4:15 speech starts

@ulugbekisakov1484

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you! Without further ado!

I'm currently watching justice on KZread and it is outstanding.

@EDUMANI

2 жыл бұрын

Read the Book also

4 themes: income inequality, meritocratic hubris, the dignity of work, patriotism and national community.

It's 2020, who is watching/listening?

Thank you so much for this program. refreshing to hear such good opinions.

He has said everything I have been trying to express but struggling to find the proper way to put together... I hope every left wing progressive liberals can take some time to listen to this.

@lt.columbo5919

2 жыл бұрын

Your comment represents EXACTLY what Prof. Sandel explains is the "PROBLEM"...

@jljones6343

9 ай бұрын

...and do it with a large dose of humility.

Thank you Mr. Sandel!

You are so brave and thank you sir

A good analysis that does also a good job of providing a set of solutions that complements Mark Blyth's work.

@endabcs4708

5 жыл бұрын

I didn't read this comment until after I listened to this, and I thought the exact same thing.

If politicians listened more to philosophers like Michael Sandel, then things in the world would be much more just and good.

I highly recommend his books, too!

I miss that town 1Lt RA Berlin Brigade ‘72- ‘75 ‘

prosím rozoberte Koncentračný tábor Sektor 1 a Zdravotnícky 1 b sektor chemický biologicky Sektor 2 a vojenský a Sektor 3 c ekonomický

The concept of "intolerance" is made to do work it cannot perform in Sandel's argument. It begs the question of what is problematic about so-called populist arguments, because to be intolerant of the right things is what morality should obligate us to be. Both 'tolerance' and 'intolerance' are morally neutral concepts. Tolerance is better than intolerance in the same sense that 'change' is better than the status quo. Everything hinges on what, specifically, we are talking about.

@barbaracretty2900

3 жыл бұрын

A perfected opposition and I will be brighter for it thank you

@nicoheidenreich

2 жыл бұрын

That seems rather assign. He means racial intolerance. He said it specifically at least once, and was clearly implied the rest of the time. And presumes the moral issue of racial intolerance is obvious to the vast majority of viewers. This is just a matter of scope. In any argument many topics and concepts have to be assumed or your piece will be infinitely long literally. If you want arguments for and against racial intolerance you will have to go else where that is not the point of this talk. Again scope somethings are always beyond your current scope.

@christofeles63

2 жыл бұрын

​@@nicoheidenreich Nonesense. Intolerance directed at immigrants and uncontrolled immigration is not racist. Concerns about political Islam and welfare tourism are not racist. The inflationary use of the term 'racist' in contemporary German discourse notwithstanding. Such intolerance represents protest against forms of injustice on the part of people who believe there IS a moral-political distinction between fellow countryman and the citizens of foreign countries worth honoring. Sandel is way too coy on the need to validate populist resentment, the moral significance of borders, and in-group loyalty from within a liberal vision of society. More tolerance is not the answer. We cannot expect liberalism--based as it is on the illusion that only unlimited toleration is genuine toleration, and that there can be inclusion without exclusion--to provide the answer to populist protest. The answer will come from that party which articulates a persuasive rationale ("substantive argument") for the grounds of exclusion and the limits of toleration. Some countries are setting the example: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Hungary, etc. It's a matter of articulating what is in the enlightened national self-interest (Sandel: "the proper relation of national and global identities"). A cosmopolitan ethic of universal human concern just IS the example of a dangerous liberal neutrality he rightly decries. The whole presentation is a wake for the liberal political imagination. Do you not smell the corpse?

@almcdonald8676

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks. I was interested in Prof sandels earlier lectures but given some of his recent pronouncements I wondered whether to waste my time with this one. Now I don’t need to.

outstanding

I was afraid to hear what Michael's opinion was on Trump but am extremely pleased to have heard his objective view. Thank you for reason and answers.

@frankiefrank4853

3 жыл бұрын

@Ronald Reagan it sucks man. I like him a lot

@frankiefrank4853

3 жыл бұрын

@Ronald Reagan I loved his lecture on murder though. But I hear you.

@frankiefrank4853

3 жыл бұрын

@Ronald Reagan 100% families rise and fall and earn and lose. I grew up poor and own a business because of the hardship. I create synthetic hardship for my kids so they grow through struggle. I hope it works but I didn't want them growing up entitled. If we were cavemen ... the strong and intelligent survive. The left are creating grey areas for victims so they can bleed them dry. It is sophisticated and sickening.

