2024 Election, Media Misinformation, & Geopolitics w/ Jon Stewart and London Mayor Sadiq Khan
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2024
- In this episode, Jon sits down with the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, to explore the challenges the U.S. and U.K. face during their differing election cycles. From immigration to populism to social media, they explore how crucial it is for our representatives to keep us informed without the interference of misinformation. In response to last week’s episode on the economy, Jon is joined by Economics Professor and author of The Deficit Myth, Stephanie Kelton, to tackle government spending and deficits.
#TheWeeklyShowWithJonStewart #TheWeeklyShow #JonStewart #ComedyCentral
Subscribe to The Weekly Show:
/ @weeklyshowpodcast
Follow The Weekly Show:
X: www.x.com/week...
Instagram: / weeklyshowpodcast
TikTok: / weeklyshowpodcast
Watch full episodes of The Weekly Show: • The Weekly Show with J...
About The Weekly Show:
On Mondays, Jon Stewart hosts The Daily Show, but on Thursdays he hosts The Weekly Show - A podcast featuring in- depth conversations with special guests that explores the biggest threats to our democracy. Also hear from producers and friends of the show who discuss the latest headlines, what’s on their minds, and more!
The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart releases new episodes every Thursday wherever you get your podcasts & full episode is available on TH-cam, Fridays at 9AM ET.
I love how Mr. Khan gives examples and explains things and he's absolutely correct that politicians need to take the time to explain and help people understand the policies etc because the old way of "trust me bro" isnt working. Most people dont trust politicians anymore because of rampant corruption in politics. People are sick of seeing politicians get rich while we all struggle daily to pay the bills.
He's ones a few politicians that talk sense which means he probably won't last long!
In America, the point is for us to not understand. If we understood then we would realize our leaders dont give a hint of giving a shit. They are more concerned about where the money is at. Policies are to serve those with a lot of money and power.
@@ScarySox He was re-elected this year. My bet would be he is the successor to Starmer (which given his initial missteps could be sooner than 5 years)
on his fourth term as mayor.
Spot on 👌
8:55 Here's "the part we don't ever really discuss":
"Undocumented immigrants are paying billions of dollars each year in taxes. In spite of their undocumented status, these immigrants-and their family members-are adding value to the U.S. economy, not only as taxpayers, but as workers, consumers, and entrepreneurs as well. A new study shows that undocumented immigrants paid nearly $100 billion in federal, state and local tax revenue in 2022, while many are shut out of the programs their taxes fund.
The findings run counter to anti-immigrant rhetoric that undocumented immigrants are 'destroying' social programs. In 40 states, undocumented immigrants paid higher tax rates than the top 1% of the income scale in those states, according to a study released Tuesday [Sept.] from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy."
that's completely false. if they are undocumented they can't even pay taxes even if they wanted. because they are, undocumented. you can't even have a social security number. they aren't even allowed to work. they have no permit. that rhetoric is false.
Jon, as a comic has the most insightful and thoughtful conversations. We should all start to use the adjective "spot on".
SPOT ON! My friend. It's a wonderful phrase.
@@kimishere2822 hakuna matata🎵🎶...sorry wrong song
Spot on..
Jon is a particular type of comedian -- a person with a very clear sense of the absurdity and hypocrisy of everyday life. That is why he is the perfect prism to focus the white noise of our insane society and political landscape, and allow people to focus on one particular issue or perspective at a time, in a clear and coherent yet still entertaining way. A lot of former Daily Show people have this gift, but I think only Jon and the other John (Oliver) really have the depth of knowledge and quick responses to do it at this level of genius
I’m in the UK. The “dark tunnel” has been very long. Finding out that it’s going to continue, for the foreseeable, is no surprise or revelation. However, a change is as good as a rest, thank God for the British sense of humour.
Jon is quite funny to be fair?🤷
my mother was English and at one low point in my life, she said, as long as you have your sense of humor intact, you can make it through anything and it’s true, lol. it will be over soon and Kamala is favored to win by Lichtman. he has predicted presidential elections since 2004. many republicans are joining us too. it’s looking really good. 😈👊👊👋😄🐁🐀🐷🐈⬛🐈⬛🐶🐶🐶💙💙💙🗳️🗳️🗳️🦋🦋🦋🦋👋
Mayor Khan's story of how his opponents used an AI fake of his voice is just the start. Especially for public figures, it's so easy to make an AI clone of someone's voice these days.
Why couldn't we have just used that tech for Happy Birthday messages or memes for our friends? Why did someone have to ruin it and use it for malice?
That’s why we can’t have nice things. Same with nuclear. The dude that split the atom never thought his discovery would be used to flatten two Japanese cities. It’s how we are self limiting as a species. We self purge.
I really like that guy. Putting spending limits on campaigns are so important. Also, I am 100% behind a 6 week elections. Thanks for another great show Jon.
You do understand he was dodging the "Why did Labour cut spending on the poorest pensioners"-question, right? I understand why Jon didn't push on this but he was right to point it out.
@@daveogfans413Do you know how Winter Fuel Payment works and how many were affected? I think it was politically more harmful than it will be for pensioners.Depends on how tight the means-testing is applied.
