Podcasts about Industrial Revolution

It's “Nvidia Day!” The Big Dog in the Tall Grass for AI reports earnings after the closing bell today. Lance Roberts & Danny Ratliff delve into the anticipation surrounding Nvidia's upcoming earnings report, set to be released after today's market close. We'll explore market expectations, potential impacts on NVDA stock, and the broader implications for the AI and semiconductor sectors. Also a discussion about the inimitable Mrs. Roberts, and the profound changes AI is poised to wrought on global industries. Is the 4% Rule dead or just being updated? Lance bemoans the bots in our X and YouTube channels, and he and Danny review the changes afoot in advisors' recommendations for retirement savings drawdowns. SEG-1: EOM & Shifting Sentiment SEG-2a: Lance' Wife is Scary SEG-2b: Is AI the Next Leg of Industrial Revolution? SEG-3a: Retirement Income Empowerment teaser SEG-3b: Death of the 4% Rule? SEG-4a: Twitter Bots & Chatrooms SEG-4b: Changing the 4% Rule Hosted by RIA Advisors Chief Investment Strategist Lance Roberts, CIO, w Senior Financial Advisor Danny Ratliff, CFP Produced by Brent Clanton, Executive Producer ------- Watch today's video on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWSQGN1zFrg&list=PLVT8LcWPeAugpcGzM8hHyEP11lE87RYPe&index=1 ------- Articles mention in this show: "The Anchoring Problem And How To Solve It" https://realinvestmentadvice.com/resources/blog/the-anchoring-problem-and-how-to-solve-it/ "Trump Tariffs Are Inflationary Claim The Experts" https://realinvestmentadvice.com/resources/blog/trump-tariffs-are-inflationary-claim-the-experts/ ------- The latest installment of our new feature, Before the Bell, "What is the Risk to Nvidia?" is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KJCZut3qwU&list=PLwNgo56zE4RAbkqxgdj-8GOvjZTp9_Zlz&index=1 ------- Our previous show is here: "The Anchoring Problem & How to Solve It" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t41x9fsYv8&list=PLVT8LcWPeAugpcGzM8hHyEP11lE87RYPe&index=1&t=4s ------- Register for our next in-person event, "Retirement Income Empowerment Workshop," June 14, 2025: https://tracking.realinvestmentadvice.com/l/1052953/2025-05-08/ysxr ------- Get more info & commentary: https://realinvestmentadvice.com/newsletter/ -------- SUBSCRIBE to The Real Investment Show here: http://www.youtube.com/c/TheRealInvestmentShow -------- Visit our Site: https://www.realinvestmentadvice.com Contact Us: 1-855-RIA-PLAN -------- Subscribe to SimpleVisor: https://www.simplevisor.com/register-new -------- Connect with us on social: https://twitter.com/RealInvAdvice https://twitter.com/LanceRoberts https://www.facebook.com/RealInvestmentAdvice/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/realinvestmentadvice/ #NvidiaDay #NVDA #NvidiaStock #TechStocks #StockMarketNews #MoneyFlows #Nvidia #TrumpTariffs #Inflation #MarketCorrection #MarketPullback #BuyTheDip #ReduceRisk #RaiseCash #MarketConsolidation #20DMA #50DMA #100DMA #200DMA #AnchoringBias #BehavioralFinance #CognitiveBiases #InvestmentPsychology #SmartInvesting #InvestingAdvice #Money #Investing

It's “Nvidia Day!” The Big Dog in the Tall Grass for AI reports earnings after the closing bell today. Lance Roberts & Danny Ratliff delve into the anticipation surrounding Nvidia's upcoming earnings report, set to be released after today's market close. We'll explore market expectations, potential impacts on NVDA stock, and the broader implications for the AI and semiconductor sectors. Also a discussion about the inimitable Mrs. Roberts, and the profound changes AI is poised to wrought on global industries. Is the 4% Rule dead or just being updated? Lance bemoans the bots in our X and YouTube channels, and he and Danny review the changes afoot in advisors' recommendations for retirement savings drawdowns. SEG-1: EOM & Shifting Sentiment SEG-2a: Lance' Wife is Scary SEG-2b: Is AI the Next Leg of Industrial Revolution? SEG-3a: Retirement Income Empowerment teaser SEG-3b: Death of the 4% Rule? SEG-4a: Twitter Bots & Chatrooms SEG-4b: Changing the 4% Rule Hosted by RIA Advisors Chief Investment Strategist Lance Roberts, CIO, w Senior Financial Advisor Danny Ratliff, CFP Produced by Brent Clanton, Executive Producer ------- Watch today's video on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWSQGN1zFrg&list=PLVT8LcWPeAugpcGzM8hHyEP11lE87RYPe&index=1 ------- Articles mention in this show: "The Anchoring Problem And How To Solve It" https://realinvestmentadvice.com/resources/blog/the-anchoring-problem-and-how-to-solve-it/ "Trump Tariffs Are Inflationary Claim The Experts" https://realinvestmentadvice.com/resources/blog/trump-tariffs-are-inflationary-claim-the-experts/ ------- The latest installment of our new feature, Before the Bell, "What is the Risk to Nvidia?" is here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KJCZut3qwU&list=PLwNgo56zE4RAbkqxgdj-8GOvjZTp9_Zlz&index=1  ------- Our previous show is here: "The Anchoring Problem & How to Solve It" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t41x9fsYv8&list=PLVT8LcWPeAugpcGzM8hHyEP11lE87RYPe&index=1&t=4s ------- Register for our next in-person event, "Retirement Income Empowerment Workshop," June 14, 2025: https://tracking.realinvestmentadvice.com/l/1052953/2025-05-08/ysxr ------- Get more info & commentary:  https://realinvestmentadvice.com/newsletter/ -------- SUBSCRIBE to The Real Investment Show here: http://www.youtube.com/c/TheRealInvestmentShow -------- Visit our Site: https://www.realinvestmentadvice.com Contact Us: 1-855-RIA-PLAN -------- Subscribe to SimpleVisor: https://www.simplevisor.com/register-new -------- Connect with us on social: https://twitter.com/RealInvAdvice https://twitter.com/LanceRoberts https://www.facebook.com/RealInvestmentAdvice/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/realinvestmentadvice/ #NvidiaDay #NVDA #NvidiaStock #TechStocks #StockMarketNews #MoneyFlows #Nvidia #TrumpTariffs #Inflation #MarketCorrection #MarketPullback #BuyTheDip #ReduceRisk #RaiseCash #MarketConsolidation #20DMA #50DMA #100DMA #200DMA #AnchoringBias #BehavioralFinance #CognitiveBiases #InvestmentPsychology #SmartInvesting #InvestingAdvice #Money #Investing

Between rising unemployment and a shrinking supply of entry level jobs, it seems like the job market's on everyone's mind. On this week's TLDR, how AI has changed the process of getting a job — and why no one seems too happy about it. Plus, over its 250 year history, industrial capitalism has offered humanity some huge advances — along with a huge number of critics. New Yorker writer John Cassidy, author of the new book Capitalism and Its Critics: A History: From the Industrial Revolution to AI, explains.This episode was hosted by Devin Friedman, business reporter Sarah Rieger and former hedgefunder Matthew Karasz, with an appearance by journalist John Cassidy. Follow us on other platforms, or subscribe to our weekly newsletter: linkin.bio/tldrThe TLDR Podcast is offered by Wealthsimple Media Inc. and is for informational purposes only. The content in the TLDR Podcast is not investment advice, a recommendation to buy or sell assets or securities, and does not represent the views of Wealthsimple Financial Corp or any of its other subsidiaries or affiliates. Wealthsimple Media Inc. does not endorse any third-party views referenced in this content. More information at wealthsimple.com/tldr.

We're in Bilbao this week, and it's got us thinking. How does a football club that refuses to sign non-Basque players manage to qualify for the Champions League, raking in close to €100 million from TV rights, match days, and UEFA money, while Dublin's best bet is a few fivers from the Conference League? The answer is in economics. The Basques were Europe's forgotten industrialists, the only region in Spain to undergo a full-blown Industrial Revolution, powered by local iron ore, steel production, and a shipbuilding boom that made Bilbao Spain's biggest port by 1900. Then they lost it all. Globalisation, China, and the EU opened the floodgates. Unlike post-industrial towns in the UK or Ireland, Bilbao didn't roll over. They moved the port. They built the Guggenheim. They chose ambition. And they proved that even a small, isolated, ancient people, who speak a pre-Ice Age language with no known relatives, can build a modern economy with global reach. What's our excuse? Join the gang! https://plus.acast.com/s/the-david-mcwilliams-podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

ITR Economics has been predicting a “Great Depression” beginning around 2030. Over the past seven years, I've had multiple representatives from their firm on the show, and they've never wavered from that forecast. That might not sound so alarming—until you realize that their long-term predictive track record is 94% accurate over the last 70 years. To understand why their conviction is so strong, tune into this week's episode of Wealth Formula Podcast. Once you hear the reasoning, it'll all make sense. The major drivers of this projected economic downturn are debt and demographics. We're spending unsustainably on entitlement programs like Medicare and Medicaid—programs that virtually no politician has the appetite to reform. At the same time, the Baby Boomers—who make up a huge chunk of the U.S. population—are moving out of the workforce and into retirement, where they'll become a significant economic burden. It seems inevitable. But as you listen, I want to introduce one wild card that could change everything: artificial intelligence. I truly believe we're on the cusp of a technological transformation that could rival the Industrial Revolution. Think back to when Thomas Malthus predicted global famine due to population growth. What he didn't account for was the invention of the tractor, which revolutionized food production. In the same way, we may be underestimating the impact of the robotic age driven by artificial intelligence. Right now, economic growth is tied closely to the size of a country's working population. But what if AI allows us to dramatically increase productivity with the same—or even a smaller—workforce? What if robotics drives a low-cost manufacturing renaissance in the U.S., making us competitive again without relying on cheap labor from overseas? In my view, these are the most important questions in American economics over the next decade. And to understand just how critical it is that we get this right, this week's episode lays it out clearly: the alternative may look a lot like the 1930s. Learn more about ITR and their resources: https://hubs.la/Q03kw-Fs0

