs and industries, its positive effects include increased productivity, innovation, and competitiveness, which have the potential to benefit world economies in various ways. Therefore, from a Schumpeterian perspective, AI serves as a catalyst for economic transformation and growth.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I agree with you, but not to the end. For example, I am getting a PhD have a lot of experience in a technical field and I make a pittance. I have also worked hard physical labor for little money. In contast people in money centers like NYC or London or any city sit in cushy jobs that do not add value, they create nothing, they innovate nothing, but they get paid 250k. How is that fair? It is not. There is an underclass in the US that works two jobs or gets 10 dollars/hour. Much of it has to do with the complexities of our monetary system. That is under a classic gold standard that tendency would exist less. Under a fiat money system money is created out of thin air and when it it pumped through it goes top down. However, still the idea here is how does that apply for you personal life? For me, it just means I have to be innovating and reinventing my life until I find myself making a wage that I personally deem fair. I did not make the rules but I can learn to play by them and still operate within my code of ethics. To try to equalize the wage through government intervention does not work. Under socialism people are all equally poor and then there is a ruling class connected to government. Better is say, OK our system is unfair, but find out the real reason behind it. If you dig deep enough, you might find it connected to the monetary system. Until that reform, I grow my own food and improve my skills. You can build a nice house for under 20k and be somewhat self sufficient for under in a 1/4 an acre. Anything you make after that is gravy and you will have a better life than the grey hairs getting fat in their corporate offices.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
We do have issues fiscally. I see that as the main issue. We spend more than we earn. Any house or country that does that seemingly is not heading for a good outcome. I do not deny that in any way shape or form. That is the reality of our political process that the incentive is to make promises and spend more than it is to tax. Also that monetization can increase inequality because asset holders, benefit from asset price inflation. I would agree with many old school thinkers even some of the founding fathers, that debt or excess debt can be a moral issue. It is saying I personally am entitled to more than I create in value. However, there are exceptions of course. If you take loan to finish medical school your income will pay it off easily in the future. So some of your claims have merit. That being said, I stick to my initial premise. People do not want to live 10,000 years in the past or 1,000 years in the past or 100 years in the past because life was harder. It was harder as technology was more primitive, and we had despots ruling, and not we have democracy. The world in 100 years will be inconceivably more advanced technologically and humans will be living better. I would not mind being a teen today. When I was 14 I started to work. At 17 I worked 7 days a week on the night shift, 11-7. To pay my master's schooling I worked on the loading docks. So in contrast life is not that bad for the youth today. Our Fiscal and monetary policy is not optimal by my assessment. Yet technology and the creative human spirit will continue to improve the lot of most humans. I do pray for peace in the world. The threat is not economic but despots and tyrants that try to take freedoms and life and in a word are 'bad actors' to say the least. However, I believe light wins over the darkness. We just have to be patient and faithful to our ideals.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
When I was in Poland in the 1990s it had little economic wealth, the Molotov plan was just to rebuild the basics, when I was living there in 2004 I remember on May 1st when it entered the EU and after I saw rapid change as markets further opened up. There is not one factor that determines anything in life. For example, why a particular person does well economically. However, generally if you have free markets and a basic structure of education and just laws nothing holds a country back. I still think Nicaragua, Guatemala and the Congo are hot humid jungle countries. Every try to sit and do advanced math when it is 100 degrees and humid? In contrast a country like Finland is cold and people plan and think, partly because the weather is more conducive or at least spurs people to sit and think. So if you have a hot humid country perhaps the culture is shaped by the weather. This is not economic theory per say but think about it. It was not until the advent of airconditioning even the our own Southern States in the US started to develop. Now everyone is moving to NC and FL, before economic growth did not happen unless it was connected to agriculture and tourism to some extent. So yes is corruption certainly a function of development but my question is why? It is not just exploitation. Poland was partitioned and exploited for hundreds of years and it bounced back quickly because of access to trade routes and the industrious nature of the people. Aid money did not make Poland what it is today, it was the people. I lived there during the transformation. However, it has the base of a just laws and democracy and peace with a free press that exposes corruption. A country like Venezuela can not develop because it is a socialist dictatorship. When it changes to a free market, it will be rich again. It is that simple.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Thank you for the comment. In the general and YouTube sense I trend to agree with you. You expressed in a clear way. I wish we had sound honest money. In Academia, which I am in, I do not think the Keynesians think consciously they are doing this, rather they are more about building econometric models which will support their ideas. However, the complexities of their models like in Michael Woodford's book Interest and Prices, someone whom I respect but disagree with, is build on a system of money that is less than optimal for freedom and growth and development. The Keynesian models have this systemic issues, connected with fiat money. I also think as you do it takes from the poor and gives to the rich in an indirect way because there are always first receivers and last receivers of money. I do not think the Keynesian theorists in any way are malicious, rather smart people operating on a paradigm that is outdated, however, connected to politics so difficult to replace. Keynesian economics does negatively affect people's lives. In contrast, the Austrian ideas of free money or a Gold standard would lead to a more market solution, and greater prosperity for all. I do not necessarily mix, Politics, Economics and religion as they human ideas and human institutions. The Ultimate reality is about transcendence.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Hi John, there is a lot here and each point is worthy of a reply.
