Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to another episode of The Mark Moss Show,
Speaker 1: where we talk about the decentralized revolution. Of course, each
Speaker 1: and every week talking about how the world changes. The
Speaker 1: world is always changing, but if what's important to understand
Speaker 1: is that it's not going back to the way it
Speaker 1: was before. The world is changing, and so you have
Speaker 1: to look at history, the long lens of history to
Speaker 1: understand where we're coming from and where we're going. That's
Speaker 1: what we're talking about each and every week, and of
Speaker 1: course we look at it through the lens of politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology, and the technology being bitcoin and the decentralized
Speaker 1: technology that is changing the world. And i'd like to
Speaker 1: bring to you, you know, some educational pieces to help
Speaker 1: you kind of understand what's going on a little bit
Speaker 1: different than what people are shoving down your throat. And
Speaker 1: we look at the politics, the finance, and the technology.
Speaker 1: And I want to talk about the technology piece today.
Speaker 1: Something I've been talking about this last week. Some things
Speaker 1: that a lot of people don't know. You know, a
Speaker 1: lot of times when you hear about bitcoin specifically or cryptocurrency,
Speaker 1: you know, from a US centric viewpoint, people would like
Speaker 1: to argue that without really taking into account it's happening
Speaker 1: in the world, and so a very US centric viewpoint.
Speaker 1: I listened to a conversation with someone that I like,
Speaker 1: someone that I kind of respect your viewpoint, Michael Shellenbergers.
Speaker 1: He's done really good job talking about climate and stuff,
Speaker 1: and I agree with him on that. And I listened
Speaker 1: to him talk with another one of my buddies, pomp
Speaker 1: Anthony Pompliano, and it was a pretty painful conversation, and
Speaker 1: Shellenberger is basically, kind, we don't need this. The U
Speaker 1: in nine States doesn't need this. This is stupid. We
Speaker 1: shouldn't have this. The US government should protect their US dollar,
Speaker 1: this and that, blah blah blah blah blah, And all
Speaker 1: I could just think about the whole time is like,
Speaker 1: what a selfish US centric viewpoint to have. So in
Speaker 1: the United States or Canada or in the western developed world,
Speaker 1: we're sitting there at the bar having a twenty dollars
Speaker 1: cocktail and your money works pretty decent. Maybe you don't
Speaker 1: know why you need an alternative like a bitcoin or
Speaker 1: cryptocurrency or something like that. If you're one of the
Speaker 1: other three billion people that live in a country where
Speaker 1: that has massively high inflation, double or triple digit inflation,
Speaker 1: or an authority terror regime that will steal all your
Speaker 1: money from you. You don't have to wonder why you
Speaker 1: need something like bitcoin. You don't have to wonder, you
Speaker 1: already know. So, for example, in Nigeria, their currency is horrible.
Speaker 1: It loses value so fast. You can't you can't hold it.
Speaker 1: You have to buy stuff all the time because it's
Speaker 1: just losing value so fast. And so in Nigeria they've
Speaker 1: moved over to bitcoin, and they've been using bitcoin for
Speaker 1: a while now. The Nigerian government they said, oh, well,
Speaker 1: people want digital money. That's what they want, So let's
Speaker 1: come up with a CBDC, and they did, and they
Speaker 1: came up with their own CBDC called the E Niara.
Speaker 1: Now the government's like, hey, people, you want a digital money.
Speaker 1: We knew that because you're using bitcoin, and so here
Speaker 1: we're gonna give you digital money. Here's your CBDC, the
Speaker 1: E Nira. But nobody wants it, nobody uses it. And
Speaker 1: so what all governments do first they apply the carrot
Speaker 1: and then they apply the stick. So the carrot was like,
Speaker 1: hey guys, if you use this edi R, I will
Speaker 1: give you discounts on your taxi cabs and things like that.
Speaker 1: But the people were like, why would we use that
Speaker 1: because it's the exact same problem. It's still losing value.
Speaker 1: I can't use it that something's going down in value
Speaker 1: so fast. So no, we're not going to use it.
Speaker 1: We already have bitcoin. The Nira is no different. It
Speaker 1: solves no problem the regular Nira does. And so now
Speaker 1: the stick comes out, and now the Nigerian government is restricted,
Speaker 1: I believe all cash transactions or are sorry withdrawals of
Speaker 1: more than twenty five dollars a day. So if you
Speaker 1: want money, you can only take it in CBDC. You
Speaker 1: can only get twenty five dollars a day of cash otherwise.
Speaker 1: And so the Nigerians don't need to understand why they
Speaker 1: need something like bitcoin. They already get it. If you're
Speaker 1: in South Korea where the government comes and searches your
Speaker 1: house regularly and steals any money you have, you get it.
Speaker 1: If you're a woman living in Afghanistan and someone's trying
Speaker 1: to send you money to help because the women are
Speaker 1: being so persecuted there in Afghanistan, but you can't get
Speaker 1: money sent to you because the Taliban steals it from you.
Speaker 1: You don't have to ask why something like bitcoin is important.
