Austrian Economics with Aleks Svetski

always changes the world, you know. I try to bring to you some you know, educational pieces to help you see the world a little bit differently, some of the latest breaking news, and of course some new unique perspectives from some different guests. And so I have a returning guest, my good friend Alex S. Fetzky. He's in the studio with me today, Alex, and you can find him on

Twitter at Sfetzky Rights. And we wanted to talk about um as I said, politics, finance and technology, and really I'm always interested in the convergence of those three, and of course they all drive each other. Technology seems to be the big driver of of change, but politics and finance come together. And Alex, I know you've been working on a lot of Austrian economics, and Austrian economics is a a school of thought, a school of thought of economics and it used to be a big school of

thought of economics. It's not really taught anymore. I've talked to many people who have graduated in the United States from UH with with MBA's and pH ds in economics who have never even heard or never heard of Austrian economics while they were in school. Amazingly. Um, but give us some of the background on you know, where it came from, uh and and kind of how Austrian economics emerged, and we'll kind of walk through that. Cool cool, cool,

cool Mark. Thank you for having me back. First of all, uh, maybe maybe a good place to stought. This is sort

of a little bit of background. I've been working on a publication for a number of years now called The Bitcoin Times and the latest edition so uh, I was about to say this year's edition, but we're actually so the edition was which just came out, actually came out of a Christmas is the Austrianan issue where I brought together who some some of who I think are the best minds in and around bitcoin, So Safety Namos, who wrote the Bitcoin standard, Michael Goldstein, who was one of

the people actually inspired him to get into bitcoin, Pierre Rochard, Raheem Tugger out a gun who's actually a direct student of hans Herman Hopper, and he's the last he's the last Austrian economist who's teaching in the direct Austrian School in Austria. UM. And he was actually a physicist turned Austrian economists. So he wrote the piece in there. And Conrad Graff, who's who's quite a well known early bitcoin or kind of tied the concepts of bitcoin and Austrian

economics together. UM. And anyway, I brought these people together to write a series of pieces, and one of them in there was actually written by Rahim hans Herman Hopper's student, and it's called from Bitcoin to the Austrian School and from the Austrian School to Bitcoin, and he talks a little bit about like why this school of economics is

called Austrian economics. It's not because it's like Austrian. It just so happened that the founding fathers of this school of thought basically sort of came out during what's kind of known but not very well known as the Austrian Renaissance, which was kind of around like late eighteen hundred's early

nine hundreds. And this is sort of you know, the two pioneering or two sort of founding fathers of this Austrians school of thought or or this economic school of thought happened to be Carmengo and Ludwig Vonsis and and obviously they're both Austrians. So so that's kind of what

inspired the nomenclature around why we call it that. But but essentially, like I kind of call it and wen't weren't weren't weren't weren't a lot of them kind of huddled up in Austria at the time, and they kind of they kind of had this like a little grouping of those people there in Austria and they all kind

of use these ideas and develop them together. Yeah. Absolutely so, so it's kind of like think of Silicon Valley, right, why do we have you know, Facebook and all these sort of technologies come out of there, you know, like you had the Xerox park, you had Apple, you had Intel, you had sort of like a critical mass of that

type of thinking. So Vienna back in the late eighteen hundreds early nine was kind of like a melting pot for people that were sort of thinking about the world in a way which where he makes a really good argument in the in the piece where he calls it a bottom up Enlightenment versus what you sort of had in England and France at the time, which was a top down kind of enforced Enlightenment, which which is really interesting because we ended up getting out of France and

England was democracy and socialism, um, and what you sort of had out of this kind of bottom up Enlightenment that came out of Austria, and also you know, it's predecessor was actually the Scottish Enlightenment, where you know, the kind of thinkers that came out of that were you know, Edmund Burke and Adam Smith, you know, Wealth of Nations

and people like that. So it's quite interesting sort of the cultures and the similarities between those sort of decentralized, emergent, bottom up kind of philosophies and thinkings and Enlightenment periods versus these top down ones that were like the French and English and what they sort of produced at the

other end. So anyway, yeah, as you said, there was this, there was you know, a bunch of students obviously that came after Manga and and mesas, and they were all obviously Austrian because that was the region they were in, and that's really what kind of you know, pioneered that

