Capitalism Vs. Socialism Debate: Arthur Laffer & Richard Wolff 

Thanks! 😃

For real, I look forward to this channel every day at work. Its quickly become my #1 channel. I am mainly a crypto weirdo but gosh these macro talks are fascinating and I learn so much.

​@@TheDavidLinReportA democratic workplace doesn't eliminate a hierarchy any more than a democracy does. It just changes and gives legitimacy to it.

​@raygaub9861 Exactly. And if you listen to Professor Wolff's larger argument he clearly uses hierarchical co-ops as examples. The CEO still exists. But the major distinction is they are accountable to the employee base rather than the Board. And coming back to a more equitable society - it's pretty clear you will balance interests towards a longer term positioning rather than constant short term cycles to hit quarterly metrics rather than true longevity. And also compensation will obviously be managed to a level that the broader employee base feels is equitable. That does the mean same pay for unequel work, but also curbing the extremes occurring at both ends of the scale.

​@@TheDavidLinReport Arthur Laffer makes me laugh. Having a phone may still make me poor among the living humans but if he compares me to the dead people from 1000 years ago, I am richer than all the dead Kings, because none of them had a phone. Laffer makes me laugh. Comparing the wealth of a living being to a dead being is very useful for the Wealthy.

At first, I taught you said Esptein instead of Einstein

@@ericmacrae6871 oh damn, that would be different! 👀

You can take one part of what someone says without having to accept or validate everything.

Einstein was not really "outspoken" about it. He seldom mentioned it. He also admitted he knew nothing about the economy and was basically going off vibes

@@aktube9084 I wouldn't recommend making up things to make your point. History exists. This lie about history and repeat is common white supremacist patriarchal capitalist practice. I get it. When there is little moral ground to justify supporting the theft, murder and exploitation of humans and the planet a capitalist system needs, you must find any way to defend it. Hey you do you. But Einstein in fact was understood the economy very well. It ain't rocket science. Economics is NOT that complex buddy. But w.s. capitalist will try to be gate keepers of their insane abstract art. LoL. Einstein even wrote an essay in 1949 titled "Why Socialism?". I own it, have read it and being someone who has taught science and economics classes, he understood it. What fun fantasy will you conjure up now to defend this w.s. system of death?

Stil better than starvation

@@Dan16673you mean like the starvation of over 5 million children every year due to malnutrition and it's related diseases that happens under global capitalism?

@@Dan16673POV: you watch Fox News

because capitalism defenders are smart, they are not there to waste their time, better advertise and sell something while they are at it.

I hear you. I prefer communist posters and pamphlets. 😏

“China collapsing in front of our eyes” haha ROFLMAO, this reminds me of Gordon Chang, that he said China is collapsing every year for the last 20 years. Look at the debt ratio between China and USA. We, USA will collapse and buried 6 feet under long before China shows any sign of collapsing.

Right? They've been saying China is "collapsing" or "is about to collapse" for years on end. Maybe it will someday, but it sure as hell hasn't yet, lmao

the moment spill this, i sense con man talk

​@@fannyalbi9040well I knew he was a fascist from the start and I am not surprised that what he said because people like him are clueless about how the economy run especially the Chinese economy

@@ericmacrae6871 eat regurgitation 🤮 is disgusting yet most people buy it.

Just another tankie

@@Dan16673 I don't know what that means. He's qualified and spot on with how capitalist functions

@@jermainemyrn19 another justifier of commies and their insanity

I think he is mostly wrong and his solution doesn't make any sense, democracy at the workplace? what the hell does that even mean? Worker doesn't own the workplace, they are just there to temporarily do some job and get paid for it. Worker doesn't care about the profits and losses, they get paid their market price and thats it.

​@@sten260a co-op is a shared ownership of the company, so yes, he is talking about shared ownership by the workers essentially.

He’s definitely not afraid and is very clear, but he’s straight up wrong.

He's not afraid to look like an idiot... He got schooled in this interview jsut as he got schooled when debating Gene Epstein..

@@Diabolical05yep this

​@@ExPwnerancap = unable to think

​@@kyleinpa5285He is totally right

That is because he is an economist working with the facts and not a blowhard fool like Wolff who makes things up

Republicans always rudely cit people off.

What’s telling about it? The USA has never been a democracy. The founding fathers made sure it wasn’t. Its a republic/ representative democracy with two legislative bodies based on two separate criteria. Pure democracy is just mob rule.

