Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

112 - Postgame ft. Harvey J. Kaye (Patreon)

Published:
2019-10-30 02:30:56
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Downloads

  • TMBS 112 Postgame Harvey Kaye.mp3

Missing 1 file, as this post has not yet been imported.

Content

Ben Burgis (@BenBurgis) joins us to talk about the “best argument against Medicare 4 All.” Yang backs off Medicare 4 All. Bill Maher is the Bad okay. We watch some lit Bernie. Global update on Argentina, Australia, and Brazil. 



Comments

Alan Ricks

Y’all are all young babies. How did I get so old.

Dylan Schwaegel

I'm so moved by these global uprisings, protests and elections. It gives me profound hope that a revolution is at hand and we (the US) can be a part of it. Can I get some recommendations for sources on all these goings-on? I really want to make a presentation on all of this for my class.

Ryan Barclay DC

Became a Patron for the Postgame. The first ten minutes here with Ben Burgis alone is worth the cost of admission.

Philip Schär

Could you elaborate on how you imagine the US government regulating against automation? The only way I'd see to really do that would be completely banning all modern technology and frankly I don't think that'd be a good idea...

Alexander Schweinsberg

I made the following comment on that Yang video (tried to be nice). Leaving it here for reference in case someone has occasion to mix it up with a Yang ganger on UBI rent gouging: "He makes some very good points, but he's quite wrong when it comes to rent. He says buying power affects prices at the margins but isn't the main driver of inflation. As evidence, he points to the fact that printing four trillion in the post-2008 bailout (quantitative easing) didn't cause inflation in consumer prices (and therefore his UBI isn't likely to either). This reasoning doesn't work because very little of the QE money ended up in consumers' hands, so it can't be used to say much about the effects of a UBI. QE couldn't ever have pushed up prices in the broad and sustained way needed to cause economists to measure a rise in the general inflation rate (i.e. in cars, clothes, food, etc. in addition to housing, education, and healthcare) because QE (increasing banks' reserves through the central bank's purchasing of the bonds and other assets banks hold) is not equivalent to putting money directly into people's pockets. This is because, whatever Fed officials and economics textbooks say, banks literally cannot lend out reserves to average borrowers, so QE cannot spur growth by fueling broad-based consumer spending. Banks can lend reserves to other banks or use them to purchase assets (stocks, securities, real estate), but only the asset purchases do anything for the real economy, and then only a little. Essentially, QE money just goes back and forth between banks (interbank lending) and gets into the money supply only slowly and partially when banks buy assets from the rich rentiers who own everything in the first place and who then (eventually) use the profits to buy some goods and services, etc. That's why QE made for such a poor stimulus for average people: they got the paltry drippings from the rich while all the asset buying pushed up real estate prices and rents along with them. Whatever the drivers of inflation in healthcare and education, QE has contributed massively to the increase in rents, even if supply constraints are also an important factor. In the absence of effective regulation, market forces and landlords' tender mercies will not allow people to hold onto their freedom dividend for very long."

Jørgen Monkerud

keep this shit up Michael! the most important left wing media right here in my opinion.