We teach Austrian Economics in a fun way! How is wealth created? ❓ Saving and investing is the key to personal wealth as well as the economic growth. 👍 How prices are determined? What can we learn from knowing the price discovery process? 😎 The Great Recession was initiated by bursting of the housing bubble. But why there was a housing bubble in the first place? Opportunity cost is the road not taken. Every action has a cost! How do we determine the value of things? How to explain the "water and diamonds paradox"? The law of diminishing marginal utility gives us an answer! Learn Austrian Economics in a fun way! 🎞
Let us establish a fact here. 1. We are at the very end stage of MMT 2. How Many Americans Are Living Paycheck to Paycheck? A 2023 survey conducted by Payroll highlighted that 78% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. Now... it seems like helicopter money is inevitable. and luckily for us, we have the privilege and luck to be born in USA where our dollar is the world's reserve currency. So, we need to give out 1000 dollars per month for 78% of US citizens age above 18. Milton Friedman described economy and inflation as being alcoholic. longer you keep drinking, more painful it becomes when you stop drinking. But my argument is... it is already too late to stop drinking since our alcoholism is so bad that the withdrawal will kill us
Since the government is 30 trillion dollars in debt, somebody isn't managing money right, if the government steals a trillion dollars a year, from you, it should be spending nine hundred fifty billion a year, and putting the rest in savings, I knew this as a teenager, and am a person who is slow mentally, a rock has more brain power, I'm not playing with a full deck, for those in government not fiscally responsible, shame on you
respectfully, I'm a little confused. I feel like Tom's lifestyle and plan is pretty much common sense, like isn't that what everyone would do? Pete's choices don't really seem like things that people would actually do either, at least not many people. Additionally, the risk-taking part is well exemplified in the fisherman example but not so much in Tom's life. Like, he makes investments and starts businesses and stuff, all of which can go wrong, but none of them do. Tom is saved at least partially by luck. My final point of confusion is based moreso in the implications of the video than anything it actually says. One of the themes of the video is that wealth is created by taking risks and self-sacrifice. This seems pretty true. My issue with it is that the video seems ignorant of the fact that not everyone has the same opportunities to take those risks in the first place. in other words, it isn't really an equitable situation. For example, what if Tom was from a relatively lower-income family that depended on him for support? If that was the case, he wouldn't have as much money to invest or use to start a business, even if he had the same level of self-sacrifice and frugality that he did in the video. And, sure, he could live even more frugally and skip out on more stuff to be able to make those investments and all, but after a point it isn't as much of a feasible choice to make. After all, those risks mean more to someone who has less disposable income, especially when it might involve lowering your standard of living to invest/start a business that you aren't sure will succeed. that's all.
I don't see any cited studies here, but would highly recommend this video giving a detailed assessment of financial risk management assessment of climate change from the institute and faculty of actuaries, UK. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-X-FJvzgrM00.html and the peer reviewd article from the same actuaries.org.uk/media/qeydewmk/the-emperor-s-new-climate-scenarios.pdf "climate-scenario models in financial services are significantly underestimating climate risk... estimate a 65% GDP loss or a 50-60% downside to existing financial assets if climate change is not mitigated ... these are likely to be conservative estimates."
Why the USA and the EU have not sanctioned Israel …that has broken all the European Rules of the United Nation’s charter ,regarding War crimes,Genocides,on Palestine for the last 74 years,and definitely,on the War of GAZA ,bombing destruction human habitat ,bombing civilians ,murdering children ,women ,young men ,torturing Palestinians unlawfully detained ,since over 74 year ,Israel colonialist settlers,have been executing in cold blood ,Palestinians and steeling their land ,by building settlements on Palestinian owned lands ,using military force against the people,with no army to defend them ,leaving in GAZA an open air prison ,with no rights ,watched by Israeli military day and night ,not able to leave unless permitted by Israeli military forces,that abuse them ,like inferior to the Israelis ,by conducting shamelessly,towards all Palestinians ,by military force and indignation,Zionist Israelis do not belong to that land ,remnants of the Holocaust survivors that😢 have with the help of colonialist Britain ,came to Palestine to steel the land from the indigenous people ,and claiming that religion was a race ? This is a scum ,that cannot go on ..by Israel getting away by GENOCIDE in Palestine .😢😢😢😢😢😢😢
There is a misunderstanding if you believe logical dedication is the same as Science; to quote Google Science is “the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained.” The issue with calling AUSTRIAN ECONOMICS scientific is that their methodology, even as you describe it in this very video, doesn’t actually consider real world observation and experiment; again, we can understand how one might logically conclude an increase in minimum wage would increase unemployment, for example- the issue is we’ve actually observed the opposite in the real world, you even point it out and basically state “despite the evidence you an see how Austrian’s MUST be right” That is literally, by definition, not Science.
