Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 23, 2023 - The Delingpod - James Delingpole

01:55:50

Dan Tubb

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I love Denning Poll.
	Come and subscribe to the podcast baby.
	I love Denning Poll.
	And listen another time, subscribe with me.
	Welcome to the Denning Poll with me, James Denning Poll.
	I know I always say I'm excited about this week's special guest, but before I introduce him, a word from our sponsor.
	As you know, I've been advocating for the positive impact a real food diet can have on your health, and I'm not about to stop.
	Hunter and Gather have changed the game for me, so I want to keep sharing them with you.
	They are an ancestrally inspired... No, stop it!
	Remember your rules, no cuts!
	They are an ancestrally inspired real food and supplements brand, simplifying optimal healthy living and... No!
	Oh, no!
	Yes, no!
	It's your trademark, you don't do cuts!
	I know, it's annoying in an ad.
	Oh my goodness.
	Do you have to read the script or can you just say, Hunter and Gather, they're really good, go and check them out?
	I don't like their script.
	It's not very me.
	It's not your words.
	It's not my voice.
	And also, I mean, I should have a word with them about this.
	I really like the product and it's a perfect match because it's really good.
	And loads of people want it because they can get discounts and stuff.
	But I wouldn't use a phrase like, I've been advocating the positive impact.
	I mean, it's just like, why would you do that?
	That does sound a bit, yeah.
	That sounds like you're about to throw yourself on a snooker table or something.
	Let's get rid of this call.
	So... Oh, he's gone now anyway.
	That's good.
	Right.
	Anyway, look, Hunter and Gather have got this amazing range of products.
	Their range spans from great tasting mayonnaise, I've tried the mayonnaise, they're good, and condiments, all free from refined sugar and seed oils to cooking oils and supplements such as collagen powder, freeze-dried lamb's organs and easy-to-take capsules and MCT oil.
	Anyway, you can get a discount on their stuff, 10%, which you can redeem by heading to hunterandgatherfoods.com.
	I'm using the code TDP10 Enjoy.
	I really bollocked up that ad, but I think it's kind of more on brand anyway.
	No, you got there in the end.
	I got there in the end.
	So Dan!
	Sorry, I must introduce my special guest, Dan Tubbs.
	Dan!
	I can't remember when it was we last did a podcast.
	A while back.
	I think it was a couple of years ago.
	Because I remember, I listened to it again in the car yesterday, because I knew it was going to be coming on, and I thought we were talking about lockdown restrictions.
	Because I came to you last time, didn't I?
	Because, you know, basically just to poke one in the eye of the lockdown restrictions.
	So it must have been a couple of years ago now.
	Oh, you came to my house, that's right, you did.
	You did.
	And what, we recorded it old school with a tape recorder and... Yeah, well, you tried to record it and then we lost the recording, but you managed to get it on the audio thing.
	No, that sounds very unlike me, Dan.
	I can't imagine that would have happened.
	I'm the king of tech.
	Yeah, and also, by the way, thank you.
	The thing you brought to my house was...
	The reason that we're doing this on the internet now.
	The Starlink thing.
	You brought me the Starlink.
	You enabled Elon Musk, his spies, to have better access to my entire life.
	Well, somebody's going to be spying on you, so it might as well be him.
	Do you trust him?
	By the way, Dan, this is a test because I'm curious as to how much further down the rabbit hole you've gone since we last spoke.
	People move at different paces.
	Yeah.
	It's not... I don't know if the question is necessarily, do I trust him?
	It's out of all of the people who you can interact with to get anything done within this world in tech, you can't trust any of them, so which of them do you distrust the least?
	And he's probably at the top of that pile for me.
	Right.
	That's fair enough.
	I get interrogated on the subject of Elon Musk by my By my Normie family who, they're always trying to catch me out and they say things like, yeah, well what do you think about Elon Musk owning that BBC person?
	I suppose you're going to say that you don't trust Elon Musk and you don't like him.
	And I say, no, I really, really enjoyed Elon Musk owning that squid, that horrible little tick from the BBC.
