All right, Hello, welcome to another episode of the markro mov Show, where we're always talking about the decentralized revolution, trying to explain to you the play by play of what the heck is going on in the world. And you know, I'd like to bring you some education so you can start to understand subjects a little bit differently,
changing the way you think about money. As I always say, I like to bring to you some of the latest breaking news headlines so you can see what is going on with the play by play of the signposts, and of course some interesting guests so you can listen to some different perspectives than just mine. And that's what we
have for you today. I am joined in the studio with q. He is one of my friends, my research assistant and the producer, and we want to have some conversations today that I think will help give a different perspective because, believe it or not, him and I don't agree on everything, and believe it or not, that's a good thing. You see. One of the things as humans and as an investors, is that our own human emotions
make us horrible investors. And part of the reason why is because we suffer from all types of biases, and you always have to be aware of what your biases are. And so we suffer from things like normalcy bias or recentcy bias. So if prices are going up, they're always going up. If prices going down, they're always going down. Things like that. But one of the things that we suffer from is something called confirmation bias. And what that means is like you see the world for whatever it
is because of the lens that you have. Your experience is what shapes that. And what most people do is they look for information to confirm the bias they have. But a much better way is to always try to disprove your bias, and so I do that. I always try to disprove my bias, and so I like to talk to people I don't agree with. I call it like verbal sparring. I grew up doing martial arts karate as a kid, lots of jiu jitsu, mutai, and I love just putting on some sparring gear and just going
at it with some friends. Not hard, but just fun and it's fun and you sharpen yourself. And so this is like a verbal sparring so que. Anyway, thanks for joining me today. It's always a pleasure talking to you because we don't agree on everything, and it's fun just to dissect that. And it's proof that people can have different viewpoints and still be friends and get along.
Absolutely.
I'll start off by saying, I'm sure you've seen the headlines, like, I don't know, forty six fifty four whatever the number is, people that have worked for the Hillary Clinton, for the Clinton Foundation have ended up dead. And I'm sure you've seen that, right and Killery as she's been called, right, And while I think that is where they smoke, there's fire, and that seems well, that seems like there's a big problem.
And I certainly believe she's one of the most corrupt politicians, probably under Biden at this point, but one of the most career corrupt politicians. I saw recently Patrick Bett David had Michael Wiener or Scott Wiener on his show and he was the one that was married to Huma Abodeen and sent the pictures of the you know, the penis or whatever, and Patrick Way David went hard on him, and I don't agree with him. He's a way different then I am. Politically. His wife whom Aberdeen is caught
up in all types of bad things with Hillary. But I listened to his perspective and I have to say that he had a good point. I kind of lean with Patrick bed david and there's where they smoke. There's fire real quick.
Was what was the point?
Just so that the point was? Patrick mc david says, Look, I got all these questions that we want to ask you, but I can't really substantiate any of these. So I want to know, why is there whatever fifty sixty people that have died on the Hillary Clinton campaign. And Scott Waders like, come on, man, really, and like patrickay david was not letting this go, like he hammered, hammered, hammered, right, But I found myself going, man, Weider's got some good points.
And basically his defense was, look, Hillary Clinton's whatever, seventy years old. I don't know what exactly, seventy five years old, through the Clinton Foundation and through decades and decad decades of public service and billions and blah blah blah. She's had one hundreds, she's had thou thousands of people work for her, thousands of people. She's seventy years old. People die.
I'm like, dang, that's actually a pretty good answer. And so my point is is like always always check your bias and be willing to take in new information that challenges That's kind of my setup story. That's kind of I was thinking about it. No, I like that.
It's Awkham's razor. The simplest solution is often the right answer. Like it just logic would validate that claim. Like, I'm thirty years old, I don't know a lot. I've worked with a lot of people. Most of the people I've worked with, they're still alive. Yeah, talk to me in forty years, probably be singing a different tune.
