Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to another episode of The Mark Moss Show,
Speaker 1: where we talk about the decentralized revolution. Of course, each
Speaker 1: and every week, talking about the way the world is
Speaker 1: changing through the lens of politics, finance, and technology. Now,
Speaker 1: I try to bring to you some of the latest
Speaker 1: breaking news headlines every single week, and that's what we
Speaker 1: are going to talk about right now. There has been
Speaker 1: a lot going on now. Like I said, I like
Speaker 1: to focus on politics, finance, and technology, but only the
Speaker 1: intersection of those three things. We don't try to talk
Speaker 1: about those things on their own. We want to give
Speaker 1: you the context you need now. Of course, as I
Speaker 1: talk about each and every week, it's technology that changes
Speaker 1: things more than anything. Technology is what changes the way
Speaker 1: the world works. And so the technology that's driving change
Speaker 1: right now is Bitcoin. Is the decentralized technologists bringing us
Speaker 1: this decentralized revolution I talk about each and every week,
Speaker 1: and you know when I talk about bitcoin and the
Speaker 1: new technology that's that's building off of that, you know,
Speaker 1: I don't typically talk about the price of bitcoin as
Speaker 1: I talk about a lot. I think that the price
Speaker 1: is a distraction when you're looking at brand new technologies.
Speaker 1: You don't want to look at the price. You want
Speaker 1: to look at either will both. You want to look
Speaker 1: at the growth of the network. You're looking for network effects.
Speaker 1: You're looking for the growth of the network, and you're
Speaker 1: looking for development on the network. Those are two things
Speaker 1: that you want to see and we are seeing that
Speaker 1: in a really big way. In a couple of ways
Speaker 1: that you can measure this. I mean, obviously we're looking
Speaker 1: at users the growth of the network. Can that be
Speaker 1: the amount of users, so it's the amount of wallets
Speaker 1: that we have, but it's also the amount of stores
Speaker 1: or companies or merchants that accept it. But we also
Speaker 1: look at the network itself, which is the mining capacity
Speaker 1: of the network. How many computers are plugged into the network,
Speaker 1: are helping process transactions, helping to secure the network, and
Speaker 1: we can see that it has hit a brand new
Speaker 1: all time high. As a matter of fact, you measure
Speaker 1: it so in a computer, you would measure it by
Speaker 1: the hash rate. That's the power of the computer. And
Speaker 1: you can look at the total amount of hash rate
Speaker 1: being put into the Bitcoin network, and we just passed
Speaker 1: three hundred equa hash. Now I'm not going to break
Speaker 1: down what that really means, but just know it's a
Speaker 1: really big number. But more importantly, it took only about
Speaker 1: one year for the bitcoin mining hash rate to gain
Speaker 1: one hundred equahsh so to go from two to three hundred,
Speaker 1: so over a thirty percent increase in the size of
Speaker 1: the network in just a year. It's a pretty big deal,
Speaker 1: really really big deal. Now we can see that part
Speaker 1: of that was I think really led by China getting
Speaker 1: rid of a lot of the mind, and a lot
Speaker 1: of it was the price of bitcoin had gone up
Speaker 1: so much that a lot of companies took out big loans.
Speaker 1: But either way, right now we are seeing the network
Speaker 1: itself getting to new levels that we haven't seen before,
Speaker 1: which is pretty cool. And we can see that it's
Speaker 1: also growing in terms of its reach, of the amount
Speaker 1: of people using it and even like I said, ors
Speaker 1: and merchants and even countries. Now we've talked a lot
Speaker 1: about El Salvador being the first nation to make bitcoin
Speaker 1: legal tender, which I think is a little bit I
Speaker 1: mean like kind of like who cares like they made
Speaker 1: it legal tender. That's cool. I mean, I'm glad they
Speaker 1: did that. It brings a lot of attention to it.
Speaker 1: But anybody can accept bitcoin if they want it doesn't
Speaker 1: have to be recognized as legal tender for it to
Speaker 1: be used here in the United States. I hear it's
Speaker 1: people talking about we need to make it legal tender
Speaker 1: in the US. It's like, no, we don't. Like anybody,
Speaker 1: any store or any service provider could just accept bitcoin
Speaker 1: if they want right now, we don't need to do that.
Speaker 1: But El Salvador did, and it's worked out pretty well
Speaker 1: for them. Now. A lot of people say it won't
Speaker 1: because the price of the bitcoin isn't as high as
Speaker 1: when they first bought it, but it's brought them lots
Speaker 1: of other benefits, including it's brought them massive amounts of tourism,
Speaker 1: massive amounts of investment, which more than makeup for any
Speaker 1: potential loss they might have had in some of the
Speaker 1: bitcoin they bought. But what we can also see is
Speaker 1: that while this is happening, and while it's in starting
Speaker 1: to influence other nations to do the same, remember growth
Speaker 1: of the network, other nations are starting to do this.
Speaker 1: The IMF, the International Monetary Fund, the Central Bank above
Speaker 1: all the central banks does not like this. A matter
Speaker 1: of fact, they've been threatening El Savador many times. We're
Speaker 1: not going to give you any more money. We won't
Speaker 1: give any more loans. We won't bill you out unless
Speaker 1: you drop bitcoin. Now we're seeing someone saying the IMF
Speaker 1: they're trying to scare other countries away from adopting bitcoin
Speaker 1: as legal tender. Ever since El Salvador established that legal framework,
Speaker 1: the IMF has been trying to attack it and shut
Speaker 1: it down. They don't want other countries to do this.