Speaker 1: You already get it. And so these viewpoints of why
Speaker 1: do we need something like a bitcoin or cryptocurrency is
Speaker 1: a very very US centric viewpoint, and you have to
Speaker 1: look at the rest of the world. And so I
Speaker 1: want to give you some more viewpoints. And so I
Speaker 1: saw this week a news headline that kind of made
Speaker 1: me think about this, and it's that Strike, a company
Speaker 1: called Strike has expanded the lightning network powered remittances to
Speaker 1: the Philippines. So what does that mean. Well, again, if
Speaker 1: you're an American or Canadian or Europinian, you maybe don't
Speaker 1: understand this. But if you live in any of the
Speaker 1: other parts of the world, typically you send family to
Speaker 1: a western developed world. So all over Mexico, Central America,
Speaker 1: El Salvador, Nicaragua, Venezuela, you know, Philippines, etc. You send
Speaker 1: people to the US to work and then those people,
Speaker 1: the families, send you money back. That's called remittances. Now,
Speaker 1: if I want to send money to somebody overseas, there's
Speaker 1: not a lot of easy ways to do that. I mean,
Speaker 1: obviously I can do a wire transfer. What if I
Speaker 1: want to send them seventy five bucks, sixty bucks, or whatever.
Speaker 1: So I would have to go to my bank bank,
Speaker 1: stand in line, I drive there, take me whatever ten minutes.
Speaker 1: Drive from the bank, another ten fifty minutes, stand in line,
Speaker 1: I pull cash. I have to drive over to the
Speaker 1: wal martyr of the bank, another ten to fifteen minutes,
Speaker 1: stand in line, fell at the western uniforms and give
Speaker 1: them the money. So that takes me whatever an hour.
Speaker 1: Then in El Salvador or the Philippines or wherever they
Speaker 1: live in this little town, they got to get on
Speaker 1: a bus, ride a bus for a couple hours and
Speaker 1: get to the city to get the cash. And they
Speaker 1: have to ride the bus back with their cash and
Speaker 1: hopefully they don't get robbed or mug or something like that.
Speaker 1: So it takes a day for them and put the
Speaker 1: massive risk. It's a big problem. And now with bitcoin,
Speaker 1: I could send them money right now, instantly and for free,
Speaker 1: like literally from my bed in my pajamas. I can
Speaker 1: click a button and they'll have it within a fraction
Speaker 1: of a second on their phone. They don't have to
Speaker 1: get on a bus, there's no risk, and they can
Speaker 1: do it for free. Now why for free? Why does
Speaker 1: that matter? Well, El Salvador, about thirty percent of their
Speaker 1: GDP comes from remittances, and the average fee for their
Speaker 1: remittance is about thirty percent because it's like a flat fee.
Speaker 1: So it's like twenty bucks a sent on Western Union.
Speaker 1: But if only if I'm only spending, if I'm only
Speaker 1: sending fifty bucks, it's a big percentage in the Philippines
Speaker 1: is The Philippines is one of the world's largest remittance markets.
Speaker 1: Thirty five billion dollars. Thirty five billion dollars is being
Speaker 1: sent back as remittances in that old, clunky, pain in
Speaker 1: the butt way, very expensive way I've just talked about,
Speaker 1: all right, because it's using these very old technology, very
Speaker 1: clunky rails. And Strike is a company that builds on
Speaker 1: the Bitcoin Lightning network and they've fixed this. They've created
Speaker 1: a new rail, a new way to do this. And
Speaker 1: basically what they can do, I can just instantly send dollars.
Speaker 1: It uses the Bitcoin Lightning network to send it to
Speaker 1: the Philippines and then instantly on the other end they
Speaker 1: can convert it into any currency they want. So the
Speaker 1: Philippines is now working to do this using Strike and
Speaker 1: so instead of using the Western Unions and all those things,
Speaker 1: they just do it over the Bitcoin network, and again
Speaker 1: they don't have to use bitcoin. What they're using is
Speaker 1: the Bitcoin network, the rail system. Soily to send money,
Speaker 1: you'd have to do it through the Swift system. That's
Speaker 1: how money gets sent through Swift. This sends it across
Speaker 1: not Swift, but instead the Bitcoin network. All right, that's
Speaker 1: how it's doing cross border. Typically, like I said, it's
Speaker 1: not cheap or fast to do a cross border, but
Speaker 1: using bitcoin Lightning you can do this. And this Lightning
Speaker 1: network has been growing massively. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: there's over sixteen thousand nodes, seventy six thousand channels, and
Speaker 1: about one hundred and twenty two million dollars of liquidity
Speaker 1: locked up inside this right now. And the Strike app.
Speaker 1: You can download the Strike app and you can convert
Speaker 1: your dollars into the bitcoin and then sends across the
Speaker 1: Lighting network and then in the recipients country, it delivers
Speaker 1: to do them in whatever they want. So in the
Speaker 1: Philippines they use a company called pouch dot pH and
Speaker 1: it converts that bitcoin into local fiat currency and then
Speaker 1: forwards the money through the recipients bank or mobile account.
Speaker 1: So the important piece to understand is that you don't
Speaker 1: have to understand that it uses the Bitcoin network. You
Speaker 1: don't have to know that, just like you don't know
Speaker 1: how my voice is coming across your speakers right now.
Speaker 1: You don't have to know how it works. And that's
Speaker 1: the beauty of this. And so this is how it's working. Now.
Speaker 1: People in the Philippines or Nigeria or Kenya or else
Speaker 1: I would or can receive money instantly and for free
Speaker 1: in whatever currency they want, in the dollar, in the paso,
Speaker 1: and they don't have to know that it's going over
Speaker 1: the Bitcoin network. They don't have to know that it's
Speaker 1: a new payment rail. And so this is changing lives.
Speaker 1: It's saving lots of money, thirty five billion dollars it's
Speaker 1: being spent, and a large part of that is being
Speaker 1: taken up by fees. And so bitcoin is saving that.
