To add to your point, the futility of copyright enforcement in the digital age created a new industry in the form of DRM and YouTube auto-takedown algorithms.
Enforcement is more pertinent than policy. If their policy allows for such videos, but in practice removes them, it doesn't really matter what their policy is.
Spoiler: US Government spent more money than they had in gold reserves culminating in the breaking of the Bretton Woods agreement with European nations. The USD from 1973 became a fully fiat currency. So yes, if it deals with the US economy after 1970's, as the graphs indicate, it's inseparable from USD inflation most likely caused by government spending.
I'd personally categorize Paul Krugman as an idealogue. You might think the same of Bob Murphy and Tom Woods, but the aim was to offer a counterpoint to Krugman's ideas.
I believe you'd find the intellectual engagement and critiques within the podcast, not the subtitle.
The "Analysis/Bias" section of Washington Times basically boils down to: founded by religious people, uses language and SEO that they don't like, and publishes articles from scientists they don't like. I don't consider Washington Times as a paper of record necessarily, but I do think fact-checking is a much harder problem than people are willing to grant and the evidence listed in that section wasn't very edifying.
Some people volunteer at a food bank or shelter and some people volunteer by writing/maintaining open source code. It's for the common good and volunteerism is a good thing.
Just to clarify, are you speaking for the team to condemn extremism in general, or the specific belief in upholding the U.S. Constitution within the U.S., or something else?
Maybe I should pay attention to the discussion with the community when that occurs, but I'm interested in which "values" you take issue with. Care to share here?