Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to another episode of the Mark Mos Show,
Speaker 1: where of course we talk about each and every week
Speaker 1: the way the world is changing through what I call
Speaker 1: the decentralized revolution.
Speaker 2: Of course, we're talking about a.
Speaker 1: World of centralization, central control, central planning into a decentralized world,
Speaker 1: a multipolar world, if you want to call it. That
Speaker 1: from like a geopolitical picture. And really the thing that
Speaker 1: we like to look at is the intersection of politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology. Of course, it's always technology that changes the world,
Speaker 1: that changes the way we communicate, organize, and of course
Speaker 1: today we are seeing this change of technology and that
Speaker 1: is the decentralized technology of bitcoin that's changing every aspect
Speaker 1: of the world. I want to have a big show today,
Speaker 1: as always, I have a very ambitious schedule, see how
Speaker 1: which I can get through.
Speaker 2: And I want to talk about how they stole your.
Speaker 1: Life and you didn't even notice. Now what does that
Speaker 1: even mean? Well, it means a lot of things. We're
Speaker 1: going to talk about how your life has actually been stolen.
Speaker 1: We're going to talk about your freedoms, how they've been stolen,
Speaker 1: your freedom of expression, your property, you know, the freedom
Speaker 1: of expression, the ability to trains, act and whole private property.
Speaker 1: We're going to talk about legalization questions and so much more.
Speaker 1: There's lots of covers we're going to get into this.
Speaker 1: If you miss any of this, don't worry.
Speaker 2: I got you back.
Speaker 1: Just check me out on the podcast. Just search Mark
Speaker 1: mah Show on your favorite podcast player and you can
Speaker 1: find all of the archives there. Go ahead and feel
Speaker 1: free to listen to them if you want. And if
Speaker 1: you wouldn't mind just doing one small, simple favor, and
Speaker 1: that would be just to comment and share the episode.
Speaker 1: If you did that, that'd be amazing trying to get
Speaker 1: more people to see these and so any type of
Speaker 1: feedback can give me on the podcast app would be greatly,
Speaker 1: greatly appreciated. So we talk about stealing your life. I
Speaker 1: know that sounds like a really big thing, and it is.
Speaker 1: And I want to go just philosophical with you for
Speaker 1: a second and then we'll get a little bit more tactical.
Speaker 1: But you have to understand that the law of energy
Speaker 1: states that energy can't be created, energy can only be transferred,
Speaker 1: all right, So in order for you and I to
Speaker 1: stay alive, we must consume calories. Calories are a unit
Speaker 1: of energy, right, So I need food, which gives me energy.
Speaker 1: That energy allows me to think and work to do
Speaker 1: more things. Now that energy that I got in those
Speaker 1: calories wasn't created. It came from the from what I ate,
Speaker 1: Like the animal, the cow. I like to eat steak,
Speaker 1: So that cow, I like to say that I'm a
Speaker 1: you know, I'm not gonna say it, but the cow
Speaker 1: eats grass, right, So I'm a plant based I'm on
Speaker 1: a plant based diet. My cows eat plants. I eat
Speaker 1: the cows. But you know, you have soil on the earth.
Speaker 1: The plant grows up. There's energy in that. The cow
Speaker 1: eats that. There's proteins in the grass. The cow goes big.
Speaker 2: I eat the steak.
Speaker 1: I get the proteins from the steak the calories, and
Speaker 1: then I have calories units of energy that I can
Speaker 1: now think to talk to you about subjects like this,
Speaker 1: or I can go work, build a fence, or dig
Speaker 1: a hole, whatever that may be. Now, if you understand
Speaker 1: that core premise that, then my life I need calories.
Speaker 1: I need energy to come into them in order to
Speaker 1: stay alive. Now let's say that I have to dig
Speaker 1: a hole for four hours a day to earn enough
Speaker 1: for me to live those four hours that I work
Speaker 1: provides me with enough food and supplies where I can
Speaker 1: get shelter for the day. But let's say that I
Speaker 1: decide to work an extra four hours that day, so
Speaker 1: I work eight hours. Well, those extra four hours I
Speaker 1: don't need that today. I don't need that food.
Speaker 2: So what do I do. Well?
Speaker 1: I can store that wealth in money, and then tomorrow
Speaker 1: I could choose not to work or expend energy, and
Speaker 1: I could then use that money to then provide me
Speaker 1: sustenance for that day, So that money becomes like a
Speaker 1: battery for me. It's like a life battery, just like
Speaker 1: fat on your body as a life battery.
Speaker 2: Let's say if you had.
Speaker 1: Like a real rare form of like diabetes, where you
Speaker 1: couldn't keep fat on, but then you have to be
Speaker 1: eating constantly to keep calories coming in, otherwise you die.
Speaker 1: But we store fat on our bodies which allows us
Speaker 1: to live for weeks or over a month without eating
Speaker 1: because we can tap into that. That fat on your
Speaker 1: body is like a battery for your life.
Speaker 2: If you don't eat, you can continue to run.
Speaker 1: But again, if I have money, that money is also
Speaker 1: an extension of my life. I expended energy and now
Speaker 1: that what I buy with that, that extra food or
Speaker 1: whatever is like a battery for me. Let's say that
Speaker 1: I save up enough and I buy a goat. Well,
Speaker 1: now that goat is like a battery. If I don't
Speaker 1: work for a few weeks, I could kill the goat.
Speaker 2: I could eat it.
Speaker 1: So's it's like an extension. You know, I buy a
Speaker 1: piece of land, I start growing crops, I have a garden.
Speaker 2: A field, whatever.
