Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome back to another episode of the Mark
Speaker 1: Mos Show where we talk about the decentralized revolution and
Speaker 1: the way the world is changing um from a world
Speaker 1: of centralization, central planning, central banking, to a world of decentralization,
Speaker 1: which means more power and control back into you as
Speaker 1: an individual, as an individual person, getting away from central
Speaker 1: planning to individual planning, away from central banking, and back
Speaker 1: to uh unbanking or independent personal banking. Of course, we
Speaker 1: look at it through the lens of politics, finance, and technology,
Speaker 1: and there are so much going on with all of that,
Speaker 1: so we try to keep up with the flow of
Speaker 1: information so we can see this. I know a lot
Speaker 1: of times I get thousands of messages a week across
Speaker 1: all my social media platforms, which, by the way, if
Speaker 1: you're not following me on social media, please do. You
Speaker 1: can find me at one Mark Moss on most platforms,
Speaker 1: or just go to my website at one Mark Moss
Speaker 1: dot I'm sorry, just one Mark Moss dot com and
Speaker 1: I have all of it listed there. But I get
Speaker 1: thousands of comments a week across my social media. Try
Speaker 1: to get to most of them if I can, um
Speaker 1: not all the ones on YouTube. There's are so many there,
Speaker 1: but I try my best to get to as many
Speaker 1: as I can. And the one thing that I see
Speaker 1: all the time is like, Mark, when is this going
Speaker 1: to happen? When will the dollar lose its status? When
Speaker 1: will the dollar collapse? When will the new system take over? Right?
Speaker 1: And it's not when. It's not a process, it's an event.
Speaker 1: Let me say that again. I said it backwards. Sorry,
Speaker 1: it's it's not at an event, it's a process. What
Speaker 1: do I mean by that? So it's a process, it's
Speaker 1: that it goes for over a long period of time.
Speaker 1: I think it was Mark Twain. Forgive me if I'm
Speaker 1: wrong on this attribution of the quote. But they said,
Speaker 1: how did you go broke? And they said, now, I
Speaker 1: went broke gradually and then suddenly. And so there's like
Speaker 1: this gradually then suddenly kind of a thing. Um. And
Speaker 1: so if you look at the United States dollar took over,
Speaker 1: the took over the reserve status of the world, world's
Speaker 1: reserve status from the pounds sterling a hundred years ago.
Speaker 1: But it didn't happen all at months. It was a process,
Speaker 1: not an event. It took It happened over about a
Speaker 1: forty year period where um the UK just continued to
Speaker 1: destroy their currency by continuing to print more and more money,
Speaker 1: by devaluing it, and to the point where it was
Speaker 1: devalued so much they had to give up all their gold.
Speaker 1: The United States got all the gold and thereby was
Speaker 1: the strongest economy and the strongest currency in the world
Speaker 1: because it was backed by gold, and thereby took over
Speaker 1: as the world's reserve currency. This was a long process,
Speaker 1: a forty year process. Now the pounds to earliest still
Speaker 1: there today, it's still being used. So again it's a process,
Speaker 1: not event, a forty year process before the US dollar
Speaker 1: was kind of recognized as taking over, but it's still
Speaker 1: there today. So when did these things happen? They are
Speaker 1: happening right now, and that's exactly what we're looking at now. Um,
Speaker 1: we look at it the de lens of politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology. Those are the three cycles that are converging
Speaker 1: right now. Of course, the technology piece is bitcoin, which
Speaker 1: is this decentralized technology that we need in order to
Speaker 1: really usher in this change that's happening, and it is here,
Speaker 1: and it's happening and it's happening fast. Now. Um. You
Speaker 1: know one thing that we look at when it comes
Speaker 1: to bitcoin, is everybody likes to point to the fact that, um,
Speaker 1: you know, the price of bitcoin is down, how good
Speaker 1: is this asset? If the price is down, it's not
Speaker 1: a good medium of exchange, is too volatile, it's not
Speaker 1: a good store of value because look how far it's
Speaker 1: off of their high. Well, those things are true. Um,
Speaker 1: I can't debate that. Now we can look at the
Speaker 1: nuance of those things. So, for example, bitcoin is holding
Speaker 1: up pretty dangn good considering where other risk assets are,
Speaker 1: so we can we can we can make that argument.
Speaker 1: We could say that, um, it's been certainly a good
Speaker 1: store value if you just zoom out and look over
Speaker 1: like a two year period instead of a six month period.
