Everything Is NOT OK: DC Chaos, Tariffs, Famine & Tucker’s Circus | Yaron Brook Show - Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Fundamental principles of freedom, national self interest, and individual rights.

Speaker 2 (00:15):
This is the Ran Brook Show, all right, everybody walk
up there on Brook Show on this Friday, August twenty second.

Speaker 1 (00:28):
I hope everybody had a fantastic week. It's a little
late on Friday. I know here in Portugal it's ten pm,
so I'm with you Europeans. I know the Iron Book
Show is always late at night for you, so I'm
living the experience with you. So no worries. All right,

(00:50):
we have an AMA tomorrow. I just want to remind
you that there was a show tomorrow. There will be
in Ama two pm East Coast time tomorrow, two pm
East Coast time. Ask me anything. Those of you who
support the show twenty five dollars or more should have
received the link to be able to come on and
participate in live of a video on zoom. So if

(01:14):
you haven't received that, send me an email, or send
send us an email and we'll get back to you.
All right, let's see where are we? Yeah? I wanted
to say something follow up on yesterday's rant about gen Z,
which I thought was probably all correct. Everything I remember

(01:36):
I said in that rant was all correct, but I
wanted to acknowledge something because I think it's important that
we all keep this in mind, and that is the
things are not good that you know, to a large extent,
there is a cause for anger, there is a cause
for frustration. There was a cause for being pissed off.

(01:58):
It's just not what you think is. It's not you know,
it's not that you're not making enough money. It's not
that you can't afford a house. It's not I mean,
all of that is, you know, marginally, yeah, you should
be making more money, you should houses should be definitely
cheap and all that. That's all true, but that's not

(02:18):
the main thing you should be upset about. You should
be upset about the state of the world. You should
be upset about the lack of freedom. And you know,
if you're gen Z, I think you should the thing
you should be most upset about. And I don't like
the comments on my on my on my chat about

(02:39):
calling this an evil generation, a bad generation, no good generation.
I think that's completely wrong. You know, this is this
is a a I don't know about the generation, but
there are great individuals within this generation. And what you
should really be pissed off about, primarily is the education
that you got. You got conned. Your education is at best,

(03:06):
if you went to really good schools, and I'm sure
many of you did go to really good schools in
a context, is at best mediocre. At best, you have
wasted twelve years in school. Longer, unless you went an
early education in Mounts Surrey, you wasted many years. And

(03:28):
many of you, I'm sure were bored, frustrated. Many of
you might have even been drugged because because it was
easier to drug you than to deal with you in school.
But even if you were completely there and completely awake
and completely conscious, it was just you didn't get a

(03:50):
good education. You didn't learn the fact about reality. You
wanted courage to think for yourself. You haven't had any
kind of experience with life and with work and with production,
and you know, unless you went out there and did
something by your own initiative. But educational system in many respects,

(04:12):
and this is maybe the ultimate cause of your frustration.
The educational system has not prepared you for the world,
has not prepared you for life. Now, I don't think
it did that for me and for others either, but
I think every generation is a little worse because the
educational system is not getting better, it's getting worse. So

(04:34):
it's not that everything in the world is okay, and
it's not that you are okay. You should be frustrated.
You should be looking for alternatives, and maybe the show
is part of that alternatives. To round out your knowledge,
to challenge your thinking skills, you need to be seeking

(04:56):
out experiences by going out there, going out into the
world and living and trying different things, experiencing different things.
You know, your generation that by by most accounts, does

(05:22):
not spend a lot of time with friends, does not
spend a lot of time in a sense, exploring is
not having sex. That's a bad sign. Not having sex,
that's not a good sign. I know the conservatives are
loving it, but I don't. I don't think that's good
at all. You're you're you know, you are not a

(05:44):
risk You're not risk takers. As I said before, entrepreneurship
is down, innovation is down within this generation. So there
are real problems. I blame those problems on our educational system.
So if you want to be frustrated, that's the way
your frustrations should be targeted. And the way to get
around that is self educate, self correct. If you will

(06:07):
do one thing. Readinn Rand, Go readinn Rand, Go read
THATTS Shrugged and the fountain Head. Get inspired by great literature,
by great philosophy, but by great stories by great heroes.
And you know, re recalibrate, recalibrate, as I said yesterday,

(06:35):
stop whining and figure out what you need to do
in order to become the burden of the educational system
that you got. And then go on and live, live, live, live.
Stop blaming cell phones, stop blaming social media, stop blaming

(06:55):
technology or blaming adults of blaming boomers like me. Take responsibility,
own your life. Go live and go experience stuff, take
some risks, challenge yourself. Don't listen to your teachers and learn.

(07:22):
Go go study I don't know, find find good sources
of knowledge, and readine Rand. Number one recommendation is readinn
Rand and don't rush through it. Read it properly. And

(07:46):
you know, I think if you do that, you'll come
to the realization, yes, you be screwed by a lousy
educational system, and yes everything is more expensive than it
should be. We still have inflation, regular inflation, and while
wages are mostly keeping track keeping pace with the inflation,

(08:09):
inflation distorts prices. It distorts price signals, it distorts the market,
the story, It destroys investments and savings. And the consequence
of that is, yeah, there are fewer jobs than it
should be right now. There are plenty of jobs and
and but there are fewer jobs. That should be the

(08:31):
wealthiest generation ever interms of income and in terms of
net worth. But you should be given out technological advancement
much richer you. You have a lot of opportunities in life,
you should have many more. And there's a whole world

(08:55):
out there of things that haven't happened, didn't get created
because of government controls coming and regulations and government distortions,
you know, from Fiat money to regulations to anti trust,
a million things that are distorting the economic world in
which we live. And then add to that, you know

(09:21):
nothing about great art. You think that hip hop is music,
I mean music and the pinnacle of human achievement because
that's all you've been exposed to. You think that splashes
of pains on canvas, which you don't understand, it doesn't

(09:44):
really move you and doesn't do much to you, but
you think that's art, And say you avoid museums, why
go to museums. If that's art, it's a waste of time.
You think costco music is boring, You think great novels
are God, who has time for that? Who is the
energy for that? So you're poor. I mean we live

(10:08):
in a poor culture when it comes to aesthetics. We
live in a culture where we'll be starved of great
aesthetic experiences. Gen Zas Thomas, not you not, you don't worry,
but the culture, the culture doesn't have the kind of level,

(10:31):
the kind of aesthetic experiences that we should have human beings.
We should be demanding, We should be encouraging creators and
producers and great artists to produce, to create. But yeah,
the one thing your iPhone does distract you from is

(10:54):
an attention span that would allow you to listen to
symphony or to read a victor who go novel and
experience what an aesthetic experience can really be. Yeah, more
than just a rave, a mindless, mindless rave. So yeah,

(11:15):
there's a lot to be upset about. There's a lot
to seek better. You should be pissed off at the culture,
at your parents, at boomers, at the silent generations, at
generation exit everybody. Yes, the pinnacle of movies is superhero movies,

(11:36):
which one the twenty seven ones that come out every season. Now,
a lot of that is you can fix because a
lot of that you can re educate yourself. You can
discover great art, you can discover great aesthetic experiences. You
can do the work if you choose to, just like

(11:59):
you can find good job if you choose to. You
can even and I know this is hard to believe,
you can probably even find a goal a girlfriend if
you're male, boyfriend, if you female. I hear less complaining
for women, but then I have a lot fewer women
who watch my show than men. This is a male
dominated show, not a male dominated chat necessarily, but certainly

(12:23):
a male dominated viewership of the show. You can find
a girlfriend if you look at it. If you work
at being the best that you can be, if you
work at your old self esteem, then there are women
out there that you can admire, that you can respect,
that you can be attracted to. So channel your frustrations

(12:51):
to where it needs to be. Channel your frustrations to
the real challenges our culture presents to you, and then
work to overcome those challenges. Because you know what, as
I think I said this yesterday, You've only got one life.

