Dr. Thomas Sowell – the best economics teacher you will ever learn from
Two half-hour interviews with my FAVORITE economist, Thomas Sowell. If you haven’t read any books by Thomas Sowell, then you don’t know how wonderful economics can be. Thomas Sowell stands for the proposition that before you adopt an economic policy, you have to consider what incentives it will create for everyone involved. And he backs up his ideas with studies that span the whole range of times and places. It turns out that many bad ideas have already been disproved in different times and places, and Thomas Sowell knows them all. Thomas Sowell is a man of facts and evidence.
Description of part one:
Dr. Thomas Sowell (Economist) joins Dave to discuss his Marxist past, free speech on campuses, distinguishing between classical liberalism and libertarianism, and his new book “Discrimination & Disparities.
Part one:
“This idiot has stumbled on something that will ruin us all”. LOL!
Description of part two:
Dr. Thomas Sowell (Economist and Author) joins Dave to discuss the role of government, the problem with minimum wage laws, his experience as a black conservative, debunking systemic racism, the importance of common decency, and his new book “Discrimination & Disparities.”
Part two:
In the comments, Dave explains that YouTube has demonetized the video. I suppose that this is because the video contains conservative ideas, and YouTube is owned by the far-left Google.
Anyway, I recommend getting your hands on some Thomas Sowell books.
This one seems to be a collection of introductory essays:
I haven’t read it, but it has the highest reviews of any of his books. What I would recommend is picking up one of the OLDER versions of his “Basic Economics”:
You can get a used one for a couple of bucks. I read the second edition a while back, and I remember that just reading the first 3 chapters knocked my socks off. Some helpful person even uploaded the audio of the edition I read to YouTube. Just listen to the first 3-4 chapters, and you’ll see what I mean. No one who wants to understand how the world really works can ignore Thomas Sowell.
One that I still haven’t read that’s short and sweet is:
I once dated a homeschooled girl who came from a large, rural family. This family produced brilliant children, but the parents didn’t really believe in college. I told the girl that to marry me, she would have to get a college degree. She and her parents didn’t really like that, and we broke up. However, I did tell her that she should read Thomas Sowell, because she had some left of center views on public policy, e.g. – health care. I found out later that she went on to read SIX Thomas Sowell books in two months. After that, she went on to get a BA in economics via distance learning, with a 4.0 GPA! I think part of that transformation is due to the Thomas Sowell books. Thomas Sowell changes lives.
I have to include this clip of Thomas Sowell from a long time ago:
He understood the things we are fighting about today decades ago. This man should have been our first black president.
Morality has always been a problem for atheists, given that the worldview of atheism is unable to rationally ground the foundations of objective morality:
Objective moral values
Objective moral duties
Accountability for moral choices
Free will, for making moral choices
Ultimate significance, in an afterlife
Each of these is not available on atheism, because if atheism is true, then the universe is an accident, human beings are accidents, and there is no design for how humans ought to be, no free will, and no accountability in an afterlife for those who escape consequences for their actions before they die.
So, how can atheists rationally ground objective morality without a Cosmic designer and an objective design for how humans ought to be?
It’s easy. And I will show you how to do it, using some examples.
Ed Buck and Hillary Clinton
So, before we see how to rationally ground objective morality on atheism, let’s first see some atheist morality, courtesy of the UK Daily Mail.
Ed Buck was convicted Tuesday on charges he injected gay men with methamphetamine in exchange for sex, leading to two deaths and other overdoses.
A federal jury found 66-year-old Buck guilty of all nine felony counts against him, which could lead to a life sentence.
[…]Prosecutors said Buck paid black men and provided drugs in return for sex acts, having hunted online for partners with the familiar term ‘PnP’ – ‘party and play’, or using meth, then having sex.
Atheists believe a lot of objectively moral things like this. Remember Democrat politician Andrew Gillum? I don’t think I’ve ever seen an atheist being more objectively moral than that. What’s more objective morally than being passed out in a hotel room with drugs and gay prostitutes when you’re married and running for governor of Florida?
So, how can atheists rationally ground this excellent objective morality to people who don’t share their atheist worldview?
The first thing is that atheists need to be rich, so that they can escape the consequences of being judged and shamed by those intolerant Christians, who lack empathy and compassion. Being rich also allows atheists to use their money to promote the objective morality of atheism in the political realm – by donating to Democrat politicians. The more Democrat politicians get elected, the more Democrat policies we’ll get. And those policies are excellent for eliminating criticism of atheist morality.
Ed Buck demonstrates this well:
Buck is a wealthy white man who was active in gay causes and animal rights issues.
His Facebook page showed him with Hillary Clinton, the former governor Jerry Brown and Representatives Ted Lieu and Adam Schiff.
