Bitcoin - Tech - Disinformation

news this week. Some of the big news has been dominating all the headlines. You've been seeing it all over the place. Um, and I'm gonna give you a different perspective on it. But some of those news that we've been seeing coming out is of course from the big meetings in the world economic form that's been going on, and they've been talking about a lot of things. We

already talked about a lot of this stuff. But one of the things that I keep seeing coming out over and over and over, and I think it's one of the more important, one of the most important things going on, is this continued pounding the table on disinformation disinformation over and over and over, and they're calling for censorship they're calling for control, they're calling for power because they want to stop this misinformation or this disinformation that we suffer from.

As a matter of fact, New York Times publisher A. G. Sulzberger described disinformation as quote the most excess existential problem the world is facing today. That's the biggest problem in the world's facing today. Not the nuclear war that's about to happen Russia's threatening. Not not the nuclear war, not the potential nuclear war with China and Taiwan, Not the the u n s that a billion people will starve to death potentially the next two years, and not none

of that. That's not a problem. No, no, no, no, that the biggest problem that the world is facing today is disinformation. Apparently. Uh. CNN host Brian Stelter was was a host for some of the panels of the World Look on mc forum and uh basically sound there. Um. And of course he's a fan of this. He's previously called for censorship under what he called a quote harm reduction model. And they led this panel on on on how Democrats could reshape the news. He's a news guy

from CNN. Now I'll let you know that CNN's host Bryan Stelter is no stranger to this in this information. As a matter of fact, he's been confronted, accused, and actually substantiated that. He has been disseminated his own false stories many times, many, many, many times. So it's it's a kind of kind of ironic for him to be sitting there having hosting his panels where they're talking about disinformation being the most existential problem the world is facing today.

Sulzburger insisted that disinformation is the reason why. I can't say without laughing. Sulzbgger insisted that the disinformation is the reason why there's a loss of trust today. He ignored wars, his own history and eroding that trust in the media through flagrantly biased decisions in the New York Times. So never mind that I lied to you over and over, and never mind that people found out I was lying to and so you don't trust them anymore. That's not

the reason why. The reason why there's a loss of trust today is because of disinformation. And if you believe that, then maybe I have a bridge to sell you. Look, we know that humans naturally gravitate towards freedom and truth, right. We know that the truth find is always found out. We know that the truth will set you free. Humans are smart enough to know the truth. The truth it must be found through open, honest discussion and dialogue. The

truth is found through transparency. But they're saying the reason why there's no trust is because of disinformation. No no, no no. The reason why there's no trust is because of constant lies. The reason why there's no trust is because there's no transparency. Um. The panel that they added was titled a Clear and Present Danger of Disinformation, which

is pretty interesting. UM on the European Commissioner Vera Jover was on there and she was talking about how, UM, in the United States there was going to be new

laws based off of disinformation. Now, I don't know how a politician from Europe has any say over what would happen inside of the United States, but yet here we are they want to say that disinformation and the broader set of misinformation of conspiracy, propaganda and clickbait, the mix of bad information is corrupting information ecosystem and what it attacks is trust. The problem is is, uh, what is misinformation? What is disinformation? And how and who verified is that?

Now there's some things that are factual, sure, right M two plus two is four, although in schools they want to tell you two plus two is five. So what is fact anymore? But there are things that are fact. A lot of things are just information. A lot of things our opinion. What is hate speech? People saying mean things? What if my daughter hates chocolate ice cream and I talked about chocolate ice cream, but she hates chocolate ice cream. Is that hates speech? I know that's a little bit silly,

But where does that line get drawn? Who draws that stance? Well, apparently they want to draw that line. One of the most one of the biggest proponents of cracking down on disinformation was New Zealand Prime Minister Ardine. You send to Ardin.

A couple of months ago, she went to the u N calling for She made this whole presentation to the inn of why the entire world needs to crack down on disinformation and how we need to put in um we need to take away the ability for people to use the web anonymously and we need this global cooperation to stop this problem. Interesting enough, at the same time as the WF is having this meeting calling for more of this, she all of a sudden, unexpectedly announces her resignation.