Speaker 1: Bitcoin is fixing that. Bitcoin is not old and slow
Speaker 1: and clunky. It's the fastest and cheapest way to send
Speaker 1: value across the world instantly, and the Philippines and lots
Speaker 1: of other countries are now benefiting from them. If you're
Speaker 1: just tuning in, you're listening to the Mark Moas Show.
Speaker 1: I'm running through some of the biggest headlines of the
Speaker 1: week as we document and discuss how the world is
Speaker 1: changing through the decentralized revolution, and we look at through
Speaker 1: the lens of politics, finance, and technology. Now, there's lots
Speaker 1: of other big headlines that happened this week that I
Speaker 1: want to talk about that you need to know about
Speaker 1: if you want to stay in formed, that if you
Speaker 1: want to see how the world is changing, where we're going. So,
Speaker 1: I got a lot more to cover when I come back.
Speaker 1: You don't want to miss it, don't go away. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna be right back. All right, Welcome back. If you
Speaker 1: are just tuning in, you're listening to the Mark Mass Show.
Speaker 1: We're talking about the decentralized revolution that we talk about
Speaker 1: each and every week, as the world is decentralizing, as
Speaker 1: we look at it through the lens of politics, of finance,
Speaker 1: and technology, and we're talking about some of the biggest
Speaker 1: breaking news headlines. One thing I saw this week that
Speaker 1: kind of caught my eye that was kind of interesting
Speaker 1: is from the Washington Post the wappo. Their slogan is
Speaker 1: that democracy dies in darkness, which is sort of rich.
Speaker 1: They're killing the democracy by lying to us and surpassing
Speaker 1: the truth. I talked about earlier in a previous segment.
Speaker 1: If you missed it, you can catch me on the podcast.
Speaker 1: Just search Mark Moss The Mark Mos Show in your
Speaker 1: favorite podcast player, or you can always watch these and
Speaker 1: listen to me on my YouTube channel called Market Disruptors.
Speaker 1: Check that out as well. I talked about how they're
Speaker 1: using disinformation and they're always doing the opposite of what
Speaker 1: they say. So the Wappa Washington Post is saying that
Speaker 1: democracy dies in darkness, but they're the ones creating darkness. Interesting,
Speaker 1: but anyway, I don't want to go into that tangent,
Speaker 1: but they put up this article that I thought was
Speaker 1: pretty interesting. We're talking about the doomsday clock. You ever
Speaker 1: heard of that the doomsday clock hits ninety seconds to
Speaker 1: midnight its most dire prediction ever. They say ninety seconds
Speaker 1: away from midnight, whatever that means. But this is according
Speaker 1: to the doomsday clock, and basically what it is is
Speaker 1: a it's like a symbolic hour that kind of counts
Speaker 1: down this apocalypse. And the people who run the clock
Speaker 1: are mostly saying that it's because of what's happening in
Speaker 1: the Russia War with Ukraine, which I would agree. In
Speaker 1: the Russia War with Ukraine, the danger is because of
Speaker 1: the potential use of nuclear weapons. And this is a
Speaker 1: big problem, and it's something that I'm concerned about it.
Speaker 1: And I'm somebody who grew up under the Cold War.
Speaker 1: You know, as I was a kid, we still had
Speaker 1: the Cold War with Russia, you know, the East and
Speaker 1: West Berlin Wall. But maybe I was too young to realize.
Speaker 1: But I don't remember then, you know, maybe in the
Speaker 1: early days after World War Two, but I remember then
Speaker 1: they're ever really being a threat of nuclear war. We
Speaker 1: were never close to war. But here we are in war.
Speaker 1: Make no mistake. The United States is at war with Russia. Period.
Speaker 1: Now it's happening in Ukraine. That's where the battleground is,
Speaker 1: and it's most of the Ukrainian forces. But the US
Speaker 1: is giving all the weapons and the money. And the
Speaker 1: US isn't just giving the weapons, the weapons systems that
Speaker 1: were given the Ukrainians. The Ukrainians don't know how to use.
Speaker 1: Our systems are so advanced they some of these take
Speaker 1: sixty eighty people just to run the weapon. Ukrainians haven't
Speaker 1: been trained on that. So make no mistake, the US
Speaker 1: is there, and of course Russia knows this. You may
Speaker 1: not agree, but Russia does and they said, hey, we
Speaker 1: see that you're at war with us, and what are
Speaker 1: the whole point of nuclear weapons so you don't lose?
Speaker 1: And ultimately they're supposed to be a deterrence, like, hey,
Speaker 1: don't mess with me, I won't mess with you. We
Speaker 1: both have we both have nuclear weapons. It's like the
Speaker 1: Mexican standoff right where you see like two guys pointing
Speaker 1: guns at each other, like neither one wants to fire
Speaker 1: because it's mutually assured destruction. We're both going to die.
Speaker 1: We both have guns pointed at each other, so let's
Speaker 1: just decide to not kill each other, right, And that's
Speaker 1: where that's that's why nuclear weapons actually brought peace. Because
Speaker 1: of that, we know that, tay, we're not going to
Speaker 1: bomb you and you're not gonna bomb us, otherwise we
Speaker 1: all die. Sounds pretty reasonable, except for now we seem
Speaker 1: to have forgotten that and the US is now pushing
Speaker 1: to the point. You know, Russia drew this red line, Hey,
Speaker 1: don't cross this line and we'll be okay, and then
Speaker 1: we did the saying don't cross this line, and we did.
Speaker 1: Now they said, don't give them weapons, or we recognize
Speaker 1: that you're in the war with us. And then we did,
Speaker 1: and we're pushing nuclear war. And that's why this this
Speaker 1: doomsday clock is saying that we're potentially going into this now.