Right exactly. So when you're seventy a lot of people you've worked for have died, you know. But when you understand how corrupt they are and how much they lie and censor, then it leads, you know, leads to wild speculation. And that's part of the problem with you know, whatever, quote unquote conspiracy. The lack of transparency leads to that. And so when you're always being lied to, then you
just think everything's a lie. And so it's tough to talk about We're gonna talk about bitcoin and the Great humanity Equalizer because there's a lot of inequality in the world today, and I think both of us agree that we think we are moving into world that could be much more equal. And so I want to talk about some things that we go through. You know, first of all, what do you think about that, like humans being what do you think about human equality?
I mean, I think I have a We've talked so much about these things. I know I have a different perspective than you on this, like I and I recognize where my perspective comes. I grew up in America. I'm an American citizen. My parents are both immigrants into this country, and I was born here an American citizen, not because I took a test, not because I passed some qualification, just I want a lottery. Everyone else in my family
is back in Iran. They don't have the same access to a lot of the things that I am granted. So I know, off the bat, we're actually we're not created equal, but the advantages that we are granted in life, it's up to us how we choose to use that.
So well, hang on, let's back that up. So we are created equal, but whatever regime you may be under might choose to take away some of those equality options, right, And to your point, I mean, you could be a thirteen or fifteen year old kid that was born in Iran and you don't get to join the financial system.
Nope, simply because of decisions that are well out of your control.
Yeah.
Or you could be in Africa and you just don't have access to electricity.
Right so, or you don't have access to the ideas or whatever. Right. But I think and so I think that's the big problem. And I think equality the way I think about it is like equality of what, equality of what? So, equality of an outcome or equality of a chance. So there's no way to guarantee equality of an out well, the only way to guarantee equality of an outcome is to make sure that you only have one choice, right, so, Q take this or leave it. Well,
I can guarantee the outcome. We're gonna take it. Of course, if I give you iPhone or an Android, some people are gonna choose one of the other. And you see that, like twins born in the same family, with the same parents, same school, same money, same gene, same everything can end up in two different way, different locations because of the choices that they made. So the only way to really get people to end up in the same place is to limit their choices. And that's a very scary world, right.
Oh. Absolutely, Like that's the whole premise of this country. We have the freedom to choose. We should have the freedom to make the decision that we want to make.
So do you think trying to optimize for freedom or equality of an outcome is a good thing?
No. If we were optimizing for equality of outcome, especially in this country right now, with the current makeup of the interests of our generations, most people my generation would be a professional athlete and whatever support they wanted. Most people younger generations would probably just be YouTubers or TikTokers or whatever. We don't need more of those. We don't need more professional athletes, as much as I love sports.
We don't need more people making tiktoks. We need more engineers, more scientists.
Yeah, And I think about it like you look at like a Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk. Elon must probably works one hundred hours a week and he's probably done that for thirty years. Do you want to work one hundred hours a week for thirty years?
Coming up on ten years so far?
One hundred hours a week close to it. Come on, man, come on, you don't want to work that hard.
Maybe not for you.
My point is is that not everybody needs to work that hard. Some people. I have friends who've just moved down to Nicaragua and live on the beach and they surf all day, and that's great for them. They should be able to do that. There's no reason why they have to work as hard as Jeff Bezos if they don't want it. And so that's like the equality of
an outcome. But if we go back, like through some historical examples we were talking to before about like I think some of the real discrepancies come from economic or race, class or values, right like, and I think that's kind of where like some of this conversation started, Ben Shapiro was talking about frame up what bench Burro was saying in your words.
I mean, the podcast episode was essentially this conversation that most conflict in society throughout history, it's been portrayed as a class conflict. It's the pores versus the rich, it's the haves versus the have nots, when in reality it's become this values driven I want to instill my values upon you these are the right values to have, those
are the wrong values to have. It's almost like the way I was kind of we were talking about it is the way we try to sort of package and ship democracy all over the world, is exactly that in a nutshell. It's we want you to have our values because we only understand our values. We don't understand yours. But there's that.
