Steve Baker on Why Government is Failing You - MOB020
01:55:16 Share

So I see one of two things happening. Either we will end up with a massive inflation in the end, to keep the bond market going in, you have to keep debasing the currency, or will end up with a sudden deflation of a massive bond market bubble and a panic. Now what happens in that panic will really matter.

They remind that politicians in that panic can't suddenly slash health and pension spending. What will probably happen in that panic on market bubble disaster? They probably end up going for QE of some form. And then you get another inflation. How much longer really do we think we can keep distorting the real economy? Because there eventually the real economy, the real world, people's actually actual choices and the availability of real physical resources eventually is gonna catch up with what amounts to accounting games.

Now mister abductees has brought you by our east sponsor and massive legends iron, the largest nasdaq list, a bitcoin miner using one hundred renewable energy. Now they're not just parent the bit point network. They're also providing cutting edge computer resources for A I or backed by renewable energy.

Now my boy, danny and I ve been working with their founders, done and well for quite some time now, and we've always been super impressed with their values, especially their commitment to local communities and sustainable computing power. So if you're interested in mining bitcoin or harness in A I compute power, iron a set in the standard and so you can find out more at iron dot com, which is I R E N dot com, that is iron dot com. If you go to here.

please thanks very much .

and we have been .

busy er in government .

are your free man now I am a free man, free you did I watched both of your exit interviews ah I don't see me glee, just would like, uh, someone speaking honestly.

But i've been able to say these things for fourteen years in parliament course, no one took any notice. And the great thing about those moments was George and ed balls together. And I was Sparked by them. So he gave me a good excuse when people were listening to say. But I said that in my main speech.

quite mean, these are the point time I change limited something funny I live in how brit I went to university there yeah I went to back and children's college. Uh and so I lived on upper Green street at one point um I lived on the what's the very next remember yes, i've had votes .

on up a Green street. I used to say I get votes everywhere, but these days I should .

say a lot of votes everywhere.

Live is a great place to be yes, there's a lot to be said for IT. It's great countryside, of course. Yes, everything's going on in highway icon and is very close to london. And what's .

not like animals?

Like yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. But mean, those places were not constituency. And so I still, as a matter of habit.

can refer to them. Okay, fair, fair. okay. So look, I have, of course, so I want I want to talk you about, uh firstly, um you pretty pissed off and you issue some kind of dire warnings when you left the government and yeah the work i've been around seven, eight years which is thinking about money in debt and the growth of welfare state.

You know they resonated with me straight away. Uh, what is IT that IT appears in government? People just continue, continue accept this kind of growth of debt, which comes with a societal decline of solving.

It's too hard in a democracy that's i'm afraid, the public choice of IT and that's why, uh, I think that is very little hope that the state itself will solve these problems if you're trying to get elected telling the public we can not afford pensions in health care.

Not very popular, but i've always said these things, but have always had to say them a slightly round about way just to try and be understood without quite actually saying we're going have to get pensions. But the reality is if you look at the various chance, whether it's the office for budget responsibility or some ten year old ones now, often back for international settlements, but we looking at debt projection soaring away and reviews stagnating and that gap, you can't be covered anymore. I mean, in for fifty years, I believe it's been covered by easy money since the brain wood system.

And we've now got the biggest on market bubble in history. That's what you held down, said the chief economist of the bank of england then. And that bubble hasn't burst.

It's only been blown further by covers. So it's a very precarious situation we face. And at some point in our lifetimes, this is gonna go horribly wrong. But you know, I made the topic of my made in speech in twenty ten. I've said at time and time again, it's just too uncomfortable.

Does everybody else understand this with, but they actually don't understand this?

The the level of economic knowledge in parliament is pathetic. I've known some people IT just means of parliament, say they just really regret they don't know basic economics. I said, well, okay, is a copy of economics in one lesson, you know which is a great classic book ah there's also Peter shift, excEllent introduction, how an economy grows and White crashes.

There's loads of great stuff, aren't that. But people get busy and difficult. Others talk about economics in ways that can be easily understood.

But in the end, economics is fairly straight forward, is about social CoOperation, is about you and I have different objective preferences for what we want to do with our time and with our money. There's different preferences for what we want to do. For example, I ve chosen to air suit today, have chosen to where A.

I didn't realize a tisa. I worked for the first time in about eight years. Few we go into didn't have a seat to buy a suit.

I'm not to go. I'm just making the point. We all have subjective different preferences for what we want to do in a circumstance. And that makes me very difficult plan an economy.

And if you start from thinking about the individual and the the individual acting and choosing, people who have red measure will recognize, measure, yeah, the individual acting and choosing and working and exchanging and creating value for others. And you start to realize that an economy is an exchange of value for value. And you then start to think, what what does the state doing this process of exchange value, value.

I think people watching would be mildly concerned that we have a largely uneducated, uh yeah largely an uneducated group of politicians who are making really important decisions about the economy affect us yeah. They don't have a basic understanding economics. I did think the other day I was looking the research on the front bench for kids dombes front bench there not a single person who appeared to me, not single persons ever run a business.

And you know i'm somebody has five businesses uh about set up another business and the chAllenges of business rates, you know the businesses on building in my towns, uh plus the strict strict employment laws which fill very argentinean um and the uh uh rising uh uh cost of goods. My inputs get White. The customers have got a decreasing um uh this was the income is making this really, really difficult.

I want you to say, okay, who who here, if you making these policy decisions, who he is actually built a business. I don't think there's A A single person IT was lawyers um union workers and charity workers which are not discredit in. But you want people who are making decision .

to have actually had to raise invoices in order to pay their bills and you actually have to get people to pay the invoices. They only want to pay the invoices. If you produce something valuable, you can even raise in to you've done something good.

So yeah, it's a very good point. But just step in back a bit that so much to unpacking what you just said. The first thing is people aren't get in the politicians that they want in a democracy whose fault that they think is this is why i'm not wildly popular like far boris, because I keep saying things that people don't want to hear viewers.

I'm sorry, it's a democracy. If you haven't got the politicians you want is your full. What you need to do is join the political party of your choice, your views.

This is they they need to join the political party of their choice and spend just a few evenings a year going to candidate selections. And if all they do is go to candidate selections and say, Peter, that's not good enough. You have to run a bit.

You you run a business and I don't want that from you. You know, I want someone who's a run a business knows what they are doing, asking a few difficult questions about real life even if you just ask him, how am I supposed to cope with this national insurance rise? We know what my supposed to do with the extra costs that imposes on me.

I might to pass one of the customers. Do you not think that will depress my trade? And most supposed to raise wage is less.

What am I supposed to do? Just asked. That candidate meetings and IT will expose that the candidate aren't good enough and theyll fail and then others will come in their place.

So you might understand. Or you are you are watching. I mean, that's why I stood for election because I thought I can emigrate as nowhere to go.

I consider her moaning and becoming bitter right time for election. Well, I stood for election to an hgh years. Latter was an mp.

I've had fourteen, very busy years, but i'm free now. My times over, i'm not going back. Somehow something extraordinary happens, but I am reading IT out, you know, something really, really extraordinary to go back.

I've done my bit. Fourteen years was a long time. So you have .

the entire tenure of the conservation ministry. Okay, when you went into politics, what did you what did you quickly learn about how like the corridors of how what that you didn't realize when you went in? Because I think, look, i've told with the idea of being really thinking about the policy, fed up locally about my town and i'm fed up nationally, but i'm probably very naive about the reality of how much impact you can have. What what did you learn quickly?

The public are interested. That's a single or most important factor. I had no political experience when I got into politics. Two and hours years was the time I took me to go from deciding I wanted to try out frustration and going in the so I was quite wet behind the years, I didn't know what was. Well, I very naively thought that if I can, nose clean, behaviour integrators spoke the truth as I understood IT feel they, you arise that the public would recognize that I was trying to do my best, even if they disagreed with me and give me the benefit that no was. The public overwhelmingly are not interested in what their member of parliament is doing is cool in the literary, rational ignorance.

So I think they are interesting how the elected parties fAiling.

They're interested in the impacts on their own lives. absolutely. But I can tell you from the point of view of a politician about the same one hundred and twenty five, one hundred and forty people have spent fourteen years creating four fifth my email.

And when you're a new mp and you see another title wave of email coming, and you think, oh my god, onna, cope with this, what i'm going to do, but after you've been doing IT six months, you are is the same hundred and forty people are never gonna te for you joining him with every single campaign. And you learn the you can need this if it's a boiler play, they don't like IT. But if it's the same boiler play, you it's the fit iteration of the badge campaign.

We all love batches. Again, I don't want to be root to anybody. We all love batches. Batches are important. So the bees and the rest, when you get the situation and the policy hasn't changed, it's just cluttering up your inbox and preventing you getting to the person is being gonna made homeless in a minute with their kids. You start to be less tolerant of that.

But what mostly happens is in a general election, we come in a Normal year, a third of the people don't vote at all. A third of the people will vote for someone else, and a third of the people vote conservative Normally. And the result that you get about half to vote win because the opponents are fragmented.

But then do you think about what he looks like as a politician? You're only a third of the people wanted you in at all, and some of that third was pretty reluctant. They have Better than of the other choices that they've reluctantly voted for you.

So you really can't keep your customers happy. So there's two things about that. First, if you join a political party, you've got massively more influenced if you're just voting in the general election because you're there all the time.

You're in a room with hundred people are a selection meeting or even pratts, ten people are a selection meeting instead of being one of seventy five thousands. So just do the math. You're just more influential if you join.

And the other thing is that the fact that people don't participate and be supportive, it's really IT. IT makes IT such a drug to do the job. Someone turning up and saying, do you know I love what you set in parliament the other day? Is really a good solar free market stuff. Keep IT. I don't need anything for you, just want to say I am going to do if you keep what a different, don't bother you so .

they get rap litin why did you in?

I'm going to put my sub stack. I've got a sub stack where i've write about this call, fighting for a free future OK. It's part of a bigger project which are come on to, if you like, but you setting out there basically immigrate mono stand because politicians were fAiling so very badly.

So i'd discovered the monetary theory of the trade cycle in two thousand, those doing an MC in computer science talks, and to look again to the doc m. Boom that was happening, and IT promptly evaporated. And I discovered the monetary theory, the trade cycle, which sort of stuck with me, but then particularly Crystalize to gain around the global financial crisis, but also there are response to terrorism, was terrible.

Now I joined the air force to be one of the good guys when I was a teenager, to uphold western values of democracy and fundamental rights. Not only did we wage wars, which we are not to have waged and killed, people who ought not to have died, we also ended up complicit in the american people, people illegally around the world, to be tortured. And I think wo wo.

wow. And then in that context, that is, the european constitution comes forward and is rejected by electorate. And instead of the elite, the governing elite changing course, they changed the constitution of france.

So they didn't need a referendum on eliza an street. They made the irish vote twice, and they stopped us getting one. And at this point I thought, I am not having this. I am not allowing power, a power which wages war tour, literally tortures people, people despite an international absolute prohibition, and which ignores the results of referenda on major constitutional change with permanent significant speak.

explained eliza, and treaty.