People do starve under communism, you do not hear about it. What about the 7 million Ukrainians who did under the Ukrainian holocaust 1932-1933? There are other examples but I think that is enough. The idea is the same, in order to treat people like a planned input, there will be a great cost, because embedded in every human is an in the sense of freedom and self sufficiency, One million years of evolution and all. There was mass starvation and even when people had food it was rationed. How do I know? All my family came from there. However, in the countryside when people could grow their own, things were better. At least this was my families experience.
However, that does not make me right in my argument. Because there could have been starvation if Czarist Russia was not replace. We just do not know which would have been worst.
I do not object to government help for the poor. People talk about cutting food stamps but 50% or more of this countries discretionary income is Weapons. Its a trade off, guns or butter, and certainly a rich society does not have to purist. It can help people without a great loss of efficiency.
Remember the point is to make a just society not to maximizes efficiency.
However, I still believe the the ideas of freedom in the markets will usually produce both unless there are externalities.
Healthcare - Agreed. Greed from drug companies and insurance and everyone else destroys quality care. I work hard but can not afford to take my family to the dentist. If we need care we have to fly to Poland. However, the solution is to dismantle the system and have a free market. I know this sounds crazy because health care should be one of those goods that everyone has, but the reality is the ideas in healthcare are upside down.
The masses are using prescription opiates (universal healthcare is the opium of the masses), people are taking antibiotics like they are going out of style. Doctors are doing unnecessary surgeries from tonsils on children to back operations on adults. Its all backward thinking and the worst is I have to pay for it. If tonsils are removed t-cells go down over a lifetime and 9 months latter children are worst off. Back operations do not work in the long term. Back, knee and hip etc could be better treated with stem cells. But this is a free market idea and not covered by most insurance.
In the free market health care world - ie. cash payers people are doing adipose stem cells. In the government market they are doing back and knee operations. This profit motive taps into the desire for humans to better themselves and others.
If people want a healthier populous, better is to increase awareness about curtail junk food or something as obesity is perhaps the most serious problem in this country. In fact the more insurance coverage a person has the more obese they are, that is a statistic.
So it comes down to freedom. I grow my own organic food, and I will get sick someday, but I find it strange I do not get sick when those around me are huffing a puffing. It comes down to some extent taking responsibility for your own health.
My point is if you layer more and more planners you will get more and more nonsense and the quality is less. Because right now the state of US medicine is nonsense. Even the doctors, have their hands tied because it is all about rules and regulations under our system.
I want planning by the many not by the few. Planning by the many means we can all plan for ourselves rather than have government 'geniuses' plan for us. I know this sounds arrogant but I will compare IQ scores or chess ranking with any government planner. I do not like the idea of a planner engineering my life.