Speaker 1: That's a battery for me and I can live off
Speaker 1: of that, and so all of that becomes an extension
Speaker 1: of my life. And the reason why I want to
Speaker 1: break it down to the philosophical level is because what
Speaker 1: we're talking about today where they're stealing your life, and
Speaker 1: I don't mean like you know, putting you in prison,
Speaker 1: but literally as they steal your property or your ability
Speaker 1: to earn property, or literally steal the value from what
Speaker 1: you've created, that's literally still in your life. So I'm
Speaker 1: going to break that down for you. So let's talk
Speaker 1: about this. So you know, if we start again staying
Speaker 1: high sort of high level on this sort of philosophical level,
Speaker 1: if we think about it from a multiple levels, we
Speaker 1: can think about it just as my life as a
Speaker 1: human being. One thing that separates human beings from animals
Speaker 1: is that we can communicate, we can speak, we can think,
Speaker 1: we can ide eight, we can speak, and so that
Speaker 1: is something that's super important.
Speaker 2: It's unique to us as humans.
Speaker 1: That's a characteristic of it, and it's our life to
Speaker 1: be able to do that. If they want to restrict
Speaker 1: your ability to speak or your ability to express yourself,
Speaker 1: then they're stealing that from you. I know that's a
Speaker 1: little bit philosophical, but that's the way it Lerk works. Now.
Speaker 1: We know, you know, we have famous quotes from our
Speaker 1: founding fathers. These guys were so smart. The Founding fathers
Speaker 1: were so smart for a number of reasons, and I
Speaker 1: think we probably won't ever have people as smart as
Speaker 1: them because we have TikTok now. But you know, they
Speaker 1: sat around and just read books and they studied history.
Speaker 1: They read the books and they discuss these ideas. One
Speaker 1: of my favorite authors f A. Hayek. It's a Nobel
Speaker 1: Prize winner in economics. He wrote a bunch of great books,
Speaker 1: one of which is a highly highly highly recommend everybody
Speaker 1: put on your list, which is the road to serf him.
Speaker 1: If you haven't read that book, don't pass. Go open
Speaker 1: up Amazon on your app and buy that book right now.
Speaker 1: Road to serf him his seminal book, which is called
Speaker 1: The Constitution of Liberty. And in that book it had
Speaker 1: I believe, nineteen hundred citations in nine different languages.
Speaker 2: Like whoa, nineteen hundred citations.
Speaker 1: It's amazing, Like nobody's ever going to be that smart again,
Speaker 1: because now we're distracted by all these things. Anyway, final
Speaker 1: fathers are very smart, and they gave us a lot
Speaker 1: of warnings. And if you read these warnings you can
Speaker 1: see how relative they are for today. So for example,
Speaker 1: Benjamin Franklin, it's attributed to him or Jefferson, We're not
Speaker 1: quite sure, but he says, those who give up essential
Speaker 1: liberty in exchange for a little bit of temporary safety
Speaker 1: deserve neither deserve neither liberty or safety. And we see
Speaker 1: that all all the time, Right, everybody is giving up liberty. Fine,
Speaker 1: I'll accept the lockdown.
Speaker 2: If you keep me safe. Right, we see that all
Speaker 2: the time.
Speaker 1: So we've been given all types of warnings like that,
Speaker 1: But what does that mean?
Speaker 2: Like what is freedom? Well, you can define it different ways.
Speaker 1: I've asked a lot of people these questions and I
Speaker 1: get a lot of different answers to me. I would
Speaker 1: like to go back to Fai x book The Constitution
Speaker 1: of Liberty, and I think about liberty because freedom is
Speaker 1: typically free from something. So I like to think about liberty,
Speaker 1: which could be kind of interchangeable. But I think about
Speaker 1: freedom being the freedom from coercion. And coercion is when
Speaker 1: somebody forces me to take one of their options. So
Speaker 1: you believe you have the option to choose, but the
Speaker 1: reality is either choice that you make leads to their end.
Speaker 2: So, for example, take the job or lose your job. Well,
Speaker 2: I have a choice.
Speaker 1: I can lose my job or take the jab. But
Speaker 1: either way, either one of those options that I am
Speaker 1: choosing now lead to your ends. See, I want to
Speaker 1: be freedom. I want to be free to choose the
Speaker 1: option that leads to my own ends, free from coercion.
Speaker 1: So that's how we define that. Now, when you understand
Speaker 1: how freedom works, ability to be free from coercion, freedom
Speaker 1: isn't anything. Freedom isn't I can't just go slap you
Speaker 1: in the face, and I can't harm another person. I
Speaker 1: should just be free from coercion so I could direct
Speaker 1: my life as I see fit. So I can choose
Speaker 1: what I want to do, and really, at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, it's always your choices.
Speaker 2: That's why you see.
Speaker 1: Twins born in the same family, the same neighborhood, same economics,
Speaker 1: same school, same friends, same parents, same gene, same everything,
Speaker 1: end up in two different places because along the way
Speaker 1: they made different choices. Now it's pretty interesting today they
Speaker 1: want to talk about how we all need to be equal,
Speaker 1: not equal as opportunity, but equal on outcome. How can
Speaker 1: we be equal on outcome if we can have different choices,
Speaker 1: And there you have it. If we can just limit
Speaker 1: everyone's choices, then maybe.
Speaker 2: We can get everybody to an equal outcome.
Speaker 1: If you're just tune in, you're listening to the Mark
Speaker 1: Ma Show, we're talking about the decentralized Revolution. We're talking
Speaker 1: about how they stole your life. Start from a philosophical level,
Speaker 1: we're going to take it down into something more, much
Speaker 1: more tactical, so you can understand how this is impacting
Speaker 1: your life and of course, what we can do about it.
Speaker 2: I got to take a quick break though, we're gone
Speaker 2: just for a second. Don't go away.
