Modern Monetary Theory, explained - Vox

CRBG comments on Apr 17, 2019:

Help me understand this: Instead of raising taxes to pay for social programs, they're proposing printing more money? Printing more money will simply make the value of the dollar tank. The only reason countries like Lebanon and Zimbabwe are using the US dollar instead of their own currency is that...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 17, 2019:

@CRBG I'm not a Yang fan. I'm not entirely against UBI, but he seems to want to use it to replace the entire safety net, as libertarians are wont to do, and I think people need a lot more help than just a check. I wish he were on the MMT train--he might be open to it, but for now he seems set on putting in place a regressive VAT tax.

Modern Monetary Theory, explained - Vox

CRBG comments on Apr 17, 2019:

Help me understand this: Instead of raising taxes to pay for social programs, they're proposing printing more money? Printing more money will simply make the value of the dollar tank. The only reason countries like Lebanon and Zimbabwe are using the US dollar instead of their own currency is that...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 17, 2019:

I mentioned the part about the diverse economy, strong military, and diplomatic power (forgot to mention stable government) because that helps maintain the integrity of our reserve currency. That is, it helps maintain confidence that we'll pay our debts through taxation. So we should be fine as long as we keep deficits within a reasonable percentage of GDP (historically it's been about 4% and it could probably be higher). So in a nutshell, it all kind of follows from the fact that we're the world's reserve currency: reserve currency begets trade deficit, trade deficit begets economic deficits, economic deficits beget deficit spending, deficit spending begets printing money and issuing bonds only to keep interest rates from going too low, and printing money while maintaining our credibility as a tax authority begets being the world's reserve currency. Maintaining those balances comes with some nice privileges.

Modern Monetary Theory, explained - Vox

CRBG comments on Apr 17, 2019:

Help me understand this: Instead of raising taxes to pay for social programs, they're proposing printing more money? Printing more money will simply make the value of the dollar tank. The only reason countries like Lebanon and Zimbabwe are using the US dollar instead of their own currency is that...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 17, 2019:

First, keep in mind first that the US is unique in that it not only can print its own currency but that currency is the world's reserve currency. Because it is the world's reserve currency, that will always be balanced out by trade deficits. It also has one of the world's most diverse economies and is arguably the world's strongest military and diplomatic power. After the 2008 financial crisis, there was a lot of bad debt that only an entity with a long time horizon, like the US government, could clean up. So they printed tens of trillions of dollars to do just that. To the surprise of some, not only did hyperinflation not result, but much of the world's economies threatened to go into deflation, with interest rates going negative. The US government managed to make money off the investments it's sold off, but regardless there are still more than $10 trillion on the federal reserve's balance sheet. Subsequently, economists and people on Wall Street have searched for a theoretical framework to help explain what was happening in the economy. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/05/business/economy/mmt-wall-street.html Some key things to understand about the theory are: 1. Printing money without issuing bonds actually drives down interest rates because there ends up being more money in private bank accounts/reserves not yet being lent out 2. If government spending goes toward something that increases productivity, that should balance out some increased consumer demand. A good application of this would be a job guarantee. The government was once going to become the employer of last resort and it got watered down to giving the Fed a mandate to keep unemployment down. 3. When you have trade deficits government deficits are balanced by surpluses in the economy and likewise government surpluses are balanced by deficits in the economy. Case in point the 2001 recession that followed a government surplus.

I Have a Problem With This...

iThink comments on Apr 16, 2019:

I am willing to bet the ranch when they rebuild Notre Dame they will make it a shrine to diversity and multi-culturalism - very much like what was done on the site of the destroyed World Trade Center in NY.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 17, 2019:

@iThink LOL, if they're that easy to find, why don't you post the link of one that you think is credible? Better yet, find one in Illinois.

I Have a Problem With This...

iThink comments on Apr 16, 2019:

I am willing to bet the ranch when they rebuild Notre Dame they will make it a shrine to diversity and multi-culturalism - very much like what was done on the site of the destroyed World Trade Center in NY.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 17, 2019:

@iThink Here's the refugee screening process from 2015. I hear it's gotten more "extreme."

I Have a Problem With This...

iThink comments on Apr 16, 2019:

I am willing to bet the ranch when they rebuild Notre Dame they will make it a shrine to diversity and multi-culturalism - very much like what was done on the site of the destroyed World Trade Center in NY.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 17, 2019:

@iThink Let's constrain this conversation to the United States. Do you truly think those things you mention exist here? I saw someone post on this site that Sharia law had arrived in Illinois--and remember Roy Moore saying that it had taken over whole communities in Illinois and Indiana. I also remember Michele Bachmann, I believe, talking about Sharia law in Dearborn Michigan. As an Illinoisan, I can confidently debunk those notions.