All right, Well, we're gonna stop with that. We'll come back to that a minute. If you're tuning and you're listening to the Mark mass Show, we're talking about the great humanity equalizer and it's not taking away your choice. We're gonna break that down Q and I when we come back. Don't miss as we're going take a quick break.
We'll be right back. All right, welcome back. If you're just tune in and you're listening to the Mark Maus Show, I'm sitting down with my show producer Q. We are talking about the technology that we have today that could be the great equalizer of humanity, but not in the way that you're thinking. So you were kind of framing this up before, and you talked about shipping ideology or values, and I think that's the big problem that I have
with that. I was at this conference like a year ago and someone had brought their wife and she wasn't really into what we were talking about, and she asked me, how do you know you're on the right side of things? And I think the answer to that question, much I'll tell you is also I thought what I thought Ben Scheper was saying, and again, we just see and hear things differently. But she asked me, how do you know you're on the right side? And that was a good question.
I hadn't really been asked that, and I thought about it, and I said, the reason why I know I'm on the right side is because I'm gonna take care of me and live my life the best I can, and you do you, but the other side wants to tell me how to live my life, and I'm not okay with that. I don't want I don't want you pushing
your ideal vision onto me. And so what I heard as bench Burrow was talking was he was giving examples of Silicon Valley pushing values on the rest of the world or the rest of the country, even though they don't even live those values. So you know, in Silicon Valley, they're saying that you know, don't get married, be transvestite, don't have kids, blah blah blah, when they mostly live traditional values.
Well, let's unpack that for a second, because it's they're working the social media companies and they're allowing that rhetoric to be perpetuated. That's that's really what he was dissecting.
But for the most part, yes, right, And so then people across the country look at Silicon Valley and think that, wow, there are a bunch of liberal wackos that have these values, and that's actually not the case. So the point is is that they're trying to push their ideal values onto those people even though they're not living them themselves. And so we agree on that, and that's that's kind of
what I was hearing. And so I think that's back to the question she asked me, and it's like, well, I believe in let me do me, you do you. That's why I'm on the right. If you're trying to tell me how I need to live my life, I don't like that. Now. I I am okay having influence over other people. I hope that I can live my life the best that I can and that would encourage other people. But I don't want power over people. I
don't want to tell people what to do. And as a matter of fact, from being a content creator and sort of if you listen to what influencers or content creators or gurus would tell you, most of the fake gurus are the ones telling you what you should do. Most of the real ones are the ones that are just demonstrating it right. And so I think that's where it comes down. And that's where you mentioned like offshoring democracy. It's like we're trying to tell you what you need
to do to live. Now we were talking, he was also talking about how what Karl marxcot wrong and how really things are more about values than they are about economics. And I know you had a little bit of a disagreement there. To frame it up, Karl Marx wrot the Communist Manifesto. That book led to the largest revolution in European history, and it still has become the number one one of the best sellers in economics in political science,
which is the problem. But what he did is he said that there's a struggle between two arbitrary classes, the rich and the poor. And I say it's arbitrary because what's the definition of rich and poor. The rich are oppressors, the poor are oppressed. So if I go from rich to poor, Nolbmenn oppressor. Like so it's just like this arbitrary line. And really what he argues is that it wasn't about the economic classes. It was about the ideology
that they shared. And he gave examples. So for example, you know, early in the United States, you would have JP Morgan going to church with the same poor people, and so they really cared about local community. And when you have a local community, not only have a duty and a responsibility of that community, hang out, your kids go to same school as you go to same churches, et cetera. And so really it wasn't about the economics of it. It was more about the values of it.
And I know you didn't necessarily agree with that, Yeah, I.