Speaker 1: But it doesn't matter. It is growing, and as a
Speaker 1: matter of fact, El Salvadore just grew into the United States.
Speaker 1: Interesting enough, they're planning to open in embassy in Texas.
Speaker 1: Not just an embassy, though, a bitcoin embassy. The central
Speaker 1: American country. Elsvadare wishes to open a bitcoin embassy in
Speaker 1: the new ally of Texas, and this will aid the
Speaker 1: expansion and commercial of economic exchange projects. Now Texas has
Speaker 1: sort of become the bitcoin capital of the United States,
Speaker 1: maybe even the bitcoin capital of the world. Partly because
Speaker 1: Texas is probably one of the most if not the
Speaker 1: most pro freedom states in the United States, but also
Speaker 1: because of the massive amounts of energy that they have,
Speaker 1: and so bitcoin needs energy. It needs the miners need
Speaker 1: the power to run off of and so bitcoin has
Speaker 1: really found its home there in Texas, so it kind
Speaker 1: of makes sense that they would want to set up
Speaker 1: an embassy in Texas. Now they're not just doing it
Speaker 1: in Texas. As a matter of fact, El Sovada are
Speaker 1: also agreed to open a similar embassy in Lugano, Switzerland
Speaker 1: in October, with the aim of encouraging adoption of bitcoin
Speaker 1: across Europe. You know, it's sort of we have to
Speaker 1: kind of think about the game theory and how this
Speaker 1: plays out, right, and so like any new technology, you
Speaker 1: have the first mover advantage, we'll just say, and El
Speaker 1: Salvador certainly leading on that, and of course then what
Speaker 1: will be the next country to adopt it? And that's
Speaker 1: the race that we're seeing right now. In another big news,
Speaker 1: remember we're looking at the growth of the network. We're
Speaker 1: also looking for development on the network. And another big
Speaker 1: piece of development to happen on the network with this
Speaker 1: week we got Bitcoin Ordinals, which brought NFTs. Now, if
Speaker 1: you love NFTs, like I know a lot of you do,
Speaker 1: now there's NFTs happening on the bitcoin blockchain. This is real.
Speaker 1: It's done through what's called inscriptions, and so some updates,
Speaker 1: some upgrades on the Bitcoin network have allowed people to
Speaker 1: now put this code into there, and right now they're
Speaker 1: putting JPEGs, they're putting NFT transactions into this. Minors have
Speaker 1: earned nearly six hundred thousand and two months from these
Speaker 1: NFT objects, these ordinals that have been on there. And
Speaker 1: so a lot of people would say, well, what happens
Speaker 1: to the bitcoin miners when there's no more bitcoin to
Speaker 1: be mined? And the answer is always well, transaction fees.
Speaker 1: So bitcoin miners earn from transaction fees and from receiving
Speaker 1: new mind coins. If there's no mind coins, then they
Speaker 1: get transaction fees. And a lot of people say, well,
Speaker 1: will that be enough? Well, we don't know. We'll find
Speaker 1: out in a hundred years, but will that be enough? Well,
Speaker 1: now we see that this is another really big source
Speaker 1: of revenue for these bitcoin miners. Now there's a lot
Speaker 1: of controversy about this. Do we really need JPEGs and
Speaker 1: NFTs on the bitcoin blockchain? The answer is, we don't know.
Speaker 1: My opinion is right now sort of like a wait
Speaker 1: and see, let's see what happens. I think the free
Speaker 1: market will figure this out. Whatever seems to be the
Speaker 1: highest and best use case, whatever seems to have the
Speaker 1: best monetary incentives will probably win. But think beyond what
Speaker 1: this means for just NFTs and JPEGs. I mean, I
Speaker 1: don't think JPEGs need to be on there, But what
Speaker 1: about other types of things like, for example, three D
Speaker 1: printed guns schematics. Right, so, as of course every nation
Speaker 1: wants to get rid of guns so they can put
Speaker 1: their people into oppression. Most of the world doesn't have them,
Speaker 1: and now we can print them with three D printers
Speaker 1: and all you gotta do is download the code. But
Speaker 1: of course they don't want you to have the code.
Speaker 1: They're trying to delete that everywhere. And if I could
Speaker 1: store that three D printed guns schematic, that code into
Speaker 1: the Bitcoin blockchain, the only censorship resistant and immutable blockchain,
Speaker 1: what could that do for the power balance of humanity?
Speaker 1: I think it'd be pretty big. Now, that's just one example.
Speaker 1: We don't know. Humans are no good at imagine in
Speaker 1: the future, so we don't know really where this takes us.
Speaker 1: What we do know is this is a new building block.
