Subscribe to Krystal Kyle & Friends On Substack!:
Follow Kyle on Twitter:
“The first time I ever really listened to Kyle Kulinski’s show was in the back of a cab last summer. The driver had his phone hooked up through the stereo and was pumping out an episode through the car speakers — loudly, as if looking to convert a captive audience.
“Do you like Kyle Kulinski?”
The driver, Ahmed, was a recent immigrant and apparently a die-hard fan of Secular Talk, the political talk show that Kulinski broadcasts on YouTube. I told him, yes, in fact. I do like Kulinski, had come across his show several years ago, and, all things considered, he seemed pretty good.
“He understands what we’re up against,” Ahmed said. “Like Bernie.”
But I was surprised to hear Kulinski’s name mentioned in the same breath as Bernie Sanders, particularly with such adoration. Because what I did remember about Kulinski’s show struck me as mostly capital-P “progressive” takes on the news — the left wing of the Netroots crowd more than the democratic socialism Sanders has popularized.
It’s an impression that wasn’t entirely incorrect.
“I have no time for philosophical, airy bullshit,” Kulinski tells me from his home in Westchester, New York. “I don’t want to hear about Lenin. I don’t want to hear about Marx. I just want a super plainspoken, straightforward agenda with a straightforward way of selling it.”
With over 800,000 subscribers and nearly 670 million total views on YouTube, selling a progressive agenda is clearly something Kulinski knows how to do — even Democracy Now, the long-standing flagship of progressive media, cannot match his reach on the platform. Chapo Trap House can certainly boast a wildly devoted fan base (and a not insignificant degree of media influence), but their audience is roughly half the size of Kulinski’s.
While Secular Talk might be more likely to be looped in with the progressive networks around Air America and Pacifica alums like Sam Seder than the more resolutely socialist world, Kulinski’s fiery rhetoric, razor-sharp class instincts, and knack for withering takedowns sets him apart from his peers. Judging by his rhetoric alone, he’s closer to a Eugene Debs than a Chris Hayes.
But unlike Hayes, Amy Goodman, or his friend Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks — who began airing Secular Talk on his web network seven years ago — the thirty-two-year-old Kulinski is virtually invisible in the mainstream media. Despite his enormous fan base, his show has never once been mentioned in the obligatory trend pieces on “the Millennial Left” pumped out by the prestige media. Nor has Kulinski’s name ever popped up at all in the New York Times, Vox, the New Yorker, New York Magazine, or the Washington Post, despite his leading role in cofounding Justice Democrats, the organization widely credited with sweeping Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the rest of “the Squad” to power.
Just last week, his Wikipedia page was deleted. The reason? “There is very simply no [reliable source] coverage of this person,” according to one moderator. In new media, he’s king — the Sean Hannity of the Berniecrat left. In old media, he’s nobody.
I suspect there are a few reasons for that. There is nothing “cool” about Kulinski’s show. (As a friend put it, “‘Welcome to Secular Talk’ sounds like something you’d hear on Egyptian radio.”) His no-nonsense social-democratic politics won’t get him much cred with the Full Communism crowd. He records his show not in Brooklyn or Los Angeles, but in a studio he built himself in his modest Westchester home. His hair is too groomed and his taste in clothes too preppy to qualify as “Dirtbag Left.” Nor has he ever attended an n+1 release party. “Not only have I not attended one,” he says, “I have no idea what that means.”
And yet he’s astonishingly plugged-in for a young man in the suburbs. Wondering how Sanders ended up on the Joe Rogan Experience? Kulinski, a frequent guest on Rogan’s wildly popular show, introduced them. “You make the most sense to me,” Rogan told Kulinski on a recent episode. “You’re a normal person.”
Much like Sanders himself, Kulinski’s show has a massive audience that just doesn’t compute with our media’s understanding of “what the kids want” or even “what the left-wing kids want.”
It’s probably for the best — the very woke and very WASP-ish decorum haunting much of the media world is nowhere to be found in Secular Talk. “Corporate Democrats over-focus on identity as a trick to divert you from the issues that unite us all — class issues,” he said on a recent episode.
