Episode #220 - Vince Lanci and The New American ATM Economy

Vince Lanci returns to the podcast to follow up on Episode #213's discussion with Caitlin Long.  Vince lays out his argument for why the GENIUS Bill, stablecoins, and crypto will usher in a new era of financial terms enforced this time by the US vs. City of London.  

It's the flipside to the ideas floated by Ms. Long.   In short, dollar bulls and bears may in fact be right... but for reasons you haven't truly thought of yet.

Show Notes:
Ep#213 Caitlin Long and the Financial Crisis that Wasn't

VBL's GoldFix
Vince on X

Tom on X
GGNG Patreon

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:19):
Hello, and welcome to the Gold, Goats and Guns Podcast
for June second, twenty twenty five.

Speaker 2 (00:23):
My name Ismolongo. We have a lot to talk about.

Speaker 1 (00:25):
It is episode two twenty and I have with me
very popular guests who you know, Uh gave me the.

Speaker 2 (00:31):
Great compliment the other day saying, damn good, the only
guy I want to talk to you anymore. So Vince
Launchi is back.

Speaker 3 (00:37):
And I didn't say that. That was another.

Speaker 2 (00:41):
Exactly now, that was another talk again, thanks Vince.

Speaker 1 (00:44):
I appreciate that. Like, no, it was a just so
you guys know, like Vince and I chat privately all
the time, and it's and it's and and invariably the
texture hilarious.

Speaker 2 (00:54):
Vince. How are you.

Speaker 3 (00:56):
I'm good, Uh, good to be back and good to
you back from from Canada. I heard you killed it
with your speech, with your talk. Speech is probably not
the right word, but you with your talk.

Speaker 1 (01:08):
It was it was a it was a piece of rhetoric,
let's just put it that way, you know that, And
it was and it was a constructive piece of rhetoric.
And yeah, I think it did go very very well.
It is really sad that you couldn't join us for Cornerstone,
not the least of which I think it was just
you would have really found like a whole like group
of people that were just like they're your people. Then

(01:29):
it was a good time and we would have loved
to have had you at the the G, G and
G brunch that we did. You know, Marty Armstrong was there,
Alex Kraner was there. You know, we were all there,
had barbecue, chatted, had a great time and it was
it was, it was, it was amazing and I really
enjoyed it. And shout out to Sean Newman as always,
Sean did a great job putting everything together. Shout out

(01:50):
to the Guy's Skull Silver Bowl as well. I just
got done doing two hours with Sean talking about I
just blew his mind making getting him to Refillip K.

Speaker 2 (01:58):
Dick for the first time, and he's like, oh my.

Speaker 1 (02:00):
God, reading Philip reading Philip K.

Speaker 2 (02:04):
Dick for the first time. The writer I had.

Speaker 1 (02:07):
My speech was centered around a moment in the book Ubik,
which is my favorite novel of all time, and Sean
went ahead and read it on his drive down the
Calar listened to it on his way down to the
Calgary and he was like Okay, I get it, and
you know, mind equals blown.

Speaker 2 (02:22):
It was great. So but that's not what we're going
to talk about today. I just did that half an
hour with Sean Newman.

Speaker 1 (02:28):
I what I heard through the scuttle but I was
telling you earlier, is that, you know, as busy as
I've been and just trying to get caught up to
be honest with you, that you know, I've heard this
from a couple of your people, your patrons, who your
people who are patrons for both of our services, that
you have been really adding some you know, adding some
color and some dotting eyes crossing. T's to the discussion

(02:52):
that Kaitlin Long and I had in episode two thirteen
about stable coins and US treasuries and all that stuff.
So I'm just going to leave it there and let
you go because I want to hear what you have
to say about all that, because you and I haven't
really had a chance to put a lot of color
on that.

Speaker 3 (03:06):
So the statement is. The statement is that I believe
that the US is moving towards for multiple reasons, integrating
stable coins from a different conclusion from what you and
Caitlin talked about. But the overlap is what we're here
for right the US is we approaching it from a

(03:31):
different discipline. The US is in the process of integrating
stable coins into its finance community for multiple reasons. One
of them is it will disintermediate banks. And Trump is
not a financial person and he doesn't like financial intermediaries

(03:53):
like banks. It won't disintermediate all of them, It'll just
allow them to trim even more banks off of the top.
So you end up having you know, two banks JP
Morgan and Bank of America. But the point is it'll
it'll streamline finance number one, uh and lower cost number two.
It will find us a home for treasuries and another

(04:17):
country another literally like I'm looking at it like a nation.
And number three, Uh, it becomes an upside call on America.
So uh uh and and and here's and so that's
that's when it comes down. So the reason the reason
that I had this, I guess, uh, this thesis right

(04:38):
where there's pieces and always pieces of a puzzle out
there or dots that I can't connect because I'm missing
a piece and and this piece doesn't completely connect it.
But the conversation that you and Caitlin had and and
the behavior of the President and the behavior of percent
you start connecting those dots and you say, well, even
if they're not thinking of it, they should be. And

(04:58):
so that's what that's where I was, and then it
fell into my lap with the conversation whom Caitlin had
and a couple other things that I saw. So, so
here's here's the here's the conclusion is that the US
will use that. The primary point is the US will
use stable coins to to encourage holdings of US treasuries

(05:22):
to go up. That's it. That's that's at the very
grassroots level. And and and the way they're going to
do that is they're going to convert treasuries into to
use an option phrasor and you convert treasuries into a call,
not a put. So, Uh, you own treasuries for safety, Fine,
you're not happy about the safety anymore because you're worried

(05:43):
about counterparty risk because of the Russia Ukraine stuff. Fine,
we're with you on that. Uh, we understand that we're
not going to we know we're not going to change
your mind in the short term. Right, However, how would
you like to have access to our stable coins? How
would you like to have access to our capital markets. Well,
you can do that through these tether type of products,

(06:05):
these stable coin type of products. And to do that,
you can use We don't care about dollars. I mean,
this is me dramatizing, but we don't care about dollars.
We care about treasuries. You don't have to sell treasuries
to own stable coins. You can pledge treasuries as collateral.
So how would you like to get four or five
percent interest and have access to our markets? And so

(06:27):
you become a lender to the US and will give
you access to our markets. And all these things started
to click for me. So so here here's here's a
couple seemingly random points. So going back to bess End
when he said when he and Trump and and Maker
and they said we're going to monetize the balance sheet

(06:48):
of the US, and you and I discussed that it
was like real estate. Fanny made Freddie mac that type
of stuff. He locked that type of concept. And then
there was gold, which is the easier one to see,
but those were all there. And there's other assets. And
one of the assets that I had read about was
swift itself. And I'm simplifying it, but but access to

(07:08):
the US capital market is like getting access to an ATM. Right.
So the problem is we we want to monetize an asset,
and that asset is our plumbing, the swift plumbing. Access
to our payment chains should be monetized. If you want
access to our payment chains, you should pay us. Well
how do you do that, right? Well, you do a

(07:30):
million different ways. But that's the first point, right. The
second point is, and this is the easiest one to see,
is that there is a dedollarization going on. And at
what point it will end, we don't know, but it'll
find a new stability. But on the way there we
need to cushion the blow of it. So people are
going to sell their You can't, I say this sincerely

(07:51):
if you are of the mindset that the US can confiscate.
If you believe that there's counter party risk with the US,
then you believe there's existential counterparty risk. And if you that,
then there's nothing that can compete with gold for you. Uh,
that is treasuries. Not saying you won't have a mix
of its two, but you're going to have a bigger
portion of your assets and gold. And if you look

(08:11):
at say a central bank, whether it be East or West,
You're going to diversify your FX reserves out of dollars
and into gold because people are going to be using
gold war and transactions. Fine, all right, so we need
to we need to we need to monetize our payment chains,
and we need to find a reason for people to
own bonds because they're not owning it for safety anymore.

