Select text to annotate, Click play in YouTube to begin
00:00:43
hi uh i'm nikan david's wife um and this is an event in corner in the owner of the first anniversary of david graber's passing and in the spirit of his rejection of academic arrogance and our urgent need to get out of the crisis we are in we set up the art project
00:01:07
fight club welcome to the first one of the series today we're talking about what is that the next one will be about the nature of money david was probably the most famous anthropologist of our times and the best-selling offer even still he had a food in his computer called nightmare in which he dumped all bills bureaucratic papers invoices and papers of his academic achievements he regards
00:01:35
the idea of isolated individual as a myth what interested david much more was a dialogue he believed that it is only in dialogue in the class of opinions where answers are formed and how human consciousness is born we humans according to david are the product of our social relationship that's why it was so important for him to be involved in a situation in which
00:02:03
people think and act collectively and david grabber foundation will follow the same path so we have several projects lined up from collective education of his archive to publishing the anthology of the fight club starting from the first debate between david greber and peter thiel as fight club official cheerleader i urge our fighters to be emotional provocative and bold because the questions that we'll discuss concern us all if enough of us will change the way we
00:02:33
think about what deb mean then the social design of our society will change i'll change along with this so this is just that as david described what a revolution is a change of common sense and the collective imagination and david argued that the main achievement of the paris commune despite a defeat had been the transformation of the common sense about how we live together
00:03:02
so most of what we consider ordinary in our cities public transportation street lights public schools the eight hours work days and even the not yet achieved equal pay for women and men originated in the paris commune and it was then considered to be a social madness so the same can be said said about occupy those 10 anniversary we celebrate it now just as we
00:03:29
celebrate david's life occupy didn't take over any territory he didn't have leaders and government but it did change the public discourse it's become important to talk about equality poverty and that so after after occupy we'll look at the world differently speaking on death the position of our fighters today are radically different we want to i want to express my immense
00:03:56
gratitude to thomas piketty who replied to my email although we didn't know each other and agreed to participate in this debate i also want to thank michael hudson who came up with them many of the ideas that david graber built upon in his book 5000 years of death and i really hope that this debate can radically change the way we think about the world and what else could be more
00:04:20
exciting so i passed to liam who uh thank you for agree to moderate his discussion well it's my great pleasure and it's wonderful to welcome everyone from all over the world uh we share some commonalities in our human experience and one of them is that we tend to come into the world most of us sort of under-capitalized for the experience so in a sense most of us are united in
00:04:49
debt and that's why it's especially exciting to have two such brilliant thinkers help us unpack this difficult subject from the suitcase where we like to push it way into the back of the closet today i'm very delighted to welcome my friend michael hudson he is a distinguished professor of economics at the university of missouri kansas city he's also a researcher at the levy institute
00:05:16
at bard he's a former wall street analyst and a frequent commenter on economic matters and historical matters he's written extensively about debt and as you just heard from nika his work was a great inspiration for david graber he can also tell you more about the ancient sumerians than you ever dreamed of knowing so hopefully we get to hear a little bit about that today uh welcome professor hudson and welcome also to tomati he is the um professor at the e-h-e-s-s
00:05:50
and the paris school of economics and he's also the co-director of the world inequality lab uh you know him for going viral with his books telling us why most of us don't have any money of course there was his smash hit capitalism in the 21st century and more recently which you must get if you haven't read it capitalism and ideology uh welcome to you professor pikati and we'll start
00:06:16
out having each of you tell us uh your thoughts about debt your position on the topic and you'll have about five minutes each and uh i think we'll start with you professor hudson i thought we're going to let tom go first otherwise it's going to be fine all the things i agree with that he wrote and let him say what nobody wrote that's fine with me thomas would you like to go first
00:06:40
uh yeah whatever is it's fine i mean so okay let me say a few words first let me you know thank you for organizing this and and you know i was very you know when i received nika's email you know i felt you know where you know i felt very emotional because you know i remember very well the discussion we had with david grubber back in 2013 in paris which was
00:07:06
right after my book capital in the 21st century was first published in french it was not yet available in english so david has not read it but i had read this book and on that um the first ten thousand years and and um and and this was you know this was for me this was really a very um you know powerful reading and this made me think a lot maybe this was not so visible in capital
00:07:31
in the 21st century because i had written it actually before i i could read david's book but but you know to me this was this was really a major and this is a major contribution so what about that let me simply say that you know there will be in the future there will be again other debt constellation massive debt consolation so you know there are long cycles about that which
