Mediaboss Marketing

In the wake of Silicon Valley Banks collapse, followed by the FDICs decision to make good on all SVB deposits (even if they were uninsured), Ive seen one pundit after another describe the situation as nothing more than a bailout for the rich. Follow certain accounts on Twitter and you might think that SVBs client list consisted exclusively of libertarian billionaires.

Now if their criticism was aimed solely at rich investors, I might not say anything publicly. No ones going to shed a tear for the venture capital firmsand no one should. If someone wants to talk about how our industrys herd mentalitycontributed to SVBs fate, thats only fair.

What isnt fair, however, is acting as if everyone with an SVB account is the samefailing to distinguish between creditors and depositors, or between large and small businesses.Its easy to paint situations like this with a broad brush if you believe they only affect the richbut why should we lose empathy for hardworking people just because of where they bank?

Yes, when Eniac invests in a startup, we believe it could become the next unicorn or decacorn, and that it should make its founders wealthy in the process. But even as we hope our portfolio is full of future Jobses and Zuckerbergs (but better!), the key word isfuture.

While SVB hasnt released a detailed breakdown, Ive been told that the bank had thousands of depositors with fewer than 20 employees. The current reality for those depositors involves scrappily leading small teams to pursue their vision of building something transformative when they could probably be working less and making more money if they were at one of the big incumbents.Today, Americas mom-and-pop businesses are led by these entrepreneurs who are building companies in climate, healthcare, fintech, and more.

These are the founders our team has been talking to, listening as they strategized about how to ensure their small businesss survival beyond the coming weeks, and as they agonized over what this would mean for their teams. Their employees were suddenly left wondering if theyd actually receive their next paychecks, or if they might lose their jobs.

These are stories for the founders, not me, to tell. Most of them, of course, have been more focused on keeping their company afloat than on external communication. So Ive been grateful to those few who have been willing to publicly share their experiences:

Criticize the billionaires and the VCs all you wantbut remember that theyre not the majority of depositors affected by the news. Many future American innovators breathed a sigh of relief when they realized that their companies would live to fight another day and they could continue to employ the hard-working team members who depend on that paycheck to put food on the table.

Nihal Mehta is a co-founder and general partner at Eniac Ventures.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs ofFortune.

Go here to see the original:
Dont believe the pundits who conflate middle-class entrepreneurs and Big Tech. Startups are todays mom-and-pop businesses - Fortune

As long as the awful law exists, concerning which the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Monday, be careful what you say to, or write about, unauthorized immigrants.

Congress, in one of the federal governments increasingly frequent offenses against the First Amendment, makes it a crime if one encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in this nation in violation of federal law. Let the formulation of hypotheticals begin in order to illustrate the laws unconstitutional vagueness and overbreadth.

Suppose a pediatrician says an unauthorized immigrants child needs medical care that is available here but not in the country from which the immigrant came.

Has a crime been committed?

According to the Migration Policy Institute, approximately 11 million unauthorized immigrants have been here for almost two decades. They are a declining portion of the growing U.S. population 30 percent in 2007, 23 percent in 2018. And there is no reason to believe that Americans in their decency would tolerate the police measures that would be necessary to substantially reduce that number. Now, suppose you factually tell an unauthorized immigrant that his or her chance of being deported is small.

Did you criminally induce that immigrant to reside here?

Seventy-eight percent of unauthorized immigrants have resided here for more than five years, the institute says; 19 percent for 10 to 14 years, 21 percent for 15 to 19 years, 22 percent for 20 or more years. Twenty-four percent have high school diplomas or equivalents; 18 percent have bachelors, graduate, or professional degrees. Sixty-five percent are employed and 28 percent are homeowners.

How many U.S. citizens, in their many interactions with these people over many years, could be said to have encouraged or induced any of them to reside here knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that this is illegal?