(08:34):
And then the Genius Act passes, the stable coin Genius
AC passes. And I had been watching the previous two years.
I was watching, but I stopped watching them, like you know, Gensler, etcetera, etcetera.
But Gensler's out and the Genius Act passes, and and
I'm not so sure that I have everything on this,

(08:54):
but what I see is the US wants to own
the stable coin market, or at least have the best
uh and be at the forefront of it, the best.
We have the best. Look as an American, we suck
at this, we suck at that. Fine, But in the world,
we have the best regulatory system. They take their cue
from us. We have the rule of we have the

(09:15):
best financial infrastructure. On a you know, on a bad day,
it's number one, you know, like that's that, there's there's
there's no number two in that respect, at least at
least not in the financial aspect of it. So so
when when when you look at those things and then
and then you see Trump going around. This is where
Trump's going around and doing this is perfect for Trump,

(09:37):
by the way, in terms of he's a horse trader.
He wants to buy letter or does. But the third
point is you see Trump going around needing to do
bilateral deals with countries, and the Saudis are the one
that that really made me go, oh shit, this makes sense.
So what does he do? He goes to the Saudis
and he says, I mean, among other things, he says,

(09:58):
how do I get the Saudis to keep buying treasuries?
They're already buying gold, they're already doing business with with
with China. How do I get them to buy treasuries? Well,
you have to convert the US treasury market from a
safety feature to an upside feature. So Saudis, we've been
doing that forever with them. Saudi's buy our treasuries and

(10:21):
we'll give you a discount on more jets, you know whatever.
We'll we'll make sure you don't get blown away if
a Ran gets a nuclear missile stuff like that, right,
all right? And then and then I say, well, why
are they committing to buy more treasuries? What do we
give them to sweeten the deal? And in seventies to
deal with sweeten with higher interest rates? You know, So
that's upside, it's not protection, right, So what do we

(10:42):
sweeping to deal with? Now? I mean, I don't know
what they sweeten to deal with, but I can, I can,
I can picture this. I can picture this. Uh. We
go to a country and we say, all right, you're
going to be our trade partner. And for being our
trade partner and buying treasuries, here's what we're going to
do for you. It's like negotiating an apartment building to
be built in your city. This is what Trump does.

(11:03):
He's a real estate corporatist. He goes, he goes to
the southeast, and he says hypothetically, he says, he says,
we're gonna start charging nations to have access to our
capital markets, capital controls of the outside company. And of course,
as you mentioned, and I agree with, solve capital controls

(11:24):
like you know, two years ago and then a year
ago and then six months ago, and now people are
talking about it. We're going to restrict capital flows because
that's part of unfortunately, that's part of mercantilism. We got
to protect where the money goes. But just getting back
on point, so you say to the saut as, you say,
you buy our treasuries. That's a hall pass to come

(11:45):
in and out of our country as much as you
want with your dollars. And we're not going to charge
you a fee. Other people are gonna charge your fee.
Do you want to buy bitcoin, you can buy it
through our stable coins, and you could use your treasuries
to vouch for so it becomes like it becomes a

(12:06):
call option. I'm not being very eloquent about it, but
what I see is I see I see stable coins.
The Genius Act creates stable coins as a product that
will be closely regulated and protected and expanded by the
US under the FDIC, banks and the companies like PayPal.
I see that product growing and taking market share from

(12:29):
regular banking. I see it potentially decimating the model of
the euro dollar, you know, especially the British bankers, which
is right up your alley, right in my alley too. Now,
to be honest with you, I'm totally converted on that
and I see us finding our country to buy treasuries.
So if China says we're selling treasuries and we're buying gold,

(12:51):
half the world's going to say, we're going to buy
the Chinese you want because it's safer than the US dollar.
And then we're gonna say, fine, you can have your
fucking gold. We've got innovation, we've got ideas, and you
can have access to that in are in my club
over here, which is where the hot chicks are, you know.
And so that's and so it becomes the Chinese model

(13:14):
becomes the safety model, and our model becomes the innovation model.
So anyway, I'm not really doing a just good job
of explaining it, except to say that I think I
think stable coins and tether will become products that things
like gold can be put into, and bitcoin and crypto
and anything else, which will do so many things for us.

(13:34):
If it works, it'll increase the holdings of treasuries worldwide,
it'll increase the holdings of treasuries domestically, and it wi
will find other buyers. It's like we're colonizing Mars and
they want to buy treasuries we've created. We've created an
abstract nation of commonality of people who want to participate
in the American dream for lack of It's a cheesy phrase,

(13:56):
but you get my point.

Speaker 2 (13:57):
And so that's it.

Speaker 3 (13:58):
That's that's my whole spiel. Bugs help the nation.

Speaker 1 (14:03):
It makes it by American it makes sense like when
you when you you you lay it out that way,
is you know the way Caitlin and I were describing
it where she was describing it to me and was
is you know, Teather, is you know, internationalizing around the
world and creating and by by virtue of the fact
that it has it has to hold US treasuries or

(14:25):
tea bills as reserves for the most part, that it's
now bringing the US treasury market by proxy to the
rest of the unbanked world that couldn't buy treasuries otherwise.
So you're increasing the total addressable market the treasuries in
a way that we haven't before. And you're just saying,
this is exact the exact same thing that we would
have in reverse, which we would have domestic table clients,

(14:47):
we'd have a domestic dollar crypto dollar, and effect that
that you know, our that our trade partners or you know,
our investing partners can then put their treasuries into and
you know, create a soft demand for in order to

(15:09):
get access to access to that market. And what I
would say to that in some ways, what I would I'd.

Speaker 2 (15:15):
Say is that the way.

Speaker 1 (15:18):
That's going to go without there being any kind of
tax implications.

Speaker 2 (15:22):
Let's just let's just start think about what Trump has said.

Speaker 1 (15:25):
I'm just now I'm vamping by the way everything, you
actually did a better job of explaining all that than
you think you did, which is so so now we're
going to move forward. So what I'm now going to
vamp and say, well, what is Trump said about capital
gains tax and about all of these things about American businesses.
Partner with an American, invest in America, build here in America,

(15:47):
do all these things in America. You will be exempt
from these taxes. So this is how you can get
access to dollars at par. But the dollars have to
come in and stay here in the United States and
invest in the United States. So as the world pulls
back from some people who have a sur feet of
treasuries have too many treasuries because of the years of

(16:09):
the dollar reserve standard as the as it serves a
couple of different purposes here as well. As they try
to pull back and they need to internationalize their reserves,
they can they can still have a way to we
have a way of absorbing the treasuries, creating a product
that they can use to get dollars at par to
invest in the United States and then build and get

(16:30):
a return on that money through investment, not through speculation,
and through sending our interest out. And this way, now
all of a sudden, we're not even dealing with the
We're not dealing with the.

