Capitalism 2.0 Will Include a Healthy Dose of Socialism | Eric Weinstein


I get asked a lot about the state of capitalism
and I think that for those members of society of a certain age we think of capitalism as
being locked in an ideological battle with socialism perhaps or even communism.But we
never really saw that capitalism might be defeated by its own child – technology. And I think that what we find is that even
the most diehard free market economists usually save place for what they call market failure. That is, markets really only work when the
value of something and the price of that object or service coincide. So the key question is: what causes value
and price to get out of alignment? And, in fact, every government on earth has
a form of levying taxes of some form, because at some level there are certain things that
need to be paid for that cannot, in fact, be priced where they must be valued. So, for example, raising a standing army is
tough because if somebody chooses not to pay for it it’s very difficult to exclude them
from the protection of that army. So that in general—what we find is that
these market failures are found in every economy, but they are also hopefully a small portion
of the economic activity so that we can deal with them as a special edge case. Now the problem with this is that technology
appears to do something about figuring out the size of that small slice and making it
rather large. So, for example, if I record a piece of music,
once upon a time if you wanted a high quality version of that music you had to go to the
folks who actually pressed the record albums. But now I can record music with arbitrary
fidelity and share it as a small file. And my having a copy of that file doesn’t
preclude anyone else from copying the file and using it themselves. There’s no question that the number of times
I use that file doesn’t really degrade the file because it’s, in fact, digital. So in that situation musicians were among
the first to feel the earth crumble beneath their feet and they had to find new business
models because, in fact, they found that they had gone from producing a private good where
price and value coincided to producing a public good. And the idea of taxing people to pay for both
an army and their diet of jazz and rock n’ roll probably didn’t make a lot of sense. So the danger is that more and more things
are being turned into small files, and that means that the portion of the pie that is
private goods is likely to shrink. This is one of several different forces. Another one that I talked about in an essay
called Anthropic Capitalism is that software has some very peculiar features. Traditionally technology has moved us from
low value occupations into higher value occupations. So while we always decry the loss of jobs
we usually create new jobs which are more fulfilling and less taxing. And therefore those who have cried wolf when
they’ve seen technology laying waste to the previous occupations, those people have
usually just been wrong. The problem with software is that software
spends most of its time in loops. Almost all code can be broken into two kinds
of code. Code that runs once and never repeats and
code that loops over and over and over. Unfortunately what jobs are is usually some
form of a loop where somebody goes to work and does some version of whatever it is they’ve
been trained to do every day. Now the danger of that is that what we didn’t
realize is that our technical training for occupations maneuvers the entire population
into the crosshairs of software. It’s not just a question in this case of
being moved from lower value repetitive behaviors into higher ones. But the problem is is that all repetitive
behaviors are in the crosshairs of software. So it’s not that there’s nowhere to go;
we still have the Rube Goldberg sections of code, where something will happen only once. You know: a company will be founded, never
to be repeated. A poem will be composed that will never need
to be recomposed. But the problem here is that most people don’t
see themselves as opportunists in this positive sense, right. They don’t see themselves as capable of
doing these one off acts of inspiration, which will probably always be fairly highly rewarded. They see themselves as needing a repetitive
behavior on which they can build their families, their hopes and their dreams. And in general that may be coming to a close. Even if that’s always been false in the
past I think that there’s excellent reason to think that the era may have changed. When we lost the ability to beat computers
at chess we immediately thought of Go as being a deeper game. But that bought us a very small respite from
the power of the computer. And I don’t even know of anyone searching
for new games more human-friendly than Go to maintain our edge. So I think it’s really important to understand
that where we are is that we may need a hybrid model in the future which is paradoxically
more capitalistic than our capitalism of today and perhaps even more socialistic than our
communism of yesteryear, because so many souls will require respect and hope and freedom
and choice who may not be able to defend themselves in the market as our machines and our software
gets better and better. And this is one of the reasons why something
like universal basic income comes out of a place fiercely capitalistic like Silicon Valley,
because despite the fact that many view the technologists as mercenary megalomaniacs,
in fact, these are the folks who are closest to seeing the destruction that their work
may visit upon the population. And I don’t know I think of any 9, 10 or
11-figure individual at the moment that I’m familiar with who isn’t worrying about what
we’re going to do to take care of those who may not be able to meet their expectations
with training and jobs as in previous models. Whether it’s truck and car-driving is one
of the largest employers of working age men threatened by self-driving vehicles or any
of the other examples. For example: computers that are capable of
writing sports stories from the scores alone. So in all of these cases I think the technology
is actually forcing those who are most familiar with it to become most compassionate. And whether or not we are going to leaven
our capitalism with some communism or start from some sort of socialist ideal and realize
that if we don’t find a way to grow our pie very aggressively with the tiny number
of individuals who are capable of taking over operations of great complexity, I think that
we are going to have some kind of a hybrid system. I wish I could tell you what it was going
to look like but the fact is nobody knows. Universal basic income is very interesting
but is clearly a first step and I would say really a first draft of a part of a theory
that we just don’t have yet. It’s hard to say whether I’m optimistic
about the future. I’m very confused as to why our government
is still populated with so many soft – let me try it again. Honestly I’m rather confused about whether
to be optimistic or pessimistic. One of the things that I find most perplexing
is that our government is still populated by people who come from sort of softer disciplines
if you will. Whether that’s law, whether these people
come from poly-sci, very few people in government come from a hard core technical background. There are very few senators who could solve
a partial differential equation or representatives who could program a computer. And I think that this is really a terrible
inversion of what should be happening. As the world becomes more technically demanding
it’s important that the children of engineers, mathematicians and scientists grow up with
the children of politicians or executives. And what we’ve seen is we’ve seen this
terrible economic stratification where the technical professions were turned into support
roles for this different leadership class. Now during the 50s, for example, we would
have university presidents who might come from a physics background such as we had at
the University of Pennsylvania. The atomic bomb came out of World War II,
as did radar. We came to understand the incredible power
of computers like ENIAC and during that period of time there was a tremendous vogue for thinking
of a technical intellectual elite that could, in fact, lead us into a more hopeful and technological
scientific tomorrow. Somewhere along the line that got lost and
I’m very concerned that we have the technical talent to build an optimistic future, but
that what for whatever reason we’re so terrified now of those technical folks that we keep
attempting to subordinate them, to keep them on a leash, to make sure that they are not
the ones in the know with power, with decision-making abilities. And I think that if you look at a society
like China’s, China’s certainly not falling for this trap and they are proceeding along
a very different path. So I think whether or not we understand where
we are and we make the correct decisions for the optimistic future depends as to whether
we have the right leadership class. Do we view our technical people as support
staff for the true decision-makers or do we realize that, in fact, these are the people
who should have been making the decisions all along? I think if you think about, for example, the
Challenger disaster it was the management class that didn’t understand the real risks. The engineers knew just how much risk was
being taken. And I think that, in fact, if we could just
invert that relationship we’d have a much better chance at an optimistic outcome.

