WEBVTT

NOTE Advertising

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:06.000
Okay, advertising should be sort of the central focus tonight.

2
00:00:06.000 --> 00:00:14.000
Also, of course, touches on the competition monopoly thing, but I'm going to try to focus on the advertising aspect of it.

3
00:00:14.000 --> 00:00:20.000
Advertising has always had a very, very bad press in economics, textbooks and treatises and so forth.

4
00:00:20.000 --> 00:00:25.000
Only within the last couple of years has there been any kind of re-evaluation of advertising.

5
00:00:25.000 --> 00:00:29.000
Even that is pretty grudging, I'll tell you that.

6
00:00:29.000 --> 00:00:36.000
One thing is advertising is supposed to be wasteful. It's supposed to be a waste of resources. It's supposed to be monopolistic.

7
00:00:36.000 --> 00:00:44.000
And it's supposed to somehow determine the consumer. In other words, the advertising, you look at the ad and somehow it sets up some kind of a button in your head.

8
00:00:44.000 --> 00:00:52.000
And it determines you to rush off and buy the product. These are sort of, I guess, the three basic charges against advertising.

9
00:00:52.000 --> 00:00:57.720
The thing about being wasteful stems from a topic which I will return to with great love

10
00:00:57.720 --> 00:01:04.280
and affection later, the so-called perfect competition model, the pure competition model.

11
00:01:04.280 --> 00:01:11.120
One of the cookiest, most peculiar, most bizarre theories has ever come to dominate economic

12
00:01:11.120 --> 00:01:16.200
thought, and really still does, and we can't write down to it.

13
00:01:16.200 --> 00:01:21.720
The perfect competition model is a model which, given to us by Frank Knight, founder of the

14
00:01:21.720 --> 00:01:32.360
The Perfect Competition Model is supposed to be, as a name, perfect implies, obviously.

15
00:01:32.360 --> 00:01:37.880
If you use the word perfect, you're already using a very value-loaded term, or else the

16
00:01:37.880 --> 00:01:42.760
word pure, another word, another alternative, where it's also value-loaded.

17
00:01:42.760 --> 00:01:47.560
Obviously, everybody's in favor of purity and perfection.

18
00:01:47.560 --> 00:01:54.580
The pure perfect competition model assumes that the only real competition, the only fruitful

19
00:01:54.580 --> 00:01:59.460
competition, the ideal kind of competition, the only competition worth the name, is the

20
00:01:59.460 --> 00:02:07.120
competition that exists when every firm in the industry is so small, so teeny, so minuscule,

21
00:02:07.120 --> 00:02:12.840
that nothing it does has any effect whatsoever on the price, on the product, on nothing.

22
00:02:12.840 --> 00:02:27.840
This is pure competition, I should say, more specific. Pure competition is that. Every firm in the industry is atomically small, therefore has no impact on anything.

23
00:02:27.840 --> 00:02:39.840
Perfect competition is pure competition, all of that, plus perfect knowledge on the part of everybody. I swear, everybody in the market knows everything.

24
00:02:39.840 --> 00:02:49.840
All consumers know everything about what's going on. All products, all prices, they know, they're born somehow with information in their head.

25
00:02:49.840 --> 00:02:55.840
And all producers know everything. All businessmen know what the costs are, they know what the demand is.

26
00:02:55.840 --> 00:03:00.840
It's all there. And you see, it's given on the textbook. You open the pages of the textbook, there it is.

27
00:03:00.840 --> 00:03:06.840
It's got the demand curve, the cost curve, I don't know if you know what. It's all given.

28
00:03:06.840 --> 00:03:14.840
So the assumption is that perfect competition is somehow realistic, and better, and terrific, and wonderful.

29
00:03:14.840 --> 00:03:24.840
And then you see what these people do. They look around at the world, and they look around and they see that things are not like perfect competition.

30
00:03:24.840 --> 00:03:32.840
Firms are too big. They're big enough to affect the price of their product. They're not tiny. They're not microscopically small.

31
00:03:32.840 --> 00:03:35.200
And you don't have perfect competition, you have a lot of people who don't know what's

32
00:03:35.200 --> 00:03:36.200
going on.

33
00:03:36.200 --> 00:03:40.440
Like most people don't know what's going on.

34
00:03:40.440 --> 00:03:41.440
And nobody knows the future.

35
00:03:41.440 --> 00:03:45.040
And it's not only perfect knowledge, it also means perfect knowledge of the future, obviously.

36
00:03:45.040 --> 00:03:50.040
It means that you know what future prices are going to be, and it's up to the indefinite

37
00:03:50.040 --> 00:03:52.040
future and future demand, the future course.

38
00:03:52.040 --> 00:03:54.720
It's total insanity, there's no question about it.

39
00:03:54.720 --> 00:03:55.720
But this is the assumption.

40
00:03:55.720 --> 00:04:00.320
And what happened was that Frank Knight in the Chicago School, really the original Chicago

41
00:04:00.320 --> 00:04:05.440
School, set up this perfect competition model, except they assume this is the way things

42
00:04:05.440 --> 00:04:10.800
were more or less, with a few deviations which were unimportant.

43
00:04:10.800 --> 00:04:14.080
The model, by the way, forces the 19th century wheat farm.

44
00:04:14.080 --> 00:04:19.560
Irem Jones, Iowa wheat farmer, you know, whatever he does within reason, it's not going to affect

45
00:04:19.560 --> 00:04:24.200
the wheat market terribly much, although, you see, philosophically it's still not true,

46
00:04:24.200 --> 00:04:30.160
because if the angel Gabriel came down to him and gave him some magic formula for multiplying

47
00:04:30.160 --> 00:04:46.600
In the 19th century, 19th century economists were much more realistic, when they talked

48
00:04:46.600 --> 00:04:47.600
about competition.

49
00:04:47.600 --> 00:04:52.600
They didn't assume perfect competition, they were living in an agricultural so-called era.

50
00:04:52.600 --> 00:05:00.560
In the era, they didn't assume perfect competition or teeny wheat farms, but the pure competition

51
00:05:00.560 --> 00:05:03.920
model comes in in the early 20th century, just when the whole wheat farm model is going

52
00:05:03.920 --> 00:05:07.280
out the window, because it is obviously irrelevant.

53
00:05:07.280 --> 00:05:12.880
Anyway, so the Frank Knight people assumed the perfect competition, pure competition,

54
00:05:12.880 --> 00:05:13.880
was pretty realistic.

55
00:05:13.880 --> 00:05:19.360
This is what competition is and was, and this is great and so forth and so on.

56
00:05:19.360 --> 00:05:25.960
And then in the early thirties, Chamberlain and Robertson, independently, Edward Chamberlain,

57
00:05:25.960 --> 00:05:31.980
one of the most famous PhD thesis ever written, and Robertson's book coming out of there

58
00:05:31.980 --> 00:05:37.280
I think in the same year in 1933, essentially said, and I said, we'll get back to this

59
00:05:37.280 --> 00:05:41.960
when we get to the marketing competition proper, essentially they said, hey, wait a minute,

60
00:05:41.960 --> 00:05:46.440
this is not the way things are, the world is not like this, you don't have teeny-wee

61
00:06:16.440 --> 00:06:42.640
The Market is Far from Perfect and Far from Pure, and therefore, it's monopolistic and

62
00:06:42.640 --> 00:06:47.640
and therefore it's evil, and therefore it's impure, and therefore the government has to come in and smash it some way.

63
00:06:47.640 --> 00:06:52.640
Now the point is that the Chamberlain Robinson, I don't really blame the Chamberlain Robinson people,

64
00:06:52.640 --> 00:06:58.640
because they were working within the matrix that had been accepted by that time by orthodox economics,

65
00:06:58.640 --> 00:07:04.640
Frank Knight, these people having imposed it sort of on an orthodox economic,

66
00:07:04.640 --> 00:07:10.640
and they accepted the perfect competition model as being the proper one, and the best thing to happen, and so on,

67
00:07:10.640 --> 00:07:14.640
And without considering it was totally absurd, unrealistic, it would be bad if we had it.

68
00:07:14.640 --> 00:07:17.640
It seems to me almost self-evident, at any rate.

69
00:07:17.640 --> 00:07:23.640
They said, well look, we haven't got it, we're far from it, and therefore the market is evil and we have to do something about it.

70
00:07:23.640 --> 00:07:25.640
And it seems to me this is almost as follows.

71
00:07:25.640 --> 00:07:30.640
I don't really blame them as much as I blame the original Perfect Competition model builders.

72
00:07:30.640 --> 00:07:34.640
At any rate, getting to the advertising end of this,

73
00:07:34.640 --> 00:07:42.280
If the man curves are given, if you've got perfect knowledge, if consumers know everything,

74
00:07:42.280 --> 00:07:47.480
if all consumers know everything automatically, and all producers know everything automatically,

75
00:07:47.480 --> 00:07:49.560
of course advertising is wasteful.

76
00:07:49.560 --> 00:07:51.120
And nobody in his right mind would advertise.

77
00:07:51.120 --> 00:07:55.520
If all of us had ESP, if I knew what Mises' sale was going to be tomorrow without having

78
00:07:55.520 --> 00:07:58.720
to look at some paper, and you just sort of automatically know that Mises is going to

79
00:07:58.720 --> 00:08:05.420
So toothpaste for such and such a tube would be no point in Mises' advertising.

80
00:08:05.420 --> 00:08:09.520
Then of course it would be wasteful and they'd know it and they wouldn't advertise.