@@youtubewatcher2 I wouldn't introduce it but I wouldn't scrap it either. It's a bad look for Labour and doesn't take away doubt with regards to Starmer being a red Tory.
@@daveogfans413 Agreed. Optics are especially bad in connection with the "gifts" being.somewhat hypocritically decried in the traditional Tory press. But I am not expecting anyone to be found frozen because of the cuts.
@@youtubewatcher2 "But I am not expecting anyone to be found frozen because of the cuts." And yet I've read about living conditions of the poorest pensioners during particular harsh winters in The Independent and The Guardian. Listen, it shouldn't be required at all. It's wild but afaik Labour was rightfully attacking Tories during those harsh winters. Now it's somehow acceptable to cut? I wouldn't even mind if the cuts follow after a better spending policy is already decided or ideally implemented. It could've waited.
I think lots of people are drawn to populism, because both the "left" and conservatives aren't actually redistributing wealth to the people who need it most. The time where UK really had a radical Labour choice, said candidate was backstabbed by corporate leftist press (like Guardian and Independent) as well his colleagues. Weird how he had massive support from Labour member yet got backstabbed by the people he campaigned with. Hmm, strange. Almost like there is a considerable amount of career politicians that would rather have Boris Johnson than Corbyn.
Labour changed during the 90s, together with lots of social democratic parties in Europe. Ever since then, we've seen a trend of working class people increasingly voting for right wing pro-austerity politicians (tax cuts for the rich; cuts to social services for the poor) because they're good with the economy and keep immigrants out. It's what happens if the party that ought to fight for worker's rights is too busy enriching themselves or at least protecting the status quo.
Brilliant interview fantastic as a Londoner deep issues discussed. Thank you Mr Mayor and Jon
Stephanie Kelton, was very insightful with her assessment regarding the Fed, treasury bills, notes and bonds, banking system. Her book The Deficit Myth seems interesting to read. Would like to read it.
Be warned once you start seeing money and taxes through an MMT lens, you will be enormously frustrated by 95% of the economic discourse you hear from then on. Increased yelling at the telly may occur.
Jon - you’re the MAN.
Stephanie Kelton is so smart, she just helped me understand that so easily, she must be an amazing professor.
Stephanie Kelton blew my mind with this dept discussion. What would actually happen if we just did not issue certificates or treasury bonds to offset any deficit.
My guess is hyperinflation. If increasing the money supply were the only instrument, then its a simple case of supply and demand.
At some point governments would be forced to increase taxes and adopt deflationary economic policies simply to keep their currencies from collapsing.
Tell me about it. As I am listening to this woman, my mind is being blown. woah
@@catherinewilliams9680 Really, read her book. It is like an epiphany when you “get it”. I think just about everyone must feel that way, like you’ve been looking at things through a reversing lens and now you’re not. I know she must have experienced the same thing because she started off trying to find the obvious flaw in MMT but ended up realizing that it was actually the correct description of money and taxes.
@@marmotsongs what’s the title of her book that you recommend? I’ll check it out.
@@Grizabeebles Why would slowing down the production of increased money supply cause hyperinflation? In her analogy, the FED is already injecting 2 trillion of cash into the market. Adding interests on top of that would just be injecting even more. Stopping the interests would seem to inject less money into the economy.
Amazing conversation. Thank you Jon and Sadiq. Beautiful
As Jon basically stated, a 6-week election cycle would (hopefully) force politicians to actually do their jobs.
Couldn’t agree more. The American election system is exhausting me, & I live in Oz. We have a State election 25/10, basically haven’t seen to much campaigning 🇦🇺
We don't really have a 6 week election cycle though, politicians are constantly campaigning for 4+ years before the election. What's different is a party does its 'primary' straight after losing an election and strict spending limits. That means the 4 years of campaigning is mostly the leaders arguing over policy / values and not trying to raise funds
It would also shrink the amount of time swing state voters would have to deal with incessant ads.
Most of the democracies in the world have both campaign limits and time limits.
Some have spending limits, some countries limit donations to under $3,000 per person or company. Imagine how much LESS influence the ultra-wealthy would have if they're NOT allowed to create PACs nor donate huge sums.
Oligarchy is defined by the political influence exerted by the wealthy. The US has oligarchs who have become ludicrously influential.
It's not 6 weeks, but technically speaking, our elections last only ~3 months. Our parties hold conventions in mid-July and determine who they're going to put forward as a candidate, they then campaign for those 3 months until November. This is the exact reason the Democrats were able to reverse course with Biden and front Harris at the last second. Nothing had been decided yet.
The issue, of course, is our primary system incentivizes up and comers to be angling and campaigning for that nomination and "not campaigning" and fund-raising and all of that for 1-4 years depending on how you reckon it prior to all of that.
He keeps claiming it’s young people being fooled by their echo chamber. This is absolutely a universal problem. However, it’s not young people that I experience being the most dogmatic toward their echo chamber. It’s our eldest generations.
I didn't hear it as a competition on who is most scamable. I see it as they said it's a problem for everyone to deal with and that Meta, X and other SoMe etc isn't taking their share of the responsibility. We, who knows all this should help educate people around us no matter their age.