100 Comments

  1. All prior technological improvements made people stronger (bulldozers, tractors, cranes etc), more efficient (textile mills, production lines etc), smarter (20th century computers), faster (trains, cars, airplanes etc). The common thread with all these is that it requires humans to design, build and operate them. The big difference now is that the new technologies will not require human intervention, either to operate or to iterate the next generation. This equals obsolescence for humans. Obviously not everyone but the example of truck driving going away is a stark example.

  2. We're already harvesting the horrors of socialism. If anything, kapitalism will sow the seeds of liberty.

    …unless you like social engineering, thought control, value fostering and progressive tyranny before individual freedom.

  3. Weird eye movements

  4. Capitalism came after technology numbnuts

  5. As technology advances and replaces repetitive tasks i.e. those tasks that require little brain power, just doing the same action over and over; what we will be left with is the folks who are the most innovative and creative benefiting from the new economy. Crafts, trades, and jobs that require human thought devoid of the use of algorithmic necessity will be the most rewarding. Also, people who can repair the AI of the future. We will always need construction workers, city sewer workers, welders and plumbers. However, it's only a matter of time before some of the niche jobs will be automated. I recently saw an video where a robotic hand was being developed that could replicate the dexterity of the human hand. If you can retro fit that hand onto a robot arm, you can theoretically get that hand to replicate the actions as if it were a real human to a certain extent.

    The question is, how are we going to handle the new change. People gawk and scream at the idea of UBI or some form of public housing for everyone or universal healthcare, however these things will end up happening naturally as the need for fewer and fewer workers becomes more evident. This can be a good thing and very troubling reality. Why would you keep job around that could be automated just for the sake of saying to the workers "you won't be replaced'. That is silly because competitors will not adhere to that sentiment, they will move forward and embrace the technology thereby becoming more lean and efficient which inevitably will force your business to either shift your practices to join in the future, or be left behind and close up shop.

    Millennial's, Gen Z and the Alpha generation will have to figure about new business strategies to stay solvent. Competition in the workforce will be different the it was before the turn of the century. We are in a transitory shift as it relates to work, technology and the human experience. How will we adjust in ensure widespread poverty does not ensue. Is a minimum housing standard necessary to ward of homeless filling the streets? How to these things get paid for in an economy where the tax base is reduced due to lower worker participation? Maybe all these questions are simple to answer from the experts out there or some other person on the internet. It doesn't seem so simple to me because our economy is very complex and it's not only our economy that is affected. As much as we would like to cut ourselves off from the rest of the world, we value products that are produced in other countries. Global competition is unavoidable at this point. We have to reconcile with the fact that we cannot recluse ourselves into a good economy.