	It was kind of funny watching two people with a 50 IQ point difference try and debate something where one of them didn't come prepared and only had sort of woke talking points to fall back on.
	Indeed.
	What interested me, some of the more idiot comments I saw on social media said that the BBC person should have been better prepared.
	As though somehow, you know, if he'd spent eight hours researching the history of Elon Musk and researching politics, that this would suddenly have enabled him to... Hang on.
	I'm doing a podcast, Ratty.
	OK, bye.
	So, yeah, and it's ludicrous, it's the same, I got the same criticisms, you know, after my Andrew Neil debacle and what these pillocks, they are pillocks, they really don't get it, they don't understand the nature of the game.
	In the case of that BBC child, the problem was not that he was ill-prepared, the problem was his entire His entire belief system was geared towards the notion that things like, um, uh, uh, what was it called?
	Racism.
	It's this worldview that, I mean, everything is set up against, well, I know minorities or something like that, or whatever it is that they're trying to push.
	But your Andrew Neil thing was completely different though, because I mean, you, I would have imagined up until that point you would have considered yourselves friends and colleagues basically.
	Indeed.
	He just turned on you for some random reason.
	He did and I think it was... Look, I believe all these things are sent by God.
	That there was a purpose to this and what that did was accelerated my departure from the mainstream media in all its forms.
	I used to think that the mainstream media, and this is very much the Toby Young point of view still, he hasn't woken up yet, that the mainstream TV needed right-wing voices like mine to counter the left-wing bias.
	And what you don't realise when you're in that mindset Is that the whole thing is a trap.
	It's dishonest.
	It's designed to... It's designed to... The best you can hope for is a draw.
	You can almost never hope for a win.
	You might occasionally slip one past the keeper into the net.
	But generally that's not the idea.
	The direction is to make people who believe in free markets and limited government look like...
	The curtain has sort of been pulled back on that one because I mean you used to sort of, well you could believe that sort of thing, you could just believe it was a bit of a bias and institutional thinking that sort of lent in one way and they occasionally had some sound guests on and you know it was kind of okay and it was imperfect but But now, I just see psyops and propaganda.
	I just see no value.
	I consume absolutely no mainstream media.
	And that's quite cool, actually.
	I mean, you're doing... You've presumably completely divorced yourself from that world at this point.
	Maybe one spectator TV thing or something, whatever it is.
	You've answered one of the questions I was going to ask you.
	Because I was looking back at...
	WhatsApp correspondence.
	And you've been following my stuff for a long, long time.
	You've been on the journey with me.
	So you would have defined yourself in the way I used to define myself as probably having Thatcherite tendencies and thinking probably Ronnie Reagan was generally a good thing and believing in low taxes and a small estate.
	And believing these things were possible.
	Believing there was such a thing as the right.
	Believing there were such things as conservative values and all these lies that We were sold, and we spent most of our lives believing, because we consumed the mainstream media which was part of the lie machine, maybe the most important part of the lie machine.
	And since then, you and I have, well, it's good to hear that you've cut loose, because reading any form of, consuming any form of Mainstream media is... Yeah.
	But I mean it's quite cool there are real viable alternatives now because I mean you're just doing your thing now sort of completely outside of this.
	The weird journey that I've been on, you know, starting in finance.
	Actually, have we told anyone who I am yet?
	Is that worth mentioning?
	Tell them who you are, Dan.
	Yeah, just in case anybody didn't catch the first podcast.
	So I was a finance guy for about 20 years.
	Basically, the fund that I was working on was wrapping up, because these things tend to have a 10-year life.
	So I wanted to take that as an opportunity to get out of London, because I had small children.
	So I moved down to Winchester and was in this sort of semi-retirement state, thinking, OK, what do I want to turn my energies to next?
	And then the pandemic hit.
	We sort of had that really weird two-year period and I just found it so utterly revolting that I basically just had to start speaking out on this.
	And there was only a few of us who... I mean we knew each other before that had happened because I used to come along to those sort of Midland Libertarian drinks things that your brother was organising.