school of thought and hence hence the name. And you know what I was going to say before is I just think of it as natural economics, because that's essentially what it is, you know, it's it's the school of economic thought that says, don't touch things because you're going to break them, because the economic system is more complex than what you know, a single entity or a single mind or a single organization can define it as. So s quit you know, messing with stuff and let the

market kind of figure itself out, would you. And I've discussed that nauseaum in the book we wrote, and you know, as you do obviously every week on your podcast. So you know, these guys were the founding fathers, the pioneers of this type of thinking. Yeah, yeah, it's you know, it just seems you kind of said naturally, you know,

like natural economics. And and obviously Mesas, who is also may be considered one of the godfathers of that school at Busas I wrote the book Human Action, right talking about how human actions drive economics, and so you don't really break the two down, you know, between each other. Um, Now, how would you compare Austrian economics than the traditional or probably the dominant and maybe some people don't even know that, but the dominant economic kind of policy or theory today

is Kinsian or has been born off of Kinsey. And it's probably so, you know, uh, morphed and evolved. Now maybe it's not exactly what it's probably way worse than what Kings even had in mind back then. But how would you kind of compare those two? Yeah, I think a good way to think about it is, you know, I mean you asked the average person, you know, what, what's the economic model of the world that they wouldn't even know who the hell Keens is, you know, they

wouldn't know that it Keenes, you know any of that. Right. So the way I kind of think of it as interventionist or non interventionist economics, right, And you know, the interventionist school suggests that, hey, we should play with interest rates, we should you know, uh, you know, make the money supply elastic, you know, we should uh you know, use regulations to try and you know, funnel money and productivity

in particular directions. And the non interventionist school, which is the Austrian school, which is what I call the natural school, just says no, don't do any of that, because every time you make one of those decisions, there's one one of those central planning decisions, you have unintended consequences downstream, which then deform the rest of the system, and you will forever be playing not only catch up, but you'll be making everything worse because you have like a you know,

one of those magnification effects. You know, you you you push one thing here, intend things happen out there. And that's really the that's really the two big schools of thought. And actually Parker wrote a little bit about He wrote the forward for this Peace Paco Lewis, and he was like, you know, most people just don't they don't get they don't know what Australians or Kinsian or any of that

sort of stuff. And sometimes, you know, we in the bitcoin space get lost, you know, throwing those terms around, and he was like, look, let's just call it as it is is. You know, one school thinks that the way toward economic prosperity is to have some sort of central planners and managers, and the other school of thought says no, let people at the edges decide and really, um, I guess I think I think there's more more to it than that. I mean, it's certainly is that, certainly right?

But how to the how do these central planners manage then? Right? And so not only is it that now they're trying to control and tell people what to do, but they're also increasing or decreasing the money supply. I So that's that could be a big piece of it. So it's not just like, hey, you do this, you do this kind of a thing, but they're but they're in increasing the money. But I was just talking about in a previous segment, Um, Amazon's laying off seventeen thousand people. Uh,

and that's that's one small drop in the bucket. We gotta take a breakthough. We're gonna come back to this in a minute. If you're just tuning in, you're listening to the Mark Moss Show. I'm in the studio with Alex Sfetzky. We're talking about um economic theory, different economic models. Uh, it gets more exciting. Don't go away, We'll be right back in a minute. All right, welcome back. If you're just tune in, you're listening to the Mark Moss Show.

Talking about the decentralized revolution. Right now, I'm in the studio with Alex Spetzky. We're talking about Austrian economics. Um. He's just been written and it just published an entire um magazine kind of article full of articles on Austrian economics. That's called the Bitcoin Times. You can find them on

Twitter at Sfetzky Rights. But before the break, Alex I was saying, how you know it's it certainly is intervention versus non intervention, but I think it's the way that they intervene as also important where Austrian school believes that at um, you know, all wealth is needs to be created first before it can be consumed, and so we must save our money and then um all then saving or even credit would come from delayed gratification as opposed

to Kinsian's interventionists, if you want to call adapt believe in creating or increasing the money supply. And I was just in in in the segment of the hour I did before you jumped up, I was talking about how Amazon's laying off seventeen thousand people and this is happening all over the economy. I mean that was just one

data point, but but everywhere is being laid off. Um, and I was just talking about I was thinking about the insanity of this, where um, the the the interventionists, the central banks printed uh tens of trillions of dollars in and UM dump that money into the ecosystem. So then everybody had this extra money. They started going buying all these things, which then broke supply chains down right cause all these problems. And then Amazon is like, whoa,

we can't keep up with orders. So they started building all these distribution centers. They started hiring all these people, and then people are like and then they have to pay people increased wages because they're trying to get them to back to work because the interventionists are giving them money to stay at home. So now people are getting hired at Amazon with good wages. They're feeling good. And so then the guy's like, hey, I got hired at Amazon.

