4:30 gives us a nice clue about why wealth trickles up and it isn't an awful conspiracy. Wealth concentrates in the global 1-10% because like all dynamical systems the global economy tends towards statistical dynamicisms which are closer to Pareto or Power Law distribution at large scales but our stereotyped, non-critical manner of thinking tends towards assuming observed systems as being closer to normal or constant distributions irrespective of scaling or the ranking of participants. The assumption that talent, opportunity, intelligence, or wealth are or ought to be normally distributed is not just a statistical error but is from a certain perspective morally reprehensible as it negatively exceptionalizes the performant in the name of establishing fairness for all participants which isn't just destructive but hypocritical. It ends up being breaking Lebron's legs so that statistically we all get a tiny bit better at basketball and calling it socioeconomic justice. In practice this is usually more like Pol Pot killing all the guys with glasses.
Ha Joon Chang's argument that there should be more equality is just a dopey argument that he himself does not personally ascribe to. Does he get paid more than those who struggle ? Of course he does and doesn't see it. Is he part of those he calls "the rich" ? Of course he is since he earns many times what some others in the world in poorer situations earn and he doesn't sare talk about it because he doesn't want others to see what he really is like – a hypocritical economist telling others to do what he doesn't do himself.
Equality would mean that we either all live in mansions or garbage dumpsters, so maybe we should be focusing on a reduction in inequality instead.
And yes, I'm sure that exceedingly wealthy people would be very happy for things to remain as they are and can come up with numerous justifications why the current set-up is as immutable as the laws of physics, which includes a widening gap between the rich and poor, with the rich exploiting the poor for their personal benefit, thrown in for good measure.
I wonder if it is fair to compare the US as a whole, which consists of 50 States all with very distinct economic activities, population, cost of living, and tax and regulatory policies, to that of individual European nations. 70K household income affords a family a decent middle class lifestyle in a suburb of Springfield, Missouri, while the same would be poverty in Seattle. Tax and welfare policies will look very different for these two scenarios.
The nordic countries, despite having achieved much greater equality, all have populations of 5-10 million, which are smaller than many US cities. They all have their own independent systems of government, and different regulatory, trade, tax, and welfare policies. I wonder if the US would look very differently, if we analyzed the stats and looked at the policies at each state level? Would the American people be better off, if the States had more autonomy to craft their own policies to address their own issues?
After all, the framers of the US constitution was keenly aware of the issue of using a purely population based approach elect federal representatives, as they were concerned about the states with populous, trade heavy port cities to grow and overtime over power the more agrarian states. Hence the two houses of legislative body where while the House seats are delegated based on population, the Senate gets 2 seats per state.
Inequality is a term used , and abused by Cultural Leftists in their rhetorical deceits to monopolize political power. The Leftist use of the term “inequality” applies to the superficialities of material life ( money) . They are not talking IQ “inequalities”, spirtual "inequalities" lifespan “inequalities” , body weight “inequalities”, height “inequalities” , health “inequalities”, personality “inequalities” , they are once again talking about material inequalities from which they seek a political position based on toxic ENVY… sad but true.
A politicized envy that not only violates the Judeo-Christian values found in the 10 Commandments, but promoted and used by the narcissistic Leftists to incite hatred of those "different" from the "regular" folk …. be they "Jewish being different from Christians" , the "Capitalist" being different from 'Workers" or the "1% " different from the "99%" , it is same old sad politics of self serving elites narcissistic coercive control, fostered by lies , deceit and violence, from the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt to the "Socialists" of today.
Cultural Leftists use the term "inequality" , to foster ENVY as they seeks to dominate both social and individualist discourses in the politics of the temporal, or as in todays weaponized terminology the “Politically Correct”.
Sadly the ‘politically correct” covert attack on the Judeo-Christian people, and the basic Human Rights of all (see UDHR 1948) represents the sectarian/ racist ‘theoretical” assumptions of the Cultural Left. Sad but True.
Sadly Cultural Leftism is based on debunked Marxist “theory” a 19th century updating of the ancient politics of “collectivist” narcissism in modern “economic” semantics that gives rhetorical license to a power seeking elite to critique or “control” the lives of others. Control in violation of peoples Natural Rights, and the ethical dimensions of Abrahamic Law (as it applies to over half the worlds population) the Jewish, and Judeo- Christian people, and everyone’s rights under UDHR 1948. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
2 Corinthians 11. 14/15 “And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15 It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness.”
