Perspective is everything
-
0:01 - 0:03What you have here
-
0:03 - 0:06is an electronic cigarette.
-
0:07 - 0:10It's something that, since it was
invented a year or two ago, -
0:10 - 0:12has given me untold happiness.
-
0:12 - 0:13(Laughter)
-
0:13 - 0:15A little bit of it,
I think, is the nicotine, -
0:15 - 0:17but there's something
much bigger than that; -
0:17 - 0:23which is, ever since, in the UK,
they banned smoking in public places, -
0:23 - 0:26I've never enjoyed
a drinks party ever again. -
0:26 - 0:28(Laughter)
-
0:28 - 0:31And the reason, I only worked out
just the other day, -
0:31 - 0:34which is: when you go
to a drinks party and you stand up -
0:34 - 0:37and hold a glass of red wine
and you talk endlessly to people, -
0:37 - 0:39you don't actually want to spend
all the time talking. -
0:39 - 0:41It's really, really tiring.
-
0:41 - 0:45Sometimes you just want to stand there
silently, alone with your thoughts. -
0:45 - 0:49Sometimes you just want to stand
in the corner and stare out of the window. -
0:50 - 0:53Now the problem is, when you can't smoke,
-
0:53 - 0:56if you stand and stare
out of the window on your own, -
0:57 - 0:59you're an antisocial, friendless idiot.
-
0:59 - 1:01(Laughter)
-
1:01 - 1:05If you stand and stare out of the window
on your own with a cigarette, -
1:05 - 1:06you're a fucking philosopher.
-
1:06 - 1:09(Laughter)
-
1:09 - 1:15(Applause)
-
1:15 - 1:18So the power of reframing things
-
1:20 - 1:22cannot be overstated.
-
1:22 - 1:26What we have is exactly
the same thing, the same activity, -
1:26 - 1:28but one of them makes you feel great
-
1:28 - 1:32and the other one,
with just a small change of posture, -
1:32 - 1:33makes you feel terrible.
-
1:34 - 1:37And I think one of the problems
with classical economics is, -
1:37 - 1:40it's absolutely preoccupied with reality.
-
1:40 - 1:43And reality isn't a particularly good
guide to human happiness. -
1:44 - 1:49Why, for example,
are pensioners much happier -
1:49 - 1:50than the young unemployed?
-
1:51 - 1:55Both of them, after all,
are in exactly the same stage of life. -
1:55 - 1:58You both have too much time
on your hands and not much money. -
1:58 - 2:01But pensioners are reportedly
very, very happy, -
2:01 - 2:05whereas the unemployed
are extraordinarily unhappy and depressed. -
2:05 - 2:08The reason, I think,
is that the pensioners believe -
2:08 - 2:09they've chosen to be pensioners,
-
2:09 - 2:13whereas the young unemployed
feel it's been thrust upon them. -
2:15 - 2:19In England, the upper-middle classes have
actually solved this problem perfectly, -
2:19 - 2:21because they've re-branded unemployment.
-
2:21 - 2:23If you're an upper-middle-class
English person, -
2:23 - 2:26you call unemployment "a year off."
-
2:26 - 2:28(Laughter)
-
2:29 - 2:32And that's because having a son
who's unemployed in Manchester -
2:32 - 2:34is really quite embarrassing.
-
2:34 - 2:37But having a son
who's unemployed in Thailand -
2:37 - 2:39is really viewed
as quite an accomplishment. -
2:39 - 2:41(Laughter)
-
2:41 - 2:43But actually, the power
to re-brand things -- -
2:43 - 2:49to understand that
our experiences, costs, things -
2:49 - 2:51don't actually much depend
on what they really are, -
2:51 - 2:53but on how we view them --
-
2:53 - 2:56I genuinely think can't be overstated.
-
2:56 - 2:58There's an experiment
I think Daniel Pink refers to, -
2:58 - 3:01where you put two dogs in a box
-
3:01 - 3:04and the box has an electric floor.
-
3:05 - 3:10Every now and then,
an electric shock is applied to the floor, -
3:10 - 3:12which pains the dogs.
-
3:13 - 3:16The only difference is one of the dogs
has a small button in its half of the box. -
3:17 - 3:20And when it nuzzles the button,
the electric shock stops. -
3:21 - 3:24The other dog doesn't have the button.
