Listen now | Welcome to Episode 130 of KK&F: a can’t-miss debate between your KK&F hosts and libertarian presidential candidate Mike ter Maat. We’ve got an episode that we hope will challenge and interest you with its lively, contrasting opinions on central social and economic issues: on the table are minimum wage, crypto, regulating Wall St and a lot more.
I don't know where else to post this feed back about this guest so hopefully this is actually viewed . The Libertarian ideology is antithetical to living in a society....full stop. You would never hire someone for a job who is openly and actively trying to undermine that exact job...that would be a crazy thing to do.
Now this gentlemen believes in his opinions so in that sense he's an honest actor in a discussion but to arrive at such beliefs he has to subvert and pervert historical facts to create a basis for his nonsensical ideas. He can't even agree as to what the word "regulation" means how can you hope to have an interesting exchange with this person if he's constantly changing the terms of a common language.
I'm not sure where I stand or draw the line with the nuanced idea of "platforming" when it relates to this gentleman...I don't think anyone should be afraid of ideas or even words so in that sense I think it's important to hone your arguments against scrutiny. But my god this man is not drawing conclusions from the same set of facts we are.
So let me connect my points in my conclusion....This Libertarian that you had on your program is not a good faith actor in a discussion on policy because he doesn't agree with what has happened in the past he so desperately needs the facts to point towards less government is the answer that he'll say anything to achieve reinforcement of this fact.
This guy was funny his arguments are the main reason why libertarian economics are not to be taken serious
I don't know where else to post this feed back about this guest so hopefully this is actually viewed . The Libertarian ideology is antithetical to living in a society....full stop. You would never hire someone for a job who is openly and actively trying to undermine that exact job...that would be a crazy thing to do.
Now this gentlemen believes in his opinions so in that sense he's an honest actor in a discussion but to arrive at such beliefs he has to subvert and pervert historical facts to create a basis for his nonsensical ideas. He can't even agree as to what the word "regulation" means how can you hope to have an interesting exchange with this person if he's constantly changing the terms of a common language.
I'm not sure where I stand or draw the line with the nuanced idea of "platforming" when it relates to this gentleman...I don't think anyone should be afraid of ideas or even words so in that sense I think it's important to hone your arguments against scrutiny. But my god this man is not drawing conclusions from the same set of facts we are.
So let me connect my points in my conclusion....This Libertarian that you had on your program is not a good faith actor in a discussion on policy because he doesn't agree with what has happened in the past he so desperately needs the facts to point towards less government is the answer that he'll say anything to achieve reinforcement of this fact.
The building code conversation really got him Roiled up, this was JUICY
I've been both a man and a woman and women DEFINITELY cry WAY more than men. I'd like to see the methodology of this study.