Chapo Trap House and the rise of the dirtbag left

kill whitey motherfuckers

"a friend of mine said some shit" is a construction that appears way too often in that piece

It seems increasingly likely that the rising generation is more likely to turn conservative not because they want to be rich, but because they want to be mean.

(A friend of mine in Berlin had heard about them through someone there who used to date the founder of K-Hole, the branding group that originated the term normcore.)

...I need to get off the internet.

Xpost That sounds plausible imo

i think it's pretty dumb idk

can u say more

ive never heard of this podcast but i thought this podcast was smart & interesting

“I met Dasha’s agent inside,” said Gelman, who, in a leftward turn, had just hosted a fundraiser for the Democratic Socialist Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez. “I was like, I wish you could angel-invest in ‘It’ girls.”

this part is so good... using the first part of the quote to shade the red scare girls but then using the second half of the quote to shade gelman

er thought this profile* rather

i don't listen to any of them but out of chapo, cumtown and this, red scare seems like the least embarrassing to listen to or god forbid pay money for

It seems increasingly likely that the rising generation is more likely to turn conservative not because they want to be rich, but because they want to be mean.
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, 25. oktober 2018 22:57 (forty-six minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

In all honesty, wasn't it always like this for a lot of people?

can u say more

― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, October 25, 2018 2:38 PM (seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

nah can’t really, more of a feeling than anything i could articulate

i don't listen to any of them but out of chapo, cumtown and this, red scare seems like the least embarrassing to listen to or god forbid pay money for

Red Scare is all of the Berniebro Chapo stereotypes but real.

It’s much less socially liberal than that.

yeah I'm glad the profile used the term "revanchist" cause it actually applies here

responses to Christina from Mic Dicta up there highlighting the quality of the Red Scare fandom

Androsky’s explanation of public banking seemed line it was lacking something or confusing something. Still an interesting concept I want to learn more about.

Revanchist nails it

I think it’s a very good idea, but I think he was exaggerating the extent to which it would disentangle the city’s finances from the financial system at large. Presumably you still have to issue bonds to finance things, and you still need institutions to offer, market, buy and trade those bonds.

can we also talk about politipod here
latest episode how chapo out of the water
https://m.soundcloud.com/politipod

Who the fuck are these people

#Mika pic.twitter.com/xUuyvzKYSA

— PolitiPod (@PolitiPod) October 24, 2018

#ThursdayThoughts pic.twitter.com/2euu0CNN45

— PolitiPod (@PolitiPod) October 19, 2018

#SaturdayMorning pic.twitter.com/qvfp54NIOg

— PolitiPod (@PolitiPod) October 13, 2018

I don't even get those

lib decals to put on your bomber van

xp - I think it's supposed to be a liberal parody?

huh, I thought PolitiPod was like Pod Save America or something around that alignment, is it a real podcast?

xp - I think it's supposed to be a liberal parody?

― louise ck (milo z), Friday, October 26, 2018 3:49 PM (six minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

when u can't tell anymore

oh ok, I think it's real, it's Tom Myers

I write for @PolitiPod. Give us a listen! @LesterHoltNBC @realDonaldTrump @IvankaTrump pic.twitter.com/fXmnoPicNP

— Tom Myers (@Tom_Myers) May 12, 2017

Although this makes me wonder if Tom Myers isn't Nick Mullen in disguise a la Andy Kaufman as Tony Clifton

wow his website is full of youtube videos of his years of DC-metro stand up

also he is 35 and appears to suffer from the stephen miller disease

can sadly confirm Tom Myers is real, a friend of mine went to college with him

he's a failed comedian from maryland whose online notoriety is due to him being mockingly discussed by the hosts of cumtown who know him from the dc comedy scene

he has a comedy special on spotify called "make america innate again"

the best I can say about him is that his political humor is as good as Andy Borowitz's

this is really the only thing you ever need to see of Tom Myers. it's the core, the heart music. Bong Hit Transplant

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLDZyUlV8Ww

https://soundcloud.com/politipod/better-vote-early

can't stop singing this
♪no more fake news from that orange fool♪
♪♪because u and i have the only tool♪♪

resisting the urge to FP

Anna Khachiyan 2016: cats are an insurance policy against your own suicide

Anna Khachiyan 2018: you're retarded if you think being a CEO is better than being raped

— Suburban Ambien Groyper (@ambiengroyp) October 28, 2018

well the first one is right at least

arguing about BoJack Horseman at the top of latest episode.

Matt: how would that show be any different if none of them were animals? the only jokes are puns. Puns: the lowest form of humor. so it's depression and puns.
Felix: what if the Budweiser Clydesdale self-harmed?

the proud boys are the ms-13 of rose emoji twitter, amber says

people have this addiction to saying things that is starting to seem kind of pathetic

as someone who's been working hard to fend off the useless side of despair it's been validating to hear the chapos struggle with the same thing

I love Chapo but their econ shows are so bad. Instead of getting a qualified MMT/left-wing econ/finance expert on they always have some absolute fucking nobody come on to spout nonsense like "banks take 90% of your checking account and buy shares in oil pipelines"

— Quantian (@quantian1) October 26, 2018

I love Chapo but their econ shows are so bad. Instead of getting a qualified MMT...

first sentence: good; second sentence: bad

MMT is to the modern left what the Gold Standard is to AnCaps afaict

The underlying principle of MMT makes sense to me, it's just the whole "and therefore the govt can do infinite spending" conclusion that I take some issue with.

