0 Flares

0 Flares


Questions? Comments? Suggestions?

E-mail your feedback to!

11 Comments to “Contact”

  1. Frank Falupa // 2014/01/28 at 8:55 pm // Reply

    Liking the new show format. I agree somewhat with the person who said that they wish the broadcasts might possibly be longer. I actually enjoy the daily broadcasts and 30 – 40 minute lengths, but maybe have one day per week where a longer, more in-depth podcast could happen.
    Also, I would like to suggest for a guest, Neil Kramer. Very well spoken and very interesting individual. He just released a compelling, well-written book entitled “The Unfoldment”.

  2. Hey Guy and crew just listened to the new R Brand episode. Really like your break downs. Online political systems, 2016 federal elections in Canada has a new candidate, a computer.
    Michael Nicula – Participatory Democracy,
    IDEACITY 2013 On CBC Radio Part 4:
    Moses Znaimer’s ideacity Conference.
    And I’d also really like to hear an episode on The Dark Wallet by Cody Wilson and Indiegogo.
    Yaaa .
    Where Brand got a little hazy in the end, boxed in by lines being drawn in sand. Rather than try to dance around them.
    Use of the tools at hand and like all tools its how you use them. Hope Brand finds some more productive platforms that move beyond the cheap tricks of these tv interviewers.
    He should be the interviewer, the degrowth movement, transition towns, bitcoiners, Chomsky, Stephan Molineux, Jeff Berwick. Look forward to the day Brands on S L H S.
    Thanks for all the righteous work. Ben

  3. Hi Guy,

    I’ve added SLHS to the front page of

    I’m trusting that you’ll get some new toriffic listeners.

    All the best and bye for now,

    Barry Hoon.

  4. Hey Guy,

    I’m Dan Lett, a student and sessional instructor at UVic (Canada). I just wanted to write and show appreciation for the podcast. You’ve managed to keep the quality up during your transition to a daily show — an impressive feat. I have been trying to get my own podcast together for a few months now, and you’ve inspired me to get recording this weekend. Wish me luck.

    I noticed the banner on your main page is a bit mangy, so I remade it for you: . Feel free to use that if you like (totally rights-free imagery), but no sweat obviously if you don’t. Just a show of appreciation.

    All the best


  5. Matteo Masiello // 2014/02/22 at 7:49 am // Reply

    Guy, I really love your podcast and listen everyday. How do I post a comment on an episode? Specifically, it was the episode with Dan Carlin, whose podcasts I also listen to. Concerning the issue of addiction, I think that the argument lately is misguided. I live in the US by the way. I work in the child welfare system and when I see addiction amongst clients, it usually leads to the neglect and abuse of children, as well as domestic violence. I don’t think addiction is seen as a crime. It is a disease and there is assistance for it. Yes, there are several factors which may lead one into addiction – poverty for one, which is what I see in my line of work. And there is the tendency that addiction is something which crosses generations. There are many clients who were abused and/or neglected as a child and they get involved with drugs and/or alcohol at an early age and eventually become addicted themselves. Addiction is not criminal, though. It is what the client does while under the influence when it creates “a substantial risk of harm” to the child that it becomes the concern of the child welfare system. Now, in my particular system (I’m hesitant to say what state. Each state has different systems in place – some of which in my opinion are very laced when it comes to protecting children) there is an ongoing struggle we (the child welfare system) have with respect to make a strong case that the child is impacted. There might be a clear case that a parent is addicted to a substance, but if we cannot prove that the child has been impacted then we don’t have a case. We can offer the parent services, but without the court being involved, we cannot force anyone to do anything. Also, there are plenty of clients who are savvy in working the system. They know when to take drugs, how to take them, in order to create the appearance that they are clean and sober and complying with services. Most of the time they slip up and then we can prove our case and appeal to the court. If they don’t, then the child can be in a vulnerable state. Even if the parent or parents do use drugs, and someone else is caring for the child (another family member), then that drug use is okay in the eyes of the law. Addiction itself is not a crime, but the effects of it become one when the user becomes a threat to someone else and even to themselves. Why should it be any different? Concerning legalizing drugs, well, philosophically I can say that everything should be legal. But in reality, I wonder how much more of a mess things would be? People are still under the influence when using prescribed medications like oxyocodone, whether legally or not. If legalization is done, then what is the new criterion for enforcement? We can create a new corporate structure that will be allowed to produce the products and sell it. The ATF Bureau will have to have more resources to enforce it – same with local law enforcement. There will be the need to monitor usage when driving for example. What benefit will it present? More money for evil corporations. More government intervention whether through law enforcement or taxation. Would the revenue from taxes really be beneficial to the society? It seems that this argument is getting more attention due to the death of Philip Seymour Hoffman. This to me is another sign that those who support drug reform are buying into the celebrity culture which they also criticize. If heroin were legal, would Hoffman not have overdoses? People in his sphere of influence knew he had a problem (I presume) as it was known that he had relapsed a couple of years ago with pain medication and heroin. At least that is what was I heard on the news. Should I believe that? What did they do about it? Apparently he was functional enough to get away with it. His behavior was not criminal, but in the end it became so because he ended up being a threat to himself. If he had not died from the overdose I am certain he would not have been thrown in jail, but he would have gotten help (though that might not have helped.) What also concerns me about the argument made is that addiction is criminal because there are draconian drug laws. Well, yes, but that is not addiction. That is distribution, which means that is about money and commerce. Again, drugs were legalized then I wonder how much the government – meaning the general public too – would benefit. It will be interesting to see what impact legalizing marijuana will have on the economy in Colorado. Has medicinal marijuana use in California benefited the general public in terms of adding tax revenue and if so where is this revenue going? Sorry for the rambling, Guy. Keep up the good work.

  6. Hey Guy. I just wanted to say that I enjoy listening to your podcast. I reside in Canada and I have noticed you sometimes include Canadian material into your podcast subject matter, such as the Rob Ford saga. I was wondering if you have been following the pipeline project and the situation with the Canadian and American government’s in this issue. I think you should do a podcast on the tar sands in Alberta and discuss the pros and cons of a pipeline being built. I understand that we as north american’s have large energy needs to sustain our lifestyle, but I have heard that the environmental implications from carbon emissions could be very detrimental for future generations. Just would love to hear a podcast with your insights into the matter.

  7. The Bushism show is brilliant guy. A nice change from some the deeper more thought ful shows. Keep up the good work mate. You’re doing good. How about looking into to what john Lennon did inhis New York years?

    Send me a PO box number and I’ll post you some cdm.

  8. Paul Bollmeier // 2014/04/15 at 9:13 am // Reply

    Like your show. I was wondering if you could list the music you use for each podcast.
    Specifically I would like to know what the music was for the intro on your latest podcast episode 191.


  9. When possible please have Dr. Parenti on to discuss the events unfolding in Ukraine. Dr. Parenti will be able to tie in many of these events with the events we witness during the fall of Yugoslavia.

  10. Hi Guy!
    I hope you are ok. I found you a few months ago and am getting caught up on your past episodes and now it seems like you are on a rather long hiatus. I hope you will be back soon.
    Diane Allen recently posted…SLHS Update (05/28/14)My Profile

  11. l mckenzie // 2014/07/07 at 11:03 pm // Reply

    thanks for Edward bernays info; very interesting / informative

Leave a Reply to Matteo Masiello Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.


CommentLuv badge

0 Flares Twitter 0 Facebook 0 0 Flares ×