Good Sunday morning to you,I am just on a train home from Glasgow, where I have been gigging these past two nights. I've had a great time, as I always seem to do when I go north of the wall.But Glasgow on a Saturday night is something else. My hotel was right next to the station and so I was right in the thick of it. If I ever get to make a cacatopian, end-of-days, post-apocalyptic thriller, I'll just stroll through Glasgow city centre on a Friday or Saturday night with a camera to get all the B roll. It was like walking through a Hieronymus Bosch painting only with a Scottish accent. Little seems to have changed since I wrote that infamous chapter about Glasgow in Life After the State all those years ago. The only difference is that now it's more multi-ethnic. So many people are so off their heads. I lost count of the number of randoms wandering about just howling at the stars. The long days - it was still light at 10 o'clock - make the insanity all the more visible. Part of me finds it funny, but another part of me finds it so very sad that so many people let themselves get into this condition. It prompted me to revisit said chapter, and I offer it today as your Sunday thought piece.Just a couple of little notes, before we begin. This caught my eye on Friday. Our favourite uranium tech company, Lightbridge Fuels (NASDAQ:LTBR), has taken off again with Donald Trump's statement that he is going to quadruple US nuclear capacity. The stock was up 45% in a day. We first looked at it in October at $3. It hit $15 on Friday. It's one to sell on the spikes and buy on the dips, as this incredible chart shows.(In other news I have now listened twice to the Comstock Lode AGM, and I'll report back on that shortly too). ICYMI here is my mid-week commentary, which attracted a lot of attentionRight - Glasgow.(NB I haven't included references here. Needless to say, they are all there in the book. And sorry I don't have access to the audio of me reading this from my laptop, but, if you like, you can get the audiobook at Audible, Apple Books and all good audiobookshops. The book itself available at Amazon, Apple Books et al).How the Most Entrepreneurial City in Europe Became Its SickestThe cause of waves of unemployment is not capitalism, but governments …Friedrich Hayek, economist and philosopherIn the 18th and 19th centuries, the city of Glasgow in Scotland became enormously, stupendously rich. It happened quite organically, without planning. An entrepreneurial people reacted to their circumstances and, over time, turned Glasgow into an industrial and economic centre of such might that, by the turn of the 20th century, Glasgow was producing half the tonnage of Britain's ships and a quarter of all locomotives in the world. (Not unlike China's industrial dominance today). It was regarded as the best-governed city in Europe and popular histories compared it to the great imperial cities of Venice and Rome. It became known as the ‘Second City of the British Empire'.Barely 100 years later, it is the heroin capital of the UK, the murder capital of the UK and its East End, once home to Europe's largest steelworks, has been dubbed ‘the benefits capital of the UK'. Glasgow is Britain's fattest city: its men have Britain's lowest life expectancy – on a par with Palestine and Albania – and its unemployment rate is 50% higher than the rest of the UK.How did Glasgow manage all that?The growth in Glasgow's economic fortunes began in the latter part of the 17th century and the early 18th century. First, the city's location in the west of Scotland at the mouth of the river Clyde meant that it lay in the path of the trade winds and at least 100 nautical miles closer to America's east coast than other British ports – 200 miles closer than London. In the days before fossil fuels (which only found widespread use in shipping in the second half of the 19th century) the journey to Virginia was some two weeks shorter than the same journey from London or many of the other ports in Britain and Europe. Even modern sailors describe how easy the port of Glasgow is to navigate. Second, when England was at war with France – as it was repeatedly between 1688 and 1815 – ships travelling to Glasgow were less vulnerable than those travelling to ports further south. Glasgow's merchants took advantage and, by the early 18th century, the city had begun to assert itself as a trading hub. Manufactured goods were carried from Britain and Europe to North America and the Caribbean, where they were traded for increasingly popular commodities such as tobacco, cotton and sugar.Through the 18th century, the Glasgow merchants' business networks spread, and they took steps to further accelerate trade. New ships were introduced, bigger than those of rival ports, with fore and aft sails that enabled them to sail closer to the wind and reduce journey times. Trading posts were built to ensure that cargo was gathered and stored for collection, so that ships wouldn't swing idly at anchor. By the 1760s Glasgow had a 50% share of the tobacco trade – as much as the rest of Britain's ports combined. While the English merchants simply sold American tobacco in Europe at a profit, the Glaswegians actually extended credit to American farmers against future production (a bit like a crop future today, where a crop to be grown at a later date is sold now). The Virginia farmers could then use this credit to buy European goods, which the Glaswegians were only too happy to supply. This brought about the rise of financial institutions such as the Glasgow Ship Bank and the Glasgow Thistle Bank, which would later become part of the now-bailed-out, taxpayer-owned Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS).Their practices paid rewards. Glasgow's merchants earned a great deal of money. They built glamorous homes and large churches and, it seems, took on aristocratic airs – hence they became known as the ‘Tobacco Lords'. Numbering among them were Buchanan, Dunlop, Ingram, Wilson, Oswald, Cochrane and Glassford, all of whom had streets in the Merchant City district of Glasgow named after them (other streets, such as Virginia Street and Jamaica Street, refer to their trade destinations). In 1771, over 47 million pounds of tobacco were imported.However, the credit the Glaswegians extended to American tobacco farmers would backfire. The debts incurred by the tobacco farmers – which included future presidents George Washington and Thomas Jefferson (who almost lost his farm as a result) – grew, and were among the grievances when the American War of Independence came in 1775. That war destroyed the tobacco trade for the Glaswegians. Much of the money that was owed to them was never repaid. Many of their plantations were lost. But the Glaswegians were entrepreneurial and they adapted. They moved on to other businesses, particularly cotton.By the 19th century, all sorts of local industry had emerged around the goods traded in the city. It was producing and exporting textiles, chemicals, engineered goods and steel. River engineering projects to dredge and deepen the Clyde (with a view to forming a deep- water port) had begun in 1768 and they would enable shipbuilding to become a major industry on the upper reaches of the river, pioneered by industrialists such as Robert Napier and John Elder. The final stretch of the Monkland Canal, linking the Forth and Clyde Canal at Port Dundas, was opened in 1795, facilitating access to the iron-ore and coal mines of Lanarkshire.The move to fossil-fuelled shipping in the latter 19th century destroyed the advantages that the trade winds had given Glasgow. But it didn't matter. Again, the people adapted. By the turn of the 20th century the Second City of the British Empire had become a world centre of industry and heavy engineering. It has been estimated that, between 1870 and 1914, it produced as much as one-fifth of the world's ships, and half of Britain's tonnage. Among the 25,000 ships it produced were some of the greatest ever built: the Cutty Sark, the Queen Mary, HMS Hood, the Lusitania, the Glenlee tall ship and even the iconic Mississippi paddle steamer, the Delta Queen. It had also become a centre for locomotive manufacture and, shortly after the turn of the 20th century, could boast the largest concentration of locomotive building works in Europe.It was not just Glasgow's industry and wealth that was so gargantuan. The city's contribution to mankind – made possible by the innovation and progress that comes with booming economies – would also have an international impact. Many great inventors either hailed from Glasgow or moved there to study or work. There's James Watt, for example, whose improvements to the steam engine were fundamental to the Industrial Revolution. One of Watt's employees, William Murdoch, has been dubbed ‘the Scot who lit the world' – he invented gas lighting, a new kind of steam cannon and waterproof paint. Charles MacIntosh gave us the raincoat. James Young, the chemist dubbed as ‘the father of the oil industry', gave us paraffin. William Thomson, known as Lord Kelvin, developed the science of thermodynamics, formulating the Kelvin scale of absolute temperature; he also managed the laying of the first transatlantic telegraph cable.The turning point in the economic fortunes of Glasgow – indeed, of industrial Britain – was WWI. Both have been in decline ever since. By the end of the war, the British were drained, both emotionally and in terms of capital and manpower; the workers, the entrepreneurs, the ideas men, too many of them were dead or incapacitated. There was insufficient money and no appetite to invest. The post-war recession, and later the Great Depression, did little to help. The trend of the city was now one of inexorable economic decline.If Glasgow was the home of shipping and industry in 19th-century Britain, it became the home of socialism in the 20th century. Known by some as the ‘Red Clydeside' movement, the socialist tide in Scotland actually pre-dated the First World War. In 1906 came the city's first Labour Member of Parliament (MP), George Barnes – prior to that its seven MPs were all Conservatives or Liberal Unionists. In the spring of 1911, 11,000 workers at the Singer sewing-machine factory (run by an American corporation in Clydebank) went on strike to support 12 women who were protesting about new work practices. Singer sacked 400 workers, but the movement was growing – as was labour unrest. In the four years between 1910 and 1914 Clydebank workers spent four times as many days on strike than in the whole of the previous decade. The Scottish Trades Union Congress and its affiliations saw membership rise from 129,000 in 1909 to 230,000 in 1914.20The rise in discontent had much to do with Glasgow's housing. Conditions were bad, there was overcrowding, bad sanitation, housing was close to dirty, noxious and deafening industry. Unions grew quite organically to protect the interests of their members.Then came WWI, and inflation, as Britain all but abandoned gold. In 1915 many landlords responded by attempting to increase rent, but with their young men on the Western front, those left behind didn't have the means to pay these higher costs. If they couldn't, eviction soon followed. In Govan, an area of Glasgow where shipbuilding was the main occupation, women – now in the majority with so many men gone – organized opposition to the rent increases. There are photographs showing women blocking the entrance to tenements; officers who did get inside to evict tenants are said to have had their trousers pulled down.The landlords were attacked for being unpatriotic. Placards read: ‘While our men are fighting on the front line,the landlord is attacking us at home.' The strikes spread to other cities throughout the UK, and on 27 November 1915 the government introduced legislation to restrict rents to the pre-war level. The strikers were placated. They had won. The government was happy; it had dealt with the problem. The landlords lost out.In the aftermath of the Russian Revolution of 1917, more frequent strikes crippled the city. In 1919 the ‘Bloody Friday' uprising prompted the prime minister, David Lloyd George, to deploy 10,000 troops and tanks onto the city's streets. By the 1930s Glasgow had become the main base of the Independent Labour Party, so when Labour finally came to power alone after WWII, its influence was strong. Glasgow has always remained a socialist stronghold. Labour dominates the city council, and the city has not had a Conservative MP for 30 years.By the late 1950s, Glasgow was losing out to the more competitive industries of Japan, Germany and elsewhere. There was a lack of investment. Union demands for workers, enforced by government legislation, made costs uneconomic and entrepreneurial activity arduous. With lack of investment came lack of innovation.Rapid de-industrialization followed, and by the 1960s and 70s most employment lay not in manufacturing, but in the service industries.Which brings us to today. On the plus side, Glasgow is still ranked as one of Europe's top 20 financial centres and is home to some leading Scottish businesses. But there is considerable downside.Recent studies have suggested that nearly 30% of Glasgow's working age population is unemployed. That's 50% higher than that of the rest of Scotland or the UK. Eighteen per cent of 16- to 19-year-olds are neither in school nor employed. More than one in five working-age Glaswegians have no sort of education that might qualify them for a job.In the city centre, the Merchant City, 50% of children are growing up in homes where nobody works. In the poorer neighbourhoods, such as Ruchill, Possilpark, or Dalmarnock, about 65% of children live in homes where nobody works – more than three times the national average. Figures from the Department of Work and Pensions show that 85% of working age adults from the district of Bridgeton claim some kind of welfare payment.Across the city, almost a third of the population regularly receives sickness or incapacity benefit, the highest rate of all UK cities. A 2008 World Health Organization report noted that in Glasgow's Calton, Bridgeton and Queenslie neighbourhoods, the average life expectancy for males is only 54. In contrast, residents of Glasgow's more affluent West End live to be 80 and virtually none of them are on the dole.Glasgow has the highest crime rate in Scotland. A recent report by the Centre for Social Justice noted that there are 170 teenage gangs in Glasgow. That's the same number as in London, which has over six times the population of Glasgow.It also has the dubious record of being Britain's murder capital. In fact, Glasgow had the highest homicide rate in Western Europe until it was overtaken in 2012 by Amsterdam, with more violent crime per head of population than even New York. What's more, its suicide rate is the highest in the UK.Then there are the drug and alcohol problems. The residents of the poorer neighbourhoods are an astounding six times more likely to die of a drugs overdose than the national average. Drug-related mortality has increased by 95% since 1997. There are 20,000 registered drug users – that's just registered – and the situation is not going to get any better: children who grow up in households where family members use drugs are seven times more likely to end up using drugs themselves than children who live in drug-free families.Glasgow has the highest incidence of liver diseases from alcohol abuse in all of Scotland. In the East End district of Dennistoun, these illnesses kill more people than heart attacks and lung cancer combined. Men and women are more likely to die of alcohol-related deaths in Glasgow than anywhere else in the UK. Time and time again Glasgow is proud winner of the title ‘Fattest City in Britain'. Around 40% of the population are obese – 5% morbidly so – and it also boasts the most smokers per capita.I have taken these statistics from an array of different sources. It might be in some cases that they're overstated. I know that I've accentuated both the 18th- and 19th-century positives, as well as the 20th- and 21st-century negatives to make my point. Of course, there are lots of healthy, happy people in Glasgow – I've done many gigs there and I loved it. Despite the stories you hear about intimidating Glasgow audiences, the ones I encountered were as good as any I've ever performed in front of. But none of this changes the broad-brush strokes: Glasgow was a once mighty city that now has grave social problems. It is a city that is not fulfilling its potential in the way that it once did. All in all, it's quite a transformation. How has it happened?Every few years a report comes out that highlights Glasgow's various problems. Comments are then sought from across the political spectrum. Usually, those asked to comment agree that the city has grave, ‘long-standing and deep-rooted social problems' (the words of Stephen Purcell, former leader of Glasgow City Council); they agree that something needs to be done, though they don't always agree on what that something is.There's the view from the right: Bill Aitken of the Scottish Conservatives, quoted in The Sunday Times in 2008, said, ‘We simply don't have the jobs for people who are not academically inclined. Another factor is that some people are simply disinclined to work. We have got to find something for these people to do, to give them a reason to get up in the morning and give them some self-respect.' There's the supposedly apolitical view of anti-poverty groups: Peter Kelly, director of the Glasgow-based Poverty Alliance, responded, ‘We need real, intensive support for people if we are going to tackle poverty. It's not about a lack of aspiration, often people who are unemployed or on low incomes are stymied by a lack of money and support from local and central government.' And there's the view from the left. In the same article, Patricia Ferguson, the Labour Member of the Scottish Parliament (MSP) for Maryhill, also declared a belief in government regeneration of the area. ‘It's about better housing, more jobs, better education and these things take years to make an impact. I believe that the huge regeneration in the area is fostering a lot more community involvement and cohesion. My real hope is that these figures will take a knock in the next five or ten years.' At the time of writing in 2013, five years later, the figures have worsened.All three points of view agree on one thing: the government must do something.In 2008 the £435 million Fairer Scotland Fund – established to tackle poverty – was unveiled, aiming to allocate cash to the country's most deprived communities. Its targets included increasing average income among lower wage-earners and narrowing the poverty gap between Scotland's best- and worst-performing regions by 2017. So far, it hasn't met those targets.In 2008 a report entitled ‘Power for The Public' examined the provision of health, education and justice in Scotland. It said the budgets for these three areas had grown by 55%, 87% and 44% respectively over the last decade, but added that this had produced ‘mixed results'. ‘Mixed results' means it didn't work. More money was spent and the figures got worse.After the Centre for Social Justice report on Glasgow in 2008, Iain Duncan Smith (who set up this think tank, and is now the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions) said, ‘Policy must deal with the pathways to breakdown – high levels of family breakdown, high levels of failed education, debt and unemployment.'So what are ‘pathways to breakdown'? If you were to look at a chart of Glasgow's prosperity relative to the rest of the world, its peak would have come somewhere around 1910. With the onset of WWI in 1914 its decline accelerated, and since then the falls have been relentless and inexorable. It's not just Glasgow that would have this chart pattern, but the whole of industrial Britain. What changed the trend? Yes, empires rise and fall, but was British decline all a consequence of WWI? Or was there something else?A seismic shift came with that war – a change which is very rarely spoken or written about. Actually, the change was gradual and it pre-dated 1914. It was a change that was sweeping through the West: that of government or state involvement in our lives. In the UK it began with the reforms of the Liberal government of 1906–14, championed by David Lloyd George and Winston Churchill, known as the ‘terrible twins' by contemporaries. The Pensions Act of 1908, the People's Budget of 1909–10 (to ‘wage implacable warfare against poverty', declared Lloyd George) and the National Insurance Act of 1911 saw the Liberal government moving away from its tradition of laissez-faire systems – from classical liberalism and Gladstonian principles of self-help and self-reliance – towards larger, more active government by which taxes were collected from the wealthy and the proceeds redistributed. Afraid of losing votes to the emerging Labour party and the increasingly popular ideology of socialism, modern liberals betrayed their classical principles. In his War Memoirs, Lloyd George said ‘the partisan warfare that raged around these topics was so fierce that by 1913, this country was brought to the verge of civil war'. But these were small steps. The Pensions Act, for example, meant that men aged 70 and above could claim between two and five shillings per week from the government. But average male life- expectancy then was 47. Today it's 77. Using the same ratio, and, yes, I'm manipulating statistics here, that's akin to only awarding pensions to people above the age 117 today. Back then it was workable.To go back to my analogy of the prologue, this period was when the ‘train' was set in motion across the West. In 1914 it went up a gear. Here are the opening paragraphs of historian A. J. P. Taylor's most celebrated book, English History 1914–1945, published in 1965.I quote this long passage in full, because it is so telling.Until August 1914 a sensible, law-abiding Englishman could pass through life and hardly notice the existence of the state, beyond the post office and the policeman. He could live where he liked and as he liked. He had no official number or identity card. He could travel abroad or leave his country forever without a passport or any sort of official permission. He could exchange his money for any other currency without restriction or limit. He could buy goods from any country in the world on the same terms as he bought goods at home. For that matter, a foreigner could spend his life in this country without permit and without informing the police. Unlike the countries of the European continent, the state did not require its citizens to perform military service. An Englishman could enlist, if he chose, in the regular army, the navy, or the territorials. He could also ignore, if he chose, the demands of national defence. Substantial householders were occasionally called on for jury service. Otherwise, only those helped the state, who wished to do so. The Englishman paid taxes on a modest scale: nearly £200 million in 1913–14, or rather less than 8% of the national income.The state intervened to prevent the citizen from eating adulterated food or contracting certain infectious diseases. It imposed safety rules in factories, and prevented women, and adult males in some industries,from working excessive hours.The state saw to it that children received education up to the age of 13. Since 1 January 1909, it provided a meagre pension for the needy over the age of 70. Since 1911, it helped to insure certain classes of workers against sickness and unemployment. This tendency towards more state action was increasing. Expenditure on the social services had roughly doubled since the Liberals took office in 1905. Still, broadly speaking, the state acted only to help those who could not help themselves. It left the adult citizen alone.All this was changed by the impact of the Great War. The mass of the people became, for the first time, active citizens. Their lives were shaped by orders from above; they were required to serve the state instead of pursuing exclusively their own affairs. Five million men entered the armed forces, many of them (though a minority) under compulsion. The Englishman's food was limited, and its quality changed, by government order. His freedom of movement was restricted; his conditions of work prescribed. Some industries were reduced or closed, others artificially fostered. The publication of news was fettered. Street lights were dimmed. The sacred freedom of drinking was tampered with: licensed hours were cut down, and the beer watered by order. The very time on the clocks was changed. From 1916 onwards, every Englishman got up an hour earlier in summer than he would otherwise have done, thanks to an act of parliament. The state established a hold over its citizens which, though relaxed in peacetime, was never to be removed and which the Second World war was again to increase. The history of the English state and of the English people merged for the first time.Since the beginning of WWI , the role that the state has played in our lives has not stopped growing. This has been especially so in the case of Glasgow. The state has spent more and more, provided more and more services, more subsidy, more education, more health care, more infrastructure, more accommodation, more benefits, more regulations, more laws, more protection. The more it has provided, the worse Glasgow has fared. Is this correlation a coincidence? I don't think so.The story of the rise and fall of Glasgow is a distilled version of the story of the rise and fall of industrial Britain – indeed the entire industrial West. In the next chapter I'm going to show you a simple mistake that goes on being made; a dynamic by which the state, whose very aim was to help Glasgow, has actually been its ‘pathway to breakdown' . . .Life After the State is available at Amazon, Apple Books and all good bookshops, with the audiobook at Audible, Apple Books and all good audiobookshops. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

Conventional wisdom is brimming with economic myths: the Industrial Revolution impoverished the masses; bobber barons were the scourge of the Gilded Age; the Great Recession was caused by irresponsible deregulation. Senator Phil Gramm and economist Don Boudreaux attempt to set the record straight in their new book, “The Triumph of Economic Freedom: Debunking the Seven Great Myths of American Capitalism.”