I have this good career. I'm making good money. Hey, wife, wown you quit your job. Just quit your job. You stay home now, and let's go buy that new car we've always wanted. Right, So like now I've I've planned my whole life based off of that. And then all of a sudden, the central planners, the interventions want to suck the money out of the economy, and now Amazon

has to lay seventeen thousand people off. But it's like, wait a minute, my wife just quit her job and I just bought this new car, like and sorry, is that magnification effect? Yeah, this is that magnification effect. Right, you do one thing here and then ten other things happened somewhere else, and then of course the problem is the greedy capitalist again, which is you know, this is this is part of the positive blame month of something else, the issue that happened. It's it's the it's the it's

also it's the whipsaw effect. Right, So it's like if okay, increase the money and this, okay, let us deal with that. But it's no, no, no, it's it's let's increase it by and then let's suck it back out and then let's put it back in then and so we don't even know what's ever coming, you know what I mean. So it's like we we can't ever get used to it, we can't ever like adjust for it. Well, this is

this is actually one of the other things. While we're on the Austrian economics topic, it's that you know, modern economists talk about this thing called the business cycle, and they're like, well, we don't know where the business cycle comes from, and um, they actually and this is you know a lot of people don't realize this, but you go to university and when you learn about what the business cycle comes from, no word of a lie. They call it animal spirits. They say that it just happens,

and like it's right there in front of you. What you just explain there the whips or effect, like the business cycles are created by the very interventionism that is supposed to smooth out the business cycles. They literally created

by their own hubris and stupidity. Whereas you you know, naturally get some sort of cyclical effect in and a economy because you know, as you said, sometimes people go out, they build a business, they get a little bit carried away, you know, they hire too much or whatever, and you

know that has local effects. But when you're doing it at the central planning level, you know, and at the at the mass you know, national global national economy level of the global economy level, then you actually create these total business cycles where everything becomes correlated. So in a normal natural organic economy, if one industry kind of grew itself out a little bit too much, and maybe the adjacent industries might benefit a little bit from that, but

that tapers off very quickly. So if they make a mistake and blow themselves up, it's a localized effect and the rest of the economy is pretty fine. Whereas what this interventionism does is it actually correlates everything. And now you know, there's businesses that are going bust that should actually be doing quite well now, but it's it's it's all the same thing now. So so there's no more actual economy. It's just the function of what the intervention

us to doing. How much money they're pulling into the system and how much money they're sucking out has nothing to do with productivity anymore, or very little to do with productivity anymore, which is madness, Like what why are we working? What are we doing? Yeah? Um, if I was going to play Devil's advocate here a little bit,

you know, understanding kind of the other side of the argument. Um, you know the kinsians would you already made the case is is their goal, their whole purpose that the federal serves purpose is kind of to smooth out those cycles. So what we'll do is the natural business cycles there, right, we have changing one's needs and desires. Humans are irrational, right um and so um, you you ordered too much of one product or good or whatever, but I don't want that anymore, right, and now all of a sudden

you're stuck with it. Right, So you have these natural business cycles, and the Kinsians believe that they could smooth that out by what what we'll do is we'll stimulate a little bit in the times when we need, and then we won't stimulant and we don't, and then we'll smooth that cycle out. That's the purpose versus if we kind of allowed the natural market to take its place, then we'd have much more choppy boo and busts. So

what would you say to that? Yeah, well, I mean the I guess the proof is in the pudding is that you know, it really comes down to a study of complex systems and and just a humility to at least recognize that if you allow things like as I sort of said before, it's like you get these natural business cycles all the time, because as you said, people are rational, they order too much, they've changed their mind, whatever the case is. But when the effect is more localized.

