(((My Fellow Americans))) #59: Mortgage Interest Deduction JAM!

WEDNESDAY WEDNESDAY WEDNESDAY! This week on (((My Fellow Americans))), prepare to have your thoughts on mortgage interest deductions ANNIHILATED! Libertarian Party Waffle House Caucus​ proudly presents the Mortgage Interest Deduction JAM! Sam Coppinger and TJ Roberts​ are supposed square off in a no-holds barred, to-the-DEATH Oxford-style debate cage match of epic proportions! Instead, TJ's computer breaks down and Sam and Spike face off in a battle of wits over the future of the liberty movement! WHO WILL CRY FIRST? MAYBE YOU!


About This Episode

WEDNESDAY WEDNESDAY WEDNESDAY!

This week on (((My Fellow Americans))), prepare to have your thoughts on mortgage interest deductions ANNIHILATED!

Libertarian Party Waffle House Caucus​ proudly presents the Mortgage Interest Deduction JAM!

Sam Coppinger and TJ Roberts​ are supposed square off in a no-holds barred, to-the-DEATH Oxford-style debate cage match of epic proportions!

Instead, TJ’s computer breaks down and Sam and Spike face off in a battle of wits over the future of the liberty movement!

WHO WILL CRY FIRST? MAYBE YOU!

Vermin For President

Spike For Vice President

2020 Libertarian Dad Bod Calendar

Intro & Outro Music by JoDavi.