The law in question provides enhanced penalties for people who encourage or induce illegal immigration for financial gain. Damon Root, who writes about legal matters for Reason magazine, published by the libertarian Reason Foundation, posits: Suppose an advocate of open borders writes a book arguing that restrictions on immigration are unjust and calling for unauthorized immigrants to remain, hopes for better policies, and fights for their rights. Selling such a book, Root writes, would seem to violate the plain text of the law at issue in Mondays oral arguments in the case concerning Helaman Hansen.

He was convicted, and given an enhanced sentence (240 months), for a fraudulent and lucrative plan that purported to enable undocumented immigrants to pay to become U.S. citizens. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit vacated his conviction last year, endorsing his argument that the law is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague. The law at issue is ominously symptomatic of casual violations of the letter and spirit of the First Amendment.

In the years since the 2002 enactment of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, speech restrictions imposed or encouraged sometimes that is a distinction without much difference by government have become more common. McCain-Feingolds purpose was to regulate the quantity of political speech: All campaign spending is, directly or indirectly, for the dissemination of political advocacy. Since then, and especially recently, government has become promiscuous and audacious in attempting to regulate speech.

The Department of Homeland Security failed to embed in American life a Disinformation Governance Board. But other government agencies have practiced what George Washington University Law Schools Jonathan Turley calls censorship by surrogate by, for example, numerous moderation requests to Twitter, and perhaps Facebook and other social media. Government, says Turley, cannot use private agents to do indirectly what it cannot do directly.

In the name of public health, government has encouraged the suppression of certain views about vaccines, masks and the origins of the coronavirus. In the name of national security, government sought to discredit critics of the false theory that the surfacing of Hunter Bidens laptop was a Russian intervention in the 2020 election.

After Silicon Valley Bank capsized, Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) participated in a Zoom call with other members of Congress and Federal Reserve, Treasury and other officials. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) says Kelly asked whether there was a program that could censor social media posts that, by sowing doubts about the banking systems health, might cause bank runs. Kelly denies suggesting censorship. Perhaps there was a misunderstanding.

Given, however, the governments recent attempts to shape the information ecosystem, and given the governments slapdash criminalization of speech by means of the law the court will consider come Monday, wariness is prudent.

George Will is an American libertarian-conservative political commentator and author.

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

Here is the original post:
How government casually violates letter and spirit of First Amendment - NUjournal

Greg Gutfeld has never hosted the Academy Awards, done carpool karaoke with Ariana Grande or chugged cocktails with Lizzo. Yet he's become the hottest name in late-night TV by sticking to a simple, but smart, formula: Cater to a conservative audience tired of being beat up by liberal Hollywood.

Gutfeld, a former editor at Men's Health and Stuff magazines, has been part of Fox News since 2007. But it wasn't until two years ago that he became a force that can't be ignored with the launch of "Gutfeld," which airs at 10 p.m. Monday through Friday. His program averages more than 2 million viewers a night, thanks in no small part to having Laura Ingraham as his opening act. But it's still impressive that he has more than five times the audience that "The Daily Show" can muster. On most nights, he has higher numbers than any of the network hosts, with Stephen Colbert as his closest competitor.

The fact that he does it with mediocre material and a minuscule budget shows just how hungry conservatives are for humor. Any humor.

"Gutfeld" airs from an intimate New York studio with lights so hot that you could probably roast a chicken on stage. After a snarky monologue, the 58-year-old host turns to four panelists, often regular Fox contributors hot-footing it over from nearby sets.

The mix usually includes a stand-up comic, a marquee name like Sarah Palin or Kat Timpf, a 34-year-old libertarian commentator who often looks embarrassed to be sharing space with guests her parents' age. When Gutfeld tried to explain the plot of "Indecent Proposal" to her, she reacted like he was trying to revive the telegraph.

"I don't even know who Robert Redford is," she said.

The conversation is sometimes interrupted by taped comedy bits, like one that imagined a Zoom debate between Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Vice President Kamala Harris. The impressionists were so awful that I wouldn't be surprised to learn they were volunteers from the studio audience.

Gutfeld himself is the show's biggest draw. He may come from a print background but he's got the timing and delivery of a veteran stand-up. I could do without his habit of teasing segments with corny rhymes ("There's no disputing/The downed drone was Putin?") but he seems to relish the fans' groans.