I'll clap for that. We'll go ahead and clap for that. She is one of the best known and longest spaces for globalism, especially when it comes to totalitarian governments. I think she was trying to win the award of being the most like Hitler, probably through pandemic. There's been a bunch of of of articles. I've seen them come out where they've shown pictures of her, like the day that she was selected in the office, and what she looks like now. It looks like she's aged like twenty years.

Is it because of the guilt that she feels. Is it because of the evil is wearing her out? Has it been too much on her? Is that why she's stepping down. We don't know. I find it interesting. I find it encouraging at the same time, you know what I like to look at um, I'd like to look at the cause and effect here. Right, Each force has

an equal opposite reaction. So the more governments tend to squeeze, the more people tend to push back, and the more they push back is the more the governments have to squeeze, And the more that squeeze, the more people push back and so it's apparently been too much for her. She's decided to step down. Is that a good thing? I guess we'll find out when the next person gets elected.

We'll see, we'll see who's next after that. I also saw this article from the West that says that um NGOs non government organizations quote must hit back against right wing groups that we can public trust in them. Don't take it, they say, don't take it. So a world like on my foreign panelists said that in geos, non government organizations must hit back against right wing groups that we can public trust in them. I think they do

that on their own. I don't think they need any right wing groups to uh two we can trust in them. They do that on their own by being caught lying, by trying to force policies that people don't want, by hiding transparency. I think they do that on their own. Richard Edelman, he's the CEO of global communications firm Edelman. He spoke Tuesday at the VENT Davos, Switzerland during a panel about disrupting trust, and he said that the recent

sadness he's endured has been the deterioration of trust. Oh boo hoo. My hypothesis on that is right wing groups have done a really good job of disenfranchiseing NGOs. He said, they're challenging the funding sources they've associated with Bill Gates and George Soros. They said that your world people as opposed to actually what you are, which is local. So they've challenged the funding sources Bill Gates and George Soros. Yes, we have. We've looked at George Soros. We've looked at

Bill Gates, and we've looked at their funding sources. Not the funding sources, but what they've done with their money. You don't want to be associated with those people, then you shouldn't be associate with those people. If you're just tuning and you're listening to the Markma Show, we're talking about the decentralized Revolution. We're running through the latest news headlines of the week, talking about the play by play of how the world is being reshaped. I got more

headlines coming up when I come back. We're gonna be talking about more things happening in the cryptocurrency space, specifically in the financial sector, UM and fence and charges that are happening there. I got some stuff happening in the tech side of things, a lot of stuff that you needn't know about. We'll be back with that in a minute. All right, welcome back. If you just tune in, you're listening to the Mark Moa show. We're talking about, of course,

the decentralized revolution. We're talking about the latest news headlines that have been going through the ecosystem this week that show us where we're going, what track we're on. You know, I saw some big news this week that I thought was pretty pretty big. It was a regarding the bitcoin cryptocurrency space overall, and a report came out of research paper UM at the Digital Assets firm, and they say, how UM circle and unit swap can solve a two

trillion dollar effects risk problem. What are they talking about? Circle, as you may know, is a US dollar back stable coin. Unit swap is a decentralized exchange. So how does circle and unit swap solve a two trillion dollar risk problem? Was a big deal a lot of people. You're gonna hear people all over not you, of course, but you're gonna hear other people tell you that what does bitcoin? You know, what what use case does bitcoin have? What

do we need cryptocurrency for all of those things? But here we can see that it can solve a two trillion dollar problem. It's a pretty big problem. How big of a problem does your business solve? Probably not two trillion. So what am I talking about here, Well, every day about two point two trillion dollars in foreign exchange FEX foreign exchange transactions happen, and those foreign transactions FicT transactions carry a risk that they yet to be settled side

of the agreement won't meet its upgation. So every single time that transaction is made, there's a risk that the other side won't settle their transaction. But there's research paper that came out from Circle talking about Circle and unit swap, finds that a distributed ledger could solve that problem with simultaneous settlement. To see, bitcoin is trust lists. When you deal with bitcoin, you don't have to trust another third party.