Speaker 1: What we do know is we're finding new ways to
Speaker 1: develop on the Bitcoin blockchain, including ordinals, and so this
Speaker 1: is exciting. This is just the beginning. But what do
Speaker 1: you think hit me up on social media at one
Speaker 1: Mark Moss let me know what you think. I'd love
Speaker 1: to hear what you think about ordinals, NFTs on the
Speaker 1: block chain, or what you think could be potentially new
Speaker 1: use cases. If you're just tuning in, you're listening to
Speaker 1: the Mark Moss Show talking about the decentralized Revolution. Each
Speaker 1: and every week. We're running down some of the latest
Speaker 1: breaking news this week, so you're up to date. I
Speaker 1: got a whole lot more to cover when I come back.
Speaker 1: You don't want to miss its it don't go away.
Speaker 1: I'll be right back, all right, Welcome back. If you
Speaker 1: just tune in, you are listening to the Mark Moss Show.
Speaker 1: We're talking about the decentralized Revolution, of course, each and
Speaker 1: every week, just like we always do. If you miss
Speaker 1: any of this, don't worry. I always got your back.
Speaker 1: You can check me out on the podcast. Just search
Speaker 1: the Mark Moss Show on your favorite podcast player, iHeartRadio
Speaker 1: or iTunes wherever you get your podcast app. And if
Speaker 1: you'd like to watch me and listen at the same time,
Speaker 1: you can find me on the YouTube channel. Just search
Speaker 1: Market Disruptors and you'll find all my archives there as well.
Speaker 1: And you can watch me and listen to me at
Speaker 1: the same time, and as always, hit me up on
Speaker 1: social media, man, I want to hear what you have
Speaker 1: to say. I'm at one Mark Moss, find me on Twitter,
Speaker 1: on Instagram, wherever I'm pretty active. So send me a message,
Speaker 1: tell me you're listening to the show, tell me what
Speaker 1: you like, which you don't like, and any requests or
Speaker 1: questions that you have. I'm happy to get those for
Speaker 1: you as well, you know, talking about this decentralized revolution.
Speaker 1: Always sticking on that theme of course, looking at through
Speaker 1: the lens of politics, finance, and technology. I like to
Speaker 1: look at the latest breaking news so we can see
Speaker 1: how this is developing. And one thing that we saw
Speaker 1: this week was a lot of action coming from the SEC,
Speaker 1: the Securities and Exchange Commission in the United States. And
Speaker 1: it's not surprising, not surprising to me. I've talked about
Speaker 1: extensively on this show and on my main YouTube channel,
Speaker 1: Mark Moss, and on lots of other shows, including Fox Business.
Speaker 1: I've talked extensively about how the SEC, Securities Exchange Commission,
Speaker 1: and just the US government overall was going to come
Speaker 1: and really start clamping down on cryptocurrencies. They have to
Speaker 1: do this because they look horrible. In my opinion, the
Speaker 1: SEC should shut down and disgrace their job. There used
Speaker 1: to be that thing was like you had one job.
Speaker 1: The SEC's one job is to protect consumers. That's their job,
Speaker 1: protect consumers. How well have they done? Did they protect
Speaker 1: them from Celsius? Did they protect them from FTX and
Speaker 1: the answers? Of course not. Millions and millions of people
Speaker 1: lost everything, lost their entire life savings. They did nothing
Speaker 1: to protect them. They failed at their one job. They
Speaker 1: should shut down in disgrace and walk away in shame.
Speaker 1: But of course they're not doing that, and instead, now
Speaker 1: they have to come back and try to, you know,
Speaker 1: regain some confidence. And now they're going to come way
Speaker 1: too heavy handed, of course, right of course. And so
Speaker 1: here they are with the heavy hand coming after anything
Speaker 1: and everything that evenly seeming like it has nothing to
Speaker 1: do with securities at all. So what am I talking about? Well,
Speaker 1: the SEC is now slapping lawsuits just left and right.
Speaker 1: You got one, you got one, you got one right
Speaker 1: right right, boom boom boom, and they just they win
Speaker 1: after Kraken and Crack and said, hey, we're not going
Speaker 1: to fight you. Here's thirty million dollars, you know, just
Speaker 1: go away kind of a thing. They came after a
Speaker 1: company called Paksos, which is a stay coin, so meaning
Speaker 1: you give me a dollar, I give you a dollar
Speaker 1: token back, and then you can exchange the token back
Speaker 1: for a dollar whenever you want. There's lots of stable
Speaker 1: coins that are out there, and most people have thought
Speaker 1: this is actually pretty good for the government. It's good
Speaker 1: for the United States, it's good for the FED. It's
Speaker 1: good for the dollar because it makes more people use dollars. So, now,
Speaker 1: if you're in a country like Nigeria, or in Turkey
Speaker 1: or in Argentina, and you're in a currency that's losing
Speaker 1: one hundred percent of its value, losing everything, you need
Speaker 1: to get out of that currency as fast as you can.
