Video scenes shots:
Watch the video:
| URL: | |
| Embed: |
Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment
Other videos by this author:
|
|
Bush Tax Cuts (Ecolanguage) Posted by: leearnold
Video duration: 807 seconds More Ecolanguage: click "leearnold" right above. -- This one shows the economics and politics of President Bush's tax cuts. Related: animation, biology, business, ecology, economics, environment, global, history, money, politics, science, social, system Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
 |
Social Security (Ecolanguage) Posted by: leearnold
Video duration: 697 seconds More Ecolanguage: click "leearnold" right above. -- This one is an overview of the U.S. Social Security debate. Related: animation, biology, business, ecology, economics, environment, global, history, money, politics, science, social, system Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
 |
1. Plants & Animals -- intro. to ecolang. (Ecolanguage) Posted by: leearnold
Video duration: 507 seconds More Ecolanguage: click "leearnold" right above. This one: A very simple introduction to Ecolanguage, in the terms of elementary-school nature studies. Related: animation, biology, business, ecology, economics, environment, global, history, money, politics, science, social, system Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
 |
7. MONEY symbol -- Debt, Price, Supply, Demand (Ecolanguage) Posted by: leearnold
Video duration: 226 seconds More Ecolanguage: click "leearnold" right above. This one: The different kinds of transactions with money. Introduction to supply and demand. (High-school level.) Related: animation, biology, business, ecology, economics, environment, global, history, money, politics, science, social, system Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
 |
2. Social Groups (Introduction to Ecolanguage) Posted by: leearnold
Video duration: 402 seconds More Ecolanguage: click "leearnold" right above. This one: Basic human relationships and groups, using the "symmetry" grammar. (Level: Elementary-school social studies.) Related: animation, biology, business, ecology, economics, environment, global, history, money, politics, science, social, system Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
 |
4. The Eco Alphabet -- all the symbols (Ecolanguage) Posted by: leearnold
Video duration: 313 seconds More Ecolanguage: click "leearnold" right above. -- This one lists all of the symbols needed to show real world systems. (Elementary-school level.) Related: animation, biology, business, ecology, economics, environment, global, history, money, politics, science, social, system Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
![Al Gore\](http://img.youtube.com/vi/P6nTAR2MVYQ/2.jpg "Al Gore\") |
Al Gore's book - The Assault on Reason (Ecolanguage) Posted by: leearnold
Video duration: 126 seconds More Ecolanguage: click "leearnold" right above. This one outlines the main argument of Al Gore's new book, THE ASSAULT ON REASON. Related: animation, biology, business, ecology, economics, environment, global, history, money, politics, science, social, system Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
 |
3. Little Tribe and Ancient Kingdom (Ecolanguage) Posted by: leearnold
Video duration: 198 seconds More Ecolanguage: click "leearnold" right above. This one: Growth of social system: from farmers to village; from village to town; and an ancient kingdom. (excerpts, middle-school level) Related: animation, biology, business, ecology, economics, environment, global, history, money, politics, science, social, system Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
 |
Origin of Banking (Economics #8, in Ecolanguage) Posted by: leearnold
Video duration: 86 seconds More Ecolanguage: click "leearnold" right above. This one: "Once upon a time, gold was used as money..." (College introductory economics level.) Related: animation, biology, business, ecology, economics, environment, global, history, money, politics, science, social, system Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
 |
6. WORK-symbol, Trade & Growth (Ecolanguage) Posted by: leearnold
Video duration: 177 seconds More Ecolanguage: click "leearnold" right above. In this one: You apply effort, to get a return. Specialization. Efficiency. Surplus. Related: animation, biology, business, ecology, economics, environment, global, history, money, politics, science, social, system Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
 |
5. WASTE-symbol, Cycles & Pollution (Ecolanguage) Posted by: leearnold
Video duration: 181 seconds More Ecolanguage: click "leearnold" right above. This one: "Everything gives off waste!" (Middle-school level.) Related: animation, biology, business, ecology, economics, environment, global, history, money, politics, science, social, system Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
 |
Long-Term Farm Problem (Economics #14, in Ecolanguage) Posted by: leearnold
Video duration: 119 seconds More Ecolanguage: click "leearnold" right above. This one: "The farmer sells food to the city and buys goods in return." (College introductory economics level.) Related: animation, biology, business, ecology, economics, environment, global, history, money, politics, science, social, system Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
Latest comments made on this video:
By: leearnold. on 10 Nov 08, 21:22:59
Saying that the government "should just do less" is easier than saying how to make it happen, successfully and without damage. Despite libertarian delusion, no one is really running around trying to make government bigger. Nobody likes big government. Reagan cut taxes but CONTINUED big government spending, thus running-up a huge deficit. That is why the economy did well: "Borrow and spend." "Flat tax" means everybody pays the same rate. That would be very unfair to the poor and middle class.