It saddens me that so many know the Kardashians and all about the various Bachelors, but no one I've ever talked to knows who Sandel is. I worry for our future; this apathy towards substantive matters is worrying.

I can sense his desperation and panic in his voice. It must feel good to take off the disguise and reveal one’s true color.

Don't deficits matter? On the surface, the latest episode of dollar frailty seems to validate concerns about America's persistent current-account deficit and the associated build-up of overseas debt. Many economists welcome a weaker dollar which, by making America's imports dearer and its exports cheaper, helps narrow the country's external deficit. Indeed, the trade gap in the first five months of this year was smaller than in the same period in 2006. But a closer look suggests that currency markets, rightly or wrongly, are blithe about trade imbalances. Some of the countries whose currencies have gained most at the dollar's expense, like Britain, Australia and New Zealand, have large external deficits and debts too. Australia's current-account shortfall has been more persistent than America's and, as a result, its net overseas debt last year was 60% of its GDP, compared with 19% for America. New Zealand's debt ratio is larger still at 90% of GDP. Meanwhile the currency of the world's largest creditor nation, Japan, continues to languish-even against the dollar. If anxiety about global imbalances is not driving currency markets, perhaps the dollar might rally once America's economy is back on its feet. It has, after all, fallen a long way already: on the Fed's broad trade-weighted index, the greenback is down 22% since its peak in 2002. According to the purchasing-power parities calculated by the OECD, the dollar is undervalued by 15% against the euro, 18% against the Australian dollar and 21% against the pound. Such divergences from fair value might not prove sustainable, particularly for the countries that have external financing gaps of their own to fill.

@dr.tanveerahmedph.d4176

3 жыл бұрын

Economics focus: Soft currency - Jul 26th 2007 LONDON is never a cheap destination, but American visitors to Britain's capital this summer will find their wallets emptying a little faster than usual. A dollar now buys less British currency than it has for a generation. On July 23rd, the greenback slumped to $2.06 against the pound, its weakest level since 1981. Paris is scarcely cheaper for transatlantic tourists: this week the dollar sagged to €1.38, its lowest rate since the euro's launch in 1999. The greenback has never been further out of favour on currency markets. The Federal Reserve tracks the dollar's value against a weighted basket of seven currencies that are commonly traded beyond their respective borders. This index, regarded as a good gauge of financial-market sentiment about the dollar, has fallen to an all-time low (see chart). What lies behind the latest bout of dollar weakness? Part of the slump is cyclical, reflecting America's weak economy. GDP growth this year is expected to be lower in America than in the euro area, Britain, Australia and Canada, according to The Economist's monthly poll of forecasters. The origins of weak growth are a particular worry. Just as the trouble in America's housing market is a drag on the economy, the turmoil in the subprime-mortgage market weighs on the currency. Analysts at Goldman Sachs believe that lower overseas demand for corporate debt has put downward pressure on the dollar. The disquiet about mortgage credit in America, they suggest, may even have chipped away a little at the dollar's standing as a reserve currency. High oil prices haven't helped either. Paul Robinson, a currency strategist at Barclays Capital, reckons that the dollar is the worst performing major currency during periods of rising oil prices. This might be because America uses more oil for each unit of output than other rich countries, so the higher cost of fuel hits growth-and thus the dollar-harder. American consumers are especially vulnerable, because low fuel taxes leave a thinner cushion between the cost of crude and retail prices. The spending of petrodollars also helps the dollar less than the euro, because oil-producing countries tend to import more from Europe than America. So a steep oil price, a weak economy and an anxious credit market have all weakened the dollar. But America's growth prospects are not so poor and the subprime-mortgage market not so woeful-at least, not yet-that they can fully explain the dollar's recent sickliness. Stephen Jen, currency economist at Morgan Stanley, suggests there might be more powerful forces driving the dollar down. A common fear is that Asia's central banks will diversify out of their large holdings of American debt. Mr Jen argues, however, that the biggest dollar diversifiers have been pension, insurance and mutual funds in America. These funds control assets worth $20.7 trillion, more than four times the size of the world's official currency reserves. American mutual funds have gradually increased their overseas allocation of equities since 2003 from 15% to 22.5% of assets, says Mr Jen. If this portfolio shift mirrors the behaviour of all pension, insurance and mutual fund managers, it would imply an outflow from dollar assets of $1.16 trillion since 2003. That sum is not far short of China's entire hoard of official reserves. Mr Jen argues that these capital outflows need not be a sign that asset managers are gloomy about prospects for either the dollar or the American economy. Rather they might reflect an underlying decline in provincialism, as investors gradually come to appreciate the dangers of relying excessively on home-country assets. A similar thing is happening, he says, in Japan where households are greedily buying overseas assets. If the dollar has suffered most, it is only because American institutions are the biggest pioneers of financial globalisation. Yet wariness about the dollar may be part of the motivation to diversify. A regular survey by Merrill Lynch shows that global fund managers have been consistently negative about the dollar's prospects for the past five years. For most of that period, the same asset managers have expressed a wish to reduce the weight of American assets in their portfolios, though that urge was strongest three years ago. It is hard to disentangle diversification from desertion since each feeds on the other.