(13:11):
You can spend that life complaining and bitching and moaning
that you didn't grow up in gold sculch. You didn't
grow up in some utopian, amazing America where you get
handed keys to a house when you turn eighteen and
you know you have a girlfriend at your beck and call,
because that will never happen. All those things you will

(13:34):
always have to earn, and that's good. Stop complaining and
take the world as it is. It is what it is,
and it's not good. A lot of not good things
about it. If you listen to my show, God, you
know how many things I complain about on a daily
basis about what's going on in the world. But take

(13:57):
that as a given. Go do the best that you
can for your life. There's no alternative. Nothing's gonna change
because you complain. Nothing's gonna change because you're depressed. Nothing's
gonna change because you're unhappy. You have to step up,

(14:23):
you know, use use your mind to figure out what
your values are and go pursue them, go get them.
And it can take time, and maybe it takes much
more time because we live in the kind of world
we live than it should in a more rational world.
But again, that's reality. That's what you have to deal with,
and you have to make the most and the best

(14:46):
of the reality with which in which you exist. So yep,
my continued message to gen Zas and pretty much everybody else.
All right, let's get back into the depressing part of
the world in which we live. John Bolton, remember John Bolton,

(15:10):
John Bolton, who was a President Trump's national security advisor
for a while in his first term, and who was
one of the few people that going back to nine eleven,
in the post nine to eleven world I had, I
had respectful I thought was good. He was not. He

(15:30):
was never a conventional, a conventional nil Kahn. He I
think he was much better, much more realistic, much and
had a good grasp on the threat that Islamism constituted.
It was much more realistic about what could and couldn't

(15:51):
be achieved in Afghanistan in New York, and had a
much better, healthier approach to fighting the war. Was generally
a good guy, and I was disappointed actually when he
agreed to serve under Trump. He didn't last long eighteen
months because of that, because he's a good guy, and
ultimately he constantly clashed with Trump. He clashed with Trump

(16:15):
over Iran because John Bolton is principled and Trump is not.
He clashed with Trump over North Korea more than anything,
because he is principled and Donald Trump is not. He
thought meeting with the brutal dictator of North Korea was
a mistake. He clashed with him on Syria, and on
Turki and in the Colds, and on a bunch of

(16:35):
different things and pretty much everything. I think Bolton was
right and Trump was wrong. When he left the administration,
he wrote a book, and the book was, you know,
a scathing, scathing testament of what was going on in

(16:56):
the Trump administration, how mindless Prince suppled, awful Trump is
when it comes to phone policy, and how disintegrated the
whole administration was. The book initially had received a governor
reviewer looked at it and judged the manuscript to be

(17:17):
free of classified information on that basis. On the basis
that it was cleared of having no classified information, it
was published later other officials decided it did contain classified passages.
As a consequence, of Justice Department at the time escalated

(17:39):
the fight. Months after the book was published. It launched
a criminal probe inter Bolton's handling of the information, issued
a grand jury subpoena for him and for his literary agent,
and this continued as long as Trump was president. This
investigation and the grand jury continued. The under Biden that

(18:09):
Justice wondered dropped the case, dropped the case, and the
grand jury in twenty twenty one later reopened the investigation,
and I'm sure reopened the investigation that Justice banded under Trump.
And today this morning there was the FBI came to

(18:36):
Bolton's home and investigated and I guess searched the home
as part of an investigation into whether Bolton is illegally
possessed or shared class fighted material and including whether he
used that classified material presented it to the media. Agents

(18:58):
coming out of the house could be seen carrying boxes
of Bolton's office of stuff from his office building where
he his office. I mean, look, Trump is going after
his enemies. He's got a long list of people. I mean,
one of the horrific things that he's done is he's
taken away the protection that some of these people have, Bolton,

(19:22):
for example, because of threats like from the Iranians to
kill them. He's taken away security clearance from many of
what he perceives as his enemies, people within the intelligence community.
He's taken them all away. He is going to hound
anybody who disagreed with him, anybody that went after him.

(19:44):
I mean, the big difference between going after Trump and
going after people like Bolton is that Trump broke the law.
Trump broke the law Trump incited January sixth, we all
saw it. Trump actually had classified materials in his home,
and he lied repeatedly to the FBI. And even when

(20:10):
he you know, he kept hiding it from people searching,
so he actively tried to hide stuff it was not
his to hide. Trump did indeed commit fraud. Now, the
penalty he got five hundred million dollars on the one
case of fraud was completely nuts and out of proportion. Indeed,

(20:35):
today a pelic Corte ruled dismissed the penalty. They still
held the fraud guilt, but they dismissed a penalty as
exaggerated and ridiculous. He did, you know, he did, by
all evidence, molest that woman. So the differences then in

(20:57):
every one of the cases Trump actually did this stuff.
Did he he threatened or you know, suggests that he
was a threat to election officials in Georgia and encourage
them to find missing votes. Of course he did. We
all know that. So it is a criminal. It would

(21:20):
have gone to court and we would have seen. So.
While there's no question the Bide administration went after him
with a certain zeal, he deserved it, much of it,
maybe not all of it. The fraud case in New
York was probably overreached, and maybe there was one other

(21:41):
case that was overreached at the federal level. But the
documents cases a slam dunk as many as as the
you know, election interference case in Georgie I think is
a slam dunk anyway, So I wouldn't compare this that
Trump is taking this a whole new level. He's not

(22:04):
making people care. He's giving the executive powers that presidents
in the future will use to take away your rights,
to limit your freedom, to make this country a nightmare.
Trump is setting the president pre precedent and we'll see
this apply to other areas forthoritarianism, whether he is an

(22:29):
authoritarian or not. It's setting the precedent for that. And
this is the stuff that ultimately Trump really cares about.
He cares much more about retribution than he cares about
actually governing, and actually when he governs, he does more

(22:52):
damage than goods. So I'm not sure it's good that
he governs. Maybe this is a good distraction. It keeps
him away from this keeps him away. So Trump has
taken whatever past presidents have done in a variety of

(23:14):
different realms that have been I think against the Constitution,
He's taking at a whole new level and now set
us on the path towards a nightmare salute, nightmare outcome
in our future. So I think that's sad about Bolton.
I think that you know, the fact that he ended

(23:36):
his security detail, the fact that he took away his
security clearance, and the fact now that they're going after
him is just tragic. This is one of the good guys,
one of the good guys. And I know it doesn't
matter to you guys because it's Trump, and whatever Trump
does it must be right, and it's all Biden's fault.
Whatever bad is happening, it's Biden's fault. This is sad

(23:59):
because again, both it was one of the good guys.
I saw Bolton a few months ago. I was at
an airports. Where was I I don't maybe it was London.
Maybe it was London, but I don't think it was London, Huh,
I can't remember. And I was in the lounge, I

(24:19):
think the britichet was lounge, and he sat down not
far from me, and I went up to him. As
I was leaving. I went up to him and thanked
him for his courage. And you know that I that
many of us still appreciated the work that he was doing.
So again, one of the good guys. They're going after him.

(24:41):
It's sad. We'll see what they find. We'll see what
they find or what they planted. It's the u FBI,
remember it's the new FDI by run by Kash Spartel,
who was much more interested in going after Trump's enemies,
much more interested in going after anybody who's against Trump.

(25:02):
Then he is about actually running you know, actually running
their FBI a as a what as a police force,
as an organization that's supposed to catch criminals. I don't
think he cares about criminals. I think he cares about

(25:23):
the only criminals defined in his mind are the people
who don't like Trump. And the people who above the
law are Trump and you and recognize that Trump is
above the law because you think that all those all
the prosecutions against him by the Biden administration shouldn't be done.

(25:47):
You think he's above the law. You think he should have,
you know, documents that he shouldn't have. You think that
he should be able to incite, You think she should
be able to influence election. Now comes that the only
person in this world that is allowed to be above
the law is Trump. Well, and he's getting away with it.

(26:13):
That's the beauty of it. Trump is actually getting away
with it. He would have been he was, He should
have been ineligible to run. He should have been impeached,
but he wasn't impeached because the Republicans were cowards. I
didn't say Trump was not illigible to run. I said
the Trump was guilty of many of the things the

(26:36):
Biden administration accused him of, or at least there was
enough reason to go after him. Not to call it
law fair, but to call it nobody's above the law.
Somebody violates the law, they should be prosecuted. And that's
what they did with Trump. So if you want to
say nobody's above the law, if you actually hold that
and you believe that, then you should have been a

(26:57):
big supporter of the the prosecution of Trump under the
Biden administration because he's not above the law. And yeah,
I mean what should have happened. He should have been impeached.
He should be impeached now, I mean he should. He

(27:17):
has committed so many impeachable offenses since he became president
this time around, that is shocking that Congress has not
even considered it. All right, let's see, Well, but if

(27:38):
they I'm not saying that he wasn't above the law,
I'm saying you're inconsistent. And I'm saying, but you're saying
that Biden was law fair, you're saying they shouldn't have
prosecuted Trump, and you're saying he is above the law.
You're saying that not mean. All right, Let's go to

(28:02):
his next crazy stuff, and that is the occupation of Washington,
d C. Now, you know, the reality is that this
is probably legal what he's doing because of the status
of Washington, DC, as you know, being under the authority
of the federal government. Now, Congress still has to act

(28:25):
within thirty days to make this legitimate. If they don't
act within thirty days giving President Trump authority over DC,
then this is an illegal action. So we will see
what Congress does. It's in recess now, so I'm not
sure if they have the thirty days. Nobody seems to
be talking about this, but the only way to keep

(28:47):
the troops in the streets of DC is to get
congressional authority after thirty days, supposed to as an emergency.
There's no emergency. But again, this is the thing. I mean,
I don't know if you've seen the photos coming out
of Washington, DC, but they're truly stunning. I don't think

(29:09):
I would have ever expected to see armed vehicles standing
in front of the train station, armed vehicles spread out
all over the city, many in uniform, and now starting
with tomorrow, carrying weapons, fully stacked, militarized roaming the streets

(29:30):
of DC. Again, probably legal, but just horrible, despicable. Of
course Trump is it, says, why you see, it's safe again. Yeah,
of course it's safe again. I mean, I'm not sure
it ever was safe, but you know, of course it's safe.