I Have a Problem With This...

iThink comments on Apr 16, 2019:

I am willing to bet the ranch when they rebuild Notre Dame they will make it a shrine to diversity and multi-culturalism - very much like what was done on the site of the destroyed World Trade Center in NY.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@iThink I'm not an expert on the situation in Europe, but I think those worries are overblown. Regardless, the situation in the US is not exactly the same. We have an ocean between us and Muslim countries and, due to our wars the Middle East and northern Africa, a moral obligation to accept refugees. Moreover, we have always been a multicultural nation, and a successful one at that. You paint with one brush the diverse global community of 1.8 billion Muslims. Your concern would be better focused on Saudi Arabia who spreads its extremist Wahhabism in Europe and throughout the Muslim world in its rivalry with Iran.

I Have a Problem With This...

iThink comments on Apr 16, 2019:

I am willing to bet the ranch when they rebuild Notre Dame they will make it a shrine to diversity and multi-culturalism - very much like what was done on the site of the destroyed World Trade Center in NY.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@IThink And to be clear, the point I thought was bizarre was that Notre Dame would be transformed into some sort of modernist monument.

I Have a Problem With This...

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 16, 2019:

There's a word for people who consistently criticize the terseness of someone whose first language is not English: pedant.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@iThink Point taken.

I Have a Problem With This...

iThink comments on Apr 16, 2019:

I am willing to bet the ranch when they rebuild Notre Dame they will make it a shrine to diversity and multi-culturalism - very much like what was done on the site of the destroyed World Trade Center in NY.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@iThink I think you're conflating the principles in the Constitution with a certain white Christian culture. There's nothing wrong with the latter, but to use your words, when you "begin to make demands that everyone else bend their way of life and thinking," that nativism becomes a problem. Your worries about Sharia law are paranoid and not grounded in reality. I wonder why you seem to care so deeply about what happened at the WTC on 9/11 when the dead were members of the multicultural elite that you seem to resent, and at least 30 were Muslim. I can tell you from my lived experience that multiculturalism is a success in this country. To believe otherwise is to succumb to propaganda meant to stoke and exploit the very division you fear.

I Have a Problem With This...

iThink comments on Apr 16, 2019:

I am willing to bet the ranch when they rebuild Notre Dame they will make it a shrine to diversity and multi-culturalism - very much like what was done on the site of the destroyed World Trade Center in NY.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

That's a bizarre thought--and do you really think the memorial and buildings on the WTC site aren't representative of the WTC, the people who worked there, and the people on the planes?

A phrase that annoys me is "living in your truth.

chuckpo comments on Apr 16, 2019:

I HATE that phrase. Can you link to the source on JP? I only remember him criticizing the idea.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@chuckpo Karl Popper has something to say about countering reprehensible ideas. No Jungian archetypes needed! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance It has elements of game theory. Speaking of which, this is fun: https://ncase.me/trust/

On a scale of 1 to 5, how disappointed will you be if it turns out that the Notre Dame fire wasn't ...

Naomi comments on Apr 16, 2019:

Hi. To be honest, I don't feel very comfortable with the question. I think it buys into the narrative of MSM. Sorry...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@Naomi I think that's the right instinct.

On a scale of 1 to 5, how disappointed will you be if it turns out that the Notre Dame fire wasn't ...

Naomi comments on Apr 16, 2019:

Hi. To be honest, I don't feel very comfortable with the question. I think it buys into the narrative of MSM. Sorry...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

What narrative is that? Are questions that fit into an MSM narrative inherently false? Why do such questions make you uncomfortable?

The "level" system on IDW is broken - change my mind: [slug.

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Down with the IDW.community aristocracy!

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@Janeybird It was a joke, i.e., that the class of users with the highest levels in the IDW.Community hierarchy represent an aristocracy.

Ilhan Omar said "frankly, I’m tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired...

shj648 comments on Apr 15, 2019:

If she's so tired she should leave the US, why bother coming anyways if the US is such a horrible place?

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@beekeeper Some references: Detention (from November 2001): https://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/25/national/swept-up-in-a-dragnet-hundreds-sit-in-custody-and-ask-why.html Registration (NSEERS): https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/dhs-announces-end-controversial-post-911-immigrant-registration-and-tracking-program Today we have the "travel ban" and of course the Patriot Act lives on. Glad you didn't write the Constitution!

Ilhan Omar said "frankly, I’m tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired...

shj648 comments on Apr 15, 2019:

If she's so tired she should leave the US, why bother coming anyways if the US is such a horrible place?

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@beekeeper Namely there was racial profiling, special registration, and secret detentions without charges.

Ilhan Omar said "frankly, I’m tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired...

shj648 comments on Apr 15, 2019:

If she's so tired she should leave the US, why bother coming anyways if the US is such a horrible place?

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@shj648 That's irrelevant.

[mobile.

10thGeneration comments on Apr 15, 2019:

Her remarks at a CAIR convention were to misdirect the blame from Saudi extremist Muslims. In that community the "someone" who "did something" is always considered to be Israel. You must remember that CAIR is a propaganda group whose ties to hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood are known. They are ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@ObiRonMoldy To clarify, that was my interpretation of her clumsy, terse phrasing in context.

Ilhan Omar said "frankly, I’m tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired...

shj648 comments on Apr 15, 2019:

If she's so tired she should leave the US, why bother coming anyways if the US is such a horrible place?