You can have instantaneous settlement, and that's exactly what they're talking about. And so using a combination of bitcoin and a stable coin and a decentralized exchange, we could send money through these FX markets instantly for free, nearly free, and without a counterparty, no counterparty risk, without the risk of the other side not meeting their obligation. As a matter of fact, we can see that there's um thirty

billion dollars a year of cross border remittances happening. So people from Central America move up to the United States, they get a job, they send money back home. They send money all over the world back to their people at home, their family at home where they don't have enough money. Thirty billion dollars a year in cross border remittances. Now, maybe you don't know how this works, so let me let me fill you in. If I have family member in somewhere in another part of the world, for example,

now depends on where they're in the world. For example, if they're in Afghanistan, I may not have to send them money because the Taliban might intercept it before they even get it. So that's a problem if I send it through the normal banking system or money remitted system. If they're in let's say El Salvador, for example, I would have to get in the car and drive to my bank and stand in line and pull out cash.

I could take thirty forty minutes easy. Then I have to drive to the grocery store of Walmart standard line at Western Union, fill out the forms to send the money that's another thirty minutes. Let say it's a round trip, it takes me an hour and a half and that's a lot of hassle. Then um, in Al Salvador, they need to go to the Western Union or whatever to

get the money. So now they got to hop on bus and they got to go to three four hours on a bus to the nearest town where they have a Western Union of money for men's office, and then they have to get to cash, and then they have to get back on the bus and ride three or four hours back with cash with a good chance they get robbed, with an entire day out of their out

of their way. So here we have hours on my end um a day on their end, the risk of getting robbed, and on top of that potentially fees that they have to pay. And it sounds like a very good system, doesn't. Using bitcoin stable coins, we could just transfer them that instantly and for basically free, And I could do it from my bed, in my underwear. I wouldn't have to go anywhere, I wouldn't have to stand

in line, it wouldn't cost me any money. The receiving end could receive that money immediately without having to ride a bus without having to get risk of being stolen, without having to give up. Now that's a noo savot. Or again, back in Afghanistan, they can't even get it at all because most likely Taliban will steal that money

before they even get it. But using bitcoin or stable coin, I could transfer them the money directly, directly to them without anybody able to transit or transact or I'm sorry to intercept that transaction. This is a big deal and this is exactly what this research paper is saying. That's a two trillion dollar problem. Now, look, I say it all the time. We get paid for the value we provide. So if you can solve a bigger problem that affects

more people, you get more money for it. If you can solve a two trillion dollar problem that affects a big majority of the world, that's a very valuable solution. But but why does bitcoin have any value? What purpose does bitcoin have? What utility doesn't have? I don't even know why we need it. You may not. You may not. To the four billion people living under harsh authority and regimes that have money trying to be sent to them on a regular basis, they understand, they care and there's value.

It's a pretty big deal. It's a good, good paper that just came out. But while all we have positive progress on one side, we have negative progress on the other. We saw the Justice Department, the Department of just in the United States. They made an announcement of an announcement that came out this week and said we're going to have a big announcement. It's always so stupid when people

make an announcement of announcement. Last they did UM. Finally we had announcement came out and it was major international

crypto enforcement action. The Department held a press conference basically saying that there was a major international cryptocurrency enforcement action happening UM and they were cracking down on a crypto exchange called bit bits latto because they laundered apparently allegedly laundered seven hundred million dollars seven million dollars of laundering and they potentially allegedly had ties to elicit Russian finance. So the Department of Justice made this big deal Global

Cooperation announcement of announcement, held a big press conference. They went in and they arrested the founder of bits Lato, um Cufftam made a big spectacle of it, hauled him in arrest of them made this big press release because allegedly they laundered about seven million dollars allegedly for some Russians, allegedly we'll see, but this was this was being prosecuted

by the Treasuries Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. Finnsin and I want to bring this into light because there was something known as the fencin files that were released. I've talked about it before on the show. And so there was this massive reporting project, sweeping revelations about some of the roles some of the biggest banks in the world using