[…]His contributions to Democrat politicians and causes from 2005 to 2017 totaled $433,500, according to The New York Times.
Democrats politicians support all kinds of policies designed to rationally ground atheist morality. Democrats push for single mother welfare, in order to incentivize fatherlessness. Democrats support premarital sex and no-fault divorce, to destabilize marriage. Democrats urge women put their children with taxpayer-funded daycare and public schools. This way, children, (the ones who survive being aborted or infanticided), can avoid the harmful morality of their biological parents, and instead be raised by strangers in daycares and government-run schools. There, they will learn objective atheist morality: there is no God, no human rights, no objective morality, that natural marriage is an abomination, that abortion is a sacrament, that transgenderism is scientific, etc. Democrat policies will produce a generation of young people with rationally grounded objective morality.
Gay activist Terry Bean and Barack Obama
Let’s see another example of atheist morality, and see how it can be rationally grounded in an atheist worldview.
The former boyfriend of Terrence P. Bean was arrested early Thursday on sex abuse charges stemming from the same alleged 2013 encounter with a 15-year-old boy at a hotel in Eugene.
Kiah Loy Lawson, 25, was arrested at 1:15 a.m. at the Portland Police Bureau’s Central Precinct and booked into the Multnomah County Detention Center shortly after 2 a.m.
He’s accused of third-degree sodomy and third-degree sexual abuse.
[…]Bean, 66, a prominent gay rights activist and major Democratic Party fundraiser, was arrested at his home in Southwest Portland and booked into the Multnomah County Detention Center at 10:12 a.m. Wednesday.
The indictment charges Bean with two counts of third-degree sodomy, a felony, and one count of third-degree sex abuse, a misdemeanor, police said.
[…]Both Bean and Lawson are accused of having a sexual encounter with the same 15-year-old boy in a hotel in Eugene last year. They had arranged the encounter with the teen after meeting him via a website, investigators allege.
Bean has been one of the state’s biggest Democratic donors and an influential figure in gay rights circles in the state. He helped found two major national political groups, the Human Rights Campaign and the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund, and has been a major contributor for several Democratic presidential candidates, including Barack Obama. He’s also a close friend of former Gov. Barbara Roberts.
Again, the important thing is that atheists need to be wealthy, and donate to Democrat politicians. That way, no one will ever be able to judge or shame them for their atheist objective morality – it will be rationally grounded with all the best atheist logic and evidence.
Actually, there are a lot more good examples of atheist morality.
The mayor of Seattle, Ed Murray, said on Tuesday that he would resign after announcing in May that he would not seek a second term. Several men have come forward to accuse Mr. Murray of sexually abusing them decades ago, when they were underage.
The announcement came just hours after The Seattle Times published a story with an account by a fifth man, Mr. Murray’s cousin, who said Mr. Murray had abused him in the 1970s.
[..]Mr. Murray, 62, a Democrat, is the city’s first openly gay mayor, and had served in the State Legislature for many years before being elected in 2013.
[…]The liberal Mr. Murray is generally considered a father of Washington’s same-sex marriage law, which he pressed in the State Legislature for years.
The radically-leftist New York Times isn’t about to tell you what this Democrat gay-marriage activist actually did – that’s not news that’s fit to print. For that you have to go to Life Site News. Again, don’t try this unless you are an expert in atheist philosophy (being wealthy and donating to Democrat politicians).
Huma Abedin (left), Harvey Weinstein (center), Hillary Clinton (right) discussing feminism
Harvey Weinstein was especially good at defending atheist morality. He had perfected the argument from wealth and the argument from giving money to Democrats. He might have the most rationally-grounded atheist objective morality of any non-Christian scholar I’ve ever read. Even better than than the philosophical arguments of Jeffrey Epstein, Bill Clinton, Anthony Weiner, Elliot Spitzer or Eric Schneiderman. And those philosophers knew a thing or two about rationally-grounded objective morality on atheism.
The important point is that atheists need to be familiar with the 1) be wealthy argument, and the 2) give money to Democrat politicians argument, in order to rationally ground atheist objective morality. It’s also a good idea for rank-and-file atheists to vote Democrat – it will make moral judgement of atheists, and shaming of atheist morality impossible. As soon as atheists can user government to eliminate bad philosophy by Christians, then there will be no one left to question the excellent atheist morality I described above.
Amid the Biden administration’s struggle to v4cc1nate Americans, a video surfaced comments made during the 2020 election cycle by the then-Democratic ticket that cast doubt in a v4cc1ne developed under President Trump.
Biden suggested back in August that any v4cc1ne that comes along is “not likely to go through all the tests that need to be done and the trials that are needed to be done.”
