Speaker 1: All right, welcome back to another episode of The Markma Show,
Speaker 1: where we talk about the decentralized revolution, how the world
Speaker 1: is changing as we look at through the lens of politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology. Today, I am sitting down with another special guest.
Speaker 1: I'm talking about podcast host media personality, Marty Bent. He's
Speaker 1: the host of the t f TC podcast. He's recently
Speaker 1: been featured on shows such as Glenn beck Um and
Speaker 1: he is on front. He's in front of what is
Speaker 1: going on as this world is changing, and I'm talking
Speaker 1: about it through the lens of politics, finance, and technology
Speaker 1: and the merger of those three. And we are going
Speaker 1: to talk about all three of those topics. The economy,
Speaker 1: the markets, the signs of the economy is breaking down,
Speaker 1: but what does that mean for the market, How the
Speaker 1: monetary system of the world is changing, what's going on
Speaker 1: with the World Forum, what they're talking about, and what
Speaker 1: is going to happen from that. We're gonna talk about
Speaker 1: all that. Let's quead just jump right into the interview
Speaker 1: with Marty. Alright, Marty, thanks for hosting. I'm hosting you
Speaker 1: this time. But in your studio, tables of the table
Speaker 1: is gonna nice its chairs So here we are in
Speaker 1: the t FTC studios with UM with Marty Bent. If
Speaker 1: you don't watch Marty Show, you definitely should t f
Speaker 1: TC and read his uh every read it right, every day. Right,
Speaker 1: you're trying to get back to it. Your days been
Speaker 1: like two just three days a week. This week, I'm
Speaker 1: getting back to five days a week. So check out
Speaker 1: his email. Will link will link to that stuff down below. UM.
Speaker 1: I always love listening to your stuff. We share a
Speaker 1: very common worldview, so so it's always a pleasure to
Speaker 1: get down to sit down talk to you as well
Speaker 1: a lot of things to cover today. You put an
Speaker 1: article I think it was this morning or last night
Speaker 1: talking about the signs of economic stress or everywhere, So
Speaker 1: I want to dig into that first. I was just
Speaker 1: saying before we sat down that I think this year
Speaker 1: is gonna be better than most people expect, and that's
Speaker 1: a contrary and view. So let's let's talk about that
Speaker 1: a little bit and then we'll get into a bunch
Speaker 1: of other fun stuff that I have planned. But so
Speaker 1: what I there's all there's been all these like disparate
Speaker 1: stories there we've been reading on zero Hedge and they're
Speaker 1: just like siloed. That's what I try to do with
Speaker 1: this letter last night was to put a few of
Speaker 1: them together. That's what I focused on was consumer credit
Speaker 1: and savings UM, housing or a real estate more broadly
Speaker 1: commercial real estate and residential real estate, and then the
Speaker 1: used car market. And you threw in late layoffs and
Speaker 1: layoffs as well UM, and that tied into the commercial
Speaker 1: real estate and so consumer credit, Uh, it's hitting new
Speaker 1: all time highs. Obviously, it fell significantly after the COVID lockdowns.
Speaker 1: People went into their houses, paid off their debt, had
Speaker 1: a lot more disposable income, and they weren't traveling to
Speaker 1: work and eating out and all that jazz. But since then,
Speaker 1: if you look at like the slope of the increase
Speaker 1: of consumer credit since it started going back up, and
Speaker 1: it's a bit steeper than it was in the ten
Speaker 1: years prior after after things started going back up after
Speaker 1: eight and so we have that situation. Then you juxtapose
Speaker 1: that credit growth with savings rates which are plummeting. There
Speaker 1: two point seven of disposable income right now, which is
Speaker 1: the second lowest point in recorded history, with the first
Speaker 1: being two point four in two thousand five, right before
Speaker 1: the housing crisis and so, and that was as of
Speaker 1: Q three two, so we have another quarter of which
Speaker 1: Christmas was abolved with. So you have to imagine people
Speaker 1: were digging in their savings to do all their spending.
Speaker 1: And the retail numbers came in this morning and retail
Speaker 1: sales were down one point one percent, which was for Christmas. Yeah,
Speaker 1: which was lower than expected. And so that savings rates
Speaker 1: probably even a bit lower, um than it was in
Speaker 1: Q three two. And then you combine those two and
Speaker 1: add an interest rates. You have credit card rates hitting
Speaker 1: levels around on average. So that signals to me that
Speaker 1: the consumers under an immense amount of stretch stress excuse me.
Speaker 1: They're over extending themselves, going into more debts at the
Speaker 1: same time blowing through their savings. Uh. And obviously prices
Speaker 1: are going up. Food energy, it's leveled off a bit,
Speaker 1: but it seems like wheels going back up. And so
Speaker 1: that was the one sort of theme that I honed
Speaker 1: in on, like, Hey, consumers seem pretty stressed out. They're
Speaker 1: adding more debt at higher rates, although they haven't cut
Speaker 1: their spending no, which is weird, Yes, because uh, people,
Speaker 1: I forget what podcast I was listening to, but um,
Speaker 1: it's like a social psychological thing. Like once you're used
Speaker 1: to getting a new iPhone every eighteen months or getting
Speaker 1: the latest athletic equipment and want to keep doing that.
Speaker 1: It's just like hard. Let go that that tendency in
Speaker 1: the latest CPI day that it just came out. Um,
Speaker 1: the core inflation is very sticky. It's like not budging,
Speaker 1: which kind of shows this consumer is just not stopping spending. No. Yeah, no,
Speaker 1: well the core inflation too. It's like going, you know,
Speaker 1: thinking what they're spending on, like food and then g
Speaker 1: predominantly um, which is your central goods. Yeah, obviously we
Speaker 1: have an egg crisis country right up, which is this
Speaker 1: bird flu. But yeah, people are freaking out about eggs,
Speaker 1: which is something I never thought i'd see. It's weird. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's weird when you know, we have this ranch out
Speaker 1: here and it might be a little t m I
Speaker 1: for the audience. But my daughter was freaking out at
Speaker 1: the time. They were having like a tampon shortage and
Speaker 1: like she was like seeing the news and like all
Speaker 1: these girls are freaking out and she was like freaking out.
Speaker 1: It's like the end of the world for her. You know,
Speaker 1: we have to go stockpile these things, so like seeing
Speaker 1: whether it's eggs or that. Like, I mean, the economy
Speaker 1: is just kind of breaking down, which I want to
Speaker 1: come back to. Okay, So the consumers getting stretched, then
Speaker 1: that's a horrible um position both spending or if say
Speaker 1: saving or credit going up as savings are going down.
Speaker 1: So the consumers getting stretched, it's not cut couldn't spending yet. Um.
Speaker 1: Then we have a couple of other things, right, So
Speaker 1: the used car our markets, So what do you see?
Speaker 1: What are you see in there? Like what are you
Speaker 1: thinking about that? So these are typically used cars, particularly
Speaker 1: like leading indicators of economic stress because people are deciding hey, uh,
Speaker 1: they're either just saying, hey, I need to get rid
Speaker 1: of this car because I don't need it. I can
Speaker 1: take an uber, especially in the uber eyes world, like
Speaker 1: people are weighing their monthly payment verse um just paying
Speaker 1: an uber to get to and from work, which does
Speaker 1: tend to be cheaper, Like I uber to and from
Speaker 1: here usually met my wife have one car, and it's
Speaker 1: definitely cheaper than our car payment over the course of
Speaker 1: the month, especially when you had in parking and all
Speaker 1: the other stuff. Yeah, exactly, And so that market's career
Speaker 1: but it's it's down. It was down, had like the
Speaker 1: largest monthly decline in December. But you also have to
Speaker 1: take an account that also had this roaring bull market
Speaker 1: after when people moved out of the city as they said, Hey,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna live in the suburbs, I need a car
Speaker 1: if I'm in the suburbs. Uh, and so that sent
Speaker 1: prices of used cars skyrocketing. Another factor of that was
Speaker 1: the supply chains for new cars got completely bored. They
Speaker 1: couldn't find the parts and so you have to supply
Speaker 1: con straight on the new cars. So used car market
Speaker 1: got flooded. But yeah, if you look at I forget
Speaker 1: the exact stats, but the average monthly payment for I
Speaker 1: believe thousand dollars, yeah, for of used car owners, UM,
Speaker 1: which is pretty high, uh, for your average consumer. And
Speaker 1: then on top of that, the probably I didn't include
Speaker 1: it in the newsletter, but I saw the stat this morning. Um,
Speaker 1: the sixty day delinquency rate for used cars is up
Speaker 1: year on year. And so there's delinquency rates When people
Speaker 1: stop paying their bills, that's usually an indicator that they
Speaker 1: can't and they're in economic stress. And so that wasn't
Speaker 1: included in that particular newsletter, but it's a stat I
Speaker 1: saw this morning, year on year, sixty day delinquacies up,
Speaker 1: which is a pretty material increase. I have a buddy
Speaker 1: who runs the auto auctions in California, and I was
Speaker 1: talking to just this last weekend, and um, he said
Speaker 1: that there's still a lot of action, but he has
Speaker 1: seen a lot of weakness, and especially the luxury car marks.