Speaker 2 (16:45):
Same level of launder.

Speaker 1 (16:49):
Right of that, effectively, we everybody is now a partner in.

Speaker 2 (16:54):
The labor that's being.

Speaker 1 (16:58):
Deployed here in the United States to pay for the
the the interest on the treasuries right right now, that's
your money.

Speaker 3 (17:05):
We'll build it. We want your money. Put your money here, put.

Speaker 1 (17:09):
Your money here, put your investment here, and we'll grow
businesses that are fat. We'll grow businesses that grow faster
than the interest on the on the treasury that and
it's net positive, net net positive for the Treasury Department
to pay out the interest because.

Speaker 3 (17:24):
We have the structure. The rest of the world doesn't
have that structure. We have the bones of that. You know, right,
and it's like the rule of law, et cetera, et cetera.
You know, give us the money, we're going to give
you the upside. You're not going to have a problem
with it. You're going to get the ups.

Speaker 1 (17:37):
It's like and and and then the other. The other
side of that is that it allows the United States.
This is a very elegant way. Well, it sounds inelegant
because we're now like putting the whole financial structure together,
so there's a lot to take in here, but what
it's really doing is very elegant, elegantly saying yeah, and
we're exiting the whole global reserve currency thing and we're

(18:00):
taking Triffin's paradox off of the table.

Speaker 3 (18:04):
Okay, all right, so so yeah, that's it. Can I
jump in here?

Speaker 2 (18:08):
I'm done?

Speaker 3 (18:09):
So you you made three points. I'm saying this out loud,
so I remember. The first one was dollars at par
I got something to add to that. The second one
was U upside right, and the third one was the
last thing you just said. Uh, but I want to
start with the dollars at par Uh. See, there's there's

(18:33):
a reason to do this, even if we don't need
someone to buy our treasuries. There's a fucking reason to
do this now, okay, And so here it is the
global reserve currents. I'm actually tying the last part in
as well. Sure we're basically we're keeping the title of
global reserve currency and all the privileges with that. I

(18:53):
need to fucking problems. That's what's going on, okay, So
I mean that's what I say. All right, So here
we got you, You got me, You got me plugging
into what you're saying. All right, So here we go.
If we don't need anyone to buy our treasuries, everything
is fine. But we don't want to be the global
reserve currency for this reason, the global reason. We don't

(19:13):
want to be the global reserve currency in a world
that you must export for the following reason, Trifon's dilemma.
The global reserve currency, by its nature is too strong.
People are always running to it, and it's the nation
who has that currency. It's to do what they can
to weak in it. Now, whether the US is trying

(19:36):
hard enough or not is irrelevant. It's not weak enough, okay,
And it is if you're a really economist and you
understand this. It was in our interest over the last
fifty years to be the stronger currency. We basically tax
the rest of the world and repress their currencies. Right,

(19:56):
so are current Okay, So that was a tax on
the rest of the world. But now now that nobody's
lending or borrowing anymore, we need to make stuff to
pay our debt down. We can't just borrow anymore. Enter
the global reserve currency as a problem as this is
by the way, this is going to play probably right
into the whole euro dollar stuff that you talk about

(20:17):
the global reserve currency. We treat our swift and let's
just say our plumbing, our payment chains as cost cost
not profit centers, cost centers. That's where I'm going for center, right,
So if you treat it as a cost center, then
you give it away for free. Everyone can use our plumbing.

(20:39):
This is what one of the things that makes the
dollar worth too much. If there's a crisis, I hate
a button. It's in dollars, right, So everything there's no charge,
it just goes into the US and dollars. And having
free plumbing, not charging people a toll road makes the
dollar go up because if it's free and there's a
c in the Middle East, I'll just park money in

(21:02):
dollars and everyone else who needs dollars suffers. Okay, so
this is part of the this is a proven model.
Proven I don't know, but this is a model that
they want to use. If you monetize your plumbing, which
is what we want to do, you make money. So
there's there's a non tariff revenue stream. You're monetizing an asset,

(21:23):
and you weaken the dollar because all those people on
the margin, you know, like you know Joe in Zimbabwe
sporting goods, he's not going to hit a button and
put his money into dollars because he can't afford the fee.
And that's a market access charge. And we're doing that now,
like there's we're doing the antecedent of that. But so

(21:44):
so when you do that, you retain your global reserve
currency status, but you you unattracted. You get rid of
the hot money that's always parking itself in dollars, right,
that doesn't do anything with it. You get rid of
the financial uh rent a class. That's what you do.
You really, you get rid of that. You get rid

(22:05):
of that side.

Speaker 2 (22:08):
And that's a great point.

Speaker 3 (22:11):
I mean, so so now dovetail into what into. Isn't
that what the euro dollar market is.

Speaker 2 (22:18):
It's the class, it's the it's the hot money renda class.

Speaker 3 (22:22):
Right, I mean, you know, I mean, if there's a problem,
they put it like it really just fucking destroys the
money that flows into dollars. So anyway, so I mean,
I mean, aside from the fact that I'm in love
with this concept and probably myself for saying it, because
I know that you plug into this, it is just
it's just a fact that if you put a market

(22:44):
access charge an m AC on your plumbing, uh, you
charge people money, you give capital charges for external money
to come in. If you do that, your currency gets
held by less people. So you have less people holding
your currency, and the ones that do hold it our
pay and then says that's that's the whole dollar. That's

(23:06):
why I'm focused on dollars at par What does that
do dollars apart, it has to do with this. Anyone
who wants a dollar that you've cut a deal with,
the Saudi's, whatever country you gotta deal with, they get
a dollar.

Speaker 2 (23:19):
Right.

Speaker 3 (23:19):
Anybody who wants a dollar that you haven't cut a
deal with, they get ninety five cents. Because we take
a fee, all right, and so so here here's here's
here's why the dollars at part triggered that for me.

Speaker 2 (23:33):
Yes years ago.

Speaker 3 (23:34):
Yeah, this is this is a Jim Rickers moment years ago. Uh,
I was talking about the war on cash or own cash,
and that was a big thing with Jim rickerds. You
had a book on that as well. And I was
looking at I'm like, how are they going to not
support cash? Meaning meaning what the government inevitably does is
when it wants to make people do what it wants

(23:55):
them to do, it gives them an economic choice. So
either you do it or I charge you more to
what it comes down to, the right. So somebody asked
Jim a question, and the question was was was how
are they going to not support cash? And at the time,
Mody was like, you know, if you don't return these
bills and take smaller denominations, they're going to expire stuff.