Speaker 1: So we can pick and choose our periods if we
Speaker 1: want to do that. But ultimately, what I would say
Speaker 1: is that when you're looking at new technologies, especially a
Speaker 1: technological revolution such as bitcoin, you don't want to look
Speaker 1: at the price. I say this all the time we've
Speaker 1: been listening. Thank you for your support, but I've said
Speaker 1: this to you over and over and over. Right, we
Speaker 1: don't look at the price. Imagine when Uber raised money
Speaker 1: to start building out in Silicon Valley, they you know,
Speaker 1: they didn't go public for over a decade, so we
Speaker 1: didn't see the price of Uber changing every day based
Speaker 1: off of this new city picked them up, this city
Speaker 1: banned am etcetera. And so when we're looking at something
Speaker 1: like bitcoin of technological revolution, the price doesn't really give
Speaker 1: us the true data. So what we want to look
Speaker 1: at is two things. We want to look at the
Speaker 1: growth of the network. So when Uber's case, are we
Speaker 1: getting more drivers, are we getting more riders, are we
Speaker 1: getting more cities? That's the growth of the network. And
Speaker 1: we also want to look at the development happening on
Speaker 1: the network. Are they added in new services, Uber eats,
Speaker 1: things like that. And so with Bitcoin we can see
Speaker 1: the same thing. And one of the big talient signs
Speaker 1: is the growth growth of the network. And we saw
Speaker 1: this week that the difficulty gauge of bitcoin rose by
Speaker 1: thirteen and a half percent from the last adjustment roughly
Speaker 1: two weeks ago. What does that mean, Well, that means
Speaker 1: that the bitcoin mining difficulty has surged to an all
Speaker 1: time high. What does that mean? There's more people mining bitcoin,
Speaker 1: the network has grown to a level of all time highs,
Speaker 1: there's more people actively working in the network, and providing
Speaker 1: security to the network than there ever has been before.
Speaker 1: So while the price the US dollar value might be down,
Speaker 1: first of all, if we price bitcoin in Turkish lear,
Speaker 1: for example, the price of bitcoin is actually way up.
Speaker 1: So we have to look at what you're measuring it in.
Speaker 1: If you're measured in US dollars, the prices down. But
Speaker 1: that's the thing we shouldn't really be paying attention to.
Speaker 1: If we're trying to zoom out and see what's what
Speaker 1: going on, we want to look at the growth of
Speaker 1: the network, and we can see that it has grown massive.
Speaker 1: As a matter of fact, the current network hash rate,
Speaker 1: this is the amount of power that all the computers
Speaker 1: are using to secure the network is UM is two
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty seven million terror hashes per second and
Speaker 1: last this time last year it was around a hundred
Speaker 1: and forties. Went from one forty to two fifty seven
Speaker 1: in twelve months. That is a massive rise in power,
Speaker 1: participation and security on the bitcoin network. Now, UM this
Speaker 1: difficulty adjustment, what does that mean? So what it means
Speaker 1: is that right now, UM there's way more people mining bitcoin,
Speaker 1: bringing new bitcoin in the space. And so what happens
Speaker 1: is it adjust the difficulty so what do I mean
Speaker 1: by that? So if the price of gold shot up,
Speaker 1: you know it's whatever sixteen hundred bucks anounce today, let's
Speaker 1: say it went up to ten thousand announced, a lot
Speaker 1: more people would go to Mind gold. There would be
Speaker 1: gold mines popping up all over the world, new equipment,
Speaker 1: bringing as much gold as they could out of the ground,
Speaker 1: and that would increase the new supply of gold really fast.
Speaker 1: That would create inflation. But with bitcoin, it's different. If
Speaker 1: bitcoin jumps from its price today of a roughly twenty
Speaker 1: and say it went to a hundred thousand like that,
Speaker 1: more people could jump in mind, but there would be
Speaker 1: no new bitcoin, no additional bitcoin coming out. It would
Speaker 1: just it's just how much big going to split between
Speaker 1: the people that are there. So that's the difficulty adjustment.
Speaker 1: So about every two weeks it adjust that number, the ratio,
Speaker 1: the percentage of what people get. And so what happens
Speaker 1: is now people are making less and less money because
Speaker 1: there's so many people doing it right, it's grown. So
Speaker 1: what happens is the people that aren't profitable to say
Speaker 1: they're paying you know, ten cents for their power, they
Speaker 1: have to turn their machines off and when they turn
Speaker 1: their machines off, that's more bitcoin for the rest of
Speaker 1: the miners. And then let's say the price keeps dropping, well,
Speaker 1: the next batch of unprofitable miners have to drop off,
Speaker 1: and the people that are left get more of it,
Speaker 1: and so forth. And also that it works in opposite
Speaker 1: and so as more people jump in, they get less
Speaker 1: of it. It works the same way, which is why
Speaker 1: this week we saw Senator Senator H. Warren Elizabeth Warren
Speaker 1: leads a congressional groups probe into bitcoin mining mining energy
Speaker 1: in Texas. Imagine a group of of Democratic lawmakers from Washington,
Speaker 1: d C. Senator Senator Senator Elizabeth Warren is from Massachusetts.
Speaker 1: Imagine them going to Texas trying to tell Texas how
Speaker 1: to handle their power. Texas is not on the global grid.
Speaker 1: They have their own internal grid. So the fact that
Speaker 1: they're going to go there and try and demand the
Speaker 1: Texas answers to them is pretty funny. But really the
Speaker 1: whole thing behind it is is uh. It just shows
Speaker 1: that a lack of knowledge of what they're even talking about.
Speaker 1: Um they say that they express concerns that bitcoin's mining
Speaker 1: enormous demand for energy is straining the state's grid adversely
Speaker 1: impacting consumers and climate goal. So bitcoin has to have
Speaker 1: the cheapest power available. So bitcoin can't compete for customers.
Speaker 1: It can't participate in California, where it has to compete.
Speaker 1: It has to go where there's cheap power. Why is
Speaker 1: their cheap power in some places because there's surplus, there's
Speaker 1: energy being created that's not being used, and that's one
Speaker 1: of the reasons why Texas has picked up so much energy.