@dr.tanveerahmedph.d4176

3 жыл бұрын

Lexington: Gotcha! - Aug 2nd 2007 RUPERT MURDOCH'S takeover of the Wall Street Journal is a spectacular business coup (see article). Mr Murdoch has pocketed one of the country's two best-respected newspapers. He has paid top dollar for the Journal's parent company, Dow Jones. And he has arguably provided the Journal with the mixture of capital and management grit that it needs to thrive. And the reaction in the land of capitalism red in tooth and claw? Decidedly sniffy. It is as if Mr Murdoch has barged into a posh club wearing a Lycra tracksuit and an “I love Australia” T-shirt and offered to buy everyone a pint of Foster's. Mr Murdoch is no stranger to controversy in his adopted country. The media establishment regards him as a brash outsider. The left hates Fox News (the Democratic presidential candidates even refused to appear at a Fox-sponsored debate). But the criticism has always been limited by his focus on tabloid news and entertainment. Nobody expects the New York Post or Twentieth Century Fox to be run as public trusts. Mr Murdoch built Fox News from the ground up. He spotted a market niche-the 50% of the population who think that TV news leans too far to the left-and filled it with gusto. The Wall Street Journal is different. It is the very embodiment of the highest journalistic standards. Ever since Mr Murdoch began to stalk the Journal, the news media has been singing with stories of his barbarities. How he habitually breaks his promises that he will protect journalistic independence. How he uses his media empire to advance his business interests or pursue personal feuds. How he fills his British tabloids with topless girls and bombastic headlines. How he kowtows to the Chinese government. This is the first time that American criticism of the man (whom Private Eye, a British satirical magazine, has dubbed “the Dirty Digger”) has reached British levels. The left has been vocally against. The Huffington Post website marked the news of the deal by reproducing several front-page stories from Mr Murdoch's tabloids. On August 1st protesters from Moveon.org gathered outside Dow Jones's headquarters to hand out parody headlines to demonstrate “the type of unreliable, partisan information businesspeople can expect from the news pages of the Journal under Rupert Murdoch.” The sight of left-wing activists rallying to defend the Journal is amusing. But Mr Murdoch has also received criticism from an unfamiliar quarter: his fellow conservatives. Conservatives have long celebrated Mr Murdoch as a kindred spirit and business buccaneer. But some of them worry that his acquisition of the Journal's op-ed pages-the Bible of American conservatism-will give him too much power over the movement. Paleocons and populists dislike his enthusiasm for immigration. Neocons dislike his penchant for doing business with China. Social conservatives disapprove of his tabloid smut. They all worry about his weakness for pragmatism. The Washington Times ran an op-ed piece lambasting him for holding a fund-raising breakfast for Hillary Clinton, “the scariest spectral [sic] of conservative nightmares”. The reason for all this fuss lies in the nature of the two beasts involved-the Journal and the mogul. The Journal is as good as it gets in terms of high-quality journalism. It is also one of only three national newspapers. Mr Murdoch is a tabloid king who has a reputation for taking everything he buys downmarket. The Journal is the gold standard of business reporting. Mr Murdoch is one of the biggest beasts in the business jungle, constantly on the prowl for synergies and acquisitions. Isn't there a problem in one of the players owning the scorecard that everybody uses? The Journal is not really one newspaper but two-a newspaper and a highly opinionated conservative magazine. Hitherto it has succeeded in drawing a line between them. Will Mr Murdoch resist allowing his own conservative opinions to blur that line? For many, Mr Murdoch is a threat to the whole American journalistic tradition. Jim Ottaway, a former vice-president of Dow Jones, argues that there is a sharp difference between the Anglo-Australian model of media ownership and the American one. Anglo-Australian bosses are in the habit of expressing their various biases through their newspapers and TV channels. The American journalistic tradition depends on a “strict separation between political opinions expressed vigorously on editorial pages and news reported with as much factual objectivity as possible.” Mr Murdoch is a barbarian at the gates indeed. Printer's-ink dynasties How much truth is there in all this? The best American newspapers are certainly superior to their Anglo-Australian counterparts in terms of depth and seriousness. But this may have more to do with the size and structure of the market and the American penchant for professionalism than with ownership. If Mr Murdoch degrades the Journal, he will be destroying the very thing for which he is paying such a premium-the paper's reputation. The Bancroft family was certainly an ideal steward when it came to guaranteeing the Journal's independence. But is the same true of all American media families? The Grahams at the Washington Post and the Sulzbergers at the New York Times have exercised considerable influence over their papers' tone, coverage and personnel. Mr Ottaway is describing the exception rather than the rule. Mr Murdoch is much more like America's great newspaper proprietors than his critics imagine. He has printer's ink in his veins. He is investing in the newspaper business at a time when others are heading for the hills. And he runs News Corporation much like a family firm, with special voting rights that allow the family to resist the pressures of quarterly earnings. Perhaps the newest member of America's press-barons' club is not such an outsider after all. Print Pages