It's both. A lot of young people are "radicalized" by tiktok and TH-cam. Once someone is identified as mildly right wing by these or other networks, they can very quickly be funneled into a stream of misinformation and conspiracies.
It's everyone 🤷
I concur. We are all in our bubble silo away from seeing the diversity of what is going on in people’s every day lives even locally especially in metropolitan a cities but even in rural communities. The internet is a great tool for extending the scope of our experiences, understanding, and knowledge. But we have to news stories with some skepticism and confirm facts from multiple sources. Gossip, conspiracies, and outright unsubstantiated lies blended either propaganda to manipulate us and propagated by social media algorithms is something we need to be aware of. Must people are busy surviving and keeping themselves and if they are lucky their families alive and fed with roof overhead to shelter which allows them to sleep nightly. Critical Thinking is always a priority.
All he said is kids are being raised on echo chamber algorithms now?
Sadiq Khan will be in the top 100 most hated people online, he knows it’s not kids at the moment but fearful it’s just going to get worse.
Two of my favourite people in the world - together 🥰 Sadiq K and John S. Sò proud of my Mayor
Hey Mr. Steward could you please have Stephanie return for a full episode? She gave so much good information in just a little time. I understand the first hit is free 😂. Now I am a little inspired and less hopeless about what I see on TV.
A few months before the tragic stabbing of children in London inflamed the far-right, a tragic stabbing of children in Dublin did the same thing. The stabber was an Irish citizen but social media said he was a Muslim refugee. (A by-stander who risked his life to stop the stabbings was actually an immigrant man of colour!) And the far-right came out and set O'Connell Street on fire. You would think London would have seen that and prepared themselves for something similar. I'm left thinking that you guys should have been prepared for such a circumstance and had safeties in place to prevent it from getting as bad as it did. But then again, when does any tragedy in Ireland ever get noticed by the Brits.
The stabbing took place in Southport not London. The Irish riots were the main headlines at the time that they happened. There has been a great push to attempt to tackle knife crime across the whole of the UK including a big campaign by Idris Elba at the beginning of the year... Ultimately these are the symptoms of huge societal inequality which take time to address, it's underway and building momentum, I'm hopeful that the underlying root will be removed or significantly curtailed now the Tories are out.
Also, people rely on social media for information rather than traditional media, so prone to the ‘spin’ of whichever source they follow - just like Fox News/Murdoch trash. If the actual news doesn’t suit their narrative, they won’t report it or will selectively report certain facts.
The issue is with the lack of regulation against misinformation. Misinformation is assault and murder by proxy. Media and social media companies, conspiracy theorists who profit from the rhetoric, all profit without any accountability, which leads to people getting hurt and killed. If they become actually criminally liable, including their CEOs and Directors, then we might see a reduction (not total elimination) of this.
100% correct. Safeties in place and being prepared are the opposite of what the Tories did to the UK for nearly two decades straight. Its going to take time to fix unfortunately.
Jon! We love you, bud. Thank you for your work with veterans.❤️🤍💙
Make social media a public service like the telephone or internet. REGULATE it or things will only get worse.
S'il vous plait Yankee Doodlers, please do not inflict another DJT shitstorm on Canada and the rest of the world.
We hope to do better this time.
For your support, merci!
Intelligent conversation with actual information!
How dare you sir!!!
Why can't the FDA sue on our behalf for consumer safety being dismissed on these platforms? We can prove stochastic terror is killing us.
Why? Congress.
Whose fault is that? Voters
That’s the SEC job - which was defunded decades ago by the Republican Party.
@@AKHill-gj2uy
"Why? Congress.
Whose fault is that? Voters "
When voters get to pick between a red tie douchebag or blue tie douchebag is it their fault??
I'm in the UK it's the same but the red and blue reversed but neither "party" represent the voters!
@mattharker9212 So if a product is killing us, there is no legal path for liability for those deaths? That's all a platform is. A product, one that's killing people.
@mattharker9212 The internet is just a product. If a product is causing irreparable harm the FDA is obligated to protect consumers.
Great conversation. Two very smart people who understand world politics well.
John needs to upload Stephanie’s chat as a separate post!!!
Jeezus Jon, Professor Kelton is too f'ing clear about the past 50 years of neoliberal/Laissez-faire/trickle-down economic policy. Get her in the Harrison/Walz econ policy room ASAP!!!
I loved that conversation with Stephanie Kelton. It reminds me of the conversation a few years ago about Modern Monetary Policy. It really highlights how public spending can get conflated with personal finance and the issues that causes for policy making.
so awesome to see Stephanie Kelton back
There has always been migration, even before there were human beings. Technology advances of the last 5 centuries accelerated human migration globally with no end in sight.
In the UK & US migrants or "illegals" are being scapegoated for the problems created by the greedy ruling class.
Global migration is coming with Global warming so we better get this figured out fast folks. There are ways of doing things that work.
In fact EVERY SINGLE modern American, except for the indian natives, is the result of their parents'migration. They are all immigrants
For years we see and know, Fear sells and without being able to counter these folks with truth we loose to small groups that do this without checking them. Maybe the first amendment, is being abused,,,
I love that it has come true. I made a comment and asked for Stephanie Kelton to respond ❤. I want , mmt, and Stephanie ,to give us their economics and try it out!!!!!