Born in 1945 in the USA and grew up in relative poverty, due to the choices made by my Evangelical father, I never-the-less was provided, with my 4 younger siblings, a home in a state sponsored housing project in California, very good education and good health care. The housing, health care and education (including violin lessons) was all supported by the post war investment in the people of the USA. I spent two years in Cal State college and then on to U C Berkely, all supported by state funding, and then on to Medical School in Canada and on to a middle income position which I could then support my children. On it goes. Support the population to thrive, no matter what their beginnings, and we create a happy and prosperous community of caring people. What a shame that by 1980 that all was slowly destroyed by the Reagan collusion and worsening equality. Not Rocket Science!
I am new to economic thinking. I really like Dr. Chang's comparison of countries and his continuous breakdown of beliefs and reasons things are happenng the way they do.
Sikh religion propounded by Guru Nank Sahib in Punjab in 15th century ensures equality justice for all and the right to wear arms. Following this Sikhs created a massive Khalsa Sikh Empire led by Maharaja Ranjit Singh sarkar e Khalsa in 18th century that even the British Empire in India were shit scared to attack .
The theory is that rich people are motivated to work when paid large sums of money while poor people are motivated to work when they never have enough money. Unpaid labor goes unrecognized and we ignore the masses of people who have given up and refused to participate or only participate enough to skate by.
So now we have again learned the Big Government economic model doesn't work and the search for a redo (again) of the Keynesian economics . Why not just consider M. Friedman's model of smaller government?
Have you noticed that the implosion of Twitter, FaceBook, Twitch, Tumbler and other social media while good for reducing instability is bad for those under the thumb of traditional brick and mortar establishments? What I mean is those social media platforms offered ways for people to be social influences, entertainers, and political activists. In all of those things they are able to contribute and make a living earning far more than they would get at Wal-Mart or Target for example. Those platforms were the closest thing I've seen to neoliberal/libertarian economics working in my life-time but they became overrun by grifters and dangerous political talk about killing your enemies.
Gross inequality is the ultimate failure of any economic system. Gross inequality is an actual attempt for the rich to eliminate the poor by killing them with a system of repression.
I lived in Norway for three years and I have seen how equal their economic system is. You do not need to be very educated to earn more. Almost everyone's salary starts from the same range. I meet one guy who is autistic and he doesn't look very abnormal when you see him except he is very slim, he gets 1700 UDS per month from the government, living in his own apartment. Even though I don't like the discriminated world but I still do think there should some differences, people should get paid based on their hard exceptional work. As everyone has the same living standard there, no one cares about anyone, and people are lonely, emotionally unavailable, less knowledge about the outer world. After coming from a developing country when I see that somehow I feel so unlucky that how much I have been gone through to reach some point and some people just born in a lucky world.
Oh trickle down economics… has there ever been a less accurate economic theory?! You would think something that is so far off of the empirical data would die a quick and decisive death… instead, in true economic fashion, it lives on in perpetuity 🤦♂️
2:20 "When you think about it, this is a bit of a curious logic because it says that the rich need to be made richer in order to work harder, and the poor need to be made poorer in order to work harder." Just outstanding.
I assume this is about the US? We are a REPUBLIC, not a democracy. The problem I see is the VERY rich avoid taxes all together, by laundering it through non-profit foundations. Kill Gates and George Soros comes to mind. Globally? I also understand that the right to own private property is fundamental to a 1st world country, vs a 3rd world country that doesn't have that right. It therefore is NOT the fault of western culture that a poor country is in that situation. The UN and the poor countries want to solve this by taking away our water, electricity, and food. Why aren't they told to change their own policies to help their people live a more quality life. It isn't fair to the people, but taking our way of life away from us isn't going to help. Their government will still not give them access to the resources.
4:30 gives us a nice clue about why wealth trickles up and it isn't an awful conspiracy. Wealth concentrates in the global 1-10% because like all dynamical systems the global economy tends towards statistical dynamicisms which are closer to Pareto or Power Law distribution at large scales but our stereotyped, non-critical manner of thinking tends towards assuming observed systems as being closer to normal or constant distributions irrespective of scaling or the ranking of participants. The assumption that talent, opportunity, intelligence, or wealth are or ought to be normally distributed is not just a statistical error but is from a certain perspective morally reprehensible as it negatively exceptionalizes the performant in the name of establishing fairness for all participants which isn't just destructive but hypocritical. It ends up being breaking Lebron's legs so that statistically we all get a tiny bit better at basketball and calling it socioeconomic justice. In practice this is usually more like Pol Pot killing all the guys with glasses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_distribution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat-tailed_distribution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trees_(Rush_song)
Ha Joon Chang's argument that there should be more equality is just a dopey argument that he himself does not personally ascribe to. Does he get paid more than those who struggle ? Of course he does and doesn't see it. Is he part of those he calls "the rich" ?
