Warner Deal; Obamacare; Oil Tanker; Indiana; Border Search; Drugs; Space | Yaron Brook Show - Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
A lot of the metals, walls and any individual. Last
this is the show, all right, everybody, welcome to you.
One book show on this Thursday, December eleventh. It's it's

(00:26):
kind of late over here in Puerto Rico. Hopefully you
guys are having a good week and looking forward to
the weekend and all of that. We will have a
show tomorrow at four pm at four pm, well sorry, anyway,
around three pm East Coast time, so a little later

(00:47):
than usual. We'll have definitely a show on Saturday, topic
to be determined, and Sunday will be a members only
show and we'll be discussing, discussing the inn rand essay,
the Missing Link, the Iron rand Essay, the missing link.
For those of you who want to read in advance,

(01:09):
and you should, the missing link is in philosophy. Who
needs it? In the not in the book philosophy? Who
needs it? So just a reminder on all that.

Speaker 2 (01:22):
All right, let's see, Uh yeah, let's let's just roll.

Speaker 1 (01:34):
Let's just go right into it. Okay. So I don't know,
I don't know how many people are really interested in this,
in this, but I find it fascinating. Uh, the the
kind of takeover attempts or the merger attempts regarding one
of Brother's Discovery. Uh, and there are two. There are
two opposing groups that are trying to take this over.

(01:57):
One of them is Netflix, which Warner Brothers has said
it has agreed to sell most of its assets its
properties to Netflix, and Netflix will not be buying the
broadcasting parts. So, for example, CNN will not be part
of the deal when Netflix. If Netflix buys Warner brother

(02:21):
and supposed to the Warner brother has agreed to sell
for what was the price? The price was thirty It
was twenty seven and a half, I think, so they've

(02:43):
agreed to a thirty seven and a half. Sorry, thirty
seven and a half. Sorry, Netflix screwed to pay twenty
seven and seven five cents twenty seven dollars seventy five,
says push sche In cash and stock for most of
Warner Brothers, leaving one of the Brothers with CNN a

(03:03):
little bit more, probably worth about a buck or two
one to two dollars. Then Paramount stepped in. Paramount stepped in,
and Pamount is now offered to do a hostile takeover
without the agreement of the board in a sense at
thirty dollars a share. So Pamont is upping the biating

(03:27):
to thirty dollars a share. The stock closed, right, the
stock closed yesterday. I don't know what to closed that today,
but yesterday the stock closed at twenty nine dollars and
fifty three cents. So in this typical of this kind
of a deal. So we're going to do a little
of finance here, right, We're going to do what is

(03:48):
exactly a hostile takeover. Hostile takeover is a takeover where
the company that is being bought doesn't really want to
sell to you. So, for example, in this case, one
of brothers wants to sell and they've agreed to sell
to Netflix, and Paramut is saying, yeah, but I'll offer

(04:10):
higher price. And management might say, yeah, but we won't
take that high price. We're not interested in that high price.
But shareholders might say, wait a minute, managers, it's really
our call. It's our company. We want to sell for
the higher price. We don't give an am who owns
the company. Afterwards, we want to make money, so we

(04:30):
want to go with Pamont. So it's hostile when in
a sense, the new bidda is going directly to shareholders
and not getting the acquiescence of management. And in this case,
Palmont has been trying to buy Warner Brothers for months.
One of others has rebuffed the efforts. One of others

(04:53):
managers have rebuffed their efforts. One of others found a
friendly deal with Netflix for twenty seven dollars or seventy
five cents plus one or two dollars worth of other
stuff that's going to stay with shareld with warn about
the shareholders. So you could you could imagine the total

(05:13):
value of the Netflix deal is about twenty nine dollars
and you know somewhere around twenty nine something, right, And
then Palmont is not coming in and said, oh no,
we'll buy you for thirty and shareholders, anybody want to

(05:34):
buy anybody want to sell their stock to us at
thirty you can. You can get the twenty five seventy
five from Netflix, but we'll give you thirty now. So
this is that's what a hostile tico is it how
it functions. And of course the stock is right now

(05:56):
trading a twenty nine fifty three now twenty nine fifty
three rippers a few things. Twenty nine fifty three is
about the full value that you would expect to get
from Netflix twenty seven to five plus two bucks of
the stuff that they're not buying. But we don't know

(06:17):
when this deal is going to happen. It could happen
in six months or nine months. We also don't know
if the regulators will approve it. So in a in
a rational market, if I'm holding, if I'm buying one
a stock, I'm going, Okay, I'm going to get twenty
seven to seventy five, and then I'll be I'll keep

(06:38):
a two dollar piece. So I'm gonna get twenty in
ninety seventy five. Let's say sometime in the future, let's
set worth three today. Well, I mean there's inflation, and
there's a I could I could buy, you know, I
could put the money in the bank and get interest.
So I'm going to take a three percent discount on that.
So I'm gonna I'm going to only pay three percent
less than twenty ninth seventy five. But then there's us

(07:02):
uncertainty about whether the deal will even pass right. I mean,
there's a certain probability that the regulators want to prove it.
Their regular is already saying maybe we won't. Maybe Netflix
plus HBO Max is too much HBO Plus is too much.
It's a monopoly, So you know, maybe I don't want

(07:24):
to pay that much because I'm worried that the deal
doesn't go through. But on the other hand, there are
lots of hands in finance, there are lots and lots
and lots of hands. On the other hand, even if
the deal doesn't go through, it's likely somebody else is
going to come in and buy the assets, for example,
Warner Brothers, So that makes me a little bit more comfortable.

(07:46):
But still, if the deal is at right now at
you know, twenty nine seventy five, you know, I'm not
bidding more than I don't know twenty seven. I'm not
willing to buy it at twenty six. So why people
buying a twenty nine five ft three Because paramount has
been thirty and the market is telling us pretty clearly

(08:09):
that they don't believe thirty is the last bid. They
expect Netflix to come back with a higher bid than Paramount,
and Paramount then to bid make a higher bid than Netflix,
and then Netflix up it from Paramount, and on and
on it goes until they finally agree on a price.
Would it shock anybody if Warner Brothers ultimately sells for

(08:31):
forty dollars a share. Now you have to believe that
the shareholders and Warner Brothers are eager for such a
battle to take them over. That drives up the price.
And indeed, the CEO of Warner Brothers is going to
be a billionaire, which is very rare. It's very rare
for CEO of an established company, not the founder, not

(08:54):
the guy started the company, but just the CEO of
a company to become a billionaire. But he is likely
to become a billionaire at the end of this the
end of this deal. So it's an exciting deal, it's
fun to watch, it's interesting. And then answer to this,
answer this the drama of all of this, and the
interesting how the stock price adjusts and how the market

(09:16):
responds and so on. You know, I don't know. Sadly,
my finance guys almostly in Europe. But we've got Raphael
who does merges and acquisitions in Portugal, and we've got
some other finance people. But this is a fund deal.
This is a fund deal to watch for anybody interested
in finance. But beyond that, there is a whole political dimension. So,

(09:42):
for example, Jared Kushner, Donald Trump's son in law is
a part. That is, he is providing financing for the
Palamount bid. So Donald Trump at least the extent that
he he likes Jared Kushner all indications so he likes

(10:05):
him as an incentive for this deal to go to Palama.
And indeed he can tweak the regulators. He can encourage
the regulators not to prove the Netflix deal and yes,
approve the Palamont deal. There's also a bunch of like
Saudi money in this deal which also on the Palamount side,

(10:34):
which again is going to is going to put pressure
on the administration on Trump. Member. This is all political, right,
because the politicians have to prove the deal. I mean
the regulators, but politicians have influenced also Paramount leader, the

(10:55):
guy who runs Palamont. The guy who owns Paramount is
David Ellison. Now David Ellison happens to be the son
of the second richest man I think in the world,
Larry Ellison, who happens to be a major donor supporter

(11:17):
of Donald Trump. So you got on the Paramount site,
You've got Jared Kushner, Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, and Kata
Kata being Donald Trump's favorite country in the world, or
that's that could cost im. Sorry, and you've got Larry Ellison,
a major donor to the Trump administration. Who do you

(11:38):
think Trump wants? But then there's another aspect to it.
One of the properties that Warner Brothers discover Discovery, that's
one company owned is CNN. Now who hates CNN. Well,
the person who really, really, really really really hates CNN

(12:01):
as Donald Trump because of the bad coverage he tends
to get at s CNN. So Donald Trump has said,
you know, if a deal goes through for this, I
want CNN to have new managers. But if Netflix buys,

(12:26):
if Netflix buys Warner Brothers, they don't plan to buy CNN,
and CNN remains in the hands of the comment owners
with the same management. So again, Donald Trump has a
real strong incentive not to allow Netflix to buy it
a paramount. On the other hand, if it buys it,
it would love to have CNN. It would replace the

(12:49):
management of CNN, replace the whole probably the whole network,
replace it with people who lean far more pro Trump,
because hey, that's who they are, right, we saw that
was CBS. Palamount owns CBS. They're the ones who bought
Barry Weiss to run the news department at CBS. Why

(13:12):
not give Barry Weiss CNN as well? So this one
is going to be interesting to watch. I mean, howe well,
in a sense of God, politicians should have no business
getting involved in this. You know, this is so political.