Speaker 1: And so again we can see that this is growing
Speaker 1: in a rapid We can see that the network has growing,
Speaker 1: we can see the development is growing on the network.
Speaker 1: And so instead of being focused on the US dollar
Speaker 1: valuation price, we want to stay focused on those two things,
Speaker 1: the growth of network and the development on the network.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Mark Ma Show. We're talking about
Speaker 1: the decentralized revolution, the way the world is changing from
Speaker 1: world of centralization to decentralization through the lens of politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology. I got a big show. I got a
Speaker 1: lot of signposts that we're looking at to show us
Speaker 1: what's happening. I'm gonna try and get through them all.
Speaker 1: I'll be back in a minute. Don't go away, all right,
Speaker 1: Welcome back. You are listening to the Mark ma Show.
Speaker 1: We're talking about the decentralized revolution, the way the world
Speaker 1: is swinging from centralization to decentralization, and we're just looking
Speaker 1: through the signpost that we see. Um. You know, if
Speaker 1: you've been with me for the entire show, I was
Speaker 1: talking about inflation. This week, the new inflation numbers came out.
Speaker 1: I want to look at it from a little bit
Speaker 1: of a different angle because what we're looking at is
Speaker 1: the breakdown of both Paul of of of three things, politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and then of course technology is the catalyst that change that.
Speaker 1: And the financial system is breaking down, the political system
Speaker 1: is breaking down. We're gonna look at both of those
Speaker 1: things some big signposts that happened. But um I was
Speaker 1: talking about earlier. I'm not going to dig super deep
Speaker 1: into it. Go back and catch out the podcast The
Speaker 1: Markmas Show, just on your favorite podcast player or Market
Speaker 1: Disruptors on YouTube if you want to watch me and
Speaker 1: listen to me at the same time. But we talked
Speaker 1: about how the new CPI Consumer Price UM index. The
Speaker 1: prices went back up again. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: it went up UM much higher than expected, search to
Speaker 1: more than eight point two percent, and you know, the
Speaker 1: core CPI strips out the food and energy, which is
Speaker 1: crazy because those are the two things that we need
Speaker 1: the most. But even with stripping those things out, we
Speaker 1: still went up at the highest rate since nineteen, surpassing
Speaker 1: the recent six point four percent highs that we hit
Speaker 1: in February. In March, now, even worse than that is
Speaker 1: that economists had expected the rate increased to be much
Speaker 1: much less than it was. But what we're seeing now,
Speaker 1: the monthly figures show that it's acts accelerating, and of
Speaker 1: course the photo reserve is trying to decelerate. The photo
Speaker 1: reserve is trying to tackle it and trying to get
Speaker 1: it back down to two percent, but instead it's going
Speaker 1: back up. It's a big problem now. The news sent
Speaker 1: the stock futures price plunging right the investors um revised
Speaker 1: their views of what the feds next moves will be.
Speaker 1: So everybody's waiting for this pivot. The pivot, the pivot
Speaker 1: when with the Feds stop raising rates, When with the
Speaker 1: peds the Fed start easing the monetary supply again, And
Speaker 1: so we're waiting for this move. And everybody thought that maybe,
Speaker 1: just maybe, if we started seeing the inflation numbers come down,
Speaker 1: they would pivot sooner than later, maybe this year. I
Speaker 1: was thinking maybe this year, but it looks like, based
Speaker 1: off of this new data that came out, this is
Speaker 1: probably not going to be the case. But let's talk
Speaker 1: about it from a different angle than I've already talked
Speaker 1: about it from before. So what does what does this mean?
Speaker 1: What means lots of things, right, we could sit here
Speaker 1: and talk about all the different angles and all the
Speaker 1: things that it means. But one of the things that
Speaker 1: it means is that because cp I has been revised up, um,
Speaker 1: what it means is that the cost of living goes up.
Speaker 1: We've talked about that. I'm not gonna take super deep
Speaker 1: into that, but the cost of you, um, having to
Speaker 1: buy gas for your car or food for your grocery
Speaker 1: carts has gone up. Your cost of living has gone up. Now,
Speaker 1: part of the thing that the BLS does by providing
Speaker 1: this number, the CPI data number, is it shows the
Speaker 1: cost of living, which then the Social Security Administration uses
Speaker 1: to decide how much money do distribute out to Social
Speaker 1: Security recipients. And this is a big deal and it
Speaker 1: might be a big problem. And so what we're talking
Speaker 1: about is that sociecurity payments are now set for a
Speaker 1: really really really big increase, and so it looks like
Speaker 1: tens of millions of Americans on SO security are about
Speaker 1: to get what maybe the biggest rays of their lifetime.
Speaker 1: All Right, it says the US government is said to
Speaker 1: announce how big a percentage increased SO security beneficiaries will
Speaker 1: see in monthly payments this upcoming year. It's certain to
Speaker 1: be the largest in four decades. So the largest raise
Speaker 1: pay raise that these SoC security beneficiaries get. Now, there's
Speaker 1: plenty of controversy companies that move, it says UM, known
Speaker 1: as a cost of living adjustment or COLA c o
Speaker 1: L a cost of living adjustment. Now, critics say the
Speaker 1: data of the government uses to set the increase doesn't
Speaker 1: reflect what older Americans are actually spending and thus the
Speaker 1: inflation they're actually feeling. Yes, we've talked about extensively over
Speaker 1: and over and over how manipulated that number is. So yes,
Speaker 1: it doesn't really doesn't really reflect what they're paying. So
Speaker 1: many of the tricks they do. So for example, they
Speaker 1: have something UM that basically adjusted by by swapping out items,
Speaker 1: so UM, you know, the cost of living index, the
Speaker 1: CPI used to include steak and now it just includes hamburger.
