저자: PeterSchiff · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 피터 쉬프는 금·은 강세와 달러 약세를 전제로 금 가격 상승을 전망하고, 비트코인은 거품이며 결국 0에 가까워질 것이라 주장한다. 출연자 배경: 2008년 주택시장 붕괴를 예측한 'Doctor Doom'으로 불리며, 연간 대부분을 푸에르토리코에서 생활하며 세금 혜택을 강조한다. 세제 주장: 푸에르토리코는 법인세 0%(2026년부터 4%)로 자본이득이 비과세에 가깝고, 법인을 통해 4% 세율로 운영하면 배당도 비과세로 받을 수 있어 미국 고세율 주 대비 큰 이점이 있다고 설명한다. 금 전망: 금은 2월 약 5,600달러 고점 이후 28% 조정을 받아 현재 약 4,100달러 수준이며, 4,000달러 아래로는 크게 내려가지 않을 것이라 본다. 금 장기 근거: 연준 설립 이후 금은 1913년 온스당 20달러에서 4,000달러 이상으로 상승해 달러보다 가치 보존력이 우수하다고 주장하며, 장기적으로 10,000~20,000달러까지 갈 수 있다고 전망한다. 은 전망: 은은 현재 약 59~60달러이며 50달러 이하로 다시 떨어지지 않을 것으로 보고, 금보다 상승 여력이 크다고 강조한다. 중앙은행·기관 수요: 외국 중앙은행이 달러 준비금을 금으로 다변화하고 있으며, 향후 연기금·펀드·개인 투자자의 금 매수(현물, ETF, 토큰화 금)가 확대될 것으로 본다. 재정 리스크: 국가부채 약 40조 달러, 연간 이자비용 약 1.66조 달러로 디폴트 대신 인플레이션을 통한 통화가치 하락이 불가피하다고 경고한다. 비트코인: 2021년 고점 대비 약 60% 하락한 약 5.9만 달러이며, 암호화폐는 대부분 0으로 갈 가능성이 크고 비트코인도 결국 0에 가까워질 수 있다고 주장한다. AI 관련주: AI 기술 자체는 혁명적이지만 관련 주식은 과대평가되어 있어 장기 보유자도 손실 가능성이 크다고 본다. 그랜트 카돈 비판: 부동산 펀드에 비트코인을 결합하는 전략을 난센스로 비판하며 부동산은 임대수익으로 유지비를 충당한다고 반박한다. 정치 리스크: 정부 개입과 과도한 지출이 인플레이션의 원인이며, 트럼프 관세는 위헌이라고 주장한다.
다듬은 글
Okay, let's begin. Today we have investment royalty in the building. Peter Schiff, CEO and co-founder of Europacific Asset Management, which manages over $2 billion in assets with a particular focus on gold. He is also credited with predicting the 2008 housing market crash, which earned him the nickname Doctor Doom.
Peter, welcome to Vlad TV. Greetings. Hello, Vlad. Thank you for inviting me again. Yes, it's been five years since our last interview. Yeah, and I guess we were also at my house here, uh, at the time we were doing this interview, right? You actually live in Puerto Rico most of the time. Almost all of it...Yes.
I mean, the vast majority of my time I spend, you know, maybe two months, sometimes three with breaks in the States, but, you know, nine or ten months a year I'm in Puerto Rico. Although I take vacations. So yeah, I spend a little bit of time in Europe or some time in South America or other parts of the Caribbean.
Uh, but, you know, my base, my business, my kids and everything, we're all in Puerto Rico, and I've been there for almost 10 years. Good. Now tell me from a tax perspective why it makes sense for an American with money to live in Puerto Rico. Even for Americans without a lot of money, it makes sense to live in Puerto Rico because it's a great place to live.
I mean, I like it there. Hmm, the climate is wonderful there. I mean you have some infrastructure problems. You know, electricity is not that reliable unless you have a good generator, which we have, and lots of diesel, or you can go off the grid and get solar power. But if you don't have much money but you want to start a business and hope to make a lot of money, then this is a great place to start your business because you can do it with zero capital gains.
Although they are changing this , starting next year it will be 4%. Still not a bad deal. I mean, it's not as good as the one I got, you know, zero. Uh, but 4% is a lot lower than, uh , the rate you would pay in the States, especially if you 're in a high-tax state where you're assessed complex taxes.
But you can also structure your business so that your corporate tax rate is only 4%, and then you can pay yourself dividends tax-free. So it's even a bigger savings than capital gains because if you're doing business in the US, depending on where you're located, you know your marginal tax rate could be 40-50% closer to even 60 % if you're in New York, California.
So 4% of the total tax, uh , gives you a real advantage, you know, you can keep a lot more of what you earn. You can also invest your income in growing your business. Invest all of your income, not just your after- tax income. And another real advantage is because, as you know, I've been working there for 10 years.
You can also invest the money you don't pay taxes on . So, you're not just saving on taxes, but let's say you would pay a million dollars in taxes; and instead you take that million dollars and invest it with money you never would have had, and now, over the years, that 1 million turns into 5 million or 10 million, which you now have, and which you never would have had if you had had to pay taxes.
So the longer you stay there, the more it accumulates, and, you know, my capital gains are not taxed. So if I turn that million dollars I didn't pay taxes on into 10 million, I don't pay any taxes on the other nine either. So over time, this is a huge advantage. This allows you to accumulate wealth, uh, at a much faster rate.
Uh, you can, and it actually frees up more money, uh, for spending, because you know you can, you can still invest more of your income, but you can also spend more. Uh, so I-you know, I think it's a great choice. I wish I knew about this. Well, actually, incentives didn't exist until 2012. So I moved there in 2013, but I wish I was younger because I met a lot of people who moved there, you know, in their 30s.
I moved there in my 50s. But if you're in your 30s and just starting out with this tax structure, it's much better. You have 20 more years than I do to earn, invest, and accumulate all that tax-free income. So for young people, you know , entrepreneurs, I think this is a great place. I'm really surprised more people haven't done this.
I mean, there are many such people , thousands, but there must be tens of thousands. There must be millions. Um, but, you know, obviously they just don't know about it . Either if they knew about it, they, you know, thought it was too good to be true, or they just have such a negative opinion of Puerto Rico that they feel like it's going to be a prison sentence.
Because I remember when I first moved there, people were like, "Well, that sounds like a good idea , but, you know, you have to live in Puerto Rico." And I said, " You mean I can live in Puerto Rico?" "Weren't you there?" And of course, you know, not all of Puerto Rico is the same. You know, there are good neighborhoods, there are bad ones, but I live in a good neighborhood, so it makes a big difference.
Well, you've always been very passionate about gold, and since our last interview 5 years ago, the price of gold has gone crazy. It reached approximately $5,600 per ounce, which is the peak. Um, it was, I think, in February before the war, just before the war with Iran. And the night it started, when we first bombed Iran, the price of gold went up, probably to 5,500.
Not quite a new high. And that's when , the next day, the correction began. And in fact , literally in the last few days it's fallen below 4,000. As we speak, we're back above, you know, around 4,100. But we've had a pullback of about 28%. But when I first started recommending gold , buying gold, recommending it to clients, it was under $300 an ounce, it was in the late 1990s.
And I remember when I talked about gold being worth $5,000, which I was obviously doing a little prematurely, because I was talking about it when it was worth about $1,000, and people laughed at that, saying there's no way gold would reach $5,000. And that's what happened. You know, I thought it would be sooner, but I knew it would eventually get to this point.
Hmm, but even if you go back, you know, gold has actually outperformed the S&P since then. That's a bigger increase, from 300 to 4,000. That's more than 10 times. The S&P has not increased 10 times in that time. It has now paid dividends, but even with dividends, uh, gold has outpaced it. Same with silver.
Silver is currently worth about $60. When I first started buying it, it was $4, and in February it went up to $ 120. It was crazy. I've never seen silver move like that. It went from 30 to about 120 in a few months, which is crazy. But it really caught up because for a year or two, gold went up and up and up, and silver didn't go anywhere.
And I, you know, I really insisted on silver. I tried to get my clients to: buy silver, buy silver because it's so cheap. And then, you know, it was finally reevaluated. There has been a fairly large correction now. But when the price went above $50 an ounce, it was significant because $50 was the high in 1980 when the Hunt brothers were trying to take over the market.
And then we almost got to $50 again in 2011, when the price of gold reached about $1,900. And then when the markets rolled back, you know, um, silver rolled back. Gold hit a new high and even reached $3,000 and above, and gold never returned to $50, or silver to be exact . But once silver got past 50, it just, you know, was like a hot knife through butter, and it just exploded.
I think this is a big breakthrough. So this setback might have scared some people. You know, a 50% drop, but it tripled before it dropped 50%. Uh, but you know, I think we're headed for much higher prices from here. I doubt silver will trade below 50 again. Uh, I think 60 is a pretty good price. Right now it's about 59.
Um, and I think 4,000 is... I doubt gold will go much lower than 4,000. Uh, and the main driver is inflation and the depreciation of the dollar, dollarization. And it's not just Americans who are concerned about inflation . It's both Europeans and Japanese, you know, all over the world governments have big deficits, print too much money, have interest rates that are too low.
So inflation erodes the purchasing power of all fiat currencies. And that's why people are switching to gold and silver. Although over the last few years, it's been central banks, foreign central banks, that have been getting rid of US dollars, because now we have almost $40 trillion in national debt.
He is getting out of control. Our budget deficit is about three trillion a year and growing. Interest rates on the public debt are rising rapidly. We spend over a trillion a year. I mean, in May we spent the equivalent of an annual $1.66 trillion in interest on the debt. This was the entire federal budget as of 1997, and now it's just interest on the debt.
So foreign central banks can see the writing on the wall or read it. Uh, we're going to have a significant, you know, devaluation of the dollar. There is no way to repay this debt. Our leaders do not have the integrity to honestly declare default. So it will be devalued by inflation. And so foreign central banks are getting ahead of this by diversifying most of their reserves into gold.
And I think you'll see a big movement in the private sector. This hasn't actually happened yet. I mean a little bit closer to the end of last year, early this year , when metal prices peaked. Uh, but I think this next growth will lead to more private investment participation. Both institutions, uh, you know, pension funds, endowment funds, mutual funds, hedge funds, will be involved in gold, and I think private investors will be buying gold on their own: both physical gold and gold ETFs, maybe even tokenized gold.
But I think you'll see, uh, this shift. And, you know, when the air really comes out of the crypto bubble, the Bitcoin bubble, I think that bubble has burst, and, you know, the air is coming out pretty quickly now, but there's still a lot to come, but I think you're going to see a lot of people who are distracted by Bitcoin who are also into gold.
Well, I've never been a big gold investor, and I remember reading about Warren Buffett's view on it , and he essentially said that something like gold would never grow like a real company because it doesn't generate money. Even a farm generates money every year. A company, er, corporation generates money every year, every day, etc.
They have a quarterly report where you can see what their profit is, etc. When it comes to gold, silver, or other similar assets, you buy them with the hope that someone else will pay a higher price for them later for various reasons. Is this correct? No. I mean, I don't disagree with Warren Buffett that in the long run, if you buy a productive asset, you should have a better return than just owning gold.
But gold is not a substitute for productive assets . And this is where I always disagree with Warren Buffett, because he never put it right. Gold does not compete with stocks or real estate. It competes with the dollar. It competes with the euro and the yen. So if you go back to the time the Federal Reserve was created in 1913, you could buy an ounce of gold for $20, and now it's worth $4,000.
So, if someone buried an ounce of gold in the ground in 1913, and someone else buried a $20 bill, and you dug it up today, right? What would you choose? An ounce of gold or a 20-dollar bill? Right? So, this shows that over time, if you're going to save money, it's better to save gold than dollars. Someone might say, " Well, I could put my dollar in the bank and get interest ." Yes, but now you lend your dollar to the bank and the bank lends it out, right?
You could do the same with gold. I can lend my gold to someone and they can pay me interest on my gold. So you can still earn interest on gold if you lend it out. But if you just put it in a safe , it's the same as stuffing money under your mattress. They just lie there. The reason gold holds its value better than dollar bills is because the Federal Reserve can just print the stuff like crazy, right?
There is an infinite amount of paper money they can create. So , the supply of dollars grows very quickly, whereas the supply of gold grows very slowly, because you actually have to physically mine and find it. So, gold is a great store of value. It is not a source of value. This is a means of preserving value.
So, if you have wealth and want to preserve it, you can buy gold. If you want to, you know, multiply your wealth, then you don't just invest it in gold. You are buying a business or starting a business. When it comes to investing, Warren Buffett would agree with me, and in fact Brookshire Hathaway now has a record amount of cash.
And the reason Warren Buffett has a lot of cash is because he thinks stocks are overvalued, so he doesn't want to buy them right now. He wants to wait for prices to drop. And I agree. But I think he would be better off if he waited, holding gold instead of dollars. Because it's possible that inflation is so strong that even if stocks are expensive, they continue to rise in dollars, which lose value even faster.
But I think stock prices will fall significantly in terms of gold. And they fell significantly in terms of gold, because gold is better served than the stock market. So if Buffett were holy gold waiting for better buys, that would be a better strategy. But if you can buy stocks cheaply, if you can get a good deal on a company so that you're not overpaying and not paying too much on a profit basis, you're getting a good dividend, then yes, of course it's better than buying gold.
Although if you don't have some diversification, because you can be in a company, I can invest in a company and something can go wrong. Then the company may start losing money. The company may go bankrupt. Therefore, stock companies should yield better returns over time than simply owning an ounce of gold.
But it's also possible that your company will go bankrupt and you will lose all your money. This won't happen with gold. With gold, you don't have that risk. Gold will fluctuate a bit , but it increases in value over time. That's why the price went from $20 an ounce to $4,000 an ounce, and it will go up to $10,000 an ounce.
It will grow to 20,000. It just depends on how long it takes to get there. And this will be a function of high inflation. You know how much money we create and how fast we create it. Good. So, Grant Cardone and I, uh, do you know who he is? Of course, I know who he is. Yes. Good. Always a participant in my show.
He is a billionaire real estate developer. And we discussed gold last time, uh, he was on my show. And he said something interesting. He said: " If you look at the development of technology with artificial intelligence and robotics, there will come a point where they will start deploying thousands of robots in these mines, quarries, etc." You know, at the bottom of the ocean, in all these places, on most of the planet that we have n't really explored.
Wait until he has 8 million, 80 million, or 8 billion goddamn Optimus robots. Yes. Just mining gold costs $10,000. If it's $10,000, all his work won't clean the kitchen. They will dig for gold. And they will find him too. By the way, 24/7, 365. As long as there's energy, this damn robot, he, he, he won't masturbate.
He will dig in the ground , grab gold or silver, uranium or copper. An infinite number will come from this breed. We have..." 91% of our ocean floor we haven't even opened, hell, turned over, right? So imagine you throw 100,000 robots in the middle of the ocean and have them mine gold and diamonds and all that stuff , and silver, and eventually this will happen.
It won't happen in the next year or two, but it could happen in the next 20 years. Right. Well, I don't know how much they'll actually find, but yeah, I don't think they'll find enough to flood the market, because remember, we've already mined a lot of the gold that we have. I mean, gold is pretty rare, and cheap and easy to find gold has already been found.
So, uh, but as we have more technology, yes, we might be able to find it, but I'm not worried, uh, that that's going to happen. And of course, it only makes sense to send robots into space or to the bottom of the ocean to mine gold when gold is expensive, because I'm sure it would n't be...cheap, especially when people talk about mining gold in space.
I hope they start mining gold in space, because that means it's going to be very, very expensive for them to justify. But usually the reason you hear this kind of nonsense, and the reason Grant Cardon mentions it, is because he's now a Bitcoin fan. And that's why the Bitcoin guys are always trying to scare the gold bugs away so they don't want to mine them.
They are trying to come up with a reason why gold won't work. As if you should own Bitcoin because Bitcoin is advertised as digital gold, which is a scam. This is not digital gold. This is digital nothingness. Digital gold would be tokenized gold, like Tether Gold. This is digital gold because it is backed by real gold.
You know, Bitcoin is not secured by anything. But you know, Grant Cardone also has a trick where he, um, combines his real estate funds with Bitcoin and claims that this is some kind of, you know, revolutionary way of managing real estate, because he says that real estate is illiquid , and therefore you have no money.
to cover your repairs and maintenance. And so you solve this problem by also holding bitcoins, which you know can be more easily sold and used for these expenses, which is complete nonsense. And he should have known better as a realtor. I mean, he's certainly been in real estate a lot more than I am, but I know that real estate generates income.
That's why you buy it. He buys rental properties. The rent covers all these costs. You don't need Bitcoins to cover maintenance costs. It requires rent, you know , and you also have a lot of depreciation when you own real estate. Er, so you don't even have to pay taxes on all your income. So you have plenty of income to cover these expenses.
So Bitcoin does not solve the problem for real estate investment trusts (REITs). He creates a problem that does not exist. The problem is that you invested money in Bitcoin, which is going to collapse. So, you know, you're throwing your money away. But if people want to play Bitcoin, they don't need Grant Cardon's real estate fund to...Do it.
If you want to buy real estate, buy a real estate trust. If you want to buy Bitcoin, buy Bitcoin. There is no point in buying both. There's no point in paying Grant Cardona, you know, to manage your Bitcoin when you can manage it yourself. It's not difficult. So, I think it's just some kind of scam.
I mean, I'd be happy to debate with Grant. I mean, I, you know, I talked to him every now and then . I challenged them to X, you know, hey , you know, I'd like to debate this topic because, you know, I think it's...I think, I think I'd win easily. Uh, but if you want to do something on your show, that's fine.
If you have a monologue... er, well, in our last interview in 2021 you said that Bitcoin is the biggest bubble of all time. But to me, it's just another bubble. In fact, it's probably the biggest bubble when it comes to... you know, it's funny because I ultimately think that, uh, cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, have no...value at all.
I don't know if that's true, maybe, maybe it is. I mean, there's an AI bubble right now, which could be bigger , but, you know, at least the AI bubble is built on substance. There is something real there. There is a revolutionary technology. Hmm, I think the stocks that are related to this right now are very overvalued.
And I think the people who are buying these names now, if they hold on to them long enough, they will eventually lose a lot of money. Not because AI won't be revolutionary, but because they've overpaid for these early adopters and these hyperscalers , who are spending insane amounts of money, and we don't know if they'll ever get a return on that investment.
Uh , I believe their clients will make money using AI. I think this will make businesses more productive, but for many AI vendors it could turn into a commodity. This could be a price war. It could be, you know, who knows ? We can, the Chinese can ultimately win. You know, we have an advantage over them right now , but who the hell knows?
Hmm, but I think the reason I consider Bitcoin and cryptocurrency in general is not just Bitcoin. You need to invest all these tokens there , uh, it's the biggest bubble . It's not that it's the largest in scale. It is simply the biggest because there is nothing there. It's all noise. These things, most of these coins, almost all of them will fall to zero.
And Bitcoin will probably eventually fall to zero too. Although it may take some time, given the huge cult that has been created around it. But you know , Bitcoin is at around 59,000 today, which is lower than it was in April 2021. Lower than that peak. As for gold, Bitcoin is 60% below its 2021 high .
And this is despite all the Bitcoin ETFs that have been created in the last 5 years that have bought up Bitcoin. Even though Strategy spent $60 billion, whatever that is, buying Bitcoin; despite all the other bitcoin treasury companies that...5 years ago there were none that would buy up all these bitcoins; despite El Salvador buying Bitcoin; despite the fact that several state governments are entering into these Bitcoin deals; despite electing the first Bitcoin president, who has a Bitcoin cabinet and a Bitcoin strategic reserve; Despite all this hype, Bitcoin has fallen.
So that's a pretty good sign that the party is over, the bubble has burst, and I think the people who are still in the game are delusional. They think it will fly to the moon, but it will fall to Earth. And I think what's happening now with the strategy, and I've been exposing Saylor for a year now in this digital lending scam, in a Ponzi scheme known as Stretch.
Uh, I warned you. I said I would sue him because I believe his marketing violates SEC rules. Uh , I think he's very vulnerable. I think there is a big responsibility because investors are losing a lot of money. They will lose. a lot of money. Stretch, which he advertised as safe. He said it is suitable for retirees looking for income.
It has already fallen by almost 30% in one month. This is more than Bitcoin. Bitcoin has fallen about 22% in the last month, and Stretch, which he told people was less risky than Bitcoin, de-risked Bitcoin, has fallen 28%. People lose more money there. You know, his core strategy for the company is now down about 84% from its peak.
Uh, people are being killed. And he made "pie in the sky" predictions. You will receive $10 million worth of Bitcoin. Bitcoin for $20 million . Uh, mortgage your house to buy Bitcoin. Use your business to buy Bitcoin. Max out your credit cards to buy Bitcoin. Sell your organs and buy Bitcoin. Anyone who followed his advice, he is the CEO of a public company.
He must comply with safety laws. He's not your typical, uh, crypto promoter, because his statements were also designed to encourage people to buy Strategy shares and drive up the price of Bitcoin, which pushed Strategy up. So, I think a lot of people who lost a lot of money are going to sue Strategy and Sailor, and they might even sue the media companies that covered his activities, like CNBC, you know, that allowed him to go on the air and essentially deceive the public and lie to them.
Er, distorting these securities, er, simply inflating the upside potential and returns without any disclosure of downside risk. Uh, you know, there's a lot of blame, a lot of blame that can be placed on everybody, and I think, you know, the government, ever since Trump won the election, you know, the government seems to be blessing all of this.
And I think the government is also, uh, responsible for a lot of people investing money in, uh , Strategy or Bitcoin, which they're going to lose, uh , because a lot of people were tempted to buy it because the U.S. government legalized it. Here's how it's progressing: Donald Trump is behind it, the US government.
Look at the Trump family, his entire family business has become ...cryptocurrency. And by the way, his Donald Trump media company, which is also a Bitcoin company, is now down 96%. That is, people are being killed. Yesterday it reached a new historical low . I didn't check the price today. Uh, but, you know, and of course Trumpcoin and Melaniacoin, they're down about 99%.
Right? I mean, people are being deceived, uh, because of this. I did everything I could to warn him, you know, but I'm just one guy, you know. I meant that I called out this Mashinsky guy when I first debated him. He had Celsius. I had a debate with a guy and said, “This is a Ponzi. You're like Bernie Madoff." It took the government years after that interview to arrest him, you know, because it was obvious to me .
I wish I had investigated Sam Benkman Freed because I didn't even know who the guy was. I didn't pay much attention to him. But after he was exposed, I went back and watched some of his interviews. And if I had watched him, I would have known right away that he was a fraud. I mean, sometimes these guys are easy to recognize by what they say.
And I knew this about Sailor. I mean , I, you know, I, I was joking, you know, a couple of weeks ago, before this big fall, that he might have to trade his orange tie for an orange jumpsuit. And, you know, I don't know if the Trump administration will prosecute him , but the next one might. But I don't know if it's criminal.
This is definitely civil. Fraud is definitely civil. I, you know, I don't know if that qualifies as a crime. That will be decided by, you know, the Department of Justice and the jury. Well, I checked it while you were talking. So, in April 2021, Bitcoin was worth about $56,000. It is now around $59,000.
So, now it actually doesn't change. Well, no, but the peak has reached its maximum. If you look at the high at that time, it went up to about 64. So in November 2022, it went down to about 16,000. Yeah, I'm talking about... And then in October, excuse me, September 2025, it hit an all- time high of 123,000.
Yeah. If you sold it, you did well. But if you still own it, the high in November 2021 was 69,000. We are below that figure. And the high , I think, in April was around 64,000. But in November 2021, when Bitcoin was at 69,000, gold, uh, was still around 1,900. It didn't even reach 2,000. Now gold is at 4,000.
So the value of gold has doubled, and Bitcoin has gone down. That's why, when it comes to gold, Bitcoin has lost 60% of its value. You know, a lot of people were selling gold to buy Bitcoin back then. They would have to sell their bitcoins to buy gold. Yes. Listen, when Bitcoin dropped to 60,000, I bought some of it.
Not a huge part, just because, look, when I saw something drop by 50%. And there is still a lot of investment in this. I thought, okay, why not? Even if my investment goes to zero, who cares, right? Well, if you're willing to lose everything, and it costs about the same as what I bought it for back then, you know?
So it really hasn't changed much, but I thought, what the hell. I also didn't buy any real cryptocurrency. I bought IBIT, an ETF, which just made it easier, you know, so I don't have a wallet and a password, and, you know, I can't be fooled by some catchphrase or anything. I'm like: listen, it's right there, with the rest of my shares.
I see it. I can buy and sell whenever I want and it's there. But the irony, the irony of it, Vlad, the irony is that the value proposition of Bitcoin , when it first came out, was that you don't need any of it. You didn't need a third-party custodian. It wasn't like gold, where it was hard to store and you had to buy a gold ETF.
You just, you know, open your wallet. You get your self-preservation, and that was supposedly his advantage. It's ironic that people are now buying Bitcoin just like they buy gold in ETFs. Well, if you're going to own an ETF with a third-party custodian, you might as well own gold, because the advantage of owning Bitcoin was that there was no third party that you had to rely on, no one that you had to trust.
So, this is all ridiculous because the very purpose of Bitcoin no longer exists. Um, you know, you know, maybe, you know, maybe it will happen again sometime in the future, but I think the price of Bitcoin will be much lower. If it ever, if it ever returns to its original function or purpose, it will be at a much lower cost.
Uh, significantly, maybe 99% lower. Well, you know, what's interesting is that the alleged inventor of Bitcoin, uh, Satoshi, has a Bitcoin wallet. Wait, let me look at this price. Yeah, he has like a million bitcoins there or something. About 5% or so of the offer. Look, instead of instead of bitcoiners, yeah, instead of him having, he has 1.1 million bitcoins.
So now this amount is worth $89 billion . This is the largest untouched repository of wealth in human history. In the history of mankind. There has never been a store of wealth on this scale. Untouched. I wouldn't say it's a store of wealth. It's a store of wealth because I do n't think I look at Bitcoin as wealth the way I look at real estate as wealth, or companies as wealth, or even gold as wealth, because Bitcoin is only worth something when you sell it and get something else.
So this is a potential right to wealth. But you know, I'm instead of all these Bitcoiners, you know, they're worried, or they're trying to say that we should be worried, gold bugs should be worried, you know, about AI or computers, you know, about mining gold or finding all this gold. I think it's much more likely that supercomputers or AI will figure out how to get those 1.1 million satoshis out of that dead wallet and start, or the satoshis, rather, are n't what they are.
I have a dog here drinking my water. Um, 1.1 million, uh, bitcoins. Um, that's what they should worry about. Supercomputers and AI are cracking the entire blockchain code. Um, because it seems crazy to me that this bitcoin is still lying there. It makes me think that whoever owned it died, and you know how could you, I mean how could you not sell something , if it was yours, you know, and I don't know, and it's not even being used, this wallet has had no activity since it was created, for 15 years this wallet has remained untouched.
So, if the person is actually alive, having the mental stability to not touch that much money at all makes me think he's probably dead, right? It wasn't even , you know, pledged as collateral. There are no loans for it, right? So this is very, I mean, this is very suspicious to me . Hmm, but you know, I think there's a better chance of this Bitcoin coming to market than a gold asteroid that's, you know, being mined.
But you know, the other thing that I, I kept mentioning about Satoshi. But the other thing about Bitcoin is that when people want to talk about its rarity, because they want to say there are only 21 million, it's because they decided to create an artificial bundle of satoshis, because each Bitcoin is worth 100 million satoshis.
I mean, who says why is Bitcoin worth 100 million? Why not make Bitcoin 10 million satoshis or a million satoshis? Because if Bitcoin were a million satoshis, there would n't be 2.1 million. There would be 2.1 billion of them. And then they wouldn't sound so rare, you know, because they're just, you know, because how much is one satoshi worth?
It's just a speck of dust. She is tiny. And I know that when I bring this up , people say, "Well, you can break the gold into little microscopic dust particles." I say: " Well, yes, but they don't do it that way." And you know , a speck of dust would get lost. It would just blow away. But the thing is , yes, you can break an ounce of gold, but you need a certain amount.
If I'm a jeweler and I want to make jewelry, I need a certain weight of gold. And if I don't have that weight, I can't make jewelry. So, you need a certain amount of gold. You don't need any number of Bitcoins, because it doesn't matter. You can't do anything with one satoshi. So, you can't do anything with 100 million satoshis.
The only thing you can do with one satoshi is give it to someone else, because it has no real use. It's just, you know, speculation. It's just , you know, trading. But this whole thing will end very badly. And I think it's already over. I think people holding onto Bitcoin have lost a huge amount of money.
They just don't realize it yet . They don't realize how much they've lost. The people who made money on Bitcoins are the ones who sold them. These are the winners. The people who still own them are the ones who lost. Didn't the previous Fed chairman say that eventually a US digital currency would emerge, and that would effectively destroy the very purpose of Bitcoin?
Well, they're already destroying it to some extent with stablecoins, generally speaking, because stablecoins, if you look at Bitcoin as a way to transact, as a digital currency, as an easy way to send money over the internet across the planet, it's much easier to use a stablecoin like Tether or, you know, USDT, whatever.
This is because it works better as a medium of exchange than Bitcoin. And everyone admits it. The problem with tokenized dollars, which is actually a stablecoin, is that tokenized dollars are not a means of saving, just as the dollar is not a means of saving. And, um, stablecoins don't even earn interest.
And that's where I think gold will come into play, which is somewhat ironic, because Bitcoin proponents were saying, "Hey, blockchain is going to kill gold. Bitcoin is the new gold. Blockchain will actually help gold become an even better money. Because when you tokenize gold instead of dollars and then put that on the blockchain, you have something.
Now you have gold, which is even more liquid, more divisible, more fungible. You can use gold as a medium of exchange. You can instantly send your gold holdings anywhere in the world in seconds for virtually nothing. So this solves all the problems that Bitcoin supposedly solved but can't solve. So, if you want to know what digital gold is, it's tokenized gold.
This is not Bitcoin. And so there are some, I mean Tether has the biggest selection right now with Tether Gold. Um, but there will be more companies doing this. You know, there are a few other companies that have done this. There are more companies doing this. Um, you know, this is probably the future of blockchain and tokenization digital money.
This is gold. This is not Bitcoin. Well, in 2011 you appeared on the Occupy Wall Street campaign as the 1%. Yes. You had a big poster and you said: " I am the 1%. I will talk to the 99%.'' ''Yes. And it looked like for the next 8 hours you were basically just arguing with people at the protest. Well, it was about two hours.
I wasn't there for eight. OK. Because at some point it was dark. So I just thought I came because that's what happened. I had tickets to the theater that evening. So I went to New York to participate in the Occupy Wall Street movement. And then my wife and I were going to a play, on Broadway. So when we arrived, it was a little later that day because the tickets were in the evening.
So when I started filming, the sun was shining brightly, but when we finished a couple of hours later, the sun was already setting. That's why it got dark. It was the time of day when I started, it was not far from sunset. So okay. So since then, you and I have both become rich. We both got deeper into 1% territory and a lot of people got left behind and so on.
And there has always been this concept of "eat the rich." You see, the mayor of New York these days is making a lot of policies that hurt the top 1%, right? And companies are actually leaving, etc. What do you think when people have an "eat the rich" mentality? Well, obviously I don't want to be eaten.
This is one of the reasons I live in Puerto Rico. Um , you know, but, you know, you'll be fine, you 'll be well seasoned there. You know, in Puerto Rico they season it a lot more. You will still eat. This is the main cry of the left. It was, uh, after every , you know, communist revolution, uh, that failed.
Uh, but, you know, the whole origin of the income tax was " eat the rich." You know, there wasn't always an income tax in the country. We did n't have it until 1913. But the reason we have it is because the politicians of the time said that if we had an income tax to make rich people get Rockefellers...and Carnegies and Vanderbilts, we could eliminate tariffs.
Because at that time, the US government's largest source of revenue was tariffs. And the middle class paid the tariffs. And the government said, " Hey, if we can introduce an income tax, we can get rid of these tariffs." And the public said, “Yes, great. Come on...I hate tariffs. "Let's tax the rich." It didn't take long .
Once they got the 16th Amendment and were able to tax the rich, it wasn't long before they started taxing everyone. And actually, the withholding tax, which is, you know, where taxes are taken from your paycheck, only started in 1942 as a war victory tax. But then they really lowered the rate. So by 1942-43 almost everyone was paying income tax, and in fact the initial rates that were supposed to apply to the rich were around 2%3%.
Now the middle class pays 30-40%, or none, or 20-30%. We tax the middle class much more than we should tax the rich. So all of this backfires, with the middle class chasing the rich and giving the government more power. It always backfires on them . But the other problem is this, and this is what people don't understand.
Economic growth is driven by wealth. The reason is that we have a higher standard of living. The reason we all have more things to consume is because of business. Through capital investment, innovation, investment and productivity. Where does all this come from? This comes from capital investment . This comes from savings.
Well, where does the money for this come from? They come from the rich, right? The middle class and the poor are not investing. They spend their salary etc. on living. They don't fund companies. Find a middle-class person. How many people do you employ? Almost none or none at all. The rich not only create the products we consume, but they also provide the jobs that give us the income to consume them.
So when you tax the rich, you destroy the capital that drives the economy. You know, if someone makes, let's say, I don't know, $10 million a year, and spends a million dollars a year, and you raise their taxes, you don't reduce the million dollars a year that they spend, you reduce it. Well, obviously, if they make 10, let's say , they pay 4 million in taxes, and they have six million left, and they spend 1 million, and now you're chasing them.
They are not going to cut short their pleasure. They are not going to cut the one million they are spending. They are going to cut the six million they are investing. So you are harming the investment. You are not harming their consumption. The best way to tax the rich is to tax the sales of things that rich people buy.
So, jewelry , exotic cars, private jets, yachts–fine, if you want the rich to pay some taxes, it won't hurt the economy. Then tax these things, right? Maybe the yacht builders won't like it much if they sell them. But you know what? If you are rich and can afford a yacht, you can afford to pay yacht tax.
This is normal. You know, you don't want to tax rich people when they spend money they don't spend, because that's money that grows the economy. This is the hen that lays the golden eggs. Don't kill her. Tax them when they spend their money. That's why, do you know what his name is? Not just Mandami from New York, but, um, Congressman Schiff, right?
Same last name as me, Adam Schiff, right? It's a shame that he has my last name. He said: “Imagine what we could do if we confiscated Elon Musk’s wealth. If we confiscated it, if we stole it,” he said. “We can give everyone $7,000. To every family." "Yes. So they can go to Walmart and Amazon and buy something Chinese.
And what then? What can we show for this? Nothing. You will destroy these businesses . You will destroy Tesla. You will destroy SpaceX so we can buy more crap we don't need. I'm serious, but you know, this is how you destroy the economy. This is not how you grow an economy. So people who want to eat the rich don't realize that they end up eating themselves.
They should thank the rich, right? You know, you know , you have a job, thank your boss, right? Because what would you do if you didn't have a job? Try to figure out how to, you know, do something on your own. I mean, look at all the products, everything we have. All clothes. Why do we have clothes?
Because someone got rich making our clothes. Would you rather be naked so no one gets rich? What about all the medicines we have to treat our illnesses? People got rich inventing these things, right? No one has a cure for cancer yet. Do you want someone to get rich by curing cancer? I want. I want someone to really get rich by curing cancer, because that's an incentive to cure it.
Hey, if I cure cancer, I can get rich, right ? That's why no one invents anything in a communist country. They don't invent anything because there is no incentive to do so. I want to encourage people to provide me with the things I need, the things that make my life better, and everything we have. Look, look, look how important Apple is to so many people.
How many people can't even live without their iPhones, right? Steve Jobs became very rich. He got rich. I don't resent it. I don't mind that there are all sorts of products that people didn't even know they wanted until the iPhone came out. How can you want something that doesn't even exist? So, an entrepreneur figures out what people want, what they don't even know, but they come up with products that make your life better.
and they get rewarded for it. So, people get richer in proportion to how much they have helped society, because you can't steal money from people. You don't put a gun to someone's head. Hey, give me your money and take my product. They must voluntarily buy your product because they want it. They value it more than their money.
They are willing to spend the money they earn to buy the product you produce or consume the services you provide. So, if you sell a lot of stuff, it means you are improving the lives of a lot of people who voluntarily bought your stuff. Um, so the rich are rich because they deserve it. Are some people rich because they stole money?
Yes. Are some people rich because they cheated people? Yes, that's wrong. But in general, the vast majority of wealthy people achieve their wealth through honest means. Some politicians have become rich . How did they get rich? Selling your influence, right? This is wrong. It didn't help society, you know, you know, or they trade, you know, they they they they can use their influence, uh, to extract rent from someone or something , bribes or something.
So, yeah, you know, you'll have it. But it's interesting because it's always the politicians who want to go after the rich, uh, when it's them who got their wealth dishonestly, using their power, uh, that they have because they're in government . But if you work in the private sector, you have to earn your money.
Well, Elon Musk surpassed a trillion dollars for the first time in human history when this happened. People like to say: well, it's illiquid. He doesn't have all this in cash. But even if he doesn't have that in cash, he could sell huge chunks of stock, and he could also borrow against his net worth, right?
Yeah, he could probably borrow half a trillion dollars if he really needed to, right? Yes. Well, Elon Musk. Yes . I mean, his wealth, and that lasted until Elon Musk came along, because before Elon Musk came along, the richest American in history was still John...D. Rockefeller, who was over a hundred years ago, adjusted for inflation , had a fortune of about 6 or 700 billion, right?
So, it took Elon Musk to beat John Rockefeller of Standard Oil. But the reason he beats John Rockefeller is not because he earns more. This is because its assets are valued higher. And this is part of the bubble. I do n't think SpaceX is worth 100 times earnings, but that's what the stock is valued at.
I don't think Tesla is worth nearly as much as it is valued at. So Elon Musk's net worth is a function of his wealth being concentrated in overvalued assets . Now, if he sold a lot of these assets, prices would fall. He would no longer be a trillionaire. The reason he's a trillionaire is because he doesn't sell .
He is holding on. Uh, but he's still very rich. I'm not taking anything away from Elon. Uh, but I think if he tried to become liquid, he wouldn't be as rich as John. Rockefeller. He would still be much richer than me. Uh, but he won't be richer than Rockefeller. But yeah, and , and, but I think the reason he was able to achieve that is because of the bubble that we have in the market for certain stocks right now.
The public is willing to pay a crazy price for the shares. And you know, we mentioned Donald Trump, CEO of DJT, earlier. It just shows you that this is an example of people buying these stocks early on when they were being hyped up and they were paying hundreds, I think they went up to two, 300, 4, whatever it was, for some crazy price.
Someone bought them and now they're worth $7. So at that point, Donald Trump had a huge net worth, right? Because he owned this part of this company. But now it's 96% or 94% lower, whatever it is. Um, and that's why Elon Musk is now a trillionaire. We'll see how long this lasts. Uh, but eventually we're all going to...be trillionaires, but that's going to be a value of money that's unlikely to have any value, right?
I mean, everyone in Zimbabwe is a trillionaire, right? So, you know, this is just an attempt...I'm a trillionaire. What trillion of what? What do you have? Right? Well, if I have a trillion dollars, it all depends on how much a dollar is worth. Oh, listen, I checked. Uh, I have a bunch of Tesla shares and their price-to-earnings ratio is 353, which is pretty crazy.
But at least there is profit. SpaceX doesn't even have any profit, so it's just sales. No, you are right. That's right. This is profitable. But I can tell you that as someone who has been buying Tesla cars since 2010, when my children were born. Sorry. Since 2015, when my children were born , uh, Tesla's technology has been so far ahead of all other car companies that they do n't even come close to them.
Ability to drive independently, Wait. Ability to drive independently. Tesla is literally worth 10, maybe even 100 times more than the next company, which will actually stop producing the Model X and Model S, which I always believed, because now they are immediately switching to robot taxis. And these robot taxis actually come off the production line and just drive to people's homes.
And between that, and if you look at what they're doing with robotics, if everything goes the way it's supposed to go, this is going to be a very, very valuable company in the next 5-10 years, so I have no problem with Tesla stock being worth over a million dollars. Yes. You know, it all depends on, um, how things develop over time.
There's no doubt that Tesla has great products. Um, the question is, how much money can Tesla make selling these great products? Because right now they do n't earn very much. So, um, how much do they cost? You may have great products, but how much is the business that sells them worth? And one more thing...
Over time, one of the beautiful things about capitalism is that success breeds competition . And if you do something, and you do it well, other people try to imitate it and eventually they can beat you. Um, there's going to be a lot of competition from Germany, from China, from Japan, from somewhere unknown, uh, in all of these products.
And over time, and if Tesla really starts making more money, that will lead to even more competition, right? Because if excess profits are being made in a particular industry , capital naturally stretches to try to displace them. So when you pay that price for a Tesla, you're already paying on the assumption that all these great things will happen, right?
They may not happen, in which case you lose. What I would rather do as an investor is, instead of buying something that's priced to be perfect, where something could go wrong and I'd lose a lot of money, I would rather buy something that's not priced to be perfect, that's So if these bad things don't happen, then I make a lot of money.
money. Or if something good, unexpected, just happens, I'll make a lot of money. Tesla's price depends on all these good things. They have to happen. So, you know, you can own a company that doesn't have that price tag. For example, you know, I have stocks that I own, uh, that are in Thailand. It's a shame I didn't own more of their price because they've gone up about 100 times since I bought them.
But when I bought them, they were relatively cheap and had nothing to do with artificial intelligence, but suddenly they got into artificial intelligence. It is now the largest company in Thailand. When I bought them, they were like nothing. But now they are a hundred times more than my expenses because something really good happened that I did n't even expect.
So, you know, if you can buy something when no one is expecting good things, and then something good happens, you can be successful. If you buy something where everyone already expects great things, you are setting yourself up for disappointment. Um, well, I don't... I don't necessarily agree with that, because the core of my portfolio was Google, and I started buying its stock in 2010-2011.
Google was a household name. It was the largest search engine in the world. It had the largest number of email users in the world. Google Maps was completely dominant , and YouTube was completely dominant at that point. He dominated in every direction, and people said that this could not go on. And that initial stock purchase that I made all those years ago has gone up about 2,000%.
Yes. I mean, that's the basis of my wealth at the moment. Yes. I mean, Google, you know, is more of an exception than a rule. I'm not saying you can't buy a popular company and have it actually do better than people thought. But it's also a great example because what did people use before Google? Yahoo, for example, and at one point Yahoo was the top search engine, and there were others, there were telescopes, I forget, there were about three or four of those things that went down to nothing.
Uh, but people had a lot of expectations, uh, when it came to...Google. So, Google, you know, came along, as did Facebook. But before Facebook, there was MySpace. Then it came along, and then, you know, I think the main thing that saved Facebook, uh, Facebook Meta, was that they bought Instagram, because nobody uses Facebook anymore.
They use, you know, uh, but he was smart enough to buy Instagram, and that was a great move that Zuckerberg made, realizing that it was better than Facebook. That's where, you know, and he went and bought them. And at the time when he bought Instagram, people probably thought, oh, that's a lot of money.
He didn't pay any money. He just paid with shares, you know, he just issued shares. And now, you know, I don't know, now it's an artificial intelligence company. This is hyperscaling. Who the hell knows what Meta is, uh , at this point? But, you know, I think Google is overrated. I think that within the next 10 years your capital will be...
dead. I think you...I think now you bought it so cheap that, you know, again, just paying taxes on your sale might not be worth it. That's why I said you should move to Puerto Rico. But, uh , but I would...I would...I would...I would mix it up a little bit. I, you know, don't have to sell everything, but I would ...I would...I would look for other opportunities...uh, you know, from...From 10 to 12.
I ...I don't remember exactly, but it was a serious commitment, right ? For example, I had to sit at my desk for those two hours every day. It wasn't necessarily hard to fill the time, uh, but it was just making time. So at some point I just ended the radio show, but then I started a podcast. And the podcast was a lot easier because I wasn't doing them every day.
I did one, two, three a week. I made them whenever I wanted. There was no set time when I had to do it, right? So it was much easier. And it grew. I mean, I have a good audience for it. My YouTube account has just over 625,000 subscribers, and I think that's the best way if you want to follow my podcast: to do it on YouTube.
Because for a while I only did them in audio format, but for the last few years I've been doing videos. So, here I am doing them live; There is video, there is audio. So, if you want to get the full experience, you can watch it on YouTube. But if you just want to listen to it, the website where I host it is Shiftradio.com, and on any platform, you know, iTunes or, uh, Spotify, Stitcher , you know, wherever you find podcasts, my audio podcast is there.
So my podcast is a combination of markets , uh, economics, and politics, which is rare. You know, some people are very political, but they're not really interested in finance or economics. Some people, you know, are interested in markets, but not so much in economics. But I combined all three of these things and my politics .
I am an Austrian economist, a libertarian market politician. That's how I realized that in 2008 we would have a financial crisis. I have a very good understanding of, you know, the United States, the Constitution, the legality, you know, all these documents. That's how I realized Trump's tariffs were unconstitutional.
I told my... The podcast audience the day Trump imposed these reciprocal tariffs reported that the Supreme Court was going to strike them down, and I said exactly why. I immediately realized that they were unconstitutional. Um, and so I talk about these issues, uh, and then, you know, just about economics, uh, so it's a great podcast.
I think it's an important podcast to not only listen to but also share with friends because there's so much misinformation in the mainstream media , uh, that if you get a lot of information and I, you know, comment on current events and things that are happening, uh , you get a completely different perspective that is generally correct.
And then I also, you know, supplement that with my social media ; I actually have more followers now on X, I have over a million and a half followers , and I'm on that platform every day. I am constantly, and I am the one who does it . I don't have anyone who does it for me. I comment on politics. I comment on the markets.
I'm commenting, yes, that's all. regular. Actually, I don't even talk ... I used to talk to reporters who called me in different ways, you know, to get my opinion. Nobody calls me anymore . They just watch what I write on X, and the next day I read the articles. All these different things, and they just quote me with X, right?
So I don't need to give interviews. I just write what I think, I just put it out there. Hmm, but I think it's important that people follow me on X because, again , I mean, so much of what's out there is completely wrong, nonsense. Uh, and you know, and that's why I...I'm telling the truth. So not only do you want to follow me, but you also want to encourage your followers to follow me by reposting my stuff, right?
commenting. Here is my site getting a lot of engagement. You'll see I'll post on X, and I'll look at the likes and the comments, and I'll look at other accounts that have five or ten million followers, and...They don't have that many. So I have a lot of involvement. The people on my site, meaning those who are subscribed to me, are active and they are engaged.
So I have haters too. There are people who follow me because they want to, you know, troll me. A lot of crypto guys are following me just to pounce on me. But there are also many fans who also follow me, but that's what creates engagement. You love me, you hate me, and then they fight among themselves, right?
People post and reply to other people's replies. So I'm there. You should definitely follow me on X, but I'm also on Facebook. I'm on Instagram. I'm on TikTok . I mean, everywhere there's social media, there's content being created from, you know, my podcasts and from my, you know, my posts. Uh , I don't create all this myself, but it's all me, right?
So, it's, you know , uh, yeah, anywhere, wherever you can follow me, you should definitely do it . Especially , as I said, we will have a big crisis, like in 2008, only worse. And the government, just like in 2008, will blame capitalism for this. They will say, “We need more regulation. We need more government." “And that would be wrong, because what is happening is a consequence of the government, not capitalism, not the failure of capitalism.
This is the failure of public restraint, uh, in preventing government from corrupting capitalism. Government interference in capitalism is a problem. Capitalism is what will solve the problem created by the government. So I want to make sure that, you know, when this works, and, you know, you're lining up for food, and, you know, there's shortages, there's rationing , and there's power outages because we had a currency crisis, uh, inflation is skyrocketing, and all the politicians are trying to blame it on the greedy oil companies, or Putin, or China, or speculators, and they're saying we need a government, right?
I want people to know that this is not why we have a problem, and that all government decisions will make all government problems worse. So at some point we will have to have a revolution. You know, in a couple of weeks it will be the 250th anniversary." our independence from Britain and the birth of our republic.
I mean, we didn't create a republic until we won the war , but that was independence, and we need another revolution now, uh, and for the same reason that the American Revolution was a rebellion against the king, because the king, uh, you know, played too big a role in the lives of the colonists. We didn't want to follow their rules.
We didn't want to pay royal taxes. We wanted freedom. Well, the taxes and regulations we have to follow now are much more dependent than anything King George did . I mean, we have a lot more tyranny coming out of Washington than we do in the United Kingdom. So Americans today have a better reason for revolution than those who lived 250 years ago.
I mean, there's nothing as bad as King George, he didn't have an income tax. He didn't have the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. He wasn't that bad. Taxes were tiny. I wouldn't have to live in Puerto Rico if we were still ruled by a British king who was as nice as...King George. So, we need to rediscover the spirit that made America great in order to make it great again.
Donald Trump talks about making America great again. But nothing he's done makes America great again. I don't want to talk about making America great again. I want America to be great again. And that means making government small again. Everything Trump has done has made government bigger, spending bigger, government bigger.
I want less government, less spending. That's why we have inflation. We pay for government with inflation because we don't raise taxes enough to cover the increase in government spending. So, we create money. We are creating inflation. The government is taking away our purchasing power instead of taking away our money.
But that's exactly why we have an affordability crisis. This is because the government is unavailable. If we had had a tax increase over the last five or six years that matched the increase in government spending, then people would know why they couldn't afford anything because the government would be taking all their money.
They would see it taken out of their paycheck. But now they think it's because of...Inflation. But inflation is because of the government. This is a government tax. This is the same as income tax. It's just harder to understand because the government doesn't physically take your money. Just prints money, spends it, which destroys the value of your money, which means prices must rise.
And every time you go to the store and something is more expensive, you're paying for the government, right? Food is not more expensive now. Even if the price is higher , it is the government that is more expensive. You just pay for it when you buy food. Here's what's happening. So we need this revolution.
And I hope that the more people who follow me, who listen to my stuff, will understand that. And that will make it harder for the government to fool us again. And you know, it's going to be hard because, you know, I'm just one person. So, but I can multiply because people, uh, follow me and repost my stuff, and, uh, again , I'm not the only one who understands this.
it is, but I think that of all the people who actually know what's going on, I'm probably the biggest soapbox person. You know, you have some guys who are maybe a little bigger, but, you know, maybe they're not as pushy. Well, that's what it is. Peter Schiff, it's been five years since our last interview. I congratulate you on all your successes. I wish you all the best. Thank you.
Comments 0