wife's
on the phone is a pleasure to welcome to
the program distinguished professor of
anthropology and geography at the
graduate center I love cuny
author I love many books the
the latest the 17 contradictions and end
have capitalism as well as
two volumes are on the companion to
Mark's
rebel cities and others David Harvey
welcome to the program
thanks for having me %uh so
a professor II 18 start with some
sorted more I guess amor more
rudimentary things and then and workout
from there but but but tell us what you
what you mean by contradictions of
capitalism
a its
a opposing forces a poet in opposite
direction sound the most obvious analogy
that would be
that most diverse have some tensions
between having a decent personalized
professional objectives usually we
manage those tensions but sometimes
heightened to the point where something
has to give and
at a major contradiction in most
people's lives but capital has
similar kinda contradictions like that
and
there are quite a few of them and the
for the these contradictions give rise
to a lot of instability
in a capitalist society and they reveal
themselves
I am I am he in those time of crisis is
yeah I know I'm and I they they they
become particularly obvious
a to when crises breakout and
we sometimes think that crises are
accidents but to I think when we look at
the history of capitalism you have to
say that
they're actually functional for
reorganizing capitalism
dealing with the contradictions in one
way or another
so let's let's talk about what you call
be. you talk about three classes above
contradiction where one is
foundational well were what is
a a foundational a a contradiction
love capital well for example
there's another incentives for employers
to try to keep wages down
and the degree they're successful
a course they can look forward to
regaining higher profits and
as we've seen over the last thirty or
forty years to share wages and national
income has tended to go down in the
United States and
in many other countries the trouble is
that
you do that of course and the problem is
who is going to buy a product
on at that point the
a difficult the finding a market out
there because you're reducing the wages
the systematically are working
working people I love most recently
we've tried to
square that particular problem by
introducing credit so we end up with the
society this much more dependent now I
in terms of the market
by using credit cards and having
long-term credit
and as we've seen in 2008 a certain
point
that blows up a cuz you can sustain
credit
my over and above I'll what it is that
people are earning
for very long and so where we get a
crisis
coming out of the fact that what's going
on in terms of work capital individual
capitalism do
is not consistent with there being a
robust consumer market
in in in some ways I'm you just you just
described the past
eighty years in this country are
absolutely i mean
a you know the problem a.m.
the nineteen seventies will in effect
was a be the other way around
the the market was Sourav a a
okay problem was that workers were
bit too powerful and going a bit too
uppity and so
a share wages national income was
fairly fairly high and so there was a a
systematic counterattack
by what we call a neoliberal policies
which included Reagan and Thatcher and
and Peniche until I and all the rest a
bit to
try to reduce for the power of working
people
you reduce the power trade unions reduce
the power left political parties
which allowed and capital to make higher
profits from
the gradual lowering of relative status
as a way to write
a and so this was a mean so those those
eighty years we saw
asserted the I guess I am the
I guess there the Ebon sway
absurd Ave a demand-side solution
for this contradiction and a supply-side
the solution and then yeah
everyone came out theoretically I'm and
the
theory that economists favored in the
nineteen fifties in nineteen sixties was
demand-side theory which is associated
with the name is pain
and then in the nineteen seventies we
have forever
a counterrevolution within the field of
economics and
demand-side serious thrown over
supply-side
to fairy and that led to the favored
figure
for Milton treatment in intimate so
you know from your perspective when E is
it
is the demand side theory which
you know I think you know to the extent
that
I am I am I is someone
on the left mean 10+2 now some
the sympathize with I mean is that the
just simply unsustainable because I love
I'll
where it will necessarily lead a in
terms have a
for the pushback the by a supply-side
theory
well it'll there'll be a push back but
also
in itself it tends to be unstable so
that the
the solution I i feel i come by just
pursuing
demand-side solutions by the time to get
into the nineteen sixties
we start find ourselves and difficulty
I'm bout to get in the nineteen
seventies you get
things like very high inflation rates
which are coming from
so the jacking up monetary demand
without there being enough production to
to to solve respond to that demand
so so the Keynesian demand side while it
favor ordinary working people in a
certain way also
is on stable within history of
capitalism and
I think we're beginning to see that in
in China right now which has been off
for operating on a demand-side
response to the crisis and their many
people now
kinda saying china is getting into real
serious difficulties small
we also a speak about the
the the the contradictions between the
use in exchange valuable commodity Wii U
we'll explain that for us yeah I'll
you know if you think of something like
a house and what we use a house foreign