(24:19):
We can't do that. How are we going to do it?
And Rickard said we're already doing And I went, how
are you already doing it? And he said the phrase
was the dollar trades at par electronically. The dollar doesn't
trade at par physically. I went, oh, right, if if

(24:40):
you wire money, it no longer costs you twenty five dollars.
Zell fucking Venmo, PayPal, it's free. If you take money
out of an eight it's very simple, but it's true.
If you take money out of an ATM, it's two dollars.
It didn't always used to about me that way. Remember,
the ATM was a cost center, convenience. The ATM get your

(25:00):
money till you want. Now it's a profit center. Right,
So we're turning our market access, not the market stuff,
our market access into an ATM that charges a fee.
So do you want dollars at par? Cut a deal
with Trump? Do you not want dollars at par? But
then we don't fucking want you anymore. That's it. We're

(25:23):
charging you more. It's I mean, so, no.

Speaker 2 (25:27):
You've got you've got it. So And that was really funny.
The other day.

Speaker 1 (25:30):
I was talking about this. I was thinking about this
the other day. So when I was working on last
month's newsletter, I got I got obsessed with from the
moment I sat and chatted with Kitlin Long, I had
all these like nascon ideas about about an onshore dollar
and an offshore dollar and all of this stuff, and
that was you know, rattling around in my head for
a year year and a half and I didn't I
had ideas about it, and something that grew out of

(25:52):
our initial conversation about you know, putting capital controls up
around gold and you know, the doing away with COMEX
and LBMA and moving all that into GLB and SLB
and all that stuff. Right, So it started there and
I had other people, you know, coming up with other ideas.
But when Caitlin said par I then was like, okay,

(26:14):
I've been obsessed with this idea of dollars at par
as well. And then I thought about it. So somebody
posted up on Twitter a list of the ECB accesses
to the foreign repo window. Now it wasn't a lot

(26:34):
of money, but it was clear they were having to
go out and buy dollars in the short term liquidity
and dollars at four point five eight percent when SOFA
was trading at four point three three percent. So their
sofer domestic dollars cost our banks four point three three
percent in the repo markets, whereas the ECB has got

(26:56):
to go get temporary liquidity from the FED at four
point five eight percent. There's your twenty six basis points.
We make their twenty five twenty six basis points. We
make that it's our spread. We get paid for it
the FED, and the FED gets effect gets that money
so that you're charging. That's your ATM faith that you're
talking about.

Speaker 3 (27:14):
Yeah, exactly, that's right.

Speaker 1 (27:16):
And what I've been saying for a while when you
list now, now, let's let's go back to when the
cent first entered the scene and he said, you know, well,
I don't know about this, the FED doing banking regulation.
You know that really is classically a should be a treasury, right, right,
it should be a treasury. The thing we should do

(27:38):
this in treasury is that the FED is doing too much.
That's another dog whistle. So what I've been saying for
a long time, and riffing off of things that Martin
Armstrong is said in the past that the initial, the
original conception of the Federal Reserve will piss off every
libertarian in the audience.

Speaker 2 (27:54):
Sorry, folks, but.

Speaker 1 (27:55):
It's just the truth that the original conception of the
Federal Reserve was to set regional interest rates for internal
capital flowt to move capital where it needs to go
by allowing the twelve member banks to compete U Bank
amongst themselves for a regional capital within the US and
act as a lender of glast resort for the domestic

(28:16):
commercial paper markets.

Speaker 2 (28:17):
It was the Banking Act A.

Speaker 1 (28:18):
Nineteen thirty five that undid both of those things by
giving us one singular FED funds rate and to forcing
the FED to defend.

Speaker 2 (28:29):
The US treasury market.

Speaker 1 (28:31):
So again, Nastaly kind of instinctually, I'm like, well, if
we roll the FED back to the pre nineteen thirty five,
to its original conception, wouldn't that be better than where
we are today? As opposed to end the FED. We
repurpose the FED under this new system where the FED
is there to be the lender of last resort domestically

(28:54):
and the enforcer of par internationally. And then you use
trade and tariff policy to tell everybody, oh, by the way,
this is the cost to pay. This is the cost
if you want to pay and you want to get
dollars at par as you just said the best domestically,
If you don't one goal, you're paying the terror. If

(29:16):
you're paying this, you're paying that, and you're paying the
ATM fee.

Speaker 3 (29:21):
Right, That's exactly it. I mean I mean, I don't
I'm not that familiar with it. With the old law
new the FED before. It sounds to me like the
FED was I mean, you know, federalization, right, it was
decentralized and more open market, and then it became centralized
to help us grow. And now maybe the technology, the
stable coins, the product is there for us to go

(29:41):
decentralized again in some areas.

Speaker 1 (29:44):
And right, what I'm going to say, Vince is it's
not tough. Commis Commedies took over the government nineteen thirty
an FDR nineteen thirty five. We got we got communist
monetary policy. I'm sorry, that's what we did because this
is how, because this is how the that the technocratic
state was built. And I've been I've been obsessing about

(30:04):
this over the last eighteen.

Speaker 2 (30:05):
Months about these things.

Speaker 1 (30:07):
I'm like, no, it's just obviously it's like this is Collins, like,
this is the way that your union runs things. They
have a they have, this is how they're trying to
move everything into and centralize the the issuance of the
Now the ECB has the and the member central banks
over there have the exact opposite problem.

Speaker 2 (30:25):
They've got a singular currency.

Speaker 1 (30:28):
With twenty seven different central banks issuing debt, interesting issue
debt at different bronking rates, and there's the ECB having
to like figure out how to keep it keep it
all running to what they're what they're clearly wanting to
do is to reverse that and go to the current
model that we have at the FED with the ECB
is the one that sets the singular interest rate for
everybody else, depreciate the member central banks UH and force

(30:50):
that par value of a euro onto them and then domesticate.
That's fine, but that's not But that's what built modern Germany,
right because the Germans, you used the undervalued euro to
run an internalized mercantilist system on the rest of Europe.
The Deutsche should be trading at a dollar sixty and

(31:10):
the Lyric should be trading at eighty cents, and so
what a shock. Italy runs a trade deficit with Germany.
Germany looks like the center and they've arrogated all this
political power into Germany and or France, who has the
cheapest energy rates and colonize still colonizing all of Africa
and gotta gotta go. So that system needs to break
down as well. That's why we all have to absolutely

(31:32):
and in every way, we have to absolutely say no
to more political and fiscal union in the European under
the ECB, in the European Union like this is why
it needs to be fought root and branch, otherwise all

(31:54):
of Europe will be turned into Mississippi.

Speaker 3 (31:57):
Okay, I want to. I mean, there's so many things
that I should have written. I want to tease that
last thought out because I'm not sure I understand it. Sure,
I want to. I just want to replace a pronoun.
We want to. This is why we want to stop it.

Speaker 1 (32:14):
Here, We as people want if we do not want
to watch Europe sink into absolute tyranny as opposed to
the kind of soft tyranny they currently have today.

Speaker 2 (32:24):
The win to the globalist is.

Speaker 1 (32:25):
To turn the ECB into the modern fed over all
of Europe and thereby instantiate and ensure forever that Greece
is the second class, that Grease is a second class currency,
That Slovenia, that Portugal and every and all the and
all the states that don't have any political power. One

(32:46):
of the things that I ran. I don't know if
I talked to you about this, but I know I
did this for the patrons and the and I ran a.
I thought about the Banking Act of nineteen thirty five.
I thought about the FED and the monolithic interest rate,
and this idea about and the simular euro transaction rate.
It's the same thing in reverse in the political power.