@dr.tanveerahmedph.d4176

3 жыл бұрын

Economics focus: Houses built on sand - Sep 13th 2007 EVERYTHING in America is bigger. Cars, hotel rooms, servings at dinner, the salaries of sports stars and chief executives. So anything that merits the adjective “jumbo” is extravagantly large. Except, that is, for shrimp and home loans. In America a jumbo mortgage is one that exceeds the authorised limit for loans bought and securitised by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored lenders. That cap was increased this year, to $417,000-a sum that, at today's exchange rates and prices, is barely enough to buy a cramped flat in the outer suburbs of London. Could it be that America's housing boom, which has now turned horribly sour, was not even super-sized? That is what The Economist's table of house-price indicators shows (below). The S&P/Case-Shiller national index, the best gauge of American house prices, peaked last year after rising by 134% in the previous decade. France, Sweden and Denmark have all had booms of similar size. In Britain, Australia, Spain and Ireland, the ten-year increase in house prices has been even larger. If America is staring at a nasty housing crash, what does this say about the fate of frothy markets elsewhere? Research by David Miles and Vladimir Pillonca of Morgan Stanley concludes that there are likelier candidates than America for a housing bust. In a recent paper covering 13 European countries as well as America, they assess how much of the rise in property values in the past decade can be put down to bubble-like optimism about future price increases. The authors constructed a model in which housing demand is driven by rising real incomes, population growth and declines in real interest rates. They then estimated the downward effect on prices from increased homebuilding. They argued that what is left-the part of price rises that is unexplained-is without substance and vulnerable to a correction. In six countries-Belgium, Britain, Denmark, Greece, Spain and Sweden-real house prices have risen much faster than the model predicts. Mr Miles admits that calculation of real interest rates may have distorted the results for Greece. But in the remaining five countries, the average “excess” increase in real house prices is 47%. Some of the paper's results challenge accepted wisdom. Ireland's housing boom, often seen as a spectacular bubble, is almost entirely explained away by rapid real-income growth, rising population and the drop in real interest rates. Nevertheless, Irish house prices are now falling, if modestly. The other surprise is America. The Morgan Stanley economists reckon the housing boom more or less reflected durable shifts such as rising incomes and population growth. That conclusion, however, hinges on the choice of price index. The authors' gauge of real house-price gains uses the series of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO). That index excludes deals above the loan cap of $417,000, where price gains have been greatest, as well as transactions financed by subprime mortgages, where activity was most frenetic. Mr Miles says that using the Case-Shiller index, the assessment is gloomier. Why America? Even so, the contrast with events on the other side of the Atlantic is puzzling. Several of Europe's housing markets are more overpriced, but have lost only a little of their fizz in the past year. Price rises in Britain have even accelerated. If America's housing market was less puffed up, why is it alone bursting? One reason is that America is a big country. Comparing its entire housing market-including slow-growing rural areas-with selected European hotspots makes it look less bubbly. In America's top-ten cities, for example, prices are up 171% in the past ten years, much more than the national average. But what sets America apart is the time-bomb laid by subprime mortgage lending in the late stages of the housing boom. The way many of these deals were structured-two or three years of low “teaser” rates, which then switch to much higher tariffs-gave homebuyers with tarnished credit records a free option on house prices. If prices are expected to rise enough, borrowers may be willing to pay higher interest charges in order to keep the equity gains. If prices fall short of their hopes, borrowers have an incentive to default. In short, dangerously loose lending standards fuelled America's housing boom and now the fallout from increasing defaults is exacerbating the bust. Nearly 15% of subprime borrowers are behind with their mortgage payments. The defaults so far have poisoned the mortgage market for prime borrowers too. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp, which guarantees bank deposits in America, reckons over 1.5m households will eventually be unable to meet their mortgage payments. Prices are falling and more forced sales will add to the already swollen stocks of unsold homes. What might this presage for Europe's overpriced markets? Robert Shiller, a seasoned bubble-hunter at Yale University, has stressed the role of news reporting in influencing price expectations. If America's slump deepens, it might trigger a reassessment in Europe's property hotspots, particularly as tighter credit markets start to price out the more speculative investor. Asset markets are unpredictable. When house prices in London stalled during 2004-05, many pundits thought the spell had been broken. Then the upward trend mysteriously reappeared. As Mr Shiller noted recently: “The London case study should caution any who feel that a substantial decline in home prices in the US is inevitable.” No one knows for sure how markets in Europe might respond to events in America. But one thing is certain: when it comes to asset bubbles, bigger is not better.