By: Theman77779. on 10 Nov 08, 20:41:01
leearnold Or the government should just do less the we don't need such high taxes. Also higher taxes mean less gain as we saw under Reagan and more economic growth which help all. Now I agree the Bush tax cuts are bad and should be replaced by the needed flat tax. Why do part of my taxes go to pay farmers still. Why pay welfare when that same money can make new jobs? Everyone should pay a low flat tax.
By: leearnold. on 09 Nov 08, 08:06:03
We all want individual freedom, and the economy can't work without private property. But society can't work without big government, due to the increasing complexity of the world -- the market system can't solve that. I believe that the distribution of income and wealth will always be a steep pyramid by its nature, and that your position in it will be based partly on skill, but also based partly or even mostly on luck. So I also believe that taxation should be steeply progressive.
By: narutofan1108. on 09 Nov 08, 06:20:09
so you are not with Ron Paul on this I see.
By: leearnold. on 08 Nov 08, 23:55:29
Where is the error? In three years things got worse! In 2007, the TOP 20% of the population (making over about $97,000) pulled in about 55% of the income, paid about 88% of the individual income tax, and paid about 40% of the payroll tax. The BOTTOM 80% (making under $97,000) made 45% of the income, paid 12% of the income tax, and paid 60% of the payroll tax. The TOP 1% of the population made almost 20% of the income, paid 37% of the income tax, and around 4% of the payroll tax.
By: geedafotus. on 08 Nov 08, 22:01:53
If the presentation is correct then how can it be that statistics by the IRS show that the top 25% pay over 87% of all the income tax.
By: leearnold. on 08 Nov 08, 17:32:30
Learn real economics or your comments will be deleted. Clinton's inflation started low at around 3%, then went DOWN. Real GDP growth rate was positive after the '92 recession. A stock bubble grew on top of that. Hong Kong is a CITY, without the U.S.'s infrastructure and security needs. China's taxes are involved, and complicated. There was NO prediction that the 2000 downturn would be long - aside from the hundreds of economists who said the Bush Tax Cuts were the wrong way to get out of it!
By: Theman77779. on 08 Nov 08, 16:39:23
The 2000-2002 should have lasted much longer than it did. Clinton and the Federal Reserve inflated our currency and caused fake economic growth that did not exist. That is why 90% of those stocks truly had no value but with easy credit people invested. Then Bush wanted to stay in office so he continued this fake growth with the housing market. We need a flat tax like Hong-Kong where the poor and middle class pay little to nothing and the rich pay a little of the huge value.
By: leearnold. on 08 Nov 08, 16:35:11
Flat tax? If you combine ALL taxes -- federal, state, local -- we have a flat tax NOW, all the way down through the second quintile! A flat tax punishes the poor disproportionately. Backing by gold will do nothing: all the problems show-up in other ways.
By: leearnold. on 08 Nov 08, 16:33:38
Savings equals investment, more or less. Whether or not this creates jobs, is conditional. Actually an enormous amount of the investment sought the quickest returns in financial asset inflation. So, the 2000-2002 downturn lasted longer, job creation was terrible, and now we're in an asset-deflation credit-crunch, combined with another recession.
By: Theman77779. on 08 Nov 08, 01:48:04
It would be great if America had a small (15 to 25 percent) flat tax and if the dollar was backed by gold. BTW great video, just remember though the rich invest their money (they don't store it they want to get richer) and this creates jobs.
By: jaysalo84. on 06 Nov 08, 15:55:53
Interesting how this video was made four years ago. Look where we are now...
By: leearnold. on 05 Nov 08, 15:46:59
Also: all federal, state and local taxes, taken together, make a total tax rate that is nearly FLAT, all the way down to people scraping by on about $25,000 a year. Please explain why the rich, who have benefitted from society more, shouldn't pay their fair share, shouldn't pay lots more taxes than they do? Don't give us the old "they create jobs" nonsense. Jobs were created back when the highest tax rates were over 90%. I'm not a leftist, but you're turning me into one.
