Comments by "buddermonger2000" (@buddermonger2000) on "Economics Explained" channel.

@djole94hns Basically it's a social market economy (I want to compare to like Germany or the Nordic states) with only worker co-operatives at least in how I understand it. That's certainly a very radical view compared to currently, but honestly the only issue I see is the mandating of the worker co-operatives. It's a very capitalist take on the philosophy but in real terms it might as well be in isolation probably one of the stable and least authoritarian of the takes on his philosophy. I feel the biggest issue there on a macro-scale is that it probably works best in a very peaceful world where military spending doesn't need to be very high so you can have much of that welfare spending. However if you prioritize the spending enough you could possibly have enough to allocate to the military and welfare as long as the central bureaucracy isn't too bloated. Yeah it's definitely not really socialism but definitely a very workable take. Edit: thinking about it again I wonder if it could work if food and water is decommodofied. Government production is usually the least efficient of production but if it could be lowered to only basic rations or simply be qualified by the fact that you have to work it would basically keep all of the utility of a capitalist system. "You don't work you don't eat" has been the primary motivator in getting society to work but in terms of getting it to succeed it's having the incentive of success. So you very much at the very least have the important reward for success which allows the growth in standard of living and production which drives the current world.
1
@10244325 I think the fundamental issue is that the people do not recognize that the wealth when strived for still help the people. And considering the distinct lack of social services, I don't think the government is really doing much for the people. Now, me personally, I don't think they have to. However if the idea is to benefit the people, well the people seem to be benefiting themselves more than the state has and the best decision it ever made was to start leaving people alone to do it themselves.
1
@horridohobbies He was also an idiot which probably largely came from his belief in socialism. And the party compositions are currently being changed out.
1
@horridohobbies You're right, but the party isn't controlled by the people. It's by the party. People who aren't elected control that. It's all internal party politics instead of any control by the people. And the fact that there's an entire chain to the representative democracy means that it is less representative of the people in the higher levels and simply their own agenda.
1
@cyrilmrazek6649 West Germany got 14 billion in 2019 dollars. Italy got as much, and the Netherlands almost as much. France and the UK each got double. Frankly, West Germany didn't get a lot out of the Marshall plan. Not to mention Europe as a whole only had about 10% imports and attracted little capital influx, including Germany suffering capital loss. Thus, it mostly had to rebuild manually.
1
"69th, nice"
1
@03david08 To be fair he did say he wasn't a programmer and so I give him the benefit of the doubt of simply not understanding well enough while also being an interesting concept to discuss.
1
@Antonio-lt1sp Did you just called economics explained for leftists?
1
This is the most correct analysis. However, corruption lowers with an increase in societal trust. Right now, especially due to tribal conflicts (as far as I understand it) especially among the elite, it's not really a society where you can truly trust everyone to not steal your stuff. Or, even if you can trust your neighbor, you can't trust your government. Especially as others will have implicitly less trust in seeing someone from another group. In real terms, the only way to improve this is to integrate and just get to know your neighbor and or have friends with different ethnic groups. If the youth is already at this stage, that's fantastic. However, it'll still take a few decades to really see that effect manifest in government as they're all still too young.
1
@tellesu sounds like political schizophrenia
1
well someone had to tackle it
1
What do you mean? Most countries in Africa have very little wealth inequality. They're simply all poor.
1
Stability and confidence: It may be Argentina, but it's not in a civil war or facing a violent coup or revolution, and that's our real baseline.
1
What were those shots you fired at the infographics show lol?
1
I think we're moving that direction
1
Tbh, that's perfectly fine
1
@asmsayeem3973 Tbh it is... the only difference is that the bottom two levels of the pyramid don't apply.
1
Here's a question: are those issues truly created by the actual economic system? What about the system creates these issues? Because by your metrics it would be better for all humankind to go back to the feudal system. Less depression, anxiety, more satisfaction with life, etc. You were happy in your life and nothing really bothered you. You worked the fields with your family and you were happy. I'm really not convinced that the system itself has caused these issues and in fact I'm fairly certain of anything it's the technological innovation that has done so. You don't have time to be depressed if you're focused on simply attempting to not die constantly, if you are simply working all day in a field making sure everything is together, trying to not die to diseases that come from everything around you. What we have is a life of comfort and there's little hardship in modern life. People are comfortable and don't need to work hard. We also tend to not interact with each other as much and view more and more people with suspicion. Have you noticed how many people hate people who just genuinely love everyone or think those kinds of people don't exist? I'm not really attempting to refute your arguments on a philosophical level, but instead asking you to think about this on a historical and practical level. What do you think is different today, that wasn't different before? While thinking about that please remember that all of the problems you've mentioned with people today, largely weren't present before, yet there was still very large wealth inequality.
1