Fareed Zakaria is no more than a spokesman for the entitled class. He is acting like press secretary for a Trump Administration. He is neither objective, nor a true journalist. I had greatly misjudged his integrity.
Yeah although at least usually typically just sticks to foreign policy issues. The idea that he's sitting here talking about how excited he is that Elon musk gets to participate in the gutting of government jobs and services is disgusting
Huh. Maybe calling rich people and the capital class "the entitled class" is a winning move. It might connect to conservatives' animal brain concept of "entitlements".
They are pretty much doing what the Democratic party is doing. They've decided to be a diet Fox News. And like the Democratic party, they will fail, because why would anyone watch a pale imitation when they have easy access to the genuine article?
Lot of people are oddly agitated by unfounded rumors that Elon Musk might buy MSNBC at the moment. I'm of the opinion that he should buy it. And then CNN. And then the NYT. If that's what it takes for people to FINALLY realize what 'corporate owned media' means then let's do it.
What's ironic here is the Trump people talk about faceless bureaucrats, yet Elon Musk himself is a bureaucrat trying to be involved in govt and force his will upon all of us.
@@TW0man4RMY - We're in the end zone of late capitalism. Masks have long-since been discarded, everybody is a proud demon and preying on the weak is the only sport.
Zakaria, Williams, Amram, Jones, Scarorough, etc etc ... they all showed their true colors in term one. Should be no surprise to anybody that's been paying attention.
Joe Biden's sexual assault accuser has defected to Russia 157K views 1 year ago David Pakman Show President Joe Biden's sexual assault accuser, Tara Reade, has defected to Russia ... What former Biden staffers say about Tara Reade's allegations 34K views 4 years ago CBS News After former staffer Tara Reade accused Joe Biden of sexual assaulting her in the early 1990s, PBS NewsHour spoke to 74 former ... 6:09 Now playing Tara Reade's ex-neighbor corroborates Biden sexual assault allegation 38K views 4 years ago Democracy Now!
Reminds me of when Ivanka was somehow qualified to be an “advisor” to the president. What the hell does someone like her have to contribute to the United States Executive Branch??? “Uh, Daddy? I think you should…”
@@neko19671 thanks for admitting yall do not actually like immigrants 😂 just good servants that vote the way you want them too, almost like slaves or something
You know where we can take the most $$$ from? THE PENTAGON & DOD. The pentagon & DOD failed its seventh audit IN A ROW & can't account for 68% of it's funding. So cut 68% of its funding.
There is a problem with your idea: it's such a big cut it might cause a post-ww2 style recession. You might need to bring some social programs to compensate for such cuts...
Yes Vivek is brilliant when he said that we should be worried about unelected government bureaucrats. News flash, HE'S AN UNELECTED BUREAUCRAT alongside Musk in DOGE.
@@Joe-iq1bu I saw Baron Trump next to his father, is he also part of the administration? I saw some McDonald's workers next to Trump when he was pretending to be making fries, are they part of the administration too?
I feel like the editor for the MR clipped this wrong since it only covered like the 1st 10 seconds of Zakaria's take. I saw the CNN vid a few days ago and its batshit insane, he basically just assumes that Elon Musk is good and pure and is looking for the best way to help the average American
You also have to recognize that Fareed comes from a country that has no problem letting the poor die on the street, in massive numbers. “It’s their Karma.” The Western notion of looking after the poor and infirm is not shared by countries like India.
Your quotation in this context, Mr Stu, is not completely, totally & unambiguously foolish & ignorant. Many years ago (likely before you were born) I was in the military & jumped out of Army aircraft 27 time -- each time wearing a parachute. Prior to jumping I always thought that if I could get to the exit & jump before this baby failed mechanically, I'd be okay because I knew how to manage a parachute (but did not know how to fly a plane). Thus, the question becomes, "Of the hundreds of thousands, but more likely millions, of federal & state rules, regulations, edicts & mandates could we eliminate without experiencing even a tincture of harm or injury in this country?" One? One hundred? One thousand? One million? You seem to be a fairly clever young chappie, Mr Stu! What's your estimate?
@@rogerforsberg3910 Dear roger how can anyone estimate that? How would that be possible? Absent thorough analysis? Retiring regulations based on guesswork is like retiring airline rivets based on guesswork...which was part of Mr Stu's point. The other point is that mentioning the number of rivets/regulations is a con. It doesn't even consider whether each of those rivets is doing something useful..like keeping you alive. It just mentions the number as if there is some previously agreed upon number of necessary rivets/ regulations that one should not exceed. But, you seem to be a fairly clever old, "chappie". Perhaps you can explain the blatant dishonesty/stupidity of quoting numbers of regulations to an audience as if that proves something? Come on..give it a go!
@@DavidBarnwell876tkdja In partially reverse order... "...give it a go!" Gladly! "Dear roger how can anyone estimate that? How would that be possible? Absent thorough analysis?" Let me ask you: there are likely millions of state & federal rules, regulations, edicts & mandates. From your experience as an adult living in the world is it your opinion that everyone of those are necessary? Perhaps it's been your experience in this world that EVERY ONE of those requirements keep people or property safe from harm or injury. That has NOT been my experience. "Retiring regulations based on guesswork is like retiring airline rivets based on guesswork...which was part of Mr Stu's point." I'm sorry if I gave you that misimpression. When I went up in an airplane I expected that every screw, bolt, nut, device, etc., on the plane was absolutely necessary because if it wasn't there the likelihood of the plane's failing was real. I don't have the same impression about the millions of state & federal rules, regulations, edicts & mandates. "The other point is that mentioning the number of rivets/regulations is a con. It doesn't even consider whether each of those rivets is doing something useful..like keeping you alive." Refer to my response immediately above. "...It just mentions the number as if there is some previously agreed upon number of necessary rivets/ regulations that one should not exceed." I don't believe at all about the "number of necessary rivets/regulations...." Here's what I'm trying to suggest to you -- and I'd put this text in caps except that i don't want to offend you by tyring to ensure that read what I write carefully: Some rules & regulations upon society are critically important -- and I'm one of the persons who tends to follow the rules & regulations much more carefully than most people (because of the way that I was raised). HOWEVER, and now we're getting to the important point (point): at what point does the addition of another rule, regulation, edict or mandate become more harmful or injurious -- rather than helpful, useful or beneficial? For many people this is a subtle point, Mr Barnwell (probably not for you). It has to do with marginal improvement. That is, when do we get to the point that adding additional rules, regulations, edicts, & mandates NO LONGER improves our processes, procedures & activities? "But, you seem to be a fairly clever old, "chappie"." Thank you, kindly, Mr Barnwell. I am, indeed! And, fairly knowledgable, to boot! "Perhaps you can explain the blatant dishonesty/stupidity of quoting numbers of regulations to an audience as if that proves something?" I'm too old & too polite to indicate to you that if you believe that if my remarks above are dishonest or stupid, that I believe you to be ignorant & narrow-minded -- not in general, but on this very particular topic. Thank you, by the way, Mr Barnwell, for your mostly civil response.