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@shj648 You're correct that no one is talking about removing civil rights from American Muslims today--their rights were already restricted after 9/11. That's what she was talking about.

Ilhan Omar said "frankly, I’m tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired...

shj648 comments on Apr 15, 2019:

If she's so tired she should leave the US, why bother coming anyways if the US is such a horrible place?

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 16, 2019:

@purdyday Check out my website! http://www.rightwingwatch.org/people/rick-wiles/

Ilhan Omar said "frankly, I’m tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired...

shj648 comments on Apr 15, 2019:

If she's so tired she should leave the US, why bother coming anyways if the US is such a horrible place?

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@purdyday LOL

Ilhan Omar said "frankly, I’m tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired...

shj648 comments on Apr 15, 2019:

If she's so tired she should leave the US, why bother coming anyways if the US is such a horrible place?

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

OK, I'll spell it out for you. She's tired of "it." "It" being the restriction of the civil rights of American Muslims. She's not tired of the US. She's grateful to have been able to come there after escaping war in Somalia and surviving four years in a Kenyan refugee camp.

[mobile.

10thGeneration comments on Apr 15, 2019:

Her remarks at a CAIR convention were to misdirect the blame from Saudi extremist Muslims. In that community the "someone" who "did something" is always considered to be Israel. You must remember that CAIR is a propaganda group whose ties to hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood are known. They are ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@10thGeneration @ObiRonMoldy CAIR is a non-profit that advocates for the civil rights of Muslim Americans. There are reasons to be skeptical of claims that it has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Such claims have not been clearly substantiated to my knowledge and are largely pushed by the UAE because the institutions of the Muslim Brotherhood and probably CAIR itself are a threat to its authoritarian rule. If there were ties, I think it would be important to examine when the ties occurred, what the nature of the ties were, and who represented the ties. The Muslim Brotherhood is a complex organization and often a relatively moderate force compared its Salafist rivals and the authoritarian leaders in the Middle East. As for Ilhan Omar, all she was saying, albeit clumsily (English isn't her first language) was that a small group of Muslims, mostly from Saudi Arabia, did something terrible in the 9/11 attacks, and in response the civil rights of American Muslims were unjustly restricted, in a form of collective punishment.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Unpopular opinion: Regardless of their intentions, most of these IDW figures are serving as a gateway to extremist right online media and communities, which ultimately makes it easier for the far right billionaires who bankroll some of them to pander to voters in order to get them to do their ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@chuckpo **you will take leftist sources as gospel** Try me. **I've provided actual video against the Trump is a liar trope, and had those on the left flat out reject it. Reject what was clearly in the video. What about the gun debate? How is it the left's statistics are always spot on objective measures, but the right's statistics are made-up, cherry-picked fantasy?** It ain't me. **You'll reject it, and you'll probably reject it without considering it.** I think you get the point.

Can republicanism transcend our political disagreements?

iThink comments on Apr 15, 2019:

Believe me you do NOT want an end to political disagreement. Politics exists solely for the purpose of managing (for lack of a better word) disagreements. It is unreasonable, impossible even to think that you can create a system that is universally moral and fair. This I believe is the primary ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