-
3:24 - 3:28It's exposed to exactly the same level
of pain as the dog in the first box, -
3:28 - 3:31but it has no control
over the circumstances. -
3:32 - 3:35Generally, the first dog
can be relatively content. -
3:35 - 3:38The second dog lapses
into complete depression. -
3:39 - 3:44The circumstances of our lives
may actually matter less to our happiness -
3:44 - 3:47than the sense of control
we feel over our lives. -
3:49 - 3:50It's an interesting question.
-
3:51 - 3:54We ask the question -- the whole
debate in the Western world -
3:54 - 3:56is about the level of taxation.
-
3:56 - 3:58But I think there's another
debate to be asked, -
3:58 - 4:02which is the level of control
we have over our tax money, -
4:02 - 4:07that what costs us 10 pounds
in one context can be a curse; -
4:07 - 4:11what costs us 10 pounds in a different
context, we may actually welcome. -
4:12 - 4:17You know, pay 20,000 pounds
in tax toward health, -
4:17 - 4:19and you're merely feeling a mug.
-
4:19 - 4:22Pay 20,000 pounds
to endow a hospital ward, -
4:22 - 4:24and you're called a philanthropist.
-
4:25 - 4:28I'm probably in the wrong country
to talk about willingness to pay tax. -
4:28 - 4:30(Laughter)
-
4:30 - 4:35So I'll give you one in return:
how you frame things really matters. -
4:35 - 4:38Do you call it "The bailout of Greece"?
-
4:38 - 4:41Or "The bailout of a load of stupid banks
which lent to Greece"? -
4:41 - 4:42(Laughter)
-
4:42 - 4:44Because they are actually the same thing.
-
4:44 - 4:48What you call them
actually affects how you react to them, -
4:48 - 4:50viscerally and morally.
-
4:50 - 4:53I think psychological value is great,
to be absolutely honest. -
4:53 - 4:56One of my great friends,
a professor called Nick Chater, -
4:56 - 4:59who's the Professor of Decision
Sciences in London, -
4:59 - 5:04believes we should spend far less time
looking into humanity's hidden depths, -
5:04 - 5:07and spend much more time
exploring the hidden shallows. -
5:07 - 5:09I think that's true, actually.
-
5:09 - 5:14I think impressions have an insane effect
on what we think and what we do. -
5:14 - 5:17But what we don't have is a really
good model of human psychology -- -
5:17 - 5:20at least pre-Kahneman, perhaps,
-
5:20 - 5:23we didn't have a really good model
of human psychology -
5:23 - 5:28to put alongside models of engineering,
of neoclassical economics. -
5:28 - 5:31So people who believed in psychological
solutions didn't have a model. -
5:31 - 5:33We didn't have a framework.
-
5:33 - 5:36This is what Warren Buffett's
business partner Charlie Munger calls -
5:36 - 5:39"a latticework on which
to hang your ideas." -
5:39 - 5:42Engineers, economists,
classical economists -
5:42 - 5:45all had a very, very robust
existing latticework -
5:45 - 5:48on which practically
every idea could be hung. -
5:48 - 5:51We merely have a collection
of random individual insights -
5:51 - 5:53without an overall model.
-
5:54 - 5:58And what that means
is that, in looking at solutions, -
5:58 - 6:01we've probably given too much priority
-
6:01 - 6:05to what I call technical engineering
solutions, Newtonian solutions, -
6:05 - 6:07and not nearly enough
to the psychological ones. -
6:07 - 6:10You know my example of the Eurostar:
-
6:10 - 6:11six million pounds spent
-
6:11 - 6:14to reduce the journey time
between Paris and London -
6:14 - 6:16by about 40 minutes.
-
6:17 - 6:20For 0.01 percent of this money,
you could have put wi-fi on the trains, -
6:20 - 6:23which wouldn't have reduced
the duration of the journey, -
6:23 - 6:27but would have improved its enjoyment
and its usefulness far more. -
6:28 - 6:30For maybe 10 percent of the money,
-
6:30 - 6:33you could have paid all of the world's top
male and female supermodels -
6:33 - 6:36to walk up and down the train
handing out free Château Pétrus -
6:36 - 6:37to all the passengers.