@@DavidBarnwell876tkdja Did you get a multi-paragraph reply from me earlier to your text above, or is this the first response from me you've responded? After hitting 'reply' I couldn't find my response. On occasion, the expressed opinions of Mr Seder & Co have been so shallow, so superficial, & so ignorant that I've responded to them point by point, and I don't believe that they like accurate criticism. I'm wondering if they are now placing any of my responses into their "memory hole" (expression courtesy Mr G Orwell). Thank you for your response, Mr Barnwell!!
@@DiscGoStu yeah that’s not a good analogy. A better one would be you defending putting lead weights on a plane. And crying that we want to take the weights off
In fairness, Zakaria was accused of plagiarizing ... his own articles. Never heard him go this far to the right before, disappointing. EDIT: There were 12 other instances of not attributing otherwise. I stand corrected.
Look into it a bit more, he's admitted to it, the plagiarism that is. It was a long time ago, so probably not relevant to this. However, this is absurd all on its own. 😅
It should also be noted that the Affordable Care Act involves modifications to existing laws. There are over 1500 instances of 'amend', 'amended' and other derived words. There are multiple paragraphs of text replaced by modified text. And since its introduction in 2010, there have been many modifications. This is why it is over 900 pages long.
At the time the ACA was drawn up, and its length was criticized, the New Yorker explained that a lot of its length was an attempt to establish “best practices.” Medical treatment in the US can vary widely in both procedures & outcomes. The ACA wanted to have a framework to help empirically determine what treatments had the best outcomes
Yeah, that’s a lot of regulation, but there are 350 million people in thie country with a GDP in the trillions. It takes A LOT of management and regulation to keep a structure that big in working order. Modern governments are literally the largest, most complex organizational structures humanity has ever constructed.
American experiment in government has been nothing short of amazing. The public goods produced by the US Gov is the basis of almost all innovation in the private sector - DARPA, DOD, DOE …I could go on and on and on….The private sector does not produce public goods, and that has been the amazing American experiment. Fareed wouldn’t understand that, and neither do his neocon friends. It’s not about efficiency but about open access and the construction of a public realm …..
Again, Social Security is not part of the budget. It comes from the social security trust fund that was created in 1938 and was reinvigorated in 1984. Therefore, if Congress cuts it to zero and gets rid of it, it will have zero effect on the deficit or the national debt. So what's the point of cutting it?
I read Fareed's article in the Washington Post about this very topic. His take and his column are often verbatim. He is talking about politics as much as he is policy. "...I support the impulse to reform - and not just because I think it will force greater scrutiny and efficiency on government, which needs it. The duo will also force the country and especially the Republican Party to confront a reality it has danced around for decades. The modern Republican Party was forged in opposition to Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal. Ever since the 1930s, the party’s strongest ideologues have promised to repeal the New Deal and dismantle the architecture of the federal government that was largely constructed by FDR. But they never did." "With DOGE, we might finally get an effort to actually deliver on the central Republican promise of the past 90 years. And we will find out what America thinks of it." I don't share Fareed's enthusiasm for DOGE, but your representation of his argument was very incomplete.
"As a student at Yale University in the mid-1980s, Zakaria opposed anti-apartheid divestment and argued that Yale should not divest from its holdings in South Africa" "Zakaria initially supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He said at the time, "The place is so dysfunctional ... any stirring of the pot is good. America's involvement in the region is for the good."" "Zakaria supported the April 2017 U.S. missile strike against a Syrian government-controlled airbase. Zakaria praised President Donald Trump's strike and said it was the moment "[he] became president of the United States."" "In July 2022, Zakaria wrote a Washington Post article titled "Forget pronouns. Democrats need to become the party of building things", in which he said "There is plenty of evidence that the Democratic Party has moved left, that it is out of sync with Americans on many of these cultural issues, and that it needs to correct course" and that "This is not a perception problem. It is a reality problem. Democrats need to once more become the party that gets stuff done, builds things and makes government work for people. That's a lot more important to most Americans than using the right pronouns"" Yet he thinks he's a centrist? GTFO.
As Bernie said, replacing Medicare's age of 65 to 0 would have been far simpler and more efficient than the ACA, which was complex for the sake of the insurance companies.
I lost a significant amount of respect for Zachariah after watching his nonsense. What is he thinking? This presentation was his Mika and Joe moment. I can't take him seriously anymore.
I liked Fareed's book "Post-American World" as it was an interesting rethinking of the United States' position in the world in the wake of Bush's Iraq fiasco. I've read many of his articles since and I do think there was a period of time where he was an important voice in the center. But none of these commentators can help themselves. The truth isn't good enough and there's too much money to be made if you sell out. These guys all follow the same path. Once their audience captures them, they sell out again and again, it doesn't matter who is in power, until they've lost any shred of the moral center they had at the beginning.