The system you describe only works when all parties have a shared epistemology. The Constitution provides a pretty good foundation for that, but the right in recent decades has absorbed the moral relativism of the '60s and flirted with nativism and market fundamentalism. Moreover, not all people place greed and domination of others first--and don't get me wrong competition can be fun--but many are driven first by creativity and community. You need some level of cooperation and shared understanding to hash out your disagreements. I prefer not to reduce human nature to animal instincts. History has proven that we are better than that.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Unpopular opinion: Regardless of their intentions, most of these IDW figures are serving as a gateway to extremist right online media and communities, which ultimately makes it easier for the far right billionaires who bankroll some of them to pander to voters in order to get them to do their ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@chuckpo The difference is my argument can be substantiated with public documents and the right's arguments are utter fantasy! Tommy6915 had the roles backward, but he was right about projection. Fantasy aside, the right really has a tough time distinguishing the left from corporate, mainstream liberals. If you think that I watch CNN and MSNBC all day, you're way off. I am plenty critical of "my side" but I'm not going to take some fabrication that I find in Breitbart, The Daily Caller, or WorldNetDaily as gospel.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Unpopular opinion: Regardless of their intentions, most of these IDW figures are serving as a gateway to extremist right online media and communities, which ultimately makes it easier for the far right billionaires who bankroll some of them to pander to voters in order to get them to do their ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@chuckpo Fair enough. If we're going to assess radicalism equally between the two poles of our politics (which to be clear I reject), I'd be interested to know what donors on the left are funding political causes nearly as radical as the nativism on the right. It certainly ain't Soros.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Unpopular opinion: Regardless of their intentions, most of these IDW figures are serving as a gateway to extremist right online media and communities, which ultimately makes it easier for the far right billionaires who bankroll some of them to pander to voters in order to get them to do their ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@chuckpo You call me biased but you're ignoring a pretty large plank in your own eye. Yes there are plenty of left intellectuals--you just don't see them unless you seek them out because they aren't paid to do PR for the Democrats like the IDW does for conservative institutions. And of course I grant more credibility to historians, other academics, and journalists. I know from lived experience not to believe the McCarthyist conspiracy theories that the right has spread since Harry Bradley, Fred Koch, Robert Welch, and others founded the John Birch Society in 1958. I may not have been clear enough about the distinction that I draw between left and right donors, so here it is in a nutshell: the right wing causes supported by Koch-aligned donors are reactionary--i.e. pre-liberal and not compatible with the Constitution. This frame should be familiar with you if you are familiar with Harris and many of the IDW's obsession with Islam. The left is generally on a spectrum between liberal and more liberatory politics. Therefore you can't equate left and right donors. They both influence politics--and I'd love to get money out of politics--but only the left does so within a legitimate political framework. Moreover, the left has nothing close to the constellation of think tanks and other institutions that seek to influence students (e.g., TPUSA), the judiciary (e.g., The Federalist Society), and legislation (e.g., ALEC and State Policy Network). I'm happy to engage their actual views and whether some of them are actually liberal, but I think that it is easier to understand their views when you look at their funding. I'm not asking you to love how I frame my thinking, but it would be nice if you would engage it.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Unpopular opinion: Regardless of their intentions, most of these IDW figures are serving as a gateway to extremist right online media and communities, which ultimately makes it easier for the far right billionaires who bankroll some of them to pander to voters in order to get them to do their ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@chuckpo FWIW here's YAF's funding. You can take it from YAF itself https://supporters.yaf.org/charitable-foundations/ or from partisan watchdog CMD https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Young_America's_Foundation . I've already mentioned most of their funders. You really don't see the left bankrolling purported intellectuals in the same way. It suggests that they are bad faith actors.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Another thought: The Cold War and the language we use to describe political ideologies in the United States has distorted our ability to identify extremism. This often leads to false equivalencies being drawn between those on the non-mainstream left and those on non-mainstream right. Decades of ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@REParker Tell that to the gun grabber George Washington!

Can republicanism transcend our political disagreements?

Guido_Provolone comments on Apr 15, 2019:

Libertarianism has a better chance. Since most ARE, but don't KNOW They are.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@Guido_Provolone I'm with you on the GOP and definition of libertarianism but I don't think the anarchocapitalists, Koch Brothers, and the Cato Institute would be!

Can republicanism transcend our political disagreements?

Guido_Provolone comments on Apr 15, 2019:

Libertarianism has a better chance. Since most ARE, but don't KNOW They are.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@Guido_Provolone Yes re: classic libertarianism. We Americans sure like to make things confusing in our use of political terminology.

Can republicanism transcend our political disagreements?

Guido_Provolone comments on Apr 15, 2019:

Libertarianism has a better chance. Since most ARE, but don't KNOW They are.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@Guido_Provolone Because the economically libertarian option would be to leave healthcare entirely to the free market.

Can republicanism transcend our political disagreements?

Guido_Provolone comments on Apr 15, 2019:

Libertarianism has a better chance. Since most ARE, but don't KNOW They are.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@Guido_Provolone Right, but they're right wing populists rather than right wing libertarians because they're to the left in their economic attitudes.

Can republicanism transcend our political disagreements?

Guido_Provolone comments on Apr 15, 2019:

Libertarianism has a better chance. Since most ARE, but don't KNOW They are.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

@Guido_Provolone Counterpoint: Red states Idaho, Nebraska, and Utah voted by referendum to expand Medicaid in the modern elections.

Can republicanism transcend our political disagreements?

Guido_Provolone comments on Apr 15, 2019:

Libertarianism has a better chance. Since most ARE, but don't KNOW They are.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 15, 2019:

Even though there aren't many people in the bottom-right quadrant of a chart of social attitudes vs. economic attitudes? To be clear I'm just talking about right-wing libertarians here. To show you what I'm getting at, here are some takes from partisan sources of different stripes: https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publications/2016-elections/political-divisions-in-2016-and-beyond https://www.dataforprogress.org/the-convergence http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/06/new-study-shows-what-really-happened-in-the-2016-election.html https://niskanencenter.org/blog/libertarians-just-might-exist/

