Pardons; Netflix; JD Vance; Tucker & Qatar; Millionaires; Russia; China; Hamas | Yaron Brook Show - Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
H a lot of the fundamental printles of edom, last
cells and an individual lots. This is the show.

Speaker 2 (00:20):
Oh right, everybody, welcome to here one book show on
this Monday, Monday, Monday Monday. I hope everybody had a
fantastic weekend and you're looking forward to a uh having
a fantastic week All right, let's jump into it. I
will remind you that tonight at seven pm E Schoost time,

(00:42):
we've got Gene Maroney, Geene Moroney Binswanger, who's gonna come
on and talk about.

Speaker 3 (00:46):
Setting goals for the new year.

Speaker 2 (00:48):
So we're gonna talk about how to set goals, how
to how to how to figure out what your values are,
how to set goals, how to plan for achieving those goals.
Gene is great on these things, so UH join us
questions about issues related to values and goal setting and introspection.
Gene is very good on those issues, So join us

(01:12):
tonight at seven pm East Coast time. Seven pm East
Coast time. All right, let's see. Yes, we're going to
do the news. We're going to do the news right now,
and I've got a hard stop. So we've got about

(01:32):
two hours and we will go from there. Let's start
with the latest pardon that Trump gave out last week
was to a Democratic congressman. A lot of people surprised
that Trump was giving a pardon to a Democratic congressman.
This is a congressman who he and his wife faced

(01:56):
federal charges of bribery and money laundring tied to over
six hundred thousand dollars from Azerbaijean and a Mexican bank. Oh,
I know people in Azerbaijan. I wonder if they give
me six hundred thousand dollars. Anyway, it's it's not bad
for congressmen. And they were found guilty, by the way. Uh,

(02:17):
they were found guilty of this and and uh and
sentenced to jail time. And Trump granted a full pardon
on December third, so five days ago, based on a
letter that he got from the daughter. And the daughter's
claimed that this Democratic congressman was treated really really badly

(02:43):
by the left, by by by the progressive win of
the democratic progressive wing of the Democratic Party. And and
and this is why he went to jail. He didn't
go to jail because he was actually cor up. No,
he was set up by by by the far left.
He was set up by those crazy leftists, and that
he was not a crazy leftist at all. And if only,

(03:06):
if only, if only Donald Trump would grant him a pardon, that.

Speaker 3 (03:09):
Would be a.

Speaker 2 (03:11):
Slap in the face of of of the radical left
and a win, a win for for America first. And uh,
you know, he was very you know, bipartisan. He has
a bi partisan record, and he's it was good on
on board of security, and and and and maybe maybe
maybe you know who knows he would support in the future.

Speaker 3 (03:33):
I don't know if this was explicit or not, but.

Speaker 2 (03:35):
It was potentially it was implied that if he got
the pardon, he he might even support a Republican in
his district. Anyway, Trump granted the pardon.

Speaker 3 (03:48):
Based on this.

Speaker 2 (03:50):
This everybody's surprised he gave it to a Democrat, but
based on this assumption that this guy would would reject
the people who sent him to jail, the far left,
and embraced Republicans. This is what Trump wrote a couple
of days ago. He said, this is in a truth

(04:12):
social He said I never spoke to this has said
that he told about the daughters sending him this letter
and asking for pardon, and he says, I never spoke
to the congressman, his wife or his daughters, but felt
very good about fighting for family that was tormented by
the very sick and deranged people.

Speaker 3 (04:31):
They were treated so badly. How does he know this?

Speaker 2 (04:35):
Based on the daughter's letter, signed the papers and said
to the people in the Oval office that I just
did a very good, perhaps life saving thing. God God
himself was very happy with me that day. Then it
happened all caps. Only a short time after signing the pardon,

(04:57):
Congressman Henry Ula I think something like that, announced that
he will be running for Congress again in the Great
State of Texas, a state where I received the highest
number of votes ever recorded.

Speaker 3 (05:15):
I mean this this guy, I e. President Trump.

Speaker 2 (05:19):
He could be a character on Saturday Night Live that
John Belushi played in the nineteen seventies, right, I mean,
he's so over the top, crazy, ludicrous that it's almost
like you. No, he's in a skit. It's not real.
He's in a skit anyway. So he was going to

(05:39):
run again for Congress in the Great State of Texas
as a Democrat, continuing to work with the same radical
left scum that just weeks before wanted him and his
wife to spend the rest of their lives in prison
and probably still do. Such a lack of loyalty something

(05:59):
that tech voters and Henry's daughters will not like. Oh well,
next time, no more, mister nice guy President Donald J. Trump. Anyway,
you know, Trump is handing out, handing out pardons, some
involving his friends, many involving his political allies, some involving

(06:26):
the friends of his political allies, some involving people who
he expects one day will do good things to him,
and some involving people who might actually turn out to
sway in the elected election, help him sway Congress in
the direction of Republicans because he's he's worried about what
will happen next election. And this guy doesn't play along.

(06:51):
He's a Democrat, and he stays a Democrat, and he's
running as a Democrat, and Trump's furious, furious. But I
think what this makes clear is how much Trump uses
pardon says quid quote quote that he expects something in return.
It could be cash, or in this case, it just
could be staying out of an election, or supporting the

(07:13):
Republican or convoting to be a Republican, whatever happens to
be in that particular case. Pardon corruption on steroids is
what we get, is what we're getting from this White
House talk about corruption. So you might have heard over
the weekend this is this is really big news that

(07:35):
Netflix is is buying Warner Brothers uh for some gazillion
dollar amount, some huge amount of money and uh and
and and a lot of people are very excited. This
is combine the Netflix library with the HBO library. It'll
also give Netflix access to a major Hollywood studio, which

(08:00):
could elevate the quality of their movies and TV shows
that they put out on Netflix. And and this is
you know, this is kind of a vertical integration of
of now a studio all the way down to UH
to streaming UH and uh and and you know, just
just enhancing I think the the heft of Netflix in

(08:23):
in Hollywood and exciting to all of us who love
streaming movies and television and everything else. This is a
wanted by the Discovery. It has a bunch of other properties,
including I think CNN. UH.

Speaker 3 (08:37):
So this is this is a big deal.

Speaker 2 (08:40):
However, on on UH over.

Speaker 3 (08:44):
The weekend, Trump was I guess it was Sunday night
last night.

Speaker 2 (08:48):
Last night, Trump was attending a big event at Kennedy Center,
and he was asked about this merger and and his
response was, you know, Trump, well, that's got to go
through a process and we'll see what happens. You know,

(09:09):
when he was asked about whether this deal would go through,
and then he said.

Speaker 3 (09:14):
But it's a big deal.

Speaker 2 (09:14):
It's a big market shap that Netflix would have it
after deal, you know, it could be a problem. Indeed,
prediction markets show a twenty three percent chance of Netflix
actually being able to be able to close this deal.
By the way, there's a massive breakup fee. So if

(09:35):
Netflix would draw us from the deal without a without
I guess a good reason. A good reason being the
regulator is not approving it. It has to pay you
know one a brother's a huge amount of money.

Speaker 3 (09:47):
But anyway, you know, right now, it's a twenty three
percent at the.

Speaker 2 (09:54):
By the end of twenty twenty six, before Trump made
the comment. Before Trump the comment, guess what the odds were?
The odds was sixty. So basically, Trump saying a sentence
like that basically dropped the chance that this deal goes

(10:14):
through by more than half. Now, what's the issue, Well,
I mean from from a regulatory perspective. The issue is
that Netflix has a very big market Shit's a number
one streamer. It would be combined with HBO Max, which
would make it even a bigger streamer, and somehow that

(10:39):
would be a problem because it would put Netflix maybe
over thirty percent of the streaming market, which is somehow
a problem not clear why. You know, Trump said Netflix
has a very big market share, and when they have
Warner Brothers, you know that Shaw goes up a lot.

(11:01):
He also said Trump said that he personally he Donald
Trump would be involved in making the decision.

Speaker 3 (11:09):
About this.

Speaker 2 (11:13):
I wonder why. I wonder why Trump needs to be involved.
We'll get to that in a minute, but it's it
is worth noting that at least Netflix is saying that, look,
YouTube is a competitor.

Speaker 3 (11:27):
TikTok is a competitor.

Speaker 2 (11:28):
It's not just an Amazon of course with Prime and
Apple with Apple TV, and there's some beat players who
are real competitors. That'll be the argument that it makes.
But why, why why why? I mean, this is not
like Netflix one of other is going to be some
real big monopoly in any kind of definition of monopoly,

(11:50):
even you know, without the ability to compete. I mean
that that is absurd and even by the most generous
definition of monopoly.

Speaker 3 (11:59):
The the quotes often abide.

Speaker 2 (12:01):
Bike, if that's thirty percent of the market, that's not
like ninety eighty. What are they talking about. Why is
Trump being involved? Well, I mean the obvious cynical perspective,
but realistic nonetheless, in spite of the element of cynicism,
is that he's waiting to see how much Netflix bribes him.

(12:26):
He's waiting to see whether the Netflix CEO shows up and.

Speaker 3 (12:32):
Argues and.

Speaker 2 (12:34):
You know, contributes to a favored charity of Trump's or
something like that, you know, to try to persuade him. Indeed,
the Netflix CEO has already met with Trump recently to
lobby him for the acquisition. Trump has confirmed that meeting,

(12:59):
So you know, the Netflix executive try to argue that
Netflix was no big deal monopoly. But of course I
don't think he gets Trump. That's not what you have
to argue in front of Trump. You have to you
have to say the right things and do the right
things to get Trump's approval. But there's a complicating factor
to Netflix. And I mentioned this last week that somebody

(13:21):
else wanted to buy somebody else wanted to buy one
of others, and that somebody else was a paramo pamat
sky Dance, and pamit sky Dance is owned by basically
by the world's second richest man, who happens to be

(13:44):
a huge supporter of Trump, and the CEO of Oracle
that is Larry Ellison and whose son David Ellison I
think is the CEO a paramount sky Dance. And of
course they are good friends with the Trumps, so it's

(14:08):
very likely that they will be lobbying Trump over dinner
at Mala Lago sometime not to approve the deal so
that they can swoop in and get Warner brothers. Anyway,
even though they can compete on price, maybe they can
compete on political influence. Indeed, you can tell kind of

(14:31):
the influence machine already working lawmakers of both political parties,
both Republican and Democrats. Dallaalasa the Republican, which is very
disappointing because AASA I always thought it was like a
free market guy. But you know, even free market guys,
I guess they're not immune from the appeal from a

(14:51):
large donor. Both Dallasa and Democratic Elizabeth Warren Elizabeth want
seems to team up with Republicans a lot lately. They
both have already folded the transaction and claimed that it
has too much power, too big, too big. It would
have four hundred and fifty million users on a global

(15:12):
that's harmful to consumers.