(13:36):
You know, we in the United States and it's National
Security strategy document accused Europe of all kinds of things
for speech and stuff like this. How are we different?
I mean, yes, we're not putting people in jail for
Twitter posts, not because this administration wouldn't want to, but
because this has been quote would rule that unconstitutional. But

(13:57):
this administration is one of the worst administration of free
speech we've ever had. We'll get to some examples later.
But think of sewing media, you know, because they don't
like the coverage that Trump gets now saying almost saying,
we're not going to give anti trust approval unless CNN

(14:20):
changes its tune. So this is a deal that has
politics and finance intermingled in ways that often happened, but
this is far more complex, far more direct. Trump is
already said explicitly that he will be involved in the

(14:42):
decision on who gets to buy Timewona. We live in
a We live in lazarf capitalism. Remember government separation from
the economy. I mean, this is so corrupt, It's so corrupt.
But there you have it. It's like the that the

(15:02):
uh you know, Warner Brothers goes to a family member
of Donald Trump's and the CNN gets recast as a
more neutral news channel than it is historically being. We
will continue to watch this and update you both on
what is happening in the marketplace. That is, how the

(15:24):
price is changing, and how the price evolves given the
different bids, and what happens with the bidding. The bidding
is going to be fun to watch, but also what
happens with the politics of this, because that's going to
be equally interesting, if if interesting in a The first
is interesting productively from a from a finance perspective. The

(15:44):
second is interesting kind of from a more bid, kind
of the decay of the American political system perspective. But
it is uh yeah, it's it's a it's a big story.
It's a big deal, uh and it really does have
for reaching ramifications for whatever is left of the American

(16:09):
free market system. I there was a vote tonight, as
you know, the government was shut down postially because Democrats
didn't want the Obamacare exchanges subsidies to go away, because

(16:32):
if they went away, premiums for people who buy insurance
policies off of Obamacare exchanges with skyrocket, they're going to
go up by some estimates about one hundred percent. Republic
you know, Republicans objected, they wanted their subsidies to go away.
Trump at some point came online and said, hey, what

(16:53):
about giving the money back to people? You know, to people,
said of subsidizing insurance companies, what about putting in people's hsas?
And some Republicans got together and put together bill to
reflect that in the meantime, Republicans don't have to get
the government open. Promised Democrats there would be a vote
on extending the subsidies. So today there was a vote

(17:13):
on two things. There's a vote on a Democratic plan
to extend the subsidies, and there was a vote on
a Republican plan to not a great plan, not unfortunately,
not Rand Paul's plan, which was quite good. Rand Paul
had a really good plan, but a decent plan that

(17:36):
involved expanding hsas dramatically. There was a vote on both
those plans Both those plans were voted down. Both those
plans were voted down. Republicans could not even get everybody
in the Republican Party to vote for the Republican plan,
and the Democrats couldn't get enough Republicans to vote for
their plan. So basically, what's going to happen, at least

(17:57):
as it stands right now, is the Obamacare subsidies will expire.
If you buy your insurance on the exchanges, expect premiums
to be dramatically higher. How much I don't know. Again,
Democrats are saying one hundred percent, but they have an
incentive to scare people. I don't know what the actual

(18:18):
impact is going to be. It could be the Republicans
regroup and try to pass a different bill, but it's
unlikely they'll get into the Democratic support. The Democrats will
would prefer, I think, to have Republicans take the hit
for the subsidies expiring. This is the year of affordability

(18:38):
and the insurance costs going up, and being able to
point to Republicans and blaming them, put aside the actual
economics of the whole thing, put aside the value of
Obamacare and all that. Blaming Republicans is what they really
care about. The bill that Republicans proposed would have set
up a fifteen hundred dollars Individual Saving Account HSA for

(19:02):
anybody who had it was less than seven hundred percent
of the federal poverty level, which is about one hundred
so that would be about one hundred and ten thousand dollars.
Anybody above one hundred and ten thousand dollars could get
this for an individual turning twenty five thousand for a
family or four. Those funds could could not be used
for abortion, of course, not God forbid to use them

(19:24):
for abortion. Can be used for gender transition procedures, and
they require edification of the beneficiaries immigration and citizen status.
We got to get all these social gender items checked off,
and I think they couldn't be. There's some other restrictions
on them, unfortunately, other restrictions on them. And yeah, now,

(19:49):
remember these subsidies were put in place to help people
out during COVID. COVID has gone a long time ago.
Of course, Obamacare what was supposed to be appealed a
long time ago. But this is all politics. It's not
about helping people. It's not about having a rational healthcare system.

(20:10):
It's not about having a rational insurance market. None of
that matters. What really matters. The only thing that really
matters is the politics of it. Democrats want to blame
affordability on Republicans. Republicans want to pretend that they offered
some kind of free market option, you know, which is

(20:30):
not really true. Yeah, I mean it's it really is.
It really is just a political game, political game where
we're just pawns with the people are just pawns there playing.
I mean, that's true of almost all the stories we'll
cover today. Here's here's a good comment from the chat.

(20:55):
I sometimes read the chat. I like reading the chat
when the comments are nice. This one a nice comment.
Juan just gets better and better, and now he's very entertaining.
I love when he laughs at his critics. All right, cool,
some people think have a sense of humor. I think

(21:15):
that's great. All right. Oil tankers. I got up this
morning and that the lead news is that the United
States had taken over a oil tanker off the coast
of Venezuela. It's not just any oil tanker, it's a

(21:37):
sanctioned oil tanker. It turns out there over one hundred
of these tankers. These are sanctional tankers. These are tankers
that have dubious paperwork. It's not clear who exactly owns them.
It's not clear what flag they're really flying under. It's

(21:58):
also they tend to turn on off the transponders when
they're out at sea, so they're not easily to track.
The reason there was such a big business in let's
call them what they are, black market oil tankers. These
are black market oil tankers is because there's a huge
black market in oil. There are a number of countries

(22:21):
that have sanctions on them that do not allow them
to export oil. Russia, Iran, Venezuela and as a consequence,
but of course, you know, we know where there's supply
and there is demand. Supplying demand will meet. All that
happens when you ban a product is that you create

(22:43):
a black market. And what we're seeing right now, what
we're seeing right now, you guys are distracting me. Lincoln said,
I think if you think you're it's funny, now, just
wait until the two glasses of wine at dinner. Jennifer
says that's true, which is absolutely not true. Jennifers, you know, yeah,

(23:10):
I don't get funnier with wine. It doesn't have that
effect on me. I don't think anybody here has bean
around me. When I've had two glasses of wine, think
I get friend of you anyway. So these tankers what
they do, these quote black market tankers, I'm calling them that,
They're called sanctioned tankers. They basically shuttle shuttle, you know,

(23:35):
oil between from sanctioned countries, Venezuela, you are, Russia, two
countries willing to buy sanctioned oil like most of Asia, China, Malaysia,
other places like that. So these tankers are always under
threat of seizure, although nobody ever bothers. Everybody just accepts.

(23:57):
I mean, this is part of the stupidity of the
sanctions game. Everybody kind of accepts that they can achieve.
Everybody accepts that there's a black market. Nobody wants to
piss Russia and Iran and Venezuela too much, so they
never actually seize these boats. They just let them go.
Except today America seized one of the boats. This is

(24:18):
a ship that just recently was you know, seen transporting
Iranian oil. It is now filled up with venezuel And
oil that was probably heading to China Venezuela. Most of
Venezuela oil is sold in China. Of course, soil is
sold at a significant discount. The Tanka takes a huge premium,

(24:43):
just like drugs. There's massive profits to be made in
illegal stuff. So Venezuela sends its sells this oil to
China really really cheap because China is not going to
pay a lot for illegal oil. And the tanker charges
are huge premium to Venezuela for shipping the oil to China.

(25:09):
So today we got heavily armed US troops you know,
propelling down onto the deck of the tanker from black
Hawk helicopter. You know this, you know, Pambandi, Attorney General,
said today the Federal Buau of investigated investigation homeland security

(25:35):
investigations in the United States Coast Guard was support from
the Department of War executed a seizure a warrant for
a Coude oil tanker used to transport sanction all for
Venezuela and you on for multiple years. The oil tanker
has been sanctioned by the United States DUDE its involvement
in illicit oil shipping network supporting the foreign terrorist organizations.

(25:57):
This seizure completed off the coast of Venezuela was conducted
safely and securely in our investigation alongside the Department of
Homeland Security to prevent the transport of sanctioned oil continues.
So this is part of the campaign to put pressure
on Maduro to squeeze his administration with the hope that

(26:17):
he will leave or commit suicide or do something or
just surrender or whatever. And you know, this is within
the within the law. There's nothing illegal about what the
US did today. There's completely legal. Whether it's a good
use of resources where it makes any sense, whether you know,

(26:38):
I put that aside for a second. The United States
is US has said that they're about they're going to
seize more tankers coming out of Venezuela. The idea is
to starve the Venezuela and regime where they ownly income
really is from these tankers. Now, look, I don't like sanctions.
I don't believe there should be sanctions in Venezuela and

(26:59):
n It'suela is not an actual threat to the United States.
It's not an enemy of the United States. I don't
think that there should be sanctions of you on. I
just think the Ranian regime should be replaced, and I
don't even think there should be sanctions in Russia. I
think the United States should bar the trade with Russia.
We shouldn't buy and sell anything with Russia. I don't

(27:20):
think we should tell other countries what to do if
they want to buy and sell from Russia. I also
think that if we're going to bar buying all from Russia,
we should also stop buying uranium from Russia. America still
buys uranian from Russia, and the United States still buys
a lot of stuff from Russia. So the whole sanctioned
game is just a con. It's to make you, guys

(27:43):
feel think that the United States is doing something when
it's doing nothing. So I'm not a fan of sanctions.
I don't like sanctions. I believe in you embalgo or
you don't embogo. I don't like tariffs. I don't like sanctions.
Uh you know this is this is unproductive. But you

(28:05):
know this squeezing Meduo with the hope that he will fall.
We'll see if he does what happens. I mean, this
is part of the new US emphasis on the Western hemisphere,
the new Manue doctrine U and uh don. Trump has
already said that after Venezuela is going to go after Columbia.

(28:29):
Uh and uh and and and you know, we'll see
where else and what else this leads to, and whether
we actually engage in war with Venezuela, where actually bombed
the place, assassinate the president? What exactly we do and
how we do it? No, that Congress is still not
declared war in Venezuela. I don't know where the Trump
administration gets its authorization too, uh, you know, militarily strike Venezuela.

(28:54):
It hasn't yet, but when it does, I don't know
where it's going to get its authorization from. We will
wait and see. US Jurgury Department today in post actions
sanctions on six more ships and three nephews of Venezuela
and President nic Maduro. So expect more seizures, more pressure.

(29:15):
I mean, what I think Trump would like is for
Maduat just to leave, just to leave. We will see
if that actually happens. I mean, Trump keeps ramping up
his rhetoric with regard to Maduro, is accusing him of
forcing criminals into the United States, facilitating drug trafficking. Again,

(29:37):
very very little, very very few drugs that come into
the United States come from Venezuela. I don't know if
any I mean Colombia. A lot of drugs come for Columbia,
and indeed, Venezuela is a massive export of drugs from Colombia.
They go to Venezuela and then they smuggle to Europe.