Speaker 1: The g wagons specifically have taken like a massive hit. Um.
Speaker 1: Some of that is a lot of these cars were
Speaker 1: going fifty thousand a hundred thousand over sticker, which is insane, insane.
Speaker 1: I mean, we looked at when we bought our car
Speaker 1: that we have. We brought it in June, right we
Speaker 1: left the city. We were in New York. We left
Speaker 1: early March, pretty early, and then we were living excuse me,
Speaker 1: we're living down the shore and needed a car, and
Speaker 1: so we went we bought a used car. Um locked
Speaker 1: in like a four percent interest rate. It was like
Speaker 1: twenty two grand. It was like the best time to
Speaker 1: get in because we checked prices like a year later.
Speaker 1: In our car, even with all the miles we put
Speaker 1: on it, what have sold for like the DeGrand um
Speaker 1: an they used car um. And so another thing to
Speaker 1: fact interest rates coming to this story as well. The
Speaker 1: average interest rate on these used cars is temper set
Speaker 1: as well. Um. And when you think a quarter of
Speaker 1: these used car owners are paying a thousand dollars a
Speaker 1: month plus that temper cent interest rate. I've seen a
Speaker 1: lot of people talking about the the used car market.
Speaker 1: I've seen changes in lending standards where they're being much
Speaker 1: more relaxed, which is a problem because they're just trying
Speaker 1: to get units out the door, which again shows the
Speaker 1: consumers stress, the credit the money is not there. And
Speaker 1: and for sure it's like a leading indicator to the
Speaker 1: point that you made, But do you think it really
Speaker 1: poses a systemic threat to the rest of the economy.
Speaker 1: I don't think they used car market particularly right. I
Speaker 1: don't think like an implosion of used cars of the economy.
Speaker 1: It's just an indicator that hey, there's some sex subsection
Speaker 1: of the economy that's under stress, is either dumping these
Speaker 1: cars or not buying them because they can't afford them. Yeah.
Speaker 1: And then we have the real estate market you covered,
Speaker 1: which I think goes into the layoffs. You said, yes,
Speaker 1: uh so that's particularly with the reats, the non tradeable rates.
Speaker 1: Blackstone had their sixty nine billion dollar reat fund that
Speaker 1: they UH curb redemptions two in November. They've recently got
Speaker 1: a capital injection from the University California system of four
Speaker 1: billion dollars, so I think that's back open. But then
Speaker 1: there was a star Wood Asset Management also curb redemptions
Speaker 1: to their sixteen billion dollar UH non tradeable rate and
Speaker 1: their explanation for why their investors were pulling money out
Speaker 1: because they had a stellar U two and they were
Speaker 1: taking profits. But I think, UH, like, especially in this market,
Speaker 1: you want to like people are scared. They people are scared,
Speaker 1: they want their money UM. And even though these reds
Speaker 1: performed really well the last couple of years, signals to
Speaker 1: me that if these types of investors are pulling their
Speaker 1: money out of that first, it's for a reason. And
Speaker 1: these rates typically invest in commercial real estate UM here
Speaker 1: in the United States and UM post lockdowns UM. And
Speaker 1: now with these tech layoffs going on, like the market
Speaker 1: for commercial real estate it's seeming pretty bearish because people
Speaker 1: are either working from home or if they are working
Speaker 1: out in an office, A lot of these tech companies
Speaker 1: are beginning to lay off people at an increasing pace,
Speaker 1: especially office space in Silicon Valley for example, right, really bad.
Speaker 1: I was looking at some of the data on Blackstone
Speaker 1: like a week ago. I talked about it in a
Speaker 1: different video. Um, you know, the whole thing with the
Speaker 1: GBTC situation, grace scale, bitcoin trust and that they don't
Speaker 1: really want to unravel that thing because they're making a
Speaker 1: two percent premium on that, which is super healthy. Blackstone
Speaker 1: makes three point six percent. They're charging three. They're making
Speaker 1: was it two billion dollars a year or something like that,
Speaker 1: right to to three point six on sixty eight billion
Speaker 1: whatever that was or something like that. I'm sorry, I
Speaker 1: can't do math on the top of my head. Um, Austin,
Speaker 1: what is that three point six of sixty billion? Anyway? Um?
Speaker 1: And uh it's even more murky so um. Just on
Speaker 1: a little side note, but they don't mark to market
Speaker 1: their assets, so it's all controlled internally, and internally they
Speaker 1: set the valuation of what their assets are. It's a
Speaker 1: breat that people invest into and they don't even have
Speaker 1: any say of what assets they buy, so who knows
Speaker 1: what they're even buying and they could be buying junk
Speaker 1: assets and then they're not marked to market. They set
Speaker 1: the valuation, which they're probably keeping artificially high because they're
Speaker 1: making the three point six percent off the back of it.
Speaker 1: That's did you forget what that is? Uh? Probably it's
Speaker 1: probably like some point three billion. It was a lot there.
Speaker 1: Side note, But okay, so back to this. So um,
Speaker 1: those that those are great data points. Um. The the
Speaker 1: economic data is bad, it's really bad. We could talk
Speaker 1: about indicators and it's all looking bad. We have the
Speaker 1: most extreme yield curve we've ever seen in history, which
Speaker 1: tells us the recessions coming. Um, the unemployment number is low,
Speaker 1: but if you dig in the data, it's actually really bad. Um,
Speaker 1: And we can keep going on and on on. They
Speaker 1: don't factoring the participation rate, which is very important, the
Speaker 1: participation rate, which is at its lowest point in history.
Speaker 1: I was trying to do a little research and look
Speaker 1: at when the unemployment rate was this low before and
Speaker 1: what the participation rate, but it was hard to get
Speaker 1: that data. But okay, so we frame it up and
Speaker 1: the economic data is bad. It's really bad, and we're
Speaker 1: hurdling too catastrophe at the rate we're on potentially, Um,
Speaker 1: we can add in a couple more things just real quick. Uh,
Speaker 1: the baby boomers are all retiring. Under the ereset law,
Speaker 1: they were able to invest tax free, but they're forced
Speaker 1: to start cashing in and pay the taxes now when
Speaker 1: they're seventy three or whatever. Um, we have interest rates
Speaker 1: so high that all these corporations aren't gonna be able
Speaker 1: to roll over their debt. And then if they don't,
Speaker 1: if they can't borrow more money, they're not buying back
Speaker 1: their stocks. So they're not buying as the boomers are selling.
Speaker 1: I mean, we can go on the question I have
Speaker 1: is um, so what not not so what? But more?
Speaker 1: What does that mean? So? Um? When if we look
Speaker 1: at uh, what we saw is that the economy does
Speaker 1: not equal the markets. The entire economy was literally shut down.
Speaker 1: It couldn't have been any worse. Businesses were literally put
Speaker 1: out of business, and yet the markets hit all new
Speaker 1: times asset prices, stocks, bonds, real estate, bitcoin, etcetera. So
Speaker 1: when we're looking at the economic data and we're looking
Speaker 1: all these data points, is it so like, Um, what
Speaker 1: does the average listener care? Like, Hey, you better buckle
Speaker 1: down because the economy is gonna get bad, maybe hard
Speaker 1: to make money or for like investing does that matter
Speaker 1: in terms of like asset prices a agree like show
Speaker 1: like the markets do not equal the economy. But the
Speaker 1: key difference between three and is FED policy, right, like
Speaker 1: you have the FED seems pretty dead set on driving
Speaker 1: rates and keeping them there higher than five percent. It
Speaker 1: seems like every other day you have a FED governor
Speaker 1: from some part of the country coming out and saying, yep,
Speaker 1: we're gonna we're gonna raise rates above five and then
Speaker 1: try to keep it there through the rest of the year.
Speaker 1: So I think that's the number one factor that would
Speaker 1: lead to a different outcome than where you shut down
Speaker 1: the economy, UH, lowered rates, print a bunch of money
Speaker 1: at a government stimulus on top of that, and people
Speaker 1: simply a more disposable income that they weren't spending as
Speaker 1: they were traveling to and from work and hanging out
Speaker 1: and weren't able to go to bars, going to movies,
Speaker 1: good all that. UM. So I think that's different today
Speaker 1: where the interest rates part really could bring markets in
Speaker 1: the economy closer to UM sort of like markets the economy,
Speaker 1: markets in the economy, UH could be accurately reflected together
Speaker 1: instead of this disconnection that we had in Yeah, Yeah,
Speaker 1: the Fed. The FED wants to crush demand. So they
Speaker 1: want to crush the economy because they want people to
Speaker 1: be broke so they don't keep spending so much money.
