Latest / Yaron Brook Show / Ballroom; Cartels; Russia Sanctions; Gov Shutdown; Elections; Gaza; San Francisco | Yaron Brook Show

Transcript

Ballroom; Cartels; Russia Sanctions; Gov Shutdown; Elections; Gaza; San Francisco | Yaron Brook Show · Yaron Brook Show

0:02
Speaker 1: So radical fundamental principles of freedom, rational self interest, and
0:10
Speaker 1: individual rights. This is the Uran Brook Show. All right, everybody,
0:21
Speaker 1: welcome to Rue Book Show on this Thursday, October twenty third.
0:25
Speaker 1: I hope everybody's having a fantastic week. I am in
0:29
Speaker 1: New York City at a hotel. I am praying. I
0:34
Speaker 1: think you should all join me in a quick prayer
0:37
Speaker 1: to the gods of the Internet, the gods of Wi Fi,
0:42
Speaker 1: to sustain our connection. And yeah, we'll see, We'll see
0:51
Speaker 1: what happens. Hopefully everything good. If you can give me
0:54
Speaker 1: those are ina chat, give me thumbs up on picture
0:58
Speaker 1: on audio. Just let me know what it's how it's going,
1:01
Speaker 1: so I have some sense of what is going on.
1:07
Speaker 1: I'd appreciate that. Let's see. Just do that, all right,
1:14
Speaker 1: it's good. Everybody says it's good. That's good, it's good, great,
1:17
Speaker 1: thank you? What does like that? All right? So I
1:25
Speaker 1: want to start today by apologizing for making an error.
1:30
Speaker 1: I do that periodically, and you guys are very good
1:34
Speaker 1: at correcting me. Usually those of you correct me are
1:37
Speaker 1: pretty obnoxious about it and use this this opportunity to
1:40
Speaker 1: rub their hands and see you're on always get stuff wrong.
1:43
Speaker 1: He's always wrong. He doesn't understand, he doesn't get it
1:46
Speaker 1: to depend on mainstream media or whatever the bullshit is. So, yes,
1:51
Speaker 1: I did get something wrong, and that was related to
1:55
Speaker 1: the ballroom, the ballroom that is being built in the
1:57
Speaker 1: East wing of the White House that I wrongly said.
2:03
Speaker 1: I've wrongly said that the taxpayer pays for it, and
2:07
Speaker 1: it's coming out of it and spending And I said,
2:10
Speaker 1: in a time of a gun but shutdown, how come
2:11
Speaker 1: they're spending money on this because this is a Trump priority.
2:15
Speaker 1: We'll get to the shutdown in a minute in a
2:17
Speaker 1: little while. But but but so let's focus on the ballroom.
2:20
Speaker 1: It turns out that I was wrong that the ballroom
2:22
Speaker 1: indeed is not being funded by Congress. It is not
2:28
Speaker 1: being funded by by taxpayer money. Now there's a real
2:36
Speaker 1: question about whether the president can just decide unilaterally to
2:39
Speaker 1: destroy half, you know, a big piece of the White
2:41
Speaker 1: House to rebuild something else without congressional approval. But he's
2:46
Speaker 1: doing it. Nobody seems to be too complaining, So I guess,
2:50
Speaker 1: I guess it's right. And so it is. It is
2:58
Speaker 1: funded by private contributions. Now, I will say I still
3:04
Speaker 1: think a lot of people who are not getting paid
3:06
Speaker 1: right now because of the government shutdown. Resent the fact
3:09
Speaker 1: that government is spending money, even if it is so
3:12
Speaker 1: called private contributions on the ballroom. So I think my
3:16
Speaker 1: analysis was correct in that sense. But it is absolutely
3:20
Speaker 1: true this ballroom is going to be funded by corporate
3:24
Speaker 1: and individual funds, you know, two hundred and thirty million
3:29
Speaker 1: dollars I think, or something north of that. Now there's
3:34
Speaker 1: a sense, there's a sense in which this is worse,
3:42
Speaker 1: much worse, because this is just more of the corruption,
3:49
Speaker 1: the cronyism. I mean, the list of the people giving
3:54
Speaker 1: money for the ballroom is a list of companies who
3:58
Speaker 1: have contracts with the government. Do you think those contracts
4:01
Speaker 1: are affected by the fact that they're giving money to
4:04
Speaker 1: the ballroom? You think they there's any trade here, you know,
4:11
Speaker 1: you give money to the ballroom, we'll give you juicy contracts.
4:16
Speaker 1: I mean, there's no doubt that there is. You just
4:18
Speaker 1: look at the list and you can see anyway from
4:21
Speaker 1: from Plantea to Lockheed Martin. Of course, all the all
4:25
Speaker 1: the tech companies that are that are constantly handing over
4:29
Speaker 1: money to Trump and the Trump administration in order to
4:33
Speaker 1: get them off their back. Microsoft Mata alphabet Amazon. This
4:40
Speaker 1: is just more of the just horrific kind of coneyism
4:45
Speaker 1: that we're seeing. And then, of course, on the individual side,
4:47
Speaker 1: you've got you've got Blackstone CEO, and you've got held
4:55
Speaker 1: held ham from from the oil billionaire. You've got people
4:58
Speaker 1: who have stuff in front of the government. And this
5:01
Speaker 1: is one way to get on Trump's good side, and
5:04
Speaker 1: he will make decisions that are beneficial to you. And
5:07
Speaker 1: given given given a Trump's oversized role in every aspect
5:14
Speaker 1: of the government these days, and and given the fact
5:16
Speaker 1: that Trump is playing at central planner in chief, it's
5:23
Speaker 1: incredibly valuable to be on Trump's good side. And and
5:27
Speaker 1: this is this is that this is exactly that this is.
5:31
Speaker 1: This is basically uh putting money into trump loved project
5:37
Speaker 1: in order to in order to get favors with Trump.
5:44
Speaker 1: So it's worse than if it was the government's money,
5:47
Speaker 1: great taxpayer money, because it's just we are establishing this
5:52
Speaker 1: country kind of a class of olligogs. We're slowly shifting
5:58
Speaker 1: to the Hungarian or more propriately Russian model, where businessmen
6:04
Speaker 1: are successful because the government chooses them to be successful,
6:08
Speaker 1: and you know they they fail because the government decides
6:12
Speaker 1: that they should fail, and if they really want them
6:14
Speaker 1: to fail, they fall off out of windows or they
6:17
Speaker 1: even go to jail. We're shifting to a business model,
6:20
Speaker 1: at least under Trump. I don't know if this is
6:22
Speaker 1: sustainable with any other president, but at least under Trump,
6:25
Speaker 1: where Trump gets to the side who who the winners are,
6:30
Speaker 1: who the winners are even in tech it it really
6:37
Speaker 1: is stunning. And of course again people will accuse me,
6:43
Speaker 1: you know, of uh being overly negative. But here's the reality.
6:49
Speaker 1: There has never been an administration in all of American
6:53
Speaker 1: history that comes even close to the level of corruption
6:58
Speaker 1: of this administration. I mean, you would have to have
7:03
Speaker 1: five to ten year on book shows in order to
7:06
Speaker 1: cover all the corruption and all the bad stuff that
7:11
Speaker 1: this administration is doing, because it doesn't do one or
7:16
Speaker 1: two little things. It does five six, seven, eight, it's
7:19
Speaker 1: all day. I mean, you have to listen to the
7:22
Speaker 1: president every day he has a press conference, and every
7:24
Speaker 1: day the amount of bs coming out and the amount
7:28
Speaker 1: of corruption being revealed is just stunning. So even if
7:35
Speaker 1: you had five to ten yourn book shows covering everything,
7:39
Speaker 1: you would still have to talk a lot about the
7:41
Speaker 1: corruption on trumpet administration just to cover what he's actually
7:45
Speaker 1: doing on a day to day basis. Richard Hanania is
7:49
Speaker 1: a good little piece. I mean some it's a little overwrought,
7:52
Speaker 1: but a good little piece on this today. And you know,
7:58
Speaker 1: he says, everybody thinks that the media is reporting too
8:03
Speaker 1: much about Trump and talking too much about Trump's corruption
8:06
Speaker 1: and dishonesty. But no, the media is not even covering
8:11
Speaker 1: this anywhere near the proportion at which Trump is different
8:14
Speaker 1: than any other president. Here's the thing. Do you remember
8:18
Speaker 1: how much talk there was and maybe many of you
8:21
Speaker 1: thought there wasn't enough talk about Hunter Biden. Hunter Biden.
8:26
Speaker 1: You know, there's talk about him getting eleven million dollars
8:29
Speaker 1: from Ukraine and then something from China, maybe maybe combined
8:32
Speaker 1: ten to twenty million dollars of payments. There's no direct
8:38
Speaker 1: evidence or that there's some circumstantial evidence of involvement by
8:43
Speaker 1: Joe Biden in all of that, and the right in
8:46
Speaker 1: America went berzook freaked out over like eleven million dollars
8:54
Speaker 1: and this is the most corrupted administration and this is
8:57
Speaker 1: a mafia family, and and on and on and on
9:00
Speaker 1: about it and just how awful and horrific Hunter was,
9:07
Speaker 1: and everybody just freaked out and put aside that the media, Yeah,
9:12
Speaker 1: you know, there was a there was a cover up
9:15
Speaker 1: there and and all that stuff, and but it it's
9:18
Speaker 1: it was small, I mean, by some estimates, By some estimates,
9:23
Speaker 1: the profit to the Trump family just in the second term.
9:25
Speaker 1: I'm not counting where Jared Kushner got from the Saudi's
9:30
Speaker 1: between administrations, right after he left, after he left the
9:35
Speaker 1: first administration, and before A twenty twenty four, Between twenty
9:38
Speaker 1: twenty and twenty twenty four, Jared Kushner, of course got
9:40
Speaker 1: two billion dollars investment by the Saudi or family would
9:44
Speaker 1: have never happened if it was just Jared Kushner. It
9:47
Speaker 1: was Jared Kushner because of what he had, because of
9:50
Speaker 1: the connections he had established, given that he was the
9:53
Speaker 1: son in law of Trump, and given his power within
9:56
Speaker 1: the administration. I'm not even counting that, right and and
10:02
Speaker 1: and that is dramatically more than anything Hunter Biden never got.
10:08
Speaker 1: But since Trump came into office, since Trump Pride gave
10:12
Speaker 1: me to office, the Trump family is profited to something
10:17
Speaker 1: like the tune of three point four billion dollars, billion dollars.
10:24
Speaker 1: And Trump has been directly involved. He's not hiding the
10:27
Speaker 1: fact that he's directly involved. He claims his kids are
10:31
Speaker 1: managing this, but there's no tr there's no separation. He
10:35
Speaker 1: owns these shares. I mean, the stuff they're doing, and
10:40
Speaker 1: the stuff they done with Crypto, the stuff they've done
10:42
Speaker 1: with uh I, I you know, with the the deals
10:47
Speaker 1: in the Middle East, with with the Katari government, with
10:49
Speaker 1: the Saudi government, with Yuee, the the the I mean,
10:53
Speaker 1: it's just unbelievable, the amount of corruption and this is
10:55
Speaker 1: just this is just directly to Trump's family. I'm not
10:59
Speaker 1: talking about all the money that is going to Trump
11:04
Speaker 1: causes by the law firms, the money going to Trump
11:09
Speaker 1: himself from the news organizations he's suing. You know, I'm
11:16
Speaker 1: gonna talk about how he's using his power to settle
11:20
Speaker 1: quote settle with everybody because they don't want to be
11:24
Speaker 1: on the bad side of the president. I mean, he's
11:27
Speaker 1: even trying to get to a hundred and eighty million
11:29
Speaker 1: dollars from the Justice Department. We talked about that yesterday,
11:33
Speaker 1: and it's just it's just stunning. And then of course
11:37
Speaker 1: you've got people like David Sachs, who works for you know,
11:43
Speaker 1: a venture capital fund that invests in crypto, hasn't left
11:48
Speaker 1: that job, still has all those investment and yet he
11:51
Speaker 1: is the White House crypto. Zaw no conflict of interest there.
