I like how trump is the example of greed fuelling his desire to be liked 😂😂😂😂 does donny know he acts like a 4 year becoming self aware for the first time???
@odin1585 Says:
🎉❤
@frsaa99 Says:
No, I disagree. Although my opinion may sound idealistic, I believe that reducing the gap between the rich and the poor can lead to economic stability and prosperity public. I understand that consumerism has a function, but doesn't it seem like everything in this world has a function? Yeah, maybe not all.
It seems that sometimes we worship a human being because their ideas seem good. But, in reality, humans have flaws, and we need to be critical of their ideas, whoever they are.
@mariyanantony6554 Says:
Make social receipt
@mariyanantony6554 Says:
Everything is divided labour
@marisaferher572 Says:
Gracias! Lo llevaré al aula
@monicamishra9722 Says:
Theory of capitalism simply means PROFIT.❤❤❤
@edgartokman4898 Says:
This is exactly what David Hume's disciple, Adam Smith, prohibits. On the same premises, in his 1766 Wealth of Nations, Smith defends the opium-trafficking of his employer, for whom that latter book was written as an anti-American tract, the British East India Company. That opposition to the principles of the Constitution is in the tradition of John Locke. Yet, as an explicit statement, the cited passage from the 1759 Adam Smith goes far beyond what British Calvinists, for example, or even David Hume, had understood Locke to have intended. Already, Adam Smith stands out as devotee of what is sometimes termed "British nineteenth-century philosophical radicalism."
Rejection of that "philosophical radicalism," the British Liberal Establishment's late-eighteenth-century break with respect for customary morality, is the basis which German empiricist Immanuel Kant cites, in his Prolegomena to a Future Metaphysic, as the motive for his open break with his former mentor, David Hume. Kant identifies Hume's turn away from toleration for customary morality as the issue of this break.
Smith's 1759 Theory of the Moral Sentiments and his 1776 Wealth of Nations typify the more radical reading of John Locke which was imported into the circles of Britain's powerful Second Earl of Shelbourne from the work Shelbourne's venetian contemporary, Giammaria Ortes. This is Adam Smith's foreshadowing Jeremy Bentham's outline of what became known later as the nineteenth-century British utilitarian's hedonistic calculus. One must see the fuller exposition of Smith's radicalism in Bentham's The Principles of Morals and Legislation, "In Defence of Usury," and "In Defence of Pederasty." This radicalism of Giammaria Ortes' type, expressed openly by Smith as early as his 1759 book, is the characteristic belief and practice of the leading intellectual and political circles ruling Britain throughout the several concluding decades of the eighteenth century, as also during Benthamite Lord Palmerston's nineteenth and Benthamite Bertrand Russell's twentieth centuries.
This representation of the sundry texts of Locke, Hume, Adam Smith, Bentham, et al. is validated by considering the historical issues of the U.S. war of 1776-1783. The irrepressible conflict between the Americans and London was forced into a state of open warfare against the British monarchy by the implications of the British East India Company's direct takeover, by outright purchase, of the British parliament and monarchy. The war was fought explicitly against the already practiced dogma of "free trade" presented publicly, only in 1776, as The Wealth of Nations. Our obligation to review this history is imposed upon us here by the widespread popularization of the plain lie, that the United States of America was founded upon the notions of "democracy" and "free trade," as associated respectively with John Locke and Adam Smith.
The United States' Declaration of Independence avows the principles of "pursuit of happiness" associated with Gottfried Leibniz, principles in direct opposition to John Locke's neo-Hobbesian dogma of "life, liberty, and property." In addition to the plain anti-Locke and anti-Adam Smith language of the Preamble to the U.S. Federal Constitution, Article I of that Constitution prescribes principles of governmental role in protectionism, the national currency, and regulation of foreign and interstate commerce which are explicitly irreconcilable with British "free trade" dogma.
These key issues of the U.S. War of Independence go back explicitly to the Massachusetts Bay Colony of 1688-1689, in the resistance to Royal Governor Andros and such key issues as the Royal suppression, by Locke's circles in London, of the Commonwealth's power to issue public credit in the form of currency. Cotton Mather's 1691 Some considerations of bills of credit, and Benjamin Franklin's famous 1729 A Modest Inquiry Into The Nature and Necessity of Paper Currency are forerunners of both Article I of the U.S. Federal Constitution and of U.S.Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton's famous Reports to the U.S. Congress on the design of the anti-British "American System of political-economy" (under the rubrics of "Public Credit," "A National Bank," and "Manufactures").
