Why Banks Suck, The Great Taking & How To Prepare | Mel Mattison
01:44:30 Share

So all these global central bankers, they get together at the bank for international settlements and bozo, and they decide exactly what they want to be doing. And then they go out and they sprinkle the job winning and very dust, and they act and ordinated ways.

Welcome to bank less, where we explore the frontier of internet money and internet finance. This is ran chon Adams and David, a conference i'm not here with the hudson, just me today, and i'm here that will be become more bank less the question today and timeless bank less question. Why do banks suck? I think banks suck is kind of the reason we started this backs less thing.

And it's never been because we hate banks. It's just we feel like they need to be disrupted and tripped out. Is the technology that's going to disrupt the existing banking system.

The current state is banks take too much and they give too little. But we've never done a podcast focusing directly on the question of why bank suck until today. Our guest is pretty clear on the reason that bank suck. He thinks they become far too centralized, that they're are unbaLanced, that they are short sited, that they're corrupt and getting more corrupt by the year.

He thinks that power is tilted away from the people and into the hands of the central banking kabul, as he calls, he thinks the relationship between n sovereign governments and private banks that as governments and banks is an unholy alliance that needs to be unwound and further. And most importantly, he thinks the incentives that play right now mean that we're headed for what he calls a great reset. That's going to happen very soon.

Few things we talk about on today's episode. Number one, the history of banks, why jeffson said banking establishments are, in quote, more dangerous than standing armies. Number two, we talk about the B.

I, S, that is, the bank for international settlements. This is a bank for the central bank, and IT forms the existing banking. kabul. Number three, we talk about the big reset and the great takenaka. Finally, we conclude with how to prepare and how to invest, why IT makes sense to have an exit plan.

I ve got to say my conclusion at the end of the episode by crypto, where you can make sure you're holding your private keys, it's going to be a bumpy decade. Let's get right to the episode of male medicine. But first wants to tell you about the sponsors that made this possible, including our recommended cyp to exchange the place to go buy your cypher assets that is cracking. Go get an account today if you want a cypher .

trading experience backed by world class security and award winning support teams, then head over the cracking when the longest standing and most secure crypto platforms in the world cracking is on a journey to a more accessible, inclusive and fair financial system, making a simple and secure for everyone everywhere to trade crypto, to crack in's.

Intuitive trading tools are designed to grow with you, empowering you to make your first or your hundreds trade just a few clicks. And there's an award winning client support team available twenty four seven to help you along the way, along with a whole range of educational guides, articles and videos with products and features like cracking pro and crack in nt marketplace and a seamless APP to bring all together. It's really the perfect place to get your complete cyp to experience.

So check out the simple, secure and powerful way for everyone to trade. Crypto arbitrium is the leading a theory um scaling solution that is home to hundreds of decentralized applications. Arbitrary m technology allows you to interact with the theory at scale with low fees and faster transactions arbitrarily.

Has the leading defi ecosystem, strong infrastructure options flourishing N F T, and is quickly becoming the web 3 gaming hub。 Explore the ecosystem at portal dot, orbital dot I O are you looking to permissionless ly launch your own arbitrary bit chain orbit? Orbit allows anyone to realize batch scaling technology to build your own orbit chain, giving you access to interrogate able, customizable permissions with dedicated route, whether you are developer, an enterprise or user, arbitral orbit lets you take your project to new heights.

All of these technologies leverage the security and decennial zone of a experiences web 3 development， the way he was always meant to be secure, fast, cheap and friction free. Visit orbital I O and get your journey started. In one of the largest at an new projects are coming online, the mental, later to every single week.

Why is this happening? Maybe because mental has been on the frontier of layer to design architecture since I first started building mental D A, powered by technology from icon. Maybe it's because users are coming onto the mental layer two to captures from the highest yellow available and defy and to automatically receive the points in tokens being accrued by the three billion dollar mental treasury in the mental rewards station.

Maybe it's because the mental team is one of those helpful team. Ms, to build with giving you grants, liquidity support and venture partners to help boots drop your mental application. Maybe is all of these reasons all puts together? So if you're a dev and you want to build on one of the best encrypt u or your user looking to claim some ownership on mental defy apps, click the link in the shana city started with big this nation.

very excited to introduce you to male medicine. He is a writer. He is a founder.

He is a former wall street asset manager. He spent a lot of his career in trade. Five is very interesting.

And more recently, he published a book called cause. This is a fiction book about the anio lation of the global economic order. IT includes some characters like AI and cropped bankers and blockchain.

I don't know. Blockchain is kind of encysted to currencies of protagonists. They feature prominently in the book as well. And male is a probably the perfect person to tell us all the reasons we should go banging less because he's got a lot of context for the history of banks that were gonna cover today. Ml, welcome to .

bengalis.

Appreciate IT. So I called your book caused fiction. But IT also seems heavily inspired by the knowledge you have and the way you see the world and the way you see the economic world. Lets say, so, how much of that book is based in reality? yeah.

So I tried to, number one, actually write a good story. IT is a novel. And so, you know, first principal on IT is I want people to enjoy the narrative. But the second principle behind that really was to embed within IT some factual information that's interesting and I think very relevant to our times with what is going on with our monetary history as a country and also globally, what some of the trends are pointing to.

So as you mention, there's kind of a couple of corruption central bankers there trying to put in a kind of a back door global central bank digital currency are protagonist as a guy who used to be in kind of traditional finance. And he, since kind of left that world in, is a crypto te trader living on the shores of someone, porter rego, who has to come in and essentially save the world from a financial arguin. So I tried to make a relevant, interesting, a good read.

The title cos is kind of a play on quantum az. There's an area in the bank for international settlements, this A I supercomputers located that has like a Green glow to IT. But I also wanted to make a little bit of a oma ge to the wizard of oz, which is no one of my favorite books.

And and is you may be aware or maybe not, it's really looked at by a lot of people as a monetary allegory in the book itself. Dork doesn't wear ruby slippers. That was something done because the movie was being done in color, and they wanted a bright red color.

SHE wear silver shoes in the book. And it's really talking about the yellow bridge road and the silver shoes, you know, SHE picks up along the way, the agrarian workers, the scarrow, the factory workers, the tin man, the cowardly lion, kind of the military, kind of enlisted guide type soldier. And they make their way to the android city, which is really emblematic of the dollar, the Green back, and, you know, the visitor device himself, in the senses, like a fraudful lent central banker behind the curtain. And it's kind of review to be what IT is. And a lot of people don't realize that this was really relevant at the time because of the debate going on the country of whether or not to allow silver to be part of the monetary system.

Oh, interesting. okay. I'd forgot that I feel like I had been told that i've never actually read the wizard of voice book. I am sure red, like a lot of people listening, they're more familiar with kind of like the movie presentation of that, you know, like something on broadway. But this book was about you was written in.

I was just looking this up the year one thousand nine hundred hundred and the economic monetary back drop of the day in the U. S. Was there was a debate over the gold standard versus the silver standard to back the U.

S. dollar. I'm actually not super familiar, and i'd like to get more educated on that era of U. S. Monetary history.

But I understand like the late nineteen hundreds and early one hundred hundreds, there were some questioning over which standard we should adopt. And there are gold proponents and silver proponents. We fill in some of the historical details for me, if you know them.

Yeah, well, I think really what was happening was a discovery of large silver deposits in the western united states. And silver, which historically was part of the U. S.

Monetary system. So when we started out, you know, hamilton put in place a biometric standard. So gold and silver were both the monetary medals initially at a ratio of fifteen to one.

IT was later changed to sixteen to one. But silver was always legal currency for most of the beginning of american history. We actually use the spanish dollar.

That's why we call our currency the dollar. There is a spanish over coin called the dollar, that one of being like eighty percent of the currency in early america. You could always take silver to the mt.

The U. S. Meant would freely melt down and minch your silver in the U.

S. coins. But most americans in silver, silver, gold is gold. They didn't care for a whatever. There are details with that. I want to get too much in the ways, but it's kind of fascinating gressier law type stuff and how we wound up almost entirely and circulation in the early america's with fractional spanish silver coins because of slight differences in the gold content and silver content of us mitted coins and spanish coins.

But to get to your coin is, in nine hundred and seventy three, there was a law past that the connage act of seventy three, which became known as the crime of seventy three, and IT essentially took silver out of the monetary system. And again, the addition of silver was kind of a threat, especially to the european banking establishment, which was based upon gold. And we had these silver deposits in the western united states and essentially, they were pulling in a monetary supply that the europeans we're not keen on.

And and the U. S. Eventually kind of came over to the european side of things they often did due to international financial influence and took away this. And this was a major issue in the united states. And there is these people called silver ride that was the free silver movement.

In eighty ninety six, William jennings brian did a speech on the cross of gold speech, yeah, do not crucify us on this cross of gold, which was basically saying, look, that people's money is silver and you're trying to take that away from us. And do you want to tell be gold, which is essentially A A european metal? And so there's been monetary issues, monetary crisis, you know, going back to the revolution, when we, we, we went from printing two million fiat dollars in seventy and seventy five to fund the revolution.

These recall continentals, by the end of the war, we printed over one hundred and sixty million feet continentals, and eventually they were redeemed by the treasury. Add one continental to one penny. So IT was devalued by one hundred times.

By the end of the war, the original currency of the continental congress. So, you know, these types of things, monetary collapses, feet, money printing, influences of european banking establishment, really go back to the founding of our country. And we've constantly bent in these battles, these monetary battles, and sometimes there at the forefront of things like they were in the later hundred hundred. They came back kind of a little bit in to the picture in the seventies when nicks on took us off the convertibility of gold. But you know, now they're coming back again until I think we're in another one of these moments where the average american is starting to wake up to the importance of the system again.

That's right. okay. Now you're giving me some flashbacks to my U. S. History classes and the cross gold speech and Williams dennings ryan and all of those details.

So what's interesting, I think we'll pull this up often as we go through this podcast talking about banks and yeah where they are today and where they're going in the future is these monetary decisions have always been political, haven't they? And they've always been about control of you know their winners and losers in these types of monetary decisions. And they also always exist in kind of this geopolitical game theory.