So there was a constitution for europe backing about two thousand and six, and IT was obviously constitution for europe. And IT was very obvious to everybody. IT was gna create a europe and that you may can be in favor of IT. As IT happens, I was in favor of a federal europe. You could change my money, but you can be a favorite agains.

But you to have to say, if you're not no longer than to gna live in a country where the ultimate paris, the united kingdom, you're onna, live in a country where the ultimate pair is in europe, is good idea to get people's consent for that sort of change. So they were going to hold referendums on the constitution across europe. But they they failed in two country's dem.

France was um so the constitution was rejected. So instead of taking stock in doing something else which could secure public consent, instead what they did was a little can't quite come fraud really yeah so instead of so, they have two founding treaty, the treaty on european on and the treaty on the functioning of the european, the lisbon. So sorry, the constitution replaced those with a new document.

What the lisbon treaty did, IT, was an amending treaty. So IT took the two documents, amended them and created the two new treats as amended. The thing and a core actually ruled that this was substantially different, and therefore we didn't need a referendum. And at that point I was really going much. I thought theyve corrupted the courts. This is because the point open europe of think tank put the two different documents for the constitution, for europe, and the treaties, as amended, put them side by side, so anyone could read and see that what differences there were, how much difference do you think there was this?

This was the problem with the E. U. And the E. U. Parliament is that I don't know anybody who engaged with the european politicians they voted.

I just don't know anyone who engage with european politics and trying to create federal europe foreign, but on maybe on the mode of the U. S, but the U. S.

People are engaged. They, they have, they understand at the state level what they want, and they understand the federal level want. I think, I think with the E U, nobody really knew what the liamine did.

no. Well, quite. And the answer is a great deal as well as a commission and. We are all products of our history. The context were in whether we like IT or not.

But you know, I was talking about the constitution for europe there as if that was the change that put the ultimate pair in europe, but IT wasn't. That was the european community's act in the early seventies when I I was born in seventy one. I kind of remember when the, thank god, at last i've forgotten something about european union, its history, but the the E C.

I, the eupeptic unities that went through seventy one or seven, three or seventy eight, but that made the ultimate source of legal authority in the united kingdom, the european union. What IT wasn't called the european union then, but the institutions, as they were then, the european institutions, they're w trun. But this is the thing.

It's like, really, and we once said that to the doorstep during a referendum to a lady, I know our vote remain. And the guy I was on the street, he was knocking on the door. The guy walked away and he just couldn't help you.

He turned n around. He said to the lady, forgive me asking, but I just got to know, do you know that if we stay in the european union, the ultimate source of political power in the U. K.

Is the european union? Oh, I didn't know that. No, tell me a bit more, told me so I vote, leave them and anything.

This is a get this interest. This interest is that if you get in crap politics is because you're not interested. Unfortunately, this is why it's called rational ignorance.

The cost of being interested and involved is very, relatively very high. And the amount of influence you get as one of millions, tens of millions of voters is quite low. yeah.

And that's why people don't bother. The problem that we've got is the consequences of not bothering are really, really damaging and profound. If we lived in a lazy, fair, liberal society where government did nothing, IT would matter.

And this to me, I was said this on another interview, which isn't help yet. You might get their first goal. I so don't care where my, where my government is. Stony doesn't do anything right.

And the point, the point about democracy, really, if you're a classical liberal, the purpose of democracy is as soon as a politician that has a good idea, you no go. No, no, I don't want that. thanks.

go. yeah. Because the problem we've had as politicians for hundred years had increasingly expensive good ideas like pensions. That's a good idea.

We gave pensions everybody up, but we had national insurance, which was not supposed to be saved up to pay for those pensions. And then we spent IT as we went. why?

Because the electronic cycles every four, five years and the the pensions are paid in a generation time. So as a real is, throw our lives. Politicians of spent national insurance contributions instead of saving them up in a sovereign alth fund, which is what a lot of the public think. And the result is when they are trying to pay as you go for pensions for which we don't have the resources.

it's crippling. Explains my song, is trying explain national insurance. What is historic role was to do? I said now to look, the reality is all taxes. He feels to me, as an outsider, national.

That the native base currency .

to base a currency when you when you're in parliament, how do the how do the factions and the power the levels of power work within a party? Because they are understand these different factions, but there's also people with more influence and less influence. Do you have to eat a game?

Well, i've always believed that IT was very much not a game. But people may have seen my interview where I had a rent, George osborn and balls. And that's because there two are the people who I think do treated like a game, right? And of course, it's people treating IT like a game that gets us into so much trouble.

Now, from a working class background, my dad was a carpenter, my granddad was a toolmaker, and my stepfather, after the parents, my parents divorce, I was an open cast mine, work as so as ordinary a background you get really. So i'm reading a book called chunks, which is about how a particular set of oxford educated public schoolboys took power in this country. Osborne, Cameron.

And it's a very bit of book with a huge chip on its shoulder, which don't really approve of. But it's teaching me a lot even now that for a lot of the guys and girls who really run this country, who've been to public school again and more than favorite public schools strong, we can break up in the culture which ruins. But for them, that is all of these unspoken hierarchies and gradient.

And you're not sure who's got power, but for some reason this guy could. Boris is very popular, and because he's funny and charismatic. But funny and charismatic doesn't solve real problems. And i'm afraid i've realized the house of comments is very much modeled on it's an extension of public schools like eaten. And so, you know, for the first time since I was a small boy, I got told him by mp, your sitting in my chair said begger part yeah, he was a breakfast CEO, but from not gna name in, but that's where I sit for breakfast. Not today.

You fuck off.

That was broadly what I said, but there was real animosity around the room. But i've never played by public school rules. And I realized that's why the likes of David Cameron, when they don't understand me, are they just just completely .

different wavelength? But you come from, like you say, working close background. My granda was a uh uh trying ticket collector.

My dad was an engineer, aircraft engineer. My mom was a nurse. But my dad is also, he didn't vote anymore, sick of IT, but he vote conservative. Yeah, I listened to a really good interview with on major that was on the the leading pocket, actually really like I did because I too Young at the time and john major was in power. But I really, really enjoy the interview because he was also working class background.

Let's not pretend there are lot of potion ws in the labor party well, in the liberal democrats. So i'm not against people be imposed. I want to be clear and my friends' portion, I want to be very inclusive.

They're welcome to vote to me in the event that I stand for election again, which I went. But, but, but here I want. I wonder if I can possibly avoid IT. But .

interesting, when working cars, people end up become a conservative vote. My dad said to me, the reason votes conservative is they take less of his money. That's what he said in the end of the month, they take less of my money, and that means the more money for my family.

This, I mean, I used to believe what john major said the that the U. K. Was a class three class society.

Not true. It's not true. But there's basically a whole set of rules which those of us. Have working class backgrounds never get in view into the only middle classes don't.

There's a sort of up middle class to tough class who have different set of rules about unspoken conversations and they think has got the history that goes back hundreds of years. Some of 的。 But is my way of a diversion really? Because the bottom line is you ask me the question, how does the power in .

the faction if you want to have influence liamine? Is he trying to get near or the front bench? I know there's like different group. Like I just don't understand how IT works. Well.

yeah. So this can be .

a long interview.

Let me so if you follow the traditional sort of public school rules IT, there's things you just don't do well, champs just don't do that, like lead big rebellion. And I had this conversation with a retired mp. He said he was back in the masters c days.

And he said he went to see the chief wap. And he said, I don't approve of what john major doing, is saying this very privately. I don't approve of what he's doing and if people move against him, I want you to know I shall vote to remove him, but i'm not gonna anything publicly.

And I certainly sharp initiate moves and he thought he's done a really big thing going to see the chief. And I said, that's really interesting because why I would do IT is not working and say what the prime minister is doing is intolerable. I'm going to go out, say so publicly.

I'm give you advance warning. I'm not going to do is mobilized the biggest rebellion, impossible to stop the policy and remove the prime minister. And we possibly this way, just think, no, we're been through this before. No, you can. And this is the difference between the sort of public school rules and the you know the the comprehend ve kid is like and and its not about it's a sort child dish to actually in fact but also but is also like a bit gangster and it's all for to have to do IT but see the the .

is authentic and integrity.

Well, you think so, but again, this is the point. So I this is like therapy now. Yes, yeah yeah.

So I thought I went through fourteen years behaving with all entity integrity, speaking the truth, assigns to study and taking that because less not pretend you don't get big hits, political hits, if you go out and do things the way I did IT like, tell them them that because you're thinking, I know who I represent and what Normal people would expect here. And that's wrong. That's a breach not to not being fair.

That's taking a liberty and Normal people down the dog and duck when I expect that liberty to be taken. And i'm not going to let you do IT. Okay, right? So I behaved like that all the time, but so I expected the voters to notice and go all that steep bakes.

All right? You know, does politics. We ought to be done that, and they don't notice. And then when the election comes along, they vote, don't vote you.

Because the prime minister stood in the rain, people around and voted on the of bets on the election. And he didn't stay to the end of d day. And IT really cut through good, solid tory, Normal tory voters.

X forces like me didn't vote for me because Richie didn't stay to the end of d day. And IT was a big mistake because those guys, those d day veterans, won't be around again. So it's a big mistake.

But was IT really a big enough mistake to say, to just stand back and allowed to lose a politician who was willing to take the hits, to stand up for your rights? Now i've that question has been asked, asked an answer. The answer is the voters think, yes.

IT was worth, if you losing Steve. So I go, right? brilliant. I've done my best.

see. But they I think when he came down to in that election, they were picking .

a new party. And then if you look at the vote and wait, the liberal democrats lost the two thousand or so voters, which they picked up from the conservatives in twenty nineteen because of my brakes. IT works.

That's fine. yeah. Two thousand people, exactly as IT happens, went to the liberal democrats because of my break at work.

They'll never forgive me. I tried to get forgiven. I got a prize for my work trying to get forgiven.

And I reset the relationship with island in the E. U. But theyll never forgive me, or I write them off. K, and I wish that I didn't have to. If I saw them in the park and they wanted to be reconcile, i'd be happy to give them a big hug, but they don't want a big hug and they wanted get rid of me and they did.

But the point of making is those people just went from the lib dems to labor, right? And the lib dem vote didn't saw IT just went back to where I used to be, the braxy party of reform. Now reform didn't sw reform wont back to where u kp.

Was in two thousand fifteen. So got these little blips and cuts in the margins. What happened was that labor vote really sank.

Thousands of voters didn't vote. Labor really sank while my vote collapsed. And my vote collapsed not because people chose the labor party. IT didn't happen. people. The labor party in wicker in this election received fewer votes, and last time, but my vote collapsed because a third to a half of the voters who would Normally vote conservative just stayed at home. So they didn't choose labor.

They just, I didn't know.

But so people got to inspire you to go out the vote vote 点， and it's a problem. But, but this is, again, this is why I feel so very, very free. Because I went through this at the time of the lisbon treaty.

I went through is, what on earth am I gonna do? And the more I studied, the more I learn, the more horrified I was by the state of politics, how it's conducted and all the rest of IT. And I thought down, and i'll stamp for election.