11:56
Speaker 1: And you've got Steve Widcuff's son who's involved in the
12:01
Speaker 1: Trump family crypto business and was in Kuta to get
12:05
Speaker 1: a major investment in the crypto stuff from the Kataries
12:11
Speaker 1: as all this stuff is being negotiated, Whitcoff is the
12:15
Speaker 1: guy negotiating and his son is flying around with him
12:19
Speaker 1: to negotiate his own deals. Now that isn't corrupt, It's
12:28
Speaker 1: just not on the same ballpark. I mean, Hunter Biden
12:31
Speaker 1: and the Biden family are amateurs. And this is the
12:35
Speaker 1: big difference between past administration in this one. Past the
12:40
Speaker 1: administration is a hide. This administration doesn't kid, just doesn't care.
12:49
Speaker 1: So yeah, this is why there's so much about Trump
12:55
Speaker 1: because Trump does so much. He's doing so many things
12:59
Speaker 1: like nobody else has ever done before. He's just every
13:02
Speaker 1: day something new, something some decent, mostly bad. And you
13:10
Speaker 1: want the news for me, that is the news. He
13:13
Speaker 1: is the news, and the coverage he gets on MSNBC,
13:18
Speaker 1: on CNN. Uh. The people who criticize him is now
13:22
Speaker 1: near enough and no near deep enough and nowhere near
13:25
Speaker 1: sustained enough to cover everything bad that he does. And
13:30
Speaker 1: of course Fox and those guys just just just uh,
13:34
Speaker 1: you know, just to prove of everything he does and
13:36
Speaker 1: and cheer him on. So you're not really getting news
13:39
Speaker 1: from anybody, and you're certainly not getting uh, any kind
13:43
Speaker 1: of sense of any attempt of objectivity. I think I
13:51
Speaker 1: attempt to do that, alright. Alright, so, uh so let's
14:10
Speaker 1: talk about some of the actions, some of the stuff
14:12
Speaker 1: that's going on today. Well, in a press conference just
14:15
Speaker 1: a little while ago, UH, Trump and and UH secret
14:18
Speaker 1: date of war hegxeth UH basically declared war. Uh. They've
14:23
Speaker 1: declared war on the cartels and not the cortels in Mexico.
14:28
Speaker 1: For some reason, even though if fentanyl is the thing
14:31
Speaker 1: that is killing Americans, it's not cocaine, it's not really heroin.
14:36
Speaker 1: What's killing Americans is fentanyl. I think that something like
14:40
Speaker 1: a hundred percent of all fentinyl comes from Mexico. I
14:44
Speaker 1: but I th they they don't want the asshole of
14:47
Speaker 1: going to war with Mexico and in Mexico as a
14:50
Speaker 1: border with the United States, and uh and the reality
14:54
Speaker 1: is that uh I I they're trying to have a
14:57
Speaker 1: decent relationship with the president of Mexico, so they're not
15:00
Speaker 1: going to go to war with Mexico. So they've chosen
15:03
Speaker 1: weaker targets. So they're going to go to war with Venezuela.
15:07
Speaker 1: With the Cortels in Venezuela who don't really involved, are
15:12
Speaker 1: not really involved in fentonyl trade, mostly involved in a
15:16
Speaker 1: cocaine trade, and they are now being authorized basically to
15:24
Speaker 1: bomb to not just bomb boats that we are told
15:30
Speaker 1: no verification, but we are told drug sluntly in boats.
15:35
Speaker 1: By the way, these boats, I read this somewhere, in
15:38
Speaker 1: order to get from Venezuela to the United States, given
15:42
Speaker 1: the size of these boats, they would have to refuel
15:45
Speaker 1: twenty times. You could arrest them at any one of
15:50
Speaker 1: those refueling stations. You could snk them at any one
15:53
Speaker 1: of those refueling stations without bombing the hell out of
15:56
Speaker 1: them and killing people, assuming even carrying drugs. And my
16:02
Speaker 1: guess is they're not carrying drugs. In the United States.
16:05
Speaker 1: You don't use little boats like that to carry drugs
16:07
Speaker 1: the United sides. I didn't notice the last couple of
16:10
Speaker 1: days that they're bombing boats in the Pacific. Maybe maybe
16:14
Speaker 1: you know Pacific coast. Maybe they've been listening to you
16:17
Speaker 1: on brook Show, where I've been saying that almost all
16:20
Speaker 1: the drugs coming into the United States come in on
16:23
Speaker 1: the Pacific side. It doesn't come in on the Atlantic side,
16:26
Speaker 1: on the Caribbean side. Maybe that's it. I don't know.
16:30
Speaker 1: But they did a couple of bombs. They've bombed a
16:35
Speaker 1: couple of boats on the Pacific side, but again not
16:39
Speaker 1: a fentannel that would require them to figure out how
16:44
Speaker 1: to stop smuggling across the southern border. And even though
16:47
Speaker 1: they've stopped immigration from the southern border, they have not
16:51
Speaker 1: stopped the floor of fentanyl now through the southern border,
16:54
Speaker 1: not on boats into California, Texas and so on. They
17:00
Speaker 1: just haven't stopped it. It's nowhere near right anyway. I
17:04
Speaker 1: now Trump is declaring an armed conflict with drug trafficking groups.
17:09
Speaker 1: He's designated them as international terrorist groups. They've already done that,
17:12
Speaker 1: and then today they announced that they will start bombing
17:16
Speaker 1: ground facilities in places like Venezuela potentially Colombia. So we're
17:23
Speaker 1: going to this is a one drugs which is basically
17:28
Speaker 1: announced by Richard Nixon in the nineteen seventies has been
17:32
Speaker 1: a complete out of failure. Has only made drugs and
17:36
Speaker 1: drug deaths and the destruction of drug and the drug
17:40
Speaker 1: trades and the cartels much much was we're doubling up
17:43
Speaker 1: on it, We're doing more, when, of course, you know,
17:48
Speaker 1: the solution to the problem of drugs, the way to
17:51
Speaker 1: get rid of fent andol is to make cocaine and
17:53
Speaker 1: heroin legal. If cocaine and heroin were legal, nobody would
17:57
Speaker 1: buy fentanel because cocaine heroine would be so cheap. Why
18:02
Speaker 1: would you bother with fentinel. Fentonel requires a chemical. All
18:05
Speaker 1: these chemicals they require some combination. Cocaine and heroin are
18:11
Speaker 1: easy to grow, they grow plenty in tropical climates, and
18:16
Speaker 1: they'd be really, really cheap, and you could save a
18:21
Speaker 1: lot of money from new wars. So for some reason,
18:25
Speaker 1: Trump has decided that the one war he does want
18:28
Speaker 1: to engage in. And I think the first person I
18:31
Speaker 1: heard raise this issue about going to war with the
18:33
Speaker 1: cartels was Vivic Ramaswami, who's probably going to become the
18:38
Speaker 1: governor of Ohio unless there's a big anti Indian vote.
18:42
Speaker 1: We'll see, but probably going to become the governor of Ohio. Yeah,
18:49
Speaker 1: it's you know, we're going to war against the cartels.
18:51
Speaker 1: I couldn't believe it when Vivic said it. I thought
18:53
Speaker 1: it was nuts. I thought it was crazy. But notice
18:56
Speaker 1: that they're not going to war with cartels in Mexico.
18:58
Speaker 1: They actually do the damage. No, no, no, we wouldn't
19:01
Speaker 1: want to do that. It's the same thing as they
19:03
Speaker 1: did before right after nine to eleven. You don't go
19:05
Speaker 1: to Iran, which is actually funding terrorists and inspiring terrorists
19:10
Speaker 1: all over the world. You got to Iraq, you go
19:12
Speaker 1: to the you know, they much poorer cousin. You do
19:20
Speaker 1: irrelevant stuff. You don't go to the source even you know,
19:25
Speaker 1: assuming if you wanted a strategy to destroy the inportation
19:29
Speaker 1: of Fenton all In. But this is ridiculous. I mean
19:33
Speaker 1: the President of Columbia at some point said the truth
19:38
Speaker 1: out loud, and he basically said, what is your problem
19:41
Speaker 1: people with cocaine? Or just make it legal and you
19:45
Speaker 1: know it's not that bad, it's not that bad for you,
19:49
Speaker 1: and it's not that bad. Just make it legal and
19:51
Speaker 1: you solve the problem. Why are you're subsessed with this stuff?
19:56
Speaker 1: That is true. It's probably the only thing I agree
19:59
Speaker 1: with the present Columbia on. So yeah, it it it.
20:04
Speaker 1: It looks like, uh, I the United States is gonna
20:08
Speaker 1: get more aggressive, not less aggressive. Uh. It looks like, uh,
20:12
Speaker 1: we're gonna be bombing in South America soon. Hopefully they
20:15
Speaker 1: don't decide to to bomb in retaliation and bomb I
20:18
Speaker 1: don't know, uh, uh Puerto Rico in retaliation. Yeah. Heroin
20:26
Speaker 1: is very addictive and it does bad things. Don't take it,
20:29
Speaker 1: don't take caroin, do not inject hero and if you do,
20:34
Speaker 1: it's your problem, not mine. And if it was legal,
20:39
Speaker 1: then my guess is a bunch of companies would figure
20:42
Speaker 1: out ways to get you uh off the addiction and
20:45
Speaker 1: maybe rewire your brain back, or maybe the rewiring of
20:49
Speaker 1: your brain. It would be a good thing, because I mean,
20:52
Speaker 1: you took the heroin, your brain might not be functioning
20:54
Speaker 1: that well to begin with. Maybe it needs rewiring. Maybe
20:58
Speaker 1: the heroine will do you good. I don't know. Heroin's
21:03
Speaker 1: a lot more addictive than nicotine, So I mean, the
21:06
Speaker 1: whole idea of nicotine being addictive is way exaggerated. I
21:10
Speaker 1: know so many people who've gone are gone off nicotine
21:14
Speaker 1: cold turkey without any problem. I don't know anybody who's
21:18
Speaker 1: ever gone heroin addiction? Cold Turkey? You can't, I mean
21:21
Speaker 1: without help, without real help. So no, heroin is really
21:26
Speaker 1: addictive and really bad. But okay, don't take it. But
21:30
Speaker 1: there are a lot of things you shouldn't do, even
21:33
Speaker 1: if they're legal. Wellhab says tropical Stone. Melissa is going
21:40
Speaker 1: to be how it can. Yeah, but it's not gonna
21:42
Speaker 1: affect Puerto Rico's though, I don't care that much, all right,
21:51
Speaker 1: Sachka tells, here's one you know, whereas as Trump flip
21:56
Speaker 1: flops through different issues, chinges his minds constant simplete revises
22:02
Speaker 1: his position based on new information. How about that? You know,
22:06
Speaker 1: yesterday the Trump administration announced new sanctions on Russia's two
22:13
Speaker 1: largest oil companies, was Neft and Luke Oil. And it
22:21
Speaker 1: turns out that these new sanctions have teeth. It's shocking
22:26
Speaker 1: that this was not done previously. It's chocking the Biden
22:28
Speaker 1: administration didn't do this. It's shocking Trump didn't do this earlier.
22:32
Speaker 1: But these have real teeth. Uh, you know this is
22:37
Speaker 1: gonna this is making it very difficult for India to
22:40
Speaker 1: input Russian oil. Uh. And it looks like they're going
22:44
Speaker 1: to cut importation of Russian oil significantly. That will also
22:49
Speaker 1: help them visa vi the tariffs that they are paying
22:53
Speaker 1: the United States. But they were negotiating around the tariffs
22:56
Speaker 1: and they didn't offer to stop buying oil because of
22:58
Speaker 1: the tariffs. The sangs thing of Roseveldt and Luke oil,
23:03
Speaker 1: because of the fact that if you violate the sanction
23:08
Speaker 1: the all kinds of consequences downstream. They are basically backing
23:15
Speaker 1: off of buying Russian oil. So it sounds like the
23:21
Speaker 1: Indians are doing it. But also even more importantly maybe
23:25
Speaker 1: is the fact that it is really hitting the Chinese heart.
23:30
Speaker 1: That is, China today announced that woos Yeah, China today
23:41
Speaker 1: announced that it is gonna stop buying oil at least
23:45
Speaker 1: in these two companies. Now it's likely that China that
23:48
Speaker 1: Russia will find a way around us. I mean the
23:51
Speaker 1: sanctions on the two largest oil companies, but at the
23:54
Speaker 1: end of the day, putin controls all of it, right,
23:57
Speaker 1: so you could imagine the oil being funnel after some
24:00
Speaker 1: of the small ower companies that maybe have not being
24:02
Speaker 1: sanctioned and and still be able to sell to China.