to facilitating international money laundering. This there was four hund journalists that that participate in this research, eight eight countries. They were nominated for a Pulitzer Prise. This is like the Legit deal. Five global banks JP, Mortgage Chase, HSBC, Standard Chartered Bank, Deutsche Bank and Bank of New York Mellon profited continue to profit from suspect transactions even after they paid fines to the u S. They used the laws that were intended to stop them, but instead it

allowed them to flourish. We can see that the banks moved over to trillion dollars two trillion dollars they laundered UM in transactions UM and that were flagged by financial institutions That included five fourteen billion at JP Morgan and a hundred and one point three trillion at Deutsche Bank. They laundered for legal operations with known Russians two trillion? And who was handcuffed, who was marched out? What press released? Was there? Two trillions? Okay, but seven hundred million. We're

gonna make a big deal about it. I bring that to your attention, and you can tell um. You can tell who the States trying to protect by how they prosecute crimes as the crime against the people at the crime against themselves. I'll let you be the decider of that. If you're just tuning in and listening to the Markma Show, we're talking about the Decentralized Revolution. I'm going through some of the latest breaking news headlines of the week. I got more to cover one. I come back in a minute.

You don't want to miss what I have, so don't go away. All right, Welcome back. If you're just tuning in, you're listening to the Markma Show, we're talking about the Decentralized Revolution, talking about the way the world is changing right before our very eyes. And of course it's changing fast, and we're looking at through lends of politics, finance, and technology, and we're looking at some of the latest breaking news this week so we can see how the world is changing.

And like I said, it's changing fast. Some of the news that I saw this week that really caught my eye is in the money system itself, and really we're looking at money, finance, and of course technology and and bitcoin and cryptocurrencies is something that's really reshaping the world. I saw this week that Russia is working with Iran on creating a gold backed stable coin. So we have stable coins that are typically pegged or backed by dollars.

So um certain companies like Circle for example, Tether for example, I give them a dollar, they give me back token that represents a dollar. Any given time, I could give them back the token and they give me back my dollar. That's how the dollar and the goals were supposed to work. I put my gold into a bank, at the bank gave me a token, a certificate back, and then whenever I want to give that certificate back, I get my

gold back. That's not how it works anymore. But they're trying to return back to that type of a system where I give them gold, they give me a token. I could use that token wherever I want, and in they given time, I could redeem that token back for gold. Now, the reason why it's important is because Russia and Iran are starting to be some major players in the world,

especially when it comes to energy. Lots of countries in the world want their energy, and so by providing this gold back token, they could really help facilitate global trade a lot faster. He says. The token will be used as a means of payment in foreign trade settlements instead of the dollar, because of course Russia can't use the dollar. Russia has been sanctioned, I Ran has been sanctioned. So all these nations are sanctioned. But they're not just gonna die.

They're going to continue to do trade. They just have to do it in some other than the dollar. And so here they have something they've created on their own, a gold backed token. It says that the Russian ruble or the Iranian real um could be settled with that instead of the dollar. Now, this is part of the Russian Cryptocurrency Blockchain Association that's that's trying to push this through, and we've seen other gold stable coins already before. This

isn't something new. Paxso's Gold has one. It's the largest backed stable coin on the market with five and twelve million market capitalization, Tether which is the largest stable coin um. They also have what's called Tether gold. It's the first goal back stable coin, and they have a market cap of four seventy one millions. We have almost about a billion dollars in gold back stable coins just with those

two alone right there. While this seems okay, it seems kind of cool if you're a gold guy, I kind of get why you would kind of like it, the reality is it's still a big problem. In my opinion, going back to a gold standard, like a sound money supply, sounds good. The problem is is that who holds the gold That's the problem. So, um, we're gonna have a gold back stable coin. I'm gonna give you a dollar, I'm gonna give you goals. Is gonna be back token, and you should be able to giving back my gold

when I want it. But who holds the goal How do I know if they really have it? How do I know it's not faith gold? How do I know that they'll give it to me if I ask for it. Now, we all not we I wasn't alive. Americans trusted that the US government and the US banking system would hold their goal and not lie about how much gold they had, and would give them their gold back when they wanted. But in the three they found out the hard way that wasn't the case. Under Executive Order two, they seized

all the gold. They made it illegal for you to own gold. Why. The reason why is because they lied about how much gold they had. They printed way too many of these paper gold certificates and they needed the gold, so they had to steal everybody's so we can go to another system like that where we have another goldback token system instead of paper, and now it's a token. It's the same thing. The problem is this, who are we trusting. We're trusting the Chinese, were trusting the Russians.