    We also have to recognize that a smarter healthier society will utilize technology to the fullest in order to make us safer, keep our cities and water clean, and reduce wasteful energy expenditures. These are real issues, that robots cannot work out for us. Human beings will still be needed to develop the tools that will help clean our planet up, harness solar energy, and create custom financial analysis for personal and commercial businesses. Our technology is a tool, the human brain cannot be replaced yet, and while we enjoy that little modicum of peace and mind, quantum technology isn't far off, and that possibly can easily be threatened.

  6. He really doesn't understand software or automation. A good example of how jobs are loss and created in the same instance is Daz3D. Daz3D is a software which helps people to make 3D characters very easily. This work previous would take experts on coding and design to create the 3D models. Now using the software anyone with the desire can make their characters and art. The people who once did the job of 3D rendering still work within the field even though the field might be small but now a huge number of new people have entered the field because the barrier to entry has been significantly lowered. The development of the software created a massive industry overnight which was much better than the industry it replaced. Automation instead of taking jobs has the ability to make work easier that enables people to do more.

    Do not fear the future. Embrace it.

  7. Eric addresses a serious problem in this video, the impending loss of millions of jobs due to computer automation. The replacement of truckers with self-driving trucks alone will be an incredible economic adjustment.

    What concerns me is the idea that socialism is the way forward. Socialism's track record of solving problems without creating larger problems is abysmal.

    I'd bet that some Eric level genius was similarly concerned with the economic effects of the invention of the automobile itself over a hundred years ago. This is not to say that Eric is wrong, but he could be worried for no reason.

    Technology doesn't advance exponentially in a vacuum. Society advances as well. Every satisfied need/want is replaced by another, creating an opportunity for the industrious.

    Recently, it's been shown that the placebo effect works in part due to the extent of human interaction involved. I think it's likely there are huge unmet needs that could be solved that aren't currently being addressed at all. These new industries are the source from which the new jobs will spring.

  8. Things are going to get so fucked up before they even try to do anything about it 🙁

  9. So basically the future has no room for idiots and America is ran and populated by them.

  10. It’s funny that climate disaster is in fact a technical/engineering creation and these people demand more control! Mathematics by nature solves artificial simplified symbolic problems whereas environmental science knows how sophisticated and chaotic the system really is. The deepest knowledge in medicine for example is 2500 yrs old: “Don’t treat a disease you can’t diagnose” and “first, do no harm”! Compare it with tech nerds who are all aggressive interventionists… gamers of yesterday who shake the joystick frantically hoping that something good will happen! Tech is a grandiose delusion…

  11. Machines have not been able yet to compete with a suitmaker for standards of fit. If it ever does it will not impart the confidence, self esteem and motivation for change, that Shakespeare mentioned in Richard the 3rd. See tramwaypods.ca for the evolution of city states via transit.

  12. Why is the next era declared to be "capitalism 2.0"? I think it should just be called "socialism". The capitalists should just admit defeat then congratulate the socialists for being correct all this time. But that means being a good sport and civilized, which capitalists are opposed to. So we have to redistribute credit to the capitalists and declare the next era be named after them, simply because they refuse to cede power and they still control the police and military. Take away the police and military and the capitalists are reduced to nothing. A popular vote on police policies should take care of that. So how long will it take the capitalists to finally congratulate the socialists for getting it correct for over 100 years, despite all the bombings, genocides, and agent orange? The socialists have clearly shown better character after all these years. It's time to recognize them. And this isn't even mentioning how Canadian health care costs less then American.

  13. Why is capitalism credited for the creation of technology? The Soviets were the first in space. Socialist cave men invented fire starting techniques. Soviets invented the AK-47. And now the USA claims that Russians are so good at trolling, they're able to control who Americans vote for. And government taxes fund most research in the U.S. The capitalists are clearly the ones doing the redistributing, seeing how they've redistributed all the credit from the hard working inventors to themselves. Some inventors are socialist. This is omitted from capitalist literature.

  14. Not invert, balance. How we address our tech experts now will be the model for addressing the expertise of the tech itself. If humans are going to roll over and take a subordinate role…. Yesterday's feminism is tomorrow's humanism. People need to be able to survive without the continued support of AI, maybe not as nicely, but get by. As soon as we can't, the freedom, the presence of choice, is lost. There's no negotiating space.

    It's critical to seek to understand the tech you use, and to turn it off periodically. Absence not only make a fonder heart, it brings perspective. Human freedom is what makes relationships worth anything. Computers can't do random. That's our job. We provide the value, to ourselves and each other. Your FB friend list is not yours friends. Zuck, to his chagrin, is not who you love.

