Podcasts about selfish reasons

In PX123 our guest is Bryan Caplan. Bryan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University and a New York Times Bestselling author. We interview him about his ground breaking graphic novel ‘Build, Baby, Build - The Science and Ethics of Housing Regulation'. The book is so described: 'In Build, Baby, Build: The Science and Ethics of Housing Regulation, economist Bryan Caplan makes the economic and philosophical case for radical deregulation of this massive market―freeing property owners to build as tall and dense as they wish. Not only would the average price of housing be cut in half, but the building boom unleashed by deregulation would simultaneously reduce inequality, increase social mobility, promote economic growth, reduce homelessness, increase birth rates, help the environment, cut crime, and more. Combining stunning homage to classic animation with careful interdisciplinary research, Build, Baby, Build takes readers on a grand tour of a bona fide “panacea policy.” We can start realizing these missed opportunities as soon as we abandon the widespread misconception that housing regulation solves more problems than it causes.' The book is a must read for planning undergraduates and all policy makers involved in the housing sector. Other books he has written include The Myth of the Rational Voter, named "the best political book of the year" by the New York Times, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, The Case Against Education, Open Borders (co-authored with SMBC's Zach Weinersmith), Labor Econ Versus the World, How Evil Are Politicians?, Don't Be a Feminist, Voters As Mad Scientists, You Will Not Stampede Me, and Self-Help Is Like a Vaccine. He is now writing Unbeatable: The Brutally Honest Case for Free Markets.  In Podcast Extra / Culture Corner Bryan recommends ‘The problem with political authority' by Michael Huemer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Problem_of_Political_Authority). He also recommends the Youtube series 'Ride with Gabi'  https://www.youtube.com/@ridewithgabi  Jess has gone back to duolingo, learning Italian (https://www.duolingo.com). Pete recommends the Netflix K Rom - com ‘Business Proposal'. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Proposal) Audio produced by Jack Bavage. Podcast released 12 November 2024.

In PX123 our guest is Bryan Caplan. Bryan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University and a New York Times Bestselling author. We interview him about his ground breaking graphic novel ‘Build, Baby, Build - The Science and Ethics of Housing Regulation'. The book is described: 'In Build, Baby, Build: The Science and Ethics of Housing Regulation, economist Bryan Caplan makes the economic and philosophical case for radical deregulation of this massive market―freeing property owners to build as tall and dense as they wish. Not only would the average price of housing be cut in half, but the building boom unleashed by deregulation would simultaneously reduce inequality, increase social mobility, promote economic growth, reduce homelessness, increase birth rates, help the environment, cut crime, and more. Combining stunning homage to classic animation with careful interdisciplinary research, Build, Baby, Build takes readers on a grand tour of a bona fide “panacea policy.” We can start realizing these missed opportunities as soon as we abandon the widespread misconception that housing regulation solves more problems than it causes.' The book should be a must read for planning undergraduates and all policy makers involved in the housing sector. Other books he has written include The Myth of the Rational Voter, named "the best political book of the year" by the New York Times, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, The Case Against Education, Open Borders (co-authored with SMBC's Zach Weinersmith), Labor Econ Versus the World, How Evil Are Politicians?, Don't Be a Feminist, Voters As Mad Scientists, You Will Not Stampede Me, and Self-Help Is Like a Vaccine. He is now writing Unbeatable: The Brutally Honest Case for Free Markets. In Podcast Extra / Culture Corner Bryan recommends 

‘The problem with political authority' by Michael Huemer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Problem_of_Political_Authority). He also recommends the Youtube series 'Ride with Gabi' https://www.youtube.com/@ridewithgabi Jess has gone back to duolingo, learning Italian (https://www.duolingo.com). Pete recommends Netflix K drama ‘Business Proposal'. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Proposal) Audio produced by Jack Bavage. Podcast released 12 November 2024.
 PlanningxChange is proud to be part of the Urban Broadcast Collective.

In PX123 our guest is Bryan Caplan. Bryan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University and a New York Times Bestselling author. We interview him about his ground breaking graphic novel ‘Build, Baby, Build - The Science and Ethics of Housing Regulation'. The book is described: 'In Build, Baby, Build: The Science and Ethics of Housing Regulation, economist Bryan Caplan makes the economic and philosophical case for radical deregulation of this massive market―freeing property owners to build as tall and dense as they wish. Not only would the average price of housing be cut in half, but the building boom unleashed by deregulation would simultaneously reduce inequality, increase social mobility, promote economic growth, reduce homelessness, increase birth rates, help the environment, cut crime, and more. Combining stunning homage to classic animation with careful interdisciplinary research, Build, Baby, Build takes readers on a grand tour of a bona fide “panacea policy.” We can start realizing these missed opportunities as soon as we abandon the widespread misconception that housing regulation solves more problems than it causes.' The book is a must read for planning undergraduates and all policy makers involved in the housing sector. Other books he has written include The Myth of the Rational Voter, named "the best political book of the year" by the New York Times, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, The Case Against Education, Open Borders (co-authored with SMBC's Zach Weinersmith), Labor Econ Versus the World, How Evil Are Politicians?, Don't Be a Feminist, Voters As Mad Scientists, You Will Not Stampede Me, and Self-Help Is Like a Vaccine. He is now writing Unbeatable: The Brutally Honest Case for Free Markets. In Podcast Extra / Culture Corner Bryan recommends 

‘The problem with political authority' by Michael Huemer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Problem_of_Political_Authority). He also recommends the Youtube series 'Ride with Gabi' https://www.youtube.com/@ridewithgabi Jess has gone back to duolingo, learning Italian (https://www.duolingo.com). Pete recommends the Netflix K Rom Com ‘Business Proposal'. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Proposal) Audio produced by Jack Bavage. Podcast released 12 November 2024.

Rebecca Williams, narrates her blog written for the Dementia Researcher website. Rebecca's blog explores the practical, self-serving benefits of Open Science, beyond its noble ideals. She highlights how practices like preregistration can streamline research, making analysis faster and writing less labor-intensive. Additionally, Open Science fosters transparency and accountability, making it easier to publish null results and receive valuable feedback on data and code. By embracing these methods, researchers can enhance the efficiency and integrity of their work, all while contributing to a more open and honest scientific community. Find the original text, and narration here on our website. https://www.dementiaresearcher.nihr.ac.uk/blog-selfish-reasons-for-open-science/ -- Rebecca Williams is PhD student at the University of Cambridge. Though originally from ‘up North' in a small town called Leigh, she did her undergraduate and masters at the University of Oxford before defecting to Cambridge for her doctorate researching Frontotemporal dementia and Apathy. She now spends her days collecting data from wonderful volunteers, and coding. Outside work, she plays board games, and is very crafty. @beccasue99 -- Enjoy listening? We're always looking for new bloggers, drop us a line. http://www.dementiaresearcher.nihr.ac.uk This podcast is brought to you in association with Alzheimer's Association, Alzheimer's Research UK, Alzheimer's Society and Race Against Dementia, who we thank for their ongoing support. -- Follow us on Social Media: https://www.instagram.com/dementia_researcher/ https://www.facebook.com/Dementia.Researcher/ https://twitter.com/demrescommunity https://www.linkedin.com/company/dementia-researcher

Professor Bryan Caplan, a bestselling author and economist at George Mason University, discusses some of his most controversial books, Don't Be a Feminist, The Case Against Education, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, and Build, Baby, Build.  

Professor Bryan Caplan, a bestselling author and economist at George Mason University, discusses some of his most controversial books, Don't Be a Femnist, The Case Against Education, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, and Build, Baby, Build.

Should Hamilton consider other avenues for making money by way of new taxes? Have Councillors looked at delaying their pet projects before introducing these? Guest: John Best, Publisher of The Bay Observer - According to a poll, it would appear that almost half of Canadians feel that Justin Trudeau is staying in power for purely selfish reasons. Guest: Muhammad Ali, Vice President with Crestview Strategies - Think of a Disney song. Chances are pretty good that song you just thought of was written by the Robert & Richard Sherman, sometimes referred to as the Sherman Brothers. Today, we received the news that Richard died at the age of 95. Guest: Eric Alper, Publicist and music commentator

Bryan Caplan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University and the New York Times Bestselling author of *The Myth of the Rational Voter*, *Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids*, *The Case Against Education*, *Open Borders*, and *Build, Baby, Build*.Show is Sponsored by The Ayn Rand Institute https://www.aynrand.org/starthereEnergy Talking Points, featuring AlexAI, by Alex Epstein alexepstein.substack.comExpress VPN https://www.expressvpn.com/yaronJoin this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/@YaronBrook/joinLike what you hear? Like, share, and subscribe to stay updated on new videos and help promote the Yaron Brook Show: https://bit.ly/3ztPxTxSupport the Show and become a sponsor: / yaronbrookshow or https://yaronbrookshow.com/membershipOr make a one-time donation: https://bit.ly/2RZOyJJContinue the discussion by following Yaron on Twitter (https://bit.ly/3iMGl6z) and Facebook (https://bit.ly/3vvWDDC )Want to learn more about Ayn Rand and Objectivism? Visit the Ayn Rand Institute: https://bit.ly/35qoEC3#housing #supplyanddemand #immigration #ethics #selfishness #egoism #capitalism #philosophy #Morality ​ ​#Objectivism​ #AynRand #politicsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/yaron-brook-show--3276901/support.

We've done several shows on the housing crisis in America, mostly from a progressive perspective in which the solution to the shortage of homes is presented in terms of government investment. The libertarian economist, Bryan Caplan, however, comes at the problem from a more conservative angle. The co-author of the new graphic novel, BUILD, BABY, BUILD, Caplan argues that the housing industry needs to be radically deregularized. This right-wing libertarian approach to the science and ethics of housing in America certainly makes sense in cities like San Francisco, with its massively inflated real-estate values, absence of affordable new homes, and huge homelessness problem. Bryan Caplan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University and a New York Times Bestselling author. He has written The Myth of the Rational Voter, named "the best political book of the year" by the New York Times, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, The Case Against Education, Open Borders (co-authored with SMBC's Zach Weinersmith), Labor Econ Versus the World, How Evil Are Politicians?, Don't Be a Feminist, Voters As Mad Scientists, and You Will Not Stampede Me. His latest book, Build, Baby, Build: The Science and Ethics of Housing, is published by the Cato Institute. He is the editor and chief writer for Bet On It, the blog hosted by the Salem Center for Policy at the University of Texas. He has published in the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, TIME, Newsweek, Atlantic, American Economic Review, Economic Journal, Journal of Law and Economics, and Intelligence, blogged for EconLog from 2005-2022, and appeared on ABC, BBC, Fox News, MSNBC, and C-SPAN. An openly nerdy man who loves role-playing games and graphic novels, Caplan live in Oakton, Virginia, with his wife and four kids.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.Keen On is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Bryan Caplan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University and a New York Times Bestselling author. He's written The Myth of the Rational Voter, named "the best political book of the year" by the New York Times, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, The Case Against Education, Open Borders, Labor Econ Versus the World, How Evil Are Politicians?, Don't Be a Feminist; A Letter to My Daughter, Voters As Mad Scientists, and You Will Not Stampede Me. Bryan is a deep-thinker, researcher, status-quo challenger, educator, self-confessed nerd and this conversation was anything but boring. Enjoy.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Our guest today is Steve Hsu is Professor of Theoretical Physics and of Computational Mathematics, Science, and Engineering at Michigan State University. Previously, he was Senior Vice President for Research and Innovation. Steve is an entrepreneur and has started successful ventures in embryo selection, forensic genetics and artificial intelligence. Steve Hsu- Steve is a polymath- you can see just how wide his interests are on his blog infoproc. Despite his mathematical chops Steve is great at having conversations- I recommend Aporia listeners check out his podcast Manifold. During the 2020 racial reckoning, after some controversy, Steve stepped down as Senior Vice President for Research and Innovation at Michigan State University. You can see his response to the allegations against him here and his resignation here. Steve published the first paper showing that polygenic scores can predict phenotype with accuracy- see his paper on height here. Steve and his team also have shown that Genomic Prediction's aneuploidy testing improves pregnancy outcomes. We also talked about my article for Aporia on ethical objections to polygenic screening. In China, Yousheng, loosely translated as "eugenics" doesn't have a bad connotation- as Steve points out here. Steve is skeptical about the deleterious effects of polygenic screening or gene editing due to pleiotropy. Simone Collins, former Aporia guest, was also interviewed on Manifold. She used Genomic Prediction's health index. We talked about Bryan Caplan's books, The Case Against Education and "Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids"

Jake and Gareth talk to a caller who wants to share some news with her husband. Check out our We're Here to Help sweatshirts, hats, and tote bags at heretohelppod.com! Want to call in? Email your question to helpfulpod@gmail.com. If you're enjoying the show, make sure to rate We're Here to Help 5-Stars on Apple Podcasts. Follow the show on Instagram @HereToHelpPod and TikTok also at @HereToHelpPod

Hour 2 of the show. Besides the football, why do we want the Eagles to beat Dallas? Who has annoying Cowboy fan friends they need to shut up?