British elections make SO MUCH SENSE. Can we PLEASE do this...
Weirdly comforted that other countries are crazy too. While I "knew" that, it's easy to get lost in our own struggles.
Man I love this podcast and it’s interesting to see Jon talking about things here and then referencing them during the daily show. This man is the goat fr
There's an awful lot I wish you'd raised with Mr. Khan. 1. "Short-term pain" sounds a lot like Reagan. And Thatcher. 2. I'd also love to hear what he has to say about the purges carried out by Starmer? Anyone with a progressive record was "un-Laboured" before the election (almost all people of immigrant background). 3. What about Jeremy Corbyn? He was basically destroyed by Labour for his pro-Palestinian advocacy. Sounds a lot like the Democratic party in the US.
The Democratic party is Centre-Right by UK standards, and are more akin to the the traditional Tory party.
What Khan fails to note is that the US centre ground is skewed heavily to the right, mostly due to the legacy of McCarthyism.
In recent years, the Tories have shifted heavily right-wing, and Labour have long been dabbling as a Centre-Right party.
Corbyn was insanely unpopular with the British public; he's on record supporting basically every anti-UK group of the last 40 years and called Hamas his friends and said Russia didn't do the Skipral posionings which killed 3 British citizens on UK soil, using a nerve agent only Russia uses and targeting a Russian defector to the UK
Hamas is a banned terror group in the UK because of how they've acted
@@AKHill-gj2uysame with Australia & NZ. America is very conservative in comparison.
@@AKHill-gj2uy Yh, when you say the Tories have shifted right though that's a reflection of their members not their voter base, which is why they got hammered. On almost every issue, except taxation, a majority of Tory voters would vote Dem in the US. The only reason they didn't lose in 2019 is because the Labour party really went off the deep-end
London is lucky!
Your guest is a rich man defending policies of pro rich society, no matter the name of who produce the policies is Labour party .Invite Owen Jones, Novara people. They can give you different ideas of life in UK
I love this quote that I use everyday I see something that's designed to insight anger and fear and makes me want to fight back online, "Contrary to popular narrative, humanity is not one massive debate club steeped in academic prowess."
Who said it? I tried looking it up but nothing but love the quote
Again, as I constantly remind folks: Please stop using euphemisms like "Immigration Control", etc. to cover the two, disparate issues of "Border Control" and "Immigration Policy". As Mr. Khan noted almost everyone agrees on the idea that a Sovereign nation should control its Borders. Once we can put aside the canard of "Open Borders" which is used to distract people with Shiny Objects, we can have an honest Policy Discussion on Who and How Many we _want_ to join our nations ... i.e. "Immigration Policy" ...
Jon, Canada's Bank of Canada(our federal reserve) used to loan money federal & provincial governments until Pierre Trudeau turned off the taps in 1972. Until then we were essentially debt free. Now we borrow from private banks and have significant (unnecessary) deficits & debt
It is interesting to hear about how elections are held in the UK. However overall, I didn't really get much out of this conversation because the ideas were very broad strokes. Nothing in true implementation. There were too many platitudes in my opinion even though I support the ideas. I just feel like regulating social media would be difficult, nebulouw, and easy to overstep. How do platforms walk that fine line? How would one go after spreaders of disinformation or misinformation? How do you differentiate from harmful accounts vs the truly misguided and ill-informed? There are a lot of considerations if one really wanted to make changes instead of just saying that changes are necessary.
I'm in Australia and our elections are 5 to 6 weeks and we all vote on a Saturday unless we do mail in or absentee voting. All parties have to give their proposals to be accessed as feasible. Plus our government departments and the funding continues without being used to shut the government down.
Regulation? 100% of all the misinformation originates from people. 100% of misinformation is consumed by people. No one wants to offend their brother of being insane but he is.
I’m so proud that Brits keep voting sadiq in, he’s such a great guy and a genuine in honest politician. Despite the racism all around it’s a beacon of light
Topic and I guess partial question, why are algorithms that recommend people content not treated as editors? I know that by law they have been exempt from that, I believe the argument at the time was that it wasn't picking any biase or something like that. But now a days it's clear that recommendation algorithms can be tuned have all of the problems that a human could have. So why are the humans doing the same job more heavily regulated?
In Canada, we have a short election period BUT in recent years, the campaigning never stops anyways, fanned mostly by the Conservatives, who lost the last (three) election(s) and have been chomping at the bit for their turn.
I think another part of the problem with social media and free speach, is that social media is largely or annonymous. And people are less likely to be so antongonistic or be less open minded when talking with annonmous people in text formats. While there certainly can be many heated discussions in a face to face forum, at least people have more information to react to, and not just overreacting to a few poorly written words.
Thanks for binging in Dr. Kelton to talk about macroeconomics. She explains it so simply even lay people like myself understand these basics and can now demand our politicians to manage the economy better. How can we get people like Dr. Kelton to run the economy?
@@carlosross4547 Bringing in Professor Warren to run CFSB was blocked by GOP Senators. Sadly Obama listened to Larry Sommers
I love Jon Stewart. I love sane, and reasonable, and hopeful conversations about the future.