Speaker 1: And what you get into, well, you can't get dollars,
Speaker 1: but what you could do is get a US dollar
Speaker 1: stable coin, which is basically the same thing. And so
Speaker 1: it all it does is get more people in the
Speaker 1: world into dollars, now indirectly through a dollar stable coin,
Speaker 1: but doesn't matter either way. It's the same thing. More
Speaker 1: people are using dollars than they were before. That should
Speaker 1: be a good thing. However, the sec one little arm
Speaker 1: of the government is now coming after stable coins. As
Speaker 1: a matter of fact, they sued this company called Paxos,
Speaker 1: which is interesting because Paxos is one of the most
Speaker 1: regulated and licensed companies. So not only are they in
Speaker 1: the United States and regulating license in the US, they're
Speaker 1: also regulating direct under the New York Department of Financial
Speaker 1: Services the nyd f S, which is the most the
Speaker 1: most restrictive, the hardest jurisdiction to get licensed in, and
Speaker 1: their license there, and they're going after them for this
Speaker 1: stable coin, which is interesting because they're saying it's a security,
Speaker 1: but there's no expectation of profit. Like I'm giving you
Speaker 1: a dollar, you're giving me a dollar token. When I
Speaker 1: give you the token back, you give me my dollar back.
Speaker 1: I don't expect you to give me a dollar twenty five.
Speaker 1: So I don't even know how it fits under that.
Speaker 1: I don't really care. I'm not a legal attorney. I'm
Speaker 1: not going to get into that. But what's interesting is
Speaker 1: that one it's taking away the dollars dominance again, right,
Speaker 1: which is strange, And it's interesting because, like I said,
Speaker 1: they should want that to happen, but they're seemingly taken away.
Speaker 1: So at a time we want the dollars to be stronger,
Speaker 1: would want more people to use the dollar. We think
Speaker 1: it would be good. The problem is that now that
Speaker 1: the US government is coming after this so hard. Specifically,
Speaker 1: really the SEC is coming after it, but even the
Speaker 1: US government, the US government is attacking Tether, which is
Speaker 1: the largest stable coin. Seemingly it looks like the government,
Speaker 1: the SEC, etc. Is trying to choose winners, and it
Speaker 1: looks like they've picked the winner which they want circle,
Speaker 1: which is USDC to reign supreme. That's the one they control.
Speaker 1: And anything that's not USDC they want to attack. So
Speaker 1: they're going after Tether. They went after Paxos because of
Speaker 1: the Binance USD, the b USD, so anything is not
Speaker 1: Circle they want to attack. But what's interesting about it
Speaker 1: is that they could be shooting themselves in the foot.
Speaker 1: As a matter of fact, Binance CEO Binance is the
Speaker 1: largest cryptocurrency exchange out there in the world. The CEO
Speaker 1: cz says that the industry, the crypto industry may start
Speaker 1: to use stable coins peg to the Euro, the yen,
Speaker 1: or the Singapore dollar instead of the US dollar. M
Speaker 1: It says it was probably start using these other currencies
Speaker 1: in the future, reducing its reliance on the US dollar
Speaker 1: based stable coins. According to Binan, CEO CZ, they said
Speaker 1: that they could even start using gold as a standard
Speaker 1: of value instead of the US dollar. He says, quote,
Speaker 1: I think that the given the current pressure and current
Speaker 1: stances taken by the regulators and the US dollar based
Speaker 1: stable coins, I think that, as you said, the industry
Speaker 1: will probably move away to non US dollar based stable coins.
Speaker 1: So you would think the US would want the stable
Speaker 1: coins to be used because it puts more of the
Speaker 1: world into the dollar, which is what they want at
Speaker 1: a time when you have Russia and China and the
Speaker 1: bricks nations trying to d dollarize. We're getting the governments
Speaker 1: can d dollarize, but the people could get back into
Speaker 1: dollars when they weren't able to get dollars before and
Speaker 1: now they can because of the stable coins. That is
Speaker 1: what they want. But the problem is is that they're
Speaker 1: so restrictive, they're so heavy handed, they're kicking so many
Speaker 1: people out that these cryptocompanies could just say we'll find
Speaker 1: we won't use the US dollar, now, we'll use the yen,
Speaker 1: will use the euro, we'll use gold something that you
Speaker 1: can't censor us from, and so it's interesting. I guess
Speaker 1: it shouldn't be surprising. It's not surprising to me. That's
Speaker 1: how the government works, and ultimately that's how all of
Speaker 1: this decentralized revolution works. So the more they squeeze to
Speaker 1: try to retain power, the more they try to censor
Speaker 1: us because they don't like what we're saying. The more
Speaker 1: they try to restrict our movement, restrict our movement of money.
Speaker 1: The more they do that, the more we look for
Speaker 1: solutions to get around those restrictions, and the more we
Speaker 1: get around them, the more they squeeze, and the more
Speaker 1: they squeeze, the more we push back, and the more
Speaker 1: we push back, the more they squeeze, and it's this
Speaker 1: never ending cycle. So they're leading their own demise, they're
Speaker 1: doing their own marketing for them, and so at a
Speaker 1: time when you would think they would want more people
Speaker 1: using the dollar and they're trying to protect their own interest,
Speaker 1: what they're probably going to do is shoot themselves in
Speaker 1: the foot and push more people away. Interesting, if you're
Speaker 1: just tuning in and you're listening to the Mark Mos Show,
Speaker 1: we're talking about the decentralized revolution through the lens of course, politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology, talking about the latest breaking news headlines this week.
Speaker 1: And we got some big ones, some big, big stories
Speaker 1: coming up that I'm pretty excited to talk about. I'm
Speaker 1: pretty fired up about it. I was fired up talking
Speaker 1: about it before we even started recording, so I got
Speaker 1: a whole lot to cover when I come back. You
Speaker 1: do not want to miss what's coming up next, so
Speaker 1: don't go away. I'm gonna be right back, all right,
Speaker 1: Welcome back. You are listening to the Mark Moss Show.