On this week's episode Editor/Author Mike Sacks (Vanity Fair) discusses his career path, the importance of not asking for permission with your writing, as well as how he prepares for some of the artists he interviews.SHOW NOTESMike Sacks Website: https://www.mikesacks.com/Mike Sacks on Instagram: mikebsacksMike Sacks on Twitter: https://twitter.com/michaelbsacksAUTOGENERATED TRANSCRIPTMike Sacks:It's never been any time in publishing history where you could do this, where you could put out a book that looks professionally done. In the past, you'd have to buy 5,000 copies of your book, and they set Moldering in the basement. Yeah. Now it's a purchase. It's a paper purchase, so if someone wants it, they'll pay for it. Then it's published and it's not published until then.Michael Jamin:You're listening to Screenwriters. Need to Hear This with Michael Jamin.Hey everyone, it's Michael Jamin. Welcome back to another Screenwriters. Need to hear this. We've got a surprise twist for you today. I've done over 90 episodes and today we're taking a turn to the world of high literature and publishing something I know very little about. And I'm very pleased to welcome my next guest, Mr. Mike Sacks, and he comes from the Mike. Welcome. Let me give you a proper introduction. I'm not done with you yet, before I let you say something. So Mike is, aside from being an editor at Vanity Fair, he's written a number of books, I don't know, 11 or 12 something. A lot of books. He's gotten his work in Vanity Fair, Esquire, gq, the New Yorker, time, New York Times, Washington Post MCs, Sweeney's, radar Radar. Funny or Die. He was Die Mad New York Observer, premier Believer, vice Max. It goes on and on. So this guy's from the world of literature. So thank you so much, Mike, for being on this show. I want to learn all about your experiences.Mike Sacks:Well, I'm from the world of literature, meaning I have no money and plenty of time. So this is nothing else to do,Michael Jamin:But why? Okay, but why was it that I want to talk about your books and all that, but okay, so what attracted you to the world of literature though?Mike Sacks:My biggest dream was to get into tv. I mean, I wanted to write for Letterman. I wanted to write for SS n l, but I didn't know how to do it. I mean, I didn't know any writers. I didn't know anyone who knew any writers, very mysterious world. So what I thought at that time was that I would write for the written page and then be discovered like I would from AA or AA to be pulled up to the majors. It doesn't work like that. I didn't know it at the time, but over having done that for so many years, I just came to actually prefer that, I guess, to any other medium. I've done a little bit of TV and a little radio, and I do a podcast in the end. You know what, I came to love? I love the control. I love the fact that there's no one over my shoulder telling me what to do, how to do it, and I think if I were at 2021 to have gotten a job on Letterman or S N l, I would've been in heaven. I think now it sounds like hell, and I don't think I would've last would last a week.Michael Jamin:But tell me when you say no, no, you get to do what you want of that. Is that entirely accurate when you're are working with a publisher or even a magazine?Mike Sacks:Not always, especially when it comes to humor, which is one of the reasons I stopped humor for magazines. I mean, what I found is that most editors view themselves as humor writers in disguise, and if they hadn't have to have a job, they would be famous humor writers. So a lot of them consider themselves humor genius as very high humor iq. So I would get a lot of rewrites based on that and also based off of, I was writing a lot of stories and pieces based off of current news. So that goes bad very quickly. So I prefer now, what I've been doing now is self-publishing and putting out evergreen pieces where meaning it's not tethered to any sort of current news. So when I look back at some of the GQ pieces, the Esquire pieces written in 2008, 2012, to whatever it is, it just seems very dated. The humor that I love is always tethered to character, and it is not dated. I mean, even going back to, or even I guess last century, Charlie Chaplin, Woody Allen, Albert Brooks, Steve Martin's, all character based, and that to me is what interests me now, and I wanted to bring that to the written page rather than have something that is say, Trump's tweets from the Middle Ages or some shit that it's not going to last.Michael Jamin:But you've been on both sides of this because you are an editor at Vanity Fair. So you obviously, you're rewriting, you're telling people you know what, what's going to play in this magazine? But you're also saying, and then human magazines, that you also getting 'em on the other side, I mean, right.Mike Sacks:And I think I have that advantage of knowing how to deal with editors, knowing what not to say, not to drive them crazy, and if they do have a suggestion to, usually it's not worth fighting over. But my job, inventing affairs, is not to edit humor, it's to edit hard news, preferably hard news, rather than puff piecesMichael Jamin:Especially. Yeah. How did you get that at Vanity Fair? Well, I was How did, go ahead. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Yeah, I have anotherMike Sacks:Question. Yeah, yeah. It was one of those things that you just kind of stumble into, and I was New Orleans. I was living in New Orleans, working in retail. Then I moved back to Maryland working in retail and got my first editing job in dc, which is a very DC type of job. I was editing a newsletter for an association that provided shareholder information to large institutional investors. So DC has a million associations, a million groups, they all need editors for their newsletters. So I got this first job. From there, I got a job working nights and weekends as an editor at the Knight Ritter Wire Corp, which used to put out articles sent around the world. And then from there, the Washington Post, and then from there, vanity Fair. So it was just sort of stumbling into one job after another, where at the time, what I really wanted to do was go to California, go to New York and write humor.It just never really seemed to work out that way. I just kept getting these jobs, and on the side, what I would do on my own time, I would write for Mad and National Lampoon and then later New Yorker. So it was just one of those things. Now, if I had to do it over again, I probably would've gone straight out to California or to straight to New York, rather than live in New Orleans and Maryland for a while. But you know, do what you do. And I didn't have the balls to do it. I didn't know anyone. I didn't have anyone to tell me, Hey, you can do this. Right. To me, it seemed very mysterious, like, Hey, how do you go to the moon? I have no fucking idea. Yeah, but itMichael Jamin:Was, it was mysterious. But you still figured it out on this other, that's the thing. You didn't know how to do it, but you did know how to do it for this other thing over here.Mike Sacks:Well, that's the thing. I mean, that's the irony is that you stumble into what you end up want to be doing, and I didn't, if I had known graduating that I would've been the circuitous route, I probably would've said, screw it. I don't want to spend seven years doing nothing, working in retail and then trying to get into magazines. But it just ended up working to my benefit where I think writing for the written page is really the best fit for me, more so than writing for TV or the movies. Not to say that I wouldn't love to have a script produced and this and that, but I do. I think I've worked alone for so many years. I wouldn't have the patience to work with producers and that timeframe. I like to put it work out and keep moving down the road. I don't like to stumble and sort of stagnate with the same piece.I've met writers who three years later will meet again working on just trying to pitch this same project. We didn't go into writing for that. I got into writing. I loved it, and I loved to write what I wanted to write. And I see too many writers out there, even in the comedy business who are miserable. And I always do try to remember, this is why I got into comedying and into writing, is because I used to have fun with my friends, and I used to go home and write and enjoy myself. And if I ever lose that, it's not something that I would want to necessarily live with. So what I do have now is a two-track system where I do make a living as an editor, and then on the side I am able to write what I want, how I write, how I want to write it, and I don't have to put out material that is not something that is something that I want to put out. Everything I put out is what I want to put out.Michael Jamin:But how many hours a day do you devote to your side writing projectsMike Sacks:Today?Michael Jamin:Well, on an average day, how much do you do on the side?Mike Sacks:I'd say at least six hours a day. I mean, I get up early,Michael Jamin:You six hours a day on your non-paying. In other words, you're not, you're non vanity. Fair job, you'reMike Sacks:Yes. And that's always been the case. I mean, there's no other way to put out material, whether it's articles or books, then to just simply do it. And it did take me giving up a lot of TV watching and a lot of drinking, which I had been doing, and to sit down and make this my O C D compulsion where I have to do this every day, and if I don't do it every day, I'm miserable. I'm just an absolute best. AndMichael Jamin:You've been both traditionally published and indie published as you're talking about, and why don't you talk a little bit, but the differences in why one appeals more to you than the other?Mike Sacks:Well, that's a great question. Now, I think there's different elements to self-publishing versus traditional publishing. If you have the opportunity to be a MCs or the New Yorker, certainly take it. I think when it comes to self-publishing, what I prefer is self-publishing books. Now, I published about four or five traditional published books when I first started, and what I ended up finding out was in the end, can, if you are competent as an editor and a writer, and if you can find a good designer, you can do all this on your own. And there's a lot of advantages to that. The main advantage is in humor. Most producers, most agents, most publishers do not have our humor sensibility. I'd say their humor sensibility lies more in the hit radio market than maybe the alternative market, which I think most writers are into. So first of all, it's going to be very, very difficult to sell the idea that you want to an agent, and that's the first step, which can take years.Yes. I know a lot of people who reach out to agents with their humor ideas, and before they know it, it becomes something else entirely, whether it's now geared towards children, whether it's a rom-com or whether it's this or that or ya novel, and then they're stuck with something that after a year doesn't sell anyway, so they wasted a year on a project that they're not happy with. I don't think you need an agent now for books. In fact, when I say books, I mean comedy books. This is very specific. If you want to put out a comedy book that's like, or similar to the Woody Allen books, you grew up reading to the National Lampoon books, you grew up reading to Mark Lehner, to anyone, Simon Rich that you grew up reading, that is not going to happen anymore. One and two, it's not necessary for it to happen. Any advantage that you have in the mainstream market can be reproduced on your own end much better.Michael Jamin:Well, let's talk about that because you can't get into, or it would be a lot harder to get your book into Barnes and Nobles, right? Well,Mike Sacks:Here's the thing too. Yeah. Everyone dreams about having their book in Barnes and Noble or an airport bookstore. It doesn't fucking make a difference anymore. So you have one copy of your book in the humor section, which is next to the restrooms. I mean, how many people are going to be stumbling by it anyway? It's not going to be on the front table. Right, okay. It's just not going to be. So when it comes to getting a book, even chosen by an agent, skip the two, three year long process and put it out yourself because an agent typically doesn't even read the book. And if they do read the book, they don't typically understand the book. What they're going to get is not much money anyway. Comedy doesn't bring in much money, so they get you a 3000, $4,000 advance. So that's something you can reap on your own without getting that advance, by putting it out yourself and having a hundred percent or not a hundred percent, maybe 60% of the profit coming back to you. So what I have done and what I recommend people to do at this point, this has never been, it's never been any time in publishing history where you could do this, where you could put out a book that looks professionally done in the past, you'd have to buy 5,000 copies of your book, and they set moldering in the basement. Now it's a purchase, a pay per purchase. So if someone wants it, they'll pay for it. Then it's published and it's not published until then. Do you and the pro,Michael Jamin:But do you get, this is, I'm getting a little off topic, but do you order a handful just so you have and send out with when people want to sign copies? I,Mike Sacks:Well, yes, it, it's the very specific process that I had that I have, which is that you as well as writing it, putting it out yourself, designing it yourself, you have to market it yourself. And I don't know if you want to get into that now later. Yeah, yeah,Michael Jamin:Let's talk about that. Okay.Mike Sacks:Yeah. Okay. So I have a very specific process, and I've been on the other end of this because I've been as a receiver of these books at Vanity Fair. And we would get hundreds of books per week from publishers. And what publishers would do was they would send out willy nilly all these advanced review copies arcs, which would end up just being in the free pile at work, 99% of which is never even looked at, 99% of which isn't even right for the magazine. So they would send out these books to me at Vanity Fair, and it would be totally inappropriate for the magazine. We don't do poetry. We don't do humor, we don't do sci-fi, so why are you sending me the books Now, the disadvantage of that to the writers, they end up in the free pile in a magazine like ours, and then typically the editorial assistants will then sell these books to the strand or on line.So you have these advanced review copies where no money is going to the author and they're getting these review copies before anyone else. So what I've tried to do with my own marketing is I'll order say 50 books and I'll pay for those myself. It's cheaper when you're ordering your own book. It's cheaper than it would be if you're paying for it otherwise. And then I send it out to a very specific group. It's more like surgical precision rather than going wide. And that group consists of comedians and actors and people who, with one mention on their Instagram can do more than a hundred advertisements can in the back of any magazine be beyond that. To get even more specific, what I'll do is I'll write the person's name, the receiver's name on the edge, the binding of the book. So they can't, or their assistant can't then sell it. I'd rather than just throw it out than it ending up being complicated.Michael Jamin:Why can't they though, if they name, why couldn't they? Because,Mike Sacks:Well, they could cross it out. They could black it out, orMichael Jamin:They could sell it with their name on it. What different, does it matter? Matter ofMike Sacks:Course. But who's, who's going to want to do that? No one's really going to want to do that. I'd hope it has happened in a few times that someone, I just out of curiosity, even before my book was legally supposedly come out, it's being sold on Amazon, I was like, who the hell is selling it? And I've purchased a copy and I'll see who then sold theMichael Jamin:Book, and then would you give 'em shit or something?Mike Sacks:No, I wouldn't. No. I mean, it's just a lousy thing to do, but I'm not going to get into it with them. But by doing that, it lessens the risk. So you do that, you make a pinpoint marketing plan rather than spreading it out wide, which is another thing that traditional marketing staffs don't do. Typically the marketing staff don't even read the book. They don't understand a book they can mostly consisting of 20, 30 somethings who don't have our sensibility and who are just sending out mass produce, press releases or versions of the book that in the end don't help you and could even harm you. So these are things that I learned by putting out in a traditional publishing venue of things to do and not to do when I would at one point when I plan to put out books by myself. So it's really important, I think, to know just as importantly, what not to do than it is what to do and what not to do is to spend thousands of dollars and sending it to every person who's in media, who's not going to be able to help you.Michael Jamin:You're very targeted. It's so interesting because there's so much, and I'm new to the publishing world, but there's just so much overlap in terms of how Hollywood works and how the publishing world works. My mind, it was publishing was a little more rarefied and maybe there was a No, it's not still about selling.Mike Sacks:No. The thing is that you have to understand that I think I understand is that publishing is not a money business. I mean, you're not going to sell a book for however much you might sell a comedy screenplay for. If you did really well for yourself, there's not much money in it. So if you're getting into it for money, I think you're doing it for the wrong reasons. But if you're getting into it for control, then it's for you. And then to have that control, why then give it to someone else to edit, to design, and then to market, it's then out of your hands for no reason. Because I, you've seen books, comedy books designed, and they overdesigned comedy more so than they underdesigned it. I'd rather have an underdesigned look thanMichael Jamin:I wacky. I wish you could mention some without. Well,Mike Sacks:I'll mention incriminating Yourself.Michael Jamin:I'llMike Sacks:Mention my ownMichael Jamin:That were Overdesigned.Mike Sacks:Yeah. And these were the first books that I put out my interview books. And here's the kicker, poking a Dead Frog and then also my collection.Michael Jamin:I'm going to pull it up hereMike Sacks:Of short humor. I had to pay for those to be redesigned. I wasn't happy with the original designMichael Jamin:That you designed.Mike Sacks:Well, no. Their design I wasn't happy with. Oh, I see. I'll tell you the typical look, it would be a chattering teeth on a bench with a microphone placed at it. It would be like a banana peel next toMichael Jamin:It. Just something that says comedy right. Comedy right.Mike Sacks:Because marketing swears by the fact that this will sell more copies. It has to do this. It's all a bunch of bullshit. Anyway.Michael Jamin:But here's the thing, does it though, I mean, they must have the numbers. They must not just say it like I am. I'm completely with you going through all this now, but are they right?Mike Sacks:No, they could be, but do you want your book to have a chattering teeth being interviewed? Right, right,Michael Jamin:Exactly. Sitting up,Mike Sacks:Sitting on a bench. I mean, I don't, so it sells another thousand copies. Who gives a shit? When you look at the classic books, especially the Woody Allen compilations, they're just white on black, right? I mean, it's very, very simple. You don't need something screaming out comedy. These are not a collection of hamburger puns we're talking about here. This is, unless it is a collection of hamburger pots, right? I'm talking about comedy that I grew up reading and I want out there. You're not going to get a cover that you're probably going to be happy with if you go traditional publishing.Michael Jamin:Right. It's so interesting because I'm going through, as you know, all of this now and everything you're saying is truly resonating with me. That's why we talked about a couple weeks ago, and it was so helpful. I want to even mention, I want to talk about some of your work because you sent me, you're very kind. You sent me some arcs and Well, you sent me a bunch of stuff. Let me put it up on the camera here. We're going to talk about this. This is your poking at Dead Frog. This is a book about, we interviewed some really great comedy writers, Woodmont College, which is a fun read. I want to talk about that as well. But first, this is the first, that book that I first dug into, and I have to send Mike, I think you are an artist. I really do because I do.But I mean, and he's being, he's blushing. You can't see on your podcast, but the book, to me, it has a very almost indie underground vibe it to me, and tell me if you're wrong, if this is not what you meant when you wrote it to me. It was like, the premise is very interesting. It's almost like a Russian nesting doll. The premise of this book is you, the author, are going through a garage, through a garage sale. You stumble upon this odd book that is written that it is the account of someone's life. The book that you wrote is called Randy, the Full and complete unedited biography and memoir of The Amazing Life and Times of Randy Ss. So you as the author, go into this garage sale or whatever, and you find this book written by this, some schmuck. Some schmuck wrote it about his friend or whatever, a guy he knows. And what's so interesting, and then you share the book. And so what's interesting to me, what I found very interesting, even about the premise of it, it's quite brilliant. It is basically, first of all, you're saying, look at this amazing book. I didn't write it. I have nothing to do with it. I just found it. It's amazing. And already you're hyping it up, but you're also distancing yourself from it saying, well, if you don't like it, it's, it's not mine. But you're also saying exactly,Here's a schmuck that the story's about, the book's about. Here's a schmuck who wrote about another schmuck and how amazing it is. And that's what I find it. So it's so almost indie. Like I said, it's like a Russian nesting doll. It's like no one has any attachment to this book, to this story. Here's this great story. I thought that was very funny premise ofMike Sacks:It. Well, thank No, that's really actually a good way to describe it. I mean, I always wanted to write a current day Medici book where some idiot is, pays an unemployed writer to write about his life in flowery terms, rather than it be 15th century Italy. It's, or Florence, it would now be 21st century Maryland. So that was one premise. Then on top of that, it would be a very mediocre life, written a very flowery type of way. But what I do love is found artifacts. I genuinely love finding shit, whether it's self-published memoirs or whether it's old or whether it's, that to me is fascinating. And what you mentioned really hits at the crux of it is that I'm not putting this book out. I'm two characters removed from the person. Yes. Writing it. And by doing that, by putting out a book like this, it's playing a character acting role where I'm not the person, and if you don't like it, it's really not my fault. Right. And by doing that, it frees me up as a writer to then take more chances because the margin of error is higher. If you don't like that joke, I had nothing fucking to do with it. I'm just reprinting. It'sMichael Jamin:Right. That's exactly my point. Yes, exactly. And that's so interesting about this because usually you write a book, you have a narrator. The narrator may even be talking about their life, but you, like you said, you're two steps removed and you don't even know who to believe is describing the story. Well,Mike Sacks:I'll tell you what I always think of, and that's Steve Martin. He was being interviewed about pennies from heaven, and he said, I can't dance, but if I play someone who can dance and maybe not well, but if I play someone who's dancing, then I can do it. So he's not even dancing. It's the character who's dancing it. And I always view that as what I'm trying to do is just have fun with it. I'm not the person in this book, my name isn't even on it. Hopefully. My father always used when he was alive, would say, why is your name, why are they not on these books? On the re-release? It was, but when I put it out myself, my name was not on any of these books. And to me, it's part of the joke. I want people to think it's real. I don't want them to think that I wrote it. I want them to come across this and say, oh, someone is republishing a shit self-published memoir. That's someone an idiot in Maryland published in 2013. Right. That really is my dream.Michael Jamin:Yeah. And that's so funny about it. It's, that's why I say it's almost underground. It's almost, yeah. I, I guess my question for you is, when you wrote this or any of your writing, are you thinking of of the audience or your reader in mind, or are you really just like, this is what I want to do? It sounds to me, I already know the answer, butMike Sacks:It's never what the audience necessarily wants. I mean, I found that by even writing Twitter jokes, if you put out what you think the audience is going to want, then I think it's not going to hit as hard. And that's part of the problem with what I had freelancing for magazines. What are the editors going to want? And then what are the editors going to want for the readers is you have to, it's not even running for yourself at that point, but for these projects, not by skirting around having an agent skirting around having a publisher, you can do whatever the hell you want. And by you, I mean me in this case, it's just these are projects that I just have an itch to scratch. I don't know why. And there's no one on earth who I think necessarily is the perfect reader for this.I just know that if I stumbled upon this book in a bookstore or online, I would fall in love with it. And that is really the, I'm trying to please myself. And it's a very specific thing mean, so specific that it'll sell a few thousand copies. This is never going to be in an airport bookstore. It's never going to be in any bookstores. I mean, it's sort of like the underground radio I used to play in New Orleans when I worked for the radio station. I love these groups, but they never would've been played on.Michael Jamin:But that's why I say you are an artist because you are doing this for the, with the purest of intentions, which is not cashing out like this is your expression.Mike Sacks:No, it isn't. But I have found one, it goes back to my O C D where if I don't do this sort of thing, I'm a mess. I'm a depressive mess, an anxious mess. The other thing that I've noticed is that by putting out these type of books and by genuinely not giving a shit, if anyone likes it, people do the right. People do tend to like it. And right with my upcoming book, I have a ton of actors and comedians who have liked the past books, John Ham and Paul Rubins and Amy Sedaris, who want to be involved in the next project. Again, I don't think it's going to certainly make them any money, and it's not going to make me any money, but it's just what I like. I genuinely like this. I, I'd rather watch an Albert Brooks standup bit from the 1970s than any of the most popular sitcoms or reality shows on now. That's just my what I like, my personal, and this is my personal, when it comes to books, very specific. It's not going to appeal to many people, but I have found that by putting out what you want, how you want, it means more to people, the right people, the people you respect, the people whose sensibility you got into the business to try to impress it has impressed those people.Michael Jamin:Tell me though, this takes me to, when you submit to let's say McSweeney's or any of these places, then are you writing with them in mind to this is what they want to buy, or are you just like, I wrote something and maybe they'll like it, maybe they'll like it.Mike Sacks:Well, you really do have to take in mind who you're sending it to. And I know this, having been friends with MCs, Sweeney's editors, they receive a ton of material that is not right for them. So don't waste their time by sending them something that is not going to be appropriate for the site. You really do. And that goes for anything that goes for Vanity Fair and New Yorker or anything. You have to know what they're looking for. And you can't be obnoxious about it. You can't say, this is a great piece, I want you to publish it, even though it's not right for the site. This is their site. I mean, this is right. That's up to them. And they have every right in the world to say, this is rightMichael Jamin:For us. But are you personally writing for them or have, or are you just writing and then you go, maybe they'll like it.Mike Sacks:Well, if I have an idea, I'll go through my mind. Would this be better for McSweeney's or New Yorker? And then you write, do have to play to the interest of the editors. You do have to play to what they're looking for style wise. If you're writing, none of these pieces would be submitted to the shouts and murmurs to New York. I just know that it wouldn't be accepted and they'd have every right not to accept it. But if there is an idea that does coincide