SOUNDS LIKE CANADA 🇨🇦 WE NEED HELP TRUDEAU GOTTA GO. BUT WHO'S NEXT-GENERATION 😊
Another great podcast. Jon, you went and got the economic answer. Bravo!!
I am all in on a 6 week campaign season. Let them govern not just work to keep the job. What a mess are system is in
The Mayor of London is doing better than the Mayor of New York...
£1 = $1.35 ish
I noticed that no one mentions numbers when talking about immigration. What are our current numbers , what do you think the numbers should be and how do we work to get there? I would be open to a stricter immigration policy, but what does that even look like compared to what we have now? Do we have a liberal immigration policy now? I know we don’t have enough staff to process new immigrants. But that’s all I really hear about it. No details. No hard facts. Part of the reason I don’t know is because its not my top issue to be honest, but maybe since its a top issue for half the country we (on the left) should get into the weeds on it more.
All this to say, if we (on the left, center, sane right) can’t bring this conversation to reality then the conversation is going to occur in the realm of histrionics and hyperbole.
Definitely a lack of sufficient quality messaging and appropriate platform that reaches most citizens (which is harder now since people aren’t restricted to TV and newspapers anymore). But I suspect the bigger and more insidious issue is a reduction in the quality of public education that teaches civics, social issues, critical thinking, independent research skills etc that would enable people to know where to look for information relevant to the issues they care about and how to make changes to them. Even if details like immigration numbers are somehow filtered through to people without being scrambled by the propaganda machine, all of the big issues - immigration, border security, international relations, economy, healthcare etc - are very complex and nuanced issues that won’t fit into a 30 second news or TikTok clip. Even with some of that data, people just aren’t receiving the level of education that helps them make sense of that info , seek more info and have constructive discussions about it within their communities.
And it’s beneficial for groups like the GOP to further cut education funding and regulation, coz the less educated the masses are, the easier they are to manipulate 😕
I don;t know if you're American or European or where you hail from, but a recent realisation clarified this issue for me. No European country - not one, not even Monaco, the richest of all of them - has a population replacement birth rate of 2.1 kids per woman. Not. One.
As long as this goes on, there will be mass immigration, whether Europeans want it or not. It's what our market economy system requires, not even for growth, but just stability.
The root problem is not "immigration", it's labour shortage. If governments want to freeze or reverse immigration, they need to create societies where having a family (or even just seeking a partner) becomes easier, affordable and a decision without trepidation. Instead we get low wages, insecure rental housing, overpriced permanent housing, short term contracts, internal migration and nomadism in search of work, ie a whole bunch of internal problems that dissuade young people or prevent young people from settling down. Then there are feminist issues; lack of childcare for women who wish to continue their careers, sexism and abuse within marriage, shaming (rather than support of) independent single mothers, etc. etc.
Make societies hospitable for young families, for women, ensure an end to child poverty, make work stable and rewarding and make housing affordable and you solve the immigration problem at one end.
As for the other end; climate issues, colonialist exploitation, expansionist wars, the arms industry, all of these destablise countries and make people want to migrate. Strengthen the UN, heighten aid budgets, take the climate crisis seriously, end interventionist violence and imperialist resource wars and the incentive for people to leave the global south is diminished. We need a multi-polar world where many societies are worth living in, not a world where some suffer obesity and others starve to death.
While we're at it, why not go back to earlier numbers? How many democraticly elected leaders in Global South countries should be forcefully deposed before we allow their war torn citizens to seek legal asylum? How many children are we willing to see die or be forcefully separated from their families at our borders? How are those numbers for "histrionics"?
Let’s goooi
thank you
There is free speech and hate speech. Hate speech is illegal in Canada.
Why not have Professor Richard Wolff on?
Because right now, Jon seems to prefer having all these right-wing assholes on and cleverly arguing with them.
I can't believe he doesn't get that the Labour Party has sold out its values and become a Center-Right, Neoliberal party just like the modern Democrats. He's far too informed to not be aware of these major changes in the UK's major parties...
“DJT is the best investment I have ever made!” -V Putin
Labour is no longer a workers party. The bums.
John Smith was the last real Labour leader, Blair was the end.
You're right but Labour as a workers party hasn't been able to win since forever. Adapt or lose and the alternative is the Conservatives. I know which I prefer, however imperfect it is.
I LOVE HOW JON CALLED IT "PRINTING MONEY" AND SADIQ CALLED IT "BORROWING MONEY" That right there folks is the Answer to everything..
Our conservative friends blame Kahn for everything they can because he is Labour (and possibly other characteristics) without ever understanding that a Labour London exists in a country run by conservatives.
Perhaps you missed the fact that now, since a couple of months, the country is run by "progressive" (Labour). The conservatives were running the country for the last 15 years, more or less. Just for your information.
Labour technically won, but it was mostly the Tory party losing. Corbyn got millions more votes in previous elections when labour lost. All the data shows that turnout was low because the Tory party is so awful that millions didn’t vote and some changed sides. This is why Lib Dems got 70 seats too because many didn’t want Labour despite how atrocious the Tory party is
Wrong. It was tactical voting. People who aren’t natural Labour voters did so where Labour were the main contenders, and in constituencies like mine they voted Lib Dem.