Mean there's a there's just an aspect of this where you start to see I think a like it to your point, like, there's no clear line being defined here. So you have one side saying, hey, this is an argument or case to be used as to why this is good. And then because there's no clear line being drawn, there's no definition of well, this is what defines someone as the I. Honestly, I'm sounded like a freaking communist right now defending this.
But don't don't defend it. You don't, don't you don't have to defend it.
I want to have like a full sort of expansive discussion on this though, because the point and where I was disagreeing was like the revolution it did cause was a revolution of class because ultimately the people who align with and agree with the communists ideology where those who didn't have anything to begin with, and they saw that as their opportunity to grasp and sort of hold on
to and gain something. So from that angle it did it was a class issue, but it was a class issue that was guised as these are different.
But there's there's two ways in my book Uncommunist manifest that we broke this down that really there's two ways to gain wealth, work for it and build it. You can you can create it, or you can steal it. You can take others, or you can build it yourself. Right, I can grow my own crops that I can take yours. Okay, Okay, So that's an ideology which one I choose. If I choose to grow my crops or steal your crops. Would that be an ideology, like if you picked one or
the other. Yeah, okay, So the Bolsheviks decided to not go create wealth but to go take wealth. Was that an ideology?
Sure?
So he says, it's not ideological, it's economic. But it was ideological.
But it was motivated through economic needs.
Sure. So what they do, and this is what Marxism did, It's what neo Marxism or what we call cultural Marxism does today, is they try to find any underrepresented group of people and they try to agitate them. You're a victim because you're black, or because you're a woman, or because you're gay, or because you're trans, or because you're whatever, and then they try to agitate them. So and Karl Marx's day, the best way was through the poor people, and they can get the poor people agitated and get
them to rise up. Today, we try to get anybody, any underrepresented group or minority and try to antagonize them to get them to rise up.
I mean, that's the whole like polarization of the world we live in. It's it's again, it's kind of what you were talking about in your previous segment. You turn on CNN, it's you only hear about how awful Trump is. You turn on Fox News, you only hear about how awful Biden is. There's no intellectual honesty in either discussion. It's just they're the bad guy. No, they're the bad guy.
It's like they're creating this narrative of infighting. And then you go to DC and you see the video of Kamala Harris fist bumping Lindsey Graham, and then you start to realize, like, oh, they want us to fight each other, but they're not going to fight each other. Again, creates that us versus them dynamic.
But I think if you dig in deeper and you understand that the reason why they do that is because they need they need victims, because victims need saviors. Right, so you can't get ahead because you're fill on the blank. And so if you only allow me, then I can help you do that. Right now, I am choosing to have a family, and I'm choosing to work for my wealth, and I'm choosing to live my best life. But for you, you just go ahead and be that victim and let
me help you do that. And so I think that's that that kind of push off there, but I would say that they use this effort, they manipulate these underrepresented groups to get their way. And yes they happen to be poor or black or trans because they're the underrepresented group that they can pit against them, but it's not them overall. Like for example, we've had you know, trans people and black people that have got along just fine. And there's a lot of people actually standing up now
and trying to announce this. If you're just tuning in your listening to the Mark Moss Show, we're kind of going off the rails a little bit for a minute, but don't worry. We're going to bring it back here for you. We're talking about ways we can really kind of address equality and bring the world back to a much more fair world, but not through the way they
want to. The commists want to do it not through ESG and not through coercion, but through cooperation and through a new technology that gives us the opportunity to build wealth in a sound money system. And so we think it's going to change the world, but we're just setting it up. Stick with us. It's going to be fun. I got to take a very quick break though, just for a minute, but you don't want to miss it,
We'll be right back. Hi. Welcome back. If you're just tuned in your listening to the Mark Mass Show, we're always talking about the decentralized revolution, and we're talking about right now. I'm sitting down with Q, he's my producer. We're talking about sort of this inequality that we have in the world, looking back through a historical lens, and we're going to take it to the future of where
we think this is going. Before the break, we had kind of left it abruptly, so you wouldn't go away, But Q, what was the question that you wanted to ask?