(29:52):
If you militarize the streets everything, yeah, things will be safe.
There's no question. If you put on guards at every
there'll be less crime. Indeed, if you ever, if you
ever a cofew just have Kofu on young men from
I don't know, sunset to sunrise, young men cannot leave

(30:16):
their houses. You will get a drastic reduction in crime.
There are a lot of things that can be done
to reduce crime, but to bring the military into the
streets when there's no emergency is a horrific act. And then,

(30:39):
of course he is saying now that this is just
the beginning. Chicago is next, followed by New York in
LA so we can expect to see national guards, military vehicles,
troops fully armed in the streets of our cities all

(31:00):
over the country. Now that I don't think is constitutional.
That will be placing Trump above the law. That will
be a violation of the constitution. There is no emergency
now in twenty twenty. You could argue with riots in
the streets and Portland burning and things like that, maybe
you could come up with a justification for using military

(31:23):
force in the cities that's not going on right now.
There is no emergency, there's no crisis, nobody's burning down
the city, and yet Trump is threatening to use military
force in the city of Chicago. I mean, New York

(31:43):
is about as safe as it's ever been. It's safer
than most rural countries or many rural countries in the
United States. It's not bad at all. Now, I don't know,
I haven't been in the subways recently, but murders and

(32:03):
violent crime is way down in New York City. Now.
I know you don't believe the statistics, but your lack
of belief in the statistics does not present any evidence
to counter that. I mean, Trump doesn't believe statistic See
this is what he writes. Why isn't he to see
as safe again? The crowds are coming back. I don't
think they ever went away. The spirit is high. And
how DC National Guard and police are doing a fantastic job.

(32:26):
They're out in force. They're not playing games. As bad
as it sounds to say. There were no murders this
week for the first time in memory. Mayor Muriel Bowser
must immediately stop giving false and highly inaccurate crime figures,
or bad things will happen, including a complete end total
federal takeover of the city. Washington, DC will soon be

(32:49):
great again, So don't issue statistics. I don't like talk
about authoritarian thuggery. This is what every authoritarian in history does.
Fire the guy who produces the statistics. I don't like
the mayor publishes crime statistics. I don't like I'm gonna
take the city over. You say, you dare to say

(33:14):
New York is not that violent? Shut him up. I
mean it is. It's I don't know, there's only so
many times I can say it, in so many ways
I can say, but this is really horrific behavior. This

(33:38):
is America. America is not a land where you expect
to see the military in the streets. America is not
the land where you expect to see troop carriers next
to train stations. I mean, unless there was a terrorist
attack and you know we're being invaded, or there's a
civil war something, but there isn't. None of that is happening.

(34:01):
Claim is down across the board in America, and we're militarizing.
We're militarizing policing. I mean, it's bad enough with the
police have armored troop carriers and bazookahs and you know,
all kinds of fancy weapons. Now we're bringing the real guys,
the Marines, the National Guard, the soldiers. It's you know,

(34:30):
this land of the free, not so much land of
the controlled, rand of the fearful and we're the American people.
Why they're on the streets protesting, Why they're not upset
by this, why they're not objecting. I think one of
Trump's great tactics, amazing tactics, is he floods US with

(34:55):
so many violations of the constitution, so much stupidity, so
much anti americanism, that we don't know what to respond to,
which one do we pick up? Like today, I had
such a long list of things I could have talked about,
and I just had to be selective because you can't
keep track of this guy, and nobody calls him when

(35:16):
he's it's a complete loser. Like the whole Russia thing
is disappearing from the news very very fast because he failed.
Nothing to see here, all right, talk about unconstitutional but
primarily anti American, really anti American. Trump now has formally

(35:40):
said the Intel Intel the company has agreed to give
the US a ten percent stake in its business. Uh
So the United States now is going to own be
the largest shareholder in the country's premiere Uh I guess
it used to be anyway chip manufacturer. We are now

(36:05):
owning the means of production. As I said I think yesterday,
Trump is a much better and more ambitious socialist than Mumdani.
I mean, all Mumdani can come up with is a
grocery store. Trump's going for the jugular. I want to
the state, the state government to produce chips. Now, you

(36:28):
say it's twenty ten percent, but it's everything. As soon
as the government steps in. As soon as the government
said steps in, it controls. It has endless cash to
pour into the business. It has regulatory power. It has

(36:49):
the power to regulate your competitors as well as yourself.
The government controls. See here's a list of things that
make this purchase not purchase. Even this takeover of ten
percent of Intel shares by the government a bad idea.

(37:10):
Six reasons. This is all from SCOTCHLANDSGM one. It's bad
for Intel's long term viability. It's politics, not commercial considerations
increasingly drive its decisions decisions and of course foreign governments
are going to target it. FIGN governments won't want to

(37:32):
do business with it. And it completely eviscerates our higher
ground when we complain about other countries subsidizing their industries.
You know state owned enterprises in China, Well we have
them too. We're all China now that's part of my thing.
Too bad for Intel's competitors who are suddenly competing against

(37:54):
it and Uncle Sam, for customers, capital, et cetera. And
this is not just chip manufactors. We're talking about anybody
in tech. Capital is limited. And now Intel, which was
a dying force, which you know, new players were rising

(38:15):
of more significance, more productive ability, and replacing Intel. They
are now going to suffer because Intel has been resurrected
artificially and they have to compete with the government. Three.

(38:38):
Bad for Intel's customers who now must fear and may
face pressure to buy Intel's products regardless of their merits.
I mean, Intel still can't make a top really top
end chip, right, And this is bad for the entire Second,

(39:00):
if customers have to buy secondary chips because the government
stands behind it, the government's pushting pressure on them, then
the entire tech sector is going to be worse off.
It's going to cripple them. It's bad for other US companies.
This is number four that took government subsidies. Are they

(39:22):
also going to be now? Is the government also going
to take a stake in them? Should they return the money?
I mean, could they lobby and maybe prevent the government
taking a position in them. Five, it's bad for companies

(39:43):
industries plausibly linked to national security. Not only might Uncle
Sam pressure them, but investors may think twice about them
and instead look elsewhere for less risky targets because the
government could step in and take them it anytime, because it's
national security after all. And of course, remember a lot

(40:09):
of these companies that depend on the government. I mean,
the government might, for example, turn to defense contractors and say,
you want the government's business, you have to buy chips
from Intel. But the chips are not as good as
the one from Nvidia. Ah. But Intel, that's an American company,
that's a real company, none of this in Vidia stuff.

(40:31):
It's bad for US exports sales from Intel. Now, a
state owned enterprise might be deemed government subsidies by foreign governments,
which could then slap countervailing duties tariffs on US goods
containing Intel chips. This is what the US government did
for years for state owned enterprises elsewhere. This is a

(40:55):
horrendous move. It's in this format at it's unprecedented. It's
going to harm US companies, US tech, the US economy,
and the winners in the ship industry, which are like
in Nvidia and Apple, they're the winners. Why is the

(41:18):
government bolstering up the loser? Who needs the loser? TSMC
one of the great companies in the world. We shouldn't
be creating a competitor for them artificially. We should be

(41:43):
securing them and making sure that we can continue to
buy from them forever, protect them from you know, and
encourage them maybe to build it build closer to the
United States and away from Asia. But other than that,
you know, we used to believe in marm. Some of
us still believe in markets. Not many. It turns up, so, yes,

(42:08):
the federal government is not going to become an owner
proud of a failing chip company, but a chimp company
with a with a legacy, with with a history with
you know, legendary all right, talk about economic whatever. Uh.
Every every August, late August, there is a conference that

(42:33):
the Federals of hosts in Jackson Hallwayoming, and it's become
now a place where the Federals of Chairman usually at
the end of the conference delivers a talk, delivers a
speech articulating FED policy and FED philosophy and how he

(42:53):
sees the world. I'm moving forward, and particularly right now,
when there's a lot of angst and uncertainty about which
the action the FED is going to go. They're gonna
raise interest rates, lower interest rates? Are they going to
succumb to Trump or not to come to Trump? What
exactly is going to happen? Today's speech by Powell was
particularly anticipated and eagerly anticipated, and indeed the consequence of

(43:15):
the speech, as we'll see, was that the stock market
took off. I mean, the stock market took the speech
as being very very good for the market. We'll see
why in a minute now. Joe Powell, while he right
now is somewhat resisting Trump and that is a good thing,

(43:37):
has not been a good FED chairman. I don't know
why he was ever chosen. Trump chose him, remember, I
don't know what made him qualified. And I don't think
he's good. He has no principles, he has no ideas.
He is generally pretty wishy washy. He was very very

(44:04):
bad in twenty twenty twenty twenty one when he created,
helped create together with the Treasury, the inflationary bout and
then didn't identify, didn't recognize it, and then didn't correct
quickly enough for it. He is just not being a

(44:27):
good chairman. Now. Granted, I don't know who he is
a good chairman. Alan Greenspan was good some of the time,
but in the two thousands he was awful. Benankee was good,
Bananki was ingenious, but I can't say it was a
good Fedchhaman. And suddenly the Great Financial Crisis didn't have

(44:49):
to be as bad as it was, and Bananki is
still as extent responsible for that, for being worse than
it needed to be. So I don't know when the
last if there is ever being a good shared Fed chairman.
But Powell is not a good chairman of the Fed anyway.

