Speaker 1: Hello, Welcome to another episode of The Markma Show, where
Speaker 1: we talk about bitcoin, we talk about cryptocurrencies, we talk
Speaker 1: about the decentralized revolution that we're living through that we're
Speaker 1: witnessing right now, and it's apparent from a bunch of
Speaker 1: different standpoints. It's apparent where we can see the centralization
Speaker 1: of governments, the centralization of money, the centralation of healthcare,
Speaker 1: all of that at an all time I and at
Speaker 1: the same time an equal and opposite reaction. It's being
Speaker 1: pushed back, it's being rejected everywhere, and we're seeing how
Speaker 1: centralized finances somewhat under attack from decentralized finance, except for
Speaker 1: it's more like centralized finances actually attacking the decentralized finance
Speaker 1: right now. I've been talking a lot about that UM
Speaker 1: in some previous segments. I'm not gonna go super deep
Speaker 1: into it, but we can see that this supposed decentralized
Speaker 1: finances defied spaces under attack and potentially bringing down not
Speaker 1: just the cryptocurrency space, but a lot of the traditional
Speaker 1: finance space at all. But of course it's a traditional
Speaker 1: finance space that it's attacking it. UM, And there's just
Speaker 1: so much going on here UM because of this, Uh,
Speaker 1: we'll call it a meltdown almost if you will. I mean,
Speaker 1: we see some of these cryptocurrency positions are down fifty
Speaker 1: sixty most of the defied protocols are down over eight percent,
Speaker 1: and then of course the bitcoin miners, UM, the exchanges
Speaker 1: like coin base are getting completely hammered. We saw this week.
Speaker 1: UM lots of earning reports have been coming out from
Speaker 1: all different types of companies and they're not looking good.
Speaker 1: Most companies are losing lots of money, and one of
Speaker 1: them in the cryptocurrency spaces coin Base now coin base
Speaker 1: coin bas is one of the largest exchanges, one of
Speaker 1: the oldest exchanges. They've been helping people get into bitcoin
Speaker 1: since I think about twenty sixteen, maybe earlier. If I'm wrong,
Speaker 1: so apologizes I didn't look that up ahead of time.
Speaker 1: But they've been around a long time and they've helped
Speaker 1: millions and millions and millions of people get into bitcoin.
Speaker 1: Of course, over the years, they started get into all
Speaker 1: the different cryptocurrency assets that are out there, and they're
Speaker 1: not really the biggest friends of bitcoin to say the least,
Speaker 1: which is why I typically like to UM send my
Speaker 1: bitcoin business over to Swan Bitcoin or River or companies
Speaker 1: that are more friendly just specifically to bitcoin. But coin
Speaker 1: Base has moved into this kind of cryptocurrency casino, if
Speaker 1: you will, and they have been hit very, very hard,
Speaker 1: I believe partially because they have a massive amount of
Speaker 1: their money in those cryptocurrencies, as well as as prices
Speaker 1: have been continuing to fall. We basically have been off
Speaker 1: of our high since last November. UM as the market
Speaker 1: has been continuing to fall, people don't want to buy
Speaker 1: as much, and they make their money from transactions from exchanges,
Speaker 1: and if people aren't doing that, they're not making much money.
Speaker 1: We saw we saw that the founder, the CEO s
Speaker 1: net worth has dropped from about almost fourteen billion in
Speaker 1: November of last year down to about two and a
Speaker 1: half billion today two point two billion today, which UM
Speaker 1: two point two billions. Still a lot of money. I'm
Speaker 1: sure each of us would be happy to have that
Speaker 1: amount of money, but you know, you don't understand his
Speaker 1: whole situation, and losing that much could be bad, especially
Speaker 1: if you were levered up against that using debt at all,
Speaker 1: which I don't know if he was. I'm not using
Speaker 1: that speculation, but it seems like the hits on coin
Speaker 1: Base just continue to just continue to mount up on it. Now.
Speaker 1: Coin Base is a publicly traded company. It's called coin
Speaker 1: c O I N. And part of their reports that
Speaker 1: they put out are, you know, obviously on their financials
Speaker 1: um explaining how they lost all their revenues. It wasn't
Speaker 1: too good, but some of the other parts that came
Speaker 1: out in their reports were much more alarming, to say
Speaker 1: the least. Now in bitcoin and probably in greater crypto
Speaker 1: you might hear as well, but we say, um in bitcoin,
Speaker 1: not your keys, not your coins. So what does that mean? Well,
Speaker 1: if you don't have your keys, then somebody else does.
Speaker 1: And I mean somebody else has the keys? Who your
Speaker 1: own coins? Which means if you don't have the keys,
Speaker 1: you don't really have the coins. Whoever has the keys
Speaker 1: does um. And this is uh the information that came
Speaker 1: out on coin base in regards to that specifically, it's
Speaker 1: pretty bad, it's pretty scary. It's been making big ripples
Speaker 1: around the cryptocurrency space, and I want to bring it
Speaker 1: to you because it is dangerous and you need to
Speaker 1: know about it now to kind of frame this up.