Speaker 1: You still get meat, and so thereby, since we went
Speaker 1: from steak to hamburger. Um, the price that didn't go up.
Speaker 1: As a matter of fact, it went down. Um. They
Speaker 1: also do something based off of performance. So let's say
Speaker 1: that they changed gasoline and now gasoline is supposed to
Speaker 1: be cleaner or more fuel efficient. They'll say, well, because
Speaker 1: the performance went up in the gasoline, we're not going
Speaker 1: to include the cost of it going up. Because your
Speaker 1: computer got more powerful. Um, we're not going to count
Speaker 1: the cost increase of the computer, which is insane because
Speaker 1: we still have to put the money out. Our cost
Speaker 1: of living still went up. There's lots of controversies. I
Speaker 1: spend an entire show talking about all of that, and
Speaker 1: I will if you want me to, So hit me
Speaker 1: up on social media at one Mark Moss and let
Speaker 1: me know if you think I should. Um. But we
Speaker 1: can see that, as they're saying, lots of controversy because
Speaker 1: it doesn't reflect what people are actually spending. And also
Speaker 1: because the increase is a one size fits all, which
Speaker 1: means beneficiaries get the same rays regardless of where they live.
Speaker 1: So for example, if you live in southern California, that
Speaker 1: pay raise may not be near enough. Then it would
Speaker 1: be if you lived in South Dakota or something like that,
Speaker 1: or Kansas right or another country. Now. I've been doing
Speaker 1: a lot of work with international diversification as recently speaking
Speaker 1: at the Nomad Capitalist event down in Mexico City, and
Speaker 1: I can tell you that if you're if you're on
Speaker 1: Social Security and your budget is tight, you might want
Speaker 1: to consider moving out of the country. You can move
Speaker 1: to Turkey, you can move to Columbia, you can move
Speaker 1: to Brazil, and you could have a ten x quality
Speaker 1: of your life for less money than you pay now.
Speaker 1: You can have a full time cook and a full
Speaker 1: time cleaner, and a full time show fore and a
Speaker 1: beautiful house for like two thousand dollars a month. So
Speaker 1: you're so Security would go much further. UM. So, anyway,
Speaker 1: payments are going to go up, which is a good
Speaker 1: Which is good if you're on SO Security. I mean,
Speaker 1: everybody wants more money. Sure, UM, it looks like those
Speaker 1: payments will begin probably in about January. UM they'll be permanent. UM. Now,
Speaker 1: since the year two thousand, the typical increase has been
Speaker 1: about two two and a half percent. But now with
Speaker 1: the numbers of inflation, it looks like that's going to
Speaker 1: be four more five more, which is gonna be a
Speaker 1: pretty big deal. But what does this mean in bigger sense?
Speaker 1: All right, this is pretty interesting. So if you haven't
Speaker 1: been paying attention, you probably should. Is something I kind
Speaker 1: of pay attention to because I'm you know, I've paid
Speaker 1: into SO security in my whole life. At some point
Speaker 1: maybe I'd want to pull out of it. But it
Speaker 1: looks like, um, so security is set to run out
Speaker 1: by four four that's twelve years from now. So that
Speaker 1: means that there's probably not gonna be any SO security
Speaker 1: by the time I get to the age in time
Speaker 1: to start drawing from that, and so it's already set
Speaker 1: to this was this was actually in February of this year.
Speaker 1: Um they said it's gonna set to run out. Now
Speaker 1: they're going to have to pay out even more money,
Speaker 1: which means they're going to run out even sooner. That's
Speaker 1: a big problem. So of course there's plenty of reasons
Speaker 1: why they would to manipulate the numbers to keep this
Speaker 1: security number down. The cost of living increases down, so
Speaker 1: they have to pay up more money. So they don't
Speaker 1: run out even faster than they were what they were
Speaker 1: planning on. That's gonna be a big problem. So if
Speaker 1: you're planning on so security um in the next you know,
Speaker 1: after twelve years from now, you should probably adjust what
Speaker 1: you're doing to come up with plan b um because
Speaker 1: it's gonna be a big problem. And what's what's exaggerating
Speaker 1: the problem is also the ability to even earn any
Speaker 1: money with interest rates so low, um, the economy crashing um,
Speaker 1: and so forth. It's gonna be a big problem anyway.
Speaker 1: That's it was so security Um. You're listening to the
Speaker 1: Mark Ball Show, we're talking about the decentralized revolution. We
Speaker 1: were just talking about how this centrally planned system that
Speaker 1: we have created by the follower reserve and so security
Speaker 1: and all that, it is coming to an end. It's
Speaker 1: coming to an end. Um that may be dooming gloom
Speaker 1: for some people. But I'd rather know than not know. Um.
Speaker 1: We're looking at typically through the lens of politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology. I have a lot more to go up
Speaker 1: in those three subjects. When I come back in a minute,
Speaker 1: I'm gona take a quick break, but I'll be back.