Read More Here!:
#KyleKulinski #SecularTalk #news #politics #youtube…(read more)
LEARN MORE ABOUT: Bank Failures
REVEALED: Best Investment During Inflation
HOW TO INVEST IN GOLD: Gold IRA Investing
HOW TO INVEST IN SILVER: Silver IRA Investing
On a recent episode of The Kyle Kulinski Show, political commentator Kyle Kulinski delved into the unfolding SVB crisis, where two major banks faced collapse and subsequently received an instant bailout. This shocking development raises important questions about the state of our financial system and the seemingly never-ending cycle of corporate greed and government intervention.
The SVB crisis refers to the collapse of two big banks, whose identities remain undisclosed at the time of writing. This, of course, adds further intrigue to an already complicated situation. These two banks, on the brink of financial ruin, faced a massive liquidity crisis that threatened to shake the entire economic structure.
This crisis was not a result of unforeseen circumstances or natural disasters, but rather the consequence of reckless practices that have plagued the financial industry for decades. These banks engaged in risky investments and made questionable decisions that eventually caught up with them. In a truly free market, such mistakes would result in the downfall of the institutions responsible. However, as we have repeatedly witnessed, the concept of a free market is continually distorted by government interventions.
As the banks in question faced imminent collapse, the government swiftly intervened to provide them with a bailout. This instant infusion of vast amounts of taxpayer money saved the day, but at what cost? The working class, struggling to make ends meet, once again witnessed their hard-earned money being utilized to save the reckless and irresponsible actions of wealthy executives. The true beneficiaries of this bailout were not the ordinary citizens who rely on these banks for their financial needs, but rather the top-tier executives who reaped massive rewards while jeopardizing the stability of our economy.
The recurring pattern of bailing out these institutions creates moral hazards. When banks know that they will be rescued from the consequences of their actions, they are encouraged to engage in increasingly risky behavior. This dynamic incentivizes reckless decision-making and contributes to the systemic issues that plague our financial sector.
Moreover, this bailout sends a distressing message to the American people. It reinforces the perception that the government prioritizes the interests of large corporations over those of ordinary citizens. While everyday Americans continue to face economic uncertainty and struggle to put food on the table, banks are rewarded for their failures without taking any real responsibility for their actions. This disconnect between corporate welfare and the needs of the working class is a damning reflection of our society’s priorities.
The SVB crisis unveiled yet again the deep-rooted flaws within our system. It highlights the urgent need for comprehensive financial reform that holds banks accountable for their actions and ensures the stability and security of our economy. Ordinary citizens should not bear the burden of corporate recklessness, nor should they continuously bail out institutions that operate above the law.
As we move forward, it is crucial that we engage in open dialogue and activism to demand change. We must challenge the cozy relationship between government and big banks, demanding transparency, accountability, and a fair system that truly benefits all members of society. The Kyle Kulinski Show offers a platform for these important discussions, shedding light on the pervasive issues within our financial sector and inspiring others to take action.
In conclusion, the SVB crisis serves as a stark reminder of the broken state of our financial system. The instant bailout of two collapsing banks illustrates the continuing cycle of corporate greed and government intervention. It is high time for comprehensive financial reform that prioritizes the needs of the working class and holds irresponsible institutions accountable for their actions.
As an auditor, we always calculate how much of a client's cash is FDIC insured. It's a risk they knowingly choose, and they should have to face the consequences of their choices.
Great break down on how higher interest rates lead to banks collapsing due to long term bonds collapsing in value. You only lose money on the long term bonds if you have to sell early, which these banks did because of the bank runs. If they never lost confidence in the bank and they had time to wait for the bonds to reach maturity then the bank would have never failed
Day late
$100 short
Boring
Excellent commentary. It's socialism for the rich. Rugged capitalism for the poor. Sick joke.
Ethereum is a security.
Thanks for you're analysis on the situation Kyle. You've made it very easy to understand and combat bullshit oppositional arguments
Fucking idiot just blabbering for 20+ minutes and every listener is dumber for it.
Kyle…. do your homework, you sound so incredibly uninformed.
Just incase Kyle doesn't understand this, but no depositor has lost a penny since the inception of the FDIC in 1933. So depositors losing money would be the 1st time since the great depression.
Failing to distinguish the difference between a bank losing money on gambling and a bank having a short term liquidity problem (yet still having all the assets in full value) shows just how little you understand about finance.
Insuring depositors is not a bail out you goober. Insuring creditors and stock owners is a bailout.
FDIC insurance states coverage of "AT LEAST $250,000", not a maximum of $250,000.
