WEBVTT

NOTE That Hayek-Keynes Rap Video

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:11.280
This is Jeffrey Tucker, and it's my great pleasure to be sitting here with John Papala,

2
00:00:11.280 --> 00:00:17.200
who is the maker of that now very famous Hayek-Keynes video with a million YouTube views or something.

3
00:00:17.200 --> 00:00:20.720
And the important thing is not so much the number of views, but where it's been viewed.

4
00:00:22.080 --> 00:00:25.200
John, your video is in all the classrooms in the world.

5
00:00:26.720 --> 00:00:27.760
Thanks for having me, Jeff.

6
00:00:27.760 --> 00:00:32.760
I don't know if it's in all the classrooms in the world, but it is certainly in song.

7
00:00:32.760 --> 00:00:36.760
You talked last night about how many languages it's been translated to.

8
00:00:36.760 --> 00:00:41.760
Yeah, I think it's up to 12, and possibly more, because I noticed that, for example,

9
00:00:41.760 --> 00:00:46.760
a French version was posted on a separate website on YouTube, but on Dailymotion.

10
00:00:46.760 --> 00:00:51.760
And it's great. The French one, as of right now, has something like 40,000 views.

11
00:00:51.760 --> 00:00:53.760
How does it work? Are they rapping in French?

12
00:00:53.760 --> 00:00:56.760
No, not yet. What they're just doing is putting the subtitles up.

13
00:00:56.760 --> 00:01:17.760
When you made this video, did you consider the implications of open sourcing it the way you did versus putting it behind a wall, a payment wall or something? Did you think about this aspect of things?

14
00:01:17.760 --> 00:01:30.760
I did, you know, in the professional media world, in the mainstream media world that I find my full-time employment,

15
00:01:30.760 --> 00:01:36.760
there's a big question about how to interact in this new media space.

16
00:01:36.760 --> 00:01:43.760
So, you know, I'm pretty familiar with sort of the questions of how are you going to find an audience in this world, in this online world,

17
00:01:43.760 --> 00:01:50.760
You know, do you put stuff behind a paywall the way Wall Street Journal does, or do you put it out for free?

18
00:01:50.760 --> 00:01:54.760
The point of this whole video was to drive awareness and education.

19
00:01:54.760 --> 00:02:01.760
So to put it behind a paywall really was exactly the opposite of what we were trying to achieve, Russ and I.

20
00:02:01.760 --> 00:02:05.760
So it wasn't even a question. It was, this is going to go out for free.

21
00:02:05.760 --> 00:02:12.760
And then, you know, if it's as successful as we hope it'll be, that'll create opportunities.

22
00:02:12.760 --> 00:02:22.760
opportunities. So in a lot of ways, this is a piece of advertisement. Right. Yeah, it was for the Austrian School and for important ideas. And people don't charge for ads.

23
00:02:22.760 --> 00:02:37.760
I thought it was intriguing when I first saw it because lots of times on YouTube, you don't see quality original content. You see some pirated thing or some home video or some guy riding his computer as a skateboard and he crashes or whatever.

24
00:02:37.760 --> 00:02:43.760
But to see such a high quality thing that was originally posted on YouTube, right, and that's your strategy from the beginning.

25
00:02:43.760 --> 00:02:53.760
Well, I think there was a couple reasons to go with YouTube. One was scale. So it's there, it's a very familiar interface for people, it's a dominant platform.

26
00:02:53.760 --> 00:02:59.760
So, and it has comments and it has embeddability and all those features.

27
00:02:59.760 --> 00:03:09.160
And for us to go with something that's a more targeted platform, like Bright Cove and some of these video services that basically provide a unique...

28
00:03:09.160 --> 00:03:09.760
Yes, right.

29
00:03:09.760 --> 00:03:10.760
Vimeo is...

30
00:03:10.760 --> 00:03:11.760
Yeah, I mean...

31
00:03:11.760 --> 00:03:20.760
I actually recently posted it on Vimeo because Vimeo is more quality-oriented, so I liked having that higher quality option available.

32
00:03:20.760 --> 00:03:28.760
But with YouTube, it's just quick. You just go to YouTube, it shows you that hit counts.

33
00:03:28.760 --> 00:03:47.760
It's just that sort of just a touch point, it helps, there's a sort of positive feedback loop, the YouTube hips keep growing, that attracts more audience, it attracts more media attention, you know, after one week we had half a million views and that in and of itself created more attention which drove even more viewership.

34
00:03:47.760 --> 00:03:49.760
The implausibility of the whole thing.