Speaker 3 (15:13):
That's not good for customers. It's not good.

Speaker 2 (15:16):
I mean I was like looking forward to having HBO
with Netflix. I would think that would be better for me.
But no, no, no, they don't like it. Of course, the
EU is althos going to look at this and review it.
The UK will also look at this and review it.

(15:36):
I mean even the House of Lords in the UK
is worried about this, and they pressing the government. I mean,
why is everybody so worried about streaming TV?

Speaker 3 (15:45):
Could it be?

Speaker 2 (15:46):
Could it be that there is lobbying behind this and
there's some political pressure being put in place.

Speaker 3 (15:55):
Talk about corruption here. It is.

Speaker 2 (16:00):
Way for those of you who think that America is
a capitalist country and we have a free market here.
If we had a free market, Netflix would already be running.

Speaker 3 (16:13):
Warner Brothers.

Speaker 2 (16:14):
It wouldn't be waiting for approval from the authorities and
from Donald Trump, the President of the United States, getting
involved personally in the deal. Maybe Trump will say, okay, Netflix,
you can have one of brothers. You can have one
of brothers. If CNN promises to give me good coverage,

(16:35):
I think that that's a good deal.

Speaker 3 (16:37):
That's probably the deal that Trump will be offering.

Speaker 2 (16:40):
Them, because that's what he thinks what happened if Ellison
buys them. If Allison buys them, he'll have CBS and CNN,
and he might put Barry Weiss in charge of CBS
as well a CNN as well. I mean, this is so,

(17:05):
I mean, antius law is awful and horrific, and it
doesn't make any economic sense.

Speaker 3 (17:11):
It doesn't make any sense period.

Speaker 2 (17:16):
Period. And in that sense it's it really is, you know,
so it doesn't make sense. Anti just law is corrupt
and based on really really corrupt you know, assumptions economic

(17:37):
and political, and of course there's a complete negation of
individual rights. But but Trump is taking it to the
next level. Now, anti just laws is just used as
political beverage. Who we go after, who we don't, What

(18:00):
deals will prove, what deals we don't. If you're friends
with Trump, yeah, sure your deals will go through. If
you're not friends with Trump, you better become friends with Trump.
Otherwise your deals will not go through. It just adds
to the you know, it just adds to the corruption

(18:21):
in DC, which is already at a all time, all
time historic, all time historic level. All Right, that is

(18:47):
where we are. All of you excited about Netflix should
be disappointed. All Right. I want to play you a
little bit of JD. Van's Uh this is an interview
he did. This is a segment that was taken out
of an interview he did over the weekend that has

(19:07):
to do with immigration. Jad Devance is on a on
a on a role with immigration. Uh you know he's
he's yeah, I mean, he really is. This is his issue,
and I think politically it makes sense. This is the
issue that that I think ultimately gave the presidency the Trump.
Jadi Vance wants the presidency. He's running for president every

(19:32):
every day now, he's running for president any and he really,
he really wants this. In addition, Uh, not only is
this a winning strategy, but you know, he really believes it.

Speaker 3 (19:45):
Jad Devance is a national conservative.

Speaker 2 (19:48):
He really does believe that that America is a nation
of of of white people. I think that's important to him,
and and it's a people, it's a blood and soil
kind of nationalism at the heart of it. How he
reconciles that with his marriage with his children, that is
between him and his wife. I have no idea, but

(20:09):
but you know that's basically basically being his position. Anyway,
this is any of you he did And this is
a rant, a short rant that he has. It's just
fifty six seconds long, but I think it's it's worth
listening to, and then we'll comment on. And then I've

(20:30):
got another tweet that he put out there about immigration
that is that is interesting, but it just gives you
a sense of I don't know just how ugly, how ugly.

Speaker 3 (20:46):
These people are.

Speaker 2 (20:46):
I mean, you can be anti immigration without tuning it
into kind of an ugly, kind of xenophobic, racist thing,
but I guess they can't because that's what they are.
Here we go, jad Evince is out of the house?

Speaker 4 (20:59):
Is that evicted from the house because there are people
who are going to pay more for rent? And then
what happens is twenty people move into a three bedroom house.

Speaker 2 (21:08):
Now notice the example he's giving, right, somebody's somebody knows
is evicted out of the house because somebody else will
pay more for it. I don't know that you can
evict anybody because somebody else can pay more for it.
But if you at least expise, you can kick somebody else,
have somebody else come in because they can pay more
for it. Why you know, that's called markets, that's called

(21:30):
price pricing mechanism.

Speaker 3 (21:32):
That's called private property.

Speaker 2 (21:35):
Private property, Right, Michael says, I give you on twenty
seconds before he breaks in.

Speaker 3 (21:43):
It only took ten seconds. Do you not want me
to break in?

Speaker 2 (21:48):
Do you? I mean, what's the deal? I thought this
is what you wanted me to do. It's good to what.

Speaker 3 (21:54):
I'm gonna do anyway.

Speaker 2 (21:55):
Anyway, And now he's taking this example, right, twenty people
move into this house. This bitter about twenty people. And
this is an example he's given as an example of
white people are so hostile to immigrants. And you know
what the issues up?

Speaker 4 (22:17):
Twenty people from a totally different culture, totally different ways
of interacting. Again, we can respect their dignity while also
being angry at the Biden administration for letting that situation happen.

Speaker 2 (22:29):
Now we can respect that dignity. We'll see how much
you respect that dignity in a second. The different culture, Yeah,
I mean that's that immigrants come from a different culture.

Speaker 3 (22:38):
Typically, that's the way it happens.

Speaker 2 (22:40):
Indeed, again, the entire history of America is people coming
from different cultures than becoming your neighbors. That's immigration, that's
the way it works.

Speaker 4 (22:54):
And recognizing that their next door neighbors are going to say, well,
wait a second, what is going on here? I don't
know these people, they don't speak the same language that
I do. And because there are twenty in the house
next door, it's a little bit rallier than it was
when there was just a family of four or a
family of five.

Speaker 2 (23:11):
It is totally reasonable and acceptable.

Speaker 4 (23:14):
For American citizens to look at their next door neighbors
and say, I want to live next to people who
I have something in common with. I don't want to
live next to four families of strangers.

Speaker 3 (23:27):
I mean, this is so on American. It's so frigging
on American.

Speaker 2 (23:33):
Like, yeah, you absolutely have a right to want to
live next to people you have something in common with.
It would be nice. I don't think I've ever lived
in my neighbors with a lot in common in with.
But you have a right to want that. But you
have a right to use quosion and I'll take force

(23:57):
to that. Do you have a right to violate people's
property rights or their right to move? The sanctity the
dignity of these people, Now it's true, twenty twenty people,
I mean you have to make it crazy like that
to make everybody good. Yeah, I don't want twenty people
moving in next to me, as if that happens. I mean, again,

(24:18):
this is a jd Vance who told us that the
Somalis in this Ohio town were eating the cats and dogs,
which turned out to be completely one hundred percent bogus.
So this is a Jdvance who lies, lies blatantly with
no shame, in a very articulate, passionate way, in order
to portray immigrants in the most monstrous way you can

(24:44):
portray them, because you have to create this image of
the other to justify doing horrible things to the other.
If the other has dignity and his normal and has
individual rights, and it's just another human being like I am,

(25:04):
I'm not going to do horrible things to them. But
if the other is a monster, if the other is
twenty people from a different culture, look different than me,
speak a different language, and they're making a raucous and
they're making noise and they're interrupting my life, then yeah,
they're not completely human. Beat them up, take them away,
arrest them all. Who cares? If you really find yourself

(25:33):
in a situation where you live next to somebody who
you don't like and it really does bother you, and
it's more than just they make a noise making no noise,
you can call the police. You can, you know, you
can address the issue of noise. But let's assume they
don't speak a language and they're not like you, and
they don't have your culture.

Speaker 3 (25:54):
You know what you should do. You should pack up
your stuff and leave.

Speaker 2 (25:58):
You should move. There is no right to have the
neighbors you want. There is no right to have the
neighbors you desire. There is no right to determine who
your neighbors should be. It's not what it means to
be a free people. And the basis for not liking

(26:22):
them here, beyond the fact that he's created a situation
where there're twenty of them, is that they have a
different culture, is that they speak a different language. But again,
isn't that the whole history of this country. Isn't that
how we became what we are? I mean, I know

(26:45):
it's not popular anymore to say this is a land
of immigrants, but it is, like it or not, and
immigrants from all kinds of places, many, even if they
all came from Europe, didn't speak the same language. Very
few people in Europe, particularly one hundred years ago, spoke English.
They learned it, and god forbid an American would have

(27:08):
to actually find a way to communicate with somebody who
doesn't speak their language. I mean, here's here's the final
part of this and the fact that we had. Oh,
I guess I saw a longer segment and then the
segment he talks about how.

Speaker 3 (27:25):
How disturbing it is.

Speaker 2 (27:27):
How are you going to go and ask them for soul,
to ask them for sugar, ask them, you know, when
they don't speak the same language. Yeah, I know people
have never managed to do that. They've never managed to
actually commut. Oh no, it's not in the interview. This
is his tweet afterwards. What's reasonable is to want to
share language with your neighbor. He writes, This is JD.