But did you know he wrote a book? I wonder if he'll tell us

@@TwoTonTaftMaybe read and learn some. Should cure the socialist disease

So just a bunch of misinformed plebs get to vote how our economy works? No thanks.

Yes democracies do not exist yet

@@captainpawpawchannelthey do. Ask your congressperson to propose it

Democracy does not work. Every country successfully uses a representative democracy

​@@garrett3848.... Congress people who only do the biddings of corporations and who barely care about the needs of the people. Then we normal people can only pull a crank every 2-4 years to vote for leaders who will only do the bidding of the corporate overlords. Our system is destined to be as anti-democratic as humanly possible while pretending to be a "liberal democracy '

There would be no point to that. There is no debate between socialism and capitalism. There is no way possible to argue that socialism is superior to capitalism. The argument does not exist, and the arguments proffered are always full of holes. Socialism is a giant con game, one that usually winds up mass murdering its own citizens and impoverishing the rest. Richard Wolff and his tribe are THE problem in this world.

that would be nice, I don’t mean to be rude, but as someone who seems to never have had an original thought, i suspect Laffer is functionally illiterate.

@@ahsimiksnabac6576 project elsewhere with your illiteracy.

No that would be pointless and a waste of everyone's brain cells. When someone who during a two person debate can't comport themselves equitably when the other is answering you know there's something wrong. Telling Dr Wolff to read his book repeatedly as if it's the definitive tome of economic theory and history is akin to people saying the Bible is a historical book. Socialist countries failed due to imperialism of the USA and the vassal states of Europe. We're all now experiencing the inevitable demise of the criminal enterprise called capitalism and if the elites need a history lesson they should look to France in 1789. 🧐

Laffer is a bit of a yawn. He's a one-trick pony. Ok, fine he thinks he knows how to make a bad system grow faster. Wolff knows a better system. They are on totally different levels.

Thank you! I appreciate the gesture

RU-vid steals 30% of that superchat

Don't know how David managed to get those guests, but that was the best debate I've seen for a long time.

@@gort3969 RU-vid is run by a bunch of socialists

@@gort3969 "Stealing"? lol. I know on which side of this capitalism/socialism debate you reside. If not for RU-vid, you wouldn't know David Lin for squat. There's be ZERO audience. Think about it just a bit more...

exactly!!!!

he is a vietnamese suffering severe stockholm syndrome. that’s why

They did until Wolff was lying.

@@arthurzetes What lies?

the part in the video where laffer calls out wolffs lies @@zarategabe

wow great retort, "justify your assertion" "uh the part where my assertion was justified"@@arthurzetes

Peter Schiff vs Michael Saylor

@@daveh6424 I would click that one even faster than I would this one.

Richard Wolff is an Educated Idiot ! Please stop indoctrinating kids.

Well, he was frustrated. He was defeated intellectually, not knowing and understanding the points that Wolff was making. All he had left is to talk over and pout.

@@timc1604no he wasn’t. He refuted Wolff’s lies directly

Well, he was frustrated. He was defeated intellectually, not knowing and understanding the points that Wolff was making. All he had left is to talk over and pout.

@@timc1604he refuted Wolff’s bullshit. Wolff lied. Grow up. Wolff was the one getting owned here

They can but they'd rather talk to their donors.

Seemed like they were talking past each other and focusing on their expertise. Wolff was talking about the organisation of the workplace and Laffer was responding by alluding to economic growth after tax cuts in particular administrations. It was actually a very pointless discussion lmao

Laffer is a demon he only wants to cut taxes for the rich and cut social programs for the poor that's literally his entire economic platform and kansas tried it and it failed miserably

@@guapochico69 Kansas did not put into place his ideas. Quit lying

@ExPwner so you literally had no idea kansas did this? All you have to do is look it up its on the southern poverty law centers website and the kansas economic forums website. Every kansas economist learns about arthur laffurs ridiculous policy failure. The fact you have never even heard of this explains how you could possibly support this dumb$hit

Its sad to see people like arthur laffer bragging hes the one constantly on CNN, NBC etc and having a bigger influence.