35
00:03:49.760 --> 00:04:00.760
Yeah, so to have gone with a put-it-where-everybody-is approach with something that's so on such a grassroots effort, I think, would have been a mistake. It would have dispersed the numbers.

36
00:04:00.760 --> 00:04:07.760
I consider your distribution method to be ingenious. I mean, it was simple, but it's sometimes hard to come up with a simple solution, you know, like that.

37
00:04:07.760 --> 00:04:16.760
Especially when you have a treasure like that video where it is, you think, well, shouldn't this be on broadcast television or something like that, which it may end up being, who knows?

38
00:04:16.760 --> 00:04:30.760
This is not an idea that originated, but we live in a new world where getting distributed is not the question, it's getting discovered.

39
00:04:30.760 --> 00:04:36.760
So discovery is the new distribution, where it used to be the case that, how am I going to get my movie distributed?

40
00:04:36.760 --> 00:04:42.760
That's easy to put on the internet. How do you get a movie discovered? How do you get people to find it in an ocean of content?

41
00:04:42.760 --> 00:04:49.760
And, you know, we had a lot of mainstream media help. We had the NPR news story.

42
00:04:49.760 --> 00:04:50.760
And New York Times.

43
00:04:50.760 --> 00:04:56.760
And, you know, I think that that was a leg up on top of the video, you know, being sort of unique.

44
00:04:56.760 --> 00:05:01.760
Yeah, and of course, every Austrian in the world was all over that thing within a matter of minutes.

45
00:05:01.760 --> 00:05:06.760
Can I ask you, what has it meant for your own professional status, for your career?

46
00:05:06.760 --> 00:05:13.720
Well, I think this project is a completely separate line of business, so to speak, from

47
00:05:13.720 --> 00:05:18.120
my life in the professional broadcast world.

48
00:05:18.120 --> 00:05:24.160
But to the extent that that professional world is trying to figure out the Internet, I think

49
00:05:24.160 --> 00:05:29.280
that at the very least, anybody with a hit, you know, there's a funny thing.

50
00:05:29.280 --> 00:05:36.000
People think that Hollywood and the media world has a bias, and I think that's probably

51
00:05:36.000 --> 00:05:42.400
I think that is true in some respects, you know, designers think they can design, which

52
00:05:42.400 --> 00:05:47.380
leads them to think that they can design more than they can, and Hayek's got a lot of good

53
00:05:47.380 --> 00:05:53.880
things to say about the problems of design and we put that quote at the end of the video.

54
00:05:53.880 --> 00:05:58.880
But at the end of the day, it's about how you get eyeballs, you know, it is actually

55
00:05:58.880 --> 00:06:07.380
This is a capitalist system, this media world, and so, this, to have a success like this can only help me.

56
00:06:07.380 --> 00:06:09.380
Yeah, people pay attention to success.

57
00:06:09.380 --> 00:06:17.380
You know, so that's really, I mean, you know, I'm reminded of, not that there's a correlation, but I'm reminded of the Passion of the Christ film,

58
00:06:17.380 --> 00:06:23.380
which despite all of the controversy about that movie and about the, you know, undertones in it and Mel Gibson as a personality,

59
00:06:23.380 --> 00:06:31.380
The fact of the matter is, after that movie, you had all of these other biblical movies that came out on TV and film because it's a capitalist system.

60
00:06:31.380 --> 00:06:40.380
Yeah, well, I mean, it's true even in the world of opera. You know, you can get a singer who's never sung in any of the major operas but as a big commercial star.

61
00:06:40.380 --> 00:06:47.380
Eventually, the major operas will invite that singer in and he or she will be singing the big parts, you know.

62
00:06:47.380 --> 00:06:54.380
So, the respectability often times follows the popularity.

63
00:06:54.380 --> 00:07:01.380
I mean, that certainly happened with Keynes.

64
00:07:01.380 --> 00:07:09.380
You know, I think his respectability to the extent that he has it definitely followed his popularity.

65
00:07:09.380 --> 00:07:15.380
Actually, you know, maybe that's not a fair dig. He had respectability before the general theory.

66
00:07:15.380 --> 00:07:18.380
But in any event, you know, you get my point.

67
00:07:18.380 --> 00:07:21.380
It was funny last night in your talk. I thought about it this morning.

68
00:07:21.380 --> 00:07:27.380
You gave very short shrift to the difficulties of coming up with the text of the rap itself.

69
00:07:27.380 --> 00:07:30.380
I mean, you just said, well, I came up with these rhymes and moved on.