(27:48):
Vanson writing, how do you borrow a cup of sugar?
Resolve disagreements, have a nice conversation. You need a common
language and in America that language is English. Yeah, absolutely,
Then why don't don't you help your neighbor learn the language.
Go over there and try to get a couple of sugar.
It's not that hot to communicate sugar, and it's not

(28:10):
that hard to teach no word for sugar. How did
people in America resolve disagreements a long time ago when
they didn't speak the same language. Now, it's true that
a lot of immigrants live in ethnic enclaves. When they immigrate,
they all live together, Somali's in Minnesota. They all live

(28:31):
in the same place so that they don't have to
worry about this and they don't have to concern the
English speaking neighbors. But then we complain about them isolating
themselves from the rest of American society. And then when
they live next door to us, we complain because they're
not They don't yet speak English. You do need a
common language. They need to assimilate. But how are they

(28:53):
going to assimilate? How they going to assimilate if they
never live next to you? Now I know what he wants.
He wants no immigration, He wants them to stop coming.
He wants stagnation. The divine right of stagnation. That's what
he wants, he continues in the in his thing, the

(29:20):
far left became so deranged in immigration that they're attacking
people for wanting to be able to speak to their neighbors. Really,
that's what people upset about. They can't speak to their neighbors.
How many people actually speak to their neighbors. And again,
you can move, or you can try to communicate with

(29:41):
your new neighbors.

Speaker 3 (29:44):
And try to be.

Speaker 2 (29:45):
Friendly with them, and maybe they won't be friendly back.
Maybe they're obnoxious jokes.

Speaker 3 (29:49):
I know some.

Speaker 2 (29:51):
I know quite a few white American, multi generational.

Speaker 3 (29:56):
White Americans who obnoxious jokes.

Speaker 2 (29:58):
And so do you. Jd Events just read the book
you wrote about where you grew up and they knew
English and they were still obnoxious jokes that you wouldn't
want to have as neighbors. I mean, this is just

(30:19):
encouraging xenophobia, encouraging racism. It's just I mean, this is
just playing to people's fears anxieties, to these xenophobia, to racism,
to encourage it, to fuel it, enhance it so you
can then run as the anti immigration president, saving us.

Speaker 3 (30:39):
So those crazy leftists who.

Speaker 2 (30:41):
Just want to bring in people who can't speak our language,
so that we have neighbors who are obnoxious to us
or something like that. It's actually not totally reasonable to
expect people next door to you to speak English or anything.
Next door to you should be able to do whatever

(31:01):
the hell they want. This is America, and if they
don't speak English, figure out a way to communicate. And again,
can always sell your house and move somewhere else. Tired
of everything has to panda to whoever whoever is there first.

(31:25):
I mean, that is not America. It's not what America is.
It's not what made America what America is. So Jadvans
also commented on Twitter on a video that a construction
company owner, young construction company owner made. He lives in Louisiana,
and this construction company worker is basically making the point

(31:49):
that in this he's driving while taping this on video,
and he's making the point that ice has now come
to New Orleans, it's come to Louisiana. And since ice
has come, since there's been stepped up in immigration enforcement,
immigrant workers have stopped showing up. So contractors who compete

(32:16):
with him, you know, I don't have work. You know,
they're not willing to go to the job sites. So
job sites have stalled, and as a consequence, this guy
who's an American, white, an American and legal, his phone
hasn't stopped bringing desperate general contractors trying to get him

(32:40):
to come and finish the job that they, you know,
non white guys started, and they're afraid to show up
because they're afraid of being harassed by ICE. So you know,
he's frustrated because these illegal labor comes in, they undercut
wages and it makes it very difficult for him to

(33:02):
get a job, and they.

Speaker 3 (33:04):
Undercut his bids.

Speaker 2 (33:08):
And now he says it's amazing because the illegal immigrants
don't want to come to work. So now he has
kind of a monopoly the government. The government has basically
eliminated competition. It's taken as competitors out and he says

(33:29):
he's so thankful to ICE and the varnery Homeland Security. Well,
of course, of course, I mean the government is basically
taken out his competitors and they're about to ship them
off to pot them out of the country. His business
is going to go through the roof and he can
charge whatever he wants. This is what you call monopoly.

(33:49):
Government granted monopoly. The government grants it to people who
have citizenship. Gd Van's comments on this video by saying
mass migration is theft of the American dream. It has
always been this way, and every position paper, think tank piece,
and economic study suggesting otherwise is paid for by the

(34:11):
people getting rich of of the old system. I mean,
Jadvance is so dishonest, so dishonest. I mean the reality
is that every position paper, every think tank piece, and
every economic study shows that he's wrong. So and he

(34:38):
knows that, right, jad Bance knows that. So what does
he have to do? You have to say, no, no, no,
it's all paid for. None of it is true. But
every economic study, every one of them, is paidful, every
one of them. And mass migration is theft of the
American dream.

Speaker 3 (34:54):
Yes, I didn't realize this.

Speaker 2 (34:55):
You should know that the American dream involves not facing competition.
The American dream is about having a monopoly over whatever
trade and profession you have and never facing competition from others.
I mean, yeah, I mean this is exactly the same
argument that was made when black workers left the South

(35:20):
in the early part of the twentieth century and moved
north to the industrializing Midwest. And Northeast, and they they
were will need to pay to work for a little
less than they unionized white workers who were in these factories.
You know what the unions did in order to undermine

(35:43):
the competition. They went running to the government to help them.

Speaker 3 (35:48):
Help them against the competitors.

Speaker 2 (35:51):
People are competing with us, and the color skin is
different than ours.

Speaker 3 (35:56):
Reduced the competition. We need to eliminate this competition.

Speaker 2 (35:58):
How you couldn't bar them from moving from the South
United States the North United States. You can't do that.
I mean, it limits how much we're willing to do.
So what do you do? What do you do? You

(36:20):
pose a minimum wage?

Speaker 3 (36:22):
You hate your country?

Speaker 2 (36:24):
Yeah, that's the guy. You pose a minimum wage, and
that minium wage price is out. You said it high enough,
so it prices out all the new people coming in.
And that was the beginning of the minium wage. The
first minimum wage was advocated for, lobbied for, lobbied for
by white workers in the Northeast and Midwest to keep

(36:48):
black workers up. It wasn't successful in the long run,
just like keeping workers from other countries out is not
going to be successful in the long run.

Speaker 3 (36:57):
It might for a few years, not in a long run.
But you know.

Speaker 2 (37:07):
It works, and and and look, it is such a
it's so appealing, it's so easy to fall into this tramp.

Speaker 3 (37:15):
It's so horrible.

Speaker 2 (37:18):
Look, the American dream does not involve protecting you from competition.
Nobody who doesn't use force against you, causion against you
can steal the American dream from you. The American dream
is about going out there and succeeding with competition, with freedom.

(37:43):
It's not about protecting you so that you don't face
competition so that you can't fail. It's not about providing
you with monopoly power. The American dream is about leaving
you free, which includes competition to pursue your dream and
to be successful, no guarantees.

Speaker 3 (38:05):
So jd Vance is.

Speaker 2 (38:09):
I mean the whole nineties cent she was mass migration.
And I look right onto this post by Jade Vance
and I see the first comment is so frigging disappointing
to me. It's by a woman called Lily Tang Williams.
Lily was a student of mine at leadership program with

(38:31):
the Rockies and claimed to be this massive defender of capitalism.
Lily is an immigrant to the United States from China,
so she knows what communism is like. She knows what
democracy is like. She's actually run for Congress and lost.
You ran in Denver, in Colorado, and then she ran

(38:53):
and she moved to New Hampshire and she ran there
and she's lost. But she positions herself as a defenderapolism.
And yet this is what she writes listening to this
young man, a father of three.

Speaker 3 (39:06):
So many stories like this.

Speaker 2 (39:08):
Democrats, politicians, and many corporations seem forget to forget about
them and their American dream. How about naturalized citizens who
are willing to work hard but can't compete with illegal
aliens low costs? Why naturalized citizens not low cost? You

(39:30):
could easily solve this problem by naturalizing all the illegal immigrants,
do you know, just open up the bortis to anybody
who's willing to work. Some wages will go down, Overall
wages go up. Every economic oh, I forget the economic
studies are corrupt. Some wages, some wages will go down,

(39:55):
Most wages go up. Overall wages go up when migrants
come into a market low cost, low whatever. Lower. So
it's so disappointing that, literally, in spite of being my student,
in spite of having hood. The case for capitalism still

(40:16):
buys into this garbage.

Speaker 3 (40:22):
But that's the problem.

Speaker 2 (40:25):
Having my perspective on capitalism, having my point of viewing capitalism,
having my position on immigration.

Speaker 3 (40:33):
Is not a politically winning position, and it.

Speaker 2 (40:38):
Requires going out there and educating people. That's work and
it's hard. People don't want to be educated. People don't
want to learn. It's much easier for them to be emotional,
to succumb to the lowest common denominator. It's kind of
funny because the next comment right under that is a

(40:59):
disgusting comment, but I guess Jadvance deserves it. It's the
comment is jd Vance's family stealing the American dream, and
a picture of jd Vance's family, which is Jadie Vance
and his wife and all her relatives who are all Indian,
not white Americans. Indians very successful in this country. The

(41:23):
Indian community is the most successful group of immigrants, I think,
together with the Nigerians.

Speaker 3 (41:28):
Nigerians are more on the.

Speaker 2 (41:30):
Education side, Indians more on the income side, but all
very successful. They must have stolen since it's sizero some world, right,
they must have stolen some Americans, some white Americans dream
in order to achieve the success and prosperity that they've achieved.
I don't know how Jadvance lives with himself. I certainly

(41:51):
don't know how Jdvance lives with his wife. I don't
get how that works. I mean, how do you live
if you're his wife? How do you live with somebody
who espouses racist ideas on a regular basis out there?
I don't know?

Speaker 3 (42:12):
All right?

Speaker 2 (42:14):
Talking about from one, you know, corrpt rasis to another,
let's move to Tucker Carlson. Sataka was in I guess
his new favorite place on planet Earth, Kato, this weekend
at a conference in Doha, where he got to interview
one of his favorite people on planet Earth. According to Taka,

(42:36):
not according to me, the Prime Minister of Kata and
then implies that there's democracy Kata, there isn't. I mean,
he's appointed by the Emir, by the king, the equivalent
of the king. It was one of these interviews where
the entire conversation, the entire thing, was about Israel, and

(42:58):
of course how amazing and generous and virtuous and wonderful
and peace loving and haters of terrorism the Kataris are,
which is of course a complete lie. Taka said, how
much he admires the Katari Prime Minister and is grateful
to be interviewing him. Techosa said that he is going

(43:20):
to that he is buying property and Kata and any
plans to spend some time there, and then the rest
of the time was spent in trying to make a
wedge between Israel and America. How bad Israel was, how
anti American interests Israel was, how Israel stabs America in

(43:40):
the back. The Katari Prime Minister never refers to Israel
as Israel. He calls them the Zionists. The entire interview,
the zionist designist designists, just truly truly disgusting. Now, what's

(44:02):
fascinating about this is that at some point, Tucker says,
Donald Trump is the first president in American history.

