I tried to imagine comments Obama would make while watching that film. When the teacher made the toy pig, I could hear him say, "Hey, you did not build that. You didn't make that mold or the roads and bridges to transport it first." Obama would cheer at the mention of "state capitalism" and "I have a phone" use the ACLU to complain about hearing "God" twice in a classroom. He would ask why the "fair" redistribution of wealth was not touched upon and why "American capitalism" was treated like it was so freaking exceptional. "What about French exceptionalism and Russian exceptionalism and Cuban exceptionalism and Iraqi exceptionalism?" he would ask as he mounted his golf cart.
It finally came to me how to return your salute-- Ahem! There's just a little something all about Obama that milks sarcasm right out of me. Aw, shucks, I just branded myself to be racist. Just ask Eric Holder. Bet if I just simply told him that I didn't care to live under a socialist government, Eric the Red would call me a racist just for that.
The "pig"alone would have been enough to boycott the class and bring in the ACLU, and his buddy from the Department of Justice. And what about all the contributions Muslims have made to our country and their exceptionalism? I think I might have even lived in that house that was in the film in about 1956.
Love it, and yes it is a bit dated but I like the pillars visual. Private property, profit, and open markets;!kinda makes me shed a tear of joy to hear such truth.
Any guesses on what question will be on my next Econ quiz?
The video is dated. So is the time when Capitalism, individual achievement and American exceptionalism and were actually considered good things by the government schools and media.
This short lecture captures the essence of American capitalism very well. It also contrasts greatly with our modern bankrupt educators in economics. I also noted the example shown of buying a new house in 1948 for only $9,885. After 66 years of inflation, that same house would cost as much as 30X the price...
My mom and dad bought their first house WAY before the 1950s for about $5000. Fought to keep it during the (Real) Great Depression. I grew up in a home with no mortgage and mom beat the idea into me that I should strive to live that way, too, if I could. She was my personal "Kickstarter" to help me on that path, financially and emotionally.
But I've discovered that it's more than 'modern educators in economics' that drive prices and inflation. Most inflation is driven by federal government's control over our money.
But about 60 years after my folks bought their home, its selling price was about sixty times higher... partially due to the desirability of homes and land/property in the geographic area of the house.
Then, I bought my first home in 1973, for about $23k. Sold it five years later for about twice that. Desirable area.
Moved to Silicon Valley and paid about $70k for less land and about the same square footage. Location, Location, Location, as well as job market and climate.
Then the loons in CA made rules that buildings couldn't be taller than six or eight stories... cuts off the view of the surrounding mountains.
Then they passed laws that said that land couldn't be developed for housing ON or close to those mountains... Keep the scenery green...
Supply, Demand and government regulations enacted by 'the people' enabled me to sell that same house (with some upgrades over two dozen years of ownership) for nearly $850k.
The other day, I heard a news report that Boulder, Colorado, I think it was, was fed up with the fast growth of their area and will be enacting rules to limit that growth of population... by limiting the number of homes that can be built, and where they can be built... like up in the hills around Boulder.
Those who do not learn from history... will be bitching about skyrocketing housing costs in Boulder pretty soon.
I agree with your prediction for Boulder. Congrats on your capital gain on the house in Silicon Valley, by the way. I hope the Feds and CA did not get their grubby hands on it, through capital gains taxes, but I suspect they did...
Thanks, Robert.. no, even with taxes, it wasn't too painful. Although, in the 24 years I lived there, the legal warnings at closing real estate transactions had 'improved' quite a bit. We had to "admit" that there was a railroad line about five miles away from our home (buyers might be put off by the noise of trains...) and the outdoor arena about ten miles away might be the source of noise pollution, as well as several interstate highways five or ten miles away AND that we were right under the landing pattern of Moffett Naval Air Base, too (I loved watching the planes go overhead and attending the vanishing air shows, too!) ...
In '78, I was amazed at Silicon Valley, compared to NJ. Never heard a car horn over the three-day exploratory visit prior to taking the job there, and the roads were so much smoother, traffic much lighter and drivers SO much more polite!
24 years later, scouting the Raleigh, NC, area for a possible move, we found the roads to be MUCH smoother, most drivers MUCH more polite AND traffic a lot lighter, too. Things change...