in for in the country like the United
States well we we need it for shelter
and we need it
for girls also you know family living
and/or
you so we can define said use values
that exists for a house on all of us
need those use values
in order to live reasonable in a
reasonable way
the but then of course it to the the
house also has an exchange value which
means that in order to get a house we
have two layout money to get it
and the more money we get we have the
the better the house we can get
about the house itself is a causal
former value which stays in place and so
for many people the house has been a
former saving
some people have a long-term mortgage in
by the end of their lives they might
end up owning a place and macum pass it
on to their kids
but over the last thirty or forty years
the house has also become
a vehicle speculations so the exchange
value system
is actually regulating our access to use
values and
we are told the court that the best way
to get the use that eases to liberate
the freedom of the market
about what we saw in in
in 2008 and 2007 was that system really
blew up
and as a result of really a
excessive speculative activity in the
ion exchange value side
some the way around six million people
last
their use values in the house because
through foreclosures so
I mean as a let let's also turn to I am
the
the contradiction the you speak about in
terms of love
the the tendency towards a universal
human alienation I mean I
I wanted to try to bring it all up to
around you know to
so much of this sort of comes to a head
at least the
most recently in in 08 I and
and i wanna talk about don't wanna move
into the
wealth inequality but I i want to make
sure that we touch on some of these
other contradictions
to talk to the the the notion Nov
love universal human alienation
well the Tennessee a capital is is
to developer technological trajectories
that at a certain point devalue skill
and work now this is not the case for
a
small elite but for the massive the the
population
a people get locked into
pretty meaningless job and a
pretty frustrating job and the other
before the poll numbers suggest is that
about 70 percent of the people in the
united states either hate their jobs or
a completely indifferent
to the job they do which means that
a you know feeling taking pride in
in in your job and the like is
harder and harder because the kinds of
jobs they're available to people are
fairly meaningless and I have to say
since I work a lot with a young people
students and so on more more of them
look at the
job market in cyber you know there are
meaningless job some
and you know rather than do is
meaningless job that enter
you know drop out an eye to eye hope
that they can
found a rock band or something like that
which is you know
macomb take some identity from so
so alienation as a as a very serious
problem I'm and and to the degree that
the
you know there was a time when even a
steelworker
you can say steelworker I am
is so the a exploited in certain ways
by by capital but on the other hand
steelworkers that I
remember talking to had a certain pride
in the job they did
but tough people and strong people and
I'm a kinda
would brag about how how good they were
as workers but
can I have here people and you know
mcdonald's or or the
the people employed by Walmart kinda
proudly
talking about the nature of the job they
do in fact the
you know in the there's a new report I
think they came out
just the days ago that suggested the the
quality
love jobs and I guess it was measured
more
in terms of wages up but the
the number of low-wage jobs that were
lost the farm or have come back
and the reverse for I higher-wage jobs
and I and i imagine
that you could probably also assume I'll
I think fairly that the the measure
prior to getting those jobs to
the is yeah very is
very very very very low area I'm you
also
you also talk about the the the
a notion love accumulation of capital
so much so that it exceeds the ability
to
reinvested in the economy he explain
that for us
yeah world you know capitalist do i mean
i
this is a sort of crude the the so
definition of it they start the day with
a certain amount of money and they're
going to the market and I
have a they get older labor power in the
ghetto love
you know raw materials and machinery in
or estimate
I put it to work in america commodity
and I sell it and
at the end of the day and I get more
money at the end of the day
event at the beginning of the day so the
system is based on a perpetual expansion
I and it gave keeps on expanding
expanding and
and well this means that actually in the
history of capitalism it's
being growing at a compound rate of
growth about
2.25 percent a year now
the compound writer grosses very the
curious thing it goes very slowly at
first but then it accelerates and
becomes very very large
very quickly and I think we're now at
that point in history of capitalism
where there's nowhere else to go
I mean we've the China China has been so
the woman's colonized by capital now
a much of India and South Asia and
Southeast Asia has been colonized by
capital course a soviet
ex-soviet blockers has come to power the
capitalist system
say it capital is now kinda really
totally global
and
and there's not much him too much space
to expand anymore
and yet is trying to expand with man is
like a very explosive force
locked into kinda close bottle and
pretty soon you see this going to be
some explosions around in
if you look at what's been happening to
capitol
since the nineteen seventies have been a
lot of little explosions
somewhere in the world somewhere going
under
and a course in 2008 a lotta places