00:07:57
which of course david uh talks about when we go back to ancient history or to sumerian times and as michael has has been has been working on and so you have this long-run cycle but you also have you know a short more short-run history of of that consolation a more medium-run history if you want and i think it's very important to to remember in particular that you know after uh you know there
00:08:24
are two modern episodes which i find particularly striking in terms of getting that back to zero or at least you know concerning a big part of that the french revolution of course is a very important example so you know this was a time when the basically the political system did not manage to make pay those who should have paid for the public spending which was the nobility
00:08:47
so there was a fight flight toward that because people who should have paid the tax managed on how to escape and the solution was the french revolutions and the fiscal privileges of the aristocracy the conservation of that through partisan inflation partly through taxation and that's sort of one modern episode the other modern episode which i want to to refer to is of
00:09:12
course uh after world war ii uh you know after you know in 1945 1950 most rich economies had public debt which were enormous you know even even bigger than than today and they made the choices you know the political choice through you know very conflictual social movement political fights
00:09:37
in the end the choice was made collectively not to replace his debt so this happens in various ways you know inflation in some cases but but some countries like germany in particular which is viewed today as as very conservative in terms of economic doctrine and ideology and which in many ways is very conservative we'll see after the election in a few days but you know it's still going to be quite conservative probably in any case but in fact after world war
00:10:05
ii developed applied the solution to to get rid of the debt of the past through a monetary reform and through progressive taxation of very high wealth holders in order to in effect compensate the lower wealth holders for the uh for the monetary reform and the the loss of links that was implied by military reform so that in the end i mean this is not job this was certainly
00:10:33
not a perfect system but as compared to all other ways of getting rid of past that you know this was certainly one of the one of the most equitable or at least or the least unequitable way to to address the problem and you know i think we will have we will have other episodes like this in the future so nobody knows the form it will take you know the kind of political mobilization
00:10:59
you know occupier was was was an important episode there will be other you know there are other you know social movement tax revolt you know if you think of the yellow vest movement in france a couple of years ago which was a major tax level to get rid of a very what i think was a very uh an equal project to raise the carbon tax basically on the poorest group in society and and there will
00:11:27
be you know to address uh climate uh challenges but also you know all sorts of social and developmental uh challenges uh we will we you know societies will have to to to to find ways of of getting rid of their debt right now we have this illusion that you know we can just take it on the central bank offer and and forget about it but you know i think it will be more conflictual and more
00:11:55
less peaceful than this because it's always a matter in the end of redefining a power relation between different social groups so it cannot be completely peaceful it involves a conflicting social interest it involves different groups of people with different agenda and you know in many ways we have we are in a situation which is not i think completely different from
00:12:20
the one at the time of the french revolution which is at the you know those who those who should pay have somehow managed to design a legal system and a political system so that they can escape taxation and and at the same time middle class and lower class people are you know fed up of paying the bill for them and so and so the solution is more and more debt but you know at some point there will have to be something else will have to happen and i think it will be roughly the same it
00:12:51
will have to be roughly the same solution as it was you know 200 years ago which is the end of fiscal privileges of a small group in the population that has that has managed to escape taxation for for for too long so that's okay that's a sort of initial uh initial perspective and and that but you know of course i'm very interested to hear michael
00:13:18
and continue the discussion thank you michael it's uh floor is yours okay well i certainly appreciated uh the the book that you published on the uh accumulation of uh wealth and how it's concentrated in the hands of the uh one percent i think everybody knew intuitively that this was
00:13:42
the case but uh economists being who they are they don't really accept something until it's all there in statistics and uh you you did uh just a wonderful job in tying together uh all of these statistics and uh showing how the degree to which wealth is uh the one percent of concentrated wealth in every country and you also made i think the most important point where you said what's
00:14:07
caused this and you came up with the broad answer that i agree with you said that financial returns exceed the overall rate of growth and if financial returns exceed the overall rate of growth of course you're going to have the rich getting uh richer uh and richer uh and i think the reason uh where we uh uh have a different approach is how do you explain all of this well uh when your book
00:14:35
came out a number of writers said well this is uh uh the marks of the uh uh 20th century and uh uh you showed that there was an abrupt turning point uh in 1980 and uh everything had been changed there and i think the one percent looked at your statistics as a success story they said yep we're really uh doing better than everybody else and as uh the head of goldman sachs said that's because
00:15:02