Speaker 1: You don't want to miss what's coming up next. So
Speaker 1: you're back, all right, welcome back. You are listening to
Speaker 1: the Markma Show. We're talking about the decentralized revolution. The
Speaker 1: way the world is changing right now. Now it's clear
Speaker 1: if you're living in this world, you know it's changing.
Speaker 1: The world as we are going into is not the
Speaker 1: one we've left behind. And we know that when we
Speaker 1: look back through thousands of years of history, we can
Speaker 1: see these cycles change the world, ebbs and flows, and
Speaker 1: we're moving from a period of centralization, central plan or
Speaker 1: central government, central banking into a world of decentralization. Of course,
Speaker 1: we look at through the lens of politics, finance, and technology,
Speaker 1: and we can see that this uh, the end of
Speaker 1: the financial era that we've known is coming to an end.
Speaker 1: To talk about it extensively, maybe the world went into
Speaker 1: well five thousand years gold was money UM. Then the
Speaker 1: whole world went into this new um financial agreement nineteen
Speaker 1: into the Breton Woods Agreement UM, where we still had
Speaker 1: the gold being money, but now the dollar was pegged
Speaker 1: to gold and other currencies were pegged to the dollar,
Speaker 1: and so we still kind of had this UM commodity
Speaker 1: based money. In nineteen seventy one, though President Richard Nixon
Speaker 1: severed the ties um to the gold standards, so removed
Speaker 1: the dollars backing too gold, and so since then the
Speaker 1: world has been in free fall. We've been about fifty
Speaker 1: one years into a financial experiment, and we went from
Speaker 1: Breton Woods one started nineteen potentially we could say nineteen
Speaker 1: seventy one. Let us to Breton Woods too. Unofficially, we
Speaker 1: went into this basically fiat monetary system that we have today.
Speaker 1: And now it is changing again and we can see
Speaker 1: that it's coming to an end. We're only fifty one
Speaker 1: years into this financial experiment and anomaly and anomaly throughout
Speaker 1: history where thousands of dollars of years, pretty much all
Speaker 1: recorded history, um, gold has been money. And now we're
Speaker 1: in this kind of fake fiat monetary system, and we
Speaker 1: can see how fast this is unraveling, and so it's
Speaker 1: easy to see that it doesn't have much more legs. Now.
Speaker 1: The Central Banks to Photo Reserve has been pretty good
Speaker 1: about pulling some rabbits out of that, had pretty good
Speaker 1: at pulling some magic tricks. However, um, you know, kicking
Speaker 1: the can down the road, so to speak. We don't
Speaker 1: know how many more they have potentially they have more,
Speaker 1: but we can see that it is getting dire. I
Speaker 1: want to look at a couple of things that I'm
Speaker 1: looking at that kind of show this, and and and
Speaker 1: so the point of seeing these signposts is trying to understand,
Speaker 1: um when when this happened. So we thought this week
Speaker 1: the i m F slashes not just cuts, not just reduces,
Speaker 1: but slashes global growth estimates. Warning, unfortunately, I hate to
Speaker 1: tell you, warning that the worst is yet to come.
Speaker 1: They say, you think things are bad now, oh just wait,
Speaker 1: they're about to get even better. Oh no, worst, They say,
Speaker 1: the global economy is headed for a quote stormy waters
Speaker 1: end quote. The Internet National Monetary Fund said this week
Speaker 1: it cut its projection for growth next year and warned
Speaker 1: that high inflation was worsening living conditions. So you think
Speaker 1: it's bad for you in the United States, what about
Speaker 1: other countries where they're seeing prices go up by double
Speaker 1: a hundred percent in months and they already live on
Speaker 1: three or four dollars a day. Imagine that. Um It
Speaker 1: says here that the global economy will grow two point
Speaker 1: seven percent in three down from a projected three point
Speaker 1: two percent this year, and six percent in so it's
Speaker 1: growing way down six going down to two point seven percent.
Speaker 1: Just um, So so think about that for a second. Actually,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna I'm gonna put that on pause. I'll come
Speaker 1: back to that. It says the global economic activity is
Speaker 1: experiencing a broad based and sharper than expected. It's always
Speaker 1: more than they expected, right, all these pH d s,
Speaker 1: all these economies, all this data, and they just can't
Speaker 1: ever seem to get it right. Um. Of course, they
Speaker 1: can't tell you what the weather is going to be
Speaker 1: like next week. They can't tell you what's going to
Speaker 1: happen with inflation. How the heck are they going to
Speaker 1: tell you what the weather is going to be like
Speaker 1: in a hundred years from now. Just stop and think
Speaker 1: about that for a second. Let's keep going here. Global
Speaker 1: economic activity is experiencing a broad based and sharper than
Speaker 1: expected slow down. We didn't expect for it to get
Speaker 1: this bad. Uh. You know, we thought we'd just shut
Speaker 1: the whole economy down and then turn it back on again,
Speaker 1: and then we have too much inflaces, so we'll shut
Speaker 1: it back down again. But we didn't expect it to
Speaker 1: be it as bad, with inflation higher than seen in
Speaker 1: several decades. Who would have thought it's it's it's sharper
Speaker 1: than expected. They say, Now, it says here that the
Speaker 1: I M s's global inflation hitting eight point eight percent.