So I did stamp for election. And the lesson of fourteen years is i've wrote, just wrote, a substate was IT worth IT? Of course, the suspect, the subtext that, of course, no, no. IT was not. why? Why was not? Well.

because what if I actually go out of IT?

For me? We've left the european union, but the countries bitterly divided. I thought people would get IT.

I thought people would understand that IT wasn't a good idea to positively trample across the democratic rejection of a new constitution. But IT turns out that is not widely held to be important principle. But right in the end, you you can do two things about that. You can be constantly enraged and bitter or in shock. Your soul doesn't say, well, I did my bet.

I don't think you'll know whether I was worth IT yet because you, this is my optimistic take. Is that your experience in government, your understanding why parliament works, the lack of understanding economics or rural world experience from politicians, um you are now on the outside can read that, relate that message out and maybe that can have influence on. Let me just so let me just tell you why, because I.

I've got thing I keeps some of people at the moment ah I know many people who thought can't have any more this conservative party and voted labor. I can't get much worse than the conservatives and now they learn is and I say to them, we don't have a party problem. We have a government problem.

And the government problem I think we have is that the political cycle is out of sink with the economic cycle. And politicians are disingenuously react to the economic cycle because they need to secure votes, which means we essentially kick the can and down the rose. Steve, we either in increased taxes if we can, if not, we borrow more. We debate the currency and everything just gets a little bit shit ter slowly. So I think we have A A government problem, not a party problem.

Yeah, my dear old dad, he's still around. He's retired now but my dear are dad who was used to say, ah, whoever you vote, the government always get in .

and that is a problem. I'm staying that of you dead yeah.

Well, we'll be proud. Mike Baker, you can credit, but there is a government problem. But you know, if I, I can just finish off that so well, that was IT worth IT because, yeah, that was worth IT because actually one of the things i've got out of this is a voice because I just to get loads of media bid, and I do so know what i'm talking about, might be wrong about some things, mostly think I do know why i'm saying what i'm saying.

So i've got a voice. I can continue to have influences without being a member of parliament, which has just cut loads of overheads out of my life. And I can still influence what the public things, hopefully.

And I probably can have more influence now than the hard's mp, but it's all about getting up stream. So this point, so IT was worth IT. yeah. So my supporters, my wife, have told me David IT was worth IT.

So IT very often IT is not felt like to me like I was worthy IT felt like I squander fourteen years of my life when I would have been happier and bet of doing something sure well. But people, so people, because of people I respect, and in some cases love, have told me that IT was worth if so, therefore I must be. So i'm going to that's the great basis on which I am going to proceed. But the one of the things we have to do is just an educated public is the best defense that we .

have against bad politicians. I wrote this down here.

I remember a conversation. I had to forgive me. Richie sonic was chancellor, and he was holding a meeting with M.

P. S. In a large ish room. There were about thirty of us. Mp, round been a big use shape with him. He made some reMarks, and IT was a question and answer.

When I came to me, I made the case that we've been living beyond. I means that too high, we we borrow ed too much with debate in the currency. Biggest bubble history is gona burst.

We can afford the pensions. What we going to do? I made the case a bit more detail, which people read about various places, and he looked to me, but money is a chance through the exchequer.

Yeah, of course, your right, Steve and the whole room horrified because the chance as exec has just agreed with me about the catastrophic fiscal position that we have and the room was a stone's island and then one mp round the end went, yeah, but we can't do anything about IT at this election yeah, yeah and the room, the room deflated and went back to the Normal thing. Oh, that's interesting, Steve. That's an interesting thing. But we can't do anything about IT this time. And why do someone .

else compare for later on?

Because it's just too hard because I need to win my seat. Democracy has been set up as the answer to all our problems, but it's not what democracy is. Is an essential and indispensable way of changing power without violence.

IT was called pop, who said, there are two kinds, government kinds. You can get rid of peacefully, the ballot box on the other kind. The former I called democracy, the other tyranny.

But that's what democracy for, is when the public have had enough, they can peacefully remove those power. Because if you can't peacefully remove, and you've got to a go, you end up with the other main mechanism being used. But that feels to start for most people, most of the time. But that is what is for is not a good way of making collective decisions.

Well, so I tried to dig out is actually my bit in capital letters, look and uneducated public.

Yeah, but yeah, I don't want to be too critical of the public.

No, I understand. I, Steve, I study economics at school. I always economics level was interesting economics. So I lets go thinking, this is the acoming model. Discover big, our economic 啊。

To me, those there are economics reinforce that that the rabbit hole goes very, very deep. Here it's about what's called a paradise shift. A guy called Thomas coon, who wrote the structure of scientific revolutions and the point he makes them.

And again, people are hardwired. I'm doing a lot of work on this with professor pool dolen in my company, the provocation people, people are wide. The group think they they have certain common shared assumptions, and then we share those assumptions.

We can communicate to each other, but the out group get alienated because they don't share those assumptions. And so you end up with these paradigms within which people Operate. And kings came along at a time when economists, other social scientists, want to have all the cus of the physical scientists, be data driven and and all the rest of IT.

But the problem is that social science and physical science are categorically different, is literally a category r because, you know, I would, subjective preferences, marginal value, we will just make different choices. You ask me before I came in coffee, you a day on another day, I had decided to some, but I didn't know until you asked me. Now, how on earth you supposed to plan society or just make the erythia tic work in a model? If a person can't tell you whether having water coffee, you are alarm.

So absurd, it's called the epytus logical problem with the social sciences. And IT was the subject of highs nobel lecture. But again, it's inconvenient for people. So what canes benefit from was a general mood among social scientists that they wanted to be like the physical scientists.

And also another thing that the quantum mechanics have been discovered to Better mind, you're in the university, the ACC academia s so people talk to each other in common rooms. But in quantum mechanics, the world really does work differently. At the macro and micro level.

You've got two quite different sets of rules in stand, ian relativity, neutronic an mechanics and quantum mechanics. And so that justified the idea that micro economics and micro economics were different. But the truth is, the inflation and GDP unemployment are not actually values which work on each other mechanically.

You can give give you loads of other examples. They are not what there is, is these individuals choosing. So in a sense, there's only micro economics. It's again a really fantastically damaging era or have made there's only micro economics. But sometimes micro economics adds up and looks like .

macros on a big scale.

But but yeah, they're winding all these dials. And of course, they do have effect on people's choice choices, but they're not thinking correctly about the the problem of knowledge, the importance of time and and the fact in, for example, you buy a car today is got steel doors. When was the was? When was the iron mind from the ground? Was IT today? No, was last week.

No, probably not. That month ago, doesn't seem very likely, is probably years since that iron always taken out the ground to get into the car you buy today, today. But the circular flow model that the kenyans use just assumes that production time doesn't matter and say that everything's being produced.

But as soon as you aggregate away the structure of production through time, suddenly now you can legitimately dial the interest rate nob. An interest rates are about people's time preference. How much do I want to charge you to get me to put off my consumption? I've got ten pounds.

You wanna borrow IT. I could have had something. I could have had a low of bread.

Nice life, several nice lives of bread for china. But you wanna borrow IT. So I landed you.

What's the premium? M, i'm gna chance you that the interest rate, but a long time economists, dian, just to give you a, give you a view as a clue about how a lot of useless they are when I was on the treasury select no Allene funning enough. Now i've read my literature, know coming from explain treaty.

select committees, parliament.

there are a number of select committees, committee s of members of parliament, which screw tenise government departments. So I was on the one which screw ized the treasurer, which also, the fact, does all of the institutions associate with the trajectory like the bank of england. So I never like mark carney and the others, and anti how and others I know them are quite like them.

I ve had lots of conversations with the month of the record, but it's not long ago in people. If they can be bother to look, they'll find the session televised where the bank of england, when i'm impressing them, the interest rates were a policy choice. And actually, to his credit, mark colony did degree with me that the setting of interest rates was a policy choice.

But almost all the economists were telling me the interest rates have been super low for a super long time because of savings preferences elsewhere. It's funny how that didn't last long because, yeah, they were and they were insisting on me. So this is the monetary policy committee whose job is to twitter le a dial.

And it's obvious now that the era space and software engineer who self tour on measure and hike was more correct about interest rates during this long period of super low rates. And the monitor policy committee, how can that be, is because the paradigm is wrong. So one of the things we need to do, we like you yeah and it's really is you and me and your listeners yeah.

We've got to go get our politicians and get to face up to the mistakes that they make and chAllenge them because we need a paradise shift. If the economic profession understood the problem of knowledge that no one can, I don't want to have for lunch. Here is loads of food out there.

I don't want going to have would be something. And I got ten key lose to lose. But am I other burger? But I don't know, you don't know.

And the point of making is the a pyo logical problem of the social sciences means that a lot of um uh mathematic economics econometrics isn't just blox technical term that ballets that they've also got to sort out that time production time does matter. That people's actual time preferences matter and savings rates. And if they just talk IT out time, and if its own all that they sorted out with time and knowledge, the paradise would collapse. And we end up with an economics profession because at the moment i'll be economists, listening to this, being furious with me. What do you you know.

you got degree economic furious with you.

Can I tell you another story please? Do I want? So I went to the london school of economics and to listen to the high eight lecture delivered by haswell to sotos, one of the good guys.

There's a few years as raw about something he has to say about reserve ratio. But sitting outside, he's a really good australian school economist. So we go to dinner afterwards with me, john redwood, hao topic banks and our friend of mine, bunch of economics professors, and me in haste.

I agree with everything haste says. I'm lecturing professors now on why they're wrong. And eventually, inevitably, one of the blows his top at me.

And i'm now sitting there with an an L. C. Economics professor to my right, furiously setting me a second year economics question.

And apart from the fact, obviously lost his temper. And a debate are turned into a rail. The stony silence.

And he went through this question, I current members, non porn. But he said this question out IT was, IT was complicated. IT was difficult.

And I said that I went through every sort of IT were assumption on line of the question and proved that IT was interesting intellectual exercise of absolutely no relevance to the real world. And you know what? Everyone agree.

Everyone can see, I was right. How can I be the an informal, self trained era space and software engineer can defeat and lc economics professor at the L. C.

In front of other elsa economics professors IT by dismantling a second year economics question IT IT makes me angry to talk about IT. And the reason is making me angry, as i'm thinking about people like my dad out there building houses. I mean, all these joints, a warn out.

Now, I hope you listen to this. I love my dad. He'd worked all his life, put roves on houses and staircases in northern of IT that so in and hamon is shoulder as elbows, needed steps. They are all react.

And while he's out there building houses, these guys who don't actually know what they're doing have got the pretense of knowledge and the arrogance to think that they can turn up and dial nose, which determine how fast and slow working people I am, a data working and ruin them. Of course not my father, but people get ruined by interest rates. Could be too ee, too low, misdirected resources.

It's a terrible unjust situation. And then very often the same economics professors having intellectually legitimized at least the social system, which creates this injustice, radical injustice, then they turn up, they complain about the injustice and say, we should have redistribution. Oh, who are these guys running our lives?