suddenly went under so I think we're
gonna likely to see more and more of
that sort of
explosive crises because
capital account expand beyond be on
certain limits
so I mean I guess the the analogy is is
almost if you take a a snowballing
rolled down a hill
for snow women in some ways
you're arguing that we're hitting the
the the bottom of the hill
and some ice yeah I well remember now to
the bottom of the hill but we're about
to
two-thirds of the way down when the snow
will start to really gather
a love things
know the famous story about the guy who
invented chess and my product we offer a
grain of sand on the first phone and
tablet on the second one on the course
by the time you get to
64 square your astronomical numbers into
its ok and what is those explosions I
mean what are they
what do they look what would they look
like a minute that mean
was 2008 a function at that imminent
if so how yeah well I think I farewell
you know
many things are coming together in 2000
I but I think for example
a problem in in the 2001
with the stock market crash and the
Andover kinda dot com economy than most
were you had all this
surplus money and where we gonna go for
greenspan Davis keep the interest rate
very very low and I'm
then people started to say okay we can
we we can deal with this problem by
going to the housing market so you get
this huge
asset bubble in the housing market in
2007
for you know seven or eight years and
many of us were saying
you know as early as 2003 2004
this cargo on for very long but it did
and then cause when it
result was when it did crash a crash
big-time
he crashed in 2003 wouldn't be so bad
but it by
by the time you get to 2008 was an
enormous amount a
access money sloshing around in housing
market
which is unsustainable and so
I mean do you have a sensible where that
where that money goes now
well that's a that's the interesting
thing I mean
crossover the credit markets froze in
2007-2008
the Federal Reserve tries to unfreeze
a.m. and then kinda says
the it hopes banks will lend for the
banks have not been lending very much
a many private firms now
a very profitable but they're not
expanding because I don't see the market
there
which goes back to know the lack of
demand in
in the system so the in this in a sense
a lot of excess
funds and just being tied up in cash
reserves held by banks corporations even
individuals
and and again this is not a very stable
situation accept that to a degree the
Federal Reserve has been pumping money
into the market you ask yourself where
is it gone but it's mainly
revived the stock market that's been the
big
can have beneficiary at Avison because
when the stock market
lives certain people in society a very
happy right about lot of people
left aside so the rich who've invested
in the stock market doing extremely well
and has recovered from the crisis
very very well by the massive population
has done very badly
and in in that sorta brings us to
I mean a you know I've a.m. I have been
working my way through the
the the the the picket ebook and
sort of because the my children prevent
me from
from reading for extended periods attack
also sorta slide off to
2 reviews %uh the picket the book in I
the way that this repeatable are
interpreting it
then the I am in so let's let's talk
about what
you know how your perspective
on what picky
is is arguing in some way I mean he is
he is
for the most part very clearly saying
that there is
something inherent in capitalism
that is that the rate of return
when it grows faster then
the economy in the you know through
Vegas crudely speaking
I we get this tremendous wealth
inequality
and ultimately sir saying this is not
a bug but a feature a of capitalism is a
mean is that your
he is that your sense a bit and indeed
at like to hear your thoughts
yeah well vessel vast that's what he
says but but
first of picketers not written a book
about capital
for instance you would have no idea from
really break it is book Why
2007-2008 happened to you have no idea
why crises
get set up you have no idea why we still
have long-term unemployment
increasing so so it's not a book about
capital what is really a book about is
the way much capital can produce
social inequality and and the basic
thesis is
a is seems to me is very simple which is
that
the the more you leave for capital to
the
sov I I'm Trammell the
power free-market a
with no state interventions and the like
the more you approach a free-market
model a society
the greater the level us social
inequality
but he buries that
political angle and kinda mechanical
saying if the rate of return on capital
versus
Grove but you have to ask yourself why
the rate of return on capital is so high
and my argument to that would be to say
well that has to do with the
the balance a class forces in a society
the ability either
a corporations and businesses and the
like to
suppress wages and repress wages and two
actually enhance profitability that way
if there was a massive social movement
that prevented them
farm repressing wages and not by a venue
would not have the effect the pic at the
describe so it's a you know I actually
have a very simple way of looking at the
same phenomena
what is really good about to get this
book is that he produces a vast amount
statistical information in effect to
show that
the way marks interpreted I how
capitalism worked in volume 1 capital is
exactly right and an idea he didn't
wanna say that of course because she's
very fearful have been described as a
marxist
and of course we know that the right
wing right now is is stepping in as a
marxist in disguise
and to because a rather complicated the