    Do we need better tech understanding in government? Absolutely. I've been harping on that for 30 years. We need to navigate toward collaboration. If we don't foster patience with the human side of things now, AI won't be wrong when the uselessness of humanity is determined. We have an imperative to assign that value… or, well, biggest null pointer exception possible. (Or depression epidemic, or meaningless/corrupt politics, or crisis of truth, are we there yet?)

    Assign the value. That's your job.

  15. What are those bumps on his face called? Are they just pimples? They seem like more colourless and permanent, the kind of thing old people get on their faces. It doesn't seem like acne.

  16. Um…what the he’ll do we have now? Because it definitely isn’t capitalism. Housing, academia, healthcare all force fucked by some amount of socialistic practice. 1930s brought us the most socialism and it was only supposed to be a rare tool. It’s now the biggest most common and expensive tool in our belt. Technology argument is a joke to me. We have a bunch of people that don’t know what needs to happen next and how to contribute because of YouTube, Facebook, Twitter… all these things ripping away at your time to create.

  17. War is the solution

  18. Just u wait

  19. Eugenics

  20. www.yang2020.com

  21. Socialism is easy! It was successfully done multiple times already! Right? USSR, Venezuela, Cuba. It only costs milion of peoples lives

  22. Hey here's a weird thought.
    Bacteria and co. provided the substrate, the scaffold and software for complex multicellular life.
    Great as we are, maybe we're creating the substrate for the next epoch of life on Earth…. the species, genus, family, order, phyla, kingdom (yes I know I've got those out of order)… which never existed before. Watch this space

  23. Probably shouldn't go same direction as China.

  24. It will take another 100+ years to convert American senators and convert our corrupt system to MAYBE fix our scenario. We are now in a money grab & run agenda… get what you can and get away before we kill ourselves.

  25. I agree that technology is having an unusual effect on our current economic system, but this issue has been known about for a long time. Readers of sci-fi will be familiar with a society where robots or AI produces everything which is required and people just live a life of leisure. The basic problem is technology is increasing the productivity of people to the point that a very few number of people can produce everything a large population requires, thus resulting in nothing for the bulk of the population to do. “Interface” by Mark Adlard covers this idea nicely. The issue with this is that there are a lot of labour intensive jobs which machines cannot do. Such as care for the young or the old. This cannot be the whole story.
    The second issue is the lack of cost of reproducing a product, such as music, movie or book. This is only an issue for a certain sub-set of products and is only a major issue if people’s consumption of these products increases. With the increase of leisure time it is increasing, but this is not significant enough by itself.
    One solution to this problem is the japan solution. With a reducing and aging population the issue in that country is a lack of labour, which will be satisfied by technology. Unless something major occurs Japan will not need a guaranteed minimum wage, although a more extensive welfare system for the old will be needed. Thus the real issue in the developed world is, as productivity is reducing the need for labour, population is increasing at a high rate. Its this mismatch which is causing the crisis.
    Thus the question is, if we need less people to product all the good we need why is governments encouraging such a high population growth. The primary reason is short term gain. Increasing population keeps wages low and increases GDP with minimal governmental effort. A simpler solution is to reduce the population to well below economic growth. A simple solution, but as Clausewitz once said about war, the solution to complex problems is simple, but doing the simple can be difficult.

  26. capitalism has to go its time has come to an end we must use socialism to get to automation communism .
    . https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLyWvB7qIEkcjAzt43nYEwtEYMVrOBWXzv

  27. I think democracy and the failed political and media landscape is

  28. Agree that there will be some form of blended economy in the future. But you're assuming that the capitalists will care about "the souls who cannot defend themselves" as you call working folks like me. I don't think the ultra rich will give a rat's until nobody is able to afford to buy the stuff their companies make and they can no longer make any more money. That means millions or even billions will suffer unemployment and severe poverty before the system is changed, if it's up to them.

  29. Breaking News: We already live with socialism in the US. We also live with capitalism. Its called a mixed economy. This is what I learned 30 plus years ago in high school and its even more socialist now than it was back then. Much of the debate around socialism/capitalism is not helpful as it doesnt deal with things as they actually are. We want socialism! You already have it! We dont want to give up capitalism! You already did and much of that happened before you were born.

  30. Pure idiocy. More capitalism and patent reform solves this problem wholesale. Eliminate intellectual property rights and there is no problem. This idiot 'educates' young minds. Sad.

  31. make the AI try to play D&D for you're human edge 😛

  32. Yang2020

  33. nonsense!

  34. "Capitalism 2.0 Will Include a Healthy Dose of Socialism" – so Europe is in Capitalism 2.0 ? aaaaaaaaaaaah!

