I think this argument is invalid from the standpoint of what groups of people he is talking about. The people who tend to value free education by supplementing with tax dollars tend to vote democrat. People who want to keep education expensive and withhold tax aid tend to be republican. Particularly in these modern times: the exit polls show that the more educated you are, the more likely you were to vote democrat. The most educated people seem to be electing those who would like to make education low cost.

Given this, the argument that 'education is kept expensive to keep competition down' is unlikely (though not impossible) to come from an educated person...because the statistics show that this tends to not be the values of an educated person. The educated 'club' tends to value exactly the opposite, and wants everyone to be educated.

I think those are actually part of the brakes. I was once told ( but I never verified) that the braking system on a train is analogous to a power generator. All of the power dumps to heating coils, on top of the train.

This is incredible! Really nice post!

Very well pointed out.

I don't know if it's sexism; do you think the same thing would have happened if his co-anchor was a younger guy?

Shame on the helicopter reporter for not redirecting credit. That said, I don't know how many of us are evolved enough to redirect the credit to where it is due.

Pretty fun how it skipped once and exploded second!

For everyone who got the environmental twinges from watching this, good for you. Also, this isn't any worse than pouring a gallon of bleach down your sink at home...use more environmentally friendly soaps (bronner's soap, for example) if you aren't already.

You and @newtboy are definitely right; this is a case of extreme bias and corruption, instead of lack of understanding.

Also, thank you for sharing your story! It's really eye opening.

I find cenk and his crew difficult to listen to, but I watched long enough to listen to the actual 'meat' of their discussion (the first 20 seconds of video). They stated that the judge threw it out because the kid was unable to describe in detail what had happened. They then went on to describe how a kid that young might have a hard time testifying, and for the rest of the 12 minutes of video (I assume) added as much knowledge to the matter as any other group of people sitting around drinking beer.

IF cenk and his crew, the judge, the lawyers, or anybody in that courtroom had taken introductory level psychology in college (and I think they must have!), they would know that kids are the most unreliable witnesses possible. Their testimony should absolutely not be used as credible, because they will say whatever nonsense. For whatever deficiency anyone's college had in basic human psychology, if anyone had the computer skills to go to WIKIPEDIA, all of this could have been avoided: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyewitness_memory_(child_testimony).

With all the access people have to knowledge these days, the most tragic part is that nobody involved in this thought to actually verify their laymen ideas. The critical thinking skills displayed here is in high disproportion to the level of education.

It really freaks me out how they aren't aiming through the sights of their guns...

Thank you for posting pieces that challenge the viewer to learn and think critically!

It's extremely important to note that, at the collegiate level, it is taught in introductory sociology courses that feminism is exactly what she says it is. Feminism by its traditional definition is actually a pretty crappy thing, which most people from both sexes would agree on in modern times. While feminists have done wonderful things for women's rights, her message of gender equality is really refreshing.

Nice to know!

Roads aren't designed like this in most places because it's better to keep the water out; one wintertime freeze, and that entire parking lot turns into gravel.

Buttle is absolutely right; we don't know. Nutritional research continues as we learn more about about the incredibly complex biochemistry in our bodies. However, the narrator conveys this same idea a relatively roundabout way. We don't know what particular diet works best (he names vegan, paleo, and mediterranean diets specifically), but he claims that all of them will work well. We perhaps don't specifically know *why* they work, but there is compelling population level data to show that they do. We will eventually be able to unearth why they work, and then likely improve upon the diets further.