Speaker 1: For that's up from four point seven percent last year.
Speaker 1: So eight point eight percent inflation globally. Now this means
Speaker 1: that in some places goes up less, in some places
Speaker 1: it goes up way more. But let's just look at
Speaker 1: this global number that the I m F is putting out.
Speaker 1: So they're expecting inflation to go up by eight point
Speaker 1: eight percent. They're expecting the grow global economy to grow
Speaker 1: by two point seven percent. So that means, yes, we
Speaker 1: are growing much slower. We're producing way less good than services.
Speaker 1: Your wealth is going up way slower than the cost
Speaker 1: of living. That means everybody in the world, on the
Speaker 1: entire globes cost of living, or i should say quality
Speaker 1: of life, standard of living is going down because we're
Speaker 1: growing much much slower, two much much slower than inflation
Speaker 1: is at eight point eight percent, they said. The I
Speaker 1: m said, quote, monetary policy should stay the course. Look
Speaker 1: things are they just said here, Um, they said experiencing
Speaker 1: sharper than expected slow downs, then expect things to get
Speaker 1: this bad. But never mind, never mind, we didn't expect
Speaker 1: for them to be this bad. It's way worse than
Speaker 1: anybody thought. Um, but never mind, stay the course, Stay
Speaker 1: the course. Uh. Fiscal policy should aim to alleviate the
Speaker 1: cost of living pressures while maintaining is sufficiently tight stance
Speaker 1: aligned with monetary policy. So let's let's break that down.
Speaker 1: So we have monetary policy and we have fiscal policy.
Speaker 1: What's the difference Monetary policy is what the central banks do.
Speaker 1: Monetary policy with the central banks increased the monetary supply,
Speaker 1: the base, the money base, but it's not super effective
Speaker 1: because all they can do is give reserves to the banks. Now,
Speaker 1: money doesn't really get printed by the Federal Reserve, like
Speaker 1: the meme says, and like I say all the time,
Speaker 1: I hope you understand that money isn't printed by the
Speaker 1: Federal reserve. Money is actually created by the banks. So
Speaker 1: the federal reserves give their reserves to the banks. Now,
Speaker 1: the banks create the money into existence by issuing loans.
Speaker 1: But if you and I don't borrow, if I don't
Speaker 1: go get a car loan, auto loan, a house loan,
Speaker 1: r V loan, a boat loan, a credit card. If
Speaker 1: I don't borrow, then no new money is created. And
Speaker 1: if no banks want to loan me money, no money's created.
Speaker 1: So that's monetary policy. Fiscal policy is what the government does.
Speaker 1: Fiscal policy is sending out you money for welfare or UBI.
Speaker 1: Fiscal policy is them giving you food stamps and and
Speaker 1: all these other things. That's fiscal policy. So what they're
Speaker 1: saying is that fiscal policy he should aim to alleviate
Speaker 1: the cost of living pressures. How could they do that?
Speaker 1: So what they're saying is that as prices keep going up,
Speaker 1: meaning your gas prices, your energy prices, as they keep
Speaker 1: going up, then fiscal policy should continue to work to
Speaker 1: offset that. But if they increase the money supply to
Speaker 1: help you with your high gas prices or energy prices
Speaker 1: or food prices, then that means you don't buy less.
Speaker 1: That means you continue buying the same amount, which means
Speaker 1: the demands still there. And if the demand is still
Speaker 1: there while the supply goes down, doesn't that mean prices
Speaker 1: keep going up? I mean, the thinking here, I mean
Speaker 1: it's just amazes me. So, um, the fed ed is
Speaker 1: trying to crush demand. They want to make you broke,
Speaker 1: so you can't afford these things anymore. But the I
Speaker 1: m F is saying that fiscal policy should aim to
Speaker 1: alleviate those costs of living pressures how by giving you money.
Speaker 1: So while the FED is trying to make you more poor,
Speaker 1: then that's the monetary policies making you poor. The fiscal
Speaker 1: policy should be giving you money. Where do they get
Speaker 1: the money from? Oh yeah, they created to see what
Speaker 1: they're dealing with here, and you can start to see
Speaker 1: very quickly why they are out of moves. They are
Speaker 1: out of moves somehow. There per the I m F,
Speaker 1: they are supposed to restore price stability. So mon tery
Speaker 1: policy should stay the course to restore price stability by
Speaker 1: crushing demand to take away your money. But fiscal policy
Speaker 1: should alleviate that while maintaining a sufficiently tight stance aligned
Speaker 1: with mon tery policy. But they work against each other
Speaker 1: because the mon tery policy is trying to make you
Speaker 1: more poor so you don't buy as much, but the
Speaker 1: fiscal policy wants to give you the money of the
Speaker 1: difference so you can continue to buy the stuff that
Speaker 1: you've always had. M Um, there's eight stages of a democracy.
Speaker 1: About a tune or fifty year life span of democracy.
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna tell you all the final stage, all
Speaker 1: the stages, but the final stages are intellectualism, um decadence,
Speaker 1: which I think you've seen that. Then it goes to dependence,
Speaker 1: which is what they're talking about, and then ultimately bondage.
Speaker 1: Those are the last four stages. You can guess which
Speaker 1: stage we're in. You're listening to the Mark Moa Show.