with style and format to a specific magazine, I'll start thinking in terms of that and I'll start writing in terms of that. You do have to make it easy for the editors not going to want to rewrite, to take the time to rewrite what you're sending them. They want something coming in appropriate for the site or magazine and as clean as can be. And if you're difficult in any way, even if you're a genius, they're not going to want to work with you again.Michael Jamin:And they do give you notes, they give you feedback, and you got to take that because that's what they want.Mike Sacks:Well, what I found is typically the notes just consist of editing out, which is fine, rather than putting in, which was my problem with magazine writing was they would put in their own jokes. I'd rather just them I, I'd rather overwrite and have them take out.Michael Jamin:Now, aside from being really an honor, let's say, to be in the New Yorker, how does it help you as your career?Mike Sacks:I don't know if it does. I mean, I, embarrassingly enough, I never read the New Yorker until I was 25. Maybe I didn't know from it. And then once I did, I fell in love with it. I mean, I remember the first piece that I read in a public library in Maryland that just was blown away. It certainly doesn't hurt, but I don't think that, especially now with the daily shouts of murmurs, I don't think that will get you an agent automatically. I do think good things can come from it. Agents may reach out and if you have enough pieces you could put out in a book. But I don't know if it's a magic key to any kingdom. It perhaps used to be.Michael Jamin:Right. Oh, you think, why do you think it's changed then?Mike Sacks:I just think there's more opportunity out there for writers that can put out, there's a million places you can put up your own website and potentially be as read as by as many people as readers as the New Yorker has. I mean, this is all new. When I was first starting out, this was pre around the beginning of the internet, very few options. So there was Crack Magazine, there was Playboy, there was New Yorker, mad Magazine, maybe the end of National Lampoon. So six, five or six choices. Now there are thousands of choices. And if it's good, it doesn't really matter necessarily where it is, as long as it sort of stands out from everybody else.Michael Jamin:See, the thing is the game, the game has changed so much even in the last, let's say even 10 years, about how to make it as a writer. But I think, or screenwriter, and I think so many people are still hung up on playing the game the way it used to be played for some reason. I can't figure out why.Mike Sacks:I think so too. And that is something I try to tell young writers is that you don't necessarily have to play. If the game is working for you and you're getting in the New Yorker and you're getting an agent, fantastic. I mean, that's the way to do it. If you're not, you have to come in the back door. And that there even is a backdoor, I think is a tremendous opportunity. Right. Because I mean TV writing, how many voices would we not have heard writing for TV 30 years ago? I mean, a lot. Yeah. The avenues are much bigger now to hear a, which is better for comedy, a lot more voices, different styles of voices, there are fewer gatekeepers than there used to be.Michael Jamin:Now you never did, go ahead, I'm sorry.Mike Sacks:No, and to spend years of your life trying to do it the way that someone in the 1980s did, I don't think is conducive to any sort of success.Michael Jamin:Do you think it's do So what is it? Do you think it's just ego driven? Is that I want that pat in the back of having it in a New Yorker. I want the pat or the pat in the back of traditional publishing or whatever.Mike Sacks:Maybe. I mean it, it's, I think it goes for anything, but I think it's sort of basing your wants on a philosophy that doesn't have to exist anymore. It's like a restaurant trying to appeal to OTs. I mean, do they have to do that anymore? Do you have to appeal to only the New Yorker editor? Can you not put out what you want, how you want on your own? And that's another thing. You don't have to write for New Yorker. If you want to get into comedy. You can put out videos, you can put out standup, you can put out a one person show, you can put out a fake document. I mean, there's a million things you have to do. So to tailor your creativity into a mold that you don't want to fit in, I don't think is worth spending your time because there is no end of the rainbow necessarily. Even if you do get into New Yorker, I don't think your life is going to change to the point where it might have been worth it spending four or five years trying to do so while not using that time to put out your own thing however you want.Michael Jamin:Hey, it's Michael Jamin. If you like my videos and you want me to email them to you for free, join my watch list. Every Friday I send out my top three videos. These are for writers, actors, creative types. You can unsubscribe whenever you want. I'm not going to spam you and it's absolutely free. Just go to michaeljamin.com/watchlist.So it's not like you are constantly trying to come up with ideas and submit to the New Yorker. It's just like if they have something, you'll give it to them.Mike Sacks:Well, I did. I spent years doing that even before that, McSweeney's, and I love them both. I read 'em every day. I think the editors are amazing. I just don't, the ideas that I wanted to put across whether there was a fake novelization, whether it was a found fake memoir, whether it was a parody of a college catalog, whatever it was, didn't fit into that realm anymore. And I could've spent three years trying to get these books in there, and they probably wouldn't have. And even if they had, how would that have helped me? I think you really need, as a young writer, to sort of discern what you want to do and how you want to get it across, and what's the best way to do that? What's the best Trojan horse to get your idea into that castle? What's the best way? And if it doesn't consist of trying to get into New Yorker with a 1000 word short humor piece for shots and murmurs, don't feel that your writing is any lesser for not having for fitting into that category. You, there's a million ways now that you can get out your creativity and you don't have to go through traditional gates.Michael Jamin:The thing that I wanted to mention earlier is you were, because you said this is like, it's really about you can wait. You can spend years writing something or submitting something and waiting for the yes or waiting for someone's permission to take. And that waiting is fucking terrible. And if you put it out yourself, if you put your energy into something, more comes from it. You know what I'm saying? The more energy you put, the more creating you do, the more things that will happen if you just stop waiting around some sitting around begging.Mike Sacks:Totally. I mean, if you're going to wait for permission to achieve success, you're going to be waiting a long time. And really, this philosophy did not come for me, to me from writing. It came from music. I grew up in DC and I grew up around Discord records, which put out minor threat and Fugazi, and I always mention them because when I was growing up in the late eighties, nineties, they were doing, this is pre-internet, and they're putting out music on their own terms. And to me, out of DC, it was a miracle. I had never heard of such a thing. And they put out what they wanted, how they wanted. And to this day, Ian mackay, who ran Discord Records, owns all the rights. He only put out what he wanted, and he is living the good life. That to me, was really what influenced me more than anything.And after years of trying to break in, even when I did sort of break in, I found that it really wasn't worth it. And you found it wasn't worth it there. Well, no, it's not like you're tenured as a professor. Even if you get into New York, it doesn't mean you'll get in again. And even if you're in New York, it doesn't mean you'll get an agent. And even if you get an agent, doesn't mean that you're going to be able to publish your dream project. So I think really in the end, and we have this opportunity now to do so, you have to be in charge, good or bad. You have to put it out and just keep on moving. Don't stagnate. And I stagnated for a long time. You cannot. I did, because I would think of ideas and I would submitted and I would be accepted. Or I go to certain agents who handled my favorite writers and they didn't like it, and it would bother me. YouMichael Jamin:Feel like a failure.Mike Sacks:You feel like a failure. But even worse, you waste time. And what you find is as you get older is time really is the most important precious thing. Because there is limited time once you learn your craft to be able to put it out. And if someone is gumming up the system by saying, for whatever reason, I don't want to take on this project, I don't think it's worthy. Well, who gives a shit? You don't need them anymore. You don't fucking need them anymore. Put it out yourself like you would a garage band record and then keep moving. But whatever you do, do not stagnate. Because before you know it, 10 years have passed and you have produced nothing. And I'll tell you, there's nothing more depressing soul crushing than that. No one got into writing to be prevented for 10 years from doing something that's hell. And that out of everything is what you need to avoid, is you need to keep moving down the path.Michael Jamin:But the little X factor I think people forget about is the marketing aspect. People think, well, I can write it, but how do I get people to see it? How do you know, read it or whatever.Mike Sacks:I'll tell you, it's not as hard as you might think. The fact that word gets out there, especially in small communities, small communities go on small communities. So this small community I'm talking about is comedy. People who read written word comedy, people who love written word comedy. We're not talking about hundreds of thousands of people here. We're talking about a somewhat small community.Michael Jamin:So if you can, and where do you find this community?Mike Sacks:You find them online, you find them on podcasts, you find them on Instagram, you find, say, pat Oswald, who loves reading comedy, maybe he'll like this book. You send it to him. If it's a smaller project and you send it to someone who is famous, I don't think they're going to be upset about it. If you set, this is part of the marketing, Hey Pat, and I'm a big fan of your work. I put this out myself. If you liked it and only if you liked it, would you mind mentioning something online? And most people who are in comedy, remember what it was like to start off. Know what it's like to get a praise from someone who has followers and whose work means a lot to others. That's really how you spread the word. If you're, I took any of these books and sent them to a New York Times reviewer, they wouldn't know what the fuck was going on.And quite frankly, I don't know if the review readers would know what the fuck was going on. So you also do have to know your audience. It's like the alternative music I listened to in the late eighties, early nineties when I was at Tulane in New Orleans, working for the radio station. You know, appeal to those who like this music and it's new, so it's not going to appeal to everyone. And then hopefully a few years later, it will appeal to everyone. It does take some time. But until that point, you have to send your records to the college DJs. You have to send your records to people working in record stores. You have to pinpoint out who you're sending to, the people who are going to spread the word, the people who are coming up now and who comedy and who are going to be able to talk about it with their friends.Michael Jamin:And why not, though? I'm asking you personally, why not? Again, I think I know the answer. Why not write something more mainstream that you think will sell or whatever peopleMike Sacks:Will love. I just don't have any interest in that. I mean, it's like, why do I not listen to Taylor Swift? I respect her. I think she's amazing, I guess in theory, but I would rather listen to Portland, the man or whatever the music is. And I don't think that I appeal. You just sort of reach a point in your career where you have to say to yourself, I don't appeal to the mass amount of people. I mean, I show these books to my relatives. They don't know what the hell's going on. Which is fine. It's not for them. It's not for everyone. So I mean, I think really you have to put your head down and not even worry about that. But if it does come to you, sell the maximum amount that the public is interested in. Well, that's just the way it is. I mean, no one writes to, I don't think, to be popular. And you can sort of tell, I think like a, Paul McCartney and Elton John were just lucky enough to put out the records they wanted. And it appeals to everyone. But most people aren't that lucky. And I am one of those. I don't think that even if I wrote something to the top of my ability that I was completely happy with, it would ever appeal to more than maybe 5% of the readers.Michael Jamin:Well, here's a good segue. Read to this other book that you wrote, poking a Dead Frog, and this is available for everywhere. And these are conversations that you had you conducted with top comedy writers. And I think for this is particularly the place for, because I have a big audience who are into this, they should go check it out. There's a lot of really interesting conversations. Well, some were actors, bill Hader, but you also have, I'm just going through the list here. Yeah, James Downey, a lot of seven, eight live writers. James L. Brooks, you a got a lot of people. My buddy Mark Marin. You had a lot of people, a lot of really great people that you found. How did this come about?Mike Sacks:Well, that was through Selfish Reasons. That's the second book that I put out of interviews. The first book came out about five years earlier. That's called. And Here's the Kicker. And this is another case of wanting to do something and being prevented from doing so. That book, that first book, and here's the Kicker, where I interviewed comedy writers, was rejected 20 times really by publishers. The only reason why it was finally accepted was that I was friendly with an editor who used to work at McSweeney's named John Warner, who was working for a smaller publisher in the Midwest called Writer's Digest. It was only because of that book came out. That book came out when there was no podcast. Very little was out there about writing about comedy. I put it out only for the express selfish purpose of being able to talk to the people whose work meant a lot to me. I wanted to talk to them and pick their brains about how they got to where they got, what worked for them and what didn't work for them. Another thing was a lot of them were dying off. This was the first generation of comedy writers. Quite a few people I interviewed for that book were in their seventies and eighties and nineties, and they passed away shortly after that book came. How didMichael Jamin:You get contact with them?Mike Sacks:Well, what I found funny enough was the easiest people to contact were the older writers who were all on a o l at that time. They would get right back to you. They would not their assistant. Usually the font would be like 46 point. It'd be huge font. But they always got back to me whether they wanted to do it or not. The ones who didn't get back to me were the younger writers who either had their assistance say no or just never. I never, and to this day, I haven't received an answer from a lot of young writers, but the older writers always got back to me and usually said yes. In one case, I wanted to interview a comedy writer who worked in the early days of radio comedy writing. So at that point in 2007, 2008, there weren't many around. I reached out to someone who ran a newsletter on radio comedy shows, and he sent me a list of writers who still might be around out of that list. One was still alive, and I just happened to call the Town Council where she lived. I said, do you know a Margaret Lynch, a Peg Lynch? She wrote for radio. She goes, yeah, yeah, yeah, peg Lynch, we know her well. I said, she's still alive. She goes, yeah, there, she's still alive. She's 95 and she's doing well. So I called her out of the blue, and I think it was a case of her thinking, why has no one called me before?Michael Jamin:AndMike Sacks:Talking to her was really something. I mean, I did, I wasn't familiar with her, but after doing research, after we hung up and I said, can I call you back? She basically invented the modern sitcom. She had a radio, then a TV show called Ethel m Albert, and she wrote, I think 30,000 scripts for radio and for movies. Jesus, Jesus. Some of them lasting 10 minutes or so. But it was all based on real life. It really was Seinfeld before Seinfeld. And the stories that she came up with, for instance, one was she grew up in Minneapolis outside the Mayo Clinic. Her mom was a nurse there at 14 years old. Peg Lynch took it upon herself to interview celebrities, PA passing through the Mayo Clinic for her little radio show that she had in town. The first person she asked to interview was Lou Gehrig when he was at the Mayo Clinic being diagnosed with a L Ss.And right Lou Gehrig said yes to that. Wow. Which I just found incredible. She also interviewed Newt Rockney when he was passing through the Mayo Clinic. So just to be able to talk to these people from another World Bridge to another time, that was really my selfish reason. I didn't think the book would sell. I didn't think it would really do well. I just wanted a product that I could have as an excuse to be able to talk to all these great writers. Some of whom, and most of whom maybe readers that weren't even familiar with. This was just my going after readers, writers that I liked and writers that I sort of stumbled upon,Michael Jamin:But poking at Dead Frog. And again, comedy students should pick this up because it is helpful to hear you talk about people's processes, how they broke it, not just how they broke in, but also writing how they approach the material. And it's just very interesting. But this must have been an easier sell. No,Mike Sacks:Yeah, that was easier because the first book did well. So by the time and that came around, I did get an agent and he did sell, and I did get it in advance, so that was much easier. But it also started coming around that people were talking about comedy, more analyzing comedy, having websites devoted to comedy. But when the first one came around, there really was not much out there. ItMichael Jamin:Was. And how were you conducting these interviews? Just over the phone. Yeah.Mike Sacks:Typically I prefer over the phone,Michael Jamin:But some of them looked like they just weren't interviews. Some of these pieces looked like they were just submission. Like you tell, Hey, write something for my, tell your process. They've submitted you something. Is that right? I like Mark Marin specifically. Specifically. ItMike Sacks:Seemed like he, yeah, well, mark Marin, that that's a case where I actually didn't even reach out to Mark. It was someone who was doing interviews for me. He reached out to Mark, but in other cases it was like, Hey, show me what it's like to submit a packet for a late night show. Can you just show me your packet? And they, yeah, that interesting. Send me your packet. But in most cases, it was me talking to them either on the phone or in some cases in person, after many, many, many hours of research. And that was part of the problem. I didn't know how good they would be to talk to until after I did all this research. So in a lot of instances, I interviewed a lot research though. Well, I mean, for each of these interview subjects, I would do 20 to 30 hours of research, reading everything they wrote, reading every interview they've done. And you really don't know what they're going to be like until you talk to 'em. So in a lot of cases, a lot of people did not make the book because either through my fault or the way they were feeling that day or whatever, it just wasn't jiving. So even after having done all that research, I would have to trash the interviews. So what you see in that book is really maybe 60% of the interviews that I conducted entirely forMichael Jamin:That book. Oh my God. Because it's not a thin book. There's a lot.Mike Sacks:That was a long year, man, putting that thing together. I mean, likeMichael Jamin:A year, huh? SinceMike Sacks:Year.Michael Jamin:Yeah. Wow. I mean, so yeah, it's just interesting that you, like even Mike Scher in here, I mean, yeah, Mel Brooks, Amy Poer, a lot of really interesting people being talked about their craft. I thought it was very interesting. Now, let's talk real fast about this one. Woodmont, this is your phony college brochure, and it's pretty funny. What is the audience for this? It seems like this would be great to leave in a dorm room somewhere, but what fuckingMike Sacks:I, well, what I was thinking was that, that I wanted it to be confused with a real, real college catalog. I thought that it was sort of ripe to be made fun of, because those catalogs are pretty ridiculous. Unfortunately. The first publisher we took it to, I have nothing bad to say about them, but they wanted to put it out in digital form only, which I did. And it looked good. But I wanted something tangible that you could sort of send to people. And I then took it to,Michael Jamin:Go ahead. Go ahead,Mike Sacks:Please. I took it to another publisher who was willing to put it out in hard copy form.Michael Jamin:And where does it get sold then?Mike Sacks:It's online. You can find it anywhere. It's on Amazon. It's,Michael Jamin:I mean, it's pretty funny. Welcome to Woodmont. And I guess their motto is No refunds,Mike Sacks:Right? It's all money based. I mean, I think it costs 150,000 per semester to go there. It's just the shittiest boutique college you can ever imagine. Yeah.Michael Jamin:Yeah. It's pretty funny read. Yeah. But that's what I say when this is just something that you wanted to do and you say you did it. Yeah. Yeah.Mike Sacks:And a lot of people might think, why? And I don't have any answer for that. There's no good answer. I don't know. I mean, it did. Okay. People seem to it. Did it change my life? No, but it just seemed like I had to do it.Michael Jamin:I'll tell you why about, I'll tell you why I've been, because I perform, I've been doing some performances, my little one man show, and every night before I go out, you know, can hear the audience. And I'm backstage and I'm starting to get nervous. And I always ask myself this question, why am I doing this? And then I only answer I'm able to come up with is because I can.Mike Sacks:But it's more than can. I mean, you can go to Mount Aetna and try to climb it, but you're not, so what is it about doing that? Is that you need to want to share it.Michael Jamin:Something.Mike Sacks:Yeah. Some itch that needs to be scratched. Right? Very specific itched. You could be home relaxing with your wife and family, but you're out at this club at 11 o'clock at night. Why are so, I mean, the question is really, why are you doing it. What is it about doing that that you need to do that you would prefer doing over, not just doing nothingMichael Jamin:Relaxing? Right. And that takes me to my last thing, my last question for you had one of the great honor, I would suppose of your career is that you've gotten to open for David Saris, and I want to talk to you a little about that mean. Yeah. Which pieces are you reading or did you read?Mike Sacks:I would usually write these pieces special for these shows. I mean, I have been doing this for a little while now, and I, I've found that the pieces I would write for McSweeney's in New Yorker wouldn't necessarily connect with a live audience. But what David does, he's such a genius, is that he'll write these pieces that appeal to not only a live audience, but also to an audience at home reading internally. I don't know if any other writer who does this, and by the time he turns into piece to New Yorker, he'll know what jokes work and what jokes. I mean, it reminds me of what the Marcus Brothers used to do. They used to travel around performing these movie scripts live to see what jokes worked and what didn't. So he's really unique in that sense. But when I would read these pieces, the reaction would not be that good.So I sort of had to tailor these pieces to a live audience. And it's a lot of work. I mean, these pieces are really meant to be read once, twice, three times, and then they're never heard from again. But it is an absolute thrill to do this because I have been out on tour where I have read to literally no one. I mean, no one has shown up, and I refuse to go out on a book tours now because of that. I don't think one sells many books. So it's like being in a bar band where never, no one shows up to opening for the Rolling Stones. I mean, it's just huge. And the fact that he allows me to do that, I mean, there's no one of his caliber who is as giving to other writers and readers as he's just spectacular.Michael Jamin:And how did you meet him then?Mike Sacks:Well, I met him interviewing him for the book, my book, and we just became friends. I think we talked for four or five hours the first time, and we just connected. And he's just a very giving person. I mean, no, what he'll do, this is what he does. And I don't, no other au author would do this. No one. When I read for him, he'll sometimes say, listen, if you want my autograph, you want me to sign your book? And these lines are hours long. You can wait in line. But if you buy Mike's books, you can go straight to the front.Michael Jamin:Isn't that nice?Mike Sacks:Isn't that ama? I mean, who else would do that? So people just out of wanting to get that, getting through the line more quickly. They'll buy my books and they'll sell out and they'll talk to me for a second and then talk to Dave. But no one else is as giving no other writer. How manyMichael Jamin:Books did you bring that they sold out? I would be like, shit, why don't I bring more?Mike Sacks:Oh, I don't know. I mean, bookstores provide them, I'm guessing 50 maybe. Okay. And the 50 of each book. Oh,Michael Jamin:Okay. A lot.Mike Sacks:There's a few books. There's a few books there.Michael Jamin:Yeah. Are you going out with him again soon?Mike Sacks:Yeah. And in fact, he just asked if I wanted to do some shows up in Maine, and I'm going to beat, my wife is from Maine, but we're not going to be there up there then. But he did very kindly ask me to be open for him in Baltimore, which is what I've done in the past. I am from Maryland, south of Baltimore, near the Virginia line. Oh, that'd be great. I love Baltimore. And yeah, I, last time I invited John Waters. Wow. Someone on whose work I absolutely love and have been in touch with. And he showed up to the reading and got to see me read. I actually read something from the Woodmont College catalog and through in the John Waters reference, just to appeaseMichael Jamin:Him. Oh, that's funny. Wow. This is Mike. I want to thank you so much. This has been a very illuminating talk for me to hear from your side of the world. Tell me, me, plug your books again all and tell me how people can follow you and find you and your podcast. Tell me, plug away.Mike Sacks:Yeah, I am on everything. Instagram, Twitter, blue sky everyth, the new piss stream or whatever it is for Instagram. I forget what threads. It'sMichael Jamin:Threads. I couldn't even get on Blue Sky. I don't know. Good for you.Mike Sacks:Yeah, someone asked me if I wanted to get, I had no idea what it was, but I'll say yes to anything. And I have my own site, mikes sex.com. And then I'm also a Wikipedia page as well. And honestly, I know what it was like to start off and not to know anyone. If anyone wants to reach out to me, I'm at Mikebsacks@gmail.com. I'll answer any questions. It is not as hard as you might think to publish a book. And I always encourage people to do so because I love to see people skirting the system to get what they want made. I think that's very important. Don't ever think that there's someone between you and success, especially when it comes to comedy. Yeah. Anyone can do it. And if you have any questions, feelMichael Jamin:Free, reach out. Wow, that's very kind and generous of you. That's very nice of you. Mike, thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you, man. Thank you. Again, don't go anywhere I want to sign out. Alright, everyone, thank you so much for listening. Lots of great resources on my website, Michaeljamin.com. Sign up, we've got free webinars coming up and my newsletter. Alright, until next week, keep writing.Phil Hudson:This has been an episode of Screenwriters. Need to Hear this with Michael Jamin and Phil Hudson. If you're interested in learning more about writing, make sure you register for Michael's monthly webinar @michaeljamn.com/webinar. If you found this podcast helpful, consider sharing it with a friend and leaving us a five star review on iTunes. For free screenwriting tips, follow Michael Jamin on social media @MichaelJaminwriter. You can follow Phil Hudson on social media @PhilaHudson. This podcast was produced by Phil Hudson. It was edited by Dallas Crane Music by Ken Joseph. Until next time, keep writing.

