- Joined
- Oct 18, 2018
If you've clicked a financial video on YouTube before, you will have been recommended How Money Works. He is a perma-Bear, someone convinced that it is only ever going to get worse for absolutely everyone except those who already have money; or, as those with more knowledge than him put it, a "Gay Bear".
He constantly reiterates his view that you should change jobs every few years, that you should never bother with any sort of side-gig (unless it's another full-time job), and that you will never retire or own a house. He has done a couple of videos on why "all" entry-level desk jobs require three years of experience, and he has put forward a few different reasons; that there are too many applicants on LinkedIn, that these jobs actually pay too well for the workload required (resulting in massively-overqualified people filling them up and even doing two or more of these at the same time), and that no one actually sticks around after being trained. Regarding that last point, according to How Money Works, you should change jobs every few years.
How Money Works is an unhappy slave to his own early-established video format, the "five paragraph essay" format. Each of his videos has an introduction, three points, and a conclusion. Lately the title drop ("So it's time to learn How Money Works") has been assigned to happen right after point #1. Usually his introduction is a colossal portion of the video, anywhere from the first third to the first half of it, and his individual points are all over the place in length as well. For example, here's the video that prompted me to make this thread calling him a bundle of twigs:
His Thesis Statement is that telling people they're better off now than they were at the start of COVID is retarded. The core reason for this is that it hasn't worked at all, with him pointing out that this has been a tough election year for incumbents. Well okay then, thirty-second video. But NO, he has to stick to his five-paragraph-essay format, trying to explain WHY it didn't work.
The bloated introduction to this video gives many statistical reasons for why people aren't feeling better-off than they were in 2020, despite the macroeconomic stats that are good for the country, none of which are elaborated on in the video because this guy has made videos on a couple of these:
Point 1: Politicians didn't mention the ways in which people are ACTUALLY better-off, because the donors have been made worse-off by them. This entire section is dedicated to sucking off Lina Kahn, the unelected head of the FTC, who decided she didn't want a corporate job after her inevitable firing and decided to power-trip. How Money Works lists only three things she did -- banning noncompete clauses in contracts, banning algorithmic pricing on Airbnb's, and mandating that cancelling a subscription should take only one click -- and he misattributes all of the antitrust cases against Google to her. He also claims that Lina has been holding back numerous corporate mergers, without listing any examples. And, keeping to the perma-Bear shtick, How Money Works points out that Trump will almost certainly fire this lady and allow stuff How Money Works personally dislikes to happen.
AD-BREAK: Have you fucked up? Now you, too, can unperson yourself with DeleteMe!
Anyway, after the ad-break, How Money Works completely derails and never actually states Points 2 or 3. I'm not sure if I should be happy that he's breaking his self-conditioning, or disappointed that he can't even hold to his own lazy format. He instead:
This guy was paid $7 per 1,000 views during the height of this last election. I sure hope he doesn't regret his career path.
Is my assessment of him in the title of this thread wrong? Would you say he's more of a schizophrenic, or an autist?
He constantly reiterates his view that you should change jobs every few years, that you should never bother with any sort of side-gig (unless it's another full-time job), and that you will never retire or own a house. He has done a couple of videos on why "all" entry-level desk jobs require three years of experience, and he has put forward a few different reasons; that there are too many applicants on LinkedIn, that these jobs actually pay too well for the workload required (resulting in massively-overqualified people filling them up and even doing two or more of these at the same time), and that no one actually sticks around after being trained. Regarding that last point, according to How Money Works, you should change jobs every few years.
How Money Works is an unhappy slave to his own early-established video format, the "five paragraph essay" format. Each of his videos has an introduction, three points, and a conclusion. Lately the title drop ("So it's time to learn How Money Works") has been assigned to happen right after point #1. Usually his introduction is a colossal portion of the video, anywhere from the first third to the first half of it, and his individual points are all over the place in length as well. For example, here's the video that prompted me to make this thread calling him a bundle of twigs:
His Thesis Statement is that telling people they're better off now than they were at the start of COVID is retarded. The core reason for this is that it hasn't worked at all, with him pointing out that this has been a tough election year for incumbents. Well okay then, thirty-second video. But NO, he has to stick to his five-paragraph-essay format, trying to explain WHY it didn't work.
The bloated introduction to this video gives many statistical reasons for why people aren't feeling better-off than they were in 2020, despite the macroeconomic stats that are good for the country, none of which are elaborated on in the video because this guy has made videos on a couple of these:
- median income is down while mean income is up (and he will NEVER say that mean income is up because the bottom 25-35% of incomes were lifted along with the top 0.1%, because Patrick Boyle pointed that out and the comments section got mad at him),
- many people have given up on work and thus don't appear on the unemployment figures (a point that doesn't contribute to his stance because he doesn't explain WHY that's bad),
- savings have collapsed alongside inflation (a point that would actually damage his case if he explained it, but oh well),
- and participation in the stock market is down while the stock market itself is up (a point he made a video on recently).
Point 1: Politicians didn't mention the ways in which people are ACTUALLY better-off, because the donors have been made worse-off by them. This entire section is dedicated to sucking off Lina Kahn, the unelected head of the FTC, who decided she didn't want a corporate job after her inevitable firing and decided to power-trip. How Money Works lists only three things she did -- banning noncompete clauses in contracts, banning algorithmic pricing on Airbnb's, and mandating that cancelling a subscription should take only one click -- and he misattributes all of the antitrust cases against Google to her. He also claims that Lina has been holding back numerous corporate mergers, without listing any examples. And, keeping to the perma-Bear shtick, How Money Works points out that Trump will almost certainly fire this lady and allow stuff How Money Works personally dislikes to happen.
AD-BREAK: Have you fucked up? Now you, too, can unperson yourself with DeleteMe!
Anyway, after the ad-break, How Money Works completely derails and never actually states Points 2 or 3. I'm not sure if I should be happy that he's breaking his self-conditioning, or disappointed that he can't even hold to his own lazy format. He instead:
- flexes his virtue as a working-class-born Ohioan, who got stuck in Hotel California because his "high finance" job there wasn't for him,
- claims he's pretty similar to J.D. Vance (despite not starting out as poor or ending up as relevant), but then all-but-states he voted for Harris,
- goes off on the homelessness crisis in California, how they can't actually do anything about it at this point because there's now a government job sector dedicated to handling it, and how something will have to be done at some point anyway,
- mentions the concept of "Luxury Beliefs" and how most people who matter in politics don't actually give a shit about the economy,
- almost makes a Point 2 by saying that this Luxury Belief stuff comes at the expense of dismissing other voters' problems,
- blames donors again,
- humble-brags that YouTubers did very well in 2024 due to the presidential campaign inflating AdSense prices,
- and makes an incoherent assertion about diminishing returns with ad dollars, which is incoherent because his limited evidence (other than Trump) runs counter to his own claims.
This guy was paid $7 per 1,000 views during the height of this last election. I sure hope he doesn't regret his career path.
Is my assessment of him in the title of this thread wrong? Would you say he's more of a schizophrenic, or an autist?
Last edited:
who repeated on every stream how the rich are going to eat EVERYTHING. Haven’t listened to him since 2020. Of course you could learn to ape the rich and become rich yourself by buying his courses. Gee thanks Johnny. He is married with 4 kids and he is still a faggot.