I wish he and his writers were more ambitious.

In mid-March, the war raged on in Ukraine, Silicon Valley Bank collapsed and Donald Trump inched closer to being indicted. But the show mostly ignored those issues, focusing instead on the threat of the woke movement.

Gutfeld routinely acts as if policies catering to trans people are the most divisive issue to face this country since the Civil War.

There's also a tendency to pick at low-hanging fruit way past its expiration date. A new Fox Nation documentary gave Gutfeld the excuse to once again go after Jussie Smollett, the actor who falsely claimed he was targeted in a racial attack more than four years ago. Gutfeld poked fun at Brian Stelter, who lost his high-profile gig at CNN seven months ago. The audience broke into applause when he compared Russian President Vladimir Putin to the Clintons.

Like a number of his Fox colleagues, Gutfeld seems to take particular delight in going after "The View," joking that Guinness World Records gave the panel the title of heaviest program in daytime TV.

An entire segment was dedicated to a recent conversation on "The View" in which Sunny Hostin admitted that she still has her groceries delivered to her home. Gutfeld and his cohorts reacted like she had sold classified documents to the Chinese.

After one particularly nasty joke, Gutfeld asked: "Did I go too far or not enough?"

Those who despise everything about Fox would answer: Too far. For those who would welcome a truly funny show from a conservative viewpoint, it's not enough.

Go here to read the rest:
Why Fox News' Greg Gutfeld is the king of late-night TV - Star Tribune

The Washington Post

The United States recently suffered the second- and third-largest bank failures in the countrys history.

This wasnt supposed to happen. A slew of protections were put in place after the financial crisis 15 years ago to prevent a repeat of big banks collapsing and nearly taking down the whole banking system with them.

But once again, the federal government had to step in with what amounted to a bailout of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank along with a bazooka of aid to prevent more banks from collapsing. Its welcome news that the dramatic action appears to have prevented other regional banks from toppling, too, though no one should be pleased. Bankers were once again taking unwise risks, and regulators were once again too lax.

Theres more to learn about all of the mistakes that led to this moment, but its already obvious midsize financial institutions need additional scrutiny. What is now apparent is that the list of too big to fail banks is far longer than most assumed. Congress and regulators have to face this new reality and rapidly adjust. Silicon Valley Bank was the nations 16th largest with about $200 billion in assets, and Signature Bank was the 30th largest with about $110 billion in assets.

These banks put profit over prudence. Silicon Valley Bank courted startups and venture capital money. Signature Bank wanted to be a player in crypto and real estate. Both had a heavy reliance on high-risk clients with many deposits well over $250,000, which is supposed to be the upper limit for insurance from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

On top of that, Silicon Valley Bank heavily bought assets that sank in value as the Federal Reserve hiked rates to fight inflation. When depositors attempted to rapidly withdrawal $42 billion earlier this month, the bank had no option but to sell those assets at a deep loss.

The FDIC, the Fed and the Biden administration calculated they had no choice but to make all of Silicon Valley Banks depositors whole. Among them were companies such as Roku and Roblox, which might have had to struggle to pay workers if they had lost their uninsured funds.

Then there was fear that panic might spread into a classic bank run if people and businesses suddenly withdrew money en masse from other midsize financial institutions. The risks to the broader economy and banking system turned out to be hefty. When the crisis came, tech luminaries and bank heads, some of the most vocal proponents of free markets in Silicon Valley, were willing to set aside their libertarian principles to plead for help.

Taxpayers were not on the hook for this bailout. Regulators used money from fees that banks pay to the FDIC. But a dicey precedent was set that all deposits of any size would be treated as though they were insured. Banks wont like it, but this new environment will likely require higher fees so the pot of emergency funding at the FDIC remains large enough going forward. If it is not, taxpayers could indeed have to step in directly as that fund is backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.