Speaker 1: If you don't know what I'm talking about, what the
Speaker 1: heck are keys I'm gonna give you a super high
Speaker 1: level view. Okay, Um, I'm not gonna spend a lot
Speaker 1: of time. There's a lot of channels and podcasts and
Speaker 1: shows that go in more depth into this. But let's
Speaker 1: think about it like this. The oldest problem that mankind
Speaker 1: has had is how do I secure my property in
Speaker 1: a way that can't be stolen. That's the oldest problem
Speaker 1: that I know of. I guess where do I get food?
Speaker 1: That's probably an older problem, But one of the oldest
Speaker 1: problem that my kind has ad is how do I
Speaker 1: keep my food that I've stored up from being stolen?
Speaker 1: How do I protect my property from being stolen? And so,
Speaker 1: of course we we band together. You know, a couple
Speaker 1: of guys get together. We make a village, we make
Speaker 1: a kingdom, we make a country. The role of United
Speaker 1: States is to protect the private property of its citizens.
Speaker 1: That's always the role. And so money has been the
Speaker 1: best store I'm sorry, gold has been the best storehold
Speaker 1: of wealth for thousands of thousands of years. And so
Speaker 1: we'd store our wealth in gold a little bit. We
Speaker 1: could bury it in that hide and the house, we
Speaker 1: could bury it in the in the yard, make a
Speaker 1: make a make a treasure map out to where we
Speaker 1: stash that gold. If we had a lot of gold,
Speaker 1: we might want to build a vault, um, build walls
Speaker 1: around it, higher security things like that. I've just spent
Speaker 1: a lot of time, effort, energy and money to secure
Speaker 1: that wealth, and then how would I move it? Right?
Speaker 1: It's very difficult. So that's one of the oldest problems
Speaker 1: that mankind has had, protecting my private property. Will bitcoins
Speaker 1: solve that problem? Now? How big will bitcoin be in
Speaker 1: the future, I don't know, But when you solve the
Speaker 1: oldest problem that mankind has had, it's pretty massive. It's
Speaker 1: a pretty big deal. I don't know all the ways
Speaker 1: it's gonna affect things. I have a lot of ideas
Speaker 1: about that I talked about pretty regularly. But how does
Speaker 1: it do that? Well, it's or it protects it cryptographically
Speaker 1: using cryptography. It protects it and as long as I
Speaker 1: have my cryptographic key that allows me to transact with it,
Speaker 1: then I can do what I want. Think about bitcoin
Speaker 1: as like this digital locker system. So you have a
Speaker 1: locker at the high school or the train station, airport,
Speaker 1: and in that locker you have a public address my
Speaker 1: locker c. Nineteen Hey, would you go put this envelope
Speaker 1: in my locker C. Nineteen That would be my public address. Well,
Speaker 1: then I also have a key, my private key, that
Speaker 1: allows me to get in that locker and move the contents.
Speaker 1: So what you have with bitcoin or cryptocurrency is you
Speaker 1: have a public address and a private key, and having
Speaker 1: my private key allows me to have access to move
Speaker 1: those coins as I see fit. You never actually download them,
Speaker 1: they're living up there in the cloud. You just have
Speaker 1: that cryptographic key. Now, if you use a wallet on
Speaker 1: your phone, like an app wallet or hardware wallet, what
Speaker 1: those do is they store that key, and so by
Speaker 1: using my app it uses my key to to do
Speaker 1: the transaction. Or if I use a hard wall and
Speaker 1: I can plug it into my computer to sign that
Speaker 1: transaction and then I can do whatever transfer I want
Speaker 1: from there. The problem is if I use someone like
Speaker 1: coin base, my coins are on coin Base, and what
Speaker 1: that means is they have my keys, and so we
Speaker 1: say not your key is not your coin. If I
Speaker 1: don't have my key, somebody else has it. Now the
Speaker 1: problem is, well, there's there's there's pros and cons. So
Speaker 1: if I have my own, then um, the securities on me.
Speaker 1: If someone hacks my phone or I lose my key,
Speaker 1: that's on me. But if coin base does it, they
Speaker 1: can protect my key. But what if they decide not
Speaker 1: to give it back to me. What if the government
Speaker 1: says freeze that account? What if something like that happens. Well, um,
Speaker 1: if news came out disclosure came out today that it
Speaker 1: says uh in their disclosure says quote in the event
Speaker 1: of a bankruptcy customers. Um. Moreover, because custodio held cryptastics
Speaker 1: may be considered to be the property of a bankruptcy estate.
Speaker 1: In the event of a bankruptcy, the cryptiastics we hold
Speaker 1: in custody on behalf of our customers could be subject
Speaker 1: to bankruptcy proceedings, and such customers could be treated as
Speaker 1: our general unsecured creditors. So what that means is that
Speaker 1: if they were to go through some sort of a
Speaker 1: bankruptcy type proceeding, then your assets that you think are
Speaker 1: your assets aren't actually yours. The assets that you think
Speaker 1: are yours are there's they owe them to you. But
Speaker 1: in a bankruptcy proceeding they would be included in their
Speaker 1: sale and what you would get would be nothing. So
Speaker 1: if the government says, hey, freeze those assets. Hey, they
Speaker 1: don't allow them to withdraw anymore. Um, something like that
Speaker 1: would happen, or they'd get into financial problems like not
Speaker 1: having any revenue, being down something like that, and they
Speaker 1: were forced into a bankruptcy. They could potentially take your assets.