@Mou3allembelgayb Says:
You’re the best video maker on Adam Smith to explain us the invisible hand as we could not see it.
@danemclain969 Says:
This is one of the most white washed narrative of Adam Smith I have ever come across. The whole video was like "See Adam Smith isn't so bad!" When the stuff he was saying was absolutely horrendous-- we need to honour and celebrate the rich so they can do what we want?? WTF?? WHEN HAS THAT EVER WORKED?
@jessicaduke9921 Says:
That fact I’m watching this for class in 2025 and this was made 10y with trump in it is crazyyyy
@hussain.elsabi1 Says:
Richtig gute Idee
@mhab3467 Says:
Give them prizes??
Really bro?
@idilqalanjo2035 Says:
Adam Smith started something that changed many human lives.
@idilqalanjo2035 Says:
It didn't sit with him why You would choose Donald Trumph as a successful person (rich person) example, when he is openly racist and perhaps pedophile. His is far from the positive out-comes of prosperity. Although he inherited substantial wealth from his parents, he did not achieve success through overcoming significant challenges or through revolutionary thinking. His rise cannot be attributed to innovation or resilience, but rather to the advantages he was born into and the systems that enabled his influence.
@Carriz487 Says:
The contemporary wealthy class couldn’t care less about honor or respect.
@DruK2000 Says:
Just like Adam Smith, this video does not age.
@EirikDoigLorentzen-u9d Says:
Feel proud of being Scottish, a Briton!
@bhagatsinghofindia3678 Says:
Why white people find these kind of guys interesting is beyond me.. Maybe it's their nature to be this way.. Ugly
@bhagatsinghofindia3678 Says:
Outdated shiiit bruh. Bro never understood the rich at all it seems. They don't care, they don't even care to pay taxes what are we expecting from them? Adam's ideas are crashing and burning infront of my eyes.. Adam doesn't understand a leader of a society is far different than these corporate cunts! Maybe it's not wealth of nations ultimately it's the wealth of a small percentage of crooks with a ton of money.. Adam fucked up big! It works they say works for who? Not society so you may say there's no society even😂 if you consider such people benefit society you fucked up my friend! Big f7ckin time
@bhagatsinghofindia3678 Says:
You did all the pampering and the rich still don't give a shit.. What are we to do now adam? You fucked up
@catholicinacar Says:
Love this new direction. I loved the old stuff, too. But this is fantastic. Keep it up!
@chanceobondo3843 Says:
why would you call all rich people narcissicts, being rich is not an evil. you can be poor and still evil ... human nature knows no wealth, but a system that can uplift millions and give them a chance of fulfilling themselves is the best! adam smith had solid points here
@geekpie100 Says:
What was fascinating about the Scottish Enlightenment was all these geniuses from different fields lived on the same few streets in Edinburgh, and they all knew each other.
@katacasper9215 Says:
The argument that our tastes are bringing forth the ills in society rather than the companies is flawed. How does the fact that big companies manipulate our tastes in order to reach a higher consumer demand, fit into this "elaborate" puzzle? Whatever Adam Smith wanted capitalism to be, is long gone and i doubt we will be able to change it without the use of a couple guillotines... :/
@AshishBaranGhosh-v4x Says:
🙏🙏🙏
@daviddelgado6090 Says:
Rich unethical people have more influence in society than poor ethical people.
@louis_the_hedgehog Says:
His ideology aged like milk in some areas.
@norman9052 Says:
Lmao all rich people want is validation and respect? 😂
@kimibobowambasi4203 Says:
Our Economics substitute teacher pulled out his old textbook when he went to our school. Though published in America, it states that human economy has never been so healthy, durable and growing all than when owners etc limited to 10x that of workers 1946-67.
The fifties grandparents lament ‘good times’ .
Again, how to make that happen though?
We learnt that he was fired, though our fav sub, for some offense to feminism, unspecified. We miss him.
Guess what his last name was😂?
@iire2955 Says:
I do not think he understood human beings.