Tim Hawkes started us off strong by talking about fighting against selfishness and even Catholic guilt. And that a kindness is kind if it delivers a benefit. Whether it is selfish or not doesn't matter.   Dave Roberts agreed that there can be ulterior motives to being kind; suggesting that if someone is trying to improve their status in the world by doing something for someone, that isn't kindness.   Atif Agha brought in the nuance that “selfish” has a negative connotation but doing something for someone that brings you self-enrichment isn't negative. However, a backhanded favor isn't a kindness.   My thoughts were – it doesn't have to be bad for me to be good for you. I don't believe in altruism. If you are kind to be manipulative, that isn't kindness.   How do you think kindness and selfishness are related?   Connect with the panelists: Dave Roberts: https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-roberts-56690513/ Teacher, co-author of the book When the Psychology Professor Met the Minister and a bereavement support specialist   Tim Hawkes: https://www.linkedin.com/in/timhawkes/ Managing Director of Unlimited Potential. Mental engineer and executive coach focusing on logical and practical solutions to challenging problems.  He is in the UK   Atif Agha: https://www.linkedin.com/in/atifagha/ Technology specialist doing data analytics and avid runner, based in Chicago   Dr Robyn Odegaard: https://www.linkedin.com/in/robynodegaard/ AKA Mental MacGyver. My doctorate is in organizational business psychology with a concentration in sport and performance. I provide luxury level, high performance support and coaching to executives, founders, celebrities and athletes.   Want a summary of the Quick Hits plus the links to the LinkedIn pages of each of the panelist to show up in your in-box every week? Let me know where to send it: https://drrobynodegaard.com/quick-hits-notifications/   #QuickHits are designed to exercise your brain by letting you listen in on an unscripted conversation to get other people's thoughts on pertinent subjects. If you would like to join a conversation or have a topic you would like to hear discussed, please message me. https://www.MentalMacGyver.com  