Speaker 1: So as we say, not your keys, not your coin.
Speaker 1: Get your bitcoin off the exchange right now. UM. You
Speaker 1: can use a hardware wallet. I'd like to use treads
Speaker 1: or it's probably the easiest one. Cold card is probably
Speaker 1: the most secure one. You can use one of those,
Speaker 1: or you could use a UM constant years multi sticks
Speaker 1: set up like I used with unchained capital. That's what
Speaker 1: I'd recommend. But whatever you do, get your bitcoin off
Speaker 1: the exchanges. We've just found out that per coin bases
Speaker 1: own UM statement. In the evident of bankruptcy, you could
Speaker 1: lose all your bitcoin. You're listening to the Markmas Show.
Speaker 1: We're talking about bitcoin, cryptocurrencies and the decentralized revolution, trying
Speaker 1: to help you navigate this world that we're going through
Speaker 1: right now. I have a lot more news about the world,
Speaker 1: the financial system and the risk that we are facing
Speaker 1: right now. So don't go away. I'll be right back,
Speaker 1: all right, welcome back. You are listening to another episode
Speaker 1: of the Markmas Show. We're talking about bitcoin, we're talking
Speaker 1: about cryptocurrencies. We're talking about the decentralized revolution, and we
Speaker 1: focus on the changes that it's making too the world.
Speaker 1: So you can navigate this correctly and really like to
Speaker 1: look at um you know these three cycles that I
Speaker 1: talked about all the time, and it's the intersection of politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology. The converging of those three things is really
Speaker 1: where the change is happening. So I let's look at
Speaker 1: like politics as relates to finance, and finances relates to politics,
Speaker 1: and off course we look at technology, which of course
Speaker 1: to me is bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. And so um man,
Speaker 1: there's some stuff going on today. Um we we saw
Speaker 1: this week the government put out its new numbers on inflation.
Speaker 1: It's trying to get a handle on inflation as fast
Speaker 1: as they can. That means the way they call it
Speaker 1: is they're trying to get a handled on prices going up.
Speaker 1: The cost of goods and services is going up so
Speaker 1: fast that it's causing a real problem for people. And
Speaker 1: uh hooray they got it to slow down a little bit.
Speaker 1: We went from an eight percent increase of inflation or
Speaker 1: CPI or price inflation to eight point five and now
Speaker 1: back down to eight point three. Doesn't mean prices are reversing.
Speaker 1: What it means is that things are just going up
Speaker 1: a tad bit slower than they were before. Now what
Speaker 1: is the government? What is it, you know, as central bank,
Speaker 1: the Federal Reserve doing to try to slow down this
Speaker 1: price appreciation while they're trying to slow down the financial markets.
Speaker 1: So the Federal Reserve has been stimulating the financial markets
Speaker 1: by doing two things. One by by bonds, by buying
Speaker 1: mortgage by securities, so propping up the debt markets. And
Speaker 1: two by lowering interest rates so people continue to borrow
Speaker 1: more and spend more money or creates more money into
Speaker 1: existence through that debt. Now, what they're trying to do
Speaker 1: is they're trying to raise the interest rates because as
Speaker 1: they raise the interest rates, less money is created. Right Well,
Speaker 1: that's what they're telling you. And so your financial portfolios,
Speaker 1: your retirement accounts are melting down right now because the
Speaker 1: government is trying to suck some of the stimulus out
Speaker 1: that they put in. I mean, this is just absurd.
Speaker 1: So they pump a bunch of money in by lowering rates,
Speaker 1: so people take on a bunch of debt and literally
Speaker 1: pumping money in the markets by buying debt, and then
Speaker 1: it starts going too hot, so they suck it back out,
Speaker 1: so they cause boom bust, boom bust. They lower rates
Speaker 1: and buy the debt, push it up, and they raise rates,
Speaker 1: and they suck the debt back out and they trying
Speaker 1: to drop it back down. The problem is these boom
Speaker 1: and bust cycles keep getting bigger and bigger and bigger,
Speaker 1: and now they're causing the entire markets to melt down.
Speaker 1: You're watching your retirement accounts dwindle away. You're watching, um,
Speaker 1: everything including your DeFi protocol is dropping. We're watching most
Speaker 1: cryptocurrencies down, even bitcoins down in the last week. UM.
Speaker 1: All those numbers were in the last week. And just
Speaker 1: when we think that it couldn't get worse, UM, when
Speaker 1: the government seemingly doesn't have any money or doesn't want
Speaker 1: to continue to push inflation by creating more money, UM,
Speaker 1: we can't deal with the problems that we even have
Speaker 1: in the United States, and so now we have all
Speaker 1: types of shortage things like that. We have the FEDS
Speaker 1: trying to do or the government trying to send forty
Speaker 1: billion dollars to Ukraine. What the heck does that mean?
