+3 votes
in Websites by (3.8k points)

I found that YouTube allows users to earn money from ads on videos. Users need to have 10 000 subscribers to start earning money. YouTube takes 45% of earn money. 

5 Answers


No 10,000. One can start earning money if he has 1,000 subscribers and 4,000 hours of view time for the past 12 months.

Kninjanin Dan

OK, thank you! 


Make some money Kninjanin! You can do it! 


My favorite YouTuber is Pat Condell.  Right on the money politically, and delivered with expert comedic timing.   :) :) :)

Tink!!!   ..."in my capacity as sole moral arbiter of the universe"...??? :D  ;)

I did not follow the whole of that, but enjoyed it very much...excellent humour...actually, I have been watching more of Bret Weinstein's evaluation of the Evergreen situation, which does seem to correlate (shudder) with this fellow's comments...

Well, Virginia, Weinstein is right.

Oh, and did you hear?  Naima Lowe, the worst faculty instigator, also resigned.


My computer could open that (yay). The article mentions the possibility that her resignation was a condition of the financial compensation package, and imo she should never have been hired there.

I think Bret Weinstein has taken special efforts to train his mind in clear thinking, as have both you and I. He indicates that when campuses give themselves over to social justice, they lose their highest mission which has to do with an educational forum for free exchange of ideas (I may not be paraphrasing him full accuracy, but this is what I took away). 

Weinstein posted a graph that shows Evergreen enrollment declining since 2011 - which coincidentally is the same year Evergreen proclaimed for social justice mission.

Yes, Virginia, that's true.  The enrollment graph is shown in this video.

Yes! That is one of the videos I watched, Tink...and I am STILL stretching to comprehend what is currently happening on college campuses...the so-called 'trigger warnings'...? Strange!

Virginia, the HuffPo loves trigger warnings, and you use them yourself, when you warn us about your capitalism posts.  (That gives me a chance to retreat to a safe space.)  :)


Tink, I looked at the Huff article and that is JUST WEIRD. 

"The national conversation has been tough on trigger warnings, with many arguing that these advisories have gone too far, impeding academic freedom."

Impeding academic freedom??? My Q's can look very innocent and interesting, so why wouldn't I have the courtesy to alert folks there is a capitalism Trojan horse here that could make you roll your eyes? Also, I expanded the U of Chicago letter, and it is bizarre! "...freedom of expression does not mean the freedom to harass or threaten others"...so to take a moment to be polite and alert people what they are getting into means you are harassed and threatened? 

Am I missing something here? Do you have a different opinion or experience with trigger warnings?


Actually, Virginia, I take trigger warnings with a large grain of humor.  The idea that someone should be frightened or feel threatened by a reasonably presented topic is laughable. I always took your capitalism trigger warnings as tongue-in-cheek on your part.  :)

This of course does not include trigger warnings of a deliberately incendiary sort. (Example: 'warning: Jews may not like this content', reminiscent of the old Nazi 'Juden haben keinen Zutritt', no Jews allowed.)

And yes, I think the snowflake mentality has gone much too far on college campuses, as have the re-definitions of racist, sexist, etc., to include anyone who disagrees with the opinions of the users of such epithets.

Okay Tink, now (I think) I see why U of Chicago would go to such lengths to repudiate the trigger warnings? It's the incendiary parallels threatening discrimination or something? (I am really stretching here...there's SJ drama going on I have NO experience with...)

And now, ima go Google "snowflake mentality"...I did watch two or three YouTube posts interviewing Bret Weinstein recently, and his explanations are clear, and prolly accurate to the best of his ability...there is some VERY strange stuff happening now.

In some respects, Virginia, it is not so strange.  The leadership of the PC movement knows perfectly well that it is nonsense, but they see it as a means to political power.

Their empty slogans and talking points are straight out of Mein Kampf:  "All propaganda must be popular and its intellectual level must be adjusted to the most limited intelligence among those it is addressed to."

Well...I have come away with a better understanding of "trigger warnings"...now thinking that U of Chicago might be on the right track! Also I spent some time in puzzlement, learning about "snowflake mentality," and "snowflake generation" ...and PC as a means to political power??? PC as a MOVEMENT ??? 

Well PC is happening so I am glad to learn of it (I guess), but truly too extreme for me...ima take up writing limericks now, I think...;)  :silly:  :D

Exhibit A, Virginia:

Tink...I saw that, and ended up skeptical of Thomas Sowell's test...because, Dan posted information about Venezuela; and seems to me that was Hugo Chavez' failure, propped up for a short time by oil revenue. And everything collapsed but ONLY when the oil income fell?

My problems with socialism are that with 73 years human experience, I cannot think of any way to get socialism to work out. As you know I have been listening to Bret Weinstein and he points out, for example, "we need markets," and I agree.


Hi Kninjanin, if I were to post on YouTube, i prolly would not even try to figure out the money aspect...I would just assume it was prolly stacked!


Thanks fir the help Dan. I also thought that a user needs 10,000 subscribers to start earning money.