By: leearnold. on 05 Nov 08, 15:44:23
And, to your fact, I added a second fact: 35.9 of those 40 million were under the poverty line. I will ask again, in another way: What should we "infer" from your complaint that those people are "not really paying their fair share," and from your call for "taxes to be raised on this enormous group?"
By: WolYou. on 05 Nov 08, 10:52:46
MKundera: Why are you talking politics when the issue is economy? Economy isn't left nor right. Economy has no political orientation. Its a model. Basically the stupid idea of exponential growth (which is reality) is only set up in order to shift money from the "bottom" to the "top". We don't need growth, only the money accumulators do. Nature doesn't grow why should we? Replace what's lost and everything would be fine. People is brainwashed. Thats the problem.
By: Mkundera. on 05 Nov 08, 06:50:12
I think the only fact I presented was that over 40 million tax filers paid zero federal income tax in 2004. Others can infer from that what they will. I believe it is self-evident that people who consume enormous benefits and pay nothing for them are not really paying their fair share. You obviously differ and I respect your opinion. And thanks for clarifying your 80% comment - true, paying any pay roll taxes is more than paying zero federal income taxes.:)
By: leearnold. on 05 Nov 08, 02:57:31
My comment meant that the bottom 80% pay more in payroll tax than they do in income tax -- and these taxes are proportioned exactly as the "Social Security" video pictures them. 35 million were below the poverty line in 2004 and paid very little or nothing in income tax. Your contention is "that means they did not pay their fair share." Is this an example of an "objective fact?" Because there are NO other facts in your two comments. Advertising yourself as "informed" doesn't make it so.
By: Mkundera. on 04 Nov 08, 17:50:04
Ha! That's one way to win an argument: delete the comments of informed people who disagree with you.:) Your videos are misleading and reflect a clear point of view (your right) but certainly not objective facts. You are completely mistaken when you say the bottom pays more in payroll taxes - they do no such thing, they pay more of a percentage of their income, which is something else altogether.
By: leearnold. on 04 Nov 08, 17:01:25
This comment is misleading, and will be deleted. Many people who pay no INCOME tax are BELOW the poverty line. And the bottom 80% of the people pay more in PAYROLL tax -- see the tax-distribution in the video "Social Security (Ecolanguage)," about a minute in. Bush's Tax Cuts shift the burden of federal taxes DOWNWARD, onto the poorer people who pay payroll tax. Plus there are other taxes -- put ALL taxes TOGETHER, and the tax rate is nearly FLAT down to the bottom of the second quintile.
By: Mkundera. on 04 Nov 08, 08:34:44
Interesting video with some good points - the Bush deficits are inexcusable. But this video is flawed by its leftist bias. In 2004 (the year this slanted video was made) over 40 million tax filers paid no federal income tax at all (that is 1/3 of all filers). That means they did not pay their fair share - if anything, taxes should be raised on this enormous group who enjoys the services of the federal government and pays nothing for them.
By: leearnold. on 26 Oct 08, 18:51:43
Technically it depends on which part of the business cycle you are talking about, and whether you are talking about normal circumstances, or extreme circumstances such as the present financial crisis.
By: leftstanding. on 26 Oct 08, 06:44:24
would lowering even more the taxes of poor and middle class actually fix the economy? i mean they earn little in the first place so lower taxes wouldn't actually increase their purchasing power significantly enough to actually make a change. or would it? sorry im not familiar with economics. :(
By: ParasiteArtist. on 21 Oct 08, 20:04:09
Wow, that was really informational. I'm not here to object - just saying thanks. This helped me understand a lot more on the economic spending.
By: leearnold. on 01 Oct 08, 16:24:29
Yes, but deficit spending can work during the business cycle DOWNTURN to relieve effects of recession -- as long as you PAY-OFF the deficit in the UPTURN, so it cancels during the cycle. What we've been getting instead are cynical and stupid politicians abusing the economics, and inattentive and stupid voters going along for the ride -- none worse, it seems, than those of the current American scene. We have to stop it -- someday the foreign money is going to stop buying Treasuries.
By: BeyondTheSpectrum08. on 01 Oct 08, 15:56:16
Here's a REAL solution--actually run the government based on a (*gasp*) budget! Households know that you don't spend more than you take in without going to the poorhouse. Outlaw riders to legislative attachments (i.e., pork Barrel spending...if local districts want parks or bridges to no where, let THEM fund it). And stop deficit spending!!!