Speaker 1: This clock's movement is heading towards catastrophe, that's what it's saying.
Speaker 1: The time had been set at one hundred seconds away
Speaker 1: from midnight since twenty twenty, but there's bulletin of atomic
Speaker 1: scientists that use this clock are now saying that we
Speaker 1: are getting very close to this. And I want to
Speaker 1: point out the obvious here. All right, Joe Biden, the
Speaker 1: Biden administration, and the neo cons that run the government
Speaker 1: are the ones pushing this. They are literally putting everybody
Speaker 1: in the world's lives in danger. Your life is in danger,
Speaker 1: My life is in danger, My kids' lives are in danger.
Speaker 1: People in Mexico, people in parts of Europe, people in
Speaker 1: Central America, people in China, even their lives are at
Speaker 1: danger because if a nuclear war goes off, it affects everybody.
Speaker 1: And the point that I want to make out is
Speaker 1: that Joe Biden, the Bide administration, the neo cons, whatever
Speaker 1: you want to call them, they a small group of
Speaker 1: people are deciding to put the entire world's lives at
Speaker 1: risk over what? Over? Who controls crimea? Do you even
Speaker 1: know where CRIMEA is? Why do you care who controls Crimeia?
Speaker 1: Why do you want to put your kids, your grandkids,
Speaker 1: your future generations that aren't even born yet. Why do
Speaker 1: you want to put third lives of risks? Who are they?
Speaker 1: Who are they to have the authority to put my
Speaker 1: life at risk over what? Over crimeia? I mean, come on,
Speaker 1: the insanity of this? And this is what this doomsday
Speaker 1: clock is saying because they realize that we are getting
Speaker 1: closer and closer and closer to this atomic war. Now,
Speaker 1: why did the doomsday clock move closer to midnight? Well,
Speaker 1: because what we're conveying with the clock move is this
Speaker 1: is this quote or conveyed with the clock move is
Speaker 1: things are not going in the right direction, and they
Speaker 1: haven't been going in the right direction, so we're always
Speaker 1: thinking about directionality, right, and so we are headed for
Speaker 1: disaster and the rhetoric that's continuing to grow is continuing
Speaker 1: to only antagonize and continue to escalate. The way you
Speaker 1: escalation works is that it owns the ends, either one
Speaker 1: when both sides agree to end it, or two so peaceably,
Speaker 1: or two ultimately the final moves made. So I say
Speaker 1: something mean to you. You push me, you threaten me,
Speaker 1: I push you, you punch me. I get a knife,
Speaker 1: you get a gun. Right, that's how escalation works until
Speaker 1: maybe somebody steps in with a cool head says, hang on,
Speaker 1: hang on, hang on, guys, do you really mean this?
Speaker 1: Can we talk it out sort of a thing and
Speaker 1: we see that. You know, the Russia and Ukraine have
Speaker 1: tried to have peace many times. The US doesn't want peace.
Speaker 1: The neo cons want war and for what for who
Speaker 1: controls Crimea? Of course not. So you have to ask
Speaker 1: yourself this, ask yourself this one, Like I said, the insanity,
Speaker 1: the absurdity that these group of people have the right
Speaker 1: to put our lives in danger over what over? Over was?
Speaker 1: So again, it's not about Crimea. What is it about? Well,
Speaker 1: they might, they're gonna tell you, well, because Russia won't
Speaker 1: stop with Crimea, Russia won't stop with Ukraine. If we
Speaker 1: don't stop them, and you crane, they're going to take
Speaker 1: over the whole world. Really, if they try to come
Speaker 1: onto us soil. I think we can defend that pretty well.
Speaker 1: I think we can defend that pretty well. So what
Speaker 1: is it really about That's the question that you have
Speaker 1: to ask yourself. The battle is over globalism and the
Speaker 1: world that coming for them. They met last week and
Speaker 1: they talked about the biggest threat we have is this
Speaker 1: deglobalization and what can they do to stop this? And
Speaker 1: stopping Russia is the path to stopping deglobalization. That's what
Speaker 1: they want, but they can't stop it. It's happening and
Speaker 1: we're talking about it each and every week now. Of course,
Speaker 1: I hope and I pray that this de escalates. I
Speaker 1: hope and I pray that they walk this back, that
Speaker 1: they find peace, because I don't want my life in jeopardy.
Speaker 1: I don't want your kids' lives in jeopardy. And hopefully
Speaker 1: cooler heads will prevail. Hopefully you will take this information
Speaker 1: and go discuss it with your friends and your family
Speaker 1: and your co workers, and hopefully we can the conscious
Speaker 1: discussion to pick up enough where they can hear this
Speaker 1: and think about how absurd this is. And whatever motives
Speaker 1: that they have, however wrong, are skewed they are they
Speaker 1: can figure out that, look, this is not what the
Speaker 1: people want. Our motives are wrong. We don't have the
Speaker 1: right to put everybody's lives in jeopardy. Now, fix the money,
Speaker 1: fix the world. If they didn't have a money printer,
Speaker 1: we would never be in the situation in the first place.
Speaker 1: That's a whole other story. If you're just doing it.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Mark Moas Show. We're talking about
Speaker 1: the decentralized Revolution, and we're talking about how globalism is ending,
Speaker 1: and that's what this war is all about. I got
Speaker 1: a whole lot more news stories to cover when I
Speaker 1: come back in a minute, so don't go away. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna be right back, all right, Welcome back. You are
Speaker 1: listening to the Mark Moss Show. We're talking about, of course,
Speaker 1: each and every week, the decentralized Revolution, talking about the
Speaker 1: way the world is changing, because it is changing fast.