Speaker 1: I'll be right back, all right, Welcome back. If you're
Speaker 1: just tune in, you're listening to the Mark Mas Show
Speaker 1: and we are talking about how they stole your life.
Speaker 1: And again we tarted from a very philosophical level. We're
Speaker 1: diving down.
Speaker 2: In deep to practical applications.
Speaker 1: You can understand we're talking about we start talking about
Speaker 1: taking away your freedom, which is part of your human
Speaker 1: ability to express express yourself. Now, the one thing I
Speaker 1: want to draw back to is that we have the
Speaker 1: ability uniquely as humans to communicate. And so if you
Speaker 1: pass laws that prevent me from communicating, that's taking away
Speaker 1: part of my life. Now I can't think properly, or
Speaker 1: I can't speak properly, I can't express myself properly. I'd
Speaker 1: like to add that, you know, Benjamin Franklin said that
Speaker 1: the freedom of speech, freedom of communication, freedom of speech
Speaker 1: is the foundation upon all other freedoms are built. I
Speaker 1: would actually say that I believe that the freedom to
Speaker 1: transact is the foundation of all others. Now, you could
Speaker 1: say that communication is a transaction, right, we're communicating value
Speaker 1: to each other. But I would say, specifically, the freedom
Speaker 1: to transact is the foundation of all others. So, for example,
Speaker 1: the First Amendment in the Constitution guarantees us the freedom
Speaker 1: of speech guarantees. Is that, however, if I don't have
Speaker 1: money to buy a phone to go on social media,
Speaker 1: or a computer to go on social media, or to
Speaker 1: print flyers, or to build a website or write a blog,
Speaker 1: do I really have the ability to speak? We're guaranteed
Speaker 1: the freedom of assembly, But if I can't pay to
Speaker 1: put gas in my truck to drive to the assembly,
Speaker 1: or I can't pay for food when I get there,
Speaker 1: I can't pay to get a hotel room, then do
Speaker 1: I really have the freedom to assemble? Right? And so
Speaker 1: without the freedom to transact, all of that falls apart.
Speaker 1: You know, we've seen this been infringed in the number
Speaker 1: of ways, and these things do get messy, and freedom
Speaker 1: is messy, you know where we see cases like so
Speaker 1: for example, where the Supreme Court ruled about this Colorado
Speaker 1: case where they didn't want to bake a cake. They
Speaker 1: don't want to make a cake for a certain group
Speaker 1: of people. Now you could look at that and say
Speaker 1: that they were the company that refused to bake the
Speaker 1: cake was infringing on the other people's rights to receive
Speaker 1: a cake. But the problem is, in my opinion, and
Speaker 1: I believe this to be a priori truth, not just
Speaker 1: an opinion, but you can decide for yourself. Is that
Speaker 1: we have in a label of rights that have been
Speaker 1: given to us by our creator. The Constitution has protected
Speaker 1: those rights, but those rights can't infringe on your rights.
Speaker 1: So I have a right to pursue my life as
Speaker 1: I see fit, as I told you, free from coercion.
Speaker 1: But I don't have a right to health care. I
Speaker 1: have a right to free.
Speaker 2: Speech, that's my right.
Speaker 1: I don't have a right to healthcare. And the reason
Speaker 1: why I don't have a right to healthcare is because
Speaker 1: that means a doctor has to provide that to me.
Speaker 1: But how can I have a right to your labor?
Speaker 2: I can't. I can't have a right.
Speaker 1: And so in this case, for example, if they said
Speaker 1: that this cake shop must make a cake for this couple,
Speaker 1: how can this couple have a right to those people's labor.
Speaker 1: If someone has a right to my labor, if I
Speaker 1: have to somehow the court forces me to work for free,
Speaker 1: to provide health care or to make a cake or
Speaker 1: whatever for you, then I'm a slave. Now my freedoms
Speaker 1: have now been taken away. And so that's where the
Speaker 1: line is drawn in my opinion. Now you could argue that, well,
Speaker 1: you have to make the cake because those people have
Speaker 1: a right to receive a cake.
Speaker 2: Well they don't.
Speaker 1: You can't have a right to receive a cake because
Speaker 1: that requires someone else's labor. Now you should have the
Speaker 1: right to bake a cake if you see fit, certainly,
Speaker 1: but you can't have a right to have someone else
Speaker 1: make a cake for you. But I'd love to hear
Speaker 1: what your thought on that. Feel free hit me up
Speaker 1: on social media at one Mark Moss let me know
Speaker 1: what you think. I'd love to get some feedback from
Speaker 1: you on that. We can see numerous examples of this
Speaker 1: freedom of expression. So, for example, we've seen schools like
Speaker 1: in New Jersey ban the use of religious clothing and
Speaker 1: things like that. They've banned, you know, wearing Maga hats
Speaker 1: for example. They've banned you know, American flags in some cases.
Speaker 1: So where do those rights infringe on other people's You know,
Speaker 1: I would argue that hanging a flag doesn't necessarily infringe
Speaker 1: on my right. You might hang something that I don't
Speaker 1: agree with. As a matter of fact, to one of
Speaker 1: my properties I own in Texas, the neighbors hang some
Speaker 1: flags that I don't agree with. Out there but that's
Speaker 1: their right to hang them. It's also my right to
Speaker 1: not to look at them if I don't want to.
Speaker 1: But then you know, in you know, let's say gated
Speaker 1: neighborhoods like homewords associations, for example, they could of course
Speaker 1: pass rules of the Homewaners Association that.
Speaker 2: You're not allowed to hang flags.