Speaker 1: Pretty interesting story that I was reading here this week
Speaker 1: talking about how Congress refuses to address our own crisiss
Speaker 1: we have in the States. Um, but yet we want
Speaker 1: to send more money to Ukraine. As a matter of fact, Um,
Speaker 1: they had only asked for the President Joe Biden only
Speaker 1: asked for thirty three billion. Now when I say, only
Speaker 1: to put that into perspective, we throw around billions and
Speaker 1: trillions like it's nothing anymore. It's insane. We lose sight
Speaker 1: of how big that is. If we put those numbers
Speaker 1: into seconds. A million seconds was eleven days ago, a
Speaker 1: billion seconds it was thirty one years ago, so from
Speaker 1: eleven days to thirty one years and seconds. But a
Speaker 1: trillion seconds is thirty one thousand years. So a billion
Speaker 1: is thirty one years, a trillions thirty one thousand years.
Speaker 1: So to put that into perspective, they had only asked president,
Speaker 1: but only asked for thirty three million. But that wasn't enough.
Speaker 1: The U. S. House of Representatives said no, let's actually
Speaker 1: give them more. Let's give them forty billion in US
Speaker 1: taxpayer dollars to Ukraine. Because you know taxpayers, us taxpayers,
Speaker 1: they're having a great time. I mean, shoot, your cost
Speaker 1: of living is going down, right, No, your cost of
Speaker 1: living is going up. So why not just raise taxes
Speaker 1: to the by administration? Of course, raised taxes and let's
Speaker 1: just send that money to Ukraine. Sounds like a pretty
Speaker 1: good deal now, never mind the problems that we have
Speaker 1: here at home, Like the Department of Homeland Security admitted
Speaker 1: that they've let almost one million illegal aliens in through
Speaker 1: the southern border this year. Now, when, uh, when we
Speaker 1: tried to get four billion dollars to build the wall
Speaker 1: up down there to protect this invasion of a million
Speaker 1: people coming in the southern border, we couldn't find four
Speaker 1: billion dollars in the budget. But now we can find
Speaker 1: forty billion dollars to go help another country with their border.
Speaker 1: Pretty interesting. Um, never mind record inflation, never mind federal deficits, um,
Speaker 1: never minded the AVAPT. Now this bill was quickly sent
Speaker 1: over there. Um. I'm not blaming it on one party
Speaker 1: or the or the other. It seems to be, um,
Speaker 1: a unanimous decision to send all this money over there.
Speaker 1: Question I like to have is like where does that
Speaker 1: money go? Pretty interesting? And that's what I want to
Speaker 1: want to talk about for a minute, where does that
Speaker 1: money go? Forty billion dollars sounds pretty good. UM, So
Speaker 1: it's hr the Ukraine Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act. Forty billion dollars.
Speaker 1: How much of that goes into Zelensky's pocket? Now, Zelenski, Uh,
Speaker 1: you may or may not be aware. First of all, Um,
Speaker 1: I'm not pro putin, I'm not pro war, I'm not
Speaker 1: pro death. I like peace. But Ukraine is not a
Speaker 1: peaceful democracy either. They were ranked ninety on a scale
Speaker 1: of uh in um in a rating of how corrupt
Speaker 1: they are. UM. Zelensky was an actor who came to
Speaker 1: power by putting his democratically elected people in prison and
Speaker 1: taking over power our Um. So, just just so you
Speaker 1: know that, and so we want to give them all
Speaker 1: this money. Let's take a look at where this goes.
Speaker 1: So we have, UM, let's see, we have sixty seventeen
Speaker 1: billion for Department of Defense Operation and maintenance, one million
Speaker 1: for army missiles. We have another another billion, another million
Speaker 1: for defense working capital funds, fourteen million for defense health programs,
Speaker 1: fifty four million for c d C activities. Uh. I
Speaker 1: want to make sure nobody gets COVID over there. I
Speaker 1: suppose we have a billion for administration. That sounds pretty good,
Speaker 1: UM ten million for Department of State Capital Investment funds.
Speaker 1: I guess we need to invest into that. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's just insane. We have forty billion dollars that's going
Speaker 1: into this giant black hall to all their friends. And
Speaker 1: so just remember that when they talk about UM they
Speaker 1: need to destroy the markets to prevent prices from going up,
Speaker 1: and then they just want to send a billion dollars
Speaker 1: over there to U crane UM. Learn to read between
Speaker 1: the lines. And of course I would recommend uh, if
Speaker 1: you're not happy with that, If you object with your
Speaker 1: taxpayer dollars going into that like I do, UH, maybe
Speaker 1: you should do something about it. You could talk about it.
Speaker 1: You could write your local congressmend your representatives, and let
Speaker 1: them know how you feel about that. This is not
Speaker 1: a right or left position, in my opinion, this is
Speaker 1: an American taxpayer position. I want to know where the
Speaker 1: heck does my forty billion dollars go? And I can
Speaker 1: tell you that I object to where that money is going.
Speaker 1: So I thought you would just like to see where
Speaker 1: some of that crazy amount went. UM for additional funds
Speaker 1: for munitionance procurement. I mean, I could just go on
Speaker 1: and on and on air four billion for foreign military
Speaker 1: financing programs. UM. Anyway, you listen to the Markmas Show.
Speaker 1: We're talking about UM, this decentralized revolution. This is part
Speaker 1: of the world breaking apart um, the the centralization of
Speaker 1: the world breaking apart of course, the United States is
Speaker 1: taking money that we should be using our own country
Speaker 1: and given to other countries to further break this down.