Speaker 1: And I'm bringing to you some of the latest breaking
Speaker 1: news headlines that I've seen this week that kind of
Speaker 1: illustrate where this is going and more importantly, kind of
Speaker 1: help us navigate this and position ourselves better for the future.
Speaker 1: You know, one of the big things that has been
Speaker 1: going on over the last couple of weeks, and I've
Speaker 1: seen really escalate this this week, was the talks in
Speaker 1: the United States about the debt limit, the debt ceiling.
Speaker 1: And you know, I mean, it's the stupidest argument, stupidest conversation.
Speaker 1: It just continues to come back over and over and
Speaker 1: over again. The government pretends like, we've hit the debt
Speaker 1: limit and we have to raise the debt limit if
Speaker 1: we want to continue to fund the government. And then
Speaker 1: you get this rhetoric from Biden comes out and says
Speaker 1: that the government's gonna shut down. The government will default
Speaker 1: on the debt if we don't raise the debt ceiling.
Speaker 1: That's what they say. Obviously, we've kind of got this
Speaker 1: a little bit of a Republican majority there in the
Speaker 1: Senate and they kind of controlled purse strings. And so
Speaker 1: there was a conference I watched some of and it
Speaker 1: was with Ted Cruz and Rand Paul and a couple
Speaker 1: other people from the JUPEAT and they are basically saying, look,
Speaker 1: this is like the stupidest rhetoric because the government will
Speaker 1: not default on its debt. This is not going to happen.
Speaker 1: The government has more and enough tax revenue to pay
Speaker 1: for the interest on the debt. So there's just there's
Speaker 1: no way that there's a default unless they decide to
Speaker 1: take the money they have, which is more than enough
Speaker 1: to cover the interest and not pay it and instead
Speaker 1: spend it somewhere else. So that would be like, for example,
Speaker 1: your house payment is one thousand dollars a month and
Speaker 1: you make two thousand dollars a month, so you make
Speaker 1: more than enough to pay for your house payment. But
Speaker 1: you could decide not to pay your house payment, and
Speaker 1: you could decide to quantification and do all these other
Speaker 1: things by clothes and by the fancy dinners and not
Speaker 1: pay it, and then you could default. And that's basically
Speaker 1: the situation the US government's in. We have enough revenue
Speaker 1: to pay the interest. That's what Rampaul and Ted Crews
Speaker 1: are saying. There's no to even mention. The word default
Speaker 1: is just ludicrous unless you decide to not pay it.
Speaker 1: And that's why this rhetoric of the Bide administration is
Speaker 1: so dangerous and scary. However, this is where we're at,
Speaker 1: and so we always talk about this debt ceiling. Basically,
Speaker 1: what it comes down to is we don't have an
Speaker 1: enough money to buy whatever we want and pay for
Speaker 1: what we have to pay for. Just like if you
Speaker 1: have to pay your house payment, you can't just go
Speaker 1: on a super exclusive expensive trip to a Fiji. If
Speaker 1: you got to make your house payment, you don't have
Speaker 1: enough money. And so that's kind of where we're app
Speaker 1: One of the things that I've seen them talking about
Speaker 1: this week specifically was what's happening with entitlements. And so
Speaker 1: we have things that have to be paid, and then
Speaker 1: we have things that we want to pay. So one
Speaker 1: are the things that we want to pay, Well, that's
Speaker 1: these hundreds of billions of dollars they spend on stupid policies,
Speaker 1: like giving money to Afghanistan so they could study transgenderism
Speaker 1: for example. We don't need to spend that money that's
Speaker 1: not needed. But some things we do have to spend,
Speaker 1: for example, social security and medicaid, we are supposed to
Speaker 1: pay that. And so there's been this talk of social
Speaker 1: security on the brink of collapse and potentially having reform
Speaker 1: with that in order to avoid this debt ceiling debate.
Speaker 1: And so that is what I want to talk about.
Speaker 1: I saw this article talking about this specifically and how
Speaker 1: sociecurity is on the brink of collapse. Now this shouldn't
Speaker 1: surprise you. We've been talking about so security running out
Speaker 1: of money and collapsing at least since two thousand that
Speaker 1: I'm aware of, at least for the last twenty plus years.
Speaker 1: We've been talking about it, so shouldn't catch you a surprise.
Speaker 1: But the problem is that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme,
Speaker 1: and I mean that literally. So what most people think
Speaker 1: is that they have an account with so Security that
Speaker 1: you've paid into your whole career, and you deserve to
Speaker 1: get that money back out. But that's not how Social
Speaker 1: Security works. Social Security is literally a Ponzi scheme. What
Speaker 1: that means is the money you're paying in today is
Speaker 1: for somebody else to withdraw today. The money they paid
Speaker 1: into earlier in their career was for the people that
Speaker 1: had retired before them. And Ponzi schemes work as long
Speaker 1: as you continually get more and more people in on
Speaker 1: the scheme. But when they get less people in, then
Speaker 1: they have to pay out. The Ponzi scheme falls apart.