Originally posted here:
Another viewpoint: Bank failures will change system - Seymour Tribune

The 2024 Presidential race is a couple years away. It could be a pivotal election year for Libertarians the moment when we finally make a mark in politics. But, will we? Who are the 2024 Libertarian presidential candidates? Who else will run? Will Trump run again? And what about Joe Biden? Were all wondering what will happen in 2024, but one things for sure: 2024 is going to be an interesting presidential race.

Before I get into who our candidates are, let me explain what a Libertarian is. A lot of people have heard about Libertarians, but dont know what Libertarians believe. So, what is a Libertarian? That often depends on who you ask, but in my opinion, most people are libertarians or agree with much of the libertarian philosophy of live and let live. Libertarianism is a philosophy or belief system, not just a platform for a political party. You can be a libertarian without being in the Libertarian Party.

Libertarians believe in a small, fiscally conservative government. Libertarians are not anarchists (this is not to say that some arent). We believe in having laws and government, but that the scope and size of government should be limited. The role of the government should be limited to protecting people from harm and fraud not arbitrary rules or rules that enforce a groups cultural ideas.

Libertarians are generally conservative on fiscal issues and liberal on social issues. While you can be conservative in your own life, we dont believe in trying to enforce anyones lifestyle, morals, or choices on others. We love diversity and believe that no one group should try to control the choices of others through laws or government.

Theres no doubt the 2024 presidential race is one were all anticipating. But, will the Libertarians have a great candidate this time, or will we have a lack-luster, no-name, or not-so-libertarian candidate? I will be updating this post as time unfolds but these are the candidates that we think might run in 2024.

Right now the Libertarian Party only has two presidential candidates confirmed. There will be more candidates for sure, as this race is definitely one that Libertarians could do well in. So, whos running and who do we think our 2024 Libertarian presidential candidates will be?

Website: MiketerMaat.com

Mike ter Maat is a pro-reform police officer and an economics professor who graduated with a BS in Aeronautical Engineering and an MBA from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He later went on to get his MS and Ph.D. degrees in Economics from George Washington University.

In the 2021-22 election cycle, Mike ran as the Libertarian candidate in a special Congressional election in Floridas District 20. He served as a police officer in Broward County from 2010-2021. Mike has worked in finance, economics, and education for banks, the White House, and other organizations. He started his own consulting business in 2002 where he provided professional education to bank executives. He ran this business until 2009.

Mike pledges to a Gold New Deal. He commits to the decentralization of authority and the power of our government. He has created a plan that includes ending the federal reserve, limiting government spending, and allowing states to have a constitutional option to remain in the Union for purposes of defense only.

Website: https://donate.lars24.com/

Lars Mapstead is a lifetime member of the Libertarian Party and an active Libertarian. Lars grew up on a farm, without electricity or indoor plumbing. Despite these challenges, he was able to found several successful internet companies. Now he spends his time in the Libertarian Party advocating for limited government and taxation.

He supports ranked-choice voting, cutting regulations, and term limits. He has a detailed plan to win an electoral vote for the Libertarian Party. He believes there is no better way for Libertarians to gain power than to be the deciding factor in the presidential vote.

Website: VoteChaseOliver.com

Chase Oliver is the Libertarian candidate who disrupted the Georgia Senate race by forcing a run-off. Hes been called the most influential Libertarian in the US right now byRolling Stones, and hes just announced that hes exploring the possibility of running as the Libertarian Partys presidential nominee.

Ina videohe released on Friday, Oliver announced that he was forming an exploratory committee to seek the Libertarian presidential nomination. He is a likely contender for the Libertarian nomination because of his ability to garner positive publicity and connect with ordinary voters.

Unlike other potential candidates, Chase Oliver is adamantly pro-choice when it comes to bodily autonomy, not just for vaccines, but on the issue of abortion. This could become a deciding factor for many Libertarians and voters in 2024.

He is charismatic, energetic, and speaks in a way that voters resonate with. With a small budget, he was able to garner 2 percent of the vote in Georgia. He was one of the most successful candidates during the 2022 election cycle, which earned him a lot of media attention. Could his appeal translate into the party nomination? Many of his fans think so.