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Another thought: The Cold War and the language we use to describe political ideologies in the United States has distorted our ability to identify extremism. This often leads to false equivalencies being drawn between those on the non-mainstream left and those on non-mainstream right. Decades of ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@Tommy6915 Where you see individualism vs. collectivism, I see liberalism vs. reactionism. Same as it ever was. There has always been a legitimate element of collectivism in America in the form of small-r republicanism.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Another thought: The Cold War and the language we use to describe political ideologies in the United States has distorted our ability to identify extremism. This often leads to false equivalencies being drawn between those on the non-mainstream left and those on non-mainstream right. Decades of ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@Mudpumper That is a caricature.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Another thought: The Cold War and the language we use to describe political ideologies in the United States has distorted our ability to identify extremism. This often leads to false equivalencies being drawn between those on the non-mainstream left and those on non-mainstream right. Decades of ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@REParker I'm not going to get into the nuances of the 2nd Amendment here, suffice it to say that only a conservative could look at its expansion in recent decades, with gun regulations struck down in cities throughout the county, open carry laws in most states, and concealed carry reciprocity on the march, and consider conservative gun enthusiasts to be in an worsening state of victimization by the pro-regulation liberals.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Another thought: The Cold War and the language we use to describe political ideologies in the United States has distorted our ability to identify extremism. This often leads to false equivalencies being drawn between those on the non-mainstream left and those on non-mainstream right. Decades of ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@Tommy6915 **Lol, reading it again, I can see the confusion. Basically i'm saying that the communist state we're trying to hold at bay today, got here by not pandering to liberals, but rather by overwhelming them in every institution to the extent that they're now demonized and shouted down, if not censored or regulated against altogether, in the public square. And for clarification, Liberals and Conservatives are the same thing.** Got it. We might have to agree to disagree on this. I see liberals as your typical corporate centrists and conservatives as people who want to restore aristocratic privileges (so politicians with a pre-Constitutional bent--like a Tory). As I see it, most leaders of both parties until the mid-20th century were liberals, with the exception of FDR who was a social democrat. Then the conservative movement (funded by oligarchs) began in response to the desegregation of religious schools and began to infect the Dixiecrats and then the Republican Party. After Eisenhower, Republican Presidents began to pander more and more to conservatives. After a power realignment surrounding the McGovern candidacy, labor and the left began a slow death and only in response to Trump has it shown signs of reanimating. I see no signs of the communism you mention, in fact that was kind of my point--Cold War, McCarthyist rhetoric and pandering to conservatives has led many conservatives to conflate anyone on the left with Stalinists and Maoists.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Another thought: The Cold War and the language we use to describe political ideologies in the United States has distorted our ability to identify extremism. This often leads to false equivalencies being drawn between those on the non-mainstream left and those on non-mainstream right. Decades of ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@Tommy6915 **Now this is an interesting statement because 1) pandering implies appeasement, or giving in to an undesirable person or behavior, and i fail to see where the communist state you describe has given in anywhere since the mid 60s, and 2) being that liberals ARE 'conservatives' under that modern banner, to appease communist's i might add, that statement implies that liberals are considered extreme left of themselves.** I'm not following this at all. I'm using dictionary definitions, not "modern-day" definitions, if that helps. **On the contrary. God, family, tradition and private property are EXACTLY liberal values.** No, those are the historical values of feudal religious nations. Liberal values are liberty and equality before the law.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Another thought: The Cold War and the language we use to describe political ideologies in the United States has distorted our ability to identify extremism. This often leads to false equivalencies being drawn between those on the non-mainstream left and those on non-mainstream right. Decades of ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@RafaelMspt But you haven't proven that. Your analysis looks at dozens or hundreds of regions with millions of people in them. Why not just look at the dozens or hundreds of people who constitute the oligarchs?

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Unpopular opinion: Regardless of their intentions, most of these IDW figures are serving as a gateway to extremist right online media and communities, which ultimately makes it easier for the far right billionaires who bankroll some of them to pander to voters in order to get them to do their ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@chuckpo I'm happy with how I've made my points so I won't beat a dead horse. I'll leave you to do your own research and maybe I'll get back to laying out more evidence at some point. It's just time consuming because while I've long had my eyes open to much of the evidence from a variety of sources, it takes time to reconstruct it in a format that those aligned with the right would see as credible even though it's based largely on public information. Such are partisan bubbles.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Unpopular opinion: Regardless of their intentions, most of these IDW figures are serving as a gateway to extremist right online media and communities, which ultimately makes it easier for the far right billionaires who bankroll some of them to pander to voters in order to get them to do their ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@chuckpo I fixed the first link. As for the second, here's a direct link to the 990: https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/download-filing?download=true=2015_05_PF%2F20-5723621_990PF_201412.pdf

