Greed With John Stossel part 1 of 6

July 3rd, 2009

Search & Download Videos:






A John Stossel report on Greed. watch it, make your friends watch it, force teachers to show it in schools, set up an organization known as the Church of Stossel and read from the Gospel of John (Myths, Lies, and downright stupidity).

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments to “Greed With John Stossel part 1 of 6”

  1. ZULEIKA Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 08:31:44 Let's talk about extortion. Let's talk about variable-rate credit cards, or sub-prime loans, or perhaps speculative oil prices. I get to vote for my government; there's a social contract with the institution that takes my money through taxes. I don't get to vote for the overpaid chairman or fat cat board of CitiGroup or Shell Oil. Now what was that you were saying about morality and extortion?
  2. ATHALIA Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 08:54:43 So, you think extortion sometimes is morally good. Well, that's your choice but I'm not supportive of that statement. It's a fyunny phenomenon that things that govt. want and is available in other countries is always so positively represented by the PC MSM. Sweden isn't that good. And the level of good that it is, is in spite of the charateristics you seem to be fond of. 'Efficient' force isn't to be envied in my book, so I wonder whether Stossel envies it, and if so for the right reasons.
  3. QUIN Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 09:17:42 Wow, your statement is the biggest molestation of the term "moral" I have ever seen. It's more moral to have an illiterate, poorly educated, poorly housed, poorly paid underclass than it is to have a progressive tax that ensures some level indirect income redistribution? If having high taxes is bad for society, why is the Scandinavian social welfare model & its relatively tiny income gap the envy of the world. Even Stossel envies the Finnish state funded education model!
  4. EVNISSYEN Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 09:40:41 Can't remember whether Stossel makes the distinction, but there is a difference between voluntary exchange between rational self-interested individuals and unvoluntary exchange between individuals with legal (but not moral) power to extortion, i.e. to tax. This latter is what politicians do, or what interest groups indirectly via the democratic process do. This process is indeed bad for society and wealth destruction. This is called rent seeking. The former is called profit seeking, and is good.
  5. Lani Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 10:03:40 Bottom-up checks & balances? Dear God, libertarians are as ideologically deluded as the most fanatical Marxists! If you're still in doubt, look up "default credit swaps," those murky pyramid schemes dreamt up by Phil Gramm which were *completely unregulated* and resulted in dozens of financial firms collapsing, so that a tiny few could benefit.
  6. IDA Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 10:26:39 "How exactly does that (...) attitude off the hook?" Exactly by definition. Individual pursuit of profit is limited by the same pursuit of others and is executed by voluntary exchange (of which both parties expect to profit) without force. The attitude you described doesn't have such bottom-up checks and balances but a top-down (government sponsored) lack of such checks and balances. These are not laissez-faire market interventions (what a gross contradiction of terms btw) but govt. regulation.
  7. Charlena Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 10:49:38 Not enough viewers here to give me incentive to make an intelligent comment about this video. Give me a better reason.
  8. ZEFIRYNA Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 11:12:37 Jes, Ted Turner is such a douche....
  9. Ferguson Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 11:35:36 When they agree to keep half the money in the bowl that, is not regulation, that would be cooperation among the people themselves... Regulations would be an outside force not letting them grab more. Both, in this case, would have the same outcome, but your analogy is not really right.
  10. Cary Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 11:58:35 Stossel promotes *individual* pursuit of profit? How exactly does that let the unregulated Wall Street traders, their exotic financial inventions & their "I have the right to get rich even if it means turning the entire American economy into rubble" attitude off the hook? Also, if you think it's about "individuals", watch the video of Stossel shilling for the oil industry. You're right - the gov't *intervened* - by eliminating New Deal banking & Wall Street regulations (see Phil Gramm).
  11. AEAEA Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 12:21:34 warren buffet did pass bill gates, just recently
  12. Nathalee Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 12:44:33 The game with the money in the bowl is a perfect example that deregulation leads to disaster. When they agree to keep half the money in the bowl that is regulation. You can't play a fun game with no rules. So it's kinda dumb when stossel later says skating with someone shouting instructions at you is regulations. Bullplop.
  13. KAMAL Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 13:07:32 That's an invalid comparison because it infringes on the rights of the rest of the world. If nobody cared about that rainforest then fine go for it. Just don't force us to pay for your bad decession.
  14. ZOLA Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 13:30:31 FranklyMisterShankly, I think you are missing the point. Stossel promotes individuals pursuing profit, but he (along with most free-market economists) do NOT want government and businesses in bed together. All of the things you just mentioned (banking lobby, subprime loans, derivatives) were a result of government getting involved with banking and business. The issue is much deeper and complicated than just saying people were greedy and took too much from everyone else.
  15. KHEPRI Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 13:53:30 I suppose it was "the government" that was sending me all those credit card applications with teaser offers that I threw into the garbage but others opted to use for personal spending sprees. The banking lobby bought the gov't in the 1990s (see Phil Gramm) like some cheap skank & changed the rules, thus making legal subprime loans, derivatives and other laissez-faire market inventions that benefit the few but fuck over the rest of society. Whre is that douchebag "greed is good" Stossel now???
  16. Gerrit Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 14:16:29 Greed is NOT good... pursuit of profit is. Greed is selfish, greed is what allows politicians and dictators to steal from the people without conscience. Pursuit of profit is an individual effort that lets people legitimately rise above their previous circumstances. Does the government live on excess and demand more? Absolutely. We need to teach that improving your standard of living LEGALLY and in a morally just manner is perfectly acceptable, but taking from those who produce is wrong.
  17. WEBER Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 14:39:28 Really, it was the government telling lenders to loan to people with no credit/bad credit as part of their plan to increase housing. It all backfired. And don't forget about the greed on "Main Street." People took loans that no rational human should ever take. This country is too stuck to credit like a nipple.
  18. ZOLA Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 15:02:27 ummm...wrong?
  19. Legarre Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 15:25:26 Now the American economy is in the dumper because some greedy fucks on Wall Street couldn't have enough. Where are their libertarian pull-yourselves-up-by-your-bootstraps libertarian ideologies? They're all "socialists" now, crawling to the taxpayers on their hands & knees begging for a handout like a bunch of crack addicted welfare mothers. Where is that douchebag Geraldo-wannabe John Stossel now and why isn't he preaching his bullshit "greed is good" ideology during this economic clusterfuck?
  20. Iona Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 15:48:25 Thank you!
  21. Annette Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 16:11:24 Wow sucks to be you, at least you have tropical weather right?
  22. Raynord Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 16:34:23 Jesus Christ! Ted Turnner is a loud anoying fuck.
  23. MacKenzie Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 16:57:22 "For the Love of Money" by The O'Jays
  24. Kedrick Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 17:20:21 Does anyone know the song that is being played towards the beginning? "Money, money, money, money... mooooney" It is killing me, not knowing what that damn song is.
  25. Phoenix Says:
    December 5th, 2008 at 17:43:20 And the thousands that didn't make their money inheritted it from someone who did.

Leave a Reply

This entry was posted on Friday, July 3rd, 2009 at and is filed under Videos. You can follow any responses to this entry through the feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.