Speaker 1: But that's not infringing to my right because I could
Speaker 1: leave that neighborhood. I used to live in a gated
Speaker 1: neighborhood and they did things that I felt I didn't
Speaker 1: agree with, and so I left and I moved to
Speaker 1: a neighborhood without an association, and now I can do
Speaker 1: those things. Other examples of this, you know, freedom of
Speaker 1: speech that we see or freedom of expression that we
Speaker 1: see all the time. We could see many examples. So
Speaker 1: for example, Jason al Dean recently, he's been sort of well,
Speaker 1: depends on which side of the al you're on. He's
Speaker 1: either been demonized or he's been celebrated for making a
Speaker 1: song talking about like try that in a small town.
Speaker 1: And you know, he talks about this song like you
Speaker 1: wouldn't be able to get away with these types of
Speaker 1: things in a small town. And he was basically saying,
Speaker 1: what's been going on in the big cities. You couldn't
Speaker 1: do that in a small town because the small town
Speaker 1: has culture and has a community, and people have duties
Speaker 1: and responsibilities to that community, and they value that community,
Speaker 1: and they wouldn't allow you to get away.
Speaker 2: With those types of things that you see in these
Speaker 2: big cities.
Speaker 1: Somehow that became a big problem, and now cancel culture
Speaker 1: has come out in full force to try to cancel
Speaker 1: him for that song. Now, never mind all these other
Speaker 1: songs you hear about, you know, killing people and robbing
Speaker 1: people and selling drugs to people. Never Mind all those songs.
Speaker 1: Those are all okay. But if you talk about community
Speaker 1: and sense of duty and responsibility, that's the problem. So
Speaker 1: he got canceled for that. But that takes away his
Speaker 1: freedom of expression, but also it takes away my ability.
Speaker 2: To hear.
Speaker 1: Interesting. So these are things, you know. Of course, we
Speaker 1: see this happening through the Twitter files. It's been exposed
Speaker 1: pretty well now that Elon must bought that and kind
Speaker 1: of exposed it. They don't want you to see that
Speaker 1: that they're doing that, and so they've been now trying to.
Speaker 2: Get that hit in. They've deleted some records.
Speaker 1: A judge basically said the Biden administration can no longer
Speaker 1: reach out and use Twitter coerce Twitter to change that.
Speaker 1: And of course the Bide administration doesn't like that, and
Speaker 1: so they've even filed an appeal. Wait a minute, court
Speaker 1: would a minute, No, no, no, you can't take away right.
Speaker 2: You have to allow us to do that.
Speaker 1: And so again they want to continue to take away
Speaker 1: that right. Now, what about your property? As I kind
Speaker 1: of set up before the commercial break, I was talking
Speaker 1: about how really all property comes from our labor, which
Speaker 1: is my life, meaning I have to expend my life force,
Speaker 1: my life energy and the time. Time is the most
Speaker 1: scarce ass that we have. I have to expend those
Speaker 1: two resources my life in order to gain property. John
Speaker 1: Locke he says that the right to property is the
Speaker 1: most sacred of all rights of man, the right to
Speaker 1: own property. Man owns property. That's the way it works
Speaker 1: in the Bible. In the Ten Commandments, the eighth commandment
Speaker 1: is that thou shalt not steal. Well, by saying thou
Speaker 1: shalt not steal, that means that I can't steal, which
Speaker 1: means I can't take away someone else's property, which means
Speaker 1: that those property rights are given in the Bible.
Speaker 2: By that.
Speaker 1: Now, it's interesting to look at the opposite of this,
Speaker 1: where Karl Marx wrote in the Communist Manifesto to summarize
Speaker 1: communism in one statement, is the abolition.
Speaker 2: Of private property. It's the exact opposite.
Speaker 1: So you got thinkers like John Locke, you got the
Speaker 1: Bible talking about having strong property rights and the problems
Speaker 1: that break down in society when people steal that property
Speaker 1: from you. And then of course you have Karl Marx
Speaker 1: and communism over here saying no, it's all about abolishing
Speaker 1: private property.
Speaker 2: Let's get rid of that.
Speaker 1: Now. We can talk about that from a many different
Speaker 1: reasons of why that is a bad thing in my mind.
Speaker 1: We'll come back to that in a little bit. But
Speaker 1: if you're just tune in you're listening to the Mark
Speaker 1: Maus show, we're talking about how they are still in
Speaker 1: your life. Things in your life, like your freedoms, things
Speaker 1: like freedom of expression, things like your property, which is
Speaker 1: I said, is an extension of your life.
Speaker 2: And it gets worse. Don't worry.
Speaker 1: We're gonna get into the tactics here coming up next,
Speaker 1: and of course, things that you could do to protect
Speaker 1: yourself against that, So don't go away, because I'm going
Speaker 1: to be right back. All right, welcome back if you're
Speaker 1: just tuning any listening to the Mark Maus Show. We're
Speaker 1: talking about how they are still in your life, which
Speaker 1: sounds like a big title and it is. We started
Speaker 1: from the philosophical level of how your private property is
Speaker 1: your life now that it's.
Speaker 2: Being taken from you in a number of ways.
Speaker 1: Of course, we talked about like sort of like the
Speaker 1: most direct way, which is you know, taking your private property.
Speaker 1: And we see that, you know, we actually really saw
Speaker 1: that happen throughout the pandemic when we start having massive
Speaker 1: protests all over the world, or really all over the world,
Speaker 1: but yes in the United States. And what you saw
Speaker 1: which was very disturbing to me, was that when anybody
Speaker 1: would try to defend their private property, they became like
Speaker 1: a target. So you saw a couple examples of this.