(33:06):
And I traced the political power of individual states in
the United States pre and post FDR. So in nineteen hundred,
California and Mississippi both had.

Speaker 2 (33:20):
Nine electoral votes. Okay, okay.

Speaker 1 (33:25):
Then the Banking Act of the nineteen thirty five happens,
and the rise of the military industrial complex and all
the hot money coming into Europe and investing in our
industrial sector in order to fight World War two, which
is what they did, and the New Deal and everything
else hunted, and the monolithic FED funds rate meant that California,

(33:45):
where all the capital was going, was still able to
borrow at well below rates that they would have been
able to borrow under the old FED structure. Meaning as
money was moving into California, the San Francisco FED should
have been six percent and the Atlanta FED should have
been a three percent, but they couldn't be. That interest
rate arbitrage that doesn't close and so guess. And again

(34:07):
that goes back to what you and I noted originally. Again,
I'm going back to that conversation you and I had
about gold. When you see an arbitrage that doesn't close,
it's because there's a law or a rule or something.

Speaker 3 (34:17):
Sticking in a way.

Speaker 1 (34:20):
And what we wound up with is by two thousand
or by twenty twenty, California with fifty four electoral votes,
in Mississippi with six right, because the Fed, because the
Mississippi is permanently starved of capital because investing at the
FED funds rate or getting money access to capital, The

(34:43):
FED funds rate for Mississippi was way over what it
should have been. And then California was getting at a
couple one hundred basis points.

Speaker 3 (34:51):
Welfare statement optimized by FED policy, yeah.

Speaker 1 (34:55):
By the by the singular Fed, by the singular interest rate,
and then using that political power to reinforce their power
in Washington, d C. Arrogating political capital for themselves by
having all of them population move there and all them
jobs move there, and then they get more they get
more represent representation, and like they just gained our system.

Speaker 3 (35:16):
Right right, right. The question is Mississippi people should have
done that too, but they didn't. Why didn't they They couldn't.

Speaker 1 (35:24):
Every there's a capital, there's a capital because they didn't
have enough political clout right right to do so.

Speaker 2 (35:31):
Eventually they were starved for capital.

Speaker 3 (35:33):
Stupid Tom. Look, look, will you and I go out
to dinner and everyone orders food, and it's like, okay,
I'm going to throw the credit card in and Mississippi's
the country that fucking orders a corn muffin the city,
the state corn muffin, and you are getting surf and turf,
and we split the bill equally in Mississippi.

Speaker 2 (35:50):
It's exactly it got it won this that's what happened.

Speaker 3 (35:54):
That's what happened.

Speaker 2 (35:55):
And we only did that for a little over for
nearly one hundred years.

Speaker 3 (35:58):
Yeah, for one hundred years.

Speaker 2 (36:00):
Yeah, this is a small thing. Like every time that
we went out to dinner.

Speaker 1 (36:03):
You know, it's in Mississippi with the corn muffin, and
Iowa with the corn muffin, and you know, yeah, and California.

Speaker 3 (36:10):
It's totally it's totally what it is. Okay that see
I never really, I never. That's so funny because because
for me to I can plug into that easily because
one of the things that I've been studying uh for years,
but it's become really important recently. Is is everything politically

(36:31):
uh and and market structure wise is a fight between
centralization and decentralization, which is very current events for people
to understand crypto. So centralization we want to control money. Decentralization,
we don't have to centralization. We want to have uh
uh fdr we want to have monopolistic control over an industry.

(36:52):
Decentralization we want free markets and and everything ebbs and flows.
And it's you're describing this and I'm going, yeah, we
mastered centralization and now in the process of decentralizing, and
Europe is still trying to figure out centralization. They're screwed, right,
So maybe the arbitrage for US is to buy Mississippi
in short California.

Speaker 1 (37:13):
That's that's well, if again, if we were feeled in
the Banking Act of nineteen thirty five, that's exactly what
I'm gonna do.

Speaker 2 (37:20):
Like, I mean, that's exactly what I'm gonna do.

Speaker 1 (37:23):
I'm gonna, I'm gonna, I'm gonna you should buy Mississippi
or you know, pick, you know, pick whatever.

Speaker 2 (37:29):
But you know what's funny is that now that was.

Speaker 1 (37:31):
And interestingly enough, the other day I noted, remember, up
until a couple maybe now it's a couple of months ago,
there were nine states that didn't have a state income tax.
Mississippi wasn't one of them. They are now, so they
have not only so they had a state income tax,
and so now they get rid of the state income tax.

(37:51):
In this environment, that's kind of offset part of the
FED funds. And that's why California and New York or
fighting so hard for the increased salt deduction limits in
order to try and write that, in order to try
and balance that.

Speaker 3 (38:11):
It always comes down to how much money is in
their pocket. And they have to lower taxes. Now they
can't afford to because they have a whole uh social
safety at welfare state predicated on the taxes. And the
people will get who pay the taxes are subsidized because
they get low rates and the low rates are gone,
and it's yeah, it's a fucking disaster.

Speaker 1 (38:32):
Yeah, and for years under and for years, you know,
I used to talk to people. I remember when I
sold my house in Gainsville, right right before I while
I was building the house that I'm at now. North Againsville,
where my wife and I were building our house, and
we sold our house. Our next door neighbors wanted buying
our house. Right I didn't even put it up on
the market.

Speaker 2 (38:52):
They heard. I ran into them at Lows one day
and I say, yeah, we're moving there and I'm going
to sell the house. I'm like, really, you're going to
sell that? Cool? We we don't pric to buy it.

Speaker 1 (39:01):
So eventually we just you know, went, They came over
and we negotiated a price, and we did the thing.
And then this is the part of the story that's
interesting is that they had access to really cheap capital
from California banks at like three or four percent under
what everybody else was paying. They were getting jumbo loans
at two percent because because what was happening was clearly

(39:22):
at the time, the euro dollar, the offshore money was
coming in, and these banks weren't really they weren't access
to the deed for money.

Speaker 2 (39:29):
They were getting money.

Speaker 1 (39:30):
Through librar at much, through the libor system through much much,
and they were getting subsidized that way because there was
all this money that still flowing into California.

Speaker 2 (39:38):
This would be two thousand and three, by the way,
so right.

Speaker 1 (39:42):
Like to think about that now, I was like, oh,
that's how they did it. I'm like, how the fuck
are you getting a two percent mortgage on you know,
we sold the house for you know, a pittance in
today's market, but how are you getting a two percent
loan on it?

Speaker 2 (39:54):
Like that's insane? Which is why they.

Speaker 1 (39:55):
Were like buying houses all over the city and fixing
them up. And then they were part of that whole
early adopters of the the flipping.

Speaker 2 (40:03):
Yeah, the buy and flip bull crap.

Speaker 1 (40:06):
Yeah, absolutely, and they and and that's why I met them,
That's why.

Speaker 2 (40:09):
I met her in the Lows right. Well, we were.

