U.S. Government, Fiat, Stephanie Kelton discussed on What Bitcoin Did


Stronger Fiat currencies. I mean, that's why I think the U.S. government should the long-term impact it might have on our inability to fight these unethical words as sort of a secondary consideration for me. I think that the U.S. government should adopt Bitcoin now because it'll advantage Americans in the future. And it will make our country stronger and will make our currency stronger, at least in the near future. Eventually, I don't think we have the currencies. But I think there's a long transitionary period here where you have dollars or Euros or whatever they are and that we kind of enter into this exchange system where they're pegged in some way. And if you care about your country, you're not going to want your country to be late in that. Because then you're going to have a pretty weak Fiat currency. So I think that's the way I'm thinking about it, although who knows. It's Brave New World out there. The crazy part is we get to watch it all happen, which is something that people in history books in the future, if we still have them, we'll say, man, it must have been crazy to be around then. There'll be some of you that Alex threat students. No, we're talking about have you read his trilogy of books. Yeah, well, look, look, I think exploring this idea of the price of war has been so illuminating for me because I just didn't know about it. I just didn't I didn't know about the history of how we fought wars in the past and how it's actually tied to democracy and I think it's a fascinating topic that people should become educated about. And then maybe you start thinking differently about government intervention in the bond markets and I'd like to see more dialog about it basically. Like I'd like to see more and more discussed and not less discussed. In finance and economics more broadly, I mean, there's a big book called stigmas money markets. That's kind of used as like the Bible for anyone trading in the money markets today. And it doesn't mention war at all, not a single time. I'd like to see you debate Stephanie kelton, but with our unaware that this is actually really interested in because she worked for Bernie, who was against wars. So how does she square this? How does she write a book that doesn't mention Iraq or Afghanistan at all? And at the end of the book, basically says she's proud of the worst we fought by through debt. Maybe because she's a little shit. Maybe, but I actually would like to see her defend that point. So would I? That's why I think it would be an interesting debate. The discussion around M and T and his implications and then you can just slip this one in and ask it to defend this. Yeah, and the people say, no, no, no, MMT is just a framework for thinking about domestic financing. It's like, no, no, no, but what about if your country's largest single domestic financing expenditures wars abroad? Like you can't separate the two. So let's just talk more about it. We have entered into a dark age that was predicted by tocqueville by Adam Smith, Adam Smith said, I have a quote here from him that I thought was powerful. He says, the people feeling during the continuance of the war, the complete burden of it would soon grow weary of it in the government in order to humor them would not be under the necessity of carrying it on longer than it was necessary to do so..

Coming up next