Speaker 1: Have you ever noticed they're seemingly growing divide in the country,
Speaker 1: a divide that's not just over politics but ideologies. But
Speaker 1: is the country really split? Is it really split down
Speaker 1: the middle? Well, let's take a look at who are
Speaker 1: the people on each side of this seemingly split that
Speaker 1: we all see and feel, but we don't really understand.
Speaker 1: Who are the people on each side, what are their views,
Speaker 1: how do they vote? And what can we learn about
Speaker 1: this as we try to navigate this. Now, in this episode,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna break down the difference between the one percent
Speaker 1: and the ninety nine percent. Who makes up who are
Speaker 1: the one percent? How their views differ. We're going to
Speaker 1: look at the polls. We're going to look at the
Speaker 1: actual data of what their views differ, and surprise, it
Speaker 1: is very shocking. I was a shocked. We're gonna look
Speaker 1: at the views how they differ from the nine percent.
Speaker 1: Why it seems like it's half the country but it's not.
Speaker 1: We're gonna look at the data behind that, and we're
Speaker 1: gonna look at the historical precedence that we can learn
Speaker 1: as we all navigate through this. Now, if you're just
Speaker 1: tuning in, you're listening to the Mark Moss Show, we
Speaker 1: delve into the intricate world of politics, finance, and technology,
Speaker 1: really looking for the sweet spot where they connected. Today,
Speaker 1: we're going to explain what is going on with this
Speaker 1: seeming divide that we have, how it really divides so
Speaker 1: we can navigate it, and let's just get going. I'm
Speaker 1: calling this the elite one percent versus the People. Now,
Speaker 1: first of all, let me just say I've been trying
Speaker 1: to reject that word elite, and the reason why I
Speaker 1: reject that word is because I don't believe they are elite. Well,
Speaker 1: let me just say I wouldn't hire pretty much any
Speaker 1: of those people to run my business. Now, if I
Speaker 1: was trying to figure out how to get some political goodwill,
Speaker 1: some political grifts, some political donations, sure I would certainly
Speaker 1: hire them. So I suppose in the world of grifting,
Speaker 1: in the world of fundraising and washing each other's backs,
Speaker 1: I suppose they're pretty elite in that. But I'm trying
Speaker 1: to sort of get that word out of my vocabulary.
Speaker 1: But we're talking about today. We talk about the one
Speaker 1: percent versus the people, but I'm not talking specifically about
Speaker 1: the one percent in terms of income like we would
Speaker 1: normally talk about it today, we're going to look at
Speaker 1: it from a handful of metrics. We're going to lay
Speaker 1: out what these metrics are. Now. There was a poll
Speaker 1: that I got most of this data from, and it's
Speaker 1: from Rasmussen. You've probably heard about the Rasmussen political polls
Speaker 1: they've done. You know, they've been doing American sort of
Speaker 1: political polls for a long time. I think they were
Speaker 1: founded in two thousand and three. They do two weekly
Speaker 1: national surveys, so they're surveying all the time, so they're
Speaker 1: getting the reason why I like this is in a business,
Speaker 1: the way I run my business, the way you should
Speaker 1: run your business. You've probably maybe heard of the term
Speaker 1: key performance indicators KPIs. It's sort of like putting your
Speaker 1: finger on the pulse of your business. And the way
Speaker 1: they run these polls is sort of similar because they're
Speaker 1: doing them every single week, twice a week, and they're
Speaker 1: sort of getting the play by play, so as things
Speaker 1: change in the market, as things change in politics, to
Speaker 1: the news, et cetera, you can see this reflected through
Speaker 1: the polls. It's really good. And what we're talking about
Speaker 1: today is the Rasmussen reports have noticed a big difference.
Speaker 1: What they've noticed is an anomaly. Right, So they look
Speaker 1: at lots of data. When you start collecting data like
Speaker 1: on your business, for example, a lot of times that
Speaker 1: data doesn't really mean anything to you, but when you
Speaker 1: look at it over long periods of time, it starts
Speaker 1: to tell you things. And specifically you see things starting
Speaker 1: to shape change and stand out anomaly, so to speak.
Speaker 1: And so they noticed this anomaly. And what they notice
Speaker 1: is that out of every one thousand or so respondents,
Speaker 1: there would always be three to four who were far
Speaker 1: more radical than everybody else. So these the outliers out
Speaker 1: of one thousand, three to four back to the one percent, right,
Speaker 1: So every one thousand, they're three or four that were,
Speaker 1: like I said, way more radical than anything else. And
Speaker 1: so what happened is after seeing this data change, after
Speaker 1: several months, after finding these seemingly, you know, unusual responses,
Speaker 1: Rasmussen realized that they all shared three characteristics, right, really
Speaker 1: maybe four, but we're going to look at three characteristics
Speaker 1: that they shared. And so what they did, because they're
Speaker 1: a polling data analytics company, they aggregated all the responses
Speaker 1: for more than twenty surveys, and he realized these people
Speaker 1: made up a very unique elite one percent, all right,
Speaker 1: and that's what we're going to look at. We're going
Speaker 1: to dive into that. So first of all, who are they.
Speaker 1: Let's just talk about that, and then we'll look at
Speaker 1: the views, we'll look at how this affects us and
Speaker 1: how we navigate it. But who are the elite? So,
Speaker 1: per all these reports, all this data he's pulled, there
Speaker 1: are people who have post graduate degrees right now, not
Speaker 1: just graduate studies, but post graduate degree. So they're the
Speaker 1: elite of the elite. They're the extra educated, if you will.
Speaker 1: They have family incomes that are above one hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty thousand dollars a year, so you know, getting close,
Speaker 1: not in the one percent of income, but they're certainly affluent,
Speaker 1: let's just call it that. So they came from good families,
Speaker 1: they went to colleges, we'll talk about the collegees they
Speaker 1: went to, and they have postgraduate degrees. Also, they lived
Speaker 1: in large cities more than ten thousand people per zip code.
Speaker 1: And so I'm sure you've probably seen like a picture
Speaker 1: of the map or a map of the United States
Speaker 1: and it's like almost all red and then you see
Speaker 1: the blue is all concentrated around the cities and this
Speaker 1: kind of back set up, so they all lived in
Speaker 1: large cities. More than ten thousand people were zip code.
Speaker 1: The elite one percent are surprisingly young. Sixty seven percent
Speaker 1: are between thirty five and fifty years old. The reason
Speaker 1: why we'll get back to this when we talk about
Speaker 1: the actual colleges, they came from the Dirty dozen, we'll
Speaker 1: call it that. However, it's because we've had a massive
Speaker 1: shift in our education system, and that's why they're predominantly
Speaker 1: so much younger. The people older than that learned under
Speaker 1: a whole different education system with a whole different ideology,
Speaker 1: I would say, with real facts and history. Let's just
Speaker 1: say that they were taught different things. So sixty seven
Speaker 1: percent between thirty five and fifty four. Eighty six percent
Speaker 1: are white, forty seven percent favor like Bernie Sanders socialist policies,
Speaker 1: seventy three percent are Democrats. Now, the gap between the
Speaker 1: elite one percent and the rest of America is startling.
Speaker 1: All right, We're going to dig into that specifically, because
Speaker 1: when you see the way that they view the world,
Speaker 1: the way that they look at government and the laws
Speaker 1: and regulations and the way they want to manage things,
Speaker 1: it's very shocking. But let's just dig into a couple
Speaker 1: of these things for a minute. So first of all,
Speaker 1: they postgraduate degree. Like I said, they're younger, and so
Speaker 1: we can see how that changed. Now we're going to
Speaker 1: talk about the importance of why that matters. Because these
Speaker 1: people with these high level degrees coming from these certain
Speaker 1: colleges we'll talk about the twelve colleges have gone into
Speaker 1: certain types of jobs. That's a big deal, right, But
Speaker 1: it also has to do with the types of jobs
Speaker 1: that they have. So the education have led them to
Speaker 1: a certain type of job, but it also puts them
Speaker 1: into a different mindset. And so when you live in
Speaker 1: these large cities and you went to these colleges and
Speaker 1: you have these types of jobs, you just think differently
Speaker 1: then you do in what we would call the flyover states.
Speaker 1: So when you're in Kansas or Iowa, or you know, Michigan,
Speaker 1: or you know you're working on the farm, or you're
Speaker 1: out in you know, Montana or Idaho, you're living in nature,
Speaker 1: you just see things differently. You're much more grounded, right,
Speaker 1: You understand the world from a rational lens when you're
Speaker 1: in nature, when you work with your hands, when you
Speaker 1: work for a living, and you just get the way
Speaker 1: the world works, like, for example, you have to produce
Speaker 1: before you consume. You see, most of these people don't
Speaker 1: really understand that. Right they they're in New York City,
Speaker 1: they're in they're in their hedge fund in Wall Street,
Speaker 1: for example, they take their helicopter out to the country
Speaker 1: for the weekend. They look at they look out over
Speaker 1: this beautiful land that they have and think, oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: this is so pristine, it's so beautiful. We should protect
Speaker 1: this for forever, which is not a bad idea. But
Speaker 1: in order to do that, we should just shut down
Speaker 1: all the energy. We shouldn't get energy in the US
Speaker 1: anymore because we want to preserve this. But they don't understand.
Speaker 1: They're so far removed. They don't understand how that all
Speaker 1: worked out. How did they even get their beautiful condo
Speaker 1: or house in New York, How did they make all
Speaker 1: that money? What went into that? Like real businesses that
Speaker 1: use energy to grow allowed them to build their wealth.
Speaker 1: They don't understand it because they're so far removed. It
Speaker 1: really comes down to this fourth turning. Right, you've heard
Speaker 1: me references before, maybe we've read the book. The fourth
Speaker 1: turning really it's generational theory, and generational theory is basically
Speaker 1: four generations. So fore turning is eighty years four twenty
Speaker 1: year cycles, and it's basically hard times create strong men.
Speaker 1: That was my grandfather. He grew up on a farm,
Speaker 1: the hardest times. He was the hardest man my father.
Speaker 1: Then hard men create great great men. Great men create
Speaker 1: great times. My father grew up under that very hard
Speaker 1: work on the farm, but he left the farm. Those
Speaker 1: great times create weak men, and then week men create
Speaker 1: bad times. And so then you know, I hate to
Speaker 1: say it, but then you know, I don't work as
Speaker 1: hard as my dad. I work very hard as far
Speaker 1: as my effort and my time commitment, but not as
Speaker 1: hard physically as my dad did. And now the fourth generation,
Speaker 1: my kids, they're not quite sure what work is. And
Speaker 1: so we can see how this changes. And that's sort
Speaker 1: of where we are with these elite at this stage
Speaker 1: in the game. Now, I want to break down, like
Speaker 1: I said, the actual data of how they vote, because
Speaker 1: I was completely shocked and you're going to be shocked
Speaker 1: as well. We're going to break that down. We're going
Speaker 1: to look at how this affects all these institutions that
Speaker 1: are sort of driving and shaping our narrative and why
Speaker 1: it seems so overwhelming and how we navigate all of this.
Speaker 1: But you know, one of the ways that we can
Speaker 1: do this is by protecting our wealth. Wealth gives us options, right,
Speaker 1: and when they're continually debasing the money, they're eroting your wealth.
Speaker 1: Even if you save that money in the bank, you're
Speaker 1: losing your wealth that way. Now, I'm going to come
Speaker 1: back with the way these people vote and the numbers
Speaker 1: are going to shock you. I'll be back with more
Speaker 1: in a minute. You're listening to the Mark Maas Show.
Speaker 1: Don't go away, I'll bear back. All right, welcome back,
Speaker 1: if you just tune in, you're listening to the Mark
Speaker 1: Maas Show. We're talking about the one percent, the elite
Speaker 1: one percent versus the people. Now we broke down who
Speaker 1: they are, like the demographics, what the age they are,
Speaker 1: where they live, how much income they have and so forth.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about now about the data of the gap.
Speaker 1: All right, So, as we kind of framed up before.
Speaker 1: Rasmussen Polls, which runs data a couple times a week.
Speaker 1: They send out these data and they collect all this data.
Speaker 1: They did a national survey of only people with those characteristics. So,
Speaker 1: as I said before, as they do these polls, they
Speaker 1: found these anomalies. Three to four people out of every
Speaker 1: one thousand had this very radical, very different viewpoint. So
Speaker 1: then what they decided to do is take that group
Speaker 1: of people and only pull them versus pulling the other
Speaker 1: people without them, so sort of splitting the group and
Speaker 1: pulling them separately as opposed to aggregating the data. And
Speaker 1: they found some astonishing results. Let's talk about a couple
Speaker 1: of those. When all the others, so we'll say there's
Speaker 1: the one percent and there's the others. When all the
Speaker 1: others gave President Joe Biden, or actually, when we look
Speaker 1: at all of the voters gave President Joe Biden a
Speaker 1: forty one percent job approval, it's not that now it's
Speaker 1: much lower. But at the time side note, President Joe
Speaker 1: Biden had a forty one percent job approval. The elite
Speaker 1: one percent rated him at an eighty two percent approval.
Speaker 1: It's a pretty big difference. It's one hundred percent difference.
Speaker 1: Think about that for a minute. Why is there such
Speaker 1: a disparity between those numbers? How can we be living
Speaker 1: in two different worlds at the same time. Certainly it's
Speaker 1: because you know, one group of people, the majority of
Speaker 1: people don't trust mainstream media. We're gonna come back to that,
Speaker 1: and they're watching alternative news sources, and the other group
Speaker 1: is just watching you know, every TV in their houses
Speaker 1: on CNN, potentially you're watching two sets of news, and
Speaker 1: so we're seeing that. But it's more than that. As
Speaker 1: I already kind of went through. We went to different schools,
Speaker 1: we came from different families, we live in different places.
Speaker 1: We're going to break that down a little bit more.
Speaker 1: But let's get back into the data, because it gets worse.
Speaker 1: Fifty seven percent of all the voters when we look
Speaker 1: at the voter base together, fifty seven percent of all
Speaker 1: voters say there's not enough individual freedom in America. What
Speaker 1: would you say, do you think there's more freedom in America?
Speaker 1: Do you think that individual freedom is getting better or
Speaker 1: getting worse? Do you think individual freedoms around the world
Speaker 1: is getting better or worse? Are we seeing the rise
Speaker 1: of authoritarianism more control? It looks like every time I
Speaker 1: turn around, they want to micro manage the minutia. Here
Speaker 1: in California, for example, this Scott Wiener who's putting through
Speaker 1: every draconian law you could ever imagine. I want to
Speaker 1: tell you, I mean that they control your kids, how
Speaker 1: they control them. He just put a bill forward that
Speaker 1: wants to make a law in California where auto manufacturers
Speaker 1: are no longer able to sell cars in the state
Speaker 1: that go more than eighty miles an hour. Now, we
Speaker 1: already have speed limit laws, but no, that's not enough.
Speaker 1: He wants to micromanage the details of your life so
Speaker 1: much that your car can't even go over that. And
Speaker 1: think about this, auto manufacturers now have to make a
Speaker 1: completely different car just to be sold in that state.
Speaker 1: So anyway, back to the individual. Fifty seven percent of
Speaker 1: voters say there is not enough individual freedom in America. However,
Speaker 1: seventy percent of the elite one percent say there's too much.
Speaker 1: Sixty percent say there's not enough. Seventy percent of the
Speaker 1: one percent say there's not there's too much freedom. Do
Speaker 1: you think there's too much freedom? I guess you can
Speaker 1: figure out. Are you on the elite one percent or
Speaker 1: you do you side with the regular people? Based off
Speaker 1: of some of this, but it gets worse, let's keep going.
Speaker 1: Ninety three percent of average Americans reject cheating and will
Speaker 1: accept defeat in an honest election. Right. I remember this
Speaker 1: when the whole Trump Biden thing went down. I'm like, look, man,
Speaker 1: this is pretty easy. We don't need all kinds of
Speaker 1: new technology. All we need is just like, why not
Speaker 1: have a Republican a Democrat both in the room, both
Speaker 1: look at the counts. Maybe we live stream it over YouTube,
Speaker 1: and if you know, one of them fairly won, they won,
Speaker 1: and that's what the people want, and then let's just
Speaker 1: accept that. And basically that's what this pool says. Ninety
Speaker 1: three percent of Americans reject cheating and would accept defeat
Speaker 1: in an honest election. Only seven percent reported that they
Speaker 1: would cheat. Seven percent of the average Americans, however, sixty
Speaker 1: nine percent, sixty nine percent, twenty percent of the elite
Speaker 1: one percent would rather cheat than lose a close election.
Speaker 1: What is this world that we've grown up in? How
Speaker 1: could we be so different? I mean, I will just
Speaker 1: think everybody would reject cheating. Ninety three percent do seventy
Speaker 1: percent of the elite one percent would rather cheat than
Speaker 1: lose an election. Let's keep going. Six percent of most
Speaker 1: voters have a very favorable favorable opinion of members of Congress.
Speaker 1: Six percent. That's extremely low. Most people do not look
Speaker 1: favorably on the leadership. They understand how corrupt Congress is
Speaker 1: and they don't like it. However, sixty nine percent of
Speaker 1: the one percent have a very favorable view. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's almost unimaginable. How can they look at the at
Speaker 1: Congress and say, oh, sure the inside of trading is okay.
Speaker 1: Sure Nancy Pelosi is the best investor in the world.
Speaker 1: Sure they all beat the hedge funds. Yes, how can
Speaker 1: they see that? We hardly because they're made up of
Speaker 1: that class. Six percent are unfavorable. Seventy percent of the
Speaker 1: one percent are favorable. Ten percent of all voters have
Speaker 1: a favorable view of journalists. Ten percent means ninety percent don't.
Speaker 1: Ninety percent do not have a favorable view of journalists
Speaker 1: because they've lost our trust. They're constantly lying, they're constantly manipulating,
Speaker 1: they're constantly omitting the truth. Things like that. Ninety percent
Speaker 1: of voters view them unfavorable. However, seventy one percent of
Speaker 1: the one percent voters view them as favorable. What like,
Speaker 1: how can this be? Ninety percent think they're unfavorable, seventy
Speaker 1: one percent think they are favorable. I mean, the disparity
Speaker 1: is amazing. Let's just keep going down to illustrate the
Speaker 1: scale of this gap. Look at a couple other issues.
Speaker 1: So those were more about like do we trust our leadership?
Speaker 1: Do we trust their media? But let's look at some
Speaker 1: of the issues that have been sort of shoved down
Speaker 1: our throats over and over and over again. Now this
Speaker 1: is all going to be from the one percent, and
Speaker 1: this is all around climate issues. So from the one percent.
Speaker 1: On climate issues, seventy seven percent of the one percent
Speaker 1: would like to impose strict restrictions and rationing on the
Speaker 1: private use of gas, meat, and electricity. Seventy seven percent
Speaker 1: of the one percent think that you have to be
Speaker 1: controlled and you should be rationed on how much gas
Speaker 1: you can put in your car, so how much you
Speaker 1: could drive, how much meat you're allowed to eat, how
Speaker 1: much electricity you can use up? No more video games,
Speaker 1: no more Netflix for you. Seventy two percent favor banning
Speaker 1: gas powered vehicles. Yeah cool for them. They're rich. They
Speaker 1: can afford that expensive tesla. What about you, Oh well,
Speaker 1: you can't afford it, so you can walk and ride
Speaker 1: the bus. Now that's how to touch They are sixty
Speaker 1: nine percent of the one percent elite favor banning gas stoves. Again,
Speaker 1: they're so out of touch. They live in the cities.
Speaker 1: They're in their high rise condo, you know, a million
Speaker 1: dollar condo. I'm sure they can cook on electric stove whatever,
Speaker 1: But what about you in your house? Gas is cheaper.
Speaker 1: People use gas to cook food. And regardless of what
Speaker 1: you want to use, how can they be in favor
Speaker 1: of micromanaging how you cook your food? And is that
Speaker 1: more freedom? Fifty eight percent of the one percent favor
Speaker 1: of banning sport utility vehicles SUVs fifty eight percent, almost
Speaker 1: sixty percent want to ban what type of or tell
Speaker 1: you what type of car you can drive. My wife
Speaker 1: drives an suv. We have kids, she drives other kids,
Speaker 1: my kid's friends. She drives them to soccer games and
Speaker 1: things like that, like well they don't play soccer, but
Speaker 1: sporting events and school events and things like that. And
Speaker 1: they want to say that they can't drive that. Now,
Speaker 1: think about the knock on effects of this. So we
Speaker 1: can't drive an suv. So now instead of my wife
Speaker 1: driving a bunch of kids to this event, than everyone
Speaker 1: has to drive their own car. Does that backfire? Have
Speaker 1: they thought through second, third, fourth order? Now if you're
Speaker 1: just tuning in. You're listening to the Mark Mas Show.
Speaker 1: We're talking about the difference between the one percent and
Speaker 1: the rest the ninety nine percent. We're talking about some
Speaker 1: of the data behind the difference, and I want to
Speaker 1: get to how do we get here and more importantly,
Speaker 1: how do we navigate all of this. I'm going to
Speaker 1: go live next week talking about this. Check it out,
Speaker 1: go dot one, Markmoss dot com, slash u turn, go
Speaker 1: dot one, Markmoss dot com, slash u turn. But I
Speaker 1: got a whole lot more to cover when I come back.
Speaker 1: You do not want to miss this. We'll talk about
Speaker 1: what we're going to do about this. I'll be back
Speaker 1: with more a minute. Don't go away, all right, welcome back.
Speaker 1: If you just tune in, you're listening to the Mark
Speaker 1: More Show. I'm running through some of the data between
Speaker 1: the difference in ideology and thinking between the one percent,
Speaker 1: elite one percent, and the rest of us, the ninety
Speaker 1: nine percent. So I was talking about really the most
Speaker 1: shocking stat was the elite one percent think we have
Speaker 1: way too much freedom and the rest of us don't.
Speaker 1: And I was running through some of the stats about
Speaker 1: some of their viewpoints and it's shocking. Seventy percent favor
Speaker 1: banning gastows they want to tell you how you can
Speaker 1: cook your food, or fifty eight percent favor banning SUVs.
Speaker 1: And I was talking about second, third, fourth, fifth order.
Speaker 1: So why would they want to ban an suv? Okay,
Speaker 1: they say it's bad for the environment, too much CO
Speaker 1: two or something like that. Okay, great, So instead of
Speaker 1: my wife being able to drive three or four kids
Speaker 1: or five kids in the car to go to the
Speaker 1: tennis match like my daughter plays tennis, now those four
Speaker 1: or five families off to drive separately. So now instead
Speaker 1: of one car driving, we have four or five cars.
Speaker 1: I mean, think about that. Does that backfire? Does that work?
Speaker 1: If they really thought through these issues, my guess is no.
Speaker 1: And this it gets worse. Fifty five percent of the
Speaker 1: one percent are in favor of banning what they call
Speaker 1: non essential air travel. Over half of the people in
Speaker 1: the one percent want to ban you from flying. You
Speaker 1: shouldn't be allowed to go travel. You shouldn't be able
Speaker 1: to go see your grandmother. You shouldn't be allowed to
Speaker 1: go vacation in Mexico or Hawaii. You shouldn't be able
Speaker 1: to go skiing or whatever. It is that you're doing.
Speaker 1: Go to a conf Now they want to ban what
Speaker 1: they call non essential, but what's essential? Who gets to
Speaker 1: choose what's essential? Now? We saw how that played out
Speaker 1: during the pandemic, when they close what they considered non
Speaker 1: essential businesses. Well, if that business paid for myself and
Speaker 1: my family, it's pretty dang essential. But they said it wasn't.
Speaker 1: So that vacation might be essential to my mental health,
Speaker 1: that vacation might be essential for my family to have
Speaker 1: good bonding and build memories so we raise better kids.
Speaker 1: That travel might be essential because I'm going to go
Speaker 1: help a nonprofit or go do some mission work or
Speaker 1: serving opportunities. I mean, I could lay out a million
Speaker 1: reasons why it may be essential to me, but not
Speaker 1: to whoever gets to choose this. But the fact that
Speaker 1: fifty five percent are in favor of taking away your
Speaker 1: freedom of choice is just beyond me. Fifty three percent
Speaker 1: favor banning private air conditioning? How dare you? How dare
Speaker 1: you be cool? I can't even believe this is I
Speaker 1: read it. Fifty three percent in favor of banning private
Speaker 1: air conditioning. Now, in contrast to this, the ideas, These
Speaker 1: ideas are opposed by the nine and nund percent between
Speaker 1: I'm not going to read through all of them. Between
Speaker 1: sixty three percent to eighty three percent oppose all these ideas.
Speaker 1: So of the one percent, sixty to eighty percent want
Speaker 1: to ban all this, your air travel, your ability to
Speaker 1: buy gas, your ability to put SUVs. The ability to
Speaker 1: try all that. But on the other side of the
Speaker 1: ninety percent, sixty three to eighty percent are opposed to
Speaker 1: these How did we get here? Like, what the heck
Speaker 1: is the difference in this? And again it comes down
Speaker 1: to where they went to school, what they were taught. Obviously,
Speaker 1: I think that's the biggest piece. Where they were raised,
Speaker 1: what kind of families they were in, and where they live, right,
Speaker 1: those are the things. And they think that this represents
Speaker 1: all the voters, but a dozen't right. The one percent
Speaker 1: are living in an echo chamber, okay. And echo chamber
Speaker 1: is basically when you just talk to the same people.
Speaker 1: It's sort of like I when I go to bigcoin conferences,
Speaker 1: it's like I'm talking to the echo chamber, Like everybody
Speaker 1: here's already a bit winner. But they not only grew
Speaker 1: up in an echo chamber, but they continue to live
Speaker 1: in an echo chamber. So they're not aware of how
Speaker 1: the rest of the world works. All right. So for example,
Speaker 1: we already talked about where they came from. Let's talk
Speaker 1: about that a little bit more detail. So the one
Speaker 1: percent went to the dirty dozen. So they went to
Speaker 1: one of twelve colleges Harvard, Yale, University of Pennsylvania, Northwestern,
Speaker 1: John Hopkins, Columbia, Stanford, Berkeley, Princeton, Cornell, MIT, and the
Speaker 1: University of Chicago. Huh. So they learned what they know
Speaker 1: from this. Now, this is part of the reason why,
Speaker 1: you know, a lot of times when we're talking about
Speaker 1: certain types of freedom type of issues, a lot of
Speaker 1: times I might use the word they, and people always
Speaker 1: are always saying, well, who are they? Who are they?
Speaker 1: Who are they? Like there's some you know, one person
Speaker 1: or a small group of people that sort of pull
Speaker 1: the strings for the whole world. I know, maybe a
Speaker 1: lot of you think that, like there's one group of
Speaker 1: people it's the Rothschild's or it's you know, the bankers
Speaker 1: at the BIS and this smoke of people really pull
Speaker 1: the strings for everything. And I just have never believed
Speaker 1: that to be true. First of all, they're not that elite,
Speaker 1: They're not smart enough to be able to organize the
Speaker 1: whole world by that small group. What it is is
Speaker 1: it sort of like birds of a feather flock together.
Speaker 1: So I kind of use an analogy sort of like
Speaker 1: if you had a bunch of birds flying and you
Speaker 1: see them up in the sky, right and they have
Speaker 1: like this v formation. It wasn't like they all had
Speaker 1: met ahead of time and said, hey, Larry, you take
Speaker 1: that row and the seventh seventh position back and Bob,
Speaker 1: you're on the right side in the thirteenth position. They
Speaker 1: didn't make any grand plan. They just all started flying
Speaker 1: together and they all just sort of start to move together.
Speaker 1: It's basically what terrorism is. Right. One of the reasons
Speaker 1: why the US is and never beody able to win
Speaker 1: the war on terrorism, nor will they ever be able to,
Speaker 1: is because there's no head on the snake, if you will.
Speaker 1: There's no one central, central authority that they could get
Speaker 1: rid of and then disband terrorism. Instead, it's all different sales,
Speaker 1: all different groups of people who are all driven by ideology.
Speaker 1: They all want death to America. They don't have an
Speaker 1: organized plan, they're not working together. There's no central leader leadership.
Speaker 1: They just have a shared ideology and that's basically what
Speaker 1: these elites are. They have a shared ideology, they went
Speaker 1: to the same schools, and they were all taught the
Speaker 1: same thing. So it's not that there's one cent in
Speaker 1: my opinion, and now that there's one group of people
Speaker 1: that are pulling the strings of everything. It's they're all
Speaker 1: birds of a feather and they're all flocking together. They
Speaker 1: all learn the same thing, they all share the same ideology,
Speaker 1: and they all just are sort of moving in the
Speaker 1: same direction because they believe the same thing, and they're
Speaker 1: sort of moving off of each other's all right. So,
Speaker 1: for example, Columbia, I did a video on my main
Speaker 1: YouTube channel, Mark Moss, and I think the title was
Speaker 1: the real reason for the migrant crisis at the border
Speaker 1: or the invasion of the United States or something about that,
Speaker 1: and I was basically breaking down how not just the US.
Speaker 1: Obviously we have a massive invasion problem, calling it that
Speaker 1: on the southern border, over three hundred thousand people are
Speaker 1: coming across the border unchecked per month. But I was
Speaker 1: also talking about what's happening in Europe. You know, Italy
Speaker 1: is being invaded and so forth. But I was talking
Speaker 1: about it specifically because in that video, I broke down
Speaker 1: something called the Cloward pivots strategy, and the cloud pivot
Speaker 1: strategy is basically the strategy of what they're using to
Speaker 1: cause this immigration. If you want, you should go watch
Speaker 1: that video. And basically the premise of this cloud pivot
Speaker 1: strategy is that is to overwhelm the system, call the
Speaker 1: nation's bluff. So because the US is willing to give
Speaker 1: welfare for example, well let's one depress the economy so
Speaker 1: more and more people have to go on the government welfare,
Speaker 1: you know, whatever you want to call that, all types
Speaker 1: of programs, and let's bring in at this point when
Speaker 1: are we up to nine million immigrants and put them
Speaker 1: onto the system as well, so we'll over tax the
Speaker 1: system and collapse it. Now that Cloward pivot strategy was
Speaker 1: taught at Columbia. To Columbia, Well, it turns out lots
Speaker 1: of very important politicians went to Columbia. Barack Obama went
Speaker 1: to Colombia. The previous Attorney General, Bill Barr went to Colombia.
Speaker 1: I think the current Attorney general went to Columbia. Secretary
Speaker 1: of State Blncoln went to Columbia. So all these people
Speaker 1: went there and they all learned this. So who are they? Well,
Speaker 1: I guess you could say who are they would be
Speaker 1: the teachers that taught this. Let's keep going, all right.
Speaker 1: Charles Murray in his classic work called Coming Apart, he
Speaker 1: analyzed zip codes and he proved that graduates from these
Speaker 1: dirty dozen universities that Rasmussen described live, work, and play
Speaker 1: in the same zip codes. Right, So they're isolated. They're
Speaker 1: in this echo chamber. They live in these echo chambers.
Speaker 1: They only work with other people of them just like that.
Speaker 1: And they really created this kind of power aristocracy, if
Speaker 1: you will. They have no knowledge of how the rest
Speaker 1: of us live in work, and that breeds contempt. Now
Speaker 1: they have contempt for most, you know, for the nine
Speaker 1: which sort of explains Hillary Clinton's basket of Deplorable's line
Speaker 1: right now. In Rasmussen's identification of the elite one percent,
Speaker 1: it begins to explain the depth of the tension between
Speaker 1: most Americans and the tiny group of elitists who control
Speaker 1: what Vladimir Lenin called the commanding heights. What does that mean?
Speaker 1: The commanding heights? It's the elements of power which control
Speaker 1: the rest. All right, So we're going to talk about this.
Speaker 1: I'm going to come back if you're tune and you're
Speaker 1: listening to the Mark Mass Show. We're always talking about
Speaker 1: the way the world is changing, and we look at
Speaker 1: through the lens of politics, finance, and technology. Now in
Speaker 1: the world of finance, I'm doing a live presentation next
Speaker 1: week to break down how this is gonna affect our money,
Speaker 1: our retirement and more. If you want to check that out,
Speaker 1: go to go dot one, Markmoss dot com, slash U
Speaker 1: turn Go dot one, Markmoss dot com slash u turn.
Speaker 1: When we come back after a very quick break, I'm
Speaker 1: going to talk about why it seems like the country's
Speaker 1: divide in half, but really it's not, and how we
Speaker 1: navigate this. I'll be back with more a minute. Don't
Speaker 1: go away, We're back, all right, Welcome back. If you
Speaker 1: just tune in, you're listening to the Mark Mass Show.
Speaker 1: We're talking about how the world is changing and how
Speaker 1: it seems like the world is divided. And we have
Speaker 1: these two ideological camps. And what I'm doing is one,
Speaker 1: we broke down the actual data, the actual issues and
Speaker 1: the data behind it to show you, yes, how divided
Speaker 1: the world really is. But what we want to look
Speaker 1: at now is that it's not divided down the middle.
Speaker 1: It's not that you know not to get into it.
Speaker 1: But it's not that Trump and Biden got almost the
Speaker 1: exact amount of votes by just a couple left or right.
Speaker 1: It's not that the country is not divided down the middle.
Speaker 1: As a matter of fact, it's broken down to one
Speaker 1: percent and ninety nine percent. We gave you the data.
Speaker 1: Now why does it seem like it's split down the middle. Well,
Speaker 1: like I said, if you look at a map of
Speaker 1: the United States, you can see the whole thing is red.
Speaker 1: The big cities have blue, and of course they're higher density,
Speaker 1: so we have that. But more specifically, it's because of
Speaker 1: what I just said right before the break, which is
Speaker 1: what Vladimir Lenin had called the commanding heights. So what
Speaker 1: the elite has done, the one percent elites have taken
Speaker 1: control of these commanding heights, and this is how they
Speaker 1: hang under power. Right, So they dominate the universities. They're
Speaker 1: the ones that have the universities. They're the ones that
Speaker 1: are teaching the next generation, your kids whatever they taught
Speaker 1: you and your kids. Right. So, because you see it
Speaker 1: in the university and they have this position of power,
Speaker 1: if you will, being a professor, you feel like it's
Speaker 1: more prevalent than it is. They control the news media,
Speaker 1: so they're controlling what you see on TV, on CNN, CNBC, ABC.
Speaker 1: They control what you're reading, you know, Washington Times or
Speaker 1: Washington Post or LA Times, for example. They control the judiciary,
Speaker 1: so they've taken over the judges and the legal side
Speaker 1: we call it lawfare now, intelligence agencies, giant foundations, and
Speaker 1: most major corporations. So these elite were trained at the
Speaker 1: best colleges and they went and got the best jobs,
Speaker 1: and so they have an abnormal amount of control over
Speaker 1: the the core things that we sort of see back
Speaker 1: to the commanding heights, if you will. Although they are few,
Speaker 1: there are relatively few people, but you know, then they
Speaker 1: marry each other, and then their children go to the
Speaker 1: same schools, and then they hire and they promote each other.
Speaker 1: So that's how that works. Now, once they've gotten control
Speaker 1: of the education system, then they continue to push those
Speaker 1: narratives down and they teach your kids to hate you
Speaker 1: and to hate their country and to think that we
Speaker 1: have too much freedom, and that's the problem. And if
Speaker 1: we only took everyone's freedom away, if we only took
Speaker 1: away their ability to do buy gas and travel and
Speaker 1: meet and all those things. If only we did that,
Speaker 1: then maybe we'd have a better world somehow. As I said,
Speaker 1: they all favor Bernie Sanders' socialist policies, and then they
Speaker 1: take control over media, and then they constantly gaslight us
Speaker 1: and lie to us, over and over and over. We
Speaker 1: can see it no matter where we look. Just last night,
Speaker 1: Jimmy Kimmel probably you know who he is, late night
Speaker 1: talk show host. I don't watch him, but apparently some
Speaker 1: people do. He suggests said that it was a crazy
Speaker 1: conspiracy theory to believe that Joe Biden might be suffering
Speaker 1: from dementia. That's what he said. He said quote. So
Speaker 1: let me get this straight. The same people who believe
Speaker 1: Joe Biden has dementia and needs Kamala Harris to feed
Speaker 1: him butterscotch tapioca every night also believe that he has
Speaker 1: somehow planned and executed a diabolically brilliant scheme to fix
Speaker 1: the NFL playoffs so the biggest pop star in the
Speaker 1: world could pop up on the JumboTron during the Super
Speaker 1: Bowl during a Kia and a Tostito's commercial to hypnotize
Speaker 1: her eleven year old fans and devoting for Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: But you see what he's doing. He's taking a couple
Speaker 1: of things and twisting around is what we call gaslde
Speaker 1: and to make it seem unbelievable, the same people who
Speaker 1: believe Joe Biden has dementia think he's also plotting a
Speaker 1: diabuckle plan. No, those two things don't have to be
Speaker 1: true at the same time. Now, let's look at some
Speaker 1: of the data. Okay, per a CNN pull, I didn't
Speaker 1: pull a Fox Bowl. I pulled a CNN pull. Per
Speaker 1: a CNN poll released last year, they found that fifty
Speaker 1: six percent of Democrats and seventy three percent of Americans
Speaker 1: are seriously concerned about Biden's mental competence. Everybody in the
Speaker 1: world knows this. This last summer, I spent a month
Speaker 1: going through Europe with my family. We did a couple
Speaker 1: of weeks in Italy and Greece. We went over to Egypt,
Speaker 1: and as we traveled around, I like to talk to people.
Speaker 1: I like to get their viewpoint, I like to get
Speaker 1: the boots on the ground information. And pretty much every
Speaker 1: single person I talked to, and again this is antidotal,
Speaker 1: because I didn't talk to millions of people, or even
Speaker 1: tens of thousands of people. But I talked to a
Speaker 1: lot of people, and every single one when I even
Speaker 1: mentioned Biden's name, because I said, you know, what do
Speaker 1: you think about the dollar? What do you think about
Speaker 1: the monetary system? You know, what do you think about politics?
Speaker 1: Things like that? Every single one laughed when bringing up Biden.
Speaker 1: Everybody knows it's why. It's why Putin has challenged Biden
Speaker 1: to a debate, That's why Trump has challenged Biden to debates.
Speaker 1: Why why Biden won't go to a debate? Right, everybody
Speaker 1: knows this, Even the C and M puls fifty six
Speaker 1: percent of Democrats, seventy three percent of America and say
Speaker 1: that they're seriously concerned. But here Jimmy Kimmel is going, Aha,
Speaker 1: those same people, they don't know what they're talking about, right,
Speaker 1: and then he throws shade on the whole like Kamala
Speaker 1: Harris Joe Biden thing. But then we saw this week
Speaker 1: as well, James O'Keeffe, he got his disguise on, he
Speaker 1: sat down with a top White House cyber official and
Speaker 1: they told him, quote, they can't say it publicly, but
Speaker 1: the White House wants to replace Kamala Harris and confirms
Speaker 1: President Joe Biden has mental decline. Right, it's all on video.
Speaker 1: You can see this video. So like we know this,
Speaker 1: we see it, like you don't have to be a
Speaker 1: genius for this. But yet the elites, the elite one percent,
Speaker 1: are using their position of power to gas it us.
Speaker 1: Now we see this all over. There's no border crisis,
Speaker 1: even as three hundred, three hundred fifty thousand people are
Speaker 1: coming across the border. I think there was ten retired
Speaker 1: FBI and intelligent analysts wrote a letter, I think in
Speaker 1: the last week or so to Congress saying that you
Speaker 1: cannot overstate the danger that has been caused by having
Speaker 1: this open border. Like everybody sees it. Right, we have
Speaker 1: avoy going down there right now. It's all over. But
Speaker 1: yet they're telling us there's snowboarder crisis, even if there is.
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris is on it. But that's not the case.
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris boasted in El Paso that the administration has
Speaker 1: made quote extreme progress over these last few months. It's extreme,
Speaker 1: all right, it's not progress. Well, it's not progress in
Speaker 1: the way that would fix it. Right, We've been told
Speaker 1: all these things we've been told, you know, the pandemic
Speaker 1: was caused by an animal in a wet lab or
Speaker 1: a wet market. When we found out, we all kind
Speaker 1: of knew all along that it was came out of
Speaker 1: a lab. And now, of course that's all been documented
Speaker 1: and so over and over and over we can see this.
Speaker 1: But really where it's most evidenced is in the definition
Speaker 1: of democracy. You see, all of this is being done
Speaker 1: to save democracy. If the people get their will, that
Speaker 1: that's a threat to democracy. If you're allowed to vote
Speaker 1: for the candidate you want and that candidate just happens
Speaker 1: to be not them, if it just happens to be
Speaker 1: Trump or anybody else probably for that matter, that's a
Speaker 1: threat to democracy. I guess they think that democracy means
Speaker 1: it's democrats in part and in rule. We've kind of
Speaker 1: grown up to believe democracy is sort of like the
Speaker 1: will of the people, where like mo rule, where we
Speaker 1: take a vote and whoever the most of the vote,
Speaker 1: whoever gets the most votes wins. That's not the definition
Speaker 1: they use democracy buy and for the elites. Old author
Speaker 1: Tuckerville predicted that an immense and tulitary power would replace
Speaker 1: genuine popular rule, and that's about it. We can see
Speaker 1: today that only fifteen percent of the American population approves
Speaker 1: of Congress, only fifteen percent. So are they governing for
Speaker 1: the people? Are they doing what the will of the
Speaker 1: people want? Now? I know, I know a lot of
Speaker 1: you are going to say this. The US isn't isn't
Speaker 1: a democracy. The US is a is a constitutional republic.
Speaker 1: I get it right, I said, the elitian is all
Speaker 1: on my life growing up. My point is they're saying
Speaker 1: that we have to protect democracy, but their word democracy
Speaker 1: no longer indicates much about popular rule. It basically refers
Speaker 1: to a hypothetic goal that gives those who invoke gets
Speaker 1: mandate to do basically whatever they want, even when it's
Speaker 1: the opposite of what the people desire, which is why
Speaker 1: Congress only has fifteen percent approval rating. We can see
Speaker 1: this over and over and over, but it's not the case.
Speaker 1: I wanted to go into a couple other things. I'm
Speaker 1: running out of time here. Just today I saw on Twitter. Rep.
Speaker 1: Il han Omar, you might know who she is. She
Speaker 1: is attacking El Salvador, saying that she's urging members of
Speaker 1: Congress to take action on threats to democracy in l
Speaker 1: Salvador now in l Salvador, they have a massive voting
Speaker 1: base that ninety percent of the population of El Salvador
Speaker 1: approve of the president's leadership. Ninety percent approve, whereas in
Speaker 1: the United States fifteen percent approve. So which one is
Speaker 1: more democratic? The President of El Salvador fired back on Twitter.
Speaker 1: He said, we are honored to receive your attacks just
Speaker 1: days before our election. I would be very worried if
Speaker 1: we had your support. He's a savage. You're not following
Speaker 1: them on social media? You definitely should. But if you're
Speaker 1: just tuning in listening to the Mark Mash Show breaking
Speaker 1: down the data between the divide and just let you
Speaker 1: know it's not as dark as it seems. The population
Speaker 1: is not split down the middle. It's one percent versus
Speaker 1: the ninety nine. All right, At the end of the day,
Speaker 1: we are going to win. We have the masses. We
Speaker 1: just have to speak up. We need to have a voice.
Speaker 1: You need to have money, I need to have influence.
Speaker 1: That's what I got today. Thanks so much for listening.
Speaker 1: Until next time,