When we have a strong opinion on a topic, we often will offer our perspectives in a deluge on information instead of one point at a time. This doesn’t allow for a conversation, instead it feels like a speech. One point at a time allows the opportunity for the person we are talking to the time to respond.
We look back at a snippet of a conversation when Colin addressed the idea that we should be constantly reassessing to ensure that our intended outcome is being achieved and the we avoid the unintended consequences.
Here, you can find a link to the YouTube video.
When news providers point out their corrections and ensure that every reader will see the correction, then you know that you have found a reputable news source.
You can find a link to the YouTube video.
Do social media companies have a responsibility to control the content that we see? Should they be managing the content that is deemed violent, offensive, demeaning or aggressive by the users? Colin & Brian both agree that in our present state, there is too much expectation placed on the social media companies to police the content we are exposed to. Remember when our feed was filled entirely with our friends and family. In the effort to monetize, the social media companies changed that experience. They use behavioral reinforcement psychology to keep us interacting and ultimately are motivated by profits.
Link to the YouTube video.
If you have watched the videos on Media and Media Bias, you may have heard Brian praise the Washington Post. In this post, Brian castigates them for a misleading headline that distorts the truth.
You can find the YouTube video here.
Links to images that are referenced in the podcast:
When someone does not recognize the validity of our argument, it does not always mean that we have failed, but it can be disappointing. It can feel like we are not being heard. It can feel like our opponent is too close-minded to hear what we are saying. Many people (including us) tend to hold onto our original views and are reluctant to concede points to other people. We should not be surprised or disappointed when someone walks away without having agreed with us. If that is your goal, you will never achieve it. But, if you present an idea skillfully and the other person is receptive to the idea, then it is possible that the idea can settle in to their world view and be incorporated at a later date. We also go back and look at some of the topics that we have discussed in the past such as media bias. At the end we agree to a more proactive approach to our conversations we can be better prepared to respond to each other’s points.
Here is a link to the YouTube video.
This is a very common strategy and one that we often do not notice happening. The response to our point is often related but not relevant and so we respond to their response and allow the conversation to veer away from the point that we made.
Link to YouTube Video.
We begin by discussing what the goal of social security is so that we can agree on our starting point. The original concept of Social Security in America was to create a financial floor for retirees, disabled and survivors. We look at who is funding the social security program and how they are doing so. The negative aspects of social security is that you do not have access to the money, you family doesn’t get the money if you die and you cannot control the investments. The positive aspects are that you cannot outlive the benefits, it will always pay until you die and the payments increase annually to compensate for inflation. We discuss asset allocation and how social security fits in with a retirement portfolio. Do we need social security to protect people from making bad decisions about their retirement? How do we ensure that people can retire comfortably.
A link to the chart that Colin created to show a suggested retirement schedule and the retirement that it would allow.
Link to the YouTube Video of the conversation.
Great News! Poverty levels having been dropping for the past 100 years and the situation is continuing to improve around the world. This is a fact that most people either are unaware of or ignore. That does not mean we should announce that the mission has been accomplished but it does warrant acknowledging.
Another fact is that in the US, poverty has decreased until the mid 1960’s and has not changed much since that time even though we have gradually increased the amount of money that we have used to address the issue. Colin addresses the problem of means tested and we discuss the issue of government assistance when thresholds cause the assistance to suddenly disappear.
We consider how much money people need to pay average bills. How much does government complicit in the problem by restricting free markets such as minimizing housing density and rent control?
Link to the YouTube video.
In recent history, America has taken on the role of the world’s police. Was that wise? Should we try to hold onto that position? What are the alternatives.
In our history of interference, much of the impact has been negative rather than improving situations. Would a laissez-faire approach be better for the people of the world? If we give up the role of the world’s police, should we instead give the United Nations more authority and power to police?
Link to the YouTube video.
