Comments by "Kim O\x27Brien" (@kimobrien.) on "TIKhistory" channel.

  1. 72
  2. 11
  3. 5
  4. 5
  5. 4
  6. 4
  7. 3
  8. 3
  9. 3
  10. 3
  11. 2
  12. 2
  13. 2
  14. 2
  15. 2
  16. 2
  17. 2
  18. 2
  19. 2
  20. 2
  21. 2
  22. 2
  23. 2
  24. 2
  25. 2
  26. The problem that many don't understand is that once you get to the place where you have banks. Banks create money. Now if you don't believe me you need to listen to Milton Friedman when you pass money back and forth between banks you create money privately. You can play a game by yourself on paper to see how this works the banks asset value will rise because because they can count the same deposits more than once if the beginning loaning money back and forth to each other all without ever violating the requirement to keep a reserve on deposit. As long as the money can be just numbers on paper not actual gold or silver you can't get away from this problem. People don't want to carry gold and silver around to buy and sell everything which is how banks came into being. They had to tell people that their money was insured against loss to get back the trust in banks. They also had to create the central bank because of this. How do you have a capitalism without money and banks? Why do you think so many banks failed durring the great depression? They use to issue private money durring the great depression. Why is this possible? Because you only keep a fractional amount of the total on deposit. Now you have the German and Japanese Central Banks having zero interest rates. The problem is that most people suspect something fishy about banks but don't really understand how capitalism involves both the circulation of money and the creation of capital. You think you can just easily assign prices with a market and forget that when you put money into a market it becomes possible to create more money and thereby change all the prices. That's why in a real socialist country not only are they internationalist in out look they try and get away from commodity production the production of commodities for money. This is why in Cuba people appear to be living much better than their salaries would imply.
    2
  27. 2
  28. 2
  29. 2
  30. 2
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. Thomas Sowell is just a disciple of Milton Friedman he even sits in his Chair at Stanford University. His book Basic Economics is what you would call a hymn to capitalism and Free Markets. At the end of the day the only thing he proves is how foolish he is. His big claim to fame is his claim to have been a marxist who saw the light You can call him a marist if you want to voulgaris Marx's teachings. Go ahead chuck the labor theory of value in the trash for one so stupid only an intellectual could think it up. Trade can be beneficial to both parties and big risk can result in big rewards. Wow what Genius Sowell is!!!! I might want to trade something I don't need for something I do and some else might have something they don't need that I do. Big Risk can produce Big rewards. Anyone with a brain knows you usually want risk as little as possible to get the biggest rewards. Fidel says he risked the whole revolution to win the battle with South Africa in Angola. Well that was certain a big risk and it produced a big reward the defeat of the invincible white man in South Africa. What did the big banks and capitalist do when the crisis of 2008 hit? Did they reject the use of the central bank for waiting for everything to naturally reset? Like Friedman postulate for the fix after the Great Depression? No the headed straight to Washington for a bailout. The only thing Friedmans ideas in the old Soviet Union produced was a deep economic crisis which is why the Chinese didn't put everything up for sale like the neoliberals told them to.
    1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1