  35. There is no such thing as a "healthy dose" of socialism. Every dose is pure poison.

  36. Thumbs up!

  37. Brownosers for billionaires is all we are.

  38. Looped programs. Folks stuck in a daily pattern. Repeating it over and over. We have unknowingly become part of the software loop. Eventually the looped programs are compressed to create more programming space and speed. We will be forced to go the way of looped programs. No jobs in mfg. or services.

  39. Nothing lasts forever . Capitalism is becoming increasingly unpopular everywhere…..

  40. Using China as a reference for a more utopian society is a little scary for Americans. Considering their social policy is taking authoritarian steps like social credit systems, I don't think it's a direction I'm interested in undertaking.

  41. Naive: Specialists are near sighted, even those whose field is cosmology. What is needed if humans actually need leaders, and that is a moot point, is a scientific generalist who is conversant with all the fields of human intellectual expansion and not hobbled by politicians in the thrall of their cash cows. Leaders should be chosen by testing and simulations and be imminently replaceable when someone betters their scores, not by popularity among the manipulating bastards that remain hidden from view like Mercer and company while their stooges like Trump distracts an imbecilic public.

    Addendum: Mercer is a perfect example why what you propose would be disastrous, a genius in his field that subscribes to a legion of crackpot theories and uses his influence to destroy America with Trump and the radical right wing fascists.

  42. The government won't implement this until the government stops being paid by rich people to not implement this.

    Maybe Bernie Sanders will be able to save us from the robots that take all our jobs.

    I think the way that it'll start is the universal basic income will be a small portion of how much you need to survive and keep growing until people start quitting their jobs and that's where it will stay.

  43. Two years late… But I found this to be less than compelling. He says we shouldn't fear the technologists, because they're at the forefront, and they're the first to compassionately ask the questions. Okay… But are they slowing down? Are they proposing that the world create some anti-atuomation treaties until the market actually evolves to the point where it's a needed resource rather than a scary burden? Nope. "Shut up and put us in charge Luddites… No we don't know either… Just shut up and put is in charge, like China did, the dictators did it right…" Wow, Eric. Just wow.

  44. capitalism 2.0 will include a healthy dose of *charity*. you know, the kind of socialism that doesn't include violence. generally unimaginable to lefties.

  45. Stupid people pandering to stupid people… It will end when you're all slaves and have to rise up again against the very masters you put in place to rule you.

    As America has adopted more socialist policies we have slowed down dramatically. Most of the stuff you hate about America oddly is Government. Look at healthcare, banking, food and welfare… Government is incredibly involved in these now and you hate it… So you blame capitalism, not Socialism. Also note that every area Government is involved they said they would lower prices and give greater quality, yet you got historic raises in costs while quality is so bad the very people demanding more Government will tell you life expectancy will decrease.

    Socialists are just not very smart people because they started the conversation thinking they care more than others do. Historically of course their policies lead to tens of millions dying and mass poverty… I mean, it's only every single case in all of history, i'm sure that's wrong and you're right because "things are different now." Same line all dictators used o get power fyi.

  46. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKhfR8WC4Eo Ill listen to this guy over Eric.

  47. No but socialism sure is?

  48. Yet another person telling me how to live my life and what’s best for me 🙂 . Also providing zero empirical data on universal basic income. Also has anyone met coders, or people that work in tech startups ? Many are extremely anti social not the type of individuals you want party. Also China is on some black mirror shit with their social credit system . Also minority Hui ethnic group are undergoing a genocide by the majority Han ethnic group, on yeah and what the fuck about Tibet…..China is hardly a model country. See people loving on Karl Marx here don’t forget he hated Jews and never worked a day in his life, and lived off his parents and spouses! Sounds like a great guy right ?

  49. At 1:00 it is the same argument as the Right to Work Laws

  50. Over my dead body will I ever be a part of socialism.

  51. The problem is government, not free market capitalism.

    A government raises a standing army to protect its self from another government.

    Both governments using and wasting capital for something completely unnecessary. Government protecting itself from government.

  52. He’s missing the point.

    Capitalism not only made it possible for a person to make money as a musician. It made the equipment they need.

    And through production and technology, which make things cheaper!!!

    Meanwhile, everything government does makes things MORE expensive.

    If everything deflated in value, like capitalism does, you would need less money to afford a life style.

  53. I’m a collapsitarian. Just waiting for this whole thing to fall apart.

  54. Universal Basic Income is not the solution!!!
    It has been tried makes people lazy and useless and addicted to free money
    If the government is to give free money to the people they can ask some things in return
    even if it is basic types of work like cleaning up the city, recycling, building things, planting trees, etc. there are many things humans are able to work and earn their mone with dignity! wich is also an important element of human health!!!!

