UK, you have a fantastic politician there. He should really become the next PM.

@Juwety

7 жыл бұрын

johnlew05 exactly, a politician...

KZread clips of Daniel Hannan act as doses of anti-depressant

It is very difficult to poke holes in Daniel Hannan's speech, I would like to see him as Britains Prime Minister one day, but it would be great to hear a debate between him and Marxist economist Richard D. Wolff, would be extremely interesting.

@frankvonfrauner

Жыл бұрын

Wolff has never made a cogent point in his life. He puts on a clipping tone and criticizes, he has no suggestions for an alternative because socialist economics is a religious system that relies on faith in the unfolding of the dialectic to reach utopia.

Iceland had the right idea: lock the bankers up! That's a country with a recovering economy now.

In Daniel Hannan, we have an eloquent speaker, a critical thinker and an orator of such high standard, it's would be a crime that we do not leave the EU and bring him back to domestic politics. He would shred many on both sides of the house.

He says regulation was already too much. By 2009, a whole host of derivatives such as Credit Default Swaps were totally unregulated and unaccounted for. Preventing traders from trading CDFs and Collateralized Debt Obligations would have stopped a most of the predatory lending. There is no logically connection between financial regulation on complex derivatives and the general bureaucracy/red tape that general businesses face. He's trying to interchange both, but they are both very different. Very misleading about regulation.

@PrivateAckbar

8 жыл бұрын

It's impossible to regulate our way out of recessions and debt crisis. The malinvestments of an economic boom aren't caused by greed or profit seeking. The fundamental cause of the business cycle is expansionary credit. In the past the first fluctuations were caused by the first bankers fraudulently issuing excess receipts for their gold reserves. But in our era of post ww2 Keynesian neo-mercantilism we routinely have horrendous business cycles as a consequence of central banks effectively polluting the entire business of banking. When banks issue credit that can't be backed up by the real capital and savings that are actually available they distort the capital structure of the economy. Businesses begin projects that can't be completed and are based on demand by fiat. The recession is an inevitable part of the business cycle. The reason business cycles ARE cycles is because central banks, by expanding money and credit, are attempting to price fix INTEREST rates. And if you look at the Keynesian philosophy behind these mercantilist policies it is nihilistic, and millennialist. Much the same as Marxist eschatology.

@charlieabbot3649

8 жыл бұрын

+Economics Alex Go further up the food chain, alex. FNMA caused the crisis with their LIBERAL lending guidelines. The CDS and CDO were supplied cash by the unions to finance, yet another, government social experiment gone horribly wrong.

@Anon54387

8 жыл бұрын

+PrivateAckbar Economics Alex got real quiet, eh?

Well said! Awesome speech!

This speech is amazingly well-articulated with meaningful words. Every time I listen to the speeches of Dan Hannan, I get goosebumps, and his speech ruffles up my feathers. He always chooses the right words, cadence, and bodily gestures to articulate his speech well. Behind his every effortless speech packaged now, I could see a lot of hard work he had undergone years together. Moreover, it requires a lot of discipline to rise to this level. I follow the speeches of so many English people, but Dan is unique. My best wishes to Dan.

Brilliant as usual Mr Hannan. Well done, almost comical that the weasel Cameron is PM.

I totally agree with this man on the bailouts, and on corporatism, and on the dynamism of the market. The problem is that we cannot have a truly free market, a truly democratic government, truly free individuals as long as we have capitalist corporations (top-down, shareholder run enterprises). We need to replace shareholder elected boards of directors with worker councils, in a market economy

Magnificent orator - and he talks absolute sense!!!!!!!

There's only one point he spoke on that was painfully inaccurate. The idea that the market is overregulated or that the business sector is privy to strong regulation. This is a fantastical claim. There are multiple regulation bodies almost all of them are about as toothless as they come. SEC, FTC, etc., all are paper tigers that talk loud and carry a little stick. The idea that CDOs were engineered in an overregulated environment is kooky.