-
6:37 - 6:38(Laughter)
-
6:38 - 6:41You'd still have five million
pounds in change, -
6:41 - 6:43and people would ask
for the trains to be slowed down. -
6:43 - 6:48(Laughter)
-
6:48 - 6:51Why were we not given the chance
to solve that problem psychologically? -
6:51 - 6:53I think it's because there's an imbalance,
-
6:53 - 7:00an asymmetry in the way we treat creative,
emotionally driven psychological ideas -
7:00 - 7:05versus the way we treat rational,
numerical, spreadsheet-driven ideas. -
7:05 - 7:07If you're a creative person,
I think, quite rightly, -
7:08 - 7:10you have to share
all your ideas for approval -
7:10 - 7:12with people much more rational than you.
-
7:12 - 7:15You have to go in
and have a cost-benefit analysis, -
7:15 - 7:18a feasibility study,
an ROI study and so forth. -
7:18 - 7:20And I think that's probably right.
-
7:21 - 7:23But this does not apply
the other way around. -
7:23 - 7:25People who have an existing framework --
-
7:25 - 7:28an economic framework,
an engineering framework -- -
7:28 - 7:31feel that, actually,
logic is its own answer. -
7:32 - 7:34What they don't say is,
"Well, the numbers all seem to add up, -
7:34 - 7:38but before I present this idea,
I'll show it to some really crazy people -
7:38 - 7:40to see if they can come up with
something better." -
7:40 - 7:43And so we -- artificially,
I think -- prioritize -
7:43 - 7:47what I'd call mechanistic ideas
over psychological ideas. -
7:48 - 7:50An example of a great psychological idea:
-
7:50 - 7:52the single best improvement
in passenger satisfaction -
7:52 - 7:54on the London Underground,
-
7:54 - 7:55per pound spent,
-
7:55 - 7:58came when they didn't add
any extra trains, -
7:58 - 7:59nor change the frequency of the trains;
-
7:59 - 8:03they put dot matrix display boards
on the platforms -- -
8:04 - 8:07because the nature of a wait is not just
dependent on its numerical quality, -
8:07 - 8:09its duration,
-
8:09 - 8:12but on the level of uncertainty
you experience during that wait. -
8:12 - 8:15Waiting seven minutes for a train
with a countdown clock -
8:15 - 8:17is less frustrating and irritating
-
8:17 - 8:20than waiting four minutes,
knuckle biting, going, -
8:20 - 8:22"When's this train
going to damn well arrive?" -
8:23 - 8:25Here's a beautiful example
of a psychological solution -
8:25 - 8:27deployed in Korea.
-
8:27 - 8:29Red traffic lights have a countdown delay.
-
8:29 - 8:32It's proven to reduce
the accident rate in experiments. -
8:32 - 8:33Why?
-
8:33 - 8:37Because road rage, impatience and general
irritation are massively reduced -
8:37 - 8:41when you can actually see
the time you have to wait. -
8:41 - 8:44In China, not really understanding
the principle behind this, -
8:44 - 8:46they applied the same principle
to green traffic lights -- -
8:46 - 8:50(Laughter)
-
8:50 - 8:52which isn't a great idea.
-
8:52 - 8:55You're 200 yards away, you realize
you've got five seconds to go, -
8:55 - 8:56you floor it.
-
8:56 - 8:59(Laughter)
-
8:59 - 9:02The Koreans, very assiduously,
did test both. -
9:02 - 9:05The accident rate goes down
when you apply this to red traffic lights; -
9:05 - 9:08it goes up when you apply it
to green traffic lights. -
9:08 - 9:11This is all I'm asking for, really,
in human decision making, -
9:11 - 9:13is the consideration
of these three things. -
9:13 - 9:16I'm not asking for the complete primacy
of one over the other. -
9:16 - 9:18I'm merely saying
that when you solve problems, -
9:18 - 9:21you should look
at all three of these equally, -
9:21 - 9:23and you should seek as far as possible
-
9:23 - 9:26to find solutions which sit
in the sweet spot in the middle. -
9:26 - 9:28If you actually look at a great business,
-
9:28 - 9:32you'll nearly always see all of these
three things coming into play. -
9:32 - 9:33Really successful businesses --
-
9:33 - 9:36Google is a great, great
technological success, -
9:36 - 9:39but it's also based
on a very good psychological insight: -
9:40 - 9:43people believe something
that only does one thing -
9:43 - 9:47is better at that thing than something
that does that thing and something else. -
9:47 - 9:50It's an innate thing
called "goal dilution." -
9:50 - 9:52Ayelet Fishbach has written
a paper about this. -
9:52 - 9:55Everybody else at the time
of Google, more or less, -
9:55 - 9:56was trying to be a portal.