81
00:08:09.520 --> 00:08:16.120
Of course the point is we ain't omniscient, we haven't got perfect knowledge, and in order to find out what Mises is going to do tomorrow,

82
00:08:16.120 --> 00:08:17.520
we have to read about it some way.

83
00:08:17.520 --> 00:08:19.720
Somebody's got to inform us of it.

84
00:08:19.720 --> 00:08:22.720
This is called, quote, advertising, unquote.

85
00:08:22.720 --> 00:08:30.720
The assumption of waste only follows from the insane, bizarre, absurd assumption of perfect competition, of perfect knowledge,

86
00:08:30.720 --> 00:08:34.220
of the idea that somehow people know everything to begin with.

87
00:08:34.220 --> 00:08:48.720
They don't have to learn, and learning takes time and effort, and somebody's got to tell them, and there's a whole information industry built around this.

88
00:08:48.720 --> 00:08:58.720
And so, incidentally, well, the whole idea of differentiated product, I will get back to, too.

89
00:08:58.720 --> 00:09:04.720
This is one of my pet peeves, a differentiated product. It's the assumption, on the part of most economists,

90
00:09:04.720 --> 00:09:11.720
that when a product is differentiated between brands, that somehow this differentiation is artificial, evil,

91
00:09:11.720 --> 00:09:14.720
and imposed upon the consumer by some kind of brainwash.

92
00:09:14.720 --> 00:09:23.720
I'm not being brainwashed when I say that Wonder Bread, to me, is better than Tasty Bread.

93
00:09:23.720 --> 00:09:28.720
There's nothing to do with advertising or pretty girls being advertised on the commercial or anything of that sort.

94
00:09:28.720 --> 00:09:30.720
I just like it to taste better.

95
00:09:30.720 --> 00:09:36.720
Okay, let me turn it in.

96
00:09:36.720 --> 00:09:43.720
Actually, advertising, again, you see the demand curve, remember we have the given demand curve in quotes,

97
00:09:43.720 --> 00:09:49.720
The Man Curve for what is the next question. The Man Curve for the product. The product is also given.

98
00:09:49.720 --> 00:09:56.720
In this never-never land of orthodox microeconomics, products are given. So nobody has to develop any new ones.

99
00:09:56.720 --> 00:10:00.720
I mean, they're there. They're there, that's all. I mean, Wonder Bread somehow drops down from the sky.

100
00:10:00.720 --> 00:10:07.720
Somebody starts selling it. No Mr. Wonder ever sat down and thought of the idea of Wonder Bread.

101
00:10:07.720 --> 00:10:12.720
Nothing ever gets created new. So the whole problem of innovation then comes into the picture.

102
00:10:42.720 --> 00:10:50.480
You have to inform the public that it's there, my peccadillo, whatever the name of the room is.

103
00:10:50.480 --> 00:10:52.960
You have to inform them that it's there somehow.

104
00:10:52.960 --> 00:10:58.800
Inform the public of the high quality, of what you think high qualities are, cause their attention.

105
00:10:58.800 --> 00:11:05.280
So that therefore, in the first couple of, in any product, in the first couple of years of a new product,

106
00:11:05.280 --> 00:11:09.280
the highest percentage of advertising, then when it gets established, it wins its market,

107
00:11:09.280 --> 00:11:14.560
The percentage of advertising usually falls off.

108
00:11:14.560 --> 00:11:18.040
So you have to inform people of a new product.

109
00:11:18.040 --> 00:11:25.160
You also, by the way, have to inform them, even if it's not new, you have to inform the

110
00:11:25.160 --> 00:11:26.560
new generation coming up.

111
00:11:26.560 --> 00:11:31.440
There's a new generation of kiddies coming up who might never have heard of Wonder Bread,

112
00:11:31.440 --> 00:11:32.440
for example.

113
00:11:32.440 --> 00:11:33.440
It has to be informed of it.

114
00:11:33.440 --> 00:11:39.440
And you have to remind the authors, because people do not have infallible memories.

115
00:11:39.440 --> 00:11:43.440
They might forget somehow about Wonder Bread, even though to me it's unlikely.

116
00:11:43.440 --> 00:11:45.440
In other words, they were not Wonder Bread fanatics.

117
00:11:45.440 --> 00:11:52.440
They might forget they might walk down the street one day and buy some other bread, unbeknownst, not having remembered about Wonder Bread.

118
00:11:52.440 --> 00:11:58.440
So they have to be re-informed, reminded of the existence of this product.

119
00:11:58.440 --> 00:12:00.440
Okay, I'll get back to that, too.

120
00:12:00.440 --> 00:12:11.400
too. Actually, just as new products obviously need a lot of advertising, advertising is an

121
00:12:11.400 --> 00:12:16.040
extremely important form of competition rather than being a form of monopoly. Again, the

122
00:12:16.040 --> 00:12:19.400
reason, incidentally, why it's supposed to be a form of monopoly according to the textbooks

123
00:12:19.400 --> 00:12:25.200
is because by definition, all products are uniform and therefore any differentiation

124
00:12:25.200 --> 00:12:30.200
Theividic competition of products within an industry, within a broad field, a broadly defined industry.

125
00:12:30.200 --> 00:12:33.200
Any differentiated product is somehow monopolistic.

126
00:12:33.200 --> 00:12:40.200
But in actual practice, when products are differentiated, when there is a difference between Wonder Bread and A.C. Bread, etc.,

127
00:12:40.200 --> 00:12:47.200
then advertising becomes a form of competition, a form of competing with your rival,

128
00:12:47.200 --> 00:12:54.200
and part of the way you restrict competition is to outlaw advertising.

129
00:12:54.200 --> 00:13:03.280
Now, for example, this is done in several fields, e.g. the medical profession, we already

130
00:13:03.280 --> 00:13:04.280
talked about.

131
00:13:04.280 --> 00:13:08.040
One of the ways in which medical competition is restricted between doctors is the so-called

132
00:13:08.040 --> 00:13:15.360
ethics, so-called medical ethics, which says to each doctor, it's nasty to advertise, it's

133
00:13:15.360 --> 00:13:19.920
nasty to put up a big sign in front of your building, so far it's only a little sign

134
00:13:19.920 --> 00:13:29.020
This form of restricting advertising is a form of restricting competition.

135
00:13:29.020 --> 00:13:35.160
Similar to this, even more blatant are the laws in many states prohibiting pharmacists

136
00:13:35.160 --> 00:13:41.800
from putting up signs in the store advertising or listing price of their prescription drugs.

137
00:13:41.800 --> 00:13:44.840
Here's an interesting point.

138
00:13:44.840 --> 00:13:49.400
Pharmacists are prohibited by law from having a sign up saying they can do it for non-prescription

139
00:14:19.400 --> 00:14:24.960
And then the price would come down from what it is now, this way, since advertising, this

140
00:14:24.960 --> 00:14:30.640
form of listing, advertising, listing prices is a form of advertising obviously, it's a

141
00:14:30.640 --> 00:14:34.080
form that most people don't attack too much and they don't realize it's advertising.

142
00:14:34.080 --> 00:14:38.000
The listing of prices in the store, in the window, just as much advertising, calling

143
00:14:38.000 --> 00:14:42.680
attention to the public of your product and what the price is, just as much advertising

144
00:14:42.680 --> 00:14:47.600
as getting commercial television, also cheaper of course.

145
00:14:47.600 --> 00:15:02.600
The fifth outlawing of this is a method by which competition can be made in the drug industry, and the outlawing is a method by which competition is restricted.

146
00:15:02.600 --> 00:15:10.600
Oh boy, I could go into the pharmacy business. It's another hot one.

147
00:15:10.600 --> 00:15:16.600
Okay, also in economics, in economic theory, a big distinction is made all the time.

148
00:15:16.600 --> 00:15:20.600
This is part of the whole competition monopoly thing too.

149
00:15:20.600 --> 00:15:26.600
A big distinction is made between quote production cost unquote and quote selling cost unquote.

150
00:15:26.600 --> 00:15:29.600
The assumption is that production cost is okay, that's legitimate.

151
00:15:29.600 --> 00:15:34.600
You have to pay money, you have to pay out money in order to produce something.

152
00:15:34.600 --> 00:15:38.600
So that costs something, it costs a certain amount of money to make a high-five set, that's okay.

153
00:15:38.600 --> 00:15:44.640
What's not okay, what's illegitimate, wasteful, evil, monopolistic, you name the pejorative

154
00:15:44.640 --> 00:15:51.760
term, what's not okay is selling costs, meaning getting these damn high five steps out from

155
00:15:51.760 --> 00:15:54.560
your warehouse and into the hands of the public.

156
00:15:54.560 --> 00:16:00.840
Anything of that sort, advertising, listing of price, marketing, direct mail, any of these

157
00:16:00.840 --> 00:16:05.480
things, a selling cost, somehow it's illegitimate.

158
00:16:05.480 --> 00:16:06.480
Why is it illegitimate?

159
00:16:06.480 --> 00:16:36.480
One of the reasons, there are several reasons I've already mentioned. One of the reasons is, according to economic theory, that production cost is okay because you're doing it to, you're incurring these production costs in order to fulfill your demand curve, to meet the demand curve, like the demand curve is there, and you're there, there's demand for high prices, and you're incurring costs in order to meet the demand. But selling costs are evil because the guy who's incurring it is trying to increase his demand curve, trying to push it upward by satisfying

160
00:16:36.480 --> 00:16:42.720
The problem with this is, that's what production costs are.

161
00:16:42.720 --> 00:16:49.040
For heaven's sake, if you're making a high-end set, you've made everything except the speaker.

162
00:16:49.040 --> 00:16:50.040
You don't have a speaker yet.

