Comments by "Curious Crow" (@CuriousCrow-mp4cx) on "Garys Economics" channel.

  1. 219
  2. 45
  3. 41
  4. 41
  5. 16
  6. 15
  7. 15
  8. Absolutely correct. The best economists I have discovered are poor kids who had the talent, and the luck to make it, but didn't forget where they came from. Gary Stevenson, Michael Hudson, and Mark Blyth have all focused on wealth inequality, because they realised that people like them were no longer coming through the system. And they all have a strong sense of economic history being a series of struggles between the asset wealthy and the state for control of the economy, and the people suffering the collateral damage of that struggle. And as technology advanced, it became harder for the state to control the asset wealthy over time. It's been a constant tug of war since antiquity. And the asset wealthy feel they have won the battle. That's why they are undermining democracy. This was only extended to the masses by the state, as a tool to counterbalance the power of the asset wealthy. But, the asset wealthy have broken the power of the state, persuading the masses that they should look to the asset wealthy for protection. That's like cattle looking to the cattle farmer, the abattoir owner, and the supermarket for protection. That protection is only ever contingent on how the asset wealthy can benefit from it. We saw that through Covid, and looking back through British economic history, the same indifference together with indoctrination runs through. And the social darwinism. We're at a tipping point, because of the harm done by capitalism to the planet we depend on for survival. And unless we start taking a wider view, a more collective view, we're in danger of leaving nothing for our descendants - no money, no property, no future. It's that simple.
    14
  9. It's a good start, but we the people have to change too. Voltaire said "People will cease to commit atrocities only when they cease to believe absurdities." And over nearly the last 5 decades we have committed several atrocities on ourselves and others, because our priorities - individually and collectively - are misplaced. All priorities bring problems, but if you end up resenting dealing with those problems your priorities bought with them, that's a sign you've got the wrong priorities. And resentment driving our politics now. And that resentment leads us to cling to blame, which changes nothing, instead of being accountable. Not only should our politicians be accountable to us, but we need to be accountable for how we contributed to our issues. We're more divided and isolated from each other and the world around us because we haven't been honest with ourselves. Yes the plutocrats and their bought politicians deceived us, but we wanted to be deceived. We wanted not to think about the consequences of policies executed by politicians we voted for that were not only counter-productive, but corrosive, harmful, and pointlessly cruel. People stood by as different groups wet made scapegoat of the week, not realising that was a beast that would eventually consume them. The poor, the sick, and the disabled, and the elderly were thrown under the bus. Then the working class, and now the middle class are now going under, all because plutocrats want more assets, and their banks and corporations they own want more profits. And they resent anyone who stands in their way of those goals. Time to be honest with ourselves, or nothing can get better. Time to accept that the plutocrats see everyone but themselves as a means to an end. And if we keep on pretending that isn't true, things will only get worse. If we want to keep the pros of capitalism, we have to take responsibility for its cons, and it's conmen that come with it. They depend on Society being organised and well-run enough to clean up after the messes they leave as they make their wealth. Well, There's a price for that and that is taxation, entailing redistribution of wealth when capitalism and its markets fail to adequately distribute assets, services, and commodities that are needed by everyone. We need to stop running our economies as if they were branches of Red Lobster, where the plutocrats consume numerous portions of fare, and leave little for the needs of those making it possible for them to eat as much as they can.