I've Got My Love to Keep Me Warm. In this episode, we discuss how pre-modern church history, the Industrial Revolution, therapeutics, language, corporate culture, and the flight of heretics from Europe in the 17th-18th century affected contemporary Western churches. SHOW NOTES:  The Sovereign Individual: Mastering the Transition to the Information Age https://amzn.to/43cElvv  On Pornography, Hunger, and Holy Rescue https://www.1517.org/articles/on-pornography-hunger-and-holy-rescue   More from 1517: Support 1517 Podcast Network: https://www.1517.org/donate-podcasts 1517 Podcasts: http://www.1517.org/podcasts 1517 on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@1517org 1517 Podcast Network on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/channel/1517-podcast-network/id6442751370 1517 Events Schedule: https://www.1517.org/events 1517 Academy - Free Theological Education: https://academy.1517.org/   What's New from 1517: Preorder Sinner Saint by By Luke Kjolhaug: https://shop.1517.org/products/9781964419152-sinner-saint The Impossible Prize: A Theology of Addiction by Donavan Riley: https://shop.1517.org/products/9781962654708-the-impossible-prize Ditching the Checklist by Mark Mattes: https://shop.1517.org/products/9781962654791-ditching-the-checklist Broken Bonds: A Novel of the Reformation, Book 1 of 2 by Amy Mantravadi: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1962654753?ref_=cm_sw_r_cp_ud_dp_FCNEEK60MVNVPCEGKBD8_5&starsLeft=1   More from the hosts: Donovan Riley https://www.1517.org/contributors/donavon-riley  Christopher Gillespie https://www.1517.org/contributors/christopher-gillespie   MORE LINKS: Tin Foil Haloes https://t.me/bannedpastors Warrior Priest Gym & Podcast https://thewarriorpriestpodcast.wordpress.com   St John's Lutheran Church (Webster, MN) - FB Live Bible Study Group https://www.facebook.com/groups/356667039608511  Donavon's Substack https://donavonlriley.substack.com Gillespie's Substack https://substack.com/@christophergillespie  Gillespie's Sermons and Catechesis http://youtube.com/stjohnrandomlake  Gillespie Coffee https://gillespie.coffee   Gillespie Media https://gillespie.media     CONTACT and FOLLOW: Email mailto:BannedBooks@1517.org  Facebook https://www.facebook.com/BannedBooksPod/  Twitter https://twitter.com/bannedbooks1517   SUBSCRIBE: YouTube https://www.youtube.com/@BannedBooks Rumble https://rumble.com/c/c-1223313  Odysee https://odysee.com/@bannedbooks:5 Apple Podcasts https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/banned-books/id1370993639  Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/2ahA20sZMpBxg9vgiRVQba  Overcast https://overcast.fm/itunes1370993639/banned-books 

