(0:00 - 0:08) Hi everyone, I'm Madison Holmes. And I am Maycee Holmes. And you're watching Holmes Squared. (0:09 - 0:16) That was cute. I was told to make it more lively. Yes, we were told to make it more lively. (0:17 - 0:27) Okay, so today we said we wanted to cover a bit on economics. A bit, just a bit guys. I know economics is a very big subject. (0:28 - 0:32) A very big subject. But we're just gonna talk about it a bit. Yeah, just a bit. (0:32 - 0:39) So we'll start off with something that we thought. I found this on Instagram because I follow Danielle Smith. And I thought it was really cool. (0:39 - 0:53) Right. And it was Danielle Smith was in Japan. And she checked out this like high-speed rail train that goes from Tokyo to, Maddie put it down, Sapporo. (0:53 - 1:06) And it can go at 320 kilometers per hour, which is insane. I love Danielle's little quote. She says, if Alberta had one, we could get between Calgary and Edmonton in less than an hour. (1:06 - 1:24) So I think that the reason why this is so cool is. Yeah, that's just so cool. But the reason it's cool is because of the fact that like, I like how our leader in Alberta is trying to go to other cultures and figure out what it is that they do. (1:24 - 1:40) And is trying to think, hmm, I wonder if we could be doing that. Because think about that. If you weren't spending three hours to drive here and back from Calgary to Edmonton or just going from interprovincially, then that makes trade so much easier. (1:40 - 1:55) And that makes people's lives and jobs so much more efficient. Like just on trying to get products there faster. It saves us money that way could be put towards other things that could save us even more money for more projects. (1:55 - 2:20) So I just was like, this is this is a good place to start. And because it's it's infrastructure. And so, Maddie, I think you and I wanted to touch a little bit about what like the concept of a national bank, because I think the reason why this is important is because we know that there's a lot of almost like four truths, one lie, false dualisms out there, false debates. (2:20 - 2:39) It was the Noam Chomsky quote that was once like, you you set the terms of what it is that people are going to debate. And then basically, they will debate these things and blah. But it's within your own terms. (2:39 - 2:53) So they think that they are granted critical thinking and that they are practicing it. But it's only within a certain confines. So, Maddie, it's trying to find the quote right now. (2:54 - 3:07) Yeah, yeah. It was the smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum. Yes. (3:07 - 3:21) And so one of the false dualisms that we have come across is Keynesian versus Von Hayek economics. Right. So it's either and this is plays into the left hemisphere and hemisphere work that we do. (3:22 - 3:43) So this is either or thinking, which is it's either government spending all the way or it's no government spending anyway, and then just let the free markets do what the free markets are going to do. Now, we are kind of advocating for a bit of the it's in the middle. It's somewhere in the middle. (3:43 - 3:59) It's not either or. And that's where I think you and I come into the concept of a national bank because we were taking a look at that Danielle Smith source. And then we were like, well, that would be government spending. (3:59 - 4:37) It's like if she decided that she was wanting to actually work on a high speed rail project here in Calgary or in Alberta, Alberta, that would be government spending. But that's the type where, again, just what are you using the money for? Plays a huge part into the success of whether or not it's going to reap the benefits for a lot of other people. Whereas with the idea, though, of during the Great Depression, when these theories were coming up to the front with, I believe it was Keynes who was also like, well, government spending. (4:37 - 4:47) But not to the point where literally you're just like, we need to create jobs. So I'm just going to create a job for this guy to go dig a hole. And then I'm going to create another job for this guy to go fill the hole. (4:47 - 4:51) Right. And then that creates money. And what's the point of that? That means that they can start spending more around. (4:52 - 5:00) And like, look at that. And it's like you're not they that's not a job worth earning anything. Like, I guess that would be a good question. (5:00 - 5:20) Maddie is like, what is money? If not. The exchange for something tangible, something real, something that it's like labor, like wealth. Like, what do you think? Yeah, well, because you and I are reading Creature of Jekyll Island right now. (5:20 - 5:51) And that's one of the first thing he does is try and define money. So you can agree upon it throughout the book, because some of even the Fed that he did went through a whole scenario where this individual is trying to get the Fed to define what money was and legal tender. And they wouldn't, because, you know, the more abstract that the definition is, the harder, the easier it is for them to make up things and then manipulate it. (5:52 - 6:16) But for money being an exchange medium, that's for one. And then you get into the, if it stops there, though, I believe you still get into the debate of, okay, gold or, you know, what we currently have, which is fiat paper money. But even that is too dichotomous. (6:17 - 6:37) Because when, even if you're looking at the history of money, starting with, it started with barterism. And