sort of political argument over a
reputations in order to it manager
because there is
you know the the I was just reading the
one brief my blog post by felix Salmon
this morning
I where he the he says that
you know in some way away that the pkt
is
is very pessimistic in the sense that
there is no way
ultimately to I mean he he offers I
guess some solutions at the
a towards the end of the book that
people are
year's survey guess less impressed with
but
I am the there does seem to be
ultimately
a a lack addressing sorted the
the systemic the that they were relieved
we left with no solution to this said
that theirs is almost certain
this is the way it is a to the extent
that it wasn't this way
was really a function I love
I am a were a an anomaly that took place
following the World Wars well i think is
a the you know its is pessimistic in the
sense that he just simply said at the
end that you need a global wealth tax in
order to
equilibria the situation and if you
don't have a global wealth tax you're
condemned forever
to to actually produce greater and
greater levels above
inequality and the
so you know and and you kinda go well
hatchery he paid more more attention to
some of the other contradictions of
capitalism you wouldn't you wouldn't
make that
that bad argument because for like I
said to you
early on the demand-supply is
differential is very very important here
and if or purchasing power get
located in this affluent
oligarchy
bandana capitalism is going to be in a
lot of deep trouble and
can have to be adjustments anyway so
live go back to a sort of the Keynesian
type model
which again has its own difficulties but
which is what china has been doing for
example so I i cant a
so I don't you know I think he set it up
in such a way as to give
only one possible answer and I think
they're actually a number of possible
answers I am but but actually I have
have grave doubts about the nature
central thesis about the rate of return
on capital
that is something that depends very much
on how you measure capital and across
another capital is measured
speculatively
and if the collapse speculative
games on on say housing or something
like that then
the amount a capitalist society is is
actually reduced
for remarkably through through such
crashes
so leave definition of capital is very
sensitive
speculative movements and also to
economic conditions
right in the n in and I guess
meet at least 22 minute the
the well I wanna talk about some of
those other
the those other I guess answers here
I mean the because the from your
perspective
even if we could get the the global tax
on wealth that would not be enough
because we would still have an unstable
system
yeah I know I'm in year
yeah I'm and obviously the levels of
inequality we've now got a
unsustainable in terms of for having a
balanced
a growth for capitalist economy and
therefore
they are source stress and potential
saw serve crisis formation maps that
would be my positions but that's not the
only for
source of crises in a few if you dealt
with this one by redistributing wealth
seriously a you would still have many of
the other difficulties
like the relationship between supply and
demand you to still have the
environmental difficulties he was still
have a difficult is
compound in growth from finding
productive
investment a
in a in a world which is which is a you
know
already faced with tremendous possessive
a money capital looking for for
somewhere to to to go so so I
a again I don't think the the
redistributive
angle that pick at it takes even if it
was followed through it wouldn't not
actually then stabilize capitalist
society
so I mean if the mmm so in
in your version up his analysis and
had he included the those other
contradictions
I where where does that leave us let me
give us a sense above
how a of what that that other solution
that we don't really talk about
in this conversation the or that that is
surrounded the the the all the talk up
in a quality
I let's talk a little bit about work
where we would start with that
with those other solutions well we begin
let me go back to one of the basic ones
for men woo would you rather live in a
society
which delivered adequate use values
to the massive the population or do you
wanna live in a society which
distributes
use values unevenly unequally depending
upon
a economic power
and depending also on have a capacity as
individuals to extract vast
42 from that exchange value system I in
other words
I would like to see us move more towards
making sure that housing is a human
right
and that everybody is provided with a
decent house in a decent living
environment in exchange value system
insofar as UConn can help do that that's
fine but we've got to stop speculative
activity and housing markets
we've got to actually stop the
extraction vast well some
you know by all other mortgage
financiers lawyers the real estate
lobbies and overestimate they're the
ones who are benefiting from this
exchange value system
and and in many instances not producing
affordable housing
for example if you just take new york
city about fifty percent of the
population of New York City is trying to
live on less than thirty thousand
dollars a year
if you take care if you take the
idea the you know the cherries spend a
certain proportion %uh view all your
money on
on housing than 50 percent of the
population are you ok
should be house for less than 1300 or
1500
dollars a month where can you find
accommodations one thousand five hundred
dollars a month in New York City
you know missus this is the kind of
dilemma that we're in in other words the
exchange value system