-
9:56 - 9:59Yes, there's a search function,
but you also have weather, -
9:59 - 10:01sports scores, bits of news.
-
10:02 - 10:04Google understood
that if you're just a search engine, -
10:04 - 10:07people assume you're a very,
very good search engine. -
10:07 - 10:11All of you know this, actually,
from when you go in to buy a television, -
10:11 - 10:14and in the shabbier end
of the row of flat-screen TVs, -
10:14 - 10:16you can see, are these
rather despised things -
10:16 - 10:19called "combined TV and DVD players."
-
10:20 - 10:23And we have no knowledge whatsoever
of the quality of those things, -
10:23 - 10:26but we look at a combined
TV and DVD player and we go, "Uck. -
10:26 - 10:30It's probably a bit of a crap telly
and a bit rubbish as a DVD player." -
10:30 - 10:33So we walk out of the shops
with one of each. -
10:33 - 10:38Google is as much a psychological success
as it is a technological one. -
10:39 - 10:42I propose that we can use
psychology to solve problems -
10:42 - 10:44that we didn't even realize
were problems at all. -
10:44 - 10:48This is my suggestion for getting people
to finish their course of antibiotics. -
10:48 - 10:49Don't give them 24 white pills;
-
10:49 - 10:52give them 18 white pills and six blue ones
-
10:52 - 10:54and tell them to take
the white pills first, -
10:55 - 10:56and then take the blue ones.
-
10:57 - 10:58It's called "chunking."
-
10:58 - 11:01The likelihood that people will get
to the end is much greater -
11:01 - 11:04when there is a milestone
somewhere in the middle. -
11:05 - 11:07One of the great mistakes,
I think, of economics -
11:07 - 11:10is it fails to understand
that what something is -- -
11:10 - 11:12whether it's retirement,
unemployment, cost -- -
11:13 - 11:17is a function, not only of its amount,
but also its meaning. -
11:18 - 11:21This is a toll crossing in Britain.
-
11:21 - 11:24Quite often queues happen at the tolls.
-
11:24 - 11:26Sometimes you get very,
very severe queues. -
11:26 - 11:28You could apply
the same principle, actually, -
11:28 - 11:30to the security lanes in airports.
-
11:30 - 11:33What would happen if you could actually
pay twice as much money -
11:33 - 11:34to cross the bridge,
-
11:34 - 11:36but go through a lane
that's an express lane? -
11:36 - 11:38It's not an unreasonable thing to do;
-
11:38 - 11:40it's an economically
efficient thing to do. -
11:40 - 11:42Time means more
to some people than others. -
11:42 - 11:45If you're waiting trying
to get to a job interview, -
11:45 - 11:49you'd patently pay a couple of pounds more
to go through the fast lane. -
11:49 - 11:51If you're on the way
to visit your mother-in-law, -
11:51 - 11:52you'd probably prefer --
-
11:52 - 11:54(Laughter)
-
11:54 - 11:56you'd probably prefer to stay on the left.
-
11:56 - 12:00The only problem is if you introduce
this economically efficient solution, -
12:00 - 12:01people hate it ...
-
12:02 - 12:05because they think you're deliberately
creating delays at the bridge -
12:05 - 12:07in order to maximize your revenue,
-
12:07 - 12:10and, "Why on earth should I pay
to subsidize your incompetence?" -
12:10 - 12:13On the other hand,
change the frame slightly -
12:13 - 12:15and create charitable yield management,
-
12:15 - 12:18so the extra money you get
goes not to the bridge company, -
12:18 - 12:19it goes to charity ...
-
12:20 - 12:23and the mental willingness
to pay completely changes. -
12:24 - 12:27You have a relatively
economically efficient solution, -
12:27 - 12:29but one that actually meets
with public approval -
12:29 - 12:31and even a small degree of affection,
-
12:31 - 12:33rather than being seen as bastardy.
-
12:35 - 12:37So where economists
make the fundamental mistake -
12:37 - 12:39is they think that money is money.
-
12:40 - 12:45Actually, my pain experienced
in paying five pounds -
12:45 - 12:47is not just proportionate to the amount,
-
12:47 - 12:49but where I think that money is going.