Speaker 1: We talk about the decentralized revolution and how I'm running
Speaker 1: through the latest breaking news headlines of this week so
Speaker 1: you know what's going on and you can see this
Speaker 1: transition that we're in as we move into this decentralized revolution. Now,
Speaker 1: something I talked about this week on my main YouTube channel,
Speaker 1: just Mark Moss on YouTube, which, by the way, if
Speaker 1: you want to listen to these and watch me at
Speaker 1: the same time, you can watch me on the Market
Speaker 1: Disruptors YouTube channel. But something I was talking about this
Speaker 1: week was this train crash that happened in Ohio. And
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna get in all that. If you want
Speaker 1: to know more about what I think about that train,
Speaker 1: the train derailment in Ohio and the chemical spill and
Speaker 1: all that. I just did a video on my main
Speaker 1: YouTube channel, Go check it out. But um, what I
Speaker 1: talked about the end really seemed to have have struck a
Speaker 1: nerve with a lot of people. And what I talked
Speaker 1: about at the end was I called it the age
Speaker 1: of incompetence. And what happens is at the end of
Speaker 1: an empire, whether it's a typically a tune and fifty
Speaker 1: year lifespan of an empire or a tuna fifty year
Speaker 1: lifespan of a democracy, it goes through six or really
Speaker 1: eight distinct stages from cradle to grave. And we're in
Speaker 1: this last kind of final stage. And I'm calling it
Speaker 1: the age of incompetence. People really like that seemed like anyway,
Speaker 1: And what am I talking about, Well, you know, when
Speaker 1: it comes to Southwest Airlines December having the largest outage,
Speaker 1: having to cancel every single flight, it's never happened before.
Speaker 1: Then the FAA had to shut down every single flight
Speaker 1: in the US because of some software problem. Then it
Speaker 1: happened in I think Canada and Australia. You know, planes
Speaker 1: can't seem to run on time anymore. Trains can't seem
Speaker 1: to run trains or derailing trucks or overturning. You know,
Speaker 1: we have food processing plants seemingly catching on fire, blowing
Speaker 1: up all the time, fuel refineries, and it could be
Speaker 1: an attack. A lot of people think it is a
Speaker 1: lot of people think it's maybe you know, some environmentalists
Speaker 1: or maybe even in our own government doing these type
Speaker 1: of things. Maybe it's another country trying to do these things.
Speaker 1: Maybe it's the open border and the five million people
Speaker 1: that have come across and a few terrorists have come
Speaker 1: across and their sabotaging or critical infrastructure. If you were
Speaker 1: going to do that, you would certainly attack high value
Speaker 1: targets like where the train derailed right now next to
Speaker 1: a river. So it could be that. How however, it
Speaker 1: could also just be because of the age of incompetence.
Speaker 1: And so what do I mean by that? What will
Speaker 1: I mean at the end of an empire? You have
Speaker 1: basically failing infrastructure, those railroads, those locomotives, those the FAA software,
Speaker 1: the fa towers, like that's old. That's sixty seventy eighty
Speaker 1: years old technology. We haven't updated that in a long time.
Speaker 1: The planes they're old. We haven't updated them. And so
Speaker 1: you know, the fuel refiners, some of these fuel refiners
Speaker 1: in the United States are one hundred years old. Like
Speaker 1: it's not going to work very good after our hundred years, right,
Speaker 1: And so we have this aged country, this age infrastructure.
Speaker 1: But on top of that, we also have people who
Speaker 1: are incompetent. So and and it's caused by any number
Speaker 1: of reasons we have. Obviously in the train situation, they
Speaker 1: all tried to walk off the job. The Biden administration
Speaker 1: force them back on the job. So maybe they're not happy,
Speaker 1: they don't feel respected, they don't feel fulfillment in their jobs,
Speaker 1: so they're disengaged. But it's also because of the way
Speaker 1: that we raise these kids. I saw this week another
Speaker 1: another big airline, Lefonsa. They had lots of flights delayed.
Speaker 1: Germans flagship airline carrier also the same thing because their
Speaker 1: internet cables were severed. They're investigating whether this was due
Speaker 1: to a cyber attack, So it was an attack or
Speaker 1: was it you know, did the fiber just go bad?
Speaker 1: We don't know. But back to the point, we're seeing
Speaker 1: this happening more and more and more, and I think
Speaker 1: a lot of it has to do with this age
Speaker 1: of incompetence. And I saw these headlines that really caught
Speaker 1: my eye and really kind of got me angry, and
Speaker 1: so I thought I would just talk about them if
Speaker 1: you want to hear me going on a little bit
Speaker 1: of ramp. But basically, I saw this article and it
Speaker 1: was about Baltimore's failing schools and Baltimore's parent demands action
Speaker 1: for twenty three schools report no math proficiency. Let me
Speaker 1: say that again, no math proficiency. It's a systematic failing,
Speaker 1: is what it says here. This is a really big deal.