Yesterday, the self-styled San Francisco “progressive” Joan Williams was on the show arguing that Democrats need to relearn the language of the American working class. But, as some of you have noted, Williams seems oblivious to the fact that politics is about more than simply aping other people's language. What you say matters, and the language of American working class, like all industrial working classes, is rooted in a critique of capitalism. She should probably read the New Yorker staff writer John Cassidy's excellent new book, Capitalism and its Critics, which traces capitalism's evolution and criticism from the East India Company through modern times. He defines capitalism as production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets, encompassing various forms from Chinese state capitalism to hyper-globalization. The book examines capitalism's most articulate critics including the Luddites, Marx, Engels, Thomas Carlisle, Adam Smith, Rosa Luxemburg, Keynes & Hayek, and contemporary figures like Sylvia Federici and Thomas Piketty. Cassidy explores how major economists were often critics of their era's dominant capitalist model, and untangles capitalism's complicated relationship with colonialism, slavery and AI which he regards as a potentially unprecedented economic disruption. This should be essential listening for all Democrats seeking to reinvent a post Biden-Harris party and message. 5 key takeaways* Capitalism has many forms - From Chinese state capitalism to Keynesian managed capitalism to hyper-globalization, all fitting the basic definition of production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets.* Great economists are typically critics - Smith criticized mercantile capitalism, Keynes critiqued laissez-faire capitalism, and Hayek/Friedman opposed managed capitalism. Each generation's leading economists challenge their era's dominant model.* Modern corporate structure has deep roots - The East India Company was essentially a modern multinational corporation with headquarters, board of directors, stockholders, and even a private army - showing capitalism's organizational continuity across centuries.* Capitalism is intertwined with colonialism and slavery - Industrial capitalism was built on pre-existing colonial and slave systems, particularly through the cotton industry and plantation economies.* AI represents a potentially unprecedented disruption - Unlike previous technological waves, AI may substitute rather than complement human labor on a massive scale, potentially creating political backlash exceeding even the "China shock" that contributed to Trump's rise.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Full TranscriptAndrew Keen: Hello, everybody. A couple of days ago, we did a show with Joan Williams. She has a new book out, "Outclassed: How the Left Lost the Working Class and How to Win Them Back." A book about language, about how to talk to the American working class. She also had a piece in Jacobin Magazine, an anti-capitalist magazine, about how the left needs to speak to what she calls average American values. We talked, of course, about Bernie Sanders and AOC and their language of fighting oligarchy, and the New York Times followed that up with "The Enduring Power of Anti-Capitalism in American Politics."But of course, that brings the question: what exactly is capitalism? I did a little bit of research. We can find definitions of capitalism from AI, from Wikipedia, even from online dictionaries, but I thought we might do a little better than relying on Wikipedia and come to a man who's given capitalism and its critics a great deal of thought. John Cassidy is well known as a staff writer at The New Yorker. He's the author of a wonderful book, the best book, actually, on the dot-com insanity. And his new book, "Capitalism and its Critics," is out this week. John, congratulations on the book.So I've got to be a bit of a schoolmaster with you, John, and get some definitions first. What exactly is capitalism before we get to criticism of it?John Cassidy: Yeah, I mean, it's a very good question, Andrew. Obviously, through the decades, even the centuries, there have been many different definitions of the term capitalism and there are different types of capitalism. To not be sort of too ideological about it, the working definition I use is basically production for profit—that could be production of goods or mostly in the new and, you know, in today's economy, production of services—for profit by companies which are privately owned in markets. That's a very sort of all-encompassing definition.Within that, you can have all sorts of different types of capitalism. You can have Chinese state capitalism, you can have the old mercantilism, which industrial capitalism came after, which Trump seems to be trying to resurrect. You can have Keynesian managed capitalism that we had for 30 or 40 years after the Second World War, which I grew up in in the UK. Or you can have sort of hyper-globalization, hyper-capitalism that we've tried for the last 30 years. There are all those different varieties of capitalism consistent with a basic definition, I think.Andrew Keen: That keeps you busy, John. I know you started this project, which is a big book and it's a wonderful book. I read it. I don't always read all the books I have on the show, but I read from cover to cover full of remarkable stories of the critics of capitalism. You note in the beginning that you began this in 2016 with the beginnings of Trump. What was it about the 2016 election that triggered a book about capitalism and its critics?John Cassidy: Well, I was reporting on it at the time for The New Yorker and it struck me—I covered, I basically covered the economy in various forms for various publications since the late 80s, early 90s. In fact, one of my first big stories was the stock market crash of '87. So yes, I am that old. But it seemed to me in 2016 when you had Bernie Sanders running from the left and Trump running from the right, but both in some way offering very sort of similar critiques of capitalism. People forget that Trump in 2016 actually was running from the left of the Republican Party. He was attacking big business. He was attacking Wall Street. He doesn't do that these days very much, but at the time he was very much posing as the sort of outsider here to protect the interests of the average working man.And it seemed to me that when you had this sort of pincer movement against the then ruling model, this wasn't just a one-off. It seemed to me it was a sort of an emerging crisis of legitimacy for the system. And I thought there could be a good book written about how we got to here. And originally I thought it would be a relatively short book just based on the last sort of 20 or 30 years since the collapse of the Cold War and the sort of triumphalism of the early 90s.But as I got into it more and more, I realized that so many of the issues which had been raised, things like globalization, rising inequality, monopoly power, exploitation, even pollution and climate change, these issues go back to the very start of the capitalist system or the industrial capitalist system back in sort of late 18th century, early 19th century Britain. So I thought, in the end, I thought, you know what, let's just do the whole thing soup to nuts through the eyes of the critics.There have obviously been many, many histories of capitalism written. I thought that an original way to do it, or hopefully original, would be to do a sort of a narrative through the lives and the critiques of the critics of various stages. So that's, I hope, what sets it apart from other books on the subject, and also provides a sort of narrative frame because, you know, I am a New Yorker writer, I realize if you want people to read things, you've got to make it readable. Easiest way to make things readable is to center them around people. People love reading about other people. So that's sort of the narrative frame. I start off with a whistleblower from the East India Company back in the—Andrew Keen: Yeah, I want to come to that. But before, John, my sense is that to simplify what you're saying, this is a labor of love. You're originally from Leeds, the heart of Yorkshire, the center of the very industrial revolution, the first industrial revolution where, in your historical analysis, capitalism was born. Is it a labor of love? What's your family relationship with capitalism? How long was the family in Leeds?John Cassidy: Right, I mean that's a very good question. It is a labor of love in a way, but it's not—our family doesn't go—I'm from an Irish family, family of Irish immigrants who moved to England in the 1940s and 1950s. So my father actually did start working in a big mill, the Kirkstall Forge in Leeds, which is a big steel mill, and he left after seeing one of his co-workers have his arms chopped off in one of the machinery, so he decided it wasn't for him and he spent his life working in the construction industry, which was dominated by immigrants as it is here now.So I don't have a—it's not like I go back to sort of the start of the industrial revolution, but I did grow up in the middle of Leeds, very working class, very industrial neighborhood. And what a sort of irony is, I'll point out, I used to, when I was a kid, I used to play golf on a municipal golf course called Gotts Park in Leeds, which—you know, most golf courses in America are sort of in the affluent suburbs, country clubs. This was right in the middle of Armley in Leeds, which is where the Victorian jail is and a very rough neighborhood. There's a small bit of land which they built a golf course on. It turns out it was named after one of the very first industrialists, Benjamin Gott, who was a wool and textile industrialist, and who played a part in the Luddite movement, which I mention.So it turns out, I was there when I was 11 or 12, just learning how to play golf on this scrappy golf course. And here I am, 50 years later, writing about Benjamin Gott at the start of the Industrial Revolution. So yeah, no, sure. I think it speaks to me in a way that perhaps it wouldn't to somebody else from a different background.Andrew Keen: We did a show with William Dalrymple, actually, a couple of years ago. He's been on actually since, the Anglo or Scottish Indian historian. His book on the East India Company, "The Anarchy," is a classic. You begin in some ways your history of capitalism with the East India Company. What was it about the East India Company, John, that makes it different from other for-profit organizations in economic, Western economic history?John Cassidy: I mean, I read that. It's a great book, by the way. That was actually quoted in my chapter on these. Yeah, I remember. I mean, the reason I focused on it was for two reasons. Number one, I was looking for a start, a narrative start to the book. And it seemed to me, you know, the obvious place to start is with the start of the industrial revolution. If you look at economics history textbooks, that's where they always start with Arkwright and all the inventors, you know, who were the sort of techno-entrepreneurs of their time, the sort of British Silicon Valley, if you could think of it as, in Lancashire and Derbyshire in the late 18th century.So I knew I had to sort of start there in some way, but I thought that's a bit pat. Is there another way into it? And it turns out that in 1772 in England, there was a huge bailout of the East India Company, very much like the sort of 2008, 2009 bailout of Wall Street. The company got into trouble. So I thought, you know, maybe there's something there. And I eventually found this guy, William Bolts, who worked for the East India Company, turned into a whistleblower after he was fired for finagling in India like lots of the people who worked for the company did.So that gave me two things. Number one, it gave me—you know, I'm a writer, so it gave me something to focus on a narrative. His personal history is very interesting. But number two, it gave me a sort of foundation because industrial capitalism didn't come from nowhere. You know, it was built on top of a pre-existing form of capitalism, which we now call mercantile capitalism, which was very protectionist, which speaks to us now. But also it had these big monopolistic multinational companies.The East India Company, in some ways, was a very modern corporation. It had a headquarters in Leadenhall Street in the city of London. It had a board of directors, it had stockholders, the company sent out very detailed instructions to the people in the field in India and Indonesia and Malaysia who were traders who bought things from the locals there, brought them back to England on their company ships. They had a company army even to enforce—to protect their operations there. It was an incredible multinational corporation.So that was also, I think, fascinating because it showed that even in the pre-existing system, you know, big corporations existed, there were monopolies, they had royal monopolies given—first the East India Company got one from Queen Elizabeth. But in some ways, they were very similar to modern monopolistic corporations. And they had some of the problems we've seen with modern monopolistic corporations, the way they acted. And Bolts was the sort of first corporate whistleblower, I thought. Yeah, that was a way of sort of getting into the story, I think. Hopefully, you know, it's just a good read, I think.William Bolts's story because he was—he came from nowhere, he was Dutch, he wasn't even English and he joined the company as a sort of impoverished young man, went to India like a lot of English minor aristocrats did to sort of make your fortune. The way the company worked, you had to sort of work on company time and make as much money as you could for the company, but then in your spare time you're allowed to trade for yourself. So a lot of the—without getting into too much detail, but you know, English aristocracy was based on—you know, the eldest child inherits everything, so if you were the younger brother of the Duke of Norfolk, you actually didn't inherit anything. So all of these minor aristocrats, so major aristocrats, but who weren't first born, joined the East India Company, went out to India and made a fortune, and then came back and built huge houses. Lots of the great manor houses in southern England were built by people from the East India Company and they were known as Nabobs, which is an Indian term. So they were the sort of, you know, billionaires of their time, and it was based on—as I say, it wasn't based on industrial capitalism, it was based on mercantile capitalism.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the beginning of the book, which focuses on Bolts and the East India Company, brings to mind for me two things. Firstly, the intimacy of modern capitalism, modern industrial capitalism with colonialism and of course slavery—lots of books have been written on that. Touch on this and also the relationship between the birth of capitalism and the birth of liberalism or democracy. John Stuart Mill, of course, the father in many ways of Western democracy. His day job, ironically enough, or perhaps not ironically, was at the East India Company. So how do those two things connect, or is it just coincidental?John Cassidy: Well, I don't think it is entirely coincidental, I mean, J.S. Mill—his father, James Mill, was also a well-known philosopher in the sort of, obviously, in the earlier generation, earlier than him. And he actually wrote the official history of the East India Company. And I think they gave his son, the sort of brilliant protégé, J.S. Mill, a job as largely as a sort of sinecure, I think. But he did go in and work there in the offices three or four days a week.But I think it does show how sort of integral—the sort of—as you say, the inheritor and the servant in Britain, particularly, of colonial capitalism was. So the East India Company was, you know, it was in decline by that stage in the middle of the 19th century, but it didn't actually give up its monopoly. It wasn't forced to give up its monopoly on the Indian trade until 1857, after, you know, some notorious massacres and there was a sort of public outcry.So yeah, no, that's—it's very interesting that the British—it's sort of unique to Britain in a way, but it's interesting that industrial capitalism arose alongside this pre-existing capitalist structure and somebody like Mill is a sort of paradoxical figure because actually he was quite critical of aspects of industrial capitalism and supported sort of taxes on the rich, even though he's known as the great, you know, one of the great apostles of the free market and free market liberalism. And his day job, as you say, he was working for the East India Company.Andrew Keen: What about the relationship between the birth of industrial capitalism, colonialism and slavery? Those are big questions and I know you deal with them in some—John Cassidy: I think you can't just write an economic history of capitalism now just starting with the cotton industry and say, you know, it was all about—it was all about just technical progress and gadgets, etc. It was built on a sort of pre-existing system which was colonial and, you know, the slave trade was a central element of that. Now, as you say, there have been lots and lots of books written about it, the whole 1619 project got an incredible amount of attention a few years ago. So I didn't really want to rehash all that, but I did want to acknowledge the sort of role of slavery, especially in the rise of the cotton industry because of course, a lot of the raw cotton was grown in the plantations in the American South.So the way I actually ended up doing that was by writing a chapter about Eric Williams, a Trinidadian writer who ended up as the Prime Minister of Trinidad when it became independent in the 1960s. But when he was younger, he wrote a book which is now regarded as a classic. He went to Oxford to do a PhD, won a scholarship. He was very smart. I won a sort of Oxford scholarship myself but 50 years before that, he came across the Atlantic and did an undergraduate degree in history and then did a PhD there and his PhD thesis was on slavery and capitalism.And at the time, in the 1930s, the link really wasn't acknowledged. You could read any sort of standard economic history written by British historians, and they completely ignored that. He made the argument that, you know, slavery was integral to the rise of capitalism and he basically started an argument which has been raging ever since the 1930s and, you know, if you want to study economic history now you have to sort of—you know, have to have to address that. And the way I thought, even though the—it's called the Williams thesis is very famous. I don't think many people knew much about where it came from. So I thought I'd do a chapter on—Andrew Keen: Yeah, that chapter is excellent. You mentioned earlier the Luddites, you're from Yorkshire where Luddism in some ways was born. One of the early chapters is on the Luddites. We did a show with Brian Merchant, his book, "Blood in the Machine," has done very well, I'm sure you're familiar with it. I always understood the Luddites as being against industrialization, against the machine, as opposed to being against capitalism. But did those two things get muddled together in the history of the Luddites?John Cassidy: I think they did. I mean, you know, Luddites, when we grew up, I mean you're English too, you know to be called a Luddite was a term of abuse, right? You know, you were sort of antediluvian, anti-technology, you're stupid. It was only, I think, with the sort of computer revolution, the tech revolution of the last 30, 40 years and the sort of disruptions it's caused, that people have started to look back at the Luddites and say, perhaps they had a point.For them, they were basically pre-industrial capitalism artisans. They worked for profit-making concerns, small workshops. Some of them worked for themselves, so they were sort of sole proprietor capitalists. Or they worked in small venues, but the rise of industrial capitalism, factory capitalism or whatever, basically took away their livelihoods progressively. So they associated capitalism with new technology. In their minds it was the same. But their argument wasn't really a technological one or even an economic one, it was more a moral one. They basically made the moral argument that capitalists shouldn't have the right to just take away their livelihoods with no sort of recompense for them.At the time they didn't have any parliamentary representation. You know, they weren't revolutionaries. The first thing they did was create petitions to try and get parliament to step in, sort of introduce some regulation here. They got turned down repeatedly by the sort of—even though it was a very aristocratic parliament, places like Manchester and Leeds didn't have any representation at all. So it was only after that that they sort of turned violent and started, you know, smashing machines and machines, I think, were sort of symbols of the system, which they saw as morally unjust.And I think that's sort of what—obviously, there's, you know, a lot of technological disruption now, so we can, especially as it starts to come for the educated cognitive class, we can sort of sympathize with them more. But I think the sort of moral critique that there's this, you know, underneath the sort of great creativity and economic growth that capitalism produces, there is also a lot of destruction and a lot of victims. And I think that message, you know, is becoming a lot more—that's why I think why they've been rediscovered in the last five or ten years and I'm one of the people I guess contributing to that rediscovery.Andrew Keen: There's obviously many critiques of capitalism politically. I want to come to Marx in a second, but your chapter, I thought, on Thomas Carlyle and this nostalgic conservatism was very important and there are other conservatives as well. John, do you think that—and you mentioned Trump earlier, who is essentially a nostalgist for a—I don't know, some sort of bizarre pre-capitalist age in America. Is there something particularly powerful about the anti-capitalism of romantics like Carlyle, 19th century Englishman, there were many others of course.John Cassidy: Well, I think so. I mean, I think what is—conservatism, when we were young anyway, was associated with Thatcherism and Reaganism, which, you know, lionized the free market and free market capitalism and was a reaction against the pre-existing form of capitalism, Keynesian capitalism of the sort of 40s to the 80s. But I think what got lost in that era was the fact that there have always been—you've got Hayek up there, obviously—Andrew Keen: And then Keynes and Hayek, the two—John Cassidy: Right, it goes to the end of that. They had a great debate in the 1930s about these issues. But Hayek really wasn't a conservative person, and neither was Milton Friedman. They were sort of free market revolutionaries, really, that you'd let the market rip and it does good things. And I think that that sort of a view, you know, it just became very powerful. But we sort of lost sight of the fact that there was also a much older tradition of sort of suspicion of radical changes of any type. And that was what conservatism was about to some extent. If you think about Baldwin in Britain, for example.And there was a sort of—during the Industrial Revolution, some of the strongest supporters of factory acts to reduce hours and hourly wages for women and kids were actually conservatives, Tories, as they were called at the time, like Ashley. That tradition, Carlyle was a sort of extreme representative of that. I mean, Carlyle was a sort of proto-fascist, let's not romanticize him, he lionized strongmen, Frederick the Great, and he didn't really believe in democracy. But he also had—he was appalled by the sort of, you know, the—like, what's the phrase I'm looking for? The sort of destructive aspects of industrial capitalism, both on the workers, you know, he said it was a dehumanizing system, sounded like Marx in some ways. That it dehumanized the workers, but also it destroyed the environment.He was an early environmentalist. He venerated the environment, was actually very strongly linked to the transcendentalists in America, people like Thoreau, who went to visit him when he visited Britain and he saw the sort of destructive impact that capitalism was having locally in places like Manchester, which were filthy with filthy rivers, etc. So he just saw the whole system as sort of morally bankrupt and he was a great writer, Carlyle, whatever you think of him. Great user of language, so he has these great ringing phrases like, you know, the cash nexus or calling it the Gospel of Mammonism, the shabbiest gospel ever preached under the sun was industrial capitalism.So, again, you know, that's a sort of paradoxical thing, because I think for so long conservatism was associated with, you know, with support for the free market and still is in most of the Republican Party, but then along comes Trump and sort of conquers the party with a, you know, more skeptical, as you say, romantic, not really based on any reality, but a sort of romantic view that America can stand by itself in the world. I mean, I see Trump actually as a sort of an effort to sort of throw back to mercantile capitalism in a way. You know, which was not just pre-industrial, but was also pre-democracy, run by monarchs, which I'm sure appeals to him, and it was based on, you know, large—there were large tariffs. You couldn't import things in the UK. If you want to import anything to the UK, you have to send it on a British ship because of the navigation laws. It was a very protectionist system and it's actually, you know, as I said, had a lot of parallels with what Trump's trying to do or tries to do until he backs off.Andrew Keen: You cheat a little bit in the book in the sense that you—everyone has their own chapter. We'll talk a little bit about Hayek and Smith and Lenin and Friedman. You do have one chapter on Marx, but you also have a chapter on Engels. So you kind of cheat. You combine the two. Is it possible, though, to do—and you've just written this book, so you know this as well as anyone. How do you write a book about capitalism and its critics and only really give one chapter to Marx, who is so dominant? I mean, you've got lots of Marxists in the book, including Lenin and Luxemburg. How fundamental is Marx to a criticism of capitalism? Is most criticism, especially from the left, from progressives, is it really just all a footnote to Marx?John Cassidy: I wouldn't go that far, but I think obviously on the left he is the central figure. But there's an element of sort of trying to rebuild Engels a bit in this. I mean, I think of Engels and Marx—I mean obviously Marx wrote the great classic "Capital," etc. But in the 1840s, when they both started writing about capitalism, Engels was sort of ahead of Marx in some ways. I mean, the sort of materialist concept, the idea that economics rules everything, Engels actually was the first one to come up with that in an essay in the 1840s which Marx then published in one of his—in the German newspaper he worked for at the time, radical newspaper, and he acknowledged openly that that was really what got him thinking seriously about economics, and even in the late—in 20, 25 years later when he wrote "Capital," all three volumes of it and the Grundrisse, just these enormous outpourings of analysis on capitalism.He acknowledged Engels's role in that and obviously Engels wrote the first draft of the Communist Manifesto in 1848 too, which Marx then topped and tailed and—he was a better writer obviously, Marx, and he gave it the dramatic language that we all know it for. So I think Engels and Marx together obviously are the central sort of figures in the sort of left-wing critique. But they didn't start out like that. I mean, they were very obscure, you've got to remember.You know, they were—when they were writing, Marx was writing "Capital" in London, it never even got published in English for another 20 years. It was just published in German. He was basically an expat. He had been thrown out of Germany, he had been thrown out of France, so England was last resort and the British didn't consider him a threat so they were happy to let him and the rest of the German sort of left in there. I think it became—it became the sort of epochal figure after his death really, I think, when he was picked up by the left-wing parties, which are especially the SPD in Germany, which was the first sort of socialist mass party and was officially Marxist until the First World War and there were great internal debates.And then of course, because Lenin and the Russians came out of that tradition too, Marxism then became the official doctrine of the Soviet Union when they adopted a version of it. And again there were massive internal arguments about what Marx really meant, and in fact, you know, one interpretation of the last 150 years of left-wing sort of intellectual development is as a sort of argument about what did Marx really mean and what are the important bits of it, what are the less essential bits of it. It's a bit like the "what did Keynes really mean" that you get in liberal circles.So yeah, Marx, obviously, this is basically an intellectual history of critiques of capitalism. In that frame, he is absolutely a central figure. Why didn't I give him more space than a chapter and a chapter and a half with Engels? There have been a million books written about Marx. I mean, it's not that—it's not that he's an unknown figure. You know, there's a best-selling book written in Britain about 20 years ago about him and then I was quoting, in my biographical research, I relied on some more recent, more scholarly biographies. So he's an endlessly fascinating figure but I didn't want him to dominate the book so I gave him basically the same space as everybody else.Andrew Keen: You've got, as I said, you've got a chapter on Adam Smith who's often considered the father of economics. You've got a chapter on Keynes. You've got a chapter on Friedman. And you've got a chapter on Hayek, all the great modern economists. Is it possible, John, to be a distinguished economist one way or the other and not be a critic of capitalism?John Cassidy: Well, I don't—I mean, I think history would suggest that the greatest economists have been critics of capitalism in their own time. People would say to me, what the hell have you got Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in a book about critics of capitalism? They were great exponents, defenders of capitalism. They loved the system. That is perfectly true. But in the 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s, middle of the 20th century, they were actually arch-critics of the ruling form of capitalism at the time, which was what I call managed capitalism. What some people call Keynesianism, what other people call European social democracy, whatever you call it, it was a model of a mixed economy in which the government played a large role both in propping up demand and in providing an extensive social safety net in the UK and providing public healthcare and public education. It was a sort of hybrid model.Most of the economy in terms of the businesses remained in private hands. So most production was capitalistic. It was a capitalist system. They didn't go to the Soviet model of nationalizing everything and Britain did nationalize some businesses, but most places didn't. The US of course didn't but it was a form of managed capitalism. And Hayek and Friedman were both great critics of that and wanted to sort of move back to 19th century laissez-faire model.Keynes was a—was actually a great, I view him anyway, as really a sort of late Victorian liberal and was trying to protect as much of the sort of J.S. Mill view of the world as he could, but he thought capitalism had one fatal flaw: that it tended to fall into recessions and then they can snowball and the whole system can collapse which is what had basically happened in the early 1930s until Keynesian policies were adopted. Keynes sort of differed from a lot of his followers—I have a chapter on Joan Robinson in there, who were pretty left-wing and wanted to sort of use Keynesianism as a way to shift the economy quite far to the left. Keynes didn't really believe in that. He has a famous quote that, you know, once you get to full employment, you can then rely on the free market to sort of take care of things. He was still a liberal at heart.Going back to Adam Smith, why is he in a book on criticism of capitalism? And again, it goes back to what I said at the beginning. He actually wrote "The Wealth of Nations"—he explains in the introduction—as a critique of mercantile capitalism. His argument was that he was a pro-free trader, pro-small business, free enterprise. His argument was if you get the government out of the way, we don't need these government-sponsored monopolies like the East India Company. If you just rely on the market, the sort of market forces and competition will produce a good outcome. So then he was seen as a great—you know, he is then seen as the apostle of free market capitalism. I mean when I started as a young reporter, when I used to report in Washington, all the conservatives used to wear Adam Smith badges. You don't see Donald Trump wearing an Adam Smith badge, but that was the case.He was also—the other aspect of Smith, which I highlight, which is not often remarked on—he's also a critic of big business. He has a famous section where he discusses the sort of tendency of any group of more than three businessmen when they get together to try and raise prices and conspire against consumers. And he was very suspicious of, as I say, large companies, monopolies. I think if Adam Smith existed today, I mean, I think he would be a big supporter of Lina Khan and the sort of antitrust movement, he would say capitalism is great as long as you have competition, but if you don't have competition it becomes, you know, exploitative.Andrew Keen: Yeah, if Smith came back to live today, you have a chapter on Thomas Piketty, maybe he may not be French, but he may be taking that position about how the rich benefit from the structure of investment. Piketty's core—I've never had Piketty on the show, but I've had some of his followers like Emmanuel Saez from Berkeley. Yeah. How powerful is Piketty's critique of capitalism within the context of the classical economic analysis from Hayek and Friedman? Yeah, it's a very good question.John Cassidy: It's a very good question. I mean, he's a very paradoxical figure, Piketty, in that he obviously shot to world fame and stardom with his book on capital in the 21st century, which in some ways he obviously used the capital as a way of linking himself to Marx, even though he said he never read Marx. But he was basically making the same argument that if you leave capitalism unrestrained and don't do anything about monopolies etc. or wealth, you're going to get massive inequality and he—I think his great contribution, Piketty and the school of people, one of them you mentioned, around him was we sort of had a vague idea that inequality was going up and that, you know, wages were stagnating, etc.What he and his colleagues did is they produced these sort of scientific empirical studies showing in very simple to understand terms how the sort of share of income and wealth of the top 10 percent, the top 5 percent, the top 1 percent and the top 0.1 percent basically skyrocketed from the 1970s to about 2010. And it was, you know, he was an MIT PhD. Saez, who you mentioned, is a Berkeley professor. They were schooled in neoclassical economics at Harvard and MIT and places like that. So the right couldn't dismiss them as sort of, you know, lefties or Trots or whatever who're just sort of making this stuff up. They had to acknowledge that this was actually an empirical reality.I think it did change the whole basis of the debate and it was sort of part of this reaction against capitalism in the 2010s. You know it was obviously linked to the sort of Sanders and the Occupy Wall Street movement at the time. It came out of the—you know, the financial crisis as well when Wall Street disgraced itself. I mean, I wrote a previous book on all that, but people have sort of, I think, forgotten the great reaction against that a decade ago, which I think even Trump sort of exploited, as I say, by using anti-banker rhetoric at the time.So, Piketty was a great figure, I think, from, you know, I was thinking, who are the most influential critics of capitalism in the 21st century? And I think you'd have to put him up there on the list. I'm not saying he's the only one or the most eminent one. But I think he is a central figure. Now, of course, you'd think, well, this is a really powerful critic of capitalism, and nobody's going to pick up, and Bernie's going to take off and everything. But here we are a decade later now. It seems to be what the backlash has produced is a swing to the right, not a swing to the left. So that's, again, a sort of paradox.Andrew Keen: One person I didn't expect to come up in the book, John, and I was fascinated with this chapter, is Silvia Federici. I've tried to get her on the show. We've had some books about her writing and her kind of—I don't know, you treat her critique as a feminist one. The role of women. Why did you choose to write a chapter about Federici and that feminist critique of capitalism?John Cassidy: Right, right. Well, I don't think it was just feminist. I'll explain what I think it was. Two reasons. Number one, I wanted to get more women into the book. I mean, it's in some sense, it is a history of economics and economic critiques. And they are overwhelmingly written by men and women were sort of written out of the narrative of capitalism for a very long time. So I tried to include as many sort of women as actual thinkers as I could and I have a couple of early socialist feminist thinkers, Anna Wheeler and Flora Tristan and then I cover some of the—I cover Rosa Luxemburg as the great sort of tribune of the left revolutionary socialist, communist whatever you want to call it. Anti-capitalist I think is probably also important to note about. Yeah, and then I also have Joan Robinson, but I wanted somebody to do something in the modern era, and I thought Federici, in the world of the Wages for Housework movement, is very interesting from two perspectives.Number one, Federici herself is a Marxist, and I think she probably would still consider herself a revolutionary. She's based in New York, as you know now. She lived in New York for 50 years, but she came from—she's originally Italian and came out of the Italian left in the 1960s, which was very radical. Do you know her? Did you talk to her? I didn't talk to her on this. No, she—I basically relied on, there has been a lot of, as you say, there's been a lot of stuff written about her over the years. She's written, you know, she's given various long interviews and she's written a book herself, a version, a history of housework, so I figured it was all there and it was just a matter of pulling it together.But I think the critique, why the critique is interesting, most of the book is a sort of critique of how capitalism works, you know, in the production or you know, in factories or in offices or you know, wherever capitalist operations are working, but her critique is sort of domestic reproduction, as she calls it, the role of unpaid labor in supporting capitalism. I mean it goes back a long way actually. There was this moment, I sort of trace it back to the 1940s and 1950s when there were feminists in America who were demonstrating outside factories and making the point that you know, the factory workers and the operations of the factory, it couldn't—there's one of the famous sort of tire factory in California demonstrations where the women made the argument, look this factory can't continue to operate unless we feed and clothe the workers and provide the next generation of workers. You know, that's domestic reproduction. So their argument was that housework should be paid and Federici took that idea and a couple of her colleagues, she founded the—it's a global movement, but she founded the most famous branch in New York City in the 1970s. In Park Slope near where I live actually.And they were—you call it feminists, they were feminists in a way, but they were rejected by the sort of mainstream feminist movement, the sort of Gloria Steinems of the world, who Federici was very critical of because she said they ignored, they really just wanted to get women ahead in the sort of capitalist economy and they ignored the sort of underlying from her perspective, the underlying sort of illegitimacy and exploitation of that system. So they were never accepted as part of the feminist movement. They're to the left of the Feminist Movement.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Keynes, of course, so central in all this, particularly his analysis of the role of automation in capitalism. We did a show recently with Robert Skidelsky and I'm sure you're familiar—John Cassidy: Yeah, yeah, great, great biography of Keynes.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the great biographer of Keynes, whose latest book is "Mindless: The Human Condition in the Age of AI." You yourself wrote a brilliant book on the last tech mania and dot-com capitalism. I used it in a lot of my writing and books. What's your analysis of AI in this latest mania and the role generally of manias in the history of capitalism and indeed in critiquing capitalism? Is AI just the next chapter of the dot-com boom?John Cassidy: I think it's a very deep question. I think I'd give two answers to it. In one sense it is just the latest mania the way—I mean, the way capitalism works is we have these, I go back to Kondratiev, one of my Russian economists who ended up being killed by Stalin. He was the sort of inventor of the long wave theory of capitalism. We have these short waves where you have sort of booms and busts driven by finance and debt etc. But we also have long waves driven by technology.And obviously, in the last 40, 50 years, the two big ones are the original deployment of the internet and microchip technology in the sort of 80s and 90s culminating in the dot-com boom of the late 90s, which as you say, I wrote about. Thanks very much for your kind comments on the book. If you just sort of compare it from a financial basis I think they are very similar just in terms of the sort of role of hype from Wall Street in hyping up these companies. The sort of FOMO aspect of it among investors that they you know, you can't miss out. So just buy the companies blindly. And the sort of lionization in the press and the media of, you know, of AI as the sort of great wave of the future.So if you take a sort of skeptical market based approach, I would say, yeah, this is just another sort of another mania which will eventually burst and it looked like it had burst for a few weeks when Trump put the tariffs up, now the market seemed to be recovering. But I think there is, there may be something new about it. I am not, I don't pretend to be a technical expert. I try to rely on the evidence of or the testimony of people who know the systems well and also economists who have studied it. It seems to me the closer you get to it the more alarming it is in terms of the potential shock value that there is there.I mean Trump and the sort of reaction to a larger extent can be traced back to the China shock where we had this global shock to American manufacturing and sort of hollowed out a lot of the industrial areas much of it, like industrial Britain was hollowed out in the 80s. If you, you know, even people like Altman and Elon Musk, they seem to think that this is going to be on a much larger scale than that and will basically, you know, get rid of the professions as they exist. Which would be a huge, huge shock. And I think a lot of the economists who studied this, who four or five years ago were relatively optimistic, people like Daron Acemoglu, David Autor—Andrew Keen: Simon Johnson, of course, who just won the Nobel Prize, and he's from England.John Cassidy: Simon, I did an event with Simon earlier this week. You know they've studied this a lot more closely than I have but I do interview them and I think five, six years ago they were sort of optimistic that you know this could just be a new steam engine or could be a microchip which would lead to sort of a lot more growth, rising productivity, rising productivity is usually associated with rising wages so sure there'd be short-term costs but ultimately it would be a good thing. Now, I think if you speak to them, they see since the, you know, obviously, the OpenAI—the original launch and now there's just this huge arms race with no government involvement at all I think they're coming to the conclusion that rather than being developed to sort of complement human labor, all these systems are just being rushed out to substitute for human labor. And it's just going, if current trends persist, it's going to be a China shock on an even bigger scale.You know what is going to, if that, if they're right, that is going to produce some huge political backlash at some point, that's inevitable. So I know—the thing when the dot-com bubble burst, it didn't really have that much long-term impact on the economy. People lost the sort of fake money they thought they'd made. And then the companies, obviously some of the companies like Amazon and you know Google were real genuine profit-making companies and if you bought them early you made a fortune. But AI does seem a sort of bigger, scarier phenomenon to me. I don't know. I mean, you're close to it. What do you think?Andrew Keen: Well, I'm waiting for a book, John, from you. I think you can combine dot-com and capitalism and its critics. We need you probably to cover it—you know more about it than me. Final question, I mean, it's a wonderful book and we haven't even scratched the surface everyone needs to get it. I enjoyed the chapter, for example, on Karl Polanyi and so much more. I mean, it's a big book. But my final question, John, is do you have any regrets about anyone you left out? The one person I would have liked to have been included was Rawls because of his sort of treatment of capitalism and luck as a kind of casino. I'm not sure whether you gave any thought to Rawls, but is there someone in retrospect you should have had a chapter on that you left out?John Cassidy: There are lots of people I left out. I mean, that's the problem. I mean there have been hundreds and hundreds of critics of capitalism. Rawls, of course, incredibly influential and his idea of the sort of, you know, the veil of ignorance that you should judge things not knowing where you are in the income distribution and then—Andrew Keen: And it's luck. I mean the idea of some people get lucky and some people don't.John Cassidy: It is the luck of the draw, obviously, what card you pull. I think that is a very powerful critique, but I just—because I am more of an expert on economics, I tended to leave out philosophers and sociologists. I mean, you know, you could say, where's Max Weber? Where are the anarchists? You know, where's Emma Goldman? Where's John Kenneth Galbraith, the sort of great mid-century critic of American industrial capitalism? There's so many people that you could include. I mean, I could have written 10 volumes. In fact, I refer in the book to, you know, there's always been a problem. G.D.H. Cole, a famous English historian, wrote a history of socialism back in the 1960s and 70s. You know, just getting to 1850 took him six volumes. So, you've got to pick and choose, and I don't claim this is the history of capitalism and its critics. That would be a ridiculous claim to make. I just claim it's a history written by me, and hopefully the people are interested in it, and they're sufficiently diverse that you can address all the big questions.Andrew Keen: Well it's certainly incredibly timely. Capitalism and its critics—more and more of them. Sometimes they don't even describe themselves as critics of capitalism when they're talking about oligarchs or billionaires, they're really criticizing capitalism. A must read from one of America's leading journalists. And would you call yourself a critic of capitalism, John?John Cassidy: Yeah, I guess I am, to some extent, sure. I mean, I'm not a—you know, I'm not on the far left, but I'd say I'm a center-left critic of capitalism. Yes, definitely, that would be fair.Andrew Keen: And does the left need to learn? Does everyone on the left need to read the book and learn the language of anti-capitalism in a more coherent and honest way?John Cassidy: I hope so. I mean, obviously, I'd be talking my own book there, as they say, but I hope that people on the left, but not just people on the left. I really did try to sort of be fair to the sort of right-wing critiques as well. I included the Carlyle chapter particularly, obviously, but in the later chapters, I also sort of refer to this emerging critique on the right, the sort of economic nationalist critique. So hopefully, I think people on the right could read it to understand the critiques from the left, and people on the left could read it to understand some of the critiques on the right as well.Andrew Keen: Well, it's a lovely book. It's enormously erudite and simultaneously readable. Anyone who likes John Cassidy's work from The New Yorker will love it. Congratulations, John, on the new book, and I'd love to get you back on the show as anti-capitalism in America picks up steam and perhaps manifests itself in the 2028 election. Thank you so much.John Cassidy: Thanks very much for inviting me on, it was fun.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

In this special episode of NL Hafta, Abhinandan Sekhri, Manisha Pande, Raman Kirpal, Anand Vardhan and Jayashree Arunachalam catch up on all the letters – over 45 of them – that we've received from subscribers.Hafta letters: India-Pakistan, podcast ideas, team feedback, thoughts on patriotismWe have a page for subscribers to send letters to our shows. If you want to write to Hafta, click here. Check out the Newslaundry store and flaunt your love for independent media. Download the Newslaundry app. Timecodes00:00:00 - Introductions00:02:30 - Subscriber letters01:41:30 - RecommendationsRecommendationsAbhinandanCapitalism and Its Critics: A History: From the Industrial Revolution to AIIs Trump Losing? A Debate | The Ezra Klein ShowRamanThe Way I See ItAmerican Manhunt: Osama bin LadenManishaDying For SexAnand Nehru's First Recruits by Kallol Bhattacharjee Jayashree Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq's Green ZoneProduced by Ashish Anand and Hassan Bilal; recorded by Anil Kumar. ​​This episode is outside of the paywall for now. Before it goes behind the paywall, why not subscribe? Get brand-new episodes of all our podcasts every week, while also doing your bit to support independent media. Click here to subscribe. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to Dr. M's Women and Children First Podcast, where we explore groundbreaking approaches to health and wellness for women and children. Today, we're honored to introduce Dr. Kevin Boyd, DDS, MSc, a board-certified pediatric dentist and a trailblazer in the field of evolutionary oral medicine. With an illustrious career spanning over three decades, Dr. Boyd practices in Chicago and serves as an attending instructor at Lurie Children's Hospital's Pediatric Dentistry Residency Program, where he also consults for the Sleep Medicine service. Dr. Boyd's unique perspective is rooted in his undergraduate work in Biological Anthropology at Northeastern University as well as a Masters of science in Human Nutrition and Dietetics from Michigan State University. As a Visiting Scholar at the University of Pennsylvania's Museum of Anthropology, he conducts pioneering research into how dietary and lifestyle changes since the Industrial Revolution have impacted craniofacial and respiratory development. His work in Darwinian Dentistry draws on anthropological insights, examining prehistoric fossil records to understand modern systemic diseases, particularly those affecting airway health in children. A passionate advocate for early intervention, Dr. Boyd focuses on preventing and treating craniofacial-respiratory issues in young children, often under age 7, to promote healthy breathing, sleep, and neurocognitive development. Through his global lectures on early childhood malocclusion, pediatric sleep-breathing hygiene, and evolutionary oral medicine, Dr. Boyd is educating clinicians and parents alike. Join us as Dr. Boyd shares his anthropological insights, clinical expertise, and vision for revolutionizing airway health to help women and children thrive. Let's dive in! Dr. M

The energy grid of the future demands a massive amount of materials: billions of solar panels, millions of wind turbines and more. Climate strategist Marielle Remillard reveals why there may be critical shortages ahead — and breaks down how this could also be the biggest business opportunity since the Industrial Revolution.Want to help shape TED's shows going forward? Fill out our survey! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Greg Jenner is joined in Victorian England by Dr Isabella Rosner and comedian Cariad Lloyd to learn all about the ethos, practitioners and creations of the Arts and Crafts movement.Most people have heard of William Morris, one of the leaders of the Arts and Crafts movement that came to prominence in England in the last decades of the 19th Century. His abstract, nature-inspired designs still adorn everything from wallpaper and curtains to notebooks and even dog beds. And the company he founded, Morris & Co., is still going strong. But the history of this artistic movement, and the other creatives who were involved, is less well known.Arts and Crafts, which advocated a return to traditional handicrafts like needlework, carpentry and ceramics, was a reaction to the Industrial Revolution and included a strong socialist vision: its practitioners wanted everyone to have access to art, and to be able to enjoy homes that were comfortable, functional and beautiful. This episode explores Morris and other creatives both in and outside his circle, including Edward Burne-Jones, May Morris, Gertrude Jekyll and Philip Webb. It looks at the ethos that inspired them, the homes and artworks they created, and asks how radical their political beliefs really were.This is a radio edit of the original podcast episode. For the full-length version, please look further back in the feed.Hosted by: Greg Jenner Research by: Jon Norman-Mason Written by: Emmie Rose Price-Goodfellow, Emma Nagouse, and Greg Jenner Produced by: Emmie Rose Price-Goodfellow and Greg Jenner Audio Producer: Steve Hankey Production Coordinator: Ben Hollands Senior Producer: Emma Nagouse Executive Editor: James Cook

REALIGNMENT NEWSLETTER: https://therealignment.substack.com/PURCHASE BOOKS AT OUR BOOKSHOP: https://bookshop.org/shop/therealignmentEmail Us: realignmentpod@gmail.comJohn Cassidy, New Yorker Staff Writer and author of Capitalism and Its Critics: A History from the Industrial Revolution to AI, joins The Realignment. Marshall and John discuss the rise of anti-capitalist sentiment on the left and right, from President Trump's economic nationalism to the democratic socialism of Senator Bernie Sanders, the missed opportunities of the globalization era, the failures of trade policy, the coming AI disruption, and tensions between tech and democracy.

Former Sen. Phil Gramm joins Jonah Goldberg to discuss his new book, The Triumph of Economic Freedom: Debunking the Seven Great Myths of American Capitalism. Phil and Jonah reminisce on the triumphs of the Industrial Revolution, better days in Congress, and Ronald Reagan's disdain for protectionism. Show Notes:—Order Sen. Gramm's book, The Triumph of Economic Freedom: Debunking the Seven Great Myths of American Capitalism The Remnant is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including Jonah's G-File newsletter, regular livestreams, and other members-only content—click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Will England just pivoted his $10B AUM hedge fund to go all in on AI with a firm-wide email:“I wrote this email using ChatGPT—you should too. As a hedge fund, we should be ashamed to leave money on the table by ignoring AI.”It's working: 75% of his 400-person team are using ChatGPT daily—and Walleye is well on its way to transforming into an AI-first juggernaut. They record every meeting, use LLMs to ingest and analyze earnings reports, and are building “The Borg”—a firmwide intelligence layer.What's surprising? Will isn't some AI hype man: He's the CEO, CIO, and managing partner of Walleye Capital, a multi-strategy hedge fund competing with firms like Citadel, Millenium, and Point72. He's Princeton and Oxford educated, but he's based in Minnesota, doesn't have an X account, and rarely gives interviews.In my experience, teams go as their CEO goes—and Will is the best example of a CEO going all in on AI that I've seen. "It would be irresponsible not to go after AI with maximum discipline and intensity," Will told me—and in this episode he lays out his exact playbook for doing it.We get into:Why AI is essential operating leverage. At Walleye, using AI is treated like using email or Excel. Ignoring it means getting left behind—in an industry where information = money, every edge counts. England makes this not optional for anyone, backed by internal leaderboards and cash incentives.How Will uses AI for journaling and decision-making. Will journals every day using ChatGPT, which helps him with everything from decision-making at work to reflecting on his family life to tracking his workouts. How Will pivoted his billion dollar firm. Will's commitment to AI isn't theoretical—he announced AI as the new standard for work at Walleye, and made avoiding it unacceptable. How to lead during times of technological change. Will leads with an ethic of personal responsibility: "If we get disrupted by AI, that's on me.”Why students of history do better at handling the future. Will sees today like the 1860s–1910s era—when the Industrial Revolution introduced factories and railroads and the skills and roles needed inside of companies transformed quickly.How Will uses AI to write faster. Will uses ChatGPT to help him draft emails or memos that would have taken hours in 15 minutes. He bullets out of his thoughts and then uses LLMs to turn that into polished prose. Having AI handle the linguistic syntax gives him more time for conceptual thinking.This is a must-watch for anyone who wants to lead a team through change with clarity and conviction.  Sponsor:Attio: Go to⁠⁠⁠ https://www.⁠⁠⁠⁠attio.com/every⁠⁠⁠⁠ and get 15% off your first year on your AI-powered CRM.Want even more?Sign up for Every to unlock our ultimate guide to prompting ChatGPT here: https://every.ck.page/ultimate-guide-to-prompting-chatgpt. It's usually only for paying subscribers, but you can get it here for free.To hear more from Dan Shipper:Subscribe to Every: https://every.to/subscribe Follow him on X: https://twitter.com/danshipper Timestamps:Introduction: 00:00:51What pushed Will to go all in on AI: 00:03:25Inside the ‘AI-first' memo Will shared at Walleye: 00:14:08Why you shouldn't be afraid of using AI for work: 00:15:56How Will uses LLMs to sharpen his thinking: 00:31:01Walleye's approach to using AI to reduce risk: 00:35:32What history can teach us about leading through change: 00:39:10Will's first principles to making better decisions: 00:56:45Why Will journals everyday—and how AI makes it easier: 00:58:58 Links to resources mentioned in the episode:Will England: https://walleyecapital.com/bio/will-england Walleye Capital: https://walleyecapital.com/ Work with Every's consulting team: https://every.to/consulting  Everything we've learned from consulting with clients like Walleye: "How We Built a 7-figure AI Consulting Business in Less Than a Year"

Suriel Arellano—Author, Speaker, and Executive Coach on Digital Transformation & AI Leadership—explores how leadership must evolve alongside AI and digital transformation. He envisions a future where technology empowers humanity rather than replaces it, emphasizing people-first strategies. Suriel shares insights on navigating this shift, ensuring AI enhances human potential, fosters collaboration, and upholds ethical workplace practices.Learn more about leading in the digital age and prioritizing the human element in tech transformations. Follow on LinkedIn Suriel Arellano and visit his website at surielarellano.com for more insights, and to learn his books.Show Notes[00:25] Introduction to Suriel ArellanoSuriel Arellano, a leadership expert with over 25 years of experience, shares his journey from engineering to leadership, working with organizations to integrate technology and human potential. He advocates for a future where technology, including AI, empowers employees, and humans thrive alongside machines.[01:22] Industrial Revolution 5.0: A New EraSuriel discusses the concept of Industrial Revolution 5.0, where humans coexist with AI, robots, and other technologies. He envisions a world where machines enhance human capabilities rather than replace them, leading to a future where work is more efficient, creative, and innovative.[02:46] AI and Leadership: Empowering HumansSuriel underscores the need for leadership to integrate AI in a way that empowers people rather than displaces them. Drawing from his own experience, he emphasizes the importance of ethical, non-biased implementation of technology, where leaders play a key role in ensuring AI serves humanity by augmenting skills and creativity. He states, "Tech needs to empower humanity, not replace it," highlighting that technology should enhance the human experience, not diminish it.[04:17] Ethical AI and Leadership ResponsibilitySuriel explores the leadership responsibility to ensure AI is used ethically in organizations. He highlights the risk of AI perpetuating biases if not carefully implemented. Leaders must focus on creating a moral framework for technology adoption, ensuring that employees are empowered rather than sidelined by the rise of automation.[05:47] Practical Steps for Leaders: The PPT FrameworkSuriel recommends a practical approach for leaders to consider: the PPT framework (People, Process, Technology). He suggests that organizations start by assessing their people—understanding their skill gaps and readiness for technological change—before diving into process re-engineering or choosing technology. This ensures that employees feel valued and part of the transformation process.[10:37] Preparing for the Future with Suriel ArellanoSuriel invites leaders to connect with him through his website, surielarellano.com, where they can learn more about his books and consulting services through Tech 4 Digital. He offers guidance on navigating digital transformations, stressing the importance of keeping people at the heart of the change to foster success in a technology-driven future.

John Cassidy, staff writer at The New Yorker and the author of Capitalism and Its Critics: A History: From the Industrial Revolution to AI (Macmillan, 2025), traces the last three hundred years of global capitalism from its beginnings. 

Amid rising concerns about AI, inequality, trade wars, and globalization, New Yorker staff writer and Pulitzer Prize finalist John Cassidy takes a bold approach: he tells the story of capitalism through its most influential critics. From the Luddites and early communists to the Wages for Housework movement and modern degrowth advocates, Cassidy's global narrative features both iconic thinkers—Smith, Marx, Keynes—and lesser-known voices like Flora Tristan, J.C. Kumarappa, and Samir Amin. John Cassidy has been a staff writer at The New Yorker since 1995. He writes a regular column, The Financial Page. He holds degrees from Oxford, Columbia, and New York Universities. His new book is Capitalism and Its Critics: A History from the Industrial Revolution to AI.

“Fusion… unlocks 20 to 100 million times more energy than traditional energy sources like coal or oil or gas,” says Whitney Tilson, lead analyst for Stansberry Investment Advisory and a 2025 New York City mayoral candidate. In a conversation with Daniela Cambone, Tilson shares his conviction that nuclear fusion—what he calls Amazon Helios—will be a revolutionary energy source poised to transform humanity in the coming years.. Fusion is not only ultra-efficient, he explains, but also runs on hydrogen, “the most abundant element in the universe.” He predicts this new energy breakthrough will disrupt the global energy economy and render traditional energy sources like oil, gas, and coal “losers.” Tilson also discusses his political ambitions and his mission to address New York City's long-standing issues. Key Facts:Why Fusion Could Surpass the Industrial Revolution and AIThe energy breakthrough catching the attention of Bezos and ZuckerbergWhitney Tilson on discovering "Amazon Helios"What will S&P be headed?

In this episode of the Maverick Activation Initiative podcast, host Cal Knight welcomes listeners on a journey of self-discovery and awakening. Focused on challenging conventional beliefs, the podcast dives deep into the nature of time, questioning whether it is truly linear. Cal examines how our perception of time influences our lives, referencing historical contexts like the Industrial Revolution and offering philosophical and spiritual perspectives. He invites listeners to rethink their understanding of time, urging them to value their relationships, experiences, and authentic selves. Tune in to explore how an expanded awareness of time can transform your life.

There's a steam engine revival in South Africa. Although steam belongs to a bygone era when trains powered the Industrial Revolution, there's now a significant steam rail tourism sector thriving in the country. The Ceres Steam Train to Elgin is one of five steam heritage train rides available in South Africa. A novel experience for some, it's nostalgic for others. Trundling along at a sedate 45 kilometers per hour, there is lots of time to chat, celebrate an event, or watch the world go by. A highlight is climbing Sir Lowry's Pass, after which the train is in the Overberg district. At the peak of steam in 1959, there were 3,300 steam locomotives in use in South Africa. Peter Rogers has run steam train tours in South Africa since the 1980s. He says there are two main reasons steam trains were used significantly longer in South Africa than in other countries. “Most traction was steam and that was due to the fact that we had abundant coal in the country, as well as the sanctions period when we couldn't get diesel fuel, and for that reason, steam kept on until about 1980s when railways eventually decided to get rid of steam. The last steam operated on the Kimberley-De Aar line in about 1992,” he explains. When steam stopped being used in 1992, there were 700 steam locomotives on the tracks. Today, there are about 20 steam locomotives in use, and one of them powers the Ceres Train to Elgin. Keeping steam train travel alive in the 21st century has several challenges, not least having to manufacture spare parts from scratch. Yet there is an enduring love for steam travel, says Ceres Train Director, Rick Botha. “There are more steam locomotives running in the country now than there were ten years ago. So it's definitely grown and there's been a revival in steam. And you can see people are interested in it. Wherever steam is running, steam is running full. People love it. People wave, people hoot. There's just a joy around steam that you don't find anywhere else.” This article was provided by The Associated Press.

POPE LEO XIV, Cardinal Robert Prevost, was elected this week to succeed Pope Francis, becoming the first American pope in history. We discuss the possible reasons for Leo's choice of that papal name. Pope Leo XIII, who served 1878–1903, is remembered for emphasizing the veneration of Mary and her status as “Mediatrix” and “Co-Redemptrix.” (There is no blblical support for the role of Mary in our redemption.) Leo XIII was also known for championing the rights of workers to fair wages and safe working conditions during the Industrial Revolution. Leo I, also called Leo the Great, was pope between 440 and 461 AD. He's remembered for laying the theological foundation for the Council of Chalcedon, which defined the nature of Jesus as both human and divine in one person, but perhaps best known for meeting with Attila the Hun and talking the barbarian out of invading Italy. Also: Cult leader and self-proclaimed Mahdi Abdullah Hashem calls on Arabs and Jews to build the Third Temple. Read the story by Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz at Israel365 News: https://bit.ly/Abdullah-temple Our new book The Gates of Hell is now available in paperback, Kindle, and as an audiobook at Audible! Derek's new book Destination: Earth, co-authored with Donna Howell and Allie Anderson, is now available in paperback, Kindle, and as an audiobook at Audible! Sharon's niece, Sarah Sachleben, was recently diagnosed with stage 4 bowel cancer, and the medical bills are piling up. If you are led to help, please go to GilbertHouse.org/hopeforsarah. Follow us! X (formerly Twitter): @pidradio | @sharonkgilbert | @derekgilbert | @gilberthouse_tvTelegram: t.me/gilberthouse | t.me/sharonsroom | t.me/viewfromthebunkerSubstack: gilberthouse.substack.comYouTube: @GilbertHouse | @UnravelingRevelationFacebook.com/pidradio —————— JOIN US AND SPECIAL GUEST CARL TEICHRIB IN ISRAEL! We will tour the Holy Land October 19–30, 2025, with an optional three-day extension in Jordan. For more information, log on to GilbertHouse.org/travel. Thank you for making our Build Barn Better project a reality! Our 1,200 square foot pole barn has a new HVAC system, epoxy floor, 100-amp electric service, new windows, insulation, lights, and ceiling fans! If you are so led, you can help out by clicking here: gilberthouse.org/donate. Get our free app! It connects you to this podcast, our weekly Bible studies, and our weekly video programs Unraveling Revelation and A View from the Bunker. The app is available for iOS, Android, Roku, and Apple TV. Links to the app stores are at pidradio.com/app. Video on demand of our best teachings! Stream presentations and teachings based on our research at our new video on demand site: gilberthouse.org/video! Think better, feel better! Our partners at Simply Clean Foods offer freeze-dried, 100% GMO-free food and delicious, vacuum-packed fair trade coffee from Honduras. Find out more at GilbertHouse.org/store/.

Today's episode is a real eye-opener. I'm sitting down with Roman Bystrianyk, co-author of Dissolving Illusions, and we're diving into some seriously uncomfortable truths about the Industrial Revolution. We've all heard about how vaccines saved the day, right? Well, Roman's here to flip that narrative. We talk about the grim reality of life back then—think poor sanitation, awful working conditions, and unhealthy living.Roman breaks it down: it wasn't vaccines that dropped those mortality rates, it was public health improvements, like better living conditions, cleaner water, and, yep, hygiene. We also unpack the history of vaccines, how people fought back against mandatory shots, and how, shocker, a lot of the time they didn't work the way we were told.This episode is a wake-up call, and trust me, it'll make you rethink a lot of what you thought you knew about health, medicine, and how we got here today. And that's not all-- stay tuned for part II, dropping next Thursday.- - - - - - - - - - -Liz Durham Instagram | WebsiteSubscribe Apple Podcast | SpotifyBeing Different with Liz Durham is a Palm Tree Pod Co. production

In this episode of the Charter Cities Podcast, Mark speaks with Michael Muthukrishna, Associate Professor of Economic Psychology at LSE, about how cultural evolution explains the rise of human civilization. They explore why Homo sapiens prevailed over Neanderthals, the role of self-domestication and social learning in societal development, and how religion and cooperation have shaped social complexity. The conversation covers major historical shifts—from agriculture to the Industrial Revolution—and examines how modern challenges like declining fertility, institutional stagnation, and academic conformity can be better understood through the lens of cultural evolution.

In this insightful episode, Gary Hamel discusses the foundational ideas behind his book, 'The Future of Management.' Delving into the historical context and evolution of management principles, Hamel explores how long-standing conventions, established by early 20th-century theorists like Frederick Winslow Taylor and Max Weber, continue to shape modern companies. He underscores the need for a radical rethink in organizational management to address contemporary challenges such as innovation, strategic renewal, and employee engagement. Drawing parallels from history, Hamel illustrates how groundbreaking management innovations in companies like Whole Foods, WL Gore, and Nucor have driven exceptional performance. He emphasizes the importance of creating human-centric workplaces that inspire and motivate employees, advocating for a shift away from bureaucratic, control-driven models towards environments rooted in purpose, community, and mutual respect. Join us for part one of this engaging conversation with one of management's leading thinkers.   00:00 Introduction to the Future of Management 02:01 The Origins of Modern Management 04:17 The Evolution of Management Innovation 08:49 Military Analogies in Management 12:34 The Layers of Innovation 22:20 Historical Management Innovations 29:56 The Industrial Revolution and Management 36:48 The Overlooked Innovation: Management 37:20 Taylor's Influence on Productivity 38:00 Ford's System and Its Limitations 39:04 Bureaucracy: A Double-Edged Sword 41:32 Adapting to the Knowledge Economy 43:16 The Role of Computational Power and Connectivity 45:50 The Need for Organizational Innovation 53:34 Case Studies: Whole Foods and Gore 01:01:54 Building Human-Centric Organizations 01:05:03 Concluding Thoughts on Leadership and Innovation

Coming soon, a new podcast series called O Me! O Life! Inspired by the existential crisis of Walt Whitman in the wake of the Industrial Revolution in the late 19th century, we'll attempt to explore what verse we might add to the enduring play that is humanity.   Featuring the musical stylings of Graeme Jago.   Watch this space!