excluding half the population from
access to adequate housing
so and I would make the same thing about
education
a education should not be mediated by
the exchange value system is to be a
human right and should be equally
available to everybody
I think the same would be true health
care what we have in this country is an
increasing commodification increasing
monetize ocean
love the provision follow these things
and if that benefit people who does that
benefit capital
the answer is it benefits capital and
the benefits some people have become
extremely rich by it
and hand and then whether we get any
decent
housing decent health care a decent
education
yeah really is a is a byproduct of
what they do so I would argue to people
let's let's work on trying to make sure
that housing health care and education
as a beginning point how human rights
and it's the use value needs to be
provided to people
independent have all these exchange
value considerations
do you do you see %uh some any a
I mean is there is there hope there that
we
are are headed in that direction I mean
there's certainly
I am I mean I think you know occupy on
some levels are to be introduced as
maybe those concepts
a new I in this country I
in some in some ways that is continue to
resonate in others not not as much
I am but but but give me your sense says
to
me how we sorta get their mean because
the
the I don't know if it's the Iranian
maybe it is actually again
a feature not a bug love up this crisis
but
those who I am there are
the capital's doing quite well are you
know five years 6 yeah it'll come out ok
capital come out this crisis extremely
well and now and and
billion as club has has come out you
know it came at a crisis 2009 and make
more money in 2008 than it's ever made
before
for some people have done extremely well
above the crisis
and and again you know you look at it
new kinda say this is not
this is not a common sense world I mean
II
the thing that strikes me was when I
when I talk to people around I would you
rather live in a place that provides
adequate use values
or set up an exchange value system that
makes a rich very rich and everybody
everybody says well we're rather live in
a society that provided
adequate use values to everybody and
it's a case common sense
it's not it's not hard now bit by bit
what what happened over particularly
over the last thirty or forty years is
the exchange value
side of things have got stronger and
stronger and stronger
we're now increasingly dominated in and
to some degree victimized by a financial
system
that is highly predatory and and
and parasitic and to the degree that
we are dominated by a love that then I
think we should have a
ownership people should really start to
say we don't want to be dominated by
that anymore we want to create a society
that actually delivers good in terms of
a decent living
standard to everybody in a decent living
environment
that mean when we will talk about
exchange value minutes is is saying
you know is describing our economy as
being becoming
I am highly financial eyes this
anonymous in our way
yeah I know it it it it said certainly
has a man
I love a mini in
in many in many countries love the world
a presence a education
I my education was was totally free and
Britain back in the 1950s and 1960s
I and it's just recently that I
governments that have started to
introduce tuition fees and/or estimate
I teach at an institution City
University of New York that was
tuition-free
up until the 1970s and then in the
crisis in the nineteen seventies
it was forced to start charging tuition
I think that higher education
an access to higher education should be
a free good
as it is what we have now is
getting come but students you know over
a trillion dollars of debt
assembled among students who have to go
deeply into debt
you know in order to cap their education
this seems to me scandalous
I mean we we shouldn't we shouldn't be
going in that direction
the about a student at site idea thirty
years ago was relatively small now it's
become enormous
and this is a dead weight on a whole
generation
for the population and its a
it seems to me this is not a sensible
way to go
I and we should over actually turn
things around in the opposite direction
and start to try to move towards
a tuition-free higher education system
and certainly have
to have tuition-free a
pre-university education an answer I
mean how missus
how does this happen we have a you know
I guess it was a a week or two ago we
saw another
I am the report by Martin gillen's which
which was based on
other work that he is down which
basically says that
I am we r largely
and by we meaning those of us who are
not the billionaires
I am a largely powerless I
some in terms love the policy outcomes
our government I am the
Ian when we are at
odds with the policy preferences I love
the very wealthy amid what what happened
what has to happen next
well I think I think again the only
thing that can really
do something about this is a popular
movement which
turns a story around a min because
by the big problems there is a from the
nineteen seventies
onwards the supreme court has kept on
making
decisions about in a campaign finances
question freedom of speech and that what
we're giving free to speech to is those
who have
this pending dollars some freedom
speeches
freedom to spend money on elections and
now we've gone to the
to the to the ultimate extreme if that
so this is a
you know are in my view I would call
this kind
legalized corruption have the political
system
and how to how to read how do we do
something about that well
you know if enough people get outraged