	But we sort of met through that but then very shortly afterwards the whole pandemic thing kicked off and there was very very few of us who were speaking out sort of consistently against it from day one.
	And it's actually quite nice.
	There's a little community of us and we generally all know each other now.
	So that's fantastic.
	And then basically what happened is because I've got a finance background and I was up on those points, I was able to elucidate some of the aspects of it that perhaps other people were struggling with.
	So the drive towards digital IDs and central bank digital currencies and all that kind of thing.
	And then I did your podcast.
	And then I got invited on a whole bunch of other ones, that was fantastic.
	I started to realise that everybody was entitled to my opinion, so I did a lot more of it.
	I very briefly tried to have my own YouTube channel, and a bit like you, I've realised that the technical side of that is a hell of a lot bloody harder than you think it is.
	Yeah, because you think it's just like, okay, turn on a camera and shoot, but actually the buggering around you have to do is setting up the mic properly and getting the camera right and the post-editing.
	Oh, do you know what?
	My Danny Rampling interview.
	I do not do interviews.
	Stop it, James.
	I don't do interviews.
	My chat with Danny Rampling, he was great.
	And obviously he was a guest that I really, really wanted to get and had been wanting for some time.
	And if you're a careful observer of the Deling Pod and you know my style, you'll notice that towards the end of the interview I start looking a bit flustered and not really... Do you run out of questions or something?
	And the real reason I can tell you is that I look at my mic And I realised that it's pointing away from my mouth.
	I haven't adjusted it at all.
	So I'm suddenly thinking, oh no, has any of it recorded?
	Because it's quite difficult to pin him down.
	It's quite funny the number of interviews you do where you make some reference to this go round or something like that.
	Of course, the amount of times that you've sort of had to record things twice.
	I mean, especially on London Calling for some reason, I don't know why.
	Well, that used to happen.
	That's got easier now that we do it through Zoom and we've got the producer producing the show, which is what you want.
	Well, exactly, that's what you want.
	You want a producer.
	So yeah, I had a go at doing my own stuff because I found I quite liked doing this whole talking thing, but the technical challenges...
	Yeah, I mean, they just threw me, and I realised that I was putting out... I mean, the stuff that I was saying was fine, but the sort of production values were so awful, I was just so embarrassed by it.
	Anyway, then I got to know Sargon of Akkad, Carl Benjamin, and he's got his Lotus Eaters thing.
	I'd imagine there's probably quite a bit of overlap between our audiences, Lotus Eaters, and the Delling poll, so I imagine a lot of people already know it, but for those who don't, LotusEaters.com and we sort of do a daily podcast thing so anyway I was speaking to him and I was saying you know I'm trying to put stuff together and I ended up going and joining him so it's only a day a week so I go in on Tuesdays now and I produce one of their daily podcasts along with one of the other hosts but I've also got my own series Brokenomics
	And in that, basically what I try and do is explain economics, finance, so I do a whole bunch of basic concepts, explain how those work, but then also sort of tie them together to what is the big picture, what's really going wrong, what are the geopolitical issues, and of course bring on interesting guests as well.
	So that amuses me, and then I can just do my finance stuff the rest of the week.
	So maybe in a bit, once we've done our general chat, you can give me the edited version of what the hell's going on and where we are.
	So before we go there, I'm reassured to know that you don't consume any mainstream media, because the point I was going to make is that it's not that we could go back if we wanted, because
	What I find now, maybe you've got this experience as well, I can read any article in the paper and parse it and deconstruct it as soon as I look at it.
	I look at the headline, I glance at the copy and I know How we're being lied to in this particular instance, why we're being lied to.
	Almost no story, even stories in the health, well obviously stories in the health section are part of the problem.
	Stories in even the travel sections, it's just the whole thing is a Yeah, social media has been really helpful for that, hasn't it?
	Because I think what started happening is... I mean, you always knew it anyway, because whenever you saw an article or a story in the mainstream media, and if it was a subject that you knew anything about, you knew it was a load of rubbish.