Speaker 1: It's pretty and interesting to watch. UM you listen to
Speaker 1: the Markmas Show. I have a lot more to cover,
Speaker 1: so do not go away, all right, welcome back here,
Speaker 1: listening to the Mark ma Show. We're talking about bitcoin.
Speaker 1: We're talking about the decentralized revolution. We're talking about UM,
Speaker 1: the intersection of politics, finance and technology, trying to navigate
Speaker 1: this crazy world and make sense of it both financially.
Speaker 1: And what I like to I like to focus on
Speaker 1: is UM what I call financial sovereignty. And so really
Speaker 1: it's about money and it's about sovereignty UM, which you
Speaker 1: can call freedom. I call sovereignty being able to direct
Speaker 1: my life as I see fit. And so we use
Speaker 1: money to give us that freedom. And so I like
Speaker 1: to look at things holistically so I can learn to
Speaker 1: navigate this, protect myself my family from it. Some of
Speaker 1: the things that's been interesting, UM paying attention to UM.
Speaker 1: That's really been catching my eye all lately, and I've
Speaker 1: talked about quite a bit, is UM the way the
Speaker 1: entire world has been shaken up by Elon Musk's and
Speaker 1: his bid or his plan and to take over Twitter.
Speaker 1: Now it's interesting because as Twitter moved to censor and
Speaker 1: delete accounts, banned people, d platform people left and right. UM.
Speaker 1: When it was along with one political ideology, it was
Speaker 1: perfectly fine. However, when somebody else comes on and says
Speaker 1: they want to open it up UM for more free speech,
Speaker 1: meaning that they want to take a much less aggressive
Speaker 1: stance on UM stopping what people say and even permanently
Speaker 1: banning people, that becomes a big problem. Now I look
Speaker 1: at this two ways. So Elon must says he wants
Speaker 1: to buy Twitter so he could open it up to
Speaker 1: more free speech. Okay, that's pretty good in my opinion.
Speaker 1: I believe in free speech. I believe in free speech
Speaker 1: because I believe that the truth is found through speech.
Speaker 1: The truth is found through discussion. I might think I
Speaker 1: have an idea. You might think you have an idea.
Speaker 1: We should openly discuss that idea. We should debate that idea.
Speaker 1: We should probably bring other people in on the discussion,
Speaker 1: and through that discussion, going back with ideas, we learned
Speaker 1: from each other, and eventually we find this understanding, we
Speaker 1: find what the truth is. That's why free speech is
Speaker 1: so important. Free speech is is important for sharing those ideas,
Speaker 1: which then leads to progress, which then leads to more creativity,
Speaker 1: which the leads to more ingenuity and inventions and products
Speaker 1: and services and so much more. Um However, apparently some
Speaker 1: people think that you're not smart enough to handle hearing
Speaker 1: things that you don't like to hear, and so it
Speaker 1: was interesting to see how uh mainstream media seemed to
Speaker 1: erupt over the fact that somebody would buy a social
Speaker 1: media platform to give it free speech. Now, what was
Speaker 1: interesting is when thousands of thousands of people have been
Speaker 1: d platformed, including the active sitting president of the United States,
Speaker 1: people said, it's fine. Twitter is a private company. They
Speaker 1: can do what they want. It's not a tricky situation.
Speaker 1: I do believe that a private business should be able
Speaker 1: to do what they want. A private business is my
Speaker 1: private property. I should be able to do with that
Speaker 1: business what I want. If I want to serve this
Speaker 1: customer or not, that should be up to me. Now,
Speaker 1: growing up, you would typically see like an establishment and
Speaker 1: say we reserve the right to refuse service, right, and
Speaker 1: so they should be able to they can choose what
Speaker 1: they do want to do. It's private business, and so
Speaker 1: they'd say, hey, Twitter, consens or whoever they wanted to
Speaker 1: it's a private business. Um. I'm not gonna get super
Speaker 1: deep into that, but um, as soon as Elon Must
Speaker 1: wants to buy Twitter and actually take it from a
Speaker 1: publicly traded company to a private company, now that's a
Speaker 1: big problem. And now all of a sudden, it's not
Speaker 1: a private company anymore, which is pretty weird. But what's
Speaker 1: even weirder is so there's this uproar about freedom of speech,
Speaker 1: which is very interesting to see. However, the contrast is
Speaker 1: that from the time that Elon Must decided to buy
Speaker 1: Twitter from he announced it, um, and I haven't actually
Speaker 1: looked at it for a minute. Here, let's take a
Speaker 1: look and see where we're at here. If I look
Speaker 1: at the price of Twitter, which I mean, it's still
Speaker 1: up quite a bit as a matter of fact, which
Speaker 1: is interesting as most of the tech stalks are way down.
Speaker 1: So right now, Tesla, I'm sorry. Twitter is up forty
Speaker 1: eight percent from where from the time when he announced
Speaker 1: that he would buy it, So it's up now. This
Speaker 1: is up at a time when all the other um
Speaker 1: tech stocks are way down, which is pretty interesting. We
Speaker 1: can see, for example, over that same period, we can
Speaker 1: see where Facebook's at, which is about flat. It's about flat.
Speaker 1: Um it had gone up and come back down. Facebook's down.