Speaker 1: So for example, you'd see people mobbing down the street,
Speaker 1: and if a shopkeeper was out there trying to like
Speaker 1: stand there so their windows wouldn't get broken, then they
Speaker 1: became the target. We saw this in Missouri. A couple,
Speaker 1: an elderly couple walked out on their porch and they
Speaker 1: held guns because the mob had not only come into
Speaker 1: the neighborhood, had gone onto their private property. They came
Speaker 1: out and stood on a porch with guns trying to
Speaker 1: defend their property, and they were criminalized. Not the people
Speaker 1: that had trespassed threatening to whatever, do whoever they can
Speaker 1: to do their house, but the people that protected it,
Speaker 1: just like the houses armside the business try to protect it.
Speaker 1: Even Kay, what was the case where the kid shot
Speaker 1: had the gun and he shot those people? Writtenhouse, Kyle rittenhouse, right.
Speaker 1: I mean they were there to protect he had been
Speaker 1: asked by somebody, his neighbor, to help protect that piece
Speaker 1: of property.
Speaker 2: I think it was like a car dealership. I forget
Speaker 2: the details. That wasn't the details.
Speaker 1: But then they got singled out and they got attacked,
Speaker 1: so over and over and over we can see trying
Speaker 1: to defend your property becomes a problem. And of course
Speaker 1: then you start running this whole campaign about defunding the police,
Speaker 1: which strangely enough, I've sort of agreed with, but not
Speaker 1: for maybe the reasons why you think so. You know,
Speaker 1: this whole campaign that ran off of that of defunding
Speaker 1: the police really was about, in my opinion, shutting the
Speaker 1: police down and like lowering, you know, charges against crimes
Speaker 1: and things like that. I haven't been a fan of
Speaker 1: the police budgets blowing up because they've been militarizing, which
Speaker 1: has been a really big problem. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: we can see from nineteen seventy seven to twenty nineteen
Speaker 1: police budgets grew from forty four billion to one hundred
Speaker 1: and twenty three billion. You know, I believe in the
Speaker 1: rule of law. I believe that we need a strong
Speaker 1: rule of law. Nobody wants to be terrorized in their house.
Speaker 1: And we can see over and over and over examples
Speaker 1: of countries, but even the United States cities where the
Speaker 1: rule of law falls down, where crimes aren't you know,
Speaker 1: disciplined and enforced. When when laws aren't enforced, the town
Speaker 1: breaks down. A good example of that, if you ever
Speaker 1: want to give a good read, I've talked about it
Speaker 1: here on the show before, is in Detroit.
Speaker 2: It was named as a.
Speaker 1: Model city, and the more they did to try to
Speaker 1: make that a model city, the more it broke down,
Speaker 1: and part of it was not really cracking down on crime.
Speaker 1: Nobody wants to live in an area with high crime,
Speaker 1: doesn't matter what level of socioeconomic status you're at. Doesn't
Speaker 1: matter what race or gender you are. Nobody wants to
Speaker 1: live in terror. And so while I don't want to
Speaker 1: get rid of the police, because that is a problem there,
Speaker 1: but I also don't want the police to become militarized
Speaker 1: because I don't believe the best way to handle those
Speaker 1: types of conflicts is through escalation.
Speaker 2: It's really through de escalation.
Speaker 1: And so anyway, that's a whole another topic. But we
Speaker 1: can see that one hundred and eighteen billion was spent
Speaker 1: funding police forces in the US in twenty eighteen, and
Speaker 1: just to put that number into perspective for you what
Speaker 1: that means. We can see American police forces have the
Speaker 1: world's third most expensive military organization, American police forces. Now America,
Speaker 1: you know, three hundred and thirty ish million people, small country,
Speaker 1: but it's also not the biggest. But yet we have
Speaker 1: the third most expensive military organization in the police, after
Speaker 1: of course the US's official armed forces, and then China,
Speaker 1: so China has four times the amount of people, but
Speaker 1: yet we spend more money. So I respect our police officers.
Speaker 1: I certainly don't want to get rid of the police officers.
Speaker 1: I'm not a big fan of them driving tanks and
Speaker 1: shooting first, I'm not a fan of that. What else
Speaker 1: some other things that we can see though, is that
Speaker 1: when they did run these you know, defund the police
Speaker 1: campaigns in some of the big cities like New York City,
Speaker 1: Los Angeles, Minneapolis, things like that, it's sort of backfired
Speaker 1: and we saw crimes starting to explode in those areas.
Speaker 1: And again because without the threat of jail, without the
Speaker 1: enforcement of that, then people do more of it. So,
Speaker 1: for example, I'm in California here, and of course I'm
Speaker 1: sure you're well aware of the story of how San
Speaker 1: Francisco basically fell into the pit of despair, really led
Speaker 1: by Gascon who was the district attorney there. Well, then
Speaker 1: LA thought that San Francisco fell so hard that why
Speaker 1: wouldn't LA want to do it? So they brought gas
Speaker 1: Gone down to be the District attorney of Los Angeles,
Speaker 1: and he came in and put all kinds of crazy
Speaker 1: policies in place, including deciding to not criminalize and not
Speaker 1: punish certain types of crimes, crimes like, for example, underage drinking.
Speaker 1: So if you don't punish that, do you think more
Speaker 1: underage kids drink? Things like driving without a license. Well,
Speaker 1: if that's not a crime, do you think more people
Speaker 1: without a license drive things like resisting arrest? If you
Speaker 1: don't punish people resisting arrest, don't you think people would
Speaker 1: resist arrest? I mean, why would I want to get
Speaker 1: arrested if I could just resist it and not be punished.
Speaker 2: But yet that we did.
Speaker 1: And I advise you not to go to downtown LA
Speaker 1: and take a look, but if you do, you'll see
Speaker 1: exactly what happens from that. But it's also led to
Speaker 1: massive amounts of polarization. Now, of course, in some schools,
Speaker 1: even running the blue line flag, which is like the
Speaker 1: I support the police, has become like a symbol of hate.