163
00:16:50.040 --> 00:16:52.240
Well, I think you put the speaker in, what are you doing?

164
00:16:52.240 --> 00:16:54.760
You're raising the demand curve for the product.

165
00:16:54.760 --> 00:16:58.280
Without the speaker, the demand curve is a lot lower.

166
00:16:58.280 --> 00:17:02.800
You push the demand curve up by adding a speaker.

167
00:17:02.800 --> 00:17:09.360
If you polish the surface, put a mahogany surface on it, as a production cost, technically

168
00:17:09.360 --> 00:17:10.360
you're raising the demand curve.

169
00:17:10.360 --> 00:17:11.360
What's wrong with that?

170
00:17:11.360 --> 00:17:15.040
That's what the whole shouting match is all about.

171
00:17:15.040 --> 00:17:18.800
The idea of production, the idea of being in business is trying to get your demand curve

172
00:17:18.800 --> 00:17:22.200
as high as possible for your product, as large a market as possible.

173
00:17:22.200 --> 00:17:24.800
There's no difference between selling cost and production cost.

174
00:17:24.800 --> 00:17:26.960
It's a phony, totally phony decision.

175
00:17:26.960 --> 00:17:31.760
I'd say all production costs are trying to raise your demand curve from zero.

176
00:17:31.760 --> 00:17:36.320
When you start with nothing, you have a nothing demand for it. Zero demand for nothing. And

177
00:17:36.320 --> 00:17:40.000
as you keep adding stuff, you're raising your demand curve.

178
00:17:40.000 --> 00:17:48.200
What is it, of course? The technical, physical thing, the high-five set, is not going to

179
00:17:48.200 --> 00:17:52.000
do the consumer any good if it's 500 miles away in a warehouse. It's somehow going to

180
00:17:52.000 --> 00:17:55.960
be transported, it's going to be called to the attention of the consumer, and so forth

181
00:17:55.960 --> 00:17:56.960
and so on.

182
00:17:56.960 --> 00:18:03.360
Another point, which my late mentor, Professor Mises, I used to talk about, is an artificial

183
00:18:03.360 --> 00:18:08.080
distinction between production cost and selling cost, because if you take a package of any

184
00:18:08.080 --> 00:18:13.200
product and you wrap a nice ribbon around it, a nice red ribbon, this is a production cost

185
00:18:13.200 --> 00:18:17.800
and supposedly legitimate, the other half you take that ribbon and hang it on the store

186
00:18:17.800 --> 00:18:21.880
in which you're selling a product, this is evil, it's a selling cost and therefore illegitimate,

187
00:18:21.880 --> 00:18:26.040
because it's not part of a physical product, you see.

188
00:18:26.040 --> 00:18:42.040
This brings me to another point, about physical product. It used to be said back in the 19th century, in the days of classical economics, that consumers in many cases are irrational.

189
00:18:42.040 --> 00:18:47.040
There's a lot of stuff in economic social history about the so-called irrationality of consumers.

190
00:18:47.040 --> 00:19:04.040
One of the reasons it's supposed to be irrational, which is sort of stuff John Stuart Mill, the Victorian type anyway, of course, used to say, is that, well, people are willing to pay a higher price for a certain product in one store than they are in another store.

191
00:19:04.040 --> 00:19:10.040
Somehow they're willing to pay more around the corner than they are from where else.

192
00:19:10.040 --> 00:19:15.040
And it seems to be irrational. Why aren't they insisting on, you know, shopping around for a cheaper price?

193
00:19:15.040 --> 00:19:19.680
Now there are many reasons why a physical product might not have the same price in different

194
00:19:19.680 --> 00:19:20.680
places.

195
00:19:20.680 --> 00:19:22.280
In the first place, location might be better.

196
00:19:22.280 --> 00:19:27.320
I might be willing to pay 10 cents more for the same product around the corner than schlepping

197
00:19:27.320 --> 00:19:32.800
downtown and paying 70 cents a fair to get the same product.

198
00:19:32.800 --> 00:19:38.040
Obviously, location cost comes into the picture, but even more, and so this is more relevant

199
00:19:38.040 --> 00:19:44.360
to the physical product, production cost, selling cost distinction, even more than that

200
00:19:44.360 --> 00:19:54.360
When you're buying something, you're not just buying a physical object, you're also buying, possibly, the whole ambiance that goes with it, the service, the whole atmosphere.

201
00:19:54.360 --> 00:19:58.360
This is all part of a package of consumers' buying.

202
00:19:58.360 --> 00:20:04.360
Now, two Jon Stewart mills might appear irrational, but with the others of us, they might appear very rational.

203
00:20:04.360 --> 00:20:19.760
For example, supposing you're buying vanilla ice cream at Lutece or at Medix, let's assume

204
00:20:19.760 --> 00:20:27.760
for a minute it's the same damn ice cream, as many left-wing anti-market types will say,

205
00:20:27.760 --> 00:20:32.160
it's the same thing, it's the same aspirin, they just put a different brand on it, let's

206
00:20:32.160 --> 00:20:37.160
Let's assume for a minute that the same ice cream, both of which were bought from Breyers or whatever,

207
00:20:37.160 --> 00:20:46.160
and the Lutece would cost $2 a plate or whatever for this ice cream, and Nidic would cost 20 cents.

208
00:20:46.160 --> 00:20:53.160
The question is, is it irrational to go into Lutece and just eat this ice cream instead of eating the same ice cream for a much cheaper rate?

209
00:20:53.160 --> 00:21:00.160
No, it isn't. Because of Lutece you're getting not just the physical ice cream, you're also getting much higher quality service,

210
00:21:00.160 --> 00:21:08.920
A much prettier restaurant. You're getting a fawning service thrown at you with disdain

211
00:21:08.920 --> 00:21:12.640
and contempt. You're getting a more pleasant atmosphere. You're getting the possibility

212
00:21:12.640 --> 00:21:16.860
or the probability of seeing John Lindsay at the next table or whatever. Those who like

213
00:21:16.860 --> 00:21:23.720
that sort of thing pay for it. You're getting all these things, all these associations and

214
00:21:23.720 --> 00:21:29.200
services, intangible services for wrap-up and eating a little test, which are unrelated

215
00:21:29.200 --> 00:21:36.160
really are not simply the physical item that you're actually eating, and people are willing

216
00:21:36.160 --> 00:21:40.120
to pay for that, obviously they're willing to pay for that, and to say this is irrational

217
00:21:40.120 --> 00:21:44.600
is simply not seeing that the physical object is not the only thing that's being purchased.

218
00:21:44.600 --> 00:21:50.840
I'll just say it's both of the atmosphere, the service, but the external effects as we

219
00:21:50.840 --> 00:21:55.840
call it and so forth, the ambiance.

220
00:21:55.840 --> 00:22:06.400
Getting back to the differentiated product now, there is this notion, as I say, which

221
00:22:06.400 --> 00:22:11.320
came into Chamberlain Robertson's hands heavily, that in the broad industry, and this broad

222
00:22:11.320 --> 00:22:16.960
industry is not defined too clearly, but industry, let's take Thomas's definition, that any

223
00:22:16.960 --> 00:22:22.320
differentiated product within that industry, any brand name, is really artificial, is differentiated

224
00:22:22.320 --> 00:22:26.920
only by advertising, by cunning on the part of the producer, by brainwashing, but they're

225
00:22:26.920 --> 00:22:27.920
really all the same.

226
00:22:27.920 --> 00:22:31.040
The assumption is they're really all the same thing, and they're stalking the consumer

227
00:22:31.040 --> 00:22:34.560
more because they're paying more for it.

228
00:22:34.560 --> 00:22:41.320
You have this brand loyalty which has been induced, but the assumption is that the products

229
00:22:41.320 --> 00:22:45.640
are really the same, and the public, the consumers, think they're different.

230
00:22:45.640 --> 00:22:49.480
My contention is, and this is the contention I first discovered in Lawrence Abbott's very

231
00:22:49.480 --> 00:22:59.120
My contention is that the facts are really just the opposite. What's really going on

232
00:22:59.120 --> 00:23:02.440
is that the consumers don't know that the differences that do exist, in other words,

233
00:23:02.440 --> 00:23:09.920
that the differences that exist are even greater than the consumers think they are. We don't

234
00:23:09.920 --> 00:23:13.800
know anything about a field. Here we get to the whole concept, which economics books never

235
00:23:13.800 --> 00:23:19.240
talk about, the concept of learning to consume. The assumption is not just a reflex action,

236
00:23:19.240 --> 00:23:21.240
The Theory of Money and Credit

237
00:23:49.240 --> 00:24:06.640
And the point is, so all these fantastic differences between wines, most people don't care about

238
00:24:06.640 --> 00:24:10.200
the difference, they don't see it, they don't evaluate it, but the point is the differences

239
00:24:10.200 --> 00:24:11.200
are really there.

240
00:24:11.200 --> 00:24:14.560
Rather than differences being artificial, differences are really there.

241
00:24:14.560 --> 00:24:19.080
The consumers, as they found out more about the topic, more about the area, discover these

242
00:24:19.080 --> 00:24:24.560
differences more and more as they go on. So rather than brand names being artificially

243
00:24:24.560 --> 00:24:31.160
different, they're right on target. I could say, for example, the New York State champagne

244
00:24:31.160 --> 00:24:35.400
is exactly the same thing as French champagne. It's absurd, anybody knows anything about

245
00:24:35.400 --> 00:24:40.480
champagne. It's not an artificially differentiated product. And it goes for every area of consumption.