    12
  10. 11
  11. 10
  12. 10
  13. 6
  14. 6
  15. 5
  16. 4
  17. 4
  18. They didn't run away when the Debt-To-GDP ratio was 270%,and the top rate of tax was 90%. It took until the 1960's,with the expansion of the tax haven network, before we had that. Tax is needed to maintain the infrastructure upon which business relies, and the theft and grift we have been allowing is not helping. So, no more free lunches. No more socialism for the asset wealthy and unfettered capitalism for everyone else. It's about paying their fair share. Yes, they can bugger off to Singapore, or Abu Dhabi, but why go to those places? It's not just the tax, because they are taxed on their consumption, and the state owns everything, and ensures every citizen has a roof over their heads, and has decent Healthcare. It's not free either. But this what you don't get. You are being reductionist and short-sighted. You don't look under the hood of those places. They can only exist if those who live their permanently are content. That the bit about Singapore on Thames BS ignored. Why? Because it was the fantasy of wannabe rich kids who've never even run a tuck shop in their lives, thinking they could run a country like Jeeves and Wooster, who then were seduced by the wads of cash of foreigners who don't care about this country. The people are this country too. They have needs and they were being failed. (And if you saw how the poor native Singaporeans live, you wouldn't be so impressed. They don't even have places to hang their washing except out of the windows of the tower blocks they live in.) Britain could be like London if it's elites had more imagination, and actually care about anyone else but their kith and kin. The one thing a former empire should never do is bring back the norms of the colonies to the home country. And the Chumocracy are so out of touch with the real world, they tried to do that, and took a bullet. Just a thought.
    3
  19. 3
  20. 3
  21. 3
  22. 3
  23. 3
  24. 3
  25. Pushback is to be expected from those interested in keeping people ignoring the inevitable effects of not distributing wealth fairly enough to keep those mostly producing it just surviving, nevermind thriving. What people don't really understand is that this is nothing new. I was reading a piece by Gore Vidal from July 1961 about the willingness of the "Conservatives" in the USA to embrace the ideas of Ayn Rand, who argued that altruism and justice were immoral, and that the Cult of "I" should replace Christianity, and other religions, and values. Then I watched Philiosphy Tube's latest video that described how the powerful encourage those they need to keep compliant and cooperative in keeping their gravy train running, to see those harmed by their hoarding and exploitation as not worthy of being cared about. The people, lives, and livelihoods ruined and being cut short by wealth inequality are to be ignored. Or not grieved over. In that, Boris' Johnson's attitudes towards the deaths in Covid were not an aberration. His response to the real damage done by Brexit to business and people's, was not the ramblings of a functional alcoholic - the only personal characteristic he shared with Churchill - but his real belief. They want us to stop feeling that injustice is wrong. That wealth inequality to that extent means that the damaged caused is swept under the carpet, devalued, or seen as not worthy of being grieved at it is destroying the capacity of people and their families to survive, is not inevitable, natural, or virtuous, but a deliberate and calculated harvesting and hoarding of asset wealth to benefit the few. It is the world of "Soylent Green". (Google it.) Where those worthy of consideration as determined by the needs of the powerful are treated are seen as worthy of our consideration, and are granted privilege, whilst those who aren't, are marginalised, seen as inconvenient problems, and their suffering is ignored. This is nothing new. Class and Caste define who gets looked after. And who ends up rioting. And who is blamed and scapegoated. The current form comes from the failure of Neoliberal economics to maintain the postwar economic settlement in the West, and to ignore the social, cultural, economic, and political dislocations and insecurities caused by it, occurring everywhere, and all at once in this present time. People everywhere, except the winners in this rigged game, are pissed at the outcome, and rightfully so. But the wealthy winners, are largely are using their profits to prevent the pitchforks coming for them. They know their fantasy has crashed to earth, to the extent it has created more instability and more frictions. To the extent the fallout is capable of damaging the earth. But, like any addict, they're not ready to give up. So they will not admit their failure, but instead, will double down. Hence, there's more political polarisation, because when people are busy hating each other, they don't notice their pockets being picked. It doesn't have to be that way. Capitalism can work in ways that focus on efficient and effective distribution of asset wealth and resources, instead of beggar thy neighbour. It can work in ways that are safer, cleaner, and that can keep the planet in habitable for humans. But we have to do capitalism differently. Capitalism has to prioritise the basic needs of people and communities before profit. Simply, profit returns to being the means rather than the ends. Capitalism has to pay its way. Simply, the costs of doing business have to be borne by those doing business. Socialism for the rich, and unmitigated capitalism for everyone else is no longer acceptable or desirable. The rich should clean up their own messes, such as pollution, and societal and cultural impacts of their activities. If Capitalism did only those two things, wealth inequality would eventually disappear. Wealth would not disappear. On the contrary, it might even grow in size, with more people being able to access the means of building it. It just would be hoarded by a minority.