In 2019 the drive was to keep Labour out, and a misguided belief that Corbyn was opposed to Brexit. Hence, the Tories got 43% and Johnson won an 80 seat majority.
@16:40 yes that's all true, but what are they doing that Murdoch and BBC are not doing every single day? pretty much your whole national tv "news" media should be off the air by that standard
They all need appropriate regulation and be held accountable for creating and/or propagating misinformation.
Maybe the guy from Harvard wanted to make sure that people understood that he was not from the Chicago School of Economics, which he might be a student of anyway. Or just to make it clear why he does not wash his hands after doing certain things. Best of it was both but I have my doubts about any conservative economist. They often sound not only like the Chicago School, they also often sound like Gold Bugs from the Cato Institute.
Jason Furman is extremely wealthy, and grew up wealthy. I think that's part of why he sounded so out of touch last week.
Algorithm food!
“Ripples of fear” is right. I live in Uruguay and when I speak with people here, they usually express a lot of concern and fear that DJT will win again. :/
If you read the dollar it's called a federal note that belongs to the federal reserve so we don't even own the dollar in our pocket
@@lwells3937 It’s just an IOU from the government to us. It used to be an IOU for a certain quantity of gold or silver. Now it’s just an IOU for… a dollar.
thank you
#JonStewart #TheWeeklyShow Hey Jon. After the announcement of Scripps News downsizing considerably after this election, do you think it is possible for a 'fact first' news network to survive today that does not use partisanship and spectacle as its central strategy? (And if you are unaware of Scripps News, you are not alone. There is a lot of their great reporting online for you to review. It's worth it.) Thanks.
In terms of regulating AI and the internet. Max Fisher had some really good ideas on what he calls a "latency tax" that he explains on a recent Pod Save America ep. They also talk about something you alluded to about the UN reframing as a regulatory body around AI and technology.
Love this mayor, unlike London Breed in San Francisco who currently while running for reelection, is pushing to arrest homeless people and she will probably win, it's really going to hell.😢
Government Domestic Debt is all the money circulating in the economy - in our pockets and bank accounts.
No government debt - no money in the economy.
Your mortgage is a bank asset
Your deposits are a bank liability - the bank owes you that money when you want it
When the government 'deposits' (spends) money in the economy it is considered a 'liability' a debt
But in double entry accounting - Bank liability is Customer asset
thus government debt is private sector asset
The "pension thing" in the UK - a winter fuel allowance of £200-300 was given to EVERY pensioner. Regardless of income. 25% of pensioners in UK are millionaires, they got the WFA as did many well off who liked the extra payment to add to their spending for their second cruise of the year. Labour have altered the universal payment to a means tested one, meaning the poorest STILL GET IT. But to hear the tory outrage, you would believe labour had scrapped the whole pension scheme. RW press are claiming millions of pensioners will freeze to death. For £200? Nobody is going to die for £200. It makes far more sense to give it to the needy, not the greedy.
Miss. Stephanie Kelton knows her shit. Tell it like it is ! This show beats any news channel I can think of. Thank you for your voice.
Really enjoying Prof. Kelton's demystifying counterpoints to the nameless man from last week, which I feel come down to "We made money up, and we decide how it works".
WRT needing people to trust “experts”, we need to do a better job teaching experts to speak to the public effectively. It’s been a while since I’ve been in academia, but my experience was that particularly scientific experts were often actively discouraged from trying to think about and practice how to communicate with the public because it would just distract and diminish their focus on research. Maybe it’s not that way anymore because universities want professors who boost their public image, but the pandemic seemed to reveal a yawning gap between public health experts and an understanding of how to communicate with the public.
Some Should Understand, One Is Also To Accept Consequence Of Intentionally Incentivising People To Divide From Each Other, Looking Elsewhere From Where They Loose Their Sense Of Unity, Except For That Which Comes Across Media, Each Toward Furthering The Divide, Increasing The Chasm, And Voices Get Louder, Easy To Conduct Family "Business, When Most Are Distracted
What I've learned is either economists are terrible at giving summarizing sentences or I'm really bad at understanding economists. I think what Stephanie should have started with is "the tax cuts did not leave us less equipped to deal with a crisis, but did lead to an increase in inflation due to us needing to take on more debt". Which I suppose is fairly self explanatory. I suppose what I dont understand is how without treasury bonds being the tangible representation of debt, how does the debt stay "real" if we just call the money in everyone's pockets the national debt? I feel like that part just got thrown out there without enough explaination
Cost of Living Crisis (Current) versus Financial Crisis (2007-2008) = not the same illness or cure. eg High inflation has now affected raw material & labor costs, required to build "affordable housing" to an extent that is unaffordable now and in the future for "working people" or "newcomers to the market" to buy or rent.
House price inflation has eliminated any potential of affordability, and higher interest rates burden markets running with greater debt, leading to bankruptcy for the over-exposed.
Stimulus will only fuel a greater gap in the cost-of-living and lower interest rates only help those with greater debt or boost profits, eg rental income for those with greater resources or "Buy to Let".
The positive side for the FED is that the financial system appears to have survived a 5% rate compared to the collapse in 2007-2008 partly due to interest rate rises and property inflation, deregulation.