Of course he is since he earns many times what some others in the world in poorer situations earn and he doesn't sare talk about it because he doesn't want others to see what he really is like – a hypocritical economist telling others to do what he doesn't do himself.
Equality would mean that we either all live in mansions or garbage dumpsters, so maybe we should be focusing on a reduction in inequality instead.
And yes, I'm sure that exceedingly wealthy people would be very happy for things to remain as they are and can come up with numerous justifications why the current set-up is as immutable as the laws of physics, which includes a widening gap between the rich and poor, with the rich exploiting the poor for their personal benefit, thrown in for good measure.
I enjoyed this. I wanted remember, so I had ChatGPT summarize it:
I wonder if it is fair to compare the US as a whole, which consists of 50 States all with very distinct economic activities, population, cost of living, and tax and regulatory policies, to that of individual European nations. 70K household income affords a family a decent middle class lifestyle in a suburb of Springfield, Missouri, while the same would be poverty in Seattle. Tax and welfare policies will look very different for these two scenarios.
The nordic countries, despite having achieved much greater equality, all have populations of 5-10 million, which are smaller than many US cities. They all have their own independent systems of government, and different regulatory, trade, tax, and welfare policies. I wonder if the US would look very differently, if we analyzed the stats and looked at the policies at each state level? Would the American people be better off, if the States had more autonomy to craft their own policies to address their own issues?
After all, the framers of the US constitution was keenly aware of the issue of using a purely population based approach elect federal representatives, as they were concerned about the states with populous, trade heavy port cities to grow and overtime over power the more agrarian states. Hence the two houses of legislative body where while the House seats are delegated based on population, the Senate gets 2 seats per state.
Thankful for this channel as it brings knowledge for these times. Interesting happens in 2023 and into the future.✒️📚✒️😊😻🐕
Inequality is a term used , and abused by Cultural Leftists in their rhetorical deceits to monopolize political power. The Leftist use of the term “inequality” applies to the superficialities of material life ( money) . They are not talking IQ “inequalities”, spirtual "inequalities" lifespan “inequalities” , body weight “inequalities”, height “inequalities” , health “inequalities”, personality “inequalities” , they are once again talking about material inequalities from which they seek a political position based on toxic ENVY… sad but true.
A politicized envy that not only violates the Judeo-Christian values found in the 10 Commandments, but promoted and used by the narcissistic Leftists to incite hatred of those "different" from the "regular" folk …. be they "Jewish being different from Christians" , the "Capitalist" being different from 'Workers" or the "1% " different from the "99%" , it is same old sad politics of self serving elites narcissistic coercive control, fostered by lies , deceit and violence, from the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt to the "Socialists" of today.
Cultural Leftists use the term "inequality" , to foster ENVY as they seeks to dominate both social and individualist discourses in the politics of the temporal, or as in todays weaponized terminology the “Politically Correct”.
Sadly the ‘politically correct” covert attack on the Judeo-Christian people, and the basic Human Rights of all (see UDHR 1948) represents the sectarian/ racist ‘theoretical” assumptions of the Cultural Left. Sad but True.
Sadly Cultural Leftism is based on debunked Marxist “theory” a 19th century updating of the ancient politics of “collectivist” narcissism in modern “economic” semantics that gives rhetorical license to a power seeking elite to critique or “control” the lives of others. Control in violation of peoples Natural Rights, and the ethical dimensions of Abrahamic Law (as it applies to over half the worlds population) the Jewish, and Judeo- Christian people, and everyone’s rights under UDHR 1948. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
2 Corinthians 11. 14/15 “And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15 It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness.”
Victor Davis Hanson On The POLITICS of ENVY: and the politics of secular religion. The Laurence Fox Show
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADjTmOqatx0
Measuring Time with Capital seems to be an illusion.
We can abandon the use of Money and live well without it.