some people think that that's the best, you know, it's very tangible. It doesn't get more materialistic than literally bartering and trading one good for another. (6:38 - 7:19) But that doesn't allow for the expansion, which is why the gold started coming in, and then gold coins. But then after gold coins came receipt money, which is like today's checks. So so-and-so would take the, would get a piece of paper or a couple pieces of paper, and whatever gold that they had, the paper would represent, would say the exact value that they had, or a couple variations of, so they could hand out instead of just one piece of paper saying I've 130,000 gold or whatever, I have 10, you know, 10 gold. (7:19 - 7:35) This paper's for 10 of my gold in my vault somewhere. And that made things a bit easier for travel and trade, because then it's, you're not lugging around your gold all the time, but you have this paper. And then if somebody ever needs it, they can go get it. (7:35 - 8:05) So, and that's not inherently a bad idea. Receipt money, paper money, it makes things easier. So going for a dichotomy of it needs to be all gold back, or it just, it's too limiting, which is why- Martin Armstrong that was talking about the concept of money allows for flexibility. (8:05 - 9:01) Yeah. And what that means is, no, you don't- if you're only working within a limited supply of, let's say, like, I think this was what you and dad were talking about, Maddie, the other day, where it was like, I'm not sure whether or not it was G. Edward Griffin that was advocating for this position or not, but it's like, gold, if you're producing gold, there's only so much of a limited amount, right? You gotta, it takes time to get it out of the- get it out and into the system, right? And so when you're working with only a limited supply of something, right, then it's like, it's tricky, because what if there's people that are wanting to, they have ideas, and they want to invest into those ideas, and they want to see it come into- Even Daniel Smith, she wants to make this rail train. Yeah, it's like, if you don't allow there to be- But Canada has no gold reserves. (9:02 - 9:45) Yeah, if you don't allow there to be some flexibility, where you do do a little bit of printing, in the sense of like, just enough for the fact where it's like, instead of all of these different people that have their ideas and their project, and it's like, almost like survival of the fittest, and it's like, well, there's only so much to go around, so sorry, even though like, maybe five out of ten of you actually would have done a really good job, we can only maybe put two through. It's like, you make the money just a little bit flexible to see whether or not these people can- to invest into, well, the potential of this thing. That's the big difference. (9:45 - 10:01) So having gold as a back system is not a bad thing. What I like about what the BRICS are doing, for people who don't know the BRICS nations, that's like Russia, China- India, Brazil. India, Brazil, Iran. (10:02 - 10:39) They're doing, where I think they have minimum 40% of their currency, they're trying to get a lot of gold right now, so they get a minimum 40% backed by gold, and then they're backing a lot of the rest by the commodities that they have in their country. So Russia has lots of oil reserves, so they would use that for example. And that's a good model, because with printing, a lot of us know, and if via G. Edward Griffin's work and such, The Creature from Jekyll Island, and then others, even people that know the speculation markets and stuff, that's all, that's more fiat paper. (10:39 - 11:19) It's not tangible things. And so if all of those bubbles, you look at movies like The Big Short, and then you look at the dot-com, what happened in the 1929, 1930s, there was nothing to back up all of the assets and securities, like the physical wealth of people, gone. So if you have gold, as the BRICS nations do, at least 40%, if the printing that you were just talking about, print a little bit, just to get that a little bit extra, so we're not limiting people, because you don't want to limit people. (11:19 - 11:23) We're not limits to growth. This is not the Club of Rome. This is not the WEF. (11:24 - 11:38) People and humanity are brilliant. If we can transcend the limits, and that's what the printing gives us, that little bit extra to transcend, gold can get us so far. We should have it, we need it, but it only goes so far. (11:38 - 11:57) And then if we do a national bank, or a little bit of credit, then that can get us a little bit extra, if people are willing to work for it, if we have a working population. Yes, because it even plays with the idea of inflation, where it's like, yes, inflation is not good, because it's the devalue of, like your dollar is being devalued. Yeah. (11:57 - 12:07) Like this mug right here, for example, it's like, it's got a worth of just what it is. It's like, it is what it is. I literally just spilled tea on myself. (12:09 - 12:26) It is, like it holds its own type of thing, has its own intrinsic value, sure. But it's like, it didn't, it's almost like if you go to the store to go buy that mug, it didn't change, like the inflation does not mean the mug just suddenly became more valuable. Like, that's not how that works. (12:26 - 13:02) It's because your dollar is less valuable. And the thing is, though, is that people don't like inflation, and they shouldn't, because of the fact that the value of your dollar is going down, but you're not earning