Speaker 1: So maybe they're saying, hey, we're doing a good job.
Speaker 1: I guess we're Larry Summers come out. I mean he's
Speaker 1: not officially associated with the Federal Reserve anymore, but I
Speaker 1: mean he was on CNBC a few weeks ago sitting
Speaker 1: on a beach saying, yeah, we need to uh, we
Speaker 1: need to drive chop loss here so that we can
Speaker 1: lower prices and the economy on a solid base. And
Speaker 1: that is a very scary thing that people need to
Speaker 1: hear again. So we're gonna repeat that again. So they
Speaker 1: want to crush demand by making you pour so you
Speaker 1: don't buy as much stuff. They're trying to do that
Speaker 1: to get CPI down to the two to three percent range,
Speaker 1: but they also want to get unemployment up to five
Speaker 1: They want more people to lose their jobs. Yeah, the Fed,
Speaker 1: it's pretty evil. I mean, the Fed won't come out
Speaker 1: and say it. They need a proxy member like Larry
Speaker 1: Summers to come out and say what everybody knows they're
Speaker 1: trying to do. Um, But Yeah, when you think about it,
Speaker 1: just highlights the insanity in the perverse nature of FED policy,
Speaker 1: like they really only care about these numbers and not
Speaker 1: the well being of individuals. At the end of the day,
Speaker 1: they've created this Frankenstein monster that they sort of lost
Speaker 1: control of, and so they're trying to get control of
Speaker 1: this monster, and they're willing to do that at the
Speaker 1: expense of your everyday American. I mean, it's to come
Speaker 1: out and say, we need more people to lose their
Speaker 1: job and high wages is a problem for them. They
Speaker 1: need people to make less money because high wages drives inflation. Yes, exactly,
Speaker 1: I mean, come on, insanity. Um. But I had said
Speaker 1: out there before we came in that I think this
Speaker 1: year could be better, and I was specifically talking about
Speaker 1: asset prices. Um. Then most people think. And the reason
Speaker 1: why I'm shifting my thinking a little bit, I don't
Speaker 1: know if you saw it just happened this week. The
Speaker 1: BLS came and said they're gonna change the way they
Speaker 1: calculate cp I. So again again right, they've done it
Speaker 1: multiple times using shadow Stats. Well, the lightest CPI rating
Speaker 1: was six point five percent. Shadow Stats says we're a
Speaker 1: fifteen point six percent if you go back to how
Speaker 1: they calculate in the eighties. So now they're going to
Speaker 1: change the way they calculate CPI, and instead of looking
Speaker 1: at a two year average of the comparables of the
Speaker 1: comp it's going to be just one year, which is
Speaker 1: the last year, which was the highest inflation we've ever had,
Speaker 1: So you measure from there, it comes down. And so
Speaker 1: even if inflation stays flat from here, which we're trending
Speaker 1: down pretty quickly right now, but let's just say it's
Speaker 1: a look at the economy, it's probably gonna trend not
Speaker 1: even faster, but assuming it just stays flat, by the
Speaker 1: end of Q one will be in the three percent range. Yeah.
Speaker 1: But again so yeah, they're just manipulating the base from
Speaker 1: which they calculate inflation. Even though inflation has come down.
Speaker 1: One thing that everybody has to consider is, like going
Speaker 1: back to last year, inflation started running hot through the
Speaker 1: summer and through or towards like the fall, started climbing
Speaker 1: up and then um all the way through. And so
Speaker 1: even though yes, the inflation rate has come down like
Speaker 1: six five percent, that's still growing on a bigger base
Speaker 1: that was still going to last year and still going up.
Speaker 1: And even if it is only six and a half percent,
Speaker 1: six and a half percent, inflation is still very high. One,
Speaker 1: it's really fifteen and a half percent exactly. For if
Speaker 1: you're using the FEDS manipulated metrics, I mean, their target
Speaker 1: historically has been two percent. They've been teasing like they're
Speaker 1: going to raise that up to four percent. But even
Speaker 1: if it's four percent, you're still, um, they're still well
Speaker 1: above it, to and a half percent above your target.
Speaker 1: So um. The reason why I would want to kind
Speaker 1: of make that distinction between the economy and the mark
Speaker 1: gets And then now looking at this if if they
Speaker 1: can magically are not magically through changing the way they calculate,
Speaker 1: it could get CPI down to three pc by the
Speaker 1: end of Q one. That gives them all the political
Speaker 1: cover they need to be easy. And again, yes, yes,
Speaker 1: it does, definitely does, and maybe that's the intention behind
Speaker 1: the manipulation of the CPI number. But I also think
Speaker 1: we need to zoom out a bit and realize that
Speaker 1: the US economy, yes it's the largest economy in the world,
Speaker 1: but we're not in a bubble. There are some uh
Speaker 1: sort of negative externalities that can come from outside the US,
Speaker 1: particularly Japan right now, which I think is a canary
Speaker 1: in the coal mine that could throw a wrench in
Speaker 1: any plans in the Federal Reserve might have because the
Speaker 1: Bank of Japan is having a pretty hard time successfully
Speaker 1: controlling their yield curve and they said they're gonna they
Speaker 1: said they may abandon it. Yeah, And they're larger center
Speaker 1: of U S treasuries in the world. They they own
Speaker 1: half of their their bond market, and I think they
Speaker 1: own a lot of their stock market as well. UM
Speaker 1: And I think that's why I'm more cautious going to
Speaker 1: this year again. I think the economic data here in
Speaker 1: the US looks pretty pissed poor, and then like an
Speaker 1: even scarier prospect is this negative externality coming from somewhere
Speaker 1: like Japan or um if Europe, I mean the UK
Speaker 1: got into a pension crisis not too long ago as well.
Speaker 1: There there's like these events that we're not really aware of.
Speaker 1: They can just pop up, and it's like that Mike
Speaker 1: Tyson uh quote. Everybody has a planned to get punched
Speaker 1: in the face. And I think it could be Japan,
Speaker 1: could be Europe, it could be somewhere else. But I
Speaker 1: think there there's somebody crouching behind the low in the
Speaker 1: bush waiting to punch global markets in the face. By
Speaker 1: the way, the first interview I in my new studio
Speaker 1: in person was with Mike Tyson, and I asked the
Speaker 1: first question I asked him was did you really say that?
Speaker 1: And I quoted it and he said yeah. I said
Speaker 1: that it wasn't that good of an interview, Um was,
Speaker 1: he hid? Yeah, it was. It was a big Yeah,
Speaker 1: it was. It was pretty difficult. I think that. And
Speaker 1: he was eating mushrooms at the same time, and it
Speaker 1: was like it was like it was like sitting across
Speaker 1: the table from like a caged lion, except where he
Speaker 1: didn't have the chain one. You know, you don't want
Speaker 1: to you don't want to piss. And I was like
Speaker 1: and I and I kind of did. I kind of
Speaker 1: like digging into questions and he was like, okay, So anyway,
Speaker 1: it wasn't my best interview, but anyway I did. I
Speaker 1: did ask him that question. Um, you had also talked
Speaker 1: about what's going on with the bricks nations and even
Speaker 1: Saudi Arabia and the Petro dollar, and so that also
Speaker 1: throws a massive wrench, right, So the FED can control
Speaker 1: who's in their system. But if there's these other people
Speaker 1: moving into the other system, then they lose control over that. Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1: I mean so this, I have a tag on my
Speaker 1: website called oil wars, and we started writing about this
Speaker 1: in September seventeen. This issue isn't hasn't made it on
Speaker 1: the website yet. I'm still going back and adding all
Speaker 1: the previous issues I wrote before transitioning to ghosts. But
Speaker 1: in September it was the first time I spoke of
Speaker 1: these oil wars. And at the time, China it was
Speaker 1: simply expressing its intent where it's wish to UH to
Speaker 1: denominate their oil trades in Yuan with Saudi Arabia, and
Speaker 1: at the time nobody really thought much of it. It
Speaker 1: was just like China saying, like, we we'd like to
Speaker 1: settle this in Yuan, and nobody thought it was a
Speaker 1: real possibility. Fast forward the last two years, obviously Russia,
Speaker 1: Ukraine and the sanctions that came with it have really
Speaker 1: um shown to the bricks nations, specifically that the US
Speaker 1: can weaponize the dollar system swift and even UH confiscate
Speaker 1: central bank reserves from these countries. And so I think
Speaker 1: that's accelerated a move toward a decay in the Petriot
Speaker 1: dollar system when and this is really accelerated particularly in
Speaker 1: the last six weeks when UH President g went to
Speaker 1: Saudi Arabia and had a meeting with them, with the
Speaker 1: Prince of Saudi Arabia and other GCC members. UH and
Speaker 1: at the end of that meeting expressed that yes, we're
Speaker 1: gonna strengthen our relationship with Saudi Arabia, We're gonna begin
Speaker 1: buying more oil from them, and on top of that,
Speaker 1: we're gonna settle these trades and you want. We've set
Speaker 1: up this four x exchange in Beijing. I believe hinjen
Speaker 1: um that is going to allow us to facilitate these
Speaker 1: oil trades in Yuan UM and then you fast forwards. Yesterday,
Speaker 1: UM at the Alvas, representative from Saudi Arabia was interviewed
Speaker 1: by Bloomberg and he came out basically confirmed, Yes, we're
Speaker 1: gonna strengthen our relationship with China and we're gonna do
Speaker 1: you Wan settled oil trades. But on top of that,
Speaker 1: we're open to doing a settlement in other currencies as wealth.