Learn more about Chase Oliver by visiting his website,VoteChaseOliver.com. You can also follow him onTwitterto learn more about him.

There are many potential candidates for the Libertarian nomination in 2024. Several Libertarian candidates have expressed interest in running, and many within the party would like to see them run. However, if they do decide to run they will need support from within the party to win the nomination. These are the three most talked about Libertarians. They hold a lot of promise in leading us to victory in 2024 if they decide to run.

Also Read: Chase Oliver, the Libertarian Who Forced a Run-Off in Georgia, Is Considering Presidential Run

Justin Amash, former congressman from Michigan, is one of the most popular Libertarians in the Libertarian party. In 2020, he formed an exploratory committee to seek the Libertarian Party presidential nomination. However, he decided shortly after launching the committee that 2020 wasnt the right time for him to run. Though many Libertarians want him to run, Amash has repeatedly told party members and the media that this isnt on his radar right now.

In spite of this, many Libertarians are still hopeful he will run in 2024, myself included. I believe he would consider running in the 2024 election if the timing made sense and he was in a position to run in a viable race. He expressed this sentiment to media outlets like USA Today saying, I want to do what I can to work from the outside to change things because Ive tried the inside and right now I cant get much traction.

I dont know if Justin Amash will run in 2024, but he is my ideal candidate. He has a strong sense of integrity and the ability to appeal to all types of people, including Democrats, Republicans, and Libertarians. With strong delegate and financial support from the Libertarian Party, I think he would be their best candidate.

Amash does not have a campaign website. He is not officially running, but he hosts a podcast where you get to know him better. You can listen to The Justin Amash Podcast here or follow him on Twitter to learn more about him.

Also read: Will Justin Amash Run for President in 2024?

Dave Smith is a New York stand-up comedian and libertarian commentator. He has appeared on Fox News, CNN, and many other popular media outlets. Hes known for his thought-provoking comedy and says he represents a new generation of pundits. He is a well-liked member of the Mises Caucus and a rising star in the Libertarian Party.

Smith has name recognition that is on par with Amash and is a first choice for many Mises Caucus members. Like many other Mises Caucus members, he became a Libertarian because of the Ron Paul movement. He likes Ron Paul because he challenged him to think differently about the government. He inspired him to read and learn more about liberty through authors like Rothbard, Mises, and Friedman.

He believes the Libertarian Party must fight harder against the tyranny of big tech monopolies which limit free speech and promote political correctness. Hes called overregulation of misinformation the biggest threat to liberty. He has also been an outspoken critic of Covid lockdowns and mask mandates.

Smith is appealing for a few reasons. One of them is that he attracts millennials with his charisma and humor. The millennial voter block may prove to be the deciding factor in the 2024 election. Although he has not stated publicly that he will seek the Libertarian nomination, he has said that its a possibility. To learn more about Dave Smith, you can follow his podcast Part of the Problem, where he discusses current events, government and foreign policy.

Also read: Dave Smith 2024 Will He Be the Next Libertarian Presidential Candidate?

Spike Cohen is a Libertarian activist and entrepreneur. In 2020, Spike Cohen was the running mate of Jo Jorgensen. He has a large social media following and is enthusiastically supported by nearly all Libertarians. He has not expressed an interest in running for president yet, but many in the party believe he would be the best choice.

There is a strong case for Spike Cohen as the Libertarian presidential candidate if he chooses to run. He is well-liked. He has an active presence in the media and can commit to campaigning full-time. He also has a background in web design and marketing.

Cohen started his web design company when he was still a teenager and retired from it in 2017. He now travels the country training Libertarians on how to run their campaigns and promotes a positive and principled message of libertarianism on social media, YouTube, and media appearances. He is what we Libertarians call a home-grown Libertarian, without the baggage of coming from the Republican or Democrat party.

Although its not clear if Cohen would even consider the nomination, he would be supported by most Libertarians if he was selected. Spike currently co-owns a news and entertainment company called Muddied Waters Media. You can also find him on YouTube at You Are the Power. Like most Libertarians, Spike is committed to working towards the partys goal of a world set free in our lifetime.