more, right? But whereas, change it up a little bit, what if you were? What if you were on the level of like, okay, so the dollar is kind of doing the thing, right? But you're still on that level, right? Well, then it's like, okay, I'm not necessarily like eating myself here, like nothing's, I'm not losing anything. It's kind of like same old, same old. (13:02 - 13:33) That's investment, right? Exactly. But also, if though, that investment into these projects, say you're doing this thing, right? If it's actually, I guess, what's the word, like producing? Yeah. And actually, you know, showing that it's doing something and it's bringing fruit, then okay, so you inflated the money a little bit, and you might have devalued it, but you're, or that credit that you were talking about, where it's like, okay, so I'm, you know, grabbing credit to say, I will make a due on this thing. (13:33 - 14:13) I'm kind of putting myself in this position where it's like, I owe you, you know? But it's like, if you actually do show that you like produce something that is going to be able to pay it back and more, right? Well, then what's the problem? Well, that's the make or break, which is why in previous episodes, if people remember, we've talked about the four to one rule, which is like either four parts truth to one to lie or four lies to one part truth. And that really plays with mode of attention, which hemisphere is reigning the day. And that's the thing with money. (14:13 - 14:34) It's not smart to pick a system. It is too dichotomous and it's too limiting because one system is lacking for the potential in the other. And that's this thing with this credit idea because when I first started Jekyll Island, he talks about how it was just loans upon loans upon loans upon loans. (14:35 - 14:41) And then loans never get paid back. And then you're just in debt. And the thing is, another word for credit is debt. (14:41 - 15:22) And another word for debt is credit because the idea is, can you pay it back? And that's what you were saying about the mode of attention. What if it produces something? If it produces something, then it's worth it. That high-speed rail transportation, getting bridges or rail, because even China wants to do this, the Belt and Road Initiative, which is how just like Danielle Smith wants to do that so we can get between Edmonton and Calgary faster within an hour, which could, that could kill so much for more job opportunities could open up for people if they wanted. (15:22 - 15:35) You know, students, different students can go to different universities now versus Calgary. Maybe we have better colleges or trades programs than Edmonton does. Maybe Edmonton has a better art school. (15:35 - 15:56) I don't know, but options open up for people. And then people get more money in their pockets, even physical shipping hours. If we had better efficient planes or we had a couple of bridges, like China trying to do the Belt and Road Initiative, now goods can get across Canada would be like another great one. (15:57 - 16:27) It's really hard for us to trade into provincially, but how flourished Canada could be if we had something like the Belt and Road Initiative in China where it connects, that's all of Europe, the Belt and Road Initiative. There's a couple, that's like all the BRICS nations, but it's to increase trade, which will put more money into all of those countries because it cuts down costs. That's something worth getting into debt for because it'll pay itself off over time. (16:28 - 16:46) Mm-hmm, like even, I don't know the name of the project right now. We were talking about it at the kitchen table today, but China right now is building, I believe, a train station, I think, or at least they have one. And it's pretty much akin a little bit to what we just showed with Tokyo and Japan. (16:46 - 17:14) It's a high-speed rail, and it's a huge economic investment for them. And right now, they don't really make much profit off of it in the sense of it costs to run it, but they run it nonetheless because they care more about people over profits. And they see it as, because this thing that we made is so efficient, and yes, it's costly to run, what we're hoping for is that it's gonna pay for itself. (17:14 - 17:39) All the people that get on that train, they get to work faster by so and so many hours. It's like, do the calculations of just all the numbers on all the ways that this could help other businesses industrialize, the other businesses grow. It's like that is what they're banking on is, okay, so where we lose a little bit in this domain, we may benefit in another, right? It's like the pros may outweigh the cons in time. (17:39 - 17:53) Yeah, yeah. And there's, I should show it because this is, I didn't totally understand the cover, but I do now. He's talking about Canada's potential Eurasian future, and it's just taking inspiration. (17:54 - 18:33) This book, he says, this is Matthew Aratt again, the historian that me and Maycee will never not rave about, but this whole book is on what we've been alluding to, taking inspiration as our premier in Alberta has from the Tokyo high-speed rail and going, we need to implement this here. Well, this book is taking ideas from Eurasia, looking at China, Russia, Iran, who are trying to do these infrastructure projects because infrastructure is real. And then it's pro-scientific technological progress, which will literally take, it could take Canada miles. (18:34 - 19:05) And that's the real future investment, screw futures as a derivative or