This epo de is brought you by the casino, the world's first license to bitcoin casino. Now whether you're into slots, table games or live casino experiences, big caso has at all, and they have lightning fast transactions, no deposit limits and no waiting on withdraws. You can enjoy game in the way has meant to be seamless and secure.

Now big, as you know, you can play with bitcoin, making your experience faster, safer and more private. Plus they offer some of the best rewards in industry from bonuses, allow programs to keep the fun going. Now if you're looking for a talk to a game and experience had over the big caso D I O, which is B I T C A S I N O I O that is big aco dio, and please remember to gamble responsibly.

Sapo bank is the world's a first fully licensed and regulated bitcoin enabler bank. Sample banks, all in one APP, allows you to secure, transact and grow your bitcoin, and you can also earn bitcoin daily with interest on your savings for both B, T, C, N USD as well as get cash back on all your card spending. With over a decade of experience in bitcoin custody, you can trust that your assets are safe with zao bank.

They played no whole security with military grade swiss bunkers, straight regulatory oversight to ensure your funds are always protected. And as a member, you'll get a dedicated account manager who can guide you through their products and help with everything you need if you want to find out more, please head over to the zapp bank dot com for slash W B D, which is X A P O B A N K dot com for slash w bd. For those of you out there who want to protect your bitcoin, I want to tell you about Carter, the lead in bitcoin security solution and a solution that I use for my bitcoin and my football clubs at bitcoin treasury.

Now, if you're seriously protecting your bitcoin, you will need a rock, a solid security plan. And Carter gives you just that with their multi signature security and key management services, costa makes IT easier than ever to take control of your bittorrent without ever having the risk of a single point of failure. Now they offer multiple level of protection or design with simplicity and ease of use in mind.

And that works even if you're not attack expert. So don't leave your bit coin security to chance. Go to castle to I O and check out the services that I am using today to break my bitcoin so you can protect your stack and sleep easily.

You can find out more caa dot I O, which is C A S A 到 I O that is casta dot I O。 I say why I am angry. I'm a business, Steve, business of creating multiple businesses.

I understand the chAllenge to create a business is hard, but sometimes it's good times, but I hate the fact that why I get angry every time government comes a steps in my mind makes IT a little bit harder because it's another job i'm not created, another business are not created. But I also I get angry because I I can see what's coming and I don't want to be alarming or hyperbolic about this. But i've traveled with this job.

I've into the extremes of, into Venus. Vila bled into argentina. I spent a little time in argentina. I want argentina. I, for this meal with these guys. And they said, everybody in genta is two jobs of their job, which is empty percent of time.

The other thirty percent of the time, they are a financial director, and they're trying to just plan their money so that they can retain as much value as possible. If people listen to understand, is inflation so high in argentina? People want to get rid of the pay so as quickly as primary, want to get rid of the pay as quickly as possible.

So they're trying to get dollars or they trying to get U S. Parties, whatever, but they move stuff around. Ah me lye warned about this the west that is coming and and I kind of see IT coming in that I do something similar.

And if I make cash profit, I can't hold cash. That's not a good idea to hold cash. The whole cash is being debase.

So I get angry because I see there and then I see labor come in and had new taxes, more borrows where I know that's gonna mean less profit for me, a more inflation. But also they've create this culture where the determination ich has become a pejorative rather than celebrating wealth and success. Yeah, it's actually kind of demonize everything is a for the risk.

So i'm an angry thing in you, do you you don't know what you actually vote in for here. You don't know the outcome you're voting for here. But the examples exist around the world. You look at what happened in the argentina, that is not that way there. Tomorrow or may be is the yeah there's .

good reasons why politics is going. Hey, everywhere. I mean, just been reelected as a convicted felon and this has been reelected present united states, france has got problems. You it's going on everywhere.

If you go back to seventeen and fifty and look at the value of money which the house of comes from you on a linear scare, you get a flat line and then a bit of inflation through the first after the twenty of th century through the wars, and then you get almost a vertical lines since one thousand nine hundred and seventy one. why? Because the postwar britain woods currency system, which tied the dollar to gold, ended by nixon so we could pay for the vietnam am war.

And yeah, once he did that, the quantity of money throughout all of our lifetime has just been soaring. So one saying, as the industrial revolution took place, with money broadly holding its value, if you zoom in by putting on a log scale, you get some fluctuations. But weirdly, you get some fluctuations. But over all over hundred years.

the value of money increases.

Have you seen that website?

The happened in seventy one. You go. There you go. This websites got every single chance that you could possibly think, think of, yeah, to do with, here we go. So this is a good, I used to produce this web, but this podcast a while ago, yeah and it's just every shot in one thousand nine hundred and seventy one products to look at that the breaking activity and compensation in nineteen.

I'm gonna. So use this. I had this argument with mark colony and showed him some charts in to asked him to analyze them about productivity and golden. So but IT look, canes to stick with the injustice. Canes rote a thing in the economic consequences of peace, which in a trip.

And I have to say that, again, because of love, IT canes role in the economic consequences of the peace inappropriate, attributing the remark to lenin that the surest way to overturn the existing basis of society was to borch the currency because that engages processes of disruption, unjust redistribution of wealth and all the rest of IT. why? Because when you are standing close to the source of the new money, you get IT first and you get the benefit of the new money before it's devalued.

Can I pick on that? Because you been in government. How really is that? Because i've wondered how people actually making that decision because I know it's coming down or is IT just is IT just organic in that way?

And it's a sad reality of most people around government, in the treasury, in parliament, listening to me talk about this will be typically i've found that they are very interested, but this is an alien language to them. They just don't know. Again, i've written about this stuff on my subset.

Why do people become mp s usually? Because there's the one or two issues that really bother them. So for me, in the end, ultimate was the lisbon treaty.

Yet that democracy itself was being trapped and I wasn't having, but I was also deeply bothered about human rights, war, peace, the standard of human rights. OK. I'm not a screaming ish man, but you don't adopt and torture people because they might be innocent.

But for anything else. So waging wars, we ought not to wait all that but the thing that we really was devious the one thing but all mp s will be the same. They'll have the one thing and IT might be the climate or IT might be, uh if sewage on the beach or or IT or might be animal welfare, there will be A A whole range of these things.

And people entitle to those views. And you get we vote for you, then get into parliament. You've got to deal with everything.

But one of the things i've discovered is there are very, very, very few politicians who saw a step back, go, how does our social system work? what? What is actually really systematically wrong with this? Now we are an engineer, and the thing about being an engineer is you've ttl be very, very practical.

But you recognize as an engineer that you can't be very, very practical until you've been very, very theoretical. Because if put IT very strong straight wards, if somebody is sitting on an airplane waiting to go on holiday and IT breaks down, they expect an engineer to turn up, just fix IT and puppetty. But also when they're sitting on the airplane, they'd like to believe that the airplanes built by people who knew what made airplanes fly and the wings stay on and the engines keep turning.

And that's why you need both theory and practice. But what typically happens with politicians, what politicians are good at is getting elected. And to get elected, what you have to do is persuade people to turn out and vote for you.

You don't need to be oud to say, a psychological problem with the social science is while understanding what IT is or heerden's of and and indeed, right. But what's wrong with the world as we need a paradigm shift in economics, so the economists can talk about the hyo capital, knowing themselves what IT means, the time structure, production and the opened logical problem of the social sciences. And but people just don't go into politics to have this conversation. And they think people like me who do are a bit weird. And like the out working of this is the mess .

that we have is so frustrating, is so frustrating because I said, they think, and well, you imagine, imagine a different scenario. Steve Baker, become trance of the cheaper. What would happened?

I wouldn't have wanted to be a chance for the exchequer.

wouldn't else, to do the job.

right? So when we've had a lot of rebellion, great net zero covered and i've stopped some stuff, you know, I got the books about breaks, have me on a lot of the pages and invite anyone to read tim shipment volumes. I hadn't read the fourteen soon, but the third, when I put a flag in everywhere I appear and i've tweed IT out, you'll find us a lot of flags in that book, and lots of people contributed to get in, contributed, but then went on and .

did the covered, locked down was the 学院。

But, but I just, I slipped into leading these rebellion party.

because dw can.

well, ask me to do part a point how IT works now that and getting up string by the time a question has come to the house of commons, it's really too late to solve IT IT doesn't matter what goes into that house to comments today with the labor party with this majority, k sta will get his way. And so it's to members of parliament rebelling in the house of commons. It's too late.

There's a fallacy goes around that members of parliament decide policy. You said that earlier as broadcast members of parliament don't decide policy, they legitimize policy is very different. They think they do.

Some of them and lots of people lobby parliament. But it's actually, it's actually diversionary activity. People go in the lobby parliamentary arians, thinking IT makes any different.

But the decisions being taken by civil service somewhere else, consulting who they want to console and very often not even taking a steer from a minister on who they should consult. This is our new subject. But you, when I was a braxy minister, is very difficult to get officials to actually consult people who are progress.

I they're constant out consulting people who be, remain and thought it's a terrible mistake, which you can discuss whether is or isn't on a mistake. But since you ve got to do IT only talk in to people who think it's wrong, to try isn't a very constructive way for it's not surprising was difficult. But you know, somebody credited me with saving Christmas because boris didn't lock down Christmas twenty two and a sort of thing.

But you can just pull that off if you're lucky. And if they, your opposition will vote with the rebels from the government benches. You can pull off something big in the comments and I ve done, but what you can do is really steer the life of the nation from the house. It's just too late.

So how do you get back up? string? First thing is you need to be a minister.

That is partly why was glad to go back into government, because enough, enough, I need to get upstream. I need to be a ministry. I'd managed to reset the relationship with island, and there by the E.

U. The winds of frameworks flared, but at least reset relationship. And and out of fresh beginning, IT was necessary.

But I could only do IT by being a minister if I done the apologies is a back bencher IT would have had impact what IT wouldn't have been consequential like a minister doing IT um have you going to get further back? What is IT the bears upon ministers and it's what officials think as well. It's what think time to think.

It's what's in journalist tire wrote about second hand dealers of of ideas. IT really matters. Law course work asked, can be back knock.

What if putting taking the V. A T. Back off? School fees took money away from state school children.

Now a decent, civilized person would just to do, I think, why that's reasonable because privilege should pave the anonyme. It's just on this just because IT is in combat on a politician. To think seriously about what we're actually saying and what you're engaging.

I think that there is a limit to how much we owe to other people. I think that that limit should be met voluntarily, overwhelmingly. Now there should be a welfare state we're always going to provide for.

Those are ultimately can provide for themselves. Online saying is as a limit with not the slaves of other people. And we should have the dignity of choosing for ourselves. So we support now. So the very question that Lauren asked, I know Laura, i'm like when you do this clipper or send IT to, but laurel assumption was fundamentally collectivist.