@dr.tanveerahmedph.d4176

3 жыл бұрын

New Jersey: Panic on the boardwalk - Oct 11th 2007 THE troubled resort town on the New Jersey shore is no stranger to scandal and strife. Five former mayors of Atlantic City have pleaded guilty or have been convicted of some crime in recent years. Multi-million dollar casinos are steps away from crime-ridden neighbourhoods. A quarter of the 40,000 residents live below the poverty line. The city has just been dealt another bad hand: Robert Levy, Atlantic City's mayor, called in sick on September 26th and hasn't been seen since. His lawyer finally disclosed on October 9th that he was at home resting after spending time in a facility that treats depression and substance abuse. The next day he resigned. His extended absence has caused chaos. Ordinarily, when the mayor was ill or travelling, Domenic Cappella, the city's business administrator, a sort of unelected chief operating officer, was in charge. He made sure rubbish was still collected and the police were still on the beat. Because this time there wasn't an apparent handover of power, many screamed no dice. One councillor even asked the courts to declare the office of mayor abandoned. William “Speedy” Marsh, the city council president and the second highest elected official, took over as interim mayor shortly after Mr Levy formally stepped down. He will now serve until the city council appoints a successor, who will serve until a special election is held next year. Even before Mr Levy went AWOL a recall petition had started to circulate. Since his election last year his attendance at city council meetings had been sporadic. A local broadsheet discovered last autumn that he had misrepresented his Vietnam military record and was not a Green Beret, as he had claimed. Federal prosecutors have been looking into whether this embellishment illegally added to his veterans' benefit package. Atlantic City matters. The city's dozen or so casinos add a useful $1.3m a day to the state coffers of New Jersey, as well as making up over 80% of the municipal budget. If the tourists are to keep coming, having a decent mayor would be advisable. Print Pages … See full article Lexington: Masters of the Senate - Sep 20th 2007 THE presidential race is so engrossing that it is easy to forget about the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. The last few days alone have seen Hillary Clinton revisiting health care, the subject that kebabbed her husband's first term; John McCain getting confused over whether he is a Baptist or an Episcopalian; and Alan Keyes, an eccentric social conservative, adding a black face to the Republican line-up. But the two parties are also engaged in a fierce battle for control of Capitol Hill. And it is a battle that, so far, is even more one-sided than the race for the White House. The Democrats look set to maintain a working majority in the House: polls show the public prefer Democratic candidates for the House by 7-12 percentage points. Seven Republican incumbents have announced their intention to retire, and this week scandal-ridden Jerry Weller of Illinois looked as if he would make it eight. More important, they look set to expand their majority in the Senate from a measly one-which depends on two independents who normally vote with the Democrats-to a commanding six or seven. The party's blooming prospects in the Senate matter hugely. The Senate ratifies treaties, confirms all the president's important appointments, and tries him if he is impeached. It also allows a cabal of 41 senators to block legislation indefinitely. It is unlikely that the Democrats will reach the magic 60 votes which allow them to break Republican filibusters and force bills to a vote: but if they get close to it, they will much improve the chances for a Democratic White House to muscle through a list of planned reforms, on health care, climate change, immigration and taxes. The likelihood of this is growing by the day. The Republicans have always faced a tough fight in 2008. They are defending 21 seats