a speculation project. You want future, real things, real things like this is what actually produces money in the future and doesn't give us this long-term debt that we can't dig ourselves out of, but not the speculation markets entirely. Well, yeah, it's like- Again, depending on how you do it. (19:05 - 19:36) Well, it plays into the idea of like, you got to stop commodifying things that are essential for human life to thrive. Like when we are, when we were, so we said we touch a little bit on the big short in the housing crisis, because we were trying to do a little bit of our own research and digging into that. And what happened was when you started speculating and betting on how people were going to be able to pay off their mortgages and their loans. (19:36 - 19:58) And so you make these mortgage-backed securities, and then you make these credit default obligations and these credit default swaps. And then you even do synthetic CDOs, which is just another, I'm going to bet on the outcome of that bet, right? It's just bets on bets. What you're doing is you're mainly, you're looking at, people were like flipping houses. (19:58 - 20:36) There were people that were just buying them and they were empty because they wanted to bring up the price because it helps with where it is that they feel they're speculating in the game, right? And so this is trying to steer the economy to hopefully win on a contract, a piece of paper, a profit, but there's no real investment going into project. It's like, you can, sorry, I was like, I gotta like breathe, talking too fast. You can, let's say, buy a futures contract for oil, right, as a commodity. (20:37 - 21:02) And then you're like, okay, so I'll like buy this futures thing for like $82 per barrel in the future, right? And then I was looking it up on DeepSeek, which is actually China's AI system, which is really cool because they made it in like half the time that it takes the West to make AI systems. People might know of ChatGPT. It's an app you can download and I'm sure you can use it on desktop too. (21:03 - 21:38) It's an AI system and a lot of people are doing it, using it for research and such. I know some people listening to this AI, but again, think of the four to one rule, mode of attention. What do you put in the AI? Do you make AI a murder killing robot, which left hemisphere fashion, or do you do a research resource? So now lawyers, how do you search up a specific article in this entire phone book of information? I need the one article on this thing, ChatGPT. (21:38 - 21:47) Could you do that for me? And then it pulls it up. But see, that would be helpful, a helpful version of AI. So just keep your brains open to mode of attention. (21:47 - 22:22) But I was looking it up and I was like, how is investing into futures not actually in, or sorry, speculating, I should say, with futures, not actually investing into, let's say, for example, the oil industry. And it was like, because people like, because more often than not, they're not actually going to be buying that commodity in the future. It's like the whole thing set up where it's like, yeah, this is going to look like, but they're actually selling the contracts to speculators for earning profit. (22:22 - 22:28) So it's like, oh, okay. So I'm going to buy my futures at this price. And then if the price rises, I'm going to sell it. (22:28 - 22:40) I earn a bit of a profit, right? And so you're just, you're profiting off the speculation and the contract, not the actual investment in the thing. And so I'm like, okay. And then same thing with the bets on bets that we were talking about. (22:40 - 22:56) It's like, now you're just profiting on where you think this thing's going to go. And the problem with that as well is I was, again, just looking it up and doing my own research. And it also means that you're just trying to sell a story. (22:57 - 23:27) So you're selling the narrative or the hype that, oh, well, I heard that this is like, there's going to be, I don't know, a war somewhere. And then that's going to drive the price, right? Or I heard that this big financial top player wrote in their magazine that they're going to be investing into this, right? And then they'll play on this, on our, honestly, just our emotions. And then that literally can change the price though of this real physical thing. (23:27 - 24:26) And it's all because they're trying to do it for the bets. They're trying to actually make what it is that they're looking for come to fruition because they are going to profit huge because leverage, right? When we're talking about derivatives, there's a thing called like margin trading and they'll literally just go like, I only have to pay a certain percentage of my own money, but then I can just loan the rest to pay for my, I guess, stock or bond or whatever that I'm going to be betting for or against or hoping that the prices rise or fall depending on what it is that I'm doing, right? And so they call it controlling a very large position with a very little amount of your own money, your own actual investment. And if that's the case, then that already in my brain just creates moral hazard because then at that point it's just like, well, I don't actually have to bear much of the actual cost myself, but that's not true because you have to pay this person back. (24:26 - 24:45) And the problem is that how the system's been set up is they're using our securities as collateral for their debts. That's what they're doing. They're going like, well, I will put down this thing that my client is investing into and I'm going to leverage it for my own sake. (24:45 - 24:50) And if things go wrong, you end up with crashes. You end up with bubbles. Like it's just, this is all. (24:51 - 25:22) Yeah, the example that I heard somebody use, it might've been in G. Edward Griffin's Jekyll Island, but he said like a coat boy or whatever, at a hotel, they take your hats and your coats and you're supposed to, when you come back, have it there so you can take it home. But while you're watching the show, you're not using your hat or your coat. So he starts renting out everybody's coats and hats to other people. (25:22 - 25:53) Yeah, and he's hoping that he'll be able to get it back to you by the time that you're done doing what it is that you're doing. And then it doesn't happen and then boom. Well, yeah, and that plays into the fact where it's like, what happens when you're running out of collateral? Like you just don't have enough because you're putting yourself purposely in debt because you wanna earn big, right? And again, like what I was just talking about, you're doing the hype thing, you're doing the, let's just make it look like it's more than it is or make it look like it's less than it is. (25:53 - 26:09) So that way I can earn big profit and I'm gonna borrow from other people to do this thing. And you know what I'm gonna use? I'm gonna use some real person's collateral, like securities as collateral and assets as collateral. And if things go wrong, well then guess who's, they're gonna seize. (26:09 - 26:24) Because that was another thing me and Maddie were doing some research on The Great Taking and Maddie, you can pull up the Man in America. Yeah, there and they did an interview. The Great Taking is a documentary. (26:24 - 26:39) You can literally search The Great Taking on Rumble and there's an entire channel dedicated to it. It's a documentary, a little over an hour, but it's by David Webb. And that explains the whole thing. (26:39 - 26:51) But this is another interview that Man in America with Seth Holehouse, he did. This is one of the producers of The Great Taking. And they show it basically. (26:51 - 27:04) And what they're trying to explain is that there are these things called like secured creditors. And so it's basically just who gets priority when things go bad. When shizzy hits the fizzy, yeah. (27:04 - 27:18) When it's time to collect, who gets to collect first? And it's not you. It's not you. They set up the system, or at least in America, they didn't, I bet you then it's probably just the same in Canada because we're so closely linked to- And Europe, yeah. (27:18 - 27:33) And Europe, yep. They set it up where you look like you're entitled to this thing, but at the end of the day, you are not. Yeah, we have the beneficiary entitlement, but the legal ownership is now with the, what it's called a custodian. (27:33 - 27:58) So it's the person who helped you do the interaction. So it's whoever is in control of the thing. So if your security is not, unless you have your own data bank and your own company basically holding all of these things, the person who's taking care of controlling your securities and your assets, they are the legal owner, technically speaking. (27:58 - 28:14) So now, even though it's your house and your car or your gold, it's not, they can take it. If things go down and they need, it's basically like a mass bailout is kind of what it is. They needed insurance. (28:14 - 28:20) They wanted guarantees. They always want guarantees. How are we going to guarantee? So there's no risk. (28:20 - 28:32) Well, now they've guaranteed themselves, so they will have no loss. So it's similar to the 2008 crisis. And now they're secured with all of our securities. (28:34 - 29:12) And so because we are reaching our 30 minute mark, I think that the thing that we're trying to explain in this is the fact that it's like, that is a system that is putting profits over people. Because now, because what they did is they were, I was watching another interview that a friend sent me about the housing crisis as well. And I like the analogy that this gentleman used, which was like, you can choose between, you're a basketball coach and you can choose your players that you want on your team, right? So you choose, you choose your players that you want. (29:12 - 29:30) And then all of a sudden the rules change where it says, okay, you can pick a couple more. And they're like, oh, okay, cool, right? But what they're picking from is the lesser selected few that you didn't choose initially when you first picked the team. And so now you technically only have the kind of inferior players left to pick from. (29:30 - 29:43) And so it's like, yay. And that was what happened when they combined subprime loans into these mortgage-backed securities. It was like, oh, well now you can, it's squeezing so much out of this thing. (29:43 - 29:56) So that way you can earn as much as you can. But at some point there is nothing left more to squeeze. It's like, that's why you fake the ratings and called them AAA when really they were just not, they were subprime. (29:56 - 30:12) It's like, that's, and it was again for what though? It's to make things look artificially more than what they are or less than what they are. It's lying. But these are people, but these are people that like, they can't, you're giving them hope that they can go and buy a house. (30:12 - 30:32) So you loan them out and you're not paying attention. And then like the, it's a house is not like, it shouldn't be treated necessarily as a commodity just so that way you can play with the housing market and buy a bunch of houses that are empty. No one's living in them or so you can flip them to make the prices look like they are different. (30:32 - 30:47) Yeah, the housing market's not a casino. No, and neither is the economy. And that's what we, that's what lots of like, that's what the West does is it'll do like interest rate swaps, right? And so it's just, there's so much where it's just profits over people. (30:47 - 30:56) And even sometimes even, well, not sometimes, even the education sector, it's like tuition. It's like, you have to go into debt to go get an education. It's like, okay. (30:57 - 31:14) If the education was really good, then that might not be a bad thing. Cause again, it's not, not all debt is created equal. 