IT was fundamentally her assumption that taking vat back off school fees could be could be taking money out of the the hands of safe school children in their education. But this really is, don't know, but in kind somebody might make the case. But my point is IT probably is bullshit. But even if it's not bullet, parents are still entitled to educate their children without put in to one percent on talk to pay for somebody else his kids education, particularly when they are already pay the income tax, vat on everything else, the national .

insurance IT said the school fees, one particularly pisses me off um yeah I mind that I told you a great class engineer, he put everything he couldn't put me through a privacy but he .

can afford IT. He had to work .

over time to do IT people literally. My dad, he was an four days on, four days off. He is four days off. He was usually work in the overtime shift to pass her, yeah, you know, as well as I do a nurse salary in an aircraft and generous salary computer kids in first school, he did IT right.

And he said to me, do to save your kids and after after that, for my kids, good on you both this this text is come in and and the point i've tried to make, even tweet about this. The point i've tried to make is when you observe that somebody is a support as an idea what the rich can afford. Rich can.

It's the ones on the margins who are working second jobs, sacrifice and holidays, which you making. It's tough decisions. But there and I know people have pulled their kids out by school because of this. And so what's happening now is those people are going into the birthday application scheme, which means the bursary application scheme is is kind of take more, but also we .

don't pay to pay vat on water.

We don't pay vat on children's clothes, we should pay on education. We should actually celebrate this and push this IT really pissed me off because, again, is a fundamental misunderstanding of the economics of this.

but labor want to change. So I think this is, again, just understanding where politicians coming from. There are two theories of justice.

There's the idea of justice being in the process, and there's the idea of justice being in the outcome. And the contemporary left is defined by a book called role, a guy called rules, called the a theory of justice. And it's all about justice in the outcome.

So again, when you listen to people, inequalities are held up as as like a synonym for injustice, and some inequalities are unjust. But I believe it's the process of how you get there that determines whether it's just to know. So just to be clear, I don't want you to see anyone left starving in the gutter.

IT breaks my heart to see homeless people out here giving more money, and I should do knowing gna spend IT on drugs. I've been involved in homelessness ness for a long time, but I still breaks mark to see. I don't leave anybody starving naked in the gutter or suffering generally, but that we still got a duty to to be displayed to consider how social systems should work on what justice is.

People make different decisions. Don't I have to go to a casino last night? I didn't gamble anything. I might have played black jack, but I wouldn't play real.

But the point is, if you and I both went into a casino with a thousand pounds in a pocket, you play internet all night, and I played black jack all night, I to play black jack, I might walk out like you, like I did last time, but I might walk out, i've been turned five hundred quid into four and off like I did once. Now i'm not a gambling man, and I can believe IT alone, but I can sometimes walking to make for enough. But the point is, if you go and play, really, you most certainly lose IT all.

But other people, more sensibly, wouldn't go and take five hundred quid and wasted and casino. They put IT on stocks and shares and leave IT there for ten years. And that be the sensible thing to do, but point on making as we choose. And it's no point at the end of the process in ten years time when one of us is starving naked in the gutter because we wasted our money on a caso. And one of us is doing medium ly OK because we occasionally he went not much, we wasted some in a casino.

And somebody else is only really ever and as much as they couldn't invested IT in real assets, which served the productive needs of others, and they're the rich one, the other two of us don't deserve to dip in their pockets and take off and what they justly earned. And the problem that left have this is IT the justice in the process on the outcome. It's one thing not to be willing on a humanely arian grounds to leave anyone absolutely an object poverty.

And i'm not I I want to lift people out of poverty, but it's also not humAnitary arian and not right. It's not moral to think that there's only justice in the outcome and unfortunate. That's what we face with this labor party.

They think justice is in the outcome, and they're completely blind to the process. They forget that some people get rich through hard work. If started, a number of businesses understand some.

Now it's hard work, is hard work. I've spent I mean, i'm forty six now and I quit university at twenty in high work yeah launched my first business in highway uh and you know for the last twenty six years of my boss, I might mean my sunday, you will tell you afterwards you know I am a up at six well, historically, up at six got a Better at ten very long time off and go to the place where we, okay, the kids can go to school.

We can have new things. And by the way, not anti tax. I pay tax, but I resent, I resent A T V.

I resent to what really pieces me off. yeah. I resent this idea that government comes in and it's their choice, what they can.

Just everything you have, we will choose what we're gonna take of you, which just going to, that really pieces me off. And people will support the idea. But the I really, really hate is, is the double, triple taxes.

Yeah, I paid my corporation tax. I paid the national insurance on the people i've employed. I've made a profit wish, may paid in a dividend, yes, yeah, which I paid my dividend tax on.

I'd then choose to invest that, and if that successful, I pay capable against tax, whether I could just spend IT yeah and also what I choose to leave behind my children that face an inheritance tax. I I just do not like this repeat attacks, these repeat attacks. I feel your .

entire will not like you .

but but I don't mind painted look, if government was efficiently and know I went mine tax so much. But what you know what's very clear to me now is that i'm not paying these taxes, these additional taxes, this increase four percent, couple gains. I'm not paying this to make society Better.

I'm paying this to fund the incompetence of the organism government. I know that now, and I fucking resented IT pieces me off, because what's what's happiness? That money isn't reaching the pockets of people who need them most. It's not doing that. But what IT is, is coming out the .

the job creation that I can do. yes. So is so much to yes, no, no, I be I feel about that.

I am ister and I really constructively with officials. The officials we have in my experience are as bright and hard working and well intention does anyone else. They go to work to do a good job.

I was always very, very fond of my officials. They were talented people, and yet somehow IT all goes wrong. So the issue is not a not that you suggested this, but the issue is not incompetent officials is structural, it's incentives. And I would also say that almost however efficient government became, we still can't afford the age related spending promises we've made.

I just that can see how i'm going study to show you, but I just don't see how any amount of government efficiency is going to make IT possible on the present trajectory of expenditure soaring away and revenge stagnating at these crippling levels. retirement? Well, that we keep doing IT away.

I mean, when I join the air force, I supposed to retire at fifty five in two years from now. Now I look at retire at sixty seven. But we are going to have to do somebody done.

have to do those things, explain that people understand this this issue or pension issue, like because I don't think a lot of people have really understand economics, or they are all welfare. What is this issue of pensions? Is these unfunded .

liabilities, actually. But the welfare state was set up to have basically affair an age, a demographic param about like that, a very, very few people living to to ripe old age, and plenty of Young working age people to fund them. So the pension came in relatively late in your expected lifespan, and you didn't live very long.

And and, and so a large body of people would be paying your pension in in old age. What's happened is, over the years, people are living longer. So this pyramid d gets higher. So the dependent that reduces what's called the dependency ratio, that they say three working people supporting every pension now instead of ten, whatever the numbers are, those the numbers, whatever the number of. But that said, the pyra gets high as people live longer, that the average age gets up towards around dating instead of seventy, but also is getting narrow because people have in fewer kids.

So instead of having A A pension pyramid like this, which can sustain the working age population pain for the pensioners at the top, you end up with A A pyramid that's coming up and up and fewer and fewer working age people and suddenly out excruciating because we've got all these pensioners who've been made promises throughout their lives if they expect to be kept, and they've got too few working age of people. Now, one answer to this as cause to top population back up with immigration, but people can't bear that either. And you know, that's another subject.

Isn't IT but big? yes.

But you can't obviously, we cannot just import hundreds of thousands of people every year just to keep the first state going.

What is the? What is the other solution?

The other solution is unafraid productivity growth. The only really you go. So when you look at the office for budget responsibility t ie s analysis, which is totally mainstream of this problem, the debt projections we have, which will see .

dead soaring work yeah from .

the office budget responsibility fiscal sustainability report. But if if you bring up every go, i'll tell you what a pause and let me bring this yes. So let me just to be three days.

So this is completely mainstream analysis. He says the government's office for budget responsibility, independently looking at west spendings going so that Green line. But the top is total government spending.

In the yellow is revenue, total revenue, which is taxes, plus the other things which are non tax running. The spiky lines are government spending, as they actually turned out. So the first sort of pyramid shape Spike is the global financial crisis, and the very sharp one is covered.

So the first thing is that's gona be further disturbances like this in the future IT work. And that the crucial thing is, though, even without those disturbances, you can see that spending is there soaring away to to get on to like sixty percent of GDP by twenty seventy two. And you know that that feels like a long time away. But if you're twenty today, you can reasonably expect to live until twenty seventy two or corner over .

there facing boy yeah when this .

is White matters today, because IT takes a long time. Meanwhile, taxes are a historic high. And even at a historic high, their forecasts to have decreasing revenues.

That gap is the problem. That and that is gonna be incredibly difficult to close whoever is in power. This is crucial.

Every time a labor politician says to me the legacy you handed over, I say, yeah, you write IT is bad. Let's talk about the real legacy. So that in a sense, if if people only understood that chart, that people start, let's go to the next one.

So this is the actual debt projection. So that's the gap between spending and revenue. But this is how you accumulate the day and you debt, and you can see IT raising away if you go down to the next one.

So this is the only really straight forward and humane way to solve this problem, because you can't just differ on pensions and health care for elderly people. You just can't. The only way to deal with this .

would kind of soft for anyway, because the only way we can do IT currently is debased the currency. So the actual, real pension that will get one right.

So this is this, that protective with that work? Well, so this is the problem, is that the politics of that. So let's deal with that and come back the productivity. Here's the problem because for politicians like us, explaining earlier is never a good time to cut, right, George, born to his credit age back so that that that that pera made more people were still work into something else.

But because it's never a good time and because the triple look, i'm sure I don't know, but i'm fairly highly certain that David Cameron, George osborne put the triple lock on pensions in as a bare trap for the labor party because they were sure they were gonna SE in twenty fifteen. And all theyve done is create a bare trap for a, which leads to these nightmares, so that the issue is, is never a good time for politicians. And that's why what's likely to happen.

The central scenario is we limon, and limp on and limp on, and we have quietly trying to get away. I say, wee governments try to quietly get away with more QE to try mitigate where the that is going. The problem we've got is that we've just had two massive rounds of Q A.

In dealing with the global financial crisis. Then dealing with covered that created the biggest bull market bubble in history. Andy held danger of economy to the bank of england, i'm sure, is right.

And it's only got worse. Ince, he said, IT, so I see one of two things happening. If you take the bank for international settlements, the central bank, er's central bank get very mainstream.

They wrote a working paper on all this back in on twenty eleven, working paper three hundred and IT shows all these disastrous debt projections. And they conclude by saying it's a threat to monetary stability. What do they really mean by that? That in the end, to keep the bond market going, you have to keep debasing the currency. So during covet argentina.

argentina.

i'm afraid so, yes. So during kova, the reason that people were buying government bonds from the government was because they knew the bank of england would be along to buy them again soon off them using Q, E. So it's like two arms of the stake, because the banking england is independent.

But IT IT is a privilege state actor. Yeah, yeah. So you got the state issuing bonds and the bank of england buying bonds.

And meanwhile you'll get enriching the cup between the two. And then again, injustice. Yes, but but you did.

How much longer really do we think we can keep distorting the real economy? Because they are eventually the real economy, the real world, world people's actually actual choices and the availability of real physical resources eventually is onna catch up with what amounts to accounting games? And if so, one of two things to me will happen.