(29:59):
So Europe has a cocaine problem, and that cocaine problem
is being fueled by Venezuela. But the United States and
drugs come you know, through Mexico typically or through the
Pacific on the Pacific side. They don't come through the Caribbean,

(30:19):
at least not as significant significant quantities. All right, what
else do we have. We'll come back to Venezuela in
a minute. I ordered these wrong, but that's okay. I
talk about Indiana. So President Trump for weeks now has

(30:41):
been encouraging Indiana to put together a redistricting plan. They
will basically increase the number of Republican congressional districts in
preparation for twenty twenty six midium election. You remember, Texas
passed a plan like that that has been approved at
least temporarily by the Supreme Court. California responded. Since then,

(31:03):
North Carolina and one of the state have also approved
plans basically to read districts, to eliminate democratic districts and
draw the lines in such a way that they will
be of Republicans. Missouri was the other state, Missouri North Carolina.

(31:23):
Trump Is also asked Indiana, but basically Indiana said no. Now,
remember Indiana is one hundred percent Republican state from you know,
it's it's state house. For example, in the Indiana Senate,

(31:45):
forty out of fifty members of Republicans. Now, Trump didn't
just run any campaign. This is a campaign of real
threats and intimidation. People were attacked in their homes or
outside their homes. People's families were threatened. People we were

(32:10):
you know, police were sent to people's homes as a
as a prank. Massive amount of pressure was put on
those Republicans who said that they would vote against the redistricting.
MAGA went nuts at least certain elements within MEGA to
try to get these Republicans to agree. Republicans said, basically,

(32:31):
you know, we're conservatives. We don't believe in jerrymandering estate
in any in mid cycle just to appease the president.
You know, this is wrong. We've got a good We've
got a proper districting, there's no reason to change it.
We're not going to play these political games again. As
a consequence of this, and during the debate over the bill,

(32:58):
Republican lives were threatened and it really got out of hand. Now,
you know, this is a big deal because unless Democrats
really have a massive showing and a sweep, it's still

(33:19):
going to be true that whoever wins in the House
is going to win by a small margin. Every seat
is going to count. And the Republicans that were pro
redistricting made this point and try to really urge people
to change their mind. And yet tonight, I think it

(33:39):
was tonight. Yeah, tonight, the Indiana Senate voted and it
voted by a huge margin, thirty one to nineteen, to
reject redistricting, to eject President Trump. Now this is unbelievably unusual. Now,
remember Trump has told them anybody who voted against this
will be you know, Trump will choose the candidate to

(34:02):
run against them in the Republican primary. The Heritage Fundation,
this is what the Heritage Fundation wrote. This is this
good old Heritage Foundation right they were. President Trump has
made it clear to Indiana leaders. Notice the tone of
this President Trump has made it clear to Indiana leaders.
If the Indiana Senate fails to pass the map, all

(34:24):
federal funding will be stripped from the state. Roads will
not be paved, guard bases will close, major projects will stop.
These are the stakes, and every no vote will be
to blame. Now note this is the same Heritage Foundation

(34:46):
that used to used to in the past tense stand
for state rights, that stood for the federal gumasu intervene
in state decisions like redistricting. Now Trump told you to
do X, do X, don't question a bay A bay

(35:08):
a bay. So you know, here we are. This is
redistincting for congress in twenty twenty six. This is for
congressional members in twenty twenty six. I mean, the Republicans
are pretty pathetic usually, and yet these Indiana Republicans, you

(35:30):
gotta give him credit. Gott to get a credit. And
I think the more like MAGA tried to intimidate them,
the more they were threatened, the more committed they became
to voting against this. So, you know, maybe this hope
for this political party. Maybe there's still some people with

(35:52):
some tiny bit of I don't know, antiguity, a little
bit teep it we will see. I mean maybe we'll see,
we'll see, we'll see. So, yeah, people maybe are starting
to stand up for Trump. To Trump, I mean, in

(36:14):
spite of the fact that some people think he's the
greatest president we've ever had. He's very unpopular. He's got
one of the lowest approval ratings in history, and maybe
that is giving balls courage to other Republicans to stand
up to him. I mean, Marjorie Taylor Green has stood
up to him. I mean, she's leaving Congress. Good riddance.

(36:35):
She's awful, but she did stand up to him. That,
you know, good for her. Okay. So here's the thing.
There is a proposal being made officially by the American

(36:56):
government that says that when people come in to the country,
when they apply for visa to come to the United States,
one of the things that they will have to submit
in order to get a visa to come into the
United States is five years worth of social media So

(37:20):
all social media accounts from the last five years. They
will have to submit, all their biometrics, face fingerprints, DNA
and IRIS, all their phone numbers in the last five years,
all email addresses from the last ten years, IP addressers,
and metadata with their photos. Names of family members, parents, spouse, sibling, children,

(37:47):
All family members phone numbers from the last five years.
Family members date of birth, family name members, place of birth,
family members residences. All business phone numbers in the last
five years. A businesses email addresses in the last ten years.
This is just this is just for like a tourist

(38:13):
E s t A. It's not even a visa, right,
this is a E s t A is like something
you know, I had to do one for for Australian
and you have to do one for UK. Now it's
a little online form you know that just just gives
you the gives them the basic information, right. So like
this is for countries. This is you think this is

(38:35):
from like maybe Kato or or you know, Saudi Arabia. No, no, no, no,
I'm sure those people can come in free. This is
for EU and UK, Australia, Japan, the countries that don't
require visas but just require this E S t A.
I mean, this is ridiculous. All social media accounts for

(38:59):
five years just to come in as a tourist. I
mean this goes against I don't know, are we becoming
a police state? We're gonna track everybody who comes in
here get all the informations in the NSA can check
everything that they do. This is it's a non visa visa.

(39:23):
That's right, Fisco, it's a non visa visa. If you
apply for visa, the requirement's going to be much tougher
than this. This is just a starting point. The certain
countries that you acquire visa to come to the United States,
you have to give DNA. I mean, I thought I

(39:48):
thought this, you know, I thought that it was China
that kept so your schools. I guess now we're going
to keep social scores of tourists. I mean, it's just

(40:09):
little steps ice and this kind of stuff, and blowing
up boats in the middle of the Caribbean Sea and
so on. Just slow little moves then move us towards
kind of an authoritarian state, a state they're just hands
over to our government, you know, full control of who

(40:30):
we are. And it starts with tourists. But then what
about us? What about you? Maybe the government already assumes
that they have your DNA, they have your fingerprints. If
you travel, you've probably given them your fingerprints. I have,
I mean, because I've got what do you call it
the fast entry into the United States. I did an interview.

(40:53):
I've given them everything they have. They've got pictures of me.
I know, because you know, when I come into the
United States traveling overseas and I come back to the
United States, I don't have to take my passport up.
I go to the machine. It takes a photo of me.
It says, okay, go ahead. It knows who I am.
He knows when my passport number. It knows all that.
Then I go up to the guard on his iPad.

(41:15):
He has my photo and he has my passport and
everything else he needs to know about me. And then
he asked me like, are you carrying anything? Do you
want to declare anything? Da da da da da Okay,
and you go. That's it. So even visitors from Gutry's

(41:35):
like Gootain and France, who I guess according to the NSS,
maybe are now our enemies and not our friends. Are
going to give five years of social media and we know,
for example that if over the five years you have
criticized our Supreme leader, oh sorry, I mean President Trump,

(41:59):
you will not get you will not be allowed in.
You will not be allowed in. Now you think this
is a slippery slope. You think this is a slippery
slope and doing this to tourist and next y going
to demand you as an American citizen when you come
back into the United States, they can demand demand all

(42:22):
your social media. Well, I'll getting news for you. It's
already happening. This is a press release from I think
it's a it's a press release from the PLF Pacific
Legal Foundation as of December tenth, yesterday. This is the

(42:43):
press release if a month school superintendent file the major
property rights lawsuit today challenging US Customs and Voter Protection
police policies that violate America's Fourth Amendment rights by permitting
permitting federal agents to conduct warrantless searchers and seizures of

(43:05):
personal electronic devices and their contents. Wilma Chevaria filed the
suit after being subjected to warrantless search at Houston George
Bush Intercontinental Airport in July. I am quoting here from
Amy Peacoff. You remember Amy Peacoff. You all know Amy Amy,

(43:26):
who is an attorney with a Parsific Legal Foundation. She writes,
the government is forcing Americans to decide between traveling without
their cell phones or surrendering their constitutional right to travel internationally.
The further Amendment right to be secure in your property,
your papers, and effects, is more vital than ever in

(43:48):
the digital age, when information about every aspect of your
life is kept on your phone. Customer and Border patrol
officers cannot trample on your right as a citizen simply
because you're within a cudain distance of the border. She

(44:09):
is absolutely right. Wilma, who has been a naturalized US
citizens in twenty eighteen, was detained by a CBP without
cause while flying home from visiting his mother in Icicagua.
Federal agents told him he did not have a Fourth
Amendment right at the border, denied him the ability to

(44:32):
contact legal counsel or family, and searched his devices without
a warrant and despite his protests. Chevaria raised concerns about
agents accessing his phone and his school district issued lap
work laptop, which contained federally protected student information, and refused

(44:53):
to give agent the passwords to district devices. More than
four hours later, the federal agents released him and returned
to property they'd seized and searched. Chevaria was never given
an explanation for his detention. He was also never told
whether the agents had copied his personal data or whether

(45:14):
they access to copy confidential student data from his work laptop.
Chevalia filed a lawsuit challenging CBP policies that give federal
agents permission to perform wantless, suspicionless searches of Americans electronic
devices within a border zone encompassing all locations within one

(45:37):
hundred miles of US voters. His lawsuit aims to stop
the government from violating americans constitutional right to protection against
unreasonable searches and caesars. PLF is representing mister Chevaria free
of charge. PLF together with ij the two just amazing

(46:00):
a legal defense organization fighting for all of our rights,
taking on cases, often taking them all the way to
the Supreme Court. Let's hope that this case it's ruled
for Chevalia and that the government has to stop this.
I mean again, it's not a slippy slope. They're already
doing it. They feel like within at the border, you