    3
  26. 3
  27. 3
  28. 3
  29. 3
  30. After being told for decades, There Was No Alternative to giving away our assets, we might just begin to realise There Was Always An Alternative. There was an alternative in 1945, when people after World War II said "We had Enough of lower living standards, poor health, poverty, and lack of opportunity" through the ballot box. And less than a hundred years later, we're facing the same problems, for the very same reasons. We've been told the same lies for nearly 50 years, that our were told in the 20th century. It's taken nearly 50 years of lies and neglect to working peoplepush people to say, yet again, "We want to take back control. We want to do things differently." it isn't going to be easy, because as happened in the interwar years, there were asset wealthy people trying to warp and misdirect our desire for change. Do not give up. They are already planning to use their asset wealth to extract more and to further strengthen their control over your country. If you really want to take back control, you have to tax the passive income of the asset wealth of multimillionaires and billionaires, and redistribute it . Then, and only, then will you have any meaningful sense of control over your own country. It took our ancestors time, blood, sweat, and tears to get what we had in the 20th century. But we did get it. Time to really put the effort into getting that back from those who want to own our assets, and pay us far less than that privilege is worth. And when we get it, we need to keep it this time. And we have to work together to do that, and stop the economic clock going backwards.
    2
  31. 2
  32. 2
  33. 2
  34. 2
  35. 2
  36. I suggest your information doesn't reflect the reality of the teaching profession in the US. So many teachers there are leaving the profession, for pretty much the same reasons as British ones. And wages vary by state, so $80,000 in California might just be chicken feed, especially when there are reports of people earning $100,000 pa and living paycheck to paycheck in the US. Should big doesn't it. But when breakfast in a diner in LA costs you $20, you can eat there every day. That's why takeaway food firms, and other discretionary spending products are reporting losses because US consumers are tightening their belts. Hell, even Louis Vuitton (LMVH) is reporting lower profits as their sales are significantly down. And teachers do work outside the classroom and at home, and often end up doing 60 hour weeks. That's why both US and UK teaching professions are haemorraghing talent. It's not just giving the lessons. It's the lesson plans, the marking, writing reports, pastoral care, as well as dealing with children who might have special needs or personal problems, such as poverty, hunger, or behavioural problems, nevermind the parents. Classes are too big, and under-and malinvestment over decades in education is reaping the whirlwind. To be honest, in the Anglo-sphere, our brand of economics is selling families short. And teachers get the brunt of that. You can tell? Why? In the UK, the dropout rate for teacher training alone was about 75%. So 3 out of every 4 graduates drop out before they get their PGCE. And of the those that get through the training, almost all are leaving the profession within 5 years. That's the reality of teaching. It's a vocation, more than a job, because it is personally and professionally demanding, as well as being poorly paid for doing what you're are expected to do. They're underfunded and so are the other staff, and so are the schools. That's why we're selling families short. And no wonder some kids fall off the rails. We need to wake up to what we're sleepwalking our society into.