Of course, the reasons we don't talk about silver today is because in the one hundred hundreds, gold, basically one didn't IT. I seem to recall IT was like maybe china was a hold out for a while on some sort of silver base standard, but they were like european kind of the gold standard. The U.

S. That sounds like was sort of playing with maybe a silver standard being like the people's money and like push back against the europeans and the elites in the U. S.

society. But they eventually lost the european gold standard kind of one out in china. I believe they also had to relent at some point in time.

So there's also this geopolitical game theoretic monetary dominance type of aspect to all of these decisions as well. And so a society like the united states can't just make monetary decisions in a vacuum. anyway. Those are some themes I think continue to tug on. But do you have any reflections on that now?

Yeah, yeah. Is fascinating. China dominated the world really in the fifteen hundred, and I think most people would consider the of china at that time the most powerful man on the planet.

And I think IT was in nineteen ninety one, he demanded that all taxes be paid in silver. So china has a long connection with silver and china doesn't have large silver deposits. And at one point, golden silver traded one for one in china.

And what really happened was the europeans, once they discovered the new world, they set up this global trade loop of know mining silver in the america, taking IT to china, getting chinese goods, spices, tapestry, silks, and then bringing IT back. Eventually they, they got tired of bringing silver to china, and they literally like, got together, and that we need to start giving china something other than silver. What do they want in the chinese emperors are like, we don't need anything.

So the westerners eventually got them hooked on opium. And so this is the start, the opium wars. And IT was really the british east india company who came up with this idea of, if we can get the chinese population hook, opium will be able to, instead of having to give them silver, will be able to give them drugs basically.

And IT was a huge thing. I started what eventually became known in chinese history as the century of humiliation, where they were dominated by foreign powers in a way that theyd never ban. And in some sense, I think the chinese that still relevant to them and they still, you remember IT and IT would wouldn't surprise me if there's people who are like y if people are using our chemicals in mexico to make that all well, you know what? It's was good for the goose, is good for the gander. They did to us for a long time pumping drugs into our society. If drugs wind up going into the united states manufacturer in mexico with input products coming from china, so be IT.

Do you know the story, by the way, to take that thread off of why china had to sort of like how long they were run the silver standard and why they had to kind of capital late to something else and move off of IT? Do they capitulate to gold? Or do they you skip that step and go directly to kind of a the system? I'm just not familiar with the history here.

yeah. I'm not a massive expert on like like what I would consider twenty a century chinese monetary policy, which is when this we've had to happen. Obviously, there was a big revolution there.

And I can say this, which is kind of also interesting, just their system IT has always been you know, kind of monetary focus and the abc, the people's bank of china is an interesting central bank, in my opinion, is a central bank that plays in the global central bank system. Their members of the bank for international settlements, they go and they meet every two months to own power, question the guard, the head of the ppc, and like sixty other central banks. But at the same time, the c is different in that IT is not in any way independent.

It's directly answerable to the party. And they do a lot more than just setting like an interest, like a fed funds rate, like the federal reserve as they're able to set actual rates in the market, they're able to set like the prime rate mortgage rates. So it's done by you know fiat, where the central bank decides this is what the mortgage rates going to be, whether or not that makes sense for market conditions.

So there's a slightly different monetary system in china is obviously much more centralized controlled, but definitely gold has been building on their baLance sheet. And a lot of people do not realize that in two thousand and seven, china surpassed south africa as the world's largest gold producer. They do not allow for the export of domestic mine gold, and many people believe that the chinese hold a lot more gold than they publicly release.

They state they hold around two thousand, some metric tones. You know, if you look in america, we claim we have eight thousand metric tones or so. Some people believe that the chinese holdings of gold could actually be over thirty thousand wow metric tons and that they're accumulating IT essentially under the radar as they incorporate gold more into their reserve asset basket. And other central banks outside of the west began increasing the gold holdings on central bank baLance utes.

Look, roman was recently on our podcast and he was just talking about this is, even with the public data, just kind of the record of china accumulating a gold and how that has accelerated in recent years. But since he used the b word banks, let's turn our focus to them. So we've talked a little bit about money systems across the last few hundred years, and the us.

Itself was born on a unique by monetary metal system of gold and silver, backed in kind of the early days for its fiat system. But then we skip forward, and we talked about the people's bank of china, the poc, right? That brings into the conversation this new entity on the block in the last five hundred years or so, the bank, and the modern manifestation of that.

When you max power the banking establishment, you get a sense al bank, like the people's bank of china, and of course the fed is all powerful vous banks in the european union that are very powerful as well. Can you give us the context in the history of banks? And maybe we could start with a Thomas jeffson quote.

I don't know this is a powerful of, or he said this undocumented letter at all, but I know it's one that you are a fan of, which is he said this, Thomas jeffson, banking establishments are more dangerous. Then standing army, what do you think jeffson meant? And then tell us, like pointing out the danger of banks and then give us some history of banks and how we came to be in the system that we presently are in now.

So it's not impowering. It's from a letter he wrote. I think he was in eighteen twelve, twenty sixteen, the john Taylor.

And there was obviously big debate around central banking in in the formation of our country. Jeffson was adamantly opposed to a central bank as we're most of what were then called the republicans. This was a different party than what became what we now know is the republicans. But essentially the first two parties were relatively known as the republicans. These were jeffers, onions and the federal list people like john Adams and hamilton, who were more globalist in nature.

But I think that really what's happening and what he's talking about there was he understood, and I think that was actually broadly understood at the time, the influence that central banks have and how they essentially manipulate the system in order to size and wealth from the people into government hands and allow for the government to do things such as fun, foreigners or or other activities. And this goes back to the beginning of central banking, which was the original purpose of IT. So I think there is a shift that took place kind of fifteen, sixteen hundreds, where you had essentially total dominance of political, social, economic power in the air stock, racy in the kings and the dukes, and they didn't need to hide things.

If they didn't like what a village was doing, they could send in the army and you burn down the town and take the train, they could act unatoned. And what began to happen is that the sovereign gan running into money problems. So they weren't obviously printing fia at the time.

You money was golden silver at that moment. And so William the third, he was the king of england that put in place the bank of england, the forerunner of all modern central banks. In the late eighteen nineties, he had wanted to continue a war with france.

The treasury was dry. He had essentially over taxes people already. He knew that if you continue to raise taxes, there would be revolts.

He also had borrowed heavily from wealthy londoners and bankers and had defaulted. He was unable to pay them back. And so he, his credit was no good. He had no way to get money. And he talked to the banking class and he said, look, I need golden silver to manufacturer ships and pay soldiers who will only accept, you know, coin.

And the bankers are basically say, will, look, we're not going to give you ARM money, but give us the exclusive right to print paper notes, make IT illegal not to accept these notes for transactions, enforce that, and, you know, a charter as a bank. And this was, the bank of england was charged. IT was on by private bankers.

And what they did was they went out. They essentially forced the people to turn in their golden silver to get these paper notes past the golden silver to the king, and then collected interest. And so the bankers were able to, instead of putting up their own money, which is what they had been doing in the past, they found a Better way.

They could put up the people's money and collect interest on IT. And that is what our central bank know still does to this day. You know, people put their money into a bank.

You're loaning money to the bank. And the bank is especially if there are big bank like A J P. Morgan, they're giving you almost zero interest.

They're taking that money and they're either putting IT with the federal reserve where they get paid interest on reserves of five plus percent right now or they're loaning IT out for more risky enterprises that should those risk go bad, they know that people will come bail that out. So it's essentially, you know a heads they win, tails they win situation. And that is what banks do, they taking people's money, they loan IT out and they collect interest. And IT hasn't changed since sixty ninety four.

interesting. So you're lens on banks in particular, central banks is almost that it's an unholy alliance between sovereign governments and kind of like the private banking industry. It's sort of interesting that banks weren't really started by governments.

At least you like there was a market need for private banks, right? These institutions that would grow up these kind of money lenders, who would you like provide you alone if you needed alone to do something or await a store, your wealth and a volt where it's protected. And that was kind of the private market force that started the institution of banks.

But you're saying very early on there came to be this unholy alliance between sovereign and governments and private bankers that went a little bit like this, where the sovereign, the governments were like, hey, we need more tax money to fund our things maybe it's a war with some sort of crisis moment. And they go over and they look at the banks and they say, well, you've got a lot of the money present of the population, perhaps we can straight a deal. And the private bankers are like, yeah, that sounds good.

We want to create alliance with the state, become sort of a qazi sovereigntists, give a special right, special access. And in return, we will allow you to control elements of society. And that was sort of the unholy alliance that happened early, not at the private banks were born, but early in its childhood, I suppose.

And you're saying that that relationship, the private bankers get wealthy, central bankers get more ability to tax and control. You're saying that relationship still exists today, and you're going even further, is saying that kind of the point? And some of the genesis of .

this entire system on the reason for their existence, it's what their fundamental purpose is. Everything else is. And siller and IT goes back to the beginning, I mean, you can go back to ten sixty six, to William the conquer.

When he unified england, there was one area of england that he was unable to subdue. And it's what is now known as the city of london, the wall street of london. And he was unable to essentially take that over.

And I think part of IT was he didn't want to take IT over. And you've seen this throughout history. You saw in europe in the ninety forties where whether a country had declared red itself as neutral or not, hitler was going to go in and take IT over the one country.

He didn't go into a switzerland, switzerland, home of bank for international settlements. This was the conduit of western money feeding. The third right, these things are documented.

We can get into the details on how this actually occurred, but basically, there's always been this unholy alliance. And to this day, the city of london. Within london, there's different neighborhoods of the city of london, but there's two what are called cities.

There's the city of london, which is a one square mile area where all the banks are headquarters, where the bank of england as headquarters, and then there's the city of westminster, which is where the government is headquarter. And both of those cities within london have different rules and regulations. And anywhere else in the country that in the city of london, believe IT or not, is not people that elect the mayor of the city of london.

There's this guy called the lord of london is lord mayor of london. And this is just for the one square mile financial district and is actually elected by the corporations to this day. So the banks vote in the political powers is not an individual that lives there, and they have different rights. And legal things are still a annual parade.