Speaker 1: We can do it in euros, we can do it
Speaker 1: in real UM and so that signals that the US
Speaker 1: dollar reserve system is beginning to be significantly threatened, because
Speaker 1: that is what really gives the dollar a lot of
Speaker 1: its strength is the fact that all these countries have
Speaker 1: to go they buy will from Saudi Arabia converted at
Speaker 1: the dollars, and that drives demand for the dollar. And
Speaker 1: it seems like pretty quickly that is not going to
Speaker 1: be the situation anymore. Um. And then when you factor
Speaker 1: in that China's opening back up, our economy is still growing, um,
Speaker 1: it could becoming a significant buyer of oil from Saudi Arabia,
Speaker 1: and it gives Saudi Arabia the ability to be like, hey,
Speaker 1: the United States, thank you for the decades of an
Speaker 1: incredible relationship. The Petris tear dollar system worked well, it did,
Speaker 1: but we're we're we have a lot more buyers and
Speaker 1: we're gonna we're gonna appease them as well. Yeah. So
Speaker 1: you have this fractured sort of oil trade. Do you
Speaker 1: see the world continuing to fracture in this way? I
Speaker 1: continue to move into a multipolar world? Um? I think
Speaker 1: so yeah, not just the bricks, but maybe even into
Speaker 1: smaller factions. Oh yeah, bricks, I mean you can even
Speaker 1: here in the United States, I think we're we're sort
Speaker 1: of having a a multi polar union, if you will,
Speaker 1: states like Texas, Florida. You have the secession movement up
Speaker 1: in Idaho and Oregon that's been getting some steam. I think,
Speaker 1: I think that it's gonna be the big trend in
Speaker 1: the next couple of decades. Is uh, like at different scales,
Speaker 1: going local, whether it's in a particular region of the
Speaker 1: world or even a particular region of the United States.
Speaker 1: And so then if if the world continues to break apart,
Speaker 1: trust is continue to break down, Um, the dollar, which
Speaker 1: has been the most trusted system, which isn't really trust
Speaker 1: it anymore. To your point, Um, if Russia gets their
Speaker 1: FIC reserve sees the mean, what chances anybody else have Exactly?
Speaker 1: So you think that really opens up the door for
Speaker 1: a new form of payment settlement. I think so in
Speaker 1: the long run, if we focus particularly onlike these oil
Speaker 1: trades and using different currencies to settle that. I mean,
Speaker 1: I do think bitcoin is perfectly suited for all these trades.
Speaker 1: From a mechanical and engineering perspective. It's a peer to
Speaker 1: peer distributed network that allows you to make transactions with
Speaker 1: the counterpart that you may not trust your trusting let's
Speaker 1: distributing that big piece, right, You're not trusting that the
Speaker 1: US won't take your money or say they're holding your
Speaker 1: money and just not give it to you. You can't
Speaker 1: do that with bitcoin. So I do think from an
Speaker 1: engineering perspective, it's perfect to facilitate these types of trades. However,
Speaker 1: I do things there will be interim period where you
Speaker 1: have the sort of fractured markets where the Chinese are
Speaker 1: setting you on, maybe the Europeans defect from the US
Speaker 1: and they decide they want to settle in euros and
Speaker 1: then go on down the line. Um. And that's simply
Speaker 1: because bitcoin doesn't have a liquidity profile at the moment
Speaker 1: too um to facilitate oil trade on the magnitude that
Speaker 1: would be necessary, um Like, there will be a lot
Speaker 1: of slippage and stuff like that right now, especially if
Speaker 1: they're just using bitcoin as a rail on the knee
Speaker 1: automatically liquidate on the other end. Um. I do think
Speaker 1: when bitcoin gets to a multi trillion dollar market, uh,
Speaker 1: the facilitation of those types of trade settlements will will
Speaker 1: be better. And then also I think if bitcoin does
Speaker 1: get to that market, it signals that all these FI
Speaker 1: currencies are being debased pretty heavily, and so people are
Speaker 1: adopting bitcoin, um, And at that point that's when it
Speaker 1: fled ups because, Uh, the slip at you would have
Speaker 1: using a field currency to buy oil would be larger
Speaker 1: than the slippet that you would incur using bitcoin because
Speaker 1: Bitcoin would be more stable at that point. Yeah, you
Speaker 1: mentioned liquidity and like that's kind of like the big thing, right,
Speaker 1: So it's like, um, people want to trade in dollars
Speaker 1: because they can use dollars anywhere in the world. And
Speaker 1: I guess I could trade with China now and they
Speaker 1: could pay me in yuan because I could just buy
Speaker 1: stuff from China back and you want. But I probably
Speaker 1: wouldn't be able to buy stuff from other countries in yuan.
Speaker 1: Or maybe some might take it because they know they
Speaker 1: need trade with China. But why would I take a
Speaker 1: smaller known currency the Turkish lira? What am I? What
Speaker 1: am I gonna do with the Turkish lira? Right? Or
Speaker 1: bitcoin for that example, right, So we needed to have
Speaker 1: more liquidity, more acceptance globally for them people to be
Speaker 1: able to receive it like Russian ruble, Like we only
Speaker 1: take Russian rouble and they're getting paid in Russian ruble,
Speaker 1: but what are they going to do with those rubles? No,
Speaker 1: one's god not take them. So like you can get
Speaker 1: paid in bitcoin, but you need someone else to take
Speaker 1: those bitcoin from you. Exactly right. Yes, we need more adoption.
Speaker 1: And as funny as it's not even a chicken and
Speaker 1: egg problem, it's just like a it's an evolution. Evolution, yeah,
Speaker 1: where people get more familiar with it, it gets bedded
Speaker 1: into more merchant systems, which is happening, gets embedded into
Speaker 1: more balance sheets as a as an inflation, they're not
Speaker 1: inflation hedge park where you yell at me for saying
Speaker 1: that as a means store wealth over time. But yeah,
Speaker 1: I think we're just going through the evolution. Really, fourteen
Speaker 1: years into this bit, Quinn is still extremely young. Um,
Speaker 1: there's still a lot of infrastructure be built out. But
Speaker 1: I do think slowly but shortly over time, it's all
Speaker 1: gonna come. Yeah. Let's uh, well, let's park that and
Speaker 1: let's jump to a couple of other things and we'll
Speaker 1: come back and tie that together. So you've been talking
Speaker 1: about on your Twitter feed the weft, the weapon. The
Speaker 1: weft is meeting Um, Klaus Schwab called out for everyone,
Speaker 1: all the people to come in master the future. That
Speaker 1: was his call. We need to master the future. So
Speaker 1: these people have this grand plan, the the global business
Speaker 1: leaders and influencers, etcetera. Right, Um, have you been paying
Speaker 1: attention to that at all? Yeah, I've been following along
Speaker 1: this week because these people have been getting on stage
Speaker 1: and word vomiting all over the world. It's very creepy.
Speaker 1: Any uh, any any new plans that they have that
Speaker 1: you've seen that are different than what we already kind
Speaker 1: of know about. I think one of the people aren't
Speaker 1: aware of is the intent more than than The World
Speaker 1: Economic Forum is starting to put out this narrative that
Speaker 1: it is essential to prevent um cybercrimes from happening happening,
Speaker 1: that that we emerge the banking sector with the intelligence
Speaker 1: agencies so that um, you sort of roll them up
Speaker 1: into one entity that's able to manage the monetary side
Speaker 1: of things and the financial side of things and the
Speaker 1: surveillance side of things. So that is one very wearing
Speaker 1: narrative that's coming out of the World Economic Forum. So
Speaker 1: still kind of beating the drum on the cyber pandemic.