70
00:07:30.380 --> 00:07:38.380
But, I can tell you watching it the first time, I was amazed at your capacity for reducing the Austrian theory to just its essentials

71
00:07:38.380 --> 00:07:41.380
in a way that so could clearly communicate in these rhyming couplets.

72
00:07:41.380 --> 00:08:11.380
I don't know. I don't know what to say. Not to pat myself on the back, but for some reason, I'm good at that. It's weird. My wife said it because, you know, I'm not a rapper, but I will kind of come up with weird songs on the fly. We'll be driving along the road, but I'm not a rapper. I'm not a rapper. I'm not a rapper. I'm not a rapper. I'm not a rapper. I'm not a rapper. I'm not a rapper. I'm not a rapper.

73
00:08:11.380 --> 00:08:17.860
and I'll sort of improvise a little thing and so you know I think it's just

74
00:08:17.860 --> 00:08:22.800
because of familiarity you know I just got I got bitten by this Austrian bug

75
00:08:22.800 --> 00:08:27.820
and so I've read I'll read things that provide no new information just because

76
00:08:27.820 --> 00:08:34.300
there's always a little color or texture yeah to some to each person's exposition

77
00:08:34.300 --> 00:08:38.800
of these things that you pick up something you pick up some terminology

78
00:08:38.800 --> 00:08:43.680
or some analogy or some insight and so I just read like crazy about it and I think

79
00:08:43.680 --> 00:08:49.560
it doesn't really help explain how I came up with the rhymes but you can see

80
00:08:49.560 --> 00:08:53.680
the influence in the videos you're watching you know if you've been

81
00:08:53.680 --> 00:08:58.760
reading this material you go oh wow that was Mises oh there's Hayek's special

82
00:08:58.760 --> 00:09:03.720
contribution oh there's Garrison oh this point made by Salerno you know so you

83
00:09:03.720 --> 00:09:08.120
yeah in this very small medium you get a kind of a collapse of like a hundred

84
00:09:08.120 --> 00:09:10.120
Years of Intellectual History.

85
00:09:10.120 --> 00:09:18.920
It's funny, Russ and I interviewed Larry White in advance of shooting, we had an opportunity

86
00:09:18.920 --> 00:09:24.000
to do so and we did, and so we played the song, because at that point we had the song,

87
00:09:24.000 --> 00:09:29.480
and he listened to the song and read it along, and then he said that there's a lot of Garrison

88
00:09:29.480 --> 00:09:30.480
in this.

89
00:09:30.480 --> 00:09:31.480
Yeah, yeah, yeah, grasping for resources.

90
00:09:31.480 --> 00:09:38.000
Yeah, grasping for resources, he pointed that out, and I'm now reading Time at Money, Garrison

91
00:09:38.000 --> 00:09:43.920
and sort of textbook which is, you know... But you handle the turning point. I mean, I've been at

92
00:09:43.920 --> 00:09:48.320
day-long seminars where people have debated this whole question of the turning point of the cycle.

93
00:09:48.320 --> 00:09:52.640
What causes it? How do you describe it? What's actually going on when everything turns? There's

94
00:09:52.640 --> 00:09:58.080
some reason in the video you made it all very crystal clear that it's just something that

95
00:09:58.080 --> 00:10:03.760
definitely has to happen because what you seem to be seeing is not reality and reality reasserts

96
00:10:03.760 --> 00:10:10.880
itself. At what particular point and precisely why is an interesting question, but it's just as

97
00:10:10.880 --> 00:10:17.040
interesting as when the person who's on the inebriated high, you know, turns to being sick.

98
00:10:17.600 --> 00:10:25.840
Well, I know Roger brought up, and he was absolutely correct, that we, in presenting it as a drinking

99
00:10:25.840 --> 00:10:33.440
story, we're actually co-opting a criticism. When I started to get into this stuff,

100
00:10:33.760 --> 00:10:43.760
I said, okay, well, this makes so much sense. Who doesn't it make sense to? Because it seems like it makes perfect sense.

101
00:10:43.760 --> 00:10:56.760
And I feel like we're in at least a bit of a Hayekian moment because this boom and bust so matches the Austrian story, the low interest rates.

102
00:10:56.760 --> 00:11:03.080
There are people like John Taylor who are not Austrians, who simply through an empirical

103
00:11:03.080 --> 00:11:08.160
review of reality have arrived at Austrian conclusions about the role of artificially

104
00:11:08.160 --> 00:11:14.240
low interest rates in creating bubbles and that's, at the very least, I think we're

105
00:11:14.240 --> 00:11:20.400
going to come out of this episode with a more Austrian flavor to the mainstream discussion.