Speaker 3 (44:11):
Donald Trump is the first president in.

Speaker 2 (44:13):
American history to stand up to Israel because he forced
Nataniel to apologize to the Prime Minister of.

Speaker 3 (44:22):
Kutta for bombing Kutcha.

Speaker 2 (44:26):
And forcing Israel to get into the seas fire. And
he's the first president in all of American history, according
to World Class Is starring an Tucker Carson, to stand
up to Israel and to say no to Israel. Now,
this is so stupid, it's so historically wrong.

Speaker 3 (44:51):
It is so.

Speaker 2 (44:55):
I mean, I don't know, and people believe it. People
believe it. If you if you see everybody on the
Internet and how they talk about Israel manipulating America and
owning America, and they own American presidents and American persons
do exactly what America says in eight back, this is
all powerful being that controls the world and controls America.
It's just bizill. It's just bizilla.

Speaker 3 (45:17):
It's just to give you.

Speaker 2 (45:19):
A little bit of history on Israel American relations. This
is short, but it's about America's standing up to Israel.

Speaker 3 (45:26):
A few examples among thousands.

Speaker 2 (45:33):
In nineteen forty seven, when the United Nations voted on
the establishment of a Petition Plan well so Goldo four
nineteen forty eight, when Israel declares its independence, Truman decides
to recognize Israel as a state positive even though almost

(45:57):
all the people around him, and probably Truman himself, believe.

Speaker 3 (46:02):
That Israel will not survive the coming war.

Speaker 2 (46:05):
Indeed, on that day, the day is All declares independence,
the armies of seven Arab countries invade Israel, and pretty
much everybody in the West, including the Americans who've never
been excited about the creation of the state of Israel
are convinced Isa's going to be wiped out. So they
recognize it, I think, partially to appease, you know, maybe
the apex of the time, but recognizing that it's going

(46:28):
to go weak. But immediately upon recognizing Israel, just to
make clear how much they are beholden to Jewish interests,
Zionist interest, Truman imposes an armsimbogo on Israel. Can't sell
arms to Israel, while at the same time and the

(46:51):
British do the same thing. By the way, while Jordan
in Egypt are getting British weapons systems, Israel, nobody is
willing to supply them officially with weapons.

Speaker 3 (47:03):
Israel wins shockingly.

Speaker 2 (47:13):
So by the way, the Songsenbogom lasts until nineteen sixty two.
In the preceding years, Israel begged three presidents Truman, Eisenhower,
and Kennedy the first two years for weapons and was rebuffed.
Even in nineteen sixty two, Israel got some missiles from

(47:37):
the Kennedy administration, and the reason Kennedy agreed to do
it is he hoped that by doing so he would
dissuade the Israelis from pursuing a nuclear weapon didn't work,
but that was his hope. Indeed, the Kennedy administration was
panicking over the fact that Israel was developing nuclear weapons.

Speaker 3 (48:00):
It's also interesting that at the time.

Speaker 2 (48:03):
Joane Eisenhower administration and Kennedy, the Soviet Union was establishing
relations with all of Israel's neighbors, all of them including
the Egyptians, and Israel was the only country that was
not becoming part of the Soviet sphere of influence. And
it was still true in spite of all those Jewish

(48:24):
donors that the United States refused to provide any significant
weapons and even after nineteen sixty two until nineteen sixty seven, no.

Speaker 3 (48:34):
Weapons, very few weapons.

Speaker 2 (48:38):
Only after nineteen sixty seven did Israel get significant weapons.
In nineteen fifty six, when Israel took the Sinai Desert
and with the help of and the Bidish in French,
basically took the Suice Canal, it was Eisenhower that forced
the British and French to retreat and forced Israel. He

(48:58):
was against the war, condemned Isral's war, and he forced
Israel to give back the Sinai to Egypt. Only for
Israel to have to retake the Sinai, you know, eleven
years later because of Egyptian aggression. Oops, I didn't mean
to do that. What did I just do?

Speaker 3 (49:19):
Some more example right?

Speaker 2 (49:24):
You know? In nineteen seventy three, Israel was about to
wipe out the Egyptian Third Army, which they had surrounded.
It was President Nixon and is In Kissinger who forced
Israel not to wipe them out to stop I cease
fire was forced in Israel by the Nixon administration in

(49:46):
nineteen seventy three. What else, fort in nineteen seventy five
had a reassessment foes all armed shipments in order to
bully Primate start robbing into you know, negotiating about withdrawing
from the Sinai. Jimmy caught a twisted Wagan's arms until

(50:11):
he gave until Israel agreed to give all of the
Sinai to Egypt. Originally, Israel was wanted to keep a
strip of land along the Red Sea going down to
Charlemacher for its own security, and caught up basically said
no way, you have to give it all to the Egyptians.

(50:34):
Reagans sold a waxes to the Saudis. Suspended of sixteen's
from Israel after the Golden Heights were annexed by the
Israeli government and famously guaranteed safe passage to yes Or
from Beirut in spite of the fact that Israel was

(50:55):
just about to wipe him out and his man, and
thus guaranteed the disaster that the Palestinians had had since
then and Israel have had since then. Bosnia, you know,
wield a ten billion loan guarantees until the Israeli government,

(51:19):
you know, quite uncle about settlements. Clinton dragged Hildbarock to
Camp David and try to make him give Alpha Jerusalem
in ninety seven percent of Judaan and Samaria. Luckily, I think,
for Israel, Yes or Alpha turned that proposal down. Obama
made the Irandiel in spite of Israeli objections, and you

(51:43):
could go on and on and on and on. I mean,
the number of examples is stunning, stunning of the United
States indeed, time and time and time and time and
time again preventing Israel from winning wars. That the completely
withdraw off of Israeli true some Lebanon was because of

(52:07):
the Americans twisting in Israel's arms. I mean, Israel is
so often rejected Israel in favor of appeasing Saudi Arabia,
appeasing Egypt, or appeasing the Arab world.

Speaker 3 (52:21):
That it is ridiculous.

Speaker 2 (52:27):
So, you know, for Tucker Cosson to say that no
American president has ever sided with an Arab state over
Israel until Donald Trump forced Baby to apologize to Kata.

Speaker 3 (52:39):
Is just absurd on its face.

Speaker 2 (52:43):
But it's a typical kind of nonsense that Tucker Cosson
spouts in a regular basis.

Speaker 3 (52:49):
And then add to.

Speaker 2 (52:50):
That that he never asked the Katari's about all the
funding that they provide to anti American, anti American programs,
study programs at American University. Is why they have been
promoting the radical left's agenda on American campuses. Why the

(53:13):
Katari government supported isis. He accepts at face value the
Katari's claim that they only support the Palestinian people, they
never give money to Ramas, which is complete nonsense. He
accepts face value. They claim that they never supported terrorism.
They support terrorism to this day. They're supporting Islamist terrorism

(53:36):
throughout the world. And he never gets asked about the
Muslim Brotherhood and why the Muslim Brotherhood have been basically
kicked out of every other Arab country, and the only place,
only place where they are welcome is in Doha, in Kata,
where they are supported. Tuck of course, doesn't ask about

(53:57):
any of that.

Speaker 3 (54:01):
I don't know if.

Speaker 2 (54:01):
Tucka is bought by the Kataris, I don't know, if
it's an issue of money, I just don't know, or
if he is ideologically now converted to the cause of
the Islamists. But what a sellout, What an absolute disgrace

(54:21):
this man is. He lies constantly in order to promote
an anti American, an anti American, anti individualist, anti capitalist,
anti Western civilization cause, a really disgusting human being. All Right,

(54:46):
we still got a lot. I thought today was going
to be short. I completely underestimate how much I've got
to say about each one of these topics. All Right,
here's a quick one, quick fun one.

Speaker 3 (54:56):
This one is a This is.

Speaker 2 (54:58):
A graph of glue global millionaire migration. Graph of global
millionaire migration. Where do migrants leave and where do they
go to? Look at the bottom of that list. This
is in twenty five. Look at the bottom of the list.
Which country has lost the most millionaires in the world

(55:20):
more than China, and China's got a big population lots
of millionaires. The most migrations out of any country of
millionaires is the United Kingdom. Because of its tax policies,
it gave up on granting any kind of tax benefits

(55:42):
the millionaires if they moved to London. That expired in
twenty twenty five, so they got fully taxed.

Speaker 3 (55:48):
If they lived in London.

Speaker 2 (55:49):
So they left, and then you got a plethora of
new taxes added on. And more millionaires are leaving the UK,
and expectation is that next year, next year, the United
Kingdom will continue to be the number one losers a millionaires. Now,

(56:11):
if you are like many people on the left who
think the world has too many billionaires or two million
millionaires and billionaires, then you will be happy that these
people are leaving. But if you understand that, you know
when these people leave it is a massive, massive brain

(56:32):
drain on your economy. It's a capital drain because they
take their money with them from your economy, and it's
a tax drain on your government, which means everybody else
has to pay more taxes because government spending never goes down. Now,
notice where else people are leaving from the leaving from

(56:56):
the bricks. This is another reason why bricks will never
be a dominant political power right in terms of replace
the dollar in all of this, because they can't even
keep their own people. China, India, Russia, Brazil all losing millionaires. China, India, Russia, Brazil.

(57:18):
That's most of the ricks, four of the five, only
one missing in South Africa. They just don't have millions
to leave. Israel's losing millionaires. That's interesting. I guess a
lot of these start up, you know, entrepreneurs who sell
their companies. Then they got a lot of money and
they leave is It's a tough place to live South Korea.

(57:43):
I don't know why South Korea is losing millionaires. France, Spain,
Germany because they tax millionaires to death. Israel the same
taxes are very high. Who gains millionaires now, it's I
mean UAE, Okay, I mean they set up a nice
luxury condo in the UE, they get citizenship. I don't
think many of them live there full time. But yeah,

(58:05):
United States surprising left enough. As much as we complain,
As high as taxes might be, it's still better than
the rest of the world. So people are coming here.
If the millionaires. Italy has a special deal for millionaires. Switzerland,
low taxes, Saudi Arabia, God help them, Singapore, Portugal, Greece

(58:30):
all have special deal. I mean Singapore gained low taxes, Portugo,
Greece have special.