I think it's on november eleven, which is an important day for the city of london, where the lord mayor goes around in the old english stuff and he's got these statues of gog in may, gog being created and there's all kind of weird, you know, paganism type rituals around IT and and this stuff is in the law and you're like, are you serious? And I like, yes, I am serious, that these central bankers are almost an unholy alliance, and I think almost is not actually necessary. I think that kind of is okay.

So you take me a very dim view of banks. Maybe even more dimmed the David myself on the bank less podcast. This podcast is literally called bank less because we think it's important to from the power back to the people and we see crypt u isolated sort of do this.

But your dim view of banks, is there anything you would concede that they do well, like they must be providing some value, right? There's liquidity, there's credit there will help us move money faster. I think if you you ask a banker why they exist, they would extend the virtues of why they exist. Would you seed any ground to them on this? Like do they do anything well, as you completely a corrupt institution that that's praying on the populus for control and like just taking a cut yeah no.

I mean, they definitely do things well. And it's an August to math. You know, IT keeps you up energy, you know.

I mean, these things that are dangerous is always do something well. They make you feel like you're on top of the world, you're the king. So there's good aspects to things like methuen.

Fet means that there's also downsides and there's good aspects to the banking culture and banking society. But at the end of the day, I think my, as you call a dim view is a dim view, but it's not a view without precedent. And that was actually common for a long time. I think that there's a long history of people with.

It's a view that Thomas jeffson shared that sounds like in the quote that we open this banking establishment, he said, are more dangerous than standing armies. That's effectively what .

you're saying here. Yes, what my argument is, if you really get to the base premise, is that money is the ultimate control mechanism of our society, so much so that we almost have a difficult time imagining a society where money is not in the central role. It's almost like a fish trying to imagine a world without water, to try to imagine a world that's not centered around money.

And the system in which we have money, you know, Operating today as a government issue type of currency with interest rates like this, is so fundamental to our society. And the truth of the matter is, is when you really go back through history, you start to understand that this is a form of enslavement. And what is really is fundamentally is is is set up as a way to enrich the wealthy banking elite ite class, as well as a way to fund the government in a covert method.

And this was done in the united states in the very beginning where the constitution did not allow for an income tax that didn't come in until one thousand, nine and thirteen, not coincidental, vely, the same year that the federal reserve came into existence. But basically what occurred was hamilton, who had restructured all of this debt. Hamilton had, you know, done assumption, which was taking the state debt, and he wanted to assume the state debt because he knew if the states had to pay back their debt, then they would also have the tax.

And hamilton did not want states to become large taxes. He wanted the federal government to become the taxes, so the federal government could essentially rope in that power. And he restructured the debt.

He made IT such that only interest payments were made. There is a lot of shady stuff where debt that was issued during the revolution, most people thought I was never gonna repaid. By some estimates, over eighty percent of the us.

Public dead at the end of the revolution was brought up by around three hundred families, mostly in new york and fill delpha, that some of whom were also agents for european and banking clans that had brought up the us. That at ten twenty cents on the dollar, but eventually were fully repaid that that and indeed hamilton allowed people with U. S.

Debt to exchange that debt for shares in the united states, for central bank, the first bank of the united states, which was our first central bank in existence from seventeen ninety one to one thousand nine hundred eleven, which as soon as we got rid of IT, you know, britain, basically in our Scott to a war in one thousand and twelve. But basically what's happened is these banks and money in all these systems that have been put into place, they are the cover control mechanism. And as I said in the found in the next states, they're trying to find ways to create tax revenues.

They're thinking about terrorists and that that can be a little inflationary. And there also realizing that IT promote smuggling, so they'd do some terrorist, but not a time. And then they say, well, okay, let's tax items that the people don't need.

Luxury items seems like luxury leather saddles for horses. And then the big tax they put on was on spirits, on whisky. And this whisky tax LED to the first rebellion in the united states called the whisky rebellion IT had to be quelled by the troops.

And they realize that we keep trying attacks to the people, and it's causing these problems everywhere. And there's this realization, and we can do IT as an inflation tax. We can do IT by the basing money.

People do not realize that there are being tax. And to this day, this is the most common method of taxation where basically, like all the covet spending was essentially paid for by the american people through the inflation tax. Yeah.

I really with that, and I agree that I would say, just like ninety eight percent of the population is unaware that they are being tax in that way via debasement, like just a huge portion of the population is just unaware how the monetary system works today. But I want to steal me in the case, a little bit for central bankers because we've been cheating on central bankers entire time.

And I tens of central bankers and the bank less fan base that are wanting some push back here. And so I want to ask you about like the case for central banks, right? So you know, you are more jeffson's an, I suppose, in your tags and in your dim view of banks.

But there are the hamilton supporters in the audience as well who say, you know, like here what you're saying, but central banks are actually a useful coordination mechanism for us, like there are all times during crisis where we really need to have elites make sort of the decisions and pull together our resources and just get shit done. So one common case for central banks is the great depression, right? Like the idea that central banks got us out of the great depression, serving as a last resort, restoring financial confidence.

You even just playing the narrative game, the meme game, the high press game is really like drone power, like place, which is he comes out and there's you cameras and microphones on him and he restores financial confidence to american people during times of crisis. Like don't we need that mail? Isn't there? Like are you advocating for no central banks? Or should there be a baLance here? And can you see some utility and what provide?

no. Well, I think first, i'm not here to personally attack anybody and I don't know this. I'd never met the man, but from what i've seen of jero pal, I think he generally seems like a good person who I think is trying to work for the average american.

I think that the institutional system is set up in such a way that even if he has these correct motivations, eventually his actions get dict to by the constraints of the system. And I think we will see that, and we can get into how that happens. I think his pride, you to start learning ing interest since september and a lot of ways because of what's happening overseas, especially in places like europe and canada.

But you're just making the point that he's a lot less individual control than people might think. He's just in the system and he's a product of the system.

Yes, exactly. And other people brought up along with unemployment and inflation. There are other Mandates that the fed has the that has five Mandates on their website. They arly stated for employment inflation, creating a stable market for a long term, treasurer regulation of the banks and providing in facilitating for payment systems like fed wires a ages, they are involved in five processes. That third process maintained stability of the treasury market is also an important one, and that's what he's Mandated by congress to do.

And if the treasury ing market is going to collapse and that means, you know, he needs to step in to do something, then he needs to do something. And IT might be the fact that he knows he can't necessarily come and say exactly what he's gonna because it's going to exaggerate the problem. And so steps often are taken behind the scenes by people like a power that might have good motivations, but the end result is to kind of perpetuate the system.

But to get back to your question, I do think that so that I was one point I just wanted make clear. I'm not saying that these central bankers are all twisting their musta. Hes trying to really know just ruin everybody, got the product to the system.

And there are forces behind the scenes, for example, like who owns the federal reserve? right? Jp, more the city bank, they don't own the F M C, but they do own shares in all of the twelve reserve banks.

And that was part of the way the system was set up as the federal reserve system. You know you people speak IT doesn't say federal reserve with the united states, there's the federal reserve system. And you have to look at who owns the twelve regional banks, the new york fed, the clever and fed, the rich man fed.

And the shareholders of those are commercial banks. They appoint the board of directors which oversee the president of these reserve banks. And the reserve banks are where the action takes place, especially the new york fed.

So these are, you know, private institutions. unquestionably. In fact, they've released captive ables.

The new york fed released a captain a few years ago under direction from a foe request, and they said right at the top of the release, we're not a government agency. We're under no obligation to submit to a four request. But in the interests of transparency, we will give you are capable. And it's so interesting.

I guess this goes back to the unholy alliances we're talking about earlier, right? It's like they are private institutions, but they're given this government Mandates monopoly and the reason the government gives these private institutions that sort of monopoly and special rights because they get something out of IT, the ability to devalue currency, the ability to control, the ability to tax in new ways. And so you like point taken on that.

But let's get back to the depression comment here. So I think there is this view among americans, at least I was taught this in history class that kind of like the central bankers and government coordination really saved us during the depression. You know, f, dr.

New deal, all these types of things. And the previous policy was much more austerity focused. You kind of like gold back failed us. What we really needed a central coordination to like expand and get us out of the depression. And we would have done that faster and Better had we had more central coordination through mechanisms like a central bank that is given often as a reason for the value of central banks and the necessity of them.

And you like, if you don't have a central bank in your modern nation state, like what are you even doing here? Like you're living in the eighteen hundred, and that's not a modern you can possibly coordinate your economy that way. So what do you say to that criticism?

So I want to fully answer that question and get into the depression. But I also just to finish up the last points, is that I do concede that there are beneficial aspects to what things do. So you know lending to businesses facilitating ating payments.

But you have to look that there are ways to do these types of things that also don't involve the more nefarious aspects. So if you look at the rise and say, the private credit markets right now, right, so people have money, they want to invest in companies or real estate, and they give money to investment managers. And the investment managers invest.

And there you have private credit people investing their capital. But it's not being done through this fractional reserve banking system where people are taking in assets and they do. So there are ways to achieve the beneficial aspects of banks that do not require them to be built upon the foundation that they're built upon.

There's new ones to what you're saying, right? So you message is not that just like bank stock, your message is more than like the unholy alliance that was in the early stages of our banking system that now pervades and has kind of one out between governments and private banks, leads to this corruption vector that makes them suck. But the concept of private banks outside of this unholy alliance, like you're sort of on board with that, their ability to provide a private free market value service to a population you like that aspect of banks, you just against the corruption element between governments and the banking system.

yes. Essentially what they're given is, as you mentioned, they're given these special powers and they are able to print money and they are able to have that money usage be enforced, right? Like if you try to pay your tax bill in gold or silver or bitcoin or a thorium, you know the IOS is not going to accept that, right? So you've gotten this requirement to use an instrument that is issued by a private institution.

You know, if you look at your dog bills, IT doesn't say united states is a federal serve note. So you're having these private corporations issue paper or digital paper that we need to use. And when you look at dollars, I can you look at the federal or about sheet like any cash outstanding and that listed as a liability of the federal reserve.