I am a college professor but I grow my own food in my little backyard and do a lot of things myself. If I was homeless all I would need is a good saw and I would build by own house and like the people who founded this country I would grow my own food and sew my own clothes. It is called the human spirit, and planning crushes that. The big baby bottle of government is contrary to my understanding of human dignity.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DanNorton1 First, interesting comments so nothing personal. I am not an expert on Ayn Rand, but her thinking there are absolutes in a world without the Absolute is not possible. Each person will construct their view of the world and call it right. Like the 100 million lives lost in the 20th century from such things, e.g. the Soviets and the National Socialists to start. In history each person has their own view, including religion, but I would argue there is less variance with the latter. Ayn Rand's thinking is just one philosophy among many. In the words of Hans Kung 'there is a post enlightenment bias on the individual'. To grossly, paraphrase of Mortimer J. Adler, the 20th century thinking did not yield any radically new thinking that was not already debated in philosophy of the Ancients or the past.I think her claim to absolutes is absurd if there is no Absolute that exists in the universe. This is what Han Kung, Fyodor Dostoyevsky and Nieszche write about. Yes you can not refute it. But if you take it to its corrosive end, there is nihilism, a void. There is nothing, including no absolutes. Only nihilism that each person tries to ascribe meaning in their own way. Like Camus myth of Sisyphus. Each person defies the fate of the void in some way they find. Some of those ways include Soviet Socialism which is almost 100% opposite of what Rand stood for. If there is no God then up or down makes no sense. If you stand back from the planet we live on, which point is up or down? There can be people making moral arguments but not compass no moral compass. That is why if there is no God, the end of 19th century thinking became aware there is nihilsm. Rand, is like in the Camus just trying to define something in someway to make her like meaningful.
I argue that there is a God and that with reasonable fundamental trust we can go forward.
Rand, in my reading are self centered. Adam Smith would have a very different view on self interest. Smith, if you read his Theory of Moral Sentiment said 'people should act lovely'. Rand wrote ' I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.' To me that is selflish. To me that is nihilist... ' Or The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.' She is all about the individual. But the individual has to make reference to society in a positive way. I can not do whatever I want.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@blackswanrising2024 You are fantastic. Your depth and insights, if you write a book, I will read it. I am more like a Christian Platonist. I believe Christ came to earth, in addition to being the lamb of God, to remind people of our true natures. That we are great and powerful spiritual beings. However, it is the curse of the dark one that tries to make us forget.
On a lighter note, from an economic standpoint, I believe, like Adam Smith did, enlightened self-interest. Since society is good, it does work, and we are all progressing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I know right? Does that not sound funny, that a better diet and improved climate can help? But it does. I have seen it in the USA. In the Appalachian mountain region and the South in the US when I was a kid, it was poor and even had problems with nutrition. Now since I went to school it is wealthy. There was no corruption before and they were poor, only free trade, better AC and better diet. Do not dismiss my theory so fast until you know the facts. Consider 1 and only 1 thing, iodine, there are many factors besides this but research this one nutrient. Iodine in the diet will account for a 15 point difference in IQ. The Flynn effect is largely fetal iodine phenomenon. This is just one nutrient. That data is overwhelming. You can not get iodine in a normal diet, and further foods like Cassava block it. I know what I am talking about and do not dismiss this. If you couple with other dietary factors life is harder. In the USA I saw this as we had this issue in the past. I know there is a lot of corruption, but if people have a good diet and AC and a computer, the playing field is leveled to some extent and corruption fades when the economic incentives go away, which means more people are making money in honest international ways, then local dishonest ways.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Kristen, I know how you feel. That is because it is the way our human brain's work. Negative sometimes has an impact greater than the beauty and good around us as a survival mechanism. Do not worry, things will get better. Like I said in one of my old videos, evil has its hour. However, light wins over darkness, you will see.
Funny you mention the Trump-Orban alliance, I wanted to do a video on it. Worry not things will get better. Even if the orange gets elected, Russia China and North Korea, these are simply controlled economies of poor suffering souls. They are no match or the innovation and energy of developed nations. We are doing amazing things in the US and Europe and around the world in terms of science. Ultimately it comes down to your world view. I have faith and trust in an ultimate reality. A reality that is more than we see here, and I personally work on transcending this day to day negativity and return to that source of goodness and light. I am fully confident the world will get better. Sorry about all that. Sincerely, Mark
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1