Speaker 3 (58:35):
Deals for millionaires.

Speaker 2 (58:37):
Canada, Australia, I guess relatively low taxes and relatively free
Bass to live. People are moving from unfree, high tax,
high tax being emphasis in the UK to low tax
free slash or free. A nice graph for a year

(58:59):
and twenty, let's see. I think we can go through
the next few stories pretty quickly. Russia, just you know,
just if you're not sure what Putin thinks of this
national security strategy that was put out. We talked about

(59:21):
this on Friday. I did a whole section on the
national security strategy. While the Russian presidents really likes, really
likes this strategy. Indeed, he thinks it's completely in line
with Russia's view of the world, the view that Europe
and Central Asia should be left to the Russians.

Speaker 3 (59:43):
That's Russia's sphere of influence.

Speaker 2 (59:47):
China should have East Asia and South maybe Southeast Asia,
Middle East. We're not sure we'll fight over the Middle
East another time, and America can have, you know, the
Western hemisphere. In a sense, Moscow's public acknowledgement of the
alignment between the former between Russia and the United States

(01:00:08):
underlines how much cozier the relationship has become since Trump
returned to office earlier this year. This is from the
This is fumer Is at the World Russian Political Political
story about this.

Speaker 3 (01:00:22):
This is a quote from the Russians.

Speaker 2 (01:00:26):
The adjustments we are seeing, I would say, a largely
consistent without vision, and perhaps you can hope that this
could be a modest guarantee that we will be able
to constructively continue our joint work on finding a peaceful
settlement in Ukraine. In other words, Ukraine surrender at the
very least, at the very least. This is Dmitri Peshkov,

(01:00:49):
who is one of Putin's advisors. So yeah, the Russians
are happy. I don't know if Americans should be happy.
Out Americans should be happy. I don't think it's a
politically good document. I think Americans should be worried, particularly
given that Russia is happy. That should worry people in

(01:01:10):
and of itself. But Russia is happy because it basically
leaves much to Russia. It doesn't condemn Russia, it doesn't
criticize Russia. It doesn't present Russia as an enemy or
a foe in any kind of way. The one only
part of the world that is presented as one that

(01:01:31):
the United States has to have an active interest in.

Speaker 3 (01:01:36):
Regime change is Europe.

Speaker 2 (01:01:41):
This document presents it as the United States needs to
advocate for regime change in Europe, needs to become more
right wing, not right wing in economic sense, right wing
in the nationalistic, xenophobic, keep the immigrants out sense, and
elevate religion sense. China, Now, I know, I know, I know,

(01:02:04):
I know.

Speaker 3 (01:02:04):
You guys thought that the.

Speaker 2 (01:02:06):
Whole point of tariffs was to penalize the Chinese. You
guys thought that the whole point of tariff was the
curb Chinese exports.

Speaker 3 (01:02:17):
Well, it turns out that the opposite has happened.

Speaker 2 (01:02:22):
China has now a one trillion dollars surplus with the
world for the first time in history. Exports are boomed
in spite of the two four In the first eleven
months of the year, China's trade suplus in dollar terms
was one point zero seven six trillion. That's significantly better

(01:02:51):
in eleven months or slightly better than eleven months than
the whole of twenty twenty four. You know, China is
very resilient to what America has to tariffs at least
right uh, TEFs have nothing to do with China, have
everything to do with Trump's mercantilistic milk into list view

(01:03:14):
of the world, his ignorance when it comes to economics,
and is ignorance in understanding economic principles. And yeah, China
in terms of experts, it's got China's got huge problems
that have nothing to do with Trump. Then everything to
do with its own bad economic policies. The real estate

(01:03:35):
there's still you know, a disaster, the debts that their
regional governments are taken on. You know, who knows how
they will ever, if ever they ever pay them back.
The private sector is suffering from over over over controlling
central government. The economy is not growing, young people unemployed,

(01:03:56):
and they've got demographic collapse. Although demographic collapses probably overstated
in terms of labor shortage, because what's actually gonna happen,
And this is why China is so heavily investing in
robots that they don't need many of these workers because
you know, the delver placed them with robots.

Speaker 3 (01:04:14):
Robots will step in UH.

Speaker 2 (01:04:16):
To continue to work in these factories and to continue
to produce these export goods. But anyway, so China is
imploding from within. But it's not because of American policy.
It's not because what Trump thinks he's doing to them. Indeed,

(01:04:36):
as I said before, Trump Trump is incompetent in dealing
with the Chinese. All right, finally, Hamas, you know, we
were told, we were told Hamas was ready to turn
a new leaf, and that Hamas is is I mean,

(01:05:00):
Trumpez guarantee to us that Ramas is going to lose
power and they're gonna disarm and they're going to give
up their weapons, or if they don't give up their weapons,
somebody is going to disarm them. This is all being promised,
This is being said well over the weekend. Uh. Halad Micheal,
a senior and you know, long time senior official in Hamas,

(01:05:24):
one of the few webs and being killed by the Israelis.
He was targeted, he was supposed to be killed in Doha,
a shame that they missed. Wanted to make it clear
that this was indeed not the case. He made it
clear that Hamas views the battle as far from over.
He made it clear that Ramas is going to insist

(01:05:44):
that it will keep its weapons, that peace can only
be achieved by one way. There is only one way
to achieve peace, and that is through the destruction of
the state of Israel. Only in Israel is destroyed will
there be peace. Even then, not so much, because then
they'll move on to destroying some other countries. Diplomacy. Hamas

(01:06:08):
will never give into diplomacy. He may clear Ramasa has
no intention of giving up control of Gaza. You know,
all in a public speech which has been translated, and
it has been very clear. He wasn't hiding anything, He
wasn't pretending anything. Remember, this is a Michal who lives

(01:06:30):
in Doha. I guess he's Tacker Carson's neighbor. Now, one
of Tacker Carson's neighbors. Yeah so, And they don't care
about gods and lives. They're quite happy with Israel bombing them.
They know Israel's not killing that many. But even if

(01:06:51):
Isroel was killing that many, Kamas doesn't care. Hamas doesn't
care when Iyota about godsen lives. They care about their
own power. They care about the stroying as well. That's
what they care about. They don't care about. They don't
actually care about, you know, the people. Yes, all right, that,

(01:07:18):
my friends, is the news for this Monday, December eighth.
Let me remind you that support that the show is
funded through contributions from you, the listeners and watches of
this show that can be done through super chat or
stickers and on the live shows.

Speaker 3 (01:07:40):
And we have targets for the show.

Speaker 2 (01:07:41):
We're currently two hundred dollars short of our two hour target.
We've got plenty of time to achieve it, so I'm
not worried. I also want to remind you that if
you'd like to support the show on a monthly basis,
which is the preferred method, then you can do so through.

Speaker 3 (01:07:58):
Patreon dot com.

Speaker 2 (01:07:59):
Patreon dot com, just put your own book show in
there and become a monthly donor at whatever level you're
comfortable with, whatever level.

Speaker 3 (01:08:05):
You believe.

Speaker 2 (01:08:08):
You believe is.

Speaker 3 (01:08:13):
The trade warrants. All right, I want to mention.

Speaker 2 (01:08:18):
I want to mention.

Speaker 5 (01:08:22):
What was I looking for? I had something open here
and it's gone. Let me just see you one second.
That's that?

Speaker 2 (01:08:34):
That?

Speaker 5 (01:08:36):
Okay?

Speaker 2 (01:08:39):
Yeah? I wanted to mention that the Iron Institute is
offering a ri I Live a Life of courses that
you can take at your own time. You can take
them live if you want with a professor, or you
can or you can take them you know, you can
watch them whenever you want to. There's no application, you

(01:09:01):
just need to sign up and pay for it. Classes
start in January, so now's the time to go look
and see if you want to sign up for any
of them.

Speaker 3 (01:09:11):
These are I think courses.

Speaker 2 (01:09:13):
All of them are ones that will really enhance your
understanding of knowledge of objectivism. You will become a you know,
the great professors and like any college level of course,
you'll learn. It's good. You will learn something from it.
Highly highly recommend it. I'm not going to be teaching
any this coming semester, but I will in future semesters.

(01:09:35):
You can find that information about registering and signing up
and taking these classes on Iinman dot slash start here.
You can also get at YBS discount which is twenty
six YBS ten. That's the code twenty six YBS ten.
And by the way, you can hand in homework assignments
and get them graded or not. You can get as

(01:09:57):
much feedback from the professor as you want, you'll be
signed a coach. You can take advantage of the coach
or not. Incredibly flexible and just incredible value. I was
still with somebody like this when.

Speaker 4 (01:10:10):
I was.

Speaker 3 (01:10:12):
Getting started.

Speaker 2 (01:10:13):
If you will in objectivism, Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:10:18):
Amazing, So take advantage of it.

Speaker 2 (01:10:22):
Slash dot here, hand a shot, Wealth dot com, hand
a shot to Tashandershot, Wealth dot com, slash ybs, hander shot.
Wealth is offering products that can dramatically reduce your capital gains,
tax liability. You can find a lot more information about
that and how it happens and whether it's appropriate for

(01:10:45):
you by listening to the interview I did with Robert
Robert Hendershot. That interview is available on YouTube on a playlist,
a playlist for sponsors. You're on book Robert Handershot and yeah,
you'll learn a lot from the interview.

Speaker 3 (01:11:02):
I think you'll enjoy it.

Speaker 2 (01:11:03):
And of course you can go to Hindershot, wealth dot com,
slash ybs to get more information.

Speaker 3 (01:11:09):
Also.

Speaker 2 (01:11:10):
Alex Epstein. Alex Epstein is an advocate for freedom and energy.
He is the number one advocate in the world for
freedom and energy. He has a substack Alex Epstein dot
Substack dot com incredibly valuable talking points.

Speaker 3 (01:11:26):
Knowledge.