Speaker 1: We can see obviously all the big tech stalks are down,
Speaker 1: but Twitter is up almost fift So here's what this
Speaker 1: tells me. What this tells me is that the mainstream
Speaker 1: media is all up in arms about giving somebody freedom
Speaker 1: of speech, which is insane to me. However, the mainstream
Speaker 1: media represents a very small percentage of the market. The market,
Speaker 1: as represented through the financial markets are telling us something
Speaker 1: completely different. Now, there's one reason why when you run
Speaker 1: polls to find out who's going to be president, they're
Speaker 1: typically way off. But we saw in the last presidential
Speaker 1: election cycle we had betting markets where people were betting
Speaker 1: on who would become the eventual winner of the election.
Speaker 1: The betting markets were extremely close, and the and the
Speaker 1: polls were way off. Why is that. Well, anybody can
Speaker 1: say whatever they want to pull. But when it comes
Speaker 1: to putting your money where your mouth is, when you
Speaker 1: have skin in the game, when you have an incentive,
Speaker 1: you you choose much wiser, much closer. And so that's
Speaker 1: why the betting markets were different. So back to this.
Speaker 1: Mainstream media wants to tell you it's insane, No, we
Speaker 1: can't have free speech. How horrible is this? But the
Speaker 1: markets are telling us that they value free speech. The
Speaker 1: Twitter's up. Why, well, the markets are a discounting mechanism.
Speaker 1: What does that mean? The markets discount they you try
Speaker 1: to buy something cheaper today than you think it will
Speaker 1: be worth in the future. So people were buying Twitter
Speaker 1: saying it will be worth more in the future because
Speaker 1: if Elon Musk can open it up for free speech,
Speaker 1: then we believe that will be more valuable in the future.
Speaker 1: And so they're buying it. And so the market, like
Speaker 1: a betting market, put money where their mouth was, put
Speaker 1: skin in the game, and we saw the price of
Speaker 1: Twitter go up by more than But of course, um,
Speaker 1: the powers that be, if you want to call them that,
Speaker 1: are certainly not a fan of that. It was only
Speaker 1: within days or maybe a week or two after that
Speaker 1: was announced that then all of a sudden, the United States,
Speaker 1: the Biden administration, the Department of Homeless Security announces their
Speaker 1: new Ministry of Truth. They want to tell you what's
Speaker 1: true because apparently you don't know and you're not smart
Speaker 1: enough to figure out. So they want to tell you
Speaker 1: what the Ministry of Truth was. And it's not just
Speaker 1: the United States, is a matter of fact, this is
Speaker 1: kicked off a firestorm of regulators. We see social media
Speaker 1: regulations expand globally. As Elon Musk plans the Twitter takeover,
Speaker 1: he says, says there the countries are taking more steps
Speaker 1: to compel social media platforms to shield users, shield them.
Speaker 1: We gotta protect people from material that they deem harmful
Speaker 1: through standards that could affect Twitter. So if the government
Speaker 1: deems it to be harmful, then they need to protect you. Now.
Speaker 1: One thing that's interesting about freedom of speech is that
Speaker 1: if you if, if, if you take away my freedom
Speaker 1: of speech so I can't say what I want, they're
Speaker 1: also punishing you. They're also taking away your freedom to hear.
Speaker 1: Think about that, I may lose my right to speech.
Speaker 1: You may lose your right to hear. We're both being
Speaker 1: punished in that. The good thing about hearing harmful content
Speaker 1: is that if you don't want to hear it, you
Speaker 1: don't have to see You also have freedom to hear it.
Speaker 1: You also have freedom not to hear it. You can
Speaker 1: mute accounts on Twitter you don't like, you can block
Speaker 1: accounts on Twitter. You can you don't like, you can
Speaker 1: not follow them if you don't like them. It's very
Speaker 1: simple to do that. We don't need the government, but
Speaker 1: the government here was The regulators from Australia to European Union, India,
Speaker 1: Canada and the UK have recently introduced are or are
Speaker 1: now considering new rules for policing online content. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is insane. Um. This is why we need bitcoin.
Speaker 1: We like to say bitcoin fixes this. And the reason
Speaker 1: why bitcoin fixes this is because it takes away the money.
Speaker 1: With the with the money, with freedom of money, we
Speaker 1: have freedom, and so we need to have freedom of money.
Speaker 1: We need to take away some of the power of
Speaker 1: them to be able to print all this money so
Speaker 1: they can build out these large regulatory bodies like this.
Speaker 1: The government continues to get bigger and bigger and bigger
Speaker 1: because they're able to print more and more and more
Speaker 1: of their money. You're listening to the Mark Marchell will
Speaker 1: be right back with more. Don't go away, all right,
Speaker 1: welcome back here, listening to the markma Show. We're talking
Speaker 1: about we're talking about this decentralized revolution the world is
Speaker 1: going through. We're talking about the intersection of politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology, and as the as the world goes through
Speaker 1: this decentralized revolution, which of course is being led by
Speaker 1: bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, it's the technology, the decentralized technology that's
Speaker 1: helping the world become more decentralized. It's not easy, it's
Speaker 1: not smooth. The centralized powers that be, the governments don't
Speaker 1: want to give up that power and control. And so
Speaker 1: as they start, as it starts to slip through their fingers,
Speaker 1: they try to grab more harshly, and the more harshly
Speaker 1: they grab, the more starts to slip through their fingers.