24:06
Speaker 1: But as of now, both China and India are significantly shrinking.
24:12
Speaker 1: They purchase of Russian oil. Russia is basically funding its
24:21
Speaker 1: war to a large extent with money coming in, you know,
24:27
Speaker 1: from from oil. So Russia to a large extent, I
24:34
Speaker 1: means their war effort is going to be significantly I
24:37
Speaker 1: think crippled is going to be significantly crippled by if
24:45
Speaker 1: they lose these markets, particularly if they lose the Chinese
24:48
Speaker 1: and the Indian markets. So that is good, you know,
24:51
Speaker 1: starving the Russian market is good. And you can see
24:54
Speaker 1: these are really having an effect by the fact that
24:59
Speaker 1: or plight is jumped, or places went significantly up, so
25:04
Speaker 1: people expect a lot less oil coming out of Russia.
25:08
Speaker 1: Therefore there'll be a lot less oil in the world market.
25:11
Speaker 1: And as a consequence of that, or prices went up.
25:16
Speaker 1: So it has that suggest to me that this is
25:22
Speaker 1: you know, we'll see if they sustain, if they stay up.
25:24
Speaker 1: As I as I said a few minutes ago, I
25:27
Speaker 1: believe that Russia will find a way around us. I
25:30
Speaker 1: don't think this is long lasting, but at least for
25:32
Speaker 1: now it's having a real impact and it will be
25:40
Speaker 1: will be significant. OR prices spiked to above sixty four,
25:46
Speaker 1: which is you know, means that people expect to reduce
25:54
Speaker 1: to supply. It also means that whatever oil Russia does
25:57
Speaker 1: sell not from these two companies, they sell it higher price.
26:01
Speaker 1: So we'll see what impact Neat this all has, but
26:05
Speaker 1: I think at least in the short run, it's going
26:06
Speaker 1: to have a significant impact on the Russians, and then
26:09
Speaker 1: the question is can they sustain it. Also, supposedly from
26:14
Speaker 1: the administration, there was a Wall Street Journal article yesterday
26:19
Speaker 1: saying that the US lifted restrictions on Ukraine's use of
26:23
Speaker 1: European long range missiles. So the US has to approve
26:28
Speaker 1: because technology, the US technology is in the missiles they
26:31
Speaker 1: use a long rage. Even though they're withholding the Tomahawks,
26:36
Speaker 1: they're letting for the first time. Supposedly they're letting. For example,
26:41
Speaker 1: the Ukrainians used the Stone Shadow, which is a British missile,
26:45
Speaker 1: firing it deep into Russia. So yesterday there was the
26:51
Speaker 1: story that the Trump administration has approved this and that
26:58
Speaker 1: this is part of the pressure the Trump is putting
27:00
Speaker 1: on Putin to agree to this cease fire deal or
27:03
Speaker 1: to agree to better terms, I guess for the Ukrainians.
27:10
Speaker 1: Interestingly enough, Trump doesn't want to be associated with that
27:14
Speaker 1: at all, and you know he doesn't always deny stuff
27:17
Speaker 1: that's written about him, But he did go yesterday on
27:20
Speaker 1: truth social and say, the Wall Street Journal on the
27:25
Speaker 1: us a's approval of Ukraine being allowed to use long
27:28
Speaker 1: range missiles deep into Russia, it's fake news. The US
27:32
Speaker 1: has nothing to do with those missiles wherever they may
27:35
Speaker 1: come from, or what Ukraine does with them, which is nonsense.
27:39
Speaker 1: That's just not true. But you know, he's probably got
27:42
Speaker 1: a phone call from Putin or one of Putin's cronies saying,
27:48
Speaker 1: what are you doing? Why are you proving this stuff?
27:50
Speaker 1: You know, it's very hostile. Don't behaving like this, Donald really,
27:55
Speaker 1: and he backed off. So while I think the approval
27:58
Speaker 1: is really there, will see if the Ukrainians keep using them.
28:03
Speaker 1: Trump is distancing of self from having anything to do
28:08
Speaker 1: with it, which is just interesting in and of itself.
28:14
Speaker 1: All right, let's go back to the goverment shut down.
28:19
Speaker 1: The government is now the second longest government shut down
28:22
Speaker 1: in history. It's now longer than the government shutdown in
28:24
Speaker 1: ninety five ninety six that actually produced the compromise between
28:30
Speaker 1: Bill Clinton and Nude Gingrich, that actually put in place
28:34
Speaker 1: mechanisms to control government spending and actually led the US
28:38
Speaker 1: government for the first time ever, well not ever, for
28:41
Speaker 1: the first time in modern times, to have a surplus
28:44
Speaker 1: in nineteen ninety nine. So in nineteen fifteen, ninety five,
28:48
Speaker 1: and ninety six, there was real effort to come to
28:50
Speaker 1: some kind of deal, and that deal involved cutting government
28:53
Speaker 1: spending and you know, again nude gingrich control. Congress, they
29:01
Speaker 1: passed a budget that cut spending dramatically. Bill Clinton said
29:05
Speaker 1: he was gonna veto it. The government shut down for
29:09
Speaker 1: twenty one days, but they ultimately negotiated a deal that
29:13
Speaker 1: allowed the government to open and where and where what
29:24
Speaker 1: do you call it? I'm reading David Susson's comments, which
29:28
Speaker 1: I shouldn't do it in the middle of a sentence.
29:31
Speaker 1: So they took the series they and actually cut gun spending.
29:34
Speaker 1: But at least there's a percentage GP if not, if
29:36
Speaker 1: not not real government spending. This time, the government shut down,
29:43
Speaker 1: there's no indication it's gonna reopen. Nobody really seems to care.
29:49
Speaker 1: Dem cuts on Republicans seem fine with the government shutdown.
29:52
Speaker 1: Trump has manipulated the whole thing in a way where
29:59
Speaker 1: he's he's basically he's basically paying the people who wants
30:03
Speaker 1: to pay and not paying the people who doesn't want
30:05
Speaker 1: to pay. Now, this is probably illegal, but again, this
30:09
Speaker 1: is like the corruption. Trump does so many things that
30:11
Speaker 1: are illegal. There's so many, for example, lawsuits right now
30:14
Speaker 1: against it that you can't keep track anymore. And a
30:19
Speaker 1: lot of legal scholars are like, who has the energy
30:23
Speaker 1: to follow this anymore? But it's probably illegal what he's doing.
30:26
Speaker 1: But you know, for example, the Department of War of
30:29
Speaker 1: War has repurposed about eight billion dollars in funds that
30:36
Speaker 1: were supposed to be used for something else and not
30:38
Speaker 1: being used to pay the one point three million members
30:42
Speaker 1: of the armed forces. Huh, that's not what a government
30:45
Speaker 1: shutdown looks like. You don't get to payout. Yeah, I mean,
30:50
Speaker 1: it's just shenanigans. For example, some agents of ICE, FBI,
30:55
Speaker 1: Homeland Security seem to be receiving their paychecks. Others not,
31:00
Speaker 1: but some Yes. The president has pledged to use tariff
31:05
Speaker 1: revenue as if it's not just regular revenue tax revenue
31:10
Speaker 1: to fund food aid programs for low income mothers and
31:13
Speaker 1: their children. How can he do that when the government
31:16
Speaker 1: shut down and no budget's being approved, no, no spending
31:20
Speaker 1: has been approved. He also said he's gonna resume paying
31:26
Speaker 1: the three billion dollars in farm aid because the farmers
31:29
Speaker 1: need it, need no standard, certainly no Congress Congresses. I mean,
31:39
Speaker 1: for that matter, we might have a permanent government shutdown.
31:42
Speaker 1: That'll basically mean Congress is not functioning. Is Congress functioning anyway?
31:52
Speaker 1: At the same time, things that are not being funded
31:55
Speaker 1: are things that he thinks of the Democrats. So they
31:58
Speaker 1: cancel twenty eight billion dollars for projects located in Republican areas.
32:02
Speaker 1: They're firing federal employees who they think who are working
32:08
Speaker 1: in government, in government programs that Democrats like. But even there,
32:13
Speaker 1: the Democrats don't seem phased. They don't seem to care.
32:17
Speaker 1: I mean, generally the country is going on. Everything's fine.
32:20
Speaker 1: I mean, this always happens in a government shutdown, panic
32:23
Speaker 1: in hysteria. The world's gonna come to an end, the
32:25
Speaker 1: economy will collapse, the stock market will go to zero.
32:29
Speaker 1: GENP is gonna be heard dramatically, and then there's a
32:33
Speaker 1: government shut down and nothing really happens. Nobody's that upset.
32:38
Speaker 1: The markets don't collapse. GENP is fine. Arguably, it's actually
32:45
Speaker 1: good that the government shuts down. Uh. And you know,
32:51
Speaker 1: but usually politicians are panicked who's gonna get blamed this time.
32:57
Speaker 1: They've managed to organize a government shutdown without any pain.
33:07
Speaker 1: Now finale, you know, there's certain things that have certain deadlines,
33:13
Speaker 1: and if you don't stop paying into them, particularly the
33:15
Speaker 1: welfare programs, I mean, that's when the pain happens. You know,
33:19
Speaker 1: if soial Security checks are going out and Medicaid is
33:22
Speaker 1: being paid, so those are the big and interest on
33:25
Speaker 1: the debt is being paid. Those are the big parts
33:27
Speaker 1: of the government. Right If interest on the debt doesn't
33:29
Speaker 1: get paid, the government is a default. It goes bankrupt,
33:32
Speaker 1: you know. SOID Security, nobody's gonna stop paying Social Security, Medicaid,
33:35
Speaker 1: nobody's gonna stop paying Medicaid. So the real pain points
33:39
Speaker 1: they've eliminated. Now they're paying the military somehow through some Shenanigan.
33:45
Speaker 1: The big one is another welfare program called food stamps,
33:50
Speaker 1: and funding for food stamps is going to run out
33:56
Speaker 1: supposedly in several states because federal government gives them an
34:00
Speaker 1: the states and states distributed. A number of states are
34:02
Speaker 1: going to run out of that money by November first.
34:07
Speaker 1: What then, So November first might be the point where
34:13
Speaker 1: they have to make a decision where there's a pain
34:15
Speaker 1: point because people who get food stamps will be upset.
34:20
Speaker 1: I mean, is any anybody, I mean, a lot of
34:23
Speaker 1: people get food stamps, right, It's tens of millions of people,
34:26
Speaker 1: and a lot of them are in red states, and
34:29
Speaker 1: a lot of them voted for Trump. So bit, as
34:34
Speaker 1: far as I can tell, money is being spent. I mean,
34:38
Speaker 1: I'm at the airport all the time. TSA is working fine,
34:41
Speaker 1: air traffic control is working fine. I haven't heard of
34:43
Speaker 1: any real problems in the air traffic control. Things seem
34:46
Speaker 1: to me kind of chunking along. So I don't know
34:50
Speaker 1: what the pain point is. Keep the gum shot. How
34:56
Speaker 1: many people use food stamps? Tens of millions of Americans
35:00
Speaker 1: food stamps about fifty percent of Americans. I think it's
35:03
Speaker 1: fifty one to fifty two percent of Americans a net
35:06
Speaker 1: recipients of welfare payments from the government. That is, they
35:10
Speaker 1: get more payments from the government than they pay in taxes,
35:13
Speaker 1: and food stamps is a big part of it. And
35:15
Speaker 1: again it's tens of millions of people. So yeah, we'll
35:22
Speaker 1: see what happens. We'll keep track, but it's not a
35:26
Speaker 1: real government shutdown when you can reallocate funds and make
35:31
Speaker 1: the payments anyway, and the government really hasn't shut down,
35:34
Speaker 1: and most of the stuff that the government does is
35:36
Speaker 1: still working. There be ice still out there. As far
35:38
Speaker 1: as I can tell, ice is still out there now.
35:41
Speaker 1: Supposedly a lot of these people, according to chatchupt forty
35:44
Speaker 1: two million people get food stamps. That is a lot
35:48
Speaker 1: of people, forty two million people. Lincoln says it's like
35:54
Speaker 1: twelve percent of the country. Maybe chat GIPT is a percentage,
35:57
Speaker 1: but yeah, it's a lot, surprisingly, but twelve point three
36:03
Speaker 1: percent of the population. Welfare is massive in the United States,
36:09
Speaker 1: And of course the biggest welfare plan is so security.
36:11
Speaker 1: They've taken that off the table because the one thing
36:13
Speaker 1: you have to keep doing is paying welfare. The real
36:16
Speaker 1: thing is if government employees get really pissed off because
36:19
Speaker 1: they're not getting paid, like TSA, air traffic control is others.
36:23
Speaker 1: I mean, they've even managed to keep the national parks open,
36:26
Speaker 1: not to piss off the people visiting national parks. So
36:31
Speaker 1: what's the point of having a budget if the president
36:37
Speaker 1: can just decide unilaterally what he spends it on, when
36:40
Speaker 1: he spends it on, how he spends it on, and
36:44
Speaker 1: there's no shut down there's no anything. Yeah, we live
36:50
Speaker 1: in a very strange country right now, where the constitution,
36:55
Speaker 1: the rule of law, the rules, any kind of rules
36:59
Speaker 1: governing just be put to the side and are being
37:03
Speaker 1: ignored and they don't exist, and it's just gone. It
37:07
Speaker 1: just doesn't exist. And you know, we can probably survive
37:15
Speaker 1: it through the Trump years, probably maybe, but how long?
37:21
Speaker 1: Y you know, how is this gonna translate into the future,
37:26
Speaker 1: how's it gonna be, how's it gonna work in the future,
37:28
Speaker 1: And what happens, uh if every administration adopts this, and
37:33
Speaker 1: if as we move into the future, you don't get
37:36
Speaker 1: worse and worse and worse, and and then the consitution
37:38
Speaker 1: becomes completely irrelevant and and that com political system completely
37:43
Speaker 1: changes or collapses. Which is it looks like is where
37:47
Speaker 1: we're heading, where we're hitting. The only thing that can
37:50
Speaker 1: save us really are the courts. And so far the
37:53
Speaker 1: courts have indicated a willingness to cave. Now we will
37:57
Speaker 1: see if you know how far they will to go.
38:01
Speaker 1: And you know, a big one here, a big one
38:06
Speaker 1: here is is what Trump is doing with the with
38:10
Speaker 1: the whole election mechanism. You know, he now has appointed
38:16
Speaker 1: a person in the federal government. This is a new agency,
38:21
Speaker 1: if you will, called the Election Protection Programs. This is
38:27
Speaker 1: part of this is part of Homeland Security, and it's
38:31
Speaker 1: it's an apartment that is concerned with election integrity. He
38:36
Speaker 1: is placed at the head of this program. Have the Honey,
38:40
Speaker 1: who is a leader and an avid spokesman for and
38:47
Speaker 1: somebody who's been very active around election denials of the
38:51
Speaker 1: twenty twenty election, claims of election fraud left and right,
38:57
Speaker 1: the idea that you know, the the electronic voting is
39:05
Speaker 1: super you know, super fraudulent. I mean she is. She's
39:13
Speaker 1: a partisan hack who is committed to conspiracy theories around elections,
39:21
Speaker 1: and she's a position now to I don't know, dictate
39:28
Speaker 1: election technology and the elections as they happen in the
39:31
Speaker 1: future and generally at the state level as well. We've
39:36
Speaker 1: put the Republicans are put in charge of many of
39:39
Speaker 1: these elections, election deniers throughout the country. Republicans bought into
39:47
Speaker 1: these ideas. Are we ever going to have an actual
39:54
Speaker 1: real election again? Again? I mean Trump is a student
39:58
Speaker 1: of what Auburn and what Putin have done. I mean
40:02
Speaker 1: Putin has an election every four years. To have an election,
40:05
Speaker 1: Auban has elections now Auburn might lose the next election
40:09
Speaker 1: because he's so unpopular right now. He might lose in
40:12
Speaker 1: spite of how much he rigs it. But Putin will
40:15
Speaker 1: never lose. And one really wonders to what extent the
40:21
Speaker 1: Trump administration is putting people in place that are going
40:29
Speaker 1: to are going to create standards and processes that they
40:38
Speaker 1: can rig, that they can rig. I mean, Wookie in
40:44
Speaker 1: the White House is you know Could Olson, who worked
40:48
Speaker 1: for Michael Lindell, you know pillow Man, and was a
40:52
Speaker 1: big promoter of stolen election theories, all kinds of stolen
40:55
Speaker 1: election theories. And yeah, I mean the director of public
41:06
Speaker 1: Affairs at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Cybersecurity Infrastructure
41:12
Speaker 1: Security Agency is a woman by the name of Marcy
41:14
Speaker 1: McCarthy who spread debunk claims about voting machines at Georgia
41:20
Speaker 1: when she was the chair chairwoman of the the Caleb
41:24
Speaker 1: County Republican Party. Now she's the director of public Affairs
41:30
Speaker 1: at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. And the lots
41:34
Speaker 1: of these people. This is what I told you all
41:37
Speaker 1: the time about Trump's second term. Trump's second term is
41:40
Speaker 1: about putting his people in there, people who will do
41:46
Speaker 1: whatever he wants. People who are committed to manga and
41:51
Speaker 1: committed to the insanity of Mega. And these are people
41:54
Speaker 1: who have in the past in twenty twenty and would
41:59
Speaker 1: in the few which completely undermining the integrity of the
42:01
Speaker 1: election system. And it could be that these appointments that
42:05
Speaker 1: he's making will have, you know, greater consequences to what
42:10
Speaker 1: happens to the to our election, in our political system
42:14
Speaker 1: than maybe any other appointments he makes. You know. He
42:19
Speaker 1: also said two days ago and one of these past
42:24
Speaker 1: conferences where he's sitting around and talking to the press,
42:26
Speaker 1: he says, in our quoting Trump here, we can never
42:29
Speaker 1: let what happened in twenty twenty elections happen again. We
42:32
Speaker 1: just can't let that happen. I know, Cash, this is
42:36
Speaker 1: head of the FBI is working on it. That's kind
42:38
Speaker 1: of ominous and scary. Everyone is working on it. And
42:43
Speaker 1: suddenly Tulsi, Tulsi's head of all intelligence agencies, she's working
42:48
Speaker 1: on it. We can't let that happen again to our country.
42:53
Speaker 1: What happened in twenty twenty nothing he didn't get to
42:59
Speaker 1: steal this election. What happened in twenty twenty is that
43:02
Speaker 1: Donald Trump was prevented from stealing an election, and now
43:06
Speaker 1: he says the head of the FBI and the head
43:09
Speaker 1: of our intelligence agencies are working on making sure that
43:14
Speaker 1: he can steal elections in the future. I mean, he
43:22
Speaker 1: said it, and that's the only way I mean. I
43:25
Speaker 1: know he doesn't interpret it that way because he I
43:28
Speaker 1: don't know that he believes himself. I don't know what
43:31
Speaker 1: he believes. But you know, the election wasn't stolen. People
43:38
Speaker 1: think that Trump cannot be elected again because he's limited,
43:42
Speaker 1: But Steve Bannon is out there every way saying Donald
43:47
Speaker 1: Trump will run for a third term and will win
43:48
Speaker 1: a third term. And I don't know what the strategy is.
43:54
Speaker 1: I don't know how they get around the constitutional thing.
43:56
Speaker 1: And I think at the end of the day, it's
43:57
Speaker 1: unlikely that he runs. But okay, so Donald Trump uses
44:04
Speaker 1: all these tools that he has in place in order
44:07
Speaker 1: to make sure that JD. Vance wins, or in order
44:09
Speaker 1: to make sure that Don Junior wins, or whoever he
44:12
Speaker 1: decides is his heir and should win. These people are
44:17
Speaker 1: low to him. He'll just tell them what to do.
44:23
Speaker 1: You know, they're telling you exactly what they want to do.
44:26
Speaker 1: They're not hiding it. This is not hidden in code.
44:30
Speaker 1: I mean, that's the thing about Trump. He's corrupt right upfront.
44:34
Speaker 1: He just takes a suitcase of cash. There's no ifs,
44:37
Speaker 1: but maybe you know. The corruption is happening right in
44:40
Speaker 1: front of our eyes. You cannot fail to see it.
44:44
Speaker 1: And he doesn't care. And when asked about he says,
44:46
Speaker 1: oh yeah, who cares. And in terms of rigging the
44:51
Speaker 1: next election, he says, we're not gonna let twenty twenty
44:54
Speaker 1: happen again. We're not gonna let it happened again. That
44:59
Speaker 1: if I feel like I want an election, or if
45:01
Speaker 1: I feel like my people want an election, they won't
45:04
Speaker 1: be able to win it. They should win it if
45:06
Speaker 1: I feel like they want it. This is not pretend,
45:09
Speaker 1: this is real. All right. Let me see I did
45:14
Speaker 1: see Troy. Thank you, thank you, thank you, Troy. Troy
45:17
Speaker 1: came in a five hundred Australian dollars. Really appreciate that.
45:20
Speaker 1: Thanks to the support. And we've got John with the sticker.
45:26
Speaker 1: I'll just go through the stickers quickly. Stephen and another
45:29
Speaker 1: Stephen Hopper and Stephen Kreisman and yeah, those are stickers
45:34
Speaker 1: for today. Thank you guys. Really appreciate the support. All right, well,
45:38
Speaker 1: we have left, we have Gaza and San Francisco. So
45:41
Speaker 1: let's quickly talk about Gaza. The reality right now is
45:47
Speaker 1: that I think everybody there's a lot of doubt about
45:51
Speaker 1: being able to disarm Hamas. There's a lot of doubt
45:55
Speaker 1: about who will be in the military force to go
45:58
Speaker 1: in there, and and and the peacekeeping force to go
46:03
Speaker 1: in there supposedly after Ramas disalms or maybe to disarms Ramas.
46:07
Speaker 1: Israel is basically put its foot down that the Turkey
46:10
Speaker 1: cannots and troops Katao cannots, and I don't think it
46:13
Speaker 1: has any troops, so Turkey cannot send troops. Uh and
46:17
Speaker 1: and so the latest proposal is Azerbaijan and Indonesia, which
46:22
Speaker 1: I think Israel will accept. Azerbaijan is a Muslim country
46:26
Speaker 1: friendly to Israel. Indonesia is not yet friendly to as well,
46:29
Speaker 1: but they there are noises about establishing relationships. And Indonesia
46:34
Speaker 1: is not hostile to Indo Israel like like turky Is.
46:38
Speaker 1: So they would accept Indonesian and and Azari troops. But
46:42
Speaker 1: I don't think Indonesian and az Vaijan went to send
46:44
Speaker 1: troops into a war zone to fight Ramas, which is
46:47
Speaker 1: what will be necessary, you know, to disarm them, And
46:50
Speaker 1: there really does seem to be now a kind of
46:54
Speaker 1: an implicit plan that I think is being pushed by
46:57
Speaker 1: Jared Kushna to basically focus on, you know, creating two gazas,
47:07
Speaker 1: having a Gaza strip that is controlled by Israel and
47:10
Speaker 1: a Gaza strip that is controlled by Hamas, and to
47:14
Speaker 1: invest a lot of money and rebuild the part of
47:18
Speaker 1: Gaza that is controlled by Israel what's called the yellow
47:22
Speaker 1: line now and build that up and not pull any resources,
47:27
Speaker 1: not put any money, and not put any kind of
47:30
Speaker 1: construction material and things like that into the area controlled Bahamas.
47:34
Speaker 1: Give them food, humanitarian aid, I guess that is a requirement,
47:38
Speaker 1: but other than that, not do anything and over time
47:44
Speaker 1: potentially allow Gazan civilian populations screened by Israel to move
47:51
Speaker 1: from the Hamas controlled areas to Israeli controlled areas and
47:56
Speaker 1: basically ultimately make I'm not so unpopular because people will
48:02
Speaker 1: see across the border Guzans are living really, really well
48:05
Speaker 1: and they're struggling. Hamaso on popular that they will dissolve
48:10
Speaker 1: and they will go away where their plan like that
48:11
Speaker 1: can work is doubtful, quite doubtful. But that looks like
48:17
Speaker 1: what they're doing because I don't think, as I said
48:20
Speaker 1: from the beginning, that I don't think that the plan
48:24
Speaker 1: that they put together is doable. I don't think it's
48:30
Speaker 1: doable because Ramas does not want to disarmle Ramas does
48:34
Speaker 1: not want to give up control. And the only force
48:38
Speaker 1: that can actually get them to do that and has
48:41
Speaker 1: the capacity and the will to do that is Israel.