Speaker 2 (01:11:26):
You will learn about the energy industry, You'll learn about
what happens in Washington. You'll learn about the best arguments
around environmentalism, climate change, and all of that. So check
out Alex Epstein dot substack dot com and finally Michael
Williams of Defenders of Capitalism dot com. Defenders of Capitalism

(01:11:48):
dot com. One would Definers of Capitalism. I've been friends
and working with Michael Williams on Definers of Capitalism for
twenty years now. Fantastic program. Check out Definers of Capitalism
dot com online. All right, guys, let us turn to
the super chat. We're doing quite well in terms of

(01:12:11):
in terms of our second hour goal. We're getting there
slowly but surely, so keep it coming. I appreciate it.
All right, lots of questions have a heart stop in
forty five minutes, so let's see if we can get
through all the questions by then. Here's the mechanism. This
is homemaker. Here's my mechanism by which they perform this

(01:12:32):
blank out quote by but.

Speaker 3 (01:12:34):
The left unquote.

Speaker 2 (01:12:36):
The degree to which the principle was violated by Trump's
predecessors is either exaggerated or ignored. Quote nothing here, nothing
new here. They say, as if magnitudes don't matter. Here's
the mechanism. By I'm trying to completely understand the point. Yeah,

(01:12:57):
I mean they'll do anything. They'll take power, they'll violate
your rights, they'll contradict what they've said in the past,
and now the blank out is but the left they
did it, or they did more of it, or this
is the only way to fight them. And you know,

(01:13:18):
they'll exaggerate, they'll distort, they'll pervert what actually happened and
what actually they're doing in order to somehow make it reasonable,
make it possible. So yeah, I agree with you completely, Michael. Okay, Michael,

(01:13:42):
the intellectual rot that is the Republican Party has begun
to show for what they really are. It cannot be
honestly said that they are conservatives. The idea is that
idea is dead. These aren't nationalists, theocrats, nihilists. Yeah, I
think they are. I think absolutely they are. These dangerous people.

(01:14:04):
There is a definite nihilistic streak there, and Republicans need
to be repudiated for this turn, even if that means
suffering through God forbid, but suffing through a leftist or
at least a sender left government. Again, there's just no

(01:14:26):
options anymore. Screwed either way, Michael, Dubai and Qatar obviously
have some economic freedom, or they couldn't have built those skyscrapers.
Having oil above alone isn't enough. Raw materials mean nothing
if you don't have the freedom to trans form them
into resources.

Speaker 3 (01:14:47):
Well, that's not exactly right.

Speaker 2 (01:14:50):
The fact is that the rest of the world has
uses for that oil. Kata can also build and Dubai
can build refineries. They can refine that. Oh, you don't
need freedom for that, You just need the money to
pay Western engineers to build it for you. As long
as the Free West cooperates with them, they can get

(01:15:11):
the expertise that they need in order to create.

Speaker 3 (01:15:14):
The oil and then ship it out.

Speaker 2 (01:15:16):
And the money just flows in, and it is a
lot of money by any standard. It is a fortune.
And to remember these are tiny little countries. Now, what
they do need is to have rulers who don't immediately
waste that money. Indeed, the resource curse in economics the
idea that if you have resources, your economy has cursed,

(01:15:40):
usually as a consequence of the fact. For example, in
Spain during the sixteenth and seventeenth century where they got
all the gold from South America, but then they wasted it.
The idea is not to waste it, but to invest
it in things like skyscrapers and in various things that
will attract West to come and bring more capital and

(01:16:02):
investment and expertise and brains. So they allow for freedom
up to a point. They create a pseudo freedom, a
potent freedom, just like in China. Dubai does this more
than Kata. That's why Dubai is the place where all
the millionaires go, not Katau. Kata doesn't have that many

(01:16:22):
foreigners living in Katau, wealthy foreigners.

Speaker 3 (01:16:25):
Dubai does.

Speaker 2 (01:16:26):
They create this sense of freedom, but it's a mirage.
At any day, they could clamp down on anything you do.
They have full authority over you, They take your passports.

Speaker 3 (01:16:40):
You are not free there. It is a It is
the equivalent of a dictatorship.

Speaker 2 (01:16:44):
It is a dictatorship to monarchy, equivalent of a monarchy.
But right now they have a benevolent monarch at least
in Dubai. Qatar is a little different. Who as long
as people are bringing in money, as long as they
see a benefit of having westerners there leave those Westerns
and know alone.

Speaker 3 (01:17:04):
And that's the freedom that they that they have.

Speaker 2 (01:17:07):
Uh and and and uh. That's how these countries function.
But the source is the huge amount of money that
flows in Michael. Freedom doesn't necessarily lead to benevolence if
the population is spoiled, entitled, and nihilistic, but evalence only

(01:17:27):
comes from a healthy philosophy and psychology.

Speaker 3 (01:17:30):
Even if economic freedom is present.

Speaker 2 (01:17:33):
Yes, but you know that healthy psychology and and cerdainly
and even a healthy philosophy are more likely when I
mean it feeds off of each other. That produces freedom,
but also freedom encourages that. So when you have that,
you get more of of of that loops even as
and even as philosophy detwoates the positive psychology and the

(01:17:57):
philosophy of the past imprinted if you will, than your
sense of life can keep you going and keep that
benevolence going for a while. So freedom doesn't necessarily lead
to benevolence, but it almost It usually does. It usually does,
And of course the more free, the more benevolent. As

(01:18:17):
you start losing freedom, you start becoming more cynical and
more nihilistic, and you're likely to be less malevolent but
less benevolently, less benevolent. Paul have Emen commented on Facebook
about Trump being one of the best presidents in US
history and those who think definitely are worse than Southern

(01:18:38):
slave owners. Many objectives intellectuals agree with him. I don't
think that's true, So, I mean I would like a
list of the objectives intellectuals who agree with him. I
can think of maybe two, so I don't consider too many.

(01:18:58):
So I don't know who the many is.

Speaker 3 (01:19:01):
I don't know what.

Speaker 2 (01:19:03):
Yeah, I mean, you'd have to come on, you have
to come up maybe in the chat list the people
the intellectuals objectives to the intellectuals who agree with him, because
I can only agree think of two who would agree
with Harriman. But look, generally, don't tell me what Haverman
and Bernstein and these other people are saying about Trump.

Speaker 3 (01:19:26):
I really don't care.

Speaker 2 (01:19:27):
I mean, they've disqualified themselves from being of significance. Adam
Mossov commented on Facebook. Adam Ossof said agreed with Harriman
that Trump was one of the best presidents in US history.
I know Bernstein did, but Adam Osof did that. I mean, oh,

(01:19:50):
you just I don't think Adam would say that. I mean,
I might be wrong. I haven't talked to Adam, but
I do not think Adam would say that. So, No,
I know he voted for him. Lots of people voted
for him. I've said many times I don't consider voting
the issue right.

Speaker 3 (01:20:10):
I want to know who thinks.

Speaker 2 (01:20:11):
Who are objectivists, intellectuals who think that Trump is one
of the best presidents in your history. I want to
know who those are, other than Harriman and Bernstein. I'm

(01:20:32):
not don't ask me to gossip. You guys are gossiping.
You can provide me with the gossip you on Facebook.
I'm not on Facebook. I don't know who they are.
Michael says, Andrew Bunstein just posted God blessed Donald Trump.
Hard to imagine light level of mental gymnastics. Yeah, I
don't get it. It's sad. I like Andy. I don't
like Haroman, so it's not sad for me that Harriman

(01:20:53):
is nuts. That's just predictable. But Andy I like. So
it saddens me that Andy has taken this, in my view,
a completely irrational position. Daniels says, Shapiro and others like
to blame inflation today and the peak after COVID on
Biden and failed to recognize Trump's role in it. It's

(01:21:15):
too infuriating, especially from Shapiro.

Speaker 3 (01:21:17):
Yeah, I agree.

Speaker 2 (01:21:19):
The reality is that the big stimulus that Trump did
during COVID was the first push towards inflation. No question,
Biden doubled up on it, or maybe even tripled up
on it, but it definitely started with Trump and then

(01:21:40):
got elevated got elevated with Biden. And it's sad because
they will spin anything to make Biden look bad because
they that's a cheap way for them to make Trump
look good. All right, let's see, Michael. If people like

(01:22:13):
Andrew Bernstein simply abandoned objectivism, I would just put them
in the rank of the unthinking.

Speaker 3 (01:22:21):
But they are doing much worse. They are claiming that
their delusions.

Speaker 2 (01:22:26):
Rest on the only body of ideas capable of saving
the country from future collapse. Yeah, I agree. I agree.
It would be healthier for the movement if they left
given this position, but they're not, so we're gonna have
to deal with it. So, you know, stop listening to them,
stop following them. I've told you, stop following them, stop
sanctioning them. You know, just you know, particularly have them

(01:22:51):
and who's just despicable at this point. Uh, just just
ignore ignore it, ignore it, and make sure to make
your case, make it clear that they don't represent all
the voices and objectivism, because we don't want the culture

(01:23:11):
to think that that is the position of objectivism. Michael,
is tribalism and manifestation of a nihilism or the traditional
reaction to it, No, I mean, tribalism is a much
broader phenomena. Tribalism doesn't necessitate nihilism in and of itself.

(01:23:33):
I don't think, and nihilism isn't always you know, tribal,
although it often is. Tribalism is a broader phenomena. There
are different types of phenomena. Tribalism is more of a
kind of political It's also got epistemological you know characteristics.

(01:23:58):
Nihilism is is metaphysical, epistemological, and model. It's about destruction
for the sake of destruction. So I don't think tribalism
manifestation on anaism. Think about the fact that tribalism has
existed in the beginning of man, and nihilism is probably more.

Speaker 3 (01:24:17):
Of a.

Speaker 2 (01:24:20):
You know, it's probably not a monophenomena, but not one
that necessarily existed in every tribe that ever formed in
for primitive mankind. Somebody says I'm an immigrant and I'm
anti immigration and I am a capitalist. Debate me or

(01:24:42):
on No, why would I debate you? You can ask
a question, you can use the super chat to challenge
me and to make arguments against But what incentive do
I have to to.

Speaker 3 (01:24:56):
Debate some random person on my chat?

Speaker 2 (01:25:05):
Michael? The Rattlesnake TV guys vigorously defending Nick Frantis. If
the left hates somebody, the right has to defend them,
no matter what, whether.

Speaker 3 (01:25:16):
It's Putin or Nuck Frantis.