(46:22):
have no rights. I don't remember in the Constitution it's
saying that Americans don't have rights at the border. I mean,
it really is scary where this country is going. Talk
about scary. So I've talked a lot. I mentioned to

(46:46):
talk somewhat about the bombing of boats that are supposed
to carrying drugs to the United States. Here's the restionnale
given by Schlichter, who's you know, Republican. I guess he's
a lawyer, he's a columnist, he's a novelist or whatever

(47:07):
this is. You know, Based on the reasoning in this post,
I don't recommend his books. Here's the irrationale in a
Twitter post. You say it's illegal to destroy doug boats,
drug boats full of drugs headed to our country? Correct?
Could we just throw boats they were carrying borels of

(47:28):
mustard gas heading to our country? Mustard gas horrible gas
that will kill you, used in World War One, used
by Saddam Hussein against the Kods. Just a horrific and
you die, and you die horrific death. Now, if you
want to take the position that we cannot destroy boats
carrying ballots of mustard gas headed towards our country, you

(47:49):
can stop right now. Please make that case to American people,
and we will make the case that we can. But
if you agree that we can destroy boats carrying ballows
of mustard gas heading to our country. Can you tell
me the difference between the drugs and the mustard gas.
I submit that the only meaningful difference is that drugs
have killed nearly one hundred thousand Americans in the last

(48:11):
year and mustard gas has killed zero Americans. Please provide
any other reason you think we should be able to
destroy ships carrying bowels a mustard gas to the United States,
but not vessels carrying drugs. There you go, there's the
logical challenge for all of you. Logical challenge, you destroy

(48:37):
mustard gas votes. I would yeah, mustard gas heading to
the United States, I would destroy them. Well, drugs are
was the mustard gas because mustard gas has not killed anybody,
and drugs have killed one hundred thousand people. But you see,
drugs don't kill people. Drugs don't kill people. I mean,

(48:59):
the only purpose of mustard gas, the only purpose a
mustard gas is to kill people only purpose. But the
purpose of drugs is to get high. Now, you might
not like the fact that people get high. Indeed, in
America we don't like it so much as we made illegal.
But the purpose of these drugs is to get people high.

(49:19):
People voluntarily voluntarily take these drugs not. Some of them
are addicted, so maybe it's not voluntary, but how did
they get addicted? Because they voluntarily took the drugs, and

(49:40):
in some cases a minority, a pretty small minority of
the cases, people die from those drugs. Now, in the
case of Venezuela and drug boats, the claim is that
they are carrying cocaine. Now, there's a number of year

(50:00):
one the drug boats from Venezuela are not heading to
the United States. So you might want to blow up
mustard gas anyway, because again, the only purpose of mustard
gas is to kill people, whereas cocaine if it's heading

(50:20):
to some Caribbean island or if it's heading to some
Latin American country or to Central American company, Yeah, some
people will die, but mainly people will get high. That's
not like mustard gas. It's very very different. Again, people
voluntarily take the drugs. People do not voluntarily expose themselves

(50:43):
to mustard gas. Now, given that it's cocaine, it's also
just not true that one hundred thousand people died last
year of cocaine. Seventy thousand died of drug overdose overall.
Most of those deaths, a significant majority of those deaths

(51:03):
were caused by fentanyl, drugs that were laced with fentanyl
or fentanl directly, not cocaine. Maybe twenty thousand people died
of cocaine overdose. Maybe that's a high number. But cocaine,
even more so than these other drugs, is a drug

(51:23):
that people take recreationally. So drugs didn't kill those people
anymore than as I'm sure Schlichter, as a good conservatives
would havemit, guns don't kill people. Guns never mind drugs.
Guns don't kill people. People kill people. And in the

(51:46):
case of drug overdoses, people commit suicide purposeful or by accident,
or directly or indirectly, they're committing suicide. So there is
no parallel between drugs and mustard gas, none whatsoever, no
logical connection between the two. In the case a mustard deck,

(52:11):
the explicit purpose of people transporting mustard gas is to
kill other people people transferring cocaine. It's to get people high,
and people people choose to get high, none of my business.
I don't really care. And if they take too much
and die, tough sad for their family. I mean imagine saying,

(52:41):
you know, I can't remember the number. The number is
some astronomical number of people, like in the tens of thousands.
You know, in one hundreds of thousands, more people die
of car accidents than actually die of drug overdose. I
think that's true. Imagine saying we should be bombing boats

(53:03):
that bring caused into America because the cause of killing people.
They're killing people by the thousands, They're dropping dead by
the thousands. I mean, not only that, we've got a

(53:26):
whole industry in the United States producing these killing machines,
producing the equivalent of mustard gas, and we're letting them
sell them domestically. I mean, immediately we should shut down
Forward and General Motors, And I mean it really is

(53:48):
absurd and ridiculous. Now, it's true, drugs are illegal, and
you know, if the drugs are really heading to the
United States, and you have reason to believe they're heading
in that dire are, then you can stop a boat
and search and confiscate the drugs and maybe arrest the
people and put them to trial. Where do you get

(54:08):
the right to kill them summarily execute them without even
searching the boat and finding the drugs. And if you
find the drugs, at least you know they're drug dealers.
Maybe you shoot them, but I still don't know height
where you get their right to do that. But now
you don't even have to prove that there were drugs
on the boat. You just blow them out of the water.
You say they were dealing drugs, but nobody knows. You

(54:30):
can't prove that. I mean, it is ridiculous that we
have now given the government, or we haven't really given it.
The government has taken upon itself the authority to kill

(54:52):
people at the president's whim. Congress has not approved this.
It's not within any law of the United States, and
it goes against many treaties that we have signed. I
put aside my opinion about international law. In the United

(55:12):
States is a signature to many treaties. If you want
to get out of those treaties, fine, but as long
as you're signatures, you should rite by them. Transporting drugs
in international waters is not a killable offense. By no

(55:40):
standard is it a killable offense. I mean, I know
I've said this before. It comes up with a lot
on my show because I find it so ridiculous. And remember,
some people, some people who claim to be objectives, think
this is the greatest president we've ever had. And it
is taken the power to help with Congress told everyone, now,

(56:03):
why has he done this? I mean, does he really
care about drugs in the United States? I'm pretty sure not.
Is it part of a move to depose, you know,
my duo. Maybe? Is it a way to be macho

(56:27):
and a man, to express masculinity and to show those
weak leftists what a real man does. Yeah, I think
very much. So. He wants to be a tough guy
and Maggie loves that. But it's also a way for
President Trump to basically say, you know, there are a

(56:51):
lot of areas here that I can just do whatever
the hell I want and you cannot stop me. I'm
just gonna do what ever the hell I want. I'm
going to blow people out of the water, and it's illegal,
I don't care. That is not a good precedence. If
you believe slopes are slippery, Oh my god, is this

(57:13):
one's slippery? I mean, and I believe many of you
might actually think this is a good idea, so I'm
afraid to actually suggest it. Actually I read this idea
in Jonah goldbook as an excellent article about this called
cocaine is not mustard gas highly recommend it, And he says,

(57:35):
what if he decides to put machine guns on the
border and just mow down illegal immigrants, just mow them down,
just kill them all? Is that okay? Some illegal immigrants,
some illegal immigrants when they entered the United States, Well,
maybe murder or rave somebody, so she would just kill

(57:56):
him in advance, not even bother. What kind of country
do we become when we start killing people before crime
is committed, or just killing them before trial. We're not
a country of laws anymore. Indeed, the kind of country

(58:16):
Trump and his supporters, including those who call him one
of the great presidents ever want, is not a country
of laws, not a country of rights. They want a
country ruled by strong men. As long as the strong
men are from the right, not the left. That's the

(58:38):
only condition. I just I don't want to be ruled
by thugs. I don't care if they're right or left.
I don't want to be ruled by monsters. I don't
care if they're right or left. I don't want to
be ruled by men, any men, anybody from any side
of the political spectrum. I want freedom. You don't get
freedom by killing people in international waters for moving drugs.

(59:06):
You don't get freedom for ignoring the law. You don't
get freedom by giving the executive branch unlimited power. I mean,
let me be clear, I think this is an impeachable offense.
I think much of what Trump has done is impeachable.
This is impeachable. Every Republican in the House and Senate

(59:28):
should vote to impeach Trump just on this basis. It
is disgusting and horrific and a violation, a violation of
the purpose of government. Protectile rights, not violate them. Put

(59:51):
a site. Even the question or whether the drugs should
be legal. They should be legal, not decriminalized. Legal. But
it's a victim of But even there, it's not the point.
Point is, even if it's a crime, you can't just
shoot people. Can't just kill them, all right. Somebody mentions

(01:00:33):
the National Security Act of nineteen forty seven, But a
lot of what the National Security Act of nineteen forty
seven is being retracted by the War Powers Act of
nineteen seventy something. But it doesn't matter. None of this
is constitutional. None of this is constitutional, None of this
is right, none of this is legal. And this is
not a war. There's no war here. We haven't declared war.

(01:00:56):
Trump hasn't declared war. You can't just clear I mean,
this is the problem with a war terrorism. You can't
just declare a a one knocko terrorism. You can't just
declare a new enemy enemy. I mean, you shouldn't have
been able to declare war terrorism. That's bizarre. Terrorism is
a strategy. It's not a it's not a place, it's

(01:01:17):
not a thing, it's not an entity. All right, good news,
change tone. So you know, there's the real big problems
in for for data centers, UH in terms of getting

(01:01:38):
power because the United States does not have a grid.
We don't have the power production to be able to
fit the needs of UH. You know, all the all
these data centers that need to be built. One you know,

(01:02:04):
suggestion is being made for years is what if we
you know, And you know a lot of people talk
about alternative energies and solar panels, and solar panels are
super cheap, so why don't we just get so good
solar panels. But solar panels are incredibly ineffective, and the
sun doesn't always shine. But you know, where the sun

(01:02:24):
does always shine, The sun does always shine. It always
shines in space, and there being these ideas of what
if we put the solar planels in space where the
sun shines twenty four seven, and then we beam the
electricity down to Earth and you know, the that will

(01:02:51):
give us plentiful energy. Now, nobody has never been able
to do that, except for this week. A Japanese company
has managed to do that. They created an array in
space and they managed to beam it down to the
electricity generated in space to Earth. It's going to be
a very expensive system. And you know when the beaming

(01:03:16):
it down to Earth is not simple, it's an expensive technology.
It's difficult to do. But that's an alternative, and that
is what if you put the entire data center in
space with the solar array to produce the electricity for it.