Either will end up with a massive inflation, as as politicians, one where another tried to debase the currency to cope with this. Or we ll end up with a sudden deflation of a massive on market bubble and a panic. Now what happens in that panic will really matter.

So they remind that politicians in that panic can't suddenly slash health and pension spending. What will probably happen in that panic? Bond market bubble disaster, they probably end up going for Q A of some form, and then you get another inflation.

And this is the museum thing. Meses wrote something along the lines. The the only way out of an inflation like this was either to stop the date and let the crisis, the recession, the depression happen, or to have a currency catastrophe.

Now i'm afraid i've come to the conclusion, unpalatable as IT, is the all of the so called public choice things, what the factors that determine what politicians do, all of those factors push politicians not to solve this problem in advance. And that means we will have a currency attack. Phy, but the alternative to a currency catastrophe with all the suffering IT will entail is productivity, because on the obs own projections, that yellow line at the bottom is with higher productivity. T two and after senate, instead of no point five at all, if we could just be more productive, we deal with this because, basically because we produce more real goods and services to indirectly pay for the pensions of older people. And the here's the rub, bo, do you become more productive by taxing people .

so that you don't become more productive by giving people excuses not to work?

But the thing is, we are living at a time of amazing potential because the combination of generating A I and quantum computing, synthetic biology, eeta, that creates the potential not only to have amazing new cures for things potentially like dementia, also at least push off dementia, so it's not so expensive to deal with. But the combination of generative A I and developments in computing, notably content, these things could could deliberate an extraordinary gain in productivity, but nobody really knows how it's gona work out. IT could be very dangerous like synthetic biology.

synthetic bio o yeah that .

could be very tRicky if people can .

suddenly create viruses themselves and tell you need a productivity boom. And i'm telling you right now, as a as a business owner, um you are making a hard of me to make money and make any of me to create businesses. I'm going to create less businesses.

But there's an another thing I do have other this point income to create businesses. But I see I see where the economics is governing based on your policies. So why would I create businesses into a full train technical economy? So you actually not give me the end of the truth for me is, is that we I personally think that IT what's required as the unpalatable, which is a massive, massive cut in spending.

i'm a ID in the short run. So this is the problem of the mess we have created for ourselves. In the short run, if we want an economic bone, we've got to cut spending.

And we've got to cut spending where it's really made. You can't baLance the books by cutting the even the M O D, because the defense budgets is not too big, not big enough to make a difference. You can't cut IT by cut in the foreign ice. You gotta cut IT by cutting the spending where is made. And that's pensions and health care and education.

So I i've been through the o i've been through the obel website. I've been through the the budget as I could find wrong. But the n is about twenty percent, about two hundred billion a year getting interest itself.

This is one I guess me is about hundred billion and nothing education, about eighty seven billion um the nh is a funny one because it's that yeah it's not politically popular to attack the nh. But I think about the simple things that why can't we charge for appointments? Why can we just be not charged for appoints .

just because of the public right? They would be about IT. And you can see, look with the consent.

So look there in minds that I had that conversation with russia and other M. P. S.

About the unaffordable city of age related spending. They all, he agreed with me, you can take IT for granted. Everyone has been a treasury minister knows this.

And yet, somehow, when labor cut wins of fuel payments for wealthy pensioners and reduced to means tested, which is the right thing to have done, when they did that, conservative party opposed IT. why? Because I was cheap and easy politics and this is the problem. It's sort of it's easy to blame them for being an adequate.

But I come back to what said earlier, if you think the politicians, you've got an adequate at their job, if you all fall in a democracy because you didn't go into the meeting and deselect them and get someone else, so alright, but what probably more likely is that the politician is just responding to the incentives that they have. And at the moment, older pensioners who are wealthier think they're entitled to their interview el allowance. And i've metic because I knock I took parents and all the rest of you, you know, people because but when the winter fuel allowance was introduced, I remember wealthy of pensions saying they're going to give IT to charity or spends IT on a good bottle of whisk because they didn't need IT.

And now somehow it's grave injustice to take IT away. But why is the conservative party done its incentives? Why are the incentives that? X, because it's what the public want.

You know what if, rich, I came about ideas that then said, you know what? Good idea? We agree with you. We back on this.

I think people to go, wow, god, to start pick up on this. He started to say the things that i've been saying for years about this and sustainability. why? But not for nigel.

He's able to say, because he can just blame someone else, because he but his budget that he brought forth his prosper ding plans rather than budget. His spending plans in his manifesto were fantasy. The ifs had a look at the miss fantasy stuff.

So but he he just his opportunity. And so he started to say that because he can see that needs to be sad. So he's gonna do IT reform a .

saying in the right thing that, I mean, look to me, reform a reflection on kind of mirrors. What's happening in the U. S.

really. I know, I know what you said about a trump. And to that I spent a lot of time in america.

I understand why one that election was really office is what was coming because, uh, people were sick, things that was sick of the top dollars kind of eggs they were sick of um you know just a range of issues but but I see the same same thing happened here. You know we got chemin now. great.

It's more of the same. Every like you between labor politics is more the same, all the same. And I think what's happening is the patience is going shorter now.

So yeah, so well, the argument make is a good one. Of course, IT is so. But but I don't think kamiya more of the same and the test will come in what you actually does. There's no point really debating IT now. But you know if I was the leader of the opposition, and you know, because because I might have been, you know, if I can see a path, I might have been a fight, one my see you, would you have been sense as more the same?

This episode is what to you? By ledger, the most trusted bitcoin hardware wallet. Now, if you are serious about protecting your bitcoin, ledger has the solution.

You need that hardware while that gives you complete control over your private keys, ensuring that your bitcoins stay, stay from hacks, fishing a mware. And i've been a customer often there, two thousand and seventeen love the product use IT for my bitcoin. I use IT with my castle multiseminal for protecting the foot class bitcoin too.

Now would ledger sleep easy to use devices and the letter life APP managing your bitcoin has never been more secure or convenient. And whether you're a long time holder or knew to the world of bitcoin, letter makes IT symbol to keep your assets protected. So if you want to find out more, please do head over to ledger dot com and secure your bitcoin today.

That is leger dot com, which is L E D G E R 点 com。 That is leger dot com. Is episode brought to you by river the best platform for bacon n investing and financial services? 那 whether you are just starting out or managing a large holding river has everything you need to maximize your back on journey。 Now with zero fee recent buys, you can snack that automatically without worrying about hidden fees.

And for high that worth individuals, river office private client services, giving you personal support, secure custody and deep liquidity that can help you manage and grow your bitcoin portfolio. And for businesses, river provides business counts, allowing companies to securely hold and managed bitcoin as part of their financial strategy. Visit river dot com today and find out more. That is river dot com, which is R I V E R dot com. This epo de is brought you by letter, the only bitcoin back financial service, the eye SONY use.

So whether you're looking to earn interesting a bit coin, get alone without selling your asses, or buy more biton with these laden, has the tools help you manage and grow your wealth with letting you can an interest on your bitcoin and USD c holdings, or unlock the value of bitcoin with secure low interest loans, or without needing to sell your stack, laden is built for bit corinna, who want more flexibility with their assets. So if you want to find out more, please head over the letter or A O for sash. Mister ob knoxes to get started.

That is LED to I O for lash. mr. G noxious.

would you have been set? Is more the same to me?

What i'm saying is I don't I don't see a scenario where they can say IT says one term labor party because of it's get in that they're going to radically change .

things again. I think we're wrong, this trade, right? So he started to say IT, but he's not expecting actually have to do anything about IT because he's not he's not gonna m the next government.

But theyve done really well to get five m pace and people celebrating that. But again, this is the problem with politics. You need to just always detached yourself in the present and survey the the grand battle field, if at the next election.

In five years time natio farage does really well. He might double the number of M P. He has, in which case i'll have ten. And that means that in ten years time we will go into an election with only ten m base.

And if he doubles this number of M, P, S, again, in ten years time, he'll have twenty M P, S, and he'll still be irrelevant, and not for the next government. And this is where I get really angry. I can feel my blood because no one .

person is an opportunity.

st. This, this is what drives me crazy. It's obvious to me what the right answer is to this problem. OK obvious. All your viewers who are watching this podcast should go enjoying the conservative party, and they'll be turning off screaming at the show now, because without them, we're doomed if they go to reform or vote for reform that condemns us to waiting another generation when, after which, by the way, njal faragon Richard ties about sixty only that would be dead by the time reform. If IT succeeds, at the maximum end of what is plausible, far, ties will be dead.

Hi, because I think more right, because at the moment .

there's another political vehicle which only lost power because voters stayed home because they went inspired. The conservative party didn't lose its votes to labor. That is just isn't what happened. The voters stayed at home and some swan's reform, including from the labor party. So the thing that's terror's frustrating to me is, if only your listeners who do get this stuff, because if they've listened this so far through this book test, they really care about this stuff. But if they would just please, for the love of god, give up on reform and join the conservative party, they would turn the conservative .

party into what IT needs to be. I just don't. If they not optimism.

it's experience.

I think, yeah, no, no, I get IT. And I wish, I wish something that was on the front bench, and I wish I was palace to to raise these economic issues and make real change. But you've but also said it's politically on pop.

If I was on the front bench, if I was the leader of the opposition and i've always sought to speak the truth, as I understand IT in all circumstance, sometimes i've had slightly, say IT carefully, but i've always made sure that what i've said is true, necessary, rightly motivated, beneficial, with permission, where that was required. But, but was so you, god.

So here's a thing, if I was on the front bench, how much would I be able to achieve down all these paths without the public behind me? And this is why I get so frustrated. Everybody's impatient.

They all want an answer like that because we're all used. If we don't like the iphone, we go to get an android. But politics doesn't work like that if you get elected as mp. I was there for fourteen years in a seat which became marginal. Other emps will be there for thirty years, and it's a long, long lead time.

So even if I was the leader of the opposition saying all the things I say, I still need members because without members, I can't get rid of the people I need to get rid of and replace them with someone else. You've just got to have the support of the public. And what happens is a public who won't quick answers that fast and effective answers like they can get in markets go out, well, I want a choice.

I'll go somewhere else. So they go to reform. But if you actually look at what reforms plans are, their plans are really populist. 对我 population itself .

is is a term of nuances that requires new ones， because because .

I think I think .

popular as alternative uses a majority against political threat. First, if you bring up that cost of government article, I put my this chart there, Peter, mcm mac don't come. I been used as a majority tive.

I think rightly it's uh, the there are issues with populism in the complex issues are simplified. I think it's uh, uh I think this can be political opportunity. But at the same time, if reform, i'm not saying this is a reform vote.

I'm i'm a not vote, but 好的 reform are appealing to people。 They have got a growing fifteen and vote. What my issue is, is that conservative for me would have been way Better than for me, the labor party.

I would never vote for labor because I just fundamentally, ideologically disagree with them. But this tax as a percentage GDP, yeah, this is two thousand to two thousand. twenty.

Yes, just up in one way. If you go down U. K. Taxation, debt is about to GDP, and you've also got debt is.

So what i'm saying is I as I said before, I don't think we have a party problem. I think we have a government problem. I think historically, the conservative ideologically we have the best is for government yeah.