And you ask yourself at one point time that was a liability because there was a gold, silver backing. And so people could take paper money to central banks and requests gold, silver. At this point, we don't.

And so I think it's important to look at the reason that I mentioned in sixteen hundred why William wanted IT was he needed gold and silver. But now that there is no golder silver that the government needs to get through or manipulate the money supply, you do not have that argument of the depression argument. So the depression argument when we were on the gold standard is we would have had a central bank, which could become a lender of last.

And I still think this is a straw man and argument, because you were able to revalue gold when F D R. Confiscate people's gold in one thousand nine hundred and thirty three immediately after he did a dollar revaluation, he said, you know what goal is twenty dollars announced? Now i'm saying it's thirty five dollars announced and he immediately devalued ed the currency in the money supply, even though he didn't need to increase the amount of gold. If gold could have been kept as a monetary system during the depression and the money supply could have been increased by a devaluation of the dollar relative to gold, but that does not require a central bank.

we see, you don't need a central bank to do you, just the Operation.

you know, and I was not done, the central bank of I ve exit when he was done by the treasury. And the treasury still has the right to revalue the gold on the federal reserve value.

And you think that's all fair play though. Is that the same sort? Like taxation by devaluing the currency, sort of a play that we were just criticizing central banks for having too .

much control in. Well, if you own the goal, if you if you have the gold and silver when that evaluation occurs. And the point is that you just want more dollar circulating than you can immediately revalue that. And now you have, you know, more dollar circulating. And what that does is that deflates away the debt.

So if you borrowed money at the day, you borrow ed a thousand dollars in one nine hundred and thirty two, and you needed to pay back a thousand dollars in one nine hundred and thirty four, and you could pay back alone with dollars, but the gold was simply revalued. You would now be able to get more dollars from those gold coins. You might have to pay that back.

And so the money supply could have been increased whether people that were holding gold would not have been hurt by. But what we would have done was you would have reduced the real value of gets outstanding, you would have increased the money supply and you would have alleviated some of the debt pressures and the deflationary pressures. And so a lot of people blame like the deflation that began occurring in the thorium is the problem. But you didn't need to solve IT with a central bank coming in and printing fiat money.

And so these things can then go to today's world, which I think even makes IT a more iron clad case against central banks, is that now that there is no a sensible reason where, like, we need wealthy people to deposit golden silver at a bank, that the government can then drop on when it's a neat, you now have a situation where, and I tend to, you know, lean towards, like an austrian school of economics, where the money supply is a primary driver of inflationary forces. As milk and freeman said, inflation is always everywhere, a monetary phenomenon. And that control of the money supply could be handled directly by the treasury.

So we would not need a central bank where there needed to be interest paid on our debt. So for example, we could basically state, you know, we are going to and maybe you could be a constitutional man IT could be a hope for different laws, different things, where we said, okay, from now on, we're going to begin issuing united states notes. We're going to begin issuing legal tender.

That is non interest bearing. This is what the continental was during the revolutionary war, is what the Greenback was during the civil war that linton did. We can begin issuing united states notes, not interesting ing notes in order to pay our bills.

We're going to put constraints s on the amount of those notes that we can do. I don't know how much that would work, but i'm just kind of spp all in the idea here to give people idea of how world could Operate in a post central bank world. And what we could do, we could agree that we are going to continue to service our debt in dollars.

We're going to continue to pay those off, but there are going to be created by the united states treasury instead of the federal err. And that going forward, when the says has deficits, we're going to pay for those deficits out of these non interest bearing notes, and we're going to constrain our issuance of those notes because of the knowledge of the inflationary aspects of over printing these. And you then can cut out that middle and cut out that interesting expense, which is essentially taking money from the people and painting IT out to the banks, to the commercial banks that are able to hold treasury bonds on their baLance sheets.

And they're working so that these are not even going to be counted against their reserve ratio so that they can eventually, at some point, hold, relatively speaking, almost unlimited amounts of treasuries for which they are getting payment of interest on and then fractionally reserve loan out against those loans. And the american people are paying this interest. There's not a good reason for us.

And other governments have worked without central banks, and they usually don't last long. Libya, iraq, these were governments that did not Operate within the central banking system, where they issued money that was dependent upon loans. So the base, this of our money system is not the dollar, the united states treasury bond, if we change from the basis of our money system of the dollar to the united states note and non interest sparing dollar, then we could eliminate the central bank. IT would obviously be calamitous for the banking cobalts and IT would need to be done and faced in over time so that IT doesn't completely collapse the financial system. But I do think there's a path, a realistic path, that would be much Better for humanity, that would essentially phase out central banks, which are no longer necessary in a fight world.

And if you did that, if you faced out the central banks like so what are the benefits to citizens? Would the government no longer be able to use this like back door or method of taxation by devaluing currency? Would that be the primary benefit?

Yeah, that's one immediate benefit. IT essentially takes one more layer off of their observation of what they are doing. IT makes things a little bit more clear. People could very, you understandably understand that deficit spending means that more dollars are just gonna let out there, and this is going to mean inflation. And you know, you would have essentially a similar constraints to what you have now because I think most politicians, you know, at this point time, they're not really you know making any decisions based on debt or deficit. They're looking at getting elected in the next election cycle.

And if that means that they're just going to pile on more debt and eventually it's gonna to be absorb through is a quantity of easing or it's going to need to be absorb by inflationary aspects of putting that dead on bank baLance sheet and then the fractional reserving loans, that would be a massive negative impact. But I think the other main advantage to getting rid of the central bank is you eliminate this monopoly, this none free market monopoly, on money, and once you free up money and IT becomes a free market, good. And people can say, do they want to use bitt coin? Do they want to use something else? And why do they want to use that? What is the benefits of IT? What do people accept? And you begin to have essentially a free market for money? I think that the main benefit of getting rid.

the central bank, I see, and you are distributing power from the banking class in the bankers. And central bankers like back to the people, maybe, perhaps in this method, if we said earlier in this conversation that all monetary decisions are like decisions that seems to be about politics, so they're gonna winners and losers and control who maintains the control? And also to your politics, like what other nations are doing in reference to you america, you know, your nation that you're currently in.

And this is a point I just want to ask on sort of the steel men case for central bankers. And you that hamiltonians that are listening to this episode might say, okay, well, all of that's great mail. The idea of restoring power back to the people.

But geopolitically, the U. S. Is in a competition against nation states that are a coordinated via central banks. And if there is a wartime type of scenario, and it's one nation state versus the other, and one nation state has the ability to print money and infinitely fund their war machine or war effort, and another economy, another nation state does not, then the one with the central bank, that technology, that social technology, could beat the one that doesn't have this right.

And so I want to ask that question about, like kind of the rules of the jungle when we were talking about geopolitics and the game theory, like if your country doesn't have a central bank and you get into some scenario that requires massive coordination, like wartime spending, types of scenarios, centralized decision making, even new deal style infrastructure to outstrip your competition, are you disadvantage geopolitically if you don't have a central bank? And so these jeff re. Sonia ideas of, like new distribute power, decentralized might be great, but they don't work geopolitically would be an argument here.

What do you say to that? No, I mean, you're massively advantaged not to have a central bank because you still retain the unlimited power to print money. It's is not interesting.

So in my scenario, a war happens and we need to pay radium five hundred billion dollars. The united states treasury simply creates an issues that understanding that this is gonna an inflationary impulse, of course, but that's what the cost is. The cost is the inflationary impulse created by the increase in the money supply, which we get through the creation of debt regardless. But basically, what i'm doing is i'm taking out that middle man, which used to be necessary because of the need to provide physical golden silver and no longer exists.

I see. So you still have nation states with the ability to devalue their currency and print money if they need to. We're just like cutting out kind of the banking layer of all of this is IT possible to reform existing central banks are not as drastic as you know.

And i'm sure you acknowledge that like abolish central banks would be just absolutely monumental in terms of political change. Probably a crisis is needed to really precipitate that level of change. But how about reforming central banks, right? We've gone through reforms of a different kind that were basically, you know, not democratic in nature.

When the U. S. Got off the gold standard, for instance, that was a massive reform of the fed. And you know, the central banking system now asked the population about that.

But could we reform central banks in the other direction? May be limit their power in some way? And if so, do you have any need like ideas or proposals for how we might do that?

yes. I mean, there are intermediary steps beyond just putting in a controlled phase out of central banking. IT was around the financial crisis when the federal serve just began paying interest on reserves. So one step that we could take is we could return to a situation where banks are required to keep capital requirements held the federal serve, but they don't get interest on those.

And I know this is a sensitive of subsidy of commercial banks that was put in place post financial crisis in order to help stabilize the banks to begin paining interest on required reserves, which we never did before, which is billions and billions of dollars every year being paid out to jb Morgan and city group in, well fargo on behalf of the american people, for basically keeping a small amount of money with the federal reserve. Why does the federal reserve these reserves, right, that me federation erp creates money. I mean, it's obviously a sm.

So there are steps that we can take to make the banking system less offensive. But I think at the end of the day, the real issue is the control of money in private hands and in the banking cartel. And so know that just one example, I think you know those looking at how much money these banks are actually able to lever up and loan out, I think we could change leverage ratio.

The argument against this, and this is what's going on right now with the bozzle course, which they are called the bozzle of three n game or bother you, they don't want to call you know, the b central bankers gaining together and making the global rules, which is what IT is. They all happen in boston at the headquarters of the bank for international settlement. But the bank for international settlement, as I mentioned, its previous nai ties and different checked history, means that everything with the B, I, S is Normally kept in the shadows, even though that's where the euro was created before the E C B came into existence.

That's where all these financial regulatory standards happened. We had power and the gar talking in center portugal the other week, but they don't talk about the fact that all the central bankers were essentially meeting in secret over the weekend at the bank for international settlements at their annual meeting. So all these global central bankers, they get together at the bank for international settlements and bozzle, and they decide exactly what they want to be doing.

And then they go out and they sprinkle the job wowing and the very dust, and they act and coordinated ways. So, I mean, just sheds light on what the B. I.