	But you kind of assumed that everything else was about right.
	Yes.
	And then social media comes along and whenever there was a sort of a big story that sort of generated a bit of discussion, it would be very easy to find somebody on Twitter or something completely deconstructing even the stories that you didn't know about.
	And then you started to realise, oh I can't hang on, there's something really smells in.
	You sort of get into that habit and you get very used to very quickly being able to find trusted people who are experts on particular things, deconstructing the mainstream absolute nonsense.
	And then you kind of realise that it's all a load of rubbish.
	And then what you do is you start to realise the patterns in the way that they lie.
	So now, even if you don't know anything about the subject, you can just read an article and you can see the sort of pattern of lying and propaganda that they kind of feed into it.
	So you're kind of immune to it.
	So I think by the time that Covid came along, even though, you know, neither of us are virologists, you could just smell the bullshit emanating from the story.
	And then you start doing your own homework anyway.
	And I like to go into the whole kind of numbers thing.
	So I mean, early on, I was looking at the sort of John Leonidas stuff and the Princess Cruz data, and I mean, all the rest of it.
	And then you start finding, you know, the Socrates and the, you know, I mean, all the rest of it.
	You probably interviewed most of these characters at this point.
	I haven't done that yet, but I'd like to.
	Okay, he would be a good one.
	He would be very good.
	Although I've moved on in some respects, in that I now reckon, I'm now leaning towards viruses don't exist, which six months ago I just thought, oh that's just like so tough.
	I've got no idea on that one, so... No, I think it's perfectly okay to be agnostic on this one, although what I've noticed is that the The viruses don't exist people and basically the terrain theory people are really shrill and indignant and petulant and if you don't believe in terrain theory you're beyond the pale of discussion.
	You're not in the game at all.
	And I find that a bit tiresome because one doesn't want too many schisms within the resistance movement.
	I think it's perfectly possible to be a really sound fighter at the barricades without necessarily having gone as far as terrain theory.
	Yeah, well there's not many of us, so we can't afford too many splits.
	What about somebody right on the fringes between normie world and where we might be?
	Somebody like a Julie Hartley brewer.
	Where do you stand on people like that?
	Oh, I'm scorched earth.
	She would need to be crawling on her knees across broken glass and daub her forehead in ashes.
	So you're for a semi-broad tent then, but not too broad?
	No, it's not that.
	I think one really needs to make the distinction between sincere parties and gatekeepers controlled opposition.
	She is very, very obviously not sincere.
	She is bought and paid for.
	I mean, if only with the vast salary that she gets from Talk Radio, which is a Murdoch propaganda organisation.
	If Julia suddenly started calling out the vaccine, which isn't a vaccine, if she said, I was wrong, I'm really embarrassed about having promoted this death jab, I'm appalled by the number of young people who've died or had their lives ruined with myocarditis etc.
	I really am ashamed to have been part of this and now I'm going to, to my dying breath, I'm going to fight against this monstrous machine.
	Then I go, Julia, Come to the phone.
	Welcome.
	You are completely forgiven.
	So one of the things I found really surprising was, I mean, I guess what I was talking about a minute ago is sort of basic pattern recognition with the lies that sort of come out of this machine.
	So I mean, not picking on her in particular, but just more broadly, there was a whole load of people who, you know, they ended up being quite sensible over the COVID era stuff.
	And then they sort of realised that wasn't working anymore, so we're going to pivot to the new one.
	We're going to do Ukraine War.
	And a whole bunch of people who you would think their pattern recognition would be able to clock the bullshit coming out of that one, fell hook, line and sinker for that.
	And I kind of get that a lot of them are starting to slowly wake up to that one as well.
	But you know, the narrative is going to pivot again, and who knows what's going to be the next thing?
	You're right.
	Funnily, a line came into my head.
	It said about Christians, they need to be wise as serpents.
	And in the same way, you know all those sort of mechanisms that enable a snake to track down its prey, all the senses, that it gets a sort of an image of what the mouse looks like.
	I don't really know, but I kind of get what you're driving at.