It just doesn't have a systemic effect on everything else, versus the process of correlating everyone together so that when there is a problem, it actually becomes entirely systemic. It affects people and industries and sections of the economy that just shouldn't have anything to do with this, like and it just it just spreads it all and and it basically it reminds me of the whole all in this together, you know, interventionist economy puts us all in everything together

for no reason. And instead of you know, the healthy engine in a car for example, you know, like you know, the radiator does its job, and the you know, the carburetor does its job, the fuel injectors do their job. You know, like everything does its own job here, Like everyone is being sort of skewed to basically become a

speculator of some sort. And it exacerbates the booms and it exacerbates the busts, and it just stresses everyone the hell out, and instead of doing something productive with their time, like building a business, everyone's hanging on you know, what the hell is the interest rate going to be? What

are they getting? Like it's at the point now it's like, what are they hinting about hinting about doing in the future, And it's like, Okay, now, let's make all our decisions based on the hint of a hint of a hint, which is you know, animal spirits. Yeah. One way they do that is, I mean, I think most people, not everybody, but most people um probably realize that, like, price fixing

is bad. Right, If I set the price of bread, but then the bread manufacturer, the baker can't produce it for the price that it's fixed at, then he doesn't produce bread anymore, at least the shortages. And so most we will understand that. But they probably don't understand is that when the Fed fixes the price of money, they're they're they're fixing the price of everything. And so that's that coordination, that large scale coordination that you're talking about.

There's a there's a guy a Matt Staller. He writes a article called the I think it's called Big or Big Monopoly, and he's talked about these monopolies that happen all over the place. And just what wrote one talking about Ponzi hospitals and counterfeit capitalism, which is pretty interesting.

I want to talk about more of that in a minute. Also, we'll get into time preference, we get into what the world looks like if we could implement something like this on the back end, how Bitcoin could potentially do that, and maybe the moral core code for for fixing this system like this. You're listening to the Mark Moa Show. If you're just tune in, m in the studio with Alex s Fetzky. We're talking about the decentralized Revolution, talking

about money and economics right now. We'll be back with more in a minute. Don't go away, all right, Welcome back. If you're just tuning in. You're listening to the Mark Moa Show. We're talking about the Decentralized Revolution, and I'm in the studio with Alex s. Fetzki. You canna find him on Twitter at sfetzky Rights. He's the author of the The Bitcoin Times, which is a really cool publication. He's put together a bunch of Austrian articles, Austrian economics.

We're talking about economics, you know, before the break, I had kind of hinted about this sub steck article I got from Matt Staller and it's called Big and he was talking about how um every every issue is talking about these monopolies and he was talking about how he calls it ponzi hospitals and counterfeit capitalism, and he was talking about how ft X is nothing new, how it's just like we work was where you get this uh guy wearing a T shirt that everyone thinks is a genius,

and uh, he creates a story. This genius creates a story as to why he's losing money, but why it's a good thing because he's getting growth and blah blah blah. But it's only possible because of this counterfeit capitalism, this ponzi finance. Right, we work continue to give them money to buy get these building leases that were worth more than the buildings themselves, which were insane or like f TX.

They were talking about, um, how how it's happening with hospitals and so it's allowed these private equity companies now to start going and buying up all these hospitals, but they don't know how to run them. The running them horrible. Now the hospitals are going on a business. Um they own the land and they were he was saying that even like UM, the they gave the loans to the hospitals, the hospitals are paying on the land, but when the hospitals go broken, can't pay the loan the hospital money

to keep making payments. So then they can show to their shareholders in prospective investors, hey we've never had a payment missed. We're still growing even though they're actually funding

the money in. And he's talking about how it's only possible because of this counterfeit capitalism, only possible because the interventionalists created all this free money, gave it to them, and how is distorting things and causing problems where now hospital care has gone down, Uh, hospitals are going to business. He was. He was blaming this whole last past hack that recently happened on on on the same thing where

private equity came in, took over the business. They don't know how to run it ran too the ground cause the hack whatever. So I think there's there's definitely a good case for that, um but let's let's go this is the opposite of time preference. And I think this is a big piece to hit on because as I already kind of made the case that under Austrian economics or natural law, it's like I've expended my energy and if I decide not to expend that energy today, I

could store it and I could use it later. So I'm delaying the gratification of using that later versus the interventionalist. The Kinsians want to just create the money today and we'll just pull it from the future. And so I have this instant gratification, and that really starts to distort everything, including every choice that we make concluding relationships, health, etcetera. Right, totally, So,