we're so uh productive uh but i think the reason your book was praised so much uh in the west is you didn't come up with a threatening political solution uh and uh when they said this was the mark book is the marks for modern time that meant don't read marx read this book and i suspect that after you put all of this enormous good work into the uh statistics that you did on wealth
00:15:30
and income i think the publisher probably said well what are what are your solutions well you just came up with uh the solution that you uh said in the book and that's to tax income and wealth uh this is not a threatening solution because there's no way that you're going to tax wealth as long as you have offshore banking centers to conceal wealth as long as you have what the oil
00:15:54
industry put in place a hundred years ago the flags of convenience pretending to make their uh income abroad the fact is uh the one percent don't really make much income they're ideal if you're a billionaire you want to do what uh half of american corporations do you don't make a penny of taxable income uh that that's uh the whole problem so i want to go into what uh your
00:16:20
book was not about uh i'm not criticizing you for not writing a different book but it's what i write about and that is why what is it that has created this uh uh disparity and why is it widened so much since 1980. well the most obvious reason is uh interest rates reached a peak of 20 in uh 1980 and they've gone down ever since well in the late 1970s uh my old
00:16:50
boss's boss at chase manhattan paul volcker said let's raise interest rates to very high because the 99 are getting too much income their wages are going up let's uh raise interest to slow the economy and that will prevent wages from going up and he did and that was a large uh reason why carter lost the the election to ronald reagan interest rates then went down from 20 to almost 0
00:17:20
today the result was the largest bond market boom in history bonds went way up in price the economy was flooded with bank credit and most of this credit uh apart from going into the bond market went into real estate and there is a uh symbiosis between finance and real estate and also between finance and raw materials and also like oil and gas and minerals uh extraction natural resource
00:17:48
rent land rent and also monopoly rent and most of the monopoly rent has come from the privatization that you had from ronald reagan margaret thatcher and the whole neoliberalism uh if you look at how did this one percent get most of its wealth well if you look at the forbes list of the billionaires in almost every country they got wealth in the old-fashioned way from taking it from
00:18:13
the public domain in other words privatization you have the largest privatization and transfer of wealth from the public sector to uh the private sector and specifically to the financial sector uh in in history uh sell-offs and all of a sudden instead of uh infrastructure uh public health uh other uh basic needs being provided at subsidized rates to the population you have uh privatized
00:18:41
owners uh financed by the banks raising the rates to whatever rate they can get without any market firing power uh in the united states the government is not even allowed to bargain with the pharmaceutical companies for the drug prices so there's been a huge monopolization a huge privatization a huge flooding of the economy with credit and one person's credit is somebody else's
00:19:11
uh debt so you you've described the one percent's wealth in the form of uh savings but uh i focus on the other side of the balance sheet this one percent finds its counterpart in the debts of the 99 so the one percent has got wealthy by indebting the 99 uh for housing that is soared in price 20
00:19:37
uh just in the last year in the united states uh for medical care for uh utilities for education uh the economy is being forced increasingly into debt and how how can one uh solve this taxation will not be enough the only way that you can uh actually reverse this uh concentration of wealth is to begin wiping out uh the debt if you leave the debt in place of the 99
00:20:10
uh then uh you're going to leave the one percent savings all in place uh and these savings are largely tax exempt uh so basically i think you you uh left out the government's role in this wealth creation of the one percent so your finance has indeed grown faster than economy absorbed real estate into the finance insurance and real estate sector the fire sector finances
00:20:39
absorb the oil industry the mining industry and it's absorbed most of the government so the financial wealth has spilled over to become essentially the economy's central planner it's not planned in washington or paris or london it's planned in wall street the city of london and the paris ports the economy is being managed financially and the object of financial management
00:21:04
isn't really to make money it's capital gains and again as your statistics point out capital gains are really what explains the increase in wealth you don't get rich by saving the income rent is for paying interest income is for paying interest you get rich off the government basically subsidizing an enormous increase in the value of stocks the value of bonds by the central
00:21:31
banks which have been privatized and uh the reason that this is occurring is that uh the largest public utility of all money creation and banking is left in private hands and private banking in the west is very different from what government banking is in say china government banking would create credit for public uses for what the economy needs to grow in the united states
00:21:59
and throughout the west banks create credit to slow the economy from growing they make loans only not to create new means of production new factories and uh they create uh they make loans against property already in place mainly real estate already in place 80 of bank loans in america and europe are for real estate uh they make loans for corporate takeovers uh they make
00:22:25
loans to buy other companies they don't make loans to build new factories which is what a government creation money creation in say china china would do so as long as you leave banking and credit in private hands you're going to have banks trading their product debt and the more debt they create the more debt service that the borrowers the 99 have to pay the banks in order to obtain a house