Speaker 1 (40:13):
Building the house, because we were literally building the house,
like you know, I would we get we get out there,
I had you know, oh I need shingles, and I'd like,
go to Lows and I go buy five packs of shingles,
put them on the cart and drive and then drive
back up to the home site and start, you know,
pound the shingles. And I was going to the Low's
and Ace Hardware all the time while building the house
because you know, he ran short, we ran out of

(40:34):
screws or this or whatever, you.

Speaker 3 (40:36):
Know, right exactly, So but they were there to buy
stuff to fix up there, to.

Speaker 1 (40:42):
Fix up whatever it was that they were gonna they
were going to buy and flip.

Speaker 2 (40:45):
Yes, was that No, she wasn't.

Speaker 3 (40:51):
That's the big short.

Speaker 2 (40:52):
I didn't. I hated her husband, but I like her.
She's great.

Speaker 3 (40:54):
Well, of course, because she's a woman and he's a man.

Speaker 2 (40:57):
Right.

Speaker 1 (40:58):
No, because he was a because he was a ship,
because he was no, because he was a lining.

Speaker 2 (41:06):
It was worse than anything else. Here's a army.

Speaker 1 (41:09):
So it all comes, it all comes full circle, folks,
And now you know what. Now you know I don't
like the British.

Speaker 3 (41:15):
Let's talk about Italian racism for a second. Let's talk
about Italian racism. Racism that Italians feel all right.

Speaker 2 (41:25):
Okay, noe long and deep.

Speaker 3 (41:28):
I think even though we're I think we're from different
necks of the woods. I think there's a uh, there
is an overlap that goes beyond geography and it goes
back to being Italian. I remember growing up, Uh, I
hated the Irish. So when you said, liney, I'm like
Irish to me, they're all Irish. You know, I grew

(41:49):
up and he was not Italian as Irish. So it's
like you know anyway, having been a little bit Irish,
it's I'm self loathing, I guess. But but that's the
way the reason I thought this, But I saw I
saw him, uh the Untouchables where Annie Garcia is confronted
by and it's a because oh another thieve and Dago
Loop you know.

Speaker 2 (42:09):
That's right, Yeah, that's exists on that.

Speaker 1 (42:12):
Yeah, and then some some fucking and he calls him
a mick or something like that, like, oh, that's a
great scene.

Speaker 2 (42:23):
No, for me, it's a i've never I've never. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (42:26):
I grew up with my dad, who was going on
to the New York n Y who moved from the
State Troopers to the NYPD, and then I in the
late nineteen fifties after we met my mom, HA started
a family and it was dominated by the by the Irish,
and he couldn't get anything done because his name ended
in a vowel. The vow the O was on the
wrong end of the name. It wasn't O'Malley. He was

(42:46):
a long guy, like you know what I mean, Like
that's so yeah. But I never really held it against
the Irish per se because I was kind of I
thought they were really cool and they are as people
I think they're and they're much different than British, so
let's just not even get there.

Speaker 3 (42:59):
So right, So, so for me, I'm the racist because
I generalize lying the everyone's iron absolutely, you just hate
the fucking Brits and you know.

Speaker 1 (43:09):
I just hate City London and yeah, yeah, you do,
you do it, and and that class of people, like
what they've done to little England is disgusting.

Speaker 3 (43:17):
So and I'm gonna I'm not gonna defend them, but
I'm just gonna's gonna throw through something out there that's
a stable concept. So so one of the things I
plugged into early about stable coins is going to have
to do with with London is that is that as
the more authoritarian side of the world. So we'll say
China and Russia or China primarily goes with a stable

(43:40):
last book, there was CBDC that won't fly in the West,
and it will not fly in the US. It actually could,
they're trying to make it fly in England and Europe,
but it won't fly in the US. Stable Coins, for
better and worse, primarily for better are the West's answer
to UH, to UH Central Bank Digital and they will

(44:01):
fly because eventually, uh, the government won't have control over
our over our money, the banks will so anyway, whatever
banks are left. But I guess, I guess what I'm
saying is that stable coins really really undermine uh, financial intermediators. Uh.

(44:21):
And that would be you know, I mean, you know,
it's like money change or stuff like when you look
at when you look at even what the bricks are doing,
the bricks pay concept is is to happen, is to
have be able to change your currency if anything you
want without going to an FX change, you know, and
and and and by the way, that's centralization. They're centralizing
at the nation state level. Isn't that what we're doing here,

(44:43):
like in some things like I feel like some of
our things are becoming centralized.

Speaker 1 (44:48):
And when you this is why, this is why the ripple,
this is why the XRP slash ripple. Part of the
conversation is so very obvious, which is that we're you know,
ripple as a concept, right, Riple Labs and x are key.
They've been selling they've been trying to sell that to
whoever will win the war for a long time. And
we've just made the move that no ripple is going

(45:10):
to become an American asset.

Speaker 2 (45:11):
Ripple is an x RB.

Speaker 1 (45:13):
At the end of the day, is does away with
the City of London's you know, main business, which is
which is FX intermediation. Now the other thing, you know,
just your point on banks, which again I'm not shilling
for Ripple, I'm just telling you this is what's happening.
I don't give a shock a way that anybody can
build it. Anybody can build a Ripple style network. But
they've done it, and they've got the partners, and they've

(45:36):
and they're clearly signing up the clients and and end
eighty five percent of Japanese banks are on board with
the guess what Japan is a is a partner of
the United States, not Europe.

Speaker 2 (45:45):
It's you know, that's just the way things work. Now.

Speaker 1 (45:48):
The last, the last point on that is your point
about banks and how many how many of them survived. Actually,
I think what this is doing is it's getting the
banks back to their core business, which is net interest
mart from banking, finding the investments with so they can
stop being casinos and they can go back to financing
and doing risk assessed proper risk assessment of investment processes.

(46:12):
You know, investments that are and and projects that need
to be built, you know, and that's that's what they
should be.

Speaker 3 (46:18):
It would be, you know it. You know I've been
I haven't been thinking about it from that point of view,
but that is a good way to think about it,
you know. Uh uh you know, post class Eagle. Uh,
after glass Eagle is repealed, banks started gambling right to
simplify it, right and and now and now there is
a movement on the left. You're describing the rights version

(46:41):
of it. There's a movement on the left to make
banks futilities, okay, like in a sense that you know,
let them only do their core business. And of course,
but you know, alump dim with that is m MT
and let's kill capitalism and all that other ship. Right. Meanwhile,
on the right, I think extreme liberty. It's like it

(47:01):
would be a more to the right version of what
you're talking about. But I guess I guess what I'm
talking about is uh, banks will split again into investment
merchant bank right right, and they might not even call
that versus versus like specializations PayPal and Venmo. That's an

(47:24):
aspect of a bank, you know. JP Morgan is another
as commercial bank wire transfer bank, merchant bank, and so
the decentralized versus the point. The point is you have
a centralized product called ripple, right, right, you have a
centralized tool that the government can use that allows the
banking to be decentralized. Of course a lot can go

(47:46):
wrong there, right, Everyone could pick their specialty. And I
want to buy a musician magazine. You want to buy
drummer he wants to buy. You know, everything's fucking specialty oriented.
On the left. It's the same idea, let's use ripple
to control the bank. So I get it. You know
what is through centralization and the other's through decentralization. And
I think, I think what will happen is to your point,

(48:07):
I think, as as as the forest gets thinned for
the trees and there's only like these two monolithic firms left,
like JP Morgan and Bank of America, all these other
smaller ones will pick their specialty whatever it is left.