	But it's about pattern recognition, isn't it?
	It's about reading the signals.
	And you're right, we need to develop those skills.
	And I, too, am baffled how somebody who's seen through the Covid nonsense cannot see through the Ukraine nonsense.
	And that instantly makes me suspicious.
	Because I'm thinking, OK, I'll give you another example.
	Ron DeSantis.
	I think that Ron DeSantis is an establishment stooge who's been inserted, who was allowed to talk a good game on jabs and enable Florida to become a sort of, a kind of ghetto for, a last redoubt if you will be polite, a Helms Deep for the vaccine resistance.
	He was permitted that little sop towards liberty and wisdom and common sense, etc.
	for the longer term game of derailing Trump.
	And by the way, I'm not carrying water for Trump here.
	I think he's got problems as well, but I don't trust DeSantis.
	I quite like DeSantis.
	The problem you've got is within the established political system, You're not going to get somebody who is really over our way.
	DeSantis is probably about as close as you're going to get, and it's an improvement on somebody like a Joe Biden.
	So, given that I have such low expectations for this system as it is to be able to produce good results, if I'm offered a result which is better than the absolute mess we've got at the moment, I don't mind tolerating that until the whole thing comes down.
	So you are happy to eat your yoghurt with a bit of dog food in it?
	I realise that the vending machine that I'm at cannot give me any other options.
	I mean, that's more the point.
	So what you're saying is... Excuse me, I mean, sorry, but this is what you are saying.
	You're saying... I know, I know... You've gone to the supermarket and... Yeah, but in the supermarket you get to choose, don't you?
	No, I'm saying, no, no, this is the analogy that I'm... You've gone to the supermarket and your favourite yoghurt brands have all been taken off the shelf.
	No, actually, they never existed.
	Of course they never existed.
	This has never been the option.
	And what you find is that there's a 50% dog shit yoghurt and you're not going to have that.
	You don't think dog shit has any place in your yoghurt.
	And then there's a 25% dog shit yoghurt and you're not going to have that because dog shit has no place in yoghurt.
	And then you're looking at the 5% and you're thinking, oh 5% that's not so bad.
	and you're thinking, oh, 5%, now that's not so bad.
	And then suddenly on the top shelf, you see a 0.5%.
	0.5%, that's all the, only a tiny bit of dog shit.
	You're thinking, I'll have some of that.
	Yum, yum, yum, yum, yum, yum.
	Meanwhile I am looking at these same shelves and thinking You bastard!
	How dare you sell your bitcoin!
	Here's the difference James.
	You think you're in a supermarket and I think that I'm in a Soviet gulag and I'm in the bottom of this pit cell and I think I might be able to break out at some future point but right now I'm in occupied territory And I've got bad options, and I'm starving down here, and, you know, I don't get given a choice.
	All I get is that the trolley comes along, and there's a pot of yoghurt on it, and there's a turd in the corner of it, and I basically need to scoop out as best I can.
	No, what you're saying is that I may as well work with the system until it changes.
	I'm not working with the system!
	I think we're in occupied territory at this point.
	You're saying I may as well... OK, kids, if you want to join the Young Pioneers, fair enough.
	It seems to be the sense of proportion.
	And by the way, I think I'm going to be joining the party now.
	Until the system changes.
	Oh, I'm not joining them.
	Well, I'm not... Yeah, you are.
	You work for the system.
	You are.
	How am I working with the system?
	Because you haven't yet accepted that if you are of a mind where you say, oh I don't mind that Ron DeSantis, What you are actually doing is endorsing the system, which is, they are all bad.
	They are all bad.
	I'll tell you who else is bad.
	Robert Kennedy Jr.
	He's not to be trusted.
	I mean, he's less obviously untrustworthy than, say, Jordan Peterson, who is definitely untrustworthy.
	All these people.
	It's not about, um, am I being, am I purity spiralling?
	Because that's a different thing.
	I don't, I don't like purity spiralling.
	I mean, I love you, even though that you're, you're wrong on certain issues.