S. Activities are. You know, when these bankers are meeting, why can't we know the attendance rosters? Why can't we be told what the minutes of these meetings? Why can't there be a press conference after these by monthly meetings for people who don't know the central bank chips of the top sixty three central banks in the world, every two months they go to bozzle, switzerland for this two meeting. Know is power, the guard, everybody, canada, know arabic, A, P, B, O, C.

everybody in the west or the p everybody in the to .

sixty three central banks in the world. Russia was suspended after their invitation of ukraine. I, O, so russia no longer attends, but no, pretty much every single major central bank head goes there.

And almost all of the time, IT is the actual head. So once in a while, like power won't go because of another commitment or something, and IT will just be like the head of the factories or bank of new york. You know, these means have been going on for decades.

So every two months and you could go to like B I S or you google bi, five monthly meetings and they will talk about there's three meetings they have every two months they have something called the ecc, which is the executive consultative committee. And this is essentially the g 2。 It's the central bank chase of like the top nineteen central banks in the world and the U.

S, S. Two people on that committee. Interestingly, it's not just our chairman that's part of that committee, but it's also the president of the new york fed. As I mentioned, you have to look at the reserve banks in the united states to understand the fear reserve system. And in that ecc, they essentially set the agenda for what their marching orders are going to be to the rest of the worlds central banks.

They have a very posh dinner in the evening, on sunday evening in the eighteen th floor of the VS headquarters, catered in the beautiful dining room designed by the same architects that the birds next in china. And then on monday, there's two meetings. The first one is called the gem, the global economy meeting.

And that's where this agenda that was set by the ecc gets passed down to the second tear of banks. And it's like the next twenty banks get to attend that meeting and the final tier, kind of the last twenty banks, they get to watch the G M, but they don't get the voter talk. And then once everything's kind of been so less than they conclude the meeting with the ag, that all governors meeting where all sixty three members get to attend and talk and discussed. But essentially, by that point, it's just a ratification of what's been decided in the ecc and the gym. The current chairman of both of those committees is john pal .

launching a token, don't let complex legal and tax issues slow you down toko provide specialized support to optimize your launch and ensure that U. S. A founder and your team and your investors get the most taxiways ion outcomes.

The toko team understands the crypto space inside and will ensure your token launch is fully compliant, while maxi zing tax efficiency toko can connect you with the best atterley if you need them to make sure that you have the best advice and hope you can help to optimize your taxes so you pay the least possible amount taxes while still maintaining legal complaint with tokyo guidance, you can concentrate on building your company while toko handles the logistic token launches don't have to be complicated, talk to toko today to get a free initial token valuation. The united extension is here, the self custody wallet created by the most trusted team in defeat n swap laps, designed to make swapping feel ever less. This extension lives in your browsers side bar, letting you swap sign transactions and send over the pipes without ever losing place on the internet.

Plus, with human readable transaction messages, you'll always know exactly what you're citing. Navigate a multi chain e world effortless ly with support for eleven chains like a theory, mint base, arbitrary and optimism, no more chain switching or token importing. All your are right where you need them to be. The uniform extension is designed to level up your swapping experience with other unions, wap apps products as well, easily on board to the extension using the uniform mobile wallet to begin, manage your assets across platforms and take the advantage of smooth seas energy with the united web up. So go and download the union of extension today by clicking the link in the just Operating state.

Sustainable high performance at theoria rolph fuel is scaling the etherium ecosystem with features like state minimized execution, paralyzing and cross chain and robbed plus IT has native account attraction and support to walls of popular networks sya theoria entering that you can use fuel regardless of which wallet you use. The fuel may net is planned for q four twenty four, and fuel has just launched the fuel points program, which enables algic participants to earn points unless rewards and qualify for future incentives. As fuel marches towards mainland, fuel points are off chain points earned by depositing approved assets and completing on train actions that positively contribute to network group users holding fuel point automatically qualify for few network rewards, join fuel and contribute to our shaping the future of a thereon release.

okay. So talk about this a little bit. So I guess is zoom ing out for a second. There is maybe some measure of this centralization is not as much as we would want.

But if you had a bunch of different nation state entities with central banks and they were all kind of Operating you like outside of the collusion type of scenario just on their own, independently with their own goals and objectives, at least across the different countries, the world that have central banks, you'd have some degree of decentralized. But what you're actually talking about here is almost like this elite group of global bankers, this cobo organized, and institutions like the B. I S, which is the bank for international settlements.

I think a lot of bank list listeners probably familiar with E, C, B, be familiar the fed, less familiar with the B, I S. Does the B, I S really exert sort of monopolist kao type control? Or do each of the central banks just kind of have their own agenda? Like what are really the power dynamics here and what makes this institution nefer ious in your mind? Or potentially nefer IOS one of the corruption vectors?

What's agenda as the central bank for central banks, that part of their mission statement. And there's a few functions that they provide. One of them is like they play host things like the bozo accords and things of that nature.

So banking regulation, global banking regulation, they also provide these bym thly meetings for the central bankers to essentially discuss monetary policy, which, and this is their view, in a very confidential environment where they don't have to worry about the press, they can speak freely, they can know get to know each other. There's a private golf course they have in bozzle that only for like bias members, I guess. So they have this kind of country club medicine city type arrangement.

Bas is sothern ground IT cannot be invaded by anybody without permission. And even swiss authorities. It's got embassy like status under an international treaty at the heck that pays no taxes.

Its employees pay no taxes. Any actions taken by managers at the bis are immune from prosecution. They have a level of like diplomatic community and their actions.

There's all kinds of things that this organization has that most people have no idea that even exist in your listeners. I'm sure there's a lot of people say, no, i've heard of the B I S, but they might not be aware of all what's going on with IT. But in the general population, it's literally an organization that most people don't even know exist.

You say to the average man on the street, have you ever heard of the bank for international settlements? You can say hello. No, I have no idea what that is, right? So this is a very important institution that completely acts in the shadows. And what happens, I believe, is, as I mentioned earlier, that the institutional zone of the financial system forces the hands of these people. So paul comes in and he's got his american, you know, agenda right, what he wants and thinks he's right there.

But then he has a conversation, would say the head of the bank of england and the bank of england talks about, look, i'm going to a have to lower interest rates because we don't do thirty year mortgagees like you guys do in the U S. In the U K. Everything like a three or five year fix rate and then IT resets and like we're going to have massive mortgage resets coming very soon in the U.

K. And if we have our interest rates where they are is going to be a big trouble, is the same. And a lot of economies, something like a thirty year fixed mortgage is very I think I maybe germany might have on.

But like other countries, I think france, I think you know, canada, like all these places, they essentially like what we would call variable rate mortgages. So all these foreign central banks are essentially saying in private where they know they can speak for, really, we got to cut rates, right? Inflation be damned.

If we don't, we're gona put our economies into a tailspin. But if we do that and you don't in the united states, what's onna happen? The interest rate differentials are onna start to drive capital.

They're going to start to drain. Capital from our economies and then they're going to go you know, into the U. S. economy. It's gona jack up the dollar in order to essentially meet other demands because we use the dollars reserve currency, we're going to have to be begin selling dollar denominated assets, treasury bonds is going to jack up, yell. So in order to for you, pal, to protect the american economy, you're gonna have to cut rates to because we have to.

And if we get two wide of a spread between, you know, where the ecb and the B O E and B O J are at in their interest rates and what the fed is at is going to cause all these financial dislocations, and it's going to cause instability in the treasury market, which is also one of your Mandates, along with employment and Price stability. So you need to fulfilling your congressional Mandate by cutting rates even if that could be inflation oner. And I think that's what we're going to see power do in september. He's going to cut rates because he can't, you know keep rates where they're at, you know as the rest of the major central banks are entering and many already have cut rates such as the E C B, swiss bank.

bank england, the B I S provides a platform for the coordination of all of the central banks and for the ability to act as one.

But I want to ask the question here is like what's wrong with that? Like is there's something necessarily wrong with that? Do you want those managing nation state level economies, the central bankers of the world, to coordinate when they do something so we don't have bad ripple effects? Isn't this just a sign of CoOperation and everyone getting along? I mean, imagine a different scenario.

You had like a world, world three, and none of the various central makers were like meeting at all. And you like not coordinating because their countries were at war with one another. Is that sort of a scenario that we want? I guess the question is, does the act of CoOperating or coordinating, does that necessarily lead to new ferrous outcomes? Or like what are the problems of this?

I think in the short term, IT leads to beneficial outcomes so that if people just were not coordinating, and we had, like the scenario R I just laid out, play out with uncoordinated moves, IT would be detrimental to the financial system. IT would begin to cause volatility. IT would begin to hurt in the stock market.

These would then lead to recessions. Recessions would lead to layoff. People would begin to lose their jobs. But in a way, it's the same thing. To take you back to a drug analogy.

It's like you know you take heroin e away from the heroine at there's a lot of bad outcomes that happened and that a different type of a drug that might simulate heroin can help giving them harrowin can help so that these negative initial effects are not felt. And what we keep doing is we keep doing things that for stall, a fundamental reshaping that, as I mentioned, would be beneficial to the american people. Because what we would be doing, in essence, is beginning the process of cutting out the middleman of the central bank.

And this is kind of the financialization of the world. So I mean, you can just look at, for example, the united states and how much of our GDP at one point in time came from things like manufacturing and production, and how much of IT now comes from finance and these types of aspects. And so the world would have a Richard supply of goods and services, which would be deflationary, right? The real impulse of technology and progress is deflationary.

But through the fiat money printing system, we oppressed that initial and primary deflationary impulse with an stationary impulse and an inflationary impulse. Benefits deters, right? I mean, creditor ors get hurt and inflation deters benefit.

And so we're perpetuating a system which benefits deters and largest debts are, of course, corporations and governments. And so we're helping out the leading system by perpetuating this inflationary system. And in the short term, we need this coordination to stop IT off from unraveling.