Speaker 1 (48:21):
I agree with you, and I think that's actually, you know,
the model has to be that there's going to be
the model has to be that that we're going to
go back to actually empowering regional banks and the local
banks and credit unions and everything else by this kind
of decentralized died process. And you know it's we're reaching
the natire or sorry, the apex of the big bank

(48:45):
central bank dominated markets. We're only the money center banks
and have any kind of political control.

Speaker 2 (48:52):
And you know, the what what got.

Speaker 1 (48:56):
Me started down this path, as you remember this, is
that I said, well, you know, Davos's plan is to
do a way with commercial banking completely, is to have
a direct representation, the direct relationship between the central bank
and the consumer and then control the consumer through the
con central bank and the right CVDC is right, and

(49:16):
you know in that model, you would of course have
the commercial banks then turn around and go, no, no,
you're not gonna have JP Morgan like give that ship up.
Like that's that's why I'm like, oh no, Jamie Diamond
is not going to be down with that.

Speaker 2 (49:29):
I just conceptually it makes no sense.

Speaker 1 (49:31):
So that also means that if they want to survive,
they're going to have to give up some certain aspects
of their system though or the other thing I've always
said is that but at the end of the day,
does JP Morgan really want you know, the business to
build a library and fucking Palaca no, of course they don't.
They want they want the big projects, you know, they
want they want the the nuclear power plants, they want

(49:54):
the pipelines and the and the refinery.

Speaker 3 (49:59):
Get energy is bigger than JP Morgan and other stores.

Speaker 2 (50:01):
But you understand what I mean.

Speaker 1 (50:02):
They want the big products, right, and they want to
help Blockheed Martin build the you know, build n F
thirty five that works, that kind of thing. And so
you know, you're and they can do that interest margin
on banking on that and some of that's going to
be subsidized by the government.

Speaker 2 (50:18):
It is what it is, and that's fine. I don't care.

Speaker 1 (50:20):
Like what matters is is that you know the capital
is available for the small banks that they don't compete
with JP Morgan for you know, your fucking Carloan.

Speaker 3 (50:30):
Like right, and that would be and and that's it.
I'd like JP Morgan to get out of the ship
that they don't add value in right, right, other let
that that branch of the tree needs to be cleared,
so the other.

Speaker 2 (50:46):
Right, so that everybody else can start to grow.

Speaker 1 (50:48):
And you know, so because they're like they're blocking out
all the sun to extend the metaphor and that and
that's the way. I that's that's the way we have
to start looking at this. That's that that is the
goal that we need to be elucidating, you know, bringing
to the table. And you know, and that's going to
be the GiB for a guy like Diamond to get

(51:10):
on board with all this, even though he has antipathy
to all these things, because you know, he's doing his
best to protect his business. And but I think even
Diamond and you know, Solomon and the rest of them,
I think they understand that, you know, this system is
not unworkable. So you know, they're still going to be
able to go out into the world and you know,
build big dams out and I don't know in Central

(51:33):
Africa or whatever, they're gonna be able to do that.
And there's going to be a and there's going to
be a market for US dollars in those markets in
a way that hasn't been there before. That they don't
have to be the burden of have to bear the
burden of providing liquidity for either because of all the
stable coin ship that we talked about.

Speaker 2 (51:47):
At the beginning of the podcast, just to kind of
prop around.

Speaker 3 (51:50):
Them to bring it back, to bring it back.

Speaker 2 (51:53):
Yeah, right right back. I don't know how we got there,
but we got there, but.

Speaker 3 (51:56):
We got there, we got we got back to it. Yeah,
I agree. I mean that's that's really good. So now
that we solve the roles problems, what's left to talk about?

Speaker 1 (52:06):
I don't know, you know, I've been talking forever in
a freaking day because we got like forty minutes before
we even like hit record on the podcast, So I
don't know events, Like, what else do we want to
talk about?

Speaker 2 (52:14):
What else are you saying? We can talk about gold
like we're talking about what's happening there.

Speaker 1 (52:17):
I mean what I mean by that is that, you know,
look at the geopolitical picture and how that's affecting those
other markets. I don't know, if you want to, you know,
do five or ten minutes, we can do.

Speaker 3 (52:27):
We can do quick current events because I don't know
when this is going to air, but but but I think,
I think what we're about to talk about is is
it'll be it'll be relevant even if it airs a
couple of days from now. You know, since since the
today while we're recording this, gold's up sixty bucks, sowers
up four percent, natural gases up a billion percent. You
know oils up two bucks. Stocks are struggling to be unchanged.

(52:50):
Last I looked, bonds are down a little bit, the
dollars weaker, and and the behavior today and it's easy
to see in commodities. UH copper was up for percent,
you know, five percent at one point. I think, I
think over the weekend, two things happened that shook the
market out of its complacency. Meaning since since since the

(53:14):
Ukraine Russia UH peace talks were scheduled, and since Trump
got the Trump and and and G had a ninety
day reprieve on the tariffs, UH, Trump's popularity went up.
Stock market stabilized, bond market stabilizing for whateveryonether you agree
with the stability or not, it's happening, and UH and

(53:35):
and markets started to float a little bit higher, and
gold was under limit pressure, and the dollar and the
bond market started acting what we would consider normal again.
And then over the weekend, you know, UH, the Ukraine
Russian war just exploded. Because hey, if we're going to
have a negotiation, we may as well just fucking get
in our shots before we sit at the table, because

(53:56):
we want to get as much as we can on
our own land grabs and then g comes back and says,
we're China comes back and says and says, we think
the US is cheating too. And so everything's blown out
of the water, right, everyone's front running TIFFs again by
all the copper before the tires get turned back on,
Like the hope is out of the market again, and
the only thing that's that's to find that is stocks.

(54:16):
And I think stocks are up because they're manipulated. But hey,
what am I going to What am I going to
say there?

Speaker 1 (54:21):
But again, I think you have to look at like,
certainly the Dow. It's always been my argument that the
Dow has to be looked at like a hard asset.
It's a thing you front run into because it's a
big pool of liquidity that people can pre capital and
without moving price, you know, and it's hard and it's
relatively a hard asset, and you know, you know, the

(54:42):
the bigger I think.

Speaker 2 (54:44):
I don't think the Dow is manipulated. I be honest
with you.

Speaker 1 (54:47):
I think the I look at the German docks, at
the French cack forty ale at the or Stocks fifty
ale at the foot seat, those are the manipulated markets.

Speaker 3 (54:54):
I'm just I'm throwing hyperbole out there except to say that,
only to say that this stock market goes up because
when it's down, because somebody catches the knife, and that
knife catches that kind of stabilize it.

Speaker 1 (55:09):
Yeah, I have to say I love what I'm seeing
in silver this morning. This is this afternoon like training it.
You know, I only ever I don't watch the futures price.
I only ever watched the spot price. And it's very
clear that we're about to clear this conjection, this congestion
h area. And the only thing that happened last week
was that they were clearly banging the fucking monthly clothes
and they did it in bitcoin, it and gold and silver.