00:22:54
or an education or medical care or just to break even and the more money they pay to the financial sector the less they have to pay for goods and services so as the economy polarizes between the 1 and the 99 the economy as a whole shrinks because more and more of its income is spent not on production uh and consumption it's spent just on bit service so my solution is you have to restore
00:23:23
banking and credit in to public hands to prevent the kind of lending that makes asset price inflation secondly uh you talked about taxing some taxes are more important than others i don't think that as long as there are as long as the banks and the financial sector write the tax codes as long as the government lawmakers are basically employees of the financial sector who finances
00:23:49
their political campaigns uh you're not going to be able to tax them or to close down the fake uh transfer pricing that corporations use to pretend not to make money so uh you have to tax the source of uh the money that pays interest to the banks itself and that source is mainly economic rent it's land rent if you would have a tax on the increase in land values if you'd have
00:24:18
a land tax which is what the whole 19th century was about adam smith john stewart mill uh marx then if you would not have this uh increased rent being paid to the financial sector to be monopolized by the one percent uh so you you'd have to change the the way in which the tax code is based away from just overall income and wealth which is really not very practical in today's
00:24:45
political situation you'd have to have a land tax and a natural resource tax and to get rid of monopoly rent you have to return basic key uh infrastructure to the public domain where it was before 1980 so that uh basic needs can be supplied at low prices not uh creating monopoly for uh the one percent uh and i guess i'm saying you have to realize that finance has used as well
00:25:12
to take over the economy and this has to be reversed uh because uh once you have uh wealth taking the form of uh claims uh loans and claims on other people's debt we'll count you up compound interest any rate of interest is a doubling time and compound interest is always going to grow faster than the economy's real growth and the only way to prevent this isn't
00:25:37
simply to lower the interest rate which you've done today 0.1 uh the only solution is to wipe out the overall debts that are stopping economic growth and these debts are the savings of the one percent the good thing about cancelling debts is you cancel the savings of the one percent and as long as you leave these savings in place there's not going to be a solution
00:26:03
thank you so much michael and tomah feel free to respond to this idea of uh canceling debt yeah you know i i i don't feel like we have any major uh disagreement about you know everything you just said michael uh let me say also regarding you know my book capital in the 21st century you know it's a book that has lots of limitations and and you know i have on many issues you know i've tried to
00:26:31
to to to make progress since then so this was written 10 years ago i wrote capital and ideology much more recently which i think addresses some of the shortcomings but this is and still this book has also a lot of limitations so you know i'm trying to make progress all the time and i certainly don't pretend that all the answers are in you know one book and that being said i think you know many many things that you've mentioned you know again i fully agree with that i as i said you know the consolation of that is is is very
00:27:02
important because as as you very well say the the part of the increase in private wealth at the top was really made um through you know privatization of public assets increase in public debt you know there's one one statistic which i which i stress a lot which is that if you look at the net wealth of the public sector uh you know the net wealth of the government so government assets
00:27:25
minus government debt it used to be you know in the 1970s net public wealth was you know between 20 30 percent of total national wealth so you know net private wealth was bigger you know was like 70 or 80 percent but still net public waste was 20 30 percent in germany in the u.s in france in britain in japan so that was you know substantial part of everything there was to own in terms of
00:27:52
of marketable assets in society belong to the public domain you know say around one quarter or between one quarter and one third today so you know three four decades later it is uh close to zero or actually negative in in in the u.s or in the uk in the sense that the public debt is bigger than the public assets because many public assets were privatized and and public debt increased
00:28:18
and you know in effect there was a transfer of public wealth uh two to private wealth holders and that's a you know that's a very important evolution which you see the most extreme case of course will be russia and post communist country where you know you just transfer all the public wealth and you make oligarchs out of nothing but in fact we've all you know all countries have had
00:28:42
this kind of trajectories over the recent decades so that's really an important part of the story that i've been trying to tell so you know again i i don't think we have any disagreement on this at an even broader level you know it's it's all about power and and political institutions so as you said you know as long as the system of of political finance and you know parties and campaigns and media and think tank you know are largely controlled by by large wealth
00:29:11
holders you know our collective ability to change the distribution of wealth and the you know through through taxation or that consolation and or what you know whatever the method is going to be limited so it will take major political fights and in some cases you know changing the political rules of the game and the political institution to to to changes and and you know the good news is that this has always been like this or this has always