Cure - deflation of raw material & energy (green) costs and new technology (growth). Higher tax on property & inheritance over a value limit as well as new legislation on rental income potentials.
Network/Cyber architect here. Jon.... the Internet IS basically a series of pipes. For the average Joe, its a analogy that provides a basic description. I could explain it in depth to anyone, but most are not capable of understanding it, especially elected officials or C level people with zero technical knowledge. Network engineers commonly refer to telecommunication circuits as pipes. I know many people think wireless and cloud when they think of the Internet, but most of that is interconnected with wires/fiber. Mr. Khan is spot on about uncontrolled social media being used as a social engineering tool to manipulate the masses. The fun stuff with GenAI being able to fabricate and make up just about anything you can think up means "truth" is going to be extremely difficult to determine for many. And the tech industry is so focused on speed to market aka more money, they ignore the impact or damage (greed is good right?).
Thank you so much for explaining vaccine hesitancy when it arises from informed skepticism instead of conspiracy stories. There are so few people willing to put that out there lest they themselves become -gasp!- conspiracy theorists or nuts. Pharma has not earned my trust, and has in fact damaged me in the past. The fact that they don't want to fully inform me now only worsens the trust. Give me all the information so I can make an informed decision.
I wish you would have pushed a bit further on inflation because its still not clear when you say "just manage inflation" like, WTF, how?? What is the thing that affects inflation? If its not the spending of fictional money then what it is? How do you measure it? This is the thing that's missing from the conversation. People will see government spending and think inflation will rise automatically. You need to actually define exactly how this happens so people will understand.
Its the type fo spending that affects inflation. For example, giving average people 10k will likely impact things like food prices, gas prices, rent, etc because people still have the same needs but now they have more money to spend on them so they do. More eating out, more driving etc.
Give 10k to companies building houses, the cost of materials will likely rise, but the price of food probably wont because the money will be spread across a smaller number of people.
Its a complex issue because depending on what demographics the money flows to will affect the prices of the things they pay for in different ways.
It's complex but its incredibly important to understand and yhe government needs to do a better job at explaining this and also they need to do more analysis and modelling to estimate the impacts this fake money will have so that they can more effectively channel the money where it will do the most good and if the average person understands this, they will vote for the people that have the best chance of improving the country
Still mixing public and monetary policy. Stunning when Stephanie tells Jon about Republicans using the fiscal policy of tax cuts and his response is, "but that's mostly supply side". Again highlighting the fundamental misunderstandings of economics Americans have. Jon heard fiscal policy and thought "demand" and heard monetary policy and thought "supply". Just like in previous conversations when he heard "changes to the fed funds rate" and assumed that, no matter which direction, those changes only help hedge funds. I'm more and more impressed that he keeps putting himself in these conversations where he displays his ignorance. These issues are complex and highly relevant and Jon could look much smarter or heroic by talking about Veterans Affairs or Fox News yet The Weekly Show chooses the topic based on what is important and where Jon can stand to learn. Keep it up!
One of the reasons that people don't trust the experts is because often times they side with the politicians, and so you have a mixed class of real experts, people who know better but are spreading the political message for favors, and fake experts like Elon Musk who doesn't know a damn thing about tech but people believe the lie that he does, so he's consulted for tech legislation, which ends up being horribly stupid. Nobody can trust anyone anymore. We've seen this time and again. I think "experts" need more accountability, when they lie. Unfortunately everyone in America is so numb from every politician lying to us on all sides, that we just default to our chosen side and accept the lies as truth. And that's how we keep getting insanely bad politicians and government leaders, and live in massive disinformation bubbles, which also cause us to waste insane amounts of money. I guess this other guest doesn't care that we're 35 trillion dollars in debt, and Our national debt is higher than the GDP of 1/3rd of the Planet earth. But sure we can always just go deeper into debt.
Jon you have to go back a few episodes where there was conversation about lobbyists to understand why politicians can't really focus on governing. US politicians fundraise 24/7. They tell the lobbyists to write the legislation because they don't have time themselves to do it. They also complain they don't have time to even read it. So the question is, who's running the legislature? Politicians or lobbyists? I think the majority of people will pick lobbyists. We've know for years money drives the system. Congress will never decide to limit or even eliminate donations or spending on elected officials. Who would want to give up money once it's received? Candidates are being considered behind closed doors and out of the public discourse all the time. You can limit the public campaigning to 6 weeks, but it's still a 24/7 operation. Conversations will still get leaked to the public. Take the money out of the game and it would be wholly different.
I don't particularly like Horror films. Every time I'm listening to an economist break down our situation with no political agenda whatsoever, just the facts, I'm reminded of that. It is terrifying how little we actually perceive how wrong the direction is we're headed towards.
You're both right, this is exactly the reality and problem we face. Majorie Taylor Green and Josh Hawley and Nigel Farage are representing perfectly. Their constituents could not care less about any of the issues you're talking about. They simply want to "own" the left, and despise (and I don't use this word lightly) change. It's a gameday parking lot culture. Some legislation on media companys might help (god willing) but the problem is "not in our stars, but in ourselves."