And that's why I say, if we were to move away from this system, IT needs to be done you gingerly and well telegraph, and it's still probably gonna have some painful aspects to IT. But in the long run, IT puts us on, I believe, a more solid footing for growth and for actual deflationary aspects, positive deflationary aspects, which most people have a hard time comprehending, but it's basically turning the whole world on its head. And just imagine if we lived in a deflationary world, what that does in the idea is that I would kill growth, but I would not not necessarily kill real growth. IT would essentially stop this tax on money that happens. Person, I think what's probably .

going to happen, mail, is the central bankers and the B I S will keep doing what they're doing because IT feels good in the short term. And you know like I think there's probably good intention going into IT, right? So we're trying to coordinate.

We're trying to stave off recession. You like we need CoOperation. But you're saying sort of like similar to the meth addict that I guess this compounds over time and the health effects of the long term are like quite, quite significant, right in the negative direction.

And so where do you think all of this leads? Because of we have banks, and then we have central banks, which are the bank for the banks, and now we have the B. I, S, which is the central bank for the banks.

What we have is a lot of monoculture. What we have is a lot of your coordination, I guess, on the good side. But another word for that is like ability to control, I suppose.

And we all are running on the same playbook like all of the world's economies are running on sort of the Operating system that is heavily fuelled by debt. Maybe china is like on the side, breaking off and like investing in gold and other things, which is so were an interesting side quest. How do you think this ends? How close are we to the end game? Some idea of A A reset or a collapse. Do you see that as the end scenario to get us off the train?

Yeah, well, I do think you know he does have these long term negative effects, even though these short term fix us help things. And I think the clearest way to really look at IT like to take A A sample period. Let's say, from seventy one when we left convertibility the dollar to today, you have seen real wages as a percentage of GDP get cut in half.

And so when you look, we've had a great growth of GDP, but IT has been very unevenly distributed and the real wages is being cut in half as a percentage of GDP is the eventual outcome of these types of processes, which essentially inflate financial assets and in the inflation of financial assets, concentrates wealth in those that hold these financial assets, and you get more and more wealth inequality. And so this is kind of the payment for these short term fixes. And these are what eventually tend to get to such started levels that you risk civil unrest.

But what I think is probably the end game, like what's the solution for this is that I believe we're coming to a bit of a crisis moment now. I've been listening to people for decades talk about how deaded levels are unsustainable in all of that. You know, people say, now i've heard IT all before.

You know, I could play a video of Peter shift or some guy from fifteen years ago saying this is all going to come crushing down in the next two years. I think we're getting close because the actual signs that we're getting close are starting to appear in ways that they never appeared before. So for example, yeah, we were printing a lot of money after the financial crisis, but our debt to GDP levels, we're not anywhere near what they are not.

We're now at max point. We're now surpassing the hundred and twenty percent level that we saw the end of world war two, which, by the way, at the end of world were two and forty six and forty seven. We had about forty percent inflation, commute inflation in those two years.

And that's how we reduce our debt levels. The last time we ve got to high inflation or to hide det GDP levels as we essentially inflated away the debt in forty six and forty seven in the war debt. And so that's just one example.

And the other examples, interest expense. You can look at countries throughout history, when do they start getting into trouble? What interest expense starts surpassing defense? Interest expense starts growing exponentially. So it's not just that we're doing two trillion dollars in deficit is that this year, yeah, we have to issue two trillion and new treasuries, but we also had to roll over like ten plus trillion in treasuries that needed reissuing at higher rates.

And so when you look at the monthly treasury statement that comes out every month where a breaks down like growth interest expense here today and you look at what's our growth interest expense fiscal year to date versus last year, it's up by almost fifty percent. And so in one year, our interesting expense has gone to almost fifty percent because we're repricing our debt that was at one and a half, two and a half percent at five percent, and we're doing at five percent for a lot of political reasons. The treasury gets to decide what det.

We issue. And yelling is issuing a lot more bills than notes know. Coupons is a good way to describe as. So there's treasury bills a year less.

There's notes a year to ten year, and then there's bonds ten to thirty in the financial nominal clatter allow people call bill's or coupons, right? So bills are bills, notes and bonds are coupons. So she's issuing a lot less coupons and she's doing a lot more bills.

And what that's doing is it's suppressing the longer term rates. So I believe like the yellow curve is no longer giving an accurate signal on the market. I think a lot of people have talked about this inversion of the yo curve.

I think there were these suppressing mechanisms not in place, the yal curve would not be inverted. And that's why we haven't hit the recession. You can look at things like mortgage back securities, which are also backed by the full faith and credit of the united states, and they're trading around seven percent if you look at the equivalent of a ten year treasury.

And if you do that and you have a ten year agency back security trading at seven percent and the front end is five percent, and you've got a two hundred basis point spread between the front end in the long end. And so the yellow curve is not inverted. I don't think the eo curve has ever been inverted, the treasury curve has been inverted, but the true risk rate curve has not been inverted.

And so that's an idea I got by a guy I want to give credit named George roberson, who did just done a lot of work on that and is excEllent if you want to learn more about his view of the true risk yal curve. But basically, I think a lot of this stuff that's going on is now starting to come to ahead, and they're using these last rabbit out of their head to keep the system going. And as that begins to break down and start to crumble, where things we're going to start to happen, where people are going to realized, okay, the facts having the lower rates, but the government still running these wartime tide deficits.

And then in twenty seven and twenty eight, you're going to start getting close to the evaporation of the social security trust fund that we're gone to have these kind of congested type moments in the next few years. Where is gonna start to enter into the political consciousness, much as I was back into the eighteen hundreds, the free silver movement. And I think jeff rey, gn, lock a great bye.

Manager said, debts and deficits may not be a huge issue in the twenty four election, that they will be the issue in the twenty, twenty eight election and that we're coming to this moment where I think there's two pass like we can get together and work to fix these. And I think the end result is going to be a prolonged inflation in the basement, but that's kind of the good scenario. And it's going to be good for things like bitcoin, gold and silver.

But then the worst case scenario is that we do not fix this in a management able way. And more civil, rest begins to boil up and we start having real issues. And I think even in the last few weeks, we've already began to see the first casualties of the global dead bubble in kenya, where kenya was trying to raise taxes to pay off I M.

F loans. The people protested and dozens were shot dead on the streets. So we're already seeing people lose their lives because of sovereign bt.

wow. okay. So you're painting a picture of one we've heard from other bank las gas sick in oldness talked about of the slow motion train rack of fiscal dominance that's coming.

And kind of starting to a question you're talking about, yelled curve control, which is very interesting in the mechanism that central bankers will use. And just like the civil unrest, monetary policy starting to be top of mind again, as IT was in the U. S.

And in delay eighteen hundreds, where we talked about that cross of gold speech earlier. So that's coming into consciousness. And this could be explosive in some ways, in ways we can anticipate, which is perhaps the scarious scenario.

And make me that part of the genesis for your book. Or we could have a less explosive unwind, but IT would be your nineteen forties level inflation sort of unwind, where I would feel very uncomfortable, particularly if you are invested in certain nasi classes. So this could unite in, unfurl in a variety of different ways.

One aspect I want to touch on, though, is another element of all of this, which is kind of financial repression. This is something we saw in the united states and kind of the nineteen thirties, with you mentioned, fr. s.

Executive order to, like, get all the gold from american citizens, which is like somewhat successful. Other forms of capital control financial report resent. We talked about this a little bit.

You were recently on the bank less podcast. And where actually had loop grow men who talked about this book called the great taking. I still have not read IT. This is on my list of things to read mail, but I understand you've kind of read this and you're subscriber to the great taking concept. Could you tell us about just financial repression in general, what that might look like as we enter this new era of change and the concept behind the great taking .

together on someone of an to missing? Now before I get to the great taking is I I think what we're going to go through is something that's gonna be essentially new to everyone that's alive, but not new in our country's history or our world history. We're going through a very large period of monetary change, which is very Normal and happens on a regular basis, especially in almost every eighty hundred years.

You start to see some of these major monetary economic shifts. We actually are literally eighty years to the day that britain woods was going on. IT was going on in july of one thousand nine hundred and forty four.

I was a multiple conference. And so it's been eighty years since this monetary system kind of got put in place and change. And we're about do and we're about do. So i'm not saying we're heading towards worlds are three and this coming and I might be a non zero probability, but I don't think that's the most likely case.

I think the likely cases were going through a major monetary reset and IT will be shocking and uncomfortable at times, but we will get through IT the way we've got ten through these types of situation. The past now with the great taking. This is a work by a guy named David Rogers web, who is a former hatch fund manager.

He is very concerned about the financial system so much so he's moved his family to a farm in sweden. He's originally from ohio, and he basically did a lot of research and uncovered some very startling changes that we're made to U. S.

And also laws around the world regarding securities and who actually owned securities. So talking mostly about stocks and bonds here. And so in the us, we have something called the ucc, the uniform commercial code, which is sentiment, a code that all the states kind of pass on a state level.

So it's not a federal law, but it's uniform so that all the states kind of can Operate on the same page. And so all fifty states of passes ucc code that change things from essentially, if you buy a stock like you buy apple stock in a jpMorgan broker account, at one point time you own that stock. So what do I mean that you owit? Is that as a public company, they need to know who owns their stocks.

The apple treasure would have a list of who owns stock. And at one point time, IT was the individual right? At a certain point, broke ages started getting, you know, so big they started doing something called street name where, okay, you buy a through J.

P. Morgan. J P. Morgan is going to be on the apple treasures, capable as owning certain amounts.

But jp Morgans going to have to segregate your client funds from the bank's funds or the broker his funds. And in the case of a bankrupcy of J. P.

Morgan, these are separate legal entities. And you have first claim on that apple stock if J. P.

Morgan goes under. Well, in the nineteen seventies really is where process started, like things just started getting too overwhelming. The volumes got too big.

A lot of times in the seventies, they were shutting down trading on the new york stock exchange on wednesday so that, you know, paperwork could be caught up. And this guy named William denser was brought in. He was a former CIA Operative.

And I think that in his walls y journal, orbital ary former CIA Operative helped unsnarl wall streets paperwork problem. And he founded this company, A W S J. William denser CIA Operated wall streets paperwork problem.