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Another thought: The Cold War and the language we use to describe political ideologies in the United States has distorted our ability to identify extremism. This often leads to false equivalencies being drawn between those on the non-mainstream left and those on non-mainstream right. Decades of ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@RafaelMspt Also, you seem to have assumed that I was referring to ALL nativists and conservatives. I wasn't. I frankly don't care if someone has nativist feelings. I have a problem when those feelings turn to policy or vigilantism based on falsehoods and the social contract is broken for non-conformists.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Another thought: The Cold War and the language we use to describe political ideologies in the United States has distorted our ability to identify extremism. This often leads to false equivalencies being drawn between those on the non-mainstream left and those on non-mainstream right. Decades of ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@RafaelMspt You're conflating the professional class affluent with uber-wealthy oligarchs and anarcho-communists with liberals.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Unpopular opinion: Regardless of their intentions, most of these IDW figures are serving as a gateway to extremist right online media and communities, which ultimately makes it easier for the far right billionaires who bankroll some of them to pander to voters in order to get them to do their ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@chuckpo **I don't agree that Trump represents the far right--not at all. To me, that's partisan propaganda. And, I don't take such things lightly. I investigate them. I'm really confused about the second comment. Which group is being shut down? What do you mean by 'most thinking about how to combat the right?' Is that like the Russia McCarthyism strategy?** I'll concede that it's arguable whether he represents the far right. But he certainly panders to them. Again, with the second comment, I may have been reading too much into your intent to shut down speech on the left seeing as though your original post posited an equivalency between extremes on the left and the right, and a line beyond which speech became unacceptable. And to be clear, I was not arguing for any reciprocal restrictions on speech. I draw many of my ideas from the left but try very hard to think independently and not allow myself to be swayed by political caricatures. And ultimately I desire to form a personal politics that is constructive and can interface with the majority of people in the real world (those people generally being socially split between left and right and economically to the left). **Do you have anything looking remotely like evidence for this? Where are you getting this 'information. These seems like opposite world in Sponge Bob. Really.** It would probably take a while to go through the funding of all of the IDW figures and the history of the conservative movement, so for now let's just look at how the IDW campus tours are funded. Can we agree that many of them are funded by Turning Point USA? Here is an article about Turning Point USA's donors: https://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/who-funds-conservative-campus-group-turning-point-usa-donors-revealed-2620325 . If you don't trust that source, much of the names came from the public tax records filed by donor foundations (TPUSA itself isn't required to disclose its donors). If you go to this page (https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/205723621) and then download the 2014 990 form for the Uihlein Family Foundation, for example, you can see that they gave $50,000 that year to TPUSA. There are other more partisan websites that make this sort of thing easier to track down and aggregate. Let me know if you want more substantiation.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

Admin comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Thanks for you post! I'll be following the conversation here as I'm working on a more clear policy of conduct. I want to allow as many views as possible, even some of the angry one provided that we have a quorum of honest, civil people to discuss them. Here's my first draft... ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@purdyday Last time I checked the Constitution didn't read "you have an obligation to culturally conform," or "it is an act of sedition to break the law," or "you have a right to leave the country," or "you have a right to citizenship in another country." It seems you are the one perverting our founding documents!

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Unpopular opinion: Regardless of their intentions, most of these IDW figures are serving as a gateway to extremist right online media and communities, which ultimately makes it easier for the far right billionaires who bankroll some of them to pander to voters in order to get them to do their ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@chuckpo I may have read too much into your "opposition to the drifting left" and your statement that the "left has done more to give voice to the extreme right."

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Unpopular opinion: Regardless of their intentions, most of these IDW figures are serving as a gateway to extremist right online media and communities, which ultimately makes it easier for the far right billionaires who bankroll some of them to pander to voters in order to get them to do their ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@chuckpo So you broadly classify the left as extremist not on the basis of their ideas but because they engage and possibly trigger the far right, which is a dangerous thing to do? Might the resurgence of the far right have more to do with powerful interests and politicians like Trump who are stirring them up and pandering to them for political gain? Isn't it more dangerous and certainly not in keeping with freedom of speech to shut down a group of people on the left who have done the most thinking about how to combat the right? The IDW gets much of its funding from the Koch Brothers (oil refining), Wilks Brothers (fracking), Mercers (hedge fund), Uihleins (shipping and business supplies), Mellons/Scaifes (banking, oil, and resources), Bradleys (factory automation), DeVoses/Princes (MLM, auto parts, and mercenary contracting), Marcuses (home improvement) and other likeminded billionaries. These are families that have long been involved in the conservative and right-wing libertarian movements in this country, some from their inception in the mid-20th century, and whose interests primarily lie in hoarding wealth, resources, and power for a new aristocracy. The IDW's coordinated efforts on platforms like YouTube, Facebook, and college campuses work to exploit the disaffected and uninformed and shuttle them to increasingly extreme content. Yes many figures on the left get funding from billionaires like Soros, Steyer, Omidyar, and the Ford Foundation, but there is a difference. Their efforts are of lesser magnitude than those of the right and they are less aligned with their business interests and more aligned with universal, civil society values. That's where the false equivalencies come into play that I mentioned in my other comment on this page. Yes, both right-wing billionaires and left-wing billionaires use their wealth to influence politics. But right-wing billionaires fund political movements that are antithetical to the liberal and republican values the US was founded on whereas left-wing billionaires fund efforts that support those values or attempt to expand liberty. We must recognize the ideological imbalances in the funding of political speech because middle-of-the-road billionaires like the Buffets and Gateses do not offer similar support for mainstream political speech. Rather they either focus on limited corporate interests or have strange obsessions like overpopulation and teacher evaluation that dovetail with the more extreme interests of the right.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

Admin comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Thanks for you post! I'll be following the conversation here as I'm working on a more clear policy of conduct. I want to allow as many views as possible, even some of the angry one provided that we have a quorum of honest, civil people to discuss them. Here's my first draft... ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@purdyday You used "anti-American" as an adjective describing a purported revolutionary political movement. To me that implies an ideology (i.e., an "ism") based on some quality of being American, i.e. nativism, rather than one based on universal ideas, like liberalism or republicanism. Why does it matter what group I am talking about not being treated as equal citizens? They should have the same moral rights regardless of their identity. Would you deny rights from some groups of people?