00:29:39
and and still sometimes you know it has worked in the in the past but it has worked you know i mentioned the french revolution you know of course that's a huge popular mobilization uh also in the 20th century i mentioned after world war ii after world war one well let's be clear it's only because there was a very powerful uh you know labor movement a socialist movement and communist counter model in the east which in the end put pressure uh on the on the uh and you know and on
00:30:09
the in effect and the elite governing elite in in in the west so that they they they had to accept a number of decisions you know which which were limited in their scope but still which transform the economic and social system in in a very substantial way as compared to the pre-world war one and 19th century economic system but it's only through this enormous political mobilization
00:30:34
and collective organization and you know it will be the same in in the past so just one last point you know you mentioned the case of china and you know i think the chinese counter model can can contribute maybe in the future also to sort of put pressure on the west to to to change the system also at this stage you know we are not um you know the the big difference of course with the soviet
00:30:59
counter model is that the soviet control model you know you had a a sort of a narrative and a proximity between socialist and communist party and the labor movement so that in effect the elite in the west felt threatened by the by the by this counter model and this contributed to reinforce to some extent uh until a certain point of the labor movement in the in
00:31:24
the in the west well until the final fall of the soviet union which of course reinforced a lot uh you know capitalist ideology and and and everything we've seen since then the chinese model you know you mentioned the fact that the banking system is working a bit more to the service of the real economy and infrastructure and investment than the banking system in the west
00:31:50
but by and large you know the chinese model you know looks more and more like a sort of perfect digital dictatorship and you know nobody really wants to to to copy this and you know apart from other government elites you know would like to to to you know to keep quiet their population and their grassroots movement as efficiently as
00:32:15
the beijing regime is doing but apart from you know no no nobody in the world you know no no collective movement in the world wants to wants to look like this so this also limits the the the sort of the pressure that this this contour model can can put on on on on on the on the west but you know at the end of the day i think this can be one of the fourths which still can induce uh for instance you know when we talk about the taxation of
00:32:45
multinational in 2021 which uh you know what has been decided by rich countries you know is very limited you know they claim they have solved the problem of multinational taxation but it's it's a bit ridiculous how little they have done the minimum tax rate of 15 percent is ridiculously small and also it's only sort of sharing sort of rich countries are sharing between themselves you
00:33:10
know the tax base that is currently in tax haven but countries in the south in the global south basically don't get anything and i think that's an that's an issue that's something an area in which the pressure of the chinese counter model in the future maybe will contribute to induce rich countries to to to to to to to have a bit more you know inclusive attitude towards the
00:33:37
the south also well if they don't do it i mean you know if they don't do it in effect china will finance the investment and the infrastructure investment that is needed in africa and in south asia and and that's that's you know this is at some point you know fully uh western countries will realize that they have to change something otherwise they will just lose any any influence and any capacity to influence the world yeah okay so this is getting us very far
00:34:08
from the initial discussion but uh i hope this is still more or less relevant michael feel free to respond well it would not surprise me if we end up in agreement uh with what to do uh and i realized that uh uh you wrote your book about your topic and i wrote my book about what to do about it i just want to uh point out where i think we do have i have a disagreement uh my point
00:34:34
is that compound interest is always going to grow faster than the economy's uh real ability to grow so in the end debts can't be paid right now you see a lot of third world debts that uh if the third world better countries have to pay uh their foreign debts under as the world economy slows down they're going to be subject to austerity to the world banks and the imf's austerity programs
00:35:01
and they're going to be kept in poverty uh is it really right that they should be kept in poverty just to enrich the bondholders of the one percent the one percent will say yes that's why we're the one percent so that we can impoverish other people that's our liberty our liberty is the right to impoverish other people and reduce them to dependency uh that will happen if you do not write down the debts uh it's already happening in the united states to the student debt uh crisis
00:35:30
where students uh have to pay so much money uh as they fall behind on their student debts that they can't afford to take out mortgages to buy homes uh and you're having the home ownership rates plunge in the united states that's the result of leaving the debts in place uh the mortgage steps uh uh are causing shrinkage so there is no way to get out of this economic polarization without
00:35:54
a debt write down and that's something that is too radical and uh uh when we talked about when i was referring to what china's doing i'm referring to what it's doing today and tomorrow about uh the uh real estate company evergreen uh uh china has a choice is it going to leave evergreen's real estate debts in place and every grand uh as a real estate company is two to three
00:36:21