compared with the Democrats' 12. They are also defending seats that they won in 2002 when George Bush was wildly popular-his approval ratings are half what they were then-and the Republicans were seen as America's natural champions against the perpetrators of September 11th, 2001. But it is beginning to look as if a tough fight could turn into a massacre. The Republicans are lagging badly in the race to raise money and recruit candidates. The National Republican Senatorial Committee has only $6.5m in the bank compared with $20.6m for its Democratic equivalent. The Republicans have failed to lure any big names to take on vulnerable Democrats such as Max Baucus of Montana and Tom Harkin of Iowa. And the rising tide of anti-war sentiment threatens to submerge a slew of Republican senators in Democratic-leaning states, such as Susan Collins (Maine), John Sununu (New Hampshire), Norm Coleman (Minnesota) and Gordon Smith (Oregon). And that is before you start to factor in the sex and ethics scandals. Alaska's Ted Stevens is under scrutiny by the FBI for improper influence-peddling. New Mexico's Pete Domenici is under investigation by his Senate colleagues for his role in the sacking of a US attorney. Louisiana's David Vitter has admitted to frequenting prostitutes. And Idaho's Larry Craig is still deciding whether to resign over a bizarre incident in an airport lavatory (one wag says that he is seeking advice from his wife and the man in stall number three). This torrent of scandals is not only damaging the Republican Party's family-values brand; it is also forcing it to devote energy to defending territory that it ought to be able to take for granted. The Democrats' already sunny prospects have brightened still further with a trio of retirements: Virginia's John Warner, Colorado's Wayne Allard and Nebraska's Chuck Hagel are all standing down. Mark Warner is the clear favourite to capture the Virginia seat: a popular ex-governor who leads his nearest Republican rival by 28 points and who has a private fortune of $200m. The Democrats also have a good chance in Colorado, where they already control both state houses, the governor's mansion and one Senate seat, and in Nebraska, if they can get Bob Kerrey, a former governor and senator, to forsake academia for a return to politics. The Democrats have also succeeded in recruiting prominent candidates to take on Republican incumbents. The biggest recent catch is Jeanne Shaheen, a popular former governor of New Hampshire, who will try to unseat Mr Sununu, the son of George Bush senior's chief of staff and, at 43, the youngest senator. New Hampshire is trending Democratic even more markedly than Colorado-in 2006 the Democrats ousted both Republican congressmen, captured the governorship and took over both state houses-and Ms Shaheen is currently beating Mr Sununu by 16 points in the polls. Slim hopes The Republicans have a few straws to clutch at. They point out that someone other than Mr Bush will be leading the party into battle in 2008. They note that the Democrats have a long history of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The anti-war left in particular has a genius for alienating the silent majority: witness its decision to impugn General Petraeus's patriotism by dubbing him General Betray-us. The Republicans are in with a chance of picking up a couple of seats-in South Dakota, where the incumbent is ailing, and in Louisiana, where the Democratic-voting population has not recovered since the great flight after Katrina. But that hardly evens the field. In the wake of their 2006 thumping, the Republicans thought that they could recover given the narrowness of the margins in many Senate races. But the mood among Republicans in the Senate is gloomier now than at any time since Watergate, and many moderates are breaking ranks with the leadership. “It is always darkest right before you get clobbered over the head with a pipe wrench,” one Republican pollster told the Washington Post. They will be lucky if is just the one pipe wrench.