48:44
Speaker 1: And nobody wants Israel to go into Gaza and finish
48:47
Speaker 1: the job. Why, I do not know. It has to
48:50
Speaker 1: do more with pr than anything political. But I think
48:54
Speaker 1: everybody in the region would thank Israel if they actually
48:56
Speaker 1: did that. They won't admit that, but they would thank
48:59
Speaker 1: them at the end. So, you know, the struggle is
49:05
Speaker 1: going to be how to keep Ramas out of the
49:07
Speaker 1: Israeli side. So the idea is to create a vetting
49:12
Speaker 1: program that is Israeli authorities would lead that would vet
49:17
Speaker 1: the Palestinians who wanted to move from the Ramas side
49:20
Speaker 1: to the Israeli side. You know, we will see, we
49:24
Speaker 1: will see. But this is this is the plan that
49:27
Speaker 1: is evolving right now. The plan that it really does
49:30
Speaker 1: seem like Jared Krishna is pushing. All right, yesterday I
49:44
Speaker 1: read you something all the day before, which is something
49:46
Speaker 1: by a meet Sega from Israel where he explained how
49:51
Speaker 1: you know the reality is that Israel lost a lot
49:54
Speaker 1: of soldiers in order to protect the hostages. Right, And
49:59
Speaker 1: he has another piece today that I think is is
50:03
Speaker 1: really good. So I'll just read this to you, and
50:06
Speaker 1: I think this is the kind of mall calculus that
50:11
Speaker 1: them all decision making them all principles that Isa's going
50:13
Speaker 1: to have to come to terms with because this is
50:17
Speaker 1: not the last time they're going to fight awards, not
50:19
Speaker 1: the last time they're going to be hostages. He writes,
50:22
Speaker 1: the claim that Israeli government ordered the IDEF to sacrifice
50:26
Speaker 1: the hostages and operations Gideon's charts, that's the last operation.
50:32
Speaker 1: Is the opposite is actually reality? The opposite is true.
50:37
Speaker 1: In fact, in the area where the IDEF operated in
50:40
Speaker 1: recent months in southern Gaza, they were enclosed zones that
50:44
Speaker 1: the idea of reframed from entering or bombing due to
50:48
Speaker 1: an assessment that hostages were being held there in these compounds.
50:52
Speaker 1: Armas operatives understood that they were largely immune, they not
50:57
Speaker 1: only took part in guarding the hostages, but also attempted
51:00
Speaker 1: to harm idea of soldiers surrounding the area relying on
51:05
Speaker 1: that safe zone. From one of these areas, terrorists repeatedly
51:10
Speaker 1: came out, attacked soldiers, and returned unharmed to the location
51:14
Speaker 1: there was off limits for Isterix, and among those attacks
51:18
Speaker 1: were some of the deadliest. In total, around twelve soldiers
51:23
Speaker 1: were killed by terrorists who emerged from that protected compound
51:28
Speaker 1: where a single hostage was being held. Is all basically
51:34
Speaker 1: sacrificed twelve soldiers. And I use sacrificed because it's the
51:38
Speaker 1: appropriate tomb sacrificed, which is a negative in objectives, and
51:43
Speaker 1: negative tomb sacrificed twelve soldiers in order to protect one hostage.
51:51
Speaker 1: That cannot be right, that cannot be model, that cannot
51:58
Speaker 1: be just. And again I'll return to what I said
52:01
Speaker 1: October eighth, Israel should have said, we are going to
52:08
Speaker 1: destroy Hamas, and we are going to do it under
52:12
Speaker 1: the assumption the hostages are dead. If we can rescue
52:15
Speaker 1: some of them, we will, but we will not let
52:19
Speaker 1: Hamas use the hostages to shield itself and to kill
52:23
Speaker 1: our troops from behind their bodies. That wasn't done. A
52:30
Speaker 1: couple of hundred or a few hundred Israeli soldiers died,
52:33
Speaker 1: probably large number of those because of this policy, and
52:40
Speaker 1: it's a travesty and Israel needs to completely rethink it,
52:43
Speaker 1: completely rethink it. Howard deals with hostages in the future
52:47
Speaker 1: has to go back to the days of Antebe, the
52:49
Speaker 1: days before the two thousands, before before N'atanielle, when the
52:56
Speaker 1: policy was we do not negotiate with terrorists period. Actually
53:01
Speaker 1: the policy before Oslo, that's what they need to go
53:03
Speaker 1: to Oslo was the nineteen ninety four deal that brought
53:08
Speaker 1: our fight into the West Bank and agree to Pelcinia
53:13
Speaker 1: and autonomy. They need to go back to the days
53:16
Speaker 1: before Oslo. Away. It was clear explicit Israeli policies, we
53:20
Speaker 1: do not negotiate with terrorists principles. Good old days of
53:28
Speaker 1: principles didn't last very long. All right. Let me just
53:35
Speaker 1: see what else we heard here, all right. So Trump
53:44
Speaker 1: supposedly had made the decision and actually troops were on
53:47
Speaker 1: the way to send troops into San Francisco and to
53:52
Speaker 1: clean the place up, reduce crime and cleaned it up.
53:56
Speaker 1: And he had a phone call with the mayor of
53:57
Speaker 1: San Francisco, and he has now decided to delay, to
54:00
Speaker 1: bring the troops back, not send them into San Francisco.
54:04
Speaker 1: And the question is why you know what's going on?
54:09
Speaker 1: What did the mayor of San Francisco, Daniel Lowry say,
54:13
Speaker 1: They commenced him because because Lowie is saying the same
54:15
Speaker 1: stuff a lot of other mans are saying crime is
54:18
Speaker 1: down anyway, we're doing a real good job, and Lourie
54:21
Speaker 1: did ask. I think what Lowie did, first of foremost
54:24
Speaker 1: is he was nice to Trump and complimentary. He told Trump,
54:30
Speaker 1: you know, we're gonna really try. We're gonna let us
54:33
Speaker 1: try first, and then if we can't succeed, then you
54:36
Speaker 1: can come in and we're going to try to. You know,
54:39
Speaker 1: we can try to, you know, and we can try
54:44
Speaker 1: make the effort. And Trump quote in the in his
54:52
Speaker 1: feed the federal governor was preparing to serve San Francisco,
54:55
Speaker 1: California on Saturday. But friends of mine will get to
54:58
Speaker 1: the other fends in a minute who live in the
55:00
Speaker 1: area called last night to ask me not to go
55:03
Speaker 1: forward with the surge and that the mayor, Daniel Laurie
55:07
Speaker 1: was making substantial progress. I spoke to Mayor Laurie last
55:10
Speaker 1: night and he asked very nicely that's the key, very
55:14
Speaker 1: nicely that I give him a chance to see if
55:17
Speaker 1: he can turn it around. Laurie is a new mayor,
55:21
Speaker 1: a centrist Democrat or relatively centrist, the centrist that you
55:24
Speaker 1: can get in California. So you know, Trump says, therefore,
55:30
Speaker 1: we will not search San Francisco on Saturday. Now you
55:34
Speaker 1: might be rewilded. How come a mayor can convince him?
55:36
Speaker 1: And I don't think it was really the mayor who
55:38
Speaker 1: convinced him. I think it was these friends and new
55:41
Speaker 1: other friends. Who does he know in San Francisco. Well,
55:44
Speaker 1: he knows a lot of the tech guys. My guess
55:47
Speaker 1: is that. And I know because I read one of
55:51
Speaker 1: the new stories covered this and said that he had
55:53
Speaker 1: spoken with the CEO of Salesforce. Salesforce as a huge
55:58
Speaker 1: presence in San Francisco. It's in downtown. The CEO of Salesforce,
56:03
Speaker 1: who was until recently a real bleeding heart liberal, real
56:07
Speaker 1: bleeding heart leftists, not liberal. We are leftist, huge on
56:13
Speaker 1: social responsibility, corporate social responsibility, and woke on everything bad.
56:19
Speaker 1: And he's he's now become much more friendly to Trump.
56:25
Speaker 1: I wonder why, you know, One wonders what did he promise?
56:29
Speaker 1: Maybe he promised to five million dollar check for the ballroom,
56:33
Speaker 1: maybe he promised to five million dollar check for something else.
56:36
Speaker 1: Who knows, but the tech bros, the tech guys, basically,
56:42
Speaker 1: you know, convinced him. It's the billionaires who live there.
56:47
Speaker 1: It's the billionaires who involved in San Francisco politics and
56:51
Speaker 1: who have swayed in the White House. They're the ones
56:53
Speaker 1: who have swayed in the White House. So again, we
56:57
Speaker 1: don't know exactly what transpired, but it's doubtful that the
57:02
Speaker 1: Democratic mayor of San Francisco is the one who contritche Trump,
57:05
Speaker 1: although Trump does admit that the mayor was very nice
57:08
Speaker 1: to him, and of course, as I said, that matters
57:11
Speaker 1: a lot to Trump, matters a lot to Trump, not
57:14
Speaker 1: just to be nice, but to really suck up, really
57:17
Speaker 1: suck up. All right, that is at least an abbreviated
57:24
Speaker 1: version of the news on this what is it? Thursday
57:28
Speaker 1: till twenty third? Uh, thank you all off for joining
57:33
Speaker 1: h We will shift now to answering your questions. Let
57:39
Speaker 1: me think there will be no show tomorrow Friday, and
57:42
Speaker 1: there will be no show on Saturday, well maybe a
57:44
Speaker 1: show on Saturday, potentially a show on Saturday no show
57:48
Speaker 1: on Sunday and then Monday, Monday, no show Tuesday Wednesday
57:53
Speaker 1: will play by next week? Is not gonna be good
57:58
Speaker 1: for shows? Well, well I'll do as many as I can.
58:01
Speaker 1: But I'll be on on a israel time zone Monday,
58:05
Speaker 1: Tuesday Wednesday, and then I'll be on European time zone
58:08
Speaker 1: after that and giving lectures in the evening when it's
58:12
Speaker 1: reasonable to do a show. So I could do a
58:14
Speaker 1: show very late at night, but after early morning flights.
58:16
Speaker 1: So it's gonna be a challenge, but I I will
58:18
Speaker 1: do my best to try to do uh a show,
58:21
Speaker 1: uh some shows next week, but it's gonna be uh difficult,
58:24
Speaker 1: and I will try to do uh Saturday from London. Uh.
58:28
Speaker 1: We also know there's a good internet connection cause we've
58:30
Speaker 1: done many shows from there before. Alright, we have a
58:35
Speaker 1: bunch of super Chat questions. Again, I wanna thank Troy
58:38
Speaker 1: for getting us our target and helping us succeed the target.
58:41
Speaker 1: So thank you, uh, thank you to Troy in Australia.
58:45
Speaker 1: Really really appreciate it. One of these days we'll actually
58:48
Speaker 1: meet when I'm in Australia. That would be that would
58:50
Speaker 1: be cool. I just won't say, let me just see
58:55
Speaker 1: what's going on. I don't know if you heard about this.
59:05
Speaker 1: This is this is news, but not news that is
59:08
Speaker 1: particularly if it interest to you guys. I guess uh
59:10
Speaker 1: you know, uh I Puerto Rico I I I I
59:13
Speaker 1: I I A A a major pipe line that it
59:16
Speaker 1: brings water into the city, into the populated areas from
59:20
Speaker 1: a big reservoir was a bust and they had to
59:23
Speaker 1: shut it down. And basically there's no water. Uh so,
59:26
Speaker 1: uh there's uh you know, there's uh no water in
59:30
Speaker 1: in po in much of Puerto Rico, many many households
59:33
Speaker 1: do not have any water running water. It's now being
59:36
Speaker 1: almost a week. We have a a cistern in our building,
59:41
Speaker 1: so we have this big water tank that we were
59:44
Speaker 1: using and up until yesterday that was fine, but that
59:48
Speaker 1: you know, started getting depleted and and so u as
59:53
Speaker 1: of yesterday, yes yesterday, we are rationing water in our
59:59
Speaker 1: condo building in Puerto Rico. And as my wife said it,
1:00:04
Speaker 1: you know, it's a good time to travel because it
1:00:06
Speaker 1: means less laundry, fewer showers, you know, so sh you know,
1:00:10
Speaker 1: and she can control it much easier with me not
1:00:12
Speaker 1: being there. But but yeah, unbelievable, right, unbelievable that. I mean,
1:00:17
Speaker 1: Puerto Rico is such a mess when it comes to infrastructure,
1:00:20
Speaker 1: A and I it's such a sad mess because it's
1:00:23
Speaker 1: all unnecessary. It's all the consequence of bad governance and corruption.