(45:11):
He gave a speech today and you know, some of
what he said makes sense, and somebody says doesn't make sense.
It's just he has these theories about inflation that he
gets from all those PhDs back there that just don't
make any sense. For example, I'm going to read you
a paragraph he says. It is also possible, however, that
they are put pressure on prices from tariffs could spur

(45:35):
a more lasting inflationary inflation dynamic, and that is a
risk to be assessed and managed. Okay, how the tariffs
create this inflationary dynamic because they shouldn't. One possibility is
that workers who see their real income decline because of
higher prices demand, didn't get higher wages for employers, sending

(45:57):
off adverse price wage price dynamics. Given that labor market
is not particularly tight and faces increase downside risks, that
outcome does not seem likely. But this is all wrong.
This is the labor cost theory of inflation, which is
just wrong. Let's say labor does do that. Let's say

(46:20):
labor demands more money because they're seeing tariffs go up
and they want higher wages. And let's say companies agree
and they pay them more wages. That is not inflationary.
What will happen if that happens, Given again, money supply
has not changed, what then happens. What happens is you

(46:41):
get unemployment. That is, if employers are paying employees higher
wages but they haven't got higher revenue or higher profits,
then they're going to have fewer employees. It's very simple.
Supplying demands simplicity. Now, in times of actual monetary inflation,

(47:05):
none need supplies growing. Then companies can pay higher wages
because revenues are higher because prices keep going up and
they don't have to lay people off. They do for
other reasons, but they don't have to write They do
because of now investment, but because their revenues are increasing,
and indeed profitable doesn't always go down in a short

(47:26):
run with inflation. But tariffs a one time shock. They
don't add to profitability. They just add to prices because
they're a tax. It's just a tax increase. So corporations
have increased taxes, they might choose almost always will choose
to pass those taxes onto consumers in higher prices. But

(47:47):
they don't actually have more money to spend on higher wages.
If they give their workers higher wages, they have to
have fewer workers because the amount of money they have
hasn't increased. Now, this is not difficult economics. This is
something you'd think that the army of PhDs at the
Federals of would know. Tariffs are not inflationary. They raised prices.

(48:17):
Once increase taxes, prices go up and then that's it.
So Powell has to decide if he's going to increase
rates or decrease rates, and he has to balance the risks.
And today he said that the balance of risks appears

(48:38):
to be shifting. That is. The one risk is inflation
because of tariffs, which, as they said, is not real.
There is no inflation because of tariffs. Another risk is
the economy slowing. Powell is very worried about the labor
numbers that got that guy fired, that woman fired. He's

(49:01):
very worried about those numbers. And he's noticed that the
economy has slowed significantly this year, and that is tilting
his risk assessment to woods a position of reducing interest rates.

(49:25):
So he is going to start reducing interest rates slowly
in probably after the next meeting. Of course, the markethod
do this, and they loved it. They love rates going down.
As I've told you many many times, interest rates and
acid prices are inversely related. As interest rates go down,

(49:45):
acid prices should go up. Everything else held constant. If
interest rates go up, acid prices should come down. Everything
else health constant. Nothing is ever constant. But that's the
general relationship. A slowing economy. Trouble with labor should, trouble

(50:07):
with jobs should result in low interestrates. But this is
the problem. What if there is inflation out there, not
because of tariffs, but because of monetary policy. What if
there's inflation out there because M two measure of the
amount of money in the economy has been increasing. What

(50:27):
if the problem is that there really is inflation, and
now you lower interest rates, encourage spending, encouraged investment that
increases money circulation and therefore increases inflation, and now you've
got a slowing economy and inflation. I mean, the danger

(50:49):
that he faces is stagflation. There is a strong argument
to be made that he should be raising rates until
inflation or well maybe not even touching rates, but shrinking
the money supply, which he can do without touching rates
by shrinking the balance sheet that the FED has, or

(51:13):
you know, raising rates, which it increase reserves and therefore
reduced amount of money circulating until inflation is crushed, and
only then low interest rates and encourage economic activity. So
you know, I'm not a central planner. I don't know
what the right answer is. I mean, I honestly believe

(51:34):
that the probably isn't the right answer. But I'm saying
if he is too aggressive lowering interestrates like Trump would like,
what you will get is stagflation. You'll still get You'll
get inflation, inflation higher than it is today and you'll
get the stagnation because the reality is that if inflation
is going to pick up, lowing interestrates is not going
to cure the problems created by Trump's stupid economic policies.

(51:58):
Trump's stupid, you know, ignorant, disastrous economic policies or what
are driving to slow down in the economy. And that
is not going to be solved with interest rates changes.
That requires changes of economic policy, ultimately shrinking gum and
spending and eliminating tariffs. You want to make supply change

(52:24):
more efficient, not less, more predictable, not less. I mean,
the bureaucracy and the hell that is now being created
around trade is a disaster economically, It's completely unnecessary. None
of this needed to happen. The economy would have done
fine without the tariffs. The tasks are slowing it down

(52:45):
significantly and raising prices, not inflation, but raising prices for
all of us. So we are poorer and the economy slower.
What should the Fed do? I don't know. I don't know.
There's no right answer him. I think it's a shrink
it's balance sheet. I think it needs to I think

(53:05):
it needs to shrink M two. It needs to reduce
the money supply somehow. Whether that means increasing interest rates
or not, I don't know. But it needs to shrink
the money supply and crush inflation. That is its primary target.
The economy might go into a session, but so be
it come out of it. On the other side, the
primary responsibility, number one responsibility of the FED is no inflation.

(53:33):
But you know, I don't trust any of the analysis
because the reality is that as the quote I gave
you from Powell where he attributes inflation to wage rises
rises and wages, these people don't know economics. Sorry, these
PhD economics at the FED who advise Powell don't know economics,

(53:58):
and he doesn't know I mean I I always thought
he was clues. I've never been a big fan, right
according to Powell. According to Powell, GDP growth is at
an annual pace of about one point two percent for
this year, which is about half the pace under Biden.

(54:21):
The economy and the Trump will grow about half what
it grew under Biden. I don't know what you want
to do with that. Do with that as you will,
all right, Oh, tariffs, quick story on tariffs. I just
reminded before we get to tariffs, these next few topics

(54:44):
are going to be pretty fast. I'm not suggesting we
continue using fear Nate, Why are you being such a
a hole? Is the only thing I can think. I'm
suggesting getting rid of the FED Reserve and privatizing banking

(55:05):
and getting completely off of fiat one hundred percent non
fiat councy. That includes bitcoin, by the way, which is
a full of fiat councy. But I'm proposing a complete
separation of government for money. And since that's not going
to happen, this is what I'm proposing for tomorrow, next week,

(55:25):
next month. So unless every time I talk about the fad,
I say should be abolished, unless I say that every
single time I talk about it, I'm pro fiat money
and I'm pro the FED the debt, you know, cut

(55:46):
spending and paid back. Why is that a problem? I mean,
my economic policy is a pretty known right. And by
the way, you want to ask a question, there is
a super chat. But stop misrepresenting me. It's dishonest. I mean,

(56:06):
it's one thing if you were completely new here and
didn't know anything about the Iron Book Show. But Nate,
you've been here before, you know my views. You think
I really support fiat currency is that is that really
your interpretation of what I think? Honestly, that's what you think,
all right, But the reality is we got a FED,

(56:28):
So what do we do with the FED as it exists?
We're screwed. But the question is how do you minimize damage?
And I'm full minimizing damage while working towards a principled
long term solution. But the question Walk isn't completely honest, Nate,
because I think you've been on this channel enough to

(56:52):
know my position about the FED. Nate says, I'm not present.
I had a question Walk after my post. But that's
like Tucker, I'm just asking questions. You're implying something and
it's not an implication because you really don't know. I
think I don't know all right, tariffs. I'm all for