Just to keep you honest, SVB has regular customers too. Plenty of regular people were helped out too… some may also be “well off” people too…. but acknowledged that they disproportionally serve tech and VC community. Don’t gaslight and says it’s exclusively a VC bank though.
How is all this legal? So rigged and corrupt
Not only small banks , big banks are in deep sh** too , check BOA
There's a simple solution that Kyle isn't considering. Every person in the US should own their own bank and mutually invest in each other's banks. No moral hazard if it's a bank failure and unlimited money for bailouts!
Supercast Premium Sub possible with SPOTIFY VIDEO? The new feature on Breaking Points is AWESOME! I would be even happier to do it for Kyle’s Secular Talk channel too
The banking industry lobbied congress to ease regulations that were put in place after the 1989, 1990 banking disaster/recession. It wasn’t long after lobbing, that regulations were eased by congress putting us back in the same situation that would allowed for the disaster to happen in the first place. . Thus the 2008 banking disaster! It seems congress never learns . . . especially when those campaign contributions keep coming in ❗
True everything u just said keep up work
Hi Kyle,
I thought I could offer some extra insight into the topic, as I felt like some details could have helped you to fully understand the reasonings and arguments being made.
I do want to state first that I fully agree with the fact that this is a bailout (although a different one than in ’08, bit more on that below) and that this bailout should not be happening.
The reason they say that it’s not a bailout, is because it is not a bailout of SVB and Signature. The shareholders of the bank lost their entire stake. The bondholders will also not be bailed out and lose their entire stake. Only the depositors will be fully bailed out. So only current accounts” and “savings accounts” (of companies) will be guaranteed by the government. This is different than in ‘08 where the government stepped in and provided the banks with extra liquidity by buying up “illiquid” assets (the famous MBS/CDOs).
(Funny thing, the US government ended up slightly above break-even on this “investment”, although the nominal return of 0.6% annually becomes negative when adjusting for inflation).
With the current “bailout” for SVB and Signature, unless a private investor swoops in, these banks will cease to operate.
Now, is this a bailout?
100%.
These firms knew that at a single bank, your deposits are only covered up until 250k USD. So it was poor risk management of them to not diversify their deposits over more banks. They should have done proper risk management as well and monitored the health of the bank where they had so much money on their accounts.
Like you said, the 250k USD was chose as a limit with regular people in mind, not large businesses.
Finally, a comment on one of the main arguments that is being used in favor of a bailout of these tech firms their deposits. The US is involved in a technology development war with China (cfr Chip Act, Inflation Reduction Act). If these technology firms lose their deposits, in an environment that has already been challenging for the sector, many might go bust and there will be less financing of new startups.
Although that argument may hold some merit, I think it’s vastly overstated and it’s the investors of these tech startups, the venture capitalists, that have been pushing to prevent losing their money.
Hope this extra information helps you to pinpoint even more the exact issues of the situation, but your main analysis holds: privatize the gains and socialize the losses.
schniff
This is the kind of thing that inspired the invention of the guillotine.
I think the FDIC should insure deposits of up to $5.75 million because of inflation.
The $250k amount hasn’t changed since 1933.
I’m glad the right and left leaning people can come together and chuckle worrisomely at the collapse of stupid big banks
It’s hard to have hope when this kind of stuff continues to happen. The future looks like a fucking dark dark place.
If I start eating a lot, when will I be too big to fail?
NO SOUP FOR YOU!
#BoostingTheAlgorithm I can't believe you're at 993k now – so close to that 1M!!
It's just depressing how predictable and recyclable this story has become
Lots of start ups would have gone out of business with the funds the start ups had in their accounts. Works have been bad for many workers.
No such thing as “too big to fail!” I say.
God Kyle I can't with that hair
Personal debt of any kind isn't forgiven because the country itself has bonds to pay back to investors. It will take another American Revolution to change this.
This is vintage Kyle. Gotta love it when he gets pissed. Thank you for calling out the bs
It's okay. If we vote democrat it'll eventually get better. Trump caused this so even though Biden is bailing them out remember vote blue no matter who even though red and blue are just two wings of the same corporatacracy
https://youtube.com/shorts/JFQMyxbMkcs?feature=share
10:28 which democrats? Any justice democrats or those from the squad?
Big business always gets bailed out fast. It's almost like the corporations took over our government. That would basically be high treason…
One of your best videos, you really shine when it comes to this 2008-esque stuff