Send us a textSusan Nancarrow shares her journey from podiatrist to healthcare workforce revolutionary, explaining how invisible structures maintain inefficiencies while restricting innovation. She explains the need for healthcare workforce transformation, challenging outdated professional boundaries that have defined our system since the Industrial Revolution. • Healthcare's professional boundaries are among the most socially entrenched structures in our society• Current systems create unnecessary bottlenecks, such as requiring GP referrals to access specialized mental health services• Artificial intelligence is democratizing medical knowledge, shifting power from practitioners to patients• Traditional workforce pipelines are being disrupted as AI takes over entry-level tasks• Dual career pathways can recognize skills developed on-the-job while creating progression opportunities• Communities of practice across countries enable leaders to share challenges and build confidence to drive change• More flexible workforce models organized around competencies rather than professional identities can better serve patient needsThe impact of AI on professional rolesFrom Bureaucratic Closure to Algorithmic Governance: AI and the Neo-Weberian Crisis of the ProfessionsHow we unpack the professions through a managerialist framework - which could result in the end of the professions as we currently know themThe Two-Sided Ledger: Managerialism, AI and the Unmaking of the Professions The Reimagined Workforce podcast is brought to you by Workforce Transformations Australia Pty. Ltd.All opinions expressed are the speaker's and not the organisations they represent.If you have a story about a workforce transformation to share and would like to be a guest on this podcast, please contact us at kathhume@workforcetransformations.com.au.Connect with Kath Hume on LinkedInPurchase Kath's book Learn Solve Thrive: Making a difference that matters in a fast and complex world:Learn Solve Thrive: Making a difference that matters in a fast and complex world : Hume, Kathryn Lee: Amazon.com.au: Books

The full version of this episode (74 minutes & Ad-free) is available for Silk+ Members (FREE for a limited time!) and includes access to over 600 more episodes from these podcasts: Calm History (90+ episodes) Sleep Whispers (430+ episodes) ASMR Sleep Station (50+ episodes) 1 & 8-Hour Nature Sounds (50+ episodes) 1 & 8-Hour Background Sounds (30 episodes) Counselor Curt ASMR (20+ episodes) … Continue reading *Sample* | 1-Hour History of Coal: Geology, Discovery, Industrial Revolution, & Coal Miner Experiences | Relax & Sleep with History (Bonus Episode #63)

In this continuation of our series in a theology of work, the guys look at the kinds of work people do and the situations that determine our work. We explore how male and female and even the Industrial Revolution impact what kind of jobs we occupy today. We discuss how to pick a career, what factors should help Christians decide between job opportunities, and how faith can help direct us toward work that blesses the world. Welcome to the conversation! 

The energy grid of the future demands a massive amount of materials: billions of solar panels, millions of wind turbines and more. Climate strategist Marielle Remillard reveals why there may be critical shortages ahead — and breaks down how this could also be the biggest business opportunity since the Industrial Revolution.

Discover more TERRIFYING podcasts at http://eeriecast.com/   Follow Carman Carrion!    https://www.instagram.com/carmancarrion/?hl=en   https://twitter.com/CarmanCarrion   Subscribe to Spotify! https://open.spotify.com/show/0uiX155WEJnN7QVRfo3aQY   Please Review Us on iTunes! https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/freaky-folklore/id1550361184   Music and sound effects used in the Freaky Folklore Podcast have or may have been provided/created by:  CO.AG: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcavSftXHgxLBWwLDm_bNvA Myuu: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiSKnkKCKAQVxMUWpZQobuQ Jinglepunks: https://jinglepunks.com/ Epidemic Sound: https://www.epidemicsound.com/ Kevin MacLeod: http://incompetech.com/ Dark Music: https://soundcloud.com/darknessprevailspodcast Soundstripe: https:// Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The energy grid of the future demands a massive amount of materials: billions of solar panels, millions of wind turbines and more. Climate strategist Marielle Remillard reveals why there may be critical shortages ahead — and breaks down how this could also be the biggest business opportunity since the Industrial Revolution.

Making games better and getting them into the world seems like the thing to do when your dad passes and you need money. Sounds like Monopoly. Dave Young: Welcome to The Empire Builders Podcast, teaching business owners the not-so-secret techniques that took famous businesses from mom and pop to major brands. Stephen Semple is a marketing consultant, story collector, and storyteller. I'm Stephen's sidekick and business partner Dave Young. Before we get into today's episode, a word from our sponsor, which is, well, it's us, but we're highlighting ads we've written and produced for our clients. So here's one of those. [Tapper's Jewelry Ad] Dave Young: Welcome back to The Empire Builders Podcast. I'm Dave Young, and I'm here with Stephen Semple, who's been researching yet another empire for us to dissect and discuss. And today it's Parker Brothers, the game mogul. Were these guys on Game Row? Didn't we talk about it in another episode, the inventor of a game that was like he was over there in the part of town where all the games come from? I'm assuming. Stephen Semple: No, this kind of predates that. This sort of predates that. We're going way back. Dave Young: I mean, Parker Brothers, I know the name and I'm trying to even think of a game that's Parker Brothers. Parker Brothers. Who are these guys? Stephen Semple: We're going way back. The business was started by George Parker when he was 16 years old back in 1883. Dave Young: See, I was thinking you were going to go back farther than that. Stephen Semple: Really? Dave Young: These guys invented the stick. But 1883, that's okay. 1883 or 18... Stephen Semple: 1883. Dave Young: 1883. Okay. Stephen Semple: Yeah, so we're going back a little bit here, going back here a little bit. And one of the things that was happening around that time, because we're talking about the early stages of the Industrial Revolution, and one of the things that was being created was the eight-hour workday, which actually started to build leisure time for people. Dave Young: Because before that, the work day was waking hours. Wasn't it? It was just like... Stephen Semple: Basically. Pretty much. Yeah, pretty much. And so board games had started to come out, but most board games at that time were developed with an agenda. They were dealing with the moral decline of America is what a lot of them were. And they weren't really all that interesting or fun. And basically, George Parker was the youngest of two older brothers, and his father was a successful merchant, but had passed away and he had to find a way to make money. And what he noticed was at this time, capitalism was really changing. It was becoming actually acceptable. So for example, in 1840, there were 60 millionaires in the United States. By 1880, there were 1,000. Dave Young: Wow! Stephen Semple: Wealth was exploding, and people were actually able to imagine being wealthy. It was not just the aristocracy. There were actually regular people breaking through. And the first game he creates is a game called Banking. Dave Young: Banking. I'm pretty sure he didn't invent banking. Stephen Semple: But he invented a game game called Banking. And it's rejected by several publishers, but he spends his life savings, prints 500 copies, takes a month off school to go and sell it. He does sell all the sets for a profit of 80 bucks, but it was a lot of work, but gives him kind of a taste of success. And this is in the era of tycoons, and they were being admired. And Parker wanted to create an idea that taps into this. Dave Young: The Vanderbilts and all the... Stephen Semple: Yeah, the Carnegies and all of that stuff. And he didn't like business, so he convinced his brother Charles to join, and they formed Parker Brothers. So basically, Charles is going to manage the business, and George is going to create the games.

Online, there is a name for the experience of finding sympathy with Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber: Tedpilling. To be Tedpilled means to read Paragraph 1 of Kaczynski's manifesto, its assertion that the mad dash of technological advancement since the Industrial Revolution has “made life unfulfilling,” “led to widespread psychological suffering” and “inflicted severe damage on the natural world,” and think, Well, sure.Since Kaczynski's death by suicide in a federal prison in North Carolina nearly two years ago, the taboo surrounding the figure has been weakening. This is especially true on the right, where pessimism and paranoia about technology — largely the province of the left not long ago — have spread on the heels of the coronavirus pandemic and efforts to police speech on social media platforms. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

As we continue our Friday series on China-US Climate Cooperation, today, we will introduce pioneers in the field of climate science going back to the dawn of the Industrial Revolution and counting up the generations right up till today. 

Martin Gutmann is an expert on the history of business and has written extensively about styles of past leaders.  In this episode, he shares his thoughts on everything from today's political climate, to whether he thinks Ernest Shackleton is overrated (spoiler alert – he does), to the underrated excellence of less well-known figures in history.     Chapters: 02:27 Meet Martin Gutmann  Bill welcomes Martin Gutmann to the podcast, exploring his diverse background and extensive experience in various countries. Martin shares how his journey has shaped his understanding of different cultures and leadership.  04:24 The Role of History in Leadership  Martin discusses how historical insights can inform contemporary challenges, particularly in leadership and management. He emphasizes the necessity of understanding history to navigate present issues effectively.  07:06 Lessons from the Past  The conversation shifts to how past solutions have created today's problems, with Martin referencing the Industrial Revolution and its consequences. He highlights the importance of learning from history to find modern solutions.  10:11 The Optimism of Youth  Bill and Martin reflect on the idealism of younger generations regarding climate change and sustainability. They discuss how engaging with young people can inspire hope for the future.  14:02 The Qualities of Great Leaders Martin shares insights on the characteristics of effective leaders, emphasizing their ability to envision possibilities that others cannot see. He contrasts this with the qualities of less favorable leaders.  16:11 Reevaluating Historical Figures  The discussion turns to notable historical figures, with Martin expressing a preference for lesser-known leaders who have made significant impacts. He critiques the common narratives surrounding famous leaders like Thomas Jefferson.  20:04 Unseen Leaders and Their Impact  Martin elaborates on the contributions of unseen leaders, using the example of Vasily Archipov during the Cuban Missile Crisis. He illustrates how individual actions can alter the course of history.  27:01 Churchill: The Crisis Manager  Explore Winston Churchill's complex legacy as a leader during World War II, where he was thrust into a crisis not of his making. This chapter delves into the nuances of his leadership style, contrasting crisis management with the ability to foresee and avoid crises.  35:12 The Unseen Leader: Shackleton vs. Amundsen  Martin Gutmann discusses the concept of the ‘unseen leader' through the lens of explorers Shackleton and Amundsen. While Shackleton's dramatic story captivates audiences, Amundsen's meticulous planning and authentic leadership provide deeper lessons in effective leadership.  42:55 The Challenge of Leadership in Media  In this chapter, the conversation shifts to the media's portrayal of leadership, emphasizing how crises and scandals often overshadow the quiet, effective leaders. Martin and Bill reflect on the disparity between public admiration for dramatic leaders versus those who exemplify humility and competence.  46:26 A Global Perspective on Leadership  Martin shares his insights on the political climate in Europe and how it resonates with the current events in the U.S. He discusses the resilience of democratic institutions and the importance of good leadership amidst rising concerns about political extremism.  50:01 Optimism in the Next Generation  Ending on a hopeful note, Martin reflects on the optimism he sees in younger generations, highlighting their ability to dream big without the constraints of cynicism. This chapter underscores the importance of nurturing this optimism as a counterbalance to the challenges faced in today's world.

La révolution industrielle au 19e siècle, est-ce que c'est un avancée ou un traumatisme qui nous habite encore ? Note: merci à @EdwinVan57 de l'avoir souligné. En 1871 la France a perdu l'Alsace et la Moselle et non la Lorraine entière.  Adhérez à cette chaîne pour obtenir des avantages : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4TCCaX-gqBNkrUqXdgGRA/join Script: Maxime Testart de @laratplace et Laurent Turcot https://www.youtube.com/@laratplace Montage et réalisation: Laurent Turcot Pour soutenir la chaîne, au choix: 1. Cliquez sur le bouton « Adhérer » sous la vidéo. 2. Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/hndl 00:00 Introduction 02:30 C'est quoi la Révolution industrielle ? 06:14 Les origines au 18e siècle 12:23 Pourquoi la Grande-Bretagne ? 23:04 Des innovations qui changent le monde 29:30 Toujours plus vite et plus loin 33:31 Des villes industrielles 41:29 Deuxième révolution industrielle 46:17 Une source de conflits 56:05 Conclusion Musique issue du site : epidemicsound.com Images provenant de https://www.storyblocks.com Abonnez-vous à la chaine: https://www.youtube.com/c/LHistoirenousledira Les vidéos sont utilisées à des fins éducatives selon l'article 107 du Copyright Act de 1976 sur le Fair-Use. Sources et pour aller plus loin: Roland Marx, La révolution industrielle en Grande-Bretagne, Paris, Armand Colin, 1992 (1970). Nadège Sougy et Patick Verley, « La première industrialisation (1750-1880) » Documentation photographique, janvier-février 2008 Patrick Verley, La révolution industrielle, Paris, Gallimard, 1997 (1985). Jean-Pierre Rioux, La révolution industrielle 1780-1880, Paris, 1989 (1971). Chantal Beauchamp. Révolution industrielle et croissance économique au 19e siècle, Paris, Ellipses, 1997. Jean-Pierre Rioux et Dominique Redor, La révolution industrielle en Grande-Bretagne, Paris, Hatier, 1980. J.M. Roberts et O.A. Westad, Histoire du monde. 3. L'Âge des révolutions, Paris, Perrin, 2016. Joel Mokyr (dir.), The British Industrial Revolution: An Economic Perspective, Westview Press, 2018. Riello, Giorgio. Cotton: The Fabric That Made the Modern World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. E. P. Thompson, The Making of the English Working Class, Vintage, 1980 (1963). Smith, Bonnie G. et al. World in the Making: A Global History. New York: Oxford University Press, 2019. Jürgen Osterhammel, La transformation du monde, une histoire globale du XIXe siècle, Paris, Nouveau Monde. 2017 (2009 Louis Chevalier, Classes laborieuses et classes dangereuses pendant la première moitié du XIXe siècle, Paris, Plon, 1958. E. J. Hobsbawm, Histoire économique et sociale de la Grande-Bretagne. tome 2, de la révolution industrielle à nos jours, Paris, Seuil, 1977 (1968). E. J. Hobsbawm, Industry and Empire: From 1750 to the Present Day. 1999. Sidney Pollard, Peaceful Conquest: The Industrialization of Europe, 1760–1970, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1981. David S. Landes, Richesse et pauvreté des nations. Pourquoi des riches ? Pourquoi des pauvres ?, Paris, Albin Michel, 2000 (1998) Jean-Charles Asselain, Histoire économique de la France du XVIIIe siècle à nos jours. Paris, Points, 2011, (1984), Emma Griffin, A Short History of the British Industrial Revolution, London, Bloomsbury, 2010. N. F. R. Crafts, British Economic Growth during the Industrial Revolution, Clarendon Press, 1985 François Crouzet, Histoire de l'économie européenne, 1000-2000, Albin Michel, Paris, 2000 Paul Bairoch, Révolution industrielle et sous-développement, Paris, éd. de l'E.H.E.S.S., 1974 (1963). https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puddlage Jean-Charles Asselain, « Révolution industrielle » [en ligne]. In Encyclopædia Universalis. Disponible sur : https://www-universalis-edu-com.biblioproxy.uqtr.ca/encyclopedie/revolution-industrielle/ Samir Amin. « Industrie » - Industrialisation et formes de société [en ligne]. In Encyclopædia Universalis. Francis Demier. « Multiplication des inventions » [en ligne]. In Encyclopædia Universalis. https://www.geo.fr/histoire/quest-ce-que-la-revolution-industrielle-208173 « LA RÉVOLUTION INDUSTRIELLE | Je révise avec toi | #08 », Je révise avec toi, 8 mars 2023. « LA SECONDE RÉVOLUTION INDUSTRIELLE | Je révise avec toi | #40 », Je révise avec toi, 7 mai 2023. « Révolution industrielle : Le Charbon, Moteur de la Puissance Britannique | Partie 1 | SLICE HISTOIRE », SLICE Histoire, 30 septembre 2024. « L'Industrialisation », RÉCIT Univers social, 20 août 2019. « L'HISTOIRE PAR L'IMAGE | La révolution industrielle », Grand Palais, 2 octobre 2020. « Coal, Steam, and The Industrial Revolution: Crash Course World History #32 » CrashCourse, 20 août 2012. Autres références disponibles sur demande. #histoire #documentaire #revolutionindustrielle #revolutionaryinventions #industrialrevolution #industrialrevolution

Today we're turning the clock back to the Industrial Revolution, a time when the world was changing at a breakneck pace, and with it, the way people lived and worked. In this episode, we're exploring the curious yet almost forgotten profession of... the knocker-upper—a job that was essential in waking up an entire nation, long before the invention of alarm clocks.Got an Idea for the Podcast?I'd love to hear from you! If there's a topic you'd like me to explore or someone you think would make a great guest, flick me a message.EMAIL: thestickybeakpodcast@outlook.com INSTAGRAM: @thestickybeakpodcastTIKTOK: @thestickybeakpodcastFACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/listen.with.mon Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Worried that AI will replace you? It may not seem like the Hollywood writers' strike has anything in common with the Luddite rebellion in England in 1811, but they are surprisingly similar. Today we use the term “Luddite” dismissively to describe a technophobe, but the original Luddites – cloth workers – organized and fought Industrial Revolution automation and the factory bosses who were replacing humans with cotton spinning machines and steam powered looms. Find out what our age of AI can learn from textile workers of 200 years ago about keeping humans in the loop. Guest: Brian Merchant - Los Angeles Times tech columnist and author of “Blood in the Machine: The Origins of the Rebellion Against Big Tech”   Featuring music by Dewey Dellay and Jun Miyake Originally aired January 14, 2024 Big Picture Science is part of the Airwave Media podcast network. Please contact advertising@airwavemedia.com to inquire about advertising on Big Picture Science. You can get early access to ad-free versions of every episode by joining us on Patreon. Thanks for your support! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A talk on competing views of economists on whether the slave trade made a difference in Britain's Industrial Revolution of the 18th Century. Some of my own research on this topic is introduced.