So like you and I the other day, we're having this conversation about the gentleman you sat next to on the plane, and we were talking to just about the idea of giving to those less fortunate, and obviously that was a specific example. You've established that, Hey, I want to protect myself, my property, my family. Those are my
values that I hold dear and true. If someone else's values are not to necessarily say, hey, you need to give some of your property to help others, but rather I want to personally be going and helping others, how do we go about that? Because I feel like we're reaching a point where on one side of the argument it's everyone has to help everyone. It's like, no, that's that's an over correction. But this idea that everyone has
to fend for themselves is also an unrealistic ask. So where where's the balancing act here?
The problem? Q, You're probably not kind of like this answer. The problem that the the world has today is they want to remove all morality and then try to juggle these things. And the answer is you can't criticize Ben Shapiro because he kept talking about Judeo Christian values. But the Judeo Christian values are the answer to that question that you asked. So whether you believe in the Bible or God or Jesus or any of that doesn't matter.
In the Bible, Jesus said the greatest commandment is love God and love your neighbor more than you love yourself. Over and over and over. It says, if your neighbor asks for help, do not delay, give him help immediately. Don't even just give him what he asks. Also take the jacket off your back and give that to him as well. Okay, so when you have that, as you're guiding principle. These types of questions you're asking me are there. But when you completely get rid of that, there is
no God, there is no higher purpose. I'm a god. I do whatever I want. Life is for my own enjoyment. If you're Gary Vee saying the greatest thing to optimize for is for my own personal happiness, well then how do you then? How do you fit that in? And the question is you don't right.
I think my issue, going back to the ben Shaper of it all, is he spent the entirety of the episode essentially saying these people who are trying to instill their values on us, like I don't want their values, but let's ship my values to everyone else. It's like, you just spent this whole time telling us why try to force values.
I didn't. I didn't listen to the whole thing, so I didn't hear that conclusion and I certainly didn't get that, but I didn't listen to the end. So we'll table that for what it is. But I just think that you know, there's a quote and I can't remember it exactly, but I'm sure you've heard it where it's like in my family, I'm a communist right in my community, I'm a socialist. But then like with my government, I'm a
libertarian or whatever it is, right. And so what that means is that in my family with my daughters and my wife, we share everything, like I give everything to them, right, But that's my family. Right in my local community, I'm like a socialist, Like we kind of share and we kind of help each other. But like the further you go out, the less you do that. And so one thing that Benchuba talks about is like the neat the community was for. It's a two way street, so it
comes with responsibility. And then I have a duty back to that community. I should try to keep crime down. I should try to keep the trash off the street. I should try to keep my lawn mode right. But more importantly than that, like you know, traditionally throughout thousands of verse history, people would go to church and they would support each other. One person has a problem, they come by. The Mormon church does a very good job of this. The Mormon church. They support each other. They
all frequent each other's businesses. You know, one person loses their job, they all pitch in to help them. And so that's done through that sense of community. But you can't get that benefit from the community if you don't also have the responsibility im pour into that community as well. The problem is is like the modern government structures that we have today has dissolved all of that right and that's by design because they want us dependent on the
government for that. But the problem is when you go to the government, you break down that community. And you mentioned Iran, and I've never been there, so I don't really understand how it works. But I spent a lot of time in like Central America, Mexico, South America, et cetera, and I know that. You know, family is everything to them, And you just look at immigrants that even come to
the US. They live together, they stay in their tribes, they all help each other and support each other, and so it's really through community through family that a lot of that's done. The flip side of that is that if it's done too much, it also makes people too dependent. And so you you mentioned if we don't give, then what happens to these underrepresented people, do they fall by the wayside? Well, if there weren't safety nets for those people,
we'd have much less underserved people. Now, you know, I support an orphanage in Mexico. Last month we raised four hundred thousand dollars for them. It's an orphanage in Mexico. Mexico doesn't have a safety net, and they specifically work with kids with disabilities. So those kids they're never gonna they're never gonna get there. I mean, they don't they have disabilities, right, they're in Mexico, and so like we
need to help them. But I think for the most part, most people could work right and they so I think the handouts work kind of work against them, would be my guess.