It is. Friedrich Hayek (1974 Nobel laureate in economics) and critical figure in the formation of neoliberalism and leader in the Mont Pelerin Society famously insisted that he was a classical liberal. So the most neoliberal thinker was also a classical liberal. This usage of classical liberal comes from an older European context where it is referring to what Americans call libertarianism. But here a major disconnect in the understanding of neoliberalism comes in because it is not just American libertarianism, it is many other things too, like the corporate democracy of Biden, Harris, Obama and the Clintons because it is a fundamental philosophy that undergirds a wider range of real world policies. The core of neoliberalism is the rejection of the idea of the common good or general will (something that comes from an empiricist view rather than a rationalist view). As a result, politicians should not be zealots who think they know what's best for others. This is why neoliberalism is a predatory capitalism, it is anti-social and psychopathic because it is formulated solely on the principles of narrow self-interest. Altruism and solidarity are problematic for neoliberalism, so it requires and reinforces self-interest and alienation. Neoliberalism is the predatory capitalism of Charles Dickens but now with computers. Computers are key to neoliberalism. They love tech and are in full control so we on the left need to urgently get our act together as A.I. and everything is getting so close to an inflection point. The alternative to neoliberalism from the expert introverted intuitive thinkers is a social capitalism based on Hegel's dialectical idealism updated with math, taxing dynastic inheritors and running the meritocracy from Star Trek. This would mark a total departure from the secular empiricism and dialectical materialism of the majority report left. We are here waiting for you. Or you can bury your heads in the sand until Armageddon. Neoliberalism is not a conspiracy, Phillip Mirowski's 2013 book "Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste" is an expert description of it from the left.
It would be good to do a video addressing if there's anyway to prevent Trump from passing US info/secrets on to Putin and others, as he likely did during his first term.
And who will pay DOGE and who will benefit from DOGE, and who will oversee DOGE? And why do I just now distrust Fareed Zakaria? How does he benefit from this? Follow the money.
Everytime I watch a commenter from CNN I'm convinced they don't have journalists anymore. It feels almost like they just go to the same country club and talk their friends "Hey, what do you think is happening right now?" and report that.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned that Doge was also the title of the head of state (nominally elected) in Genoa and Venice back when they were city-states before Italian unification. I say nominally elected because the electors were essentially the most prominent businessmen in the city, and of course, the Doge was also a businessman.
I don't think Musk is brilliant. He's 90% hype. He hires some brilliant people, but nothing he says or does makes me think he deserves to be called brilliant. He's just rich to the point that he's too big to fail. I think that him being involved in any administration is a conflict of interest. If we really want to save some money, let;s stop launching Starships to nowhere. Why is Zakaria so sure that it's worth retiring many regulations based on how many exist. 150,000 pages sounds like a lot, but what are we comparing it to? What is purpose of the regulations he thinks need retiring?
There's a story told by Brazil's "Chicago Boys" (students of Milton Friedman) in which Friedman, after countless attempts, finally got to speak personally to President Richard Nixon. He asked, "Mr. President, why don't you try some of my [neoliberal] solutions to improve the US economy?" Nixon replied, "Milton, to be able to apply some of your theories, I'd first have to be declared dictator!"....some years later, Augusto Pinochet was the first guy to implement Friedman's Neoliberal policies in a real-world situation.
"Mr. President, why don't you try some of my [neoliberal] solutions to improve the US economy?" Alas, Mr lou, Milton Friedman, who was one of my teachers at the UofC would NEVER have used the word you placed in brackets ([neoliberal]) above, because he had read all of the authors of the Enlightenment (David Ricardo, John Locke, David Hume, Adam Smith, JS Mill, Wm Hazlitt, Voltaire, etc) many times, and his principles, values & ideals were liberal in the original sense through & through. Among other things he was a proponent of small government, of personal responsibility, and of the avoidance of going to war (because of its huge waste of limited resources). If you read what he writes -- as opposed to listening your chums -- you will realize this.
@@rogerforsberg3910, that's indeed very interesting...there's an essay from 1951 titled “Neo-Liberalism and its Prospects” by a certain Milton Friedman. May have been written by some namesake. Have you read this one?
@@lou914 Thank you for this reference, Mr lou! I have read an essay entitled "Neo-Liberalism & Its Discontents", but by a different author. I will look for this essay & read it. As for Friedman referring to himself as being a "liberal" (a statement that often confuses those on the Left whose knowledge of the historic origins of liberalism in Britain & on the Continent are weak or non-existent), this is what Friedman writes in the Introduction to his book, "Capitalism & Freedom" (the use of capitals is from me): "It is extremely convenient to have a label for the political and economic viewpoint elaborated in this book. The rightful and proper label is LIBERALISM. Unfortunately, "As a supreme, if unintended compliment, the enemies of the system of private enterprise have thought it wise to appropriate its label",1 so that liberalism has, in the United States, come to have a very different meaning than it did in the nineteenth century or does today over much of the Continent of Europe. " The quotation that Friedman references is from Josef Schumpeter's book, "History of Economic Analysis" (publ Oxford U Press, 1954). Schumpeter was another economic liberal (in the legitimately historical sense of the word) who emigrated from Austria to the US just before Naziism's rise in Germany. Had he lived & worked longer he would have likely have had as great an impact on economics as Keynes or Friedman. Thanks, again, for the reference to the essay.
@@rogerforsberg3910, while not a wholehearted endorsement of neo-liberalism, but a worthy consideration of its value, Milton Friedman does mention the term a few times in his early essay. I will post a link below. I do certainly agree that Americans have bestowed quite a different meaning to word 'liberal' than the original, as is still used in the rest of the world - both in politics and economics.