so I'm gonna read a passage here. It's a small paragraph from from Safe Things article in the Bitcoin Times. It says it's called a primerund time preference, and the first paragraph is the scarcity of time is the starting

point of all economic choice. The scarcity of time forces man to choose between alternatives at all points in his life, and it means that every decision has an opportunity cost, even with no restraint on the amount of resources available, and individual's choice of how to spend their time results in the elimination of all other choices for which he could have used the time. Economizing time is therefore unique

because time passes and cannot be stopped or reversed. So you know, I've I've heard the argument in the past. You know, people like, oh, you know, will we ever live in a post capitalist society where you know, we have the Star Trek machine that you know creates anything that we want at any point in time? And my answer is, well, no, because that's still not a society post time, right, Like, the only time we'll have a

post capitalist society is when time doesn't exist anymore. Because even if you could create everything that you wanted right now, you can only use what you wanted in place of something else that you may have also wanted. But there's a priority. So time is the ultimate sort of you know, the ultimate equalizers, so to speak. And you know what time preference is for for people who who may have either not heard the term or heard the term you're

not really understood it is. It's the it's the difference in how you value the future in relation to the present. Right, So everyone always has a time preference, which is, uh, it's more than one basically. So so the lowest time preference you can get to is once. So if we know, cause if we do it, like a quick example is that the present is always worth more than the future because the future has some level of uncertainty. You don't

know what's going to happen down the track. So if you could eat today, like food right now is worth more than the potential of food tomorrow, and it's definitely worth more than the potential of food a hundred days from now, and it's for certain worth more than the potential of food a thousand days from now. So so the longer you know you go out the you know,

the more the president sort of valuable in relation to it. Now, civilization, you can argue, is a function of how well or how much you can value the future in relation to the present. Because the more you can value the future, the more longer term plans you can make, the more things you can do. And then that's when you build things. You create things like if everything was just now, you

would never build anything. You'd never build a house, you'd never learned to build a fishing rod, for example, to fish for more fish. So all of these things require the lowering of one's time preference in order to increase

productivity and better the future. Essentially, now, what we do, as you said, is like when we pull from the future by intervening, by printing money, by creating credit out and where and all this sort of Ponzinomics basically is we we screw up that calculation and we make the future more uncertain. And in making the future more uncertain, it means we value the present way more in relation to the uncertain future. Um. And we do everything short termist in the way we do stuff. You know, we

spend more, We buy cheap crap. You know, we uh, we gambling on every investment that we can sort of think of. Um, you know, companies like what you mentioned with the hospitals is like they have all this free money, so you know, the money is worthless tomorrow, so let's just throw it into stupid ideas and fund our own debt, which is insane. But this is sort of well, we eat we eat junk food because it tastes good right now, even though we know it's going to cause long term

health effects. Correct, excuse everything. And I think time preference is kind of like the master knob essentially, if the master dial for the maturity of human beings an individual level and civilization at a macro level. Like if the if the time preference is really really really low, you

have extreme maturity. If the time preference is really really really really high, you have extreme immaturity, and that's really the dial And um, I think what we've done to the world with all this intervention ism is we've made the future so uncertain that we've made everybody and everything immature and we're just shooting from the hip hoping for the best. Is it a chicken or the egg? Though? Right? Like?

Is it? Is it because we we we naturally we want you know, we talked about capitalism being natural, right, so naturally we're going to try to get more for less, right,

We're gonna try to be more efficient. We want um, you know, we want to speed things up, and so naturally we kind of want to get things faster, and um, that caused us to have the short term thinking in ours of our life, including now we've found a way to short term uh you know, hack into our money or is it because the money creation and gave us that thought? You chicken or the economy? It is an

interesting one. I think the it's one where if you can separate the the consequence from the act you you you know, I don't know which one is the chicken or the egg here, but you you you create a situation where does the money cause us to have short term thinking and everything. Or is it because we have short term thinking, we've created a shortcut to money. Yeah,

I would that's a good question. I think they feed on each other, honestly, And then somewhere along the line we end up in a situation where we create a way to have short term thinking, have the benefit of it, and then have somebody else pay for it. So then you end up, you know, stuck on this drug of you know, like economic heroine, and it just feels good for the moment. Feels good, feels good, feels good, and you don't feel the concerts until you die. We gotta,

we gotta, we gotta take a quick break. UM. If you're just tuning in, you're listening to the Mark Moss Show. We talk about the decentralized Revolution. We're talking about money because money is, you know, what makes the world go around. Talking about the different types of economics, and I want to talk more. We have Alex Fetzki in the studio. I want to talk more when we come back about UM. Now we've understood this time preference. Talk more about UM.