Brilliant speech. My faith is somewhat restored in british politics

He is so awesome. Good ole Brits! When one of them speaks this well, you damn well better listen!

concentration and centralization of capital is inevitable, so the "to rich to fail" phenomenon it's inevitable, with that phenomenon comes the cartels the monopolies and the urge to keep growing monopolizing and not allowing the replacement of the inefficient. that to me is the biggest flaw of the argument

where can i see this in full

That was only part of my comment, i listened very well the first time thank you.

Always a pleasure listening to Daniel Hannan

Watch all his videos. He is very thought provoking.

"Capitalism without regulation is doomed to fail" No one is recommending that there be no regulation. Listen to the man again.

Daniel Hannan explanation of human "greed" at 6:50 was beautiful. Giving people of massively differing opinions on a subject equal respect and footing, not injecting any bias but sticking to the point. It may not seem like much, but I know this guy is religious, and for him to speak like that makes me feel he is ahead of where we are and maybe even where we are headed.

'pluarlity of small providers' hasn't been the case for a century, even then. Capitalist system has an inherent incentive to consolidate not to mention economies of scale. 'regulation that pushed out small players' was overseen by larger interests - No lobby group seeks to create more competition, they just give themselves a free hand in newly created markets. Occupy was an example of non centred organisational structures and direct democracy and could be a valuable institution in the future.

Yes! Very well said :)

When I consider the weakness, the folly, the Pride, the Vanity, the Selfishness, the Artifice, the low craft and meaning cunning, the want of Principle, the Avarice the unbounded Ambition, the unfeeling Cruelty of a majority of those (in all Nations) who are allowed an aristocratical influence; and on the other hand, the Stupidity with which the more numerous multitude, not only become their Dupes, but even love to be Taken in by their Tricks:

What a fantastic speech. I'm convinced that there isn't a politician this side of the Atlantic with a better grasp of the issues, and sadly it would appear that it is precisely this that has seen him relegated to the fringes of politics.

Excellent, sounds like a british younger Ron Paul. Keep up the good work over there.

Hannah was the only speaker at this debate with sound logic and ethics in his speech. He is an amazing speaker and a brilliant thinker.

What institution does Mr Hannan mention at 9:27 that the Soviets would close on entering a country?

Masterpiece!

This is a truly brilliant analysis of the banking crisis and what capitalism is and the functions of the markets.

4:30 - why would we be wondering about regulation, and regulation of what?

@ianwarburton5433

8 жыл бұрын

+DavidsonLoops Regulation of the financial sector. Sounds as if an earlier speaker mentioned it.

"It would be bankrupt without it and we would have moved on" If we could make them go bankrupt and start from scratch then yes MAYBE things would be better. But will this happen in reality NOPE! so we have to deal with the situation as best as we can, 10 thousand pages of financial regulation are not working because the banks have dictated/weakened the regulations. I said MAYBE because unless good regulation is in-place this would only happen again....con

Here here!

I want the Government to not bail out the super rich people that made bad decisions and drove their companies into the ground. The regulations didn't stop the meltdown from happening, and some regulations (like the ones that stipulated you had to loan to people with terrible credit) actually helped make the meltdown. But the Government bailed them out and removed any accountability from the people that caused this. That's what I have a problem with.

when people talk about glass-steagall they mean certain provisions of the banking act of 1933, the FDIC was in the banking act but its certain parts that were repealed and are called glass-steagall nowadays, at least from what i just read on wikipedia the part people are worried about right now is the provision that make commercial and investment banks separate this did not cause the problem of people borrowing money they could not pay back though, it proliferated the damage of the bubble

I mean, I’m sorry but just because he talks passionately does not mean that he is fully correct and ethical. 1. He says this wasn’t a problem with lack of regulation, because there are thousands of regulations. Quality is more important the quantity my friend. The banks have been deregulated (glass steagall for example) Over the last 40 years to a pretty absurd degree. 2. Capitalism is not the same as markets. Capitalism is a system of capital accumulation and private ownership of the means of production. This system makes oligopolys almost inevitable. Hence why the banks are too big to fail 3. They should have protested both on Wall Street and outside of the White House. The banks obviously had a hand to play in their own bail out. Why would we not protest against them? I’m still kinda confused about his argument though. Like, is he saying that markets should be totally deregulated, and that these market failures will be avoided that way? Ah well

The sneakers with the flashing lights on them are no more useless than the ones you chose to wear. They happen to be a little more flashing and silly looking but they still cover feet. The productions of those sneakers also employed some people and the support network that runs and maintains the factory employs many more. I don't think you understand what they mean when they say economy.