Born in 1945 in the USA and grew up in relative poverty, due to the choices made by my Evangelical father, I never-the-less was provided, with my 4 younger siblings, a home in a state sponsored housing project in California, very good education and good health care. The housing, health care and education (including violin lessons) was all supported by the post war investment in the people of the USA. I spent two years in Cal State college and then on to U C Berkely, all supported by state funding, and then on to Medical School in Canada and on to a middle income position which I could then support my children. On it goes. Support the population to thrive, no matter what their beginnings, and we create a happy and prosperous community of caring people. What a shame that by 1980 that all was slowly destroyed by the Reagan collusion and worsening equality. Not Rocket Science!
I am new to economic thinking. I really like Dr. Chang's comparison of countries and his continuous breakdown of beliefs and reasons things are happenng the way they do.
Don’t tell me tell to subway homeless
I need more of ur lectures. I m 60 but I feel like a grade 1 pupil. My mind needs more of this staff.
maybe working less is not such a bad thing? trickle-down is a sham! we have to figure out how to work on the "right kinda things", IMO
Sikh religion propounded by Guru Nank Sahib in Punjab in 15th century ensures equality justice for all and the right to wear arms. Following this Sikhs created a massive Khalsa Sikh Empire led by Maharaja Ranjit Singh sarkar e Khalsa in 18th century that even the British Empire in India were shit scared to attack .
The theory is that rich people are motivated to work when paid large sums of money while poor people are motivated to work when they never have enough money. Unpaid labor goes unrecognized and we ignore the masses of people who have given up and refused to participate or only participate enough to skate by.
So now we have again learned the Big Government economic model doesn't work and the search for a redo (again) of the Keynesian economics . Why not just consider M. Friedman's model of smaller government?
Have you noticed that the implosion of Twitter, FaceBook, Twitch, Tumbler and other social media while good for reducing instability is bad for those under the thumb of traditional brick and mortar establishments? What I mean is those social media platforms offered ways for people to be social influences, entertainers, and political activists. In all of those things they are able to contribute and make a living earning far more than they would get at Wal-Mart or Target for example. Those platforms were the closest thing I've seen to neoliberal/libertarian economics working in my life-time but they became overrun by grifters and dangerous political talk about killing your enemies.
Foolish conclusions based on flawed assumptions as applied by the ‘might makes right’ school of those apt to crawl after walking.
“Disapproval for claiming social ladder” that hit home, people have no idea how that feel, especially when you want to go to stem field
Like your style of delivery mate, clear, relatively easy to follow,, and delivered with humanity. Best word I could come up with at this point. Cheers
North Korea, Cuba, Russia all have incredibly high levels of inequality. Capitalism is not the enemy.
Gross inequality is the ultimate failure of any economic system. Gross inequality is an actual attempt for the rich to eliminate the poor by killing them with a system of repression.
2:37 We need to give money to nobody
I lived in Norway for three years and I have seen how equal their economic system is. You do not need to be very educated to earn more. Almost everyone's salary starts from the same range. I meet one guy who is autistic and he doesn't look very abnormal when you see him except he is very slim, he gets 1700 UDS per month from the government, living in his own apartment. Even though I don't like the discriminated world but I still do think there should some differences, people should get paid based on their hard exceptional work. As everyone has the same living standard there, no one cares about anyone, and people are lonely, emotionally unavailable, less knowledge about the outer world. After coming from a developing country when I see that somehow I feel so unlucky that how much I have been gone through to reach some point and some people just born in a lucky world.
Equality is impossible but i believe we can fix extreme poverty in this world.
These lectures are just wonderful.
Oh trickle down economics… has there ever been a less accurate economic theory?! You would think something that is so far off of the empirical data would die a quick and decisive death… instead, in true economic fashion, it lives on in perpetuity 🤦♂️
22:28 “Why does Inequality Matter?” I was looking for this, so I assumed somebody else would be looking for this too.
2:20 "When you think about it, this is a bit of a curious logic because it says that the rich need to be made richer in order to work harder, and the poor need to be made poorer in order to work harder." Just outstanding.
1:44 After financial & economic crisis, saying this is basically political suicide
I assume this is about the US? We are a REPUBLIC, not a democracy. The problem I see is the VERY rich avoid taxes all together, by laundering it through non-profit foundations. Kill Gates and George Soros comes to mind. Globally? I also understand that the right to own private property is fundamental to a 1st world country, vs a 3rd world country that doesn't have that right. It therefore is NOT the fault of western culture that a poor country is in that situation. The UN and the poor countries want to solve this by taking away our water, electricity, and food. Why aren't they told to change their own policies to help their people live a more quality life. It isn't fair to the people, but taking our way of life away from us isn't going to help. Their government will still not give them access to the resources.