percent of the entire chinese economy if it pays the foreign creditors and the domestic one percent of china it's going to impoverish the uh the employees of evergrand it's going to make housing prices more and more expensive in china china has had a debt finance housing boom uh if you leave the debts in place then uh you're you're going to impoverish china and obviously
00:36:47
china is going to say i'm we're not going to put the creditors first we're not going to do what the west does and say the sanctity of debt service debts are uh that you owe or sacred uh it's worth sacrificing the economy it's worth plunging the economy into poverty just to preserve the wealth of the one percent i think china's uh is going to make the opposite decision and say we're not going
00:37:12
to commit political suicide we're going to operate for it's a socialist economy and when it comes to debt and credit thank god we have our banking in the public domain and since the public domain the people's bank of china is the creditor they can afford to write down the debt without having any political backlash because it's cancelling that so do itself uh which is a great advantage uh and
00:37:38
it's also uh as for the private bond holders uh it's going to say well sorry bondholders you made loans to a company that was way over leveraged uh already uh the american bond rating companies have reduced their bond rating to chunk so you knew what you were buying if you continued to hold bonds that uh fitch and other bond raiders moody's all say or junk and you lose your money well
00:38:03
you took the risk you got a high rate of interest now you're you're paying the price that's how markets work uh and uh that really uh is the argument and i think uh you have to uh obviously what i'm suggesting is a radical step just as you're suggesting of taxing wealth would require the radical step of closing down offshore banking centers of simply negating uh if
00:38:28
banks would simply erase all of the deposits they have from the offshore banking centers from the cayman islands from from panama from uh from liberia to all the places that began by to be set up by the mining companies the oil companies and then were set up beginning in the 1960s essentially by the cia to finance the vietnam war by making america like england the home for criminal capital for flight capital all this uh all this flight
00:38:57
capital and the kleptocracy that you mentioned in russia all this really should be wiped out and if you leave this capital if you leave this one percent in place the economy is going to be sacrificed and shrinking is it worth shrinking the economy just to leave the one percent in place and if you challenge them that's pretty radical that's really what i think marx would say today um thank you and i i wanted to just pitch a question to you all before we turn over
00:39:27
it over to some questions from the audience um you've both mentioned it's it's not the elephant in the room it's sort of the tyrannosaurus rex in the room i think tomorrow as you put it those who should pay design the system uh you both have commented on this enormous problem that we have every time we have good ideas ranging from just a tiny little tax on the rich you know to the
00:39:52
more radical ideas that michael is suggesting we run up against this tyrannosaurus rex so where do you all see the most effective pressure points coming from right now um in terms of getting anything accomplished on debt where where is the effective mobilization potentially coming from or that you see developing now maybe let me first say you know we need that consolation you know we need a regular debt
00:40:24
consideration i i i don't think at all this is a radical or too radical if anything you know i think this is not radical enough because i think in addition to that cancellation we need also to redistribute the assets to redistribute wealth and so when i'm talking about taxing wealth it's also redistributing wealth so giving wealth to people who don't own anything so it's not only counseling their debt it's also giving them positive ownership rights in
00:40:49
companies in housing so so yeah we i think there's not really no no disagreement on this now what about you know the the pressure that will come well two things first you know i think the the real problem is the system of free capital flow so you know the idea is that you can um you know we have created an international legal system where in effect we have sacralized
00:41:14
we have almost sacralized right you know to to you you accumulate wealth in a country using the public infrastructures your education system you know the health system of your country and then you can push on a button transfer your assets you know another jurisdiction and nobody knows where you are nobody and but you know there's nothing natural in this system this was made by a set of international treaties a particular legal system and and that's just not this can we so individual
00:41:43
countries i think you know i have to get to get rid of that and so in the case of europe you know you cannot wait for unanimity to get rid of that so individual countries have to say okay you know i'm not against the circulation of investment and capital goods but it has to come with a common taxation with common regulation common rules you know this cannot just be like this you know you push on a button we don't know where you are so this has to to to go uh um so you
00:42:09
know some proposals that was made by like bernie sanders in the in the presidential campaign in the u.s last year early last year this seems like ages ago but this was only 18 months ago you know when he said okay we you know you can if you want to escape my federal wealth tax you can go away but then you will have to buy a 40 percent exit tax you know you will have to to keep 40 percent
00:42:32
of your assets in the us if you want to go ahead you know that's clearly a big change as compared to free capital flow and but that's the kind of change we we need to you know we need we need to we need to consider so how is this going to happen well first we need to realize that you know the free capital flows treaty agreement which came a lot actually in fact from europe in the 1980s but also from washington of course but it was a co-production if you want with this has to
00:42:59