I don't disagree. I mean, like, as you were describing this idea of community and working together like that is in a nutshell. Regardless of where you find yourself in the world, whatever religion or belief system you have, at its core, we all are looking for a sense of community, and way way back in human history, we are always reliant on and building upon that community, whether it's our immediate family or the extended families.
The humans are tribal, exactly, and you look at like look at the projects in Philadelphia or Chicago or Detroit or whatever, right, and it's unfortunate what's happening there. But the government basically pays young girls to have as many baby as they can because then they pay for their
apartment to pay for the childcare. And so it's incentives gone wrong, right, probably meant to be really good, like let's help these unwed mothers, but now they just have fifteen babies so they can get paid a bunch of money. And then all these kids grow up with welfare. With that welfare mentality, they don't have a father at home, so it's a bad deal. But even within that, then
they start their gangs. So then they even create that community that all starts to help each other out, okay, And so it's just like a natural part of us, right, So I don't know, you know, I think it comes down of the worldview, Like I believe that people are mostly good, and I believe that people take care of
each other. But that's because I do. And to the point that you mentioned before, and if everybody wasn't listening, but on an airplane, I was sitting next to somebody who was very well off, very very very high level business person, and he asked me the same kind of question, which is like, well, if the government doesn't take care of people, who will and I'd asked them, Hey, I don't want to get personal with you, but I just I'm curious. How much of your money do you donate?
And he's like, I don't it at all. And I said, so, I think you're putting your worldview on there. I donate a lot of my money and so I just don't look at the world that way. And so there was a Denish Desuza. He's like a felt conservative filmmaker. I love on YouTube. They have these channels where I think it's like Americans for Liberty or something, and they'll be like Michael Knowles, Ben Shapiro, DENISTISHUSA, these guys, and they'll go to college campuses and then like the professors or
the students get up and ask them these questions. And Denisiusuza had Finn this question, and the guy said, but what about reparations. Shouldn't we be paying these people back because they were oppressed and blah blah blah and uh and Denistusuza basically said, uh, yeah, you're at an Ivy League school. You should just not go here. You should give all your money and stuff to them. So you go first, and once you've done that, maybe we'll jump in.
And the kid was like, uh, never mind, right, And so that's like you should definitely give your money because you owe those people. But I'll just keep my money, right and where it's like for me, like I said, my friends and I and not trying to shoot my
own horm here. But I mean we went we were raising money for this orphange for a number of years and like, uh, we just do that and like hopefully we encourage other people to maybe go do something similar, right, And so I think that's like how the world is it should be totally.
I mean it points back to kind of what you had mentioned earlier in the episode, this idea that like we offshore the morality, like we think someone else is going to do it if we don't do it.
No, we want to. We want to mandate that you do it even though I don't.
Right, Like the example with all the social media CEOs who will tell everyone, oh, believe all these things, but then they'll go home and have their sort of conservative values that they live by, right that they won't preach.