Episode Transcript

DISCLOSURE
This episode transcript is auto-generated and a provided as a service to the hearing impaired. We apologize for any errors or inaccuracies.
FULL TRANSCRIPT TEXT
02:01
[Applause]
02:01
[Music]
02:07
beautiful you’re watching my fellow
02:12
Americans with your host spike yes thank
02:20
you thank you so much for joining me
02:25
thank you keep clapping clap for the
02:30
miracle clap to the ponies clap for this
02:34
campaign how would we know that you
02:35
wanted ponies if you didn’t keep
02:37
clapping welcome to my fellow Americans
02:39
I am literally spike Cohen guys I am so
02:42
happy to have you on this on this
02:44
episode for this very special mortgage
02:46
interest deduction Jam edition of my
02:50
fellow Americans in a few moments we
02:51
will have two men come on and fight in a
02:53
no-holds-barred to the death cage match
02:57
Oxford style debate that no one is
02:59
prepared for least of all myself this is
03:02
a muddied waters media production as
03:03
always check us out on Facebook YouTube
03:05
Instagram anchor Twitter periscope
03:08
iTunes Google Play float check us out on
03:10
I Heart Radio Spotify everywhere
03:13
anywhere that you could think of someone
03:15
being on the Internet
03:16
check us out there because we are there
03:18
when this program is over find us on all
03:21
of these platforms like us on all of
03:23
them follow us on all of them five star
03:25
US or 10 star us on all of them and hit
03:27
that Bell if applicable
03:29
I think only on YouTube and be sure to
03:31
share this video right now the last
03:33
thing that any of us wants is for your
03:36
closest loved ones to miss out on an
03:38
hour-long libertarian broadcast on a
03:41
Wednesday night be sure to give the gift
03:43
of spike Cohen today kids love it this
03:46
program of course is brought to you by
03:49
the libertarian dadbod calendar
03:51
featuring sexy libertarian men like this
03:54
man right here spike Cohen mr. April the
03:56
sweet summer boy featuring many of your
03:58
other of your favorite sexy libertarian
04:00
men be sure to get this calendar day
04:02
it’s only $12 on libertarian dad bought
04:05
calm you of course want to be able to
04:08
hang this from your fridge or wherever
04:12
you wouldn’t hang sexy libertarian men
04:14
from in your home libertarian dad bought
04:16
calm this episode is also brought to
04:18
by the libertarian party Waffle House
04:19
caucus the fastest-growing Waffle House
04:22
related caucus in the Libertarian Party
04:24
check us out we are growing each and
04:27
every day this episode of course is also
04:29
brought to you by the vermin spike 2020
04:32
campaign we are the current frontrunner
04:35
for the Libertarian Party nomination
04:37
because of course we are and with your
04:39
support together we will ride our ponies
04:41
into a zombie powered future with cheesy
04:44
bread and Badgers for all ladies and
04:49
gentlemen thank you so much and of
04:50
course the intro and outro music to this
04:52
in every episode of my fellow Americans
04:54
comes from the amazing and talented mr.
04:55
Joe Davi that is Jay Odie avi check him
04:59
out on Facebook SoundCloud go to Joe
05:01
Davi music Bandcamp calm by his entire
05:05
discography it’s like 25 bucks you’ll
05:07
love it Thank You mr. Joe Dhabi I’d like
05:09
to thank Kroger for this delicious
05:11
purified drinking water that I drink on
05:14
this in every episode
05:14
my fellow Americans blue Wanaka mm-hmm
05:18
you can taste the purity in that it’s
05:21
beautiful thank you so much shout out in
05:22
Teheran Turks is momentum as always guys
05:24
this is of course as a special episode
05:27
tonight is a very special night and by
05:29
that I mean that we’re about to have
05:31
bloodshed on the very streets that our
05:33
children play on to libertarian men are
05:35
about to battle it out in a brutal war
05:37
of attrition that threatens to rend
05:39
asunder everything we hold dear all to
05:41
answer once and for all the question
05:43
that keeps us awake at night our
05:45
mortgage interest deductions a good
05:47
thing or a bad thing who’s going to win
05:50
well that’s up to you to decide at the
05:52
end of this debate comment with the name
05:54
of who you thought one and we will tally
05:56
that and release the results tomorrow
05:58
night so then let’s get started
06:00
right now nope there we go our first
06:06
debater is a freedom fighter based out
06:08
of Kentucky who was involved with the
06:10
election of Savannah Maddox and the
06:12
passage of Constitutional Carry in his
06:14
spare time he enjoys walks on the beach
06:16
and horse racing he is TJ Roberts our
06:20
second debater is a regular on my fellow
06:23
Americans he is the creator and
06:24
administrator of libertarian memes for
06:26
neoliberal teens despite our great
06:29
working relationship he refused to write
06:30
a bio for
06:31
me to make this show prep just slightly
06:33
easier and so here I am now reading what
06:36
I wrote about him he is of course Sam
06:39
Coppinger and finally to bear witness to
06:43
this tragic senseless violence is a
06:46
cartoonishly adorable home for sale will
06:49
someone buy me I sure hope so we will be
06:54
finding out tonight gentlemen thank you
06:57
for joining me thanks for having me
06:59
again
07:00
I am looking forward to it so before we
07:03
get the started what have you guys been
07:05
up to TJ what’s going on with you oh not
07:08
much right now just doing a couple
07:11
things that aren’t exactly ready for
07:14
public release quite yet but otherwise
07:18
just here to defend keep it okay cool
07:26
and Sam what’s how have you been doing
07:27
I just lost audio for TJ’s let so you
07:31
should know that first but other than
07:33
that I’m doing swell I’ve just
07:37
introduced a new era in the evolution of
07:41
the page the libertarian memes for
07:43
neoliberal teens that is more diverse
07:46
content than just the beams themselves
07:48
as sharing articles and other opinions
07:51
and things like that and also more
07:53
importantly I’ve just launched the
07:54
official merch store which does not just
07:57
mean black t-shirts with the neoliberal
08:00
teens written on them in black text its
08:02
designs that I thought I like I’ve spent
08:05
a lot of time on and for people of
08:07
neoliberal or libertarian interests I
08:09
think they’ll be appealing it’s on red
08:11
bubble and there are currently three
08:13
designs with more on the way and they
08:15
can be gotten on stickers or shirts or
08:18
lots of other products very good and
08:20
that’s on your Facebook page yep okay
08:23
cool how see what have you been up to
08:24
well I just been waiting for someone to
08:27
buy me and I sure hope that happens soon
08:29
that is the last time I will be doing
08:31
that by the way thank you good well guys
08:34
TJ I just want to check your audio real
08:35
quick cuz we did lose you for a second
08:37
oh good
08:43
all right so we will we will try to
08:46
figure that out and in that I mean that
08:51
TJ is not on this call all right let me
08:54
try reaching out to him and in the
08:57
meantime I will get started actually
09:00
that’s probably not fair because he was
09:02
not in the call here we go so we’re
09:06
gonna call TJ Roberts so you were saying
09:10
Sam so that the link to that is in the
09:13
is on your page so if people want to buy
09:16
neo-liberal merch they’ll be able to do
09:18
that
09:18
yeah that’s pinned to the top of the
09:22
post it should or the top of the page it
09:23
should be the first post that you see if
09:25
you navigate to the page okay good well
09:29
that is good well folks we’re having a
09:31
bit of an issue in that TJ’s TJ’s
09:39
computer has bricked suppose this means
09:45
I win by default then what we’re about
09:47
to find out I may have to tell the
09:52
opposite side of that hold on we will
10:02
see we may just give your side of this
10:06
and then do this for a future you can
10:10
you could play devil’s advocate yeah his
10:16
computer’s bricked up and frozen so Sam
10:25
Sam you ignorant see no um okay so
10:30
all right let’s here’s how we were gonna
10:31
do this and we’ll have to figure out how
10:34
this was gonna work here was the rules
10:37
that I was going to set forth and what I
10:38
may do is just let you give your side
10:40
and do devil’s advocate I think that
10:42
might work but so here’s we’re gonna do
10:44
it now with our new new and improved
10:46
modified rules to the mortgage interest
10:48
deduction jam that I’m coming with up
10:50
with as I read how we were originally
10:52
gonna do it first each of you are going
10:54
to be given four minutes to give an
10:55
opening statement that means that you
10:57
Sam
10:57
will be giving an opening statement next
11:00
I’m going to ask you I was gonna ask two
11:03
questions it’s kind of pointless now I’m
11:04
gonna ask one question you will each be
11:06
given you will you Sam will be given
11:09
three minutes to answer and if you
11:10
mention my name I will have a minute to
11:12
respond actually I’m gonna talk whenever
11:13
I want to it doesn’t really matter after
11:15
that you will be given a chance to ask
11:18
me a question this really makes no sense
11:20
in this context then I’m going to
11:23
present some questions from followers
11:24
and commenters and you will have up to
11:27
three minutes to answer I’m not really
11:29
timing this at this point you can answer
11:31
as much as you want and for those of you
11:33
watching feel free to leave your
11:34
questions and I will try to get to many
11:35
as many of them as possible and then
11:37
each of you you each of Sam will be
11:41
given three minutes to give your closing
11:43
remarks and then our lovely beautiful
11:45
and brilliant viewing audience who I can
11:47
totally tell have been working out will
11:48
comment whether you have one or two how
11:51
C has won either you were how see how
11:54
she is nota I would have been keeping
11:57
time by using our Muddy Waters media
11:58
brand egg timer but Matt Hicks bought it
12:01
from me eggy we love you and we miss you
12:03
please come home in the meantime I will
12:06
be using a digital timer gentlemen this
12:09
is a libertarian debate and as such we
12:10
will not tolerate any violations of the
12:12
non-aggression principle any such
12:14
violations will be met with whatever
12:15
level of defensive violence is necessary
12:17
up to and including nuclear weapons as
12:20
always if you choose to strip naked
12:22
during this debate I will not be sharing
12:24
any of the ad revenue for you Sam you’re
12:29
gonna be arguing in favor of this
12:30
statement the mortgage interest
12:31
deduction is an act of social
12:33
engineering and distortive economic
12:36
intervention by government
12:38
let me get my timer out here we go uh
12:45
let me see here so opening statements so
12:50
I guess I guess we’re gonna be giving
12:54
maybe I’ll give an opening statement I
12:56
don’t know we will start with whomever
12:58
is able that’s not really fair because I
13:00
know the answers to these I want I just
13:01
want to know if you know the answers to
13:02
these we’re gonna use trivia to figure
13:04
out who is gonna go first but now I just
13:06
want to figure I just want to know if
13:07
you know the answer to this so I want to
13:10
know if you’re able to answer a very
13:12
obscure trivia question you will be
13:13
given 30 seconds to answer good luck the
13:17
question is which US president
13:20
previously served twice as an
13:23
executioner good luck as an executioner
13:27
execution I I do not know presumably
13:36
somebody from either the 18th or early
13:40
19th century so you know no answer
13:48
Warren Harding I have no answer it was
13:52
Grover Cleveland Grover Cleveland yeah
13:57
Grover Cleveland and so okay so we I
14:01
have it I did anticipate that you may
14:03
not know the answer to that and so I
14:06
have a backup question which is and you
14:11
have to get the closest answer and then
14:14
you you win good luck what year did the
14:22
Sultana sink what year did the Sultana
14:24
sink the year of the sinking of the
14:26
Sultana good luck well it’s the Sultana
14:29
it’s a it’s a boat
14:32
you can Lotus you could literally just
14:35
say a number you’re losing audio now oh
14:39
good you could just you could just say a
14:44
number Sam
14:48
1953 okay well that is the closest guess
14:52
that anyone has given so you win it’s
14:55
actually 1865 all right so you were not
15:00
even remotely close but that’s okay um
15:04
all right good so so because we have
15:07
lost TJ this debate is largely pointless
15:11
but you’re already live and so I’m gonna
15:13
milk this for everything it’s worth so
15:16
you will be giving an opening statement
15:18
now you will have four minutes to give
15:20
your statement you will be arguing
15:22
against mortgage interest deductions so
15:26
whenever you are ready go
15:30
needless to say this is not a topic that
15:32
interests most people or that any
15:34
libertarians or virtually anybody else
15:36
for that matter spend any amount of time
15:38
focusing on at all however it does
15:40
actually have some important
15:42
repercussions and as worthy of
15:43
discussion especially by libertarians
15:45
who love to debate about things
15:47
endlessly for no reason anyway this
15:49
actually does have an impact on the
15:50
world and deserves our attention as
15:52
spike said in the opening statement that
15:55
I will be arguing for or at least the
15:57
statement of my position the mortgage
16:00
interest deduction is an act of social
16:03
engineering by government ineffective at
16:05
that but that is the effort nonetheless
16:06
and it also distorts markets raises the
16:09
price of housing is deeply regressive
16:13
and how it effects the poor because
16:18
everything in American society does it
16:20
has racist implications to it and a lot
16:23
more bad stuff so we’ll kind of take
16:25
those one by one first of all the social
16:27
engineering aspect this is no conspiracy
16:29
theory this is pretty openly what the
16:31
point of the mortgage interest deduction
16:32
was in the first place was kind of
16:35
post-war the government wanted to
16:38
encourage homeownership because they
16:40
thought that nuclear family units with
16:43
you know one mother one father
16:45
two and a half kids and a single-family
16:48
suburban home was the most effective and
16:51
structured and positive way for society
16:55
to be organized so they wanted to
16:57
encourage that lifestyle by making it in
17:01
theory easier for people to own homes
17:04
and make it cheaper for them to do so so
17:07
that more people could do it and that
17:09
they could all be a nice little
17:10
government-approved families now on that
17:14
measure as if that’s not disturbing
17:16
enough from a libertarian perspective
17:17
that government is encouraging a
17:20
particular lifestyle and discouraging
17:22
others which that should be you know
17:28
should not like that um it did not work
17:31
anyway if you look at homeownership
17:33
rates of the United States where we do
17:35
have a mortgage interest deduction
17:36
compared to somewhere like Canada or the
17:39
UK or much of other Western Europe the
17:42
homeownership sar virtually identical
17:44
and being able to deduct our mortgage
17:47
interest does not actually an encourage
17:50
homeownership here anymore than it does
17:52
they’re not having it so even if you
17:55
believe that homeownership is good and
17:57
you have no problem with government
17:58
socially engineering the way that we
18:00
should all live our lives it was not
18:02
effective in that regard
18:03
anyway now the economics of it is that
18:07
it actually raises the price of housing
18:09
for everybody because if you are going
18:13
to buy a house and you know that you are
18:16
going to be able to deduct the cost of
18:18
the interest that you are paying on your
18:20
mortgage loan from your taxable income
18:22
you are going to spend more on a house
18:25
than you would otherwise because the
18:26
cost is artificially lowered by
18:28
government picking a winner and loser
18:30
and picking what you should be doing
18:32
with your life and so they are
18:33
encouraging a particular kind of
18:34
behavior which makes it cheaper to
18:36
engage in that behavior however because
18:39
people are more willing to pay a higher
18:40
price because they know that they’ll get
18:42
that deduction cut off later that raises
18:45
the price of housing for everybody and
18:46
that includes for renters as well
18:48
so it raises the price of rent it raises
18:51
the price of housing it raises the price
18:53
of land and it generally distorts the
18:57
market because of a specific action
18:59
government has undertaken it is also
19:01
extremely regressive in its effect it
19:04
benefits almost exclusively the highest
19:07
income earners in the United States
19:09
because that’s who owns homes and you’re
19:12
able to deduct up to $1,000,000 off of
19:15
it I think that has recently been cut by
19:17
the Trump administration one of the very
19:18
very few think good things that he is
19:20
actually done however it still exists
19:25
and it benefits the highest income
19:26
earners at the expense of the poor and
19:28
it’s not just a thing of I hear this
19:32
argument from a lot of like ancap
19:34
leading libertarians off and of well oh
19:36
you know taxation is theft so anytime we
19:38
can reduce the amount of theft that’s
19:40
good and that’s not really how it works
19:41
when you look at it with any more than
19:44
most simplistic view because if you’re
19:47
artificially lowering taxes for one
19:49
group of people that’s essentially
19:50
raising them for everybody else if price
19:52
or if spending is held constant which it
19:55
is going to be just because they’re
19:56
earning less tax income does not mean
19:58
the government is going to spend less
20:00
they’re still spending the same act
20:01
regardless ten seconds you can interject
20:07
if you want I could probably go on for a
20:09
long time but let’s have some
20:11
back-and-forth okay cool so because
20:13
again you are now the only participant a
20:16
lot of how this was gonna be structured
20:19
makes little to no sense so I’m gonna be
20:21
changing it but I’m still having to go
20:23
by how I have it structured so I guess
20:24
this is this is where I was gonna have
20:25
moderator questions I guess is gonna be
20:27
more back and forth discussion slash
20:29
debate as opposed to me asking you a
20:32
question and then asking someone else a
20:33
question
20:33
I am spike Cohen and I am the moderator
20:36
and these are my questions I will be
20:40
asking a series of questions that are
20:43
either critical of your argument or
20:45
examine it further and you have as long
20:48
as you want to I mean at this point
20:49
we’re just talking between the duals um
20:50
so this was my original question I was
20:53
originally originally gonna ask you a
20:54
question that is critical to your
20:56
argument I was gonna ask
20:57
TJ one that was critical to his it
21:00
doesn’t really make sense for me to ask
21:01
the one that’s critical to TJ’s because
21:02
it’s basically what you just said so
21:04
here’s my question for you that’s that’s
21:06
critical to your argument Sam
21:08
neither of us I don’t think want any
21:11
kind of government
21:12
distortion of the market but we also
21:14
don’t live in a vacuum and we don’t live
21:17
in a situation where we can you know
21:18
perfectly pick and choose what kind of
21:20
things happen within government whether
21:23
it’s deductions or additional taxes or
21:25
reductions in taxes we kind of are often
21:27
fighting for what we can get considering
21:29
the fact that we aren’t able to just
21:31
eliminate all taxation and you know
21:33
transition to some kind of voluntary
21:34
payment system or have a perfectly fair
21:37
tax or regulatory system isn’t it good
21:40
to fight for any kind of tax deduction
21:42
that anyone can get with the idea that
21:44
we just always keep pushing for fewer
21:46
and fewer taxes and more and more
21:47
deductions and just getting them
21:48
whenever we can and if not why not
21:51
that’s a very oversimplified view that
21:54
doesn’t take into account what
21:55
libertarianism is actually fighting for
21:57
because it’s not as simplistic as just
22:00
taxes are bad less taxes are good when
22:02
tax when tax subset it is a subsidy if
22:05
libertarians don’t like subsidies and
22:07
some people are dumb and don’t think
22:09
that tax subsidies count as subsidies
22:12
but I assure you that they do when the
22:15
government subsidizes something that
22:16
does distort the market and encourages
22:19
specific kinds of behavior or specific
22:21
industries at the expense of others that
22:23
is government picking winners and losers
22:25
and interjecting itself into the market
22:26
and preventing it from working as
22:28
efficiently as it should and that really
22:29
should be a greater libertarian priority
22:32
than just talks is Obed is ensuring that
22:34
the market can operate as it’s supposed
22:37
to because we know that we ought to all
22:39
respect as libertarians that the market
22:41
is a very efficient effective way of
22:44
achieving the best outcomes for society
22:46
but when government interjects itself
22:48
into at those markets and interferes
22:51
with their natural course and their
22:52
ability to function we get worse
22:54
outcomes for people and really that
22:55
should be what we’re focused on is
22:57
getting the best outcomes for people
23:01
okay fair enough but I guess what I’m
23:04
trying to say is what our time not be
23:07
better spent on just pushing forward so
23:09
for example well actually I’m gonna be
23:12
addressing this in another question so
23:13
we can go back to that you would mention
23:15
that the original purpose and I didn’t
23:18
because I wasn’t actually gonna be
23:19
debating this I didn’t you know event
23:21
any of this kind of stuff but you would
23:23
said that the original purpose of the
23:24
mortgage interest deduction was to try
23:26
to encourage nuclear families to buy
23:27
single-family homes in the post-war
23:29
setting and you know one with the whole
23:31
baby boom going on and everything else
23:32
and that you know that that was a type
23:35
of social engineering and it assuming
23:37
that that’s true you don’t have to be a
23:40
nuclear family or be purchasing a
23:42
single-family home to get a mortgage or
23:45
to purchase a home you could if you’re a
23:49
single non-binary person who chooses to
23:52
you know get a you know get a condo or a
23:56
flat somewhere you can also get a
23:58
mortgage for that or if you wanted to
24:00
you know whatever if you want to be a
24:02
polyamorous you know commune and
24:04
purchase a attractive land now you know
24:07
to you know have your mutual aid society
24:09
in or whatever you could do that as well
24:12
in light of that is this still social
24:15
engineering and if so why it’s still an
24:18
encouraging I mean the things that you
24:21
said are true yeah those people could
24:22
get a mortgage but obviously the the
24:24
vast like 95 plus percent majority of
24:27
people are getting a mortgage to get a
24:28
house for their single family which is
24:30
fine and I want to do that someday when
24:32
I’m older too and that’s fine that’s a
24:34
perfectly valid decision that anybody
24:36
can make I have like I don’t have a
24:38
problem against single-family housing as
24:40
a concept or if anybody wants to buy
24:43
them I have a problem with government
24:45
encouraging one specific kind of
24:47
behavior over others and that behavior
24:49
is home ownership in owning a
24:53
single-family home which is what the
24:55
mortgage interest deduction was intended
24:58
for in the first place even though like
24:59
I said it wasn’t very effective at that
25:02
anyway ok buddy but even still ok so so
25:08
yes the fact is that in a
25:11
heteronormative mostly while I’m you
25:14
didn’t even mention race by na-na-na
25:16
society where the vast majority people
25:17
are the heterosexuals sis had people
25:19
that are looking to create a family and
25:22
that like you even said it’s something
25:24
you want to do is the fact that the
25:26
majority of people is that not
25:29
substantive how is that different from
25:30
saying that for example we shouldn’t
25:32
have an you know Earned Income Tax
25:33
Credit or you know a lower income tax
25:36
because the majority of people that are
25:38
going to be using
25:39
or you know sis had heterosexual people
25:43
who want to create a family basically we
25:48
shouldn’t have have many kinds of
25:50
deductions at all
25:52
like most deductions are a bad thing
25:55
that our social engineering and distort
25:57
markets like if we’re if we are to have
25:59
to have taxes especially like an income
26:02
tax it should be pretty much flat across
26:04
the board not encouraging or
26:05
discouraging any particular kind of
26:07
behavior or subsidizing or punishing any
26:09
particular industry okay um this and and
26:16
you can tell me where I’m wrong I know
26:18
where you’re gonna tell me where I’m
26:19
wrong but in not in application but in
26:24
philosophy this feels in my mind in
26:30
partially how you’ve presented it as
26:32
being similar to the the libertarian
26:35
pro-immigration control argument in that
26:38
it argues for additional government
26:41
intrusion into something in this case
26:43
attacks because of other infringement
26:46
that are already in place such as you
26:48
know zoning or you know other taxing the
26:51
taxes and regulations that are in place
26:53
that harm the poor or you know try to
26:56
create a middle class at the at the at
27:00
the expense of the poor again wouldn’t
27:03
it be better just to push for
27:04
deregulation in the housing market that
27:06
would allow for lower income earners to
27:08
purchase homes so that this wouldn’t be
27:09
as distortive and in favoring of higher
27:11
income earners and and being less
27:13
progressive I’ve been that’s fine yeah
27:16
we should absolutely be calling for D
27:18
zoning at least episode anyway but
27:20
that’s not really relevant to my
27:22
position on this issue it’s that it is a
27:25
market distort of tax not just like the
27:28
zoning thing really doesn’t have
27:30
anything to do with it I’m not really
27:31
sure where you got that from that again
27:33
it they if you look at the economics of
27:36
it if you were incentivizing and
27:38
subsidizing it the car the affordability
27:42
of housing it by allowing people like so
27:45
if you go and do with something else if
27:49
you go skydiving every week going
27:51
skydiving trips of
27:53
the government doesn’t subsidize that
27:54
behavior but it does subsidize
27:56
homeownership but that’s just a
27:58
particular you know behavior that our
28:00
choice that some people make a
28:02
government subsidizes it by making the
28:03
price artificially cheaper in not
28:07
allowing the supply and demand you know
28:09
the market system to function properly
28:12
it raises the price of housing because
28:14
government is artificially lowering the
28:16
cost of the interest on the mortgage
28:20
loans and another reason that that’s a
28:22
big problem economically is if you know
28:24
the subsidy isn’t enough and interfering
28:27
in the market is that it encourages very
28:29
financially risky behavior because it
28:32
encourages people to take out as large
28:34
of a loan as they can and basically put
28:37
down as little as they can or there’s
28:41
there’s no we should if anything if
28:44
government was to subsidize a particular
28:46
kind of behavior or choice which should
28:48
not do but if it was going to it should
28:50
be done in a way to subsidize putting
28:53
the maximum amount down that people will
28:55
be willing to do so they’ll be less
28:58
likely to default on their loans and
29:00
cause a housing crash like we saw in
29:01
2008 but what the mortgage interest
29:04
deduction does is it encourage people to
29:06
take out a larger mortgage loan because
29:09
they know that they won’t have to pay
29:10
the interest on that or you know that
29:14
the interest payment will be subsidized
29:16
on it anyway right okay so so your
29:20
argument is essentially across the board
29:22
that there shouldn’t be these different
29:24
carve outs for certain type of behaviors
29:26
that it should essentially just be
29:28
whatever the taxes should be kind of a
29:30
flat across-the-board thing and that it
29:32
shouldn’t be trying to pick winners and
29:34
losers in terms of what you know what
29:37
what kind of economic behaviors or
29:41
actions are being taken
29:43
you know incentivizing them or D
29:44
incentivizing them yeah exactly that’s a
29:47
very standard libertarian point of view
29:49
that government should not be in the
29:51
business of encouraging or discouraging
29:52
particular behaviors so as long as they
29:55
don’t harm anybody else okay fair enough
29:58
so in the interest of beek for two
30:01
reasons first of all in the interest
30:02
that you that of not company
30:06
the person that was prepared to debate
30:08
this their computer pricked and because
30:11
I didn’t really have time to really sink
30:13
into debating what I don’t necessarily
30:16
disagree with and haven’t had time to
30:18
really vet that out in the interest of
30:20
that I think I’m going to agree with you
30:23
to the extent that the government
30:25
shouldn’t be distorting things and if we
30:27
are able to reschedule this debate then
30:29
we can do that I’m going to let you do
30:31
your well actually no so we have some
30:36
well I’ll let you do your closing
30:38
remarks cuz the rest of the follower
30:40
questions and the thing I want to talk
30:42
to you about doesn’t have anything to do
30:43
with this I’ll let you give your closing
30:44
remarks you have I mean are there any
30:46
audience questions about this issue or
30:49
not about this so far no I do have some
30:54
false anybody watching at all oh yeah
30:56
yeah no we have people watching and I
30:57
definitely have some follower questions
30:59
but none of them are about this so so
31:03
yeah so if you want that’s why I was
31:04
saying if you want to just give your
31:05
closing remarks on this and then we’ll
31:07
get to the other stuff and we can we can
31:09
do that so whenever you are ready you
31:13
can give your you can give your closing
31:17
statement I mean you know there are a
31:19
few more things to mention of why them
31:20
we should oppose the mortgage interest
31:22
deduction anyway I may have gone through
31:24
how it is social engineering how it was
31:26
ineffective social engineering if you do
31:28
happen to agree with that the purpose
31:29
was good it didn’t work in any way it
31:31
raises the price for everybody else it
31:33
raises rent costs which is most people’s
31:35
largest expense so you’re taking money
31:37
right out of people’s wallets because it
31:39
subsidizes one behavior and it
31:42
inherently punishes others because the
31:44
spending of government will remain the
31:46
same and they’re since they’re losing
31:48
all of this tax revenue from a
31:50
particular group of people they’re just
31:51
getting it from either others or adding
31:54
it on to the debt which is just taxing
31:55
future generations
31:56
it is extremely regressive because this
31:59
is a particular benefit the only people
32:00
in the higher income brackets are able
32:02
to take advantage of while they’re
32:04
renting class does not get to have this
32:07
advantage they must pay the full price
32:09
for their housing which as I said
32:11
earlier is more expensive because of
32:13
this it is also like I said this is
32:16
gonna sound hysterical because everybody
32:19
thinks that
32:20
you know bring race into anything is
32:21
hysterical but it’s it is just a factual
32:24
reality in America that racism infects
32:27
almost every sector of society that
32:30
deeply includes home ownership if you
32:32
look at home ownership rates between
32:34
white or maybe Asian families and black
32:37
or Latino families the there’s a huge
32:40
disparity in that and they’re literally
32:43
you could do a 12-part lecture series on
32:45
why that is a lot of it has to do with
32:48
you know Jim Crow laws and redlining and
32:50
all things like that but the fact of the
32:52
matter is that black homeownership is
32:55
tremendously lower so it you could
32:57
pretty much almost say that this is just
32:59
a subsidy for white people because
33:01
that’s how home ownership crossed you
33:04
know cuts across society is it is
33:06
overwhelmingly white people and maybe
33:09
Asian people who owned homes not black
33:11
people or Latino people so that’s you
33:14
know also a reason that we should oppose
33:15
it and like I said it encourages very
33:18
bad fiscal behavior that threatens the
33:20
entire economy that we saw this in the
33:22
2008 housing bubble crash that was the
33:25
greatest recession scene since the Great
33:27
Depression and this encourages that to
33:29
happen again by you know incentivizing
33:32
people to take out a larger loan than
33:34
they can really afford because the cost
33:35
of it is artificially lowered by a
33:37
government subsidy it you know
33:40
discourages people from doing the
33:41
responsible thing and saving up a larger
33:43
down payment it you know you could put
33:45
$5,000 down and get a $400,000 house and
33:50
have a mortgage payment and you’ll be
33:51
okay with that because oh you know buddy
33:53
you know the interest on it I can deduct
33:56
from my taxable income so why shouldn’t
33:58
I do that then when you know the payment
34:02
is so high if you lose your job or
34:04
something like that or you know anything
34:06
else unexpected happens and you can’t
34:07
make that payment that gives you no
34:10
significant chance to default on that
34:12
loan and if people do that and mass that
34:14
creates you know a very large problem
34:16
for the American economy as we saw
34:19
another bad thing about is this is I
34:22
guess more related to your zoning issue
34:24
kind of that you brought up it’s that
34:27
you know just it again I have no problem
34:30
with single-family home ownership and I
34:31
plan to be one so I don’t want to
34:33
I’m I don’t want to appear hypocritical
34:35
on this or anything but just still
34:37
government government encouraging
34:40
single-family ownership is not good it
34:43
should just if you want to do it on a
34:45
free marketplace with all costs that
34:47
would be naturally occurring in a free
34:49
marketplace that’s fine but when you’re
34:53
encouraging single-family ownership that
34:54
encourages you know the kind of thing
34:56
that could leads to urban sprawl which
34:59
creates worse commuter times and more
35:01
carbon pollution and less efficient use
35:04
of land and more expensive rents and all
35:08
of the rest of it and that’s just
35:10
there’s a huge ripple effect from this
35:13
issue that does not sound very
35:14
interesting or exciting or sexy but it
35:17
really does have quite an impact on
35:18
society and there are numerous reasons
35:21
that libertarians should oppose it I’m
35:23
sure that there are a lot of people you
35:24
could get the argument from better than
35:26
me I didn’t prepare at all for this and
35:28
I’m just you know kind of shooting from
35:30
the hip and probably don’t sound very
35:32
well articulate articulated right now
35:34
but you had two weeks yeah but I didn’t
35:39
prepare for it well next time you should
35:43
yeah two weeks I mean at least your
35:44
computer works so for that reason alone
35:46
with the reason so alright I guess the
35:48
only thing I would add I’m I’m sure this
35:50
is a rebuttal and I’m not sure that you
35:52
would even disagree with this if you
35:54
were going to advocate for getting rid
35:56
of the mortgage interest deduction
35:58
I would recommend coupling it with what
36:01
you would put tax reduction or deduction
36:05
or whatever you would replace it with
36:06
being something that’s more across the
36:09
board and I guess for lack of a better
36:10
word egalitarian as opposed to just
36:12
telling a bunch of homeowners you don’t
36:14
get to have your deduction anymore
36:16
instead saying everyone would be able to
36:19
get either this reduction or deduction
36:22
or credit or whatever
36:23
I made an enormity of utopian sense I I
36:27
don’t even support an income tax at all
36:29
I think it’ll be abolished in its
36:31
entirety in a very long run kind of a
36:34
sense but in the short run there should
36:36
not be any you know particular behavior
36:38
of the government is encouraging or
36:39
discouraging however Wyatt it cuts
36:42
across the society whether it’s
36:43
something that 90% of people do they
36:45
still should not be encouraging or just
36:47
edging that particular behavior because
36:49
it still has all of the negative you
36:51
know market impacting effects that I’ve
36:53
mentioned here and everything so it’s
36:55
it’s it I don’t want to replace one bad
36:59
policy with another bad policy that just
37:01
happens to help more people than it
37:03
currently does we just shouldn’t have
37:05
things like this special cut out special
37:08
carve outs that help particular
37:10
industries and hurt other particular
37:11
industries to encourage specific
37:13
behaviors and discourage others and
37:15
distort the markets in the process we
37:16
just should not have anything like that
37:18
if we are going to you know want to
37:21
lower people’s taxes which I do we
37:23
should be lowering taxes after we lower
37:25
spending because lowering taxes without
37:27
lowering spending is just increasing
37:29
taxes on future generations okay fair
37:33
enough
37:34
so okay cool so guys you now get to
37:39
decide who you thought won this debate
37:42
do you think it was do you think that
37:44
Sam won this debate do you think that TJ
37:47
who whose computer bricked very early do
37:51
you think he won this debate by not
37:52
being here or do you think house he won
37:55
maybe thought house e1 I don’t know um
37:57
so now that we’ve moved on before we go
38:01
to the follower follower questions as
38:05
you may or may not know Sam and my
38:08
lovely followers we had a very
38:11
interesting thing happen earlier today
38:12
where your very own spike Cohen was on a
38:17
local news program and because we have
38:20
the time for it I’m gonna go ahead and
38:23
show that now and I want to get your
38:27
thoughts on this on this program to eat
38:30
Sam so I’m gonna put this on right Oh
38:34
goes well this man could be on the
38:36
ballot November yeah can you hear that
38:38
no I can see it but they tell you
38:46
they’re riding ponies into a zombie
38:48
power to future but in okay all right so
38:51
we’re gonna start that over again this
38:52
is the this is my this is my thing and
38:57
I’m gonna get your thoughts on this
39:00
nope all goes well this man could be on
39:03
the ballot in November
39:04
yeah abc15 dick pepid onus is live with
39:06
the studio to show us I still can’t hear
39:08
it you can’t hear it he’s using to
39:11
deliver his message they tell you
39:13
they’re riding ponies into a zombie
39:15
powered future but an interview in spike
39:17
Cohen’s living room has given them
39:18
nothing all had turned its volume up
39:21
loud and still nothing all goes well
39:30
this man could be on the ballot in
39:31
November
39:32
yeah ABC 15 to dick pepper doughnuts is
39:34
live at the studio did you hear now the
39:36
unconventional strategy he’s using to
39:38
deliver his message they tell you about
39:41
riding ponies into a zombie power to
39:44
future but an interview in spike Cohen’s
39:45
living room has given them a serious
39:47
political platform are you recording I
39:51
you’re not hearing this
39:52
no well that’s alright Doug crawl says
39:59
house he won the debate but spike won
40:01
our hearts so that’s one for house he
40:03
but we’ll see who else gets it so I’m
40:06
gonna go through some of these other
40:07
questions that came in from followers
40:11
number one of course whenever I have any
40:16
question follower question session this
40:19
comes in Sam
40:22
Waffle House or I haunt I live in the
40:26
Pacific Northwest and I’ve never been to
40:27
a Waffle House so that’s the wrong
40:31
answer
40:32
the answer is Waffle House um whoa I’ll
40:35
give it to Waffle House anyway though
40:37
because Waffle House seems like it has
40:39
more kind of unique cultural value than
40:41
IHOP like Waffle House has like a
40:44
distinct regional identity to it kind of
40:46
a culture about i UPS literally just
40:48
like a chain restaurant so I’ll give it
40:51
to Waffle House anyway okay good that’s
40:53
the right answer
40:54
and then here was one that a follower
40:56
asked are you voting for spike for
40:59
vice-president and why not ouch
41:02
absolutely not no even if I get the
41:05
knowledge do you will you come with up
41:08
as a package with vermin don’t you I
41:11
mean it it just I I don’t know how this
41:13
is being
41:14
they just said are you voting for spike
41:15
as vice president so I guess you can
41:18
take that however you want to a man if
41:19
it’s a literal question I’m not probably
41:21
going to be there to vote anyway so this
41:24
would just have to be it kind of in
41:26
spirit thing and I who else is even
41:28
running for vice president here the only
41:30
candidate I know of so it was me and
41:33
John Phillips jr. and Jeff wood they
41:36
drummed out right yeah john phillips and
41:38
kim roth dropped out and kim endorsed me
41:40
and john didn’t endorse anyone because
41:42
he’s an LNC member and didn’t want to be
41:44
seen as showing favoritism so it’s me
41:48
and Jeff wood I don’t know who he is to
41:52
see like a miser sky or is he like a
41:54
Tsar war kind of guy he is
41:56
he currently has the nomination from the
41:59
socialist caucus and the audacious
42:01
caucus
42:02
no thank you so then you support me
42:06
among those traces I support oh yeah so
42:09
would you vote for me in the general if
42:11
I get the nomination like the general
42:15
election against the Democrats and
42:17
Republicans yes
42:19
well again are you a package with vermin
42:22
because I’m not voting for Herman so you
42:25
wouldn’t vote for vermin over Donald
42:27
Trump and say Joe Biden no okay so
42:33
assuming you’re someone you would want
42:36
as the president pick gets the
42:40
nomination and I get the VP pick would
42:45
you vote for me I would like this is the
42:49
answer that you want to hear and it’s
42:50
not fun for your audience but I would
42:52
honestly hope that in the case that we
42:53
actually got just on Amash to run for
42:57
president anyone our nomination which he
42:59
obviously would I would hope that you
43:01
would have the decency to step aside and
43:03
have him kind of pick somebody that he
43:05
wants us as running mate because I think
43:06
that you know that you would harm the
43:08
ticket by not having an experience of
43:10
being a goofball you’re a fun podcast
43:12
host but you are not qualified to be a
43:15
vice presidential candidate especially
43:17
next to somebody like Justin Amash you
43:19
heard it here folks
43:20
that is a full-on support for the vermin
43:22
spike 2020 ticket from none other than
43:24
Sam Coppinger of libertarian memes for
43:27
Neil
43:27
Merl teens so the next follower question
43:31
was bound to be a real hootenanny but
43:34
now TJ’s not here but I’ll go ahead and
43:36
get your thoughts on it and and then I
43:39
guess we can because I think that was Oh
43:44
Steven Messina you have a new fan with
43:47
Steven Messina who says that you effing
43:50
rule and thank you have clearly not been
43:55
to a Waffle House so let’s see here um
43:59
so yeah so here’s the last question
44:02
which I’m just gonna let you answer it
44:04
because again this was gonna be a big
44:05
debate question but now it’s not because
44:07
it’s just you what are your thoughts on
44:09
the Mises caucus negative like I feel
44:17
like most of the people who are watching
44:19
probably already know me and probably
44:21
already know my opinions of the is it me
44:23
sisters of Isis is it Mises so my
44:26
understanding is that it’s Mises I don’t
44:30
like that that sounds worse that was
44:35
named was said is they with Ludwig von
44:37
Mises so you hate it more because it’s
44:40
Mises and not Mises that’s it’s less
44:44
satisfying I don’t like the sound of
44:47
Mesa Selleck mices better okay we’ll say
44:49
Mises I do not like the Beezus caucus
44:52
even though on actual policy I probably
44:55
agree with them at least 90% but there’s
44:58
a lot more to politics than just sheer
45:01
policy positions and I have never really
45:04
gotten a clear answer from anybody in
45:06
the Mises caucus either the ones who I
45:07
think are the the less malicious members
45:10
of it of what exactly its purpose is
45:13
supposed to be because the actual policy
45:15
positions of it are already shared by
45:17
the libertarian party itself we it’s
45:19
already a very very radical capitalist
45:22
party a very you know radical
45:25
libertarian party and it shares
45:29
virtually the exact same platform as the
45:31
caucus does so that leaves the only
45:33
differentiating factor being their kind
45:36
of branding and strategy which is very
45:39
clearly just to appeal
45:41
two disaffected paleo conservatives and
45:44
they outright that’s just literally the
45:45
only logical purpose of what it is for
45:48
that’s not you know a slander it’s it’s
45:50
logically the only thing that it is
45:53
there to accomplish because anything
45:55
else that it it could be distinguished
45:59
by is already shared by the party itself
46:01
that is the only differentiating factor
46:02
between the Libertarian Party and the
46:04
Mises caucus is that the Mises caucus
46:07
uses branding that is appealing to the
46:10
all right so then the fact that it’s
46:14
pronounced Mises doesn’t inspire you to
46:17
say that you love me says two pieces now
46:21
it doesn’t that’s I have heard that
46:25
actual Mises himself is not nearly as
46:29
bad as the caucus is and that the caucus
46:31
really you know has done him dirty by
46:33
dragging his name through the mud Bob of
46:35
the caucus and the Institute combined
46:37
have really disgraced his legacy but Sam
46:44
I know you’re young but the thing is
46:46
you’re gonna learn soon that you have to
46:49
find joy in things and I think you
46:51
missed out on a real opportunity with
46:53
rhyming there I’m not gonna lie I just
46:56
think I just think your politics isn’t
46:59
supposed to be about fun well I disagree
47:02
and I think that’s why I’m currently the
47:04
front because that’s yeah because you’re
47:08
you are the front-runner because all of
47:10
the other white boys in the Libertarian
47:13
Party who don’t actually care about
47:15
politics and don’t aren’t affected by
47:17
any kind of a policy one way or another
47:18
don’t have anything to lose by just
47:21
voting for who they think is fun rather
47:23
than who will actually make an impact on
47:25
their lives kids and cages on the border
47:27
don’t have that that luxury okay but
47:31
okay so now we’re actually having a
47:33
debate because I haven’t just been going
47:37
and having fun with white boys although
47:39
that is largely what these conventions
47:41
are about but I will say that I mean
47:43
I’ve been going and doing tours in
47:45
marginalized communities where I don’t
47:47
do the fun stick and talk with them
47:49
about the things that are affecting them
47:51
and it’s been very well received so I
47:53
mean I go in with a humorous attitude
47:55
about it but I don’t go in and talk
47:57
about cheesy butter or Badgers or
47:59
anything like that
48:00
and it’s been very well received because
48:02
I’m going there and demonstrating an
48:04
empathy that no other party or candidate
48:06
has shown in their in their community
48:08
that the other ones are afraid to go
48:09
there so I would dispute that I think
48:13
that yeah well that’s that part that
48:15
part’s great but why do you do the
48:16
Badgers and cheesy bread the rest of the
48:18
time because that just undermines
48:21
everything that you’re doing by reaching
48:22
out to these marginalized communities
48:24
because when you do the Badger Badgers
48:26
and cheesy bread that just ensures that
48:27
you won’t actually accomplish any of the
48:29
changes that you’re asking these people
48:31
you know that they want that they can
48:35
tell you what you want you could learn
48:36
what they want you can you know sit down
48:38
with them and have a long discussion
48:39
about what would help them but you’re
48:41
not going to accomplish any of that if
48:42
you’re talking about Badgers and cheesy
48:44
bread to the general public but you say
48:46
that and yet I’m getting more engagement
48:48
than any other candidate running and and
48:51
and in the way the limit in the Waco
48:54
that’s in the workers John Phillips
48:55
dropping out no one else stepped in
48:57
because apparently I’ve become the
49:00
consensus candidate and I’m as I will
49:01
say I am as shocked as anyone else that
49:05
I’ve become the consensus candidate
49:07
apparently but I have and to say
49:11
simultaneously oh well it’s just because
49:14
people are enjoying that and also well
49:16
it’s not gonna get any results it’s
49:18
gotten results so if I’m able to for the
49:21
people that sense you say it hasn’t put
49:24
any results within the Libertarian Party
49:27
primary system are absolutely
49:30
meaninglessly and significant it’s even
49:34
among libertarians there’s maybe like 1%
49:37
participating in any way formal or
49:40
informal in this process and that that’s
49:43
among libertarians who themselves are a
49:45
statistically insignificant portion of
49:47
the general public what happens within
49:49
the libertarian party has literally no
49:52
impact or representation or significance
49:55
whatsoever of the general public in it
49:58
so then in that occasion why or results
50:00
among candidates or policy positions or
50:02
anything nothing that libertarians do
50:04
within the party has any relevance to
50:07
the general public
50:08
within the party in and of itself no but
50:10
what assuming if I got the nomination
50:12
then I would actually have an
50:14
opportunity to reach out to people and
50:15
if you’re if you’re talking about you
50:17
know if your response to that because
50:18
you made some valid points there but if
50:20
then if your response is that we need to
50:22
nominate someone who is currently in
50:24
trouble posit being able to possibly get
50:26
reelected in his own home district how
50:28
is that somehow a substantive positive
50:31
change of someone who in your I guess I
50:34
assume in your mind is someone that’s
50:36
going to be making this this amazing
50:38
positive change if the fact that just in
50:40
a mash would not suck up to trump is
50:43
enough for him to not be able to
50:44
possibly get reelected in his own
50:46
district what would make you think that
50:48
he would be any more able to effect
50:53
positive change on a cultural or
50:54
societal level than someone like averman
50:56
supreme who already is a household name
50:58
among many people for what i could dare
51:02
guarantee you that more people know
51:03
justin amash than firmance supreme
51:05
that’s that’s actually factually
51:07
incorrect I mean there’s multiple layer
51:09
I believe you it’s it’s not even close
51:12
actually I mean that they did the
51:14
recognition of of Justin um between
51:16
Justin Amash and vermin supreme within
51:18
political circles there’s probably a
51:20
slight number that know him better
51:21
within general societal circles it’s not
51:24
even close I mean we we blame there is
51:25
no who Amash is they do not know who
51:27
Furman supreme is Hara nobody knows who
51:31
Furman supreme is it’ll be one hundred
51:33
thirty votes well you’re saying nobody
51:36
under thirty votes and that’s certainly
51:37
not true but everyone on the
51:39
exaggeration but the proportion of
51:42
people under 30 who vote is dramatically
51:45
lower than the proportion of people over
51:47
30 who voted is that more statistically
51:49
acceptable for you it is but how much of
51:52
that is because the options that they’re
51:53
being given our garbage to them and that
51:56
they’re they see this people don’t care
51:58
and that’s the same kind of people who
52:00
support somebody like vermin supreme is
52:02
the people who don’t care if they don’t
52:05
rely to see the fur hair they don’t
52:06
carry important to lose they don’t they
52:08
don’t stand a they’re not engaged and
52:10
they just think it’s funny they don’t
52:11
know anything about politics they
52:13
probably this is just what you want
52:17
that’s one or the other
52:18
either the people who like firm and
52:20
supreme are completely unengaged and
52:21
have nothing to do
52:22
or the people who support vermin supreme
52:24
are the hyper engaged who are involved
52:26
in the Libertarian Party at a level that
52:29
the vast majority of libertarians aren’t
52:30
which is it that he’s the hyper engaged
52:33
like him or the unengaged like him
52:36
the people who are engaged in the
52:38
Libertarian Party are not engaged in
52:42
national politics generally there’s a
52:45
very small crossover there the
52:47
Libertarian Party is mostly a social
52:49
club of people who would do not feel
52:51
that they belong in either party and
52:53
that even includes me if I know
52:55
everybody thinks that I’m an
52:56
establishment goon obviously there’s a
52:58
reason that I’m in with this party and
52:59
not the other two and that’s because I
53:01
do not feel that I belong in either of
53:03
them and that’s but that’s who
53:05
libertarians are as people who don’t
53:07
feel that they belong in the amount the
53:10
proportion of people in the Libertarian
53:12
Party who even engaged in national
53:14
politics outside of the Libertarian
53:16
Party is it not very significant so you
53:20
could be hyper engaged in the party and
53:22
still disengaged from national politics
53:25
most of your supporters right now
53:27
probably won’t even vote you’re you’re
53:29
that’s patently false but the the the
53:33
the the people that are making up the
53:35
Libertarian Party are hyper engaged they
53:38
are largely ineffective because the
53:40
party is so small but they represent a
53:43
group of people they stat skew younger
53:46
and skew more cerebral and skew more you
53:49
know disaffected by that by the
53:51
disaffected and and disengaged with the
53:54
overall system because they see it as a
53:56
joke there is a whole demographic of
53:59
people that could get us to five percent
54:01
or even ten percent based just on people
54:03
who innately know that the system is a
54:06
joke and don’t participate in it because
54:07
of that and have no real idea that
54:09
there’s anything like a libertarian
54:11
party that has any viable chance if you
54:13
give them something that that you know
54:16
if you give something that speaks to
54:17
them on an innate level like for example
54:19
this whole thing is a joke so we’re
54:21
gonna give you the biggest clown and
54:22
we’re the walls so now that you’ve got
54:24
we’ve got your attention we’re going to
54:25
talk to you about what libertarianism is
54:27
that has a much better chance than
54:29
saying here is yet another retired
54:31
Republican who has no shot and we all
54:33
know it and he’s going to take one last
54:35
tilt that the old
54:36
before retiring because you know he no
54:38
longer represents what Republicans you
54:41
know currently believe and so he’s gonna
54:43
use our party as a you know a step down
54:45
to retirement and why would that be if
54:48
if you’re saying if you’re surrendering
54:51
that you know we’re gonna be ineffectual
54:52
not be able to make any real change then
54:54
why not go for you know a Hail Mary
54:56
dress not surrendering that you were the
54:59
one surrendering that I am not
55:01
surrendering that that’s why I want to
55:03
run correct qualified credible
55:05
candidates who actually could if they
55:08
were elected do the job when people the
55:10
general public when they beget over the
55:12
hinges somebody is not qualified to do
55:14
the job they’re not going to vote for
55:15
them to do that job this group of
55:18
disaffected 21 year olds who you just
55:20
want to vote because because you’re fun
55:22
or because oh there’s politics as a joke
55:25
that’s not going to ever ever ever win
55:29
an election literally never those people
55:31
are not going to vote anyway they don’t
55:33
vote now they’re not going to vote
55:35
anyway they’re not significant we
55:36
shouldn’t even be concerned about them
55:38
I’m not interested in even trying to
55:40
appeal to those kinds of people you’re
55:42
talking about 46% of vote you of all
55:45
people who are saying that you know
55:46
there’s all this intrusion in the market
55:49
by government that is marginalizing
55:51
people for you know the benefit of a
55:54
twin dling group of privileged people
55:56
are saying that we should completely
55:58
ignore the 40 percent 46 percent of
56:00
eligible voters not to mention a large
56:02
percentage of the the 54 percent who do
56:05
vote who are just voting because they’re
56:06
not even aware that there’s a viable
56:07
alternative that we should just
56:09
completely ignore them in favor of doing
56:11
the strategy that for the last 50 almost
56:14
50 years has not gotten a single
56:16
statewide or federal victory for the
56:19
Libertarian Party which is we’re gonna
56:21
follow Bert arias already has some
56:22
networking strategy that I want every
56:32
other one has done before that how was
56:33
Justin Amash gonna be a massive
56:35
departure from a Gary Johnson in in what
56:38
way is is yet another lizardy Lena
56:40
Republican gonna be an easy one and I
56:42
reject the notion that Gary Johnson was
56:45
a failure he was absolutely blew out of
56:47
the water our approval
56:49
vote totals he was by a immense margin
56:52
there was a successful candidate at
56:53
libertarian history and which is similar
56:56
just at a Bosch can can piggyback on
56:59
that because I love Gary but we all know
57:02
that he was goofy and he didn’t speak
57:04
well and he came across as uninformed
57:07
whether that was true or not
57:09
I think he’s a very smart person but he
57:11
was very very poor at communicating that
57:14
whereas Justin Amash did not he’s
57:15
extremely well-spoken he doesn’t act
57:18
goofy yet nobody could say that he’s
57:20
unqualified unknowledgeable you know
57:24
non-credible he’s extremely well-versed
57:29
intellectual politician whoever they’re
57:34
never gonna hear about him how would a
57:35
Gary John so you just contradicted
57:37
yourself you said that we needed serious
57:39
candidates and the proof of that is Gary
57:41
Johnson who had blew out as you said
57:42
previous vote records but he blew it out
57:45
being as you called him a goofy person
57:47
who didn’t speak well so which is it we
57:49
need we we need a goofy person who
57:51
doesn’t speak oh he was serious and that
57:54
he had elected experience he was a
57:56
two-term governor as was weld and he had
57:59
credible elected experience his
58:02
personality was unfortunately a weakness
58:05
he’s a great person that honestly that
58:07
he is such a great person as part of why
58:09
he was not more successful because you
58:11
have to be kind of a jerk to succeed in
58:14
politics but it’s you can’t say you
58:17
can’t have that both way because it
58:18
literally is both ways he was a serious
58:21
candidate in that he had elected
58:23
experience but he was not as serious as
58:25
he could have been because he isn’t a
58:26
good speaker and acts like a goofball he
58:28
is he got elected as a pothead e.type
58:34
goofball so I mean that that’s sort of I
58:37
mean we can do this all day long and I’m
58:39
okay with agreeing to disagree with you
58:40
but I lovingly encourage you Sam to
58:43
examine some of your precepts here in
58:45
terms of what is considered respectable
58:47
I don’t think respectable is this you
58:50
know a eight 20th century formal
58:53
business aesthetic combined with a a
58:56
sober August anchormen stone if it was
59:00
then we wouldn’t have a bright orange
59:02
president who
59:03
you said a little growl and gold plates
59:05
everyone okay let’s let’s address that
59:07
but if you are in one of the two major
59:10
parties you can afford to deviate from
59:13
that kind of norm you can you know AOC
59:16
is nothing like that she’s very loud and
59:18
outspoken and post memes on the internet
59:21
and she has all this grassroots support
59:22
and she you know class back get people
59:25
on Twitter all the time and she could do
59:26
that or Trump eat it I don’t need to
59:29
even say anything about Trump they are
59:31
both in the two major parties they
59:33
already have a base of 40 million
59:35
supporters most of whom are going to
59:38
vote for literally anybody of their
59:40
party who is on the ballot we do not
59:42
have that luxury the only way that we
59:44
can appeal to people is by showing them
59:47
that we are actually a credible third
59:48
option and so that’s the literally the
59:51
most important possible thing that we
59:54
can do is show that we are a valid
59:57
credible qualified legitimate third
60:00
option that is the absolute most
60:03
important thing that the party could
60:05
possibly do is portray us as a valid
60:08
credible option and that means a comical
60:12
level of seriousness and credibility and
60:17
well-spoken as’ and it’s not like when a
60:21
republican it does something you know
60:24
funny and silly that’s like oh that’s
60:26
fun because that’s not what you expect
60:28
from them but that is what people expect
60:30
from us and it’s not it’s not fun to see
60:32
people that you think are goofy idiots
60:34
acting like goofy idiots it’s fun to see
60:37
people who are normally well-spoken and
60:39
serious and you know all put together at
60:42
everything it’s fun to see those people
60:44
act like goofy idiots when it’s just the
60:47
goofy idiot party at nobody is impressed
60:49
by us acting like goofy idiots no one’s
60:51
impressed by us at all because they
60:53
don’t know we exist I I will I will
60:57
leave you with that and I will also say
61:00
that I think when when 3.25% is our
61:04
blowout
61:05
I think after 50 years at this point the
61:08
Republicans as a as a previous third
61:10
party was already a dominant party and I
61:12
think we can we can possibly maybe
61:14
deviate from the script I will
61:16
excu this as your last question when
61:18
vermin and I do get the nomination what
61:20
are you going to name your pony not even
61:25
gonna answer that but once again it you
61:27
say deviate from the script we have
61:29
never run the script that I want to run
61:32
you keep acting like I want a
61:33
continuation of the status quo of the
61:35
Libertarian Party literally it never
61:37
before somewhat 2012 and 2016 have they
61:42
done anything like what I would want us
61:44
to do what okay we’re gonna do something
61:48
radically different that Sam wants which
61:50
is to find a retired Republican who
61:52
can’t win their seat back because they
61:54
went against the Republican orthodoxy
61:57
we’re gonna name your pony kipper
62:01
because when people don’t name their
62:02
pony we give them names that they
62:04
otherwise wouldn’t want so guys thanks
62:07
again for tuning in for this episode of
62:08
the mortgage interest deduction jam we
62:11
are sorry that it didn’t actually happen
62:13
and we hope that next time we’re gonna
62:15
we’re gonna get TJ a new iPad or
62:18
something to try to get it to work right
62:19
um
62:21
so Sam I’m gonna give you one last
62:23
chance to say you’re gonna vote for me
62:27
no I’m gonna give you one last chance to
62:28
give whatever final thoughts you have on
62:30
whatever you want to talk about plug
62:32
whatever you want for your show and then
62:34
we are going to we’re going to sign out
62:36
Sam I give you the floor by merch
62:41
mortgage interest deduction is bad we
62:44
need to run credible candidates that’s
62:46
the the gist of what’s happened here
62:50
agree possibly wrong Sam thanks again
62:54
for tuning in you’re always an absolute
62:55
pleasure to have on stick around I’m
62:57
going to talk with you during the intro
62:58
guys thanks again for tuning in for this
63:00
absolutely blessed mess of an episode
63:04
actually it went well it was really the
63:07
only problem was that TJ’s things
63:09
stopped working
63:10
but yeah thanks for tuning in tonight
63:13
and now it’s up to you again to decide
63:15
who won this mortgage interest deduction
63:17
jam was it how’s he the house was it Sam
63:22
Coppinger who was the only one who spoke
63:24
or was it TJ who liked house II just
63:28
watched so guys
63:30
again for be sure to comment with who
63:32
you thought one and we will release the
63:34
winner tomorrow night also be sure to
63:37
tune in next week Tuesday night at 8:00
63:39
Eastern for the muddied waters of
63:41
freedom where Matt Wright and I will
63:44
parse through the week’s events with the
63:47
cheer and a plum of the sweet winter
63:50
wonder boys that we are also next week I
63:53
will not be having an episode of my
63:54
fellow Americans I will be getting ready
63:55
for my new hampshire primary tour with
63:58
the vermin spike 2020 campaign and we
64:01
will be going live multiple times the
64:03
following week during the New Hampshire
64:04
primary as we will be trolling the
64:06
entire process on our way to becoming
64:08
Sam’s pick for president and vice
64:11
president of these United States Sam by
64:15
saying nothing has acknowledged this
64:16
guys thanks again for tuning in we will
64:19
see you next week and god bless you
64:23
[Music]


Check out Muddied Waters Merchandise on Amazon

Get Muddied Merch!

Check out our Amazon store and pick up some sweet custom Muddied Waters merchandise. Makes a great gift!

buy now from Amazon, Prime eligible

Spike Cohen
Spike Cohen
Local Jew. Contrarian stoic sentimentalist. Antidisestablishmentarianism. Will pet your dog.