The idea that Laffer is formidable is laughable. Laffer's ideas have been debunked for decades and he had to talk over and interrupt Proff Wolff to prevent him from further exposing Laffer's bankrupt and oppressive ideology.

which refuse to do so? the deck is already in their favor naturally since their opponents haven't had to study socialism but they have had to study capitalism. Look at Doug Lain arguing with Glen Lowry, Lowry an economics PHD was at a loss because, he hadn't considered most socialists mean worker ownership not state planning

How did you come to that conclusion? Richard Wolff couldn't even define capitalism or give a direct definition for it while debating destiny.. Nor can he give a direct definition of socialism... I am curious though, how did you come to the conclusion that Wolff "knows" capitalism more then Laffer?? I suspect you came to that conclusion because his though on it aligns with yours..?

Absolute nonsense, its clear Mr. Wolff never worked in the economy and instead used his sheltered being as an academic to pump his brain full of abstract macro economics like Marx. He doesnt understand the policies hes fighting for are bogus and completely unrealistic. Its like someone who thinks they know how to fight cause they watched Rocky. If you want me to go into Detail let me know..

​​@@Diabolical05Professor Wolfe is also a historian. He would know more about the historical context of capitalism. He always gives historical context when speaking. It doesn't matter how many statistical figures you wanna throw out, it doesn't mean you're right in your analysis or your presentation of them. Which is all Laffer did. Aside from agreeing with most of Dr Wollf's arguments. If I remember correctly, the professor gave Destiny a historical lesson. He didn't want to hear it, understand it or acknowledge it. Much like most do when you challenge their views.

Wolff does NOT know capitalism better as shown by him lying right out of the gate and being corrected by Laffer

Well, it's impossible to support capitalism if you actually understand it.

It usually just leads to homelessness and high costs; the money gets smuggled at the top, the costs rise for the rest. Just look at all the problems where the tech booms occurred.

Supply-side economics, AKA trickle-down economics, AKA horse and sparrow economics . . . because the horse eats the grain and the sparrow picks food out of the horse's shit. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics

@@GeoffreyPickettsno it doesn’t

OP that data is at Our World In Data

​@@ExPwneryeah. It's so easy to find. I knew that data point prior to this debate and I must believe Laffer did as well. Wages haven't moved for 6 or so decades, adjusted for inflation.

Both made sound points. One ideology has never been tried, while the other has been rinsed & repeated but still doesn't work. Removing my personal bias, Wolff was patient & concise, while Art's cognitive dissonance made him keep repeating capitalism's broken record ideology.

Nothing close about it.

Nah Laffer wins this one hands down just on the opening clip and Wolff lying

Yaron Brook debated RW very well.

@@Raelspark no he didn’t, historical revisionism is hilarious.

@@ryanosterman2651 Yaron Brook defeated Wolff on the facts.

@@Raelspark no he wasn’t he was lying. He made a bunch of switcheros and disputed the facts when they weren’t in his favor.

@@ryanosterman2651 that’s a lie. Yaron clearly had the facts and it was Wolff who was lying.

And arthur is suggesting we should lower their tax and make them richer, so we can follow them and be richer ourselves. LOL

Nationalism vs globalism is just code for Nazi vs Jews. It has just become inappropriate for Nazis to talk about killing Jews in public so they use said words.

All countries are nationalist and globalist.

Large corporations have gotten way to powerful. They need to be brought back to the reality of the rest of the population. They control the government.

"The rich CAN NEVER be rich without the poor." whats that supposed to mean? and in an opposit of a capitalistic society, the rich can never be richg because the state stole everything from everyone and owns everything "Jeff beso became the richest man, because some of his delivery drivers had to pee in bottles to get merchandise to customers on time..." and in a socialistic society, innovators dont exist and society grinds to a standstill and drives around boxcars like the lada for decades on end furthermore, this current US is in no way capitalistic with an installed marxist vegetable destroying the country at rediculous pace

@@wasdwasdedsf Horse shit. "the rich can never be rich" is such a silly tautology - might as well ask what came first, the chicken or the egg?

The poor of a capitalistic free trade society are FAR better offer than any wealth distribution socialistic society. History shows you this. The wealth distribution of Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin were nightmarish

@@wasdwasdedsf All what society have is a product of the collective, not just a business man who randomly is the owner of the corporation and the wealth excedent.