Speaker 1: We're talking about the decentralized Revolution, the way the world
Speaker 1: is changing from centralization to decentralization through the lens of politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology, and we can see that it is crumbling
Speaker 1: right now. I want to show you more about what's
Speaker 1: happening with society because of these things. When I come back,
Speaker 1: I got a lot to cover. We'll be back in
Speaker 1: a second. Don't go away, all right, Welcome back. You
Speaker 1: are listening to the Mark Moa Show talking about the
Speaker 1: decentralized Revolution, the way, uh the way the world's changing
Speaker 1: from a centralized world, central planning and central banking into
Speaker 1: a decentralized world. And at the end of this and
Speaker 1: and before the break, I talked about the eight stages
Speaker 1: of a democracy or an empire, and the four final
Speaker 1: stages are intellectualism. People, we have so much money and
Speaker 1: so much wealth that people just sit around and think
Speaker 1: thinks all day, imagining this future world with no real
Speaker 1: world ties, right, intellectualism, which it leads to abundance. Um,
Speaker 1: like people buying board apes for sixty million dollars or whatever.
Speaker 1: Uh there was like someone who bought like an invisible
Speaker 1: piece of art for like eighteen million. I think that
Speaker 1: pretty pretty well highlights the age of decadence. Um. Then
Speaker 1: we lead to dependence, and dependence is the fiscal policy.
Speaker 1: The government has to step in and help you U,
Speaker 1: B I, welfare, food stamps, etcetera. And then that leads
Speaker 1: to bondage, where now I'm dependent on the government and
Speaker 1: so now I have to do whatever they say. But
Speaker 1: it's the it's the perversion, the distortion of these monetary
Speaker 1: policies that we're dealing with right now. And we can
Speaker 1: see it, how see it manifesting itself all throughout society.
Speaker 1: As a matter of fact, what we can see all
Speaker 1: over the place. I'm I'm coming to you from California,
Speaker 1: and we are seeing a massive problem with us in California.
Speaker 1: But it's even worse than other areas. And that is
Speaker 1: the rise of violent crimes like we just haven't seen before.
Speaker 1: It's just insane. And I was looking at this report
Speaker 1: this week of examined crime data from Baltimore, Chicago, Los Angeles,
Speaker 1: New York City, Philadelphia City, Seattle, and Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: I don't know why they didn't put San Francisco on there.
Speaker 1: That certainly would have should have changed things. But we
Speaker 1: got Los Angeles, so California as well represented. But when
Speaker 1: we look at the data and not the narratives. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna talk about the narratives in the second, but let's
Speaker 1: look at the data itself right here. And so when
Speaker 1: we examine the crime data from those cities Baltimore, Chicago,
Speaker 1: Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia, Seattle, Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: Just those cities, we found that violent crimes have increased
Speaker 1: anywhere from five up. All right, now, these are violent crimes,
Speaker 1: all right, These are definitely the crimes you don't want
Speaker 1: to have happened to you. Let's just say that. I
Speaker 1: mean not that you have, you won't have any crime
Speaker 1: app and you or in your area. But these are
Speaker 1: ones that are they're violent. Um and it says they've
Speaker 1: reached unprecedented numbers in the last two years, with murders
Speaker 1: increasing by nearly thirty percent. That's a big number, Man says.
Speaker 1: New York City has so far seen the largest increase
Speaker 1: in violent crimes out of the city's a forty point
Speaker 1: six increase compared to forty three thousand violent crime incidents
Speaker 1: UM compared to so far this year, compared to last
Speaker 1: year's thirty thousand, So big, big, big increase. Chicago shows
Speaker 1: similar data, detailing an increase in violent crimes, a thirty
Speaker 1: five percent increase compared to last year's records. Wow, this
Speaker 1: is not a small This is not a small percentage
Speaker 1: of change. There's a massive percentage of change. UM Chicago.
Speaker 1: Chicago's recorded at the time of this report a homicides
Speaker 1: on the year UM which went down, actually went down.
Speaker 1: Good job, Chicago went down. UM it's UM hundred nine
Speaker 1: four instead of two hundred and seven. It went down,
Speaker 1: I mean, good job, better than going up. I would
Speaker 1: hardly call that progress though. What about violent crimes in Seattle?
Speaker 1: And Seattle they've shot up twenty three percent so far
Speaker 1: just this year. This year, homicides have increased by more
Speaker 1: than fifty four percent. Homicides citywide shootings and shots fired
Speaker 1: increased by eighty two percent. Let's say that one again.
Speaker 1: This is Seattle. Homicides are up fifty four percent and
Speaker 1: citywide shootings and shots fired have increased by eighty two percent.
Speaker 1: That is just insanity. Um, Los Angeles. Los Angeles isn't
Speaker 1: doing so well. Seen crimes rise in all three categories.