Speaker 1: The potential dangers of this cyber crimes or whatever um
Speaker 1: and then introducing new suggestions of how they could fix that,
Speaker 1: which of course is more control. And it's a private
Speaker 1: public partnership and you get the private banks and they
Speaker 1: the intelligence agencies represent the public and you just partner
Speaker 1: of them together, which is incredibly scary thought experiment to
Speaker 1: go down, because, I mean, the intelligence agencies, I think
Speaker 1: are some of the most evil yeah entities on the world.
Speaker 1: I mean, the CIA just don't even think that's debatable. No,
Speaker 1: I mean it just came out. They just admitted that
Speaker 1: they kill JFK. What about m ok m Okay. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the FBI is out there tweeting we want to honor
Speaker 1: m Okay. Uh. They were threatening to and they were
Speaker 1: telling him to kill himself, and many people think they
Speaker 1: were part of his murder. The CIA was started by
Speaker 1: it was startup seated with Nazis. Like when we started
Speaker 1: the CIA, we pulled out all the Nazi scientists and
Speaker 1: engineers and they started their psychological warfare. Every thing's like
Speaker 1: Operation Paper Click, mocking Bird, MK Ultra and these are
Speaker 1: all people are like, oh, that's a conspiracy theory, Like no,
Speaker 1: this is all FOIA. This is all information you get
Speaker 1: from a FOIA requests, like it's all out there, and
Speaker 1: then you have the FBI. I was like watching videos
Speaker 1: of ray apps yesterday. It's like this guy work for
Speaker 1: the FBI is like everybody get in the capital. Like
Speaker 1: that was an obvious intelligence agency run called a false flag.
Speaker 1: The FBI is notorious for entrapment. These people don't want
Speaker 1: to protect you, They want to incite you to give
Speaker 1: up your rights. That Gretchen Whitmeyer can apping plot for
Speaker 1: the governor and like half of the people involved were
Speaker 1: all like government agencies. Yeah, like they were all entrapping
Speaker 1: each other. It's I mean insanity. Um I was, I
Speaker 1: was telling these guys earlier today. Um how when I
Speaker 1: was a kid, because I'm old. When I was a kid,
Speaker 1: there was the Iran Contra all over North was you know,
Speaker 1: brought under the Reagan administration whatever, and um the Iran
Speaker 1: contra deal was they were taking drugs from El Salvador,
Speaker 1: flying him to Los Angeles, selling the cocaine in the streets,
Speaker 1: getting people hooked on crack, taking the cash given it
Speaker 1: to Iran, buying weapons and then bringing the weapons back
Speaker 1: to overthrow the government and in Costa Rica. We were
Speaker 1: down there a month ago and they have one of
Speaker 1: the planes crashed in Costa Rica and they've turned it
Speaker 1: into like a restaurant now, and even go there and
Speaker 1: they have the whole story there and it's like this
Speaker 1: is all document, it's all on the open, like everybody
Speaker 1: knows this. Yeah, that's then you get into this whole.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is something I haven't really been paying
Speaker 1: attention to it, which is highlights the hypocrisy of these agencies,
Speaker 1: which is the classified documents where um Trump had some.
Speaker 1: I didn't even die deep into that, but he had some.
Speaker 1: His house got rated. It was a whole big story.
Speaker 1: And we find out Joe Biden has some and it's
Speaker 1: like that's whatever, like it was a mistake, and there's
Speaker 1: very Do you think it's all whatever or do you
Speaker 1: think they're setting him up to get him out because
Speaker 1: he said he was going to run again, and I
Speaker 1: don't want him run again. I mean, he can't run again.
Speaker 1: He can't think, he can't speak, you can't walk, you
Speaker 1: should not be president. It would not surprise me if
Speaker 1: that's their intention either. But then it's a weird place
Speaker 1: where if they try to get him out before you
Speaker 1: have Kamala Harris, who's just walking incompetent yeah bolt Yeah.
Speaker 1: So um, getting back to the big WEFT meeting that
Speaker 1: was going on, so master the future, um, the cyber
Speaker 1: pandemic um. I was looking at a list of like
Speaker 1: topics that they were going to discuss, and one was
Speaker 1: about the next pandemic. How to prepare or prevent like
Speaker 1: the next pandemic from happening, um, Which might seem reasonable
Speaker 1: to some people if they don't understand what's just happened. Um,
Speaker 1: But how do you prevent the next pandemic? How about
Speaker 1: you don't create bioweapons, bioweapons, using't gain a function. That's
Speaker 1: a pretty that's a pretty good start. Yeah. Um. What
Speaker 1: about have you seen these fifteen minutes cities? Oh yes,
Speaker 1: I mean the Netherlands is ground zero for this, where
Speaker 1: they're taking all the farm land um and trying to
Speaker 1: create these I forget what they're calling them, at these
Speaker 1: cities where everything you'll ever need in your life is
Speaker 1: within fifteen minutes within walking the king. Um. Yeah, it's scary.
Speaker 1: It's again like going back to WEFT in Davis this week,
Speaker 1: they're still leading into the climate crisis, which doesn't exist.
Speaker 1: They're they're using it as a fair tactic to try
Speaker 1: to coerce people to y be like all right, I
Speaker 1: think the Netherland's thing. They're telling his farmers to give
Speaker 1: up their farmland because of because of the I believe
Speaker 1: it's signed up to that there. Yeah, the cows, Well,
Speaker 1: was the fertilizer too much fertilizers being used, which I've
Speaker 1: looked into that a little bit. And uh, because we
Speaker 1: live in a complex system, central planners messed everything up
Speaker 1: when they try to fix one thing that creates all
Speaker 1: these unengineed consequences. And because of rule changes they placed
Speaker 1: in the EU, it pushed all the cows and farming
Speaker 1: to the Netherlands, so it all got concentrated there. So
Speaker 1: the reason why there's so much there is because of
Speaker 1: previous rule changes that that took it from a decentralized
Speaker 1: state where it was all spread out across the countrysides
Speaker 1: like I should be, and it pushed it all into
Speaker 1: the one little area. UM. And now they're trying to go,
Speaker 1: well now we have now we've created another problem to
Speaker 1: go solve that UM and the Netherlands I believe is
Speaker 1: like the top exporter of like food. Yeah right, so
Speaker 1: like um, the u N says eight hundred and sixty
Speaker 1: eight million, almost a billion people could potentially starved to
Speaker 1: death in the next twenty four months. We have the
Speaker 1: largest exporter of food in Europe and they want to
Speaker 1: shut them down. It's makes disgusting and they're in their
Speaker 1: justification for it doesn't make any sense of the whole
Speaker 1: carbon emissions boogeyman uh narrative is disgusting. And then with
Speaker 1: the cows, they use methane um. But if you actually
Speaker 1: look like the composition of the atmosphere, yes, methane is
Speaker 1: a heavier greenhouse gas, but if you look at its
Speaker 1: overall composition of the gases in the atmosphere, it's minuscule, minuscule.
Speaker 1: Even though we're adding all this methane, it's not really
Speaker 1: doing anything to affect it's not taking anything in decomposing grass.
Speaker 1: Emits methane decomposing grass on its own, and the cows
Speaker 1: eat the gas and then they break it down. Even
Speaker 1: more so, we got the weft um potential cyber pandemics
Speaker 1: potentially putting in like I d S and basically taking
Speaker 1: away like anonymous use of the internet. Yes, um, potentially
Speaker 1: health pandemics that they're planning for or somehow or another. Um.
Speaker 1: There were some European representatives laughing at a at a
Speaker 1: US representative of all one of the stages they were
Speaker 1: on saying, Hey, you guys are gonna have to enact
Speaker 1: hate crimes and curb speech in the US. Soon enough,
Speaker 1: it will come. You guys are gonna do it. Um,
Speaker 1: So a tax on free speech, you're can add that
Speaker 1: to it. Klaus Schwab was telling everybody that we're all
Speaker 1: gonna have chips in our head. Um, it's a pretty
Speaker 1: if you think of everything. It's scary that you can
Speaker 1: put in one dystopian novel. They're trying to check all
Speaker 1: the boxes. Now, UM, I love your worldview on this
Speaker 1: because you see all this and you I mean you
Speaker 1: see it, you're not naive to it. But at the
Speaker 1: same time, you tweet all the time like we will win. Yes,
Speaker 1: we're gonna win. So explain that I think. I mean,
Speaker 1: I focus on bitcoin specifically, and that's what we have
Speaker 1: right out here in front of the studios. Fix the money,
Speaker 1: fix the world. I think a lot of the problems,
Speaker 1: uh that we're describing right now emanate from the fact
Speaker 1: that we've broken the money. Um, we need to fix
Speaker 1: the money. We need to fix the way we allocate capital.