And they are 100,000X more intelligent than Trump.

indeed. then again, he is a vietnamese suffering severe stockholm syndrome. that’s why

Unfortunately I would say they do not want the same thing at all. Perhaps due to his long standing career as a defender of the current economic and political system, Prof. Laffer is, as Prof. Wolff pointed out, naturalizing the capitalist system. He implies that the employer/employee dichotomy we've grown used to over the last 300 years is inherent to humanity, and that we have somehow reached the end of history, with no way to progress as a society. So what he proposes is a bunch of tweaks here and there to the same system, hoping that it may somehow change anything at all. There are two completely different conversations going on during this debate: - Prof. Wolff is analyzing the history and evolution of economic systems, through the lens of the dominant workplace relationships (master/slave defining slavery, lord/serf defining feudalism, employer/employee defining capitalism), and then proposing what relationship is to be the next dominating one in society; - On the other hand we have Prof. Laffer, who is discarding this analysis completely as "I don't think it will work but i'd love for it to", while in the meantime actively working to undermine the efforts of anyone trying to achieve said society or said workplace relationship. And I mean this quite literally as he has taken part of a few administrations that intervened, both militarily and through the CIA, in the internal affairs of other countries, predominantly in Central America. He contributes to the efforts to remove any socialist or communist platform anywhere as part of the legacy of the Red Scare. He definitely does not want the same thing as Prof. Wolff. When he says "we want the same thing, we just don't agree on how to do it" he is either completely delusional, or does it as a desperate attempt to shut down the conversation as if it's just a petty difference rather than deep baseline divergences. You can see it on Prof. Wolff's face just how absurd he knows this phrase to be But then again the net worth of Prof. Laffer is estimated to be around $8 Million (stockholder and one of the directors of his company), he is one of the primary beneficiaries of the current economic system and therefore most of what he does is part of an effort of self-preservation. It is very difficult to make someone understand something when their career and livelihood is dependent on not understanding it.

Glad you enjoy it!

Best date idea

@@TheDavidLinReport Dude... You should be proud of yourself! It was AMAZING. And yo... You got two Champions of their ideology to level the game. It was great! This is what politicians should be doing you know.... Not that circus we see on tv's

@@TheDavidLinReport Arthur Laffer makes me laugh. Having a phone may still make me poor among the living humans but when he compares me to the dead people from long ago, I am richer than all the dead Kings, because none of them had a phone. Comparing the wealth of a living being to a dead being is very useful for the Wealthy.

Becos if we are using PPP terms, US is no longer No.1.

Read a macro book sometime

@@arnavsrivastava458will do.

Laffer kept mischaracterizing Wolff's position. He kept calling him Chairman Xi while also praising China for it's growth?? Quite embarrassing, TBH.

Haft to ask which of the gazillion gender should are moral leaders be? And who chooses decides them? Pretty clear we no longer have elections we have selections

The greatest generation upheld values because their friends died for them. It seems as that generation waned, so did our values.

I agree with that, but it is ironic since liberal capitalism is (as I see it) one of the main driving forces of the corrosion of moral and values we now see today.

However, we need less socialists.

Richard Wolff is an Educated Idiot ! Please stop indoctrinating kids.

I wouldn't call Wolff a great thinker, a good BS artist maybe.

@@huwhitecavebeast1972 exactly

@@huwhitecavebeast1972wow great analysis

​@@huwhitecavebeast1972ah yes trickle-down economic as work so well and we see how one of the framer of trickle-down economic refuse to take responsibility for the mess that he has created

@@ericmacrae6871 there was no such mess created. You are again spouting bullshit with no evidence

Yeah it already did a long time ago. Socialists are delusional and have to lie to try to peddle their garbage ideology as shown here by Wolff lying.

I guess it depends on what side of the fence you're sitting on. If you have enough Capital, then you don't have to work for a living. You can just live off of other people's labour in perpetuity. However, if you're a worker, what are the people being exploited, then capitalism really sucks.

@@michaelmappin1830capitalists are not living off of other people’s labor. Don’t you get tired of lying for a living? You already got proven wrong on this multiple times before including on live debate. The labor theory of value that you are relying upon to peddle this false statement has no merit.

Also OP is blatantly lying. He did not support capitalism.

The exact opposite is the case. The socialist wants to fix the problems caused by socialists policies with more socialist policies, aka micro manage. The capitalist wants to fix the problems caused by socialist policies by abolishing these policies. Democratizing companies sounds nice until you realize all the bureaucracy that comes along with democratic decision making. Companies need to be nimble and adaptive, but I dont blame the socialist prof for not knowing that. Studying Marx and other abstract literature about macro economics seldom leads to realistic and practical policies.

Wolff may not necessarily be for scraping the whole capitalist system. In many of his talks the big thing he cares about the most is the relationship between the Employer and the Employee. He really believes it's unfair. If that problem can be fixed and made more Fair, I doubt Wolff want to kill and cook the goose that lays the golden eggs --- which can be taxed for social programs.