1:00:27
Speaker 1: It's not a lack of money, it's not a lack
1:00:29
Speaker 1: of smart people who know what to do. It's it's
1:00:32
Speaker 1: just the political there's no political will to fix these things,
1:00:36
Speaker 1: and and there's so much corruption that you can't get
1:00:38
Speaker 1: it done properly. All right, Uh, let's jump into your
1:00:47
Speaker 1: questions and then and then we'll call it a night,
1:00:50
Speaker 1: all right, David says, David, thank you fifty one hundred dollars.
1:00:55
Speaker 1: Really really appreciate that. Thank you, David. David said, listen
1:00:59
Speaker 1: to how Let's book Economics and One Lesson. Yeah, absolutely invaluable. Yes,
1:01:04
Speaker 1: required reading. Guys. If you're out there and you want
1:01:07
Speaker 1: to understand how the world works and you want to
1:01:09
Speaker 1: understand basic economics, the first book you should read is
1:01:13
Speaker 1: Economics and One Lesson by Henry Hanslett. Absolutely valuable. Thanks
1:01:17
Speaker 1: for the recommendation. How applicable are the many fallacies to
1:01:21
Speaker 1: modern day economics? All of them are applicable, every single
1:01:24
Speaker 1: one of them is applicable. I did a series, God,
1:01:32
Speaker 1: this is I don't know, twelve thirteen, fourteen years ago
1:01:37
Speaker 1: for Pajama TV. Do you remember Pajama TV. Those are PGATV.
1:01:42
Speaker 1: We did a series where every we did these short videos.
1:01:46
Speaker 1: Every video was Okay, here's what here's this chapter in Haslet,
1:01:53
Speaker 1: here's what he covers, and here's how it applies to today.
1:01:56
Speaker 1: Here's some examples from today, and every one of applies
1:02:00
Speaker 1: and applies in spades because the principle is the same.
1:02:04
Speaker 1: Everything wrong that's being done, that Trump is doing, that
1:02:09
Speaker 1: Biden did, that is a fallacy out of that book.
1:02:16
Speaker 1: So the main difference is that when Hazard wrote it,
1:02:20
Speaker 1: unions were more powerful. I'm trying to think of as
1:02:25
Speaker 1: any But other than that, I mean, everything is applicable.
1:02:28
Speaker 1: And the broken window fallacy, which is at the heart
1:02:31
Speaker 1: of economics and one lesson. The broken window fallacy is
1:02:36
Speaker 1: every way we look, every way we look, and it's
1:02:40
Speaker 1: built into the way they calculate GDP, It's built into
1:02:42
Speaker 1: the way they think about economics. So thank you, David,
1:02:49
Speaker 1: really appreciate the supports and I'm really glad you enjoyed
1:02:52
Speaker 1: the book. I hope everybody reads it. I see, Justin says,
1:02:57
Speaker 1: very much appreciate all you do. You know that's not
1:03:00
Speaker 1: the one that was looking for anyway, very much appreciated.
1:03:03
Speaker 1: Oh you do any news on and another conference in Australia, No, don't.
1:03:09
Speaker 1: I don't have any news about it. And I supposedly
1:03:13
Speaker 1: something's happening in twenty twenty six, but I haven't heard anything,
1:03:17
Speaker 1: any kind of final decision or any any planning or
1:03:22
Speaker 1: anything like that. I'll have to ask at the Institute. Jonnaton,
1:03:27
Speaker 1: who organized the previous Australian conference, is not resigned from
1:03:32
Speaker 1: the institute when to work for a startup, And I'm
1:03:35
Speaker 1: not sure who's in charge of it now. Okay. Just
1:03:37
Speaker 1: An also says, by the way, loving economics one lesson,
1:03:40
Speaker 1: did Hazlett have any interaction with Rand? Yes he did.
1:03:44
Speaker 1: Hazlett did interact with Rand. Rand was a huge fan
1:03:47
Speaker 1: of Hazlitz of economics and one lesson, and he in
1:03:51
Speaker 1: those days in the forties, I think it was he
1:03:53
Speaker 1: had a regular column. He was in the New York Times.
1:03:56
Speaker 1: Imagine Hazlet writing regularly. He was the economics guy at
1:04:02
Speaker 1: the New York Times. So he had about as free
1:04:04
Speaker 1: market as a person as you could find who can
1:04:07
Speaker 1: write well and in an understandable way. The chief writer
1:04:12
Speaker 1: of on Economics of the New York Times, so In Rand,
1:04:16
Speaker 1: and he knew each other. Indeed, there are these famous
1:04:20
Speaker 1: dinners that I wish had been recorded. Imagine if these
1:04:23
Speaker 1: things would be recorded of Miss von Mises, Ludwig von
1:04:29
Speaker 1: Miss Henry Hazlitt and Ein Rand sitting around the table
1:04:34
Speaker 1: having dinner and conversation. Can you imagine, you know, people say,
1:04:40
Speaker 1: who would you like to have dinner with those three? Yeah,
1:04:44
Speaker 1: people who are dead? Who would you want to bring
1:04:46
Speaker 1: back to life to have dinner with? I'd want to
1:04:47
Speaker 1: be at that conversation, and I would I would stay
1:04:50
Speaker 1: completely quiet, just listen to them. You know, at least
1:04:53
Speaker 1: Mesas and Ein two of the great geniuses of the
1:04:57
Speaker 1: twentieth century. Has it amazing? Right? So yeah, really really
1:05:04
Speaker 1: good guy, Lincoln says, has lived to be ninety eight,
1:05:08
Speaker 1: probably the longest living Austrian economics guy. I don't know.
1:05:11
Speaker 1: I mean, what's his name? Oh god, oh god, his
1:05:22
Speaker 1: name escapes me. Now. The Orthodoxy Jewish guy who taught
1:05:25
Speaker 1: at NYU, who's an Austrian economist, is well into his
1:05:31
Speaker 1: nineties and might be ninety eight, might be more than that.
1:05:34
Speaker 1: I don't know. But he's well into his nineties. I
1:05:36
Speaker 1: think he's still a lot alive. His name will come
1:05:40
Speaker 1: to me. I hope that would be horrible if I
1:05:44
Speaker 1: can't remember his name all right, Hoppa Campbell. Maybe somebody,
1:05:49
Speaker 1: maybe somebody in the chat will remind me of the name,
1:05:52
Speaker 1: because it's embarrassing. Do these people, this is Hali, Do
1:05:56
Speaker 1: these people want to want no wealth, creation, no innovation,
1:06:00
Speaker 1: no material progress of any kind, or just less of it.
1:06:04
Speaker 1: They will allow it, bet don't want to see an
1:06:07
Speaker 1: explosion of it. I don't think they think in those terms.
1:06:10
Speaker 1: They want control, they want power. They also think that
1:06:14
Speaker 1: innovators would innovate no matter what. It's the same as
1:06:16
Speaker 1: in China. Why it's China, regulate everything. Don't they want innovation? Yeah,
1:06:20
Speaker 1: they want innovation. They think it will happen anyway. They
1:06:22
Speaker 1: don't understand the relationship between force and central planning and innovation.
1:06:27
Speaker 1: They don't understand the necessity of freedom for innovation. So no,
1:06:36
Speaker 1: Israel Kutzner, thank you, William Israel Kurtzner. Is I think
1:06:43
Speaker 1: in his I saw him when he was ninety one,
1:06:46
Speaker 1: on eighty two, so I think he's in his late
1:06:49
Speaker 1: nineties now, so he might live longer than Hazlet. It's
1:06:54
Speaker 1: not that they say no, we don't want I mean
1:06:56
Speaker 1: I think the environmentalist left doesn't want innovation. And even there,
1:07:00
Speaker 1: when you read the environmentalists, you read some of their
1:07:03
Speaker 1: books which I have unfortunately, that will write things like,
1:07:08
Speaker 1: you know, if we do away with this, real problems
1:07:11
Speaker 1: will arise, but technology will solve them. And where will
1:07:15
Speaker 1: this technology comes from? Who will develop this technology? Blank?
1:07:21
Speaker 1: It just happens. They don't understand because they're so focused
1:07:27
Speaker 1: on labor and exploitation and labor theory and the materialists.
1:07:32
Speaker 1: They don't understand all of the mind. They don't understand
1:07:34
Speaker 1: all the force in suppressing innovation. They don't understand how
1:07:37
Speaker 1: market incentivizes innovation. They don't understand anything. They think innovation
1:07:41
Speaker 1: just happens and will continue to happen even if we
1:07:44
Speaker 1: have communism or socialism, and the fact that it didn't
1:07:47
Speaker 1: happen in Soviet Union, Oh, that's an aberration. And you're
1:07:52
Speaker 1: underestimating that they innovated a little bit. So they think
1:07:56
Speaker 1: that you know, Americans innovate. They will continue to innovate.
1:07:59
Speaker 1: It has nothing to do with the levels of freedom. Andrew,
1:08:05
Speaker 1: have you observed this. If you're rationally confident, no matter
1:08:08
Speaker 1: how many times you admit you were wrong, there will
1:08:11
Speaker 1: be some people envious of your independence that are driven
1:08:15
Speaker 1: to prove you wrong about everything. Yeah, and when you
1:08:18
Speaker 1: are wrong, who jump on you and leap on you?
1:08:20
Speaker 1: And you know, Look, I cover a lot of news
1:08:24
Speaker 1: every day. I spend quite a bit of time trying
1:08:29
Speaker 1: to figure out what's true and what's not, what's right
1:08:31
Speaker 1: or what's wrong. And I have a lot of experience
1:08:32
Speaker 1: doing that. But giving them out, given them they do
1:08:36
Speaker 1: a show every day, given them amount of news I cover,
1:08:37
Speaker 1: I'm gonna get stuff wrong. And when somebody points that out,
1:08:41
Speaker 1: I'm happy to admit it. But anybody, you know, but
1:08:46
Speaker 1: if somebody is envious or hateful, then they will leap
1:08:50
Speaker 1: on any one of those things that are wrong and
1:08:53
Speaker 1: use them through induction to prove, Oh, where you run's useless.
1:08:57
Speaker 1: He doesn't know anything. He got this wrong. He's getting
1:09:00
Speaker 1: everything wrong. His whole view of Trump, his whole view
1:09:03
Speaker 1: of of economics, this whole view of isn't. Whatever the
1:09:07
Speaker 1: topic is, it's wrong. Look, he got wrong this wrong.
1:09:11
Speaker 1: I mean if this happened like every day to multiple stories,
1:09:16
Speaker 1: then yeah, I mean, okay, then you should stop listening
1:09:19
Speaker 1: to me. But if it happens once every three weeks,
1:09:23
Speaker 1: given the amount of shows I do, given them amount
1:09:25
Speaker 1: of topics I cover in every show, I don't think
1:09:29
Speaker 1: I'm doing badly, Shasbut this is a quote from The Wire.
1:09:35
Speaker 1: I love The Wire, one of the greatest shows ever.
1:09:38
Speaker 1: Officer one, the drug wal isn't really a war Officer two.
1:09:43
Speaker 1: And why not Officer one? I guess because wars end. Yeah,
1:09:51
Speaker 1: I mean there was one hundred year war in Europe
1:09:55
Speaker 1: that kind of ended but dragged down for a hundred years.
1:09:58
Speaker 1: So I mean, go is not one hundred year old.
1:10:04
Speaker 1: But look, you can't have a warn inanimate objects. You
1:10:07
Speaker 1: can't have a drug war. You have a one cartels Okay,
1:10:12
Speaker 1: I don't know how you win that war was a
1:10:15
Speaker 1: one by occupying territory and crushing the enemy. We can
1:10:20
Speaker 1: occupy all of South America because that's what it's gonna take.
1:10:24
Speaker 1: I mean we could, we could destroy the Carteli infrastructure
1:10:29
Speaker 1: of Venezuela. I'll just moved to Columbia and we destroyed there.
1:10:31
Speaker 1: They'll moved to Ecuador and we destroyed there. They'll move
1:10:35
Speaker 1: back to Venezuela and of course the most of the
1:10:40
Speaker 1: infrastructures in Mexico. So all right, Andrew says. Rand wrote
1:10:47
Speaker 1: that it was the age of envy. I doubt the
1:10:50
Speaker 1: situation has gotten much better since it's worse. But Rand
1:10:54
Speaker 1: would disapprove heavily of giving up pursuing values because others envy.