246
00:24:40.480 --> 00:24:48.400
It goes for music. It goes for some area of music. First of all, noise. Then as you start

247
00:24:48.400 --> 00:24:54.400
about consuming more because you see all sorts of differences and differences between composers, differences between players, et cetera, et cetera.

248
00:24:54.400 --> 00:24:57.400
And you learn more and more about differences all the time.

249
00:24:57.400 --> 00:24:59.400
Same way about baseball.

250
00:24:59.400 --> 00:25:01.400
Somebody who doesn't know anything about baseball thinks that all baseball players are the same.

251
00:25:01.400 --> 00:25:04.400
It's all the same junk as if they were waving a bat.

252
00:25:04.400 --> 00:25:09.400
As you learn more about it, you find out the enormous difference between Willie Starge and the kid around the block.

253
00:25:09.400 --> 00:25:11.400
And so forth and so on.

254
00:25:11.400 --> 00:25:20.520
Now the interesting thing is that people like Galbraith, who's a fantastic snob in this area,

255
00:25:20.520 --> 00:25:27.160
always says that everything which the masses buy is all the same stuff, all artificially differentiated.

256
00:25:27.160 --> 00:25:31.240
What he buys, of course, is all very subtly discriminating and different.

257
00:25:31.240 --> 00:25:36.360
He would never say, for example, that his economics book is the same as all other economics books.

258
00:25:36.360 --> 00:25:42.200
Why not say that? All textbooks are the same, all economics books are the same, it's all the same junk, and that's it.

259
00:25:42.200 --> 00:25:46.200
As you learn more about economics, of course you'll find out there's enormous differences.

260
00:25:46.200 --> 00:25:49.920
If you want to learn more about economics, there's enormous differences.

261
00:25:49.920 --> 00:25:54.480
You find out that Galbraith is really different from other people, and etc., etc.

262
00:25:54.480 --> 00:25:58.840
And I'm sure that Galbraith himself would say he's very different from other people, too.

263
00:25:58.840 --> 00:26:03.040
But in the areas that he doesn't like, he's not interested in, such as Wonder Bread.

264
00:26:03.040 --> 00:26:13.040
I'm sure he was, I'm sure, I'm sure that Galbraith would say, just a priori, I'm sure that Galbraith would say that one of us is the same junk as a lot of us.

265
00:26:13.040 --> 00:26:19.040
I may as well state another difference here. I'm a big Pepsi fanatic.

266
00:26:19.040 --> 00:26:24.040
To most people who don't care about colas one way or the other, who are marginally interested in colas,

267
00:26:24.040 --> 00:26:29.040
to them Pepsi and Coke are all the same. To me, of course, there are fantastic differences between Pepsi and Coke.

268
00:26:29.040 --> 00:26:36.800
and I could talk about that at length. So the real Pepsi fantasy, I'm sure when I started

269
00:26:36.800 --> 00:26:41.920
out as a little kid learning about cola, I'm sure I thought it was all the same too. It's

270
00:26:41.920 --> 00:26:48.080
only when I became an officiado in the field that I realized that Pepsi is much better.

271
00:26:48.080 --> 00:26:55.440
So rather than these differences being artificially created by advertising by evil businessmen

272
00:26:55.440 --> 00:27:23.440
Okay, so what the advertiser has to do, he has to inform people of new products, he has

273
00:27:23.440 --> 00:27:29.440
to inform people of new prices for the product, to inform new generations of consumers of what's going on,

274
00:27:29.440 --> 00:27:38.440
to remind even older people, even veterans of the existence of the product, of the improvements in the product, and so forth.

275
00:27:38.440 --> 00:27:41.440
In other words, he's competing for consumer attention.

276
00:27:41.440 --> 00:27:46.440
Here's another point that anti-advertising people don't seem to understand.

277
00:27:46.440 --> 00:27:52.440
Not only doesn't the consumer have perfect knowledge, consumer's time is limited, his energy is limited.

278
00:27:52.440 --> 00:27:56.320
I mean, there's only a certain number of things that you can do a day, and you're bombarded

279
00:27:56.320 --> 00:28:03.160
with different suggestions, plans, proposals, etc.

280
00:28:03.160 --> 00:28:10.440
The function of advertising is trying to call the existence of the product here, the attention

281
00:28:10.440 --> 00:28:16.400
of the consumer, this busy, harassed consumer, and try to say, hey, wait a minute, look,

282
00:28:16.400 --> 00:28:19.720
we got this product here, it's really pretty good, and so forth.

283
00:28:19.720 --> 00:28:28.960
Think, for example, a gas station. There's an enormous amount of anti-billboard hysteria

284
00:28:28.960 --> 00:28:33.360
among intellectuals. So think, for example, you're driving along, you're likely to have

285
00:28:33.360 --> 00:28:37.720
some gas, and if you prevent anybody from putting up a sign up there saying, I mean,

286
00:28:37.720 --> 00:28:41.960
after all, how are you going to find the gas station? I mean, unless you have total knowledge

287
00:28:41.960 --> 00:28:45.640
of the area, which most drivers don't have, you're not going to find it unless somebody

288
00:28:45.640 --> 00:28:50.760
They say somewhere up there is a sign saying gas with flashing lights or something.

289
00:28:50.760 --> 00:28:55.960
And so the function of the advertising sign is to inform the public, call the attention

290
00:28:55.960 --> 00:28:58.320
of the public that here's some gas available.

291
00:28:58.320 --> 00:29:02.400
The anti-book board fanatics who want to first eliminate all signs and book boards would

292
00:29:02.400 --> 00:29:05.520
mean that everybody would have a lot of gas breakdowns.

293
00:29:05.520 --> 00:29:07.520
Maybe that's what they want.

294
00:29:07.520 --> 00:29:16.100
Professor Kirzner, my colleague, who's written some very excellent stuff on advertising, points

295
00:29:16.100 --> 00:29:22.560
out also that an interesting thing that happened in NYU where he teaches during the height

296
00:29:22.560 --> 00:29:29.240
of the campus revolution, back in the 1969-70s, famous campus revolution period, when only

297
00:29:29.240 --> 00:29:36.880
anti-advertising new left were using the walls, of course, of NYU as their billboard. Only

298
00:29:36.880 --> 00:29:41.880
The anti-billboard types, they're putting billboards up, wall posters, is that cool?

299
00:29:41.880 --> 00:29:45.880
And the thing is that as they kept going, they kept competing for consumer attention,

300
00:29:45.880 --> 00:29:50.880
because obviously the kids were being harassed, there were a lot of riots to go to and so forth,

301
00:29:50.880 --> 00:29:53.880
and a lot of things going on.

302
00:29:53.880 --> 00:29:59.880
So, the slogans kept getting punchier and catchier,

303
00:29:59.880 --> 00:30:03.880
the signs on the wall posters began to get bigger and bigger,

304
00:30:03.880 --> 00:30:26.880
The commercial front began to be used by the New Left because that's what they were doing,

305
00:30:26.880 --> 00:30:27.880
the same sort of thing.

306
00:30:27.880 --> 00:30:32.640
They were trying to get the consumers of their constituency, the attention so they can try

307
00:30:32.640 --> 00:31:02.640
As a matter of fact, I think what we see pretty well, this brings us to the famous, the philosophic attack on advertising, we see pretty well that what businessmen are doing, desperately almost, is courting the consumer, the consumer is the king, the king on the hill, and the businessmen are trying desperately to get the consumer's attention, court the consumer, say buy this product, they like it and so forth and so on, and this

308
00:31:02.640 --> 00:31:09.000
It seems to me pretty conclusive evidence in itself that the consumer is not being determined

309
00:31:09.000 --> 00:31:13.640
like a push button to, as soon as he sees something, to rush out and buy it.

310
00:31:13.640 --> 00:31:16.240
In other words, the whole atmosphere is completely different.

311
00:31:16.240 --> 00:31:20.800
The whole attitude as part of the business man is not, hey, you go out there and buy

312
00:31:20.800 --> 00:31:21.800
this product.

313
00:31:21.800 --> 00:31:24.320
The whole atmosphere is, wait a minute, stop here, you'll like it, and so forth and so

314
00:31:24.320 --> 00:31:27.160
on, wooing, courting the consumer.

315
00:31:27.160 --> 00:31:36.740
If it were true that the consumer was determined by this sort of robot manner, then for example

316
00:31:36.740 --> 00:31:43.800
there would be no need for an enormous increasing sub-culture or sub-occupation, which most

317
00:31:43.800 --> 00:31:46.680
of us don't know much about, called market research.

318
00:31:46.680 --> 00:31:51.480
Market research is a big industry and the whole point of market research is devoted only

319
00:31:51.480 --> 00:31:57.120
one thing, that's for businessmen to try to find out desperately in advance will consumers

320
00:31:57.120 --> 00:32:16.120
The point of this is, the point of this is almost a desperate quest to try to please the consumer in advance, try to find out what the consumer is going to do.

321
00:32:16.120 --> 00:32:20.120
Will he like it, will he not like it? The whole point seems to be pretty clear.

322
00:32:20.120 --> 00:32:26.120
The consumer is the king of the walk, the consumer is being wooed and courted, and not that the consumer is being pushed around like a robot.

323
00:32:26.120 --> 00:32:52.360
And then, of course, there's the famous floparoos, which even Galbraith admits, he says these

324
00:32:52.360 --> 00:32:56.360
These are exceptions which prove the rule. Even he admits that they've existed.

325
00:32:56.360 --> 00:33:00.360
In other words, cases which don't happen too often, because after all, there is market research

326
00:33:00.360 --> 00:33:04.360
where the citizens are not desperately trying to find out in advance if they're going to lose a lot of money.