Speaker 1: We need to fix opportunity costs. The ability to print
Speaker 1: money is completely perturbed opportunity costs and led to this
Speaker 1: misallocation of capital, and the people that have control of
Speaker 1: the money printing right now are allocating that capital towards
Speaker 1: these dystopian use cases that we're we're describing, um and
Speaker 1: so like the government's printing a bunch of money and
Speaker 1: then giving them to these organizations. I saw the Uh,
Speaker 1: I'm drawn a blank on the guy's name. They're subsidizing Carpon.
Speaker 1: He just put together a bill to stop funding the
Speaker 1: w h O for example. So that's kind of what
Speaker 1: you're talking about. Should definitely do that. Defund NATO, defund
Speaker 1: all that. But yeah, go backin. We're gonna win because
Speaker 1: bitcoin exists. But if we, if we, if we had
Speaker 1: to fix money supply that they couldn't artificially create, then
Speaker 1: they wouldn't have this money to give to these organizations. Exactly,
Speaker 1: you have to that have to actually work hard for
Speaker 1: it and provide valuable services that people are willing to
Speaker 1: pay for. And then um, they could try to allocate
Speaker 1: that money that way, but it would just get UM
Speaker 1: driven out of office because it would prove to be
Speaker 1: in this allocation of capital yet again. But yeah, and
Speaker 1: I think since bitcoin exists, I've been around for almost
Speaker 1: ten years now, which is hard to believe. And even
Speaker 1: though we're down around twenty dollars, we've had a lot
Speaker 1: of punches to the face and the form of a
Speaker 1: degenerate industry in the crypto space. Really giving bitcoin to
Speaker 1: block black eye, uh, stay of the protocol is never
Speaker 1: been better. Um, more adoption than ever, more people self
Speaker 1: custoding bitcoin than ever. Uh. And you have to bitcoin.
Speaker 1: I tweeted this out the other day, Like bitcoin is
Speaker 1: just extremely reliable. You know, it's going to produce a
Speaker 1: block of transactions that are produced and a peer to
Speaker 1: peer fashion that don't uh or censorship resistant roughly every
Speaker 1: ten minutes. And that reliability and a world full of
Speaker 1: all this chaos is a godsend, Like and I don't
Speaker 1: think people are pricing in that reliability yet. And then
Speaker 1: on top of that, I think from a distribution standpoint
Speaker 1: of the actual nodes in the network, the mining of
Speaker 1: the network has gotten a little bit concentrated here in Texas.
Speaker 1: But UM, I think overall it is significantly more distributed
Speaker 1: than it was let's say five years ago. UM. And
Speaker 1: I think every day the bitcoin survives, keeps producing blocks,
Speaker 1: keeps producing, the miners, keep producing hashes, it just gets
Speaker 1: harder and harder to shut bitcoin down. Then on top
Speaker 1: of that, it's growing in mind share as well. Um,
Speaker 1: there's more engineers coming to bit on the networks and
Speaker 1: more cool things that you can build on second layers,
Speaker 1: like Lightning network. And this is just enabling this value
Speaker 1: transfer and these types of applications that have never been
Speaker 1: possible and really enable the individual to get away from
Speaker 1: all this crazy and to win. Because I mean, the
Speaker 1: you know'll tried and true trope is like, oh, just vote,
Speaker 1: if you vote, just vote harder and you'll get out
Speaker 1: of this. And that, my opinion, is never gonna work.
Speaker 1: We need to go build this system outside of the
Speaker 1: FIAT system and then we can then begin fixing things
Speaker 1: from there. And then on top of that, you just
Speaker 1: have just the sovereign movements, more people buying ranches, spinning
Speaker 1: up farms, and getting more in touch with homeschooling, UM,
Speaker 1: school choice. Those trends are growing. Uh. And then again,
Speaker 1: you have here in the States, this trend of individual
Speaker 1: states asserting their autonomy against the federal government and against
Speaker 1: black rock against black was it I think Missouri, Florida, Mississippi,
Speaker 1: six states and invested their money. Yeah, billions of dollars um,
Speaker 1: which is good to see. And still obviously you have
Speaker 1: like the NBC archetype which is still doubling and tripling
Speaker 1: down on there their love of authority. Yeah, and that's
Speaker 1: growing as well. But I think the sovereign trend is
Speaker 1: growing faster and stronger than than it has in many decades. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I agree. You know. It's. Um. The reason why I
Speaker 1: kind of want to jump to this and we put
Speaker 1: a pin on that kind of adoption piece. Um, the
Speaker 1: road to evolution we're calling it, is just because as humans,
Speaker 1: we only move when we only react when the pain's
Speaker 1: high enough. I've gone to chiropractic most of my life.
Speaker 1: I believe in the chiropractic and that our body should
Speaker 1: be aligned. Um, but I typically only go when I'm
Speaker 1: in pain. I'm busy otherwise, right, um, And so like,
Speaker 1: the pain has to get high enough, and at some
Speaker 1: point the pain is so high that will act um
Speaker 1: from a US centric. You point, it's hard for us
Speaker 1: to get the money situation. But if you're in North
Speaker 1: Korea or in the Congo or in whatever Turkey like you,
Speaker 1: you're watching your money lose a percent of its value.
Speaker 1: Like what, I'll take the risk, right, I'll go into
Speaker 1: something else. But as we talk about the WEF and um,
Speaker 1: what's company with the cyber pandemic, the health pandemic, um,
Speaker 1: all these things, I think it's just gonna keep turning
Speaker 1: that pain dial up and it's only going to accelerate
Speaker 1: the adoption people are going to need constantly and to
Speaker 1: the point of sovereign movement. The sovereign movement is being
Speaker 1: led because there's a need to become a sovereign person, right,
Speaker 1: And as they turn that dial up, more people become sovereign,
Speaker 1: more people will find a bitcoin and so um, I
Speaker 1: guess we have like the S curve, right, Um, so
Speaker 1: the ES curve kind of kind of has this straight
Speaker 1: up and I think we're probably in that period and
Speaker 1: unfortunately the pain dial gets turned up. The good is
Speaker 1: that people wake up and start moving into this in
Speaker 1: this new parallel economy and start building that out. Yeah. No,
Speaker 1: I think the pain dial I mean you mentioned it earlier.
Speaker 1: I think the the combination, well, well, these boomers retiring,
Speaker 1: selling their stocks, and the FED being put and it
Speaker 1: looks like they're going to be put between a rock
Speaker 1: and a hard place where inflation may still be elevated,
Speaker 1: but the economy is doing so bad that they need
Speaker 1: to begin printing money. And if you couple those situations,
Speaker 1: have stocks plumbering because boomers are selling all of it,
Speaker 1: inflation is still high because the supply chains and just
Speaker 1: overall monetary supply growth, and the FED begins printing again
Speaker 1: and then inflation ramps up again. I think that is
Speaker 1: a perfect ship storm to really wake people up and
Speaker 1: feel the pain that will drive them to seek alternatives.
Speaker 1: Like hopefully, if we do get to that point, I
Speaker 1: won't say it's a foregone conclusion, but if that point
Speaker 1: does come, people have to realize. I would imagine that
Speaker 1: the FED doesn't really have control, the government doesn't really
Speaker 1: have control. We need to go seek out alternatives. Who
Speaker 1: has control? Then? You do? Are you as an individual
Speaker 1: we the people? Yeah? Yeah, something I was thinking about
Speaker 1: when I was reading that with Kloup Schwab and he says,
Speaker 1: you know, master the future, and he's calling all these
Speaker 1: business leaders and politicians and influence people to master the future,
Speaker 1: and we need to go create this and we need
Speaker 1: to do this and this is our vision. But it's
Speaker 1: like they didn't ask us, we didn't vote, like who
Speaker 1: are they? Right, and so they wanted to create you
Speaker 1: you you already mentioned it, the public private partnership fascism corporatism.
Speaker 1: So if we get if we get Twitter or Facebook
Speaker 1: to censor people, if we get the banks to not
Speaker 1: fund people, right, if we can get the private businesses
Speaker 1: to work together with the governments, then we can reshape
Speaker 1: the world the way we want without asking our opinion. Right.
Speaker 1: We didn't even bring up to Twitter files where the
Speaker 1: FBI was embedded in twitters headquarters telling them the censor
Speaker 1: and who not to. Yeah, that's a big deal. I
Speaker 1: wanted to ask you about that. Okay, so let's let's
Speaker 1: ask let's let's talk about that for a second. Um
Speaker 1: we can get into Twitter files if you want. I
Speaker 1: was just thinking specifically. Um Must said he wanted to
Speaker 1: buy Twitter to open up free speech. He said that
Speaker 1: he thought it was like for humanity, it was that important.