We're trusting somebody to hold that gold, not lie or manipulate how much they have, and we're trusting them to give it back to us when we want it. But you know, if I've touched the stove one time and burn my hand, I probably don't want to touch the stove again, why would I want to trust another goldback system that's already been known to fail? And of course the answer is I wouldn't, which is why I don't really see this as being a good solution, potentially temporary solution,

but not a good long term solution. Some other tech news I saw this week, we saw TikTok, which is potentially on its way to being banned in the United States. I don't have enough of opinion one way or another. Apparently it's a big spy network for the CCP Common Chinese Party. Apparently they're using it dumbed down UM the people in the United States. UM. In China they only show them good educational, uplifting content, but in the US

they show them horrible, degrading, dumbing down content. Apparently, on top of that, they turn everybody's phone into a spy network phone, which is why I believe all members of the government now are banned from installing TikTok on their phone. Under President Trump, they tried to ban TikTok, make it legal for United States citizens, and it's still being kicked around. Of Course, TikTok, the Chinese company, doesn't want to be banned.

They probably want to continue spying on people. UM. I do have a TikTok account, by the way, UM so if you're on TikTok, go ahead and give me a follow. Just search Mark Moss on TikTok. I do not have TikTok installed on my phone on my phone, however, so UM, I let my team deal with that. I haven't looked into it enough, but I'm not taking the risk. However, TikTok says that they've changed their ways. They want to

be better, they want to comply. They want to make sure that they are transparent, they want to make sure that they are trustworthy, and so they've proposed a one point five billion dollar plan to US lawmakers to ease their national security concerns. So apparently they want to spend a billion and a half dollars to increase transparency. They want to reorganize how it operates in the United States, and so they can address these national security concerns. Um.

So we'll see if that happens. Um. You know, these are these are tricky situations right there, tricky situations. It's like we're supposed to be the land of the free. I should be free to download an app and use it if I want, the US government shouldn't get involved and tell me what I can and can't have on my phone. On the same time, I suppose the government should be protecting us from you know, harm, They should be protecting us from foreign invasion from sure is spine

through our phones? Is that a national security breach? I don't know. These are These are tough questions that I don't have the answers for, but I do think it's I think I do think it's interesting that, uh, they're they're trying to spend this money to see if they can stay in the country. So we'll see how that plays out. Um And other news that I saw this week that I thought was very interesting is something I haven't quite talked about here much on the radio. What's

what's happening with his chat GPT? Now? I did do a video on my main YouTube channel talking about open AI and chat GPT. So if you want to know a whole my whole thought process on this and including very specific ways on how you can use it, including prompts and so forth, check out my main YouTube channel, Mark Moss, and just look at that video I did on chat GPT. You'll find it on AI UM. But I think what's interesting is that Microsoft is betting really, really,

really big on this. They've invested already a few billion dollars to trying to invest another ten billion dollars in this open AI. And I think with open AI, or any AI for that matter, is it's only as good as the information that it's been fed. And so all it does is it learns from its experiences what it's

been fed, just like anybody learns. Right If your kid has only learned, has only grown up in this area and only ever known this, then that's all they can draw experiences from, which is part of the reason why we should continue to broaden our horizons and read books and so forth. But who controls the AI, Who's the one that's fed up the information? What type of information has been given? Is it right leaning? Is it left leaning? Is it woke? Is it not woke? And these are

all important questions. If everybody is using this AI to write content, to write articles, to write blogs, to be experts, but it was all written from one viewpoint, how does that start to shift the world. These are important questions that need to be figured out. And it doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy inside to see Bill Gates, Microsoft wanting to be the largest shareholder. As a matter of fact, if they get the ten billion dollars in, there will be approximately fifty owners of the open AI.