Being an old guy, I can remember when this was actually taught in schools. I remember saying the Pledge, singing the anthem, being proud to be an American and remembering how all the adults would tell us kids that we should be so very grateful to be born in America. With all its faults, prejudices and errors, I long for those days. I guess I'm sentimental, but to me, when I was a youngster, the world was filled with promise and adventure. Now....not so much.
Excellent illustration! Should be in every school, though it can be guaranteed that few politicians would support that. Common Core produces dumb kids who will join the politicians and bureaucrats doing dumb things.
It sounds geared toward elementary or middle school children. The style sounds like propaganda, but it's all fact, not opinion. There's solid evidence that private ownership of the means of production creates value. That basic fact shouldn't be ignore/denied.
Not to change the subject, how did they produce this film in 1948 with a 1954 (or 1955) Buick in it (at 5:55 in the video)? Perhaps trick photography!!! Back to topic, it's too bad they didn't keep these videos in today's curriculum. It proves a point that freedom isn't free, you have to keep fighting for it.
From Amazon: A Look At Capitalism (1955) - 13 minutes running time - Explains how and why capitalism works, mainly focusing on personal ownership issues. Responsibility of American Citizenship
Definitely not a '49, but a '54 or a '55, would have to see more of it to tell for sure. A '49 has old round top transition into windshield, not at all like shown, and check out the chrome. I think I might have seen that film too as a kid, I know I saw similar ones going into the Army, well not really similar, different subjects, but dated like that one.
fabulous video, now I ask how can we get the pres and congress to sit down and watch it and hopefully understand it. will it ever be shown to high school or business majors at colleges? wishful thinking on my part. thank you for posting it.
Trouble is, since 1948 the Fabians wormed their way into our schools. And like General Fabius they used his trademark tactics: fall back, fade away, draw you out, and ambush you.
Unfortunately, capitalism has been so infused with crony's that all capitalistic endeavors are merely viewed as cronyist schemes. There's much more good and honest capitalism, but the bad are very notable and shouted from the mountains while the local capitalists are totally overlooked. Sad. And what is taught in schools anymore is that all capitalists are compromised - look at all the movies that depict same instead of good capitalism (like ASIII).
I realize one or two of you still read my comments...
Currently I'm embroiled in an argument I don't have time for in the comments of a youtube video where they bash Governor Fallin for "banning minimum wage hikes and paid leave laws". I'm trying to argue sensibly in the teeth of a gale force of ad hominem and other nonsense, and frankly, I'm losing patience with the whole attempt at making water run uphill.
But I thought some of you might like to weigh in on their nonsense:
TV was around in 1947. We had the first TV in our neighborhood. Only one or two stations. And most of the time there was a test pattern instead of programming.
There are several comments on this thread that make it seem that this may be a modern video, filmed to look as if it were from 1948. Do we know its provenance?
Perhaps it's just me, and I don't mean to split hairs about the message, but if the video was made in 1948, why was the car in the video a model made in the '50s and in the lecture he was talking about everyone wanting a television set when they weren't available until the '50s.. I do agree the message is strong, and modern capitalism has been bastardized, but we also need to ensure our facts are accurate because the detractors look for any flaws in our argument.
I did inherit a Magnavox Brittany Television and that was made in 1947. A tall great looking mahogany corner cabinet built around a real early tube television set. So I know there were TV sets available in 1948.
I agree, they were available, and cutting edge technology at the time. Generally it was priced out of most people's reach. From the blogs that I'm on, most libs are in such denial that the capitalist system works, they'll try any argument they can to demonize the message.
Ask any of my co-workers, "Why do you work at Wal-mart?", not a one of them would say, "Oh, because Wal-mart needs me..." or "So I can feed the hungry and house the homeless".
They work at Wal-mart... to make money. Profit motive. Yet somehow when Wal-mart works to make money, it's immoral.
With credit to dbhalling, the "open market" pillar is dependent upon the protection of intellectual property rights.
If you come out with a better ceramic toy that's unbreakable and cheaper, and the government doesn't protect your intellectual property rights, then Wal-mart can purchase mass quantities of a knock-off product, and thereby undercut your prices and sales, and drive you, the creator of the better product, out of business.
When the teacher made the toy pig, I could hear him say, "Hey, you did not build that. You didn't make that mold or the roads and bridges to transport it first."