Forget the name. Change the name. The real issue is that government efficiency is too important an issue to be left to the Republicans. Which is, unfortunately, what the Democrats have done. Trump saw an opening here and he took it. A couple of amateur billionaires won't make a difference, but the issue is still important. But look at the trajectory of it: FDR wanted to make the government more efficient, so he proposed a failed "Executive Reorganization." Truman created the more successful, if less ambitious, "Hoover Commission." Clinton set up the National Performance Review, chaired by Gore, which got a lot of media attention and probably did save millions. What came out of the Clinton effort was the "Hammer Award," a six-dollar hammer given to bureaucrats who came up with cost-saving ideas. Bush abandoned the Hammer Award, and neither Obama nor Biden revived it. The last time the Democratic platform contained an efficiency plank was in 2004--and then nothing. (I think the Democrats had an efficiency plank in every platform from 1932 to 2004.) Again, Trump saw an opening and he took it. By the way, there is nothing inherently wrong with the government hiring consultants; what's inherently wrong is to hire consultants who don't have expertise.
BTW, everybody: it's not 'Dozh' - it's 'Doggy', as in the little dog in every advertisement for the bitcoin brand. That's right, there's now a US government department by this name 🙄
Hate to say it but clearly nobody on the show or in the comments actually listened to the piece in its entirety. His thesis here isn't advocating for neolib austerity measures, it's a segment about Republican "ideology" and concern about debt being a rudderless when they are actually in power.
The size of any government has nothing to do with the efficiency of that government. You can have a small government that is very inefficient and a big government that is very efficient. The number of regulations has nothing to do with government efficiency, either. The "efficiency question" is whether the government enforces those regulations at minimal cost to the taxpayers. Fareed objects to the number of pages of regulation, which suggests that his real agenda is not government efficiency but rather deregulation. Two different things.
CNN is embarrassing
Tf is a sea of nn's anyhew
Fareed Zakaria is no more than a spokesman for the entitled class. He is acting like press secretary for a Trump Administration. He is neither objective, nor a true journalist. I had greatly misjudged his integrity.
Yeah although at least usually typically just sticks to foreign policy issues. The idea that he's sitting here talking about how excited he is that Elon musk gets to participate in the gutting of government jobs and services is disgusting
Same.
They’re all just buying in.
You literally described Fox News.
Huh. Maybe calling rich people and the capital class "the entitled class" is a winning move. It might connect to conservatives' animal brain concept of "entitlements".
@@kekwayblaze3176 - Yeah man, that should tell you all you need to know about Fareed.
CNN might as well be owned by Rupert Murdock at this point. 🙄
This 👍🏻 they are just as fooled as MAGAts.
They are pretty much doing what the Democratic party is doing. They've decided to be a diet Fox News. And like the Democratic party, they will fail, because why would anyone watch a pale imitation when they have easy access to the genuine article?
@@humanitarianly Too true.
CNN is democrats media
Lot of people are oddly agitated by unfounded rumors that Elon Musk might buy MSNBC at the moment.
I'm of the opinion that he should buy it. And then CNN. And then the NYT.
If that's what it takes for people to FINALLY realize what 'corporate owned media' means then let's do it.
The only difference between a neoliberal and a Republican is their aversion to publicly say what they think about fellow Americans.
Republicans are neoliberals, there is no difference.
@@fwdcnorac8574 don’t project, you leftists are the only one with horrific opinions of Americans
Fareed Zachariah is one of the biggest grifters around…a total sell out.
Zakaria is a joke.
I'm glad you called this out. Saved me the trouble.
What's ironic here is the Trump people talk about faceless bureaucrats, yet Elon Musk himself is a bureaucrat trying to be involved in govt and force his will upon all of us.
Bbuh he has a face! Unlike Charlie Kirk
What's "ironic" is that the only thing they're doing different is being overt about being corrupt.
@@TW0man4RMY - We're in the end zone of late capitalism. Masks have long-since been discarded, everybody is a proud demon and preying on the weak is the only sport.
He’s not forcing his will on anyone. This is how democracy works. The people have spoken. Democracy was on the ballot evidently.
@@merriemelodiesfan7425 what part of him being in the public eye daily is “faceless”? 😂
I stopped taking Zakaria seriously, when he started praising Trump for bombing people.
Zakaria, Williams, Amram, Jones, Scarorough, etc etc ... they all showed their true colors in term one.
Should be no surprise to anybody that's been paying attention.
@@deathmagneto-soyIt seems we’ve all woke up to their propaganda and hypocrisy.
Wait, wait. Did Fareed Zakaria just say that Elon Musk is "brilliant"? Did he miss the last few years of evidence?
Joe Biden's sexual assault accuser has defected to Russia
157K views 1 year ago
David Pakman Show
President Joe Biden's sexual assault accuser, Tara Reade, has defected to Russia ...
What former Biden staffers say about Tara Reade's allegations
34K views 4 years ago
CBS News
After former staffer Tara Reade accused Joe Biden of sexual assaulting her in the early 1990s, PBS NewsHour spoke to 74 former ...
6:09
Now playing
Tara Reade's ex-neighbor corroborates Biden sexual assault allegation
38K views 4 years ago
Democracy Now!
And Vivek. Brilliant? 4 real?
@@Argumemnon give an example of someone you think is “brilliant” 😂 I have a funny feeling you’re not going to give a good example
vlad putin is brilliant, but also a terrible person. evek and vivlon are dumb as dirt, and they suck as people. @@Joe-iq1bu
@Joe-iq1bu you know musk is just a uber rich dork, right?
This would be embarrassing for him if anyone still watched CNN.
😂😂
Reminds me of when Ivanka was somehow qualified to be an “advisor” to the president. What the hell does someone like her have to contribute to the United States Executive Branch???
“Uh, Daddy? I think you should…”
Because if she wasn't his daughter, maybe he'd be dating her. That's her qualification, duh.
@@TMDWTFIU😂😂😂
But she has really nice gozangas!
My take is that Fareed Zacharia’s takes are hard to take.
Have to love all these rich immigrants who want to change America after coming here and getting rich. America is screwed.
The spirit of Colonialism is alive and well.
@@neko19671 thanks for admitting yall do not actually like immigrants 😂 just good servants that vote the way you want them too, almost like slaves or something
Fareed spent his years in Yale law school defending apartheid in South Africa. Look it up!