And he came in no real banking experience. He'd been working in that amErica behalf of the CIA. He spent a short period of time in a financial related post to pointed by David roca fella, than governor of new york.

And then he's brought into create distinct LED, the dt cc. That a positive trust in corporation, which is now the legal owner of eighty eight trillion dollars with the assets in the united states. And so basically basis all of the, all of the unless you would take the trouble, there is a secondary system that can allow you to directly own your stocks or both. But what's concerning is that in the law, what you own, if you own apple stock, is you own what's call IT. In the law, a security is entitlement.

And what David Rogers web points out is that while under most cases, if these financial intermediary go bankrupt, you're claim as a security entitlement holder is good enough that you're going to get paid out, but there are certain instances, and there would essentially be a calamitous type of a crash, were various financial intermediaries, like people that are doing derivatives business and stuff like that. These things all go under where they're going to be senior to you as a security is entitlement holder. And in other words, there is a legal framework that would be in place in the result of a massive crash where the stocks, the bonds you might think you own in a roker account could legally be claimed ahead of you in seniority in a mass bankrupcy of financial inter mediation type institutions.

And so he has worked to try to spread the word on this, because what he's worried is he's not thinking that this is necessarily being done on purpose. And people are planning this when she's worried, is that if we get to a state of a massive collapse and we start having this, that the legal framework is going to lead interested parties, people that might be on the other end of a derivation count, say, somebody does a swap, and J, P. Morgan goes under, and the swap is being cleared by one of these international clearing organizations like the dtc.

c. And the dtc goes under and J, P. Morgan go under, and I, at the other into the swap, and I want to get paid. It's those type of circumstances worth theoretically that creditor could come in and take dt, C, C assets, which are going to be a year apple stock or you're whatever security is being clear to the dtc c and claim those and you don't get them. And so this is what the great taking is.

He's gotten ed on the radar of people like north to koto state legislatures who have gone in and try to amend the ucc and the they just can't do IT. They get close. They pass resolutions to amend this and return ownership to the individual intended.

Sy web has a youtube video where he talks about working with this tennessee state senator, and they're ready to pass a lot to change IT and make things like I used to be. And the tendency state treasurer comes into an office and says we cannot do this tells the governor, you cannot sign this bill. If you do, tennessee will be the only one that has this banks.

nobody. He's going to do business in tennessee. We're going to have companies fleeing tennessee. It's gona be disastrous to the tennessee economy.

If any changes are made, they need to be made by like all fifty states at once. We can do IT and IT doesn't happen. And so people are aware of IT.

Things are being done to try to fix this. But they're running into road blocks because of the the set up. And it's a similar situation in europe and canada. There are similar laws on the books.

It's interesting. So all of the securities are basically all the assets in U S. Like they're not bear assets, so you don't actually own them.

The property rights around might not be what you thought they would be. Are intermediate by the D, T, C, C, which is somewhat interesting. I guess I have two reactions to that, that I here explain this.

One, bullish cyp to currency for sure because those are not obligations, those are not intermediate, those are actual barrel assets. And particularly if a great taking sort of occurred and people start to doubt the property right systems that we have in place in existing capital markets and locate the capital elsewhere, I would imagine. But secondly, I guess one question I have about this or a little bit of like baby push back on kind of the worst case scenario.

The great taking is we're talking about technicalities that maybe could be like a push through in a crisis type of scenario, but I would think that the organizing powers that be of the U. S. Government and including kind of the social layer and U. S.

Citizens and investors, would be very much against the great taking actually being fulfilled because if that was the case, the market reaction to a breach of kind of the social contract behind securities property rights shareholders saying, like, well, actually I thought I owned this, but apparently I don't. There would be just a massive amount of capital filing the U. S.

Capital system in the reason U. S. Capital markets are so fantastic and you know the entire world wants to be in them, is because of the presence of excEllent property rights, a fantastic rule of law system, or if courts, shareholder are laws in the sort of thing.

So I would to do the common case against the great taking salary actually coming in place. Well, technically this could be possible, isn't anti and center for. Basically everyone in the us. Actually allow this to occur.

Like won't you get a system where there's such a public outcry that there's an executive order against something like this because, you know, to allow this to happen would be to basically torpedo U. S. Capital markets and the confidence around property rates.

Well, back to the problem. Alth quality. Who would that right? IT would hurt the people that own assets. But if you're poor and on welfare and don't own any stock or bonds, IT doesn't hurt you.

So if your political motivation is to put in a socialist or communist type regime, this could be exactly what you're hoping for. And I think there could be aspects where there are large groups in our society who would welcome some sort of a financial meltdown as an opportunity to fundamentally altered the capitalistic leanings. Obviously were not in some sort of atmos ith capitalist society anymore, but some of the capitalists that at least leanings, that we have to try to erode those further. So I don't know if I agree that everybody would be on the page of, well, the result of this is going to be so horrible, let's not let that happen. I think there could be a people that would be on the page like this is our chance.

That's a great point, actually very interesting. So we do see this back door being open. So this brings us maybe to the last topic that I wanted to cover with you today, ml, which is okay.

What do we do? How do we prepare for this? And there's obviously you society how we can prepare. And that maybe outside of the scope of this conversation and our powers to actually affect that, i'm more interested first in individually.

So if we play this ford and you like central banks, continue to stay addicted to the math and continue to make the short term types of decisions. And just one foot in front of the other. Where does that lead us? We've talked about where that leads us you effectively. But like how do we prepare for where that leads us as individuals? Like what are you doing about all this?

So I do believe that we're still in a little bit of the build up of a bubble. I think that in p prg gon hit like six thousand by the end of the year, seven thousand by the end of next year. I think golden bitcoin are both on sale right now.

especially big coin perhaps.

but I think the Prices that goal or big coin could get to, you're gonna surprising to people, but I think is a whole of the show to get into the details of that. So more directly, answer your question of, you know, what am I doing? So what i'm doing is that I personally have most of my wealth in real state.

Now I think rental homes, which is what I own, are somewhat problematic in a severe recession. But the casual requirements, I have to keep those and get through that tomato ous period where rents might be a little lower. What have you are, are OK for me.

As far as my liquid assets are, more stocks don't have any bonds other than t bills, which I invest through A T B L etf called B I L. But basically I have treasuries, t bills, short term duration. I think the worst asset in the world right now is any type of a bond that's over a couple of years time.

Yeah, yeah. Lue grow in talks about this, the soccer at the card table. You are going to start to realize bad .

at tension funds. Yeah the four percent .

yield is not going to I mean, the yields on these things and you can trust the inflation numbers. And I mean, it's like look at the Price of a home. Is IT twenty percent in the last five years? Not always not is at least double that.

You can go back decades and look at, you know, key items and americans need to buy are up tremendously more than what the CPI would indicate. So real inflation is not what the CPI is. Again, these are a whole other podcast.

But there everybody probably knows that, like dickey messing with how it's calculated, they look at these baskets and they say, well, a cell phone with like eight gigs cost you know a thousand dollars back then and an eight gig cell phone you can get for like twenty box and so it's deflation. But you know, people need the most modern cellphones, so they're calculating things in all kinds of weird ways to tamp down on the remove borrowing costs. In the seventies, they used to include like credit card rates, mortar rates in CPI calculations.

They took out all that stuff. So we've got this massive inflation that a four percent yell on a ten years, not gonna cover. So that's what I recommend, especially if you maybe taking care of finances for an elder parent and there may be in retirement and their broker has them like fifty percent in bond mutual funds that have like duration of six or seven, eight years.

I kind of recommend maybe have a conversation with your parent or say, you mom, maybe you d be Better if you sold these longer duration bomb mutual funds and moved IT into tea bills, not only will you get five percent now, which is more than those bonds are going to be paying, but you're going to have liquidity. And if we get into a situation where you need to protect your purchasing powers in other ways, you can do that. So what i'm doing is I still think the stock bubbles going, so I still have a good amount in stocks.

But one thing i've done is i've wanted to make sure that i'm very liquid and I can act very quickly. So at one point time, my wife and I had some four one keys in different places. I consolidated everything. I got everything in one place, so that when I want to pull the trigger and get out of things, I can.

you can be first out fast.

can be out fast. Don't have be, you know, looking for passwords. And what i'm slowly doing is taking some percent, some smaller amount IT depends on kind of markets in different things, removing IT from the stock portfolio and investing IT in a mix of precious metals and bitcoin and building up that percentage of my portfolio over time.

Kind of dollar costing averaging into those and dollar cost averaging out of the stock market and also keeping cash on hand in the form of tea bills. And then I own real state. And so these are what i'm you know doing personally, I think everybody's financial system is different and they're also different at different ages.

And so what might be right for me, given my situation might not be right for everybody. So i'm not making blanket statements, but what i'm really cautioning people is if they're in the stock market, you know be aware of what you own and know exactly what you would need to do to get out of IT if you ever wanted to. And then if you're in bonds with londres ation, my recommendation is pride to get out of IT.

And you know, as far as Victorin imprecise metals, I believe in of them, I believe that bitcoin is still going through a Price discovery stage where it's being accepted as a monetary asset and that because of that, it's going to have high volatility. But it's also got potential for seismic gains in the sense that gold doesn't gold is already a monetary asset fully accepted by the financial community as a monetary asset. As big coin gets adopted as a monetary asset, I think that its value is going to go up more than gold, but it's going to a be more votile than gold.

I think there is some reason for concern with the kind of capture of bitcoin by companies like blackrock and things. And I think people need to be aware of their own. They through blackrock, they don't really own bitcoin.

Could be A D, T, C, C scenario yet again, IT.

IT is it's through the dt, C, C, and it's not that. And so these are all things that I would just say on a personal front.

you need to be a well, yeah, all of that makes sense to me. I guess you like that kind of the rental income because that sort of cash flowing and your tea bills because that's a great yield. It's highly liquid, but you're not going full.

great. Taking like David here, right? Because like if you fully believe that the crisis scenario ends in sort of a bad crisis was imminent, then I would imagine be taking other steps here, right?