Something to keep an eye on. Will be covering more in detail. If you just tune in, you're listening to the Mark Mo Show. We're talking about the decentralized revolution. AI is centralized. Bitcoin is decentralized. There's a big difference. I got more news headlines coming up when I come back, talking about um Man, some of these things the Biden administration is doing, um and what's happened over in Britain. You don't want to miss this. We're back with more

in a minute. Don't go away. I'll going back, all right, Welcome back. If youre just tune in, you're listening to the Mark Mo Show, we're talking about the decentralized revolution. Of course, each and every week, make sure to tune in with me. If you're not driving, you could pull out your phone and put a calendar reminder in right now to join me each and every week at the same time on this same channel. And if you miss me, don't worry. I got your back. You can check me

out on the podcast. Just go to your favorite podcast player and search the Mark Moa show. You'll find me there. And if you'd like to see me, you can watch me on my on YouTube to search Market Disruptors and you can watch all these archive there. You can watch it and listen to it at the same time. I have more stories coming up. Oh, by the way, and uh for the daily play by play. If you missed me throughout the week, you can catch them on social media at one Mark Moss. That's at one Mark Moss.

You know a couple of things I saw this week talking about this decentralized revolution, talking about how centralization continues to get bigger and bigger and bigger. Rothbard framed it up in his book called The State. And in the book The State, which by the way, is a booklet and you can read it in about an hour, and I think you can buy it on Amazon for like

five or six bucks. You could probably download it for free on mesas dot org and my scs dot org, or you can buy it on Amazon five six bucks. I would highly recommend you read it. It's five or six bucks, it's an hour, it's worth your time. But he talks about the state. What is the state? And he says that the state. First of all, the state is nothing. Uh that we are individuals collectively as individuals were the state, but the state is nothing on its own.

It's just a collection of individuals. But he says that the state, once it starts to grow, the goal and the purpose of the state is to get bigger. The goal and the purpose of the state is to protect itself and defend itself and again, always get bigger. What's the purpose of a business to grow, It's purpose of the state to grow. And so as the state continues to grow, it continues to become more oppressive. You hire lawmakers.

What do lawmakers do? Oh, that's right, they make laws. Well, if they're doing a good job, they have to be making laws, right, So we get more and more laws of state has to get more oppressive until the point where they control every single aspect of your life. Arbitrary laws, stupid laws, laws that don't even make any sense, but their lawmakers. So in order to do their job, they gotta make laws. And so we saw this week some of some of the big news that we're going around,

two big ones that were just insane? Is Biden the Biden admins war on gas stoves? Yeah, gas stoves? Are you kidding me? Like they don't want us to have an open flame to cook on it anymore. I believe the oldest way in the history of the world that we've ever cooked was on fire, and we still use fire today. I believe cooking. I'm not a chef, but I believe that cooking on fire is still the best way to cook today. My grill uses fire, and my

stove uses fire. My my wife hates the electric stove because it doesn't get hot enough, it doesn't heat up fast enough, and it's not efficient. We have natural gas. It's natural, it's abundant, and it's cheap. Gas seems to be the best way to cook on the flame. Now, I'm not gonna sit here and talk about the technical differences of electric versus heat flame. I don't really care

about that. The point that I want to make here is if you have a government that wants to get so big and they want to tell you what type of heat you can cook your food over, that government has gotten too big. That's the point. Now. I don't care what the reason it is. And I've seen a bunch of different reasonings. You got AOC saying it's because

that the that the gas flame is bad for you. Okay, well, heart disease is the number one killer in America, the number one killer in America, and that's mostly because of our food. We could talk about the glyphosate, we could talk about the GMOs, we could talk about the pesticides on our food that are killing people. Oh no, let's not talk about let's just talk about the gas being bad.