Speaker 2 (01:25:17):
It really is disgusting tribalism. But look the Rattlesnake TV
has and all of the people who are anti immigration,
almost all of them when you really push them, not everybody,
but when you really push them, a lot of them,
it turns out a Nickfrentis type racist. Michael, are the

(01:25:41):
intellectuals and leaders behind MAGA cultivating hatred they can no
longer contain? I mean yes, we'll see if they can
contain it or not. And it's and we'll see if
they want to contain it. Maybe they want to use
that hatred. I mean, it's it's to tell exactly what
they're going to do and how it's all going to

(01:26:03):
play out. There's still you know, there's still three years
before the next election, and it's going to be interesting
how it all plays out. A lot can happen in
a year, a lot can happen in three years. So
it could be that they want this hatred and they
will contain it and they will use it. Lincoln, the
wonder bouts merchants and acquisition deal is like a Taylor

(01:26:24):
Swift concert for finance needs nerds. I assume you mean
who wear Patagonia vests as we anxiously await news like
millennial women waiting for our albums. Okay, I have to
admit that there was I never wore Patagonia, even though
you could argue it was a finance nerd, So maybe

(01:26:45):
maybe I never had the right dress code. Let me
thank some stickers, Thomas, thank you for the sticker.

Speaker 3 (01:26:52):
Roland Henry.

Speaker 2 (01:26:55):
Let's see Alan Jeremy, Mary, Eleene, Catherine Timba, let's see
Mike Dial. I think I got everybody. I think I
got everybody. Yeah, there's timber Skid Okay, I got everybody.

(01:27:18):
Thank you, Thanks all the stickers. You can keep them
coming in. We're still about one hundred and twenty short
of our second hour goal, and we got thirty minutes
to get this.

Speaker 3 (01:27:27):
We've got plenty of time.

Speaker 2 (01:27:28):
Although it's going to take me less than thirty minutes
to cover all the questions I have, so probably less
than thirty minutes if you want to jump in to
participate in this trade value for value that we are
engaged in right here, pauses, what's your opinion about the
possibility of restricting people to one country citizenship?

Speaker 3 (01:27:48):
Why by what standard?

Speaker 2 (01:27:51):
I mean, I can understand restricting people not to have
the citizenship of an enemy country, But why do you care?
Why does anybody care if somebody else has another ship?
I mean, unless they are enemy countries, and then I
understand h I think it's a bogus pretense of of
some some some.

Speaker 3 (01:28:10):
Vague notion of loyalty.

Speaker 2 (01:28:14):
You know, most people who have second passports, don't you know,
live in one place and they and they and they
uh a patriotic I have two passports.

Speaker 3 (01:28:24):
I'm a patriot of one country.

Speaker 2 (01:28:25):
I consider myself a citizen in full meeting of one country,
it's just too much of a hassle to get through
it to the second passport and you and it's convenient.
It's incredibly convenient. I wish I had a European Union passport.
I would I would love to have a European Union
password because it's convenient to get into Europe with a passport.
As long as you have passport controls and passport restrictions

(01:28:47):
and visas and all this stuff, getting multiple passports is
incredibly beneficial. So yeah, I mean, if you had a
farm properform policy, you define your enemies and then you
would say you cannot have these countries passport with you on.

Speaker 3 (01:29:07):
But for that, you'd have to have a proper farm policy.

Speaker 2 (01:29:09):
You actually actually make definitions about who's who, right Lincoln,
In less than ten years, the narrative and hillbilly elegy
went from these people are mostly trashy, drug addicted who
had losing their economy, coming to the economy coming to

(01:29:34):
these are helpless victims who need ballots. Yeah, I mean
Jade Vance's own rhetoric about them has changed like that
over the last ten years. It used to be there
losers and they need to stand up for the You
know and and improve themselves. It's a self help.

Speaker 3 (01:29:51):
Kind of thing.

Speaker 2 (01:29:52):
They need to get better to today we need to
bail them out. Robert Sipowski argues, we have zero free will.
Whether you become a murderer or wildly successful is determined
by your eye color. Good for Sepolski, I hope he

(01:30:14):
lives his life accordingly. I don't I have free will
what happens to me. I mean, it's not all determined
by me, because there's accidents and stuff and the other
people I interact with. But I shape my own life.
I color Michael some positive news. It's looking more and

(01:30:37):
more like the Supreme Court will throw out most almost
all the towers. Well if they throw out throughout only
the twos they were established based on the Emergency Powers Act,
not the towers that are based on you know, the
the president's national security prerogatives. So it's it's it's most

(01:30:59):
of the house, but not all of the tests. Far
from all of those. So, for example, it won't trash
some of the most destructive tests, like the steel towests,
the illuminate test, those will not be eliminated. Some of
the tests in China will not be eliminated. So, but
it don't make life a lot easier for a lot
of people. And I hope this will be quoted. Indeed

(01:31:20):
does that, and we should hopefully we'll hear soon one
way or the other. Anim asked which president we're competent
on China. None, I don't think. I don't think any
of them will.

Speaker 3 (01:31:35):
Competent on China.

Speaker 2 (01:31:40):
No. But that's not surprising because I don't think any
American president is incompetent in a phone policy since World
War Two, at least, I admil Gott. If the US
electionic coint is is someone.

Speaker 3 (01:31:57):
Hobable like that? Right or left? What it is?

Speaker 2 (01:31:59):
Those options glory to the CCP. No, Look, I mean
Isol's option is survival. It will survive. It is all
I think. I think people over state Israel's reliance. Yeah,
it is all not have access to F thirty five's anymore.

(01:32:20):
It will have to develop, maybe even develop its own
plane it had in the past.

Speaker 3 (01:32:26):
It was on the verge of building its own fighter jet.

Speaker 2 (01:32:30):
It will have to. You know, there's some other weapons systems,
but Israel. You know, I heard somebody say, you know,
beyond nukes. Israel has nukes, so it doesn't have to
worry about its neighbors in that sense. But beyond nukes,
Israel has an unbelievable amount of firepower, Like we only

(01:32:52):
saw a fraction of that firepower during the two plus.

Speaker 3 (01:32:56):
Years of war.

Speaker 2 (01:32:58):
For example, is Al did not use any if it's
ground to ground ballistic missiles, which it has plenty of.
It did everything from the air. And for Israel, maybe
everything from the air is easier and more straightforward, but
it did everything from the air. It has unbelievable homemade

(01:33:20):
weapon systems that do not require.

Speaker 3 (01:33:24):
Us help.

Speaker 2 (01:33:26):
It's a rich country that could get a lot richer,
so it will survive. It doesn't mean it will go
to China, but it will mean maybe some European countries
and it become more self sufficient when it comes to
at least, you know, military weapon systems. Jonathan should the

(01:33:52):
United States have responded to North Korea's invasion of South
Korea nineteen fifty with nuclear blackmail rather than sending thousands
of troops today? I mean, the reality is the United
they should not have responded to the invasion. It was
none of America's business. South Korea was not any kind
of strategic necessity, So the United States should have stayed

(01:34:17):
out of it. If it was going to go in,
then yes, it should have used nuclear nuclear blackmail in
order to stop the North Koreans and used nuclear weapons
if that became necessary. It should not have sacrificed and sacrificed,
not sacrificed the lives of thousands of American kids for

(01:34:42):
what for the sake of South Korea, which I mean,
it's a wonderful place now, But those kids didn't deserve
to die for that.

Speaker 3 (01:34:53):
Lincoln.

Speaker 2 (01:34:54):
I sent Ari my contact info for their intellectual incubator
programs for the twenty twenty six class. Also applied for
fellowship by Pallanteer for those with Asperger's syndrome. Which should
which should? Which should?

Speaker 3 (01:35:09):
Be great?

Speaker 2 (01:35:11):
Oh so it's a it's a it's a fellowship that
they give to people with Asperger's.

Speaker 3 (01:35:16):
Interesting quote.

Speaker 2 (01:35:17):
Congratulations and good luck. I hope they both you get
accepted to both.

Speaker 3 (01:35:22):
That would be great.

Speaker 2 (01:35:26):
Michael, is objectivism not gaining traction in France because altruism
in a part of France, part of French arrogant, arrogance,
part of French identity is smug altruistic philosophy. I mean,
that's part of it.

Speaker 3 (01:35:40):
That's part of it. Augustine comp the originator.

Speaker 2 (01:35:43):
Of the term uh, the term altruism and a and
it's the most explicit advocate for altruism. As I ran
understood it.

Speaker 3 (01:35:54):
Was French, of course, but also.

Speaker 2 (01:35:57):
The French is so arrogant that they won't read books
written by non French authors, so they don't take ideas
from non French people seriously. So it's just hard to
market the book. It's hard to get people to read it.
It's hard to get it into the bookstores because it's
not by.

Speaker 3 (01:36:16):
A French author.

Speaker 2 (01:36:22):
Michael, Will they cure for colds and flues be discovered
in our lifetime or will they have to crush it?
I don't think the FDA would crush it. If there
was a cure and you could make so much money
off of something like that that.

Speaker 3 (01:36:39):
I mean, I'm sure companies are looking at it.

Speaker 2 (01:36:43):
There was some hope that mRNA vaccines would be able
to do it, but now you know they FD is
crushing MRNED the vaccines, so maybe that's the sense it
would crush it. I don't know. I don't know what
the state of the science or the investment in the
cures for colds and Fluids loan dissent one hundred percent

(01:37:06):
in favor of Netflix right to acquire Warner. As a
movie and disc fan, though, I'll just say, if you
love a film or series that's included in your deal
by a physical disc of it, while you can.

Speaker 3 (01:37:22):
All right, why because.

Speaker 2 (01:37:23):
Then it will be taken off the platform and you'll
never be able to see it again. I guess not
everything is on disc though, so a lot of stuff
you couldn't even get disc if you want, even if
you want it. Daniel, can you elaborate on encouraging assimilation
without the government adopting a code of beliefs outside of
the rule of law. Yeah, I mean, just don't allow

(01:37:46):
them to take welfare, which means they will have to
get a job, and don't don't have bilingual programs in school.
School should be in English. Now again, private schools can
do what they want, but government schools should be in English.
Don't have them swearing in as citizens using alternative languages

(01:38:11):
to English. The swearing in ceremonies should be in one
language and one language only. Make English have a proficiency
test in English in order to get citizenship. You shouldn't
be allowed. You shouldn't become citizen unless you're proficient in English.
That have forced them to learn English, which will help
them assimilate. So there are a number of things like that,

(01:38:33):
but mainly it's get them.

