Published By
Created On
17 Apr 2021 16:48:51 UTC
Transaction ID
Cost
Safe for Work
Free
Yes
Conservatives: Bright Side of a Joe Biden Victory
I'm a conservative, but I tried to look at this as non-partisan as possible since he has a good chance of winning. I don't imagine this video being particularly popular today, but in 2 years we may look back and see this as the most accurate prediction of what happened...
According to the Economist, Joe Biden has an 86% chance of winning.
If you are a small-government conservative like me then how can we look at the bright side of a Joe Biden victory?
For one, I’d argue that even more important than the U.S. Presidency is the U.S. Senate. The Presidency switches party hands almost every 8 years so even if Trump can hold onto the White House it’ll be much harder for Republicans to win again in 2024 at which point the leftist wing of the Democratic party would be so loud that they could be unstoppable.
Also according to the Economist, Democrats have a good, but smaller chance of flipping the Senate — 67%. The bright side of a Joe Biden victory for Republicans is if Republicans can hold onto the Senate then Joe Biden would be drastically limited in his ability to do anything too progressive, which in effect may pull the country closer to the center as the mainstream media would grasp at strings to explain how nothing is a lot.
I’d also argue after doing a ton of research on the subject that the only way we will balance the federal budget someday is with a divided government where the President is a Democrat and the Congress is Republican. We had an opportunity to at least cut the federal deficit in 2015 when Obama/Biden offered to make cuts to Social Security and Medicare in exchange for closing tax loopholes on billionaires and millionaires, but Mitch McConnell refused to negotiate. In 2020, Mitch McConnell is starting to pretend like he cares about the national debt again so I guess we’ll see what happens in the 2020′s, but one of the reasons I say it needs to be a divided government is because, for one, Mitch McConnell himself said it needs to be a divided government, and two, that is the only time it has happened in modern American history. Joe Biden was also the guy who introduced the Federal Spending Control Act and who voted several times for a Balanced Budget Amendment. If 2020 Joe Biden wakes up as 2001 Joe Biden then we’d have the most fiscally conservative president in decades.
But what if Democrats win both the Presidency and the Senate then what can we expect from a Biden administration?
Obama/Biden administration spent more on defense than the Bush administration. Joe Biden has also said on the campaign trail that he wants to increase defense spending on “unmanned capacity, cyber and IT” so he may in effect keep the defense budget around where it is. Obama/Biden also had more drone strikes than the Bush administration
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJ55AX80Uvw
According to the Economist, Joe Biden has an 86% chance of winning.
If you are a small-government conservative like me then how can we look at the bright side of a Joe Biden victory?
For one, I’d argue that even more important than the U.S. Presidency is the U.S. Senate. The Presidency switches party hands almost every 8 years so even if Trump can hold onto the White House it’ll be much harder for Republicans to win again in 2024 at which point the leftist wing of the Democratic party would be so loud that they could be unstoppable.
Also according to the Economist, Democrats have a good, but smaller chance of flipping the Senate — 67%. The bright side of a Joe Biden victory for Republicans is if Republicans can hold onto the Senate then Joe Biden would be drastically limited in his ability to do anything too progressive, which in effect may pull the country closer to the center as the mainstream media would grasp at strings to explain how nothing is a lot.
I’d also argue after doing a ton of research on the subject that the only way we will balance the federal budget someday is with a divided government where the President is a Democrat and the Congress is Republican. We had an opportunity to at least cut the federal deficit in 2015 when Obama/Biden offered to make cuts to Social Security and Medicare in exchange for closing tax loopholes on billionaires and millionaires, but Mitch McConnell refused to negotiate. In 2020, Mitch McConnell is starting to pretend like he cares about the national debt again so I guess we’ll see what happens in the 2020′s, but one of the reasons I say it needs to be a divided government is because, for one, Mitch McConnell himself said it needs to be a divided government, and two, that is the only time it has happened in modern American history. Joe Biden was also the guy who introduced the Federal Spending Control Act and who voted several times for a Balanced Budget Amendment. If 2020 Joe Biden wakes up as 2001 Joe Biden then we’d have the most fiscally conservative president in decades.
But what if Democrats win both the Presidency and the Senate then what can we expect from a Biden administration?