go and individual countries have to to escape that other other source of change and pressure you know i think climate change is going to put a strong pressure in the sense that you know i think when people see more and more catastrophic climatic events you know i think attitudes toward globalization and attitudes toward inequality in general you know can change very quickly because
00:43:25
you know at some point i think people will not find it funny at all to have all these billionaires you know giving lessons using their private jet doing your space tourism et cetera you know at some point you know i think nobody is going to find this funny at all and there can be a very quick and and fast you know complete change in attitude following this and you know i think the chinese sort of counter model with all its good and bad very bad sometimes
00:43:51
aspects can also be a factor of change thank you uh michael would you like to respond to that yeah i don't see a change within the existing system i guess that makes uh me radical uh uh thomas did not mention the main point that he made in his book which was uh his number one suggestion
00:44:16
was tax inherited wealth because most wealth is inherited that's one of the things that he's found absolutely right great idea sam simone uh the great french economist had this idea when the very first book he wrote around 1806 it made him very unpopular and he soon realized that that's one there was no way of doing that uh from some simone on to the entire 19th century of
00:44:43
british political and french political economy they all agreed uh with smith and the others you have to uh there's a landlord tax the the one percent in their day were the landlords you have to tax away the land rent and make that the public uh tax base not income not taxes on consumer goods not taxes on capital because you want good capital investment you want fortunes to
00:45:07
be made in a good way that add to the economy's productivity you don't want them to be made in a predatory bad way uh the whole fight to tax economic rent and to even recognize that most income is unearned when you talk about the uh income disparity almost all this disparity is unearned income it's economic rent it's not income that's made by increasing uh production
00:45:33
it's not income that's made by increasing living standards it's just predatory rent seeking from special privileges that the wealthy have gained from government and today it's not the landlord class anymore as it was in the 19th century it's the financial class and the raw materials class uh and uh without dealing uh with this uh cl structure i don't uh the system is going
00:45:57
to shrink and shrink and we've seen this before we saw it in rome the same kind of polarization and concentration of wealth in the roman empire well the last stage of that is feudalism so we're back to what rosa luxemburg said the choice is between socialism and barbarism basically and uh there's no other way to do it you can't solve the problems within the existing system
00:46:23
because it's controlled already by the one percent thank you michael and uh i'd like to toss out a couple of questions from the audience now uh we have a question about energy uh one viewer asks isn't energy as much a source of value as land should we have progressive taxes on energy use as well or instead of land value tax uh first of all land doesn't have any value nor
00:46:53
does uh energy have any value we're talking about economic rent so part of the financial sectors use part of its uh uh income to uh subsidize business economic schools and universities to change the vocabulary our vocabulary is different from the realistic vocabulary that we have in the 19th century land doesn't really have a value nature creates it a value is created by people working
00:47:20
and creating it but nature provides other land and the public sectors spending on infrastructure creates the rent of locations which increases land prices nature provides other oil so uh economic rent is what we're talking about and this economic rent of land and oil and minerals and monopolies belongs in the public domain so that you don't have to have an income tax and excise taxes
00:47:49
and value-added taxes on labor uh and industry you should tax the rentiers not labor industry that's that's what a free market meant in the 19th century and it means inverted today a free market is the right for the rentiers to avoid taxes and shift the entire tax base onto labor and industry and they do this by twisting around and perverting the english language to get rid of the analytic
00:48:14
language that you need to even explain how some in most income and most wealth is unearthed uh how about you tamar do you think that we need to clarify how we talk about and define value yeah well you know in the case of energy first we have to clarify the fact that you know there are some sources of energy which which create a negative value because of
00:48:39
of of global climate change and climate working and warming and you know all the negative external effect of using some energy so we have some to make some of the energy uh sources just illegal you know we have to keep some of the oil in the ground we have to stop looking for new oil and gas so you know so the solution to some of the of the energy questions we have is just to to
00:49:04
to make illegal you know the use of certain energy and to to to move to other energy so that's part of the answer now if we if we have done that and we deal with with energy that don't have the the negative this much bigger negative impact on mankind than their positive productive impact then you know redistribution of wealth must be about all forms of wealth you know whether it's
00:49:32
rent or energy or financial assets or i was seeing you know we we need to have a permanent circulation of wealth and power so you know that's the way i i view you know taxation of wealth is will be a permanent you know progressive tax on net wealth which in effect will will will wipe out all the biggest uh wealth right away you know say up to 90 percent tax per year for you
00:49:59