Speaker 1: It's like the most important thing in humanity or something
Speaker 1: that affect they forget. Um. A lot of people guess
Speaker 1: about his ulterior motives. I made a video his real
Speaker 1: motive was because he's trying to start this new payment
Speaker 1: system and whatever. But anyway, Um, he has opened up
Speaker 1: free speech a lot on Twitter, and it's already seems
Speaker 1: to be reshaping things pretty rapidly. Are you seeing that? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I definitely mean, I definitely see more. Definitely see people
Speaker 1: more comfortable putting out tweets that they probably would not
Speaker 1: have under the last regime. But again, yeah, like he
Speaker 1: has come out and say like we need we're going
Speaker 1: to build like the Wi Bow of the West. And
Speaker 1: I go back and forth with Ellen a trend toward
Speaker 1: I think you might be like a false prophet where
Speaker 1: it's like everybody's like, oh, Ellen, come save us, come
Speaker 1: save free speech. But there's like little things with what
Speaker 1: he's doing to Twitter that makes me raise my eyebrow,
Speaker 1: like the like paying the monthly fee for the blue
Speaker 1: check mark and if you don't pay, uh, you don't
Speaker 1: get as much visibility or engagement. Um, which is interesting.
Speaker 1: And yeah, I think if any I do agree that
Speaker 1: people seem to be speaking more freely on Twitter these days.
Speaker 1: But I don't think we should be dependent on Elon
Speaker 1: sort of waving as one saying you get free speech now.
Speaker 1: We should be building, similar to Bitcoin, alternative communication protocols.
Speaker 1: There's one uh noster that's come out, which is a
Speaker 1: distributed relay system that allows you to build Twitter like
Speaker 1: clients on top of it. And due to how the
Speaker 1: relay system works, it's extremely hard to censor individuals. You
Speaker 1: can connect to many different relays. One individual relay can
Speaker 1: sense for you, um, but the likelihood of all of
Speaker 1: them censoring you is extremely low. You could spin up
Speaker 1: your own and syndicate via your own relay. Um. I
Speaker 1: think that's the solution to the free speech problem today.
Speaker 1: Like I do agree, I think people are speaking more
Speaker 1: freely on Twitter right now. But again I don't. I'm
Speaker 1: not sure what Elon's motives are, but I do think
Speaker 1: they're just like the nagging. I thought my head that
Speaker 1: he could be a false prophet where he was like, oh,
Speaker 1: you're gonna save us and save free speech, and then
Speaker 1: it's just going to turn into dystopian be But like,
Speaker 1: I agree with you somewhat on that, but I think
Speaker 1: for me it's more like, um, we should never race
Speaker 1: somebody up like that and think they're the savior. Um.
Speaker 1: I think there's good things that he's doing, and there's
Speaker 1: probably bad things that he's doing as well. There's certainly
Speaker 1: things I don't agree with, but then I do like
Speaker 1: some of the things that he is doing right, and
Speaker 1: so like it's okay to like I like this good job,
Speaker 1: this is bad right, And so I think that's kind
Speaker 1: of how I see Ellen, Like, um, he wants to
Speaker 1: stick microchips in my brain, Like I'm not down with that. No, No,
Speaker 1: it's like this is the push and poll I have
Speaker 1: with Tesla and SpaceX. Particularly like Tesla, I think it's
Speaker 1: like a green ergy grift. I think a transition to
Speaker 1: a fleet of electric vehicles on global scales a terrible idea.
Speaker 1: Then you look at SpaceX and he's sending rockets up
Speaker 1: the space and the landing them back on these very
Speaker 1: small platforms. You're like, yeah, this is obviously extremely cool
Speaker 1: and definitely an advancement on this rocket tech that's probably
Speaker 1: gonna be necessary. Yeah. Um, so yeah, Ellen confuses me.
Speaker 1: So we don't need but we don't need deatist. And
Speaker 1: I think the same way with politics, like I don't
Speaker 1: know what I am politically, I can't align a percent
Speaker 1: with anything like I pick and choose different things. Right,
Speaker 1: generally I side with more freedom, right and less government.
Speaker 1: I was watching, uh, I was watching Rohnd Santis and
Speaker 1: he came out with this whole speech and he was
Speaker 1: talking about UM, the WEF and how we need to
Speaker 1: crack down on the WEFT. He's trying to do some
Speaker 1: stuff in the state and the CCP, the Communist Chinese Party,
Speaker 1: and we want to ban um the CCP fron be
Speaker 1: able to buy land in Florida, which sounds great. I'm
Speaker 1: I'm for that. We shouldn't allow the comments to by land,
Speaker 1: right except for wait a minute, that means that he's
Speaker 1: going to restrict what I can do with my private property. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't know if weird can undrum right, and so like,
Speaker 1: you have to really think through these issues, especially if
Speaker 1: we're trying to be a men of integrity and um.
Speaker 1: So anyway back to kind of like the Santist there's
Speaker 1: lots of things he's doing that I like some things.
Speaker 1: I think that he is a dictator too. Yeah, and uh,
Speaker 1: same with Elon and Trump and everybody else for that matter, right, Yeah, No,
Speaker 1: and I can see like going back to like Chinese
Speaker 1: buying land or property. UM told me a few years ago,
Speaker 1: like you shouldn't do that, but like, yeah, and there's
Speaker 1: no way we should do that. I know Kyle Bass
Speaker 1: is beating this drum as well. But then like in
Speaker 1: the bitcoin mining industry, after the Chinese exodus, a lot
Speaker 1: of the Chinese miners have come over to the US
Speaker 1: because they want to continue bitcoin mining and the bitcoin
Speaker 1: mining for a reason, because they believe in the ideals
Speaker 1: that bitcoin was founded on on censorship resistant private property rights,
Speaker 1: uh and freedom to transact how you want to. And
Speaker 1: so I've been interacting professionally with a lot of these
Speaker 1: Chinese miners, and we separate the CCP from individual Chinese
Speaker 1: men and women, and um it's it's hard to get's
Speaker 1: mucky right, Yeah. Yeah, these are not easy issues, which
Speaker 1: is why they should be dealt with, I think more
Speaker 1: on an individual basis and not centrally planned you know decisions.
Speaker 1: So taking that and that actually kind of took us
Speaker 1: to where I wanted to go because um, it seems like, um,
Speaker 1: it seems like businesses are the ones that really create
Speaker 1: the change, and that's why they want to have this
Speaker 1: public private PARTSIP. They realize that government politics alone isn't enough.
Speaker 1: We need to get the businesses, the banks, the social media,
Speaker 1: the corporations, cocols that we need them to get involved. Right. Um,
Speaker 1: so a couple of things I think in there so one.
Speaker 1: Um with Twitter going to free speech. Um, it seems
Speaker 1: like to me it's changing things. Like I'm starting to
Speaker 1: see a lot of information spefically on the pandemic and
Speaker 1: trials from Visor and stuff I don't want to say
Speaker 1: because I'm on youtub you here, you can't say the
Speaker 1: stuff on you. It's susan. You gotta end it, right
Speaker 1: and so. But but my point is, so this has
Speaker 1: really opening up on Twitter and Facebook's tanking. Do you
Speaker 1: think Facebook, oh shoot, we better change our policy or
Speaker 1: we're dead in the water. You know, we have to compete.
Speaker 1: We have to compete. But the consumer ones because at
Speaker 1: the end of the consumer does drive someones. And that's
Speaker 1: what I asked you, the question, if they don't have
Speaker 1: the power, who has the power? We have the power? Really,
Speaker 1: the consumer has the power, right at the end of
Speaker 1: the day, the consumer, they want our money, and so
Speaker 1: who's gonna give If we're gonna give more time? And
Speaker 1: attention and they have to serve us. And so Twitter
Speaker 1: broke that seal and hey, look we want freedom or
Speaker 1: freedom of speech or whatever, and now Facebook and YouTube
Speaker 1: are going to have to deal with that. Yeah, especially YouTube,
Speaker 1: I said Susan. I was talking to YouTube ceo CEO.
Speaker 1: Susan was sicky, like I just got I gotta strike on.
Speaker 1: I can't monetize YouTube right now because I had somebody
Speaker 1: on talking about what you're not supposed to talk about,
Speaker 1: which is I've had to not post interviews I've done
Speaker 1: on YouTube and just put them on Rumble and I
Speaker 1: saying I've been doing that in the last couple of
Speaker 1: months because of the strike. But it's it's insane because
Speaker 1: all we were literally just talking about facts that are
Speaker 1: public now and then got back to trust this. Don't
Speaker 1: don't take my channel down. I'm not like talking about
Speaker 1: trust the science. You can talk about particular pure reviewed studies,
Speaker 1: but you can't talk about others or you get kicked off.