enough
and we move from what I call the sort of
passive
sense of alienation where most people
are actually alienated from the
political process
and into an active angry kinda motive my
nation where people can actually get out
on the street say
we need to change the system we need to
change it big time
we need to go back to the democratic
roots about this country's all about we
need to go back to the
egalitarian route what this country is
all about and kind and
construct something which is radically
different from
from what we have right now now will
that happen
I have no idea a but a and
until people do that then indeed
picketers right to say
we're just gonna have increasingly a
increasing inequality and the rich are
gonna get richer and the rest of us are
going to be
basically becoming disposable
populations
wat abt there briefly i mean and I
appreciate your
you're hangin with me the but this week
I've
I am I was a I was oh seles it'd
by a professor who is a a a libertarian
professor
the from Loyola the
who because I enjoy the I guess
debating of sorts with with libertarians
and
yeah I'll end he's coming on we waited
to talk to me about the egalitarian ru
to this country any because
ultimately a libertarian is going to say
to me about the
this year the the prominent a private
property in in all sorted emanates from
there I think
I am a who what do you say when you
you when you hear well how do you dress
libertarians in other words help me out
a little better
he couldn't do it amoeba how do now
right now
I i mean i there there are some aspects
about the libertarian
a talk about which I you know
I'm very sympathetic to earn it sounds
to me like you are too
yes and and the the problem is that
this association the individual freedom
with with private property
arm you now on and
and a and and the freedom to to
accumulate
and the what is freedom ain't does it
mean freedom to exploit other people
does it mean freedom to
degrade the environment does it mean you
know is a
those kinda freedoms were talking about
well I think we have to kinda recognize
that the
you know some things which are very
positive in terms of freedoms have
and some things were some freedoms are
actually counted counter productive in
terms of the social consequences
and and the amassing a private wealth
and
privilege on the part of individuals is
I think
one of those the one of those aspects
where
which becomes counterproductive
counterproductive
so when libertarians kinda say well we
shouldn't do anything about the fact
that say the leading hedge fund
a in in New York each
and individually three billion a
dollars each in a given year a
we shouldn't interfere with that a new
kind ago a vast up kinda freedom that
that makes
sense to me to begin with the
who produced all of that that value
which they're assembling and how they're
assembling it well
that doing it through you know you know
kinda manipulations a financial markets
and
and betting about things going going
crash in
and have the like so the libertarian
position
a seems to me to have some problems
because it's so associated with this
idea
private property and the and that
therefore
the freedom that there there them mostly
seen the prize particularly
and an economic serious a freedom other
individuals
a to actually loot the public interest
and to
to loot a the to the public well
and and social well a instead of tennis
and well to the degree that we have all
contributed are
hope for most of us have been
contributing to the production social
wealth
we should all I think in an early night
to society have some returned
for contributions it see I mean it seems
to be they don't even believe
that there should be a public well no
well know but I don't think it should be
but it is amended the
you know how how are things produce
we're actually rely on millions of
people around the world to breakfast on
a table
I i mean libertarians have started a
you know all those people we're not
actually working for them so it's a
social process
every day that puts breakfast on people
stable and that involves you know
sugar cane cutters in Dominican Republic
a
involves a coffee producers and
Kenya terrified now and and we are all
highly interdependent
you are dependent upon each other and
and then the question is
the you know who is producing social
value
a that we ate daily consuming in our
breakfast a menace libertarians took it
seriously said well
we should all be independent and they
should be actually go out there
race the bacon and and and Ray and
coffee in the show go themselves but
they don't do that
this all comes from other people social
neighbor
but then what we find is the sugar cane
cutter in Dominican Republic
two dollars a day and now you know
the show for the comes on the table to
hedge fund manager who
three billion dollars a year this is
wary kinda
individual versus the social I I think
needs to be ni units need to be probed
much more deeply
yes I agree and I've had the similar
conversations with them they they still
feel like that sugar cane cutter
you know he has a right to the to sell
as labor he's done it for two bucks a
day in
that's just the way a the you know
bully for him too bad he wasn't the
you know were born the son of a hedge
funder
or would right again right for exactly
a a.m. that's generally where we end the
conversation it so i think is also a
good
a good place for us to end hours
professor David Harvey Mackay
the the book is 17 contradictions and
the end of capitalism will put a link to
to it and your your site on our at
majority .fm thanks so much for your
time today a genuine appreciate it