    We could see this as an opportunity to reconnect people to the earth and our planet so that society and government can use market forces to make humans have a positive impact on the planet

  55. What causes value and price to get out of alignment is lack of competition and shortages, which is what happens every time socialism touches capitalism. And by the way, quit trying to copy Prager U….

  56. Maybe we can do socialism with a small dosage of capitalism.

  57. Just another blowhard pseudo-intellectual — some sort of self-anointed technocrat — with a non-functioning moral compass; or, at, one who has nary a clue regarding the principles and values expressed — and AGREED TO by LEGAL American citizens — in our DOI and USA Constitution. IOW, he knows a lot … but he knows not how to put in into context with our human experience. My suggestion: have him go back to his "Ivory Tower" and don't let him out until he knows WHY — and how — he needs to respect individual unalienable rights.

  58. The current system ISN'T capitalist, it's an Oligarchic system and has already been infused with this "dose of socialism" ..

  59. The Government wont look into the Automation problem till everybody is unemployed, they'll be busy talking about Trump and Russia

  60. THERE YOU HAVE IT.. IT'S ABOUT CHINA's ECONOMIC MODEL..
    CAPITALISM THAT WAS SEX WITH SOCIALISM OR COMMUNISM WILL STILL RESULT TO AUTHORITARIANISM.. JUST A LITTLE BIT STRONGER CAUSE IT HAD AN ECONOMIC STRENGTH
    AND YOU CANNOT PRODUCE GOOD HARDWORKING PEOPLE AND ELEVATE THEIR SOCIAL CLASS BY IMPOSING UNIVERSAL MINIMUM WAGE..
    CAPITALISM EVEN WAS NOT PERFECT DO THIS FOR YEARS.. YES IT WAS NOT FOR ALL.. BUT ANYONE FROM DIFFERENT BACKGROUND AND WALKS OF LIFE CAN LIFT THEMSELVES UP IN PURE CAPITALISM

  61. More like, a certain measured dose of socialist poison might be a tonic for the capitalist system.

  62. There is no money in a product itself. It is in the distribution of that product that the money is made in capitalism. iTunes made tons with its model then it shifted to streaming. Music is in infinite supply but the payoff for searching for hours to find a song you like on Youtube verses YouTube's algos or Spotify's algos is why people choose to forgo that search. It is in the distribution of the content and not as much as the content itself. We also saw this happen with pornography and how the distribution of it is where the value unless the person becomes sought after by name. The thing is that if you decrease the cost of say using driverless trucks or electric trucks, then the cost to distribute goes down and food costs will stay flat or go down because it now costs 50% less to transport goods. That means more profit. Technology has outpaced evolution and how we compete for resources and reproduction. We have seen it disrupt elections. We will see it disrupt auto insurance (Profit will be big first but premiums will drop).

    The biggest thing is that until we have a new utility like cell phones, computers, cable TV, or cars to spur the economy it may be something that is incredibly difficult. The model T can be attributed to spuring the roaring 20s. The computer and internet can be attributed to spurring the 90s. The Cell phones spurred the economic growth of the 2000s. The focus needs to be on citizen output and efficiency in order to really foster capitalism. Industry output always follows customer demand. We need a technology device that increases citizen output that isn't a consolidation of other models. These are what drives economic growth and will match the technological increase in supply. One idea that I have is a gardening system that allows alexa to focus on the garden for you with sensors that let you know when the plants need water (using facial recognition/soil sensors), when to cover the plants due to weather changes, while optimizing the plant growth. It could have commercial purposes as well but we need a noncommercial use that increases the frequency to how often we use a device or increase the purchase of a device. Like 3d microwave with inferred recognition technology that can see where to heat the food item in the microwave as well as the ability to target specific areas only. Could make baking a thing of the past but it would shift the industry from a 10 year purchase of an oven and microwave to a 3 year purchase of a 3d inferred microwave.

  63. The only healthy dose of socialism is 0. Most problems america faces today and will be worse in the future are caused by extreme government intervention that is being normalized even by the people on the right.

  64. Glad I have a job that cant be done by a program even though I use several. Better ones would make my job faster, or even easier but my employ requires human input.
    I teach my child, dont learn how to swing a hammer …. learn to write the code that instructs the robot how, when and how hard to swing the hammer or learn how to fix the robotic hammer. But dont pick up the hammer. She doesnt know it yet but shes headed to coding camp this summer 🤣🤣

  65. If we want to save the west, let’s just make this guy make all the decisions for the next 30 years and see what happens

  66. What do you guys think about living in a Resource-Based Economy?

    https://www.resourcebasedeconomy.org

    😛

  67. Replacement migration into the West is the biggest theft in the history of the world. GDP increases only accrue to a rootless cosmopolitan elite and to the immigrants themselves. Western people get stuck paying for the cost of immigration while the immigrants get hundreds of billions from the leftists in government and corporations get tax cuts from the "right wing" controlled opposition. The reason you see every global corporation spewing leftist talking points from their social media accounts is this: cultural Capitalism needs Cultural Marxism to keep the theft going. Resist your dispossession, Western man!