Obama/Biden administration spent more on defense than the Bush administration. Joe Biden has also said on the campaign trail that he wants to increase defense spending on “unmanned capacity, cyber and IT” so he may in effect keep the defense budget around where it is. Obama/Biden also had more drone strikes than the Bush administration
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJ55AX80Uvw
Author
Content Type
Unspecified
video/mp4
Language
English
More from the publisher
Controlling
VIDEO
WHAT
what-is-the-best-inflation-rate
The Fed targets 2% price inflation. Why? Is there a better target? Let's explore.
You can read my essays at https://www.anthonygalli.com/.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXrc01LYnjA
Transaction
Created
1 year ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
GLOBA
globalist-thomas-friedman
Hi, I’m Anthony Galli and globalist Thomas Friedman, author of the famous book The World is Flat, I believe unintentionally makes the case for nationalism on Real Time with Bill Maher…
Bill Maher: You are really the guy who identified interconnected the world we are?
Thomas Friedman: The world isn’t just flat, but increasingly frail… by being so tightly together and by pushing things to their limits and beyond.
Watch the video for my thoughts.
(thomas friedman interview 2020)
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sL44o8hb0TE
Transaction
Created
1 year ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
WHAT
what’s-the-best-way-to-tax-consumers
Or a better way to phrase the question... what's the least bad way to tax consumers: value-added tax, sales tax, gross receipts tax, etc.?
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ui5zcO_lkXk
Transaction
Created
7 months ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
WHAT
what-abraham-lincoln-teaches-us-about
Up in the balcony sat Abraham Lincoln with his wife. The play helped get his mind off the war.
BANG!
His mind was off the war forever because he just got shot in the back of the head. This remains one of the most tragic moments in
American history because we can’t help but ponder, “What if he lived?
How would the world be different?”
But it has been said…
“You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.” — Harvey, The Dark Knight
Abraham Lincoln died a hero. The country mourned him, honored him, and then deified him.
But a closer analysis of his beliefs reveal that if he lived longer then eventually popular opinion would have turned against him.
He is constantly ranked as the greatest U.S. president, but even he would be considered “wrong” on most things today if he was still alive. He would be wrong from the clothes he wore, to the words he used, to the political and cultural beliefs he held. Even on the issue of slavery, which is what he is most idolized for, would earn him numerous mean tweets.
Abraham Lincoln was elected president precisely because he wasn’t a radical abolitionist, in other words he did not advocate for freeing southern slaves. He only advocated for stopping the extension of slavery into the unsettled west, which was a more acceptable political position to the slave-holding border states.
“I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.” — Abraham Lincoln
But this was still an unacceptable political position to the slave-holding southern states, which is why they seceded from the Union upon Lincoln’s election.
Then as the Civil War raged on, and hundreds of thousands of Americans lay dead (more Americans died in the Civil War than all other wars combined), popular opinion cared less about slavery and more about ending the war as quickly as possible.
“If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.” — Abraham Lincoln
Under this pretense, Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation. The proclamation freed slaves, but ONLY in the seceded south. In other words, the law only freed the slaves where it wasn’t considered law. The proclamation aimed to inspire southern slaves to revolt and sabotage the southern economy, therefore expediting the war.
But abolitionists felt the proclamation didn’t go far enough. They wanted to see slavery abolished in ALL of the United States. And then in the final months of Lincoln’s
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpkWdJnVbxw
Transaction
Created
1 year ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
ROBIN
robin-williams-would-be-fired-today
Robin Williams never seemed to hold back any of the thoughts that popped into his head.
He was willing to say and do whatever it took to get a laugh!
But if today he used his Indian accent…
Asian accent…
or dressed as a woman…
or used one of his many other stereotypical tropes…
then I think he would get fired for it, or at the very least reprimanded and expected to make some sort of public apology until eventually his comedy would be castrated.
“When in doubt… make a d*ck joke.” — Robin Williams
Robin Williams is a symbol of freedom. The freedom to be who you want to be and say what you want to say. The freedom of expression. The freedom to offend!
It has been said,
“Oppression is not hearing a word that offends you. Oppression is being told that you cannot say certain words because you will offend someone else.” — Blaire White
We are becoming so oversensitive and politically correct as a society that I worry our future will be free of laughter because it will be free of offense. I think it’s important we permit offensive language because ALL language is offensive to someone somewhere, especially in our politically polarized world where if someone isn’t part of our party or tribe we assume the worst intentions.