Speaker 1: It's really created this massive amount of polarization. A lot
Speaker 1: of it's driven by the media, of course. It's almost
Speaker 1: like it's almost like you're living in two different worlds
Speaker 1: depending on which new source you're living in. If you're
Speaker 1: watching Fox, you're hearing all about the Biden crime family.
Speaker 1: If you're watching CNN, you're hearing about all the charges
Speaker 1: being brought against Trump. Now, both of those things are
Speaker 1: happening at the same time, but one side is continued
Speaker 1: to pound the table on one the other side is
Speaker 1: talking about the other, but they're also talking about it
Speaker 1: from different angles. So, for like example, during the pandemic,
Speaker 1: CNN was like literally running their pandemic ticker at the
Speaker 1: bottom showing how many people were getting affected and how
Speaker 1: many people were dying like.
Speaker 2: Fear fear, fear, fear, fear, fear of fear.
Speaker 1: And so when they ran all types of polls, it
Speaker 1: was no wonder that the typical base of CNN, the
Speaker 1: left or the liberals or whatever you want to call it,
Speaker 1: pulled way differently on how they viewed the pandemic and
Speaker 1: what they thought the response should.
Speaker 2: Then the side that watched other news sources.
Speaker 1: Now this is not an advocate for censoring what we see,
Speaker 1: but it is showing how these types of things lead
Speaker 1: to massive amounts of a loss of freedom expression when
Speaker 1: they start to control that. Now, a lot of it
Speaker 1: was because people that tried to speak out and provide
Speaker 1: alternative viewpoints were censored, and so while mainstream media pushed
Speaker 1: one narrative, you couldn't really get.
Speaker 2: Both sides of the of the aisle. You couldn't get
Speaker 2: both sides of the to understand the issue on both sides. Now,
Speaker 2: as that was happening.
Speaker 1: We saw, like I said, not just the media becoming polarized,
Speaker 1: but we also see politics being polarized. One thing that
Speaker 1: you know, I wrote a book called The Uncommunist Manifesto.
Speaker 2: Just shout out plug.
Speaker 1: That if you haven't read it yet, you should just
Speaker 1: go to Amazon and search the Uncommunist Manifesto.
Speaker 2: It's like a booklet.
Speaker 1: It's about an hour read, hour and a half readepending
Speaker 1: how fast you read. And it was written sort of
Speaker 1: as a counter to the original book, The Commontist Manifesto,
Speaker 1: which is written by Carl Marx in the late eighteen
Speaker 1: hunds i think eighteen sixty three, which has become one
Speaker 1: of the number one books in both political science and economics,
Speaker 1: which is actually really scary. When I read the book
Speaker 1: for the first time, it was after the twenty twenty,
Speaker 1: you know, when we had the twenty twenty riots going on.
Speaker 1: I remember the leaders of BLM they said that they
Speaker 1: were trained Marxist, and so I'm like, well, I believe
Speaker 1: in going back to the source. Let me read directly
Speaker 1: from the source material. So their trained Marxist, what does
Speaker 1: that mean. Let me go back and read Carl Marx.
Speaker 1: And so I read quite a bit of the work
Speaker 1: about him, as well as the work he produced, including
Speaker 1: the Communist Manifesto, And when I read it, I was like,
Speaker 1: has anybody even read this book? Because I can't believe
Speaker 1: people would be okay with this if they did so.
Speaker 1: For example, talking about property, as I already referenced, he
Speaker 1: writes in the book that to summarize communism in one
Speaker 1: statement is the abolition.
Speaker 2: Of private property.
Speaker 1: Well, I suppose if you don't have any private property,
Speaker 1: you might think that's a good idea. But really what
Speaker 1: the book highlighted was the struggle between two arbitrary classes,
Speaker 1: the rich versus the poor. Now I say arbitrary, because
Speaker 1: what makes you rich in what makes you poor? Is
Speaker 1: it one hundred thousand? Is it two hundred thousands, five
Speaker 1: hundred thousand, and five hundred million? And he says that
Speaker 1: the rich are the oppressors and the poor are the oppressed.
Speaker 1: So if I make an extra dollar, now I'm rich,
Speaker 1: and so I'm automatically an oppressor.
Speaker 2: Now, like, how do you divide that up? Right?
Speaker 1: But yet that's what he did. But really it was
Speaker 1: about pitting two groups of people against each other. And
Speaker 1: that's the same playbook that they still do today, which
Speaker 1: is taking any underserved section of the population and trying
Speaker 1: to make them victims. Which that way, of course, you
Speaker 1: need the government to help you. Just tune you're listening
Speaker 1: to the Mark Maus Show. I got to take a
Speaker 1: very quick break and I'll be right back. Don't go away,
Speaker 1: bear back, all right, welcome back. If you're just tune in,
Speaker 1: you're listening to the Mark mash Show. We're talking about
Speaker 1: how they are stealing your life. Now, we've talked about
Speaker 1: it from a very high philosophical level, We've gotten down
Speaker 1: into a little bit more of the tactics. We talked
Speaker 1: about it from a perspective of they're stealing your life,
Speaker 1: such as in your ability or your freedoms. We talked
Speaker 1: about how they're taking away your rights of human expression,
Speaker 1: which are obviously innately unique to humans. And now I
Speaker 1: want to talk about it to a little bit more
Speaker 1: of a tactical way, and we'll talk about it from
Speaker 1: an economic standpoint or your money.
Speaker 2: Now, when you think about.
Speaker 1: It, as I kind of set up in the very
Speaker 1: beginning from a philosophical level, that I have to expend
Speaker 1: my life's my life source, my life's energy in order
Speaker 1: to acquire the property.