Speaker 1: Violent crimes shot up by six point seven percent, which
Speaker 1: don't sound so bad compared to Seattle violent crimes. We
Speaker 1: see homicides increased by one point six percent versus Seattle's
Speaker 1: fifty saw shots fired increased by one point five percent,
Speaker 1: um up by in Seattle. So l A is not
Speaker 1: looking so bad. Now. I will say that, Um, there's
Speaker 1: a lot more crime going in the Los Angeles than
Speaker 1: as in this report. This is just violent crimes, shots fired, homicides, etcetera. Um,
Speaker 1: they've decriminalized a lot of stuff in Los Angeles, so
Speaker 1: while we're seeing a lot of violent crime, it's just
Speaker 1: not called violent crime anymore. So they change that. UM,
Speaker 1: Washington d C. Total violent crimes increased by homicides and
Speaker 1: only only increased by four percent, Not only, but still
Speaker 1: four percent. M Philadelphia violent crimes have increased by almost
Speaker 1: five percent. You get the idea. I can sit here
Speaker 1: and keep reading this data to you, But why, why
Speaker 1: why is crime rising so hard? I mean every day
Speaker 1: obviously depend on where you're looking, but if you go
Speaker 1: on Twitter at all, you can see this stuff. It's
Speaker 1: all boots on the ground reporting and you can see
Speaker 1: every single day or new attacks at airport, baggage claims, UM,
Speaker 1: subway stations, you know, convenience stores, um, et cetera. I mean,
Speaker 1: every single day I see this information, I see these
Speaker 1: videos of this stuff happening. Why while it's happening for
Speaker 1: a bunch of reasons. Ultimately it comes from a breakdown
Speaker 1: in the money supply. It perverts everything. It also has
Speaker 1: to do with the the incentive, so you know, when
Speaker 1: people are broke, they act out for sure. Um. The
Speaker 1: Democrats want to blame um red states. They say it's
Speaker 1: it's the red states. Um. California governors Gavin Knewsoon recently
Speaker 1: said he was going to break down quote America's red
Speaker 1: state murder problem, which is pretty funny that he would
Speaker 1: say that it's the soft on crime policies that seemed
Speaker 1: to be the problem. As a matter of fact, this
Speaker 1: week we saw a report about these Green Goblins. If
Speaker 1: you've heard about this, I had just heard about this
Speaker 1: as in New York, these Green Goblin games. They show
Speaker 1: up into the um dressed in these like green tight suits,
Speaker 1: like when they call themselves Green Goblins, and they show
Speaker 1: up in gangs neon green full body suits and they
Speaker 1: attack people on the subways, and they attack people on
Speaker 1: subways and steal from them, assault them things like that,
Speaker 1: and then they just walk right out of jail. So
Speaker 1: there was Miriam is So six years old, a member
Speaker 1: of this Green Goblin crew assaulted and robbed two teens
Speaker 1: on the subway on October two, charged with violent felony
Speaker 1: and then no bail, just walked right out, she walked
Speaker 1: out of the court um. And so what's happening is
Speaker 1: that we're soft on crime and we're continue to release
Speaker 1: these people. And if there's no consequence to you beating
Speaker 1: people up and stealing from them from them, then what
Speaker 1: do you think happens. That's right, more people getting beat
Speaker 1: up and more people stealing from them. That's exactly what happens.
Speaker 1: The society is breaking down, The world is changing. The
Speaker 1: world that we have known is not the world that
Speaker 1: we are going into any longer we can see California
Speaker 1: home to California is home to three of the ten
Speaker 1: worst cities for retail crime. And this is kind of
Speaker 1: what I was talking about. Um, they've decriminalized a lot
Speaker 1: of this, and so now it's home to three. The
Speaker 1: state has three of the ten worst cities for retail crime.
Speaker 1: Smash and grabs plague the state, as they say. According
Speaker 1: to the National Retail Federation, three California cities are among
Speaker 1: the ten most affected cities for organized retail crime. Those
Speaker 1: are Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Sacramento. Of course, um,
Speaker 1: very very very very blue hotbeds for sure, um, and
Speaker 1: it makes it very difficult for store or owners to
Speaker 1: be there. So of course what happens then the stores
Speaker 1: break down, The stores have to close up, The stores
Speaker 1: close up. The people that have any money don't want
Speaker 1: to live in a violent area, and especially I don't
Speaker 1: want to live in an area that's violent and has
Speaker 1: no stores or services available because all the stores have
Speaker 1: to close up, and what do they do They move
Speaker 1: out of the area. We've talked about this before in
Speaker 1: terms of San Francisco, and it's caused a massive, massive problem.
Speaker 1: What's happening here in California is we have the rise
Speaker 1: of these uh flash mob style robberies. And um, they
Speaker 1: used to just show up in a flash mob and
Speaker 1: starting dancing and singing, and now they show up and
Speaker 1: start robbing. So um again, this is a direct result
Speaker 1: of the monetary system breaking down, and it shows just
Speaker 1: how quickly the system that we know is going to
Speaker 1: change now. Um. Change is hard, change is scary, but
Speaker 1: I believe we need the change. And what's on the
Speaker 1: other side of it is good. It's hopeful. Um, some
Speaker 1: of this information is bad, I get it. I'm sorry.
Speaker 1: It's not doing gloom. There is hope. What we're seeing
Speaker 1: is coming to an end, and there is hope on
Speaker 1: the other end. You're listening to the market Ball Show.
Speaker 1: We're talking about the decentralized revolution, the way that the
Speaker 1: way the world is changing from centralization, central planning is
Speaker 1: failing us into a world of decentralization, back into a
Speaker 1: system like we used to have. This really affects the
Speaker 1: entire world, no matter where you're at. This is a big, big,
Speaker 1: big deal. You're listening to the Mark Moa Show. That's
Speaker 1: what I got for you this week. Thanks so much
Speaker 1: for listening,