“I was once on a German talk show, and this woman said to me, “Mr. Williams, why do you think there is not so much comedy in Germany?” And I said, “Did you ever think you killed all the funny people?”
From a psychological perspective, when we like a person we’re more likely to laugh at their jokes, or at the very least excuse them.
Part of the reason why Robin Williams could get away with was because he was so well-liked by everyone. He could make fun of you to your face and you’d still laugh.
“Jack’s [Nicholson] done every drug known to mankind. He’s the only guy in the world where Keith Richards will go, “I have to go home now, Jack.” — Robin Williams
But I’m not suggesting we should be forced to like everyone because forced laughter isn’t fun for anyone, but what I am suggesting is that despite not liking someone we should still give that someone the benefit of the doubt by assuming their well-intentioned.
Looking at the world from an easily-offended lens only pushes people away thereby making the world that much more offensive.
Laughter brings us together, and some times the best way to bridge the gap is by poking fun at our differences.
R.I.P. Robin Williams, AUGUST 11, 2014
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJx47JPW45k
Transaction
Created
1 year ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
A GLO
a-global-minimum-corporate-tax-is-a-bad
A high corporate tax rate forces multinational corporations to move their headquarters overseas in order to stay price competitive with other multinational corporations, i.e. a “race to the bottom.”
The U.S. had the highest corporate tax rate in the world until President Trump reduced it to a more competitive level.
Biden has proposed increasing the corporate tax rate again, but his policymakers must be aware that unless the U.S. can force independent nations to get on board with raising their’s too then effectively Biden would be incentivizing the offshoring of even more of America’s economic capacity.
Introducing: The Global Minimum Tax.
The G-7 recently endorsed a global minimum corporate tax rate of 15%.
Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen called it a return to multilateralism and a sign that countries can tighten the tax net on profitable firms.
Tech companies, in particular, pay relatively little in taxes where they operate. Does this mean Big Tech is against a Global Minimum Tax?
No. Nick Clegg, Facebook’s Vice President of Global Affairs, said the deal is a “step toward certainty for businesses” when it comes to taxes. An Amazon spokesperson called the agreement "a welcome step forward,” and a Google spokesperson said, "We strongly support the work being done to update international tax rules. We hope countries continue to work together to ensure a balanced and durable agreement will be finalized soon.”
When Big Tech supports a government action meant to curb its power then let that serve as a massive red flag.
Objectively, there are several reasons why a Global Minimum Tax Rate is a terrible economic policy…
For one, corporate taxes hurt workers. Studies show that for every $1 generated for the government, 65¢ is taken from workers’ wallets.
“High corporate taxes divert capital away from the U.S. corporate sector and toward noncorporate uses and other countries. They therefore limit investments that would raise the productivity of American workers and would increase real wages. This is the cruel logic of a corporate tax in a global economy—that its burden falls most heavily on workers.”
Secondly, to get the few small nations like Ireland who are beneath the 15% Global Minimum Tax to agree to the hike then the G-7 would have to threaten Ireland with penalties and tariffs to force her compliance. Imperialistic, eh?
Third, if a Global Minimum Tax was implemented, which would take years, and then assuming every nation on Earth agrees to it, then what is stopping nations from giving subsidies and tax exemptions to offset the rise of their corporate tax rate? If China gets on board with a GMT then you know this proposal is largely smoke-and-mirrors because their tech companies are effectively state
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfghR5-mShQ
Transaction
Created
1 year ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
Controlling
VIDEO
TENNE
tennessee-man-who-hoarded-17,700-bottles
The day after the United Stares had its first coronavirus de*th, the Colvin brothers decided to exploit the pandemic for financial gain.
They drove around Chattanooga, Tennessee, and like bank robbers hit a Dollar Tree, then a Walmart, then a Staples, and then a Home Depot.
But they weren’t cleaning out their cash registers, instead, they were cleaning out their hand sanitizer shelves.
Over the next three days, they drove around Tennessee and Kentucky, 1,300 miles in total, buying up all the hand sanitizer they could get their well-sanitized hands on.
After filling up their SUV multiple times they got a storage unit and listed their booty on Amazon at a massive markup. “It was crazy money,” they recalled.
Excitement and the coronavirus were in the air!