@AidanCho-s9p Says:
smith is better than marx
@nazaren45 Says:
😺👍
@1serious0mfr Says:
Yeah, Im not a fan of this Adam smith guy
@MrJCerqueira Says:
Um, real cute, thanks. Adam Smith was comparatively very *anti-capitalist* & wanna be cliffnotes like these do a disservice by misrepresenting not only the man, but more importantly, his ideas & philosophies.
@adenhamilton5804 Says:
Bro sounds like the OG social democrat
@kingmj87 Says:
The one part where this video's way off the mark is in claiming that Smith didn't support taxing the rich at higher rates than everyone else. He did discuss the risks of capital flight, and likewise how vanity can be used by society to take control of the rich, but he also EXPLICITLY calls for progressive taxation in the Wealth of Nations (emphasis my own):
Book 5, Chapter 2: "The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, IN PROPORTION TO THE REVENUE WHICH THEY RESPECTIVELY ENJOY UNDER THE PROTECTION OF THE STATE."
In fact, he later adds: "It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something MORE THAN IN THAT PROPORTION."
@djan959 Says:
It is incomprehensible that you're talking about an 18th century man having anything to do with the later Mass society that you are describing. Why don't you give an understanding of Adam Smith and barr your application
@hugomith1041 Says:
I would like a better explaination of Jean jacques rousseau to better understand the comparison between his and Adam Smiths believes about consumer capitalism.
@Juliana_Evelyn Says:
Que vídeo incrível! ❤😊
@carlhartwell7978 Says:
All very interesting, just missing his selflessness in discovering that tea and buttered bread do not brew well together! Or so I've heard!
@RitamUlrich Says:
Adam Smith sounds a bit like a proto-social democrat.
@Daily_memez420 Says:
Wild theory 🔥
@Zagirus Says:
"In the untouched wilderness of innate ambition, where courage roars louder than the winds and the law of the jungle is written by the unforgiving claws of destiny, Adam Smith, enshrined in the majestic aura of a regal lion, strides across the savannah of enterprise with a dignified grace, his mane glows like a crown of pure gold, symbolizing the radiant success that comes from the sweat of one's brow. Each step he takes imprints the legacy of unfettered opportunity and the sanctity of individual achievement upon the earth, his growls the hymns of market freedom and competition's pure doctrine.
Every chase, every triumphant kill under the scorching sun, reflects the core tenets of his existence: that prosperity is forged by one's own claws, that the spoils belong to those who dare hunt for themselves. In this realm where nature's unforgiving law dictates the survival of the fittest, Smith's feast is a hallowed celebration of meritocracy, a sacred ritual where the fruits of labor are savored in their earned glory.
Yet, within the dark and deceitful shadows that plague the untouched corners of the vast savannah, a figure emerges that is both foreboding and out of place – Karl Marx, the ghost of collective despair, creeps with the stealth of disillusionment, his presence a blight on the lush landscape of innovation. His philosophy, a morass of dependency and entitlement, seeks to strangle the vibrant life of autonomy and merit, to redistribute the spoils of the hunt without the sweat of the chase. In the whispers of the wind, his doctrines spread like a pestilence, aiming to corrupt the natural order with the falsehood of utopian equality.
His vision, dreary and monotonous, threatens to leech the color from the world, proposing a landscape in which the lion lies down not with the lamb, but as the lamb, denying the essence of its nature. This apparition of equal misery rails against the very laws of nature, against the survival of the fittest, pushing instead for a survival of the most numerous. It represents a chilling specter of uniform mediocrity, where the exhilarating chase of aspiration and achievement gives way to the lethargic shuffle of complacency.
Nonetheless, despite his attempts to blanket the world in the fog of his malaise, Marx remains a ghost among the tangible triumphs of the individual, unable to fully extinguish the fire of ambition that burns within the heart of the savanna, as Smith's roar, a clarion call to the spirits of ambition and self-reliance, pierces through Marx's murmuring shadows. It is a battle cry, celebrating the victories won by claw and tooth–by wit, will, and work. For in this primal savannah, success is not a gift to be doled out but a prize to be claimed by those daring enough to hunt their dreams under the sun of free enterprise." – Andrea Zanzotto
@TorianCJ Says:
4:09 this is not the ‘Christian’ answer. The Christian answer is the biblical answer, which is to wisely steward your wealth through investment and industry, and to honor God, you parents, and to care for the poor, the widows, and the orphans.
@donthatethegame42 Says:
The pic of Trump after saying the rich "desire honor" sure didn't age well.
LATEST COMMENTS