Because like a lot of the assets that you just named ed, you talk about rental property income, you talk about even the stocks. Maybe you can exit those quickly. But like you know tea bills, even I would imagine the precious medals that you own, you're probably not costing you like the gold yourself.

You're not like buying gold bars. Imagine you're buying some sort of certificate for gold. You're not betting that there will be no, you do have oh my god, there's a good bar on screen bank less listeners so you're going full bear .

one hundred thousand of silver right there. Well, look, I trade golden silver through etf. Yeah, but I have a stockpile that I keep in a hidden spot that is not here.

I have some a very small amount in the house, and it's mostly a small amount of silver for things like using a hundred amounts bar of silver as a paper wait and that so ver bar, by the way, when I bought IT, I think I was like ten box and now it's over three thousand dollars for that bar. But know these things, I do worry about custody. So the gold E T F, which forever was only allowed to custody gold IT, was all being done by H S.

B C. Just recently. They added J. P Morgan as a custodian, and J P. Morgan is working to move some of that gold from europe and other deposit aries to the united states, I think is an interesting development of what's going on with the physical gold market because the physical gold market as a whole bunch of issues with IT, with the gold leasing market in the future contracts, higher cent. And so I do think that there's issues with like if you're like all all my gold is in the golden tf gd, again, your N D T C C territory vulnerable .

yeah capital repression. You're very vulnerable to that. I was curious about kind of because I know you are excited about crypto, but also newer decypher that may be some listening the bank less pocket. So like when you're doing the crypt to currency a journey, have you gone down the rap hole of taking custody of your own keys because that is the point at which you is not your keys, not you're crypt of sort of thing is similar to the bar of silver that you are just holding from your screen. That is the bear asset when you tape take custody of your own coins, if you're still on an exchange like a crack in our coin base or you know if you're in the bitcoin etf in some way that you don't have that, have you gone that far down your crypto journey to take cost?

A I would be a good question for you because i'm not very super up on this. So I have some good cut friends and colleagues that I worked without a prior company. Now we never talked about my background.

I've been A C, O. Three different S, C, C, final registered broker dealers have N, B, A from duke. I've done a lot of different stuff in finance for over twenty years with some of my former colleagues who are really into cyp to in europe, they started a stable coin called glow.

USD is a nonprofit stable coin that takes the interest from the tea bills and invest glow. yeah. So the guys that I used to work with that a company called sacri started that a guy, jasper, the CEO and other friend of my harm, look, and also involved with IT.

So when I was buying glow, like I could only do IT on uni swap. So if I am using a uni swap wallet now, is that my custody is or is? Yes, IT is also generally .

means custody. I mean, we could have another conversation. This is melt to just like make sure you set up because I do want to make sure that you're set up and you have custody of your own crypto to assets and you're doing so in a way that you're not going to lose them.

So the biggest thing you need to learn to do when you're getting to cyp to as if you're going to take custody of your own assets, great power, great responsibility. So the moment you decide to get off in an exchange and like do that, you need to make sure that you have your back up keys, like you know what you're doing, you have a redone Nancy if, god forbid, something would happen to you. You have loved ones that can access those assets.

You know probably similar in some ways, the level of effort not quite a significant of like cutting your own gold. You like what would that take, right? You really have to think about where you're going to store IT and like who knows about and what they access criteria.

So it's on that level, but a bit more simple. So want to make sure you get set up. I want to get your reaction to you sort of egypt of portfolio or sort of a portfolio construction of investing that, that blank list i've been an advocate for.

And I think some listeners are advocates for and you might think this is absolutely crazy because it's not sort of as diversified as you know traditionally is recommended, but it's basically like the barbell strategy, tea bills. So you have t bills. You know the short term treasury is right for your yield, the liquidity, all of that in case markets go down.

And that's one side of the bar, bill, and there's nothing in the middle. So no securities maybe have a roof over your head, but like just not a lot of property, not much in the middle. And then on the right side, it's all cyp to basically completely cyp ed out.

And the advantage of this sort of portfolio is, you know, crypto, if you take us of your own asset, it's all bear instruments. So if something like the worst case scenario of the great reset happens, you have the ability to just take and leave IT. You don't have any D, T, C, C.

You don't have any intermedia areas. You don't have anyone who can come in and steal the capital and take the capital forced fully. So benefits from that.

And you know if something less significant happens in to the one thousand and forties where we have multiple years of like very high inflation, you know the bet on crypt do is that crypto to realizes some of that upside. You said IT yourself earlier that bitcoin is on sale right now potentially greatly undervalued. So i'm not advocating for benglis stoners.

You obviously your case will vary and this not financial advice what you say the end of the las podcast, but that sort of at the end of these episodes, when I hear a message like yours where i'm always left, i'm just like, okay, well, you like I could buy stocks, I could do that sort of thing, but i'm sort of like i'm very comfy in my trip to positions and i'm very comfy and t bills and i'm comfy. Not only you know multiyear government bonds ends like not having to worry about the stock market. So yeah, what's your reaction to that kind of portfolio austerity other than to maybe recoil and say like, hey, right, you need to diversify.

What's your take on this? no. And I think you .

know you said some key words that which is you're comfortable and you understand IT and you know, you ve got a guy like me who is still a little knew to this journey. Although I one of my great financial mistakes was I was really interested in getting my hands on some bitcoin. And twenty twelve, when I first heard about IT, I heard A M P R story talking about this new thing called bitcoin.

And I did a couple searches and tried to figure out a way to get my hands on some and IT. IT wasn't easy, so hard, just didn't think about IT. And then finally, like, I don't know, five, six years later, about my first big coin, basically, your strategy, especially with dealing with other coins, is I played around a little bit in the past with other cause.

I really did know what I was doing. I was not comfortable, I didn't really understand the technology and IT wasn't very successful. And so for me, I just got comfortable saying the only cyp do I want to own a bitcoin and that's what i'm gonna very, very small amount of a theory.

I own some glow stable coin ts to support my friends, and I think it's a great idea, but those are my three crypto coins in my u swap wallet, and some USD c and some polygon matrix or whatever, is that I need to users gas, as you guys call, right? So these are what I have, and i'm comfortable with that. If you're someone who really understands the china logy, knows what these other coins do, knows what's going on, then I think you have a leg up.

You know, you have an understanding of an emerging technology that a lot of people like me don't have, and you're able to see things and you've got a competitive advantage to be in that. So I think if you're comfortable with that because there are all these issues with stocks, I mean, i'm saying I think the bubbles is going to keep going for a couple years. But obviously, I have no Crystal ball.

Some sort of a collapse or outside event could come in at any point time and make my get out of jail quick scheme of, okay, I can go into one site and basically get out all my stock positions in a three minute period like, yeah, i've got that set up where if I needed to do that, I could, but it's still got ta settle. It's got the money is got to calm like you know in the markets can move so quick and have something happens overnight is down twenty percent. I like H, I don't want to pull that trigger.

Get could come back then go, you know. So there are all kinds of issues with whatever you do. And this is kind of the problem with an inflationary world, right? If we lived in an inflationary world, we won't have these concerns.

We can have whatever the money is and just, you know, know that it's going to go up in value just by being money, and that's the way that is. So I don't have any judgment on that negatively at all. And I think there's a very strong likelihood going to outperform some sort of a mixed that I outline. Is this also a little bit of a factor of how my path of all financial and what got me into rental housing was not necessarily like this idea that I want to get out of the stock market IT was this idea that I found IT nuts, that banks were literally willing to lend me millions of dollars at two and a half of years.

and I was not solution crazy. This is the best retail arbitrage you can get.

This can you up as an individual? Some of my houses are list the second homes, some of them are initial homes, some of them are investment properties, where I had to put twenty percent down. You know, I had to do what I needed to do, but I literally had a mortgage guy that I went to college with, and I kept pushing and pushing and pushing until I couldn't borrow anymore and buying homes in two and thousand and twenty eighteen.

You know, my first rental property, I gotten two thousand and eight, but I only have one. And then as these interest rates got low, I started just to say, this is ridiculous. Like, why are they giving me this amount of money at this interest rate? I can buy this house.

I bought two houses in my nights or od. And I can buy this house and I can rent IT out. And it's not only gonna cover the mortgage and esco and everything else, it's onna immediately start cash following me like four hundred dollars a month and that was like twenty twenty now is like cash lowing me like double the mortgage payment and it's like, this is just crazy.

And I almost thought I was too good to be true, but my financial mind kind of over read that fear. And I had people, my mom told me, mail, stop buying houses. And i'm like, as long as you're going to give me the money, if it's free money.

like the interest strates for so low back then, especially then it's crazy. You know there is this a guy encysted t who is famous Michael sailor is his name company called microstrip. IT gives taking out like long term bonds of various forms and buying bitcoin with effectively, I see you know the thirty year fix rate mortgage in the U S.

That is like the Michael sailor play like pheroras for bcr ypo because like the rates are absolutely insane. And effectively, in a way, you are short, you know, long term duration bonds of the type that we were talking about and saying that they were toxic. You don't buy.

You are the recipient of that on that kind of like a mortgage trade. Of course, people need to be careful, take out too much debt. IT is a form of leverage, all of these things.

But the rates that you can lock in even now IT is just like, you know, given the prospects of the future, just seems like free money. Now this has been great. You thank you so much for walking through this you some other time, if you're ever having any trouble with crypt, ta want to learn about you know cutting your assets.

Please reach out to me like myself to me from the back. The team would be just like happy to help you and make sure you're on a good footing there. So you don't have an intermediate asset, you have actual bear cyp du assets. But thanks every time today. This been absolutely fantastic.

Well, thanks for having me. I really enjoyed the .

conversation back of nation. We ve got two books that were mentioned today. One is called cause, which is mills of books that we mentioned earlier in the episodes include link to that one.

The second is the great taking, which is a books I still need to read. But maybe you can bank less listener. It'll be in the show as well for you got to end with this.

Of course, none of this has been financial advice. Script is risky. You could lose what you put in.

But we are headed west. This is the frontier. It's not for everyone, but work.

Glad you with us on the bangles journey. thanks. what?