29 thoughts on “Glen Weyl: “Radical Markets: Uprooting Capitalism & Democracy for a Just Society” | Talks at Google

  1. Start your own company and run it how you want to, and i'll do the same. The opposite arrangement is called Marxism and it's immoral and disastrous in every conceivable way.

  2. Marketopia assumes assets belongs to society, which is to say the state. The so called owner can't refuse to sell. Soou are talking socialism, not a free market. There is no paradox. You are.just calling socialism something else, but it is still socialism, still utter stupidity and will fail every time it is tried. Read some von mises

  3. Who develops and improves property when no one owns it? Debt and economic inequality are critical features of a dynamic marketplace. Our attention should be upon the principles that determine the distribution of debt and the integrity of our economic hierarchy.

  4. We’re actually testing this right now, EU, :p, UK got disqualified , well see how it goes :p, joke, you sir ARE actually quite AT communism avenue :/

  5. No dude this system does not sound like any kind of free market, it's a hyper centralized labyrinthine mess that will eventually devolve into tyranny when someone much smarter than you decides to hoard all the money they make to manipulate the market in their design.

  6. Google, a multi billion dollar corporation, can't get 2000 views in 10 days on their own video.
    I think it's time they auctioned off their Youtube account so someone like Scribe Light can make better use of it.

  7. So are you saying that people in your city have to pay for everything and gets nothing out of it. No one owns enything even though they've won it in auction. When said item, ie a house, is won in auction, you can live in it until it comes up for reauction then you can get kicked out if you don't win again. How long will there be between auctions? Do you have to bid on food and other aminatives, like water, electricity and gas? You, my friend, are living in a dreamworld if you think anything like the city you want could ever exist.

  8. "I am actually a socialist. …True socialism seeks greatest good for all." — Elon Musk, Twitter, June 16, 2018

    “Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights. …I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.”
    ― Albert Einstein, Why Socialism?, Monthly Review, May 1949

    "The trouble is that we live in a failed system. Capitalism does not permit an even flow of economic resources. With this system, a small privileged few are rich beyond conscience and almost all others are doomed to be poor at some level…That’s the way the system works. And since we know that the system will not change the rules, we’re going to have to change the system."
    — Martin Luther King, Jr., March 27, 1968

    “Why is it right that there is not a fairer division of the spoil all around? Because laws and constitutions have ordered otherwise. Then it follows that laws and constitutions should change around and say there shall be a more nearly equal division.”
    — Mark Twain, The New Dynasty speech to the Knights of Labor, March 22, 1886, https://tinyurl.com/ybkv35ev

    "A basic principle of modern state capitalism is that costs and risks are socialized to the extent possible, while profit is privatized."
    — Noam Chomsky, “Hopes and Prospects," 2010, p. 114

    "[The] trickle-down approach to economic policy [is] what an older and less elegant generation called the Horse-and-Sparrow Theory: If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows.
    — John Kenneth Galbraith, Economist and Advisor to President John F. Kennedy, Recession Economics, Feb. 4, 1982

    “The present conditions of business cannot be accepted as satisfactory. There are too many who cannot prosper enough. … This [trickle down capitalism] is merely the plan, already tested and found wanting, of giving prosperity to the big men on top, and trusting to their mercy to let something leak through to the mass of their countrymen below.”
    — Theodore Roosevelt, Convention of the National Progressive Party, Chicago, Illinois, August 6, 1912

    "There are two ideas of government. There are those who believe that, if you will only legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea, however, has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous, their prosperity will find its way up through every class which rests upon them."
    — William Jennings Bryan, Democrat, Cross of Gold speech, July 9, 1896

  9. Without private property you don't have a free market so no – this is nothing like a free market at all. This is statism – Marxism as he finally reveals. This is a completely immoral economic model. No one would ever invest in property knowing that at any moment they will lose control of it once a group of people decide they like it and want to steal the benefits of that investment (which cost the investor his money he would otherwise use to keep the property).

    In fact, in order to keep certain amateur car races within a certain budget and affordable for people without huge resources to remain competitive there are rules that allow anyone who did not win the race to be able to buy the engine of the winning car for some fixed amount like $300. This guarantees that no one will ever put more than $250 of value in their engine unless they just want a one-time win. It also means that the technology and capabilities of the cars never increase – which is the purpose of this class of racing but is a damn poor idea for use of property in the "free world". Nothing "just" about this at all.

    This is the stupidest economic model I have ever heard of and I'm disturbed that Google would allow such nonsense to be presented as a good idea.

  10. Blunt and outright communism disguised in a thick pseudo- intellectual coat. Implementing these ideas destroys societies. as have been proven many times in history.