Yeah, you have all these man. I mean, you know what's happening with the kids these days, both with the transitioning and with schools and whatnot. And most of these people that are pushing this don't have kids, right, you don't even have kids. Who the hell are you to tell me what I should do with my kid? You don't even have your own, you know. Oh, but these are the states kids and these it's our response. And no, it's not your responsibility. You don't even have kids. So
I think that's the problem. If you're just to listen to the Mark mass Show a little bit different than we normally do. I'm sitting down with Q, my show producer, and we're going to bring it together to talk about a much more fair and equal world, but not through coersion, through incentives and through cooperation. So we're gonna be back with more in a second. I gotta take a very quick break. Don't go away, we'll be right back, all right,
Welcome back. If you're just tune in, you're listening to the Mark Maas Show a little bit, a little bit different content today, a little bit more on the political philosophical side of things, so you can get different perspectivesm sitting down with Q, my show producer. We're talking about, you know, the difference of class and economic struggles and I want to kind of bring all this back because really the cause of a lot of this, in my opinion, well goes back to the money. And to frame it up,
you mentioned the Bolshevik Revolution. So Vladimir Lenin from the Volshevik Revolution said that the best way to destroy capitalism is by debouching the currency. Through in fla we can arbitrarily steal, and through a process of inflation, we can break all relation so that the best way to get rich is through gambling and theft. And so the leader of the Bullshek Revolution, that's what he said. And so here we are. People say, oh, but this is capitalism
gone away. Well, Karl Marx gave us ten points of communism in the United States. As seven of the ten, so I would say, we're not in a capitalist society. We're actually seventy percent communism. Now we could we could debate each one of those. I mean, is it one or ten percent? Whatever?
Time for that?
You don't have enough time for that. But the but, the but the key piece here is that when the when the money has been destroyed so much that the best way seeming to get ahead is by either stealing or by gambling. So I'm gonna yolo into a crypto position. I'm gonna I'm gonna rug pull on a on a DeFi or NFTT on.
Whatever MLB games are going on. There's no coincidence. Online gambling is picking up right now in this moment in our history.
Right and then it makes me really greedy, So gambling and theft. So then theft like most people think like breaking in arey, it doesn't have to be that way. I could cheat you on selling you a used card and disclose problems. I could build wrong hours, I could embezzle from my employment. There's a million ways we can cheat as well or steal, not just outright breaking and entering.
And so when we're in a society where everybody's kind of looking out for themselves, and really, in a business, the leader of the company sets the culture of the company. And if you look at the founding fathers, they all came here literally sacrificing their life for future generations, planting a tree they'll never sit under the shade of. And the people that signed the Declaration of Independence, most of them ended up broken dead. It wasn't good for them.
But today we have leaders that only look out for themselves. I mean, I don't think there's any way to debate that evidence that's come out against Biden and the tens and tens of millions of dollars that he's embezzled, And so what does that mean for the rest of the country. I mean, we've see Nancy Pelosi is the best stockpicker in the world. Like, I mean, we can go on and on and on right, And I'm sure there's people on both sides that they're all trying to rich themselves.
So that's why they don't want to pass inside our trading rules and so but they're all trying to enrich themselves, and so that sets this culture here. But back to the social issues. It affects the social issues because everybody's looking out for themselves.
I mean, it's a broken system, and if you kind of scale it back and go back enough, you start to realize, like, oh, well, when the moment we broke the money is the moment things really started to break apart. Like one of my favorite websites for anyone listening you've never checked this out, you should, It's called wtf Happened?
In nineteen seventy one. Type out all of those words, WTF happened in nineteen seventy one, and what this guy did, Ben Prentice and some of his friends just took a range of economic charts and they point to nineteen seventy one, which, for historical context, is the moment Nixon took us off the gold standard. Officially, we are no longer backed by gold. We are just pure fiat money. And you start to
see a lot of things. In the last segment or in the last hour, you brought up just how much the police budgets started to bloom starting in nineteen seventy seven, right around this window of time, So you see and can point to the moment where we started to have the money get ruined. You start to see also politicians become millionaires very quickly, very conveniently for themselves.
Yeah. Yeah, if you think about in the book Thank God for Bitcoin, they made a good case that I really love is stuck with me, which is that we tend to think of money as like a tool, and tools could be used for good or bad. I can with a screwdriver and fix my car, I get stabby with it, so it's just a tool, so it's neutral. But they said that that's not the case with Fiat money, because Fiat money that the government creates is not neutral.