1:10:59
Speaker 1: Her attitude be to help with them. Yeah. Absolutely, Your
1:11:01
Speaker 1: life is your life. Your life is not determined by
1:11:05
Speaker 1: other people's envy or fear or hatred or anything like that.
1:11:10
Speaker 1: You live, you pursue values, if you know. If you
1:11:14
Speaker 1: want a jolt of that energy, go to my Rules
1:11:18
Speaker 1: for Living Uran's Rulesful Life, which has where I talk
1:11:22
Speaker 1: a lot about this, right, I talk about pursuit of
1:11:24
Speaker 1: values and living your life and living fully and engaging
1:11:28
Speaker 1: in it. The hole with politics to help with what's
1:11:30
Speaker 1: going on in the world with this idiots and the
1:11:32
Speaker 1: envious and the fearmongerers and the and the haters. Now
1:11:38
Speaker 1: you're limited, I mean, let's be real here. The fact
1:11:42
Speaker 1: that they dominate the world limits your options in terms
1:11:48
Speaker 1: of happiness and values and success. But it doesn't eliminate them.
1:11:52
Speaker 1: So resent them for limiting your possibilities, resent them for
1:11:56
Speaker 1: wasting your time, resent them for taking your money. But
1:12:01
Speaker 1: even with that resentment, don't stop pursuing values. Andrew, how
1:12:09
Speaker 1: would you rate the effectiveness of the Democrats resistance of Trump?
1:12:13
Speaker 1: They seem to have taken the fact of becoming more brutish, cursing,
1:12:17
Speaker 1: doing strange social media videos and claiming the way in
1:12:20
Speaker 1: the third ride. Yeah, I mean, I I think they
1:12:24
Speaker 1: p they're very weak and and look, they're very weak
1:12:27
Speaker 1: because what do they stand for. What is their argument
1:12:31
Speaker 1: against Trump? What is it that makes them different than Trump?
1:12:36
Speaker 1: What is it that they want to Trump to stop doing?
1:12:43
Speaker 1: What is their principle by which they stand? And of
1:12:46
Speaker 1: course if you see such principles, you'll find the postmodern
1:12:50
Speaker 1: woke garbage that they have. And then it's it's all nonsense,
1:12:55
Speaker 1: and it's all really really bad and evil, and and
1:12:57
Speaker 1: they can't really promote that. They know that they're not elected,
1:13:01
Speaker 1: so they're stuck cursing him. I mean, I think many
1:13:04
Speaker 1: of them just admire his ability to get what he's
1:13:09
Speaker 1: to do, what he's doing, and to get stuff done.
1:13:11
Speaker 1: They wish they could. I mean, the reality is that that. Look,
1:13:19
Speaker 1: here's something you need to remember, as we're soapersual mistic
1:13:23
Speaker 1: about this country, but you need to remember this. Trump
1:13:26
Speaker 1: barely beat Kamala House, barely beat Kamala Harris. I mean,
1:13:37
Speaker 1: can you imagine a weaker candidate than Kamala and of
1:13:40
Speaker 1: course Biden see now Biden and he barely beat them barely.
1:13:47
Speaker 1: I mean, any decent Democrat more Centrius moarticulate would have
1:13:53
Speaker 1: beaten Trump solidly. So I think you can imagine in
1:14:00
Speaker 1: the future, you know, the right, while is well, the
1:14:05
Speaker 1: right is growing in strength and I think is becoming
1:14:07
Speaker 1: more radical and more crazy. JD events really win. He's
1:14:12
Speaker 1: not that likable. Who can win the Republicans? You know?
1:14:20
Speaker 1: You know now now it's not good because the Democrats
1:14:22
Speaker 1: are pretty lousy and it looks like the lead candidate
1:14:24
Speaker 1: right now for the Democrats is the governorment of California,
1:14:28
Speaker 1: who's terrible. But but yeah, I mean they are they
1:14:35
Speaker 1: are pathetic. They don't have anything they can do. What
1:14:37
Speaker 1: is uh, what is the governor of California trying to do?
1:14:40
Speaker 1: He's trying to mimic Trump, He's trying to be like Trump.
1:14:43
Speaker 1: He's trying to troll. He's not as good as Trump is,
1:14:46
Speaker 1: but he's trying. But no, I don't think the Democrats
1:14:50
Speaker 1: are effective. I think what's effective. What would place to
1:14:53
Speaker 1: their benefit is how bad Trump is and the fact
1:14:56
Speaker 1: that the American people could see that, or at least
1:14:58
Speaker 1: some of American people can see that. So if they
1:15:06
Speaker 1: stay quiet, I mean, I mean what they should do
1:15:09
Speaker 1: is they should be they should stop worrying about beating
1:15:12
Speaker 1: Trump is their own game and critique him. Well, they
1:15:19
Speaker 1: can't because they don't have principles, So what are they
1:15:20
Speaker 1: going to critique him on? I mean, they should critique
1:15:23
Speaker 1: him without cussing and without trolling, without all that, and
1:15:27
Speaker 1: just assume that the American people will realizing how bad
1:15:34
Speaker 1: Trump is, I mean bad. Trump's approval ratings are bysmal,
1:15:36
Speaker 1: really really bad. Thomas, thank you for the stick. I
1:15:41
Speaker 1: really appreciate the support. Thank you. Andrews says, I felt
1:15:46
Speaker 1: depressed and I just willed myself to do something constructive
1:15:50
Speaker 1: and it worked to alleviate the depression. Absolutely. Do you
1:15:54
Speaker 1: think such a common sense premise would be considered toxic
1:15:58
Speaker 1: and judgmental under modern psychology? Ooh, I don't know. I
1:16:03
Speaker 1: think I think cognitive psychology, which is quite dominant in
1:16:07
Speaker 1: terms of its clinical application today. I think I would
1:16:10
Speaker 1: approve of that, and I think that, but that really
1:16:14
Speaker 1: is a question for Gina. I don't think that modern
1:16:17
Speaker 1: psychology is as bad as it used to be. I
1:16:20
Speaker 1: think cognitive psychology has made it better, and there's much
1:16:26
Speaker 1: more of a recognition of cognition of thinking and then evaluing,
1:16:33
Speaker 1: not as much as it should be, but some right,
1:16:37
Speaker 1: so yeah, so I think that I don't know that
1:16:45
Speaker 1: modern psychology would prove poo that completely. All right. Lea
1:16:51
Speaker 1: Mamdani is g had with a smile. He only received
1:16:54
Speaker 1: four hundred and fifty thousand votes in the primary. There
1:16:57
Speaker 1: are over four million registered voters in New York's eat.
1:17:00
Speaker 1: My prediction, Como wins. I hope you're right as much
1:17:04
Speaker 1: as I think Como is awful. I hope you're right,
1:17:08
Speaker 1: but I doubt it. I think I think Mom Donnie wins.
1:17:12
Speaker 1: I think he's got the energy and the passion, and
1:17:13
Speaker 1: I think people will vote for that. But we will say,
1:17:16
Speaker 1: the polls all show in winning quite easily. Now there
1:17:19
Speaker 1: was the last debate was last night, and suppose you
1:17:22
Speaker 1: Mom Doney did not do very well. But I don't.
1:17:26
Speaker 1: It's hard to tell. I hope you're right, really do not?
1:17:30
Speaker 1: You have a jogorithm. The state has succeeded spectacularly in
1:17:35
Speaker 1: making us more and more into children than serves. Yes,
1:17:38
Speaker 1: the warf of state does that, The regulatory state does that.
1:17:42
Speaker 1: The you know, don't use this lawnmower to try to
1:17:48
Speaker 1: trim the hedges. Stickers do that. The I don't know,
1:17:52
Speaker 1: you know, all the ridiculous you know, don't don't stick
1:17:55
Speaker 1: your finger into the into the electricity plug. I don't know,
1:17:58
Speaker 1: all the warning labels and all this. That's yeah, that
1:18:01
Speaker 1: it infantilizes us. It assumes we're all stupid and idiots,
1:18:06
Speaker 1: and at some point we become stupid and idiot because
1:18:08
Speaker 1: that's the attitude pbe. How does objectives and build a
1:18:15
Speaker 1: logical progression from the initial actions existence exist in as
1:18:20
Speaker 1: a to derive its moral code? How how logically? To
1:18:25
Speaker 1: refute the saying you can't get an art from it is, well,
1:18:30
Speaker 1: this is not the time or the place to fully
1:18:34
Speaker 1: articulate that. But I would just say read the first
1:18:37
Speaker 1: few chapters of OPAH. I mean, that's exactly what OPAH does.
1:18:42
Speaker 1: Objectives and builds logical progression from existence exists through the epistemology,
1:18:47
Speaker 1: through reasons Man's basic means of survival to a moral
1:18:53
Speaker 1: code that basically bases reason that the scent of human life.
1:18:58
Speaker 1: You know, I'm not going to do that on foot
1:19:00
Speaker 1: right here again, I suggest you read you read Opah.
1:19:05
Speaker 1: You know, how do you get an oft from it? Is?
1:19:08
Speaker 1: It's not that hard? You know what is man? Man
1:19:14
Speaker 1: is is a living being? A living being must you know,
1:19:21
Speaker 1: the fundamental choice that a living being faces is the
1:19:25
Speaker 1: fund is the fundamental optionist existence and non existence, to
1:19:30
Speaker 1: live or not to live? You know, once once a
1:19:36
Speaker 1: living being, and this is all is is right. Once
1:19:38
Speaker 1: a living being chooses to live, and that's the beginning,
1:19:47
Speaker 1: it's the beginning of morality. Once you choose to live,
1:19:50
Speaker 1: then the question is then the question becomes, okay, how
1:19:53
Speaker 1: do I do that? What are the tools? What values
1:19:57
Speaker 1: and virtues should I pursue so that I can? It's
1:20:01
Speaker 1: not automatic, it's not pre programmed. We don't have we
1:20:06
Speaker 1: don't have it in our consciousness just ready to pluck.
1:20:10
Speaker 1: We have to figure it out. So we figure out
1:20:14
Speaker 1: the arts that facilitate there is which is life that
1:20:19
Speaker 1: make possible? There is which is life. And of course
1:20:23
Speaker 1: the number one ought is think because because empirically, observationally
1:20:30
Speaker 1: and rationally, it's obvious that human existence, human life depends
1:20:38
Speaker 1: on each one of our ability to think for ourselves.
1:20:42
Speaker 1: So that's the very brief short one. But the answer
1:20:46
Speaker 1: to that is in the Virtue of selfishness, and the
1:20:49
Speaker 1: first essay in the Virtue of selfishness the objectives to ethics,
1:20:52
Speaker 1: and if you want the whole development from metaphysics on
1:20:55
Speaker 1: that is in that is in opah. And remember these
1:20:59
Speaker 1: are deductions. These are going to be inductions. You start
1:21:03
Speaker 1: with reality, you start with the facts, and then you
1:21:06
Speaker 1: induce the truths that allow you to progress from existence
1:21:10
Speaker 1: exists to the whole objective's morality. But it is a
1:21:16
Speaker 1: sequence of inductions bridge together by deductions. But yeah, but
1:21:26
Speaker 1: that would be a whole three hour you know, thing
1:21:31
Speaker 1: that we'd have to do, and even then we wouldn't
1:21:33
Speaker 1: cover it. It's basically open. I encourage you to eat.
1:21:37
Speaker 1: Read the objectivism of the philosophy of line Man by
1:21:40
Speaker 1: LANDA Peacock Kim. How are we supposed to go from
1:21:43
Speaker 1: this current government and society to a right respecting government?
1:21:46
Speaker 1: Seems too are slowly becoming a lost cause. Yeah, I mean,
1:21:49
Speaker 1: I don't think it's going to happen right So I
1:21:53
Speaker 1: think if it happens, it happens in the distant future,
1:21:55
Speaker 1: and there's a lot that's going to happen between now
1:21:58
Speaker 1: and then. Who know, our society might collapse, we might
1:22:02
Speaker 1: go through a period of authoritarianism before there's a revival
1:22:06
Speaker 1: of the founding principles. So I don't think the way
1:22:13
Speaker 1: things are going right now is going to lead us
1:22:15
Speaker 1: to a right respecting government. I think things will have
1:22:18
Speaker 1: to completely break before people re re engage with the
1:22:26
Speaker 1: idea of a rights respecting government. Things will get a
1:22:29
Speaker 1: lot worse, in other words, before they get better. In
1:22:31
Speaker 1: my view, Raymond did Stalin force confessions to deal with
1:22:37
Speaker 1: his conscience. Why did the Soviets invent so many tortures
1:22:42
Speaker 1: when a couple would do it seems deeper than sadism,
1:22:47
Speaker 1: you know, I don't know in terms of the torture.