Amazing ... perfectly said!! It's nice to hear Ron Paul's name rings freedom and sound fiscal decisions outside the US too.

Astounding!

removal of Glass-Stegall allowed the bubble to affect more areas on the market, but it did not create the bubble, if you don't have the bubble in the first place you don't have to worry about not having glass-Stegall, and its the government and the central banks that create the bubble

Well, if you want to be picky - is a law against murder a regulation?

There is no consumerism or democracy in the system? Please, explain that.

Corporations are as moral as the people within them, and they are far more moral than Government. And no, they would NOT do the same "bad trading" as before if they knew that they would go bankrupt and lose their jobs. The problem here is that they are not forced to suffer the reprecussions of their actions, and more industries will be doing this if they are not held accountable. Would you like to see the Chemical industry do something horrendous only to see it swept under the rug?

*claps* great speech!

Dan Hannan is a top man, brilliant

Certainly 10.001 would do the trick. The same goes to budgets, it is always just a few billions below the ideal size which would be enough. Let's just write one more regulation and expand taxes/borrowing/inflation just a little and it will all work like a charm.

Anyone in the audience who was tweeting rather than listening is being rude. They should listen to what he has to say or leave the room and give their seat to someone who wants to hear him.

It is quite a new documentary so it maybe a few weeks of so before it hits YT. I am from the UK as well so i used a proxy but It is also available to download as a torrent. If you read between the lines the banks are as the title says untouchable, i think there is far more that we do not know ie that they are holding a far larger amount of bad debt, enough to crash the whole system.

Daniel Hannan is also right to state that giving Taxpayers money to the International Banking Cartels is not Capitalist, and indeed it's not particularly 'Leftist' - certainly not a Socialist idea. Iceland's recovery would be seen as more Leftist - but what the U.S. under Bush and Obama, and Britain achieved from 2008-9 was the consolidation of power for the Banks. It never happened, but both Free Marketeers and Socialists should have been shouting from the rooftops in rigid opposition.

Brilliant man.

Where where!

Beautiful

It's not "my program." It's just using science and a systems theory approach to providing the highest possible standard of living to all people. It requires a value shift. Right now, money is a controlled access conduit, winners come at the expense of losers. It does not have to be this way. In fact, continuing in this mindset is causing degradation across all aspects of life: psychologically, environmentally, sociologically.

I knew that Daniel Hannan was good, but I didn't realise he was THIS good.

I fully understand how efficiently most corporations are run especially the banks. Dam they have used the scientific method to fine tune every aspect of their business model, if they were not so morally corrupt a person could easily be dazzled by the brilliance of it. The thing I do not understand about what you are saying is the OUR!...con

At the turn of the last century, J.P.Morgan bought out Carnegie in an effort to establish a monopoly in Steel. He did not succeed, because he could not continue the dynamic that had enabled Carnegie to march from triumph to triumph, which of course, included a high tariff on foreign steel. Without 20 years charles Schwab, Carnegie’s crafty manager had started up Bethlehem Steel, and was able to oppose US Steel, simply because it had some of the agility that enabled Carnegie to succeed.

We should indeed have let the banks fail. Ordinary citizens would have been protected as savings are covered up until a certain pound value. It would have been the super rich that would have lost out & you can be certain this would only have happened once as the banks would have been forced to change without state interference.

Salute, commrade. This video is a clear example of bourgeois reacionism.

... I feel a stronger disposition to weep at their destiny, than to laugh at their Folly.

Excellent and very true

It's true; the cost of regulation prevented competition and choice in banking. It is very hard and expensive to set up a bank.

Oooh Hannan. Opining on a criticism of wall St. I wonder which side he's on ? I don't think I'll bother watching !