They're talking about it's for the environment. Look again, I'm not here to debate the intricacies of gas versus electric heat. I'm not here to talk about the intricacies of is it good or bad? Is it good or bad? Is it is it better or worse for your health than glypha states spread on our foods. What I am saying is that if you have a government that wants to tell you what type of heat you're allowed to use for your food, that government is too big. And it's

not just in the United States. I saw this week. We saw in Britain. The British foods are they have a foods are so just like in the United States. Under Obama's first presidency, he appointed these oars industries ares. These are non elected individuals who basically are the administrative state that take over every single industry. So your vote to vote in a representative to go vote on your behalf means nothing because he appointed administrative state these ares

that have the power over each one of these. Well, Britain also has the same thing. So Britain has a foods Are and the Britain foods Are says that they want to have a cake band at the office. Yeah, a cake band, meaning it would be illegal for you in Britain to bring cake with you to the office. Now, I know a lot of times I don't need a lot of sweets, So a lot of times, you know, we'll get a gift basket, we'll get cookies, we'll get you know, we'll have a cake. Whatever'll take it to

the office. Maybe people eat it right. Um, they want to ban that. They what they say that it compares to the same as smoking in the office. So by bringing a cake to the office would be the same as smoking in the office. It says that Professor Sue and Jeb, chairwoman of the Food Standards Agency, Why would even have that? I don't know. F s A said that she only needs cake during the day because colleagues

give her the opportunity to do so. She then called on office workers to refrain from the practice to help the fight against obesity. So the professor Susan Jeb who's the chairwoman of f S, a food stand agency, the person who's making decisions, is admitting so she's responsible for policy over food and she's admitting that she has no control over her own body. She has no personal agency. And she says, quote, only eats cake because colleagues give

her the opportunity to do so. How dare those colleagues be willing to share stuff with her? How dare they offer her those things? And she has no agency on her own, And so because she has no agency, she needs to pass laws to protect you because you also have no agency. You see, that's how this works. All of these laws are really a projection because they're insecure,

because they're done lazy, stupid or fat or whatever. Because they have no self control, they need to pass laws they wish they had on themselves because they have no control and they want to pass them on you. Have you seen what the health ministers look like? Have you seen what the health ministers of the US and other countries look like. Have you seen what the health ministers of the counties look like? It came widely, it became, we came pretty widely known throughout the COVID pandemic. They

are all atrocious. I would not take health advice from any one of these people. Just like her, who is she? The chair one of the food center agency admitted here that she only cake because people bring it to her and they give her the opportunity to do so. And now she wants to make a law so people are not allowed to bring cake to the office anymore. Now, look, this is one of those things where you have to

think even further. So, know what, I guess there's no reason people need to bring cake to the office, right, I mean that's like dessert food. I mean, well maybe on birthdays? Should we bring you cake on birthdays? Okay, only on birthdays? But whose birthday? Only managers or employees? Okay? You know what? How about this? No cake at all? Can we can we all go to a work party afterwards the celebrated birthday? Could there be cake there? Well?

And if it's not cake, then what other types of people? Well, what about food that has a lot of butter or salt. Should we be in stuff with butter? What about if it has to have fashould we also be on that. Okay, how about we only allow cricket protein? Then like, where does this go when they start allowing telling you what type of food you can and can't bring to the office. I mean again back to the same as discussing the gas.

So I don't want to get into the fact of when you should have cake, youre shouldn't have cake, or what type of heat you should be cooking your food on. The point is when you have a government that wants to tell you what type of heat you should be cooking your food on, or what type of food you can and cannot bring to your own office, you have a government's gotten too big. It's easy to see that we are at peak centralization. World duckument formed, World Health Organization,

World Trade Organization. You in I m F b I s the UK says you can't bring cake to the office, and Biden as you can't cook on gas anymore. We have a problem and it's time to push back. And that's why the world is changing and we're going back into a world of decentralization. It's happening. We can see the signs everywhere. The stricter they are grasping on the power, the more pushedback we have. As long as we keep pushing back on this decrepit and corrupt system, we're gonna win.

If you just tune in, you're listening to the Mark Moss Show, I've been talking about the decentralized revolution. Run into the latest breaking news headlines of the week. Hopefully that makes sense. Hopefully that gives you some clarity of where the world is going. And I appreciate you taking the time. If you've missed any of it, catch me on the podcast. Just search the Market Moss Show or find me on YouTube at Market Disruptors. And that's what I got. Thanks for listening.