Speaker 1: And it's this um, this reflexive loop that basically happens.
Speaker 1: And that's exactly what we're seeing today. So the powers
Speaker 1: that be, the governments of the world, started to lose
Speaker 1: their narrative. What does that mean, Well, they want to
Speaker 1: control the information that you read, that you see, so
Speaker 1: they can control the narraive, they can control what you believe,
Speaker 1: what you think. The problem is, we had an Internet.
Speaker 1: We we had an invention called the Internet, and the
Speaker 1: Internet allows us to spread information and allows you to
Speaker 1: hear my voice and hear what I'm saying. And through
Speaker 1: the Internet, Um, they've lost control. It was very easy
Speaker 1: when we all watched the same three news channels and
Speaker 1: we all read the same couple of newspapers. When we
Speaker 1: did that, it was super simple for them to control
Speaker 1: the narrative. It was cheap, it was easy. The returns
Speaker 1: on their violence were very high. The problem is, as
Speaker 1: the Internet um came, it allowed all this new alternative
Speaker 1: media to grow up. And now we have you know,
Speaker 1: people like um, Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson and these big,
Speaker 1: big channels that are getting way more views than mainstream media.
Speaker 1: And so they're losing the narrative on that, and so
Speaker 1: in order to try to regain control, they have to
Speaker 1: figure out any way they can to try to control
Speaker 1: and regulate that, and of course they'll put laws into
Speaker 1: place to do just that. Take away my right to talk,
Speaker 1: so they can take away you're right, to hear. Now,
Speaker 1: you might be listening to this and saying, Mark, but look,
Speaker 1: there's crazy people like Alex Jones, and Alex Jones says
Speaker 1: things that are really dangerous, and we have to prevent
Speaker 1: these the dangerous people from saying these really dangerous things. Okay,
Speaker 1: do we You see, the truth is found through open
Speaker 1: discussion and through transparency. So if we had open and
Speaker 1: honest debate, Alex Jones could say something really crazy, for example,
Speaker 1: and other people could come out and say that's not right. Now.
Speaker 1: I don't know about you, but I love to see
Speaker 1: debates and the reason why I love to see debates
Speaker 1: is because one person may say something that seems very convincing.
Speaker 1: They may be very certain about what they're saying, and
Speaker 1: I might believe that maybe I don't have a really
Speaker 1: educated opinion on that, But then I hear somebody else
Speaker 1: and I'm like, oh wait a minute, I thought about that.
Speaker 1: That that right, And so through open discussion, through open debate,
Speaker 1: we can find that truth. The problem is that when
Speaker 1: you censor that, we never find it, and so now
Speaker 1: those voices are in the dark. Now they may be right,
Speaker 1: they may be wrong, but we may never know the
Speaker 1: reason why is because censorship does the exact opposite. It
Speaker 1: doesn't bring more truth or more trust. So if you've
Speaker 1: ever had a business partner um that was embezzling from you,
Speaker 1: or a friend that was, you know, stealing from you,
Speaker 1: or a girlfriend, boyfriend's spouse, whatever, cheating on you, you
Speaker 1: know that confidence starts being lost. You start to think like, wow,
Speaker 1: what are these charges showing off my bank account? And
Speaker 1: is my partner doing this for that? Or who's my
Speaker 1: who's my significant other texting late at night? Right? And
Speaker 1: you start to lose confidence, start to lose trust. Now,
Speaker 1: if you went to your business partner said hey, could
Speaker 1: we look at the bank account and look at a
Speaker 1: couple of these charges to see what they are? If
Speaker 1: they said yeah, sure, here's the receipts and whatever, they
Speaker 1: could restore that confidence through open, honest dialogue, through transparency.
Speaker 1: If you look at your significant other in bed and say,
Speaker 1: who the heck are you texting late at night and
Speaker 1: they said, oh, I'm not talking to my mom. Look
Speaker 1: here's my text message, that would restore trust. If your
Speaker 1: business partner said, that's nothing for you to see. You
Speaker 1: you don't want to know that, don't look at that.
Speaker 1: That would almost just confirm what you already know. And
Speaker 1: so whenever you take away a person's right to talk,
Speaker 1: it looks bad. They're saying that ripping out a man's
Speaker 1: tongue does not prove him wrong. It only proves that
Speaker 1: you have something to hide. And so the way that
Speaker 1: we build trust, the way that we build trust, the
Speaker 1: way that we find truth, the way that we discuss
Speaker 1: ideas is through open platforms and discussion. The other thing
Speaker 1: is that you know, I see some people on Twitter
Speaker 1: saying some insane, crazy things like they're like especially here
Speaker 1: in California the legislative but also all across twity. You
Speaker 1: can see like there's like a whole subset of people
Speaker 1: that are like trying to um change the age of consent.
Speaker 1: They want little kids to be able to consent to
Speaker 1: sexual acts. I mean, it is absolutely insane. I can't
Speaker 1: believe Twitter allows us to happen. They censor active stay
Speaker 1: in presidents, but they allow that to be talked about.
Speaker 1: It's in saying, however, now we see who these people are.