Larry Sharpe is a former marine and popular Libertarian from New York. He has not publicly stated any intention to run as a Libertarian presidential candidate in 2024. However, he has a lot of supporters in the Libertarian community who would support him if he decided to run as our Libertarian presidential nominee.

Sharpe is a successful entrepreneur who started and sold a trucking and distribution business. Hes also been a leadership coach who has helped other entrepreneurs, executives, and companies to develop stronger leadership and team-building skills. Hes been a guest instructor at universities including Yale and Columbia University.

He is highly respected in the Libertarian community for his grassroots campaigning and activism. As a Libertarian,he ran for governor of New York in 2018 and 2022. He was also a candidate for the Libertarian Vice Presidential nomination in 2022.

At this point, he hasnt mentioned anything about running as a presidential candidate in 2024. While it seems unlikely to me that he is interested in this role right now, I think anything is possible between now and our 2024 convention.

You can learn more about Larry Sharpe atLarrySharpe.com.

Former Democrat Tulsi Gabbard appears to be preparing for a run for president. She hasnt announced anything, but her recent departure from the Democrat party and subsequentcampaigning for MAGA Republicanscertainly hinted at a presidential run in 2024.

Shes also launched her own YouTube channel,The Tulsi Gabbard Show, which already has thousands of subscribers. As I mentioned in my video about her, YouTube is the largest social media platform for young voters.

I think she is keenly aware of the demographics she needs to win an election. This is also why I believe shes targeted MAGA Republicans. She and Trump may both appeal to the same group of voters voters who are fed up with politics as usual. Even with Trump announcing his own run for president, aligning with his base may help her if she decides to run herself.

She is well-liked by many Libertarians. On her show, she spoke with Ron Paul, a prominent figure in the Libertarian community. The two discussed civil liberties and how they are under attack in the U.S. She also changed her views on the second amendment. It looks like she is realigning her political views to attract a wider base of voters, including Libertarians.

At this point, it is unlikely that she will run as a Libertarian. It appears she is trying to win over Republican voters. Still, she isnt a Republican and has views that dont fit into any of the major parties. This is why some think she will run as an independent or third-party candidate and possibly as a Libertarian.

Historically, the Libertarian Party has not performed well in presidential races. In 2016, the party had its best showing ever with candidate Gary Johnson. Although he only received 3.3 percent of the vote nationally, this was a record-setting campaign for the party.

In the United States, many people are unhappy with the two-party system. Pew reports that almost half of younger adults wish they had more parties to choose from. This is most felt by millennials, who will have the biggest impact on the next election. With many young adults unhappy with how Biden has handled the economy, this could be the right time for a strong Libertarian presidential candidate to enter the race as an alternative.

We know that many in the U.S. are dissatisfied with the two-party system. Pew Research reports that nearly half of younger adults wish they had more parties to choose from. This discontent is most felt by millennials, who will have the biggest impact on the next election. With many young adults unhappy with how Biden is handling the economy, this could be the right time for a third party to shake up the presidential race.

Libertarians have reason to be optimistic in 2024. But, with the events currently taking place in the Libertarian Party, its hard to say if any candidate will have the funding or ballot access needed to win. It is now more important than ever for Libertarians to be engaged and active in their state parties.

In 2024, Libertarians will hold a convention to select the presidential and vice presidential candidates. The convention will be held in Washington, DC. To serve as a delegate at the national convention, you must be selected by your state party to represent your state as a delegate at National.

If you are not involved in the Libertarian Party, I hope you will get involved. If you are new to politics, I strongly encourage you to join my Facebook group, Pattys American Integrity and Liberty Group. We are a group of friendly people from all over the country. My goal is to help you learn about libertarianism and connect with like-minded, principled, positive people.

Help me spread the message of liberty to more people. Take a second to support Patty for Liberty on Patreon!

More:
2024 Libertarian Presidential Candidates - Who's Running in 2024?