  68. Replacement migration into the West is the biggest theft in the history of the world. GDP increases only accrue to a rootless cosmopolitan elite and to the immigrants themselves. Western people get stuck paying for the cost of immigration while the immigrants get hundreds of billions from the leftists in government and corporations get tax cuts from the "right wing" controlled opposition. The reason you see every global corporation spewing leftist talking points from their social media accounts is this: cultural Capitalism needs Cultural Marxism to keep the theft going. Resist your dispossession, Western man!

  69. Implementing basic social income amounts to a subsidy for those who find it impossible to provide for themselves. This needs to be done with some care to insure the problem doesn't grow to the extent it exceeds the nations capacity to deal with it successfully.

  70. UBI is a very scary proposition, as it suggests that a growing proportion of the population will simply be useless in terms of productivity. It will be in society's interest to remove this resource drain. On the other hand, we've had the same issue with the military in the last half century, i.e. our government has had to manufacture fake crises in order to deploy them and use up excess hardware, and we seem to be fine with that. So…

  71. It already does, just as socialism contains capitalism, but the morons the USA are too fucking blinkered to understand that if it were not for socialist input the USA would not exist as a going concern (for now, but Don the Fart may destroy it).

  72. Socialism is force and coercion. Socialism is evil. Even in small doses. The only role of the government is to provide for the common defense, either internally or externally. (including violence, theft and fraud) Anything outside of that including health care, retirement, education, space travel and even agriculture is not what the founders had in mind. There are dozens of wealthy nations that these statists can move to. When the last of our freedoms are gone, where will those who demand to be free go?

  73. Capitalism will eventually collapse just as Karl Marx sort of imagined but without accounting for the changes brought by unpredicted things like the internet thats why no one can actually predict what surely is the next step after Capitalism.

  74. Why are we acting like we don't know why these problems persist?

  75. Radar was WW1.

  76. You can't have constant growth in a world of finite resources. Capitalism has the philosophy of a cancer cell- growth for the sake of growth, until it kills it's host. Capitalism is organized crime.

  77. I feel that those 'big' people are trying to postpone the revolution in simple terms, not that it is wrong or immoral.

  78. awesome video

  79. Donate to Yang. Even $1 helps him meet the debate stage threshold.

  80. the only problem with today's "capitalism" is too much socialism.

  81. When we get rid of the education department in Washington then we will start producing more people that are capable of greater things. I don't think having techies running the show will be adaquate.

  82. Too many People defend capitalism like a religion. It’s a class based system that divides us into property holders and wage earners. Why is this the ideal system? Why is production not viewed as it truly is? A social process, there’s no valid justification for private ownership of the means of production.

    Why not plan the economy so resources can be used effectively, and human needs can be met? Let technology work for you instead of taking you out of a job. UBI is no solution, it just perpetuates the capitalist system even longer and creates a new non working class.

  83. tech geniouses despise politics because it is WAY too much crownnyism/tradeoff/but muh feelings .. to mathematicaly correct/incorrect .. hard sciences live from disprovablility .. politics live from dodging the outrage of some ones/groups feelings being hurt .. to survive long enough to actualy getting SOMETHING done .. those 2 worlds aren't combinable ..

  84. Eric,
    I’m a fan of yours. I love the way you consider problems, break down and express ideas. The last interview that popped up was awesome, maybe it was rebel wisdom or Rubin.

    I might have misunderstood you, but at around 5 minutes it seems you might be projecting your world and your abilities onto others. I have heard the story of you and your brother and how it was a challenged genius. I get it, a lot. For some the level of challenged and genius didn’t hit the sweet spot that yours did. Or they were not privy to peers who identified the genius over the challenges.

    Eric, you have won the I.Q. Lottery and had it nurtured until it was off its knees. You’ve also obviously applied it well and worked very very hard, so kudos to you Sir.

    However, most people will find themselves in a more middle ground. They’ll never write a timeless poem, a symphony or have a light bulb appear above their head with ‘Apple Computers’, Air BnB’ or ‘neutron bomb’ written on it. There will always be ‘masses’ of people who need to be gainfully employed in a useful task as part of a tribe. Maybe it’s written in our code from societal evolution, your brother would know better than I.. then there’s 10% of those ‘masses’ who don’t even have the light bulb potential to be gainfully employed for any real task, despite their strong desire to be as productive and useful as the ‘normal’ people they envy. As a ‘socialist’ I’m sure you’ve given time (your most precious and finite resource) at the coal face of the destitute and would understand that for every genius who makes it to the top there are also many who get ground up at the bottom of the pile.