Brasserie d-Achouffe is a Belgian brewery that makes traditional Belgian styles plus Belgian interpretations of modern styles. Chouffe Houblon is their take on a DIPA. It's a 9% ABV made with Belgian yeasts giving it a fun, twisted take on classic DIPA expectations. Swedish berwers beerbliotek likes to play with different styles. Their releases have really run the spectrum of brewing possibilities. Purely selfish reasons is their take on a Belgian Tripel. It's got what you expect from the style to more less success. #beer #craftbeer #drinks #belgianipa #dipa #belgiantripel

➡️ Sign Up Today To Join The 'I Never Knew Tv' Movement:https://ineverknewtv.com/sign-upOn the 141st episode of The Bald Head-N-The Dread Podcast, Jr (The Bald Head) and Autarchii (The Dread) reason about people who do good deeds for selfish reasons and the importance of giving genuine support to others.➡️ Tune into 'I NEVER KNEW RADIO'Roots, Rock, Reggae MusicHosted By : Jr of 'I Never Knew Tv'https://www.WLOY.orgSunday 9 -11 AM ESTWednesday 8- 10 AM ESTThursday 10- Noon AM EST➡️ Autarchii - As The Water Flows (Visualizer)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyL23dzBnNk Marijuana Documentary : 'Cure My Pain'https://youtu.be/ChzR1D5z62w➡️ Listen To The 'Generation Gap Riddim': https://ingrv.es/generation-gap-riddi-3qn-i 

Aporia Magazine: https://www.aporiamagazine.com/ Bryan Caplan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University, and the New York Times Bestselling author of The Myth of the Rational Voter, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, The Case Against Education, Open Borders, and Labor Econ Versus the World. In this podcast, Diana speaks with Bryan about many topics (timestamps below), but centres the conversation around his book Don't Be a Feminist: Essays on Genuine Justice. You should subscribe to Bryan's superb Substack: https://betonit.substack.com/

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks to Bryan Caplan about Caplan's new book, Don't Be a Feminist: Essays on Genuine Justice. Despite what the narrow purview  the title might suggest, Don't Be a Feminist is a wide-ranging book that contains essays on IQ, immigration and identity politics, among other things (in addition, yes, to women's rights). Caplan is the editor and chief writer for Bet On It, the blog hosted by the Salem Center for Policy at the University of Texas, and a professor of economics at George Mason. His previous books were The Myth of the Rational Voter,  Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, The Case Against Education, Open Borders, Labor Econ Versus the World, and How Evil Are Politicians? Razib and Caplan also discuss his colleague Garrett Jones' new book The Culture Transplant: How Migrants Make the Economies They Move To a Lot Like the Ones They Left, the case for open borders, the cultural tenor of academia and its future prospects https://razib.substack.com This is where you will find all the podcasts from Razib Khan's Substack and original video content.  

Bryan Caplan is a Professor of Economics at George Mason University and New York Times Bestselling author.In this episode, we dive deep into his newest book, Don't Be a Feminist: Essays on Genuine Justice.Get a copy of Don't Be a Feminist here.Bryan has written The Myth of the Rational Voter, named "the best political book of the year" by the New York Times, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, The Case Against Education, Open Borders (co-authored with SMBC's Zach Weinersmith), Labor Econ Versus the World, How Evil Are Politicians?, and Don't Be a Feminist. His next book, Build, Baby, Build: The Science and Ethics of Housing, will be published by the Cato Institute in 2023.Bryan is the editor and chief writer for Bet On It, the blog hosted by the Salem Center for Policy at the University of Texas. He has published in the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, TIME, Newsweek, Atlantic, American Economic Review, Economic Journal, Journal of Law and Economics, and Intelligence, blogged for EconLog from 2005-2022, and appeared on ABC, BBC, Fox News, MSNBC, and C-SPAN.Subscribe Now and Join Me as we Explore The Truth Through Conversations With The Most Brilliant Minds. --- Highlights:0:39 Why Write Don't be a Feminist?1:20 What is a good definition of Feminism?2:30 Are women treated less fair than men in our society?5:50 Intimidation & Ideologies9:30 Is Critical Thinking Lacking in today's world?11:50 Moral Over-learning.19:10 What's education for?24:20 Social Justice vs. Genuine Justice.30:30 Closing remarks.

Bryan Caplan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University and a New York Times Bestselling author. He's written "The Myth of the Rational Voter", "Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids", "The Case Against Education", and "How Evil Are Politicians?", among others. He's joining us today to talk about his latest book "Don't Be a Feminist". Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Bryan Caplan is an economist and professor at George Mason University, the writer of the betonit substack and the author of many books: The Myth of the Rational Voter, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, the Case Against Education, Open Borders: the Science and Ethics of Immigration, and the newly released Don't Be A Feminist: Essays on Genuine Justice. Bryan's Susbtack:Timestamps:0:00 Feminism30:40 Wokeness and Anti-wokeness39:40 Social Desirability Bias1:00:45 Private Companies1:05:20 Rebranding Libertarianism1:15:15 Life as a Public Intellectual This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cactus.substack.com

Growth Hacker Marketing: A Primer on the Future of PR, Marketing and Advertising Kindle Edition by Ryan Holidayhttps://amzn.to/3dx1SM3It maybe fairly old by this point (8 years at time of writing) but by no means is this book out of date. When I was in tech start up world, this was my bible. If you've got a marketing budget of closer to zero than squillions, how are you supposed to create a movement around your product or service? How can you get to your first thousand - or million - clients?  Although written with SaaS founders in mind, I strongly believe there is something here for every person with marketing in their remit.Clients From Hell: A collection of anonymously-contributed client horror stories from designers by Anonymoushttps://amzn.to/3iR6aisA cult phenomenon among those who work in graphic, print and web design — and those lucky enough to have discovered the namesake blog — Clients From Hell has been bringing readers to tears with its unbelievable and always hilarious anecdotes from the twenty and thirty-somethings on the frontlines of design. It'll help you realise which clients to appreciate, and which you should probably shed for your own good.The Boron Letters by Gary Halberthttps://amzn.to/2IoofYtSeries of letters written by copywriting legend Gary C. Halbert explaining the secrets to effect marketing. This is a timeless classic that holds true even though the thoughts were penned as far back as 1984. Fewer people appreciate the power of words than Gary, and it all holds true today. If words are part of your service, this is a must-read.ReWork: Change the Way You Work Forever by Jason Friedhttps://amzn.to/3dr8oEfThis has been on my repeated reading list since 2017, but it has never felt more poignant and relevant than following the disruption to the way we work, due to Covid. From the founders of the trailblazing software company 37signals (the people behind Basecamp and more) here is a different kind of business book - one that explores a new reality and way of working. Essential reading for anyone who wants to make lean, remote working a long term part of their business set up.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Selfish Reasons to Move to DC, published by Anonymous EA on September 5, 2022 on The Effective Altruism Forum. You've probably heard the arguments for working in DC policy. Basically, the US government has lots of power and money, and it's possible to get into influential roles surprisingly quickly. But many in the EA community have a negative view of the quality of life of a DC policymaker: the hours are long; the policy wins are big but rare; the pay is terrible; the bureaucracy is even worse; and you can't wear jeans to work. Doing policy work in DC is sometimes framed as a noble sacrifice that EAs make in order to have a higher impact. In the run-up to EAG DC, I want to offer some reasons that DC is not only a great place from an impact perspective, but also a really nice place to live (for a certain sort of person). I think these selfish factors matter quite a bit for whether a career in the federal government is going to be sustainable for you over the long term. Note: I'm deliberately including some items on this list that will sound terrible to some readers, as long as they're perks from my perspective. The EA community in DC rocks. This honestly bears like 90% of the weight for me (and probably most EAs in DC). I've found the DC EA community to be by far the most warm and welcoming of any EA community I've encountered. One possible reason is that EAs who decide to come to DC are self-selected for being more extroverted than the median EA. There's also a strong culture of networking and making introductions in DC, which makes it easier to get integrated quickly. DC is beautiful. DC has tons of parks (the most of any major US city?), lots of beautiful architecture and lots of interesting trails to explore. It's a particularly great place for runners and bikers – you can feel like you're out in nature pretty quickly on a regular basis without needing to actually leave the city. The dating market is good. I haven't been on the market while living in DC, but friends tell me there's an abundance of young, fit, single, highly-educated, socially skilled, do-gooding people in the area. Non-EAs living in DC tend to be pretty impact-oriented and ambitious. It's not uncommon for my non-EA peers in DC to be really excited about the work they're doing and enjoy talking about their ambitions for impacting the world. It's not huge. Most places and people I want to visit in DC are at most 30 minutes away. In fact, much of the EA community in DC is very concentrated in just a couple neighborhoods. If you live in one of those places, you'll live within walking distance of lots of cool people. And because DC is beautiful (see point 2), the walks are pleasant. The food scene is great, especially for vegns. I honestly don't care much about food, but I hear that DC's restaurants are actually a huge draw for my foodie friends, particularly vegans and vegetarians. I've definitely appreciated the abundance of really high-quality and relatively affordable “fast casual” vegan-friendly spots around DC. Free museums! The Smithsonian museums are awesome, and it's pretty great to be able to walk in any day of the week without paying anything. Lots of free activities make it easier to live on the modest salaries of early policy jobs. DC is cool. Alright, maybe only according to me. But I think between the grand architecture, the security clearances, proximity to the “halls of power,” and wearing suits all the time, my life in DC is just a lot cooler than it was in other cities. Movies like “All the President's Men” and “The Report” convey some of the coolness of DC. You don't have to work in government. This isn't exactly a benefit — more of a PSA: it's not crazy to move to DC, even if you don't see yourself having a long career in government. It could still make sense to come to DC and wor...