But at the moment, I don't recognize this conservative party. And so for me to say, oh, good, join the conservatives, they're fix this. This is to say that the other concern is gonna one.

I see things going to change. And that's my point, is that I think is we don't need more this. We need, we kind of need revolution people. We need an entire government populated by people who understand next minutes like you, who can cross the area and say, we can't Carry because all bringing this is so important.

And this is so important because bearing in mind the our civilization rests on the division of labor, the television of labor is only possible because of money, because of money Prices, profit and loss. That's been a big left in the socialism. As soon as they try and do things through planning, IT fails and you end up with even millions of people dead that that is.

And societies much more fancy than people realize Normally around, it's often said that were two meals away from collapse. civilization. You saw what with toilet paper.

This is ridiculous. You know, society's civilization is much more fragile than people realised. And we've been sitting and talking about the collapse of monetary systems because of violate spending pressure, pressure. So when we look at these things, this tearing frustration that we all have is totally understandable. People have got legitimate complaints, totally understandable.

The thing really that i'm saying, which is IT, this is again why i'm not very popular compared to boris or jacor or nigel because unfortunately, i've got this course of wanting to speak the truth that you actually is. And none of the answers are simple. The problem we've got is a lot of old people have been made a lot of promises, which now can be kept.

Agree, right? So that means that if you want to get elected in a democracy, you've got to pretend that you're going to build to meet those spending promises. Now the great advantage that naja fergan reform have and IT IT was true during the preset referendum.

He only tries to mobilize his core vote. He can do terrific ally well and make a lot of noise. And many years he only want to do influence the conservative party.

Now he wishes to replace IT. That's why I talked about the decades IT will take to do IT. IT will take decades to replace IT. Sure, absent some.

But the other is you can I tell you what? I, I, I, I don't. I think this a chance I might not be.

Look, i've seen that you've seen IT malaya came out of nowhere yeah in argentina, uh uh, with a new party. After many years of trouble, we are yeah many years of trouble, but be managed to to other influence. So yes, he required a coalition, but is in there? Bk, I did an out salvo brand new party.

He's now one ninety five percent popularity in the country. Approval rating is the yeah popular uh leader in the world at the moment. Um I think if people continue to find but yeah feel disenfranchise, let down by party of the party they're gna want and they watching.

And to me, donor trump wasn't really a republic. IT was a new vote. IT wasn't a traditional republican vote. IT was a new vote. And if things continue to get paid, if people continue .

feel let down to something different.

I can see a world where a reform party suddenly, as a massive presentation of the vote, and I can see that happening. I'm not saying I should. I'm not four against IT. I'm just saying I can see a lot, lots of people now, my friend circles, I like reforms, policies, but I .

understand i'm .

trying to be .

amused by, of course, why completely lost my mind? I don't know. This is the problem with democracy. Yes, yes, what the policy? The office? Yes, they are attractive, but he can't pay for them. And the I F S said that during the election and no one listen. And this is the problem with democracy, are superficially interested. Electoral will hear a bit of what naja farage says, oh, I like that that sounds good and he said, oh yeah, IT does so good he's saying IT because he want to vote, can he actually you got, this is what we need for the elector and afraid this you got but we have had, we've said.

all politicians do that. They want you vote and they say what you want to hear, not the truth. Labor have done that.

I mean, probably action. I stood up in my constituency in front of my voters since the beginning and said, we can't afford the at once I did at a dinner. Well, really well, unrealized.

Now, what was required of me was a light and informatie at a light and entertaining speech, instead of one heavy on these dramas. And that was the worst mistakes. But this is the first time of contested by this.

But i've said IT to my voters in wicken for fourteen years, and this time I accepted i've, I i've been reelected. And if so, it's about how you tell them. But i'm afraid most politicians and most political activists, i'm afraid to treat the public like falls and i'm afraid to public reward them by voting for them.

And it's as true of of of the liberal democrats as IT is a reform. There are basically three political ideas. There's conservative m, which properly understood is to avoid too much change because the way the world works fine. Thank you and that that has its place. Like I know that that is leaving .

the fuck a load maybe.

But you know, conservatism once upon a time would have just supported whatever the world was. Just leave IT like that. He works for me.

thanks. Then there's classical liberalism, which is we're going to make progress through freedom. We're gna diminish the pair of the state gonna be free because we got great faith in one another to make progress.

It's not a repudiation of our institutions clad that it's not will take our institutions. We're onna let them to develop through free CoOperation. And then there's socialism, which is a doctorate of state power to get you topia and planning.

We don't need. Protheus, but those are basically the three ideas. My view is that socialism is adoption, which should absolutely be repudiated after its century failure and millions of debt that the state must do less.

So that leaves you with two doctrine which are useful to society. I like a bit of both. Yeah, right.

So this is the thing then. Well, because I like a bit of both. two. And there is one political party for a hundred years, which is combined within IT the entire spectrum of legitimate and useful political debate between classical liberalism and mere conservative m. And of course, it's the conservative party.

Now, the reasonable this is going wrong is because of these economic factors we've been talking about. We've had a hundred years of growth of the state through the two world wars awards. A revolution in the opposite direction from classical liberalism, private sectors of proportion of GDP public sector.

And if they converge through the wars, and then we stay about fifty, fifty, depending a mental GDP subsequently. So we are living through the final collapse of social democracy right now. That's my belief.

Second crisis of socialism. The first crisis of socialism is very easy to spot, because the war, the cold war, ended on the and IT was easy to see the soviet union collapsed. But now we're living through the second crisis of socialism, which is this insidious state.

c. Collectivist socialism, which says everyone can live at the expense of everyone else. IT turns out you can.

The reason that our political parties are going hay while and people get this, is because people don't have a clear understanding within political parties or outside of what's actually happening in the world. And so where work could vote for reform? So put, yeah.

But look at IT. Lee's actually proposed the I F. S. Looked at IT. It's a fantasy. And this is a game why, i'm afraid, on a stock record.

We need an educated population to actually participate in political parties because then we get political parties which reflected the educated views of the where is at the moment. What we get is an electorate that are easily distracted by an easy promise. And then we will get more, Frankly, shit political parties.

So would you say I was in the media of less down? The journalist is, are the ones who could be holding people to account with this? I mean, the coverage during the U.

S. Election year, I thought, was fucking embarrassed. By the way, I am not a huge fan of Alice, a gamble or shoes, but I like their podcast.

I like that back and forth because it's not done uh, it's not it's not done as uh uh uh elected in P S. So they're be more reasonable. They have a conversation. I'm not found them, but I get .

something here. The reason that they have reasonable conversation, it's because I is as far to the left within the conservative party, you can be an allisters as far to the right as you can be with the labor. So they don't disagree. I M as as I not very much. So I I probably limit my comment, but I know them both yeah and I and i've got much more .

patients with lauri than I told I of M I .

six suggested their advice and we went to war in IQ.

I saw I W, or maybe it's him took, said he was getting fed up. The people keep in the the iraq words like, yeah.

those people died, he was wrong and tennis hall. And by the way, people were shipped abroad for torture in which we were, of course, I D have to change a you.

But all of the coverage I was seeing, whether IT was their coverage, whether IT was the BBC, everyone was acting with this kind of like contempt for republic s and this, uh, this dismissal of the trip. IT wasn't objective. And so I think they failed in their job.

They failed in how helping people understand why people were of, I knew why they were voted trump, and I I thought the coverage was embarrassing. But at the same time in the U. K, we need the B, B, C somehow, uh, sky news, to really hold people to action.

So this is why one, my main endeavor now is gonna the provocation people with professor dolen o helping people to break out of group think. It's a commercial endeavor because companies need to do, but helping people break out a group think and embrace different perspectives without the hostility which we've seen elsewhere because it's reflecting everything we do, including media. All of the assumptions within the media are just within the comfortable terrain of what people like us, everyone agrees is right. And we, our civilization is going to rest soon.

I believe on people being able to embrace other perspectives and asked, could I be wrong? Why does this person, why is this person saying these things? Because what what I think happens is, once you get into hostility over perfectly reasonable disagreements escalating into hostility, then your identities on the table, and then people say things that they are not to have said before, you know, if you hate each other and nothing can say anything, right, but, you know, so I might, I might say, we're going to have a currency catch rover less.

We got spending and somebody else will say, but my special educational needs, child desperately needs to care that they are not getting at go. And unfortunately, both points of you are right. And I accept the other point of view.

I ve been an M P for fourteen years. I know that too many S C N kids don't get what they need, and there's too many pensions living in poverty and the health systems not good enough. So it's possible to to actually have a civilized conversation where I can say to a person, you're right, there's not enough I N care or pensions, whatever. Just unfortunate if we keep going on like we are, we're going to have a currency strophe and then IT will be civilization threatening because you you can't destroy the monetary system and then expect food in the supermarkets.

I don't think many people, I think we walked out out here down to let square and we said to people, there is a currency catastrophe come in and to be a civilizational issue. I think they're think we mad there.

So that is a big danger. That's partly why i'm still wearing a soup, but is partly why i'm still wearing a soup, is partly why I keep trying everything back to what the o. br. say. I can stack up everything i'm saying by mainstream measures, the office for national statistics, the house of commons library, the office for budget responsibility, the bank for international segment.

I don't need to rely on any one who's off base, higher measuring people, you know, people anyone can trust is just what i'm doing is saying, given that these given these facts and ideas and projections, what is the sensible interpretation to draw from them? And and then I come up with the conclusions I have. I partially wear a suit to avoid being called a conspiracy theirs.

I know i'm not. I've been I are quite often make conspiracy theory and the thing I say him is i'm sorry me, you're not gona believe me. Are you going to think i'm in on IT? But I have been behind the curtain too deeply, too often to think there's a conspiracy.

What there is is ignorance and incompetence and self interest preventing people from actually looking at a thing differently. You know, you look at the ipad that way on is very different to when you look at IT that way on, you should do IT for the camera that way. What people need to do is get their head to go.

Oh, sure. If you look at IT differently, it's a disaster. Now, these things are gonna take time. But the problem we think we've all got is, over the course of human history, things have sometimes gone very far south, very quickly.

And if we get a bond market bubble burst and government's desperate to raise the money, and they go for QA to try and solve IT, then very quickly, because you can keep printing money all the time people believe will stop. And the bank of england has actually yan vlada, whose named very difficult to spell, made a speech in which he compared what the bank of england was doing to to the vima republic and embarked way. And of course, I had this conversation on the record with the now governor.

What he was doing was not trying to say what we're doing is embargoed environment. He was making the point that the monetary policy committee of the bank of england is independent and has a Mandate to pursue two percent inflation. And IT is because they have that Mandate that everyone participating in the market knows that if inflation gets out of hand, the bank of england will pull the plug.

And the reason I had the conversation on the record was to force the government to say that which he did. The problem will come is if the government really can't get the income IT needs to meet its obligations and theyll have to find some way to do IT. There is a facility at the bank of england which wasn't used during covet, but which was available, which is like an overdraft. But it's overdraft likes they just create money, right? yes.