327
00:33:04.360 --> 00:33:10.360
But cases, there are cases where after an enormous amount of ballyhoo and publicity and advertising,

328
00:33:10.360 --> 00:33:14.360
the product is produced and falls completely on its face.

329
00:33:14.360 --> 00:33:20.360
It swaps. There's of course the famous case of the ethical car, which is a total flopperoo.

330
00:33:20.360 --> 00:33:37.860
There's also the case of Corfan, Corfan's shoe, where the idea was, you see, that there's a new kind of, a new thing which is better than leather because it doesn't break in at all, it just stays there like a mold and your foot breaks in, unfortunately, the discovery.

331
00:33:37.860 --> 00:33:47.860
The foot caves in before the leather, for the Corfan. People didn't like that. People wanted to feel they were in control of the shoe, the shoe in control of them.

332
00:33:47.860 --> 00:33:51.860
The result of which Corfan was also caught for real, the Corfan shoe.

333
00:33:51.860 --> 00:33:56.860
So, these are two heartwarming examples of undetermined consumers, obviously,

334
00:33:56.860 --> 00:33:59.860
consumers asserting their wrath.

335
00:34:09.860 --> 00:34:13.860
The whole determinist argument, as a matter of fact, just like in all other cases,

336
00:34:13.860 --> 00:34:20.180
and all other cases of determinism I should say. There are many instances of ideas of

337
00:34:20.180 --> 00:34:24.020
philosophical determinism. Just as in those cases, the same way with advertising, there's

338
00:34:24.020 --> 00:34:27.980
always a hidden escape hatch for the determinists. In other words, the assumption always is,

339
00:34:27.980 --> 00:34:32.620
you, you, and you out there, you're all determined, but I'm not. Boy, I'm somehow out of it. I'm

340
00:34:32.620 --> 00:34:37.860
floating above the cloud, telling all you jerks that you're all determined. Now obviously,

341
00:34:37.860 --> 00:34:43.060
there's something peculiar about this kind of reasoning. If everybody's determined by

342
00:34:43.060 --> 00:34:56.340
If this is really the way things work, how come the gal-brave and every left-wing intellectual

343
00:34:56.340 --> 00:34:58.820
you've ever met, how come they've risen above all this?

344
00:34:58.820 --> 00:35:03.900
They're not the term of anything, they don't buy a damn thing, presumably.

345
00:35:03.900 --> 00:35:09.420
They are free-floating intellectuals, floating on top of, levitating above the crowd, and

346
00:35:09.420 --> 00:35:12.580
not subject to these determining influences.

347
00:35:12.580 --> 00:35:19.540
Well, either they're superheroes and somehow heroically escape this miasma, which I somehow

348
00:35:19.540 --> 00:35:27.180
doubt, or there ain't no determinism, which I think is the correct solution of this.

349
00:35:27.180 --> 00:35:33.980
I don'tsidek they have any sort of secret immunizing potion that has prevented them

350
00:35:33.980 --> 00:35:41.060
from being determined while all the rest of us have been robotized.

351
00:35:41.060 --> 00:35:44.600
Another point, of course, and I think this is a crucial point, that's a point with the

352
00:35:44.600 --> 00:35:49.580
epsilon core fan also, is that on the market, and particularly on the market when we get

353
00:35:49.580 --> 00:35:54.560
to advertising, there's a direct feedback, or a direct reality test, or a direct market

354
00:35:54.560 --> 00:35:57.620
test, called a reality test, of a product.

355
00:35:57.620 --> 00:36:00.620
I don't care how much junkie advertising you're subjected to.

356
00:36:00.620 --> 00:36:05.460
I don't care if you sit there, if the housewife sits there all day and Mr. Clean whistles

357
00:36:05.460 --> 00:36:06.460
her out of the kitchen.

358
00:36:06.460 --> 00:36:07.460
I think it was Mr. Clean.

359
00:36:07.460 --> 00:36:10.460
You go out and you buy Mr. Clean, you find out.

360
00:36:10.460 --> 00:36:14.260
I mean, very quickly, does a giant appear and wish you out of the kitchen?

361
00:36:14.260 --> 00:36:18.460
If not, then either, if you really believe this nonsense,

362
00:36:18.460 --> 00:36:21.660
then you have to have an IQ of something like 30,

363
00:36:21.660 --> 00:36:24.760
if you really believe that, then you're disillusioned,

364
00:36:24.760 --> 00:36:29.360
and you realize, there's no Mr. Clean, there's no genie that comes and suddenly pops up,

365
00:36:29.360 --> 00:36:34.060
and all the rest of it, and then you forget about it, that's the market test, the reality test,

366
00:36:34.060 --> 00:36:38.060
of, you know, puff-up advertising.

367
00:36:38.060 --> 00:36:44.620
So you find out, you find out very quickly as we found out about core fan on your foot

368
00:36:44.620 --> 00:36:48.340
and so forth and so on, you find out if the radio works, you find out whether the detergent

369
00:36:48.340 --> 00:36:54.260
works and all that stuff, you find out by the reality test, the market test to see if

370
00:36:54.260 --> 00:36:55.260
it works or not.

371
00:36:55.260 --> 00:36:58.900
So in other words, advertising can only do so much, it can call your attention to something,

372
00:36:58.900 --> 00:37:03.820
it might even get you to buy the darn thing for the first time, there's always this test,

373
00:37:03.820 --> 00:37:07.260
you find out if you win the girl if you use Gleam or whatever it is.

374
00:37:07.260 --> 00:37:12.260
If you don't, that's it. Your reality test works.

375
00:37:12.260 --> 00:37:21.260
The interesting thing is, there is one area of life, one very large area of life, which neither Galbraith doesn't talk about,

376
00:37:21.260 --> 00:37:25.260
and the left liberal intellectuals don't talk about, ever, ever, in connection with advertising.

377
00:37:25.260 --> 00:37:29.260
There's one area of life where there is no reality test. There is no direct market test.

378
00:37:29.260 --> 00:37:31.260
There's no feedback. There's no nothing.

379
00:37:31.260 --> 00:37:36.260
And that's the area, somehow, I'd say, these people never criticize advertising in this area.

380
00:37:36.260 --> 00:37:41.660
This is political advertising, whole area of government, whole area of politics, if

381
00:37:41.660 --> 00:37:46.220
you elect me, my friends, I will do such and such, that sort of advertising.

382
00:37:46.220 --> 00:37:52.180
And somehow, the political process, where you can't find out if Mr. Clean works or

383
00:37:52.180 --> 00:37:57.100
will get you out of the kitchen, or if you'll win the girl with a gleam and that sort of

384
00:37:57.100 --> 00:38:01.780
stuff, where there's no direct test, there's no nothing, there's vague, cloudy promises.

385
00:38:01.780 --> 00:38:07.220
It's in this area of political advertising that has full sway, where people can be sucked

386
00:38:07.220 --> 00:38:13.700
in to believing stuff which isn't true, but somehow left liberals never, never, never discuss

387
00:38:13.700 --> 00:38:18.580
this problem.

388
00:38:18.580 --> 00:38:24.860
This brings us to, really brings us to government, the whole question of government vis-a-vis

389
00:38:24.860 --> 00:38:27.860
and the Market, and that connection.

390
00:38:36.860 --> 00:38:43.860
Okay, one of my disagreements, one of my minor areas of disagreement with my mentors in free market economics,

391
00:38:43.860 --> 00:38:48.860
is that Professor Mises will refer to the market as the democracy of the market, or the ballot box of the market.

392
00:38:48.860 --> 00:38:51.860
I think that's a smear on the market.

393
00:38:51.860 --> 00:38:59.540
The processes, what happens in so-called democracy is so inferior, that's why it's consumer choice

394
00:38:59.540 --> 00:39:04.340
goes, or feedback or anything of that sort, so inferior to the market that they don't

395
00:39:04.340 --> 00:39:07.660
really bear comparison at all.

396
00:39:07.660 --> 00:39:11.900
For example, on the market you buy your product, you buy a Mr. Clean, you try it, you don't

397
00:39:11.900 --> 00:39:15.740
buy it anymore, you buy it some more, whatever, you have this direct test, also you have complete

398
00:39:15.740 --> 00:39:19.940
control of your own individual purchases, and you have your income, and you decide what

399
00:39:19.940 --> 00:39:23.600
to purchase and which things to purchase and so forth. You can decide to keep buying it

400
00:39:23.600 --> 00:39:31.600
or not buy it. And you have an enormous number of choices. I mean, even though there's a

401
00:39:31.600 --> 00:39:34.900
lot of griping about there should be twice as many automobile companies or something

402
00:39:34.900 --> 00:39:40.100
like that, still we only have thousands and thousands and thousands of ways in which to

403
00:39:40.100 --> 00:39:44.140
spend the consumer dollar, and thousands and thousands and thousands of different entrepreneurs

404
00:39:44.140 --> 00:39:48.660
are trying to sell us stuff. We have an enormous range of choice and it's a choice that keeps

405
00:39:48.660 --> 00:39:58.380
The market is always being attacked as being monopolistic.

406
00:39:58.380 --> 00:40:03.500
We turn to government, which is usually being praised as heroic and democratic and the people's

407
00:40:03.500 --> 00:40:04.500
will and all that.

408
00:40:04.500 --> 00:40:09.900
In the field of government, we have a situation where, first of all, we vote, we cast our

409
00:40:09.900 --> 00:40:16.820
ballot not every day for, for Mr. Clean or against Mr. Clean, but every four years, once.

410
00:40:16.820 --> 00:40:24.140
In the last three or four years, at best, if we really think the majority rules, which

411
00:40:24.140 --> 00:40:30.360
is dubious anyway, as assumed from the majority rules, at best 51% of the people will get

412
00:40:30.360 --> 00:40:33.620
their way, but the other 49% are shaftless in another four years.

413
00:40:33.620 --> 00:40:37.700
In other words, they can't say, well, I don't want Mr. Clean.

414
00:40:37.700 --> 00:40:41.540
They can't say that because majority's voting for Mr. Clean, it's tough, but you're going

415
00:40:41.540 --> 00:40:56.700
49% can't opt for business or whatever, also, in addition to the fact that you have a 51%

416
00:40:56.700 --> 00:41:07.260
crushing the 49%, instead of buying individual things, you have this majority buying the

417
00:41:07.260 --> 00:41:13.260
The whole complete package. You like one guy for president, one guy for congressman, et cetera, and that's it.

418
00:41:13.260 --> 00:41:16.260
And he works his will with you for four years.

419
00:41:16.260 --> 00:41:22.260
In other words, you're not saying, well, I think I'll vote for your rent policy, but against your foreign policy, or whatever. No, no.

420
00:41:22.260 --> 00:41:28.260
It's a complete package, wrapped up, and when you vote for one guy, you're getting his entire package, period.

421
00:41:28.260 --> 00:41:30.260
There's no way to break this down.

422
00:41:30.260 --> 00:41:36.260
On the market, of course, you're buying Mr. Clean, you're not buying it, you're buying Hi-Fi sets somewhere else, you're not buying them, and so forth.

423
00:41:36.260 --> 00:41:42.260
The individual service is broken down to their individual components, and to the individual consumer.

424
00:41:42.260 --> 00:41:48.260
Of course, the government is totally different. In government you have the masses collectively buying a pig and a poke.

425
00:41:48.260 --> 00:41:55.260
Literally. You're buying, you're putting one guy in, you're not sure what he's going to do, there's no...

426
00:41:55.260 --> 00:42:02.260
There's lots of fraudulent advertising. When I get in, I'll raise expenditures for everything and cut taxes, and that's where it stops.

427
00:42:02.260 --> 00:42:11.260
and then inflation, and after four years, the guy violated every one of his promises, and nothing happens to him. He's not sent to jail for fraud.

428
00:42:11.260 --> 00:42:17.260
In fact, he probably gets a pension from the taxpayer to live the rest of his life.

429
00:42:17.260 --> 00:42:21.260
There's no feedback at all. There's no reality test at all.

430
00:42:21.260 --> 00:42:30.260
There's a cloudy, vague, vague promises, vaguely met, vaguely repudiated, nobody knows what happened.

431
00:42:30.260 --> 00:42:39.260
If you haven't seen it, you probably haven't for four years. Who remembers anyway? If you can't remember what happened two weeks ago with your purchase, who's going to remember what the guy did three years ago?

432
00:42:39.260 --> 00:42:52.260
Also, in addition to that, on the market, despite the usual approach of monopoly, et cetera, et cetera, there are thousands upon thousands of choices of firms, businesses to buy from.

433
00:42:52.260 --> 00:42:59.260
In politics, in government, there's only two. A duopoly. We have what's known as a giant duopoly.

434
00:42:59.260 --> 00:43:04.260
Democratic party and Republican party. There's a couple of minor parties that don't amount to much.

435
00:43:04.260 --> 00:43:08.260
And there's two parties. Not only are there only two parties, but everybody loves this.

436
00:43:08.260 --> 00:43:14.260
Every liberal, political scientist, if you ever take a course in political science, what a wonderful thing we have.

437
00:43:14.260 --> 00:43:19.260
A super glorious two-party system. You ever hear talk about a glorious two-firm system?

438
00:43:19.260 --> 00:43:27.260
That's terrible. It'd be evil and monopolistic. If there are only three firms in the automobile industry, everybody thinks that the world has come to an end.

439
00:43:27.260 --> 00:43:32.260
But it's okay to have two firms and the entire government apparatus, and only two.

440
00:43:32.260 --> 00:43:39.260
Of course, when you have a duopoly, as classical economics shows, you tend to have collusion. If you're only two guys, why not?

441
00:43:39.260 --> 00:43:45.260
There's a collusive duopoly. The Democrats and Republicans sound very much alike, and their promises are very much the same.

442
00:43:45.260 --> 00:43:49.260
And then what do you do? Where is our choice then? It means we have no choice whatsoever.

443
00:43:49.260 --> 00:43:57.260
So this wonderful democratic choice, which is offered every four years, is a choice between one fraud and another fraud,

444
00:43:57.260 --> 00:44:05.260
each of which are pushing almost the same ideology, with slight differences in rhetoric, in order to differentiate the product artificially a little bit.

445
00:44:05.260 --> 00:44:14.940
And so here's where the only attack on monopoly differentiated product, on collusion, on concentration

446
00:44:14.940 --> 00:44:20.100
of size, on lack of choices, all that sort of stuff, all this stuff really applies to

447
00:44:20.100 --> 00:44:21.100
the government.

448
00:44:21.100 --> 00:44:25.220
And yet somehow the liberal economist never, never applies to the government, never, even

449
00:44:25.220 --> 00:44:31.700
right-wing economists don't apply to the government, no place, you get this kind of analysis.

450
00:44:31.700 --> 00:44:38.940
Now, government is sacrosanct, you see. You don't apply ordinary standards to it. That's

451
00:44:38.940 --> 00:44:48.940
why I say that when you say the market is democratic, you're really smearing the market.

452
00:44:48.940 --> 00:44:56.860
Well let's take the uniformity of 51%. Let's take a specific example, which at least until

453
00:44:56.860 --> 00:45:01.600
A year or two or three ago, there was a hallowed example in American life and any criticism

454
00:45:01.600 --> 00:45:05.520
of it was considered the equivalent of criticizing motherhood and apple pie, because motherhood

455
00:45:05.520 --> 00:45:11.060
is sort of under attack now, and I don't know about apple pie, at any rate, it's now sort

456
00:45:11.060 --> 00:45:14.000
of almost legitimate to criticize the public school system.

457
00:45:14.000 --> 00:45:20.500
Let's take the public school system, here's a system run by the taxpayers, let's say,

458
00:45:20.500 --> 00:45:26.340
run by the majority of each area, well you have to have this product, you have to run

459
00:45:26.340 --> 00:45:30.840
on it in some way, public school, and it has to be a decision, there's all sorts of important

460
00:45:30.840 --> 00:45:32.660
decisions to make.

461
00:45:32.660 --> 00:45:35.580
Should it be traditional education, should it be progressive, should it be some combination

462
00:45:35.580 --> 00:45:40.740
of the two, should it be sex education, should it be religious education, should it be push

463
00:45:40.740 --> 00:45:45.620
capitalism or socialism, dozens of different very important questions to be decided.

464
00:45:45.620 --> 00:45:52.980
And the point is whatever the decision is, usually the decision will be bland, centrist,

465
00:45:52.980 --> 00:45:59.260
and not annoying too many people. That would be the usual bureaucratic majority kind of

466
00:45:59.260 --> 00:46:07.060
decision. The point is once the decision is made, that's it. There's no room for dissent,

467
00:46:07.060 --> 00:46:12.740
getting out from under the uniformity, etc. Whereas the private education where the parents

468
00:46:12.740 --> 00:46:17.420
and children are in control, consumers are in control, then instead of being one type

469
00:46:17.420 --> 00:46:23.260
for Public School, which is imposed on the whole country, the whole area, robot-like.

470
00:46:23.260 --> 00:46:28.020
You have all sorts of different groups of parents who will set up and sponsor different

471
00:46:28.020 --> 00:46:33.780
kinds of schools. You'll have Christian schools, parochial schools, secular schools, progressive,

472
00:46:33.780 --> 00:46:38.460
traditional, left-wing, right-wing, et cetera, et cetera, and the consumers then will determine

473
00:46:38.460 --> 00:46:47.120
what kind of school they want. So instead of having a uniform, centrist kind of uniformity

474
00:46:47.120 --> 00:47:02.120
with a market you have an enormous range, a wide range of diversity, and diversity is covering a whole spectrum of what people are interested in and willing to pay for.

475
00:47:02.120 --> 00:47:12.120
There's again a difference between a government in action and private individuals in action on the market, because the market really means voluntary action, that's really the result of voluntary action.

476
00:47:12.120 --> 00:47:23.120
Take, for example, another educational, which is one of my favorite examples on the educational front, because education doesn't only mean schooling, obviously. We learn things all the time.

477
00:47:23.120 --> 00:47:27.120
And one of the ways in which we learn things is newspapers and magazines.

478
00:47:27.120 --> 00:47:36.120
Now, if we should have public schools, then we should also have, it seems to me, public newspapers and magazines.

479
00:47:36.120 --> 00:47:47.120
Can you imagine the kind of magazine that would come out? Can you imagine the kind of newspaper that would emerge from a government bureaucratic handling of it?

480
00:47:47.120 --> 00:47:53.120
Can you imagine how monstrous it would be? Can you imagine how dull? Can you imagine what a painter would be? Who would read it?

481
00:47:53.120 --> 00:47:58.120
Obviously nobody would read it, but taxpayers would kick in for it.

482
00:47:58.120 --> 00:48:13.120
Imagine, for example, the interesting decisions would be made. Supposing, how would they decide how to allocate their space, the scarce amount of space, for any newspaper, any magazine, how would they decide who gets into it?