Speaker 2: Money.
Speaker 1: Money is where I could store that energy so I
Speaker 1: could use it later. So let's say that I work
Speaker 1: those extra four hours digging that hole, I get the money.
Speaker 1: I can save that money so tomorrow I don't have
Speaker 1: to work four hours. I can then deploy that money
Speaker 1: to get the resources that I need. And so that's
Speaker 1: the way that you can look at money like a
Speaker 1: storage source of value, a storage source of energy. But
Speaker 1: what happens is, as you're probably well aware, at least
Speaker 1: if you tune into my show on a regular basis,
Speaker 1: is that when they inflate the money supply, when they
Speaker 1: increase more money, that means the existing money buys less
Speaker 1: goods and services. So when you see prices going up,
Speaker 1: it's not that prices are going up, it's that the
Speaker 1: value the purchasing power of the dollars have gone down,
Speaker 1: so it takes more dollars to buy those So the
Speaker 1: reason why it's important to understand is because if I
Speaker 1: put one hundred thousand dollars in the bank account ten
Speaker 1: years ago, I was going to buy a house ten
Speaker 1: years ago, but I thought the market's going to crash,
Speaker 1: so I'll put one hundred thousand dollars in the bank,
Speaker 1: and now ten years later, I want to deploy those
Speaker 1: hundred thousand buy a house. But the problem is it
Speaker 1: will buy me about half of the house that would
Speaker 1: have bought me before. I still have the same one
Speaker 1: hundred thousand currency units, but the value of those currency
Speaker 1: units have been stolen away, stolen away by the money printer,
Speaker 1: which is theft. So when you think about that, through inflation,
Speaker 1: through money printing, they're stealing the value directly from my
Speaker 1: bank without taking my currency units. They just take the
Speaker 1: value away. But it's a way that they actually steal
Speaker 1: my life. So for example, you hear about inflation, it's
Speaker 1: come back down and a little bit.
Speaker 2: It's down to about I.
Speaker 1: Think the latest reading shows three point two percent, up
Speaker 1: a little bit from the last reading. Put this into perspective,
Speaker 1: what does that mean. That means they want to steal
Speaker 1: only three percent of your life per year. Now the
Speaker 1: Fed's target is two percent, so they only want to
Speaker 1: steal two percent of your life per year, So you know,
Speaker 1: only ten percent of your life over five years. No
Speaker 1: big deal, right, Well, if we put that into some calculations,
Speaker 1: think about it at eight percent inflation, this is the
Speaker 1: last time I ran the calculations, but just for illustrations purposes,
Speaker 1: at eight percent inflation, that puts the average income earner
Speaker 1: in the United States, that puts that increases their cost
Speaker 1: by about three hundred and twenty four dollars a month
Speaker 1: just to have the same quality of life that before.
Speaker 2: So with the quality of life you.
Speaker 1: Had today, how many times you got to eat, how
Speaker 1: much clothes you buy, you know, if you're eating steak
Speaker 1: or whatever it is to maintain that same quality of life,
Speaker 1: it went up by three hundred and twenty four dollars. Well,
Speaker 1: if you make thirty two dollars an hour, that means
Speaker 1: you now have to work ten hours more just to
Speaker 1: have the exact same quality.
Speaker 2: Of life that you had the month before.
Speaker 1: Now, when I talk about stealing your life, if it's
Speaker 1: because that's ten extra hours you have to live, I'm
Speaker 1: sorry it worked to have that same quality of life.
Speaker 1: That's ten extra hours of your life that you could
Speaker 1: spend in a way that you see fit, to learn
Speaker 1: a new skill, to start a new business, to spend
Speaker 1: time with your wife so you have a good relationship,
Speaker 1: or with your kids so you have a good relationship,
Speaker 1: or in the gym for your own health or whatever
Speaker 1: it may be.
Speaker 2: It's your life.
Speaker 1: You should be able to spend it as you see fit.
Speaker 1: But now the government has stolen that from you, because
Speaker 1: now you're forced to work those extra hours just to
Speaker 1: maintain the life. Now you could not work those extra hours,
Speaker 1: and then you could just have a lower quality of life.
Speaker 1: Either way, your life has been stolen. I don't have
Speaker 1: the data in front of me. I've used it many, many,
Speaker 1: many times, but you can see, like the average hours
Speaker 1: of work it required to buy the median home in
Speaker 1: nineteen seventy versus the average hours of work it takes
Speaker 1: to buy the meeting home today, the car et cetera,
Speaker 1: one share of the Dow et cetera, and over and
Speaker 1: over and over. You can see that your life is
Speaker 1: literally being stolen.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: It hasn't always been the case. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: these taxes aren't aren't super new now. Of course, if
Speaker 1: you understand how America was founded, you know that, of course,
Speaker 1: taxes have always been part of the rub.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: There's the Great Boston Tea Party, where the United States
Speaker 1: revolted against paying taxes to Britain. Didn't want to pay tax,
Speaker 1: no taxation without representation. The amount of taxes they paid
Speaker 1: were minuscule compared to what we paid today. But really
Speaker 1: where taxes really got their hold, We saw them in
Speaker 1: the Civil War in the eighteen sixties. They imposed a
Speaker 1: at tax, a three percent income tax for the war,
Speaker 1: and then.
Speaker 2: After the war was over they dropped it.
Speaker 1: But really where the income taxes got ratified where it
Speaker 1: was in nineteen thirteen. And what's important to understand about
Speaker 1: nineteen thirteen is why what else happened in nineteen thirteen. Well,
Speaker 1: we saw the creation of both the IRS and the
Speaker 1: Federal Reserve. So the Federal Reserve gold had been money
Speaker 1: for all of history, and now the Federal Reserve went
Speaker 1: to create fake paper counterfeit money out of thin air.