(57:19):
principled long term solutions, absolutely, and I'm also for in
the meantime surviving. You've got to get beyond. You've got
to be able to feed yourself tomorrow while we fight
for principled long term solutions. I'm awful getting rid of
the FED. As I always say, there is no right

(57:42):
answer when you ask what they should the FED do?
Because it's a central planner and central planners have no
right answers. Their only answers that are more damaging or
less damaging. But they're no good answers, they're no right answers.
And I'm trying to suggest what the less damaging are
while we fight to get rid of the entire institution. Okay,

(58:07):
So I believe you, Nate, So I believe that the
FED should not exist. I think that government should not
print money. I think that we should be on a
private banking gold standard where governments, where private banks issue
currency like they did in the nineteenth century, based on

(58:28):
gold reserves, all bitcoin reserves, or any reserves that the
market will accept. And because as long as the Federal
Reserve is, you know, is a central planner, it can
only do damage. And as a consequence, the question is,
as I said, is the damage going to be great

(58:49):
or is it going to be small? So that's my position.
If you're interested in more than that, I think I
did a whole I've done shows on this Federal Reserve.
I've done shows on money. I've done show and interest rates.
You can just search you on book Federal Reserve and
you can find those shows. Also, I just did a
whole eight hour class for the Peter Center Academy on Money,

(59:13):
which will be out later this year, so it might
be with people's while to sign up for the Peterson
Academy just to take that class. But there'll be five
on there soon. So my Corporations class kind of a
history of American Business, which is really good if I
say so myself, and I think you'd really all really

(59:33):
enjoy it, is going to be out in a few weeks,
so it's they're getting ready to publicize it. So hopefully
some of you are signing up, or maybe wait until
I have five courses on there and then you get
a good bang for your buck. Tariffs who benefit two losers? Well,

(59:53):
there's a good story in the Wall Street Journal today
that basically argues yesterday, actually argues that it's big business
relative to small to medium sized business that can handle
tariffs better. Why can they handle tarifts better. They have
more capital, they can absorb losses for longer, they can

(01:00:16):
lobby government to get exclusions. So in this environment right now,
Walmart and Amazon and companies like TJ.

Speaker 3 (01:00:24):
Max absorbing some of the costs associated with the tariff,
keeping prices low in that way, taking business fund their
competitors who cannot afford to.

Speaker 1 (01:00:37):
Do that, who are passing on the cost of the
tariff to the customers, and they are growing and smaller
businesses are shrinking as a consequence. And you can see
that a lot of government policies, the effect of them
is ultimately to penalize small and medium sized businesses and

(01:00:59):
support law businesses, and and and it's particularly striking. It's
particularly striking that you know that a company like Amazon
is gaining market share and then it'll be accused of

(01:01:23):
engaging in monopolistic practices. No, it's just gaining market share
because it can it can absorb some of the some
of the cost of these stupid tariffs. Well, what's the
cause the causes the tariffs, the cause of stupid government policy.
It's government policy that distorts markets and makes some companies

(01:01:45):
bigger than they otherwise would be, smaller than the otherwise
would be. We don't know how big or small they'd
be because we don't have a market. So you know,
Target is struggling right now, and Walmart is taking advantage

(01:02:06):
of that fact. And again, Walmart is in a position
right now to be able to absorb down the tafts.
I remember Trump kind of asked them to not some
point they won't be able to, and at some point
prices will come up. Home depot and Low's struggling right now.

(01:02:33):
People are pulling up, holding off on home improvement projects
because of interest rates and because of economic consutainty and
in some cases higher prices. So retail space is being
shaken up by the taiffs. Changes are indeed happening. All right, Troy,

(01:02:56):
Just Troy just showed up. Thank you, Troy with five
hundred thallion dollars. Really appreciate that, Troy. Thank you, think you,
thank you. We will get to super chat in a
little bit, all right. A couple of final stories. We've

(01:03:17):
got redistricting. You probably all know. Texas signed the redistricting bill.
Democrats ultimately came back to the state, the state legislation
voted to redistrict, the governor signed it basically not completely gamanteeing,
but increasing dramatically the odds that they will gain five
seats in the coming election. They might be negatively surprised.

(01:03:41):
There are quite a few Hispanics in Texas that are
unhappy with the fact that they voted for Trump last time.
It might not be eager to vote for Republican this time.
We'll see anyway, California has done the similar thing. The
state law makers submitted a new redistricting play to the governor.

(01:04:01):
He signed it now in California, though it doesn't go
into effect immediately. In California, it actually has to go
to the voters to get voter approval, So there's going
to be They just declared a special election on November fourth.
They will ask voters to grant final approval to the

(01:04:23):
newly drawn congressional districts. And I don't know how voters
in California will vote on this. They might say, this
is ridiculous, we don't want to play this game. The
previous districts are fine. Why are you playing this? Why
are you doing this? Or they might say, no, we're
going to match Texas and we're going to correct this.

(01:04:43):
I don't know how truly democratic if there's such a
majority on a lot of issues, California doesn't vote democratic. Remember,
you know, California is the first state to really all
this affirmative action at universities through ballot, through a ballot initiative,

(01:05:05):
So it's how to tell how they'll vote. But right now,
if California passes this, then Texas will add five Republican seats,
California will add five Democratic seats, and we're back at
a stalemate and nothing has changed. So we'll see what

(01:05:26):
happens then. But this redistricting fiasco will continue. But again
California is gonna have a hard time. All right. Finally,
you know, the UN shockingly surprisingly, I mean completely surprising.
You know, I was shocked by this. The UN has

(01:05:50):
now declared officially before it is unofficial, and now it's
officially that there is a famine going on in Gauza.
Now they had to change on the parameters and how
they define famine exactly in order to make this declaration.
But now they have assessed that their family conditions accidentally

(01:06:11):
right where Israel has threatened to take over, that is
the city of Gaza. So their food shortages in and
around Gaza City, well maybe that suggests that shouldn't take
it over. Finally, because the reality is that there's no
famine in the seventy five percent of the Gauzan territory
that Israel occupies. Israeli occupation actually guarantees that Palestinians get fed.

(01:06:37):
The only reason Gauzans don't get fed in areas that
Hamas controls is because Hamas holds the food and doesn't
distribute it to them. So the solution has always been
the destruction of Hamas and israel occupation of Gaza. Strip

(01:06:59):
That will solve the humanitarian problem. That will solve the
famine problem. Not that there is such a problem, but
if there was, it will solve the AID problem. I mean,
Israel will provide security for the AID. It is just
stunning to me how much these people lie deceive, the

(01:07:22):
extent to which they hatred of Israel is such that
they're willing to make themselves out to be complete and
out of liars on the world stage, and that the
world of course doesn't call them on it because they're
happy to engage in hating on the Jews.

Speaker 4 (01:07:38):
The very idea that Israel should be feeding its enemy,
the very idea the humanitarian age should be flowing into
Gaza while the Gozens Gozens, not just Hamas Garzens, hold hostages.

Speaker 1 (01:07:52):
The very notion that somehow Israel is responsible for feeding,
provide water, electricity, and internet service to its enemies. This
is altruism taken to now is it is very mistaken.

(01:08:13):
It should have never got itself into this position. This
war should have been over a year and a half ago.
It should have taken more than three months.

Speaker 5 (01:08:21):
It should have been quick, decisive, brutal, ruthless, and it
should have been devoured of any humanitarian aid. But it
could have been so quick that it wouldn't have mattered.
It should have shut off the water, shut off the electricity,
shut off the internet, and gone in for force, no

(01:08:44):
holds barred, told the Palestinian civilians to evacuate to the beaches,
built tense cities over there, you know, send them tents,
and destroyed the rest of the Gaza.

Speaker 1 (01:08:54):
Strip and annihilated Kamas. And I know many of the
hostages that our live today would be dead. I know that,
and it's horrible. What I'm proposing is horrible, but it's
the only way to guarantee the destruction of evil and

(01:09:16):
to guarantee long term security and to prevent more hostages
from being taken. You know, Tramas values hostage just so much.
Said yesterday, yesterday or the day before, they send eighteen
Ramas fighters to try to attack an Israeli a military
position inside Gaza with the sole purpose of trying to

(01:09:39):
take more hostages. Luckily they were stopped and killed. Most
of them were killed. Howzo still allows us to happen,
how ramas troops can still crawl out of tunnels. I
do not understand why there was a tunnel left in Gaza.
I don't understand. I mean, I understand it. They don't
want to bomb the tunnels because they're afraid of killing hostages.