483
00:48:13.120 --> 00:48:26.120
Should they have this left-winger in it? Should they have a right-winger in it? How do they decide this? And of course, every decision becomes a political decision as the taxpayers are supposed to pay for this, so they will wind up with a blandest map you can possibly imagine.

484
00:48:26.120 --> 00:48:30.120
I would not be writing for the government newspaper, even if I wanted to.

485
00:48:30.120 --> 00:48:39.120
Okay, so the result of this, of course, is a stifling result of government education, whether it's schools or newspapers or magazines,

486
00:48:39.120 --> 00:48:45.120
a stifling of any kind of independent thought, any kind of criticism, any kind of opposition of the status quo.

487
00:48:45.120 --> 00:48:53.120
This is what public schools inevitably become. They become the engineers of consent,

488
00:48:53.120 --> 00:48:58.120
Engineers of general public support for the status quo, for the government itself.

489
00:48:58.120 --> 00:49:03.120
It's inevitable, regardless of how they even start at that to found the public school system.

490
00:49:03.120 --> 00:49:08.120
If we get back, interestingly enough, if we get back to the origins of the public school system in this country or abroad,

491
00:49:08.120 --> 00:49:11.120
we find out that the origins were precisely that.

492
00:49:11.120 --> 00:49:15.120
But the people then were much franker than they are now.

493
00:49:15.120 --> 00:49:24.720
The origins were specifically to mold the public into a general government way of thinking,

494
00:49:24.720 --> 00:49:27.520
obedience to the government, obedience to the powers of the...

495
00:49:27.520 --> 00:49:32.120
In the case of the United States, the first public schools were in New England, Massachusetts,

496
00:49:32.120 --> 00:49:33.120
and Puritan Massachusetts.

497
00:49:33.120 --> 00:49:37.620
The idea was to mold the public and mold each little kid into a Puritan framework.

498
00:49:37.620 --> 00:49:41.520
Every kid becomes, you know, such fast or Puritan.

499
00:49:41.520 --> 00:49:42.520
And that was...

500
00:49:42.520 --> 00:49:44.520
They made no bones about it.

501
00:49:44.520 --> 00:50:03.760
There was no democratic patina surrounding the public school system in the old days.

502
00:50:03.760 --> 00:50:13.880
In addition to that problem, this of course relates to, in general, the whole problem

503
00:50:13.880 --> 00:50:19.040
of education and the whole problem of use of resources government get to later, too.

504
00:50:19.040 --> 00:50:25.360
In addition to this, there's also involved in the attack on advertising a monstrous assault

505
00:50:25.360 --> 00:50:26.360
on free speech.

506
00:50:26.360 --> 00:50:38.360
Interestingly enough, the civil libertarians, who are very hept on civil liberties in some areas, somehow lose their voice when they get to, for example, cigarette advertising on television.

507
00:50:38.360 --> 00:50:53.360
That seems to me, cigarette advertising on television is a form of speech, a form of expression, and yet the government has outlawed it with no, as far as I can see, no reaction whatsoever, no complaint, no griping from the American Civil Liberties Union, no nothing.

508
00:50:53.360 --> 00:51:02.360
As far as I'm concerned, liberties are under direct attack when cigarette advertising is outlawed.

509
00:51:02.360 --> 00:51:15.360
If we're going to say that somehow it's fraudulent because you're not being told at all times that you're going to get lung cancer from cigarette advertising or whatever,

510
00:51:15.360 --> 00:51:22.360
if we can say that we should outlaw all fraudulent advertising, this brings up an interesting point.

511
00:51:22.360 --> 00:51:35.360
If we're really going to outlaw all fraudulent advertising, all advertising is not going to meet its, somehow its promises, what are we going to do about campaigners? What are we going to do about government? What are we going to do about all these politicians? Do we outlaw them?

512
00:51:35.360 --> 00:51:45.360
Well, I'm almost tempted to say yes. It's only my devotion to free speech that prevents it. I'd sooner outlaw political advertising than I would cigarette advertising.

513
00:51:45.360 --> 00:51:48.360
So that way, people are much more fraudulent.

514
00:51:48.360 --> 00:51:55.360
And yet, somehow nobody advocates outlawing that.

515
00:51:55.360 --> 00:51:59.360
Then, of course, we get into other, even touchier areas.

516
00:51:59.360 --> 00:52:04.360
What about Professor Galbraith, for example, in his books?

517
00:52:04.360 --> 00:52:08.360
Some of us would say it's fraudulent to call it economics.

518
00:52:08.360 --> 00:52:14.360
Do we then give the government the power of saying what's really economic and what isn't?

519
00:52:14.360 --> 00:52:24.360
and anything which is not as really be outlawed as being fraudulent. You see a lot of sticky areas here when you start outlawing instruments of expression.

520
00:52:24.360 --> 00:52:51.360
There's a book on the advertising front, and it's sort of basically against the attack on advertising, by Galbraith, in his famous book, The Affluent Society, which is one of my least favorite books of all time.

521
00:52:51.360 --> 00:52:59.360
One of these things, the affluent society, by Galbraith, who was the first great best-seller in 1959.

522
00:52:59.360 --> 00:53:07.360
He talks there, it was an assault on affluence, people were too affluent, capitalism was evil because we were too affluent.

523
00:53:07.360 --> 00:53:11.360
That was before they found out that capitalism was evil because we were too poverty-stricken.

524
00:53:11.360 --> 00:53:16.360
That was about three years before that. This was the anti-affluence gig.

525
00:53:16.360 --> 00:53:32.360
At any rate, in there he talks about, see the problem is that these brainwashed wants, these things which we are induced to purchase, such as Wonder Bread or Pepsi or whatever, these are artificial wants, he calls them, artificial wants.

526
00:53:32.360 --> 00:53:42.360
And there's this very strong implication in Galbraith, that artificial wants means that they're illegitimate, they're improper, they should not be expressed.

527
00:53:42.360 --> 00:53:46.360
This is in contrast presumably to natural wants.

528
00:53:46.360 --> 00:53:49.360
What are natural wants? This is about left pretty vague.

529
00:53:49.360 --> 00:54:01.360
It seems to me pretty, if he says it, it really does say that unofficial wants are wants that are discovered from other people, learned of from advertising or from friends or whatever.

530
00:54:01.360 --> 00:54:15.360
If you really say that, you're really outlawing practically everything except the pure, you know, sort of caveman kind of wants, like, you know, sort of chewing up the meat and sort of basing this pure subsistence.

531
00:54:15.360 --> 00:54:21.360
Everything above pure subsistence, pure permanent subsistence that is dismissed by Galbraith as being artificial.

532
00:54:21.360 --> 00:54:26.360
There's a peculiar kind of philosophic system he's got there.

533
00:54:26.360 --> 00:54:34.120
Why is it artificial? Why is it evil or artificial, improper to learn about wants from other people?

534
00:54:34.120 --> 00:54:38.960
After all, people, human beings are not animals. We don't learn about stuff through instincts.

535
00:54:38.960 --> 00:54:42.960
We can only learn about stuff either from our own experience or from other people's

536
00:54:42.960 --> 00:54:50.080
experience. So we learn about wants, just like we learn about techniques. We learn about

537
00:54:50.080 --> 00:54:55.640
wants from other people, from friends, neighbors or whatever, and this is really the process

538
00:54:55.640 --> 00:54:59.800
This is what civilization is all about in many ways The fact that we are influenced by other

539
00:54:59.800 --> 00:55:03.560
people and we learn about things from other people, you try to outlaw this, it seems to

540
00:55:03.560 --> 00:55:05.600
me you're really outlawing the human condition altogether.

541
00:55:05.600 --> 00:55:10.320
There are very few people who can create their own once a day novo, sort of out of thin air,

542
00:55:10.320 --> 00:55:14.160
without consulting anything else, an experience, or any other person.

543
00:55:14.160 --> 00:55:19.160
If it's ever been done, it's pretty unusual to say the least, I doubt whether Galbraith

544
00:55:19.160 --> 00:55:20.160
even has done it.

545
00:55:20.160 --> 00:55:29.160
And in the learning process, again, I've talked about the learning process before, the learning process also includes the process of learning about what's going on.

546
00:55:29.160 --> 00:55:34.160
I mean, you learn about TV sets, for example, because the first guy in the town buys a TV set when it first comes out.

547
00:55:34.160 --> 00:55:38.160
You go and look at it, hey, it looks terrific, and you want to buy it yourself.

548
00:55:38.160 --> 00:55:46.160
This process of diffusion of new consumer products is very similar to the diffusion of producer's products.

549
00:55:46.160 --> 00:55:53.520
Incidentally, Hayek and Dejuvenel both written some very interesting stuff, which egalitarians

550
00:55:53.520 --> 00:56:00.200
have always stuck in egalitarians' throats. Justifications for differences of wealth and

551
00:56:00.200 --> 00:56:05.480
income on the basis of learning how to consume. In other words, the wealthy guy in town buys

552
00:56:05.480 --> 00:56:11.720
the first TV set, and he buys it because not too many TV sets have come out yet, it's pretty

553
00:56:11.720 --> 00:56:28.360
In other words, the wealthy people have performed an important social function of pioneering

554
00:56:28.360 --> 00:56:29.360
in consumption.

555
00:56:29.360 --> 00:56:38.000
Huftus don't like that approach, I think it's correct.

556
00:56:38.000 --> 00:56:45.880
Again pointing out, there's always a person for everything, there's always a first creator

557
00:56:45.880 --> 00:56:51.360
of inventions or production or new products, there's always a first consumer of everything,

558
00:56:51.360 --> 00:56:57.360
First guy goes out and gets a TV set. First guy has his own private helicopter or whatever.