Speaker 1: Now we know who they are, we know exactly what
Speaker 1: they want, and we can call them out for who
Speaker 1: they are, and we know to discount what they say,
Speaker 1: and so on one hand, I would like, I don't
Speaker 1: want to hear it. It bothers me that there's people
Speaker 1: that have those views. But at least we know who
Speaker 1: they are and then we can combat that. We can
Speaker 1: talk about that anyway. Back to this at hand, it
Speaker 1: says that, um, how content moderation rules would work at
Speaker 1: Twitter under Mr Musk remains unclear. Of course, it's always unclear. Um.
Speaker 1: He called the move a quote morally bad decision, and
Speaker 1: he said, quote if there are tweets that are wrong
Speaker 1: and bad, those should be either deleted or made invisible.
Speaker 1: And a suspension or temporary suspension is appropriate, but not
Speaker 1: a permanent ban. But that's not good enough for the lawmakers.
Speaker 1: The European Digital Services Act, which was agreed to buy
Speaker 1: lawmakers in April, would compel platforms to swiftly address illegal
Speaker 1: content and offer a process for users to complain if
Speaker 1: they disagree with moderation decisions. So swiftly address illegal content.
Speaker 1: But what's illegal? What type of content would be illegal?
Speaker 1: That where some of this problem starts to line up,
Speaker 1: it says um. A new law and Australia goes further,
Speaker 1: allowing an e Safety Commission to order platforms to remove
Speaker 1: certain content or face fines. What content and who's the
Speaker 1: who's the safety commission, who, who's determining what's safe and
Speaker 1: what isn't safe? It says um. We'll be keeping a
Speaker 1: close watch and making sure that Twitter and other platforms
Speaker 1: are taking the steps required under Australian law to address
Speaker 1: online safety issues. Now, I think there's all things that
Speaker 1: we could agree are not safe, like child exploitation, for example.
Speaker 1: I think there's things that we could all agree to,
Speaker 1: But the problem is the rest becomes subjective. So we
Speaker 1: want to start banning hate speech. Well, let's say that. Um,
Speaker 1: let's say that I hate pineapple on pizza. I hate
Speaker 1: that and it grosses me out to even hear anybody
Speaker 1: talk about that. And I feel that it's violence because
Speaker 1: speech is violence now apparently, and I hate that. Now,
Speaker 1: is that should that be considered hate speech? I use
Speaker 1: I use a ridiculous example, partly because that's how ridiculous
Speaker 1: things have become. But to show you that it's subjective,
Speaker 1: there's only a couple of things that we could all
Speaker 1: agree on, but the rest are all subjective. Now. The
Speaker 1: other thing is that we have laws against things. So
Speaker 1: for example, I think we all agree that child exploitation
Speaker 1: is wrong, and turns out it's actually illegal too. So
Speaker 1: if anybody we're actually talking about it, then there's a
Speaker 1: crime and they can go do something about it. Hating
Speaker 1: um somebody because they're um, dumb or ugly isn't a crime.
Speaker 1: You don't have to choose to listen to that. We
Speaker 1: also have laws against a libel and slander. We also
Speaker 1: have those laws as well, so we already have laws it.
Speaker 1: As in the US, lawmakers have put forward multiple proposals
Speaker 1: for dealing with online content, though few have advanced the
Speaker 1: mid debates over freedom of expression and censorship. Canada's government
Speaker 1: has also pledged to introduce legislation to address online content
Speaker 1: such as hate speak. And again, what is hate speech?
Speaker 1: And that is the point. We can't have these subjective things, um.
Speaker 1: And this just further goes to prove how the world
Speaker 1: is grasping to maintain power over centralization, mainly because they
Speaker 1: want to control the narrative, not so much because they
Speaker 1: care about you. As I said, Twitter already makes it
Speaker 1: very easy to unfollow people, block people if I want to.
Speaker 1: I don't have to hear it. Um. But maybe I'm
Speaker 1: wrong I'd love to hear what you have to think.
Speaker 1: You can hit me up on social media at number
Speaker 1: one Mark Moss, find me on Twitter, I find me
Speaker 1: on on Instagram, whatever. At one Mark Moss. Send me
Speaker 1: a message and let me know what you think. I'm
Speaker 1: here trying to help you make sense of this decentralized
Speaker 1: revolution that we're living through from a political, financial, and
Speaker 1: a technological standpoint. If you miss some of the show,
Speaker 1: you can catch it on the I Heart radio network.
Speaker 1: Just search Mark Moss I Heart Mark Moss Podcast and
Speaker 1: you'll find it there. UM and you can catch up
Speaker 1: on some of that We've covered so much today, including um,
Speaker 1: the Defy tokens, the Luna tokens, uh Defied protocol is
Speaker 1: blowing up, what's happening to bitcoin. We've talked about Twitter.
Speaker 1: We've talked about so much and more so. If you
Speaker 1: missed any of that, go ahead and check it out
Speaker 1: and don't miss it next time. Put a reminder on
Speaker 1: your phone for this time this channel, and joined me
Speaker 1: each and every week. It's the most important part of
Speaker 1: your week, and that's what I got. Thanks so much
Speaker 1: for listening. I'll see you next week on The Mark
Speaker 1: Mos Show.