Bryan Caplan and I discuss the ideas of the iconoclast social critic and psychiatrist Thomas Szasz. Dr. Caplan won the Thomas Szasz award in 2005 for his paper, The Economics of Szasz: Preferences, Constraints, and Mental Illness. We have a wide-ranging conversation about Szasz, his ideas, and how to help ourselves and others when struggling with life. Dr. Caplan shares some of his personal experiences with depression during Covid and how he got out of it. Related Episodes Bryan Caplan on Parenting: https://youtu.be/JM0dGLRgko0 Anthony Stadlen on Szasz: https://youtu.be/wzVVLgpgLBA Jeffrey Schaler on Szasz: https://youtu.be/7wySu4S1w14 Christopher Lane on Shyness: https://youtu.be/GrV46aVkNvM Irvin Kirsch on Antidepressants: https://youtu.be/PtubmyA3BgU Related Videos John Nash on Schizophrenia: https://youtu.be/SizS1nOOeJg Take These Broken Wings (Documentary about Schizophrenia): https://youtu.be/EPfKc-TknWU Titicut Follies (Mistreatment of Involuntary Patients): https://youtu.be/e-wVwtN5f-U Crazywise Film: https://youtu.be/IXnmBIYaIZE Jim Van Os on Schizophrenia: https://youtu.be/sE3gxX5CiW0 Chapters: 00:00 Intro to Bryan Caplan https://twitter.com/bryan_caplan 00:35 Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids https://amzn.to/3NZcxQg 00:56 How did you discover Thomas Szasz? 01:33 The Untamed Tongue https://amzn.to/3NYtTwI 02:07 Insanity: The Idea and Its Consequences https://amzn.to/3aAp3bn 02:34 Myth of Mental Illness https://amzn.to/3ANgIvp 02:57 Ceremonial Chemistry https://amzn.to/3P4IBU5 03:25 How long did it take you to understand Szasz? 06:13 What do you think most people misunderstood about Szasz? 08:14 Heavy drinkers respond to incentives https://wp.me/p8ReVr-1i5 10:55 How homosexuality got declassified as a disease 11:41 Transvestism 12:34 The Useful Lie https://wp.me/p8ReVr-1eT 12:56 Responsibility 14:34 Criticisms of Szasz 15:42 Szasz as a philosopher of mind https://wp.me/p8ReVr-rs 16:34 Scott Alexander https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/10/07/contra-caplan-on-mental-illness/ 17:53 Drapetomania https://g.co/kgs/5qVtCe 18:06 What was it like to meet Szasz? https://www.econlib.org/archives/2012/09/thomas_szasz_a.html 19:29 Suicide https://amzn.to/3RuQS5w 20:05 Why do you think Szasz wrote so much? 21:00 Did you get pushback when writing your paper on Szasz? 22:19 Shakespeare and Szasz 23:24 Has Szasz helped you in your personal life? 27:12 Brittany Spears 28:27 Addiction is a Choice https://wp.me/p8ReVr-9U 29:05 Karl Kraus https://wp.me/p8ReVr-1hz 29:51 Szasz's political beliefs 31:13 Suicide 32:29 Epicurus https://epicurus.net/en/menoeceus.html 32:54 Julian Simon https://amzn.to/3P4Kct3 35:17 Surround yourself with friends 36:11 How do you stay productive? 37:51 Lucretius http://classics.mit.edu/Carus/nature_things.html 39:01 How do you deal with depression during Covid? 41:16 Faith in Freedom https://amzn.to/3caLvIq 41:38 Free will https://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/freewill 43:38 Writing advice 44:45 The Baader Meinhof Complex https://youtu.be/2UPrDdb0r70 46:43 Economics of Szasz http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/pdfs/szasz.pdf 49:50 Rational vs. Irrational 52:53 Schizophrenia https://amzn.to/3AK5yb3 56:10 Biographies of schizophrenics https://amzn.to/3IBtJu0 59:15 Hearing voices https://youtu.be/sE3gxX5CiW0 --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/aaronolson/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/aaronolson/support

Bryan Caplan and I discuss the ideas of the iconoclast social critic and psychiatrist Thomas Szasz. Dr. Caplan won the Thomas Szasz award in 2005 for his paper, The Economics of Szasz: Preferences, Constraints, and Mental Illness. We have a wide-ranging conversation about Szasz, his ideas, and how to help ourselves and others when struggling with life. Dr. Caplan shares some of his personal experiences with depression during Covid and how he got out of it. Related Episodes Bryan Caplan on Parenting: https://youtu.be/JM0dGLRgko0 Anthony Stadlen on Szasz: https://youtu.be/wzVVLgpgLBA Jeffrey Schaler on Szasz: https://youtu.be/7wySu4S1w14 Christopher Lane on Shyness: https://youtu.be/GrV46aVkNvM Irvin Kirsch on Antidepressants: https://youtu.be/PtubmyA3BgU Related Videos John Nash on Schizophrenia: https://youtu.be/SizS1nOOeJg Take These Broken Wings (Documentary about Schizophrenia): https://youtu.be/EPfKc-TknWU Titicut Follies (Mistreatment of Involuntary Patients): https://youtu.be/e-wVwtN5f-U Crazywise Film: https://youtu.be/IXnmBIYaIZE Jim Van Os on Schizophrenia: https://youtu.be/sE3gxX5CiW0 Chapters: 00:00 Intro to Bryan Caplan https://twitter.com/bryan_caplan 00:35 Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids https://amzn.to/3NZcxQg 00:56 How did you discover Thomas Szasz? 01:33 The Untamed Tongue https://amzn.to/3NYtTwI 02:07 Insanity: The Idea and Its Consequences https://amzn.to/3aAp3bn 02:34 Myth of Mental Illness https://amzn.to/3ANgIvp 02:57 Ceremonial Chemistry https://amzn.to/3P4IBU5 03:25 How long did it take you to understand Szasz? 06:13 What do you think most people misunderstood about Szasz? 08:14 Heavy drinkers respond to incentives https://wp.me/p8ReVr-1i5 10:55 How homosexuality got declassified as a disease 11:41 Transvestism 12:34 The Useful Lie https://wp.me/p8ReVr-1eT 12:56 Responsibility 14:34 Criticisms of Szasz 15:42 Szasz as a philosopher of mind https://wp.me/p8ReVr-rs 16:34 Scott Alexander https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/10/07/contra-caplan-on-mental-illness/ 17:53 Drapetomania https://g.co/kgs/5qVtCe 18:06 What was it like to meet Szasz? https://www.econlib.org/archives/2012/09/thomas_szasz_a.html 19:29 Suicide https://amzn.to/3RuQS5w 20:05 Why do you think Szasz wrote so much? 21:00 Did you get pushback when writing your paper on Szasz? 22:19 Shakespeare and Szasz 23:24 Has Szasz helped you in your personal life? 27:12 Brittany Spears 28:27 Addiction is a Choice https://wp.me/p8ReVr-9U 29:05 Karl Kraus https://wp.me/p8ReVr-1hz 29:51 Szasz's political beliefs 31:13 Suicide 32:29 Epicurus https://epicurus.net/en/menoeceus.html 32:54 Julian Simon https://amzn.to/3P4Kct3 35:17 Surround yourself with friends 36:11 How do you stay productive? 37:51 Lucretius http://classics.mit.edu/Carus/nature_things.html 39:01 How do you deal with depression during Covid? 41:16 Faith in Freedom https://amzn.to/3caLvIq 41:38 Free will https://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/freewill 43:38 Writing advice 44:45 The Baader Meinhof Complex https://youtu.be/2UPrDdb0r70 46:43 Economics of Szasz http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/pdfs/szasz.pdf 49:50 Rational vs. Irrational 52:53 Schizophrenia https://amzn.to/3AK5yb3 56:10 Biographies of schizophrenics https://amzn.to/3IBtJu0 59:15 Hearing voices https://youtu.be/sE3gxX5CiW0 --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/aaronolson/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/aaronolson/support

There is no subject—not Trump, not abortion, not immigration, not taxes-–that is more contentious than the one we tackle today: parenting.  This subject has particular urgency because my wife is pregnant! As are two of my producers. But you don't need to be pregnant to be curious about the following: What is the right way to raise kids who become good, responsible, kind adults? Can we blame our problems as adults on our parents? What about Or do parenting styles not really matter? Is it nature that determines just about everything? That–and a thousand more questions–are what we discuss on today's show. So today: a debate with three parenting experts who have radically different ideas about raising kids. Bryan Caplan, an economics professor at George Mason, is the author of “Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids.” Michaelleen Doucleff is a NPR global health correspondent and the author of “Hunt, Gather, Parent.” And Carla Naumburg is a clinical social worker and the author of “How to Stop Losing Your Sh*t With Your Kids.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

https://youtu.be/FrAG6MpikUg Free markets are awesome because they give business incentives to do good stuff that sounds bad. Governments are awful because they give politicians incentives to do bad stuff that sounds good. Since the correlation between what IS good and what SOUNDS good is quite low, this is a huge deal. - Bryan Caplan, Ph.D. (December 27th, 2021) Dr. Bryan Caplan is the New York Times Bestselling author of Open Borders, The Myth of the Rational Voter, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, and The Case Against Education, has been blogging for EconLog since 2005. Labor Econ Versus the World collects the very best of his EconLog essays on the science and ethics of work. Odysee BitChute Flote Archive Spotify Apple Podcasts

Labor Econ Versus the World: Essays on the World's Greatest Market by Bryan Caplan. Ph.D.: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09QF44HHG/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_BJV0YJ2ZBJXKM9ACGTHX?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1 Bryan Caplan, New York Times Bestselling author of Open Borders, The Myth of the Rational Voter, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, and The Case Against Education, has been blogging for EconLog since 2005. Labor Econ Versus the World collects the very best of his EconLog essays on the science and ethics of work. ----------------------------------------- If you find value in the content, please consider donating to my PayPal KeithKnight590@gmail.com or Venmo: @Keith-Knight-34 LBRY: https://lbry.tv/@KeithKnightDontTreadOnAnyone:b BitChute: KeithKnightDontTreadOnAnyone https://www.bitchute.com/channel/keithknightdonttreadonanyone/ Minds: https://www.minds.com/KeithKnightDontTreadOnAnyone/ MeWe: mewe.com/i/keithknight25 Flote: https://flote.app/VoluntaryistKeith Gab: https://gab.com/Voluntarykeith Twitter: @an_capitalist The Libertarian Institute: https://libertarianinstitute.org/dont-tread-on-anyone/ One Great Work Network: https://www.onegreatworknetwork.com/keith-knight

The most renowned living public choice theorist, GMU economics professor and author of the books The Myth of Rational Voter, The Case Against Education, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids or Open Borders visited us #navrsku! Why are open borders the best recipe for massive wealth growth in the world. His book Open Borders is now available also in Czech language version! Najvýznamnejší žijúci bádateľ public choice teórie, profesor ekonómie na GMU a autor kníh Mýtus racionálneho voliča, The Case Against Education, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids či Open Borders nás navštívil #navrsku. Bavili sme sa, prečo otvorené hranice sú najlepší recept na masívny rast bohatstva vo svete. Jeho kniha Otevřené hranice je dostupná u nás po novom aj v češtine!

Najvýznamnejší žijúci bádateľ public choice teórie, profesor ekonómie na GMU a autor kníh Mýtus racionálneho voliča, The Case Against Education, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, či Open Borders nás navštívil #navrsku. V jubilejnej 100. časti sa bavíme o vzdelaní, školách a diplomoch. The most renowned living public choice theorist, GMU economics professor and author of the books The Myth of Rational Voter, The Case Against Education, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids or Open Borders visited us #navrsku! We are discussing education, schools and diplomas in our anniversary 100th part.

@IdeasHavingSexx on TwitterToday's Episode: Labor Econ Versus the WorldOther Books: Open Borders, The Case Against Education, The Myth of the Rational Voter, Selfish Reasons to Have More KidsBlogs: EconLog, Bet On It

This week, Byran Caplan, author of The Case Against Education and Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, joins us to discuss the causes of bloat in education, and why we might be better off with less of it. You can find Bryan on Twitter (@bryan_caplan) or check out his website at http://www.bcaplan.com/.

Appealing to the needs of your listener base is key to making a successful podcast. But there's one listener who has slightly different needs than the rest. Make sure you're fulfilling their needs too. What is it that you get out of experiencing your own show as a listener? If your answer is "I don't listen to my own show like a listener, just as I produce the episode, and that's enough.", then I'm afraid we can't be friends.  For those that do: why do you do it? What itch does it scratch for you? I've a few possibilities to consider: Listening Back Can Make You A Better Podcaster The craft of podcasting is one of continual improvement. And while I'm sure you listen to other podcasts to learn other techniques, you can't know why certain decisions were made by those other podcasters.  But you do know the what and the why of your own specific choices made during your own production process. Listening back to your episode when you're not in production-mode lets you evaluate whether or not those choices worked out in situ.  Listening Back Can Reassure You Are A Good Podcaster  Podcasting, like any creative endeavor, can leave you feeling quite vulnerable. Listening back to the way listeners listen can boost your self-confidence, give you the self-affirmation you need, and give you proof that yeah, you are good enough to keep going! Listening Back Can Keep You Humble Podcasting is often done in isolation, where it's easy to become a bit too full of yourself. This problem is compounded if you're not getting much or any feedback from your audience. It's up to you to keep yourself in check!  Listening For Defensive Reasons Someone is listening to your show. It might be your peers. It might be your competition. It might be your prospects. All groups of people you want to make a good impression upon. Listening back gives you confidence that you're putting your best foot forward. Listening Back Can Keep You On Mission Everyone has their own reasons why they podcast. What True North they're trying to reach. What greater purpose their podcast serves. You need to check the final product to make sure you are producing a show that is the perfect fit for who it is for and is, in fact, why they are there. ----- Links Getting more than 10K downloads per episode? Talk to https://evoterra.link/gumball (Gumball.fm)!  https://3clipspodcast.com/ (3 Clips) Email me! Over 100K active podcasters trust https://evoterra.link/buzz (Buzzsprout). Serious about podcasting? Join the https://evoterra.link/app (Advancing Podcasting Community) today! ------  https://podcastpontifications./ (Podcast Pontifications) is a production of https://simpler.media/ (Simpler Media). New episodes are released four times a week, providing ideas and questions every serious podcaster should be thinking about. It's created and hosted by https://twitter.com/evoterra (Evo Terra. Follow him on Twitter) for more podcasting insights as they come. http://alliepress.ne/ (Allie Press) assists with the production and transcription of the show. If you received value from today's episode of Podcast Pontifications, return some of that! We call it https://podcastpontifications.com/support (value-for-value), and there are many ways to show your support. This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Chartable - https://chartable.com/privacy Podsights - https://podsights.com/privacy Support this podcast

Women initiate the vast majority of divorces. It used to be that women felt the need to give a justification for divorcing their husbands. For example, they might say that he was emotionally abusive or neglectful. But today they increasingly no longer feel compelled to do that. Recent articles in the New York Times from Lara Bazelon and Vogue about the British singer Adele feature women proudly stating that they divorced husbands who did nothing wrong for purely selfish reasons. These powerful culture shaping organs are broadcasting to women that openly divorcing for selfish reasons is acceptable. They no longer need have a reason to dump their husbands.Lara Bazelon: Divorce Can Be an Act of Radical Self-Love: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/30/opinion/divorce-children.htmlVogue: Adele on the Other Side: https://www.vogue.com/article/adele-cover-november-2021Amazon Alexa Superbowl Ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxNxqveseyI

Bryan Caplan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University and the author of Open Borders, The Myth of the Rational Voter, The Case Against Education, and Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids. In our interview, we discuss: Causes of poverty Charter cities The case for open borders Democracy — is it overrated? Why do voters keep choosing bad policies? Do democracies last longer, grow faster, and go to war less? Stable global totalitarianism Should longtermists care more about having more children? Is the cost of subsidising a new life competitive with the cost of saving a life? What the philosopher Michael Huemer gets right How many kids is Bryan counterfactually responsible for? Life lessons from Hairspray and The Room You can read more about the topics we cover this episode's write-up: hearthisidea.com/episodes/bryan. If you have any feedback or suggestions for future guests, feel free to get in touch through our website. Consider leaving us a review wherever you're listening to this — it's the best free way to support the show. If you want to support the show more directly, consider leaving a tip. Thanks for listening!