Speaker 1: But why the heck would anybody want to use fake
Speaker 1: paper money? Like imagine today someone says, hey, you should
Speaker 1: start using this monopoly money here. You're like, no, why
Speaker 1: would I use monopoly money. I'm not going to do that.
Speaker 1: And that's exactly what happened. The Federal Reserve said, hey,
Speaker 1: we printed this fake monopoly money, everyone should use it.
Speaker 2: And everyone's like, well, we ain't going to use that.
Speaker 2: So of course they had to come up with a reason.
Speaker 1: How could we get people to use it. Someone had
Speaker 1: a bright idea, here's what we're going to do. We're
Speaker 1: going to create the Federal Reserve and we're also going
Speaker 1: to create the IRS at the same time.
Speaker 2: And here's what we'll do.
Speaker 1: Since nobody wants to use this fake, counterfeit paper money,
Speaker 1: monopoly money, what we'll do is we'll create the IRS.
Speaker 1: And now you have to work all year collecting that
Speaker 1: fake money so you can send it back to us
Speaker 1: at the end of the year.
Speaker 2: Ah, that's a good idea.
Speaker 1: So we saw the IRS and the FED put in
Speaker 1: to act at the same time. Now, this is why
Speaker 1: you hear a lot of times something like with bitcoin
Speaker 1: where they're like, well, you know, bitcoin's not note ever
Speaker 1: going to make it because we can't pay taxes in bitcoin.
Speaker 1: And that's where that's where it goes back to really
Speaker 1: creation of that. Now I have seen a few states,
Speaker 1: I believe Colorado, I want to say, maybe Arizona. There's
Speaker 1: a handful of states that are now allowing you to
Speaker 1: pay your taxes in bitcoin. Anyway, I don't want to
Speaker 1: go down that path, but we can see over and
Speaker 1: over this is happening. And of course this is part
Speaker 1: of what's known as Kensian economics, and really more today
Speaker 1: is more pervasive in what's known as the modern monetary
Speaker 1: theory and modern monetary theory theor risk believe they could
Speaker 1: just print an unlimited amount of money, which to most
Speaker 1: of us go but wouldn't that create a lot of inflation?
Speaker 1: And they look at it sort of like think about
Speaker 1: the money supply as like a bathtub where they could
Speaker 1: print as much money as they want, and if the
Speaker 1: water level, or if the monetary level starts getting too high,
Speaker 1: then they pull the plug at the bottom, which is
Speaker 1: the taxes, and then they can just tax the money
Speaker 1: out of the system, and they can fill it back up,
Speaker 1: and they can tax it back out. And somehow they
Speaker 1: think they can control the entire economy by printing as
Speaker 1: much money as they want and then just imposing taxes arbitrarily.
Speaker 1: Of course, we have hundreds of years of facts that
Speaker 1: show that that doesn't work. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: there's been studies that show that regardless of what the
Speaker 1: tax rate is, whether it's two percent, five percent, or
Speaker 1: fifty percent, the percentage of revenue compared to GDP that
Speaker 1: the government receives is always about the same. The reason
Speaker 1: why is because incentives. Here in California, we have legalized marijuana,
Speaker 1: and they thought it would be a good idea to
Speaker 1: legalize it, and we'll just tax it and that way
Speaker 1: will be a massive extra revenue source for the government.
Speaker 1: The problem is that they got greedy and they put
Speaker 1: a massive tax on it. Now I don't work in
Speaker 1: that industry, so I don't have the exact data, but
Speaker 1: they have put a very very very large tax on it,
Speaker 1: so large in fact, that most of the people involved
Speaker 1: in the legal marijuana trade business can't make a profit.
Speaker 1: So something like sixty percent of the marijuana in California
Speaker 1: is still being sold black market. So if the state
Speaker 1: would have said, hey, we'll just give like a more
Speaker 1: modest tax rate of whatever, five or ten percent, they
Speaker 1: would probably take a much larger share of the revenue
Speaker 1: coming in because everybody would gladly pay five or ten
Speaker 1: percent to be perfectly legal.
Speaker 2: But at sixty.
Speaker 1: Percent, I'll take my chances, I'll just go black market.
Speaker 1: And so we can see over and over and over again.
Speaker 1: The more that they do that, the more that they
Speaker 1: try to steal your life, either through money printing or
Speaker 1: through taxation. The more people revolt and how much it
Speaker 1: backfires on them. Of course, it depends I guess on
Speaker 1: which side of the al you're on, whether you're looking
Speaker 1: at inflation good or bad. At the end of the day,
Speaker 1: what is good or bad? Unfortunately, I think most people
Speaker 1: today look at good as something that helps them personally,
Speaker 1: as opposed to like the greater good. I like to
Speaker 1: think of good or bad as good being something that
Speaker 1: takes me closer to my goals, and bad being something
Speaker 1: that takes me further away from my goals. But again,
Speaker 1: when we think about it from the world, it shouldn't
Speaker 1: be your personal goals.
Speaker 2: It should be a global goal.
Speaker 1: And we can see that if we allowed people to
Speaker 1: have more of their life, we allowed them to build
Speaker 1: into their own life, their families, their relationships, their health,
Speaker 1: the world will be a better place. So I don't
Speaker 1: support the government steal in our lives. But what do
Speaker 1: you think I'd love to hear from you? Hit me
Speaker 1: up on social media at one Mark Moss, let me know,
Speaker 1: leave a comment of if you're listening to the podcast,
Speaker 1: let me know what you think. So I cantinue to
Speaker 1: bring more content like this to you. But that's what
Speaker 1: I got today.
Speaker 2: Thanks so much for listening. Until next time,