This moral code for us, moral code for leaders in the future, UM and what that future looks like. So We're gonna be back with that and more in a minute. You don't want to miss this part. It brings it all together. We're back. Don't go away, all right, Welcome back. If you're just tuning in, you're listening to the Mark Moss Show. We're talking about the decentralized Revolution, and specifically

we're talking about economics. We're talking about money. We're talking about long time perspective or preference, high time preference, low time preference. I'm in the studio with Alex S. Fetzki. Uh. He's the author of the Bitcoin Times UM and you can find them on Twitter at Sfetzki Rights. Now, Um, Alex, I kind of asked you about this chicken or the egg, and you know, like you said, they probably feed on each other. I think that's probably probably the best case.

But let's say that, UM, you know, if we can you know, fix the money, fix the world, so to speak. So there's money, maybe it's not the root of the cause, but it certainly accelerates, uh and feeds into this kind of short time perspective. UM. So if we could fix that where these interventionists don't have the ability to just create all this money from thin air, we went to a sound money, a fixed money supply like bitcoin, um,

and then that slows down our perspective on money. Then you believe that then that probably helps start changing the perspective on all other other areas of our life. I

think so. So, Like if you think about all the ancient teachings, and not just the ancient, like even the Austrian teachings, like all this sort of stuff, they try and educate human beings to be more mature, more moral, more honorable, and a lot of these things sort of revolve around behaving like an adult, thinking about the future, not just about the present, right like that, they're sort of all of these great stories, these great philosophies, whether

it's Stoicism or Christianity or any of these things, they all kind of try and impart these lessons on human beings. Um. But as we sort of identified as like, human beings have a tendency to want to do things the easy way and you know, get the shortcut, you know, and if they don't feel the consequence of the shortcut, then they're oblivious to, uh, you know, whether what they did was you know, right or wrong or indifferent. Um. Now,

by by fixing the money. What you end up doing is you you create a new environment in which, at least the hypothesis here is that if you make a poor economic choice, the consequence is far more localized and therefore you get feedback, right, And we talked about this in the Uncommunist Manifestomy. I wrote that is like the faster the feedback loop, or the closer the the the consequence you know, to the actor, the more likely they

are to adapt and change in order to survive. And you know, my my hypothesis in my article in in the Bitcoin Times was that bitcoin kind of makes what the Austrians and prudent schools of thought all throughout history of sort of suggested. I think bitcoin kind of codifies it in the economy by making the money fixed and you know, not allowing any bailouts through printing you know,

more money or all that sort of stuff. And I actually think that what will happen is smart people, good operators, will actually orient themselves in such a way that the teachings of you know, Austrian economics and all that sort of stuff don't just have to call upon people's like honor and um an intelligence and maturity to behave the

right way. There's actually going to be an economic benefit to behaving the right way, because you're less likely to blow yourself up because you know, you'll, uh, You're purchasing power is increasing just purely by function of being a responsible adult and saving you know, so so it kind of changes that game a little bit. So, yeah, that's interesting,

that's interesting point I am. You know, you've referenced many times Lennon's quote where you said that you know, destroy capitalism, devoutch the currency through inflation, and you steal, and then the best way to get rich is through gambling and theft, right, And so that's kind of where wrath is gambling and theft, and so then you just start looking at your whole life that way, and you're just trying to thieve and

steal and gamble and trick everything kind of a thing. Um. But and in these of that last piece you're talking about our savings and so like if we did have this kind of like fixed money supply and our savings were sound, that really starts to change a lot of things, right, because one, we have to continually work harder to try

to offset the theft of inflation. And now that X or time we might save could go into building better relationships or better education or knowledge of becoming more mature, because you're saying, like the argument or maybe the problem is that we're not maturing enough. And as you were saying that, I was thinking back to the chicken or the egg dilemma. Uh, you don't have kids. I do, and kids at one and two years old have very short time preference. It wasn't the money. It wasn't money