Are there business benefits to family? Can running a business and a family actually make us better? This episode (light heartily) presents seven reasons why investing in family has some good payoffs for your business and includes a call-to-action. More information at http://Arise2Live.com #Arise2Live #family #businessowner

Bryan Caplan is a professor of economics at George Mason University. He is the author of The Myth of the Rational Voter, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, The Case Against Education, and Open Borders. He and Richard discuss their experiences in academia and why people get too much education and don't have enough kids. They also go into why parenting might not matter on average but having Bryan Caplan as a parent might, in addition to the ethics and politics of open borders, and how the conversation around the topic has changed.

Parents in the United States are spending more time and energy than ever to ensure that their children turn out happy, healthy, and successful. But what does the evidence suggest about the impact of their efforts? Economist Bryan Caplan (and the author of "Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids") argues that, despite our intuition that parenting choices affect children's life outcomes, there's strong evidence to the contrary. Bryan and Julia discuss his case, and explore what that means for how people should parent and how many kids they should have. Sped up the speakers by ['1.33', '1.0']

This Sunday’s scripture text is Genesis 9:18-28. The sermon title is:  The Curse of Ham: When Scripture is Misused for Selfish Reasons. Today’s scripture text is not in the lectionary and many in the church are unfamiliar with it. Beginning in 1830,  southern slaveholders began to misuse the text to justify slavery, disenfranchise people of color, and protect the role of honor in their psyche. Before we go judging slaveholders for their reprehensible behavior, I encourage you to pause and consider whether you have weaponized scripture to justify your judgement or criticism of others who live or think differently than you. If we are honest, we all have been guilty of misappropriating scripture for our own agenda, sometimes intentionally and sometimes unintentionally. Either way, what became known as The Story of Ham is a cautionary tale about how dangerous it is to mishandle God’s word. Jesus said the Word is spirit, truth, and life. Whenever we misappropriate it for selfish gain or to judge and criticize another, we engage in sin.     -  Pastor Felicia Introduction - "The Curtain Rises" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

For the inaugural episode of the podcast, Bryan Caplan talks with me about open borders, the idea trap, UBI, appeasement, China, the education system, and his next two books on poverty and housing regulation. Bryan Caplan is a Professor of Economics at George Mason University and a New York Times Bestselling author. He is the author of The Myth of the Rational Voter, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, The Case Against Education, and Open Borders: The Science and Ethics of Immigration.

I came perilously close to letting a friend down this week, but at the eleventh hour, for selfish reasons, I decided against it. This is the story. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/ckgoldiing/message

http://www.alainguillot.com/bryan-caplan/ What would it be like if the United States had open borders? If anyone could just fly to the United States and there were no immigration officers, you would just get out of the airplane, get your bags, and jump into your Uber. No passport, no nothing, just Open Borders. This is the scenario that our guest Bryan Caplan proposes with his book Open Border. Bryan Caplan is a professor of economics at George Mason University and a New York Times Bestselling author. He has written The Myth of the Rational Voter, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, The Case Against Education, and Open Borders. Byan blogs for EconLog, he has published in the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, TIME, Newsweek, Atlantic, American Economic Review, Economic Journal, Journal of Law and Economics, and Intelligence, and appeared on ABC, BBC, Fox News, MSNBC, and C-SPAN.

Bryan Caplan is an economist and professor of economics at George Mason University, research fellow at the Mercatus Center, adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and a frequent contributor to Freakonomics as well as publishing his own blog, EconLog. He’s also the author of the books The Myth of the Rational Voter, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, and The Case Against Education. He is a self-described libertarian and anarchocapitalist, but in his popular works I mostly think of him as a contrarian.

I came across this week’s guest thanks to the overlap of three passions of mine: data informed investing, value creation, and basketball.  Sam Hinkie worked for more than a decade in the NBA with the Houston Rockets, and then most recently as the President and GM of the Philadelphia 76ers. He helped launch basketball's analytics movement when he joined the Houston Rockets in 2005, and is known for unique trade structuring and a keen focus on acquiring undervalued players. Today, he is also an investor and advisor to a limited number of young companies in which he feels his experience can improve outcomes.  At one point in our conversation, Sam mentions that he tracked success via future financial outcomes, so I did some research and found many interesting stats about the 76ers surrounding Sam’s tenure. When he took over the franchise, it was 24th in ESPN’s franchise rankings, and today it is 4th. This is the result of an impressive crop of young talent—players like All-Star Joel Embiid and Ben Simmons—which resulted in large part from unconventional decisions Sam and his team made.  While I’m sure these estimates are imperfect, Forbes estimated the 76ers value at around $418M when Sam took over and $1.2B a few months ago. NBA teams in general have grown in value, so a lot of that appreciation is obviously “beta,” but given that the 76ers had the top percentage growth number more recently of any team, some of it is “alpha,” too. While we can’t parse the exact amount, it seems his unique approach to building a team clearly created some large amount of current franchise equity value. And it looks like the dividends from those decisions will compound for many years to come.  While basketball was where Sam plied his talents in the past, his approach is more elemental. It is about finding great people, using data, and structuring decisions that create the possibility of huge returns, be they financial or otherwise. I don’t know what Sam will do next, be it investing in companies, running one, or taking over another team, but I know it will be fun to watch.  Please enjoy this unique episode with Sam Hinkie.  For more episodes go to InvestorFieldGuide.com/podcast. Sign up for the book club, where you’ll get a full investor curriculum and then 3-4 suggestions every month at InvestorFieldGuide.com/bookclub. Follow Patrick on Twitter at @patrick_oshag Books Referenced Empire of the Summer Moon: Quanah Parker and the Rise and Fall of the Comanches, the Most Powerful Indian Tribe in American History Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent is Less Work and More Fun Than You Think Links Referenced International Justice Mission Show Notes 3:24 – (First Question) Advantages of having a long view and how to structurally harness one 6:08 – Using technology to foster an innovative culture             6:18– Empire of the Summer Moon: Quanah Parker and the Rise and Fall of the Comanches, the Most Powerful Indian Tribe in American History 10:16 – Favorite example of applied innovation from Sam’s career 11:34 - Most fun aspect of doing data analytics early on the Houston Rockets 13:38 - Is there anything more important than courage in asymmetric outcomes 14:29 – How does Sam know when to let the art of decision making finish where the data started 16:29 - Pros and cons of a contrarian mindset 17:26 – Where he wanted to apply his knowledge in sports when first getting out of school and how his thinking is best applied in the current sports landscape 21:39 – How does he think about trying to find the equivalent of mispriced assets in the NBA 23:12 – Where tradition can be an impediment to innovation 25:07 – What did the team and workflow of the team look like in the front office 27:03 -  The measure of truth in a sports complex 29:10 – What were the early factors coming out of the data that helped to shape NBA teams 30:42 – Best tactics for hiring 33:59 – Process of recruiting spectacular people 35:39 – Thoughts on fostering a good marriage 37:57 – Picking your kids traits in your spouse             38:02 – Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent is Less Work and More Fun Than You Think 40:45 – What kind of markers does he look for when evaluating long term investment ideas 42:44 – His interest in machine learning 45:55 – What’s more exciting, the actual advances in machine learning or the applications that can be imagined as a result             47:15– International Justice Mission 48:11 – How he got started teaching negotiations and some of the points he makes in that class 49:16 – Effective techniques for negotiating 50:03 – Is negotiating contentious, do you need empathy 50:41 – A Rorschach test of Sam based on his reading of Lessons of History (book) 53:01 – Biggest risk Sam took in his career 54:37 – Biggest risks Sam took while with the 76ers 58:09 – Do people undervalue asymmetric outcomes in the NBA 1:00:11 – The players Sam has enjoyed watching over the years 1:02:45 – Why Robert Caro is a favorite author of his 1:04:30 – Kindest thing anyone has done for Sam   Learn More For more episodes go to InvestorFieldGuide.com/podcast.  Sign up for the book club, where you’ll get a full investor curriculum and then 3-4 suggestions every month at InvestorFieldGuide.com/bookclub Follow Patrick on twitter at @patrick_oshag

Bryan Caplan is an economist and professor of economics at George Mason University, research fellow at the Mercatus Center, adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and a frequent contributor to Freakonomics as well as publishing his own blog, EconLog. He’s also the author of the books The Myth of the Rational Voter, Selfish Reasons to … Continue reading "The Turing Test #7: Bryan Caplan"

Ben and Kami discuss their biggest idea of parenting. How you see kids will change everything about what you DO. What are the pros and cons about seeing children as a gift vs a project, how do you know which you are doing AND how do you change? Selfish Reasons to Have more Kids: http://bit.ly/selfishkids Youtube Talk: http://bit.ly/2Kdl6eG Leave us a message: (206) 651-5744 Discuss on FB: https://goo.gl/THhxCF We're writing a book (get updates) https://goo.gl/wfaEaY YouTube: https://goo.gl/Uwo9wb Vlog: https://www.youtube.com/c/FightforTogether Our only financial support for projects comes via donations. paypal.me/fightfortogether Venmo - @fightfortogether CONNECT IG: https://instagram.com/fightfortogether/ FB: https://www.facebook.com/fightfortogether/ TW: https://twitter.com/fight4together FFT@crawfordlife.com RECORDED: April 4, 2019 --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/fightfortogether/support

I came across this week’s guest thanks to the overlap of three passions of mine: data informed investing, value creation, and basketball.  Sam Hinkie worked for more than a decade in the NBA with the Houston Rockets, and then most recently as the President and GM of the Philadelphia 76ers. He helped launch basketball's analytics movement when he joined the Houston Rockets in 2005, and is known for unique trade structuring and a keen focus on acquiring undervalued players. Today, he is also an investor and advisor to a limited number of young companies in which he feels his experience can improve outcomes.  At one point in our conversation, Sam mentions that he tracked success via future financial outcomes, so I did some research and found many interesting stats about the 76ers surrounding Sam’s tenure. When he took over the franchise, it was 24th in ESPN’s franchise rankings, and today it is 4th. This is the result of an impressive crop of young talent—players like All-Star Joel Embiid and Ben Simmons—which resulted in large part from unconventional decisions Sam and his team made.  While I’m sure these estimates are imperfect, Forbes estimated the 76ers value at around $418M when Sam took over and $1.2B a few months ago. NBA teams in general have grown in value, so a lot of that appreciation is obviously “beta,” but given that the 76ers had the top percentage growth number more recently of any team, some of it is “alpha,” too. While we can’t parse the exact amount, it seems his unique approach to building a team clearly created some large amount of current franchise equity value. And it looks like the dividends from those decisions will compound for many years to come.  While basketball was where Sam plied his talents in the past, his approach is more elemental. It is about finding great people, using data, and structuring decisions that create the possibility of huge returns, be they financial or otherwise. I don’t know what Sam will do next, be it investing in companies, running one, or taking over another team, but I know it will be fun to watch.  Please enjoy this unique episode with Sam Hinkie.  For more episodes go to InvestorFieldGuide.com/podcast. Sign up for the book club, where you’ll get a full investor curriculum and then 3-4 suggestions every month at InvestorFieldGuide.com/bookclub. Follow Patrick on Twitter at @patrick_oshag   Books Referenced Empire of the Summer Moon: Quanah Parker and the Rise and Fall of the Comanches, the Most Powerful Indian Tribe in American History Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent is Less Work and More Fun Than You Think   Links Referenced International Justice Mission   Show Notes 3:24 – (First Question) Advantages of having a long view and how to structurally harness one 6:08 – Using technology to foster an innovative culture             6:18– Empire of the Summer Moon: Quanah Parker and the Rise and Fall of the Comanches, the Most Powerful Indian Tribe in American History 10:16 – Favorite example of applied innovation from Sam’s career 11:34 - Most fun aspect of doing data analytics early on the Houston Rockets 13:38 - Is there anything more important than courage in asymmetric outcomes 14:29 – How does Sam know when to let the art of decision making finish where the data started 16:29 - Pros and cons of a contrarian mindset 17:26 – Where he wanted to apply his knowledge in sports when first getting out of school and how his thinking is best applied in the current sports landscape 21:39 – How does he think about trying to find the equivalent of mispriced assets in the NBA 23:12 – Where tradition can be an impediment to innovation 25:07 – What did the team and workflow of the team look like in the front office 27:03 -  The measure of truth in a sports complex 29:10 – What were the early factors coming out of the data that helped to shape NBA teams 30:42 – Best tactics for hiring 33:59 – Process of recruiting spectacular people 35:39 – Thoughts on fostering a good marriage 37:57 – Picking your kids traits in your spouse             38:02 – Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent is Less Work and More Fun Than You Think 40:45 – What kind of markers does he look for when evaluating long term investment ideas 42:44 – His interest in machine learning 45:55 – What’s more exciting, the actual advances in machine learning or the applications that can be imagined as a result             47:15– International Justice Mission 48:11 – How he got started teaching negotiations and some of the points he makes in that class 49:16 – Effective techniques for negotiating 50:03 – Is negotiating contentious, do you need empathy 50:41 – A Rorschach test of Sam based on his reading of Lessons of History (book) 53:01 – Biggest risk Sam took in his career 54:37 – Biggest risks Sam took while with the 76ers 58:09 – Do people undervalue asymmetric outcomes in the NBA 1:00:11 – The players Sam has enjoyed watching over the years 1:02:45 – Why Robert Caro is a favorite author of his 1:04:30 – Kindest thing anyone has done for Sam   Learn More For more episodes go to InvestorFieldGuide.com/podcast.  Sign up for the book club, where you’ll get a full investor curriculum and then 3-4 suggestions every month at InvestorFieldGuide.com/bookclub Follow Patrick on twitter at @patrick_oshag

Bryan Caplan’s claim in *The Case Against Education* is striking: education doesn’t teach people much, we use little of what we learn, and college is mostly about trying to seem smarter than other people - so the government should slash education funding. It’s a dismaying - almost profane - idea, and one people are inclined to dismiss out of hand. But having read the book, I have to admit that Bryan can point to a surprising amount of evidence in his favour. After all, imagine this dilemma: you can have either a Princeton education without a diploma, or a Princeton diploma without an education. Which is the bigger benefit of college - learning or convincing people you’re smart? It’s not so easy to say. For this interview, I searched for the best counterarguments I could find and challenged Bryan on what seem like his weakest or most controversial claims. Wouldn’t defunding education be especially bad for capable but low income students? If you reduced funding for education, wouldn’t that just lower prices, and not actually change the number of years people study? Is it really true that students who drop out in their final year of college earn about the same as people who never go to college at all? What about studies that show that extra years of education boost IQ scores? And surely the early years of primary school, when you learn reading and arithmetic, *are* useful even if college isn’t. I then get his advice on who should study, what they should study, and where they should study, if he’s right that college is mostly about separating yourself from the pack. Full transcript, links to learn more, and summary of key points. We then venture into some of Bryan’s other unorthodox views - like that immigration restrictions are a human rights violation, or that we should worry about the risk of global totalitarianism. Bryan is a Professor of Economics at George Mason University, and a blogger at *EconLog*. He is also the author of *Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent is Less Work and More Fun Than You Think*, and *The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies*. Get this episode by subscribing to our podcast on the world’s most pressing problems and how to solve them: type *80,000 Hours* into your podcasting app. In this lengthy interview, Rob and Bryan cover: * How worried should we be about China’s new citizen ranking system as a means of authoritarian rule? * How will advances in surveillance technology impact a government’s ability to rule absolutely? * Does more global coordination make us safer, or more at risk? * Should the push for open borders be a major cause area for effective altruism? * Are immigration restrictions a human rights violation? * Why aren’t libertarian-minded people more focused on modern slavery? * Should altruists work on criminal justice reform or reducing land use regulations? * What’s the greatest art form: opera, or Nicki Minaj? * What are the main implications of Bryan’s thesis for society? * Is elementary school more valuable than university? * What does Bryan think are the best arguments against his view? * Do years of education affect political affiliation? * How do people really improve themselves and their circumstances? * Who should and who shouldn’t do a masters or PhD? * The value of teaching foreign languages in school * Are there some skills people can develop that have wide applicability? Get this episode by subscribing: search for '80,000 Hours' in your podcasting app. The 80,000 Hours Podcast is produced by Keiran Harris.