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Unpopular opinion: Regardless of their intentions, most of these IDW figures are serving as a gateway to extremist right online media and communities, which ultimately makes it easier for the far right billionaires who bankroll some of them to pander to voters in order to get them to do their ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@chuckpo Surely we can agree that when speech is funded by a small group of powerful individuals in order to advance concealed political interests, and is propagated through centralized media platforms, exploiting network effects, that it becomes propaganda and does not qualify as the good faith civil debate that this platform purportedly aims to advance.

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

Admin comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Thanks for you post! I'll be following the conversation here as I'm working on a more clear policy of conduct. I want to allow as many views as possible, even some of the angry one provided that we have a quorum of honest, civil people to discuss them. Here's my first draft... ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

@purdyday What is "Americanism" and what does it have to do with being treated as an equal citizen?

Where is the line between acceptable and unacceptable speech on IDW?

Admin comments on Apr 14, 2019:

Thanks for you post! I'll be following the conversation here as I'm working on a more clear policy of conduct. I want to allow as many views as possible, even some of the angry one provided that we have a quorum of honest, civil people to discuss them. Here's my first draft... ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 14, 2019:

We should expect civility from people most of the time, but remember that the social contract is broken when certain groups of people are not treated as equal citizens. When that happens, those people have a moral right to use non-civil means to restore their civil liberties. Isn't that what the American Revolution was all about?

Is there or should there be a right to not be burdened with subsidizing my lazy or stupid fellow ...

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 13, 2019:

Should we also outlaw mortgages and other loans? They appear to be paid for by other parties (banks) in the short term--though just like federal spending they are backed by a federal reserve which can print as much of its own currency as it likes. During quantitative easing following the 2008 ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 13, 2019:

@Clammypollack Those aren't exactly apples-to-apples comparisons. 1. The United States is unique in that not only does it have monetary sovereignty, but it prints the world's reserve currency. 2. None of those countries have economies near the size of the US economy. 3. With the exception of the UK, none of those countries have economies near the complexity of the US economy. 4. None of those countries has a military nearly as powerful as the US military. 5. None of those countries has the diplomatic influence of the US. 6. Venezuela has a different kind of socialism than is found in developed European nations and has an oil dependent economy. Moreover, when you look back in history, it's not enough to just look at what ideologies just happened to have currency at times of economic distress. You need to look at the economic merit of individual policies in different contexts.

Is there or should there be a right to not be burdened with subsidizing my lazy or stupid fellow ...

DMcCreery1956 comments on Apr 13, 2019:

The United States is being Cloward-Pivened out of existence.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 13, 2019:

@Demere With his record-setting deficits?

Is there or should there be a right to not be burdened with subsidizing my lazy or stupid fellow ...

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 13, 2019:

Should we also outlaw mortgages and other loans? They appear to be paid for by other parties (banks) in the short term--though just like federal spending they are backed by a federal reserve which can print as much of its own currency as it likes. During quantitative easing following the 2008 ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 13, 2019:

Moreover, a deficit that is a reasonable fraction of GDP (which can likely be higher than it is currently) spent wisely bolsters productivity (and your prosperity) whereas austerity and surpluses historically lead to economic contractions. We're fully off the gold standard and the kind of shock that accompanied the 1970s transition is a thing of the past. No one is picking your pocket.

And into today’s news. Crazed ass liberal sets themselves on fire in front of the White House.

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 13, 2019:

What makes you think he was a liberal?

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 13, 2019:

@Marydaniels6011 I have no idea what his politics are--you're the one with the secret knowledge!

Is there or should there be a right to not be burdened with subsidizing my lazy or stupid fellow ...

Leelumorticia comments on Apr 13, 2019:

If they have nothing to offer society then euthenize. My hubby and I are both retired but we look after the granddaughter while both her parents work

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 13, 2019:

Am I reading correctly that you plan to carry out an honor killing of your granddaughter if she doesn't become a productive member of society in your eyes?

No, the FBI shouldn't have started an investigation on Trump based on the Dodgy Dossier, but were ...

Alexis86 comments on Apr 12, 2019:

I thought they started the Hillary investigation because the bengazi committee subpoenaed her emails, and then found her bathroom server.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 12, 2019:

There were multiple investigations. I'm referring to the investigation into the Clinton Foundation. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/us/politics/fbi-james-comey-hillary-clinton-donald-trump.html

Avi Yemini DEPORTED, Came To Appear on Dave Rubin And Crowder

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 12, 2019:

Probably was planning to overstay his visa. Thank you brave CBP!

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 12, 2019:

@fisherman0707 He should be thankful our brave CBP agents let him get farther than radical leftist Omar Barghouti!

No, the FBI shouldn't have started an investigation on Trump based on the Dodgy Dossier, but were ...

Phrankhs comments on Apr 12, 2019:

Bill & Hillary went in the White house with average (for politicians) wealth They left multi-millionaires Like Pelosi and many others that live on mere government salaries So, the question is... Where did they get all that cash?