It's actually inherently evil. And it's inherently evil because it's built on a system of theft. When they infleet inflate, they steal from you. That's what vlnemer Lyin said. A system of theft, a system of lies. They're constantly telling us that they're tightening when they're really easing, et cetera. And uh, theftlies and deceit. They're constantly deceiving us about what they're doing with policy, how many dollars there are,
they won't go through an audit, et cetera. So if a system is built on theft, licency is inherently evil. So then almost anything it's being used for then thereby could also be used for evil. No, it's certainly okay. I mean I use Fiat for good, but as a system it's bad. And so then you start to see what's going on in the world. And as opposed to that, like a bitcoin system is open, it's transparent, it's permissionless,
and so it's built it's it's trustless. I don't want to say it's truth itself, but it's code, it's transparent, so we can we can trust it or we don't have to trust it because it's open and transparent. And so it's like almost like the exact opposite. Now, from a theological standpoint, the Bible calls the devil the father of lies. The only tool the devil has is deceit right, and God would be called truth right, and so like,
you have two different systems. But if we can do that, we change the incentive structures and maybe we go to a world that didn't debouch the currency and destroy capitalism and we end up in a more of a meocratic world meritocracy right, where we're all trying to do better for each other.
Totally, I mean, at its core, it really just goes down to the government's ability to continue to print themselves out of whatever situation they find themselves in prevents them from having accountability for their mistakes and actions. It's like you're a parent. If your children make a mistake, you sit them down and you explain, hey, like, you messed this up, this is how it got I messed up, and this is how we do better in the future.
You learn from your mistakes. That's what my dad did to me, and that's how I grew as a person for some reason. Though our politicians are exempt from this. They're able to just, hey, I misplaced two trillion dollars on September tenth, again two thousand and one. And when I brought that story up to you, he's like, that's not the only time. Yeah, And it's like, that's not an insignificant amount of money today, let alone twenty plus
years ago. But there's no accountability for that. In fact, we promote, we give them new titles, we give them new roles in government, and it's as though, just yeah, they mess they messed up. Everyone makes mistakes, right, and they learn from they are punished and learned from their mistakes. Yeah, everyone except for you.
Yeah, no consequence exactly, And without consequence, how do we learn because success is a horrible teacher. We learn from our mistakes, right, And so if you don't burn your hand to touch stove, then you don't know any better. And so when you're constantly able to punt your way
out of it, I think about like safety. The author of the Bitcoin standard, he says that a monarchy is actually a preferred form of government because a monarchy really treats the country more like an entrepreneur, and if he mismanages it, then they're run out and somebody else gets to try again. But in this FIAT money world, we constantly print.
You know how the old Roman Empire used to fund all of its endeavors and do all the things.
That wanted to do by debasing its currency.
Actually, no, before they started debasing their currency, it was a sense of pride, and the wealthy class would almost like submit applications. They were all assigned. Even if you didn't submit an application, you were assigned. Hey, your role within our community is you're to upkeep the roads. Hey, you are the art director of our community. And so the wealthy class was instilled to you have to fund these endeavors to keep.
Our society duty and responsibility exactly. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So maybe if we get away from the FIAM money system that's a system built on fleft flies and the seat, get back to a somone system that, as Lenin said, would be destroyed and we would just turn a gambling and theft. We can get back to a world where there's meritocracy and people are all working towards a common goal. We get rid of the bad players, We reincentivize people.
At least that's what we're hoping. And you know, when it comes to equality, I like to think of equality of a chance, and really we need to make sure everybody has the best chance they can have and not optimize for the outcome. And I think having a form of money that you can hold that doesn't get stolen from you arbitrarily and you don't end up in a system like Iran where you can't even get into the global financial system, gives us that much more fair world,
a permissionless, borderless, censorship resistant, immutable world. If you just tune in your listening to the Mark Wall Show, we've been talking with Q, my show producer, about this inequality and how bitcoin could fix this. That's what we got. Let me know in the show notes what you think. Until next time.