    2
  37. 2
  38. 2
  39. That is not THE problem. It's a symptom of how myopic and unfair the tax system is. It's not the cause. And, once the people who really run this country realise that has to change, and put their mind to it, then that will have to change. And it's not only the asset wealthy who have to change. The asset limited who rely on a wage, and the assetess, have to wake up the reality of their gradual demise, and stop supporting politicians who do not serve their interests. And let's be honest, the indoctrination is going to be as hard as giving up the worst addictive drug. Fear and Greed are more powerful. And until we stop believing things that can't be true, we will keep falling victim to them. Why? Because we don't understand what's really happening, and the asset wealthy class, especially the ones at the very top, are investing in ways to make you not believe reality. Why do you think Musk, Trump, Bezos, etc spend billions buying access to your attention? Why do you think the best selling newspapers in the UK are kept in business although they are in the red, losing millions every year? Why do think Google have screwed over small businesses SEO strategy to insert their least useful AI on your android phones? Or Apple are now getting their users to work for nothing to train their own AI? No such thing as a free lunch. That's why Twitter wasn't banned here in the UK, when they arguably endangered the lives of innocent people and wrecked communities in the UK by spreading disinformation? We live in a world that's addicted to wealth, and it's slowing killing us, and will continue to do so, until we wake up to the reality that we cannot win a game that is designed to make a very small percentage win. 1% win. 99% lose. And don't think they will stop willingly. They won't until it costs them more to continue than to stop. Capitalism was invented to harness human fear and greed in a controlled manner, but the addiction is stronger than the controls. Until we wake up to that, we are walking into a disaster that will only protect those who own all the assets.
    2
  40. Are you familiar with the ONS? Then look up the Labour Share of GDP since 1980. Immigration is not your problem. Nobody from abroad told you to have too few children to support your economic model. You listened to your meal mouthed elites, your betters, who took every cookie jar your ancestors put away since 1945, and shared them with their kith and kin, and rewarded their donors with it. And you voted for that. And now you spout the same mealy mouthed scapegoating of those who robbed you? You are too easily manipulated. You are not in charge of your economy. Your mealy mouthed tubthimpers are, and how they shaped that economy wasn't for the benefit of anyone earning a wage. It was for the ones who own most of this country's assets. All they want you and the migrants to do is get them the money to buy more assets for themselves. And to keep you distracted, they give you migrants to blame for the worries you and your biases allow to take root. They gave you single mothers, the sick and the poor as well to throw under the bus. What you don't realise that it will be your turn next. They have their plans for you to keep on making them richer, and you and your descendants might just end up under the bus as well. Freeports were only to be the beginning. Open working prisons, with no workers rights, legally outside the law. Let's hope Starmer doesn't have to let those schemes go through, because the only way he's going to avoid it, is by doing as Gary asks. It's funny that, but you read Gary's book? He was a working class kid in a mixed race area. His neighbours was Asian, and you know a funny thing. He was friends with the eldest boy, and his mum befriended him, and encouraged him to settle down in school, and to work hard, as she was doing with her son. And he listened. His mum and dad upstanding people, god-fearing too. But they didn't get through to him. Not his teachers, not his other mates. That Asian woman did.. She understood him, and saw him not as just kid. She swa his potential. That's the Britain I like. Not the fearful, anxious, petty, mean-spirited Britain, where you can fulfil your potential and put something back, even if it's a kind word. She could have seen him as a rival to her son, and not taken an interest in him. She wasn't vowed by her poverty. She wasn't vowed by fear, or false pride, or envy. She was truly strong enough to be kind. That's what's been buried for so long in this country. And I hope we rediscover that spirit again.
    2
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. Home is where the heart, is but their hearts are not with you. Their heart sare elsewhere. And I think you might not realise that they do think about you, I, or us in the same way we think about them. And we're encouraged to do so, because it maintains the status quo. So we cannot rely on them to do what needs to be done by their own volition. The people must stand up together and demand real change. and that can begin by remembering Tony Benn's words - protecting our interests is an eternal duty of self care of those who are not rich. And the only way to do it, is to stop asking anything of those who can't or won't help us do that. And to be heard we must act in solidarity again. We've forgotten that lesson of what it was like before 1945, and it took less than 100 years to do so. Now it's time to start rebuilding that machinery again, based on local people working together and creating ways to help ourselves and our communities flourish. That means making our wants and needs clear to those seeking our votes, and be compassionately sceptical while doing it. No big honchos parachuting into our communities and disappearing to Westminster. We want people who know us, care about us, and who will work with us to represent us, and we should pursue democratic goals like English devolution, strengthening of local government, and citizen participation in policy making. Proportional representation, and reform of cfebtrak government. Britain needs to stop morphing into a company town, and be a country, a home again for all its people.
    1
  49. 1
  50. 1