-
12:49 - 12:52And I think understanding that
could revolutionize tax policy. -
12:52 - 12:54It could revolutionize
the public services. -
12:54 - 12:57It could actually change things
quite significantly. -
12:57 - 12:58[Ludwig Von Mises is my hero.]
-
12:58 - 13:00Here's a guy you all need to study.
-
13:00 - 13:02He's an Austrian School economist
-
13:02 - 13:06who was first active in the first half
of the 20th century in Vienna. -
13:06 - 13:09What was interesting
about the Austrian School -
13:09 - 13:12is they actually grew up alongside Freud.
-
13:12 - 13:14And so they're predominantly
interested in psychology. -
13:14 - 13:19They believed that there was
a discipline called praxeology, -
13:19 - 13:21which is a prior discipline
to the study of economics. -
13:21 - 13:26Praxeology is the study of human choice,
action and decision-making. -
13:27 - 13:28I think they're right.
-
13:28 - 13:30I think the danger
we have in today's world -
13:30 - 13:32is we have the study of economics
-
13:32 - 13:36considers itself to be a prior discipline
to the study of human psychology. -
13:36 - 13:39But as Charlie Munger says,
"If economics isn't behavioral, -
13:39 - 13:40I don't know what the hell is."
-
13:42 - 13:48Von Mises, interestingly, believes
economics is just a subset of psychology. -
13:48 - 13:50I think he just refers to economics
-
13:50 - 13:53as "the study of human praxeology
under conditions of scarcity." -
13:54 - 13:57But Von Mises, among many other things,
-
13:57 - 14:02I think uses an analogy which is probably
the best justification and explanation -
14:02 - 14:06for the value of marketing,
the value of perceived value -
14:06 - 14:09and the fact that we should treat it
as being absolutely equivalent -
14:09 - 14:11to any other kind of value.
-
14:11 - 14:14We tend to, all of us, even those of us
who work in marketing, -
14:14 - 14:15think of value in two ways:
-
14:15 - 14:18the real value, which is when
you make something in a factory -
14:18 - 14:19or provide a service,
-
14:19 - 14:21and then there's a dubious value,
-
14:21 - 14:24which you create by changing
the way people look at things. -
14:24 - 14:26Von Mises completely rejected
this distinction. -
14:26 - 14:28And he used this following analogy:
-
14:28 - 14:33he referred to strange economists
called the French physiocrats, -
14:34 - 14:37who believed that the only true value
was what you extracted from the land. -
14:37 - 14:40So if you're a shepherd
or a quarryman or a farmer, -
14:40 - 14:41you created true value.
-
14:41 - 14:44If however, you bought
some wool from the shepherd -
14:44 - 14:47and charged a premium
for converting it into a hat, -
14:47 - 14:49you weren't actually creating value,
-
14:49 - 14:51you were exploiting the shepherd.
-
14:51 - 14:55Now, Von Mises said that modern
economists make exactly the same mistake -
14:55 - 14:57with regard to advertising and marketing.
-
14:58 - 14:59He says if you run a restaurant,
-
14:59 - 15:02there is no healthy distinction to be made
-
15:02 - 15:04between the value you create
by cooking the food -
15:04 - 15:07and the value you create
by sweeping the floor. -
15:07 - 15:10One of them creates, perhaps,
the primary product -- -
15:10 - 15:12the thing we think we're paying for --
-
15:12 - 15:14the other one creates a context
within which we can enjoy -
15:14 - 15:16and appreciate that product.
-
15:16 - 15:19And the idea that one of them
should have priority over the other -
15:19 - 15:20is fundamentally wrong.
-
15:21 - 15:23Try this quick thought experiment:
-
15:23 - 15:25imagine a restaurant
that serves Michelin-starred food, -
15:25 - 15:28but where the restaurant smells of sewage
-
15:28 - 15:30and there's human feces on the floor.
-
15:30 - 15:32(Laughter)
-
15:32 - 15:34The best thing you can do there
to create value -
15:34 - 15:37is not actually to improve
the food still further, -
15:37 - 15:40it's to get rid of the smell
and clean up the floor. -
15:42 - 15:45And it's vital we understand this.