But then the next day, Amazon pulled their items and thousands of others off the site for trying to profiteer off the pandemic. The company suspended other sellers using similar tactics and warned others that if they kept running up prices, they'd be run out of their virtual town.
But the question I’d encourage you to ask is, “How is what they did any different than how a lot of people get rich today, i.e. hoarding a necessity to turn a massive profit?”
Just replace the word “sanitizer” with “shelter.”
Now I don’t blame a rich person for buying a bunch of land, apartment complexes, and mansions so he could eventually flip the property or have a steady stream of rent money coming in because it’s smart business. And a lot of times the rich person isn’t even doing the work themselves. He’s sippin’ champaign on a yaht while his accountants, lawyers, and finiancial advisors agnostically put his money whereever they think he’ll get the highest return, which often includes buying up real estate.
The 100 richest American families own more than 40 million acres, which is about the combined size of Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island.
They own empty apartment complexs mansions as financial instrument quote
But by hoarding land and housing they are driving up the price of a necessity.
To put it into perspective, there are far more empty homes in the United States than unused hand sanitizers in the Colven brother’s storage unit.
It doesn’t have to be this way.
Amazon should allow the brothers to sell their hand sanitizers at a small loss, which the brothers would willingly do to at least recoup some of their money, and therefore this would be good for society because it would discourage hoarding while putting a much needed product back on the market.
The United States government should discourage the practice of hoarding land by taxing large estates at a much higher rate. It’ll be because of the higher tax that we’d actually see
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKMNWLF_P8k
Transaction
Created
1 year ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
STATE
state-with-the-lowest-homeless-rate-will
Debunking Jimmy Dore's video: "State With The Lowest Homeless Rate Will Shock You"
In the video he argues in favor of Finland and Mississippi's approach toward homelessness as well as offers up his own grand plan. Let's explore his well-intentioned thoughts to see the error of his ways.
Link to his vid: https://youtu.be/F1M60MRTyzA
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWPR6cyjt0A
Transaction
Created
1 year ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
HOW T
how-to-stop-china-global-domination-the
Free Speech Doctrine: Stop China from World Supremacy
Hi, I'm Anthony Galli and RBG said, “The right to speak my mind out, that’s America!” Her frenemy Anton Scalia agreed, “If you had to pick one freedom that is the most essential to the functioning of a democracy it has to be freedom of speech.”
You are fat, stup*d, and lazy. You are too handsome, smart, and humble. You see WE MUST protect each other’s right to call each other names, but globalization could strip us of this first amendment right because free speech threatened anywhere is threatened everywhere.
This is because corporations are competing with each other to make money. For example, if Apple can make their smartphones in China for 50% less money and then more importantly sell those smartphones to China’s massive consumer market without having to pay a tariff then what choice will Google have but to relocate there too in order to stay price competitive with Apple? This gives enormous power to the Chinese government. The Chinese Communist Party can then tell these big tech giants that if they want to continue to have access to their consumer workers then they need to play by their totalitarian rules.
Free speech lovers should find this graph horrifying…
Most sources, however, point to the U.S. as having a bigger economy, but no matter how we slice it, the U.S. and China are neck-in-neck…
As China’s market continues to grow in size, its ability to pressure global corporations to relocate within their borders will also grow. Once these tech giants are within arms reach of the Chinese Communist Party then how much freedom will the rest of us have on these platforms? What influencers and stories will they ban for spreading Anti-Chinese conspiracy theories and “hate speech” while boosting content that puts China in the most positive light? The mechanisms are already in place to make this a reality.
To prevent this global dystopia the President of the United States should commit to what I call: The Free Speech Doctrine.
How it works is we’d categorize countries based on three tiers of free speech: free, restricted, suppressed. We could use the 2020 World Press Freedom Index as a guide…
Tier 1 (yellow) countries would face a 0% tariff.
Tier 2 (orange-red) countries would face a 5% tariff.
Tier 3 (black) countries would face a 10% tariff.
This free speech tariff would be in addition to existing tariffs. We would also work closely with other free speech countries to encourage them to implement the Free Speech Doctrine so we can leverage our combined economies for maximum pressure.
Once it becomes more profitable to be free then these totalitarian states will be in a conundrum: watch their economy shrink or expand free speech rights. Some nations as evidenced
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5wP67S24Kg
Transaction
Created
1 year ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English