flopson posted this quote in the econ thread a while back which i think explains it quite well (i know nothing about economics):

Modern monetary theory (MMT) in a nutshell, at least as far as I see it, goes something like this. Back in the 1990s a couple of clever guys came up with the idea of a government-provided jobs guarantee. They realized that this program would be seen by the public as an expensive boondoggle requiring sky-high taxes and huge debts. Could they outflank these criticisms by finding another way to fund the jobs guarantee?
To find the funds the early MMTers worked backwards through the labyrinthine relationship between the Federal Reserve and the Treasury. What they claimed to have discovered at the end of their trek was certainly shocking. The US Treasury, they said, funds itself not by the conventional route of taxes and bonds, but by creating and directly spending fiat (i.e. inconvertible) money. Furthermore, it is not only the government's prerogative, but its obligation to spend this money into existence, since people need a stock of fiat money to pay their taxes. Bonds, contrary to what most of us think, are not a sign of government indebtedness—rather, they drain spending.

This bit of monetary jiu-jitsu is powerful because it has the ability to disarm people's instinctual aversion to expensive social programs. If all it takes to fund a jobs guarantee is that the government spend money, and debt and taxes are not the great evils we have been trained to think, then why resist it?

Most governments don't create fiat money—their central banks do. For a government to have this power, it needs to be able to force its central bank to add new money to the government account. One way to do this is for the government to print up a bond and give it to the central bank. The central bank then credits the government's account for the full amount of the bond, and now the government can spend, say on a jobs guarantee. Alternatively, the transaction can be completed without the transferral of the bond—just have the central bank automatically credit the government's account prior to spending. When the government can require its central bank to create money on its behalf, we say that they are effectively consolidated into one entity.

The earliest MMT tome, Wray's Understanding Modern Money, is very insistent on the consolidated nature of the Fed-Treasury:
"The important thing to notice is that the Treasury spends before and without regard to either previous receipt of taxes or prior bond sales."

"...permanent consolidated government deficits are the theoretical and practical norm in a modern economy... Further, government spending is always financed through creation of fiat money - rather than through tax revenues or bond sales."

"While it appears that the Treasury 'needs' the tax revenue so that it can spend, that is clearly a superficial view... The government certainly does not need to have its own IOU returned before it can spend; rather, the public needs the government's IOU before it can pay taxes."

Now as their critics were quick to point out (see Lavoie, for instance), the relationship between Fed and Treasury is such that the two are not consolidated. The Treasury cannot ask the Fed to credit its account, nor can the Treasury print up a bond and give it to the Fed in exchange for spending power. The only way the Treasury can spend is by moving previously acquired funds that are held in the private banking system into its Federal Reserve account—and the only way it can acquire these funds is through taxes and bond issues. Using the Fed to print money and fund a jobs guarantee program is impossible.

The MMT wish, it would seem, was the father to the thought—Wray's 1998 tome was too hasty in consolidating the Fed and Treasury. MMTers are left with an intriguing theory of how modern money works, yet their theory corresponds to no underlying reality. That doesn't mean that MMT is without some merits. MMTers are hackers. In their efforts to reverse engineer the Fed-Treasury nexus in order to fund their pet project, they've come across plenty of interesting minutiae about monetary operations. MMT papers and blogs go into these details and are worth reading if you want to hone your understanding of the monetary system [just take anything they say about consolidation with a grain of salt].

Has the lack of overlap between Wray 1998's theory and reality stopped MMTers? Not at all. When your theory doesn't describe reality, don't bother changing your theory—change reality so that it conforms to your theory. Enter the platinum coin.

The idea of issuing a trillion dollar platinum coin rose to prominence with the onset of yet another US debt ceiling crisis. The MMT blogs hummed about the coin, a huge coin crescendo grew on Twitter, and the issue went all the way to the White House, which demurred. My hunch is that beating the debt ceiling is only a tertiary motive for MMTer excitement over the platinum coin. Far more important to them is that the platinum coin, if implemented, will effectively consolidate the Fed and Treasury, finally redeeming Wray 1998. This opens to door to their beloved jobs guarantee.

I'm not sure how MMT will evolve, but one thing we'll probably see more of is platinum coin-style activism. Though the rest of world has moved on from the coin, the MMT blogs are still buzzing about it. I'm sure more clever ways to hack the Fed-Treasury nexus will be found, thereby giving the Treasury other routes by which to force Bernanke or whomever follows him to print dollars on demand. These hack-arounds will be publicized. Perhaps a political movement will form. This wouldn't be unique. All sorts parties have formed around monetary ideas—Greenbackism, Free Silver, and Social Credit.

http://jpkoning.blogspot.ca/2013/01/meandering-from-mmt-and-platinum-coin.html

sorry for derailing the chapo thread podcast fans

The underlying principle of MMT makes sense to me, it's just the whole "and therefore the govt can do infinite spending" conclusion that I take some issue with.

― Fedora Dostoyevsky (man alive), Thursday, November 1, 2018 1:52 PM (fifty minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

well nobody's tried it yet!

Fwiw I endorse derailment itt

Marshall Steinbaum is the economist that badly needs to go on chapo

the dual-pronged attack of MMT and bitcoin/blockchain has made talking to econ-curious leftists so painful

Those are ideologically opposed projects!