@donj06

4 жыл бұрын

Gordon Bradley Oooh Gordon. A closed mind is an ignorant mind!

Now I'm just thinking about the shop girl and her stockings.

"For it is written in the law, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' But, look many of your brother s, sons of Abraham, are clothed in excrement and dying of hunger while your home is filled with many good things, not one of which goes forth to these others." He turned and said to his disciple Simon, sitting beside him, "Simon son of Jonah, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven." -(Origen commentary on Matthew 15,14)

A man after my heart

When Daniel Hannan is in the room with David Cameron and George Osborne, I believe Daniel Hannan generously sits quietly and lets them get on with making themselves sound like the idiots they are. Simply because they cannot compete with him intellectually. This guy has the right stuff and should challenge the leadership. This guy could be the saviour of the Conservative party. Something is stopping him, not sure what but he needs to get moving, the time is now.

No idea how I ended up here, but why is this guy doing Dave Gorman impressions?

I think you are referring to the registration of copyright, which has many times been used to stifle innovation instead of protect inventors. That is a government regulated system (Library of Congress) which is abused by the politically connected. So, actually, it is not capitalism but Government regulation thereof, so your example proves Mr. Hannan's point. Government interference in the Market, while it always sounds well and good, can easily be captured by larger players in the market.

I cant believe this man got me to vote for his side while saying that accepting and proposing the other side. Now thats politician.

He's getting better.

He should be a British Prime Minister, great speech!

Epic..epic!

Turn on closed captioning for your daily laugh. You're welcome.

He speaks some truths mixed up with the establishment lies. He will draw some people in i suppose. The guy that established the Gillette company said one day he expected all companies to merge into one entity one day, perhaps were nearing that point.

I find it wierd that a person can advocate capitalism and not understand the power of capital. If you can buy and sell any commodity, why not buy legislation? "Corporativism" is an natural consequence of capitalism. If you want to compete against others, why not buy legal benifits trou politicians? Or better yet, why not become a politician in order to benefit your corporation? It's not a coincedent that Ben Bernanki, Hank Paulson, Dick Chaney and Alan Greenspan did what they did, because they were paid to. By friends. Not "the people". Capitalism has always needed government and in modern history the two of them has almost always been dependent on one another.

@rolffalt1968

10 жыл бұрын

Lossiemouth Beach Yeah you got his point right. Because its a easy talking point to get. If people was free and government didnt get involved we would be better of. But nothing was whooshing over my head. I was saying that legislation, in a capitalist society, and be bought just like any other commodity. And this favors the rich. The capitalist class. There is a reason the tax system looks as it does, because it was paid to look that way. A free market gives each individual freedom proportional to his or hers bank account, because the ability to do things correlate directly to your purchasing power.

@michaeljmcglade

9 жыл бұрын

Rolf Fält You'd have a point if there was a system which does not allow corruption. But there is isn't, so you don't. The realities of capitalism are always compared with the theories of marxism/anarchism, never their realities.

@rolffalt1968

9 жыл бұрын

Michael McGlade So you agree with the critique but you dont see any other serius political option?

@rolffalt1968

9 жыл бұрын

***** Well the class diffrences is abit more then just "do you own your own shop?". A capitalist, in the marxist sence, is someone who lives of the labour of others throu their capital. A fruit shop owner is only a capitalist if he makes enough money from his buissness so that he doesnt have to do any labour himself in order to sustain his needs. Meaning his employies does his work for him. And then there is of course blurred lines. Where does the line go? It is, eventually, abit arbitrary. But the poor guy on the little town square selling tomatoes isnt a "capitalist" for selling some fruits. But alot of Nestle's stock owners are. And the way the laws and taxcodes are set up mirrors the intresst of Nestle. Not my local fruit shop owner. So the memebers of the "the capitalists class" has a specific relationship to work and capital. That is what makes the class unique.

It was amusing... "only you and Ron Paul".

The bail out wasn't just wrong, it was ludicrously wrong, there should be no reward for failure.

Yes.