(01:10:01):
But that fear has crippled Israel, has made it impossible
for it to win. That fear needs to go out
the window. They need to do what's right. It's better
late than never. It needs to happen. Otherwise most people
will die, and Israel would become a pariah in the
world if it'd be gone. If they had gone ruthless

(01:10:22):
and fast and effective early on, immediately after October seventh,
the world by now would have forgotten about it. But
they're dragging out. Every week there's a new famine declaration
and Israel is in very, very, very bad shape internationally. Oh,

(01:10:43):
just for fun, Just for fun, can I show you
a video? I know I didn't list it, but you know,
I know, I keep thinking I'm not gonna show any more.
Tucker calls, and it really is ridiculous. I mean, how
many times I have to make the point. But why not, right,
I mean, he's setting himself up for this. Why not

(01:11:04):
show you videos of Tucker calls it. It's just at
this point it's it's it's kind of required watching. It
really is. Let's see how low, how deep into hell
this guy actually goes. See here's an example. I don't

(01:11:26):
know when this was, what interview this was, exactly which
interview this was. It doesn't matter because we're not going
to see the guy's interviewing. It's just tucka Tucker riffing
on something. But it's I think it's worth I think
it's worth watching in the category of Tucker descends into
hell and still has millions of people watching his show

(01:11:47):
as he descends into hell, and some of them might
be just fascinated by the fact that he's descending into hell,
and others might be supportive of this. And if they
are supportive of this, then you and I should be very,
very very afraid because this is bad stuff. This is
really scary stuff. Okay, here we go. Let me know.

(01:12:07):
Let me know if you can't if the sound is good,
or if you can't hear it, or anything like that.
It's only fifty nine seconds long, but it it's fifty
nine seconds of gold well done, depending on how you
view it.

Speaker 6 (01:12:23):
That the real danger is Sharia law. Sharia law, and
you can tell when you go to a place like
Abu Dhabi or Riyad like oh Man. I hope we
don't ever wind up with a society like this with
a rape rate of zero, where you leave your keys
in your Lamborghini and don't ever worry about.

Speaker 1 (01:12:39):
It being stolen.

Speaker 6 (01:12:40):
And you know, if people want to get wasted, they
do it at.

Speaker 1 (01:12:42):
Home, you know what I mean. Yeah, I don't. I
hope we don't wind up with that. Yeah, I think.

Speaker 7 (01:12:49):
I mean, Sharia law is obviously just a punchline. I
don't know that too many people actually believe in the
reality of that.

Speaker 1 (01:12:55):
And I mean sure, like I said, you know, I'm
a lawyer.

Speaker 7 (01:12:59):
I actually philosophy is not that different from other legal codes.
A lot of our own legal code, the Anglo Saxon
common law angle, American common law derives ultimately from religious authorities.

Speaker 1 (01:13:20):
That's it, guys. I don't have much to say about that.
So it turns out Tucker Cousin is now advocating for
Sharia law as superior to own law. He just wants
law and order. He just wants there to be no
rape and no crime, and he wants to be able
to leave the keys of Lamborghini in the Lamborghini and
not have it stolen, all reasonable, reasonable things, you know,

(01:13:43):
as I said, just yeah, I mean, and if you
need Sharia law in order to get it, then what's
wrong with Sharia law? Should law is fine, and all
law ultimately is religious law. So we can just impose
religious law on everybody. Should be a law. I mean,
who would have thought that that you don't twenty four
years after nine to eleven, one of the most popular

(01:14:04):
commentators in American media, right on the right, on the
far right, would be praising Sharia law, will be praising
Islamic law. I mean. Now, for MAGA, Sharia law is based.
That's that's maga's new thing. Sharia law is based. And well,

(01:14:27):
we don't want Sharia law, but how about how about
we just do we just do Christian law Christian law?
You know, this is where this is, this is what
we've come to. This is how bad it is. This
is how really bad it is. And I don't know
if you guys are taking Taka seriously yet as a

(01:14:50):
real threat, or some of you might just think he's crazy,
and maybe that's it. Maybe he's just crazy, and maybe
it doesn't matter. I worry because I see how many
people watch him, and I see the direction of the culture.
The direction. It's not good. It is not good, not

(01:15:13):
good at all. All right, let's see what I want
to do here. That is the news for Friday, August
twenty second. And thank you all for being here and
listening and participating. So let's go to the super chat.
Before we do that, I'll do a few things. One
is I want to thank I want to thank our stickers, guys,

(01:15:35):
because there were some good, very general stickers. Dave did
fifty dollars. Thank you, Dave, really appreciate that. Of course,
Troy Troy came in with five hundred Australian dollars. It's
over three hundred American dollars. Thank you, Troy. Thank you
for being so consistent in your support of your own
Brooks show. Really really really appreciate it. Let's see other stickers,

(01:15:56):
other stickers. Oh, Dave did another fifty dollars. Dave did
two fifty dollars. No he didn't. He did one. My mistake.
I double counted Gaale thank you, and Roland thank you,
and Mary Aleen thank you, and apple Jack thank you,
and Bonnie thank you. You know, there's a way for

(01:16:19):
me to set a sup which had goals. I need
to figure out how to do that. Yeah, I have
to do it at the beginning of the show. I think. Anyway,
I'll figure that out and we'll do it in the future.
We have sponsors for the on book show. The Iron
Ran Institute is a sponsor, and they would like to

(01:16:42):
remind you that on September second. September second, of course,
is an important date in the history of Atlas Shrugged,
and September second, Dinmand Institute is going to have an
exclusive premiere of a newly acquired high quality recording of
Iran nineteen sixty four four to whole Forum lecture, is

(01:17:03):
Atlas shrugging A perennial question, is Atlas shrugging? Oh, Dave
did a second fifty dollars. I guess my mistake turned
out positive for me. Thank you. Dave really appreciated. And
Aman is here with one hundred dollars. Thank you. Armen
really really appreciated. Guys, thank you, thank you, thank you,
And anyway, so is Atlas Shrugging, which is a great

(01:17:28):
lecture and relevant, always relevant because you can ask that
question sixty four and seventy four, certainly in two thousand
and four and in twenty twenty four, twenty twenty five.
So it will be presented by Arii Alchiaravist, Odra Hilsey,
and Brandon Leacy. After Atlas Shrug was published, people routinely
asked Ironman whether it was a prophetic novel or an

(01:17:50):
historic one. Was it a warning about the future or
diagnosis of current events? In this talk, Ironman gives the answer,
which is fascinating. In addition to the talk, Audra and Brandon,
along with literature professor and I RAND expert Shoshana Milgram,
will provide exclusive behind the scenes context and commentary. So

(01:18:11):
this is going to be fun and fun and educational
and just fun. So that's September second, that's what soon, right,
So September second, you can find information and how to register.
It's free, by the way, free free stuff. You can
find information about it at iinrand dot org slash start here,
I rand dot org slash start here. So check out

(01:18:36):
Iran slash start here for information about this new tap
taping of Iran's talk Hendershot Hander Shot Wealth has a
product that if you have significant capital gains, whether in

(01:18:57):
the stock market or in a business that you own
and are going to be selling, and you have capital
gainst tax exposure, a product that can save you a
lot of money. I mean a lot of money on
that capital gainst tax exposure. If you're interested, check out
the interview I did with Robert head a Shot on
my YouTube channel. It's in a playlist called sponsors. You

(01:19:20):
can also just go to their website hand a shot
wealth dot com, slash ybs, handershot wealth dot com, slash
ibs and and just read up about it. And if
you see the interview and if it sounds interesting, then
schedule a time to talk to Robert and it'll be
a good conversation. It's not a hot sell. It's going
to be friendly. It's going to give you advice and

(01:19:43):
you can figure out does this fit with my investment strategy?
Is this product appropriate for me? They won't sell you
anything that doesn't make sense for you. I trust them
completely completely, So no qualms about referring these guys to you.
And then finally Alex Epstein, somebody else I trust. Alex

(01:20:06):
EPs Epstein is the world expert on climate change. He
is a friend, a colleague, a you know, a fellow
in the fight to change the world. And uh. He
puts out a substack that's incredibly informative, uh and incredibly
valuable on all things related to energy, and you should

(01:20:31):
you should subscribe. You'll learn a huge amount. You'll learn
a lot of stuff about what's going on right now
in terms of inside this administration with regard to energy.
And you'll get talking points so how to deal with
a lot of these questions and maybe your relatives and
uh and and friends or coworkers might have on your

(01:20:51):
position on climate change. So check him out. Alex Epstein
substack dot com alex Epstein dot substack dot com. All right,
let's see again. Thank you all the stickers, they were great. Oh,

(01:21:16):
don't forget, don't forget Patreon dot com to become a
monthly supporter. Monthly support is really really helpful for this show,
which could not happen without you. All right, let's jump
in with the fifty dollars questions Zion pairs. Thank you
Zion generally speaking, why do unions harm non unions workers? Well,

(01:21:41):
because unions, you know't raise wages, and because they raise
wages in their industry, in their company, a number of
things happen one a number of different things could happen,

(01:22:02):
but one of these, all of these is bad. One
there fewer jobs, So people who are not in the union,
who would one day like to join and become an
auto worker become They're gonna be fewer jobs because the
people who have their jobs are getting paid more. The
company has only an x amount of money allocated for wages,

(01:22:22):
then they'll just have fewer people working for them. Second,
let's say the company is in a position, let's say
it's an entire order industry. All the workers in the
audit you've gotten to raise. Then they can raise the price.
Then they can raise prices an automobile and thus fund

(01:22:43):
they increase in wages, and then workers in other industry
suffer because prices of their automobiles are now higher, so
they have to spend more of their income on automobiles
or whatever the industry is that the unions raised prices on,

(01:23:05):
and that means they qualgive life. Standard of living goes.

