I watched the first few minutes of each. Rather appalling. Conferees desperately seeking epistemic closure. 1. "no matter how progressive their politics" they answer yes to two questions. This is an attempt to promote group think. These ideas are to be scorned before they are even understood. 2. "framing" is admitted to mean manipulation, but since it's *manipulation for our side, for good* then it's okay. Somewhere the Austrians are having a mirror conference, and all the words are the same, except for "progressive" swapped with "libertarian".
Well said. The idea that it's evil/misguided to believe that government spending is financed by borrowing and taxation is bonkers. The man is a quack and a fanatic.
It's just an alternative terminology apparently invented to make certain policies sound better. Could be good for (temporarily) exciting voters but it'll have absolutely zero lasting impact on policy. And fortunately so, because the idea that public spending comes for free is the last thing we need in countries such as Italy or Greece. And this is true even if some significant portion of it could and should be financed for free with monetary policy.
People who control the money also control the cognitive map. How you seek to debunk the false premises of that cognitive map is important. It can, in fact, reinforce the message that you are seeking to oppose because those false premises are commonplace myths we live with. http://www.skepticalscience.com/Debunking-Handbook-now-freely-available-download.html