that taught them that they're born with that right. And it's through the act of maturing that you learned to delay the gratification. So uh to me. And as I started kind of thinking about that, usually word maturity and it kind of brought that into perspective. But um, you know, I was on this Twitter spaces recently and we started getting kind of into you know, what does the future

of money look like? On bitcoin? And um, they're trying to explain how, you know, I think there could be some fractional reserve and there would be you know, people would loan your money against your bitcoin and and and you can get some yield this way and blah blah blah. And I was like, if your money held value and actually bought you more goods and services in the future

than less. I wouldn't need to be invested it, and I wouldn't need to be earning yield, and so like you're trying to like think of how it could be used in context of what we have today. But if my money brought me more goods and services, then I just saved my money and I just keep focusing on wealth creation instead of this whole investing complex, you know, Wall Street and Wall Street industrial complex that's been built up.

Kind of a thing. I agree, I agree. One of the best articles that was ever written about this concept is called the Great de Financialization, which was written by pacul Lewis, and he actually wrote it for addition three of the Bitcoin Times. It was one of my favorite ever and um it was actually around the first time you and I did a podcast. Actually, I remember I was in Germany when he wrote the article, and I was in Germany when we did our first podcast together.

But he basically it's called the Great Definancialization, and the premise of the article is that while people think that you know, bitcoin is gonna you know, increase financialization in the world and everything is like no, no, no, it's actually going to simplify all of this excess um, you know, baggage and confusion comes with the financial world today because we are trying to find ways basically not to become poor.

Like that's literally all these machinations like investing and trading and like you know, millions and millions upon millions derivatives products and all this sort of stuff. It's all hot air, it's all fluff, and it's all kind of like a a roundabout way to try and offset the damage that basically monetary inflation does to the world. And it's like, you know, let's just you know Alexander the Great and the Gordian Knot, right, you know, they said you can,

you will become you know whatever. It was like king of this region if you can untie the knot before the sun goes down. And he looks at the knot, looks at the sun, pulls out his sword and he just cut the knot in half. Right, So like, let's just you know, Bitcoin is cutting the Gordian knot of this tangle of crap. You know, You've got people talking about like, oh, let's like, you know, open up regulations a little bit. It's like no, no, let's just cut

the crap and you know, let let the chips full. Basically, yeah, yeah, I mean, it's it's uh, It's something I talked to my kids a lot about, specifically my oldest daughter, and she's kind of wrestling with this, like what she's gonna do and does she want to take class at university? I'm like, what is that you old ultimately want? And like, what's just the quickest way to get there? Like do you need to go through this existing system to get

to where you want to go? In my opinion from where I'm at, the answer is no. And kind of to your point, like do you need to sit there and untie the knot or do you just cut it? You know, a conversation I've had many times with some of the people I'll leave unnamed for now, but you know they talk about like, well, how does it fix the euro dollar market? That's a question I've been asked a bunch of times, right, because like we have this huge problem with all these off short dollars, and that's

really where the shortage is happening. In the FED doesn't have enough firepower to actually keep the dollars enough dollars in supply because of what's happened to the euro dollar market? And then the yield curves are inverting and how does it fix that? And like it doesn't like it just does a way with the whole need for that. And then firstly, like know, so it's kind of like top like like like cutting cutting the knot, so to speak. We got about thirty or forty five seconds left. Anything

else you want to throw out there? Throw out before we wrap this up, no other than like if if people found this interesting and they want to dig into this a little bit further, like Bitcoin Times dot io is dot io sorry is where they can pick up a copy of the Bitcoin Times. So there's five editions, the latest being the Australian one. I think is you know, really really really really special. So you know, people want to support and check that out by all means. But

I hope, I hope they enjoyed this history and economics lesson. Yeah, hopefully, And I would I would really encourage everyone to just dig into this a little bit. Get get the Bitcoin Times. I have, I have every issue that's come out. Check out mesas dot org as well. Lots of good articles on mesas as well. Check out the book that we wrote the Uncommunist Manifesto. You can get that on Amazon just search Uncommunist Manifesto. UM and check that out as well.

And uh man, keep digging into this. It's it's it can change not just your life, but change the world. UM. You've been listening to the Markma Show or talking about the decentralized Revolution in the studio with Alex Fetzky and that's what we got. Thanks for listening.