Speaker 8 (01:23:08):
Down, so either way, if the company absorbs the cost
of the raisers and wages, then it fires people or
it hires fewer people.

Speaker 1 (01:23:22):
And if the company passes on the cost in higher prices,
then workers everywhere else suffer because their stand of living
has just gone down because something is more expensive artificially
now because productivity went up, then prices wouldn't go up
if productivity went up, but because artificially the price went
up in spite of the fact that productivity didn't go up.

(01:23:46):
Hope that answers the questions I'm Michael fifty dollars, Thank you, Michael.
Doesn't America have too many different types of ethnic minorities
for us to morph into nineteen thirties Germany? Germany was
low to the homogeneous success for a tiny Jewish minority,
and they could scapegoat. America today has over one hundred

(01:24:06):
million non whites. Yeah, I mean, we're not gonna be
Nazi Germany. And I mean, I keep saying this. Our
form of authoritarianism, a fascism, is going to be different
than Germany's. We're not gonna have concentration camps in America.
Although you know, it's not that hard to imagine that

(01:24:28):
all these minorities could gang up on the Jews. I mean,
after all, there's a lot of anti semitism in the
black community. I don't know about the Hispanic community, but
there's suddenly antisemitism in the community of white of just
average American whites, there's a lot of anti Semitism. So

(01:24:49):
anti Semitism is not limited to just whites. You don't
need a homogeneous society to inflict the anti Semitic harm.
But I don't think that's what's gonna happen in the
as I said, America is gonna be become an authoritarian
state that is wrapped around nation, patriotism and religion, and

(01:25:11):
the religion will be Christianity, because the reality is that
a significant majority of Americans are Christians, and many of
them identify as Christians, and that could be another reason
why they might persecute Jews. But it's not gonna look
like Nazi Germany. Don't think history doesn't repeat, History doesn't

(01:25:31):
go in cycles. So white people people with white skin.
I don't know what it means, but so don't think
of America as gonna have a Hitler. I mean, it
will have its own unique form of authoritarian but It's

(01:25:55):
probably not going to be ethnically centered violence related to
anti Semitism around a kind of a Nazi party. It'll
be something else. I don't know what exactly, but it
will be something else, And I think Landing Peacff is
right in that it is. It will be wrapped in

(01:26:21):
what do you call it? A flag and a cross,
which is different than a Nazis rand. Have you seen
Sean Ryan's interview with Blake Showal's brilliant and thought provoking.
I have not. I really want to. I've heard it's

(01:26:42):
really good. Blake is really smart, and this is I
think the first time he's done a long format interview,
and yeah, I'm curious to listen to it. So thanks
for bringing it up and pointing it out, and I'll
let you know what I think once I hear it.

(01:27:02):
But I'm very positively inclined based on everything I'm hearing
about it. Thank you, Ann, Thank you for the fifty dollars.
All right, let's move to twenty dollars questions. Thomas, you
almost can buy a house in the Bay Area because
of land use in building restrictions. That's right. Over the
last forty years, population grew forty five percent, but housing

(01:27:24):
stock only rose about five percent. Socialism. Statism is the
opposite of a solution. Yes, you need more housing, less regulation,
less zoning, all the yes in my backyard. People know this.
I don't know what the appeal is of socialism or
or the mag up crowd. You know why they they
all use housing where it's so clear, so obvious, so

(01:27:49):
not complicated. What is going on? Andrew Rand is quoting Rand.
A major source of men's earned guilt in regard to
philosophy as well as in regard to their own minds
and lives is failure to introspect. As end quote, would

(01:28:10):
you be as moralistic? Or has would you be as moralistic?
Or has Christianity can't crippled man's emotions? Well, I don't
see why they're to contradict. A major source of man's
earned guilt in regard to philosophy is failure to introspect. So,

(01:28:31):
I mean that makes complete sense, right. Introspection is available
to everybody, and the fact that they don't introspect with
regard to their own mind and with regard to how
they came to the conclusions they're coming to is the reason.

(01:28:52):
I think it's where their ultimate evasion happens, and that's
morality and the reason why ultimately Christianity kant have the
power they have over them. That is a culture in
which there's more introspection. A culture which encourages young people
to introspect would be a lot less susceptible to count

(01:29:16):
in Christianity because they'd identify much more easily the processes
of cognition and realize how destructive what Christianitian count is
doing to their mind. That's my interpretation. By the way,
I'm curious which essay that's from, So if you don't

(01:29:37):
mind putting in the chat just the name of the
essay where that's from. Oh yes, okay, Michael, does the
conceptual level always beat the perceptual level once? Since objectives
are on a higher plane of thought and moral clarity,
we will inevitably overpower those who haven't put the effort
to reach our abstract plane. I mean it is if

(01:30:00):
you're on the conceptual level. But you know, a brute
who's on a perceptual level can still bash your head in.
He can still press the button to launch a nuke
and destroy you. So yeah, ultimately objectivism has to win. Ultimately,
the conceptual beats out the perceptual level mentality. But a

(01:30:24):
lot of damage could be caused in the meantime and
it can take a long time. But yes, ultimately it
has to happen, Roberts says, since I announced it in
previous super Chat this week, for your information, a Sunday
interview with Augustina has to be postponed a couple of weeks,
but it will be worth the way. Meanwhile, do watch

(01:30:45):
your okon twenty twenty five talk. I second all of that,
So look forward to ultimately having that interview and Augustina
will be on the show at some point. Once I
get back to home. I'll scale, I'll schedule interviews, PB says.
My son sites New York Times article titled no proof

(01:31:07):
Ramas ROUTUNI stole UNAID. Israeli military official say, what credible
evidence exists that Tramas did systematically steal UNAID. I mean,
there's a ton of it. There's zero evidence that a
military official actually said that. That an Israeli military official
actually said it. The New York Times, you know, likely

(01:31:31):
made that up or purposefully misunderstood what he actually said.
The fact that the UN is not driving AID into
Gaza suggests that something stopping them. They don't want the
aid stolen inside, but they're not. There's tons and tons
and tons of aid sitting at the border in UN

(01:31:53):
truckloads that is not being delivered to Gaza. The UN's
just start moving it. It has his approval. They're just
not moving it. But there is a ton of evidence,
there's videos. There's also just the Shia amount of aid
that's gone into Gaza. They should all be obese by

(01:32:16):
now in terms just the quantity of food that they
would have had to consume if they had accessed all
that aid. So you just count the trucks and count
them out of aid. It's gone someway, not into the
mouths of many Gazans. Somebody's holding it, somebody's sitting on it.

(01:32:40):
And there's plenty of video evidence where we see Hamas
fighters take over the trucks. There's plenty of intelligence evidence
coming out of Israeli intelligence, plenty of news paper stories,
maybe not New York Times, but I think at some
point even in the New York Times documenting Ramas stealing

(01:33:03):
all the eight So you know, this one New York
Times story after all the lies, the New York Times
have said about Gaza, after all the deception, after the
printing of those pictures of the babies and all of that.
It's all made up stuff. They make stuff up. And

(01:33:25):
then they were trackeded in some you know, in some
recess in some page thirty four or something.

Speaker 9 (01:33:43):
Right, Oh god, what did I do here? M sorry,

(01:34:14):
I screwed something up here one second? Let me just
try to fix this. How do I lug out?

Speaker 1 (01:34:38):
Uh? Thanks? All right? Huh all right, I'll deal with
this later. Let's let's see Jennifer is ama Saturday or Sunday?

(01:35:05):
I got an email changing it from Saturday to Sunday.
Did anybody else get that email? It's Saturday. There's definitely
no show on Sunday. No show on Sunday, Saturday to
pm Eastern time. All right, let's do this one. Why

(01:35:34):
are the youth sold in verious flavors of socialism? How
do we reverse that? And basically because the mixed economy
has failed and they know it and nobody defends or
the voices defending capitalism are pretty meek and they're not
enough of them, and socialism is consistent with them all
code altruism. And I did a whole show on this recently.