Oh my god.
I thought you were fabricating this but it's even mentioned on his Wikipedia page.
What the.... 😮
You know where we can take the most $$$ from? THE PENTAGON & DOD. The pentagon & DOD failed its seventh audit IN A ROW & can't account for 68% of it's funding. So cut 68% of its funding.
This.
Tax the rich too.
There is a problem with your idea: it's such a big cut it might cause a post-ww2 style recession.
You might need to bring some social programs to compensate for such cuts...
@@Lumi_Lumi13 yes you don’t think they’ll go after the pentagon? 😂
@@1MarkKeller you are not owed someone else’s money
@@therrydicule post ww2 recession? Bruh the economy boomed post ww2 😂🤡
The fact he thinks that Musk and Ramaswamy are brilliant tells you all you need to know about Fareed Zakaria.
Neoliberal, Neo-fascist, Neo from the Matrix
Neo conservative, Neo Clownfederacy, Neo Nazis.
Hey, hey.. Don't insult Neo.
These talking heads are closer to agent smith
Elon and Vivek are Trumps Neopets
Elon and Vivek are Trumps Neopets
Yes Vivek is brilliant when he said that we should be worried about unelected government bureaucrats. News flash, HE'S AN UNELECTED BUREAUCRAT alongside Musk in DOGE.
Even here I may be giving VIvek too much credit. DOGE is not an actual government department it's more of a consultant and advisory role.
@@Overonator how? He campaigned with Trump, all maga supporters voted for him to be apart of the administration 😂
@@Joe-iq1bu On what ballot did he appear on?
@ didn’t have to, he was right next to trump for most of the end campaign, if maga had a problem with that; you would’ve known about it.
@@Joe-iq1bu I saw Baron Trump next to his father, is he also part of the administration? I saw some McDonald's workers next to Trump when he was pretending to be making fries, are they part of the administration too?
I feel like the editor for the MR clipped this wrong since it only covered like the 1st 10 seconds of Zakaria's take. I saw the CNN vid a few days ago and its batshit insane, he basically just assumes that Elon Musk is good and pure and is looking for the best way to help the average American
Holy hell! Hasn't Musk shown us very clearly that he's basically the tech bro version of Trump?
You also have to recognize that Fareed comes from a country that has no problem letting the poor die on the street, in massive numbers. “It’s their Karma.” The Western notion of looking after the poor and infirm is not shared by countries like India.
He just called vivake and eloon brilliant 🤔
Elonia Trump
@@northuniverse Elek Musramaswamy
@@Argumemnon - Vivek Rathersmarmy.
@@panbaiye they’re smarter than anyone on the left 😂😂😂😂
He says it’s misnamed and then gives a tertiary reason why the name is problematic.
“Commercial airliners have hundreds of thousands of bolts and rivets: What’s the harm in looking at them and retiring many?”
Your quotation in this context, Mr Stu, is not completely, totally & unambiguously foolish & ignorant. Many years ago (likely before you were born) I was in the military & jumped out of Army aircraft 27 time -- each time wearing a parachute. Prior to jumping I always thought that if I could get to the exit & jump before this baby failed mechanically, I'd be okay because I knew how to manage a parachute (but did not know how to fly a plane).
Thus, the question becomes, "Of the hundreds of thousands, but more likely millions, of federal & state rules, regulations, edicts & mandates could we eliminate without experiencing even a tincture of harm or injury in this country?" One? One hundred? One thousand? One million?
You seem to be a fairly clever young chappie, Mr Stu! What's your estimate?
@@rogerforsberg3910 Dear roger how can anyone estimate that? How would that be possible? Absent thorough analysis? Retiring regulations based on guesswork is like retiring airline rivets based on guesswork...which was part of Mr Stu's point.
The other point is that mentioning the number of rivets/regulations is a con. It doesn't even consider whether each of those rivets is doing something useful..like keeping you alive. It just mentions the number as if there is some previously agreed upon number of necessary rivets/ regulations that one should not exceed.
But, you seem to be a fairly clever old, "chappie".
Perhaps you can explain the blatant dishonesty/stupidity of quoting numbers of regulations to an audience as if that proves something?
Come on..give it a go!
@@DavidBarnwell876tkdja In partially reverse order...
"...give it a go!"
Gladly!
"Dear roger how can anyone estimate that? How would that be possible? Absent thorough analysis?"
Let me ask you: there are likely millions of state & federal rules, regulations, edicts & mandates. From your experience as an adult living in the world is it your opinion that everyone of those are necessary? Perhaps it's been your experience in this world that EVERY ONE of those requirements keep people or property safe from harm or injury. That has NOT been my experience.
"Retiring regulations based on guesswork is like retiring airline rivets based on guesswork...which was part of Mr Stu's point."
I'm sorry if I gave you that misimpression. When I went up in an airplane I expected that every screw, bolt, nut, device, etc., on the plane was absolutely necessary because if it wasn't there the likelihood of the plane's failing was real. I don't have the same impression about the millions of state & federal rules, regulations, edicts & mandates.
"The other point is that mentioning the number of rivets/regulations is a con. It doesn't even consider whether each of those rivets is doing something useful..like keeping you alive."
Refer to my response immediately above.
"...It just mentions the number as if there is some previously agreed upon number of necessary rivets/ regulations that one should not exceed."
I don't believe at all about the "number of necessary rivets/regulations...." Here's what I'm trying to suggest to you -- and I'd put this text in caps except that i don't want to offend you by tyring to ensure that read what I write carefully: Some rules & regulations upon society are critically important -- and I'm one of the persons who tends to follow the rules & regulations much more carefully than most people (because of the way that I was raised). HOWEVER, and now we're getting to the important point (point): at what point does the addition of another rule, regulation, edict or mandate become more harmful or injurious -- rather than helpful, useful or beneficial? For many people this is a subtle point, Mr Barnwell (probably not for you). It has to do with marginal improvement. That is, when do we get to the point that adding additional rules, regulations, edicts, & mandates NO LONGER improves our processes, procedures & activities?