559
00:57:01.360 --> 00:57:11.360
Interestingly enough, Galbraith is attacking, in this book, the Axlum Society, which I'd say is one of my veins, one of the veins of my existence,

560
00:57:11.360 --> 00:57:14.360
he's attacking these artificial ones constantly throughout the book.

561
00:57:14.360 --> 00:57:33.360
And then when he's talking about a solution to the problem, his solution is what we need, he says, is a vast multi-billion dollar program using federal funds to educate people so they can change their consumption, so they can do the right things like listening to Bach or reading his books or whatever it is.

562
00:57:33.360 --> 00:58:03.360
For some reason, these things are not artificial. Doing the sort of things that Galbraith wants you to do, like drinking fine wine, or listening to Bach, or reading Galbraith, or watching God forbid, Channel 13 all your life, public television was that time in New York, or listening to uplift kind of lectures all the time, this sort of activity is somehow not artificial, but somehow on the same plane as raw existence.

563
00:58:03.360 --> 00:58:12.360
Well, that's one of the many contradictions in the outbreak. That's one of the things that sticks in my court of this day.

564
00:58:12.360 --> 00:58:35.760
Well, we have, I'll just say just a word here, a very lengthy topic, I just want to say a

565
00:58:35.760 --> 00:58:36.760
couple of words on it.

566
00:58:36.760 --> 00:58:39.560
It's the sort of thing you can be talking about for weeks.

567
00:58:39.560 --> 00:58:42.560
That's the whole relationship between the market and ethics.

568
00:58:42.560 --> 00:58:49.560
I've been talking about how Galbraith really wants to change people's consumption patterns,

569
00:58:49.560 --> 00:58:55.560
but he's really saying it's somehow unethical to buy Pepsi and buy Coke and buy Wonder Bread,

570
00:58:55.560 --> 00:58:59.560
but it's ethical to listen to Bach and buy Galbraith's volumes.

571
00:58:59.560 --> 00:59:03.560
That's his implicit position.

572
00:59:03.560 --> 00:59:09.760
And I can see how the point about the market is, the free market, is that it leaves the

573
00:59:09.760 --> 00:59:15.680
public, the individuals on the market free to follow their own values, to follow their

574
00:59:15.680 --> 00:59:23.760
own ethics, to buy whatever they want to buy, and they follow their own codes.

575
00:59:23.760 --> 00:59:30.000
The, now you can say if you want to, but some of their purchases are unethical from some

576
00:59:30.000 --> 00:59:40.320
What I'm saying is that you should try to persuade a person that is an unethical purchase

577
00:59:40.320 --> 00:59:41.320
rather than outlaw it.

578
00:59:41.320 --> 00:59:48.560
That was the difference here between coercion and persuasion.

579
00:59:48.560 --> 00:59:52.560
Oddly enough, Galbraith is very, very upset about the persuasion involved in advertising

580
00:59:52.560 --> 00:59:56.560
and the persuasion involved in market selling court, etc.

581
00:59:56.560 --> 00:59:58.560
and the selling court, etc.

582
00:59:58.560 --> 01:00:04.560
It's not upset at all about coercive actions of the federal government to force people to listen to Bach or to do whatever.

583
01:00:04.560 --> 01:00:11.560
Somehow that's okay. That's not brainwashing. That's not artificial.

584
01:00:11.560 --> 01:00:19.560
I think you can say, if you want to, that certain categories of purchases are unethical.

585
01:00:19.560 --> 01:00:25.760
It's kind of difficult to say that, for example, a lot of people say that we're spending too

586
01:00:25.760 --> 01:00:26.760
much on cosmetics.

587
01:00:26.760 --> 01:00:27.760
It's a common charge.

588
01:00:27.760 --> 01:00:34.160
If America spends too much on cosmetics, we should spend less on cosmetics and more on

589
01:00:34.160 --> 01:00:36.760
bubble gum or whatever the alternative is.

590
01:00:36.760 --> 01:00:42.360
Well, the thing is, I don't know of any ethical system which can grind out or crank out a

591
01:00:42.360 --> 01:00:44.120
quantitative conclusion like that.

592
01:00:44.120 --> 01:00:48.600
What's the ethical optimum cosmetics purchase?

593
01:00:48.600 --> 01:00:53.240
I don't know, I don't think anybody else does these.

594
01:00:53.240 --> 01:00:56.440
You can try to make the case that cosmetics are evil

595
01:00:56.440 --> 01:01:00.880
and should be abandoned altogether. I wouldn't agree with it, but that's a possible case.

596
01:01:00.880 --> 01:01:04.200
But to say that there should be 10% less purchase on cosmetics

597
01:01:04.200 --> 01:01:08.480
than there are now, I don't know how anybody can really back this up.

598
01:01:08.480 --> 01:01:14.440
I've not yet heard anybody set forth a system of quantitative ethics.

599
01:01:14.440 --> 01:01:24.440
and yet there's a lot of the ethical criticism of the market of this sort of peculiar kind of quantitative ethics.

600
01:01:24.440 --> 01:01:37.440
There's also of course, in this connection, there's the familiar, less intellectual critique of so-called materialism.

601
01:01:37.440 --> 01:01:43.940
The people, the market forces are too materialistic to somehow encourage materialism.

602
01:01:43.940 --> 01:01:52.440
Actually, I don't know what sense, I guess it gets vague in what sense the person is talking about materialism.

603
01:01:52.440 --> 01:01:59.440
If you mean concern with purely physical objects or physical consumption or something like that,

604
01:01:59.440 --> 01:02:05.440
then it's really the reverse of the truth because in the primitive period, when everybody is on mere subsistence level,

605
01:02:05.440 --> 01:02:14.440
Everybody's spending all of their time scratching out food. Nobody ain't got time to think about economics, philosophy or anything of that sort, or high culture.

606
01:02:14.440 --> 01:02:24.440
High culture only becomes possible when there's a certain surplus standard of living, when the standard of living gets to the point where people have the leisure to begin concentrating on other things.

607
01:02:24.440 --> 01:02:50.440
Secondly, the cuter thing about this materialism attack is, for example, somebody will say this guy is making a terrible thing, this guy's making a lot of money because he's writing stuff for the public likes, it's too commercial, it's too materialistic and he's making millions out of it, whereas I was a great novel making practically nothing.

608
01:02:50.440 --> 01:03:02.440
Well, it seems to me he should glory in this. He shouldn't be griping about it. If he's really against materialism and money and commerce, then the fact that he's making nothing out of it should be a great joy to him. Somehow it isn't.

609
01:03:02.440 --> 01:03:16.440
Somehow the conclusion from this is, our anti-materialist is, that somehow the other guy's material should be taken away from him and handed over to him, the anti-materialist, who then is more deserving of these material goodies.

610
01:03:16.440 --> 01:03:19.440
and it seems to me an inner contradiction by the anti-materialists.

611
01:03:19.440 --> 01:03:30.440
There's always sort of the implicit inclusion clause that somehow either the government should take tax the commercial people and give it over, hand it over to the anti-materialists or whatever.

612
01:03:30.440 --> 01:03:33.440
That seems to me a big contradiction there.

613
01:03:33.440 --> 01:03:41.440
Well, another thing I wanted to say about government advertising and public advertising

614
01:03:41.440 --> 01:03:49.560
and all that is that public service commercials, for example, on television strike me as being

615
01:03:49.560 --> 01:03:50.560
fantastically dull.

616
01:03:50.560 --> 01:03:51.560
Dull, dull, doleville.

617
01:03:51.560 --> 01:03:57.280
Even if they're not government, even if they're just some, you know, a beloved public agency,

618
01:03:57.280 --> 01:04:03.040
a private voluntary agency, they are dull and probably the most imaginative of them

619
01:04:03.040 --> 01:04:19.040
One turns out to be a complete fraud. That's our old pal Smokey the Bear. Now it turns out that Smokey the Bear has been peddling fraud for all of his years on television because there's a split, you see, among the conservationist and environmentalists, which has just surfaced recently.

620
01:04:19.040 --> 01:04:25.040
And that is that all this hysteria about forest fires turns out to be a bad thing because forest fires are really good.

621
01:04:25.040 --> 01:04:32.040
See, the small-scale natural forest fires, we don't have the government rushing every forest fire and stamping it out immediately.

622
01:04:32.040 --> 01:04:36.000
uh... you have some natural forest fires that clears away the underbrush

623
01:04:36.000 --> 01:04:37.960
that makes the pine cones hot

624
01:04:37.960 --> 01:04:42.040
so the pine trees can then refurbish themselves and all that

625
01:04:42.040 --> 01:04:48.800
you can see I'm a little hazy on the technological points

626
01:04:48.800 --> 01:04:50.600
but my close friends in the

627
01:04:50.600 --> 01:04:53.920
the nature field tell me this is true

628
01:04:53.920 --> 01:04:57.040
uh... and then they can refurbish themselves and all that

629
01:04:57.040 --> 01:05:00.960
but now you see what's happening since the government comes in and stamps out every forest fire

630
01:05:00.960 --> 01:05:06.400
helped by Smokey the Bear as a theoretician of this, they don't give a chance for natural

631
01:05:06.400 --> 01:05:10.240
forest fires to grow and the planting fees don't grow and there's too much underbrush

632
01:05:10.240 --> 01:05:16.120
and then a big forest fire comes and strikes down the whole forest as a result, so the

633
01:05:16.120 --> 01:05:20.840
government messes everything up always regardless of what area it's involved in, even Smokey

634
01:05:20.840 --> 01:05:25.160
See the bear, seemingly harmless kind of thing there.