I just joined IDW after being a regular YouTube and podcast fan of many of the Group leaders (whose Groups I also joined). So, I have a good idea of where they stand on most of their pet issues because of their willingness to engage in an honest debate. I also listen to podcasts of their opponents on single issues so as to confirm/modify/deny my own consensus of position.

However, there are several important issues that I believe need separate discussion Groups to provide a lasered and deeper focus to help -- at least me -- form a more informed opinion. In the absence of those Groups, please provide your most unbiased opinion of the best fact and logic based groups to join to get honest debates on:

1. Media Bias and/or Intentional Misinformation How do we mitigate it (from the left and right) (a) within the protections of the 1st Amendment, under existing or proposed governmental regulations, and within the environment of social media platforms who seemingly have the rights of censorship without the need to conform to the 1st Amendment?

2. Climate Change I believe it is real, has been real and will always be real. That is not my personal point of confusion. However, assuming there is a correlation between carbon emissions and climate change, I am confused as to which leads and which follows. I have a great respect for the need for skeptic thought throughout the scientific process -- and especially during a period when governments provide most of the funding with their own political bias that has the risk of incentivizing/penalizing research that does/does not agree with that bias.

Finally, what is a rational "100 Year Plan B" (for the USA and each country of the world) if there is consensus that climate change is human caused AND sea levels continue to rise and there are disproportionate weather impacts as it relates to local/regional/national/world economies, human migration, building codes, food resources, etc., etc. etc.? Having a choice between polarizing beliefs that climate change will be of minimal importance or that we have 12 years to save the world is neither comforting nor rational. At a minimum, we need the development and ability to implement a 3rd plan (in time) in the event that those two polar opposite options are both wrong.

3. Artificial Intelligence AI will have an increasingly disruptive impact at an increasing rate. The impact of it to make our lives easier, safer, healthier and to provide more discretionary personal time are the obvious upsides. However, what is the government's ability to mitigate economic and social polarization among its citizenry when jobs are lost that previously provided the source of income for personal standards of living?

Is it possible to have a world without significant work as we know it? If so, how do economies transition to that world? In the interim what happens to wealth of meaningful shareholders of Amazon, Google, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft and thousands more during that transition? Do they live in incredible luxury or does that become socialized in some sense? Will the cumulative past purchases of products and services of consumers be viewed as the primary source of funding for that accumulated shareholder wealth (i.e. similar to a co-op dividend or reparations for destroying jobs) in order to justify the socialization of wealth? How does shared prosperity affect the role (or need) for government? Will AI, provide our entertainment, plant/cultivate/harvest our food, build our homes, build the equipment needed to further build/maintain the infrastructure and equipment needed for the supply chain for our basic needs? How do these changes integrate or even interrupt climate change impacts?

4. Electrical Grid There seems to strong skepticism that solar and wind will solve the total energy needs for the entire world. Nuclear seems to be the most promising assuming it is safe. However, irrespective of what provides our electricity, what protections/redundancy to our systems do we have if a solar disturbance wipes out portions of our electrical grid including satellites? Unless homes and all the supply chains and delivery systems have a relatively continuous source of electricity, a regional or world wide catastrophe could occur. What is our true current state of vulnerability? How and how quickly can it be mitigated/solved?

The above is not an exclusive list, but I believe that they are a part of the fundamental questions needing answers to making informed decisions about the current direction we should be taking. Issues like social justice, terrorism, border security and even gun rights and abortion should be greatly mitigated if much of the above has a practical plan that is based on truth without excessive self-serving personal or political agendas.