[…]Biden repeatedly indicated only if there was enough “transparency” would he take the v4cc1ne and that the “American people should not have confidence” in the v4cc1ne developed by the Trump administration if his concerns weren’t addressed.
Harris was heard during a CNN interview that getting a v4cc1ne that’s approved by the Trump administration would be “an issue for all of us” and “if Donald Trump tells us that we should take it, I’m not taking it” during the vice presidential debate.
However, PolitiFact issued a so-called “fact-check” with the headline “Biden, Harris distrusted Trump with C0V1D-19 v4cc1nes, not the v4cc1nes themselves.”
This isn’t the first time that Politifact, which is used by all the big social media companies to “fact check” speech, has been caught protecting their favored political party.
Let’s see some examples of past bias.
Arizona Senate Race
Politifact screwed up their fact-check for the Arizona Senate race.
PolitiFact incorrectly labeled it “mostly false” that Democratic Senate candidate Kyrsten Sinema “protested troops in a pink tutu” during its live fact-check of the Arizona Senate debate Monday night.
It’s an established fact that Sinema, a former Green Party activist who co-founded an anti-war group, wore a pink tutu at one of the multiple anti-war protests she attended in 2003.
“While we were in harm’s way, she was protesting our troops in a pink tutu,” Republican candidate Martha McSally, a former Air Force fighter pilot, said during Monday night’s debate.
Here’s their Politifact’s evaluation of McSally’s claim:
Who are you going to believe? Politifact, or your own eyes?
And here’s the photo of Kyrsten Sinema, protesting the troops, in a pink tutu:
Anti-war Democrat Senate candidate Kyrsten Sinema in a pink tutu
The Daily Caller notes:
A 2003 Arizona State University news article at the time described Sinema wearing “something resembling a pink tutu” at one of the protests.
[…]Sinema openly associated with fringe elements of the far-left during her anti-war activism.
She promoted an appearance by Lynne Stewart, a lawyer who was convicted of aiding an Islamic terrorist organization, in 2003.
Sinema also reportedly partnered with anarchists and witches in her anti-war activism and said she did “not care” if Americans wanted to join the Taliban.
And now for the big one: Politifact’s fact-checking of Obamacare.
Obama’s claims about Obamacare
Avik Roy, health care policy expert at Forbes magazine, wrote about Politifact’s assessment of Obama’s promise to Americans about keeping their health plans after Obamacare.
In 2008, before the presidential election, PolitiFact rated Obama’s claims about Obamacare “True”:
Roy writes: (links removed)
On October 9, 2008, Angie Drobnic Holan of PolitiFact published an article using the site’s “Truth-O-Meter” to evaluate this claim: “Under Barack Obama’s health care proposal, ‘if you’ve got a health care plan that you like, you can keep it.’”
And she concluded:
[…]…people who want to keep their current insurance should be able to do that under Obama’s plan. His description of his plan is accurate, and we rate his statement True.”
Roy notes:
PolitiFact’s pronouncements about Obamacare were widely repeated by pro-Obama reporters and pundits, and had a meaningful impact on the outcome of the election. Indeed, in 2009, PolitiFact won the Pulitzer Prize for its coverage of the 2008 campaign.
Here’s the screen capture from 2008:
Politifact says that everyone who likes their health care plan can keep it
Before the election, it’s true! And Obama got re-elected, because people believed that. But what happened after the election?
In 2013, after the 2012 election, PolitiFact rated Obama’s claims about Obamacare “Pants On Fire”:
Roy writes: (links removed)
On December 12, [2013] the self-appointed guardians of truth and justice at PolitiFact named President Obama’s infamous promise—that “if you like your health care plan, you can keep it”—its 2013 “Lie of the Year.”
[…][N]one of the key facts that made that promise “impossible” in 2008 had changed by 2013. The President’s plan had always required major disruption of the health insurance market; the Obamacare bill contained the key elements of that plan; the Obamacare law did as well. The only thing that had changed was the actual first-hand accounts of millions of Americans who were losing their plans now that Obamacare was live.
And the screen capture from 2013:
Politifact said one thing before the election, and the opposite afterwards
So when Politifact rates a statement by a Democrat as true, what they really mean is that it’s pants-on-fire-false, but it’s election time so they don’t say that. It’s not like the critical assessments of Obamacare from health policy experts were not out there between 2007-2012. I know, because I blogged on every study and report on the predicted effects of the law that I could find. But the intellectually lazy journalism-major clowns at Politifact couldn’t be bothered to read those studies and reports.
Secular left journalists are the stupidest people on the planet. Stick with reading The Federalist and Daily Wire if you want to know what’s really going on in the world.
WINTERY KNIGHT 