In this episode of Good Morning Liberty, Nate Thurston and Charles Chuck Thompson discuss the latest headlines and controversies surrounding the Trump administration, including his stance on Israeli military action against Iran. They scrutinize Bill Burr's recent podcast where he discusses historical labor issues, the outsourcing of American jobs, and stock market fluctuations. Nate and Chuck also delve into the principles of economics and stock market valuations, addressing common misconceptions. Join the conversation for in-depth analysis, informed opinions, and some hearty debate on current events and economic theory. (03:27) Trump's Diplomacy with Iran (06:23) Historical Context and Libertarian Views (16:02) Bill Burr's Take on Trade and Industrial Revolution (22:22) Critique of Western Perspectives on Labor (23:07) Historical Context of Labor Exploitation (24:22) Robber Barons and Industrial Risks (26:30) Union Strikes and Labor Conflicts (31:33) Globalization and Labor Economics (36:22) Stock Market Misconceptions   Links:   https://gml.bio.link/   YOUTUBE:   https://bit.ly/3UwsRiv   RUMBLE:   https://rumble.com/c/GML   Check out Martens Minute!   https://martensminute.podbean.com/   Follow Josh Martens on X:   https://twitter.com/joshmartens13   Join the private discord & chat during the show!   joingml.com   Bank on Yourself bankonyourself.com/gml   Get FACTOR Today! FACTORMEALS.com/factorpodcast     Good Morning Liberty is sponsored by BetterHelp! Rediscover your curiosity today by visiting Betterhelp.com/GML (Get 10% off your first month)     Protect your privacy and unlock the full potential of your streaming services with ExpressVPN. Get 3 more months absolutely FREE by using our link EXPRESSVPN.com/GML  

Throughout history, technological revolutions have fundamentally shifted the balance of power in society. The Industrial Revolution created conditions where democracies could flourish for the first time — as nations needed educated, informed, and empowered citizens to deploy advanced technologies and remain competitive.Unfortunately there's every reason to think artificial general intelligence (AGI) will reverse that trend. Today's guest — Tom Davidson of the Forethought Centre for AI Strategy — claims in a new paper published today that advanced AI enables power grabs by small groups, by removing the need for widespread human participation. Links to learn more, video, highlights, and full transcript. https://80k.info/tdAlso: come work with us on the 80,000 Hours podcast team! https://80k.info/workThere are a few routes by which small groups might seize power:Military coups: Though rare in established democracies due to citizen/soldier resistance, future AI-controlled militaries may lack such constraints. Self-built hard power: History suggests maybe only 10,000 obedient military drones could seize power.Autocratisation: Leaders using millions of loyal AI workers, while denying others access, could remove democratic checks and balances.Tom explains several reasons why AI systems might follow a tyrant's orders:They might be programmed to obey the top of the chain of command, with no checks on that power.Systems could contain "secret loyalties" inserted during development.Superior cyber capabilities could allow small groups to control AI-operated military infrastructure.Host Rob Wiblin and Tom discuss all this plus potential countermeasures.Chapters:Cold open (00:00:00)A major update on the show (00:00:55)How AI enables tiny groups to seize power (00:06:24)The 3 different threats (00:07:42)Is this common sense or far-fetched? (00:08:51)“No person rules alone.” Except now they might. (00:11:48)Underpinning all 3 threats: Secret AI loyalties (00:17:46)Key risk factors (00:25:38)Preventing secret loyalties in a nutshell (00:27:12)Are human power grabs more plausible than 'rogue AI'? (00:29:32)If you took over the US, could you take over the whole world? (00:38:11)Will this make it impossible to escape autocracy? (00:42:20)Threat 1: AI-enabled military coups (00:46:19)Will we sleepwalk into an AI military coup? (00:56:23)Could AIs be more coup-resistant than humans? (01:02:28)Threat 2: Autocratisation (01:05:22)Will AGI be super-persuasive? (01:15:32)Threat 3: Self-built hard power (01:17:56)Can you stage a coup with 10,000 drones? (01:25:42)That sounds a lot like sci-fi... is it credible? (01:27:49)Will we foresee and prevent all this? (01:32:08)Are people psychologically willing to do coups? (01:33:34)Will a balance of power between AIs prevent this? (01:37:39)Will whistleblowers or internal mistrust prevent coups? (01:39:55)Would other countries step in? (01:46:03)Will rogue AI preempt a human power grab? (01:48:30)The best reasons not to worry (01:51:05)How likely is this in the US? (01:53:23)Is a small group seizing power really so bad? (02:00:47)Countermeasure 1: Block internal misuse (02:04:19)Countermeasure 2: Cybersecurity (02:14:02)Countermeasure 3: Model spec transparency (02:16:11)Countermeasure 4: Sharing AI access broadly (02:25:23)Is it more dangerous to concentrate or share AGI? (02:30:13)Is it important to have more than one powerful AI country? (02:32:56)In defence of open sourcing AI models (02:35:59)2 ways to stop secret AI loyalties (02:43:34)Preventing AI-enabled military coups in particular (02:56:20)How listeners can help (03:01:59)How to help if you work at an AI company (03:05:49)The power ML researchers still have, for now (03:09:53)How to help if you're an elected leader (03:13:14)Rob's outro (03:19:05)This episode was originally recorded on January 20, 2025.Video editing: Simon MonsourAudio engineering: Ben Cordell, Milo McGuire, Simon Monsour, and Dominic ArmstrongCamera operator: Jeremy ChevillotteTranscriptions and web: Katy Moore

We predict that the impact of superhuman AI over the next decade will be enormous, exceeding that of the Industrial Revolution. We wrote a scenario that represents our best guess about what that might look like.1 It's informed by trend extrapolations, wargames, expert feedback, experience at OpenAI, and previous forecasting successes. https://ai-2027.com/  (A condensed two-hour version with footnotes and text boxes removed is available at the above link.)

Cake has been around for a long time, but mostly less than great forms. It took the Industrial Revolution, the advent of plentiful sugar, and some good old American know-how to come together to make the cake we know and love today. Find out all about it in this classic episode.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Sometime around eight to nine thousand years ago, ancient people in Asia Minor found a very dull grey metal that turned out to be easy to manipulate when it was heated. For thousands of years, it was used for a variety of purposes, including as a food additive.  4 With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, even more uses were found for this unique metal.  However, by the 20th century, scientists realized that maybe this stuff wasn't really so good for us.  Learn more about lead, how it has been used throughout history, and how our perception of it has changed on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily. Sponsors Mint Mobile Cut your wireless bill to 15 bucks a month at mintmobile.com/eed Quince Go to quince.com/daily for 365-day returns, plus free shipping on your order! Stitch Fix Go to stitchfix.com/everywhere to have a stylist help you look your best Tourist Office of Spain Plan your next adventure at Spain.info  Stash Go to get.stash.com/EVERYTHING to see how you can receive $25 towards your first stock purchase and to view important disclosures. Subscribe to the podcast!  https://everything-everywhere.com/everything-everywhere-daily-podcast/ -------------------------------- Executive Producer: Charles Daniel Associate Producers: Austin Oetken & Cameron Kieffer   Become a supporter on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/everythingeverywhere Update your podcast app at newpodcastapps.com Discord Server: https://discord.gg/UkRUJFh Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/everythingeverywhere/ Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/everythingeverywheredaily Twitter: https://twitter.com/everywheretrip Website: https://everything-everywhere.com/  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We all want to be more productive, right? But what does true productivity look like today? In this episode, I dive into how the definition of productivity has evolved—from the Industrial Revolution's quest to do more with less, to today's goal of creating space for what actually matters. I share the systems I rely on to keep my days running smoothly, and how productivity doesn't have to mean sacrificing well-being.For more go to: www.scottmlynch.comLevel up your life by joining my Patreon where you'll get exclusive content every week and more badass offerings (rips t-shirt in half, Hulk Hogan style, and runs around the room). And/or…Unlock practical and tactical insights on how to master your mindset and optimize your happiness directly to your inbox.If you're a glutton for punishment and want more swift kicks in the mind follow me on social:InstagramYouTubeLeave a review and tell me how I suck so I can stop doing that or you can also tell me about things you like. I'd be okay with that, too.Produced by ya boi.Past guests on The Motivated Mind include Chris Voss, Captain Sandy, Dr. Chris Palmer, Joey Thurman, Jason Harris, Koshin Paley Ellison, Rudy Mawer, Molly Fletcher, Kristen Butler, Hasard Lee, Natasha Graziano, ⁠David Hauser⁠, Cheryl Hunter, Michael Brandt, Heather Moyse, Tim Shriver, and Alan Stein, Jr.

If you've ever eaten at a university dining hall or at an airport bar or in a corporate cafeteria, you have relied on the labor of thousands and thousands of people whose work often goes unseen. Our guest today spends his own working hours fighting to make sure those food service workers are paid fairly and have access to good benefits and safe working conditions. Chuck Hendricks is the food service lead director for UNITE HERE, a labor union in the US and Canada that has about 300,000 active members. Chuck is also the board president of a group called the Catholic Labor Network, which promotes the cause of workers and Catholic social teaching in labor unions, parishes and other organizations. It was really fun to welcome Chuck into our Washington, DC, studio to talk about his work, his history with organized labor, and how his spiritual journey led him to the Catholic Church. You may or may not be familiar with the Catholic tradition's deep history of supporting worker's rights and unionizing. Back in 1891, Pope Leo XIII published the first modern papal encyclical on social justice issues. It was called “Rerum Novarum” and it emphasized the rights of workers in the wake of the often-dehumanizing Industrial Revolution. In his service with the Catholic Labor Network, Chuck has found a holistic way to support workers by practicing his faith. We think you'll really like getting to know him and learning about the contemporary labor movement. "I came to the Church because the Church came to the workers" by Chuck Hendricks: https://catholiclabor.org/i-came-to-the-church-because-the-church-came-to-the-workers/ The Catholic Labor Network: https://catholiclabor.org/ AMDG is a production of the Jesuit Media Lab, which is a project of the Jesuit Conference of Canada and the United States. www.jesuits.org/ www.beajesuit.org/ twitter.com/jesuitnews facebook.com/Jesuits instagram.com/wearethejesuits youtube.com/societyofjesus www.jesuitmedialab.org/

Episode 2624: Vinnie Tortorich speaks to Dr. Sharon Bergquist about resilience, our culture clashing with biology, using stress for growth, and more. https://vinnietortorich.com/2025/03/stress-for-growth-dr-sharon-bergquist-episode-2624 PLEASE SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS YOU CAN WATCH ALL THE PODCAST EPISODES ON YOUTUBE -  Culture Clashing with Biology Dr. Sharon Bergquist is an internal medicine physician ( you can find her  online at ) and has a new book you can purchase through Vinnie's Book Club: The Stress Paradox book  (2:15) It's necessary to challenge yourself for physical strength and resilience. Our current lifestyle has weakened over several generations. (7:00) Today's lifestyle has phased out needs and behaviors that years ago were relied upon for strength and resiliency. (9:00) This has contributed to poor health and decreased longevity. Our bodies are supposed to be interconnected with nature and the environment (15:00). Vinnie gives an example of a recent climb he did where another climber was missing out on the beauty of the surroundings. The Industrial Revolution started much of the culture change. (23:00) Many inventions have helped improve life; however, many have changed how we challenge ourselves. Reintroducing some of the challenges can help us to achieve better health, both mentally and physically. (26:00) Dr. Sharon explains hormesis, which is a form of adaptation. (30:00) The leading cause of disability in this country is disuse. (37:50) There is a more recent specialty in medicine called “exercise oncology.” It has been shown that exercise can improve cancer outcomes. (38:00) Stress For Growth There are various types of stress; however, too much and too inadequate amounts of stress can both be harmful. (46:00) The goal is to find the optimal or “Goldilocks level” of stress. A mild or moderate amount should work. There's no real need to go to extremes to make a difference. Vinnie mentions his desire to get back to a “fitness middle class.” (51:00) “Stress inoculation” is an idea (not an actual vaccine and not childhood adversity) that exposes kids to small amounts of stress to help childhood development. (55:15) Giving kids the tools and the skills to find their way is a good start. (1:00:00) More News If you are interested in the NSNG® VIP group, closed for registration, but you can get on the wait list - Don't forget to check out Serena Scott Thomas on Days Of Our Lives on the Peacock channel.  “Dirty Keto” is available on Amazon! You can purchase or rent it . Make sure you watch, rate, and review it! Eat Happy Italian, Anna's next cookbook is available!  You can go to  You can order it from .  Anna's recipes are in her cookbooks, website, and Substack–they will spice up your day!  Don't forget you can invest in Anna's Eat Happy Kitchen through StartEngine.  Details are at Eat Happy Kitchen.  There's a new NSNG® Foods promo code you can use! The promo code ONLY works on the NSNG® Foods website, NOT on Amazon. https://nsngfoods.com/   PURCHASE  DIRTY KETO (2024) The documentary launched in August 2024! Order it TODAY! This is Vinnie's fourth documentary in just over five years. Visit my new Documentaries HQ to find my films everywhere:  Then, please share my fact-based, health-focused documentary series with your friends and family. Additionally, the more views, the better it ranks, so please watch it again with a new friend! REVIEWS: Please submit your REVIEW after you watch my films. Your positive REVIEW does matter! PURCHASE BEYOND IMPOSSIBLE (2022) Visit my new Documentaries HQ to find my films everywhere:  REVIEWS: Please submit your REVIEW after you watch my films. Your positive REVIEW does matter! FAT: A DOCUMENTARY 2 (2021) Visit my new Documentaries HQ to find my films everywhere:  FAT: A DOCUMENTARY (2019) Visit my new Documentaries HQ to find my films everywhere: