00:02:32.000come down now, do not correct it Let's get ignorant, let's get hectic Everybody, everybody, let's get into it Get stoned, come on Get it started, come on Get it started, Get it started, Let's get it started.
00:10:05.000Yeah, you could be big bone, long as you feel like your own.
00:10:09.000You could be the model type, skinny with no appetite, short stack, black or white, long as you do what you like, body out of sight, body, body out of sight.
00:10:20.000She does a two step and a tongue drive, she does a cabbage patch and a bust out.
00:10:24.000She likes to like throw, she love hair vibe, she likes to break, she feels perk vibe, she likes to sound fun and the mumbo, she likes to break dance and calypso.
00:11:55.000But I got a super chat tonight on my show, and some people reached out to me saying that Nick Video And some others wanted to debate from TikTok on Zoom.
00:12:21.000I haven't entered even into the Zoom yet, so I'm going to jump in there, and that'll be, you know, we'll see what's up.
00:12:27.000But I'm going to launch in right now, and then once I get on the Zoom call, I'll put it up on the screen, and I'll be multitasking a little bit.
00:12:38.000But I just want to have something up on the screen, just, you know, depending on what we find in the Zoom call.
00:12:46.000So let me bring the music down a little bit.
00:16:41.000Free trade allows us as a nation to increase the amount that we produce past.
00:16:46.000The frontier that we can actually like pass the limits of our personal production.
00:16:51.000It allows us to specialize in trade and specialize in specific goods that we're just better at producing.
00:16:57.000And then whatever we need, we can trade with other nations to get.
00:17:00.000Protectionism, and especially when it comes to protectionist tariffs, lead to something in economics which is called deadweight loss.
00:17:06.000And these sort of losses can actually harm the overall economy more than the minuscule benefits that actually come from protectionism tariffs.
00:18:06.000And, you know, I think a lot of free traders, the big mistake that they make is that they think that trade deficits don't matter.
00:18:13.000You know, Milton Friedman famously, I think he said in the 60s something to the effect that a trade deficit is an accounting abstraction, is the famous quote.
00:18:24.000It's totally arbitrary whether you have a trade surplus or a trade deficit.
00:18:27.000What matters is that these mutually beneficial exchanges are occurring, and because of comparative advantage theory, You cannot lose with free trade, right?
00:18:39.000If one country is specializing in something according to their comparative advantage with opportunity costs, then, like you said, we could expand our frontier of consumption.
00:18:50.000We can exceed what we could create with our own productive capacities.
00:18:55.000But the problem is that none of that is true.
00:19:20.000It means that we're getting, just for the sake of numbers, let's say we're getting $500 billion worth of goods from China and we're only sending them $250 billion worth of goods.
00:19:32.000That means it's a trade deficit of $250 billion.
00:19:35.000But you don't get something for nothing.
00:20:18.000Those are the only ways that you can pay for it.
00:20:20.000And assets, that is things like securities, that is like ownership in companies, that's real estate, it's land, it's buildings, debt, obviously, we all know what debt is.
00:20:32.000Or currency is we're actually giving them US dollars.
00:20:35.000And all three of those are problematic ways to pay for the consumption goods that China sends us.
00:20:43.000We're getting cheap Chinese plastic goods in a lot of cases.
00:20:49.000Our productive capital, our productive assets like businesses, like land.
00:20:53.000We're giving them debt so that not only are we paying for it, but then we're paying more money to service that debt later on in the future.
00:20:59.000And then currency is particularly pernicious because they take our currency, they store our currency in sovereign wealth funds, and then they can use our own currency sort of against us to manipulate the exchange rate at strategic times.
00:21:14.000And so basically, in any way you cut it with trade, a lot of this theory stuff is really nice, and economists come up with nice theories.
00:21:24.000You know, this panacea that, well, free trade is as easy.
00:21:28.000It works everywhere in every country, in every case, all the time, and you never lose.
00:21:31.000You just trade, and you don't have to look at ports.
00:21:34.000You don't have to look at factories or goods or countries.
00:21:37.000It's just the one stop shop, it's the only answer.
00:21:39.000But when you really break down balance of payments and if you get into comparative theory, comparative trade theory, or comparative advantage theory, then that's when it begins to fall apart.
00:22:03.000So I understand why you focus a lot on trade deficits, but wouldn't you argue, right?
00:22:09.000The trade deficit is not itself a problem for the U.S. economy if we're looking specifically at the United States, as because a larger trade deficit can be actually the result of a stronger economy, because obviously larger trade deficits happen as we spend more, right?
00:22:22.000So as consumers spend more and more and import more, while higher interest rates make foreign investors more eager to place their money in the United States, this means that higher trade deficits could actually mean A result of a stronger economy.
00:22:33.000And, like, I don't understand the point that you're trying to make when you say trade deficits are inherently bad.
00:22:40.000Because the idea that, yes, while we do spend more and put less into the economy, it's flawed at heart because part of our economic advantage is the massive increase in consumer spending.
00:22:53.000And any increase in consumer spending could theoretically lead to an increase in trade deficits.
00:23:00.000Well, the focus, again, on the deficits, it's really about short term versus long term.
00:23:05.000I guess the problem with what you're saying and the problem with free trade theory is that if you're trying to maximize consumption today, I would actually concede and say that you're right.
00:23:21.000The free market ideology is like this in a lot of ways.
00:23:24.000It just leaves out kind of the other part of the equation, which is to say that, as you know, as free market people also like to say, there's no such thing as a free lunch.
00:23:43.000And when it comes to free trade, what you're inherently doing is prioritizing short term consumption over other long term considerations.
00:23:53.000So I would agree that, you know, like in the short term, if you wanted to consume, if you wanted to be a decadent society and consume more than, you know, your country is able to consume with just its own factors of production, then yeah, free trade would allow you to do that.
00:24:09.000In order to pay for that excess consumption, like I said, What are you giving in return for those goods?
00:24:15.000What are you giving in balance of payments?
00:24:17.000What are you giving in return for the goods and services that you're running a deficit on?
00:24:22.000You're giving over all of your productive capital.
00:24:24.000You're giving over, like I said, your debt, your assets, your securities.
00:24:29.000And so the point I'm getting at is that you can run a trade deficit, but you cannot run a trade deficit indefinitely because at a certain point, you run out of assets to sell off, you run out of debt that you can service, you run out of money.
00:24:43.000And so at a certain point, The proverbial chicken comes home to roost, and then you have to limit your consumption in order to subsidize the trade deficit.
00:24:53.000That is really, I think, the point, which is to say that if you're a decadent society trading with a diligent society, you're going to consume more in the short term, but eventually we'll be working for the diligent society because we will be servicing that trade deficit with all of our productive capital and with our debt.
00:25:10.000I don't think it's a fair trade, for example.
00:25:17.000To trade shares in Amazon in exchange for a consumable.
00:25:22.000In other words, something that you're just going to consume, one time use, like a Chinese toy or an agricultural product or something like that?
00:25:30.000Of course not, because the shares in Amazon, in a company, in land, this is productive capital.
00:25:36.000And we should have a longer time horizon and say we want to protect industries that are going to be the industries of the future.
00:25:43.000We want to make it so that we're protecting our jobs, we're protecting our capital, we're going to be a creditor as opposed to a debtor.
00:25:49.000And that is really just about the strategic position of America.
00:25:54.000I prefer a long term time horizon to the short term.
00:25:59.000So, to better understand your point, what would be your policy then, like when it comes to just protectionist tariffs?
00:26:06.000Like, would you implement protectionist tariffs with the implementation of like, would you with changing underlying savings and investment levels, or would you just like implement protectionist tariffs just to implement protectionist tariffs without changing anything else in the economic market?
00:26:29.000For example, look at some of these industries where Japan and China and other countries have been rising against us for decades or are poised to in the future.
00:26:39.000It's things like artificial intelligence, robotics, quantum computing, semiconductors, things like that.
00:26:47.000And that's just a short list, but things like that should be protected.
00:27:44.000I don't see how any way in how tariffs don't create a deadweight loss and how any way that it decreases our overall productivity to try to assume that this idea of these sort of protectionist tariffs work.
00:27:56.000And under my system, we would just specialize in what we do best because, as you said before, Nick, resources are.
00:28:05.000And on top of that, right, not all resources go effectively into the thing that we want to produce, right?
00:28:10.000Like, for example, right, like, not all land is perfect for growing avocados, yet, like, Mexico is very good at growing avocados.
00:28:17.000Why would the US then turn around and say, we're just going to grow avocados as much as we need for ourselves, even though our land isn't sustainable for that, right?
00:28:24.000And this sort of protectionism undermines this idea of specialization, which then allows us to not only consume more, as you said, in the short term, but consume more in the long term, while also we can implement policies.
00:28:37.000Even if I do concede the point, right, that trade deficits do hurt, which I don't, right?
00:28:41.000You could always implement policies that try to limit any sort of growing pains that come from trade deficits.
00:28:48.000Well, I would say that, you know, I'm not in favor of no trade because, I mean, it is true, obviously, that America just can't produce some resources.
00:28:57.000I think we can produce basically nearly anything as efficiently or more efficiently than any other country.
00:29:04.000But, I mean, it obviously isn't beneficial to do that.
00:29:08.000But if you look at, for example, as late as the 1970s, imports only accounted for 5% of our economy.
00:29:18.000And with the exception of, like you said, some specialty products like avocados or Swiss watches or things that grow in a more tropical climate, it's like geographically we just can't do it here.
00:29:30.000With the exception of things like that, I mean, we made virtually everything in America.
00:29:35.000And I think that we were doing fine in the 70s.
00:29:39.000And even if you look at the Industrial Revolution, it was under a tariff system that we went through the Industrial Revolution.
00:29:45.000And curiously, I think that time is actually very interesting that, like, Maybe 50 year period between the 1880s and the 1930s.
00:29:53.000It was during that 50 year period, and I guess that was like the second or third wave of industrialization, that Germany and America vastly exceeded Great Britain in terms of their economic output.
00:30:06.000Germany and America, they were protectionist during the Industrial Revolution versus Britain, which was free trade.
00:30:12.000And the United Kingdom or Great Britain, that's held up as the shining example of free trade by the free traders.
00:30:20.000They say, you know, in the The Jubilee in the 1890s and under Queen Victoria, only 10% of the GDP was government spending.
00:30:28.000And they had laissez faire internally and free trade with foreign countries abroad.
00:30:33.000And during that period in that Industrial Revolution, that is when they fell behind the other protective powers like Germany, America.
00:30:41.000America had the greatest gap that they've ever had in history with other countries in terms of output during the Industrial Revolution when we had protective tariffs.
00:30:52.000And that was actually the norm from the War of 1812 all the way through until the FDR administration tariffs.
00:31:00.000And so I think that, you know, that's sane America first policy.
00:31:04.000I think that's the, you know, American trade policy that made America a great industrial power.
00:31:08.000And, you know, I hear, you know, like deadweight loss and things like that.
00:31:13.000A lot of the problem with free market people is the excessive focus on theory.
00:31:19.000And the problem, it's not that I have a problem with economic theory, it's the problem that economic theory, Is very, can be very limited and can't tell the whole story, which, like I just talked about, like balance of payments is a perfect example.
00:31:35.000First of all, bringing up the 1970s and bringing up those other examples that you brought up, I mean, that could be up to a thousand different factors during the time.
00:31:42.000So I'd have to ask you to prove causation on every single one of those points that you brought up, right?
00:31:46.000Because, I mean, the 1970s grow, boom and busts.
00:32:24.000Just an economic indicator that just shows us how much we are spending and how much we are spending and how much we are getting in.
00:32:31.000And as such, I mean, the best example of this is, for example, the last time America had a significant decrease in its trade deficit was in 2009 during the Great Recession.
00:32:39.000So, again, that's just the first point.
00:32:41.000Trade deficits are nothing more than an economic indicator, really.
00:33:05.000And none of those are good for the long term.
00:33:09.000None of those trade offs are good long term decisions.
00:33:12.000So, I mean, consumption is good for the economy, like in a very broad way, but like maximizing consumption at the expense of your factors of production, that's not good for the economy.
00:33:23.000See, yeah, and I'm going to address that point, but I'm going to make my second point that I was going to make, which is trade deficits leave out an important piece of the picture, which is foreign investment, right?
00:33:34.000The flow of capital from outside foreign countries, like Oh, Rosh is too scared to join the Zoom.
00:33:45.000Yeah, I invited him to join the Zoom just because it would be funny.
00:33:47.000And then he goes, No, I'm afraid not, with a Nazi in the call.
00:33:52.000Yeah, I just want to say, I'm willing to talk to anybody.
00:33:57.000So, anyways, the flow of capital in building a new factory or purchasing government bonds is left out of that number.
00:34:06.000And in America, we have such a massive capital surplus, meaning companies and individuals around the world invest more money in the U.S. than we do abroad.
00:34:14.000So, this sort of money coming in could theoretically just literally absolve any sort of trade deficit that we have just because of how big of a capital surplus we have.
00:34:27.000And to move on to your point, you're looking at it from this fashion where it's just two nations that are trading with each other.
00:34:34.000Trade deficits happen because of individualistic contracts, right?
00:34:39.000So, pretty much, it's this idea that both sides of the parties are agreeing to this.
00:34:43.000Assume through the rationality of the individual in the free market, right?
00:34:47.000That both sides see in that benefit in this, right?
00:34:49.000Like the idea that saying, oh, oh, you always have to pay for what you get.
00:34:54.000Yes, while yes, we have to pay for what we get, we get marginal benefits out of every single good that we purchase because it's the individual rationality of the person.
00:35:03.000Yeah, if it's free trade, usually it's the individuals making their own decisions based on where they need to put the investment into different industries, right?
00:35:12.000And then I found it interesting that you brought up, um, Great Britain during industrial times, I'm pretty sure, if I'm not mistaken, Great Britain, 18 something to 1850, they had a ton of protectionist areas.
00:35:23.000They had corn laws, they had navigation laws, they had stuff like that.
00:35:28.000And Ireland was trying to adjust because they couldn't produce, obviously, they couldn't produce potatoes as well anymore, right?
00:35:35.000Because, you know, they had the potato famine and they're trying to adjust.
00:35:38.000And because of these protectionist tariffs, they weren't able to adjust their food as much because the navigation laws made it so that it was only British ships that could move around, like, Different foods, and then the corn laws made it so that these seeds and the corn and all of this grain was expensive to bring in.
00:35:56.000So, I mean, you could argue that because of these protectionist tariffs and the inability for the free market to allocate resources efficiently, people died in the name of it.
00:36:06.000And then, as soon as you had the repeal of these navigation laws and corn laws, you actually started having the Irish people start eating more again because the United States was able to start sending things over to Ireland.
00:36:20.000Which is to say that, again, when you're talking about rational actors in the economy, you're making a lot of assumptions.
00:36:30.000And the point I'm trying to get across for most of this discussion is that the free trade argument, it's not necessarily that what free traders are arguing is necessarily wrong.
00:36:42.000It's just that it's based on a lot of assumptions, which is to say that as a country, we have to make value judgments about what we desire.
00:36:52.000Simply saying that it's the free market and rational actors are making decisions that are beneficial for themselves.
00:37:06.000We as a country have to decide what we want to do strategically with our industry and with our country.
00:37:12.000You know, a business might very well decide to make, for example, a decision to offshore jobs to China or something like that.
00:37:19.000And that very well might be in the interest of the business.
00:37:22.000But, you know, again, we're sort of talking about this like fallacy of composition, so to speak, which is to say that what's good for a company and what is a company?
00:37:32.000A company is, you know, the leader of the company.
00:37:34.000Maybe that's a CEO or that's an owner or that's a board.
00:37:39.000And ostensibly, their shareholders, what's good for the firm owners or the people that direct the firm, any particular firm, is not necessarily what's good for the rest of the country.
00:37:51.000And that's sort of what we're getting at here.
00:37:52.000Even consumers, what consumers, what firm owners, the decisions that they make, rational as they may be in a narrow economic sense, are these good decisions for the country?
00:38:03.000Because what we're getting down to fundamentally is that there's a difference between the global market and a nation.
00:38:14.000When you start talking about rational actors and marginal utility and things like that, I mean, that can be applied to an economy, but you're talking now about the world economy.
00:38:25.000And what is necessary from that conclusion or what's necessary from that thought process is that the benefits that accrue to individual actors in this global economy, the benefits accrue to the global economy, which means that the benefits don't necessarily go to the country.
00:38:42.000I mean, sure, firms and consumers might make their decisions on a global basis, but the beneficiary of that is not necessarily always America.
00:38:53.000You know, if you want to talk about that in the context of like Alabama or Michigan or Maine or California, then, you know, I would probably agree with you.
00:39:01.000But we're talking about nation states.
00:39:02.000And so, therefore, you know, decisions that are undertaken in free trade that benefit individual firms or actors, I mean, in a sense, this makes the global economy more efficient, and maybe this benefits.
00:39:14.000China or it benefits other trading partners, but does it benefit America?
00:39:18.000And I think, again, if you're looking at what exactly you're trading away for these consumption goods, assets, debt, things like that, currency, it ends up hurting, again, it's the long term horizon for America, the long term prospects for America.
00:39:35.000I don't want to trade our productive assets, our productive capital for consumption goods.
00:39:42.000That's not strategically good for America, it's not economically good for America.
00:39:46.000Eventually, with trade deficits, you'll have to curb your consumption to subsidize those deficits.
00:39:52.000So, you know, it just gets back to what value judgment do we want to make?
00:39:56.000I mean, we've got a lot of economic theory to work with.
00:39:58.000And, you know, the economic theory, we could get into the weeds on that.
00:40:02.000But, you know, even if you think these things are true, balance of payments is still a reality.
00:40:06.000You still have to pay for these deficits.
00:40:08.000Deficits are not just an accounting abstraction.
00:40:11.000And we have to make choices about these things.
00:40:13.000So, and then the last part about the Irish potato famine, I'm not well read enough on that to.
00:40:20.000So, I don't really know the whole history of that.
00:40:24.000But I think it's worth pointing out that England was the greatest empire in world history and the most powerful empire in world history, really, until they started to embrace free trade.
00:40:35.000I mean, I think that you can attribute a lot of that to their embrace of free trade and their competitors and their rivals' embrace of protection.
00:40:43.000You know, in a lot of ways, like Germany, and this is more getting to like foreign policy, but Germany in the world wars was created because Germany was rising.
00:40:51.000As an industrial power, and their power is rising relatively to Britain, and that's why they challenge Britain for hegemony in Germany.
00:40:57.000And the same could be said about America, but without the war.
00:41:03.000So that's what I would say about that.
00:41:09.000The first thing is that the UK example, or Great Britain rather, I'd say it's not really about their embrace of free trade and more the fact that their colonies really didn't like them and started revolting around the 1950s.
00:41:20.000I wouldn't really say that their embrace of free trade had anything to do with that.
00:41:23.000I'd really say it was more like the riots and the protests and half their empire trying to get out under the boot of their revolution.
00:41:51.000And I keep on buying from this restaurant.
00:41:53.000I have a negative trade surplus with the restaurant, right?
00:41:56.000A lot of the things that America produces, just like a lot of the things that I do there, are not part of that just one way track mindset, right?
00:42:15.000America's strong suit is in the sectors that aren't as easily quantifiable when it comes to the trade surplus.
00:42:21.000For example, social networking, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Google, those type of things, or services that aren't easily quantifiable when it comes to the trade goods.
00:42:32.000You did not address this when I brought this up before, right?
00:42:34.000But capital investment is so important when it comes to this.
00:42:37.000I don't even, the numbers when it comes to our difference of capital investment to all other nations across the world is massively, is so massive that It could easily take that over.
00:42:49.000The third point you brought up is that, oh, we can't bring up theory and we can't assess the rationality of the individual when, regardless of economic belief, the basic premise of economics is that the individual is rational.
00:43:03.000If the individual wasn't rational, Nick, then guess what?
00:43:05.000We wouldn't have an economy in the first place because individuals act in the interest to benefit themselves, right?
00:43:12.000That's not even something that you can debate, that you can say it's a theory because it's obviously not.
00:43:16.000I mean, if a Keynesian and an Austrian can agree on something, that probably means that that thing is true.
00:43:22.000And then the other point that I'd like to bring up as well is this idea that you're trying to state, like, you're trying to say, oh, we need to look out for what's best for the nation.
00:43:34.000First of all, how can you genuinely say that you can trust the economic decisions of this nation within the hands of individuals or maybe like what, 100 people?
00:43:46.000Could you trust an economy of no, not 316 million, of 7 billion people, because we're talking about the world economy as a whole.
00:43:56.000Could you trust that economy in the hands of 100 people or worse, in the hands of one Fed chairman?
00:44:00.000Of course not, because humans are naturally at fault.
00:44:03.000This is why the free market allows this to do better, because guess what?
00:44:05.000The free market is a collective correction.
00:44:09.000This collective correction allows for multiple transactions to pretty much correct themselves over time.
00:44:14.000While, yes, individually, people will not do what's best for the nation, but guess what?
00:44:19.000As a collective, they will, because guess what?
00:44:22.000All of the companies that are based here in the U.S. want to increase profits, all of the people that are here in the U.S. want to increase consumption.
00:44:50.000China has what, 1 billion people, while the US has 316 million people.
00:44:54.000Even if we look at that, China has obviously a much larger labor market.
00:44:58.000So, regardless, and has less regulations on labor laws and minimum wage and et cetera, right?
00:45:03.000So, regardless of whatever tariffs or et cetera that you put into any sort of car, the tariffs would have to be so incredibly high that they would not work in the first place in order for you to make sure that these companies stay in the United States.
00:45:16.000So, that's all I've got to say, really.
00:45:21.000Can I respond first just while it's fresh in my memory?
00:45:32.000From free traders, and they say things like, Well, you know, you have a trade deficit with your supermarket.
00:45:36.000And I think that's actually very illustrative of the fallacy of composition that we're committing, comparing like individual consumers and individual firms with a nation.
00:45:48.000You know, it would be comparable if you were saying that in order to buy your groceries, you were like only using a credit card and you had to pay that back, you know, like decades and centuries into the future.
00:46:00.000Or if you said that you're going to like mortgage your house, you know, or you're going to refinance your house in order to pay for the groceries.
00:46:06.000Well, here, I'll buy my groceries in exchange.
00:46:33.000You said that, well, America has like service jobs or something, and that's.
00:46:39.000I don't really know how that's relevant.
00:46:42.000You said something about Facebook and we have different jobs than China or something.
00:46:47.000And I would say that when it comes to the jobs that are replacing the jobs that we've lost, for example, with NAFTA, we lost something like 750,000 jobs between 1994 and I think 2003 because of NAFTA.
00:47:03.000I mean, we completely lost those jobs as a result of the NAFTA agreement.
00:47:07.000And if you look at the jobs that replaced the manufacturing jobs, Largely service jobs, and this is the big problem with free trade they paid less.
00:47:15.000And this is a big problem with factors of production is that when you look at labor and capital, it doesn't move as freely as financial capital, it doesn't move as freely as currency.
00:47:28.000So, for example, some free traders will say, Well, you're going to lose jobs and you're going to gain jobs.
00:47:33.000You might lose manufacturing, but you'll get service jobs.
00:47:36.000One of the big problems with free trade and why it doesn't often show up in unemployment is because the people or the workers that free trade affects don't always end up unemployed.
00:47:45.000But they often end up underemployed, which is to say that you may go from earning a pretty high wage on an assembly line or in a manufacturing plant and then end up as some kind of a service worker, like at a McDonald's or as an aide in a school or as something like that, some kind of untrained assistant.
00:48:05.000And so when you're looking at that job loss, it's often pretty devastating.
00:48:09.000And also, it doesn't account, you don't typically see that show up in just plain unemployment statistics.
00:48:15.000It'll show up as underemployment, it'll show up as people that are not really.
00:48:19.000Reaching their full potential in terms of what capacity they were operating at before.
00:50:09.000And like I said earlier, when you have a global economy, then the benefits don't always accrue to your nation.
00:50:15.000I want to make our nation as wealthy and as powerful and as good of a strategic position as possible.
00:50:21.000And that simply cannot be done when, for example, in a perfect free trade economy, we would expect that Americans would relocate to China with their capital.
00:50:31.000And over there in order to do some of these jobs.
00:50:34.000I mean, in a perfect free market, or perfect free trade situation, you would have people getting up from America and constantly flying all over to different countries in pursuit of jobs.
00:50:45.000And of course, borders matter because people can't do that.
00:50:48.000So we have to impose the same regulations on our other factors of production, which is our capital, our land.
00:50:55.000Obviously, our land's not going anywhere, but our land, our entrepreneurship, which comes in the form of technology and patents.
00:51:02.000You said that we do so much trade with China that it would be not feasible to regulate it, but that's just simply not true.
00:51:07.000There are all kinds of restrictions and regulations we could put in place, not just tariffs, but other non tariff trade barriers.
00:51:14.000For example, we could say that our companies can't use their manufacturing know how to teach Chinese people how to make factories.
00:51:22.000We can't have our technology sold off to China.
00:51:25.000One of the prerequisites to get access to Chinese markets with a lot of firms is that they will give over their tech.
00:51:33.000To China, one of the terms often is that they'll have to train the people in China to do the work in their factories.
00:51:40.000And that expertise and know how is very critical because one of the ways that a country develops, how an economy grows, is that these industries that are, like you said, I think earlier, very critical and important, we can agree, things like computers and things like artificial intelligence and so on, a lot of that know how is necessary to then research and develop that technology further.
00:52:04.000When we lose a factory, we're not just losing jobs, we're also losing the fact that all the people in the factory that have those skills and have that know how are now in another country.
00:52:15.000And who do you think it's going to be that's going to have the know how and the expertise to further develop the technology and then build the technologies and the new things of the future?
00:52:24.000So, you know, it's really not just that we're losing jobs sometimes or we're losing companies or we're losing things, but we're also, it's properly said, it's de industrialization.
00:52:36.000We're really just completely losing our momentum and actually regressing.
00:52:39.000We don't know how to build the same things.
00:52:53.000Look at the tariffs against China or Mexico or the European Union or Canada.
00:52:57.000We could bring countries to their knees with tariffs, and it doesn't take much.
00:53:02.000Wait, if we could bring countries to their knees with tariffs like China, when China put tariffs on us, wouldn't that have also put us to our knees?
00:53:22.000Is being enriched by these trade policies.
00:53:25.000You know, before the World Trade Organization and before we opened up our markets to China, I mean, China was a total shithole third world country.
00:53:53.000That's just such a one way just looking at the One specific aspect of the economy, look into NAFTA.
00:53:59.000NAFTA also increased our global trade by four, I mean, rather global trade, increased like trade by four times the amount.
00:54:06.000We almost saw a $1.23 trillion increase in trade yearly, right?
00:54:13.000Do you know what $1.23 trillion extra dollars in the market means?
00:54:16.000That extra liquidity in the market creates more jobs as you need more people to service, for example, the extra truck drivers that come from Mexico up into the United States, or the truck drivers that came from Canada into the United States.
00:54:49.000You don't have an issue with foreign direct investments.
00:54:52.000You can't be for free trade and then be against foreign direct investments.
00:54:55.000Free trade, I mean, Did I say that for free?
00:54:59.000You can't be against free trade and be for foreign direct investments because these sort of protectionist tariffs lead to the decrease of foreign direct investments, especially decrease of capital surplus back into this country.
00:55:10.000Another thing is, when I brought up that we specialize in services, you said, if I'm not mistaken, you said like you don't understand what that brings to the discussion.
00:55:18.000What I'm saying is that even in the numbers that you're citing in this quote unquote trade surplus, it's not showing you the bigger picture because guess what?
00:55:25.000Most of the stuff that we send over to China is, as you said, Nick, know how, knowledge, information.
00:55:32.000Social media, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, all these different types of things that don't actually have an economic dollar value tied to them per se and don't get factored in into our trade surplus or trade deficit or regardless.
00:55:43.000So, in reality, the number is just much smaller than it's made out to be because all you're looking at, Nick, is production.
00:55:50.000And regardless, when we look at production and when we look at just pure, like, just factory goods, just producing factory goods, of course, China's going to produce more than us.
00:56:01.000You said something along the lines of like, when I said that we can't stop free trade with China, you said, You can do things that aren't tariffs.
00:56:14.000And even if we do agree, even if we say that for some reason we have the monopoly on how to make a basic factory, you know, even though like the second industrial revolution happened like what, 100 something years ago, like they already have the knowledge right now at this point in time from what you said.
00:56:41.000Third of all, they actually only hurt our economy more than they would help us because they decrease foreign direct investment while at the same time creating deadweight loss, which you haven't been able to tell me anything about, right?
00:56:51.000About why deadweight loss doesn't happen.
00:56:53.000So, well, you're not really engaging with what I'm saying.
00:56:57.000I mean, I'm not saying that we're going to prevent China from building factories.
00:57:01.000I mean, you know, I'm not talking about like, of course, factories have been around for hundreds of years.
00:57:07.000I'm talking about like, when you're talking about These industries, which are very sophisticated industries, very developed industries, when you're talking about technology in particular, I'll give you an example.
00:57:20.000For a long time, Apple basically outsourced the production of chips that they use in their phones to other suppliers, like Intel and a few other companies, and also some companies in China.
00:57:36.000Because they were outsourcing that part of their phone, the production of it to other companies, Companies in China were learning about Apple's proprietary hardware and their software because they were producing those chips for Apple.
00:57:50.000Recently, Apple is now developing their own proprietary chips.
00:57:56.000And so they're making their own proprietary chips in house.
00:58:00.000And now they're able to customize it better and it's more efficient.
00:58:03.000And I'm not a tech guy, but there's a lot of benefits to this.
00:58:07.000As a consequence, now companies like Huawei, which is a phone company in China, They are not going to benefit from a lot of the hardware and software know how that they get from that business making chips for Apple for their iPhones.
00:58:24.000I'm not saying like China wouldn't know how to build a factory if it weren't for us, obviously.
00:58:28.000I'm talking about in these very sophisticated sectors of the economy where it's niche and it relies on specialists and experts.
00:58:38.000When you're talking about some of these factories, you're talking about training workers, you're talking about training.
00:58:43.000And bringing in a lot of human capital, a lot of talent.
00:58:47.000And when you're moving that entire process to another country, then they gain the upper hand and they gain the advantage on producing the next iteration of that.
00:58:54.000You know, Japan is a perfect example of this.
00:58:56.000You know, America was not able to capitalize on the production of consumer electronics in the same way as Japan was.
00:59:04.000We totally fell off on things like VHS and on camcorders and all kinds of things like that.
00:59:09.000That's why a lot of our televisions and other consumer electronics are made in another country.
00:59:15.000It'll be very lucrative for America to have.
00:59:17.000And the other thing is just because China can produce more than us, it's kind of getting away from the point.
00:59:22.000I mean, China has like a billion people, but the question is about efficiency.
00:59:26.000And the other question is about who's going to do the producing, who's going to get the jobs, and who's going to be able to sell that technology.
00:59:33.000And America should be producing those things.
00:59:35.000If America can produce things, America should produce it.
00:59:38.000And the point I made earlier about the 1970s is that trade is really negligible.
00:59:44.000The point I made about the 1970s, you said, oh, well, you're going to have to show me a causal factor.
00:59:50.000The point I made about the 70s when I said that 5% of our GDP was trade was to say that it's not like we were a poor country.
00:59:58.000It's to say that even when trade was a minuscule part of the economy, and we hardly relied on countries for anything necessary, we had everything that we needed.
01:00:08.000We had virtually everything that we have today, with some obvious exceptions new technology, new developments, almost all of which have been developed in America.
01:00:17.000But the point was to say that the trade is really.
01:00:20.000The icing on the top, as opposed to like a foundational pillar for the economy, it's really just sort of like you know, like you said, avocados.
01:00:28.000It's things that, if we must, we can get, you know, luxury goods and things that have to be produced in a certain tropical climate or, you know, things like guano or oil or, you know, whatever.
01:00:37.000Things that we just simply cannot produce here, we can get from somewhere else.
01:00:40.000But there's really no good reason that so much of our economy has to be tied up in trade.
01:00:45.000And you said, like, well, NAFTA losing three quarters of a million jobs is no big deal because the volume of trade increased.
01:00:52.000And it's like, you know, jobs actually matter because producers and workers, Or rather, producers and consumers are the same people.
01:01:01.000Producers and consumers are the same people.
01:01:09.000I didn't finish my point, but does someone have an interjection that was like.
01:01:13.000Sorry, if you want to continue your point, if you want, but I believe the way that you're describing jobs as such a high necessity and so hard to create is an incredible overstatement.
01:01:24.000We've seen our government be able to produce jobs for its citizens several times over in the past.
01:01:33.000And to suggest that the NAFTA agreements that led to three quarters of a million people losing their job is due to tariffs is kind of a false causation.
01:01:44.000It's most likely to do to other barriers of entry and probably not tariffs.
01:01:49.000Tariffs, if anything, create cyclical employment, which is above the natural rate of employment and is much harder to recover from than either frictional or structural unemployment.
01:02:01.000So, none of what you just said is even remotely relevant to what I'm saying.
01:02:08.000It's like arguing with, I don't even know.
01:02:11.000This is the problem that the economic literature on this is just so decidedly wrong that, I mean, you can't even grapple with these practical considerations that I'm talking about here.
01:02:22.000I'm telling you about Americans that are losing employment.
01:02:25.000I'm talking about Americans and America losing industries that are critical in the industries of the future.
01:02:32.000We're losing our technology, we're losing our human capital.
01:02:53.000And, you know, again, the answer to my point about, and by the way, this is a government study that says that on net, not gross, on net, NAFTA cost us three quarters of a million jobs.
01:03:08.000And the answer to that is well, the volume of trade increased.
01:03:11.000Well, I mean, who do you think are the consumers?
01:03:14.000It's the people that are working these jobs.
01:03:16.000You know, imagine you lose your job, you lose your good manufacturing job to Mexico, and it went right over the border in, for example, like automotive industry and in a lot of other sectors.
01:03:27.000But people are going to say, well, you're going to pay like a dime less for a can of beef.
01:03:30.000Nick, you're misunderstanding my point here, though.
01:03:49.000What I'm saying is, how could they measure that net?
01:03:50.000Because if I'm not mistaken, doesn't it, hasn't the unemployment rate and the number of jobs been decently positive even during the times of NAFTA?
01:03:56.000Like, how are they measuring this on net?
01:03:58.000Well, NAFTA is not the only thing that's happening in the economy.
01:04:02.000So I'm just wondering how they're measuring this on net.
01:04:04.000How are they measuring exactly how it's.
01:04:07.000Well, because when it comes to creating jobs in terms of consumer like surplus, right?
01:04:11.000And if we talk about like Deadweight loss, let's say.
01:04:13.000If you're taking away from the consumer and purchasing power, and it's interesting that you bring up regress and progress.
01:04:18.000If we're trying to progress in terms of investment, then you would want the consumer to have the power in order to buy things from not just these current industries that you're listing out, but future industries, being able to invest and save.
01:04:29.000And these go into like capital investments and such.
01:04:33.000So when you talk like, I don't know how they're measuring this on net in terms of capital investments and investments into different jobs, into different industries that were created in net from that.
01:04:44.000If we export jobs and it increases the amount of power that the consumer has, how are they measuring what these consumers are spending their money on in creating industries and jobs in those industries?
01:04:56.000They're looking at jobs that are being lost as a result of the trade agreement and all the industries and sectors covered in the trade agreement.
01:05:05.000And you can measure the jobs that are gained.
01:05:07.000And NAFTA, and by the way, this is universally recognized that NAFTA did lead to a net loss in employment.
01:05:15.000What you guys are telling me essentially, and this gets back to the fundamental point, whereas we're talking about, or the tariff position, the protectionist position is talking about industry.
01:06:49.000Okay, and they can go spend it on different industries to create demand elsewhere, which has to be met by supply.
01:06:55.000I don't think that's necessarily true because I think that the gain that consumers get is so marginal and negligible that it doesn't even begin, it doesn't even approach offsetting the job loss.
01:07:07.000When you're talking about hundreds of thousands or millions of job loss, you know, look at, for example, like the trade war that we've been in with China for the past couple of years.
01:07:15.000We've put serious tariffs on China and, you know, serious tariffs on steel and other industries.
01:07:22.000Was there any noticeable increase in the cost of goods?
01:07:25.000As far as I know, the consumer price index didn't go up considerably at all.
01:07:30.000Okay, well, Nick, Nick, Nick, Nick, one point, one point.
01:07:33.000I looked up the 750,000 number that you brought up, by the way.
01:07:35.000And the study, by the way, is done by the Economic Policy Institute.
01:07:40.000And I think you might have misread the data because it says direct net job loss, right?
01:07:44.000And actually, if you look at it, trade, most of the jobs that we get from trade are indirect.
01:07:49.000So either A, the study is flawed and tried to just push an agenda for no reason because.
01:07:54.000Because of its flawed methodology, because I haven't seen a single study to date that has ever tried to look at trade and looked at it without looking at indirect benefits.
01:08:02.000When you actually look at indirect benefits, right?
01:08:04.000We created 5 million jobs in the total time.
01:08:07.000We created about, if I'm not mistaken, between 1993 and 1997, 800,000 jobs.
01:11:20.000They're looking specifically at markets that would have been affected by this sort of job.
01:11:24.000They're not looking at the internet as you presume.
01:11:26.000They're looking at, for example, trucking or consumer spending in groceries, especially when we're looking at Mexico, because Mexico is one of our biggest exporters of groceries, right?
01:11:33.000So, again, this is a 19 page document from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
01:11:37.000And if you'd like, I'd be more than happy to link every single one of my sources to you, right?
01:11:41.000Yeah, well, you're going to have to give me some time to read the 19 page document.
01:11:45.000All right, Nick, Nick, I want to go over something that you said earlier.
01:11:49.000So, you said that the consumer price index hadn't really gone up, as you could, so far as you could tell.
01:11:55.000And I mean, while that's technically true, the average American household is spending, I think it was between $32 and $57 more every month.
01:12:04.000And a lot of this has correlation and didn't actually start until the tariff increases.
01:12:12.000Not only that, but what were you saying?
01:12:13.000I'm not going to touch about what you were saying towards the beginning of the debate about, like, I think it was time preference.
01:12:18.000You said something about now versus later.
01:12:23.000But I do want to bring up, okay, I guess I will kind of touch on that.
01:12:29.000So, what these tariffs do is they do, in some way, They encourage present consumption as opposed to future consumption.
01:12:39.000One way of doing this is against American steel and, or not American steel, Chinese steel produced by American companies and farming equipment and capital equipment produced by American companies in China.
01:12:52.000What this does is we can't import this and use it to hire Americans and create jobs and create growth, long term growth, not this short consumption growth, jobs and like actual capital equipment.
01:16:34.000The reason that we will always lose on jobs against these countries is because when it comes to labor, they have the comparative advantage.
01:16:43.000So when you're looking at China, when you're looking at Mexico, when you're looking at India, this is one of the laws of international relations, actually.
01:16:50.000When you're looking at the factors of production, you're just always going to lose when you're competing with a country like that when it comes to labor.
01:16:57.000And, you know, there's no magical rule, by the way, that says that.
01:17:03.000There's already like five people arguing with me, and they're like, I'm playing Civ and people are like, well, I just looked up the study.
01:17:10.000But the point is this there's no magical rule that says that you're going to get as many jobs back as you give up.
01:17:19.000And actually, it's proven that the opposite is true.
01:17:22.000And it's true and it makes sense because the jobs that we're now taking, the jobs that have replaced the manufacturing jobs, a lot of them are highly technical and highly specialized.
01:17:32.000I didn't get to flesh this out, but it's a perfect example, like with the factory jobs where You might be making one wage and now you're working a much lesser wage because you're working in a restaurant or something like that.
01:17:43.000But on top of that, the new jobs that are replacing the old jobs are fewer in number and they require specialized education.
01:17:50.000So, you know, they'll often require a degree or some kind of training, whereas a factory job is a lot simpler.
01:17:55.000And, you know, that's a big problem with free trade as well.
01:17:58.000So, and what incentivizing people from other countries to come in here for less money for the benefit of corporations?
01:18:47.000I mean, the argument here, look, look, look, the argument here boils down to whether or not tariffs are A, feasible, B, necessary, C, do they give us benefits or losses, right?
01:18:58.000So, first of all, the feasibility of tariffs, right?
01:19:00.000I'd argue they're not feasible because, again, regardless of how much tariffs you implement, you won't be able to counter what you said so yourself the comparative advantage of labor that these companies have over us.
01:20:27.000So, you have to prove to me why these are feasible.
01:20:29.000I've shown you why they aren't feasible.
01:20:31.000The second point, which I brought up, was.
01:20:34.000Was comparative, was are they necessary, right?
01:20:38.000I told you how this is only a one track mindset.
01:20:41.000When we look at an economic circumstance, we have to look at five tracks.
01:20:45.000We have to look at every single thing.
01:20:46.000We have to look at the decrease in capital goods that will happen because of this, which will actually contribute to trade deals.
01:20:51.000We have to look at why that trade deficit number doesn't exactly make sense and doesn't necessarily factor in everything that needs to be factored in.
01:20:57.000Like, for example, most of the goods that we give to China are actually goods that really wouldn't be factored in in any sort of like trade deficit.
01:21:03.000Trade deficits only look at genuine goods that are feasible and can be interchanged.
01:21:08.000Right, which a lot of the goods that we actually give them, like expertise, cannot be feasibly given like a dollar value, right?
01:21:14.000And the third thing is net benefits versus net loss.
01:21:16.000We can look at NAFTA to this NAFTA, five million jobs, right, that created indirectly through NAFTA's uh, through the increase in trade, right?
01:21:25.000And even if I agree, by the way, that you say, oh, specialization, oh, most of the jobs that we actually got back were specialized, yeah, but guess what?
01:21:32.000Specialized job owners actually generate more income, more income means more consumer spending, more consumer spending means more money circulating in the market, more money circulating in the market means more jobs.
01:21:41.000So, regardless, it's Regardless, even if I accept you at your highest premise, you still fail to prove the point, right?
01:21:47.000The second point of NAFTA is foreign direct investment, something that you didn't mention.
01:21:51.000We increased our foreign direct investment in this nation by $500 billion.
01:21:54.000That means more money for American companies, more money for American workers, more money for American jobs to be created.
01:22:00.000So, regardless, yeah, more money for stock buybacks.
01:22:05.000No, because, okay, then I don't think foreign direct investments don't go into stock buybacks.
01:22:10.000Foreign direct investments go into creation of like factories, creation of like For example, innovation, research and development, et cetera.
01:22:33.000After Nick has his rebuttal, I say we move into something like immigration because we're kind of like.
01:22:39.000So, after 200, so tell me how 200 people, tell me how 200 people, or Really, if we're going to be honest, one or two people, right, can manage a marketplace of about 316 million people, if not more, 7 billion people, because we're looking at global trade.
01:22:54.000And tell me why the free market doesn't do that better, considering it's a collective correction.
01:23:11.000And I believe, oh, yes, yes, we all know about the problem of calculation in a socialist economy, but I'm not a socialist.
01:23:19.000And I'm not in favor of a command economy or the state directs all production in the country.
01:23:24.000I'm not talking about the state directing all the production in America.
01:23:27.000We're talking about things that are very simple and common sense.
01:23:31.000When we're talking about some of these industries, which we know are strategic industries or the industries of the future, we need to protect those industries in America.
01:24:06.000Like, where do you think the internet came from?
01:24:09.000Where do you think semiconductors came from?
01:24:10.000Where do you think airplanes came from?
01:24:13.000You know, if it weren't for the U.S. military, you wouldn't have an internet.
01:24:16.000If it weren't for the U.S. military, you wouldn't have Boeing 747s.
01:24:20.000If it weren't for the military, you wouldn't have Silicon Valley.
01:24:24.000It was the U.S. government and monopolies that created a lot of this technology.
01:24:28.000The idea that only the free market knows how to pick and choose and everything, of course, we know.
01:24:33.000Like I said earlier, that AI, quantum computing, robotics, the future lies in those industries as compared to other things, as compared to industries like if China is making McDonald's toys or China is making Crocs or something like that.
01:24:49.000So it's not a question of a dozen people managing the economy.
01:24:52.000It's a matter of can, and this is just.
01:24:57.000I think the difference in how we're looking at this, we as a country have to make value judgments.
01:25:03.000And you could say like free trade, free trade, free trade, but fundamentally what you're saying is consumption.
01:25:07.000You're saying prioritize present consumption over really any other consideration, over how our workers are doing, over strategic considerations, over this sort of ladder of innovation that has to be built up, industrialization.
01:25:23.000So whether you choose to abstain from that choice or consciously make that choice, you're making a choice.
01:26:13.000How is it that we can finance hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars in trade deficits with productive capital, with assets, with debt, with currency that is used against us and manipulated?
01:26:24.000How is that in the long term benefit of us to receive consumption goods in return?
01:26:28.000And you said earlier, like, we're trading intangible expertise and that narrows the trade deficit.
01:26:34.000It's not a good thing to trade our expertise for consumer goods.
01:26:37.000That's maybe the worst thing possible.
01:26:39.000So, and I would also say that if free trade were all it's knocked up to be, you know, this is just the gold rush that I guess every other country in the world is missing out on.
01:26:48.000I guess, you know, Canada, the European Union, China, you know, America during the Industrial Revolution, Germany during the I mean, all these successful countries, all these countries that are absolutely killing it and enriching themselves, they're just missing out on this gold rush that is free trade.
01:27:04.000You know, free trade that lost Britain's comparative advantage in the Industrial Revolution, free trade which lost our comparative advantage in the past 30 years.
01:27:12.000Or, I guess you could say the past 80 years.
01:27:30.000I'm a immigrant to this country as an immigrant from North Africa, right?
01:27:34.000And yeah, I am in a debate team, but like, regardless, I still care about what this nation means.
01:27:39.000And that means actually supporting solutions that really work, solutions that help the American public, solutions that increase.
01:27:44.000Jobs, increased economic growth, solutions that have worked in the past, have worked in the present, and will work in the future.
01:27:52.000You are supporting an outdated system with facts that really don't hold your side, with methodologies and studies that really don't work on your side.
01:28:00.000And I mean, like, I mean, it's just, it baffles me how, like, you could still support a system that would actually hurt American workers in the future if you are truly an American.
01:30:43.000And then you start to get into like, okay, well, even if we afford a lot of rights and principles to native born Americans, what does American mean?
01:30:57.000And if you're on the left or you're, frankly, at this point, if you're even center left, you have no binding to what it means to be American.
01:31:19.000I'm not going to interject, you know, too harshly if someone jumps in, but it's like, what's the limiting principle on being an American?
01:31:26.000Because according to the left, if you're in an immigrant camp in Brownsville, Texas on the border, you know, you're facing horrible treatment and you deserve to be moved to the.
01:31:41.000Des Moines, Iowa, to get a job at a factory to displace a white worker.
01:34:42.000And even without the immigration, somehow they have remained a stable, safe, clean, traditional country.
01:34:52.000And so I also think about technological unemployment.
01:34:55.000It might be a good thing, maybe, that the population diminishes, but I don't think that the population diminishing necessitates that we replace the population with non white immigrants.
01:35:05.000And MJ, at this point, you still have not explained how.
01:35:09.000How mass migration would be a good response to life?
01:36:05.000They've been, people like you have been saying that since the mid 70s, that Japan's population is going to collapse on itself and the debt will collapse on itself.
01:38:14.000This black guy was just like using this white person in the nursing home as like a punching bag, just like brutally punching the shit out of this.
01:38:24.000I think it was a guy, or I don't know.
01:38:29.000And, like, you know, it's no secret that immigrants, even white immigrants, Polish immigrants, especially in Chicago, but Polish, Hispanic, Central American immigrants, and blacks, often blacks, often end up working as, like, nannies or in nursing homes.
01:39:07.000So in Michigan, Nick had a very good point on his show tonight.
01:39:11.000Nick talked about the fact that you can't import tens of millions of migrants into the third or into the first world from the third world over the span of 50 years, inject them with the ideology of anti whiteness, and then expect them to act civilly towards whites.
01:39:30.000Like, why would you expect that thing to happen?
01:39:34.000If you tell non white people when they enter this country that whites have always wronged them, have always hated them, have always enslaved them, have always beat them, why would you think it's like some weird anomaly that they start beating them when they start taking care of them at an old age?
01:39:48.000And then when white people become the minority, we think it's just going to flip.
01:40:10.000No, it's not relevant because you're misunderstanding the point.
01:40:14.000The point is that you're being sort of like snarky right now, but the point is this is that we import foreign people, and the point is that there are considerations outside of the social safety net and outside of this pyramid that we're trying to construct of like a giant base of taxpayers to support the social safety net or social security.
01:40:35.000The point is that the people that are coming here, if they're quite literally going to be physically abusing our elderly, Then, you know, what does it matter if they're paying for the Social Security?
01:40:44.000I mean, that obviously I'm not extrapolating, I'm being a little bit facetious, but that is symbolic and that is emblematic of the problem with mass migration.
01:40:54.000You might very well say that we're going to bring over Hispanics and they're going to pay for the Social Security for the current retirees and their benefits.
01:41:03.000But you also are ignoring the giant civilizational transformation that occurs when you transition to a different racial demographic.
01:41:13.000I mean, there's There's serious consequences to this, and to say that it's like, oh, well, we're just going to replace these people with these other people in a different color.
01:41:20.000Like, there's serious consequences to that.
01:41:23.000Okay, okay, Nick Fuentes, I'm just like really curious on why you used that Detroit example in particular, considering he was not an immigrant.
01:43:04.000Number one, I should point out, we have brought in more than 60 million immigrants since the 1965 Hartzeller Immigration Act.
01:43:11.000So, the volume of immigrants is too high, no matter what way you cut it, you know, whether they're coming from Europe or they're coming from anywhere.
01:43:21.000I don't think assimilation is even possible from a lot of these places, but there's no way that they're going to adhere to a new culture.
01:43:27.000There's no way that they're even learning the language or anything else for that matter.
01:43:32.000The other thing is that it's totally disruptive to the economy.
01:43:34.000And usually, to me, the economy is secondary, but if we're just talking about volume, there's just way too many people in this country in order for wages to rise.
01:43:42.000I mean, we know that the people that are coming in are coming in.
01:43:45.000I mean, there's a lot of family based immigration, but a lot of the immigrants have come in and they've totally destroyed the job market for high school graduates or people without a college diploma.
01:43:54.000But primarily, more than anything, and I don't want to get into the weeds on that, the primary.
01:43:59.000Reason we need no more immigration is because of the social and cultural consequences of a total demographic change, totally changing the racial composition of the country.
01:44:31.000It's about the fact that when you bring people over here, whether they're high IQ, low IQ, they're bringing over a culture that is alien and foreign and basically immutable.
01:44:40.000The non white people that we're bringing in cannot perpetuate the European culture that created America.
01:44:50.000Nick, what about the Cubans that went to Miami?
01:44:53.000Yeah, when their second generation became the same exact thing that they were not, and voted on the left and kept just continuation of the structure of this country.
01:46:27.000I mean, personally, I'd see Mormonism as, you know, extremely different to, let's say, a Protestant or a Catholic, if you take it, you know, those values.
01:46:44.000Well, it's not to say that there are no differences, but it is to say that, you know, strip away maybe regional things or, again, some of the trappings, and you do have a discernible monoculture.
01:46:56.000I think the more appropriate question would be Are the differences between Bostonians and Mormons equal or lesser to the differences between Bostonians and Nigerians?
01:47:09.000You know, clearly we would say that there are more things that Mormons and Utah have in common with Bostonians.
01:47:16.000In Boston, than Bostonians have in common with Nigerians.
01:48:18.000You can, you don't need to keep on saying it, bro.
01:48:20.000So, what I'm saying is if you said that the comparison between cultures and seeing how you know these values.
01:48:30.000How similar they are is a substantial argument to say it's American or not, then we can look at cultures outside of the borders, the geographical borders of America, and apply those same cultures to those values, right?
01:48:47.000So, if a culture had similar values to, let's say, Mormonism or Bostonian culture or New York culture, but they're outside of America, even though these same values were similar, To these American values, would you say they wouldn't be as candidates for immigration?
01:49:56.000But if there's some, you know, Western European culture that shares these same values, these values are similar, then they want to be, you know, candidates for immigration.
01:50:08.000You're labeling the problem with the difference in values, but if that's the case, then difference of values doesn't matter, so you're basing it on something else.
01:50:18.000Eventually, eventually, I think Europeans will be candidates to become immigrants.
01:50:23.000What we're talking about is right now.
01:50:25.000And like I said earlier, it's context denial to say that, to ignore the fact that we have just brought in more than 60 million immigrants since 1965.
01:50:37.000And the point is to say that even at this point, If we were to bring in European immigrants, I think that would be the least, that would be maybe the least disruptive place that we could bring in immigrants from.
01:50:48.000And I would be unopposed to bringing in European immigrants on the grounds of culture.
01:50:52.000But the reason that I say no European immigrants even now is because we have brought in tens of millions of immigrants from other countries.
01:51:01.000And for a variety of reasons, it's a good reason to not bring in any more immigrants.
01:51:06.000I think that Europeans absolutely pass the smell test when it comes to culture.
01:51:38.000That's not the major part of the problem that we're talking about.
01:51:44.000So it would be much better if you could just state your point instead of this laborious process of asking these sort of inane questions to build up to a point that isn't even salient.
01:51:56.000Which makes no sense to me whatsoever.
01:51:57.000And okay, well, elaborate on that, please.
01:52:00.000Yeah, no, that's not that's not that wasn't my point on any of this.
01:52:02.000So, like, I'd like to actually get into a debate now, like, instead of just dancing around points, right?
01:52:09.000And like, so I see the immigration debate personally on three planes.
01:52:14.000The first is the morality plane, the second is the policy plane, the third is the economic plane, right?
01:52:19.000So, when we look at the morality, Nick, do you believe that in the idea of innocence until proven guilty?
01:53:11.000It's because if I'm walking down the street at night, the proverbial walking down the street at night argument, and I see even just a man, if I, you know, forget about the color, creed, whatever, if I'm walking down the street at night and I even see a man as opposed to a woman coming up behind me, I'm going to be nervous.
01:53:28.000I'm going to prejudge that that person is a threat.
01:54:10.000Because again, your idea of saying, oh, you're not removing the individuality is completely flawed because you are essentially removing the individuality of the person by pretty much stating, oh, because you are part of this group, because you must believe what this group believes or you must follow what this group follows, you're removing the individuality of that person.
01:56:44.000And I think we as a people are sovereign over our land.
01:56:47.000And we actually have exceptional powers when it comes to this.
01:56:51.000Because when you're talking about citizens in our country, I apply a different set of standards to our citizens.
01:56:58.000You know, interactions on an individual by individual basis than versus a country.
01:57:02.000Because when you're talking about a country, number one, you're talking about a state.
01:57:06.000And a state's number one, you're talking about morality.
01:57:09.000The number one moral obligation of a state beyond everything else is to protect its people.
01:57:13.000So that, I mean, that is this very special consideration.
01:57:15.000Moreover, a state is not dealing with individuals.
01:57:18.000A state is dealing with, when we're talking about immigration, millions and millions, tens of millions of people over a decade or over several decades.
01:57:27.000And so when it comes to that, actually, we do have to generalize.
01:57:30.000And when it comes to a nation protecting its people, You do have to take special care to protect them.
01:57:36.000The other thing is that the act of immigration, if you want to talk about positive action, the act of immigration itself is a positive action.
01:57:43.000I mean, I don't want to go over and bomb potential immigrants in other countries, but I do think that we can prevent them from coming here.
01:57:50.000Immigrants have no right to come here, they're not entitled to come here.
01:57:52.000This is our country, and we as the people are sovereign over it.
01:57:55.000That's kind of a socialistic viewpoint, I would say that everybody owns the lands.
01:58:43.000But you're saying if we live it as a nation and collectively say they do not have the right, you're not speaking about rights, you're just talking about permission.
01:58:52.000So if the majority of the country says they want to come here.
01:58:55.000They do not have the right to come here.
01:58:56.000I mean, what are really, I don't even like rights talk.
01:59:15.000Protection from the idea that, I'm not even talking about crime, although I could, but I'm talking about protecting our country from a transformation.
01:59:25.000I look at Little Italy as a good example of this in Chicago.
01:59:28.000This is a native neighborhood in Chicago, obviously not indigenous, but I look at a part of the city like that, several neighborhoods in the city, and they've been steamrolled by Hispanic immigrants over the course of the past 30 or 40 years.
01:59:48.000Our native culture and the character of this country is being steamrolled over by other people.
01:59:53.000And we, as a country, have a right not just to protect our people and their safety and well being, but also to preserve and protect their communities, their neighborhoods, their schools, their workplaces, protect them from competition, protect them from threats to their heritage, protect them from threats to their life and their well being.
02:00:51.000All right, so all right, let's scratch what I said.
02:00:54.000So, you don't believe in rights because, or do you?
02:00:58.000It's not that I don't believe in rights, it's just that, you know, talking in terms of like, oh, you have a right to like move.
02:01:03.000I mean, to me, this is just kind of like a useless abstract.
02:01:06.000Oh, like in general, like what does that even mean?
02:01:08.000I mean, okay, if you have a right to like walk through the jungle where a tiger is, I mean, so it's like within a country, it's like Nick, the best example, hold on, a verbal, verbal, verbal, we've talked, we've talked a lot of times, verbal, right?
02:01:23.000So, the best example Nick gave that I saw live that he gave one time was about Rashad Brooks when he got tased, right?
02:01:35.000And it was after the Hotep debate with Hotep Jesus and all those people.
02:01:42.000And they were all debating, like, autistically, did Rashad deserve to die?
02:01:47.000And it's like, no, no one deserves to die in that situation.
02:01:50.000But it's like, you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes.
02:01:53.000And it's like, yeah, if you wrestle a cop for their taser, You will win the stupid prize of like getting tased and like you have a heart attack.
02:02:03.000It's like it's not that hard to like calculate.
02:02:09.000So it's like, yeah, if I fight a cop for his taser or for his nine millimeter and I get shot, it's like, yeah, maybe I die, but it's like, did I deserve to die?
02:02:23.000Maybe not necessarily, but it's like I played a very stupid game and I won a very stupid prize.
02:02:30.000I think the question is really not difficult there.
02:02:33.000I think people confuse these there when they talk about this.
02:02:35.000Usually, what they mean is, was it justified?
02:02:38.000So, I don't really see the relevance of your analogy as far as what you're talking about.
02:02:48.000But there's nothing much to say about what you just said.
02:03:25.000Here's the problem typically with when people talk about the economic benefits of immigration it's a question of who benefits from the immigration.
02:03:36.000This is another problem with a lot of the economic literature you have to specify who benefits because, of course, There are a lot of people in this country, and we have to look at the ways in which people are benefiting and who's benefiting.
02:03:49.000And what we find is that when immigrants come here, yes, it is true they add value to the economy.
02:03:55.000Yes, it is true that they add a surplus to the economy.
02:03:59.000But if you break it down, the value that they add to the economy is about $2.1 trillion.
02:04:05.000The value that they add, or the benefits of that value that accrue to the native people in this country, is about $50 billion.
02:04:14.000So, in other words, immigrants add $2.1 trillion to the economy, but the benefits of that, $2.05 trillion of that, accrues to the immigrants themselves.
02:04:24.000And moreover, if you're looking at winners and losers when it comes to immigration, the people that benefit, the natives that benefit in this country from that, are firms.
02:04:33.000The two groups that benefit from legal immigration are the firms that employ immigrants and the immigrants themselves.
02:04:40.000The people that lose are the American worker.
02:05:21.000In any case, we're talking about value added to the economy.
02:05:24.000It's like if you're bringing an immigrant in and they're an employee, the immigrant that they're adding is the value that they're adding through their labor or something like that.
02:05:34.000And the point is that if they're only adding $50 billion, you're bringing in millions and millions and millions of people, the benefit that they add to the actual native people is actually pretty marginal.
02:05:47.000It's not a difference maker, is the point.
02:06:01.000How far long are they tracing the money, the $2.05 trillion, just in direct benefits or reinvestment into the economy, reinvestment through concessions?
02:06:10.000Well, I mean, obviously, they're not calculating how the economy is rippling across the economy.
02:06:15.000But the point being is that it's a pretty simple point.
02:06:18.000It's just that when immigrants are coming here and they add economic value, it's like, well, Of course, insofar as immigrants are going to earn money and spend money, the economy will grow.
02:06:27.000But if you're dividing that by one extra person, I mean, do you get the picture?
02:06:33.000We're trying to determine if immigration works for America as it is.
02:06:38.000Adding immigrants and immigrants adding value to this country for themselves, they add into the denominator as well as the numerator.
02:06:45.000I mean, that's not really a question of our value.
02:06:48.000And then at that point, the question has to be asked if they're not adding significant value, if the value that's added is marginal, Then you have to begin to think about these other consequences.
02:06:59.000And I think you have to think about them regardless.
02:07:01.000But at that point, the question is is it worth it to bring in, to cause all this disruption, in other words, this transformation in exchange for $50 billion?
02:07:10.000I mean, it would be a viable question, I think, if it was a huge number, if the value that they added was huge.
02:07:27.000I don't know, but it doesn't matter because that's not the case.
02:07:30.000But, like, for example, I'm just looking at some economic literature, or rather, economic study in front of me right now, right?
02:07:37.000Which is done, if I'm not mistaken, if you want the source on it, it is done by the American Progress and So they looked at immigration, right?
02:07:46.000And they looked at how do immigrants benefit us right now?
02:07:50.000They benefit us about $690 billion increase in wages, rather, in income, right?
02:07:57.000Of immigrants, rather, not of immigrants, of citizens, like original native citizens in this country.
02:08:03.000So would you say that that's a benefit?
02:08:51.000And if you read his book, it's called We Wanted Workers.
02:08:55.000He goes over the methodology and how, if you look at just about any immigration study, you can take the same data and, depending on your methodology, can end up with wildly different outcomes.
02:09:06.000And typically and often, you'll find that a lot of these think tanks, which are backed by big business or backed by the political left, they will produce results that support the claim that immigration adds to the economy.
02:09:17.000And they'll do a variety of tricks like that.
02:09:21.000They'll break down welfare by the individual as opposed to the household.
02:09:25.000If you look at different studies on local markets where you've had a surge of immigration, they will look at people that are in high school.
02:09:36.000They'll look at people that aren't even eligible in the workforce.
02:09:40.000There's all kinds of ways that studies can be distorted.
02:09:42.000That's why it's very important to not just throw up a study that says, oh, hey, well, this study says that immigrants increase wages.
02:09:49.000If you're the supply and demand guy, then tell me how.
02:09:52.000Increasing the supply of labor will somehow increase the price.
02:09:56.000I mean, you know that when you get more of something, you're going to get a lower price.
02:10:00.000Because you assume there are assumptions with the supply and demand, especially.
02:10:05.000So, first, you assume that the kind of labor supply is uniform, right?
02:10:08.000You know, late uniform in terms of skills and uniform in terms of necessity, in terms of like, can the pie grow in terms of labor necessity if you have increased demand?
02:10:18.000And that's what I thought with the Borja study I thought it would be interesting if he looked more into the ripple effect of how money interacted further, right?
02:10:26.000How, you know, capital investment, stuff like that affected people who are native here.
02:10:33.000And when it comes to the labor market, you usually have people in the United States, native born citizens who are in the middle of the labor market.
02:10:42.000And then people who are coming from immigration, they are coming from either extremely low skill or extremely high skill.
02:10:48.000So they aren't necessarily competing for the exact same jobs.
02:10:50.000And then when they do come here and they create a demand, they're creating a job for, or a job or two for every job that is quote unquote taken.
02:11:53.000However much you need, it will be there and it will be expendable.
02:11:56.000And wherever they're coming from, they're going to earn a higher wage in America doing just about anything than they would be at home doing the exact same thing or something else.
02:12:05.000And so at that point, it becomes a question of, you know, if you have an endless supply of labor, what's the incentive?
02:12:12.000Is your incentive to hire Americans or to raise wages, or is it to hire cheap foreigners and cut wages when you absolutely can and when you have limitless potential to do so?
02:12:22.000I mean, to me, that is, and obviously it's limited by certain things.
02:12:25.000You know, it's limited by the government only gives out so many H 1Bs and they cost a little bit of money.
02:12:30.000But the point being is that, you know, I just don't, it just doesn't make much sense to me the idea that, like, oh, well, you're going to get this huge supply of labor.
02:12:39.000But actually, it doesn't decrease the price because of reasons.
02:12:43.000Because, well, indirectly, the money that Amazon saves from hiring a foreigner is going to be reinvested, and I don't know.
02:14:12.000If you're trying to establish that there's.
02:14:14.000But the point being is this we don't want to bring people over that are comparatively less criminal than the most disproportionately criminal population in the country or arguably in the world.
02:14:26.000We want to bring in people that are comparatively low crime to the majority.
02:14:30.000But wouldn't black people be in this uniform American culture, though, that you established earlier?
02:14:35.000Well, why wouldn't people, especially who have been here since 18?
02:14:56.000And what we find is that, you know, not only do blacks have like a totally different culture than us, and they just do, but they don't even identify with us.
02:15:05.000And that's the biggest component of assimilation is sure, they speak English, but I mean, obviously they have their own slang, they have their own dialect.
02:15:49.000Well, well, then aren't you kind of establishing that this American culture is just, again, this isn't, I'm not calling you anything, it's just old European culture at that point?
02:16:10.000Like violation, you know, child rape, right?
02:16:13.000If you look at the United Kingdom, for example, which is the thing that I want to bring up because everybody loves bringing up what is it again?
02:16:21.000If you look at rape in general in the United Kingdom, right?
02:16:24.000The CEO said that offenders in these cases often act in groups, which is true, right?
02:16:29.000But it also said that Compared to the proportion of Asian people in the general population, they actually do less, right?
02:16:35.000And when you actually look at total crime rates, most of it is committed by white people, which actually characterize about 70% of all rapes in the region, right?
02:16:46.000Like, I guess that's just an example of showing, like, this is comparative to the white population in the UK, not the black population, not the African population, not the anything population.
02:17:04.000Because well, I would, I don't know enough about the United Kingdom, but I would say that, uh, I mean, that's just completely bullshit.
02:17:10.000I mean, and then this is the problem is we, we clearly, what wait, you don't know enough about it, but you call it complete bullshit, yeah, yeah, absolutely.
02:17:17.000And here's why because we, we all the time, I mean, we see what's going on in these countries.
02:17:23.000I mean, you see it in the news, you see it all over the place, and then you know, you're going to have liberals that will come up and say, well, you know, according to this study, you can't, you literally cannot believe what you're seeing.
02:18:41.000If you're looking at the incarcerated population, In America, illegal immigrants, it's wildly disproportionate, wildly disproportionate for the population that they are.
02:18:50.000And moreover, and as I said earlier, if you're looking at the crime data, the reason why you're wrong, and why I said I knew you were wrong before I even cited this statistic, this is what everybody says.
02:19:00.000Well, you know, if you compare immigrants to the native population, immigrants commit less crime.
02:19:05.000And that is only because you have this dramatic outlier that blacks, you know, black men in particular, are, you know, roughly 5% or 6% of the population, and they're committing more than half of the crime.
02:20:26.000Because if you're going to try to establish, if you're going to try to establish, if you're going to try to establish that there's, you know, 11 million people, like even the moderate people, like this guy said earlier, it's like 13 or 14 million.
02:20:39.000That number has been in the low teens of millions, obviously, for like 20 years.
02:20:46.000And you can get estimates that range from between 11 to 40 million.
02:20:51.000So, you know, before you go and say that, oh, there's only 11 million illegal immigrants in the country, it's important to establish, inherently, the problem is that, you know, there's.
02:21:10.000Because that number has been used for 20 years, in spite of the fact that we know that millions of people have been coming over every year illegally.
02:21:52.000I mean, according to Ann Coulter and Bear Stearns, one of the leading financial institutions in America up until 2015, according to Audios America, written by Ann Coulter, we're looking at probably 20 to 30.
02:23:28.000Nick, don't they chop heads on the wall.
02:23:31.000I love how the wall birds are against it.
02:23:33.000No, Because I'm from North Africa and because I realize that giving a government that much power to allow them to decide whether or not it's okay to kill somebody and giving the government the power of life and death is wrong, that's why I believe that maybe, maybe we shouldn't have the death penalty.
02:23:53.000Because my home country, Algeria, had a dictator.
02:23:55.000For about, if I'm not mistaken, from 1905 to about 2020.
02:27:46.000Sidetracked on immigration, but just kind of surrounding this idea, just for sake of argument, so we can know if even discussing economics or anything other than social cohesion is even relevant.
02:27:56.000If we were to accept the premise for hypothetical, I mean, I personally believe this based on research I've done that immigrants are a net positive to the economy.
02:28:03.000But even so, even if we accepted that, would you still not be for it due to the social ramifications you necessarily see?
02:28:10.000Yeah, even if it was an economic boon, I would still say.
02:28:13.000So, us to discuss economics is basically irrelevant when it comes to.
02:28:31.000Again, I was making a point before we realized that.
02:28:34.000I was making a point before we realized that the Supreme Court decided to pretty much allow the government to fucking do whatever it wants.
02:29:26.000The president should be the one who gets out of his little motorcade, waves his hand, goes rah rah America on the 4th of July, and then everyone goes back to their lives as if the president.
02:30:14.000Because you were talking a little bit about another reason why you were against certain forms of immigration was because they like vote overwhelmingly, you know, for democratic policies and things like that.
02:30:23.000But wouldn't you say that a larger threat to that would be necessarily the white liberal, the natural born citizen who votes probably for those policies and even over.
02:31:00.000Nick, Nick, hypothetically, if we were to put this in place, this is not what I support, but just for sake of argument, if we were to support a plan in which first generation immigrants would not be able to vote.
02:31:44.000Republican, that's because they associate the Democratic Party with socialism.
02:31:48.000They don't want to put socialism, and they honestly don't care about the immigration policies.
02:31:52.000And they're allowed to look over the immigration policies of the Republican Party and say, okay, they can say, okay, it's okay that they don't like immigrants like us, as long as we don't get the commons that they see as a government.
02:32:39.000The issue here is that the reason why a lot of people don't vote for the Republican Party, especially us, is because you're anti immigrant.
02:32:46.000So it's kind of like you're shooting yourself in the foot.
02:32:48.000But that's because you see yourselves as immigrants and not Americans.
02:33:07.000So if you're anti immigration, anti the action of immigrating, it's regardless of whether you consider yourself American or not, you're anti the action that got them to the country.
02:33:14.000The Republican Party's not even anti immigrant.
02:33:17.000I mean, the Republican Party hasn't been anti immigrant for decades.
02:33:55.000How Republicans consider immigrants, and they're on the side of the immigrants.
02:33:59.000It's like that just proves the whole point.
02:34:01.000They're not properly assimilated, and we don't need any more of them.
02:34:04.000They're not properly assimilated, but Nick, what defines assimilation?
02:34:07.000I'm trying to say that the way that they got into this country is bad, right?
02:34:11.000Like, your premise here is like saying, your premise makes no sense here because what you're saying is that they're not properly assimilated because they don't agree with me, right?
02:34:20.000The only reason they don't agree with you is because you're attacking the very way that they got into this country.
02:34:27.000If you were to drop the anti immigrant rhetoric, I promise you, I 100% promise you, you would see an uptick in every single immigrant group, not even going for the Republican Party.
02:34:40.000Let's forget whether or not the Republican Party is or isn't anti immigrant on paper, right?
02:34:44.000Because regardless, the portrayal there is that they're still anti immigrant.
02:34:48.000If you were to drop the anti immigrant stuff, you would see a massive demographic switch from all demographics to go towards voting more right.
02:36:39.000But moreover, but moreover, wait, But moreover, my ancestors, when they got on this land, they kissed the ground when they got here and they considered themselves.
02:37:07.000George W. Bush, this was his great gamble, you know, compassionate conservatism.
02:37:12.000He let in, what was it, 8 million immigrants, legal and illegal, in the first five years of his presidency.
02:37:20.000And how have Republicans been rewarded from this?
02:37:22.000I mean, we don't even get more than half.
02:37:24.000We don't even get more than half of Hispanics.
02:37:26.000And the great gamble with George W. Bush's immigration plan was that if we would just bring them all over and get soft on them and so on, bless you, then we were going to win them all over the ballot box.
02:39:05.000You're acting like you're on some moral high ground by saying, oh, I'm not going to pander.
02:39:10.000Is why the Republican Party is about to lose Texas and why they've lost California and why they're going to lose this coming up election.
02:39:16.000See, this moral high ground of no pandering is so stupid.
02:39:19.000You're totally missing the point, man.
02:39:21.000This is just like total smooth brain stuff.
02:39:24.000The point is, if you're going to come over here and be an American, yeah, yeah, 100%.
02:39:29.000Because if you're going to come here and be an American, the whole point is that you clearly are still thinking as a foreigner when you say something like, well, I'm not going to vote for Republicans because they haven't pandered to immigrants.
02:39:40.000You're saying it's a perception problem.
02:39:46.000Wait, are you an immigrant, by the way?
02:39:48.000No, I'm speaking from their perspective.
02:39:50.000Well, you know, our friend over here from Algeria just said a moment ago he just said that he would be more inclined to vote Republican or whatever, but they have this anti immigrant rhetoric.
02:40:02.000And here's the thing you got to come here.
02:41:17.000What I'm talking about is real native born Americans.
02:41:19.000I'm talking about Americans that have been here for generations, not people that crossed over to the end zone and dropped a fucking baby over the border.
02:41:40.000Clearly, these immigrants that are coming into the Southwest aren't you openly pandering right now to people who would consider them Americans?
02:41:49.000Your entire movement is America First.
02:41:52.000Pandering to win some sort of political game.
02:41:54.000Like I said, like I said, I mean, that's just like a total idiotic objection because the point is not about pandering.
02:41:59.000I mean, this is just like a very low IQ, like comeback.
02:42:06.000The point is not about pandering in itself.
02:42:09.000The point is about American politicians bending over backwards to appease foreigners, to appease people that spiritually or in terms of their citizenship, you know, whatever you want to qualify it as, bending over backwards, excuse me, as representatives of this country.
02:42:27.000In the same way that I don't want the American president to bend over backwards to appease, or whatever word you want to use, pander to people living in Mexico now, I don't want the president to bend over backwards and appease people that lived in Mexico yesterday, walked across the border, and dropped a fucking baby in Texas.
02:44:07.000You just said, well, you know, immigrants need to be pandered to as immigrants.
02:44:11.000And, you know, I'll tell you, my America First message, I'm sure it appeals to people that consider themselves Americans.
02:44:16.000It's only foreigners who, by being alienated by my rhetoric in the first place, I mean, in the fact, they are proving themselves to be foreigners.
02:44:24.000Wait, Nick, are you saying the only people who are opposed to your message are immigrants?
02:45:05.000What clearly feels like you're kind of giving them an impossible problem, so they can't solve this.
02:45:10.000You're saying they should treat. themselves more like Americans so that they should declare themselves Americans so that they can get your respect.
02:45:18.000But no, they can't be Americans because they're foreigners and immigrants.
02:46:44.000They're voting left and they're voting for a party that is now explicitly anti American, against American values, against the Constitution.
02:46:51.000Any way you want to cut it, they're against America.
02:46:53.000And so, why would we bring in more people, whether we can win them or we can't win them?
02:46:57.000We have to pander, but visibly and significantly, whatever it is, we're bringing over people that are leftist.
02:47:03.000We're bringing over people that are voting Democrat.
02:47:34.000Well, I think the idea is not how many people you're letting in.
02:47:39.000I think it's the fact that you consider them.
02:47:42.000It would be, and then you might hate on me for saying pandering, but it would be helpful to consider them say you're coming here and you're becoming Americans.
02:47:50.000And this party, this Democratic Party, they're anti American.
02:47:53.000They're anti what you're coming here to stand for.
02:47:57.000What are they coming here to stand for?
02:47:58.000I mean, when people come from Central America, when people come from Mexico over there, they're economic migrants.
02:48:06.000We're talking about economic migrants, whether they come from an overstay visa from Asia or they come here by crossing the border in the South, they're economic migrants.
02:48:15.000I mean, they're not coming here out of any ideology of like, you know, the adventure of a lifetime and, you know, this rugged individualism.
02:48:22.000They're coming here because they're peasants in Mexico and they come here and they're able to live and have a decent standard of living.
02:48:27.000I mean, let's not pretend it's anything more than.
02:48:52.000Doesn't that show that if you were to be like, if you were to pander to them that you were like pro immigration, that they would vote Republican?
02:49:09.000One in 10 legal Hispanic immigrants identifies Republican.
02:49:12.000One in 20 illegal Hispanic immigrants identifies Republican.
02:49:16.000Why would we bring people over here that have not voted for a Republican in the majority in this century for president to bring them over here and then try to win them over when we could just simply not have them here and have the native population, which has been here for generations, Determine the outcome of elections as opposed to, you know, because it's clearly a game that the Democrats play.
02:49:37.000They bring in immigrants to Texas and Arizona.
02:50:40.000Okay, Nick, but I don't think the voting necessarily is what you're worried about because if we look at the necessarily when it comes down to.
02:50:47.000Hypothetically, if they were to vote Republican, would you still be anti immigration?
02:51:24.000So if we go back to this idea of the 2000 election, of the 2004 election, when it was 8 million more came in and there was about 10% increase in voting for the Republican Party, I think what we're failing to look at here is a majority of immigrants do not vote.
02:51:39.000It's not like immigrants are a large voting block in this country.
02:51:43.000So it's not like they will have this huge amount of sway that you're speaking of.
02:51:46.000And also, a 10% increase on 8 million immigrants, in which Their voting block is incredibly small, is an incredibly substantial amount considering how little they vote.
02:51:58.000But here's the thing I mean, you just don't know what you're talking about because the exact thing that I'm describing happened in California.
02:52:04.000Ronald Reagan won California, I think it was three or four times between president and governor.
02:53:15.000Plus, they can bring over more immigrants because of family based migration.
02:53:18.000So you bring over one immigrant and irreversibly you've brought in an entire family and then generations and it's exponential growth.
02:53:27.000And that's not voters, that's not just voters, but it's also You know, people that are living in the country.
02:53:32.000And I think that making these kinds of irreversible transformations demographically, this is something that we have to think very seriously.
02:53:41.000And you keep saying, okay, okay, and it's obvious you're not hearing me.
02:53:44.000This has to be thought about very seriously.
02:53:47.000And this kind of like, oh, well, you know, what if they don't vote?
02:53:49.000Oh, well, you know, what if we just pander to them?
02:53:50.000I mean, do you understand the gravity of tens of millions of people coming in here and displacing the native population?
02:53:56.000Do you really think it's as arbitrary as, oh, they just came from Mexico?
02:54:01.000Why do you think all the countries in Latin America don't work?
02:54:03.000How do you think you take people from a country that doesn't work and bring them to a country that does work, and they're going to be the same, better, and not be absolutely worse, and create the same conditions to prevail in their countries?
02:54:13.000And why isn't it a serious question and worthy of concern?
02:54:17.000We're just going to dismiss it and say, well, you know, maybe they'll vote right, maybe they'll vote left, but we just have to pander them more.
02:54:24.000No, I never mentioned that any of those were the case.
02:54:27.000What I'm saying here, and I think as interesting as you keep saying they keep voting blue, I think when we're trying to figure out why they're voting blue, I think it one has to do with the sentiment that you're portraying, when I think there could be a very interesting sentiment that could be portrayed if we decide that, you know what, what if we welcome them as Americans?
02:54:44.000What if we say, you know what it means to be American?
02:54:46.000It means to be American is to have more rights.
02:54:48.000Leaning values, not to have left leaning values.
02:55:25.000What constitutes an American to you, Nick?
02:55:27.000I told you earlier, what constitutes an American?
02:55:30.000Well, I think that it's a difficult question, but I'll tell you what's not American.
02:55:35.000And that's bringing over millions of foreigners that don't speak the language, millions of people that will never assimilate, and turning America into a country that is majority non white.
02:55:45.000I think that once you reach that tipping point and beyond, it ceases to be a.
02:56:00.000Well, now I'm going to tell you about how America's great because we're going to pander to more immigrants.
02:56:05.000The point is this whether they vote Republican or don't vote Republican, what's the gamble?
02:56:10.000We're gambling on our entire civilizational inheritance.
02:56:14.000And that's not an exaggeration to say that.
02:56:17.000Everything that makes America great very easily could be lost when you switch out the population for another one.
02:56:23.000When you take a population from Europe.
02:56:25.000That built up Germany and Britain and France and Italy and all those great countries and put them in America, a lot can be lost when you remove those people and now put in place the people that built Nigeria and the people that built Brazil and the people that built Mexico and India.
02:56:40.000And I don't think anybody understands the gravity of that.
02:58:27.000But in any case, their language, their culture, their values, almost everything about them is distinct from white Americans.
02:58:34.000It's not to say that they are unique in the sense that they have been on this continent as long as we have, and they've obviously had a very unique experience.
02:58:42.000Because they were brought over here against their will as slaves and then experienced segregation.
02:58:49.000I would say that you've got white Americans, you've got black Americans, which I think are American but distinct, and then I think you've got really everybody else.
02:58:58.000It's not to say that non white or non black groups can't become American, but it is to say that if America as a whole becomes non white, it ceases to be American.
02:59:09.000I'm a quarter Mexican, my father's half Mexican, and I would say that he's an American.
02:59:13.000I think that he and his ancestors are qualitatively different.
02:59:17.000Than the millions of immigrants that are coming over now, because the immigration now is qualitatively and quantitatively different than the immigration of some non black and non white minority groups that came here 100 years ago or prior to 1965.
02:59:31.000And in large part, that's just, it goes back to the quantitative difference, it's just a numbers difference.
02:59:37.000The number of non white immigrants that were coming here 100 years ago was marginal compared to the number of immigrants coming from Europe.
02:59:45.000It means that they are growing up in, around, embedded in white neighborhoods.
02:59:52.000I think you could have a proper assimilation occurring.
02:59:54.000The immigration that's happening now is that the volume is exponentially greater.
02:59:59.000And not only is it greater, but they're moving to the same places.
03:00:03.000They're geographically concentrated in the same cities, in the same Southwest, in the same region of the country.
03:00:09.000They're all, whether they're Mexican, Puerto Rican, I know there's ethnic differences between them, but they're all speaking the same language.
03:00:16.000And moreover, because of the contiguity of Mexico with America, it's very.
03:00:22.000It's much easier for them to maintain a connection to their culture than it is for other immigrants.
03:00:28.000But the point being is that you could say that a Mexican can become an American, a Chinese person can become an American, but America cannot become a Mexican, Chinese, African country and still be America.
03:00:59.000I mean, many people on the left, many leftists, would you say, who support the disrespecting of the flag, as you would say, by kneeling for the anthem or even burning the American flag?
03:01:09.000Would you say that they're not Americans, or would you say they are Americans?
03:01:12.000I would say they're not Americans, but not in the same way.
03:01:26.000And the composition of the country up until recently is European.
03:01:30.000And the thing is, is that I believe that only Europeans can perpetuate American civilization, which means, in other words, even if every American was a leftist today, barring immigration, there's a potentiality where in three centuries, you know, you're still going to have a European nation and they're not going to be leftist and they will still have the capacity to perpetuate European civilization.
03:01:53.000If you switch out that population with Hispanics, I don't think there's a scenario where.
03:01:57.000300 million Hispanics on this land perpetuate American civilization.
03:02:01.000Okay, Nick, so who would you rather have in this country?
03:02:04.000A white European leftist or a Hispanic proud American who supports all the values that you support?
03:02:11.000Probably a white European leftist, honestly.
03:02:14.000Because, and I just explained this because, you know, even if a left wing white person isn't expressing America's values now, they still have the potential to perpetuate American civilization in the future.
03:02:25.000Because you're not talking about one white person and one Hispanic.
03:02:29.000You're talking about genes, you're talking about generations.
03:02:33.000And so, You know, America, if it loses that European character, it doesn't get it back and it ceases to be America at that point.
03:02:40.000You could call it whatever you'd like America 2, you know, postmodern America, Latin America, whatever you want to call it, but it won't be the same country.
03:02:48.000And so, even if you have, and don't get me wrong, it's not to say dislike, you know, non white Trump supporters or non white conservatives or anything like that, but it's simply about the composition of the country, which is to say that you cannot replace the population of the country and have the same country.
03:03:04.000It's not to say that you can't have people that are not.
03:03:07.000European, but it is to say that everybody cannot be not European.
03:03:37.000We're talking about the whole country.
03:03:39.000So that's why I said it's a stupid question earlier.
03:03:41.000I think it's useless to get hung up on the weeds on that because it's really not about an individual because we're not dealing with individuals.
03:03:48.000We're dealing with millions and millions of people on a civilizational level.
03:03:52.000And we're talking about a demographic transformation that's occurring over generations.
03:04:05.000Well, I think the place I differ here is I think that, and I would be curious to hear why exactly you feel that.
03:04:12.000Race is so determinant on the perpetuation of cultural values.
03:04:17.000But I would necessarily say that if someone of a different race supports all of the values that you support, and hypothetically, what if the demographics were switched?
03:04:28.000What if the only determinant variable factor was race and all of the ideologies that these Hispanic people held, or in your opinion, were held by white people and the values that are traditionally held by white people were held by Hispanics?
03:04:42.000Would you switch your position to support more of the Hispanics because they inherently hold the technical European culture that you necessarily support?
03:04:53.000That is a stupid question because then they would be Europeans.
03:04:57.000The whole point is that people are not interchangeable.
03:05:01.000That's the entire point Hispanics and Europeans are not interchangeable.
03:05:07.000All the different groups of people in the world are not interchangeable.
03:05:09.000I don't believe that you can bring Mexicans over and just because they believe the same things as us, that you're going to get the same outcomes.
03:05:23.000Argentina, where they have a massive Italian and German population, some neighborhoods in Brazil where it's the same.
03:05:29.000Just about everything south of the Rio Grande, all these countries, and you could find rich neighborhoods and beaches and resorts, but you wouldn't want to be in any of these countries south of the Rio Grande.
03:05:42.000And that is because they're violent, because they're poor, because they're corrupt.
03:05:47.000And you know what these societies look like?
03:05:49.000They look just like the societies that predated European colonization on this continent.
03:05:54.000And I don't think that's a coincidence.
03:05:55.000You cannot separate people's tribe from the outcomes and the nations that they create.
03:06:01.000In the same way that you get the same outcomes all throughout Latin America, you get the same outcomes all throughout Europe, you get the same outcomes all throughout Sub Saharan Africa, you get the same outcomes throughout most of East Asia, and there's a little bit more diversity there.
03:06:12.000But the point is the same it's that race, it's not everything, but it's not nothing.
03:06:18.000And you people seem to think it's nothing.
03:06:21.000Specifically, what about race do you think is determinant on, for example, political values?
03:06:28.000I think that things like that are very subtle and I think that, for example, when we look at the political behaviors of Europeans, Europeans were once a barbarous, primitive people.
03:06:44.000But for a variety of genetic factors, and really through, I guess you could say, this idea of historically we sort of rose up over time, we've developed behaviors and attitudes and beliefs that are cultural and biological.
03:07:02.000And I think that, you know, both genetic, I should say, and cultural, that have led to societies where we can have something like democracy.
03:07:09.000You know, if you look at Latin America, one of the big problems is corruption.
03:07:14.000Or you look at some of the people that come over here from Mexico, and one problem is like, you know, maybe laziness or general impropriety, you know, a different set of expectations for themselves.
03:07:26.000And I think a lot of it is culture, but I think maybe the capacity to realize a lot of that culture can be genetic.
03:07:31.000And specifically, what I'm referring to is so.
03:08:24.000What I'm getting at is someone's ancestral populations isn't necessarily indicative of the entire population, right?
03:08:35.000We're not going to make an ecological fallacy, right?
03:08:38.000One of the reasons why universities that literally 33% of The black population is from Nigeria is because the American immigration system is actually supposed to take the best from the world.
03:08:52.000And so if America takes the best from the world, we can build up America.
03:09:50.000But let's say you swapped out the entire population with Asians.
03:09:55.000I don't think civilization would collapse.
03:09:56.000I think that Asians are competent, and I think they possess traits that lead to successful civilizations, and there's proof of that in Japan and South Korea.
03:10:05.000But while that is the case, it wouldn't be America.
03:10:09.000I mean, what you will have created is an Asian civilization.
03:10:15.000And to me, it's not even a question so much of having the greatest civilization in the world, although I think that's what Europeans strive for.
03:10:22.000I think it's a question of having a civilization that is ours.
03:10:41.000Yeah, probably something closer to that.
03:10:43.000So that would be like, for example, Israel is, you would say Israel is an ethnostate, I would assume, even though it's not an ethnic ethnostate, for example.
03:10:53.000It just advances the political causes for Jews.
03:10:57.000For example, would you apply that for the United States in your vision?
03:11:01.000I don't think it needs to be more complicated than not having demographic transformation.
03:11:07.000You know, I mean, to me, I think that it is, you know, and I don't want this to sound like a cop out, but we're talking about like European and American civilization being completely demographically transformed.
03:11:19.000And like, do you have to put a word on that?
03:11:20.000Oh, you're a white nationalist if what?
03:11:22.000You're not in favor of 100 million more immigrants coming in in the next 100 years and demographically.
03:11:27.000Well, you're not for mass immigration.
03:11:32.000I'm just saying, you know, I would just say it's as simple as let's just stop bringing in immigrants and let's try to promote a country that is cohesive.
03:11:41.000And I think the only way to do that is with an ethnic white core.
03:11:43.000And I don't think that, you know, I don't want to kick out all non white people or anything like that.
03:12:23.000And moreover, well, I would say that in terms of prospects for the future, I think that European countries have a better prospect for the future.
03:12:33.000And European countries, I think, you know, in some ways, they obviously don't have the military we have.
03:12:39.000And, you know, but I think that if you're looking at long term stability, I look at like Black Lives Matter, I look at what's happening on the border, and I'm like, yeah, I mean, this country, this country being the greatest country in the world, has an expiration date that is approaching.
03:12:53.000So, you know, it's important to note that 50 years ago, this was 90% white country, and the 10% of blacks, I mean, they were discriminated against.
03:13:01.000And I'm not saying that's a good thing or to justify it, but it is to say that.
03:13:04.000In effect, you're talking about a massive superpower country that has virtually the same, effectively the same demographics as Europe.
03:13:12.000But I mean, we're not talking about that now.
03:13:16.000And also, you know, this isn't just at the border.
03:13:19.000There, you know, people like, especially Latinos, are making ethnic enclaves just about everywhere in Southwest America.
03:13:27.000And these enclaves, I mean, I define a nation as its inhabitant, not by like the landmass or lines on a map or anything.
03:13:37.000Multi ethnicities in this country, the landmass, I don't all refer to them as being in the same nation or group of people because I define a nation as an ethnic group.
03:13:50.000And Nick, I know you took a 23andMe or something like that, right?
03:14:07.000Because, for example, I do think from your definition that you would support America being a political ethnostate for the advocacy of Europeans.
03:14:20.000I would dispute that characterization, but.
03:15:29.000Quote a piece or like, what do you mean?
03:15:31.000We are genetically tribalistic, we're social animals, so I don't obviously have implicit bias, right?
03:15:38.000You know, we're always going to have an easy way to see all the Asian kids sitting together at the table, you know, like we do have implicit bias, right?
03:15:50.000Obviously, we have, for example, we have bias for attractive people, right?
03:15:54.000Attractive people are more likely to be hired, right?
03:15:57.000Taller people are more likely to be hired or, or Successful or whatever you say, but we're not going to base your Americanism on how hot you are, you know.
03:16:09.000Well, I mean, if I can rebut originally, because that's not really my.
03:16:14.000I mean, I agree that we have in group preference, but, you know, the idea that, like, well, you know, Germany has a homeland and Europe has a homeland.
03:16:21.000I mean, the question is about America, and, you know, it is an open ended question about whose is America, and you could say, well, you know.
03:16:30.000Right, and you've been dodging it a little bit, but.
03:16:46.000But we're talking about prospectively what is America going to be and what's going to be best for America.
03:16:53.000And I think that the best course for America is to limit and prevent this demographic transformation.
03:16:58.000And maybe as a Korean or as an Asian, it would be in your interest.
03:17:02.000I'm not going to put words in your mouth, but maybe you think it would be best if Asians colonized America or something like that.
03:17:09.000You know, it's a battle for who gets to define America's future.
03:17:12.000And I think that Hispanics and primates in their future would be a disaster.
03:17:16.000If white people, on average, the vast majority of Europeans in America, whether it's from influence or from political ideologies, I think you would admit from Pew Research information that the vast majority of Europeans support increased immigration.
03:17:31.000So if Europeans believe that this is the future for the country, would you just disagree with your people, for example?
03:17:40.000But you would say if this matter is in the hands of the people because you're defining America as the people, the direction of the country as a whole would be going in a direction, and you would just be one of the outliers that says this is not what I want.
03:17:57.000Well, I mean, I'm an outlier, but it's really about it's less about it's sort of a complicated question because I'm not in favor of democracy or anything.
03:18:08.000And I think that in as much as We love the American people and everything.
03:18:31.000So, for example, a couple decades ago, what you were right, but no, as of the last year, a majority of Americans, and I would assume Europeans, but I guess that could be wrong.
03:18:44.000I don't think that's true, but I don't have it right in front of me.
03:18:47.000And I would say that historically, and I do know historically, just about every poll that's been done shows that Americans are not only not in favor of more, or, well, yeah, they're not in favor of more immigration.
03:18:58.000I think that's never been a majority, but very few want to keep the status quo, and a lot of them want less immigration, specifically conservatives.
03:19:39.000I presume it would, I presumably, vote Democrat.
03:19:45.000You know, Europeans coming here now, I think, would only accelerate the rate at which Democrats are going to reach this point where they can't lose and they're going to bring over more immigrants, and those immigrants won't be from Europe.
03:19:56.000You know, they'll be from Asia and Latin America.
03:20:00.000So you have no objection to the, I guess, people coming over other than the way they might possibly vote, not the same as, you know, from Latin American countries.
03:20:27.000It is happening in a lot of places, like whether it be, you know, like a lot of the Nordic countries have some of the most strict immigration policies.
03:20:47.000Switzerland, I don't think, has an extremely restrictive immigration policy.
03:20:50.000Switzerland has really strict immigration policies.
03:20:51.000I'm not familiar with Switzerland, but.
03:20:53.000But the point being is that, and moreover, you know, even if in particular these countries have strict immigration policies, they're still getting in.
03:21:00.000They're being let in in the Mediterranean.
03:21:02.000They're being let in through Turkey, through Greece, obviously.
03:21:05.000And it's only up until recently that some of these countries have started to put up a resistance.
03:21:09.000But there's been legal immigration happening in Europe for decades.
03:21:13.000You know, this is a recent phenomenon.
03:21:14.000You had this giant surge because of the refugee crisis in 15.
03:21:17.000But to say that there's not a migrant crisis in Europe, you could point out a handful of Eastern European countries.
03:21:56.000I don't understand what is difficult about this.
03:21:59.000I mean, the problem is we're taking this as like immigration as a given.
03:22:04.000Immigrants coming here, they contribute nothing but problems on net.
03:22:08.000The benefit that they bring is marginal compared to the problems.
03:22:12.000If they come in here and they're from a non white group, in my belief, they're challenging the identity, the historic identity of America, and they're disrupting the social fabric.
03:22:21.000If they're coming from Europe at this particular time because of the political climate in Europe and America, I think they'll vote for the party which is facilitating the aforementioned trend.
03:23:56.000But then if we get down to this idea, I guess so, if we're doing this for more of a thought experiment purpose and less for a feasibility, legality purpose, if you were allowed to, if you were Supreme Dictator Nick Fuentes of America, would you?
03:24:11.000Want to remove necessarily people who supported policy.
03:25:01.000What hypothetically I would do if I ran the country?
03:25:03.000That sounds like remarkably irrelevant for the debate we're in.
03:25:06.000Well, no, it's not remarkably irrelevant because you're pushing for policies that would support your type of ideology being in the White House.
03:27:39.000I think that every other country in the world.
03:27:40.000Well, yes, every other country is not like that.
03:27:42.000And I think that America is no different.
03:27:43.000And I think that the values America expresses are unique and exclusive to the people that generated them.
03:27:49.000Why is it that no other country in the world has done similarly?
03:27:52.000Why is it that Haiti got independence around the same time that we did and they are the poorest and one of the worst countries in the world?
03:28:00.000And the same can be said about all the Central and South American countries too.
03:28:04.000Because one is the worst country in the world.
03:28:06.000If you can bring up Haiti, you have to understand that these people that revolted weren't like the Americans that revolted, you know, like.
03:28:49.000And when the Haitians revolted, when the Haitian slaves revolted, the land was already like so bad because the French were using it all up.
03:29:11.000This is a country that you're talking about that has been literally, like, the best definition of it would be raped and pillaged by the French, right?
03:35:19.000But, you know, it's very interesting how quickly this became racialized, you know, and how all these enlightened people, all these enlightened anti racist, individualist libertarians, You know, taunting me.
03:35:39.000What I'm noting, what I'm observing, what I'm observing, which I think you're panicking because this is true, is that you are trying to taunt me on the basis of race.
03:35:51.000And I think that that is because, on some level, you're laughing at this, but it's totally true.
03:35:58.000I don't agree what they did was right or productive.
03:36:00.000Because you are, you're sort of, Defending, and this guy with the Arab numerals.
03:36:05.000No, no, no, not you, not you, the Algerian, defending the Arab numerals.
03:36:11.000It's almost like there's an intrinsic grievance against Europeans in there.
03:36:19.000Talking about the rape of Algeria by France sounds like racial grievance to me, which is weird because I thought I was with all these pink on the inside libertarian individuals.
03:36:29.000I don't blame the French for what they did, I blame the specific people for what they did.
03:36:34.000That's not what it sounds like, my guy.
03:36:36.000My guy, that's not what it sounds like, right?
03:37:18.000I don't understand why you taunted me on the basis of race after you yourself got offended on the basis of race.
03:37:24.000Because I thought, you know, I was trying to get offended on the basis of race, man.
03:37:28.000Because we were talking about Haiti, talking about Haiti being, you know, colonized, eating mud, and now you're talking about Alexandria and Roman numerals and, you know, my, Nick, The simple premise here.
03:38:03.000The simple premise here, right, is that what you're trying to say is you're trying to say, oh, these people, right, the Haitian people, et cetera, and all these different, like, non American, non white groups, right, they're shit because they are non American, non white, right?
03:38:15.000What I'm trying to understand here is I'm trying to tell you it's because of external factors.
03:38:19.000And I brought up Haiti, and I brought up the external factors there, right?
03:38:23.000And you said, no, no, no, they eat mud, right?
03:38:25.000So what I did is I then turned around and I brought up other groups.
03:38:28.000Right, that are non white, that are non American, that are non cultural.
03:49:13.000But the uh, since there's a video and it's like a compilation of like I think it's the Polish, I don't know if it's prime minister, and he's talking about like immigration and all of that.
03:49:22.000It's like a compilation, and it's so funny, it's funny as well.
03:49:25.000Bro, the Polish prime minister is such an authoritarian.
03:49:52.000Wouldn't you agree that part of American ideals is this idea that the judicial system is supposed to be not corrupted, supposed to be good for the nation?
03:50:02.000Yeah, but I also believe that we're in a civilizational war and it's kind of exceptional circumstances.
03:54:02.000I don't know if you've addressed this, but what do you think about, for example, Catholics in the United States being more left wing than Protestants?
03:54:27.000Do you think, for example, because a lot of Christianity is more equality based, do you think, for example, the West and European countries being more egalitarian and more open to immigration might be traced back to Christian principles rather than?
03:54:45.000Their previous, more Indo European style beliefs?
03:54:50.000No, I think that that's largely a myth.
03:54:52.000I mean, it's true that I wouldn't say that Christianity is egalitarian so much as it is universalist, which is a little different.
03:55:01.000And I think that you can, you know, I think that it can coexist because, I mean, Christianity doesn't say that everybody is equal.
03:55:07.000They say that everybody's equal before God, you know, but like one of the first stories in the Bible is about Cain and Abel, which, you know, is really kind of like it's not quite, but it's a story about inequality.
03:55:16.000It's about favorites, you know, and it's fundamentally about hierarchy.
03:55:22.000I do think that might be a little more Jewish.
03:55:24.000Like, for example, all the way to the New Testament, where Jesus said, preach to everyone, and I think was more universalist then, especially in the New Testament.
03:55:33.000Do you think that might have been a change where a lot of Christian adherents might have been more egalitarian and might have adopted this as a more, you know, left leaning ideology?
03:55:45.000No, I don't think that it's left leaning.
03:55:48.000And that's because Christianity predates ideology, it predates the idea of ideology or even left and right.
03:55:54.000And that's not even just a cop out, but it is to say that, I mean, Christian values are right wing values.
03:56:04.000You know, and I would say that there's something about equality in the Bible, but again, it's about that we are all equal in a spiritual sense.
03:56:11.000But it doesn't say anything about, like, immigration, for example, or about our talents or anything like that.
03:56:17.000So I think that, you know, the Bible, and by the way, the Old Testament is just as much a part of the Bible as the New Testament.
03:56:23.000So I think that there's a universality of, like, belief and brotherhood in the sense that we're all children of God, but.
03:56:29.000Does that, if you look in, like, for example, the Catholic Catechism, you know, there's something in there even about immigration.
03:56:34.000And it says that, you know, a country cannot take in any more immigrants than it can sustain.
03:56:40.000And the immigrants that go there have to respect the culture and the identity and the heritage of the land.
03:56:45.000I mean, there's all kinds of stuff even in the catechism about that.
03:56:47.000So I think it's, if you were to characterize it as an ideology, I'd say.
03:56:52.000And by the way, this is everybody else too.
03:56:53.000Even capital T traditionalists like Evola and others have said that, you know, Christianity is right wing.
03:57:01.000Hey, Nick, will you and Jay Dyer ever do like a round two or like a rematch?
03:57:06.000Probably not, just because I'm not like a theologian.
03:57:09.000I don't do like religious debates because I mean, I don't think I was proven wrong in that debate, but I wasn't prepared.
03:57:17.000You know, he just knows more than I do because he's been studying theology for like 20 years or whatever.
03:58:20.000No, just my question was like, I think Trump passed some act like five days ago that's going to give citizenship to like two million illegals.
03:58:28.000And I was starting to get faith in Trump.
03:59:14.000But, you know, when it comes to black pills, you just got to realize that you have to have sort of a fatalistic perspective, which is that, you know, what's going to happen is going to happen.
03:59:22.000And the mistakes that have been made cannot be easily, you know, unmade.
03:59:28.000And we're up against very difficult odds.
03:59:30.000So, you know, to me, it's really just about we have to do everything that we can, like impossible, you know, impossible energy, impossible intelligence.
03:59:40.000And, you know, if we fall short of that, then we fall short.
03:59:43.000But, you know, Whether or not we win is not really entering into my head because whether we can win or we can't win, we have to fight.
03:59:52.000Even if it's impossible, we have to see if it is possible.
03:59:55.000We don't know what the outcome could be.
03:59:57.000So, to me, it's like if there are setbacks, if there are other things, my head is in the game about saving our people, and it's just about, okay, well, that's a setback.
04:01:57.000I think that, you know, like, democratic elements, yeah, but the problem with the democracy is, you know, putting sovereignty in the hands of the majority.
04:02:06.000Like, America, I know it's kind of trite and You know, boomers say this, but America is not a democracy.
04:02:14.000And that's because the founders, even when they were talking about the government, I mean, they understand that there is just as much of a threat to liberty coming from like a mob or from a majority than there is from, you know, like a tyrant or anything like that.
04:02:27.000So, or, you know, the population can enable a tyrant.
04:02:29.000So, I mean, I think democratic elements are good, but we think about the founding and it's like, you know, was that a democracy when the electoral college was way more restrictive?
04:02:39.000And the Senate was a body of the states, and so on and so forth, like only white landowning males.
04:02:46.000Yeah, I know specifically the one guy, I think the Chad Autist guy in the Zoom call that you did a while ago mentioned this, but throughout time, when we see more implementation of people voting more suffrage, we actually see the speech of politicians go down to a lower and lower level.
04:03:13.000Oh, yeah, we also see because we're on the same page basically, but we also see kind of the democracy kind of institute things of hedonism and high time preference as well.
04:03:23.000Yeah, I don't know if you know, I mean, I know you understand the concept of time preference.
04:03:26.000Have you heard the argument that like time preference can make it so that like a or time preference is like one of the fatal flaws of a democracy that a democracy will inevitably have a higher time preference?
04:03:40.000And, you know, there's a lot of people have read about it.
04:03:43.000I think, you know, Basic, like, anti, like, the ban all people thing is funny because that's kind of the pill that I've taken lately, which is that, like, you know, everybody's written about this that people will fuck everything up and things inherently will devolve any society.
04:04:03.000Even Rousseau, I read Rousseau when I was in college, and even he talked about how when you have a very, very tiny country, the proportion of, like, I forget, he gets into this mathematical reasoning, but he talks about, like, the proportion of the ruled to, The rulers.
04:04:19.000And in a very tiny country, you can have much more democracy.
04:04:22.000In a very, very large country, you have to have a tyrant.
04:04:26.000I think that you can have democratic elements, and certainly some things can be decided by vote, but everyone voting on important things, no, that will not do.
04:05:54.000Nick, you and your brother are like supporting like paleocon ideas, and it's just like the Berg in your name is just going to stick with you.
04:06:49.000And the problem is that the state is still a threat to the people.
04:06:54.000But the thing is, is that people are just ignoring corporations.
04:06:57.000You know, traditional conservatives or mainstream conservatives, I should say, just ignore completely the idea that like Silicon Valley and like the biggest corporations in the history of the world, like maybe they might have the capacity to oppress people because, you know, the free market and Big business didn't exist in 1776 the same way that it does today.
04:07:20.000And, you know, when the founders were putting in the Constitution checks and balances on state and federal government, on the different branches and so on, they did not obviously take into account the idea that Amazon would exist or Facebook would exist.
04:07:33.000And, you know, some people say that about guns, but it's totally true about, you know, corporations.
04:07:37.000So I would say the government can be very deadly, you know, if they enable that or if they ever oppress us.
04:07:43.000But, I mean, clearly now, like, nothing's being done about corporations.
04:07:47.000And this is why we need to ban all people.
04:08:21.000There are some intellectuals that I've heard talk about accelerationism, and honestly, I'm unimpressed by the people that have talked about it.
04:08:27.000Like a friend of mine recommended this Russian guy who was talking about accelerationism, whose name I forget.
04:08:34.000And I watched this stuff, and he just walked away feeling very compelling.
04:08:39.000But to me, the equation that a lot of people have in mind when they say accelerationism is like, well, things get bad, and then, you know, somehow, somehow, somehow things get better.
04:08:50.000And, you know, I understand the basic premise, which is, you know, well, if things get really bad really quickly, then that's going to awaken people, or this is going to create destabilizing events or events that will change circumstances.
04:09:01.000And, you know, I think there's some truth to that.
04:09:04.000There's no guarantee, and it's highly likely that those events won't go in your favor.
04:09:09.000Like, I don't think there's any guarantee.
04:09:12.000I don't even think it's likely that if things like collapse to your collapsitarian, number one, I don't think things are going to collapse.
04:09:18.000I don't think things are going to collapse.
04:09:19.000I think, you know, things get really, really, really, really bad.
04:09:22.000And they hardly collapse, especially with modern technology.
04:09:25.000The other thing is, even if things get really bad and there's destabilizing events and maybe people get red pilled, I don't think there's a guarantee people wake up or they don't do anything about it.
04:09:34.000And even if they did, we're now going up against all the power in the country, all the hard power, which is military, which is money.
04:09:44.000And to me, it's much more sensible to achieve the reforms that we desire to be like the other people that have accumulated power in the past so many years.
04:09:55.000Subversively, quietly, with numbers against them.
04:09:58.000And that is, you know, I'm not like NRX, but I think that we just got to, you know, take it day by day.
04:10:05.000I mean, I would rather go through the Reformation option because, you know, in the Bible, you know, rebellion is that of witchcraft and idolatry.
04:10:12.000And I would much rather prefer Reformation, but I don't know how far Reformation would, or I don't know how we go about it, I guess.
04:10:24.000Yeah, I mean, well, and equally, and I think maybe more.
04:10:29.000Would be a more pessimistic lens is how would we go about any kind of challenge to the system?
04:10:48.000Go up against the federal government, go up against the NSA, go up against the Department of Defense, go up against, you know, most of the country.
04:10:55.000I mean, even the people that agree with us, a fraction of them would support something like that.
04:11:00.000Forget about people that are adjacent.
04:11:03.000Forget about people that are of our kin.
04:11:05.000Forget about people that identify as conservative or Republican.
04:11:08.000You're talking about such a small proportion that it leads me to believe that anybody who thinks that's viable is trying to get you in trouble.
04:11:15.000Because I feel like only teenagers could buy into this fantasy that it's going to be the French Revolution and it's going to be Richard Spencer and Kurt Doolittle holding an AK 47 over the Capitol.
04:12:19.000I understand the argument that, like, you know, the Federal Reserve managing the monetary policy, like the Great Depression, you know, some say is a consequence of mismanagement by the Fed.
04:12:30.000But I think that at this point, expenditure, yeah.
04:12:34.000I think at this point, it's just the only practical way to do it.
04:12:36.000I mean, I get the monetarist argument.
04:12:38.000It seems like we're too dug into fiat at this point that we can't really get out of it.
04:12:42.000Yeah, and I think also gold is impractical.
04:12:46.000You know, and some people talk about like Bitcoin.
04:12:52.000Well, because I think that if you're talking about the scale of the economy, the global economy today, I think that relying on gold for currency and finding gold, because I understand all these monetary arguments that the rate at which new gold is discovered is very stable.
04:13:11.000So that means that the rate of the growth of the monetary base is stable and that's reliable.
04:13:17.000But the idea of we're going to be conducting these giant transactions and they're all backed in.
04:13:22.000Gold somewhere, you know, like Amazon's a trillion dollar company, like that's all backed in gold, like underground somewhere.
04:13:28.000I mean, it just seems like no, but also, the trillion dollars not in pure, like obviously money, it's in assets, other things.
04:13:38.000Yeah, I mean, it's technically not all monetary, but I get the point.
04:14:25.000That's why I was personally hurt the other day when I was in this Zoom call and somebody called me a Keynesian because I'm anti immigration.
04:14:31.000That hurt me more than anything, really.
04:15:16.000It's kind of tough because paleoconservatism, as it is, is already kind of niche.
04:15:22.000Yeah, and really had no traction until America first revived this.
04:15:27.000It's not to say that nobody was out there pushing it, maybe not by name, but I would say Pat Buchanan was probably the guy that put a face behind it.
04:15:37.000Put it on a map, but I mean, there are a lot of like theorists, people like Sam Francis or Paul Gottfried and like Peter Brimelow.
04:15:45.000There have been people who have been making the argument.
04:16:00.000It's one of these like, it's like how I gave the example how I support Trump, kind of a weird coalition, like a national anti globalism and anti immigration.
04:16:10.000Well, the thing about Huntington is that, like, he, if you read his book, Who Are We?, he's actually arguing from, like, a liberal perspective.
04:16:18.000Like, his solution is, I mean, these problems are problems, whether you're right, left, it doesn't matter.
04:19:43.000Okay, so whoever has the bigger private rights enforcement agency gets the better contract, gets to just get out of any contract they want, right?
04:28:18.000He tried to actually have a break here.
04:28:22.000Nick, my Nick videos tried to bring him in.
04:28:24.000Videos tried to bring him in, and I'm pretty sure.
04:28:27.000Like, we tried DMing him on Twitter, and he said, No, I want to debate him on whether or not his girlfriend is bad.
04:28:37.000Yeah, who hey, Nick, bro, Vosh literally like said something about horse cocks being hot, and he's such a fucking yeah, he's a fucking gross degenerate.
04:35:26.000Yeah, I think, you know, there's a lot in like, like, Thomism, there's a lot of like fusion with like Greek thought, like Aristotle and things like that.
04:38:51.000As someone who's Catholic, right, how do you support the Catholic Church in a sense when they've been historically very anti nationalist, especially during the 19th century movements in the Gandolian places?
04:39:30.000So, like, isn't it doesn't it make sense though?
04:39:32.000From like when we talk about culture, we have to talk about culture in a sense that we're specifically speaking to not only American culture, but like Catholic American culture because you were mentioning a lot of tolerance towards different religions.
04:42:10.000If I'm not mistaken, like, honestly, like, I don't know if you've been here before, but like, Nick was like considering like classical liberalism.
04:43:26.000Are you like pro-separation of church and state?
04:43:27.000Do you believe they should be like together, the church and the state?
04:43:30.000You know, at this stage in the game, it's like, you know, I think that's so far out from where we are, you know, building our way back to like.
04:44:29.000I wasn't going to do like a synagogue of Satan thing, but Ecclesiastes 3 8, there is a time for love, there's a time for peace, and there's a time for war, and there's a time for hate.
04:44:40.000And that's like, that is like one of my favorite Bible verses.
04:44:44.000My favorite Bible verse is 1 Timothy 2 12.
04:44:47.000I do not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man because your entire TikTok is simply free, girls.
04:44:54.000I just want to know are you done with political content or not?
04:48:53.000I've heard you debate immigration matters.
04:48:55.000Times and you've never brought up like genetic epidemiology, which in Europe that's such a huge problem.
04:49:03.000Trillions of dollars on infrastructure in London and Paris regarding sickle cell anemia, which comes from the Middle Eastern and African population.
04:49:16.000Yeah, but like in America, I mean, epidemiology is not like the top right list.
04:49:21.000We've seen it in Detroit, we've seen it with some Indian population.
04:50:45.000And there was a book, there have been a few books that have been written about this in like the 2000s about it's like a liberal perspective.
04:55:10.000I mean, do you like, because you have a lot, because obviously you have a lot of negative things to say about James Allstuff and other people.
04:55:16.000Like, do you have any, like, are you like, are you like, what are your thoughts on him as an individual, as like his ideas?
04:55:25.000I don't obviously care for his lifestyle, and we have big disagreements on ideology, which we talked about on the show.
04:55:35.000But, you know, it's always been my belief that we have to have a big tent movement, you know, and I think that.
04:55:41.000America first is a faction in the movement, but it's always useful to have allies who, you know, arm's length allies, which we even talked about on that show.
04:55:54.000But, you know, the reason with James Alsop, me and James Alsop were friends, even though he fucked me over.
04:55:59.000I mean, we had a business partnership, and I can't, for legal reasons, get into the details, but, I mean, he fucked me over big time with that.
04:56:15.000So, I mean, but he really wronged me when it came to our business, and I forgave him.
04:56:20.000He apologized, and I forgave him, and we put our differences aside and offered to help him.
04:56:25.000And in spite of that, he then turned around after all that, and he literally admitted to me, Oh, no, the reason that I fucked with you with our business is because I was broke and I feel bad and blah, And by the way, betrayed me with the other business partner, he was a friend of mine from grade school.
04:56:45.000I'd known this guy since I was six years old.
04:56:58.000And then, you know, with no provocation, then he starts making fun of me and attacking me and attacking my friends and, you know, saying that we're like controlled opposition and then just did this big article trying to sabotage me.
04:57:10.000And it's like, you know, don't attack me.
04:57:13.000You know, I'm only against people that attack me and people that are like, you know, diametrically opposed to our views.
04:57:35.000Yeah, yeah, because the cookie thing, if anybody paid attention during the Groyper Wars, it's like the Groyper Wars were going so well and we were humiliating them so much.
04:57:46.000And then they found that clip from a year ago.
04:57:48.000And that was the most damning thing that they could find.
04:57:50.000I've done thousands of hours of content.
04:57:52.000You know, and they found that clip and they decided that that was going to be their counterattack.
04:57:57.000Okay, well, there's this very effective conversation about immigration happening.
04:58:02.000Okay, well, the guy that's talking about it said this joke one year ago.
04:58:06.000It was from January 2019, and they were talking about it in November 2019.
04:58:54.000I just don't like people, you know, feeding you.
04:58:57.000I grew up, you know, getting it in the hand and then, like, You know, just it's it seems like cattle, one of those Japanese cows that they overfeed.
04:59:06.000Yeah, I mean, it's not you know, no disrespect to people that do that, but just yeah, hey Nick, okay, yeah, for example, you're talking about immigration, and I feel like I'm not a big fan of low skill immigration.
04:59:20.000I think I can agree with you there, but one thing that I am kind of confused by a lot of people don't really care about culture, for example, right?
04:59:29.000A lot of people don't, and so for example, if Someone were to make the $3 billion is a lot of money when it's going to Israel, that's really stupid, right?
04:59:39.000When it's going to anyone, but when $3 billion is wasted after low skill immigrants use our health care services, wouldn't you say this is might be a compelling argument for people more in the center or people who want good health care?
04:59:54.000Would you say, like, there's for example, you're talking with like left wing arguments with uh exploitation, that's a good argument to use with the left.
05:00:03.000So, don't you think health care costs, for example, and Other things like that could be compelling arguments for people in the center?
05:00:10.000I think, you know, maybe in light of like coronavirus, but I just think that, you know, when it comes to like what we're trying to do, I'm not looking to just kind of like swindle the American people into like being against immigration.
05:00:26.000Like, well, it's for healthcare reasons.
05:00:28.000I mean, in order for us to really like make America great, we have to have like sort of a cultural or an identity renaissance.
05:00:36.000And I think that, you know, it's not simply a matter of, you know, by hook or by crook shutting down immigration, although I think that'd be worthwhile.
05:00:43.000I think that what really has to happen is that conservatives have to wake up, and anybody that appreciates America has to wake up and realize it's being transformed.
05:00:53.000And I don't disagree that the epidemiology argument might appeal to leftists.
05:00:59.000But I also think that at this point, it's become much more than that.
05:01:03.000Because you could just as easily say that immigration benefits giant corporations and hurts workers, and that's totally true.
05:01:09.000But leftists are so ideologically committed to diversifying this country, in other words, just transforming the country that.
05:01:17.000At that point, I think that it's really going to be one side or the other on that.
05:01:22.000I don't know that you're going to get people that are going to say, well, I'm against immigration for this kind of obscure or maybe less high stakes reason.
05:01:33.000I feel like we could make just about any pitch to a Bernie voter on immigration, and they wouldn't believe it because they think it's white nationalist or it's racist.
05:01:54.000What do you think, like, for example, every other country, for example, my country, Korea, Mexico, all these countries tend to preserve the demographics besides like European countries.
05:02:07.000What do you think makes European countries different?
05:02:39.000It could also be something about the stage that we're at economically and in terms of our development, because the truth is that European civilization has had primacy in the world for 500 years.
05:02:53.000That's not to say that they're the only civilization or the only developed civilization now, but.
05:02:58.000We're in a unique position where we have just exited or maybe at the apex of half of a millennia of just total hegemony over the planet as a race or as a civilization.
05:03:11.000And so maybe there's something unique to that in our stage in development that the Koreas and China and Japan don't have because you can see that China is militant and they're aggressive and they're nationalistic.
05:03:24.000And that's because they've got something to prove.
05:03:27.000I mean, they have been not colonized, but.
05:03:30.000In a state of subjugation to some extent by Western powers for a long time.
05:03:34.000So you could see where they're coming.
05:03:37.000Civilizationally, they're in a different place than we are.
05:03:39.000So maybe it's something about that, that we're in the autumn of our civilization.
05:04:37.000And if he thought Germans were swarthy and not white, then, you know.
05:04:41.000And I think it's a stretch to say that that's the case.
05:04:45.000And even if it were, it's like, you know, I don't know how that makes an argument in favor of mass immigration from non white countries.
05:04:55.000Like if we have deviated from the founders by even letting in other European ethnicities, I don't know how that's an argument that it's like, oh, well, you know, it doesn't matter anything that they said.
05:05:06.000It's sort of like this false syllogism, which Jason Richwine talks about, which is to say that, like, well, if Italians are now white, and if Germans are now white, or Irish are now white, well, then what?
05:05:17.000Then blacks are white now, and, like, Mexicans are white now?
05:05:21.000And I think that's just a false syllogism.
05:05:29.000I only have, like, one argument to this, and it's just like, well, the Irish and the Italians are, like, kind of allowed to immigrate here, and then, like, the.
05:05:38.000Only white people with like the 1790 Act, like they were allowed.
05:05:43.000Like there was also like Irish and, well, never mind, never mind.
05:05:46.000But like the Italians and the Irish were allowed to immigrate here.
05:05:49.000When like the Chinese tried to come over here, they got BTFO'd with the Chinese Exclusion Act.
05:05:55.000So it's like they had to consider these type of people white.
05:05:59.000And also, if they hated racial mixing so much, they even hated ethnic mixing.
05:06:04.000How is that an argument for them only considering, They're only considering Anglo Saxon life.
05:06:12.000Well, I think the utility of pointing out the founders' views is not to say that we should determine our immigration policy based on what the founders wanted 300 years ago.
05:06:21.000I think it's more to say that this country isn't what you think it is.
05:06:24.000Because to me, that's really an effective counter not to say, well, the founders had it this way and now we have to have it this way.
05:06:30.000It's more to say the mythos of this country is that our country is about Ellis Island and the Statue of Liberty.
05:06:36.000And what makes America great is everyone gets to come here and everyone's going to contribute.
05:06:40.000And it's like, People will make that argument based on the Constitution that the founding fathers were all these hardcore liberal progressives, and when they said every man is created equal, that meant that we want to be the boarding house of the world's poor.
05:06:57.000I mean, the point is to say if you look at the founders, if they were alive today, you'd call them extreme white nationalists, you would call them extreme white supremacists.
05:07:06.000And so it's to say that liberals do not own the mythology of this country.
05:07:12.000It's not factual, it's not historical.
05:07:14.000It's not to say that we want to replicate that, but it is to say that this idea that we're anti American because we want less immigration is ridiculous.
05:07:23.000And I've heard that from Dinesh D'Souza and Dennis Prager.
05:07:26.000Dennis Prager says that e pluribus unum means out of many races and many nationalities, there's one nation.
05:07:34.000That's not at all what e pluribus unum meant.
05:07:36.000It meant out of 13 colonies, out of 13 states, one nation.
05:07:40.000There's no historical basis that that meant out of many different peoples.
05:07:44.000And I think that's when that becomes a compelling point.
05:07:48.000Destiny tried to make that retarded argument about them only considering Anglo Saxons white when you debated him.
05:09:42.000I'm not in favor of eating the rich or taking all their money or even raising taxes on them to some exorbitant level.
05:09:49.000But the problem is the way we tax money in this country because if you get a W-2, you're just fucked.
05:09:57.000If you get your money through a salary or through employment, what are the loopholes?
05:10:03.000What are the loopholes that you can exploit to save money?
05:10:06.000Now, contrast that with if your primary income is through investments or through a business.
05:10:10.000I mean, rich people can afford all kinds of.
05:10:13.000Lawyers and lobbyists and accountants, and they know all the tricks.
05:10:17.000And what ends up happening is that even though rich people pay the vast majority of the tax dollars, it ends up being the middle class that's paying 30%, they're paying 25%.
05:10:28.000Rich people don't pay 30% of their income.
05:10:31.000And in terms of marginal utility, your $100 million is worth less to you than somebody's $100,000 or $5,000 or whatever.
05:10:41.000So to me, it's like I believe in progressive taxation.
05:10:44.000Not eating the rich, but something that makes sure everyone has skin in the game.
05:18:59.000They only invented rocket ships, televisions, radios, the semiconductor, the computer, the internet, the gun, railroads, like, okay, right.