-
15:45 - 15:47If that seems like a sort
of strange, abstruse thing -- -
15:48 - 15:51in the UK, the post office
had a 98 percent success rate -
15:51 - 15:54at delivering first-class
mail the next day. -
15:54 - 15:56They decided this wasn't good enough,
-
15:56 - 15:58and they wanted to get it up to 99.
-
15:59 - 16:03The effort to do that
almost broke the organization. -
16:04 - 16:06If, at the same time,
you'd gone and asked people, -
16:06 - 16:09"What percentage of first-class mail
arrives the next day?" -
16:09 - 16:13the average answer, or the modal answer,
would have been "50 to 60 percent." -
16:13 - 16:16Now, if your perception
is much worse than your reality, -
16:16 - 16:19what on earth are you doing
trying to change the reality? -
16:19 - 16:23That's like trying to improve the food
in a restaurant that stinks. -
16:24 - 16:27What you need to do is,
first of all, tell people -
16:27 - 16:32that 98 percent of first-class mail
gets there the next day. -
16:32 - 16:33That's pretty good.
-
16:33 - 16:36I would argue, in Britain,
there's a much better frame of reference, -
16:36 - 16:40which is to tell people that more
first-class mail arrives the next day -
16:40 - 16:43in the UK than in Germany,
because generally, in Britain, -
16:43 - 16:45if you want to make us happy
about something, -
16:45 - 16:47just tell us we do it
better than the Germans. -
16:47 - 16:49(Laughter)
-
16:49 - 16:51(Applause)
-
16:51 - 16:54Choose your frame of reference
and the perceived value, -
16:54 - 16:58and therefore, the actual value
is completely transformed. -
16:58 - 16:59It has to be said of the Germans
-
16:59 - 17:02that the Germans and the French
are doing a brilliant job -
17:02 - 17:04of creating a united Europe.
-
17:04 - 17:07The only thing they didn't expect
is they're uniting Europe -
17:07 - 17:10through a shared mild hatred
of the French and Germans. -
17:10 - 17:12But I'm British;
that's the way we like it. -
17:12 - 17:14(Laughter)
-
17:14 - 17:16What you'll also notice
is that, in any case, -
17:16 - 17:17our perception is leaky.
-
17:17 - 17:20We can't tell the difference
between the quality of the food -
17:20 - 17:22and the environment
in which we consume it. -
17:22 - 17:24All of you will have seen this phenomenon
-
17:24 - 17:26if you have your car washed or valeted.
-
17:26 - 17:30When you drive away,
your car feels as if it drives better. -
17:30 - 17:31(Laughter)
-
17:31 - 17:32And the reason for this --
-
17:32 - 17:35unless my car valet
mysteriously is changing the oil -
17:35 - 17:38and performing work which I'm not paying
him for and I'm unaware of -- -
17:38 - 17:41is because perception
is, in any case, leaky. -
17:41 - 17:45Analgesics that are branded
are more effective at reducing pain -
17:45 - 17:46than analgesics that are not branded.
-
17:46 - 17:49I don't just mean through reported
pain reduction -- -
17:49 - 17:51actual measured pain reduction.
-
17:51 - 17:55And so perception
actually is leaky in any case. -
17:56 - 17:59So if you do something
that's perceptually bad in one respect, -
17:59 - 18:00you can damage the other.
-
18:00 - 18:01Thank you very much.
-
18:01 - 18:04(Applause)
- Title:
- Perspective is everything
- Speaker:
- Rory Sutherland
- Description:
-
The circumstances of our lives may matter less than how we see them, says Rory Sutherland. At TEDxAthens, he makes a compelling case for how reframing is the key to happiness.
- Video Language:
- English
- Team:
- closed TED
- Project:
- TEDTalks
- Duration:
- 18:24
Krystian Aparta commented on English subtitles for Perspective is everything | ||
Krystian Aparta edited English subtitles for Perspective is everything | ||
Krystian Aparta edited English subtitles for Perspective is everything | ||
Camille Martínez commented on English subtitles for Perspective is everything | ||
Jenny Zurawell edited English subtitles for Perspective is everything | ||
Jenny Zurawell commented on English subtitles for Perspective is everything | ||
Jenny Zurawell edited English subtitles for Perspective is everything | ||
Jenny Zurawell edited English subtitles for Perspective is everything |
Krystian Aparta
The English transcript was updated on 4/20/2017. On-screen text ("[Ludwig Von Mises is my hero.]") was added at 12:56.