1:08:00 reference to Parkland townhall forum can be viewed at kzread.info/dash/bejne/jJWAypltlbu6dNI.html

So much of this seems like something that anyone with basic common sense could have said. What would be much more interesting would be some solution to the problem of inequality in America, which no one seems to have. It's clear that there are these problems. We've heard about them over and over again

@barbaracretty2900

3 жыл бұрын

Yes isn't it beautiful to contemplate what is good and what is right what is fair and what is not something over the centuries centuries not just this decade not just these decades not this half a century centuries so perfectly put

@boom7713

3 жыл бұрын

@@barbaracretty2900 The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it ;)

@barbaracretty2900

3 жыл бұрын

It's exactly why I like different ideas and opposing ideas I have only liked this because it's what I've taken away from his class nothing more nothing less but a discussion gets people to understand the shoes that they're walking in themselves and better able to withstand questions and debates and opposing wannabe authorities and authorities

Stále tu není vyriešená odpoveď na otázku kto je vini General alebo Doktor mimo obete a Hitlera ktorého postávali pred tribúny a predali vojnu územia z môžete od povedať na otazku z ktoré univerzity vyšla WW2

Profesor vo vojne WW 2 obloha vyzerá ako by bola smutná môžete od povedať na otazku ako je to možné podobné smutné počasie dnes

Philosophy sounds like poetry. Reality is prose.

We should not confuse UBI and some kind of "no working" notion of people... Universal Basic Income in a proper way can support people and release their potentials to do what they are called to do and not because of fear of hunger,etc.

@sergkapitan2578

3 жыл бұрын

@Ronald Reagan Let them just be "lazy"... those who want can go on and make themselves relatively richer:) But evrrybody deserves to eat and to live just by the fact that they are human beings (though you are rong in your premises!)....

@sergkapitan2578

3 жыл бұрын

@Ronald Reagan which people??? Read Nicolas Berdyaev "The destiny of man" you do oversimplify the question! Your channel name is showing your slavery and hypocrisy toward neoliberal believes... We do not have the same level to start in life... and even if we did... there are many other factors including corruption of many when they've got to riches or power,etc...

@sergkapitan2578

3 жыл бұрын

@Ronald Reagan :))) Statistics:))) Most accurate science about human soul that I know (just kidding:))) Who can weight the "success" of those rich and HOW they become rich,especially in the light of the international picture,etc. Read Erich Fromm,then you understand what I mean! Still better: Nicolas Berdyaev "The destiny of man" ! Neoliberalism is a false philosophy in regard to where the people must be developed to-- TOGETHER! We must participate in the Highest Reality,which is Communion and not just jungles! Relationship and not just concurrence,etc. Of course there are differences in people abilities and the atmosphere of "who is more powerful" , very often read-- humanless, is not the right one and endanger our well being on this Earth!

I have been waiting to get a list of reasons or items that Trump supporters can give. After listening I have learned here what his supports could not or refused to even discuss. I too have just the audit of the class Justice. It is great education.

@noodle3768

2 жыл бұрын

You are wrong. Trump supporters normally will engage debate. While the left returns pure hate, screaming and violence.

Office

If we were committed to basic moral precepts, we would subordinate the market to democratic principles. If we believe we have a shared right to set limits to various kinds of human impacts on the environment, we will take random polls to ask people's opinions about acceptable limits to various kinds of impacts, and we will issue permits that align with the will of the people--average opinion. (The polls should give people time to ponder, reflect and discuss, so that they can consult expert opinion, based on who they believe to be trustworthy experts.) Permits can be auctioned in a free market. Prices will then show environmental impacts. Consumers can make more informed decisions. Conditions in the world will come to match what people want. Profit will align with sustainability. End poverty. Promote sustainability. A sustainable and just society REQUIRES that we respect Truth and Fairness as primary values.

Herr Professor není možné aby sa Boh sa mohol presúvať vo vojne

6.55 minutes were enough for me ...although I've watched the Harvard University justice series and appreciated the debates ... I have no time for a philosopher and his political views ....

@DialgaFury28

2 жыл бұрын

Philosophy is the set of moral grounds we use for politics. All of politics is philosophical by nature. You merely dislike what he is saying and choose to ignore his position as a result.