(01:03:37):
Now you've got twenty four to seven electricity and you've
got the consumption of power done right there in space.
And then all you have to beam down is data.
And we know how to beam down data, so data
updata down. We do that all the time with satellites.

(01:03:58):
Stall Link does it all this time. And indeed, both
Stalling SpaceX and Blue Origin and now working separately, of course,
in competition on a technology for an orbital AI data center.

(01:04:20):
SpaceX is planning to upgrade at stallink satellites to host
AI computing payloads that are being again getting energy from
the sun. It's pitching the technology as part of a
potential IPO that could value the company. I think SpaceX

(01:04:43):
generally at eight hundred billion dollars. We will see. Now,
none of this is going to be easy, right Deploying
satellites that provide AI computing capabilities is going to present
real engineering hurdles and a question of price and how

(01:05:06):
many of these can you put up there? You're going
to have to have swarms of these all connected. But
given them amount of investment going into AI right now,
and given the hoodles on Earth for these data centers,
the hoodles are huge. But now now it looks like

(01:05:33):
they're can at least try. And you know, if you've
got jip bezels and alone mask running companies looking for
the solution, you've got to believe that they're going to
have solved this problem. Now. Again, it might turn out
in the end to be too expensive, but given how
expensive it is down here, and given the fact that
to some extense, it's an impossibility down here because the

(01:05:55):
only way to do this is to quickly build a
bunch of small nuclear power plants, or somehow to get
from somewhere enough natural gas turbines to build a ton
of natural gas power plants. I don't see how you
can get enough energy to power these AI facilities. So,

(01:06:19):
you know, this is the kind of exciting stuff the
people are doing in technology. The people are imagining and
making and then turning into a reality. Just the kind
of stuff entrepreneurs are working on, you know. So there's
there's Google is working on this in addition to them.
You know, a Google executive working on this thinks that

(01:06:41):
it will take ten thousand satellites to create the computer
capacity of a gigawd data center, assuming one hundred kilowatts satellites,
you know, ten thousands sounds like a lot. It sounds
like the first demonstration of this is going to happen
in twenty twenty seven. And of course we know that

(01:07:06):
as technology advances, as demand for these things rises, as
more of these satellites might get built, as competition between start,
you know, the two space companies, accelerates, prices will drop.
So it's going to be interesting. It's going to be interesting.

(01:07:32):
So yeah, I mean it really looks like Elon Musk
is all in, so it's got a decent chance of
becoming a reality. All right, guys, that is the news
for Thursday, December eleventh. We will have a show tomorrow, Friday,
December twelfth. It'll be I think it something like three

(01:07:52):
pm East Coast time. Maybe maybe a little later, maybe
a little earlier. We'll see how the day evolves. Let's see,
we are behind in our goals. We have a first
hour goal of two hundred and fifty dollars. Every hour
we have to raise tow hundred and fifty dollars, and
we have not raised the first hour goal even though
we're now into the second hour. So please consider supporting

(01:08:14):
the show with a sticker or with a super check question.
In particular, it would be great if we had some
twenty or fifty dollars questions and stickers so we can
quickly ramp up to our goal and ultimately get to
our second hour goal, which is five hundred dollars. So

(01:08:34):
it would be great if we could ramp up and
get there in the meantime. Thank you Greg for the sticker.
Stickers are when you make a contribution to the show.
Value for value you're listening, you're gaining of value. I'm
producing the value. You know, trade with me. You can
do that with a sticker. Alan, thank you, Steven, thank you, Kim,

(01:08:54):
thank you. So this is a fairly easy way. You
don't have to think of a question. You can just
put a dollar amount and send it over. It's right
at the bottom of your chat screen. There is a
dollar sign you can click on to make it happen.
So I'm gonna remind you of our sponsors. While I'm
reminding you of your sponsors, think of a question or

(01:09:17):
think of an amount you can do. We just got
Nick just did a a a sticker and he said
it's just twentieth twentieth super chat that he's ever done
on a live stream, So a congratulations. Whoops, I don't
want to do that. What is going on here? So

(01:09:40):
congratulations to Nick. Right, let's see if everything's working. Okay,
everything's working. Let's see Lincoln just did gifted a membership.
You can also do that. You can gift memberships and
we're gonna have a member's only show on Sunday, the
Missing Link, the Missing Lincoln as an essay, We're going

(01:10:00):
to go over it's in philosophy. Who needs it. You
might be able to find it on the internet the essay.
But yeah, please please consider joining us becoming a member.
Some of you were just gifted a membership by Lincoln,
five of you, six of you, So please consider becoming

(01:10:25):
a member and joining us on Sunday for the show.
The Missing Link is a really, really crucial and incredibly
insightful essay that Ian wrote that explains a lot of
what's going on in the world around us. Liscinder says,
let's reach the superchet goal, as she put twenty euros
on that. So please listen to Lycinda and listener. It's

(01:10:46):
good to see you here. Haven't seen you in a while. Thanks,
thanks for being here, Thanks for support, thanks for joining us.
Let's see Joseph just did a stick. Hey did ninety
nine cents and that's his third on our live stream,
So thank you, Joseph. Let me remind you of our
of our sponsors. The Imand Institute is a sponsor of

(01:11:09):
the show, and it was to remind you that iron
Rand Life classes start in January. You can sign up
for those classes, and unlike aar you you don't have
to apply to them. You just sign up. Anybody can
take them. You can attend life classes and get feedback
from professors by doing homework, or you can take the
class anytime you want and not even do homework if

(01:11:32):
you don't want to. You can even get a coach
that will, you know, be with you and provide study
coaching and life coaching as a freebie for being for
being part of iron rand AOI Live. There are classes

(01:11:53):
on the three different courses. The professors are amazing. Sign up.
You can get more information at Inran dot org slash
start here, Ironran dot oak slash start here, and you
can get a ten percent discount for being a you
on book show listener. That's twenty six ybs ten. Twenty

(01:12:14):
six ybs ten. All right, or so I want to
mention handershot wealth dot com slash ybs. Handershot wealth dot
com slash ybs. They have products that can really save
some of you, not all of you, some of you
huge amount of money on your capital gains, taxes, on

(01:12:38):
your tax liability if you're about to sell a business,
or you're about to sell a appreciated stock portfolio or
just a stock. If you bought in Vidia a long
time ago and have made a fortune on in video,
but now you're going to have to share that fortune
with the government. Contact handish out wealth and see if
you can shield some of that some of that capital

(01:13:01):
gains from taxes, maybe all of it. Even you can
hear an interview that Robert and I do about this.
You can see it on YouTube on in my playlists
under sponsors the Sponsors playlist. I think you'll enjoy the interview,
even if you're not. This is not relevant, the product

(01:13:24):
is not relevant for you. You'll enjoy the interview. Uh.
You know, Robert's incredibly smart, very knowledgeable, and and and
you'll learn a lot about this. This is not about
a conversion. This is a lot more complex than that
and really requires that you have a significant amount of
money at stake. Check it out, Check check out my
discussion with Robert. Check out understud wealth dot com slash

(01:13:45):
webs Finally, also we have Alex Epstein. Alex Epstein is
the best mind out there, the best advocate out there
for freedom and energy, uh, for freedom to produce energy.
He would solve the AI data center problem quite quickly

(01:14:07):
and easily. He's an advocate for nuclear and advocate for
more use of ourself fuels. So check out alex Epstein
dot subsect dot com, alex Epstein dot subsect dot com.
And finally, Michael Williams is the owner and the mind
behind Defenders of Capitalism dot com. Defenders of Capitalism dot

(01:14:31):
com a program I'm being involved with for what now
twenty years or so and where we defend capitalism as
part of a leadership program with the Rockies in Colorado.
Michael does a great job of organizing and teaching, organizing
the program, teaching, inviting speakers like me to come in

(01:14:52):
and teach, and it you know, it's unmatched. I don't
think the program they have their in terms of it's
the Defensive Capitalism. So check it out Defensive Capitalism dot com.
All right, Wow, James James has just come in with
two fifty dollars stickers. Thank you, James. I really really

(01:15:13):
really really really appreciate that. That is fantastic. Thank you,
thank you, thank you. All Right, a couple more announcements,
few more announcements, and then we'll go on. Then we'll
start with the with the answering the questions. One if
you want to become a monthly support of the show,
which is great because it's predictable. I know exactly what's coming.

(01:15:34):
It makes doing the show much much easier. Then please
consider going to ybs sorry to Patreon dot com and
checking out your one book show and becoming a monthly supporter.
That is that is one second on December thirty first,

(01:15:55):
I would be doing the Year and show, which will
be twenty twenty five, Year in a Review, twenty twenty six,
looking into the future. And we also make it a
big fundraising show. So this is show in which I
hope to raise I don't know, fifteen twenty thousand dollars,
which is pretty crazy if you think about it. Right,
we're talking about three hundred dollars right now, four hundred

(01:16:17):
dollars maybe to raise five hundred dollars in two hours
to Asia. We'll go four hours, but we're not going
to raise cold and fifty an hour. The goal there
is to raise something like five thousand dollars an hour.
So I'm going to need all of your help, those
of you on live now, all of you people listening
by podcast or listening to YouTube after the fact, I

(01:16:40):
need you to be like participants. I need you to
show up and be there, even if it's ten minutes
enough time to do a super chat and head on
your way. But it's going to be a fun show.
It usually is entertaining, it's usually fun. It's usually you know,
it's New Year's Eve, so we have a good time.