know for for billionaires but among you know there will still be some people who want 100 000 dollars some people who earn 1 million or 2 million but there will be a permanent circulation of wealth holdings within within this limited uh wealth gap that that will still exist and this should be for all forms of wealth you know whether it's land or housing or whatever whatever the origin
00:50:26
thank you uh we seem to have quite a number of students in the audience today so we have a question about student debt and what types of resistance students could make to uh to change the social relationship of debt that they get forced into do you have any suggestions on rhetorical points that students need to engage with in
00:50:52
in order to gain support for a jet jubilee on their debts michael you wouldn't i wish there were i don't see any because uh the uh you have a president of the united states who wrote the law saying it you're not allowed to wipe out student debt as a result of bankruptcy the basic the american philosophy is the way to prevent a middle class from developing is to keep them
00:51:19
basically so deeply indebted that uh they're afraid they have to go to work they're afraid to leave their jobs uh they can't afford houses the the purpose of student debt is to make them dependent under socialism on in europe china and old countries uh education was free and the whole idea was uh it's you need education in order to grow uh under the finance capitalist system and
00:51:48
this is not industrial capitalism anymore this is financial capitalism very different you use a basic need as a means of saying your money or your life if you don't pay us uh then uh you'll you'll just have to forego your education so the price of uh getting access to a labor force is to go so deeply into debt that you're going to have to work for a living and you're going to have to work for
00:52:12
what we pay you there's a class war on and you got to realize that and there's very little you can do with students because if you don't right now i guess if you all stop paying the debt uh make the government for uh throw uh 20 million of you in jail they can't do it uh the only thing to do i guess would be a strike couldn't mean well they're going to uh try to uh go after your credit rating they're going to try to uh fight you you you have to back politicians who are
00:52:41
willing to change this and unfortunately there's no party that's uh in favor of canceling student debt or any kind of debt in the united states because the political parties are subsidized by the banking in the financial sector so uh i don't see uh i don't see a way out tomorrow yeah well i agree with michael that with this government and with this president in the us you know it's probably going to be difficult to get a lot going but and i also agree that the
00:53:10
entire political system in the u.s in a way is so corrupt by money and the way campaigns are financed and you know the way media also are financed and are biased in the way they cover the different possible candidates this makes it very difficult that being said uh again if we go back to 18 months ago you know there were candidates in the in the democratic primary which uh you know
00:53:37
together you know bernie sanders elizabeth i mean they don't put them exactly together of course but but they add a substantial share of the word and on the issue of student debt you know i think different things could have happened with with a different president and a different majority so i think it's it's important also to to to to to be helpful and to try to prepare you know what will be a more successful coalition or a more successful political campaign
00:54:05
in the future and it's important to always remember that as as michael was saying the true source of economic prosperity is not financial capitalism investment in education investment in the real economy in infrastructure and you know when the in the middle of the 20th century in the 1950s 1960s when the u.s had were in a situation of economic dominance over the rest
00:54:32
of the world it was not through extreme financial inequality except you know you had 19 percent top income tax rate after roosevelt and but you had a big educational advance as compared to you know at that time you had a 90 percent of a court would go to high school in the us in 1950s 1960s at the same time it was 20 30 percent in germany or in
00:54:56
france or so and this was this educational advance which made prosperity historically and and and we seem to to have forgotten this uh you know in the us following you know since the 1980s but so we we have to manage to put this back on the on this agenda but that's that's of course that's not that's not easy well thank you very much to uh both of our speakers today i think you've helped
00:55:25
open our minds and and think about this topic um a little more clearly even though we're still not exactly sure how to overcome these um tremendous forces uh that are working against us to find solutions that uh really at the end of the day i don't think anything either one of you has said is truly radical in the sense of history i mean we have as human beings we have approached
00:55:50
and confronted these problems before and there have been good practical solutions uh that both of you have offered so i wanted to just turn the floor over to professor steve king now and again thank you everyone for uh participating in this conversation today thank you for our speakers and thank you for the audience as well i'm sorry that there was only one hour so there's been over 70 questions asked we'd be here for three hours trying to answer them so it took a
00:56:15
couple hours to make it make it worthwhile i think i want to particularly thank thomas for being part of this debate because one thing michael and i've experienced so frequently is that we can't get anybody in the establishment to join into discussions with us outside the establishment and i really respect you and honor you for for doing that it also shows the tremendous contribution that david made by being somebody who can talk to everybody and everybody enjoys talking
00:56:40
to david we hope we can maintain that through the idea of forthcoming debates and we look forward to seeing you all there in the future installments in the fight club so thank you everybody you
End of transcript