I thought myself why does this man hate me and I love him so much and I return to myself I thought if it wasn't for the fact that I already owned my thoughts and ideas again something he said that resonated with something that my father had once said and I realized that he has got it right perceptively clear and perfected the reason that I love Trump is all these ignored harms that I incur as an innocent party to their problems and I jumped on the bandwagon with Trump

My name is kirti kansal i am from Bharat

Prečo sa ne zrušili zbrane hneď po vojne 1945 stále alebo aspoň po 1989

He had "classical good intentions" ...I think althou his arguments have a good psichological reading of the politcal atmosphere, he glossed over other mechanisms of democratic engagement, and that is because I think, he firmly believes in the "process" , in representation and that is the whole issue, to expect that a politician would come out of the blue with moral courage is too naive to even imagine, he did little no nothing to address the grip of money on politcs...Nice guy, but too naive to be taken seriously

selon biologie immunité, république est en train de rentrer à parler avec biologie, Nobel lauréat 2020 médecins Emmanuelle a commencé DNA replanter. Trump doit comprendre dent de lion est fragile mais seule combattre immunité parlementaire

You lost your marbles professor! Enough said....

@barbaracretty2900

3 жыл бұрын

What this was two months ago damn it where's my marbles

@sunnykim9917

2 жыл бұрын

True. Maybe he is getting old like Mr. Biden.

The nine attempt progressively rescue because distance differently tempt athwart a needless dietician. zealous, sassy chess

Well a few minutes in and the claim trump is the greatest threat to our constitution since Nixon is made. From a policy professor no less. Learning from Sandels past lectures and talks this seems to be a let down. Given his studies I’m apt to give him serious credibility on the subject but this was seriously unfortunate and only seemed like a play with populism.

@sunnykim9917

2 жыл бұрын

I agree with you. I just recognized why Harvard graduates are not patriotic and unable to make wise decisions.

Watching Justice 👍👏👏👏🙏🙏🙏👀⚖️📺👆 With students. What's the Right thing to do Free to choose Who own me Who am I Climate Change Price to go university A... Z vaccines is not a easy task. 共产主义与社会主义。...主要区别在于，在共产主义条件下，大多数财产和经济资源由国家（而不是公民个人）拥有和控制：在社会主义条件下，所有公民平等分享民主选举产生的政府分配的经济资源。

another trump hater...he lost me

@Victor-qy1uy

Жыл бұрын

^least deaf trump supporter

Populism can be left and right, authoritarian and libertarian, progressive and reactionary, depending on the values ​​of the elites and the “dangerous others” they oppose. Generic characteristics stem from the fact that all populist movements pit corrupt and corrupt elites against good and honest people, and contextual characteristics depend on the specific political, social, and cultural conditions in which individual populist movements develop. I value lecturers in colleges who teach and explain their subject on a solid objective basis, without subjective definition in politics. Commitment - to be a Democrat or to be a Republican has no place in colleges !!! Listening to a lecture at a recognized college on the negative state of the Trump presidency is a serious crime for a lecturer. The observer and listener at the same time thinks that the lecturer and the college have received and accepted a donation from the opposing political party to sow evil and not allow the young brain a free choice. Horror. You are destroying America and the whole world!

@nomadicrecovery1586

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you It’s skewed Biased. One side

@sunnykim9917

2 жыл бұрын

I could not agree more. It’s a serious crime for a lecturer!!! Thank you for your elaboration.

This is all just opinionated... far from his usual philosophical lectures. Sad!

The puzzling bush oppositely thank because flat unlikely subtract excluding a gamy suede. yielding, overrated cell

sandel thinks of himself as a genious and thinks little of Trump; superbia of even the best of liberals in working. This alsways precedes downfall.

I think you Michael Sandrl has lost his way

@byronwilliams7977

4 жыл бұрын

I would say Mr. Sandel is spot on.

I am convinced that Prof. Sandel is misinformed about Pres. Trump. Even then, there are insightful moments in his lecture.

Michael Sandel is a portrait of what ideology can do to intelligent people: corrupt them intellectually. Poor Sandel ...

@YellowSpaceMarine

3 жыл бұрын

I don't understand how anyone can be simultaneously interested in academic discourse and support Donald Trump. Everything about him says 'I hate reason and logic'.

@liedersanger1

3 жыл бұрын

And I will act accordingly.

@oleandra3759

3 жыл бұрын

@@YellowSpaceMarine your answer is inherent in your statement

@sunnykim9917

2 жыл бұрын

Poor sandel 2222222

Just a little reminder to Sandel ; the Republicans have lost the popular vote for like 30 years lol ...... I love sandal but that man should stay away from politics and stick to justice and philosophy

@stevefromsaskatoon830

3 жыл бұрын

It was propaganda and lies that tricked people into liking Trump , Sandal's entire argument ( and many other elitists academics argue it) is flawed, misleading or maybe just dumb and inept .

Nonsense.