Obama would cheer at the mention of "state capitalism" and "I have a phone" use the ACLU to complain about hearing "God" twice in a classroom.
He would ask why the "fair" redistribution of wealth was not touched upon and why "American capitalism" was treated like it was so freaking exceptional.
"What about French exceptionalism and Russian exceptionalism and Cuban exceptionalism and Iraqi exceptionalism?" he would ask as he mounted his golf cart.
Jan
Ahem!
There's just a little something all about Obama that milks sarcasm right out of me. Aw, shucks, I just branded myself to be racist.
Just ask Eric Holder. Bet if I just simply told him that I didn't care to live under a socialist government, Eric the Red would call me a racist just for that.
That gave me such a disturbing, yet hilarious, image...
Any guesses on what question will be on my next Econ quiz?
Mucho Mahalos for sharing.
And that good stuff!
Or an essay question quiz: compare and contrast the positions set forth in the movie with what's going on today...
But I've discovered that it's more than 'modern educators in economics' that drive prices and inflation. Most inflation is driven by federal government's control over our money.
But about 60 years after my folks bought their home, its selling price was about sixty times higher... partially due to the desirability of homes and land/property in the geographic area of the house.
Then, I bought my first home in 1973, for about $23k. Sold it five years later for about twice that. Desirable area.
Moved to Silicon Valley and paid about $70k for less land and about the same square footage. Location, Location, Location, as well as job market and climate.
Then the loons in CA made rules that buildings couldn't be taller than six or eight stories... cuts off the view of the surrounding mountains.
Then they passed laws that said that land couldn't be developed for housing ON or close to those mountains... Keep the scenery green...
Supply, Demand and government regulations enacted by 'the people' enabled me to sell that same house (with some upgrades over two dozen years of ownership) for nearly $850k.
The other day, I heard a news report that Boulder, Colorado, I think it was, was fed up with the fast growth of their area and will be enacting rules to limit that growth of population... by limiting the number of homes that can be built, and where they can be built... like up in the hills around Boulder.
Those who do not learn from history... will be bitching about skyrocketing housing costs in Boulder pretty soon.
Handwriting... Wall... Illiteracy.
In '78, I was amazed at Silicon Valley, compared to NJ. Never heard a car horn over the three-day exploratory visit prior to taking the job there, and the roads were so much smoother, traffic much lighter and drivers SO much more polite!
24 years later, scouting the Raleigh, NC, area for a possible move, we found the roads to be MUCH smoother, most drivers MUCH more polite AND traffic a lot lighter, too. Things change...
Good luck, Colorado... your path is clear.
Common Core produces dumb kids who will join the politicians and bureaucrats doing dumb things.
It looks like the main video is " A Look At Capitalism" from 1955.
and not "What is Capitalism?" which is from 1948.
The year at the begin is wrong.
Here is some historical information on George Stuart Benson, the man that is first seen in this film,
http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/en...
Here is another one of his videos, dated 1955,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5P7MBUy...
The good old days... "... the American way."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2l4bz1FT...
Regards,
O.A.
Currently I'm embroiled in an argument I don't have time for in the comments of a youtube video where they bash Governor Fallin for "banning minimum wage hikes and paid leave laws".
I'm trying to argue sensibly in the teeth of a gale force of ad hominem and other nonsense, and frankly, I'm losing patience with the whole attempt at making water run uphill.
But I thought some of you might like to weigh in on their nonsense:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFEBSsRt...
{sorry} ;^) {not really} :^)
Jan
So I know there were TV sets available in 1948.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtOtV-gE...
At about 03:42, the girl says, "They're all in business to make a profit", I'm reminded of this scene from ASp2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGQigt_U...
"Why are you in businss?"
"To make money"
Ask any of my co-workers, "Why do you work at Wal-mart?", not a one of them would say, "Oh, because Wal-mart needs me..." or "So I can feed the hungry and house the homeless".
They work at Wal-mart... to make money.
Profit motive. Yet somehow when Wal-mart works to make money, it's immoral.
If you come out with a better ceramic toy that's unbreakable and cheaper, and the government doesn't protect your intellectual property rights, then Wal-mart can purchase mass quantities of a knock-off product, and thereby undercut your prices and sales, and drive you, the creator of the better product, out of business.