(55:31):
They banged the crap out of oil in order to
it was and then they've all just bounced this morning
like and you have to ask yourself the question, like
you know, you knew you were banging the clothes on
on down I'm speaking for London. You knew you were
going to bang the freaking monthly clothes on Friday and
only only to have the Ukrainians you know, send the
send the world into with hisney on Monday morning, Like okay,

(55:52):
so you won that rounds and what you reloaded a
little bit, but you're going to give you're now picking
up nickels in front of a freight train, if you're
if you're short in the markets.

Speaker 3 (56:01):
Yeah, you know that that's true. The silver thing, if
I could just add something on specifically about silver, and
it also applies to oil as well, but silver is
something that people never talked about, but now they're finally
talking about it. And that is sure. If you're looking
at the tire situation, tariff on, tariff off, Tariff on
means by gold, tariff off means buy copper, and in

(56:25):
between is silver. And if you're buying gold in a
world of specialization, you know, we want to have a
pure play on this. If pure play on that silver
gets sold on, people buy gold or put in this way,
it doesn't get bought as much. I'm buying gold recession
or inflation, and then people sell silver when they buy copper.

(56:47):
And so for the last a billion years, because I
made part of my living doing this, people sell silver
to and buy gold when they think there's going to
be tariff's on, and they sell silver and buy copper
when they think tireff's off, and so every so often
it gets really out of whack and someone says, wait
a minute, tariffs on, which is what happened this weekend.

Speaker 2 (57:08):
And.

Speaker 3 (57:10):
We need to pre stock. And so copper goes up
five percent four percent, I should say, gold goes up
one and a half two percent, and silver is just
dicking around up one percent, and then silver just explodes
and it's up four to five percent now. So so
I think, I think what you have is you have
a class of investors American CTAs. I know this, a

(57:33):
class of investors that say, oh, I think I want
to buy gold for this, and I want to buy
copper for that, and overall just keeps selling silver and
they're getting their ass sanitin. And now the reason I
say it's related to oil is that's what happens in
silver all the time. Forever oil everyone's lung stocks, and
they have been selling oil as an economic hedge. They've
been selling copper as an economic hedge as well in part.

(57:56):
And so I think, you know, everyone's like, oh, oh,
Peck is going to pump more. And so now we're
in a completely geopolitics is uh is not going the
way let's put it that way.

Speaker 1 (58:08):
So and and in that's and in that scenario, everybody,
everybody goes to the money goes to the ground.

Speaker 2 (58:14):
And it becomes.

Speaker 1 (58:15):
Even more important that people remind themselves that you can
play the game about the dollar versus gold, and this
versus that, and inflation, the tariffs not at the end
of the day, when you're not sure what's you know,
whether there's going to be a world tomorrow or not,
you're buying gold. And this is the armstrong point of
UH and that I think it's important that over the

(58:36):
long run is gold and inflation hedge. Of course, there's
a preserve your purchasing power of your savings so that
you can go buy a house today with the same
number of bounds as.

Speaker 2 (58:44):
The gold you could have fifty years ago.

Speaker 1 (58:46):
In the long run, you're you're correct about that in
the But what gets goal to those those billy prices
is and to correct upwards is geopolitical risk. Gold in
the short term moves on your geopolitical risk and then
goes up and then doesn't give everything back. And that's

(59:07):
how it expresses itself. So when you look at the
monthly chart of gold or the quarterly chart of gold, yeah,
it's an inflation story or an annual chart of gold,
it's an inflation story, but in a week at the weekly,
the daily, or the even the monthly level, it's a
geopolitical story. And you have to you have to, you
have to gauge your time with gold in particular.

Speaker 2 (59:27):
And I think and and then.

Speaker 1 (59:28):
Silver and copper and copper is the same way on
geopolitical risk. Like you know, copper five hours a pound
or four forty six a pounds, but you know above
five dollars a pound.

Speaker 2 (59:38):
That's dude. People are worried about World War.

Speaker 1 (59:40):
Fucking three, it says, as they're not front running tariffs
either any of that shit, they're worried about World War three?

Speaker 2 (59:46):
Like how do I?

Speaker 1 (59:47):
How do I survive? Then there's the other angle on this,
of course, is that everybody is now building freaking power plants.
And that they're building power plants, that means that they're
building an upgrading the electrical grid to distribute that power.
And we're now into you know, we're now into coppers
massively uninvested, under investing folks sor right, So.

Speaker 3 (01:00:08):
We're supposed to take three dollars by one gold, by
one silver, buy one copper, and then margin it and
then buy oil with that. That's the gas right by
the way. I was one of the things I said
this morning. I was thinking about when I said it,
natural gas opens up like fucking eight percent, and I go, oh,
Europe is so fucked. You know, I have more sanctions

(01:00:30):
and I'm always like, at least it happened during the summertime.
I hope they have. But by twenty thirty, Europe is
going to be using coal. There'll be nothing more soft
and that'll keep Great Britain in business. Great, Great Britain
probably wants to blow up another pipeline so they can
start exporting exporting coal. I mean, anyway, no, you're you're right.

Speaker 1 (01:00:49):
It's like what Vince just touched on as the great
joke that you know, what did socialists used before, like
before candles, electricity, electricity right now? So you know, it's
the same bind the thing what if France used, you
know before before coal nuclear power.

Speaker 2 (01:01:07):
It's the same thing case Germany.

Speaker 1 (01:01:10):
But yes, so there you go. Vince has been fun,
it's been great as always. I'm so happy to have
caught up with you today. I think this was the
exact right moment for you and I sit down and
have this chat. Tell everybody where they can find you.
Do the plug because you know, at the end of
the day we are selling folks, So let's do the thing.

Speaker 3 (01:01:28):
That's right. Gold Fix on substack v b L Victor Boy,
Larry Goldfix, uh substack dot com so just gold fix
will pull it up. There's there's no competition unless you're
looking for, uh, how the how London manipulates the gold
fix like they used to?

Speaker 2 (01:01:44):
Uh?

Speaker 3 (01:01:45):
And I'm on I'm on Twitter as well under soaring
the K. But look forward?

Speaker 2 (01:01:50):
Is that what that actually means? Sore in the K.

Speaker 3 (01:01:52):
That was a big of sorn kerekudguard and I was like,
I'll do sorn crecudguard fox. I went soreing the K
And at the time it made sense because that was
my backup account and had a pictures bar with some
TI chick with with cleavage sitting next to him. It
was great. And then of course my Twitter account got blocked,
so I had to I had.

Speaker 1 (01:02:13):
Your back up account. That's that's hilarious. I had no
idea that that. I was like, Soren that, what the
fuck is that? But you know, whatever, I you know,
in a in a previous life, as always like, you know,
you know I had a.

Speaker 3 (01:02:24):
Picture, you would have picked it up right away.

Speaker 1 (01:02:28):
But no, But he's He's Soren the k On on Twitter,
I'm TfL seventeen twenty eight, Patreon, slash Cold, Goats and Guns.

Speaker 2 (01:02:35):
You guys know the drills. So with that said, we're out.
You guys be well, take care. We'll talk soon.

Speaker 1 (01:02:39):
People stick on the ice, uh,