106
00:11:20.400 --> 00:11:25.160
Well, I mean even Obama himself in an interview I read made reference to the artificial wealth

107
00:11:25.160 --> 00:11:37.320
And I think as I was digging into these ideas and reading articles on Mises.org and listening

108
00:11:37.320 --> 00:11:44.880
to podcasts, I was like, well, who disagrees with this basic story about cheap credit creating

109
00:11:44.880 --> 00:11:45.880
a boom?

110
00:11:45.880 --> 00:11:51.480
Because it seems like it's an obvious, there's a natural, the individual mechanics of the

111
00:11:51.480 --> 00:11:55.960
The Austrian Theory, I think, can be overwhelming, because you take it together as a story and

112
00:11:55.960 --> 00:12:00.960
it's got a lot of moving parts, but that piece in particular makes so much sense.

113
00:12:00.960 --> 00:12:05.580
So I said, okay, well, that's fine if it doesn't, and I came across that 1998 article that Paul

114
00:12:05.580 --> 00:12:12.300
Krugman wrote in which he called it the hangover theory, and I think, you know, he completely

115
00:12:12.300 --> 00:12:19.000
glossed over the nature of the structure of capital, that during, he just called it, and

116
00:12:19.000 --> 00:12:25.200
And I think that my understanding is that this is a pretty common straw man attack on the Austrian theory.

117
00:12:25.200 --> 00:12:26.600
Yeah, it goes way back.

118
00:12:26.600 --> 00:12:28.300
That it's an over investment theory.

119
00:12:28.300 --> 00:12:28.800
That's right.

120
00:12:28.800 --> 00:12:31.600
What's so bad about having more quote capital?

121
00:12:31.600 --> 00:12:34.300
Now we've got more capital so we can be more productive.

122
00:12:34.300 --> 00:12:40.900
But if you've made a lot of cars and people don't want any more cars, that capital is not worth anything.

123
00:12:40.900 --> 00:12:44.800
Hence the line now is devalued capital that makes up the slack.

124
00:12:44.800 --> 00:12:46.700
Yeah, that was a great line.

125
00:12:46.700 --> 00:12:54.420
So that was a direct, that line is a direct answer to those like Paul Krugman and Brad

126
00:12:54.420 --> 00:13:00.140
DeLong and other Keynesians who have what seems to be a sort of superficial understanding

127
00:13:00.140 --> 00:13:04.660
of what the Austrian theory is saying, that it's not just which capital, capital is not

128
00:13:04.660 --> 00:13:06.880
K, it's not a capital stock.

129
00:13:06.880 --> 00:13:14.060
We have specific factories that make specific things and the factories that went into producing

130
00:13:14.060 --> 00:13:18.380
housing, caterpillar equipment for housing construction aren't worth as much anymore.

131
00:13:18.380 --> 00:13:23.580
It doesn't matter that they're lying there, underutilized now, we don't need any more

132
00:13:23.580 --> 00:13:24.580
houses.

133
00:13:24.580 --> 00:13:25.580
We're not going to utilize them.

134
00:13:25.580 --> 00:13:26.580
Right.

135
00:13:26.580 --> 00:13:27.580
That's devalued capital.

136
00:13:27.580 --> 00:13:31.500
You know, John, I'm just sitting here wishing that your video had been around in the 1930s

137
00:13:31.500 --> 00:13:32.500
and 1940s.

138
00:13:32.500 --> 00:13:38.420
It could have avoided a lot of problems, you know, because it does answer issues that came

139
00:13:38.420 --> 00:13:43.980
up between the debates over Lord Robbins' book and Hobbler's struggle with these issues

140
00:13:43.980 --> 00:13:48.900
in the 1940s. You know, I think you have something, you could have taught these

141
00:13:48.900 --> 00:13:52.460
gentlemen something about the Austrian Cyclope. Let me ask you some personal

142
00:13:52.460 --> 00:13:58.460
issues. How old are you? I am 32. And did you ever study economics in college? No.

143
00:13:58.460 --> 00:14:04.800
And how long have you been interested in economics? I've always been

144
00:14:04.800 --> 00:14:10.540
politically minded. I started off as, you know, I was raised in a conservative

145
00:14:10.540 --> 00:14:16.700
Family and so you sort of you you as a young person more or less depending whether you're

146
00:14:18.780 --> 00:14:25.500
rebellious or not either adopt or reject the politics of your parents so my dad's sort of like

147
00:14:25.500 --> 00:14:31.500
a populist conservative you know pretty libertarian but not a libertarian not a self-proclaiming not

148
00:14:31.500 --> 00:14:36.060
like okay but you could call him like a monarchist libertarian like get the government out of

149
00:14:36.060 --> 00:14:38.060
of Everything Except Defense.