​@@themoonrider351 it seems you didn't understand what socialism is ... there aren't socialist policies. Any "socialist" policies were implemented by capitalists and their political actor puppets to prevent the volatility and instability of any capitalist system. If economic power, actual power of land, resources, people... were democratic, our political system would become more democratic. We aren't talking about more or less policy and regulation. We are talking about a change in the actual economic system. Capitalist apologists also never acknowledge that ALL capitalist wealth is built on theft exploitation and state violence. Nation states historically developed because of the oppressive needs of royalty and then capitalists. Countries exist because of violence and dominance. I believe most humans, if they experienced a worker coop, would choose to have a say in their well being and how their company ethically operates in their community and beyond. Statistically and historically, whether ya wanna believe it or not, has higher productivity, higher worker-owner morale, safer work spaces. But some peeps rather believe in "dreams" than understand the material realities of systems and how humans relate to one another. It is literally the American dream... to everyone being an owner of the work they do. At the end of the day, capitalist apologists MUST be honest that they are antidemocratic and more champions of dictatorships... boards of dictators (oh sorry it was euphemized as directors). That they believe the majority of humans are beneath or less than a minority of the wealthy, predominantly white straight men. Hey peeps should support what they support. Just when you take pride in a system which relies on violence, theft and exploitation through economic dictatorship, there will be consequences.

​@@Sandcrackattack Literally checked all the boxes for cultural marxist buzz word bingo when reading your comment. There are in fact socialist policies, just because they have been implemented in a capitalist system by capitalist, doesnt change the nature of the policy. The chinese government has implemented a bunch of capitalistic policies despite being a communist regime on paper. Besides the fact that nobody seems to be able to give a comprehensive descritption about how your anarcho communistic or anarcho syndicalistic system is supposed function in real life, the attempts I have read have about as much to do with democracy as the democratic peoples republic of north korea. But feel free to prove me wrong, descripe your utopian system to me and answer me these three questions: 1. How do you ensure that your ideal system remains socialist / anarcho communist? 2. Will your citizens enjoy human rights and if so, how are you planning to protect those? 3. If you democratize your companies, will employees (in this case also the owners) have to cover for finanical losses the company might suffer?

​@@Sandcrackattackand when you point those things how capitalism is a neo-slavery system they think that you are nuts

I tend to agree with your comment. Laffer and Wolff didn't even discuss many other essential topics. My question is, why? True capitalism hasn't existed for decades. And neither gentleman acknowledge that fact. And that's only one item they didn't discuss.

@@scottmccutcheon9828 So well said. When the big bank's f*uk up who bails them out? Socialism is the little people. But otherwise it's Capitalism. Crazy shit.

​@@scottmccutcheon9828 True capitalism has never existed and never will. Big government systems are always morphing to serve chosen groups. Particularly those at the top in maintaining their status. Those at the the bottom currently get to maintain theirs, while more join their ranks. At the end of every epoch, the serpent eats its tail and civilizations crumble.

Richard Wolff is an Educated Idiot ! Please stop indoctrinating kids.

capitalism is a pyramid scheme that requires infinite population growth on a finite planet.

Part 2 Wolff gets laughed out of the room

Fun fact: prey animals virtually always outnumber predators, almost by definition. The same is true for democracy. So it's not "2 wolves and a sheep", it's "2 wolves and 50 sheep". Good luck to the wolves, because we're having grass for dinner for the next infinity days 😉

For sure, that's why you have liberal democracies and not pure democracies, the analogy would be "a wolf and a sheep voting for what's for dinner and no one can be eaten"

Although I'm a socialist, I wouldn't call China a socialist country and many orthodox Marxists wouldn't call China socialist either. That's a big point of debate in the left wing circles.

@@dorinpopa6962 In my historical opinion... that won't happen... if you put it in order, China lived from the era of many kingdoms... because the initial goal of the rebellion of the royal system was corruption within the kingdom... until the nationalists were established it didn't reduce corruption and even when socialists emerged corruption was still happened... Deng xiaoping quote during his leadership, equality in all things is the basis for equality in prosperity (I heard it from Prof. Kishore), if you look at the development in Chinese cities, it was done in stages, and each city has its own level (tier)...

You've mistaken 'panic' for 'aggravation.'

It’s political, and the super rich now own the political.