	But I, but I know that your heart is in the right place and your intentions are sincere.
	We're going to cover some more of those things that are wrong on, so we can have a debate on that as well.
	But okay.
	Okay.
	Let's turn this around.
	Any dog shit yoghurt, it's only a tiny thing, but you were having the 0.5%.
	Okay, I feel we're spending a lot of time on dog shit yoghurt, but nevertheless, if we're going to nail this one out, let's go for it.
	the I I I see it slightly differently.
	I see that it's not our pot of yoghurt.
	You know, the establishment, they control the systems and the structures, or the systems and the structures control them, I'm not entirely sure which way round it is at the moment, and they've got the pot of yoghurt.
	And it's actually, you know, how much dog shit can we throw into their yoghurt to upset them?
	And perhaps, you know, in this sense Trump is the biggest turd and we'd like to put that in their yoghurt.
	But DeSantis is a slightly smaller turd and I think we can upset them by putting that in their yoghurt.
	So I think we're probably stretching this wrong quite a bit at this point.
	We're not in control of yoghurt manufacture.
	No, no, we just get to toss things into their yoghurt pot every now and again.
	That's the best we can do at this point.
	They've got security.
	They've got... They run the whole world.
	We are really torturing this analogy.
	Dan, they run the whole world.
	You can't... You can't... You're the one who's torturing the world.
	That's why it's not our supermarket.
	I think perhaps we ought to move on because... Yes.
	We're going very sideways on that one.
	So, I suppose, Dan, you must give us an update on what's... where we are, how...
	Where we're going, how we can protect ourselves, and how we get out of it.
	I mean, whether you're optimistic or pessimistic.
	But we'll save the optimism or pessimism until the end.
	So give me a TLDR on what's going on.
	The big issue that we've got is all Western nations are facing an absolutely extraordinary level of debt at this point.
	There's quite an interesting website to go and have a look at.
	It's US Debt Clock.
	I wish there was a sort of UK version.
	There was a very stripped down UK version where you can sort of see the level of spending that governments have and the debt that they've accumulated.
	And, you know, in the US, for example, they've got a sort of an official debt of 31 trillion, but they've got, you know, unfunded liabilities of, you know, basically boomer entitlements of another sort of, well, 250.
	So, and this is trillion, so 250 trillion.
	Yeah.
	That sounds quite a lot.
	What is that?
	How many millions is that?
	Oh, it's an order of magnitude above a billion, so a thousand billion.
	So 250,000 billion is the sort of total amount of debt and liability that they're dealing with.
	Now, we calculate it in a slightly different way here because, you know, we've got the NHS, which is just sort of this long, ongoing liability.
	But I mean, I think our official debt is sort of equal to the size of the economy as well.
	We've got vast amounts of debt to deal with.
	In a year we could pay it off?
	Oh no, we couldn't pay it off in a year.
	There are ways that you can deal with it.
	Actually, should we talk through the ways that you could deal with this situation?
	And I'll basically demonstrate why none of them are possible.
	Why it's going to end really badly.
	Yeah, okay, so take the UK, right?
	So we're collecting revenues of about £820 billion a year, okay?
	And we are spending about £1.1 trillion a year.
	So we've got this sort of deficit of £250 trillion, and we've got a national debt of about £2.2 trillion.
	2.2 trillion.
	So a deficit of about 250 billion and a total debt of about 2.2 trillion.
	Okay.
	Yep.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Now, take that back to the human scale because, you know, these are big numbers and they don't necessarily mean anything by themselves.
	So what is the scale we're looking at?
	So officially the population of the UK is about 67 million.
	Now I don't believe those numbers because I think they're substantially higher.
	I think there's a lot of immigration that has got lost.
	It is probably another, you know, 10 to 15 million on top of that.
	But, you know, let's just take the official numbers for the hell of it.
	What we do know is that about 33 million people working.
	So basically the burden of paying off all of this comes down to the working population.
	Now when you start to look at it like that, okay, what is the amount the government is spending per working person?
	Well it's spending about £32,000 a year per working person.
	Okay?