Speaker 1: Asked Bernie made Off, And that's exactly the problem that
Speaker 1: we're in. In nineteen fifty there were sixteen workers for
Speaker 1: every one person pulling money out. Perfect that's a great
Speaker 1: Ponzi scheme. But in twenty thirty five that ratio goes
Speaker 1: to only two workers per retiree. That's the problem with
Speaker 1: a Ponzi. We went from sixteen to one to two
Speaker 1: to one, and that's a problem. But it gets even
Speaker 1: worse than that. There's lots of reasons. I'm not going
Speaker 1: to get into a whole lot of it, but other reasons, like,
Speaker 1: for example, people live a lot longer when they started
Speaker 1: SO security. I think the average life expectancy, I didn't
Speaker 1: look it up, but I think it was, you know,
Speaker 1: sixty five years something like that. Today it's like eighty.
Speaker 1: So not only do we have less people pay, but
Speaker 1: now we have to pay them for a lot longer
Speaker 1: time and it's way more expensive, not just because of inflation,
Speaker 1: but because of Medicare and things like that. And so
Speaker 1: how do we deal with that? Now? I'm not meaning
Speaker 1: to scare you, but I want you to know what's
Speaker 1: potentially coming down the pipe. And while you know these
Speaker 1: negotiating the debt is mandatory, we have to do it.
Speaker 1: You have to be aware at unfortunately renegotiating some of
Speaker 1: these things, it's gonna have to happen. I'll just be
Speaker 1: blunt here. If you're depending on SO Security to live,
Speaker 1: you need to find another option. Let me just tell
Speaker 1: you that you're gonna need to find another option. Social
Speaker 1: Security is not going to save you. Depending on how
Speaker 1: old you are there, you're either going to get much
Speaker 1: less money than you hope or expect, or you're going
Speaker 1: to get none at all. Now, for Social Security alone,
Speaker 1: let's let's take out so security, for medicare, for soci
Speaker 1: security alone, when the trust fund dries out, what happens, Well,
Speaker 1: they would have to raise payroll taxes. Payroll taxes are
Speaker 1: what pays into Social Security. They would probably have to
Speaker 1: increase those taxes by twenty five percent right off the bat, Well,
Speaker 1: what is it? What? Okay? Then what happens? Right, so
Speaker 1: we can kind of keeping okay, So they run out
Speaker 1: of pay they run out of security, So then they
Speaker 1: have to pay payroll taxes by twenty five percent. Well,
Speaker 1: then what happens, Well, a lot of businesses can't afford that,
Speaker 1: so they got a business. Well, then what happens, Well,
Speaker 1: then the economy suffers, the unemployment right rises. Well, then
Speaker 1: what happens, Well, another business started server because it's not
Speaker 1: enough customers. And then what happens, Well, then the country
Speaker 1: goes into a great depression. And then what happened? Right,
Speaker 1: they think about that. Now, for the business that don't
Speaker 1: go out of business, what do they do, Well, they
Speaker 1: raise their prices to offset that. So then what happens, Well,
Speaker 1: then we have to pay way more money for all
Speaker 1: the goods and servers that were used to paint. Well,
Speaker 1: then what happens, Well, then we have to give up
Speaker 1: on other things. Well, then what happens, Well, the quality
Speaker 1: of our life declines. All right, So at a minimum,
Speaker 1: that's going to happen now, Like I said, we've been
Speaker 1: talking about raising the dead ceilings since at least two
Speaker 1: thousand and experts were warning that socialecurity would run out
Speaker 1: by twenty thirty seven. And it's gonna be painful. Like
Speaker 1: I said, at a minimum, they're gonna have to cut benefits,
Speaker 1: and a maximum they're gonna have to raise taxes. There
Speaker 1: are probably some combination of that, but today it's gotten worse,
Speaker 1: Like this is accelerating and now they're expecting to run
Speaker 1: out of funds by twenty thirty five. So that's uh,
Speaker 1: you know, twelve years, So I'm not expected to even
Speaker 1: get them for a twelve years. So by the time
Speaker 1: I'm affect to get them, there probably won't be anything left.
Speaker 1: But you need to know when this is gonna hit.
Speaker 1: So by twenty thirty five, there's this taking time bomb.
Speaker 1: And like I said, lots of perfect storms have happened longer.
Speaker 1: Life expectancies is obviously a big one. But the big
Speaker 1: one is because it's a Ponzi scheme. The ratio is
Speaker 1: below three to one when it used to be sixteen
Speaker 1: to one when they first calculated this, and then you
Speaker 1: just continue to add on to it. So like, for example,
Speaker 1: basically every politician comes into power by basically buying votes, right,
Speaker 1: they do that by expanding benefits. No one will ever
Speaker 1: be elected by saying they're going to take away a
Speaker 1: bunch of benefits, so each one has to give more
Speaker 1: than the one before them. And all this continues to
Speaker 1: do is to escalate this until we actually have a
Speaker 1: big crisis on their hands. And I get it. Like
Speaker 1: the main argument that I hear is that it's not fair.
Speaker 1: Retirees deserve fair, fair, fair, fair equity, equity, they deserve
Speaker 1: fair treatment, and I agree, But the problem is the
Speaker 1: facts in the law are not on that side. As
Speaker 1: a matter of fact, the Supreme Court ruled in nineteen
Speaker 1: sixty that workers do not have illegally binding right to
Speaker 1: SoC security benefits. So just know that there's a big
Speaker 1: risk and if you're planing on so security to save you,
Speaker 1: you're better make another plan. If you're just tuning in,
Speaker 1: you're listening to the markmas Show. We're talking about some
Speaker 1: of the latest breaking news headlines this week as we
Speaker 1: navigate the decentralized revolution, as we navigate this world changing
Speaker 1: as we look at it through the lens of politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology, and of course technologies will changes in the world,
Speaker 1: but this is more about politics and finance. The politicians
Speaker 1: are making rules and more importantly, making promises that they
Speaker 1: can't keep because the economics, the finances don't keep up
Speaker 1: with it, and it's going to create massive change socially, politically,
Speaker 1: and of course we have technologically. I have more news
Speaker 1: headlines to talk about when I come back. You don't
Speaker 1: want to miss this. You want to be well informed,
Speaker 1: because if you're not well informed, you're going to fall behind.