1:22:52
Speaker 1: I don't know that a couple will do. I don't
1:22:54
Speaker 1: know how torture works. It's an interesting psychological question. And
1:22:58
Speaker 1: it's not just it's not just the Communists, but the
1:23:02
Speaker 1: Nazis had all kinds of tortures the Japanese did. In
1:23:06
Speaker 1: the Middle Ages, the Dark Ages, the Christians tortured people
1:23:10
Speaker 1: in all kinds of ways, and they didn't just do one.
1:23:13
Speaker 1: I think multiple tortures is a way to completely break
1:23:16
Speaker 1: the spirit. You think your leg hoods, wait until your
1:23:20
Speaker 1: arm hourtz and your back hurts and your testicle hoots
1:23:22
Speaker 1: and everything else, and then you slowly break apart. So
1:23:25
Speaker 1: you need multiple sources of torture. And you know the
1:23:28
Speaker 1: Chinese drip. And I don't know, you know, I'm not
1:23:30
Speaker 1: an expert on this field, so I don't know why,
1:23:33
Speaker 1: you know. So what did they want confessions for? Because
1:23:37
Speaker 1: psychologically they wanted the pretense. This is both psychologically for
1:23:43
Speaker 1: themselves and also for the people. The people that they
1:23:48
Speaker 1: were afraid of and stalin lived in constant fear that
1:23:52
Speaker 1: people would rise up against them, So they needed to
1:23:56
Speaker 1: the constant reinforcement that they were doing good. The people
1:24:02
Speaker 1: that were putting were really bad guys, and they need
1:24:04
Speaker 1: to reinforce it for themselves, but they also need to
1:24:07
Speaker 1: reinforce it for everybody around them, even though again those
1:24:10
Speaker 1: people were fooling themselves because they were constantly lived in
1:24:15
Speaker 1: fear that they would be next that there would be
1:24:19
Speaker 1: a revolution that would take them out. Live by force,
1:24:23
Speaker 1: die by force. I mean Stalin was very afraid of
1:24:31
Speaker 1: the head of the of the KGB, was very afraid
1:24:33
Speaker 1: of the people around him. Daniel says, can a democratic
1:24:38
Speaker 1: society exist without capitalism? You asked this question yesterday and
1:24:42
Speaker 1: I answered it yesterday or the day before, and I
1:24:47
Speaker 1: answered it in length. Can a democratic societies exist with
1:24:55
Speaker 1: that capitalism? Well, all of them do. There is no
1:24:58
Speaker 1: capitalism in the world, so I don't know what you
1:25:01
Speaker 1: mean by capitalism. You mean a little bit of freedom,
1:25:03
Speaker 1: a little bit of property rights that we have today.
1:25:06
Speaker 1: There is no capitalism in the world. There's democracy in France.
1:25:10
Speaker 1: It is the capitalism. No, So the answer is yes,
1:25:14
Speaker 1: now for how long? I don't know for how long
1:25:17
Speaker 1: can the exist? But yeah, in the medium term decades, Yes,
1:25:24
Speaker 1: democracy can exist without capitalism. If when I say it
1:25:28
Speaker 1: without capitalism, what I mean by that is real capitalism?
1:25:31
Speaker 1: Well does it fair capitalism everything owned by the private sector,
1:25:37
Speaker 1: and real free markets. But we don't. So no country
1:25:41
Speaker 1: has that. America has existed for one hundred years without capitalism.
1:25:47
Speaker 1: And if you mean by a little bit of capitalism
1:25:49
Speaker 1: by some capitalism by respect for some property rights, by
1:25:54
Speaker 1: some freedom. Yeah. I think democras see needs to allow
1:26:02
Speaker 1: for some freedom in order to exist. I give the example.
1:26:06
Speaker 1: You know, Sweden become became quite socialist and was didn't
1:26:09
Speaker 1: lose this democracy as it nationalized industries and became quite socialist.
1:26:14
Speaker 1: Now it didn't last because then they became poor, and
1:26:17
Speaker 1: democracy basically demanded that they privatize and they go back
1:26:22
Speaker 1: to a more market economy. So, you know, the democratic
1:26:29
Speaker 1: process partially self correct when things go too far, but
1:26:34
Speaker 1: not always, not always, sometimes self correcnce. Anyway, I gave
1:26:39
Speaker 1: a longer answer day before, yesterday or yesterday whenever you
1:26:42
Speaker 1: asked the question before, Raymond, China's industrial policy reminds me
1:26:47
Speaker 1: of Japan, Yet people never blame it for the last decade,
1:26:51
Speaker 1: dumping low interest loans, national champions. Yeah, no question that Japan,
1:26:57
Speaker 1: Japan's industrial policy was the cause of the last decade.
1:27:01
Speaker 1: A lot of people do blame it. A lot of
1:27:03
Speaker 1: people do see that and understand that, and I agree
1:27:07
Speaker 1: with you. China is very similar. China's in some ways
1:27:12
Speaker 1: more interventionist, in some ways less intervenures. The intervention is
1:27:15
Speaker 1: less comprehensive than it was in Japan. Japan had a
1:27:19
Speaker 1: system by which, you know, really through the banking system,
1:27:22
Speaker 1: they controlled almost everything, at least in terms of big businesses. China,
1:27:27
Speaker 1: at least during periods at least had allowed for more
1:27:31
Speaker 1: freedom than Japanese did, even industrially. So yeah, I mean,
1:27:35
Speaker 1: and what you're seeing now in China is significant slow
1:27:38
Speaker 1: down and significant debt problems and significant and they keep
1:27:41
Speaker 1: papering over it and delaying the reckoning. But at some
1:27:46
Speaker 1: point they're going to have a reckoning. At some point
1:27:48
Speaker 1: they're gonna have to pay the pipeline, just like Japan did. Jacob,
1:27:53
Speaker 1: I dare say, for a random person not interested in
1:27:56
Speaker 1: philosophy economics, not interested in philosophy, you cannomously one lesson
1:28:00
Speaker 1: is more important to read than RAND or any objectives
1:28:03
Speaker 1: to author. No, I definitely don't think that's right. I
1:28:08
Speaker 1: definitely don't think that's right, because at the end of
1:28:10
Speaker 1: the day, what RAND gives you is something a way
1:28:15
Speaker 1: to live your life, guidance to live life, which is
1:28:18
Speaker 1: much more important than economics and will ultimately impact your
1:28:22
Speaker 1: view of economics. But at the first level, just what
1:28:26
Speaker 1: values to pursue, how to pursue them, how to live,
1:28:29
Speaker 1: which is much more important than any economic text can
1:28:32
Speaker 1: ever achieve. So no, I would say Atla Shrug Fountain
1:28:35
Speaker 1: had virtue of selfishness. Even if you're not interested in philosophy,
1:28:38
Speaker 1: philosophy is interested in you, so get interested. Andrew Objectives
1:28:47
Speaker 1: is not against democracy when it comes to voting, would
1:28:50
Speaker 1: you say, properly America is a democratic republic. I mean
1:28:54
Speaker 1: that there is a role for a majority rule in
1:28:57
Speaker 1: the objective's politics. Yes, yeah, you could all of the
1:29:00
Speaker 1: democratic republic. I just think of republic captures that already
1:29:03
Speaker 1: you don't have to. A republic has that as a feature.
1:29:08
Speaker 1: And I would add that it's a constitutional republic. So
1:29:11
Speaker 1: America is a constitutional republic, and voting is a feature
1:29:16
Speaker 1: of a constitutional republic, but not always majoritarian voting. So,
1:29:22
Speaker 1: for example, you could have limits on voting, and an
1:29:26
Speaker 1: objective society might have limits on voting. You might have
1:29:29
Speaker 1: to have I don't know, you might have to have
1:29:34
Speaker 1: certain knowledge, you might have to have certain amount of property.
1:29:39
Speaker 1: There might be all kinds of restrictions for voting. So
1:29:41
Speaker 1: in that sense, I don't want to call myself a
1:29:45
Speaker 1: pro democracy, which assumes that everybody can vote. I don't
1:29:49
Speaker 1: believe in universal suffrage necessarily right in a proper republic,
1:29:53
Speaker 1: and it might be appropriate that, like they did, the
1:29:57
Speaker 1: senators were elected by state government rather than by the people. So,
1:30:05
Speaker 1: but who gets to vote? Who gets to vote is
1:30:11
Speaker 1: all a question, So I would call it a constitutional republic,
1:30:14
Speaker 1: not a democracy. Jonathan will Trump allow free and fair
1:30:21
Speaker 1: elections in twenty six to twenty eight? I mean, that's
1:30:23
Speaker 1: a big question, And I don't know. I mean, I
1:30:25
Speaker 1: think he will claim he's allowing. He won't, he won't
1:30:28
Speaker 1: reject elections, and he won't He will just appoint whoever
1:30:36
Speaker 1: the replacement is. But will he manipulate the system to
1:30:41
Speaker 1: try to get his people elected? Yes, you'relready sing it
1:30:43
Speaker 1: with the jerymandering which is happening, which is not conventional.
1:30:48
Speaker 1: Usually gerrymandering happens only once a year, you know, once
1:30:52
Speaker 1: every ten years. Now it's happening for the specific reason
1:30:56
Speaker 1: that he's afraid of losing the twenty twenty sixth election.
1:30:59
Speaker 1: He'll use every trick in the book that he can
1:31:01
Speaker 1: without declaring no elections to get the people he wants elected.
1:31:08
Speaker 1: Will they be free and fair? I'm skeptical. I'm skeptical. Okay,
1:31:15
Speaker 1: final question, Lincoln. I just considered the left and the right.
1:31:19
Speaker 1: I just considered the left and the right represent two
1:31:22
Speaker 1: warring dystopias, the masculine totalitarianism of nineteen eighty four for
1:31:27
Speaker 1: the right and the feminine nanny state of brave New
1:31:30
Speaker 1: World for the left. Yeah, that's pretty good. I think
1:31:35
Speaker 1: that's right. Although remember that Stalin was of the left,
1:31:38
Speaker 1: and Stalin was not exactly feminine, so you know, I
1:31:45
Speaker 1: think the analogy only goes so far. But yes, I
1:31:48
Speaker 1: think that's right. Oh, think about the supporters of ramas
1:31:52
Speaker 1: who are part of the left. Would you call them feminine? No,
1:31:58
Speaker 1: they're masculine, the same kind of barbaric sense that people
1:32:04
Speaker 1: mean masculine these days. Okay, we go one more question.
1:32:10
Speaker 1: Do you feel like people this is Andrew. Do you
1:32:12
Speaker 1: feel like people are in too sulky or nasty a
1:32:15
Speaker 1: mood for living in modern America? Well, generally, I think
1:32:19
Speaker 1: being in a sulky or nasty mood is unhelpful to you,
1:32:23
Speaker 1: or to anybody around you, or to the state of
1:32:25
Speaker 1: the n h state of any of us, So stop it.
1:32:28
Speaker 1: But but yeah, I I I I I think it's
1:32:32
Speaker 1: I I I understand why people are depressed, and why
1:32:35
Speaker 1: people are fearful and why they're worried about the state
1:32:38
Speaker 1: of the world. I'm worried about the state of the world,
1:32:40
Speaker 1: but try not to affect I, I Y Y. Let
1:32:43
Speaker 1: it affect your life, because there's too much to live
1:32:49
Speaker 1: for than to let them win. And and this affects
1:32:54
Speaker 1: you directly. It defects how you live when you are
1:32:57
Speaker 1: sulky and whatever Sulky and Nat speak. All right, guys,
1:33:02
Speaker 1: I will see you all hopefully on Saturday. Stay tuned
1:33:08
Speaker 1: for what time and everything else. But uh yeah, I
1:33:10
Speaker 1: have a great rest of the weekend, a great weekend,
1:33:13
Speaker 1: and I'll see you soon. Bye, everybody.