Speaker 1: So they went through all these schools and they looked
Speaker 1: at all of them, they did the tests or whatever,
Speaker 1: and none of the students in past math. Maryland State
Speaker 1: Department of Educator Educations twenty twenty two state test results
Speaker 1: indicated the bombshell findings that no students, no students across
Speaker 1: twenty three schools were proficient in math. Well, let me
Speaker 1: ask you a question. What are schools supposed to be
Speaker 1: doing they're supposed to be teaching. What are they supposed
Speaker 1: to be teaching? Now, I thought they were supposed to
Speaker 1: teach us how to read and write and do math, math, science,
Speaker 1: English history. They should be teaching us those things. But here,
Speaker 1: no students, no, none, No students across all twenty three
Speaker 1: schools were proficient in math. So what are they doing? Well?
Speaker 1: Over here? Do you think that's bad? Over here we
Speaker 1: have Chicago. Not a single student again, not a single,
Speaker 1: not one, nobody, not a single student is proficient in
Speaker 1: reading or math at fifty five Chicago schools. Not a
Speaker 1: single student in fifty five schools, not one student met
Speaker 1: grade level expectations in either math or reading during the
Speaker 1: twenty one twenty two school year out of six hundred
Speaker 1: and forty nine schools. What are they supposed to be
Speaker 1: doing they're supposed to be teaching. Now, we could argue
Speaker 1: what they're supposed to be teaching, But if you don't
Speaker 1: think that math and reading or like probably the two
Speaker 1: of the most important ones at the very top of
Speaker 1: the pile, then we don't. We have no conversation math
Speaker 1: if you can't read and write and perform math like
Speaker 1: you failed. As a matter of fact, I think most
Speaker 1: of high school is pretty much pointless. Once you learn
Speaker 1: how to read and write and do math like you're
Speaker 1: kind of done. But they can't even teach that. But
Speaker 1: what are they teaching. Well, they're teaching how to be woke.
Speaker 1: They're teaching that boys can be girls and girls can
Speaker 1: be boys. They're teaching that there's no difference in biological sex.
Speaker 1: They're teaching that men can get pregnant. They're teaching preschoolers
Speaker 1: and kindergarteners and elementary kids about transgenderism. Here where I'm
Speaker 1: at in California, maybe I would say that one or
Speaker 1: maybe some of the worst school districts, But now that
Speaker 1: I see this about the Chicago and Baltimore, I'm not
Speaker 1: so sure. But here in California, in the middle schools,
Speaker 1: in the middle schools, they're putting tampons in the boys' bathrooms.
Speaker 1: In a city two cities over from where I'm at,
Speaker 1: in the schools, they're putting litter boxes in the bathrooms,
Speaker 1: litter boxes in the bathrooms. Now, why would they put
Speaker 1: litter boxes? Well, who uses litter boxes? Cats use litter
Speaker 1: boxes cats, So why would they put litter boxes in
Speaker 1: the bathrooms. Well, it's for the students that identify as cats,
Speaker 1: of course. Like what, Hang on a second, Well, hang
Speaker 1: on a second, this is this is for real, all right,
Speaker 1: this is not joke. I'm serious. So students think they're cats,
Speaker 1: and the teachers oblige this by putting litter boxes in
Speaker 1: the bathrooms they're supposed to be teaching, Like, how about, no,
Speaker 1: you're not really a cat, You're actually a human. How
Speaker 1: about that? How about that would be something we should teach.
Speaker 1: I mean, when I was at school, biology, I guess
Speaker 1: was a lot different than it is now. I guess
Speaker 1: we weren't as woke, but we understood that humans and
Speaker 1: animals were different. We were not the same pigs. We
Speaker 1: we dissected pigs because pigs were supposed to be the
Speaker 1: closest to humans. Not cats. We're not cats. How about,
Speaker 1: as a teacher like, hey, sorry, student, you're not a cat.
Speaker 1: You're just not right. You're you're not a unicorn. Uh,
Speaker 1: You're you're a person, You're a kid. How about that,
Speaker 1: your boy, you're a girl, and you should go to
Speaker 1: the bathroom using a urinal or a a toilet like everybody else.
Speaker 1: Maybe we should teach them how to use journals. We're school,
Speaker 1: we're supposed to teach them, but no, instead of teaching
Speaker 1: them math, not a single student in Chicago's proficient in
Speaker 1: reading or math at schools, Not a single One or
Speaker 1: Baltimore instead of teaching reading and writing and math, or
Speaker 1: teaching them that they're they're a cat and they should
Speaker 1: use a litter box. And we're putting it in the bathroom.
Speaker 1: Oh man, If that doesn't get you mad and fired up,
Speaker 1: I don't know what will. And this leads to the
Speaker 1: age of incompetence. Where does this lead us? Does this
Speaker 1: lead to more skilled workers in the railroad, in the
Speaker 1: airline industry? Does this lead to more trains and planes
Speaker 1: running on time and breaking down? No? This is the
Speaker 1: age of incompetence. Now. The good news is for you
Speaker 1: and I all y gotta do is be above average
Speaker 1: and you could crush it. You don't have to work
Speaker 1: that hard. If you're tuning to listen to the Mark
Speaker 1: Moss Show talking about the Decentralized Revolution, how the world
Speaker 1: is changing. I'm breaking with the latest breaking news headlines
Speaker 1: this week. I got them. I think that's big. I
Speaker 1: got more to come. Don't go away, I'm gonna be
Speaker 1: right back, all right, welcome back. If you're just tune in,
Speaker 1: you are listening to the Mark Moss Show, or we
Speaker 1: talk about the Decentralized Revolution, talking about the way the
Speaker 1: world is changing as we look at through the lens
Speaker 1: of politics, finance, and technology. And I'm running through some
Speaker 1: of the latest breaking news of this week so you
Speaker 1: can be caught up on exactly how this is all
Speaker 1: going down, how this is changing now. I talked about
Speaker 1: last week, but it's continue to dominate the news headlines.