Speaker 3 (01:38:35):
Into the workforce. Get them into the workforce.

Speaker 2 (01:38:40):
But yeah, things like English school, teaching school that the
US is the best place as the best culture and
they should give up the culture of their homeland and
embrace American culture as part of civics classes. But again,

(01:39:01):
once you have private schools, they can teach whatever they want.

Speaker 3 (01:39:07):
Jamie.

Speaker 2 (01:39:08):
A lobster license costs five hundred thousand, and no new
ones are issued. Should government be able to say I
can't harvest lobsters without it? And where is the line?
Can we catch them to extinction? I mean, it's a
good question. So there has you have to be able
to develop some kind of regime around You have to

(01:39:35):
be able to develop some kind of property rights regime
around fish and lobsters and see animals.

Speaker 3 (01:39:42):
You have to be able to privatize them.

Speaker 2 (01:39:43):
In other words, Now, how exactly that is done, I'm
going to leave to experts in the field. I don't know,
but I know one way is to give licenses. But
those licenses you should be able to buy and sell
those licenses. It's quite reasonable the known new ones are issued.
If the private property, the lobsters, their population is not growing,

(01:40:07):
they haven't gone into new places. You know, you can't
you can't create more of the resource. Then it's it's
reasonable that no more licenses are issued. But you have
to find creative ways to assign property rights to fisher
to fishermen over either certain areas in the sea or

(01:40:28):
certain populations of fish. And I know Iceland has a
method to do that that's quite effective, but I haven't
really studied, you know, what is the most effective and
what is the most consistent with property rights method to use?
You would have to figure that out.

Speaker 3 (01:40:46):
But you shouldn't be.

Speaker 2 (01:40:49):
Able to just catch them with no limitation, because you
have to you have to be able to recognize some
sense of property rights over you know, over the seas.
Let me just say, I'm I'm really this close to

(01:41:11):
blocking gubbo Ish or whatever his name is encoveras you
not engage with him. He's not he's not an honest player.
He's not asking questions because he's interested in the answer.
And I'm and very close to blocking him partially because
he takes up some space in the chat, but also
because he spends a lot of time going on different

(01:41:33):
chats in my videos, and and uh, you know, undermining
in any kind of way he can me right, and
uh and and and just kind of kind of uh
speaking ill of the show, which is just which he
then comes and you know, participates as if he's as

(01:41:56):
if he's hearing good for good will. So this is
a destructive guy. There nothing, there's no positive, So just disengage.
The best thing is just block him on your side.
And if he continues, I'll just block him on mind.

Speaker 3 (01:42:10):
Uh, Paul Ferris.

Speaker 2 (01:42:14):
Economist Robert Larry Ludlow said affordability is greatly overrated. God,
I mean, the Giza needs to get off the stage.
I don't even understand what that means. Affordability is overrated.
So so now being able to afford stuff, Yeah, that's overrated.

Speaker 3 (01:42:28):
You should just shut up and be quiet. Just just
just just enjoy the.

Speaker 2 (01:42:34):
Uh, the the the the eminence being in the presence
and the eminence of Donald Trump.

Speaker 3 (01:42:41):
Don't don't complain. You're not allowed to complain.

Speaker 2 (01:42:44):
Not allowed to complain. Uh, Jamie, who is the best
and worst president in your opinion and why I think
the best, I mean, the best is is hard. It's
it's probably George Washington because the only of two terms

(01:43:05):
and left and established the tradition of a two term presidency.
And he could have stayed and become king, because he
helped found this country and create this country and build
this country.

Speaker 3 (01:43:18):
So I think it.

Speaker 2 (01:43:19):
I think George Washington is probably number one of the
non Founding Father presidents. From what I've read, the best
is Grover Cleveland. Certainly not cool, he's cool. He's very mixed.
But Grover Cleveland who was brilliant and and had to
fight off regulations and government intervention and tariffs and all

(01:43:44):
these things. And I think he vetoed more bills than
any other president or something like that, and he was
just terrific. So I would say I would say Cleveland
Lincoln is again and mixed in many respects. He's a
great president, particularly given his understanding of the Declaration and

(01:44:04):
its warle in America and its meaning, and his willingness
to fight the Civil War and to and engage in
winning it. So, but on the other hand, he used
emergency powers to both impose an income tax, to print
money and uh, and and to have a draft. So

(01:44:25):
those are big negatives. They're not little negatives, the big negatives.
And I did it for a good cause, winning the
Civil War. But but yeah, I mean they were still
bad that I think puts a blemish on his on
who he is and what he was. Also the suspense

(01:44:47):
of habeas corpus, it's also one of his uh whereas.

Speaker 3 (01:44:52):
I don't know anything negative. The Cleveland did uh worst.
It's also hard because there are a lot of them.
Is real competition.

Speaker 2 (01:45:02):
There's you know, there is Teddy Roosevelt, who is the
first really really really bad president in the sense that
he sets the tone for the rest of the twentieth century.
There is a Woodrow Wilson who did some of the
most horrific things in American history. You know, under his
presidency you get the income tax and the Federal Reserve

(01:45:24):
and World War One and a bunch of other things.
And generally the first progressive president fully progressive restaurants. There's
FDR who completely socialized everything and try to, you know,
in the fastest way, take over much of the US economy.
And then there's Donald Trump, who has brought the lowest

(01:45:48):
character to the presidency and has diminished its honor more
than any other president, any other president by far, and
all the kind of attributes of these others. Although he
doesn't believe in anything, whereas Wilson and Roosevelt, and both
Roosevelt actually believed in something, something bad and we're trying

(01:46:12):
to impose it.

Speaker 3 (01:46:12):
Trump brings.

Speaker 2 (01:46:15):
A mafia thuggishness to the presidency that's unique and for
the first time. So I don't know how to rank them,
but certainly Trump, Fdr and Wilson have to be in
the in the worst five, if nothing else. You know,
Obama and Biden up pretty pretty high on the list

(01:46:36):
of worst presidents as well, but just not quite as
high as these guys. Tamil, Have you seen the Manhattan
Institute's survey on GP voters' views on the Holocaust and
does it concern you? Yes, I mean there's a general
decline in GP knowledge, appreciation of liberty, understanding of history.

(01:46:57):
And you know, the number of people in the GP
now engaged in Holocaust denial is stunning. It's over thirty
percent according to the survey. And my guess is it's
even higher if you cut it up by age. So yeah,
it's very, very, very concerning the GP has deteriorated.

Speaker 3 (01:47:19):
It used to be.

Speaker 2 (01:47:21):
At least somewhat positive, and it's deteriorated into complete, complete garbage.
I cannivor tell Governess. There's many hours of audio and

(01:47:42):
many pages written about the objective's theory of free will,
where he'll get better answers than a count events show,
especially if he's not super chatting. Yeah, I mean, but
the point is that he's not interested in better answers.
He's not interested in a real discussion. He's interesting in poking.

(01:48:04):
That's all he wants to do is poke. He's interested
in subvoting, He's interested in undermining. He's not interested in
an honest discussion about free will. There is a ton
I mean, there's some some excellent stuff by Uncle Gate
and and uh and Gregselmieri and havey, Vince Wanga, Uh
you know has done.

Speaker 3 (01:48:24):
He's just a he's just a weird I think he's
a weirdo.

Speaker 2 (01:48:28):
I'm sure he's a weirdo in person, but he's a
weird type of troll who has nothing else to do
but come uh and and ask the same question over
and over again, and everything and and but in addition,
undermined now let's assume, yeah, he wants to be part
of this I don't know community and he wants to engage,

(01:48:49):
and then he undermines it by by trashing the show
at every opportunity that he has and trashing me at
every opportunity he has when he goes on chat. So
there's no honesty there, There's not there's no there. There,
there's nothing to deal with. Lincoln.

Speaker 3 (01:49:07):
Good news.

Speaker 2 (01:49:08):
Found out all my AP credit transferred over to University
of Arizona, so I actually have more than a year
of credit built up and will graduate early. Congratulations, that's really, really,
really terrific. Good job, and I will get back to
you about the talk at Arizona as soon as I
know when I'm coming out there.

Speaker 3 (01:49:29):
Jamie from Canada.

Speaker 2 (01:49:31):
In the Big Short movie, Pitt's character said everything, the
Big everything, the employment rate. Every time the employment rate
drops one percent, forty thousand people die. I couldn't find
out whether that was true or written for the movie.

Speaker 3 (01:49:46):
Do you have any.

Speaker 2 (01:49:47):
Knowledge every time the unemployed the employment rate drops one percent,
so one percent fewer people are working, forty thousand people die.
That's made up for the movie. I think it's just
a way to dramatize the point. I don't think it's
real Jamie from Canada. What would they die from? Right?

(01:50:12):
People here want to save a public beach from private
purchase and building of a golf course.

Speaker 3 (01:50:19):
Who should get their way?

Speaker 2 (01:50:22):
Well, I mean everything public should be purchased privately. That is,
you should privatize all public land. And then you know,
the private owner should be able to do whatever they
want with it, you know, assuming it's not infringing in
anybody's rights, like it's not polluting your property, not noise

(01:50:45):
or whatever, and they build the infrastructure necessary to run
a golf course or whatever.

Speaker 3 (01:50:50):
So yep. So it's.

Speaker 2 (01:51:00):
I believe all property should be privately owned and private
owners should have wide latitude in terms of what they
do with it.

Speaker 3 (01:51:06):
There should be very few.

Speaker 2 (01:51:07):
Things that where the government steps in and says you
can't do that. All right, guys, thank you, I thank you,
and all the super chat is really really appreciated. Thank
you to everybody here. I will be back tomorrow. We
will have shows all week. I will see you then.
Have a great rest of your day. Bye, everybody,

All Episodes

Pardons; Netflix; JD Vance; Tucker & Qatar; Millionaires; Russia; China; Hamas | Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

Dateline NBC

.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;}Pardons; Netflix; JD Vance; Tucker & Qatar; Millionaires; Russia; China; Hamas | Yaron Brook Show