150
00:14:38.060 --> 00:14:46.740
And I always had an interest in politics and all this stuff.

151
00:14:46.740 --> 00:14:49.740
A lot of it was just sort of the enjoyment of argument.

152
00:14:49.740 --> 00:14:51.300
I liked the debate.

153
00:14:51.300 --> 00:14:53.580
It's fun.

154
00:14:53.580 --> 00:14:57.020
But when you become a parent, it changes the way

155
00:14:57.020 --> 00:14:59.140
you care about these things a lot.

156
00:14:59.140 --> 00:15:02.660
Suddenly, you have a mortgage, you have a family,

157
00:15:02.660 --> 00:15:04.540
you're trying to make it in the world,

158
00:15:04.540 --> 00:15:11.580
You've lost your job in a downturn as I did during 2001's downturn and these issues have

159
00:15:11.580 --> 00:15:17.020
a visceral impact now and you want to know, you want to understand, if only to understand

160
00:15:17.020 --> 00:15:22.380
but ideally to help you prepare and to help you see the signs of problems.

161
00:15:22.380 --> 00:15:31.580
And I was fortunate in that even though I hadn't yet dug into the Austrian story yet,

162
00:15:31.580 --> 00:15:37.400
The boom was bizarre, and at the peak of it, we had an apartment in Hoboken, and at the

163
00:15:37.400 --> 00:15:43.060
peak of it, our neighbors sold their apartment for dramatically more than we bought ours

164
00:15:43.060 --> 00:15:44.060
for only a year later.

165
00:15:44.060 --> 00:15:49.340
I was like, there's no way that this can make any sense, and maybe I was resting on the

166
00:15:49.340 --> 00:15:52.700
labor theory of value a little bit in thinking that, but it's like it couldn't have gone

167
00:15:52.700 --> 00:15:58.340
up in value that much, it doesn't make any sense, nothing's changed, not in this amount

168
00:15:58.340 --> 00:15:59.340
of time.

169
00:15:59.340 --> 00:16:21.340
The only one talking about this stuff was Ron Paul and at this point I had already been exposed to some libertarian thinking and was beginning to move in that direction thanks to John Stossel's books and some other things I had read.

170
00:16:21.340 --> 00:16:26.340
So Ron Paul was the one that turned me on to the Austrian perspective.

171
00:16:26.340 --> 00:16:31.540
and once I got turned on to that and started reading and following and then Bear Stearns

172
00:16:32.900 --> 00:16:39.620
seemed like a full-blown sham, a bunch of really, I mean, bailing out the creditors, creating weird

173
00:16:39.620 --> 00:16:46.420
subsidiary companies of the Fed that did it, and JP Moore, that whole thing is so, you know,

174
00:16:47.300 --> 00:16:52.820
I allege that it's corrupt. Is it corrupt? Who knows, but it just appears to be a flim-flam

175
00:16:52.820 --> 00:16:58.420
and that just it just continued to confirm what Ron was talking about at a

176
00:16:58.420 --> 00:17:02.180
period where he was just being trashed by everybody left and right. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

177
00:17:02.180 --> 00:17:07.620
Well, it's a credit to the speed at which your synapses fire in your brain or

178
00:17:07.620 --> 00:17:10.940
your natural intelligence or your curiosity or something to have processed

179
00:17:10.940 --> 00:17:14.060
all this information so quickly over the course of two years and been able to

180
00:17:14.060 --> 00:17:19.420
produce what you produce and I think that in some ways you are already

181
00:17:19.420 --> 00:17:28.940
Legendary, and this video is immortal. You praise too much, Jeff. I'm just telling the truth and

182
00:17:28.940 --> 00:17:32.940
it's a pleasure to have you at the Scholars Conference and to sit here with you today. Thank

183
00:17:32.940 --> 00:17:38.860
you for taking the time. Thank you so much, Jeff, and I definitely am a big fan of everything that

184
00:17:38.860 --> 00:17:45.340
the Mises Institute and that you've done with the site. The video couldn't have been what it is

185
00:17:45.340 --> 00:17:49.340
without the knowledge I gained from the resources you provided for free.

186
00:17:49.340 --> 00:17:50.340
So, thank you for that.

187
00:17:50.340 --> 00:17:51.340
It's a good partnership.

188
00:17:51.340 --> 00:17:52.340
Thank you, John.