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 12, 2019:

My question was whether such a partisan document should be the basis for an FBI investigation.

In the state of Illinois, rural, Republican-voting districts get the best return on their tax dollar...

The_Farseer comments on Apr 11, 2019:

That's because those rural folk are paying more in taxes. Those jobless tribals in the inner city don't pay any at all

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 11, 2019:

@The_Farseer It's from the state's flat 4.95% income tax (EDIT: It looks at the 6.25% state sales tax and lottery sales too). https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1059=ppi_papers

In the state of Illinois, rural, Republican-voting districts get the best return on their tax dollar...

The_Farseer comments on Apr 11, 2019:

That's because those rural folk are paying more in taxes. Those jobless tribals in the inner city don't pay any at all

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 11, 2019:

No, as I wrote above, they get $2.81 for every $1.00 they pay in taxes. City-dwellers get less than they put in.

In the state of Illinois, rural, Republican-voting districts get the best return on their tax dollar...

WarmPotato comments on Apr 11, 2019:

How is this a "Hello"? Lol! XD

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 11, 2019:

Hmmm... thought I chose "Politics," though I guess it still qualified as "General." Fixed now.

Ole Uncle Bernie became a millionaire in a Capitalist society while touting the wonders of ...

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 11, 2019:

If socialism is so great why didn't he give his book away for free?

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 11, 2019:

The funny thing is a million dollars isn't even a lot of money. Perhaps his presidential run is his retirement plan so that he won't die a pauper LOL.

North America does not have the same history with "ethnic nationalism" that Europe and the rest of ...

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 10, 2019:

Real Americans first! My white Christian ancestors didn't pour their blood into this soil so that the globalists could send immigrant hordes to take my birthright. If it doesn't conform, round it up! That's the only solution.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 10, 2019:

@CRBG That's one rule of thumb. I certainly know a globalist when I see one. And they and the extremely dishonest press are the enemies of the people!

North America does not have the same history with "ethnic nationalism" that Europe and the rest of ...

WilyRickWiles comments on Apr 10, 2019:

Real Americans first! My white Christian ancestors didn't pour their blood into this soil so that the globalists could send immigrant hordes to take my birthright. If it doesn't conform, round it up! That's the only solution.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 10, 2019:

The Catholics have already done enough damage!

David Bowie tried to warn us! [t.co]

Leelumorticia comments on Apr 9, 2019:

So did George Orwell, animal farm and 1984.

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 9, 2019:

@RubyWright Knowing Orwell, probably a how to! He was what I would call an anarcho-syndicalist Satanist (ASS)!

Billboard just outside of AOC's new apartment in DC.

Phrankhs comments on Apr 9, 2019:

I wonder if Chick-fil-A paid extra to have that billboard put there

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 9, 2019:

It's a joke.

Should the IDW create a new transnational political party, with Jordan Peterson running for Canadian...

SpikeTalon comments on Feb 23, 2019:

Or maybe the IDW should takeover the Libertarian Party, and see where things go from there?

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 8, 2019:

@johnlocke Plus that would run the risk of having to debate Sam Seder.

Are "new world order," "cultural Marxism," and anti-Soros narratives just rehashes of antisemitic ...

MarPep comments on Apr 8, 2019:

No. NWO has been mentioned for over 100 years. HG Wells wrote a non-fiction work entitled "The New World Order" published in 1940 and another called "The Open Conspiracy" published in 1928. David Rockefeller's biography quotes him as being proud of his efforts at forming a New World Order, as ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 8, 2019:

But The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is over 100 years old too...

2 Students Face Criminal Charges After Calling Border Agents ‘Murderers’

Leelumorticia comments on Apr 3, 2019:

Those 2 students are gender fluid morons

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 3, 2019:

What will it take to get them to conform?

2 Students Face Criminal Charges After Calling Border Agents ‘Murderers’

kravmaga comments on Apr 3, 2019:

This is a good example of dishonest and misleading news coverage. The headline, "2 students face criminal charges after calling border agents murderers" is meant to propagate the notion that they face charges because they called the agents a name. Of course that is untrue. The reason for the ...

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 3, 2019:

Lock those dissenters up!

Was the conservative movement right to move on from fighting desegregation of religious schools?

AZWoman comments on Apr 3, 2019:

Not familiar with this. Do you have a link or legal statute to follow?

WilyRickWiles replies on Apr 3, 2019:

The Supreme Court decision Brown v. Board of Education in 1954 ruled segregation in public schools unconstitutional. Over the next few decades, dozens or even hundreds of segregated religious schools were established throughout the South under the guise of "choice." As a result of lawsuits and the Civil Rights Act, the IRS ruled in 1970 to revoke their tax-exempt status. In the following decade, Jerry Falwell and Paul Weyrich founded the conservative movement in opposition to this policy, framing it as a religious freedom issue. Their main battleground was Bob Jones University. Later, they moved on to other issues like abortion. The backers of Prager University, the Wilks brothers, are a countervailing force in today's conservative movement, bringing it close to its roots with their explicit focus on putting the Bible back in schools.