Speaker 1: I mean, I know I know what not to say
Speaker 1: to to make sure this gets on YouTube, but yeah,
Speaker 1: at the end of the day, consumer drives it. You're
Speaker 1: going back to We're gonna win. That's I do. Even
Speaker 1: though things are seem dire, the populace here in the
Speaker 1: United States seems a bit complacent, seems a bit degenerate.
Speaker 1: I do think at the end of the day, good
Speaker 1: beats evil, and somewhere down and many most people's stomachs,
Speaker 1: there is this this craving for freedom, for truth, for
Speaker 1: a reality in which people are good to each other.
Speaker 1: And I do think that's beginning to its head. And
Speaker 1: maybe give you lots of props. That is one thing
Speaker 1: we needed to begin changing the tides at the corporate
Speaker 1: level is somebody with the balls to stand up and say, hey, no,
Speaker 1: we're gonna We're gonna bring ed doubt on, We're gonna
Speaker 1: bring Trump back on. We're gonna bring all these conservatives
Speaker 1: who are banned um yeah over the last few years
Speaker 1: and let them have open debate on my platform. And
Speaker 1: then that's how the truth is found. Debate. Consumers flocked there,
Speaker 1: and then, like you said, facebooks, they're out. Damn, we're
Speaker 1: losing people. And if they start adding for more features
Speaker 1: to take more share from Facebook, Facebook's gonna have to respond, right. Um.
Speaker 1: One thing, you're gonna see me really starting to pound
Speaker 1: the table a lot this year On is that this
Speaker 1: is kind of where I'm really starting to push um
Speaker 1: is back to this uh, this um um sovereign thesis
Speaker 1: kind of world or a parallel market world, because this
Speaker 1: is where I just really see the most power we
Speaker 1: have is to affect change through the economy through economic means.
Speaker 1: You had was a vivik On from a Strive asset management, right,
Speaker 1: and he created it. He created a parallel to Black Rock.
Speaker 1: But instead of trying to say we beat them on
Speaker 1: returns or we have better performance or better customer, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: he just had to we serve a different customer with
Speaker 1: different values, right um. And there's examples of this popping
Speaker 1: up all over and I think, Um, we the consumer
Speaker 1: has the power because we have the money. And if
Speaker 1: we start demanding businesses to provocater to us or we
Speaker 1: don't give them our money, then they'll they'll cave. And
Speaker 1: I think there's an even bigger opportunity for entrepreneurs to
Speaker 1: go create all these like Texas Slims done with the
Speaker 1: beef initiative. But I don't know if you've seen bench
Speaker 1: Fare and Daily Wire. He created Jeremy's Razors again. And
Speaker 1: then the examples are trying to pop up and there's
Speaker 1: a massive opportunity for entrepreneurs and then we as consumers
Speaker 1: get behind it and like we win. And then of
Speaker 1: course the banking system won't like that, they'll shut us down,
Speaker 1: and we have bitcoin and that will underpin that will
Speaker 1: That would be what makes it all possible. Yeah, and
Speaker 1: I actually I'd like to think I'm trying to build
Speaker 1: one of these products, which is in terms of content creation.
Speaker 1: So for our site, t FTC dot io, we spun
Speaker 1: that up in April of twenty nine, that's been around
Speaker 1: for almost four years now, um, and we spun it
Speaker 1: up using Ghosts because ghost is open source and it's
Speaker 1: easy to build on. And when I launched the site,
Speaker 1: just selfishly, I wanted to incorporate bitcoin payments using an
Speaker 1: open source payment processor called PTC pay Server into Ghosts.
Speaker 1: And so over the last four years we've sort of
Speaker 1: been building that product out for ourselves and I've actually
Speaker 1: come to conclusion hole crap, Like we could package this
Speaker 1: up and give it to people so that they can
Speaker 1: do exactly what sub stacks doing, but uh, in a
Speaker 1: self sovereign fashion, particularly with bitcoin payments, that you cast
Speaker 1: yourself because substecs and incredible platform. I think there are
Speaker 1: another example of a company that decided not to sense
Speaker 1: or people and they've seen an extreme amount of user
Speaker 1: flow because of that, people craving truth to go into Substack.
Speaker 1: Because Substack has drawn the hardline we're not going to
Speaker 1: censor these hard conversations. But uh, the censorship that happens
Speaker 1: on substack is via Stripe the payment process. That's what
Speaker 1: some content creators, even though they're able to write on Substack,
Speaker 1: that can't monetize on substack because Stripe is stepped in
Speaker 1: and say, hey, we're not gonna allow to use our
Speaker 1: rails to receive money. Um. And so if that trend
Speaker 1: continues in the government doesn't like the substack, this free
Speaker 1: it's having this free, open discussion, and they go to
Speaker 1: Stripe and say, all right, demonetize all these people. That's gonna,
Speaker 1: uh just gonna ruin substack for those writers. And so
Speaker 1: this is just one small thing that we're trying to
Speaker 1: build a t FTC. We're trying to package up. What
Speaker 1: we've built goes to PDC pay server. We're gonna open
Speaker 1: sources for everybody, but we'll also have uh like a
Speaker 1: centralized platform that if you don't want to do a
Speaker 1: rethink yourself. We'll help you do it just plugging some
Speaker 1: API keys and tokens and stuff like that, and you'll
Speaker 1: be able to inject the bitcoin payment processor code into
Speaker 1: your ghosts. And so yeah, and that was that. I
Speaker 1: built that for myself because, as you may know, with
Speaker 1: the newsletter UH and the podcast, I talked about some
Speaker 1: topics that the government and others don't like, and so
Speaker 1: I'm not big enough to get censored, but I've built
Speaker 1: this with the intention of getting big and potentially getting
Speaker 1: to the point where they're like, hey, we're gonna senser
Speaker 1: you and I just look at them be like that
Speaker 1: they can't come take my note. But by us it's
Speaker 1: been up those businesses and even just for question to
Speaker 1: get paid in bitcoin. Then more people use it and
Speaker 1: the adoption happens, that paindal gets turned up and it
Speaker 1: all starts going pretty quickly. Oh yeah, I think it's
Speaker 1: gonna be uh. And that's the other thing with bitcoin
Speaker 1: to like, in terms of adoption, that's definitely happening here
Speaker 1: in the West. Strike UH. Their implementation with NCR at
Speaker 1: self checkout should be coming to market soon. So if
Speaker 1: you want to go and pay at Whole Foods or
Speaker 1: somewhere if they download the NCR software, you'll be able
Speaker 1: to do that UM and you can pay from any
Speaker 1: while you don't need to pay from a strike wall it.
Speaker 1: So that allows you to sort of live and spend
Speaker 1: on a bitcoin standard UM. But even more importantly, I
Speaker 1: think what's happening like emerging markets like Africa in Latin America,
Speaker 1: where these people actually desperately need bitcoins utility UM as
Speaker 1: a payments vehicle and a wealth preservation vehicle. UM is
Speaker 1: really going to drive a lot of the adoption over
Speaker 1: the next year. So that's actually my one of the
Speaker 1: bullish cases for bitcoin. Three and so we have this
Speaker 1: black Swan adoption event and emerging markets where there's a
Speaker 1: lot of activity going on right now UM. And even
Speaker 1: if the government here in the US or other Western
Speaker 1: governments and so we don't like bitcoin, we're gonna stop it.
Speaker 1: I think what's happening UH in developing markets is h
Speaker 1: is something that many people are paying attention to. It
Speaker 1: could sneak up on. I think that's the big growth theory.
Speaker 1: Like if you look at the Internet, the US Internet
Speaker 1: group fast because we had wired phone lines, but in
Speaker 1: UH in emerging markets. It's skipped that and went straight
Speaker 1: to wireless right and so here we have these existing
Speaker 1: us D payment rails over there they don't so it
Speaker 1: just skips it just goes right to a new rails
Speaker 1: mobile first, it's all mobile first, goes right to bt
Speaker 1: TH rails. U cool man. Well, we covered a lot.
Speaker 1: I think we'll wrap it up with that. Um, t
Speaker 1: FTC dot io check that out for sure? What else? Uh,
Speaker 1: I've already been on Twitter. Um yeah that's uh start
Speaker 1: of business except BTC check out the payment gateway with
Speaker 1: ghost Well when it comes out, yeah, well follow Marty
Speaker 1: for for updates on that. Yeah, we'll be open sourcing
Speaker 1: it soon. So um, we're just making sure it's stable
Speaker 1: so you can follow all that stuff. Podcast is t
Speaker 1: FTC rabbit Hole Recap. It's the other show I do. Um,
Speaker 1: but Mark, thank you. This is I think that's the
Speaker 1: first time the tables I've been turned in the studio. Nice.
Speaker 1: I'm glad it was me. This is a comfortable seat too.
Speaker 1: Thanks