I have been wondering why I haven’t heard anyone talking about the fact that the unemployment benefits the government was giving out during the pandemic was way too much. They were giving everyone, no matter how much they made at their jobs, about $1000 a week. Which to a lot of people was 2-3 times what they regularly made. So I feel that had a lot to do with what caused the initial inflation spike that corporations took advantage of to keep prices higher for longer. If they would have kept benefits at matching their pay up to the maximum then we probably wouldn’t have had the massive inflation spike that we had. But maybe the shear number of cases of unemployment overwhelmed the government and they weren’t able to figure that stuff out. Hopefully we don’t have another situation like this in the future but if we do, I hope they have figured that problem out and learned their lesson 😁
Great so now please get Mr. Harvard and Stephanie back on to debate each other.
Seriously, please. Not just for the show or us. I have a feeling Mr. Harvard and those with him will avoid that discussion like the plague or will only address it in indirect, prepared and superficial ways. This may not be novel but it is paradigm exploding stuff, so on both of those counts it ought to be a refined and unassailable exercise by dogmatic experts to dismantle everything she said. And if it isn't... Jon, you said this is perhaps the most important topic of discussion today. If you're not going to run for office or join Mr. Harvard's class next semester or something, please use the power you do have to make us have that discussion we're apparently not willing to have.
My comment after last weeks show was to have Stephanie Kelton on to correct the false information that Jason Furman was putting out because although Jon had previously spoken with her, and other MMTers, and she had been on TDS recently, MMT apparently hadn’t yet clicked for him although you could see he started to understand about treasuries and debt. And Stephanie got animated when she saw that part clicking with him. Another interview or two with MMTers and he’ll start to correct people when they state that taxes pay for govt spending.
So, my favorite comment to economist is, you could just get rid of money. But with the federal reserve/bank of NY same thing, they should run it like a real bank. Before WWII, they did. if a company or person borrowed money, the interest rate like any bank was geared to making the government a profit. IE, you borrow, and have an interest rate higher than the amount the loan costs the bank to carry. Or, in muslim systems equal exactly to the loan, as its illegal religiously to charge interest. But, during and after WWII, it was deemed that we needed a military industrial system to maintain a large global military under the justification if we didn't it would be an endless series of wars in Europe and the rest of the globe. Starting around 1950, the federal policy slowly started to incorporate the same style spending and loan system to corporations, giving them less and less interest on their loans, until what we have now. The 400 billion is the people who sell the bullets, missles, tanks, and in rare instances jets and aircraft carriers, without directly being the US government as private contractors, and releasing the US and government from any treaties liabilities, and occasionally, they take one of them out under international crimes the US signed, but not the US politicians involved.
What I would love to have explained to me is why corporate tax incentives aren't tied directly to what they're putting back into the economy?? It feels like the only two economic solutions ever being proposed for inflation are tax changes and imposed regulations.
The revenue coming from inside the US should be judged against the % of your staff that's local, and the rate you pay in comparison to the average cost of living.
This way, responsible US companies can get a healthy tax rate and build wealth on a platform we all can stand on. Companies who outsource the majority of their jobs and stiff workers, have a high tax rate and a limit on how much revenue they can make in this country.
A lot of mid-range companies can't survive paying our current minimum wage, so we can have an incentive where all US based employee salaries are paid from a federal pool that companies pay into at a 50-75% rate. This way workers make more, the company can survive and we guarantee jobs stay in the US. The reason for the pool is so companies don't pocket the money.
The purpose of government should not be to promote economic growth. It should be more oriented to ensuring that what belongs to all (what is made by natural processes) is shared by all. We can do that by charging fees to industries ~ pollution, resource extraction or habitat destruction, then sharing fee proceeds to all people. Putting money into people's hands by printing new money is like an amphetamine for the economy. To correct the inflationary effect, we will need to constrain money supply later. That makes a slump / quashes investment. If we are sharing natural wealth, we will know that, even in a slowdown of activity (pandemic), people will continue to spend to support basic needs.
This media issue is easy to solve Jon. Make every media subject to print publisher rules and recourse for anyone with more than 100,000 subscribers. Incentives it with a reduced tax rate by 10% on the first 800K of income. Cleans up the whole market.
Love the topics you guys cover. I have a suggestion that you guys have an episode about biotechnology. There have been some really profound advancements in the field recently, referred to as synthetic biology. I bring this up because these advancements have the potential to be similarly impactful as AI on society, but it hardly ever gets coverage in the media. Getting this out in the public discourse is going to be really important because this technology has tremendous ethical and societal considerations. Navigating the kinds of regulations, funding and responsible usage of this technology is going to be complex and getting people informed is the first and most important step. Keep up the good work!
Sadiq avoided talking about France. Labour is no different to the democratic party, they are only to happy to print money for war but when it comes to investing in infrastructure, they tell us we need austerity.
Great show! Always informative, and because of Jon it's always entertaining.
💙 VOTE 100% BLUE, Y'ALL! 💙
i will never understand this shit. like how is it you just get enough money, put it all in a box, then just GET money, and that’s not supposed to do something crazy to the economy. like hooray i got all they money, spend it and stimulate the economy? noooo im gonna put it in a box in some other country and live for free, but gahhhh tHe InFlAtIoN!
I *love* Sadiq’s passion…don’t completely agree with him, but he is obviously committed to making London a better city! Last week…Jason made my butt hurt!