'Cause Danielle Smith going to debt for the sake of our, this high-speed rail in Alberta, that would be a good debt to temporarily go into. (31:15 - 31:33) And then we would hope everybody should put their work and labor to back it up. And then they would pay itself off. But since not, there are unfortunate statistics about where the education tuition actually ends up, then it's not so worth it. (31:33 - 31:52) And this is why motive attention is the biggest thing. Cause we started by talking about some of the good, good infrastructure projects, good investment, looking at any system, Keynes versus Von Hayek or the free market versus the other one. Those are, it's too simplistic. (31:52 - 32:15) There's somewhere really, it should be, are we doing profits over people or people over profits? And that gathers more of the motive attention because there will always be the left hemisphere that tries to manipulate. Even the speculation market sounds like a pretty horrendous thing. And it mostly has been, cause again, it's not, it's not real, like you said, investing into the real commodity. (32:15 - 32:36) It's looking at the quality or the state of the commodity and seeing how that will do. So it's a derivative off of the thing. It's not the real thing, but certain there, the way that some of the BRICS nations are set up, they have speculation going a little bit differently where it's not one big bubble. (32:36 - 32:48) It's not centralized. And so if one part goes down, let's say they have like an infrastructure bank that goes down. It's not tied to every single other bank. (32:49 - 33:01) So there won't be this domino effect that's gonna happen in Europe and then could have been, and probably will in the West. Cause we're all centralized. All of our securities are pooled, our derivatives are pooled, all of it. (33:02 - 33:35) So we have no, there's no security or guarantees except for the people at the very top of the pyramid. So this whole episode, and we'll have to do another financial one, probably cause there's a lot to talk about here. And even breaking down the great taking a bit more would probably be good, but go watch some of the resources we shared cause it's stuff to get your head wrapped around to understand not just the economy, but this mode of attention game, which systems, it's not necessarily about the systems, but how the system gets used. (33:35 - 34:12) And that is looking, then you got to consider right hemisphere versus the left hemisphere, what your society is, where your culture is at. Are we going to work and produce to justify the credit slash debt? Are we gonna earn it back and work hard? Or are we in too much of a post-industrial consumer society? Are we consuming more than we're making? And that's a real problem, especially in the West right now. We consume more than we make, or we are limited by other people and stupid contracts and fine print that says you can't produce this. (34:12 - 34:19) Like even in Alberta, unfortunately, we don't have any refineries. Great, we have all this oil. We should really have some refineries for the oil. (34:19 - 34:37) So just ways to improve where you're at as a province and then as a country, that's the real mode of attention. It needs to be people over profit, not profit over people. And no singular system encompasses either one of those. (34:37 - 34:50) There's a little bit of each in a lot of systems. So you've got to think creatively. And there's so much to talk about, even in the globalist agenda side of it, but we are running out of time. (34:50 - 35:05) So we'll continue, I think, maybe to expand upon this discussion. I don't know if it'll be next time or whenever, but yeah, I think that that's a good thing to end off with people. It's just, the economics is just as complex as relationships. (35:07 - 35:50) And so just as you would try to figure out how to be a better person for other people, it's like, how do you help yourself so that way you can figure out how to help other countries thrive? And it's not just a self-centered version of trying to make a large group of people earn a bunch of money, like a bankers dictatorship. It's like, actually, how do we do win-win cooperation? How do we make each other less dependent on, less of a toxic codependency and more of like a parent to their child? I am supposed to be the guide to help you transcend me. So, yeah. (35:51 - 35:58) Amen, yeah. Good Jedi to their Padawan. We're currently watching Star Wars, so it makes sense. (35:59 - 36:06) All right, well, thank you, everybody. Thank you very much, yeah. This has been Holmes Squared. (36:07 - 36:10) We didn't mess it up this time. All right. Thanks, everybody. (36:10 - 36:11) Thank you, bye.