So you get .

yeah lovely if one. But this is the problem we really faces that if a government's panicking and can't raise the money and just somehow whether they change the Mandate at the bank of england or go for that overdraft facility, if that is the moment, because as soon as market participants believe that the government, a government and the bank of england, i'm not gonna stop printing money.

That's the point of which week you get what's called the crack up bom. Because as soon as you've got an asset in your hand that you know isn't going, like you said, IT about cash baLances because you're more education on this. As soon as you've got on, I said that you know isn't going to hold its value, you get rid of IT and buy something else.

Now I have a an account which allows me to hold gold. I've got some big coin. Other people will go gold.

Bitcoin, physical, real state artworks. Anything, people will buy anything. During the vir crack up boom, there would be like a greetings card shop.

There was one woman. I remember the story reading in a book about how IT happens is a greetings card shop, and people got paid. They just went in, bore everything he had in stock and SHE, and left her with worthless poles of paper. But you'd go into, have a coffee in a restaurant, and there was no point looking at the Prices .

when you SAT down, because be different when you stood up. I saw when this is the funny thing, and the menu in the shop had stickers for the Prices. IT wasn't in a printed menu because they constantly had to change the Prices. IT is a reality that exists in the world we live in. yeah.

So the trouble is, talking about these dramas is, on the one hand, life does go on imbaLance. I, life is going on. Then as well, the life has gone on.

Really, what we're talking about here is how do we promote the maximum of human prosperity? How do we have the minimum of disruption and difficulty? And IT is not by trying to tax more from the already high base and using more cheap created. We've had a rate cut today, I think, and just isn't the right way forward. So if what we need to do really is an educated public who say, actually, what I want is the government to live with in its means and have a more productive society, because only by taking advantage of technological improvement and greater productivity in the private sector will the public sector have the resources that needs to care those most in need. So we don't really need a revolution other than, in common sense.

significant. Ever can ask you a nave question? If I was an M, P, and I was in government and I knew this catastrophe was common, I wouldn't be just talking to my fellow conservative, M.

P. conservative. I would. I would wanted to reach out to the front age of the labor party.

insane. There is a catastrophe on whether you're in power or wearing power. There's a catastrophe on if we don't dress these issues, let's address them together.

I'd we don't care if we win the next election or not. As long as these issues out, you can be in power, but these issues have to be doubt. You have to constrain spending.

We have to constrain that. Otherwise we can send our country to into a catastrophe position. This is what I gone into politics for, not for the power, not for my party.

To win is for the outcome for the population. Yeah, let's sit around the table. Work altogether. I know it's not eve.

but why not? Two reasons. One is that this problem we face for a very long time, I forget what the year was, but the first time the cabinet of the united kingdom discuss the unaffordable city of pensions was decades ago, right? I forget when, but decades ago, the pension systems been unaffordable for lifetime, a lifetime.

And we've somehow kept going through IT. The thing that's different about that nail is the biggest bond market bubble history. I talked before about that charge of currency debasement, flat line up to about nineteen, nineteen hundred bit through the second world war.

And then I collapse in the value of money from one thousand nine hundred and seventy one. The previous time they talked about the unaffordable city of pensions, if my memory serves, IT was before that collapse in the value of money happened. The problem we've got today that they didn't have then is that we're at the end of this huge basement of currency.

We've gone from just cheap credit because money is created when banks end. Lot people don't know that, but we've gone from money creation through banks lending to money creation directly through Q A. And then we've had two massive rounds with and that means the situation we face today isn't like the thing.

But that's the first point, is that this is actually not a new problem. And the second thing is, what do all politicians want? They want to be in power because I think we are right.

They are wrong. All the rest of IT. And a lot, again, as a lack of education, duckers cars. Well, and I had a lot of .

conversations, the point, surely there must be people within the labor party on the front bench who know that you cannot drive productivity through taxation. Surely they must know, look, they've an aideed logical labor socialist, but they must keep deek down. That is bullshit.

They must know that you must that but I don't get go to private labor mp conversations but I mean, because I Rachel reves IT would but Rachel reves famously has worked as an economist at the bank of england. I don't want to to get no saying and IT with a smile on my face.

I think the woman daughter, I just think she's I just I clever budget back. Well, so again.

if you're labor and you that is the conversation is will this drive the growth? We've told everybody we want. The question is how do we get more money into the N.

H. S. For our voters who and this is, again, it's public choice there. And it's why I think bitcoin and gold is so important because I think the way to actually answer this problem for the minimum of pain is the one way that isn't gonna happen.

It's for educated and informed electors to join the conservative party, which contains the full spectrum of necessary political ideology. To join the conservative party, fix IT, get candidates name you want. And you already have identified that is so improbably isn't going to happen.

So since that isn't gna happen, you could try and replace the conservative party. There's only one game in town for replacing conservative party, its reform, their economic plans at the last general election, where a fantasy, there's no change time not changing. So baring reform becomes dramatically Better.

They are not the answer either. And so just put IT all together and no one on the left was solve IT. So i've kind of come to the conclusion, come very conscious on sinna former minister and privy councillor and not that any of those things prevent me from speaking.

But i've so I honest, sly, think we're going to have a currency collapse in our lifetimes because the politicians just aren't capable of and then the public aren't interested enough. So if if the public aren't interested in, the politicians we have got aren't capable. That just means we're growing forward until eventually something happens that burst the bull market bubble and we .

got important job to do. Then um if you if you are not sure where in government this decision would be made, like the the best decision I made seven years ago stopped in my money in background and he could have been gold IT IT would have been a good decision not as good but I just I just keep me a bitcoin IT made sense to me is a good place to keep my money um you know I said it's IT was a risk worth taken and i've seen the benefits from IT of large more businesses because of IT do you know I in football tape yeah we are a big fit I got a tense to football tape um and uh we we want the league two years in a row and where top this year we we could become the third side i'd ever in england one and road you me .

what I know about football.

we have one to your logo side yes yeah i've been there, by the way. I want to see reading the way. So but but the thing is we we put a treasury in place and we put a big coin treasury in place that's already half million up. I mean, our budget for next year is secured by that. And that's what big coin done for me is like, I know I can put money and forget about IT, but if you are in government and you are in the place where you could influence these decisions, do you think government, you would be a sensible decision on going .

what government does? Hope, because they say .

different criminal. I for a long time was extremely .

sceptically because i'm a software engineer, right, and a software engineer who studied monitor conomo s for a long time OK. I got involved with bit going very, very early back in the days when you could set up an ordinary desktop computer to do big money that early. I literally had a linux work station on my deck running, doing mining when you could cause the calculation was easier.

That was an early days, yeah. But I came to the conclusion that I was like a tulip bubble of mere speculative bubble, because it's back by nothing. It's back actually by energy consumption.

But I thought, really is that gonna be money. And so I I bought, I I bought five hundred year ros worth of bitcoin and fiddled with IT. And in the end, I, I, I saw a bit of a peak, and I cashed in.

I now because sixty one thousand and U. K. Government.

yeah, they go. But that's a lot of money. But but I came to the conclusion that the bubble would burst and I sold out a bit coin, and not so much that I own many tax, but enough that I I know I bought A A lovely umbrella about one hundred and fifty quid, and IT cost me not point of a bitcoin.

So yes, yeah, yes. A website I called bitcoin or shit, don't know, and that tells you what you could have had. But the truth is I was wrong about IT.

Big coin is happening, and in the end, money is the most markets iful commodity that generally accepted media is exchange, and bitcoin is heading towards acceptance. At the moment, bitcoin is not money and is not money because it's not generally accepted, but IT is emerging as a synthetic commodity manage. I take this language from George organ, a monitor, historian, professor friend, until it's generally accepted.

It's not money. So it's capable of being money. It's a synetic commodity money and that it's got loads to promise.

But to me now it's by high ec gave up on monetary reform. I should have seen that on wall. He wrote a book called the d nationalization of money. And he because he came to the conclusion not only the private sector could provide sam money, i've come to that yeah and I don't know whether that sam money is gonna be gold, silver or bitcoin .

IT probably be all three competing as some.

I think that's bank. So people, somebody texted me this morning, so I think big coin will win. And actually, I don't think there is any such thing as win in a free market. I think we'll end up with competing currencies. And actually, this is why you should get George surgeon on your podcast and get him to talk to you through the history of competing currencies.

The tweet about IT is just put out a really good thread with A Q N A on IT but I would say to anyone watching the look on ex and see what George been saying, but the indeed in the history, the U. K. Free banking in scotland had a very vulnerable record.

And in so far as there was instability, IT was caused by legislation. So you know that's a great book on that I could recommend but called legislating instability by toiler goods be um but yeah, i'm afraid the state doesn't know what it's doing. It's just trying to survive, is spending too much money and it's gonna clock things up. So to me, building the infrastructure of bitch coin and the remonetization of gold is super important.

And as one of the interesting thing about by seeing a big coin, a bitcoin, there's a lot of them stop voting and and just they are build in their own world outside of IT. They're self thread n. They become independent.

They have become, yeah, they have the abilities to move around the world easily. I mean, not, look, i'm still hikes. I want to be where I live. Bet for the Better place and. I want to to contribute to british society but i've I came to the conclusion even the even the half our jury to go vote that half now is Better spent one, if I can, of my business is .

and it's a terrible tragedy that because you may be.

think that today.

well, thank you else in on to you should say so, genuinely humbled and move. But but why I would say is one of the problems we've all got is we can be self solve in on the rest of IT IT only takes in a crisis for the government to go bitcoins illegal.

you must use CBDC now.

Now just bare. The thing is, people might say, oh, just trying to stop me because it's a decentralized. People appear money, and I can use my VPN and vit. But what that actually is saying, yeah, don't worry, you can stop me, just break law. But the vast majority of people told that's illegal and it's associated with drug dealers and Peter file, which is because that's what they are always, always most people just won't use IT. And if most people won't use IT, then IT won't become money because IT won't be generally accepted and we'll be on D C B, D C S, which is another story.

Well, that's my job out there. Teach people about this as your job is to get that people out there. And I look, I think you are experience, the government will be worth that because of this because we can have this conversation.

You can have this conversation. Other people, uh, I think there's a real need on a job to get that me to hold people to counter this. And I think that's part the education part the education is me teaching my son and daughter what they know, how they can understand.

Money inflation and dead have different in assets of money. And I think is getting out there and the media doing a job and trying to educate the public about um the trajectory. We're wrong because look, I thought the malay's speech of the west did the job perfectly he said, i've seen the future because we've lived IT and you guys ahead in that way right? Somehow we need are keeking. How do we package that up to sixty five, seventy million people here understand that. And IT puts the pressure on the politicians to reform and give us the something .

to vote that is a good to hopefully because, to be honest, democratic politicians want to get elected. yes. So if you can achieve that and get get the public to tell the politicians what they want, the politicians will give IT to them.

Well, I have been recently and doing IT myself, but that's a conversation for another day. Still, this was great. I'm glad finally able to hope we get to do this again. Good luck with everything you've doing. And thank you.

Thank you for listen everybody say so.