Speaker 1: So I'll be back with more in a minute. Don't
Speaker 1: go away, We're right back, all right, Welcome back. If
Speaker 1: you're just tuning in, you are listening to the Mark
Speaker 1: Masha We're talking about the decentralized Revolution, navigating the world
Speaker 1: changing as it goes from sensualization to decentralization. And you know,
Speaker 1: I want to talk about this transition. And what happens
Speaker 1: is sort of like the law of physics is each
Speaker 1: force is equal and opposite reaction, right, And so what
Speaker 1: happens is that I talked about this a few weeks ago.
Speaker 1: As things continue to degrade, as unfortunately we get more
Speaker 1: and more corruption inside politics and government, the more people
Speaker 1: are outraged by it, which of course they should be,
Speaker 1: and the more they start to speak out, the more
Speaker 1: disgruntled they become, the more protests happen things like that,
Speaker 1: and the government then has to squeeze even harder or
Speaker 1: restrict even harder to try to hang on to any power.
Speaker 1: But then the more that they squeeze to hang onto power,
Speaker 1: the more upset and disgrunt how people get, and the
Speaker 1: more they speak out, and then the more the politicians
Speaker 1: the governments have to squeeze. And it's just like this
Speaker 1: constant escalation and squeeze more, pushback more. So then squeeze
Speaker 1: more to them, pushback more, and squeeze more, pushback more.
Speaker 1: And that's exactly what's happening. And this is the volatility
Speaker 1: at the top before this blows off. I saw this
Speaker 1: week European official warns Elon Musk that the era of
Speaker 1: wild West for free speech is over. There will be sanctions.
Speaker 1: Quote that's a threat. So what does this European officials
Speaker 1: say and who are they? Well, the wild West for
Speaker 1: free speech is over. So break that down. So free
Speaker 1: speech is over because they are so corrupt. They are
Speaker 1: pushing things we don't want and they cannot allow us
Speaker 1: to communicate that that we don't like, that, that we
Speaker 1: don't want that. There's a better way. They can't handle that.
Speaker 1: They do not want free speech. This is her quote.
Speaker 1: The free speech era is over. That's the quote. Let's
Speaker 1: break this down. Europe is pushing now new legislation that
Speaker 1: will force online platforms like Twitter to remove disinformation. Okay,
Speaker 1: so remember I've been talking about disinformation is the single
Speaker 1: largest issue supposedly pro the WILLO come in forms the
Speaker 1: single biggest issue that we have now I broke down
Speaker 1: in a previous segment. If you missed it, check out
Speaker 1: on the podcast just served the Mark Maas Show. The
Speaker 1: previous segment, I was talking about how all the disinformation
Speaker 1: is actually coming from the mainstream media and from the
Speaker 1: inner workings of the government. Ron Paul wrote a piece
Speaker 1: this week so that the real disinformation was the Russia
Speaker 1: disinformation hoax, which came from something called Hamilton's sixty eight,
Speaker 1: which Twitter has now exposed was a completely fraudulent operation
Speaker 1: set up to feed misinformation and disinformation. It all came
Speaker 1: from them to purposely create distrust. So they're the ones
Speaker 1: pushing the disinformation. But supposedly, now this lawmaker saying that
Speaker 1: now you're passing legislation to forced online platforms to remove disinformation,
Speaker 1: Well that would be great because then Twitter would have
Speaker 1: removed all the disinformation that the FBI and CNN put out.
Speaker 1: But that's not what they want. So European politician Vera
Speaker 1: Jerrova warned the Elon Musk from the World Economic Form
Speaker 1: and Davos that Twitter, not Facebook, not YouTube because they
Speaker 1: play play ball. But Twitter will face sanctions if it
Speaker 1: doesn't shut down some forms of speech. It can't have
Speaker 1: free speech. Free speech is too dangerous. We can't allow
Speaker 1: you to say things that are against our narrative because
Speaker 1: we have to control an indoctrinate to you. That's what
Speaker 1: they say, Jerova said. Quote. So after mister Musk took
Speaker 1: over Twitter with his freedom of speech absolutism. We are
Speaker 1: the protectors of freedom of speech as well, but at
Speaker 1: the same time, we cannot accept, for instance, illegal content
Speaker 1: online and so on. So our message was clear, we
Speaker 1: have rules and there will be sanctions. So what does
Speaker 1: this even mean? Where is the line? So they have
Speaker 1: to shut down some forms of speech? What forms of speech?
Speaker 1: Who's to say what gets to be said? Who's to say?
Speaker 1: What misinformation is? What is misinformation? All the so called
Speaker 1: conspiracy theories that were being pedled twenty twenty one all
Speaker 1: have basically been proven to be true and all the misinformation.
Speaker 1: As I said, I broke this whole down, don't I'm
Speaker 1: not gonna go through all that. But if you're having
Speaker 1: doubts either one, just Google again, Always verify me, Always
Speaker 1: verify me. Google Hamilton's sixty eight. And this is the
Speaker 1: big report that just came out from Twitter where they
Speaker 1: showed all the facts, all the smoking guns of how
Speaker 1: the FBI, the intelligence community, CNBC, Washington Post, et cetera
Speaker 1: used this fake, fraudulent source to push this Russia collusion
Speaker 1: narrative and it was all made up. And this is
Speaker 1: the facts. Okay, these are the names, these are the people,
Speaker 1: these are the quotes Hamilton sixty I talked about in
Speaker 1: previous segment. I'm not going to repeat all that again,
Speaker 1: but there are the ones pushing it. So who's going
Speaker 1: to tell us what disinformation is? Well, they are right,
Speaker 1: the ones that are pushing it. He Senda Harden was
Speaker 1: the Prime Minister of New Zealand. You might remember her
Speaker 1: saying we are the source of truth. Don't listen to
Speaker 1: anybody but us. We will be the source of truth.
Speaker 1: And then she went on to the UN to ask
Speaker 1: the UN to rally the UN to put to put
Speaker 1: restrictions on freedom of speech. If you remember, during the
Speaker 1: COVID era, you had CNN saying do not do your
Speaker 1: own research. Don't do it, just trust what we have
Speaker 1: to say. We are the arbiters of truth. Now, there
Speaker 1: was a book written called Fahrenheit four fifty one. I'd
Speaker 1: highly recommend you read it. If you don't want to
Speaker 1: read the book, watch the movie. I think the actor's
Speaker 1: name is Michael Jordan. He played like Apollo Creed in
Speaker 1: the new remake great movie Fahrenheit four Duo one. So
Speaker 1: at least watch the movie. It's a very, very good movie,
Speaker 1: very entertaining. But basically the premise of the book and
Speaker 1: the movie is basically that the world went into a
Speaker 1: civil war, and so the world that comment forum says
Speaker 1: that all this misinformation will lead us into political instability
Speaker 1: and potentially civil war. And the reason why is because
Speaker 1: you have two different groups of people, one group of
Speaker 1: people that listen to the lies and narrative being fed
Speaker 1: to them, and another group of people that talk freely
Speaker 1: and they discover the truth. And now those two people
Speaker 1: can't mix because they believe they live in two different
Speaker 1: alternative realities. And I think you know what I'm talking about.
Speaker 1: We already have that today, right, And so what happened
Speaker 1: is then it led to the civil war, and it
Speaker 1: was this really bad thing and lots of people get
Speaker 1: died whatever. And so what they had to do is
Speaker 1: they had to get rid of all the information in
Speaker 1: the world, burn every single book, take over the internet,
Speaker 1: shut it all down, and then the state had to
Speaker 1: be the only source of information and truth. That way
Speaker 1: they could prevent another civil war from ever happening. That way,
Speaker 1: if there's only one narrative and everybody believed that one narrative,
Speaker 1: then there would never be any fighting again, and so
Speaker 1: a Fahrenheit fourth d one. They had these like firemen,
Speaker 1: they called them, and the fireman would go around burning
Speaker 1: any books. And you had this whole section of society
Speaker 1: that was trying to preserve this knowledge, preserve this information,
Speaker 1: preserve his and they were hoarding these books. And then
Speaker 1: what they would even do is memorize the books. So
Speaker 1: even if the books got taken away or burned by
Speaker 1: the firement, they could they could recreate those books. And
Speaker 1: so in an interesting book and a great movie. Highly
Speaker 1: recommend it. But basically it basically lays this exact thing out.
Speaker 1: They're saying that the single biggest source of societal disruption
Speaker 1: is misinformation, or the fact that there are two alternative realities,
Speaker 1: one which I consider to be the truth, and two
Speaker 1: their false narrative. Now, how am I able to sit
Speaker 1: on my high horse here and tell you that I
Speaker 1: consider one to be truth and their false narrative. Well,
Speaker 1: the reason why is because the truth is always found
Speaker 1: out through free and open and honest and intellectual discussion.
Speaker 1: A lot of times I've seeing stuff on Twitter where
Speaker 1: somebody post something I'm like, oh man, that is so good.
Speaker 1: I never thought of that, And then I start to
Speaker 1: read the comments and I'm like, oh, oh, I didn't
Speaker 1: think about that, and oh I didn't think about that,
Speaker 1: and oh that's a good point. Actually, now this guy's wrong, right,
Speaker 1: But it was only because of that open and honest
Speaker 1: discussion that I found the truth. If somebody says something
Speaker 1: mean or hateful or wrong, they'll be called out instantly.
Speaker 1: That's the way the internet works. If I say something
Speaker 1: super bigoted or mean or racist, people will call me out.
Speaker 1: And only through that open and fair and honest discussion
Speaker 1: will we find out who the liars and the frauds
Speaker 1: and the biggots and the racists are. Only through open
Speaker 1: honest discussion when we find the truth. Only lies need
Speaker 1: to censor the truth because lies can't exist on their own.
Speaker 1: If their ideas were good ideas, their ideas would win
Speaker 1: in the open court of honest discussion, transparency. The truth
Speaker 1: will always find out if we're allowed to speak the quote.
Speaker 1: I don't know who said this quote, but you don't
Speaker 1: prove a man wrong by ripping out his tongue. You
Speaker 1: only prove that you have something to hide. And so
Speaker 1: this is what they're trying to do with Twitter. They
Speaker 1: want to sanction it. They want to put it out
Speaker 1: of business, so we don't have a place to talk
Speaker 1: online anyway. That's what I got. You listening to the
Speaker 1: Markmas Show talking about the decentralized revolution. We're looking at
Speaker 1: the volatility. Things are changing fast. That was some of
Speaker 1: the biggest news headlines of the week. That's what I got.
Speaker 1: Thanks so much for listening.