    My other concern is your belief that those people with creative technological genius should be treated as special angels. Please remember these are the same people who brought us nuclear weapons… Im not sure we should fund them to the hilt and let them run amok unhindered. That might not end so well. Sure, some of these scientific geniuses have expressed remorse in hindsight but the same technological levelling that allows a 15 year old to become a rockstar from her bedroom, also means that it only takes one ‘mad’ scientist for things to go from bad to much much worse.

    Anyhow, I’m still a huge fan…

  85. Socialism and Capitalism can not coexist. Anyone who thinks otherwise, doesn't understand enough about Socialism, Capitalism, or either to understand this. Capitalism inherently creates deadly contradictions within society. It inherently creates wealth inequality, and works only for a small minority. Taking Socialist principles and applying them within a regulated Capitalist framework does nothing but put a bandaid on a bullet wound. Socialism doesn't forego economic growth, it just makes sure that the majority is who sees the fruits of said economic growth. Whereas Capitalist economic growth only translates to prosperity for the Capitalist class.

    It's either Socialism, or barbarism. Technocratic Capitalism like what this guy is describing, just like European social democracy, won't save us from our own contradictions, nor will it stop our imperialistic wars and artificial scarcity and poverty. Look at the right wing populism and Neo-Nazism arising in Europe again. This shit is evident.

    I'll say it again for those who do not understand. Regardless of if you love it or hate it, Socialism is within a whole different framework, it is a whole different game, and thus it can not successfully coexist with Capitalism in the same framework.

  86. This guy is just 100% pure wisdom. Thank you Mr. Weinstein.
    To those that gave a thumbs down, you need to try to build your brain, go back to school or something, but just learn, and hopefully someday you might be able to differentiate between intelligence and random content.

  87. Capitalism 2.0 will just be libertarian technofeudalism. & it will arrive in a trojan horse with dudes like this guy & Andrew Yang talking about "deeply concerned and humanitarian" silicon valley and wall street (m|b)illionaires. they'll have good, cutting critiques and observations of late neoliberal capitalism, but they likely will be pushing/enabling something much more dark and sinister

  88. Imprecise. Technology is not "capitalism's own child". Just like the wheel wasn't invented because of capitalism.

    We just happened to experience steep technological improvements while under capitalism.

    Not to mention things first satellite and first man in space – these technological advancements were realised not in a capitalistic country.

    Technologal advancement somehow being exclusive to capitalism – is simply a misguided understanding.

  89. These discussions just scare me. I feel machines will destroy humanity.

  90. Technology is not a child of capitalism. This is a silly assertion.

  91. but why is healthcare and education socialism? Funding private armies and prisons seems to be more socialistic and fascist.

  92. i have all ways wondered why we have no people in government that have no hard science background! we all so should only give degrees to hard since! we need to move to a hard science based vew.

  93. It’s very hard to argue against Weinstein, humans need to get creative if they want a future in a world where repetitive jobs, or ‘loops’ are being replaced by AI.

    I have no idea what more I can add, other than I will absorb this thought and chew it over, as it’s a very inspirational way of looking at the world going forward.

  94. I don't know what is going on in United States, but in Poland and Sweeden there is great dose of socialism and living here in both countries is like a heaven on earth, I don't know about United States because you are isolating your country and don't let people in

  95. A capitalist-socialist hybrid will be inevitable, the next step of economic evolution is Universal Basic Income or anything that take cares of the struggle for survival.

  96. (((Weinstein)))

  97. most of the comments i read below are of selfish interests and sick opinions.. I'm sorry..but that's normal human behaviour

    i know they would say it's their opinion and plausible if challenged, but 'what you say is a mirror of your own selves…"

    …..i don't blame the commentators, but realise only that the world will never make up to type 1 civilization after all with such people… God save us all!

  98. Royal,nobles and merchants of the past parallels today's businessman,politician and technologist. In the same way merchants replaced royals, I argue technologists will replace businessmen.

  99. Eric is a communist who looks to the hopeful failure of the US coincides with his theories.
    America has left free market capitalism LONG AGO (Around Roosevelt or Wilson). The digital age is not the "fix all" remedy Wensein seems to think it is. America NEEDS a smaller Federal footprint on the neck of it's people. That would free up enterprise and allow growth between the toes of government force. (also killing off useless lawyers might help – how many pages of disclaimers does one toothbrush NEED??)

  100. Im a conservative that's critical of capitalism. This is pretty much on the nose in current year +4

Leave a Reply

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