Sponsor: Amazon Alexa Skills Udemy Course - Every business, blogger, podcaster, personal brand or anyone interested should have an Alexa Flash Briefing Skill... LEARN how to create one by clicking the link below. Discount is automatically applied when clicking the link below.  https://www.udemy.com/alexa-skills-how-to-create-an-alexa-skill-flash-briefing/?couponCode=TOMWICKSTEAD   Episode 20: I talk with Prof Bryan Caplan about his book "The Case Against Education" - Why the education system is a waste of time & money. About Bryan: Bryan Caplan, Professor of Economics at George Mason University and blogger for EconLog. I am the author of The Myth of the Rational Voter, named "the best political book of the year" by the New York Times, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, and The Case Against Education. I am currently colloborating with *Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal*’s Zach Weinersmith on All Roads Lead to Open Borders, a non-fiction graphic novel on the philosophy and social science of immigration, and writing a new book, Poverty: Who To Blame. I've published in the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic, American Economic Review, Economic Journal, Journal of Law and Economics, and Intelligence, and appeared on ABC, Fox News, MSNBC, and C-SPAN. An openly nerdy man who loves role-playing games and graphic novels, I live in Oakton, Virginia, with my wife and four kids. Bryan's book is available on amazon.com: https://goo.gl/yyxD4J Connect with Bryan on twitter: https://twitter.com/bryan_caplan Connect with Bryan on his website: www.bcaplan.com   ★☆★ SUBSCRIBE TO THE PODCAST ★☆★ ★FOLLOW ME BELOW★ ► Facebook: www.facebook.com/storiesinbusiness ► Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-wickstead-1a3245158/ ► Instagram: www.instagram.com/storiesinbusiness ► Website / Blog : www.storiesinbusiness.com ► iTunes : https://goo.gl/UMx32j ► Spotify: https://goo.gl/dqNhij   Tags: Entrepreneur Entrepreneurs Marketing Social Media Success Motivation Motivational Inspiring Inspirational Conversions Sales Sale Ecommerce Consulting start up business businesses Management Marketing top podcast business podcasts podcasting speaker public speaker keynote media best podcasts Inspiration Millionaires billionaires daily show weekly show successful stories in business Inspirational

Bryan Caplan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University. He is the author of The Myth of the Rational Voter which was named "the best political book of the year" by the New York Times, he wrote Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, and the newly released, The Case Against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money, which forms the basis of today’s conversation. He is currently collaborating with Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal Zach Weinersmith on All Roads Lead to Open Borders, a nonfiction graphic novel on the philosophy and social science of immigration, and writing a new book, Poverty: Who To Blame. His work has been featured in the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic, American Economic Review, Economic Journal, Journal of Law and Economics, and Intelligence, and appeared on ABC, Fox News, MSNBC, and C-SPAN.   We went an inch deep and a mile wide in this conversation. Discover why: Bryan, a celebrated career academic himself, thinks that the education system is a waste of time and money How today’s education system teaches for short-term memory retention, not comprehension Two solutions Bryan has proposed to help solve the problems with today’s education system   I didn’t agree with Bryan on a number of topics, namely, he seems to completely disregard the threat of technology and automation on employment, suggesting that there is a lack of evidence on this and using the fact that we’ve always created more jobs than we’ve destroyed in the past to forecast the future of employment. The thing about the past is that we never had technology like the kind we possess today and the kind we’ll possess in the near future.   He also says that people can’t learn how to learn. On the latter point, I suspect that this had more to do with the way I framed the question so as to not elicit the response I was expecting. A simple example of getting better at learning is teaching someone else what you’ve read in a book, rather than just reading the words on a page. This is more likely to aid comprehension and retention, at least in the short term.   Nonetheless, as you’ll hear Bryan suggest in the lightning round, it’s important to collect evidence and opinions from different fields, from different people, to get all sides of the story and challenge your own belief system and avoid confirmation bias. This is one of the reasons why I enjoy hosting this show so much - because I get to interview and speak with experts in their own fields who contradict experts in other fields - it forces me to expand my own view of the world. And when it comes to learning, Socrates was right, the more we know, the more we know that we don’t know. And that is why we keep learning. And that is why I keep interviewing thought leaders across a range of disciplines. With that, enjoy today’s conversation on the case against education with Bryan Caplan.   Topics Discussed: Why the education system is a waste of time and money Why College grads earn more than high school grads, on average, in the US Learning skills versus signalling employability The three traits that education signals Whether education and entrepreneurship go hand in hand Social desirability bias Summer learning loss Comprehension v Memory The threat of AI and automation on employment and how this impacts education Education ecosystem challenges Vocational learning Education spending cuts   Show Notes: Bryan’s website: Bcaplan.com Bryan on Twitter: @bryan_caplan Faculty page: https://economics.gmu.edu/people/bcaplan Bryan on Econlog: http://econlog.econlib.org/authorbcaplan.html   Get Bryan's books: The Case Against Education: https://amzn.to/2BMgPuE The Myth of the Rational Voter: https://amzn.to/2BPo5FS Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: https://amzn.to/2Lr9rUR   Join the conversation on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/futuresquared/ where you can discuss episodes, request guests, propose questions for forthcoming guests and access exclusive content and special offers! Listen on iTunes @ goo.gl/sMnEa0  Listen on Stitcher @ www.stitcher.com/podcast/future  Listen on Google Play @  bit.ly/FSGoog  ‍ If you've got any questions on this podcast feel free to send an email to steve@collectivecamp.us or tweet me on Twitter @steveglaveski or @future_squared  Follow me on Instagram: @thesteveglaveski Like us?  ‍ It'd make our day if you took 1 minute to show some love on iTunes, Stitcher or Soundcloud by subscribing, sharing and giving us a 5 star rating.  ‍ To sign up to our mailing list head to www.futuresquared.xyz  For more information on Collective Campus, our innovation hub, school and consultancy based in Australia and Singapore check out www.collectivecampus.io

It's not often I truly feel that a guest changes my paradigm on the spot - but this is an exception.This week we speak with Bryan Caplan about his newest book, The Case against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money. As Bryan explains, despite being immensely popular--and immensely lucrative—education is grossly overrated. Bryan argues that the primary function of education is not to enhance students' skill but to certify their intelligence, work ethic, and conformity—in other words, to signal the qualities of a good employee. In fact, decades of growing access to education have not resulted in better jobs for the average worker but instead in runaway credential inflation, yet employers still reward workers for costly schooling they rarely if ever use. Therefore, his recommendation is to cut education spending.Caplan draws on the latest social science to show how the labor market values grades over knowledge, and why the more education your rivals have, the more you need to impress employers. He explains why graduation is our society's top conformity signal, and why even the most useless degrees can certify employability. He advocates two major policy responses. The first is educational austerity. Government needs to sharply cut education funding to curb this wasteful rat race. The second is more vocational education, because practical skills are more socially valuable than teaching students how to outshine their peers.Bryan Caplan is professor of economics at George Mason University and a blogger at EconLog. He is the author of Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent Is Less Work and More Fun than You Think and The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies.http://www.bcaplan.com/

Florian Markowetz, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, gives a talk for the Oxford Autumn School in Cognitive Neuroscience, held in 28th-29th September 2017, Sherrington Lecture Theatre, University of Oxford.

Recorded live at the Piedmont Community Church in Piedmont, California on November 26, 2017. For more info on the church, visit our website at www.piedmontchurch.org.

Bryan Caplan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University and blogger for EconLog. He is the author of The Myth of the Rational Voter, named "the best political book of the year" by the New York Times, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, and The Case Against Education, forthcoming in 2017 from Princeton University Press. He is currently working on All Roads Lead to Open Borders, a non-fiction graphic novel on the philosophy and social science of immigration, and Poverty: Who To Blame. During this segment, we will attempt to answer the question of whether immigration, aka open borders, is a basic human right.  Listen in and call in with your questions, or comments, 646-652-4620.  Look forward to hearing from you.

Bryan Caplan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University and Senior Scholar at the Mercatus Center. Bryan is the author of The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies, named "the best political book of the year" by the New York Times, and Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent Is Less Work and More Fun Than You Think. He also blogs at EconLog. He is now working on a new book, The Case Against Education. Check out the show notes page to this episode at www.economicrockstar.com/bryancaplan where you will find links to all the resources mentioned.

Parents in the United States are spending more time and energy than ever to ensure that their children turn out happy, healthy, and successful. But what does the evidence suggest about the impact of their efforts? Economist Bryan Caplan (and the author of "Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids") argues that, despite our intuition that parenting choices affect children's life outcomes, there's strong evidence to the contrary. Bryan and Julia discuss his case, and explore what that means for how people should parent and how many kids they should have.

These studies are from our current series, both Wednesday evening and Sunday mornings.

Continuing through the Old Testament, we now turn to the book of 1 Samuel with a look at the beginnings of the Kingdom of Israel and the rise of David.

Calvary Chapel of Monrovia puts the values of absolute respect and unconditional love into action through the opportunities of service, community, and prayer. We believe that with service comes sacrifice, and we offer ourselves to the community of Monrov

My guest today is Bryan Caplan, an American economist and professor of economics at George Mason University, research fellow at the Mercatus Center, adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, and blogger for EconLog. He works in public choice theory. His books include The Myth of the Rational Voter and Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids. He has also written extensively on open borders and pacifism. The topic is economics. In this episode of Trend Following Radio we discuss: Voting, rationality Defining “rational irrationality” What voting patterns in America might look like if the American stock market looked like the Japanese stock market Economic growth in benevolent dictatorships vs. republics like the USA The anti-poverty program in China Caplan's view on immigration and its effect on the economy The case for more kids, and why Caplan was so passionate and so inspired as to put out a book on the subject Why genetics matter more than the style in which you raise your kids Thomas Piketty's “Capital in the Twenty-First Century” and wealth and income inequality Jump in! --- I'm MICHAEL COVEL, the host of TREND FOLLOWING RADIO, and I'm proud to have delivered 10+ million podcast listens since 2012. Investments, economics, psychology, politics, decision-making, human behavior, entrepreneurship and trend following are all passionately explored and debated on my show. To start? I'd like to give you a great piece of advice you can use in your life and trading journey… cut your losses! You will find much more about that philosophy here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/trend/ You can watch a free video here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/video/ Can't get enough of this episode? You can choose from my thousand plus episodes here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/podcast My social media platforms: Twitter: @covel Facebook: @trendfollowing LinkedIn: @covel Instagram: @mikecovel Hope you enjoy my never-ending podcast conversation!

Michael Covel speaks with Bryan Caplan on today’s podcast. Caplan is an American economist and professor of economics at George Mason University, research fellow at the Mercatus Center, adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, and blogger for EconLog. He works in public choice theory. His books include The Myth of the Rational Voter and Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids. He has also written extensively on open borders and pacifism. Covel and Caplan discuss voting, rationality; defining “rational irrationality”; what voting patterns in America might look like if the American stock market looked like the Japanese stock market; economic growth in benevolent dictatorships vs. republics like the USA; the anti-poverty program in China; Caplan’s view on immigration and its effect on the economy; the case for more kids, and why Caplan was so passionate and so inspired as to put out a book on the subject; why genetics matter more than the style in which you raise your kids; Thomas Piketty’s “Capital in the Twenty-First Century” and wealth and income inequality. Want a free trend following DVD? Go to trendfollowing.com/win.

See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

9 AM - Skechers Shape Ups for Girls may or may not be controversial; Should parents of obese children be taxed extra?; Bin Laden's son is mad at the sea burial; Author Bryan Caplan comes on to talk about his book "Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids".

Bryan Caplan of George Mason University and EconLog talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the ideas in Caplan's new book, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids. Caplan argues that parents spend too much time trying to influence how their kids will turn out as adults. Using research on twins and adopted children, Caplan argues that nature dominates nurture and that parents have little lasting influence on many aspects of their children's lives. He concludes that parents should spend less time and energy trying to influence their children. If parenting takes less time, then have more kids, says Caplan. The conversation concludes with a discussion of whether a larger population is bad for the planet.

Bryan Caplan of George Mason University and EconLog talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the ideas in Caplan's new book, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids. Caplan argues that parents spend too much time trying to influence how their kids will turn out as adults. Using research on twins and adopted children, Caplan argues that nature dominates nurture and that parents have little lasting influence on many aspects of their children's lives. He concludes that parents should spend less time and energy trying to influence their children. If parenting takes less time, then have more kids, says Caplan. The conversation concludes with a discussion of whether a larger population is bad for the planet.

Bryan Caplan of George Mason University and EconLog talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the ideas in Caplan's new book, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids. Caplan argues that parents spend too much time trying to influence how their kids will turn out as adults. Using research on twins and adopted children, Caplan argues that nature dominates nurture and that parents have little lasting influence on many aspects of their children's lives. He concludes that parents should spend less time and energy trying to influence their children. If parenting takes less time, then have more kids, says Caplan. The conversation concludes with a discussion of whether a larger population is bad for the planet.

Mike talks to one of his favorite economists: Bryan Caplan, a Professor of Economics at George Mason University. Professor Caplan is the author of multiple books, including The Myth of the Rational Voter, named “the best political book of the year” by the New York Times, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, and The Case … Continue reading "Bryan Caplan Interview" Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/the-politics-guys/donations Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brands Privacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy