TrueLife - The Psychedelic Roundtable - The Coming Insurrection

Episode Date: November 21, 2022

In this episode we begin the conversation talking about the transition of “things to non-things.” We soon move into the coming collapse of the euro, the false idea of the United States as a constitutional republic and some interesting push back about me being a conspiracy theorist. It was great show and a whole lot of fun. I hope you’ll enjoy it as much as I did.

Darkness struck, a gut-punched theft, Sun ripped away, her health bereft. I roar at the void. This ain't just fate, a cosmic scam I spit my hate. The games rigged tight, shadows deal, blood on their hands, I'll never kneel. Yet in the rage, a crack ignites, occulted sparks cut through the nights. The scars my key, hermetic and stark. To see, to rise, I hunt in the dark. fumbling, furious through ruins

maze, lights my war cry Born from the blaze The poem is Angels with Rifles The track, I Am Sorrow, I Am Lust by Kodak Serafini Check out the entire song at the end of the cast Naniac

Yeah Ladies and gentlemen Welcome back to the true life I'm sorry Welcome back to the psychedelic round table we are here with all the usual suspects, the aesthetics of disaster, this idea of, I thought maybe today we would get into some interesting stuff, but before we get into that, let's just go ahead and go around the horn here. And Benjamin, Mr. Wizard, for those who may not know who you are, it's got to be everybody's got to know by now. But for someone, random person coming in, would you be so kind as to share who you are and what you got going?

Yeah, Benjamin C.George.com is where you can find. me. I get called Mr. Wizard as some of the nicer things. But, you know, up to a whole lot of good, hopefully, bringing good conversations and good content to the world and enjoy and having good conversations with great people. I agree. Paul, for those who may not know you, my friend, the Stig, what do you want to share with everybody, man? What do you got to tell people? Yeah, not a heck of a lot. you find me here on Sundays on the psychedelic roundtable

with the fellas yeah I mean that's about it like to participate in some more intellectual type discussions agree I don't know you guys this is what I was kind of thinking about and I'm sure we're going to end up weighing the weeds on something

but you know I thought we would I had this idea the other day I was reading this book and it talked about how we seem to be in the way this transition right now. We're moving from like the idea of things into non-things. And let me try to clarify what I mean by that. It seems like everything is we're moving away from things that are tangible and everything's rapid information now. People are spending so much time consuming information. It's almost like the red hot chili pepper song where it's like,

you know, young kids getting high on information. And it's almost like information is a drug. Like everything's wrapped and it just seems to me that we're losing the tangible or something that's intangible. And you can see it in relationships. You can see this transition happening. Is that kind of too broad? What do you think about that, Ben? Well, I mean, things have definitely gone digital and, you know, it's, I guess there's something to be said about that. But I think there's a bit of a pushback too.

I think there is kind of a resurgence, a renaissance. of, you know, people trying to get things, you know, going back to nature, you know, the psychedelic movement, you know, a lot, a lot more of like natural medicines and things like that being at the forefront of conversations. So I think while there's definitely a part of that, especially like if you, you know, kind of look at the world through like the TikTok world and things like that, I could see that, but I think there's, I think it's just kind of a temporary thing. you know all of it's getting hashed out yeah it's been kind of a move with like younger people lately of like trying to become avatars and now maybe moving back towards like what ben was saying

you know moving back towards nature and the psychedelic movement but it seemed like for a bit there and it still may be going that way it seems like people were getting all of their thrill-seeking you know, there's social interaction and, you know, and existing, you know, in a world that was that was virtual instead of the real world. Well, I guess one example of that from the world is, you know, Facebook made this big old bed on the metaverse, which I knew it was going to crash and burn at some point. But, you know, they just laid off 11,000 people, right? So, you know, in laying off 11,000 people, I guess that's kind of a sign of how much of a wrong bet that was and maybe an indication of directions things are going.

Yeah, I don't, it seems to me that the virtual is but a shadow of like the reality. You know, I was talking to a young woman yesterday. And what do you guys think? Do you think that I think virtual reality was an attempt to replace the spiritual reality. You know, it's this idea of like, hey, look at this. thing and like people got really drawn into AI, people got really drawn into like our future as like this, you can go anywhere in the world, you're almost like a God. And in some ways, it seemed to me as a virtual reality was trying to claim spiritual reality, because for so long there's been this

spiritual void. And we talk about psychedelics, it's Renaissance of Psychedelics, and I think that the psychedelic Renaissance is bringing people back to the idea of a higher power that's not virtual, but it's somehow tangible, even though you can't really touch it, like you can know it's there. And that's what virtual reality was trying to accomplish. What do you think about that, Jason? I don't know that virtuality has had enough adoption to know really the direction that is going to go yet. Like, I feel like I would say that it, I'd be curious to know, but I would bet it's probably somewhere between like 20 to 30 percent of the population has adopted VR in some way, shape or form, whether they've got an Oculus or they're like are gaming with it.

And so I think it's an interesting promise, but it's not something that enough people, I think, have bought into. And I think it's going to be interesting to see that, like if the neuralink stuff goes down, right, like the idea of some of this stuff like Elon's talking about where you can like plug straight in to the system and be in that virtual reality will become instantate, like everybody will tap in. But I think it remains like something on your goggles that you're wearing and whatnot. I think it's going to take a little bit before we really see adoption to then know really what its function is going to be in society.

You know, I would say from a technical standpoint, we are very much incapable of mimicking reality. You know, and it's come a long way. I mean, graphics are pretty wild these days in games, but it doesn't compare to walking through the forest. And let alone, you know, the fact that usually that's only engaging, you know, a couple of the sensory inputs in the body, you know, you're just seeing and hearing these things. You're not actually participating in them viscerally. You know, you don't have the feedback. And there are things like they have these haptic feedback systems, omnidirectional treadmills and all the stuff that are trying to kind of bridge that gap. But, you know, I think from just a purely technical. standpoint, we don't have the capacity to mimic the real world at any sort of level that is a big enough of a cell. Now, when you get into things like augmented reality, I think we're going to see a lot more of that in the next coming years. All of a sudden, you're walking down a street, and it just looks like a normal street. You put on your glasses, and, you know, the Chinese

restaurant has a sign that says, you know, free foe today, you know, and all these other things. I think we'll see a bit more of that. But again, the adoption for it, just because of the technical resources that it requires, from a socioeconomic perspective, I don't see it really going full virtual anytime soon. Interesting. No, I've been hearing about smart dust.

I don't know how much science fiction that is versus reality. But, you know, every now and then I'll read an article about this idea of nanobots sort of this ability to pop up ads in front of you like in real time like how far fetched is that kind of stuff man um well it depends so if i have a pair of augmented reality glasses um it's a it's a lot more easy uh but like nanotechnology and things like that are still way way way down um you know from a miniaturized perspective we've built things pretty small but the things that we can build very very small are very basic um you know There's a lot of people working on this stuff, but I don't, you know, it's one of those things.

It's like VR. If you remember, there was a big VR thing in like the late 80s, early 90s, right? And everybody's like, oh, yeah, VR is going to be the future of everything. And then the promise of it versus the reality just didn't pan out. And then it kind of disappeared. And 20 years later, now it's kind of coming back. And again, you had people like Facebook make a huge bet on it. And they haven't even been able to fulfill that.

promise by throwing billions of dollars at it. Yeah. Does that, you think that that has, when I think about nanotechnology, like what, do you give me any credence to like being able to have an RFID chip implanted, maybe in your hand to like,

for like an ID or a passport or something like that? Yeah, and people have done it. So there's, you know, there's a whole kind of subculture of people who embed RFID chips. embedded madness in their fingers, you know, and they're really big on like human augmentation type ideas. But those are still pretty fringe. And, you know, a lot of those things, when you start

mixing biology and technology, there's a lot of hurdles that all of a sudden come into play. You know, the body rejects those things readily. And to overcome that is one of the things that we really haven't done. There's there is work and I've read some papers and seen some some efforts that are you know kind of moving that along, especially when you know you're talking like prosthetics and things like that and then you have the stuff like the neuralink. And so, you know, the idea is there and people are working on it. But the, you know, getting it to the everyday individual is pretty far off, I think, yet at least five to seven years. Yeah. Man, it's crazy. Jason, what do you think are some of the big issues we got

coming up in the next maybe five or ten years that could change the world we live in? I think, honestly, I think the neuralink stuff is really fascinating. And seeing like the effort that Elon's putting in and just hearing him like when he was on Rogan, it was a while ago, but he was really kind of talking about these ideas of like when you can bypass the need for the screen and you can just directly interact the way that information begins to flow and open up. And if that really could happen, that's going to be a significant shift to society. Because the difference between the has and the have-nots, like, you know, it's going to be, you know, to have that kind of, you know, to have that kind of like understanding and information at your fingertips

would be a complete game changer. And so I, again, I don't know how far off it is. You know, it's like 10 years out or longer but that's one that's really interesting to me yeah my my problem with that is is everything can be hacked right so all of a sudden you put a chip in your brain and then you know you're like oh cool i have the power of google at my fingertips and and then all of a sudden you're getting propaganda messages just directly downloaded to your sensory cortex is yeah um and some of which you could even be unaware of right um Now, he's claimed that they only have a one-way street for this, that you can't really have, you know, you wouldn't be able to do this, but a lot of people have claimed that their systems are unhackable and that have, you know, felt the pain, the sting of reality. Yeah.

I don't know. But it's an interesting one. I can see it coming kind of out of nowhere. Well, they've made a lot of progress. Yeah. Sorry, George. Yeah. That's all right.

I read it. I was going to say they made a lot of progress, right? So they've actually, you know, they had the chimp play in pawn with its mind. That was a very interesting video. And then they've actually started implanting it into like paraplegics and things like that and allowing them to utilize, you know, interfaces for the computer, move, you know, like an electric wheelchair. You know, some really interesting, you know, really. interesting feats of technology when you think about what they're kind of doing.

And I'm not sure how familiar you are with the whole process, but they've actually, they've mapped like the firing of the sequence of neurons, like when people look at an apple and they recognize it as an apple, they, you know, they do this for hundreds of different test subjects. And then they get kind of like, you know, it's like plotting it on a graph. And all of a sudden you can see that the specific firing of these neurons correlates to an apple. And so now, you know, you can, you can kind of project the idea of an apple into somebody's mind by having those neurons fire. So it's really fascinating stuff. And it's really cool because it kind of, you know, highlights how the brain works and how we, how we use information, how it's stored,

how we recall it, how we interface with it. So, I mean, it's, it's fascinating technology. technology, again, it can always be hacked. And then my other really big concern with it is, you know, who controls the, you know, who controls the switch essentially? Because it's only ever going to be as good as them. How does this really, have you guys read any of these articles on like pre-crime? Like I read in Chicago, they have set up like this idea about pre-crime. How does reading these brainwaves and how does the idea of is it, what is this idea of pre-crime?

Is that like your scrolling history combined with your credit history or what? Does anybody know what that's about? Yeah. So I looked into it when it came out. And what they were doing is they were basically taking like prior crime data. And then they were, you know, correlating it with other data from social media and things like that. And they were able to predict. So they claimed to a 90% accuracy of when a crime was going to happen.

But it wasn't more, it wasn't like the specific individual. It was like an area. you know, so they would say that there's a 90% likelihood of crime is going to occur at, you know, six in Wiltshire type idea. I'm always skeptical when I hear stuff like that because, you know, there's a lot, like, especially with numbers in tech, like they're really good at saying, look, we're 90% there. We're 95% there. But the difference between a chimpanzee and a human is like 0.02%.

You know, they're like 99.8% the same. So when tech tells us, hey, we're 90% there. Like, that's a long way off, man. You're just saying that because it sounds good, but you know, what is 90%? Is that like the area where there might be a crime because banks get ripped off? So you're going to say there's going to be a crime with this bank? I mean, yeah, well, you know, 90% of, oh, go ahead, Paul. Kind of like the weather, right?

So when you look at your app, your weather app on your phone, and it says, like, there's a 60% chance of rain. Well, they mean there's a 60% chance in the forecasted region, which could be this whole area where you live. That rain is going to rain. somewhere, not necessarily your place, but it's going to rain somewhere within the forecasted area. Right. And so what they were using in that Chicago experiment was, you know, like cell phone chatter, right? Like, and they were basically just spying on everybody. And then, you know, you would see it, for instance, wherever there was going to be crimes, you would have, you know, just an excess of different types of messages with different types of words because people, you know, typically aren't committing crimes, you know, in abstent. or in a vacuum there's a lot of correlation and so they were taking the correlation and saying this is going to be you know it's the causation for this uh there's huge problems with that of course from

multiple different angles let alone the privacy one uh but yeah from a tech standpoint 90% there basically is you know you get a lot of things 90% there the last 5 to 10% can take you sometimes twice as long as you got to the first 90. There is, you know, it's 90% of it's there because all the functions, all of the data inputs, all the stuff is there, but actually putting it into a package and tying it with a bow is a much greater task than most people give credit for. Yeah, it's interesting to think about it.

I may have said this before, but I think there's a, there's like a parallel that says, like tech never really shows up, man. It's always like 10 years away. It's always 20 years away. We're supposed to have driving cars all the time. We're supposed to have driving trucks. We're supposed to have automation.

We're supposed to be like the Jetons and live in the Skypad apartments. When I think about that, I always think of like, you know, people or investors or short-term investors that are sitting in a boardroom and in comes this whiz kid and it's like, look at this program I got. Look, it's going to be amazing. All I need is a million dollars. and give them a million. And then a year later, all I need is another million. You know, they just string them along. And it's like meta for Facebook.

Like these things that are promised never show up. And it seems like we bet the farm. And maybe that's one reason we're in this crisis right now is because we bet the farm for so many years, all this stuff, and it never shows up. Well, it typically never shows up because you get down to these things called edge cases. It's like when you, you know,

when the video of the Tesla not stopping for the little girl and just runs right through it, right? Well, that's an edge case. And now all of a sudden you have to take that edge case and you're trying to solve for this 0.001% of instances. But in order to do that, it requires sometimes a rewrite of every, you know, the entire logic of what you've built already.

And that's why, you know, the last 5% and 10% of these projects take so much time, effort, money, and ultimately a lot of them fail. It's because they can't account for the edge cases. And when you have $8 billion, people walking around on the planet the edge cases are something that you have to consider and they have to be dealt with they have to be managed in a certain in some way it's you know it's like

what's insurance going to choose like grandma or baby right like if the if the car has to decide which one is going to hit how do you insure that how do you take care of the car making a decision who lives and guys you know they can't they can't figure that out yet you know so that to me feels like that edge case of like how do you solve for that and maybe you don't and then therefore the text's probably there it's just can we get it adopted in these ways that they want to bring it out to the message right and it's not just necessarily though sometimes it ends up as technical edge cases too like all of a sudden well on the winter solstice the light is a certain way in this region of the world and that just sends all of our sensors haywire because of you know you know they're using

LIDAR and all of these things to accomplish these feats. Well, you know, now you have to figure out, you know, now you have to program an entire astrological projection into your system so it knows when there's going to be a winter solstice. So now you can solve for the winter solstice. Oh, guess what? Summer solstice is an entirely different problem. It's actually not similar whatsoever. Now we have to go off and solve for this. And this is, you know, these are those edge cases. But when you, you know, to Jason's point, when you get to that real world scenario, how do you handle these, you know, what sort of tradeoffs are you comfortable with? What sort of risk are you willing to accept with these things? And from a public perspective, you know, the public really

doesn't enjoy more risk being put on them at any given level, let alone an insurance company. I wonder how much is, do you think like industrial espionage plays, like giant conglomerance? Like, I really don't want this technology out here. Let me just go a wrenching this project. Probably a lot. Probably quite a bit. Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, know most of your corporate espionage is stealing IP and then trying to copy and recreate it which creates a whole different set of problems because you know you're copying something incomplete and then trying to roll it out unless you have some you know gifted team of engineers who have solutions ready to go which you probably don't because you're copying shit in the first place

you just end up in a bad scenario yeah it's digitization is is definitely something on the horizon that's worth worth spending some time on. Paul, when you weigh a lake at night, when you weigh a lake, when you lay awake at night, what is it that's on your mind that makes you do that? That makes me stay awake? Yeah. Do you have anything that's bothering you about the future

that you got on your radar? Yeah, I mean, I think we're having, like, currently we're going through, we're seeing a pretty big cultural and political divide in the country. you know if we were you know poverty is rising um you know the gap between the wealthy and the poor continues to rise um you know and i kind of think that we're heading towards you know as a as a nation we're becoming more and more desperate and that that's really concerning for me do you see it like do you see there's a lot of talk about no one really accepting the results of the next

presidential election is that something you think is possible oh yeah oh yeah yeah totally i mean the guy just announced he's going to run for president again he still hasn't accepted the results from the last time you ran for president well you know i think by saying that i'm going to run for president again kind of implies that you you know you have to accept those previous results right yeah I mean, you would think, but I don't know, it doesn't seem to be the case. It's like, I'm willing to jump back in and participate in the system that I know is rigged, that I have no chance in. Like, they got a word for that, right? A few.

That's the same thing Hillary did. It's the same thing he did. And is that going to escalate to the point where something actually happens? Because it seems that there's been more and more people on both. sides that don't accept the idea that they lost, you know, and it's, it kind of fits the, the corporate idea of never admit guilt, you know, never admit you lost. Like it seems to be more like, I don't think it's a blue thing or a red thing as much as it is a strategic thing.

And I'm curious if like, you know, what's the next step in that strategy? Is the next step in that strategy to tell your people like, okay, this time we really didn't lose, this time's enough, you know, or is this more like rhetoric that is just going to be more of the same. I think by and large, I think by and large it's rhetoric to line their pockets. You know, look at how much money these people make by just being in, you know, in the public eye. And so I think a lot of it's profit-driven or monetary drivers. But at the same time, you know, how does that correlate to the common individual who, who's now playing a part of the system has joined a tribe and says, and it feels they've been cheated.

You know, you can only have people feel they've been cheated for so long before you start to have, you know, incidents, before you start to have people who just say, you know what, well, script, I'm just going to go grab a gun and I'm going to go shoot. You know, I think we're seeing that. And we are. I agree. Yeah. But, I mean, it's not, like the rhetoric so much doesn't bother me. It's the fact that there are a lot of,

of Americans out there that believe that stuff, that's the part that bothers me. You know, which goes back to the American sixth grade education stuff. Right. Yeah. And it's a systemic problem. For sure. Yeah, it's, it's, and it's a huge problem. And so I, you know, I mean, that's the kind of stuff. Look, I'm, you know, I'm, uh, I'm a firm believer in equality. And not forced equality, but, you know, that things are, you know, if I'm accessing my government, that my government is blind to my race, religion, you know, sex, sexual orientation, you know, all of that stuff. And so, you know, we're really seeing people, like, really try to push those boundaries of fairness, of equality. And that stuff, that stuff bothers me.

let me ask you this and just just to make interesting conversation like you know like maybe we should define equality because there's no such thing as equality like where none of us are born the same some of us are born some of us are born tall and good looking and fast and other of us are born short wear glasses and are clever you know but like you know there's no equality like if you're a different race you're not going to get treated the same as everybody else if you're slow you're I can treat it the same way as everybody else. So when we think about equality, we should know that that's like a noble lie.

I think we can agree that we should have, we should be expected to at least have some sort of base level of treatment. You know, and I think you could look at that as equality. Can anybody else help flesh out a better argument of equality? I think the goal should be equality of opportunity. I like that. You know, equality, you know, is a misnomer.

like you just said. But equality of opportunity is a potentially achievable feat for a society. Now, the way our society is structured, fat chance, right? You know, you get elected to Congress. You're not representing your people. You're representing, you know, the people who funded you to get there and all of the, you know, people who are trying to get certain laws passed for their own benefit in their own, you know, bottom lines. but if we had a focus of equality of opportunity where you know you remove the barriers of entry into these things and you have you know in you can see you know that people will say oh anybody can start a business but that's not true right you know what sort of resources does it require what sort of you know human skill does it require what sort of all of these things and where does that come from well you have to have the education you have to have

the you know the community you have to have all these things that are structured in a certain way in order to enable that. And in the West, we just, you know, we don't have that. Yeah, the reason I bring up equality on an, that's a beautiful, beautifully put. And I want to even add another layer on there. It seems to me like the word equality has been weaponized, especially for people below a certain economic threshold. And it's like, you, this white person is not equal to this black person. This black person is not equal to this Jewish person.

This Jewish person is not equal to this. It's like everybody below. this economic threshold, you guys fight about this inequality bullshit, okay? That way you're not talking about us. Like, you know, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, like these guys are on a whole other level. And the stuff they throw out to the people is like red meat. You guys just fight over this stupid stuff.

And yeah, and it's not equal. It's not fair. But they know that people on the bottom are going to fight about that. And I think that that, when we talk about a sixth grade education, when we talk about being educated in your government, I think that this is something people. should be thoroughly getting to understand is that we no longer live in the United States of America that you were taught. I don't care if you were taught about it in Arkansas or taught about it in California, taught about it in Florida or taught about it in Idaho. We do not live in the United States of America that you were taught in a history book.

We live in a multinational corporation that doesn't really care about you or your family or your tax money. Like you have the illusion of where your money goes. I recently listened to this girl, Catherine Austin Fitz, and she was the former secretary of HUD for housing. She said when she was in the administration, she had figured out a way to give the taxpayer like a financial statement at the end of the year as a taxpayer. You would get a financial statement the same way you did if you bought stocks in a company that would say where your tax money went. But beyond that, it would say where your money in the local community went to. It would break it down for you. your money went to the school and went to these roads and she was ran out of town they said what are you doing you can't do that

yeah of course yeah yeah nobody wants to know that their money went to a a bomb that killed a whole bunch of civilians in yemen you know um because at the end of the day they would say i don't want to support this at all and then all of that big funding from the military industrial complex dries up and goes away and can't get can't get, you know, slurped up by all of these people who are quote-unquote at the upper echelons of society. So, I mean, how much do you think, so, you know, the IRS wrapped up their agents, right? They hired something, you know, 10,000 of agents, right? How much of do you think that is them preparing for people to unplug and just be like, I'm done paying my taxes? Like, it's not supporting anything.

I'm done supporting this industrial complex. And people like, do you think they're preparing for a wave of society to be like, I'm done? I think they're preparing to go and get more. Like they're going to take more. Like they didn't hire these people for like, I think it was Jaja Gabor who said poor taxes are for poor people. And it's true. If you make a certain amount of money, you don't pay taxes. Like that's ridiculous.

But if you make under probably a few million dollars, they're coming for you. Like, I've been audited twice. I'm a truck driver. You know, I wrote a letter to my, when this whole COVID thing went down, I wrote a letter to my senator. And two weeks later, I got a letter from the IRS. You know, like, hey, look at that. Congratulations. You got yourself put on her list.

Yeah. Yeah, guaranteed, you know. And it wasn't even a mean letter. It was the letter had to do with COVID. And what I said is like, I think that we are, we are spitting in the face of the Nuremberg code here. And it was when they were trying to tell me like, hey, you have to get a shot if you want to go to your. work and I'm like, I'm not doing that. That's ridiculous. That violates all my freedoms. So I

just sent a letter to my, to my senator and then I got that back. I don't believe in coincidences. I got, oh, no. And these 15,000 IRS agents are coming for the people that have any kind of money, because that's how bad the government wants it. It's 87,000, wasn't it? Eighty-seven.

Yeah, you're right. You're right. And not only that, you know, the job posting was you have to be okay using deadly force. Right, that was part of their job posting for hiring these new agents, which, wow, talk about a throwback to the tax collector, right? Yeah. Yeah.

You could see it everywhere. Remember, they were supposed to give back money to the kids who got loans. I think when Biden came out, they were going to give, they were going to do away with some people student loans. They're not going to do that anymore. Like, I think what you're going to see, and this is a good, I kind of want to circle into this, too. like in the next 10 years like I see this hard turn to the right and what I'm basing that on is if you look at like the new people on the fringes that are being pushed into the limelight like if you watch the Tim Polshall like those kids are taking a pretty hard right if you look at like this kit take character that guy's taking a pretty hard right Elon Musk taking a pretty hard right and if you look if we if history as a barometer we can see that after a swing to the left you see a swing to the left you see a swing to the the right and I'm worried that there's going to be a big sort of roundup of people you're going to see homeless people round up put away you're going to see some of the people on the

liberal left that seem to be out there taken away and put away i i see that coming and do you guys think that that's too far of a reach or any ideas that's a bit too far is it why well i mean you know we have guardrails in this country you know we're we're a that's under the rule of law and the things that you're describing would be like circumventing those guardrails and our constitutional rights and the rule of law you know there's we don't live in a country where you just can round up people that have a different political view than you you know that's that's not gonna happen we we don't yet but if you remember when Biden first took office his

first speech was the greatest threat to this country that's facing this country is domestic terrorism. So now by labeling somebody as a domestic terrorist, which George probably got put on a list like that, all of a sudden, now you can remove their rights from them because you simply classified them as this thing. And so I think we're going to see more of that.

I don't think it's going to be as overt as what you're saying, George. I think it's going to be much more subtle. For instance, is it. I think it was Canada just legalized euthanization of mentally ill people. I think you're going to see policies like that and you're going to see, you know, well, if you do get labeled in one of these buckets like a domestic terrorist or something like that, they'll have things like, you know, oh, we can force police sterilize you. You know, you're going to have, you're going to have measures like that and they will dehumanize you first by labeling you and putting you in a bucket.

and thereby removing your rights. And then, you know, they're allowed to do whatever they want at that point. I think we're like, we're already at the point of show trials. I'm sorry, Paul, go ahead. That's all, I mean, that's a, that's a real, that's a real stretch. No, but it's already happening. Well, like, it's already happening. People are getting their rights removed and then euthanized.

Well, not euthanized, but that's, that's, like, There are people like Canada just made it law that they are allowed to euthanize mentally ill people. Okay, but we're talking about the United States, right? Right. How about January 6th? Like, there's plenty of people that were held in solitary confinement and haven't even been charged yet. Yeah. So, you know, again, I don't think these things are going to be grandly overt, but all of a sudden, you know, it becomes, if you create the precedent for this, then it becomes easier to just,

take that next incremental step for these things. So, you know, all of a sudden, you know, when did you first hear the term domestic terrorist? Right? Yeah. It hasn't, it's relatively recent, but yet all of a sudden it's the greatest step to this country. Well, I mean, it's been on the last 20 years. Right, but I would say that that's relatively recent, right? You know, I would say it was after we came back from Iraq. That's all of a sudden domestic terrorists. Domestic terrorists have gone from being people that bombed buildings to soldiers that came back from Iraq that are upset. I think that those are like the biggest threat and those are the people that are being labeled as domestic terrorists.

Not because that they want to ruin our government or they want to kill people because they're upset that they were lied to about all the wars that they fought. Well, I mean, like my recollection of domestic terrorism goes back to like the Ku Klux Klan and, you know, the skinheads where people where the government was coming out and saying, we have a war on terrorism like George Bush. And then, you know, then there's a whole bunch of people out there going, yeah, well, if we're going to have a war on terrorism, we have terrorism right here in America. They're called the Ku Klux Klan. They're called the skinheads or the white area and resistance, you know, the white nationalism. Right, but then all of a sudden, you know, look at the labels that are getting slapped on people these days. You know, and all it takes to be labeled is to have some wrong speech out in the public sphere. Or, you know, one bad tweet, for instance. I mean, you know, so all of a sudden, you know, it's these incremental steps.

And you'll see they'll be overstepped occasionally and then they'll roll it back and say, oh, we're sorry. but then fast forward two, three, five years, the same thing's happening, but there's no blowback. You know, it just becomes this kind of incremental engrossment on people's rights and liberty. And I think, I think, I don't think you could argue that we've seen that grow tremendously over the past, ever since 2001. one. I think one interesting one that recently happened over the last, you know, year and a half or so was with all the protests, a lot of local legislation, state legislation started pushing laws against protest. And it was seen as this like, oh, great, yeah, we're protecting us. We're, you know, these are good things. We don't want to let the bad guys protest any longer.

So, you know, these are good laws. It's going to protect everyone until the next round of protests need to happen. And you're like, oh, I can't protest. Right. Like, they've removed that. right in a lot of ways. And it'll be really interesting to see if there's something that does come back where we start seeing some protests come back around and what kind of force is going to be met there because of legislation that got passed right under people's members. Yeah. You know, an interesting one is I remember in the 90s, everybody was like privacy, privacy, privacy,

the government can't look at any of my stuff, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And everybody was gung-ho about that. And there would be no chance for that to ever come to fruition. Fast forward to an Edward Snowden where he leaks that the government, not only are they spying on everything you're doing, but they're creating profiles about you. And they're doing all of these things. And it was basically just kind of like a fart in the wind. You know, everybody just kind of went like, oh, okay, well, I guess that's happening. And so they completely got away with violation of constitutional rights.

And nothing was done about it. In fact, they've ramped up those programs. Well, so, I mean, the right to privacy is not a constitutional right. True. Right. You're correct. Right? Well, I'm just, you know.

I'm thinking about it. No, no, that's, there's, yeah, there's no right to privacy. Well, some, like your HIPAA rights, like your medical information, right? Like, that's yours and, like, that's not to be shared. There's no illegal search and seizure. So that's kind of a right to privacy Unless they have a warrant. So like the things that are in your possession

are things that are I mean, I don't know how to define the word secret or privacy, but the things in your home are private property. A private property is protected. There's no right to privacy though, right? I think the closest the Constitution comes is

private property. Well, no, is quartering soldiers in private. I think that's the closest thing. My mind's tickling. I think there is something, and I just can't recall it right now. And it's been a long time since I reviewed my Constitution, unfortunately. Well, it's definitely not an enumerated, right?

No, it's not an enumerated right. But it's one of those things I think that the Supreme Court ruled, you know, was kind of an extension of one of those things. I can't recall it off the top of my head. I just did that search the right to privacy is not mentioned in the Constitution, but the Supreme Court has said that several of the amendments create this right. That's what I'm talking about unannumerated rights, right? But does so, but how does that lessen the argument to you?

Well, it sounds like what Jason just read that there's, it's not clear. In fact, it sounds pretty vague. you know, that even more so after what Jason read, you know, that there's, you know, it is not written in the Constitution. And it, you know, it sounds like it is suggested that some of the amendments do provide privacy protections, which could probably be argued. But I think going into your computer and stuff is a violation of your, like, it's a violation. they need a search warrant for that. And like that was the problem with probable cause. They're not allowed to just come in your house and search your stuff.

They're allowed to just do that. Like they need probable cause. And these programs allowed them to go into your hardware and go into all your files and view it whenever they wanted to. Like that's why they call it Windows because there's a window into your computer and they can see it at all times. Well, I think like so if you're accessing the internet, right, then you're in public space. I think like Facebook and social media,

they're allowed to take your pictures and stuff like that. But the files that you keep on your computer that you don't put in the cloud that are strictly on your computer, those are your files. And if someone looks at them, that's a, that is a, that is a, uh, it falls on a private problem. The internet and access to it is a public space. It's not, it's not entirely though. like for instance i have private servers

they're connected to the internet but it's still a private server you're you know it's a say and i think it was ruled by the supreme court that those are basically an extension of private property rights okay so i mean if we view the internet like your server is like a home and then i get i leave my house and i jump on the road you know which is the worldwide web to travel to your house like at some place i'm i'm I'm crossing public space. Right. But then all of the actions you take at my house should not be privy to those prying eyes.

Right. And that's not the case. Well, then if I get that information in a private space and then I use public space to bring it back to my house, well then... You're still robbing someone's house. You know, you can get on the freeway, but if you go into someone's house and take their stuff, you're still robbing them. so if I go I mean this is I mean these are arguments that are being in

courtrooms across America right now right yeah what is public what is private what is internet I mean that's that's part of the problem that we have is that and maybe by by you know on purpose that these things

haven't been clearly defined but I know that's that's that's there are groups working on trying to clearly define like when I go online when is it do I leave my private platform, which is my computer, my laptop, my phone, and then I go and I'm using public space

to access information, bring it back to me, and then if I'm doing that to, you know, in correlation with committing a crime, like where does that, where do those lines draw? When was I thinking about it to actually use the internet to do it.

I see where your point is, but you know, I think this is where they kind of ruled the internet is kind of like a public utility. And that came with the whole section 230 that regulated the social media stuff. And it's been years since I've looked at this. But, you know, it was the same idea of

like if I use electricity in my house and all of a sudden, you know, I'm using more electricity. You can't take that as probable cause that I'm doing something illegal like growing cannabis in my house and use that to come raid my house. No, I know. They're not going to actually write that down, you know, as a reason to raid your home.

But if they see that happening, because they're viewing it, they're seeing like every one of his neighbors is $200 a month. He's paying $1,400. Right? So they're not going to actually use that. And they're not going to write that down. But they'll begin right there to begin their, building their case that you're actually growing cannabis.

right and then I think a few of those cases have been judged and you know it was where was your chain of custody of the evidence that started this whole thing right and I think a lot you know if if all of a sudden it was oh yeah we looked at the electricity records we saw this 1400 bill opposed to these 200 dollars so we started an investigation I'm pretty sure most of those have been thrown out of court to my knowledge. Now, I'm not robust in this knowledge, so I could certainly be wrong. But I think there, I think there's, you know, and again, this comes down to, you know, how we operate as a society, but the question is, is, you know, do you think that that should be allowed that we should be able to slurp up every single person's data without

any sort of probable cause, create records and files of people, you know, use programs, to monitor these things and, you know, pull out anomalies. Is that something that a government agency that, you know, doesn't necessarily have any sort of civilian oversight should be allowed to do? I mean, are they, like this data and they're actually, are they naming you as the person connected with this data that they're collecting? Oh, yeah. There's a file on every one of us.

Well, what do you mean, like an FBI file? No, NSA file, but, yeah. Yeah. That's what Edward Snowden kind of blew the cover of is there's basically a file for every American out there. And they're putting every single piece of data about you in that file. And then, you know, they're using AI essentially more like machine learning to pull out anomalies and, you know, do all sorts of nefarious things with that, not just look for crimes, but identify people who would be good snitches, you know, coerce and blackmail people. you know, a lot of different nefarious activities as well. So, you know, the question is, is again, should a government agency with no civilian oversight have that capability?

Well, you know, maybe I'll play devil's advocate here, but Edwin's, Edward Snowden says? No, no, no, no, no, it wasn't what he said. It's the data that he leaked. Oh, the data that he leaked. Yeah, he leaked all of, he basically copied the NSA servers. These are the programs that they're using. This is the data that it collects. And, you know, it was a very robust program.

And then not only that, but these are the tools that we can use to, you know, hack into your password-protected phone, your private servers, basically anything that was digitized. So it sounds like, you know, at some levels we need to have the privacy laws either more clearly defined or new ones introduced that protect privacy. I would agree with that. And I think it also comes down to, you know, how people should be governed or if people should be governed is probably the better question. But, you know, how people should be governed is the question that we're, you know, we have the closest connection to. And, you know, for me personally, you know, I can understand the impetus from the government perspective of wanting to do this, right? You're wanting to maintain your power structure. You're wanting to maintain law and order. You're wanting to maintain. you know this the society that you know is created however there's so many you know there's so many bad things that are happening with these funds they you know the same reason that woman got

ran out of town for showing where all of your tax dollars were going at the end of the day because people don't want it they don't want you to see where it's going because then if you saw or is going there's no chance that those people would still be in power so if those are the people who are using this information for not just personal gain but you know corporate gain and you know the erosion of rights and privacy where does that line get drawn what should we do as a as a public society you know where what should what should be the solution i think i think that this is the solution i think that this is everything that we have discussed so far is part of the whole like the the the the current war we're in the the idea that we all have a file the idea that you know

there's this i this scarcity there's this idea of scarcity like the truth is at least in i shouldn't say the truth because i don't really know what the truth is however in my opinion what we are going through right now is financial collapse and you're seeing the road you're seeing the circles get smaller and smaller and smaller like this idea of of COVID coming through and having the entire transfer of wealth from every small business owner. Like, how come all the small businesses get closed down? Costco's wide open. This is,

this is called property consolidation. This is called capital consolidation. Like, what you're seeing happen in our country is the exact same thing happened in the Soviet Union. Like, we are slowly, slowly but surely being changed. And that's what I mean by this is not like, Paul, this is my, my challenge to you. We don't live under the Constitution. The Constitution is a piece of paper. And those rights don't apply to you. They don't apply to me. They don't apply to Ben or Jason.

Like, posicotumatitis has been suspended. You can be taken out with a drone. Like, there's different levels of justice. Just look at the people that don't ever go to jail. How much more does our system look like the Chinese system than the American system? How much are we fighting on the bottom? Like, we are being put into. to a new container as we speak. And not enough people know about it. Like, we think we're protected by the Constitution. We're not.

We don't have elections. We have selections. Like, none of us get to choose the person that runs. We talked about this in a previous podcast. Like, you have to have $10 million in order to do that. You can put your name on the ballot and say you're going to run for it. But you don't have any money. You're not going to make it there.

And if you even got closed, people would shut you out. Like, we don't live in the United States anymore. We live in a corporate structure. and we are employees of this place. They take our taxes the same way a corporation takes the taxes out of your check first. You don't even get your money anymore. And, you know, I think we're going to see a collapse of the pension funds coming. Like that's the next shoe to drop, in my opinion.

Right? Like, look at what's happening. Look at the way they are setting up euthanasia for old people. They don't have old people's pensions, man. There's no money in Wall Street. It's all digital. money's been shipped out. It's been, we've bought millions of schools in Afghanistan. It's gone to non-government organizations. And when you think about the United States talking about infrastructure, they're not talking about our country. When they talk about infrastructure building, they're talking about building pipelines in Ukraine. We're spending $15 billion a month. That's infrastructure, but not for us. But it's infrastructure spending. So you get like a little bit of the, you get a little bit of the picture when they say things. But if you just pan back, the first step is like, dude, none of this makes any sense. None of it makes any sense.

But when you start panning back and you look at the globe and you go like, well, there's a lot of money over there. Hey, weren't they going to set aside money for infrastructure? Well, shit, that looks like infrastructure. But it's not over here. You know, and you look at the sixth grade education. That's by design. They don't want people smart enough to come in here and know where to vote, how to vote. They want us fighting on the bottom hating each other.

I saw a good picture of like there's a black guy and a white guy and then a banker. And the banker has this big giant pile of cookies. and the white guy has one cookie and the black guy has no cookie. And then the banker says to the black guy, hey, that white guy stole your cookie. You know what I mean? Like the people on top are siphoning all the money. What do you think about?

Like, look at Paul Pelosi and Nancy Pelosi. Like she just quit. Do you think that's a coincidence that somebody broke in her parent, broke in their house and did something with the husband? Like that's connected. This is connected. We don't see what's happening. But I can tell you there's major changes happening in our country

and not enough people are talking about it. sounds really wacky that's why yeah but it's always wacky yeah but the thing is is there's evidence to support this that's you know and so yeah it sounds what kind of evidence are we talking about well we've already cited quite a bit of it um but you know when you i mean no like the evidence like because something happened to paul Pelosi is that is that evidence like what's that's anecdotal cartoon And all the government people going in coming out multi-millionaires. They make $100,000 a year, but they all come out multimillionaires. Those people are getting paid.

They take money from lobbyists. Nancy Pelosi is the best trader in American history, Paul. How do you think that happened? Do you think she's better than, like, Elon Musk or any of these corporate funds? Like, she has better trader than all of them? She's insider trading all day long and it's not illegal. And they all do. And they all do.

They know what bill's going to happen before it gets passed and they go put a million bucks on it. They put $500,000 on it. And if it's, it's like that is happening all day long. Those people aren't even writing the bills. Our congressman and centers aren't even writing the bills. A lobbyist comes in, hands on the bill says, this is what you're voting for. Okay. Why do you think there's a revolving door between all the lobbyists and the politicians?

You can see it in Hawaii, man. Like, I see people that work in high industries here and then all of a sudden they go to a lobbyist because they know all the rules. They just go in and they switch it. Like it's, what's happening here is. is happening here that's the evidence and it's and it's even more than that you know you know we have the evidence of people like uh but trump's son got two billion dollars from the saddies you got hunter biden who got millions of dollars from the bariska thing in ukraine right you got and so these are proven things you know there's evidence that clearly say this has happened and so these people are

selling out everybody for to line their pockets and this is kind of you know you know that's Brett's right there, man. I mean, really, I'm like, so, I mean, Hunter Biden, he can't be employed. He can't,

he should not be taking money for foreign governments and giving it back to people in his family. Or there should be a conflict of interest at the very, he wasn't, doing that, he's taking money from foreign governments and giving it back to his family.

Is that what he's doing? Foreign government energy companies. Yeah. Foreign government energy companies, yes. Brisman government energy companies. Yes. Okay.

Yeah. So if you look at that whole thing, what happened is Joe Biden went over there and this is all documented. He celebrated giving them a quid pro quo if you have to get rid of the lawyer who's investigating this company for fraud and all these other things that they were committing or else. And he's the vice president of the United States at this point. And the or else was we're going to cause you all sorts of problems. it was a quit pro pro all of a sudden that the lawyer and the whole investigation gets shut down hunter biden gets put on the board of an energy company because he's really qualified and this is the same thing that happens on the trump side and all of these other all these other fuckers uh but this

documented evidence man i'm gonna have to research this i want to see what this documented evidence is please do yeah it doesn't it doesn't need to be the best way if you want to see what's really happening is look at the corruption that happens in every other country. And that's the corruption that's happening in our country. The same thing that happens in China happens here. The same thing that happens in Saudi Arabia, it happens here. Like, that is the government. It's like these people that are running the government.

Like, it's not Congress. It's not the Senate. It's a group of interlocking boards of directors, sovereign wealth funds. It's a bunch of unelected officials that are running the show. And that, when you look at it, from that angle, things begin to line up. All of a sudden, the puzzle starts to fit together, and you're like, oh, that kind of makes sense, you know? And this isn't like new hat either.

You know, the aristocrats, classy has done this from, as long as you want to go back in history. You know, it's why the Romans had bread and circus was to distract the people from all of the fleecing that they were doing, you know, and to keep the power structure as the power structure. And this is, you know, we're the saying, you know, power corrupts, ultimate power corrupts, absolutely. Once you have these power structures in place, they naturally become corrupted because the ideals that born them or bore them are no longer carried by all of the people who work in that environment. They get bought and paid for. Because now, look, it's a big energy company. I'm a big oil company and I don't, you know, and I need this contract.

to get through. I'm not going to go off and, you know, get myself elected to try to get this to pass. I'm just going to go buy these people and, and pay enough money to these lobbyists to get this pass through. I mean, you know, I'll send donations to, you know, 70 different people who are running in Congress. And then when time comes to vote, guess how those people are going to vote? They're going to vote for the people who line their pocketbook. Hmm. I mean, I'm not denying that there isn't corruption. I'm not. You know what I mean? I'm not saying that. There for sure is corruption.

But like George's painting a pretty like doomsday picture here about the level of corruption. Because you can tell one or two stories about corruption doesn't mean the whole system is corrupt. Yeah, but but then you can you can take those stories and if you keep looking for more stories, you find more stories. And then you can listen to the people who have gone through these, you know, like the woman who got watch. out because she had, you know, came up with the idea to show everybody where their tax money way. You know, there's these little pieces of the puzzle that, yeah, in, in a vacuum, in isolation, yeah, it kind of, oh, it's just a one-off thing. But the more you look at this, the more you will find that these are not just one-off things,

and this is much more systemic that it is not. It's, to me, like, it's very, it's hard. It's hard to look at it. Because once you start looking at it, you can't deny it. And then you have to start changing the way you see the world. Like, you know, like there's a guy in Hawaii that stole $200 billion, not $200 million. And I'm like, it blows my mind like that, like I see that guy all the time. And I'm like, how did this guy steal $200 million from the state of Hawaii?

He stole $200 million. And part of the penalty was they made him give back $150. And that begs the question. Where's the other $50? What happened to that? You get back $150? What else happened? And this guy's on house arrest?

Like, wait a minute. Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. You, there's a guy's on the corner that's selling crack and they go to jail, but this guy steals 200 million and he gets house arrest. He's got a fleet of cars. Like that is corruption at the highest level. And that's just a symptom of the sickness that plagues us. That's on a local level.

What's happening at a federal level? You know, how many people are downstream from this $100 million contract? And how many of these people are each taking a cut? And what happens when one guy is like, I'm just going to take my cut over here. you know what and once the stream stops people start fighting and i think that that is part and parcel of what's happening with the economy as the economy dries up as more in companies fail people get reckless people start getting nervous people start selling each other out they start turning on themselves look at ftx look at how look at how all that went out look at and now they're

pulling the strings on where the money went and you know follow the money uh you know what 50 some million dollars went to, you know, get people from the Democratic Party elected. You look at the guy who, his mother, raised over 150 some million dollars for, you know, I forget exactly what it is up the top of my head. But now they're pulling back the cover of this. He comes out and he says, oh, we got hacked for, you know, some 450 million dollars of your cousin. of customer money, of your money that you invested in our company, not even invested, that you were storing with our company. And it turns out it wasn't a hack at all. He was paying off the bohemian government because he made a deal with them. And so, you know, the layers of this are deep,

but once you start pulling on the threats of this, the evidence begins to line up in such a way where, you know, now it becomes such a preponderance of evidence that you have to, as a reasonable individual ask yourself is you know where does this stop and where does it begin and you know I think to George's point as you continue to span out and you look at this from a 10,000 foot perspective you know that evidence stacks up very very tall you know on one point on FTX as well before FTX failed Voyager failed and Voyager was one of these companies that was given people like 9 10 12 percent you know full it was it ended up being a full Ponzi scheme voyager went to its customers and said, look, we've made some bad loans.

We're going to get bought by new owners. Everyone's going to get 70% of their money back. You know who bought Voyager? FTX. You know, so like, those are connected. Like, it's big bank take little bank all day long. And the guy on the bottom gets nothing. And this is exactly what I mean.

When you look at that particular scam that happened, like let's use FTX as the model. That is the same model that's being used everywhere. And we, American people, people, social security, people with pension, the pension funds have been leveraged. The pension funds have nothing, they're completely wiped out. And when people figure this out, you know, when, when that's why there's this mad scramble for a CDC or what a central bank. CBDC. Yeah, CBDC. Because we're getting to a point where they can't paper over the loss is fast enough.

And you can argue this STX was a money grab. Do we need this over here? Sorry. We need this over here. We got to cover this hole so we can cover that hole. But there's not, like, how many more giant scores are they where they can go and steal stuff? Like we've already been doing it in other countries, right? When the U.S. goes there, we take all their resources and put it in a slush fund, and then we can pay the debts for a while.

Now what? Okay. Uh, uh, uh, oh, now we're going to go, Ukraine. Let's get their stuff. Okay. Uh, uh, uh, FTX. Let's get their stuff. But now where?

Like, and as, as we're stealing as much money to rob Peter to pay Paul, the, the baby boomers are getting older and older and older. And there's not enough money. to pay them. That's why we have zombie corporations. That's why that's why everyone's freaking out about the Fed raising rates like do these zombie corporations going to fail. You keep raising these things. What's a zombie corporation? A zombie corporation is a corporation that makes zero dollars but just buys its own stock back. They borrow money from the Fed. They park it at the Fed Bank, make interest, and then pay their bills with it. They're insolub. They're insolvent. They're insolvent. They're insolvent.

Yeah. They're insolvent. Yeah. They're insolvent. And a lot of them, a lot of them are insolvent. Banks, insurance companies. You know, all of a sudden, all these, why do you think you can't talk about COVID deaths? Like, insurance companies don't have money to pay that out. Like, they have to paper over all this. Like, it's coming down and people, they're not even worse. Like, that's why there's so many distractions. That's why they want us fighting is because it's getting to the point where they can't hide stuff. So when you can't hide stuff, what do you do? You make the people below you not pay attention. Hey, you want Trump or you want Hillary, man. Oh, yeah, no, Trump is a bad man. No, Hillary's this. Who cares about? You know, who cares about? either of them. They're both garbage. They're both dummies. Not one of them cares about you at all. At all. At all. Not at all, man. The government's coming down.

People don't get it, man. Right? Look at show trials. I'll throw this one out here because this will make you have a good laugh about it. How much is the Alex Jones a show trial? That guy's supposed to pay like a billion dollars. That is a flat out show trial. One point two trillion.

Dude. I think it got to. That's called a show trial, man. They had them in the Soviet Union, and now they're here. Like, I can't pay a trillion dollars, but you know what it does? It gets people talking about it. Yeah, Alex Jones is the bad guy. Donald Trump's the bad guy.

No, the Democrats are the bad guys. There's people down here budding heads. But guess what? It doesn't matter if the blue guy takes a dump on you or the red guy takes a dump on you. Because that's what's coming. And you're going to be left holding the bag, all of us. Like we should take our government back. That's what people are worried about.

And that's why people hate nationalism. Nationalism is a way for the people of the country to get the spoils that belong to that country. And what happens when the spoils of the country go to that country? Well, the oligarchs don't get the money. You kick those guys out. That's what Putin did in the Soviet Union. So everybody hates that guy.

He didn't let the oligarchs take everything. And that's what China's doing. China put Jack Ma in prison. Hey, sorry, Jack, you're getting a little too big for your bootstraps, son. You think you run stuff? We're the government. We run stuff. We're the gangsters, not you. In America, the billionaires of the gangsters.

The government's nothing. Well, if you replace all your United States of America with the state of California, it's the same argument people were making about California in the 70s, and yet there it stands still functioning as a state. I don't know what that argument. What was that argument? I'm not familiar with that one, either. What? What happened in the 70s?

I don't know, like every, you know, like this system is crashing. Well, George just made an argument that sounds like the same argument that people were making about the state of California in the 70s. Like, California is going broke. California can't support itself. You know, all the wealthy people are sucking out in California. The politicians are running California into the ground. All of these different things they've been saying about California for 50 years. And there are still stands.

There's California. You can get on plane and go fly to it. They got working infrastructure, highway. everything, you know, that, you know, that people thought was going to go straight into the toilet. More companies have been moving there since they were talking about the demise of California in the 70s than at any other point, you know, since then, at any other point in California's history. That's what I'm saying. Like, I mean, it's a pretty bleak type of outlook you got there, George, but, you know, there's definitely a lot of, like,

and I'm not saying there isn't anything to what you're saying, but what I'm saying is it's not, as bad as you're trying to make it out to be. Unfortunately, I think it's worse. Why is it worse, Ben? I mean, we'll still have a conversation in 20 years, and people are still going to be saying, oh, the United States of America is going broke. All of the wealth people are sucking out, all the wealth right out of the country. You know what I mean?

It's like, it's going to be the same shit, man. Right, and I'm sure. That was entertaining, George, for sure. You know, and I'm sure the people in the Soviet Union said the same thing before the Soviet Union became insolver. The reason that it hasn't happened so far in the United States is mainly tied to the petro dollar. And, you know, the ability for us to just endlessly print money and go into trillions and trillions of dollars in debt and kick the can down the road. You know, eventually the rooster comes home to roost. What do you think if they're going to switch the currency that back the petro dollar?

Do you get like they already are? Like the rule? Yeah. So have you heard of Bricks? Yeah. So what's happening right now is for, you know, since World War II, the United States has essentially had a stranglehold on the global oil economy. Now with Bricks, it's a new alignment of people.

You have Brazil, you have Russia, you have China, you have Iran, you have. have and not in you know you could say all those are the other guys on the other side of the coin but yet now you're they're attracting a lot of countries that are kind of in the middle who are saying hey guess what we're not going to pay a dollar for our oil we're going to pay 50 cents on the dollar for our oil because we can get it cheaper from these guys and the only response to that you know and this is the response that's happening right now is that oh well we're going to sanction you we're going to putting bargos on your country from the United States and whatnot. But we've had a shift in the manufacturing center of the world since World War II as well.

Now it's throughout Asia, Southeast Asia. And so that alliance has been gaining a lot of steam because now these people have the ability to actually depeg the petro dollar. So all of a sudden that the $30 plus trillion of debt now has to be accounted for it. And it can't just be promised off with through future liability. And so and you know all of a sudden we went to having, you know, Maduro the head of Venezuela as one of the FBI's most wanted people to sending diplomats down there to start to shake his hand because of Venezuelan oil reserves.

And we don't want them to join Brits. You know, Saudi Arabia just turned tail who's been one of the the people who basically have, you know, kept the petro dollar for the past 20, 30 years in business, they're going to, they're talking about Jordan Bricks. So when you depeg that petro dollar, it's going to cause a massive economic shift in the world. And all of that debt and all of the liabilities that have been accumulated since World War II at least are going to, are going to come home. And you're going to, and, you know, it's going to make this country and solve it. You know, I've heard another angle on it, too, that said, you know, with the

United States being the the reserve dollar, half of the United, like half of our government uses the petrol dollar as a weapon to, for the IMF, you give out loans and you put sanctions on people. Like, we use the dollar as a

weapon against like Iran and other countries, but the rest of the world needs that dollar to trade. So when you're using it's like a split personality, you're using the currency as a weapon to punish people, but here's this other country. you over here. It's like, dude, we just want to buy fish, man. Why are you guys dropping up this rate over here on these people? Like, we need to buy fish. And so it's causing like a pretty big divide

in that. Like when you're the, when you are the world reserve currency, you should be like the oil that, you know, that greases up the levers of the machine to get stuff running. But when you're using it as a wrench to beat somebody, it's kind of like saying, hey, like, if you think about the money as a tool, it's like, Ben's like, hey, I'm using this wrench to pound this guy in the face and I'm like, well, I need it to fix this thing over here, man. And you're like, too bad. I'm pounding this guy in the face with it. Like, it's the same tool, but you're using it for two different purposes. And when one person is used it one way, the other people can't use it at all. And like, that's just a problem from being too big. Another interesting point that I heard was

this girl used this thing called the Popsicle Index. And I never heard this in my life before. But she was saying when she was younger, you know, the majority of the country, she called the Popsicle Index. The majority of kids could run to the local store, grab some Popsicle sticks and come home. And she said when she was younger, the Dow was at like a thousand. She says it, she goes, so I say the Popsicle index was at a thousand. And so was the Dow. The Dow's gone up, you know, a hundred or thirtyfold since then.

But in today's world, almost no kids can run to the store and get a Popsicle and be safe. And so the lobby is common. They find ways to raise up the Dow, but they don't ever find, they don't ever lobby the government to make the community better. So the Popsicle Index is a index that measures the health of actual. communities. Yeah, and it's inverse. So the more the more the wealth goes up, the more the Dow goes up, the worst the communities get.

And like we have seen this explosive growth. And in doing so, it's like Jenga. You've got to pull from the bottom to put on the top. And when you're doing that, you're pulling out the very foundation that makes the country good. Maybe in the, like, I would argue that California, there's been a pretty big exodus. At least, like I know that my entire family, my family's probably sold 15 different houses in the last

two years, the majority of my family has left there. If you look at, you know, I think Elon Musk left there. I think Rogan left there. I think that, you know, you have a lot of crime there. And I think it's kind of connected. I know I'm somewhat of a conspiracy. I should put on my tinfoil hat. I see the homeless people. Yeah, please. Everything's interconnected. Go ahead. So I think that, you know, when you see like the prime real estate, like San Francisco, like, there's just a flood of homeless people in there. Well, why not flood all the homeless people in there? And then when it gets so bad, what happens to the, what happens to the, the, uh, the square, the price per square footage comes, it comes down. And it, I think that you can see what's happening in the United States, especially New York and California.

This is the new model. This is the Chinese model being moved into our country. And the same way they have city states in China. Now, I might butcher this, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me in China, the person ruling, over the city state has autonomy to do whatever they want. They have their own police force. They have their own rules. And the people there abide by that particular governor is like the president.

And whoever does good in those city states, then they get to move up in the party and they could potentially rule one day. I think what you're seeing with Gavin Newsom in California is like a little dictator. Like that guy can do whatever he wants. It's his state. And he has the reason you have COVID in these things is they get to keep these emergency powers. And when you have emergency powers, the Congress. can't do anything because you have emergency powers. You are effectively, it's the same way a president

has wartime powers. The Congress is almost neutered. The same thing in a state, the same thing that we had in Hawaii. When the governor, Ege has state powers, that's the law of the land. And there's always, there's always a pandemic. There's always a crisis. There's always a war. And when that happens, you're allowed to maintain those powers. That's what's happening in California and New York. And I think that you're going to see these places like San Francisco that are prime real estate. you're seeing the price be driven down so developers can go in there and buy it up like develop private companies have already bought up the infrastructure in california if you look at the electric there like they're running all of that you know and they do a horrible job private companies i think ben made a point he said in order for communities to run effective there's some things that should never be privatized well right uh and you know there's uh oh i had another point that was in my mind i just lost it damn it Um, you know, Paul, I sincerely hope you are correct and George and I are off our fucking rocker.

I really do. Well, I'm not saying like, you guys are like, I'm not discounting everything you're saying. Like, I, you know, I believe there is some truth to what George is saying. I just don't have that same apocalyptic view that he does. It took, yeah, it took me a while to get here. Yeah, it took me a while to get here too. It took a lot of massaging, George. I believe it.

Yeah. Like to defy logic like that, it takes time. Or to put your head in the sand, either way. Yeah, you see, but it's not a defying of logic if you're following the chain of evidence. And that's the problem. But it's anecdotal evidence, though. It's not, though. This is not anecdotal whatsoever.

This isn't what something that's happened to me. These are things that are articulated and documented there. Yeah, I can show you like the Anglo-American establishment. Like, there is tons of books that tell you exactly, what's happening. There's, you know, the smartest guys in the room in Ron. Like, there's tons of books that tell you, like, you want to read the financial times. Like, they don't lie about it. They tell you, we as this company are coming in, we're going to take this particular, we're going to privatize everything. Here's what's coming. Read the World Economic Forum reports. Like,

they're telling you, this is the plan. Here's what we're doing. Like, no one's hiding it. But the fact that it gets written off is like, you're crazy if you think that, okay, well, call me crazy. But I see it happening. like once you begin seeing it happen like you can't to deny the evidence is what's crazy you know you can say it's crazy but once you start looking at the evidence like you can't deny it that it's it's coming and more and and people would rather fight about silly things than just to take some time and you know read some books or listen to listen to um katherine austin fitz she's the she used to run hud so what like is you're talking about your interruption

interpretation of the world economic report? I'm talking about... What they actually say on stage. Yeah. Well, I mean, yeah, what they actually stay on stage, but it's... Not my interpretation, what they say. Their words, not mine. Okay.

Yeah, I mean, have you watched... Have you watched the speeches from the World Economic Forum? I have. So, George, what are they saying that concerns you? Well, what I see is the one... one that I think is going to be the nail in the coffin is the the central the digital currency. And let me paint you a picture of what I see. You know, I'll go full conspiracy on you right here, okay?

This is the interpretation right here. So like, I mean, you're playing armchair economist, right? No, okay. What do you want me to tell you? You want me to tell you what bothers me? Because I have to tell you my interpretation of what bothers me. Yeah, so let's hear it. Okay.

Okay. So the, why do, I start off with this. Why would a government want to change to a digital currency? That's the first question I asked myself. Like, why would they want to do that? Well, it seems to me the legitimate answer is, well, the one they have right now doesn't work. And then you look for evidence. Okay. Well, what kind of evidence could I see?

And it seems like Brit, it seems like Europe is going to be. one of the first people to move to a digital currency, maybe Britain. And isn't it interesting that they've had three different financial ministers in like the last three months? Let me ask you something, George. Let me ask you something real quick. Yeah, please. Is it possible that a digital currency would work better? And it's not that the one that they have right now doesn't work anymore?

That's possible, yeah. Okay. Absolutely. So that's what I'm saying. Like, when you watch this stuff, like it didn't take you very long, right? into your... It took me a long time to figure stuff out. No. No, no, no. It started explaining to me, like, when I asked a question, you know, then you started explaining to me why you think, what you think. It didn't take very long before you got into your explanation of why, where I could basically the first point you made, ask you a question. Could it be this way? And yeah, it could be. There you go. I know, but you never let me finish what I said. Like, you interrupted me. And so out of kindness, I stopped what I was doing and let you talk, right? I would also disagree that it would be a better system. All centralized systems are very much hackable.

And now you're talking about taking a very analog system that has many controls in place, you know, over, you know, the past 100 years, well, yeah, about 100 years since they've started doing this Fed thing. And you're taking and putting it into a centralized system of where you can now all, of a sudden just add zeros at will. Yeah, you were printing money at well too. You can make that argument. But to call this a better system when now you're opening up yourself to greater risk potential, I think is in general, is not, not, it doesn't, yeah, whatever.

I can't remember. Can't think the word. Yeah, I'm going to, I had to go and grab like some paper because George is going to go off here. Nice, man. Nice. In his explanation. And since we're not going to like stop and like, you know, like I'll try to understand each point he's going to make you just going to try to do what's called a gish gallop, right?

Oh, nice. Right? So George is about to get a gish club or he's going to overwhelm the person he's debating by using bits and pieces and fragments of arguments, right, to try to make his point. So now I have to write this down because it's in the world. crazy here. Let's go. Okay. So in my opinion, the thing that scares me the most is this introduction of a central bank digital currency. You can just abbreviate that as CBDC. And so there's a good question. And the question I think that may be on your mind is,

could this be better? Underneath that question, I would like you. to write better for whom? Would that question be better? Anytime money comes out. I don't think that the object of money is something that is beneficial to the individual. I see money as a control mechanism. And I see that the current monetary system is no longer an effective way to control the populace. Thus, a new system of government, a new money system must be implemented. I believe that the idea of COVID-19, which I believe COVID is an acronym for a certificate of vaccination ID 2019. You should probably write that down. I'm going to make that. Thank you.

So. Okay. Now, in order to thoroughly have a better monetary system, we must ask. ask the question, what is it that money does? I think I said that I believe money is a control system for people on the bottom. But I also think it's a way to move assets without, it's a medium of exchange to move assets. And with the current monetary system in the European Union, that monetary system is failing. And let me tell you what I mean by failing.

Greece is insolvent. Italy is insolvent. The German bank, Deutsche Bank, is insolvent. And because this monetary system is insolvent, because they cannot get enough money flowing around their country, the volume of money is not working, the speed of money is not working. The only way that Europe does not collapse, and by collapse, I mean people with wheelbarrows of money trying to buy a loaf of bread. The only way there's not hyperinflation is if they change to a central bank currency. That is what is going to happen, in my opinion, by 2030 in the euro. And that to me is my evidence for that would be the insolvency of Greece, the insolvency of Greece,

the insolvency of Italy, the lockdowns that have stifled the complete economy over there, the influx of $15 billion a month from the USA to Ukraine, the Europe's need to be taking the resources from Ukraine. I think that these are all elements that support my theory that the economy of Europe is failing. And the governments there are trying to consolidate as much power and money as possible. How does that sound? Can you read that back to me? There was a whole bunch of like poor arguments in there. You know, like, well, the poor arguments or they incomplete?

So they're incomplete. Thank you. Incomplete. Yeah, my bad. Incomplete. But yet then like, you did exactly what I thought you were going to do. Okay. So tell me why my argument's wrong. well I have to not go through this because you said a lot right so there's there's probably you know 12 things in here one two three four five you count Greece in Italy six seven um like there's like 10 things that you said that kind of formulate your argument okay so like I would

have to like look at these things and try to make you know like something out of I mean the overarching thing was like you're in interpretation of the World Economic Forum, right? On this thing? I think I'm trying to make the case that the CBDC, the Central Bank digital currency of Europe,

of Europe, the Euro is going to fail. Right, but we started off, like, you've cited the World Economic Forum, right, as, like, they gave presentations that some of us make out of watch. They put out of publication.

that some of us may or may not read. Yes. That argument that they're telling us right there what it is they are going to do. Okay, yes. I do that. Of what they're telling us, you know, or do you have problems with, right? And so you said a whole bunch of things. Okay.

But now I got a kind of like, you know, this is kind of like I said. And I even came out and told you before you started, you were going to gish gallop and you did exactly that. Right. But I think I tried to make the argument. Do you disagree with my argument? Did I not convince you that the CBDC is a problem in Europe? And then it was brought to us.

Like, I had heard it from the World Economic Forum. And then my argument, I tried to make a case that what I heard was accurate and here's how it's going to happen. I don't see how that's gish gash. Well, no, gish gallop is like you bring Italy into it. you know why did i bring italy into it italy is a supporting argument you bring covid into it right

um that stopped economic commerce you know i mean first of all like if you think that all of these things like to you this is not coincidental these these events that are taking place in europe especially between like greece and italy and the deuter bank right

yeah that they're all um somehow related to the CBDC. They're all part of the same monetary system. Right, right. And that, well, you're making an argument for, you know, like, well, like against the CBDC, right? And that they are the cause of all of this stuff.

No, I'm saying that that's the biggest problem that I see. And that's what's going to happen. Like, there is going to be a CBDC there. That they're going to get, they're going to get rid of the euro and move to a CBDC. And that's the biggest problem that I have from the world economic. for them. It's not because like it's something better. It's because you're trying to prove that

it's because the old system has broken down and no longer functions, right? Yes. I don't think you made that argument. What do you think I went wrong at? Well, like I said, you know, these are all things like, I would have to like kind of go through bit by bit here.

But because you are stating, okay, So you got a little bit of a straw man going on here, right? Like you're saying because, you know, Italy and Deutsche Bank and Greece are insolvent, that means that the current form of like currency that they're using in Europe no longer works. But I can come back and say, well, look, England, France, Germany, Norway, you know, like... England and Norway are not in the euro. No, yeah, England or Norway are not.

but so like i could say germany france with germany i already already talked about the german bank um well georgia banks one bank in germany right it's the biggest bank in europe yeah well not europe but in the euro right so if they're insolvent it's probably a pretty good fact that the entirety of the euro is insolvent no because they don't hold the majority of funds in europe they may be the biggest bank but there are many other banks in in europe They do hold the biggest funds.

Of all the other banks combined. In the euro. And of all the other banks combined. I don't know about all the other banks combined, but as a single standing bank they do. Okay. Yeah, I know Deutsche Bank is big, but I didn't think that they held as much euro as all the other banks combined.

Yeah, that's because Germany is really like the only, like everybody pays Germany. Germany. Germany is the only thing that produces stuff. Everybody else just takes. Okay, but still, like, so I guess that means that Deutsche Bank holds more than all the other banks combined, right? I can't confirm. Because Germany produces stuff? I'm saying that Germany, I'm just saying that that bank is the biggest standalone bank, and that Germany is the strongest economy in the euro. So I'm making those parallels there. And the fact that, their biggest bank and the strongest economy in the euro is failing, I think that that is a significant, a significant relevance that the rest of Europe is failing.

If the heart of the body is failing, it's a good chance it's going to die. So here's the thing, man. I don't even think you can make an argument that Germany is failing. I think I just did. I don't think you did at all. Why not? I mean, I didn't hear anything like, you've got to convince me that Germany is failing. Well, I gave you some good points.

Because Greece and Italy is failing or insolvent and that it's possible that Deutsche Bank could be insolvent, right? That means Germany is failing? Yes, because let me tell you why. Because Greece and Italy are being forced by Germany to pay absorbed. And they no longer have the money to do that. And so Germany is just kind of saying like, okay, well, we're going to take all your assets. We're going to take this port. We're going to take this bridge.

You guys owe it to us. You guys are going through austerity. And if you look at this girl Maloney that just got hired, not hired, but she got whether elected or selected in Italy, you know, you can see that they're uprising. They may not, they may not come to the table of this next agreement for the euro. Fokas, who was the finance minister of Greece, he tells a story about going to Germany and telling the finance ministers, we're not going to pay you back. And the finance minister is like, well, then you cannot be in the government. You're going to pay us back everything plus more.

And he's like, we don't have any money to do that. And he's like, well, that's too bad. You're going to pay it back. So when you look at it from that angle, like there's no money. Like, Germany needs money that they can't get. And I can tell you as someone who's been in debt before. When you're going to people and telling they're going to pay you and they're not going to pay you, you're going to fail. And that's exactly what's happening over there.

Does that convince you? No, it doesn't convince you. No. I mean, you know, like there's a lot more at play than just like some conversations with some people and, you know, between Italy, Greece and and Germany, man. Like, if only it was that simple, right, George? It's not that simple. I've only been scratching the surface. There's a lot of moving parts.

I was like, you know, at the beginning of this thing, it's like, so we're armed chair economists here. Yeah, I'm not an economist, man. I'm just giving you my ideas of what I think is going to happen. But, like, I mean, you're not an economist. Not at all. Back to, like, what everybody was saying about the state of California is going to fall into the ocean.

It's going to go broke. All these things are going to happen. They've been saying since the 70s. You know, I spent 20 years there, and I listen to this stuff. And yet, that's a straw man right there. Like, you're using California in place of Germany. Like, those are two different. That's two different models, right?

That's apples and oranges. No, I'm not making an argument the other way. Yeah, you're saying that Germany is just like California. The same thing that said about California, it didn't happen, therefore it won't happen in Germany. No, I didn't say that. No, I didn't say that. You did. You said it's just like California.

No, what I'm saying is I've heard these same stories. Right. You've heard similar stories, not the same stories. Stories, right? And so my point is like it goes back to armchair economics. right I'm not I'm I don't know I'm not an economist dude I'm just talking out of what I think is happening so here's my argument I think okay picking and choosing right bits and pieces of information to formulate your argument that yes I don't really think they correlate much maybe

you do but right but I'm saying this is the same type of argument that I heard in California in the 70s when I was a kid you know like all this stuff's going to happen with California it's going to collapse. And it's been almost 50 years. And there it is. It's still there. Because you know why? Because when I listened to my grandfather and, you know, my friends, parents talk about this stuff about California is going to collapse.

It was the same thing. It was bits and pieces of arguments that had no correlation to each other, but they thought it did. And that that was their evidence that this was going to happen. It sounds like you with this. So just a couple points of... reference here. You know, California is part of the United States. So comparing California to like a European Union is kind of like an apple and orange comparison. But for a more interesting comparison, the European Union's market capitalization as a percentage of their GDP has fallen

20% from 2017 to 2018. And these are the latest stats is just 2018. So we can't even get into now. And that's the same as it was basically back in 20, it looks like 2014, according to this graph. So since 2014 to 2018, they lost, looks like about 35% of the value total against their market capitalization per percentage of GDP. these are types of numbers like if you look at the United States numbers these are the numbers that kind of you know they always kind of rise type idea and this kind of goes back to why would it rise why would it fall and this goes back to the the petro dollar and the sustainability of the United States currency through that system that mechanism of trade so you know when you know if we're going to play armchair economists, which I could play a little bit more than

an armchair if I really wanted to pull up the right statistics. But we're, you know, these Keynesian economics, this debt-based system that is everybody in the West, pretty much the entire world, has always been, you know, depending on your school of thought when it comes to economics, has always been, you know, we're going to continue to kick the can down the road. We're going to deal with it later. We're just going to continue to leverage ourself leverage ourself leverage ourselves similar exactly to what happened to ftx they just continue to leverage themselves with greater liabilities until the whole thing falls apart because they actually can't pay back all of the debt that they have accrued and those in the leverage all of a sudden

disappears because of market shifts you know changing from oPEC to a bricks system something like that Yeah, like I'll make that like I I fuck I'm not an economist dude. I don't know but this is what I read and like I'm just trying to make the case like I'm not just spewing bullshit like this is coming from sources like You know some fun the financial times like um you know roiters like There's a lot of international reports that you could read for free that are saying the things something I'm not just making it up like I I've I've listened to hours of the finance minister from Greece talking about about the talks that he had when he went in there and when he was kicked out of the government in Greece and this new party that he started where he has these amazing ideas where, you know, let me share an idea with a positive idea that this guy came up with when he talks about the world after the collapse or what we can do to change business. This guy's idea is that in the United States, like the corporate structure is all wrong. Wouldn't it be a better corporate structure if the employee goes into, like you get hired at UPS?

And then you as the employee, you get one share of that company. And everybody that works there gets one share of that corporation. When there's time to vote, everybody gets a vote. That's going to make that corporation function as a meritocracy. It's going to have integrity. And everyone's going to be represented. There's going to be real equality there because the guy that drives the truck and the guy that crunches the numbers, they all get one vote.

When you quit that company, you give back your share and then you go to another company and you get a new share. It does away with all the speculators. And that's a big part of why all our government's failing are these speculators. But like this came from this guy being in the heart of the beast in the Eurofinance ministers meetings and being like, this is crazy. We're all these, it's going down. And he's written multiple books that talk about what happened there. They're fascinating. And even more fascinating are the ideas that have come from his trials and tribulations being in there.

So I think that there's, even though it's going to be rocked. and it's going to be horrible. I think that there's light at the end of the tunnel. I think some good things can come out of this. But in my opinion, there's no turning back from this devastation that's coming. And I'm not trying to be gloom and doom, but, you know, a house divided cannot stand. And when there's too many weight on top, it collapses in on itself. And we're seeing that now with FTX, with Voyager, with all the zombie corporations. Like, it's getting to a point where there's no more room to kick the can.

And, you know, maybe it could have, who knows, I didn't think they could do it after 2008. Yeah, you'd be surprised. Yeah, you'd be surprised. Maybe they can. Well, they can't. It's like, it's like you point out with the Greece, with this guy from Greece said about, you know, about companies, you know, employees, only one share. And then they have a vote. Well, the country that you say is in collapse, they do that.

I mean, not exactly that same thing. But they have something similar, whereas every board of every corporation has to, you to have workers on the board. If they got 12 board members, two of them got to be from the factory, the people who are actually doing the work, and yet there's still issues. They have a much better system in Europe as far as for the worker

than they do in the United States. But that doesn't change their economic outlook for the next 20 years. It also doesn't change the way that the company is going to operate. Just because you have two board seats doesn't give you shit all if there's 12 board seats. because it's always majority vote in those board situations. And, you know, it becomes one of those things. If you only got two out of 12, well, you know, unless you have an uphill battle to convince every single one of the other voters to vote your way as opposed to, you know, the status quo

and, you know, bonuses for executives and board members that we're going to vote on now versus, you know, distributing that money as dividends to each one of our employees. I have, go ahead. Sorry, go ahead. I was going to say, I have, I have some time on boards, and it is fucking cutthroat in this country. Well, it does work, right? Because it was those board members on the board of Volkswagen

that blew the whistle on their emissions bullshit that they were pulling, right? And there are many instances throughout Germany where it's been workers who have actually, you know, push the policy one way or the other when it came to a split in the board. Sure. And once upon a time we had this. Yeah, once upon a time we had this too with the unions, right? And then unions got completely gutted in this country, you know, over the past, you know, 30, 40 years. Well, you know, they've been in some parts, they've been replaced, which is what everybody's complaining about California is, right? As California stepped in and said, we're just going to

do what the unions do. We're going to provide protections for employees. And we think that we can do it better for cheaper. Yeah. And it doesn't really work out that well because, you know, they don't have skin in the game, so to speak. Large economy in the world. Yeah, you can say that, but that's, you know, those are numbers on paper. And, you know, you can say it's the largest economy in the world, but it's also sitting below a $36 trillion deficit. So what good is they actually doing? And then you can correlate that with, okay, so how did it actually benefit the workers at the end of the day? Was it a rising tide that raised all ships?

Or are people not able to afford the rent in San Francisco? Are people not able to even have the thought of buying a house? You know, I don't, when the problem I think with all of this kind of discussion is that none of this exists in a vacuum and it's all interconnected. And unless we're willing to, you know, reasonably examine all of the different individual pieces of this that are interconnected in these systems without trying to draw conclusions before we do so, then we're never going to get anywhere.

We're just going to beat our heads against the wall. Exactly, right? Which was the, like, I'm not saying that what George is saying doesn't hold any sort of water, there's no truth there. I just don't see the doomsday scenario that he paints. Well, like I said, I hope the hell you're right and we're wrong. I really do. You know, and, you know, it's one of those things it would probably behoove us to actually put together a little research and put together some actual real talking points instead of just blowing out our ass here, which I'm happy to do so.

But I, you know, and that would probably be a very valuable conversation for not just us, but other people as well. so maybe we should try to do that as opposed to try to solve all the worlds where it's going to go and what sort of apocalypse is going to be fall us in a two-hour psychedelic roundtable, which we haven't even talked about psychedelics, damn it. Just a second.

Man, it makes me want to take some psychedelics. I do that if George would agree not to Gish Gallup. I think I already gave Paul some good notes that he can work from. No, I mean, you know, it was good. It was good, you know, and it was like, I just realized like, hey, this isn't going to be a point-by-point discussion here.

This is going to be George coming at me hard with all these things. I needed to write them. And I think, thanks, George, for, you know, actually telling me, you know, you may want to write this down. You know what I mean? Absolutely. Yeah, thank you. I appreciated that. Yeah, and look, I, I'm not an economist, man.

But I believe, this is what I believe. And you could believe in one hand and crap in the other and see which one fills us up first. But, you know, this is what I see. And with my limited sight and with the information that I take in, you know, we all take in information from different sources. And this is my world. This is what I see. And maybe it's some of the people I talk to. And maybe it is my proclivity to see the negative so that I can react in a positive way.

Or I once heard a pessimist is an optimist who's been around the blog. Maybe that's kind of this thing that I use because, like, I know if I'm, if I'm thinking about it being negative, when it's positive, my life's going to be better. So maybe it's part of my philosophy. But these are all sources that I'll go on and I'll try to look them up too because I know I can find them all. I have the books here and stuff. And at least then I can I can give you accurate information and cite the source I'm saying from instead of just reaching back here and pulling it out. Well, you know, too, it's like we in the first couple conversations that we had during our roundtable discussion, you know, we talked about. like communication messaging like these are all these are all topics that we've touched on quite a bit

and so like to me it's like there's a there's a there's just a little bit of your responsibility when someone's going to go out there i'm not going to mention any names one of the three of us here and um and then just really like go off on some sort of you know esoteric ramp or you know or you know basically um you know basically um you know basically um i kept texting us sorry man i got distracted um but then basically you know like like paint a pretty gloom picture man you know like it's what it's part of the problem what's happening to you and i'm thinking man this is not much different than like listening to alex jones you know or one of those guys that's just out there to scare people you know and i think i for me

like lowering the temperature of America and kind of trying to avoid those types of rants to me is like it's important man but I think like I believe what I'm saying is true I'm not trying to lower the temperature but I don't why would that be irresponsible though well because like we just said like you know like we should probably be coming with more facts instead of we're kind of just winging it here right and then so somebody may listen to you George and take you seriously I'm not one of them but you you know, maybe somebody would. Which is my opinion.

Like, I mean, I think you're, I think that you can cite your opinion, right? I know you are. But, but at the same time, it's like, you know, this is the reason why we have, like, you know, info wars blows up because the guy goes out there and just scares people. And he, too, I think, believes in what he's feeding, the people that listen to him. What I'm hearing is you're very convincing, George. No. Yeah. Very convincing, but I mean, you know, but I mean, you know, which goes back to the sixth grade education thing, right?

I can see that. Okay. I agree. There is, there has to be some sense of responsibility when we're engaging in some sort of a public form, right? I have fun. I know you're having fun. And I tried to bring it back. with some facts and figures here. And I did try to tie the pieces together because for me, there is a preponderance of evidence to all of this stuff. And I've been researching it for a long time as well. But, you know, when we do jump from one thing to another to another to another without establishing the correlation, without establishing the facts, without establishing, you know, the chain of custody of all of these things, it does potentially do a disservice. And I think that's what Paul's good at you.

Yeah. I love it, Paul. Like, for me to be able, like, I want to give you a huge thank you. Because, like, I know that, like, if you ever think something, you're going to call me out on my bullshit. Like, but I hope you understand, like, how thrilling and fun it is for me to try to think on the fly of all these things that I've heard that might be true that, like, I'm like, yep, this.

And let me follow it up with that. Oh, you think that's than this. And for me, it's so exhilarating and so fun and so, like, I feel like my whole. brain is working when I can speak clearly and quickly and concisely like that to me and I know that that is dangerous like I really enjoy it and I feel when I can string it together like I hit a home run so I should probably work on that because that's not something that I should be proud of you know I should probably try to have the best evidence if I'm going to string those things together so thank you for pushing back on that I as much as I enjoy it I need it so thank you I feel like it's I'm better because

of it? It was entertaining. And you were, and you were, like, super passionate about it, man. It was fun to watch me. Like, I was like, well, George, like, I'm trying to write notes here and watch you at the same time. I'm like, I can take my eyes off George. I'm going to miss something.

I was trying to purposely talk so you couldn't write notes. I'm like, you can't talk, you can't think this fast. You know, and then I was trying to say things. Like, why don't you write that acronym down? Okay. Boom, boom, bo, blah, blah. Yeah, what the hell is what that acronym? Where do that come from?

I mean, that right there. Certificate of vaccination ID 2019, baby. I know. To me, I was like, man, this is my point. That's part of my point. You know, like, oh, I don't know. Yeah, I mean, good on you, George. Thank you.

Thank you. You went real fast. No, thank you, no, thank you, George. You know? And yeah, you went real fast and you had a lot to say and you threw a lot of stuff. It was definitely overwhelming. It was one of the best gish gallops I've heard in a long time, man. It really was.

only it wasn't only only it wasn't no it was great it was great like you know it's like i'm just going to bombard you with information bits and pieces here of different things and you can figure out if they actually all connect together that's not my responsibility i'm just here to try to overwhelm you well i think it was more than overwhelming though right like at the end at the end of it i think i tied those things together but we'll come back with the notes we'll come back with And then we'll see how many of those things actually thoroughly apply. Because I'm willing to wager a stick of bubblegum that everything I said in there is it ties together. Like I said, I can't cite you the sources right now.

But I'm very confident in what I said is accurate as far as all those things in the CBDC and Europe going to fail by 2030. That currency is going to fail. And the WEF has come out and talked about the CBD. And that is what scares me. And I think all those things are tied together. It's like I stand by my evidence. Okay. Well, you're going to struggle with the certificate of vaccination ID 2019.

Yeah. You might be surprised. You might be surprised. I'm going to need some official government documents. Okay. That might be my weakest part of the argument. But how about like if we just throw out that one, you know, because you can't get them all right. I bet you the other 90% would be really good.

That's still an A plus. Okay. I love it. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Grade yourself. You know, that's, you know, good.

Yeah. You know, for sure, George, I believe in you 100%. I can't wait. Thank you. All right. To hear the next one, man. I know you're going to be cruising around in your UPS trucks trying to get Christmas presents to people, you know.

And you're going to be going a mile a minute in your brain, right? And I feel sorry for that. girl that works now. George is going to be like, it's all on you. Okay? I got to write some notes. Hold on. I got some notes. Listen, I can't help you

until I figure out certificate of vaccination ideal. When I get that, then I'll be back in the truck with you. We'll go. I'll go packages on people front doors. Just don't write another letter to your Congress person asking for evidence for that. You don't need a third audit. Yeah.

It's true. And maybe between now and then, you could go tell your boss to fuck off, right? In a nice way. In a nice way. In a nice way. Yeah. No, this would be good. I wonder how many people are getting wrong packages, man, during this.

Nice. Probably not many. I'm pretty good at that. I think I can compartmentalize. What is it? Compartmentalize. Thank you. Thank you.

Yeah. Yeah. Well, I mean, yeah, yeah, you're good. I know, I just picture you with your, like, your AirPods in, you know, you probably got some notes app on voice notes app on your phone, you know, you're going to be, you know, make up a poll on this one. But, you know, for real. So, yeah, like, in the, in the chat, we should like kind of, you know,

like write some stuff out as to what it is. we're going to discuss. Yeah, well. I can put up slides. Again, I think, you know, again, this is going to be a long one, too. Because in order to really cite all of this stuff properly, you know, you do have to go down the rabbit holes, make the connections, cite the evidence, pull, you know, things from very disparate places and put together this into a big, long argument.

Because it's not a simple thing. you know economy economics alone isn't a simple thing and then when you start to tie all of the political aspects to it all the societal aspects to it all of these other things now it becomes a quagmire of fuckery yeah and that's exactly what i'm expecting i can't wait look looking forward to it george you took the bait thank you thank you're welcome yeah and um you know i you know i you know i owe you one after that fucking clip you put on the, you know, on the thing.

Hey, I heard that. I watched that show. Like, holy shit, gentlemen. That went to some interesting places. Yeah, well, you know what? Look, let's keep in mind here. And this is something I've known. I've been playing along with George for a little bit.

Is this guy, you know, and I don't know if he's doing it to all the rest of you guys, because I don't know what your guys is like individual, you know, conversations are all about but this dude's trying to set me up like you know like I I know know that man and I've called it out before and I'll continue to call it out but I'm cool with it you know like George like I guess I'll provide some sort of entertainment value for George I'm fine with that he's you the instigated me up he set me up a couple times too yeah yeah I think I

think he does it in good faith at least you know that's what I'm holding out with yeah oh yeah for sure it's all it's all it's a It's in fun. You know, it's all, like I said, I pointed it out here before. Dude, I, I, I'm a little sinister, and, like, it's probably a character flaw. Like, I don't, I find it, I find it funny, man. It's probably a character flaw. Probably.

Oh, shit. Dude, if I'm, if I'm being too much of a dick, dude, just tell me shit, I don't mean to be, but, like, I, okay, okay. I do do it. I do it. And, like, I think it's funny. Like I've hurt people's feelings before and I'm like, god damn. This is the counter fuckery going on here. You're dishing it out.

You got to take something too, buddy. I love it all. I love it all. But I don't, sometimes I worry. Like I'm like, dude, am I being too much of a dick? Because like, I've done that before. Like, I've been too much of a dick to people and hurt relationships. So I want to be mindful that.

Like, I'm not doing that. Like, I love you guys. And I know, like, I feel like I can push you as hard as you want and you would push me right back. So, like, if that's ever the case, please tell me up front. Like I, you know, I, maybe sometimes my sense of humor is weird, but like, I don't want it to ever injure a relationship with people that I find out of him. Well, you know, George, if you're asking yourself that question, usually the answer is yes. I probably got to work on it. I probably got to work on it.

You know, but I don't care, man. Like, you know, you're not going to hurt my feelings. I know. That's why it's awesome. Okay, perfect. But. And vice versa. So maybe at some point, we got to get back to talk about psychedelics, man.

So it's a good point. You know, we could, we could do psychedelic economics, you know, I don't know. Ooh, there we go. Let's all drop a whole bunch of mushrooms and go economic style. Well, you know, we need to do that. Maybe after the new year, man, I can't do that right now. But after the new year, I should be, I should be in a good, good place to, like, you know, like explore with that, you know, having that conversation or a conversation with, you know, with one or all of it.

you yeah I'm I'm boss to the wall till January too so may have the new year maybe yeah yeah it's not a good time for me so but yeah um cool well this is a lot of fun gentlemen I had a fricking blast last couple days I've had a blast man and I look forward to it and I'm so proud of where this is going and people are watching and like it's growing at a level that I never thought possible. So I'm really excited, man. I see it changing. I see my life changing. And I know that that may be some grandiose ideas, but I see it happening. Like, I'm booked solid. I just made a, I made a bid for January. I got someone that's already coming in jail. I'm booked until January. That's awesome. Mind blowing. Mind blowing. Yeah, good for you, man.

Well, I can't do it without you guys. Like I feel like you, every one of these conversation gives me fuel to be more excited, to be better, and to call out more stuff. And every conversation like this, I feel I get to learn more about myself, especially critical conversations like this, where there is pushback. I feel like I get to learn how I'm communicating and what's effective, what's not effective, what's fun, what's over the line. But it's all new. So it's really incredibly powerful to have people that you can just lay everything out there and then get the feedback from. I feel I've become a better communicator since I've been doing this, and especially since, we've had this format at the roundtable.

For sure. Practice, practice, practice, right? Yeah, and I think it's everybody. I think all of you guys are becoming better communicators, right?

And I think together as a, like, I think we're, like just this conversation alone is, you know, I don't have a whole lot of people that, like friends that I sit down with for two hours a week or four hours a week, you know,

and like, have conversations like this. And you can't have these kind of conversations and not get closer to somebody, not understand who they are and how they think and what they're about. and understand them and argue with them and laugh with them. It's really rewarding. So thank you. Yeah.

All right. We've got to get out of here. All right, guys. Great show. That's what we got for today. Aloha.