(01:17:01):
We need all hands on bak, as Lincoln says, to
be this. If you listen just on a podcast, try
to carve out some time that day to come online.
If you watch the YouTube show after the fact, please
cove out some time to try to be there live.
We're going to need everybody, you know, all typically, you know,
one of my shows are watch by you know, between

(01:17:24):
two to three thousand people. The New Year's Eve show
ultimately is watched by usually over three thousand people. We
need all those three thousand people to be on live
at some point during the four hours. The show will
start at one pm East Coast time and go for
four hours until five pm and maybe a little longer
if we need to, right any a little longer, and

(01:17:46):
any amount helps. Any amount will help. So don't feel
like if you can't do five hundred dollars, you can't
do anything. And look, if you want to do more
than five hundred dollars, and in the past people have said, look,
I want to do more than five hundred dollars, and
YouTube limits us to five hundred dollars. If you want
to do that, then you can. You can at any
time between now and the thirty first go to go

(01:18:08):
to PayPal, you on book show, or to a Patreon
and do a one time contribution of whatever amount you
want to do and I will count it towards our
New Year's Eve total. But so if you want to
do a thousand dollars, ten thousand dollars, whatever you want
to do, I'm not kidding about the ten thousand, then

(01:18:32):
you can do it by going to PayPal and just
making a one time contribution of whatever amount you want
that is over the five hundred dollars limit that PayPal has,
so that sorry YouTube has, so please consider doing that
as well and supporting the show so we can make
make our targets for the year one more. I've got

(01:18:54):
a lot of announcements. We're going to make one more
and then we'll make the other one tomorrow. I'm gonna
be in Austin in February, first week in February, and
I've got some time. So I thought, what if we
did like some kind of seminar while I'm in Austin,

(01:19:17):
so I've done public speaking seminars. So if the people
out there know a lot of my listeners live in Austin,
but maybe in Texas more broadly, maybe people would be
willing to come in. And so here's the question, would
you be willing to come and participate in a public
speaking seminar? The price for something like that would probably
be you know, five six, you know, probably somewhere between

(01:19:41):
four to six hours, and a public speaking seminar would
probably be something like seven out and fifty dollars a person,
and it will be small. All of these things I'm
going to suggest they're going to be small. So lots
of one on one time available. So if you you're interested,
please drop me an email, you run at your on

(01:20:03):
bookshow dot com. You run at your on bookshow dot
com if you're interested. Now, the other option, instead of
doing a public speaking seminar, we could do a seminar.
We could do something like a super chat. We could
do we could do a like four or five hours
with a small group like eight people, ten people. Each

(01:20:27):
one of you submit a certain number of questions in
advance and then I'll answer questions live with you and
interact and it won't be just me answering the question,
but you can ask follow ups and we can get
into a discussion about it, and we can actually have
like little seminars on this. But you get to some
of the topics, it'll be the eight people there who
write the topics again probably charge something like five hundred

(01:20:51):
dollars or something like that per person. But if you
would be interested in something like that, drop me an email.
So if you're interested in coming to either one of
these over them at anything else. If you have another
idea of another kind of seminar that I could give
something on capitalism, lots of things, right, then say yes,
I'll come to Austin or I'm in Austin. I'm willing

(01:21:12):
to pay, and this is the topics I'm interested in
public speaking, Q and A, capitalism, whatever you know, or
just one of the topics. And then maybe I'll do
one seminar if there's enough demand, maybe I'll do two seminos.
We'll see, and you know, we'll do it in Austin.

(01:21:32):
It's the first week in fibruarlso be giving a talk
in Austin that week on the Thursday night, I'll be
giving a talk at the University of Texas in Austin.
More information about that will be later. And yeah, so

(01:21:56):
let me know if you'd like to do a public
speaking or you and A like seminar, or if you'd
let you know Q and A, will we just we
hang out and I answer questions or capitalism seminar, you
know how to defend capitalism? Four hours on how to
defend capitalism? Any one of those topics. Happy to do
it again between five hundred and seven hundred fifty dollars.

(01:22:18):
It would be the cost. And I won't go more
than ten people. No more than ten people, So it'll
be a small group. It'll be fun and it'll be
it'll be great. It'd be great time to interact buses.
You need to share the names of the top ten
YouTube contributors to twenty twenty five. I wonder if I'm there.

(01:22:40):
YouTube won't give me that info. I wish YouTube gave
me that info, and I don't have it, but I
could pretty much gemantee balls that you are not there, Sally,
your way down on the list, Like you know, Michael
is going to be there. Although Michael's not here today.

(01:23:01):
Andrew would be there, Wes would be there, of course,
Troy from Australia would be there. And you know, we've
got a bunch of other people buzz. Yeah, not the
top ten, maybe in the top hundred, all right, but
you know there's still time, exactly, there is still time.
There's still time. I think if you did five hundred

(01:23:23):
dollars every show between now and the thirty first you
could you could top the list. Yeah, I think I
think you can. You would definitely be in the top ten.
All right, guys, thank you. In the meantime, you guys
have come through, so we're in much better shape, but
still a ways to go to get to the second

(01:23:47):
hour goal. There's more gifting going on, more more. Oh, buzz,
you got a member a membership gift. Look at that
it buzz got a membership gift. So okay, we've got
gifting going on and members ships. We'll have a members
only show on Sunday. Now that you're a member, you
can also go and access all the members only shows
that have done in the past and you can listen

(01:24:08):
to them all. What do we want to say that
we still have about one hundred dollars to go to
one hundred and forty three dollars to go, sorry, one
hundred and forty three dollars to go to get to
our five hundred dollars second hour goal. I thought I

(01:24:29):
changed that a five hundred hundred to get back to
seven to fifty A right, there we go. That's better.
So one hundred and forty three dollars to go? All right?
Let us start with fifty dollars? Did I thank everybody?
I thank James for his one hundred dollars. That's that's great, Lan,
thank you. I really appreciate the sticker, and I think
I got everybody else all right, Andrew, fifty dollars A

(01:24:52):
point inspired by your excellent analysis a Piers Morgan Foenttis
interview appeasing annihilist destroys their pisa. If due to naivete
or fear, one gives a nihilist and all the branch,
he will use it to bring one to your knees
over time. Absolutely, remember, you can't shame a nihilist, You
can't embarrass a nihilist. You can't catch him at a lie,

(01:25:16):
you can't catch him at a contradiction. You know, all
of those things are just yeah. I contract myself. So
what that's exactly what we nihilists do. I lie, Yeah,
I lie all the time, big deal. I changed my mind, sure,
absolutely all the time. But I'm not telling you which

(01:25:39):
one of my minds is the one that I really think.
There's no gotcha for a nihilist. The only thing you
can do, hope to do, is to show that he
has nothing positive to offer the world, no positive values

(01:26:00):
to fight for, no positive vision under which we should live,
that he has no productive, constructive project. That's all you
can hope to do. And that's tough because, again, particularly

(01:26:20):
if Fuentas he's smart, he's really really smart, the best
thing is to ignore him, or to show his contradictions
to the better people so that they see it, to
show his lies to people who care, but not in
front of him, because he'll just twist them and make

(01:26:43):
them funny and make them entertaining and make you look
like a fool. Buzz Thank you for the sticker. It's
going to take a lot of stickers like that to
get you into the top ten. But you know I've
got time. I'm patient, all right, not to have an algorithm.

(01:27:07):
Why don't we have any charismatic free market people other
than Malay. With a strong personality and the wrong ideas,
Mega has gotten pretty far. Imagine a strong personality with
the right ideas, we would be unstoppable. No, we would not.
This is not about personality. This is not about so
called charisma. Milay was successful on Argentina because he took

(01:27:32):
He was in a country there was desperate on its knees,
willing to be radical because it had no option, because
it was dying. America is not dying. America has lots
of options. And the reason Mago's successful is not because
of personality. The reason MAGO is successful because it plays

(01:27:57):
on the philosophy of the culture. It plays on the religion,
It plays on the conspiracies theories that already existed. It
plays on emotionalism. Objectivism is not taking off because it's
way too challenging. We're telling people to reject their religion

(01:28:26):
to embrace a morality of self interest that is about
as foreign as bizarre science fiction stuff anybody's ever heard.
We're telling them to embrace Lazefi capitalism, which nobody supports.
That's crazy radical stuff, so it has nothing to do.

(01:28:47):
We could be the most charismatic, best marketing people in
the world. Maybe we'd be growing a little bit faster
than we are right now, but not by a huge amount.

(01:29:07):
All right, let's see, Andrew. It has always fascinated me
that Rand said that sense of life was preconceptual. It
seems to imply forming a deep general attitude about the
universe based on perception. Is that right? Well, it's based

(01:29:38):
on not having a full understanding of what you're doing,
a coming to conclusions about the world, about life, about
yourself before you have the full conceptual ability to think

(01:30:03):
it through, to introspect, to really logically rationally pass it out,
make it fully conceptual. And we know this. Children come
to all kinds of conclusions all the time. You don't
want to say that just on the perceptual level, but
they're not quite conceptual. They're not reasoning it through. There's

(01:30:26):
some way in between. And that's also the time in
which we create our sense of life. It's based on
the the you know, the emotions which are based on
the conclusions that we come to as we are growing up,

(01:30:46):
as we are making ourselves into what we are. Emotions
come from conclusions, not from necessarily thought, not thought in
the fully When she means conceptual. She means a logical
rational argument. Four. So a dog attacks me when I'm three.
It doesn't really bite me. It just jumps on me

(01:31:08):
and it balks a lot. And I look at the
dog and I say, ooh, dog, scary, hurt me. I mean,
that's those all concepts, right, But it's not a fully
thought out thing. And I go, Doug's bad. That's a
conclusion I come to. Now. I develop an emotion of
fear every time I see a dog. Maybe right, but

(01:31:31):
that's how it would work. And then so I no,
I step back every time I see a dog. And
that's now a little bit of part of my emotional baggage.
Sense of life is a lot of that, and you know,

(01:31:54):
building up as we grow as we go and now,
and that might be when I'm three, but something might
happen when I'm eight. I look around and I see
skyscrapers and I go, oh, wow, cool, those are really cool.
Those skyscrapers. Wow, it took people. That was hard to build.

(01:32:15):
That's amazing. Touches the sky cool. I mean, that's not
a fully thought out what it is, but it's you know,
it's you have to say, it's preconceptual, but it's it's
the right conclusion and it's gonna, you know, play into

(01:32:39):
you know, what your emotions are going to be, and
ultimately into your sense of life. But sense of life
is not an easy concept at all to grasp. Understand, Lourie,
I'm looking for a new car. Why do you what
do you think about Audi's? Research says they're expensive to maintain.