Speaker 1: So we're gonna talk about it again a little bit.
Speaker 1: And that is the balloons, the Chinese balloons that are
Speaker 1: flying over the United States. What does all of this mean, Well,
Speaker 1: we don't really know because we can't really get a
Speaker 1: straight answer out of anybody. And what happens is when
Speaker 1: we don't get straight answers out of anybody, then it
Speaker 1: leads to lots of speculation. Now it would lead to
Speaker 1: speculation anyway, but in this case, we're getting lots of speculation.
Speaker 1: And we went from having one balloon, two balloons, to
Speaker 1: three balloons to four balloons, and I've seen lots of
Speaker 1: different ports. I've spent a lot of time looking into this,
Speaker 1: more than I should have. And it seems like some
Speaker 1: people say that they were actually very sophisticated spy balloons
Speaker 1: and that they didn't really get any information from us
Speaker 1: because as they were flying over they were trying to
Speaker 1: get pictures of our ballistic missile and nuclear military bases
Speaker 1: that we have. But as they saw them coming across,
Speaker 1: they just kind of closed up the doors and they
Speaker 1: didn't really see anything. That's I see some and some
Speaker 1: say maybe they weren't so sophisticated, maybe they weren't doing
Speaker 1: anything based off of all the data I've been able
Speaker 1: to gather. I air on more of the side of
Speaker 1: they were sophisticated, at least some of them were, and
Speaker 1: they weren't trying to capture this data and we shot
Speaker 1: them down. But it's interesting for a couple of reasons.
Speaker 1: One because China first denied them, said wait a minute, this,
Speaker 1: this wasn't ours um. Then they went on to say, uh,
Speaker 1: wait a minute. Now you know we're going to retaliate
Speaker 1: because you shot him down. You've flown balloons over the
Speaker 1: United States a bunch of times, I mean over China
Speaker 1: a bunch of times. And so now they're saying that
Speaker 1: it's a it's a it's an attack, and now there's
Speaker 1: gonna be retaliation from it. So there's like this this
Speaker 1: narrative shift that's happening. And now it seems like as
Speaker 1: of yesterday, they're trying to you know, there's been a
Speaker 1: lot of talking about UFOs. The government seems to be
Speaker 1: shutting down the UFO thing. But now there's almost like
Speaker 1: this kind of narrative shift where they're saying, well, maybe
Speaker 1: it's it's a it's not this, so we don't know,
Speaker 1: and so that's not what I want to talk about.
Speaker 1: What I do want to talk about, though, is why
Speaker 1: are we all talking about this? We talk about what
Speaker 1: they want us to talk about, they being U, the
Speaker 1: people pulling the strings, the governments who control the media,
Speaker 1: so pretty much all the media mainstream, so CNN and
Speaker 1: CNBC and MSNBC and ABC and CBS, they all get
Speaker 1: their same talking points from one group, and whatever they
Speaker 1: decide to push is what most people talk about. So
Speaker 1: the question is why are we talking about balloons and
Speaker 1: not talking about other things, like, for example, the train
Speaker 1: development that happened in Ohio, one of the massive chemical
Speaker 1: spill affecting all the farmlands, some of the best farmland
Speaker 1: in the United States right on the Ohio River that
Speaker 1: feeds into the Mississippi River. Like this is a massive
Speaker 1: ecological problem that could potentially have been an attack. Even
Speaker 1: if it's not even if it was an accident. We
Speaker 1: should probably say that, and we should probably also talk
Speaker 1: about the damage is gonna happen. We should probably warn people,
Speaker 1: tell them to put in ninety five on masks. I mean,
Speaker 1: you had to wear masks for COVID, but you don't
Speaker 1: have to wear it for this apparently. And so the
Speaker 1: question is why is no mainstream news talking about that? Now?
Speaker 1: On Twitter, you see it happening, that's where the people talk. Obviously,
Speaker 1: I'm talking about it. I did a whole YouTube video.
Speaker 1: You can check it out on my main YouTube channel.
Speaker 1: Just Mark moss I did a video on it. So
Speaker 1: people are talking about it, But why is mainstream completely silent? Now?
Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson on Fox to the piece, but no mainstream news.
