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

130 - Postgame ft. Crew (Patreon)

Published:
2020-03-12 01:05:04
Imported:
2026-06
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

thanks, patrons

Files

Previews only

Postgame - 130 - ft. Crew

Thanks for being patrons!

Comments

Daniel Weed

Showing Jake Tapper made me so fucking angry. Bernie just has to big dick it like Michael says. VP Nina Turner. Control of transition team. Bernie, you have to put personal relationships to the side. You owe us, the American people, to fight like hell before you join the ancestors.

Joel Smith
>>33558799

I completely agree. And, not just because you have an awesome last name

George Piazza

Biden, again: M4A - 35 trillion - over the course of ten years (as opposed to 50 trillion to 65 trillion for the current system) - or the numerous side benefits - according to the highball Mercatus estimate (as opposed to the Yale or Umass Amherst PERI study) - not factoring in the programs that would be replaced and/or no longer be needed, i.e. adding M4A on top of ACA, Medicare as it is today & Medicaid & other health programs (M4A would replace them).

George Piazza

Yang gang (or supposed Yang Gang) peeps kept shifting their position. No, he IS for M4A! Well, actually M4A is a bad idea. Bernie doesn't own the term 'Medicare For All'. UBI is better than FJG. No, it won't cut the safety net. Fuck the safety net; I want my money! Do some research! Math! Bernie won't speak up about Assange (duh - Assange was a central figure in 2016; Bernie needs to win & Assange is a controversial figure w Dem voters). Assange was a .. oh, wait.. a traitor! Yang will endorse Bernie. Oh, wait.. Milton Friedman was a nobel prize winning economist (yeah, and he had a major influence over the Chicago group - the economists that Nixon & Reagan sent down to Latin America to make sure people like Pinochet served US corporations instead of the locals peasants). Oh, and build more shopping malls! You have got to be kidding me! Micro loans, 'inno' centers and WalMart should tell you what you need to know about that model.

George Piazza

I agree that Bernie should use whatever leverage he has to twist the Dem corporatists arms on real concrete concession like a VP with an unfaltering commitment to Climate & M4A . As for harm reduction, I see climate disruption as too pressing to be patient. I get the argument, but how much time do you think we have? If you believe it is 11 years or less, how much will it matter if Biden is potus? Yes, the judiciary will be less extreme and crisis response might be a bit more sane, but will we see any action tackling looming threats (climate, resource wars, authoritarianism, expanding income inequality, etc.)? I do agree that a national 3rd party is a delusion right now. I remember Ross Perot in 1992. That's why taking over from the inside is the best approach (Bernie); sadly, many in the peanut gallery don't agree; I guess they don't realize how Federal power dynamics works in the current environment.

Danny Heim

From here forward it's gonna take a lot more than politics to pull our ass out of the sling. Get ready to protest while standing on your head, get ready to go to jail.

Ateff

Here we go with spirituality again! you are right Micheal some peope are allergic to the word and I am one of them! yousaid it so clearly: humanity. isn;t humanity descriptive and tangeable enough that we you need to resrot to a VAGUE word used from left to ultra right and religious fanatic???? Hey Micheal I can t help but to think that you might be on the philosophical idealism slope downward to idealism. I love your show so much and I like the person you are ( I might be older than your mom btw , bu ton the same path) that I will react every single time I hear you using this I am sorry stupid word . stupid because it is like a frech wrench used in every and all opposing situations !!! I am sure you have heard of Zizek 's talk on the way Zen helps to kill without feeling anything. ... So much to say .... just please get out of this new new age spiritualism OR define it in a waty that offers a description NOT applicable to mysticism, religion and or ANYTHING else but to spirituality ... heard so many times from Islamic republic authorities that it just repulses me. Yeah I know, now someone will reply : but not THEIR tpe of spirituality... OURS is the authentic one! .... you man such a long history of philosophy is not enough to get us out of idealism????? What is the need to use this vague word????? and ... here is a clip for a better ending... also to aggrevate Rep. Islamic: https://youtu.be/x1tNJAOEPhw :)

Bijou Smith
>>33561451

Your rant is incredibly dumb. Spirituality is just a word, in most discourse it simply refers to love, kindness, compassion, justice, wisdom. In political economy we are not using the word to refer to mysticism or New Age bullsh*t. Islamic Republic (like Christian fascists in the USA) are the opposite of spiritual. Try not to use words in the exact opposite way to which they are intended, then you might not get so enraged over Brooksy's commentary.

Bijou Smith
>>33560353

I tend to agree. But a soft acceleration argument might be applicable at the present time. If Trump wins then the climate issue will be so much more pressing in 2024. Then a modernized FDR demsoc agenda and leadership has a real chance of breaking through. Not so much if Biden puts everyone to sleep. Not full-on Accelerationism tho', 'cos I think that would be net longer term more harm. Also, the deadline for 2 degrees warming is not what a lot of environmentalist fear mongers think. It is the point at which current technology and strategy fully deployed cannot halt a 2 degree warming. But a massive human effort can do a lot to mitigate the harmful consequences, and you can't tell me we will not invent some technology improvements to perhaps even limit to below 2 degrees (it's just we aught not rely on it). We are not going to all just sit around watching the crisis unfold. It will be like a catastrophic war, but a war waged by the planet against us, with humans the only species capable of comprehending it, so we will have to act in solidarity, like any nation does in a war to defend itself, only this will mean the whole world, all nations, will pull together. There is no other choice beyond a certain point of warming and species/ecosystem collapse. The crisis will last far too long for authoritarian fascism to be people's default refuge for any long period of time. We might get climate fascists for a few years, but they are bound to fail. When the people's of the world do pull together, realising even the oligarchs will not be able to shelter themselves from food crises, My point is that Trump is probably the less harmful, if only because he will have 4 years, not 8. The problem with Biden is he (and his entourage) are too blindly wedded to neoliberal economics paradigms, they think they cannot spend US dollars, even though Congress is the monopoly USD issuer, so they will be completely stuck thinking private sector capitalism can save the day, which will be so much more harmful, because the private sector cannot issue dollars, and it is simple deficit spending by government that creates the real resource shifts needed for public projects, not the private for-profit sector. So I think of the time horizon really is short, 4 years to wait is better than 8. So I'd even contemplate voting for Trump, and as a protest vote! ... for a microsecond. But I will not, just instead write-in Bernie or vote for the Greens I think, sends a clearer message.