  11. Glen, blockchain isn't consistent with your techno Georgist utopia. There is NO state to force people to sell their crypto tokens by some given time period. One can OWN their tokens for as long as they wish. Your system is one of force, violence and coercion and should be resisted at every turn.

  12. This guy said every single adult in Belgium should be forced to house a migrant basically doubling the population of an already too densely populated country.
    If the Belgian fails to integrate the migrant because the migrant commits a crime, the Belgian will get fined.
    This means that a Belgian couple would be forced to house 2 migrants, if 1 of the migrants steals from you, you would be fined.
    If 1 of the migrants does something like rape your child or wife, the victims would be fined for it!
    This guy is a charlatan and should be discredited for everything he does coming up with such INSANE authoritarian murderous propositions.

  13. I love this idea! In a way under his model everyone is a shareholder of society, and no matter what job you have, you know you are going to receive a piece of the value you add to a company or community. If you are a simple bagger at a grocery store and know a way that can speed up the process, but might put you out of a job you are encouraged to do it because you will receive a share of the proceeds. (IT ENCOURAGES AUTOMATION!!!! 🙂 )When you buy a property you are essentially buying the job of property manager and you are only able to extract value in proportion to the value you add. It makes it easier for everyone to add value and everyone is rewarded by default of the value they add. And if someone does a bad job the value of their building goes down and someone competent can step in and add value.

    The reason why communism fell was it destroyed the prediction market that is the free-market. This idea is amazing because it gets the few benefits of communism without its downsides. It is decentralized so people can't loot the labour of others.

  14. If your response to this video is a cached, "Go home commie", "Try again Marx", then you're actually not arguing. You're just repeating a trope that you've heard, and you should really try to understand that its such a sheepish response. If you want to attack these ideas, actually attack the propositions, and don't blanket it.

  15. Humans are pretty funny. We like to try to make everything super complicated, perhaps because we feel the need to justify our bizarre sense of superiority over all other species of life. The reality is that nature — via evolution's natural selection and random mutation processes — already knows how to organize whole ecosystems, including homosapiens, extremely effectively by programming each of us with an innate motivation to create and explore, in some very unique specialized way, with the goal of serving the fitness of future life.

    All we need to do to make an exceptionally healthy, thriving planet, for all of us Earthlings — animal, vegetable, mineral, etc. — is to just set our selves free to do whatever work makes us feel like we're truly living. In other words, we need to stop using money, grades, votes, and other artificial point scoring games, to motivate us to go against our best possible selves.

  16. What about the inequality that exists between the recipients of taxation (politicians and their contractors) vs the rest of us. How does taxing all assets for just existing eliminate inequality between these two groups? Im not sure I'm a fan of the military industrial complex that would grow out of effectively nationalising all property.

  17. What about my house in which I lived for 20 years and all my friends that live in that area

    I don't want to move to another location and start to get used to some other area once a group of people decide they like to buy my house

  18. Liquid markets for housing sound horrible
    I bid 1 million dollars for beach front property
    I move in and the next day someone bids 1.1 million (do I get back MY million?)
    I want stability so I pick a house that nearly no one wants and pay 1 million
    Someone rich hates me, or my neighbor band together and pay to have me NOT live in it
    All is unstable. I greatly value stability

    This just does not take into account that part of our human diversity is that we value DIFFERENT things.

    A time scale + liquid (I pay 1 million for a decade and then I GET it for a decade) MIGHT work (so rent to the commons)

    Also this does not actually take COMMUNITY into account. If you want to live next to people you like and you all build a real community someone can "kick" out the lowest paying member and now has angry neighbors and destroys a community. Some people are just assholes and this system LETS them be

    It is a fun system to play with (in the mind) but I would not want to live there

    I think OUR mega cooperative idea with nearly complete individual freedom and tools to deal with unforeseen challenges AS they occur is better and is doable from where we are, NOW

  19. If I can't keep control of a property or production facility, then I have no interest in improving it with my work because there is no guarantee that I won't have to sell it at a loss. The entire premise of a non-ownership society is wrong.

    From an economics perspective it gets even worse. Many goods are available only once. You can burn a stack of wood only once, you can put a beam of steel into a bridge only once, then it's basically fixed in there for a very long time, i.e. the steel is unavailable to the market. If we say, however, that the highest bidder could remove a piece of steel from a bridge if they wanted to, that bidder could now extract a ransom from the people needing the bridge. The bidder would simply go there with a wad of money, wave it around and say "If you don't pay me a weekly fee, I will buy your bridge and take it apart.".

    Sometimes I think some people are too intelligent for their own good… but not intelligent enough to think trough the consequences of their thoughts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *