I have listened to your show for the last 2-3 years. In my opinion Sagar has been captured by his audience on Breaking Points. They say Don’t trust the corrupt establishment when Breaking Points opens and that has defined his world view. I think everything he thinks stems from that. It means I almost automatically know what he thinks on almost any issue. I have become a bigger fan of Marshall who seems to still think on issues on a case by case basis. I don’t think Sagar would change his point of view because his subscribers on Breaking Points would tank if he sometimes becomes pro establishment.
This is one of my favorite shows really makes me think. The conversation is top notch and something I love to binge when in the mood. Saager is what got me to the show but Marshall has won me over with his critical thinking. Thank you gentlemen for the GREAT content.
I just want to say Marshall, I’m an African immigrant who’s been listening to this podcast since it started but this is the first episode that has made me comment. There’s something you hit here that I don’t think you have with any other episode I think the best word I can phrase it is “Authenticity”. The joy of seeing an American recognize the times they are living through and actually feel deep concern about it. It all feels like a luxury now. This country needs to heal, in more than a us than one and I think more people need to realize this if this Republic is to endure to its tricentennial. Thank you for your work here and please I’d love more raw and emotional episodes like this that truly show that someone cares on a fundamentally non political, downright existential level.
This is a really good podcast that would be even better if Marshall stops consistently interrupting every guest.
If Saagard wasn’t in this conversation. Idk who is in a more crabby mood. Me listening to you now or you recording then. I tried not to leave a comment but here we are. Excellent guest today, 4 stars for him!
Why barely any conversation, not just on this Program, regarding the Republican Party and it’s freezing of our government. Also Money in politics⁉️
My 5 star review comes with a request. This show is great and I recommend you to everyone I know. S&M have effectively red-pilled me on several topics, and expanded my personal Overton window in the most respectable, well-reasoned, and unbiased way possible. Thank you! As for my request: You have had several guests on your podcast, including your most recent – Anne Helen Oeterson and Charlie Warzel – that approach the problem of Millennial political representation on some related topic (like housing, WFH, interest rates, etc) but fail to speak to it in direct generational economic terms. As an example, WFH is a major Millennial economic issue with significant potential for political debate; but both Anne and Charlie failed breach this subject on your podcast. WFH has the power to transform the fiscal outcome of nearly every Millennial household. It can summon a much-needed generational transfer of wealth in this country. And it has the potential to undo the long term economic and fiscal damage from the Recession. Collectively, our ability to retain earnings has been stymied by housing inflation, student loans, medical bills, and child care to name a few things. We have seen lower rates of marriage and housing starts, lower rates of marriage and child-birth, higher rates of suicide and drug addiction. Perennially low interest rates have permanently damaged our rate of asset accumulation and lowered our quality of life. WFH can serve to change all that by enabling us to take our salaries to place where housing costs are low and where we can finally re-claim our American Dream. But the enormity of this issue isn’t reflected in our political discourse. Take another more obvious Millennial issue of student loans. According to Morning Consult poll conducted Dec ’21, 52% of Boomers are against student loan forgiveness, compared to the 79% of Millennials who are for it. If you aren’t a Baby Boomer, the topic isn’t anywhere near controversial. And yet both Congress and the Biden Administration approach the issue as if it were. There are 42.9 million student loan borrowers in the United States with an average payment of 393 dollars a month. That’s 16.5 Billion a month, 66 Billion dollars a quarter, and nearly a quarter Trillion per year. This was a crisis before COVID. Can you imagine the political uproar, the sheer scale of controversy if Boomers also had 393 dollars a month deleted from their take home pay starting May 1! Nothing else would be on TV/Twitter/the Interweb. The Fed Chairmen would be forced to “weigh in” on its consequences. Economists would warn that consumer spending would plummet and that we’d be courting recession. Hearings would be held. Elections would pivot. Schumer might do more than just asking Biden to “flick his pen” and Biden’s Administration might stop punting to Congress. And yet, we see very little of the sort because the Millennial economic perspective is muzzled, unseen and politically unrepresented. It isn’t hard to see why when the key decision-makers are all Boomers. The HML is 81, the SML is 71 and POTUS is 79. On the GOP side, Trump is 75 and McConnell is 79. The establishment media dissects most issues in terms of conservative vs liberal, rich vs poor, small vs big business, black vs white, red state vs blue state – but I invite you to explore our political economy in the context of Millennial vs Boomer. I invite you to explore how and why the political and media establishment treats Millennial issues as a fringe topic, a side story akin to an MTV “rock the vote” campaign, when in fact we are literally the majority of working-class Americans. We staff your restaurants and offices. We police your streets and pick up your trash. We spill our blood in wars we never wanted. We have been at the front lines of COVID care and in the back of the line of vaccine deployment. And we sacrificed 2 years of normal socializing to help keep alive as many Boomers as possible. S&M – you get five stars from me but with this request: WFH and Student Loans should be our Tea Party moment that –dare I say—REALIGNS the American body politic towards a Millennial economic and fiscal needs. Kindly address this issue and speak directly to the Millennial Political REALIGNMENT we all still need.
Your July podcast with Conor Dougherty was the best podcast I’ve heard all year. You’re a great, intuitive host. The causes of homelessness and housing out-of-reach for so many Americans is a subject we must get “to the root” of. Mr. Dougherty is highly knowledgeable on this subject, and I recommend anyone listen to this episode about our current state of housing and homelessness in the US. Thank you!
Thanks for the amazing show. Great guests. Hosts that have intelligent, yet relatable takes on politics, society, and more. I’m looking forward to more historical topics in 2021. My question is mainly for Marshall - I live and work in the Portland Metro area. I’m not a native, but fell in love with the state while attending Oregon State University, GO BEAVS, and moved to Portland after graduating college in 2014. My family have visited often and have fallen in love with the city and all it has to offer, I have no family or relatives here. I’ve been asked many times in 2020 in the wake of the George Floyd tragedy and other subsequent social issues about “what it’s like in Portland?” It’s hard for me to contrast the social aspects of the openness of culture and diversity that is the city and a lot of Oregon with “Proud Boys” and Far Right activism that lives strongly here. I’m an ethnic minority myself and business owner who wants law and order but I understand that racism exists in all institutions, including law enforcement. Can you help me explain this situation and answer this question? Thanks for all that you both do. Saagar, my older brother is a GWU grad as well. Go Colonials...?
This isn’t just some “political drama podcast”. This is real substantive discussion on several serious and relevant issues to our modern day world. One thing I love (but what I’d like to see more of) is when the hosts pause and “set the stage” for all listeners. Political Science was not a Gen-Ed for my college degree so most times I’m left to wonder what some of these terms mean. Neo-Con, Hawks, Doves. Other times I just lack the historical context. But the hosts are willing to include and inform us in their discussions. They’ll stop and ask their guests to define a term or they’ll give a brief history of the topic in question. This is something I’d love to see more of in the future. Audio quality is mostly good too. As someone who works with podcast audio, I think their plosives are a bit heavy. Easily fixed with a pop filter or cover for the mic. If they can touch up their audio and continue to provide context for those less informed as myself, I’ll be happy to change my review to a 5! 100% worth a listen. Edit: Changed to 5 stars! Audio quality seems to be improving + more context given!
Saagar and Marshall, great show but get rid of the intro. it's way too long. I just want to hear the interview. put everything else in the show notes. at the very least put the timestamp of the start of the interview in the shownotes (excluding the intro music)
One of the hallmarks of a great podcast is that the most interesting episodes are those where I disagree with the guest. Saagar and Marshall are excellent at finding the overlap between what their guests know well and what’s actually important, and ask excellent questions in those areas. This show also completely flipped my perception of the American economy on issues like free trade and the minimum wage, and incidentally made it almost impossible for me to listen to a fiscal conservative or a neo lib democrat without yelling at the radio. Guest suggestion: Dean Baker of CEPR. I like his blog and I think he would have a lot to say about free trade and manufacturing. His open disdain for the innumerate press would make a great match with the show.
Trucking like yellow cabs medallions are two of many industries that sell their jobs as though it’s an investment for the worker. meanwhile they lease trucks for too much money and the medallions are just ridiculous with no protection Medallions were always an unreasonable tax against taxi drivers and when they let Uber and lift in they destroyed any value that they supposedly had. It’s taking too much time for this country to realize they need the workers and the workers need to earn a living wage.
Tectonic shifts in politics, business, media, education, etc. is a topic I’m really interested in. They’ve done a good job navigating the post-2020 world after the hopes of populism didn’t materialize and they’re doing it with intellectual honesty and genuine curiosity. You guys have to get Tim Dillon on. He’s this eras greatest philosopher.
Suggested guest: Michael Hudson (economist) 5 stars, I hope the hosts will watch Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister. It’s an old bbc show but I’m confident that they would love it.
I’ve been listening to the show for a while now & have been fluctuating on how I want to review it. My primary critique is that at times it can be pretty intense and hard to grasp for a political novice such as myself. If you aren’t prepared to really exercise your brain, this probably isn’t the show for you. However, after some time of listening I’ve absorbed enough base information to make the show overall easier for me to listen to and actually understand. Partially for the reason described above, I do find some episodes to be “boring” or of a topic that is of little interest to me. Like most humans, I am most interested in things that directly relate to my life, so I just find it hard to care or devote brain space to certain niche political goings on. In regards to the episodes I do enjoy (which is the majority of them), the discussion is always excellent, fair, and balanced. I attribute a lot of this to the fact that they avoid anything related to culture war and almost always present both right and left angles when pushing back on guests. It seems like a lot of reviewers consider the show to be right leaning, which I can kind of see why they would say that, but imho, I just think they are realists who take a more right lean on some topics, more left on others, but always present and respect the entire discourse. Their guests are also from all over the political spectrum. I am somewhere between center and left myself on most issues and I don’t find myself disagreeing with Marshall and Saagar too often, although I disagree with some of their guests regularly. However, even the guests who I strongly disagree with, I usually still appreciate the episode and the discourse. Anyways, I really like the direction the show is heading in with the new season and am looking forward to listening to more.
Great show. I understand the desire to lean away from cultural issues when they continue to be used so cynically (including by members of the anti-GOP dissident right). That said, presumably both of you believe in the continuation of many traditional/conservative/right-wing values and that a society organized around left-wing progressive cultural mores will be neither healthy nor sustainable. As modern thinkers, how do you balance the desire to maintain and push forward certain cultural values while avoiding getting bogged down in the culture war that maintains the status quo? Saagar, for his part, seems to believe that enacting populist economic policies will simply lead normal Americans to unleash their inner Bronze Age warrior/tradwife. I am skeptical of this and think that any right-wing populist movement that doesn’t include aspirational sociocultural values will fail. (This thought process is inspired in part by the many “China is based, let them destroy globohomo America” takes floating around the right lately.)
This isn’t just some “political drama podcast”. This is real substantive discussion on several serious and relevant issues to our modern day world. One thing I love (but what I’d like to see more of) is when the hosts pause and “set the stage” for all listeners. Political Science was not a Gen-Ed for my college degree so most times I’m left to wonder what some of these terms mean. Neo-Con, Hawks, Doves. Other times I just lack the historical context. But the hosts are willing to include and inform us in their discussions. They’ll stop and ask their guests to define a term or they’ll give a brief history of the topic in question. This is something I’d love to see more of in the future. Audio quality is mostly good too. As someone who works with podcast audio, I think their plosives are a bit heavy. Easily fixed with a pop filter or cover for the mic. If they can touch up their audio and continue to provide context for those less informed as myself, I’ll be happy to change my review to a 5! 100% worth a listen.
In your conversation with Colby about the need to take a tougher military stance against China, you spent over an hour and the topic of nuclear conflict only came up once, in passing, in a throwaway line from Colby. Why isn’t this a bigger concern to you, and if it is, why didn’t you bring it up on the pod? The more time that passes between today and the end of the Cold War, the more I hear policy wonks completely ignore this topic when it comes to discussions about Russia and China. It’s extremely disturbing, and I fear that the next generation of American leaders are so cavalier about and ignorant to the potential horrors of nuclear war that they’re steering us towards existential danger.
Old fart here. Appreciate the opportunity to get the POV of younger people with different life experiences on matters of politics and culture. Good guests and great conversation.
Love the show! If another constitutional amendment were to be ratified what do you think it would be?
You guys have been killing it recently, keep up the good working. Really appreciate what you do.
Big fan of the show. Here’s a question about a pretty bold and innovative idea. What do you know about charter cities / the Charter Cities Institute and do you think that innovation in city planning and governance has a big role in development both in the US and abroad?
So I am a conservative, and I’ve considered myself one for most of the time I’ve been politically aware. Despite being black, I went along pretty comfortably with the conservative consensus on race for the past couple of years. However, when I got “redpilled” by Saagar, I began adjusting my views on politics. Unfortunately, this lead me to be involved with some fringe people on the right. “Gryopers”, and their views on race, and IQ in particular. At first I ignored this, and even went along with it, despite never really liking Nick Fuentes himself. I did however like some of his followers, and thought I we agreed in most areas. When it became clear that race wasn’t just “another” policy area for these people, but the underlying foundation, despite claims their foundation was religion, this required a serious reexamination of race for me. Doing what establishment conservatives didn’t and seemed to pin on “culture”, gryopers discussed “nature vs nurture.” Their conclusions of course that people of color in large part were by their nature worse. For obvious reasons, this forced me to re-examine race in America, and I’ve come to an opposite conclusion for a variety of reasons. Now the idea that many racial disparities are due to environment seems sensible to me, albeit it’s very complicated. However this puts me at odds with even establishment conservatives. I could never consider myself a liberal or leftist due to certain social inclinations like abortion. However it’s not like I can ignore race either. Where exactly would you say that puts me? A right wing populist who is very unorthodox on the question of race
Great Podcast you two. Found you guy through Joe Rogan and have been an avid fan ever since. I’m looking for books to educate myself about Economics, specially modern economics and the way corporation are run. Since you two are such avid reader (and Saagar majored in Econ LOL.) I was wondering if you have any idea where to stat
I love that I can listen to year + old episodes and they still seem relevant. My question is: After watching the aftermath of our withdrawal from Afghanistan and realizing the limitations of our ability to shape the world with military intervention. Would it be in our best interest to defend Taiwan if China invaded? How is deploying force in that situation different from recent engagements? Thanks and love the show.
I really enjoy this show as it pushes my way of thinking and overall perspective. I consider myself a right leaning moderate from Montana. They have very interesting guests and I really like how they push the guests with tough questions and also play devils advocate so everyone has to think more about it. One of my favorite parts is the conversation around bring back American manufacturing! Guys, What are some of your favorite American made goods? I’m a big fan a Leatherman multi tools and Origins Maine jeans … saving up for a pair of boots! As an older millennial I want to say hats off to you both!
Thank you both for constantly and respectfully pushing back on your guests in real time. Also, continue to remind your guests that your listeners are outside of their bubbles and probably not on their red or blue political team. Always the best.
Love the pod, love that you guys are both open minded and willing to give other people the benefit of the doubt. I’d love to hear you speak with someone like Richard Wolff or Jeffery Sachs, get really into the weeds about economic leftism and what would work/wouldn’t. Book recommendation is Killing Hope by William Blum, been quite the eye opening read for our Cold War history.