Bijou Smith

Guys, guys,... @30:30 US dollars are issued by Congress with appropriation votes!!! Congress does not need taxes to spend. Taxes take money OUT of circulation. They cannot logically fund any government programs. It's the EXACT REVERSE in fact: since Congress is the sole monopoly issuer of US dollars YOU cannot pay a single penny in tax before the government spends first, unless you either deplete your savings or take out a bank loan to go into debt. Government spending funds YOUR ability to pay taxes, not the other way around. So the $35 trillion for free healthcare just gets spent into existence, by the Fed incrementing bank accounts using a spreadsheet. It costs next to nothing to do that in terms of real energy. A Fed bank clerks finger will suffice. It cannot be "paid for" in any other way, as a point of logic. What we need taxes for is to drive a demand for the currency and to limit inflation, but (a) there is already demand, and (b) M4A is deflationary, not inflationary, so NO TAX IS NEEDED. But there is also logically never a fee lunch. So what's the real cost of free healthcare? The answer is it takes resources away from the insurance sector putting them into the medical health sector, that's a resource shift, plus the cost of job losses in the insurance industry, plus maybe requiring an increase in medical supplies and professionals, those are the real resource costs, the only real (non-self imposed) constraints on a government that issues a fiat currency. But provided the material resources exist, the Federal government can always pay for them, it is the currency issuer, it just requires Congressional votes. If you don't understand this you will never get a progressive left agenda in your country. Taxes never fund the currency issuer. Taxes cannot logically ever constrain a currency issuer from spending as much as it needs for public purpose. We use tax not as a "pay for" but as an inflation control.

Bijou Smith

So Bernie is not being evasive about how Medicare for All is financed, he is in fact just being wrong, like everyone else who believes in neoclassical economics myth and the "loanable funds model". Money is not a real resource, fiat money especially, it is in effectively infinite supply. Even when backed by gold reserves, nothing stopped the Treasury/Fed from issuing more dollar notes and T-bills than nominally covered the gold supply. You guys need to educate yourselves about public finance, MMT and fiat money operations. The US dollar is a numeraire, it can be issued at will by Congress with enough votes. They could drop $9999 trillion on Andrew Yang's fat mouth tomorrow, if they so pleased and if it was politically acceptable. And guess what? If Yang just dropped that money into a savings account instead of spending it there'd be zero increase in inflation as a result. And generally, and more realistically, because Americans have strong savings desires, raising the US government deficit to around 20% of GDP is never likely to cause any significant inflation. Medicare for All is not only compelling and totally financially affordable in perpetuity, it is also both the most efficient (least overhead) and the only morally acceptable option (once you agree we don't want people dying in the streets). SO ENOUGH WITH THE F___KING "PAY FORS" guys. "How you gonna pay for it?" is not a valid question for a candidate running for National (Federal office), It is not a logical question. Only currency users who have no currency issuing power have a "pay for" problem. What pisses me off, and what's so ultra annoying and disappointing about Ben Burgis, is he can use all the beautiful logic in the world, but if you start with false facts then your logic means sh*t. So to be crystal clear: currency issuing governments do face constraints, real resource constraints and inflation constraints. But they have no logical constraint on how much they can spend in the currency they legally have a monopoly over issuing. The US Congress has self-imposed irrational constraints like the "debt ceiling" (where is it by the way?) So if there are only 1 million trained qualified nurses, then M4A spending cannot hire more than a million qualified nurses. But it can always hire all of them, without question. This is an example of a real fiscal constraint, but it not a financial constraint. The US government NEVER needs to collect any tax to be able to pay the wages of as many nurses as are qualified and want a job. Government might tax to slow inflation, but that's an independent decision unrelated to the choice to provide everyone with free healthcare. And besides, moderate inflation is not a bad thing, it's a very, very good thing. Inflation reduces the purchasing value of hoarded wealth, and decreases the burden of past debt. It is wholesome. And deficit spending driven inflation NEVER leads to hyperinflation. Supply collapse is what causes hyperinflations, that's just historical fact. The causes of most supply collapses are war, pestilence, famine, draught, corruption, foreign debt burden, or other causes of industrial production crises. NOTE: the OPEC oil price shocks caused inflation, but nowhere did it cause hyperinflation, it was indefinitely sustainable. Normal price-wage inflation is merely a re-gauging of the currency. It is never harmful. It can be a hassle, but if wages keep up with prices it never hurts anyone except purely predatory financial market traders and the ultra-rich who hoarded money, and who anyway are doing no valuable productive work with their savings. All our private savings (NET across the whole population) come from past government deficits. Point of pure logic that! It cannot be any other way. Banks loans do create money, but not NET financial savings. So if our government wants to allow families to have savings when the current account is in balance, they must spend more than they tax back. (Hint: "revenue" means "return back". It came from the government spending FIRST bitches!) No tax payer in sight.