The fact that so many people can listen to Hannan and not be swayed is proof that all roads eventually lead to violence. It's just a fact of nature. Amitire?

Did the "no" side win the debate?

You misunderstood my question or you deliberately ignored it so i will ask again. Would you like to see the chemical industry run just like you seem to want for the banks... unregulated...no rules...free to do what they want? A yes or no is fine

Honestly not getting the like count, he is indeed a very good speaker, yet and for no apparent reason he seems perfectly unable to see the real issue. Trying to help all of you (likers and if possible the speaker) it is not about the regulation in the books, it is not about the theoretical workings of market capitalism, IS ABOUT POWER INEQUALITY in all societies, the scale is not tipped, the scale has been eliminated from discussion.

The NHS is a tricky one lol ;) it's clearly unsustainable and currently inferior to private health care - anyone with experience knows that! But the central premise of healthcare for everyone is so very noble and at the heart of the British people - imagine if you will, a private system (with honest/lawful insurance) in which those who can't afford health insurance are covered by a welfare subsidy- those who can afford or have company health insurance - pay! Then we wouldn't have a 2 tier system

Sounds like a very sophisticated Peter Schiff. Much better at making the points on why capitalism is our best foot forward.

Daniel Hannan has hit the nail on the head. Corporatism is essentially mercantilism, the polar opposite of free market capitalism. The banks should have been allowed to fail. Bailing them out with taxpayers' money was a disgrace.

daniel hannan is a true brit, awesome guy

That's not true capitalism - true capitalism is simply free and voluntary exchange of goods and services, and does not have corporations and government in each others' pockets. When a big company is threatened by a competitor in our current corporatist system they line some politician's pockets and get "regulations" introduced (or some similar ploy) that make it impossible for their competitor to stay in business.

I’ve never wanted a Brit to be president of the USA till now

I agree with this 100%

Agreed. Excellent politician

The point I'd like to make is that if you provide a service for someone, and they're happy to pay the charged amount for the service and it's all above board lawfully etc - both parties are happy - that is not greed! Greed is having something you don't deserve or require and always wanting more etc... Also man is naturally altruistic - for self-preservation - such little faith in man to argue that he requires constant monitoring and correcting - otherwise he'll stab anyone in the back 1st chance

I believe at the time saving banks mistake. But in the United States federal government made a large profit.

i have to strongly disagree with his closing statements in the case of the nazi's and 9/11, those attacks targeted the locations they targeted for strategic purposes such as weakening the ecnomic power of their foes, not some symbolic war against capitalism

Wrong my friend - they pay taxes in many other forms. And in relative terms they suffer much more than you and as a matter all us who can afford to be on this plattform!

Hannan for PM!

I'm guessing Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Paul Krugman and an anonymous OWSer:)

Over their heads

I am talking about the reality of the situation. I agree with much of what you say about the banks but the problem is not so easy to fix after the fact. If the banks had not been bailed out it would have crashed the system. Crashing the system sounds good to some people because they don't understand the consequences....con

@frankvonfrauner

Жыл бұрын

It would not have crashed the system, it would have threatened Western hegemony. "Too big to fail" was a slogan pushed by the oligarchy because they didn't want to face the consequences of their own failures. People in the know saw it coming, they knew the banks were cheating, and what they prevented from happening was not a collapse, but a transfer of wealth. It was an opportunity to decentralize the banking system and introduce more competition to prevent a "too big to fail" system in the future and they did the exact opposite, because that's the goal of the fascist oligarchy who hide behind social-democratic platitudes.

con......Now lets say the system crashed and we started again without any regulations. Because corporations follow a very strict business model that does not included any sort of morality they will do the exact same bad trading as before. Would you like to see the chemical industry run just like banks without any regulations?

"...replacement of old inefficient producers with new better ones has raised humanity to the highest standard of living we have ever enjoyed...". by efficiency he does not mean a long lasting durable upgrade-able product for example. He means efficiency is getting more work out of employees for less, faster unregulated trading, using semi slave labour in China, more destructive bombs, etc. No, what gave the we better standard of living was the workers struggles in past 150 years until Reagan rev