Speaker 1: So the question I ask is why do they want
Speaker 1: us talking about these balloons? And why do they not
Speaker 1: want us talking about the train? The balloons caused no damage,
Speaker 1: It didn't affect anybody. There's no damage. There's no one's house,
Speaker 1: no one died, no animals are dying, no water was polluted,
Speaker 1: no form of animals ruined. So why are we talking
Speaker 1: about balloons? And that's the question that we should be asking. Well,
Speaker 1: my answer to that is, unfortunately, why do they want
Speaker 1: us talking about these balloons? Why are they saying they're
Speaker 1: coming from China? And what is the sentiment they're trying
Speaker 1: to get us about China. Well, we're mad at China,
Speaker 1: We're angry at China, China spying on us, and now
Speaker 1: they can drum up rhetoric or sentiment to beat the
Speaker 1: drumbeats of war against China some more. Potentially, they're saying
Speaker 1: that China has more intercontinental ballistic missiles than the US does,
Speaker 1: so we should probably give more money to the military
Speaker 1: industrial complex so they could build more weapons. I guess
Speaker 1: now the people, we the people, you and I we're
Speaker 1: gon we're not gonna be happy giving even more money
Speaker 1: to the military unless we can think that we're really
Speaker 1: in a big threat here, if we if we see
Speaker 1: a big threat, then maybe they could get the people
Speaker 1: to support giving more money to the military industrial complex.
Speaker 1: Now I talk about this because what we're seeing is
Speaker 1: as we move into this decentralized revolution, as we're going
Speaker 1: from a unipolar world where the US homogene controls everything
Speaker 1: to a multipolar world with Russia China, this is going
Speaker 1: to lead to us not all being friends anymore. This
Speaker 1: is going to lead go from a place of global cooperation.
Speaker 1: We were all friends to now competition instead of cooperation.
Speaker 1: It's competition, and unfortunately, war is one of those things.
Speaker 1: And so now it's a competition of who has the
Speaker 1: most weapons, who has the most determined systems, and all
Speaker 1: those things. And we can see this in a lot
Speaker 1: of different areas. We can see this week that apparently
Speaker 1: the Philippines now China. China apparently attacked the Philippines shining
Speaker 1: some laser lights in their eyes. There's like this laser
Speaker 1: report talking about how Chinese boats went after Philippine boats
Speaker 1: and shined lasers in the eyes, causing temporary blindness. They
Speaker 1: did very dangerous maneuvers in the water, blocking the delivery
Speaker 1: of food and supplies. And this is like a direct
Speaker 1: attack on the Philippines. So now the Philippines and the
Speaker 1: United States are going to join together. The US are
Speaker 1: going to protect Philippines. Now we're carrying out the biggest
Speaker 1: joint military drills since twenty fifteen. So Washington is redoubling
Speaker 1: its efforts to go against China and to now ally
Speaker 1: with Philippines. So we're allying with the Taiwan we're all
Speaker 1: applying with Philippines, and you can see what's happening here
Speaker 1: right as this world is breaking apart. Everybody's scrambling to
Speaker 1: find out who's on whose team, and maybe some of
Speaker 1: this is even being done to even build that sentiment
Speaker 1: even more so. Now supposedly Philippines got attacked by China,
Speaker 1: and so now the US is going to side. Now
Speaker 1: the Philippines will come to side with the US. Now
Speaker 1: they could have easily gone and sided with China. So
Speaker 1: we're seeing how all this shakes out, and it's happening
Speaker 1: in real time. We see that the IMF put out
Speaker 1: this report this week warning that the world needs to
Speaker 1: prepare for the unthinkable. They say it needs to be
Speaker 1: prepared to better handle shocks and the unthinkable. She referenced.
Speaker 1: Georgina Cristillian, at the head of the IMF, referenced that
Speaker 1: earthquakes in Turkey and Syria, saying, hey, we we gotta
Speaker 1: be ready, we gotta be ready. Who knows what could happen,
Speaker 1: And so they're preparing us. They're preparing us now. Of course,
Speaker 1: the IMF is preparing a little bit differently. They want
Speaker 1: to get ready to play a stabilizing role with the
Speaker 1: money because they're a banker. When all you have is
Speaker 1: a hammer, the whole world looks like a nail. And
Speaker 1: when you're a banker, the whole all you have is money.
Speaker 1: And it says that they're ready to put in forty
Speaker 1: to forty eight billion dollars into the Ukraine economy to
Speaker 1: prepare for this stabilization. So is it all about money?
Speaker 1: Is it all about war? Is it all over the dollar?
Speaker 1: Right now? We have more questions than answers. But what
Speaker 1: I can tell you is that the world is decentralizing.
Speaker 1: We are witnessing the decentralized revolution, and each one of
Speaker 1: these are signs to show us that we are getting
Speaker 1: further and further down this road and we're not coming back.
Speaker 1: If you're just tuning in, you're listening to the Mark
Speaker 1: Moss Show. We talk about the decentralized revolution each and
Speaker 1: every week, talking about the way the world is breaking
Speaker 1: apart as we look at it through the lens of politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology, and of course technology typically we're talking about bitcoin,
Speaker 1: which is the decentralized technology which has given us what
Speaker 1: we need. Is the world decentralized? If you missed any
Speaker 1: of this show. You can catch it on your favorite
Speaker 1: podcast player just search the Mark Moss Show. You can
Speaker 1: watch and listen on YouTube Undermarket Disruptors, and hit me
Speaker 1: up on social media at one Mark Moss. I'd love
Speaker 1: to hear from you, and that's what I got. Thanks
Speaker 1: so much for listening. Until next time,