(01:33:01):
So I owned an Audi for god, how many years
did I own my Audi? I don't know, six seven years.
I had two Audi's, same model. I loved the car,
you know, so I bought I think I leased the
first one and then I released it, or I bought
a NW one or whatever. I think the beautiful cause

(01:33:21):
Audi pays a huge amount of attention to the details.
Look all German cause expensive to maintain. I think Audi
is probably cheaper than BMW's to maintain. But there's not
a lot of maintenance. I think if you buy a
new Audi, the first couple of years of maintenance a
free kind of the standard maintenance. They don't break down,

(01:33:42):
I mean almost no cause breakdown anymore. New cause breakdown anymore.
They drive, you know, BMW is a little too particularly
if you're not into sports cars. The little too spotty
and the suspension is a little too rough if you're
also commuting, if you're also using the crowd of community,

(01:34:04):
Mercedes are too soft. Audi's like just the right balance
between really sporty and comfortable, and you can always put
them in sports mode and then they become like BMW's.
I love my Audi. At a two do Audi S
five there was just gorgeous red interior, kind of dark

(01:34:24):
gray exterior grayish greenish. Yeah, great car, great car. So
I haven't seen the latest Audi's interiors. Last time I
had an Audi was I sold my Audi in twenty eighteen.
I think maybe something like that. When I moved to

(01:34:45):
Puerto Rico, I sold my Audi. So I don't have
an Audi anymore. Jennifer, you're on. I have only seen
you drink a little a couple of times, and I
think I remember that it seemed to enhance your normal
the witty self. I don't think that's true. I think

(01:35:06):
it's just that the setting is. You know, if I drink,
I usually I am drinking over dinner and the setting is
a relaxing setting. And I think it's just the relaxing
because you know, you become more relaxed than Therefore, maybe
I become wittier. Maybe that's the case. I don't think
it's the alcohol. I don't get a sense that the alcohol, uh,

(01:35:29):
that the alcohol would affect it, Robert Gorman says, and
he knows right, He says, a sort of a real experience, uh,
that I would become a great Communist Party Chinese Communist
Party big wig, because they all drive black outis. But
I don't like black cars generally. Yeah, I want to

(01:35:49):
I want color, right, I want I wanna I want
my gray or red with red interior. I want I
want a red OUTI or something like that. But you know, yeah,
I mean that would be cool to be a Chinese
Communist Party big week. That would be that would be
kind of cool. Yeah, Audi's Audi is a great cause.

(01:36:11):
So you have to give you have to give the
Chinese Communist Party, I guess, credit for having good taste
and cause. All right, let's see what do we have.
So now we're about one hundred dollars short of our
five hundred dollars goal. So thank you. We keep chipping
away with this. This is great. Andrew likes Jaguars. Nah,

(01:36:34):
now Jaggers are not well made, cause I don't think Again,
my experience is jagguars is very old, so maybe they're better. Now.
Look all the waymos, all the weymos are jaguars. All
the waymos are jaguars. And uh, they obviously are incredibly dependable.
They do a lot of miles and they have no drivers.

(01:36:55):
So I'm trying to think of a you know, I
have an I have and really looked into buying a
car in a long long time. So, uh, Lincoln has
a red W beetle. Oh wow, there's a VW beetle. Okay,
that doodle bunny. Since we're moving so far away from capitalism,

(01:37:17):
shouldn't we be getting poorer every generation, not richer. No,
because we're still We've still got enough freedom that we
can still grow nowhere knee potential nowhere as much as
we should, but we can grow the reality is that
as we move away from capitalism, if you will, the

(01:37:40):
distribution of wealth in our world becomes less just there's
much more corruption, a lot of entrepreneurs that would be
successful or not. But we're not yet at the level
where we would become poorer. I mean, look at Europe,
I mean, most European countries are growing, are becoming rich

(01:38:00):
very slowly, but they're not shrinking. China is becoming richer.
So it doesn't take a lot of freedom to grow economically.
It takes some, but not a lot. You have to
really clam down on freedom to actually cause a shrinkage
of the economy. Now, of course, we're also setting ourselves

(01:38:23):
up with a potential economic catastrophe like a major accession
or depression, which would make us poorer. But I don't
see that anywhere in the near future. Liam Trump isn't important.
The system is the system, purpose is the protection of
individual rights. Trump has made it explicitly clear this system

(01:38:47):
no longer exists. Yeah, I mean, that's what makes Trump importance.
What makes Trump important is these that he is eviscerating
the system, and by doing so, he is making himself important,
you know, maybe one of the most influential consequential presidents

(01:39:10):
in American history. That for sure. That for sure. Trump
is apparently allowing the construction of ten new nuclear power
plants in the US. Is this Alex Epstein's influence. Yeah,
to some extent. I'm sure it's Alex's influence. There are
a lot of other people. There's a lot of money

(01:39:33):
trying to influence this, but a lot of it is
become ballsier, become more confident, become has more confidence because
of Alex. But I'm also not yet. I haven't yet
seen the actual permissions being given for ten new nuclear
pop plans. That is the speculation about that, the plans,

(01:39:56):
it's in the it's a motion, all of this, but
actually happening. We will see. I'm waiting to see construction start,
not to have his algorithm. How's Mila doing? Does he
have the votes for more radical market reforms? Yes, so
I think he's doing well. I don't know that the
market reforms are being in place put in place yet.

(01:40:17):
I'm not sure the new parliament is in office. It
might only come in January one, I don't know. But yeah,
he's all the pieces in play for next year to
be a really radical year in Argentina. I'm looking forward
to it, Bonnie. Any link of Elliott management and Trump
Tanker seizure, not that I know of. I don't know

(01:40:39):
of any link. Happa Campbell was has humanity outgrown communism Nazism?
We just haven't figured out how to advance from mixed
economy quasi fascism. People will tolerate a putin Ukshi. They
won't tolerate Hitler installed in two point zero. I mean,

(01:41:01):
I hope that is true. I'm not one hundred percent
sure that is true, but I hope that is true,
and you know, so they'll tolerate like this, make sure.
I think the advantage of particularly Akshi may be a
putin is that they can still grow the economy in
spite of being authoritarian, at least for a while, and

(01:41:25):
people value living in a place that's getting richer. James,
does Trump have an authoritarian project or is it the
evil people around him steering him towards particular policies. I
definitely think Trump is an authoritarian by temperament, by you know,

(01:41:52):
just by his beliefs, by his every fiber's body is authoritarian.
I think that the way it manifests itself is guy
is because I don't think he's particularly intelligent or he
cares that much. I think is dictated by the people
around him who have a plan, who have a project,

(01:42:12):
and who are thinking also how Trump can do things
that are going to set up the next president perfectly
to take it to the next level. In a much
more thoughtful way. So Trump is setting JD. Van's up
to be much more ruthless in a sense of a

(01:42:34):
real plan of authoritarianism. And I think the people around
him are setting that up by creating particular policies, by
tearing the system down. Trump just is a thug. He
just wants what he wants. He's not more than that. Andrew,
have the civil libertarians ultimately failed to safeguard our civil rights?

(01:42:58):
If so, why were they not up to the task. Well,
because because once the American people start valuing our civil rights,
those rights would go away. Once they start valuing those rights,

(01:43:19):
the political class won't feel like they have to abide
by them. And to really defend those rights you need
a proper philosophy, and the civil libertarians never had that.
So no, our civil rights are eroting, clearly evoting, and
they will continue to erode under this administration and future administrations.

(01:43:44):
There's just nobody to stand up for them. Cstn fuck
who Hi doctor Brook You mentioned some features of capitalism
that are hard to asure in economic terms, running water
and electricity. Also want to point out Google maps in

(01:44:05):
real time translation? Yeah, absolutely, I mean you can measure
them in dollars, Like what's Google Maps worth to you?
We don't know because you never bought it, it's always
been offered for free. Or search Google Search, or real
time translation. All these things are unbelievably valuable. They enhance

(01:44:25):
our life, Yet as economists, we don't have any way
to measure their real value to our lives. And that's
why our lives are even better than the numbers would suggest,
because we don't know how to measure the things that are,
to some extent, the most important things that capitalism has
provided us. Crypto fanatic, how can Foentis, despite being banned

(01:44:51):
from everything, achieves greater impact in ten years than the
entire objectivist movement in sixty because he's playing to the crowd.
He's playing to the audience. He hasn't he hasn't achieved anything.

(01:45:12):
He's got a big crowd, and he has an impact.
But that impact is nihilistic, and nihilism sells objectivism, doesn't.
I mean, I don't know you're comparing, you're comparing a
philosophy to an anti philosophy. Well, it turns out that

(01:45:32):
given the culture, given a progressive education, given uh, you know,
the state of philosophy over the last two hundred years.
Given the mixed economy, nihilistic ideas sell more than philosophical ones.
I don't know why that surprises anybody. And I know

(01:45:53):
a question like this is meant to say, you know
your objectives and failures in some way, no or not.
You know, the Nazis are one most successful than objectivists.
They actually ruled the country. They did it very quickly.
You know, objectivism has been around for a long long time.
Amount of count has been far more successful than objectivism.

(01:46:16):
Postmodernism has been more successful in objectivism. Socialism has been
more successful in objectivism. Yeah, because they're all cater to
the existing philosophy. They all cater to Christianity basically, So yeah,
it's easy being them. It's harder to be revolutionary. Frantasies

(01:46:38):
are nothing. Objectivism is a revolutionary philosophy. It challenges every
idea that people hold. And I know some of you
think that it should be easy to convince people. If
only we had the right charismatic people, if only we
had the right humor, if ally we did short videos,

(01:46:59):
if only we did vended Pepper the fog i phony,
wead whatever we would succeed. Bullshit. All of that is bullshit,
and it shows and lack of understanding of the role
of ideas in man's mind, a lack of understanding the
role of ideas in history, how ideas work, how ideas function,
and what ideas actually how they work in the culture.

(01:47:24):
Not to say that everything that the objective's movement has
done is being perfect or one hundred percent or optimal
or anything like that, probably hasn't. But to compare us
to Frentis is a joke. Andrew. If a character of

(01:47:45):
literature is given the characteristics of God, he'd be a villain. Yeah. Yeah,
I mean somebody who wants you to sacrifice for him,
somebody who wants you to who judges you base don
how much you supplicate yourself to him. Yeah, I mean,
certainly a villain. God is a villain for Lincoln. Lincoln,

(01:48:11):
I'm a little worried about how much money you're spending
on the super chats, given that you're a student and
given your plans, so you know, I don't know what
your financials are, but I'm just gonna express my concern
and then you can do with it what you want.
Lincoln says, for finishing my first semester of college. Well,
three point five GPA on a college admission and hopefully

(01:48:33):
AOI incubated acceptance. I found out, I find out in
a few days. Good luck and congratulations on the good stuff. Hope,
hope you get what you want in terms of what
you find out in a few days. Lincolns is definitely
looking into moving to Austin after college. Tucson is a

(01:48:54):
nice area like Austin, and it's a college town dominated
by state college, but there's no tech sector or art
music scene like Austin. Austin has cheaper rents since their
housing bubble deflated. Seven and fifty dollar rent in Austin, now, well,
I mean that's for a pretty small place, would be
my guess. I remember paying four hundred dollars a month

(01:49:18):
rent in Austin for a two and a half bedroom,
two and a half bedroom place had a master bedroom,
a kid's bedroom, and a closed off balcony which became
my office. And we lived there and loved that little

(01:49:39):
apartment all right. A room says, just came back from Bangkok.
Loved it. Good food available better than the US. Yeah,
the food and bank looks amazing. Can you speak more
towards the dominant philosophy and political economy forecast of the country.
Good place to move well. I mean, they've involved in
a kind of a military struggle right now with Cambodia,
which is no good. It's a very politically, very unstable place.

(01:50:06):
They have a monarch who is symbolic but who can
pull the strings in the background if he doesn't like
a government. They have a very active military that sometimes
overthrows the government. They have a generally, you know, a
good respect for property rights and things like that, but
it's also quite corrupt. So if you pay the right people,

(01:50:26):
you get what you want. Yeah, I mean, I don't
know a lot about Thailand. It's it's growing economically, although
economic growth has declined significantly over the last few years
and it's only growing in one or two percent, not
significant for country that poor. They should be going at

(01:50:48):
five six ten a year. Education is not big there.
There's still immense poverty in the countryside. People incredibly friendly
in spite of the poverty. So it's in that sense
it's a great place. The food is fantastic, it's cheap
to live there. You could be you could be a

(01:51:09):
really good you know, a digital nomn there for a while,
I think, But but yeah, you know, it's it's it's
you know, I don't know. The police are probably quite corrupt.
I've read some novels about it. I forget the names
of the novels about Thailand, which will really interesting. Buddhism
plays a big role there, Buddhist philosophy, this suddenly element

(01:51:33):
of passivity I told you about. I think last time
we talked about last show something about kind of a
lot of prostitution, partially because they have a very loose
attitude towards sex that I think comes from the Buddhism.
But yeah, real sex culture and sex shows and clubs

(01:51:56):
and prostitutions is cheap and easy and beautiful goals and
you know. But but also but again also like lady
boys and and all kinds of stuff, you can pretty
much get anything you want, sou but it's it's colorful,

(01:52:17):
it's bright. I mean, I find that people incredibly. The
best service I've ever had is at a in a
Thai hotel. Thai hotels, the service is just unbelievable, primarily
because of how how what do you call it? How
friendly they are uh and and luxurious. A lot of
the hotels are super luxury, super luxury make five stars

(01:52:37):
look like nothing. Uh and and yet reasonable reasonably priced.
So because there's a lot of hotels, there's a lot
of competition anyway, Yeah, and and Bangkok is interesting, but
then you've got the North Chang Mai, which is really interesting.
And then you've got Fu Caut've a beautiful cat but
here it's beautiful, and you've got the whole coastline. And

(01:52:59):
then I was in a place called Cosamoi, which is
an island, which is beautiful. So yeah, I mean, there's
a lot to see in Thailand. It's an impressive place.
I'd like to go back someday. I'm not sure I will,
but i'd like to nobody inviting me to give a
talk in Thailand. Maybe a room if you move there,
you can organize a talk for me in Thailand. Lincoln,
do you think a nineteen twenty nine style collapse in

(01:53:21):
the economy is likely in the next decade, well one
hundred years removed from it and almost twenty years from eight. No,
I don't think we're going to see nineteen twenty nine collapses,
partially because we now understand how to avoid them, not
in a healthy way, not in a sense of old
free markets and that's how you avoid them. But in

(01:53:44):
a sense of you know, in a sense of the
FED knows how not to make the mistakes it made
in nineteen twenty nine, and we saw that in two
thousand and eight. So we had a deep crisis in

(01:54:04):
twenty two thousand and eight, but at the end of
the day, we came out of it okay, at least
some people came out of it okay, and we took
on more debt, and you know, so we're not going
to get a crisis like that. I mean, if we
get a crisis, it's going to be related to sovereign debt.

(01:54:25):
It's going to be related to the amount of debt
the US government holds. That's the big crisis in the
future and how it manifests itself. I do not know.
It could be inflationary. I don't think you'll see default.
But that's the kind of crisis. It's not going to
look like two thousand and eight. It's not going to
look like nineteen twenty nine. And if it does, then

(01:54:46):
we know how to deal with it. Lincoln continues with
the marketing real estate values where they are the national
DEBTA thirty three trillion, sod security going bankrupt and an
idiot in the white House, so security will not go bankrupt.
While the idiot is in the white House. There is
thirty three trillion, and yet people mostly are still willing
to lend us money and to buy that debt. And

(01:55:10):
you know, I don't know real estate is that high
outside of certain areas and certain homes. But a commercial
real estate, I don't think it's very expensive. It's quite cheap. Actually,
stock market is expensive. So let's say it's talk about
goes down twenty five percent. Is that a disaster? No,
I mean it's unpleasant. I won't like it, but it's

(01:55:33):
not a disaster. Oi KG. What is your opinion on
how objectivists could support Trump when everything he does and
says is the opposite of objectivism. I think some people
are consumed with fear and with hate of the left,

(01:55:58):
and that fear, which leads to hatred of the left,
makes a strong man like Trump, who seems to be
at least standing up to the left somewhat appealing. That's
the best I can do. And some of them just

(01:56:21):
have no clue what objectivism is about. Lincoln says he's
not optimistic about the future and that he's getting married,
he's planning a family, he's going to move to Austin,
He's gonna be involved in some startup. If this is
what pessimism looks like, I don't know what optimism looks like, Lincoln.

(01:56:42):
So listen to I have. I started having multiple dreams
about watching YBS for some reason. The life chat in
my dreams still has Scott in it. Any advice in
getting Scott out, Well, I think now that you've verbalized it,

(01:57:04):
I think that's going to help. And so just just
talking about it helps. What else can we do to
help listen to get Scott out of her dreams? Yeah,
I mean, I think just participating in the chat now
without Scott is going to recondition your mind to him

(01:57:28):
not being here. Lincoln. Speaking of carse, I'd love to
rebuy the same model as my dad's first off for him,
a sixty eight Firebird convertible. Very expensive, so probably a
retirement gift. That sounds cool. That sounds cool those big

(01:57:48):
muscle cars of the past that was the cool. Now
my kind of car, but I understand the cool factor. Andrew,
did you make the point at a recent an event
that there's no social consciousness, and got a big counter reaction.
What's the significance of that? Did I get a counter reaction?
I don't remember getting a counter reaction. I often make

(01:58:11):
that point that there's no collective consciousness, that there's no
social whatever, but I don't remember. I'm sorry, I don't
remember the getting a counter reaction. Michael other Pacific Legal Foundation,
Industrute for Justice, worried they can't stop the authoritarianism. The

(01:58:31):
person you had on from IJ a little while ago
seemed pretty optimistic. Is he still? That was Larry He's
from He's actually from Pacific Legal Foundation, Larry Saltzman. And
I also had Simpson and Steve Simpson and both of
them Pacific Legal Foundation, and both of them was optimistic.
And I have no reason to believe that the optimism

(01:58:52):
has changed. I think they see beyond Trump. I think
they think that I think they think the it's generally healthy.
I think they think that, you know, we're good over this,
and that people like JD. Vance won't get elected ultimately,

(01:59:13):
but you know, we'll have to have them on again
and ask them Lincoln. Optimism for me is betting my
life saving on a startup living on Rahmen for years
and hoping for a nine figure exit from Google. Yeah,
but the world has to exist for that to happen.
We can't be in a Great Depression. Although there was
a lot of innovation and a lot of startups. A

(01:59:36):
lot of the innovation and the auto industry happened during
the Great Depression, so maybe maybe that's still possible. Gail,
thank you for the stiker, Tony, thank you for the sticker.
And Lincoln says, a well paid career in law or
tech is my pessimism. That's pretty pessimistic. I have to say.
That's awful. All right, guys, thank you, Thanks to all

(01:59:57):
the Supershadows. Really appreciate it. Thank you all for being here.
We hit the two hour mark exactly. I will see
you all tomorrow and over the weekend. Both Saturday and
Sunday that we show. Sundays will be a members only.
Please get back to me if you'd like to participate
in one of the events in Austin, get back to
me about I mean it will be during the day.

(02:00:20):
It will be during a day on a weekday, so
it will mean taking some time off of work, so
take that into ACOLM. But if you're willing to do it,
you know, let me know, send me an email and
if I have enough interest, if we get five six people,
then I'll do it. So rally your friends. There's so
many objectives in Austin now that hopefully we can get

(02:00:42):
a group together that will do something. I can make
a little bit of money and also get together with
you guys at the same time. See guys, Frederick, thank
you for the sticker. I appreciate it. Thank you guys
for everything. I will see you tomorrow. By

All Episodes

Warner Deal; Obamacare; Oil Tanker; Indiana; Border Search; Drugs; Space | Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Betrayal: Weekly

.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;}Warner Deal; Obamacare; Oil Tanker; Indiana; Border Search; Drugs; Space | Yaron Brook Show