(01:35:58):
So just check your on book Socialism and you'll find
a bunch of stuff that I've already said about this.
But basically, socialism is consistent with altruism, consistent with the
altruism and collectivism and woke ideology that they've learned in school.
And they know the system right now is bad and

(01:36:18):
they've only been exposed to one alternative, only been exposed
to one alternative, and that alternative is socialism. They have
not been exposed to capitalism as an alternative. As a
Turk economy, can you talk about goal setting sometime? I
know everyone is different, but goals are helpful for dry financial, intellectual, social,

(01:36:40):
physical I very much think. I covered that in some
of my talks on on your un Rules for Life,
so check those out. But yeah, I might do another
Rules for Life around goals. So as a Turk economy
continues by goals, I mean books, when once to read,
places to visit, social events, to attend career timeline. Most

(01:37:03):
people are sleep walking through life. I agree, and I
talk about that a lot in Uron Rules for Life.
There's a whole playlist on Uran's Rules for Life. I
encourage you to check it out. And let me know
if there's something missing from now. But I cover all
these things around there. You need to have a plan
for life. Just like you have a business plan, you

(01:37:25):
should have a plan for your life. How's the deregulation
coming along? Again, nothing big has changed. These things are
very slow. And the big deregulation that I mentioned of
getting the EPA out of regulating CO two is going

(01:37:46):
to have a huge impact, but it takes time to
actually pass. It needs public comment and da da da,
but it will get deregulated. So I think in the
energy space, in the environmental space, we're seeing a lot
of deregulation that will happen over the next few months
and it will make a big difference. As the tech

(01:38:06):
economy says, you often cite that violence is down. It is,
but compared to other nations like Japan, UK, Germany, et cetera,
we have a long way to go. Solution, well, the
solution is end of welfare state. The solution is increased policing,
end of welfare state, increased policing and privatized education. In

(01:38:30):
the United States, that's what you need to do, and
you need to solve the problem of the inner cities
I mean violence is that is a very narrow problem
really in the United States, Sudain neighborhoods. In certain places,
it is associated with poverty. It is associated with bad education,

(01:38:51):
and it is associated with limited opportunities. It's associated with
primarion as cities, and that you need to get rid
of that. But there is a there is a culture
in a sense of violence in America. That is, it's
always going to be a little bit more violent than
the rest of the world. But it shouldn't be this bad.

(01:39:12):
It shouldn't be as violent. I did a whole section
on this a couple of days ago. Somebody asked me,
and I did a whole section in the Q and
A look it up on why I think America is
more violent, And it has to do with a certain
psychology of Americans, a certain perversion of ambition, a certain

(01:39:33):
materialism and a desire for material wealth. But yeah, better
ideas and no wealth estates and none of this horrible
education that the kids are getting. P Gupta thoughts on
Trump administration will begin reviewing all fifty five US visa holders,

(01:39:57):
that is illegal immigrants. Yeah, I mean, it's horrible. They
hate him, I said from the beginning. They hate immigrants.
That it wasn't just illegals, they hate all immigrants. They
don't want you here, and there's a good chance that
they will selectively kick people out. And even if they don't,
they just want to harass you. They want to increase

(01:40:18):
your incentives to leave by yourself. The numbers I've seen
is one point six million people have left the United States,
probably almost all of them ire legal immigrants have left
the United States before ICE has an opportunity to harass them.
I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of legal immigrants
have left the United States because the United States is

(01:40:39):
becoming significantly less attractive to live in, particularly if you're Hispanic,
but if you look foreign, the United States is becoming
less attractive to live in. Now, there's a horrible thing
to say, but it is absolutely true. H fancask how

(01:41:02):
could Coote Land Holmes this just on the fountain Head
rent at the lowest price because they were efficiently and
effectively built and designed in a way as to be
built cheaply at low cost, and therefore could be rented
out at a low rent and the investor could still

(01:41:25):
get a good return in his capital. Frank says, did
Rock ever have girlfriend after Dominique married Whineen? I doubt it.
He basically was waiting for her, so I don't think he.
I don't think he had a golfriend. Maybe in a
previous version of The fountain Head he did, but it

(01:41:46):
didn't make the final version because it didn't make really sense.
Andrew we goting Vance saying that he will be quote
quiet as long as the Lensky behaves. I guess Vance
didn't want to appear to be standing down. Have you
ever seen such undignified immaturity by current leadership? No? I

(01:42:07):
mean these people are completely undignified. They are, Yeah, I
mean the horbable human beings. And to treat Zelensky the
way Vance treated him, that should be a reason never
to vote for him. Uh fank Atarisan X a way

(01:42:32):
of destroying sales on X, Well, Yes, they are a
way of destroying sales of that product from that particular country. Yes,
they're a way of maybe not destroying but reducing them,
reducing demand for them because prices go up, demand goes down.
Michael banishing every illegal immigrant will do what exactly to

(01:42:55):
make all these MAGA losers' lives better? Nothing. They'll make
their lives worse, literally make their lives worse. And then
the question is where do they turn their hatred to.
Who's next on the list of those to be hated
and and to be to be whose rights should be violated?
So I don't know, Mike, I think a few super

(01:43:24):
Chat dollars than me. Is this a good sign for movement?
I don't think it's possible. I think you, uh, you
have probably a pretty pretty high margin ahead of them too.
You know, is it possible for them to provide me
with a list of the people who've given the most

(01:43:46):
super Chat like top five and and and and and
the relative rating in the history of the show or
even just the last year or whatever. They don't have
that feature available right now. I can't pull that up,
but I've asked them, but they have the data, so
I've asked them if they would. I'll let you know

(01:44:07):
if I get some between you guys. But I do
think just based on I don't know, I haven't done
the math, but Michael, you are so consistent pretty much
every show that Yeah, as much as Troy and Dave give,

(01:44:29):
I think you give more. But it is good. It's
great to see more people having supporting what we're doing,
and successful people because obviously are successful because they have
the money to be able to contribute to this show.
So yeah, it's fantastic, Michael. Also, could it be twenty

(01:44:53):
Could it be? Could it be in twenty years we
get Tucker Cosson type more explicitly hateful rather than just
a conspiracy theorist like Disturma in Germany. Yeah, I mean,
but Tucker could turn into that as well. So absolutely,
this is the softening of the culture, the preparation of
the culture for all of that. Michael, Are there any

(01:45:17):
batter plans in place once AARI high command believes we
are on the verge of dictatorship? No, because I think
we'll know well in advance. But also it's not clear
what the batter of plans will look like. But no, nothing,
nothing at this moment, Jonathan. The US is in Germany.

(01:45:39):
But Trump reminds me of Paul von Heidelberg, old authoritarian
president who pave the way for a formal dangerous leader. Yeah,
I agree with that. You know, I don't know if
you reminds me of Heidelberg. I don't know enough about
Heideberg to make the comparison, But yes, I do think
he's definitely paying paving the way. Paving the way. I'm

(01:46:00):
sure you're not in the top fifty, pretty sure, but
we'll find out. When we find out, then maybe you
can strive to be in the top fifty. Yeah, all right, Nates,
you're on. Sorry for the misrepresenting your viewpoint of money trade,

(01:46:20):
government today and prior so politically keep government out, as
opposed to libertarians saying US government should enforce a gold standard. Yeah, no,
I'm against enforcing a gold standard. I'm for keeping goverment out.
And I agree with you about bitcoin. I don't think
bitcoin survives the competition. But let there be competition. Let

(01:46:42):
private banks issue currency on whatever they want, and let's
see who is willing to use that currency, and who
is willing to deposit, you know, to actually engage in
trade based on that. And I think gold will win
in the end, electronic gold, crypto gold, you know, stable

(01:47:03):
coin gold, I don't know, some form, but it'll be electronic,
but I think it'll be a gold standard. The government
will have to set something in the sense that it
will have to say, you know, we will pay in
this currency. And I assume that would be gold. So
it won't enforce a gold standard, but it will act

(01:47:27):
on a gold standard that it will pay its bills
in gold, and it will accept taxes contributions in gold.
But yes, separations stayed from economics. All right, guys, thank you.
You guys were very very generous today, particularly Troy and

(01:47:48):
Michael and Dean. You guys were all great. And I
will see you all tomorrow for the AMA. Ask me anything.
I mean, you ask me anything every day, but tomorrow
is just for questions. Literally, ask me anything. Some of
you will be on the video on the panel, some
of you will be on the thing. If just to

(01:48:11):
clarify the AMAS tomorrow not Sunday. It's tomorrow, Saturday at
two pm East Coast time, seven pm My time. Two pm, Yo, teme.
I will see you all tomorrow. Bye, everybody,

All Episodes

Everything Is NOT OK: DC Chaos, Tariffs, Famine & Tucker’s Circus | Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

The Herd with Colin Cowherd

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Everything Is NOT OK: DC Chaos, Tariffs, Famine & Tucker’s Circus | Yaron Brook Show