"But, you seem to be a fairly clever old, "chappie"."
Thank you, kindly, Mr Barnwell. I am, indeed! And, fairly knowledgable, to boot!
"Perhaps you can explain the blatant dishonesty/stupidity of quoting numbers of regulations to an audience as if that proves something?"
I'm too old & too polite to indicate to you that if you believe that if my remarks above are dishonest or stupid, that I believe you to be ignorant & narrow-minded -- not in general, but on this very particular topic.
Thank you, by the way, Mr Barnwell, for your mostly civil response.
@@DavidBarnwell876tkdja Did you get a multi-paragraph reply from me earlier to your text above, or is this the first response from me you've responded? After hitting 'reply' I couldn't find my response.
On occasion, the expressed opinions of Mr Seder & Co have been so shallow, so superficial, & so ignorant that I've responded to them point by point, and I don't believe that they like accurate criticism. I'm wondering if they are now placing any of my responses into their "memory hole" (expression courtesy Mr G Orwell).
Thank you for your response, Mr Barnwell!!
@@DiscGoStu yeah that’s not a good analogy. A better one would be you defending putting lead weights on a plane. And crying that we want to take the weights off
He's worried they will deport him
This guy and Thomas Friedman are two of the worst Neoliberal stooges in existence!!
It’s cringe and bad
If the government is too big then how big should it be?
And why is it never the military budget that gets cut?
they fear military retaliation because thats what they would try to do if they were in all our shoes
Jesus Christ is he wanting a job on Fox
Imagining the Fox network hiring a communist and how that would affect Hannity & Colmes.
In fairness, Zakaria was accused of plagiarizing ... his own articles.
Never heard him go this far to the right before, disappointing.
EDIT: There were 12 other instances of not attributing otherwise.
I stand corrected.
Look into it a bit more, he's admitted to it, the plagiarism that is. It was a long time ago, so probably not relevant to this. However, this is absurd all on its own. 😅
@RyanStillGames Good call, didn't realize it was so frequent.
I'll leave up my own error vice hiding my shame.
I'd love to know if he plagiarized any of his own articles in which he defended South African apartheid.
Evil Willem Dafoe
His Durkha Durkha Curry-Mouthed Cousin...!!!
How is neoliberalism different from neoconservatism?
Neoliberalism is about internal economic policies. Neoconservatism is about maintaining the United States as the sole world military superpower.
@@ryri51thank you for this. I've been trying to find the words.
Nothing, the current Democrats have the bushes cheneys mccains they ARE the early 2000s Rep.
@DemCorp-AgentsOfCarnage Delusional take. They're back to being the same party they were pre-Iraq war
It's more smug and less self aware.
It should also be noted that the Affordable Care Act involves modifications to existing laws. There are over 1500 instances of 'amend', 'amended' and other derived words. There are multiple paragraphs of text replaced by modified text. And since its introduction in 2010, there have been many modifications. This is why it is over 900 pages long.
At the time the ACA was drawn up, and its length was criticized, the New Yorker explained that a lot of its length was an attempt to establish “best practices.” Medical treatment in the US can vary widely in both procedures & outcomes. The ACA wanted to have a framework to help empirically determine what treatments had the best outcomes
Department Of Political Expediency
Say NOPE to DOPE!
And from DOPE it's only a short step to GROPE. Something Something Of Political Enemies.
"Asterisk". Emma is a savage. Love you guys!
Is there a timestamp?
Around 0:25 right after Zakaria says "Here's my take". Emma says that because he's a known plagiarist.
@@FandangoJon - Never gonna think of Zakaria without an unspoken asterisk after that Emma drop.
How does his little neck, hold up his head of empty space?
At least we can finally say Milton Friedman is a relic from a dead age.
Yeah, that’s a lot of regulation, but there are 350 million people in thie country with a GDP in the trillions. It takes A LOT of management and regulation to keep a structure that big in working order. Modern governments are literally the largest, most complex organizational structures humanity has ever constructed.
The manual to my Kia Soul is 200+ pages. But the Federal government should be character limited like a Twitter post! 🥴
Zakaria is so yesterday’s news - literally.
American experiment in government has been nothing short of amazing. The public goods produced by the US Gov is the basis of almost all innovation in the private sector - DARPA, DOD, DOE …I could go on and on and on….The private sector does not produce public goods, and that has been the amazing American experiment. Fareed wouldn’t understand that, and neither do his neocon friends. It’s not about efficiency but about open access and the construction of a public realm …..
The grift is always in the name
Gaap is also a few hundred pages but you never hear rich creeps rag on the concept of auditing because they know they can't trust eachother lol
Again, Social Security is not part of the budget. It comes from the social security trust fund that was created in 1938 and was reinvigorated in 1984. Therefore, if Congress cuts it to zero and gets rid of it, it will have zero effect on the deficit or the national debt. So what's the point of cutting it?
The cruelty? The cruelty is the point? 😐
I read Fareed's article in the Washington Post about this very topic. His take and his column are often verbatim. He is talking about politics as much as he is policy. "...I support the impulse to reform - and not just because I think it will force greater scrutiny and efficiency on government, which needs it. The duo will also force the country and especially the Republican Party to confront a reality it has danced around for decades. The modern Republican Party was forged in opposition to Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal. Ever since the 1930s, the party’s strongest ideologues have promised to repeal the New Deal and dismantle the architecture of the federal government that was largely constructed by FDR. But they never did." "With DOGE, we might finally get an effort to actually deliver on the central Republican promise of the past 90 years. And we will find out what America thinks of it." I don't share Fareed's enthusiasm for DOGE, but your representation of his argument was very incomplete.
"As a student at Yale University in the mid-1980s, Zakaria opposed anti-apartheid divestment and argued that Yale should not divest from its holdings in South Africa"
"Zakaria initially supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He said at the time, "The place is so dysfunctional ... any stirring of the pot is good. America's involvement in the region is for the good.""
"Zakaria supported the April 2017 U.S. missile strike against a Syrian government-controlled airbase. Zakaria praised President Donald Trump's strike and said it was the moment "[he] became president of the United States.""
"In July 2022, Zakaria wrote a Washington Post article titled "Forget pronouns. Democrats need to become the party of building things", in which he said "There is plenty of evidence that the Democratic Party has moved left, that it is out of sync with Americans on many of these cultural issues, and that it needs to correct course" and that "This is not a perception problem. It is a reality problem. Democrats need to once more become the party that gets stuff done, builds things and makes government work for people. That's a lot more important to most Americans than using the right pronouns""
Yet he thinks he's a centrist? GTFO.
I love all dogs but the doge
Shibas are cute 😍 but crypto isn't
As Bernie said, replacing Medicare's age of 65 to 0 would have been far simpler and more efficient than the ACA, which was complex for the sake of the insurance companies.
Zakaria totally destroying his credibility.
Guy from a foreign country telling Americans what's best for America.
My dad's friend from Tanzania loves this man much more than the mother of his children
Sam’s definition of neoliberalism is the best I’ve heard.
I could shorten the ACA: everyone gets healthcare.
I can shorten the tax code: no exemptions, all income is treated the same.
It's nice when media is media-literate. Fareed should be embarrassed.
Has George Monbiot ever been on the MR? His work on Neoliberalism is really good.
I lost a significant amount of respect for Zachariah after watching his nonsense. What is he thinking? This presentation was his Mika and Joe moment. I can't take him seriously anymore.
I liked Fareed's book "Post-American World" as it was an interesting rethinking of the United States' position in the world in the wake of Bush's Iraq fiasco. I've read many of his articles since and I do think there was a period of time where he was an important voice in the center. But none of these commentators can help themselves. The truth isn't good enough and there's too much money to be made if you sell out. These guys all follow the same path. Once their audience captures them, they sell out again and again, it doesn't matter who is in power, until they've lost any shred of the moral center they had at the beginning.
Mussolini defined fascism is the synthesis of state and corporate power...
So, in other words, neoliberalism is like "classic liberalism"?
It is. Friedrich Hayek (1974 Nobel laureate in economics) and critical figure in the formation of neoliberalism and leader in the Mont Pelerin Society famously insisted that he was a classical liberal. So the most neoliberal thinker was also a classical liberal. This usage of classical liberal comes from an older European context where it is referring to what Americans call libertarianism. But here a major disconnect in the understanding of neoliberalism comes in because it is not just American libertarianism, it is many other things too, like the corporate democracy of Biden, Harris, Obama and the Clintons because it is a fundamental philosophy that undergirds a wider range of real world policies. The core of neoliberalism is the rejection of the idea of the common good or general will (something that comes from an empiricist view rather than a rationalist view). As a result, politicians should not be zealots who think they know what's best for others. This is why neoliberalism is a predatory capitalism, it is anti-social and psychopathic because it is formulated solely on the principles of narrow self-interest. Altruism and solidarity are problematic for neoliberalism, so it requires and reinforces self-interest and alienation.
Neoliberalism is the predatory capitalism of Charles Dickens but now with computers. Computers are key to neoliberalism. They love tech and are in full control so we on the left need to urgently get our act together as A.I. and everything is getting so close to an inflection point. The alternative to neoliberalism from the expert introverted intuitive thinkers is a social capitalism based on Hegel's dialectical idealism updated with math, taxing dynastic inheritors and running the meritocracy from Star Trek. This would mark a total departure from the secular empiricism and dialectical materialism of the majority report left. We are here waiting for you. Or you can bury your heads in the sand until Armageddon. Neoliberalism is not a conspiracy, Phillip Mirowski's 2013 book "Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste" is an expert description of it from the left.
That’s “NeoLiberalism”???
No that’s pure idiocy. Period.
It would be good to do a video addressing if there's anyway to prevent Trump from passing US info/secrets on to Putin and others, as he likely did during his first term.
And who will pay DOGE and who will benefit from DOGE, and who will oversee DOGE? And why do I just now distrust Fareed Zakaria? How does he benefit from this? Follow the money.
This is exactly what this show is.
So how much is this department going to cost taxpayers 🤬. Shouldn’t efficiency be part of every single department 🤬.
Doge isnt Elon's memecoin. He just has some weird obsession with it. It's a troll to crypto nerds...
Chris Hedges accurately said the 2024 election was oligarchic capital vs corporate capital
Is Emma not even hiding her annoyance with Sam's CONSTANT pausing and interrupting?!?
Government has failed 😡
Man, 2024 aged Emma like ten years😳. Understandable tbh.
Everytime I watch a commenter from CNN I'm convinced they don't have journalists anymore. It feels almost like they just go to the same country club and talk their friends "Hey, what do you think is happening right now?" and report that.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned that Doge was also the title of the head of state (nominally elected) in Genoa and Venice back when they were city-states before Italian unification. I say nominally elected because the electors were essentially the most prominent businessmen in the city, and of course, the Doge was also a businessman.
Corruption and Oligarchy was never as painfully obvious as with Trump and Musk.
Was not aware that this ballon-juice dispenser was still around. Who watches CNN anymore?
My eyebrows were first raised on Zakaria when he praised mohdi on a last week tonight segment.
I don't think Musk is brilliant. He's 90% hype. He hires some brilliant people, but nothing he says or does makes me think he deserves to be called brilliant. He's just rich to the point that he's too big to fail. I think that him being involved in any administration is a conflict of interest. If we really want to save some money, let;s stop launching Starships to nowhere. Why is Zakaria so sure that it's worth retiring many regulations based on how many exist. 150,000 pages sounds like a lot, but what are we comparing it to? What is purpose of the regulations he thinks need retiring?
Zakaria is a realist in terms of IR so I wouldn’t call him a neoliberal.
CUT CUT CUT, the regulations must go. Its telling that business people never talk about what the regs are for and if they're working.
Words, words words I always say...
1000 pages is insanity in a country where the average adult reads at a grade six level.
it's colonialism with modernized platitudes, Fareed is part of this problem
Omg. This is what Starmer's doing here with energy.
I don't really consider Fareed to be a liberal in any real sense of the word. Maybe he was at one time, but the limelight changed him.
Lol,, fareed: "elon and vivek are brilliant"? At conniving. Thats about it
Cant wait to see how much money DodGE is going to cost us
I love this purity test.
Pray elaborate?
There's a story told by Brazil's "Chicago Boys" (students of Milton Friedman) in which Friedman, after countless attempts, finally got to speak personally to President Richard Nixon. He asked, "Mr. President, why don't you try some of my [neoliberal] solutions to improve the US economy?" Nixon replied, "Milton, to be able to apply some of your theories, I'd first have to be declared dictator!"....some years later, Augusto Pinochet was the first guy to implement Friedman's Neoliberal policies in a real-world situation.
&just like pinochet brought neoliberalism to chile, neoliberalism brought pinochet to the US & UK...
"Mr. President, why don't you try some of my [neoliberal] solutions to improve the US economy?"
Alas, Mr lou, Milton Friedman, who was one of my teachers at the UofC would NEVER have used the word you placed in brackets ([neoliberal]) above, because he had read all of the authors of the Enlightenment (David Ricardo, John Locke, David Hume, Adam Smith, JS Mill, Wm Hazlitt, Voltaire, etc) many times, and his principles, values & ideals were liberal in the original sense through & through. Among other things he was a proponent of small government, of personal responsibility, and of the avoidance of going to war (because of its huge waste of limited resources). If you read what he writes -- as opposed to listening your chums -- you will realize this.
@@rogerforsberg3910, that's indeed very interesting...there's an essay from 1951 titled “Neo-Liberalism and its Prospects” by a certain Milton Friedman. May have been written by some namesake. Have you read this one?
@@lou914 Thank you for this reference, Mr lou! I have read an essay entitled "Neo-Liberalism & Its Discontents", but by a different author. I will look for this essay & read it.
As for Friedman referring to himself as being a "liberal" (a statement that often confuses those on the Left whose knowledge of the historic origins of liberalism in Britain & on the Continent are weak or non-existent), this is what Friedman writes in the Introduction to his book, "Capitalism & Freedom" (the use of capitals is from me):
"It is extremely convenient to have a label for the political and economic
viewpoint elaborated in this book. The rightful and proper label is LIBERALISM.
Unfortunately, "As a supreme, if unintended compliment, the enemies of the
system of private enterprise have thought it wise to appropriate its label",1
so that liberalism has, in the United States, come to have a very different meaning
than it did in the nineteenth century or does today over much of the Continent of
Europe. "
The quotation that Friedman references is from Josef Schumpeter's book, "History of Economic Analysis" (publ Oxford U Press, 1954). Schumpeter was another economic liberal (in the legitimately historical sense of the word) who emigrated from Austria to the US just before Naziism's rise in Germany. Had he lived & worked longer he would have likely have had as great an impact on economics as Keynes or Friedman.
Thanks, again, for the reference to the essay.
@@rogerforsberg3910, while not a wholehearted endorsement of neo-liberalism, but a worthy consideration of its value, Milton Friedman does mention the term a few times in his early essay. I will post a link below. I do certainly agree that Americans have bestowed quite a different meaning to word 'liberal' than the original, as is still used in the rest of the world - both in politics and economics.
Genuinely surprised it's not called Department X.
Anybody who thinks those two dorks are brilliant is not a serious person...
Lots of “please don’t jail or execute me daddy Trump” going on lately.
Forget the name. Change the name. The real issue is that government efficiency is too important an issue to be left to the Republicans. Which is, unfortunately, what the Democrats have done. Trump saw an opening here and he took it. A couple of amateur billionaires won't make a difference, but the issue is still important. But look at the trajectory of it: FDR wanted to make the government more efficient, so he proposed a failed "Executive Reorganization." Truman created the more successful, if less ambitious, "Hoover Commission." Clinton set up the National Performance Review, chaired by Gore, which got a lot of media attention and probably did save millions. What came out of the Clinton effort was the "Hammer Award," a six-dollar hammer given to bureaucrats who came up with cost-saving ideas. Bush abandoned the Hammer Award, and neither Obama nor Biden revived it. The last time the Democratic platform contained an efficiency plank was in 2004--and then nothing. (I think the Democrats had an efficiency plank in every platform from 1932 to 2004.) Again, Trump saw an opening and he took it. By the way, there is nothing inherently wrong with the government hiring consultants; what's inherently wrong is to hire consultants who don't have expertise.
Perhaps Fareed REALLY wants Fox to hire him.
BTW, everybody: it's not 'Dozh' - it's 'Doggy', as in the little dog in every advertisement for the bitcoin brand. That's right, there's now a US government department by this name 🙄
Hate to say it but clearly nobody on the show or in the comments actually listened to the piece in its entirety. His thesis here isn't advocating for neolib austerity measures, it's a segment about Republican "ideology" and concern about debt being a rudderless when they are actually in power.
The size of any government has nothing to do with the efficiency of that government. You can have a small government that is very inefficient and a big government that is very efficient. The number of regulations has nothing to do with government efficiency, either. The "efficiency question" is whether the government enforces those regulations at minimal cost to the taxpayers. Fareed objects to the number of pages of regulation, which suggests that his real agenda is not government efficiency but rather deregulation. Two different things.
Melon is so against subsidies that when California announced that Tesla will not be part of their new initiative he lost his ___^.😂😂
Want to save page count? Single payer healthcare
Unaware of how corrupt is FZ until your post. Thanks.
I thought neoliberalism was liking the Beatles
Everyone knows where the booze is.
The question is, who is willing to cross Capone?