The 1% of rich Americans think of how to invest their money to increase their wealth during the recession. While the 99% of struggling hard-luck Americans think of how to survive without food and daily necessities in the recession and the coming hyperinflation. I am just about to make my first index fund purchase via vanguard. I intend to invest long term. just getting slightly stuck on how I balance my percentage portfolio between equity vs bonds. Low risk is good for me. Any tips
You are absolutely right ,firstly I believe money in the bank is not money because it is bond to inflation and losses values overtime, You have to be well disciplined to achieve success and save before you spend Lastly success does not happen overnight it takes time, dedication and self discipline
money is a liability, not an asset. You have to exchange it for assets that represent real VALUE. Real estate - properties for rent. Stocks (dividends). Bonds (interest), funds, REITs (interest), intellectual property, The aid of an institutional or basic financial advisor's cannot be over expressed. I started saving and investing in 1989 at the age of 20... I am 54 today and have 2.2 million in my retirement account, 135k liquid and I trade securities with 50-55k
I'm bombarded with the don't sit on it during the inflation, I wanted to jump in 8/22 and did nothing. So far this year I think I need to get my feet wet but I stopped listening and taking financial advise from RU-vidrs, because at the end of the day, I end up with a bunch of confusing stories. Have you always had guidance?
I've shuffled through investment consultants and yes, they can be positively impactful to an individual's portfolio, have been in touch with '’’Marisa Michelle Litwinsky’’ over a decade now her honest approach gives me complete ownership and control of my positions, and her rates are incredibly affordable
The artickle named trickle down climate risk regulation is difficult to understand clearly , so i search sth about this method but i cant find explanation to this artickle still
Here is a video of Universal Basic Income discussed by a Tesla robotics follower. A different perspective. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-YWhV5RmNksU.htmlsi=qz4Ec7ad5ftjPIk9
Why dont these owner just shut these companies down? Do they care more about enriching themselves instead of wanting to compete in a fair playing field?
What about health regulations? Take the example of wheat. Say there is an innovation ie a chemical which kills parasites and bugs thus increases production but also, over a very long term, it causes severe cancer and is harmful to humans. As it's so long term, the effects on demand will not be immediately felt. The government tries to educate people through propaganda and awareness but it's not enough, people still buy the grain. Surely the government should regulate? The issue is that pure free market assumes consumers act not out of selfless but out of self interest. But even the fact that consumers act out of self interest is not certain.
Ok that is nice story. How are they actually created? Capitalist gets a hold of a specific asset that has properties that make it easy to become a monopoly, either because its a unequally distributed natural resource, rare asset such as specific geographic location itself. This is just an example. Then suggesting that all monopolies are create by government regulation. When its the government that makes capitalism even possible, not to mention that you are slightly suggesting that license for health protection are all fake and poisons don't exists.
This just seems like common sense to implement only the necessary amount of labor/processes/inventory to keep costs down while maintaining good profits.
Off on a bit of tangent, but this is exactly how we should view body image and beauty in people's bodies. No, fat people aren't beautiful. No, people can't be perfectly beautiful. Doesn't mean we should do away with the ideal, just because we know we can never reach it!
None of these examples pay tax. For example Freelance guys 3k is subject to tax, firework guy didnt pay tax on the profit but would have on a savings deposit.
Great explanation of the bank run itself, but what causes people to want to withdraw their funds en masse? Why all of the sudden lose confidence in the bank?
Lol. The calculations at [7.49] are ridiculous. As if economists had ever predicted anything correctly to that precision. 2.5C will cost humanity EVERYTHING not 2.9% of GDP.
What I find in myself as someone who is self deciplined in personal finance is that Austrian economics came naturrally. I can debate anyone on monetary and fiscal policy without looking at data or quoting a bunch of high priests in academic institutions. Economics is not math or science. It is common sense. The world makes sense when you make the intimate connection with how money works in ones own life. Exercising prudence with one's own money, tells you everything you need to know. The masses do not want to be responsible. A nation with 35T debt is a nation of individual debtors. A broke mindset is the prevailing voice in America.
This video is full of lies or author of it has no knowledge on the topic. You defined capitalism and socialism wrong. Capitalism is defined only by private ownership of the means of production not, every form of property, socialism makes a distinction between private property (another word for means of production) and personal property which is allowed in socialism. Socialism isnt dinified by planed economy becouse markets can still exist under it (market socialism). 2:42 Ever wonder why SUV is so popular in cities dissipate there impracticality? Because producers manipulated consumers throughout clever marketing. You act here as if consumers choices can't be influenced by producers
Full reserve banking & why it's good: If all deposits are 100% backed in hard currency by the time it's accessible to depositors & remain so as long as they're accessible, *on-net consumption* - equal to the amount deposited - *is deferred* over the course of the deposit's maturity (whether by the depositor themselves, _the bank, or other investment/lending entities_ [granted the bank lends for a longer term than the deposit/s maturity]). Given that one simple rule, lending intermediaries are free to lend as they wish. Society's not misled into believing they have access to money that's not there in full. There's no risk of bank runs, & thereby no need for a ‘lender of last resort’. There's no inflationary double-spending - thereby cantillon effects, distortions along the capital structure, & heightened societal time preferences. The only risk in banking is whether they lend to sound ventures or not. The only risk to depositors is to those who explicitly lend their money to the bank (time deposits). Deposits immediately accessible would be risk-free (on-demand deposits).