	Right.
	And it is collecting in revenues only £25,000 a year per working person.
	So, per working person, the government is running up, essentially, credit card debt every year of about £7,000.
	Yeah.
	And the debt, if you divide it by the number of working people, it's about £70,000 a year, sorry, £70,000 that we are in debt per working person.
	And that's not, you know, because a lot of people think, okay, well, I've got big debts, such as my mortgage, and therefore, you know, big debts don't necessarily scare me.
	That's the equivalent of credit card debt.
	That is funding current consumption.
	And essentially, the reason that we've managed to get into these debt problems is partly because of things that you'll be very familiar with.
	It's the fiat money system.
	It is the central banking cartel.
	I know you've talked about these things a whole number of times.
	But another big part of it is going to be... I mean, that was the mechanism by which it could get so large.
	But the other part of it is straightforward demographics.
	And on that one, we're going to have to call out the boobers.
	Now, there's nothing malevolent about what they've done.
	It's not because they, as a generation, were especially self-interested or anything like that.
	It's very simply because they were a very, very large generation who came into a small world.
	And what they did over the course of their working lives is they grew the economy and they wanted to be generous to the fairly small population of retired people above them.
	So they started bringing in all of these sort of benefits, these pensions, a more generous NHS and so on.
	And it was possible to fund these all the time it was a large generation being generous to a small population.
	But what's happened is that large population is now retiring, and it completely breaks the system.
	Because now you've got smaller populations trying to be generous to a very large population.
	And there's other things that's changed as well.
	So when the boomers were in their heyday, when they were the ones making policy decisions, they could make certain assumptions.
	And those assumptions would include things like, old people are just poor.
	If you wanted to do something for poor people you generally aimed it at the over 65s because you didn't really even need to means test it because yes okay there were some wealthy old people but as a rule anyone over 65 you could consider poor.
	So a lot of sort of targeted measures addressing wealth inequality would have been dealt in that way and that was actually a lot of what Thatcherism was.
	It's continued ever since.
	But that is no longer the case.
	So the average retiree now is as wealthy as the average working person.
	And if you go down the income scale, so the bottom 20% of retirees versus the bottom 20% of workers, they're significantly wealthier.
	I mean, one in five boomers is a millionaire at this point.
	That's interesting and also it does gel with what one observes that old people, the ones who are not in firm, are taking holidays all the time.
	They're very affluent.
	Yeah, it's because they are on average wealthier than working people.
	And I mean, there's a whole number of factors that go into that, which I won't sort of stop down and explain.
	But, you know, what impact does that have on working people?
	And basically, it's that we are going to get taxed very heavily because the system has no choice at this point.
	So, you know, let's take somebody who's earning 50k a year.
	Now you might think, you know, that's a perfectly decent wage for a working man to earn.
	But what you've got to think about is, OK, let's have a look at what happens to that 50k.
	Well, before he gets paid it through PAYE, the corporate entity that he works for has already paid a whole bunch of taxes.
	So VAT, corporation tax, employers' national insurance, fuel duties, a whole bunch of stuff.
	So a lot of taxes left it before it gets to him.
	When it goes to him, he immediately pays £12,500 through PAYE.
	So he's gone from £50,000 down to £38,000.
	Then what do you have to add on to that?
	Well, council tax, about £2,000.
	Fuel duty, about another £1,000.
	VAT, that'll probably be about £4,000.
	And then other taxes, about another £2,000.
	So you're now down to £29,000 out of that £50,000.
	I think you've got to treat inflation as a tax as well.
	Because inflation absolutely is a tax in my view.
	Because effectively what it is doing is it is essentially redistributing money from people who are earning an income to people who have debt really.
	That's what it's doing.
	And inflation rate has been about 10% over the last couple of years.
	So you take off another £5,000.
	So your working mate who's on £50k a year actually gets to spend about £24,000 a year, less than half of it.
	And that's the point when you've got to start paying your mortgage, saving for retirement, and even when you hit retirement you've then got to pay several of these taxes all over again.
	Right, and by the time he gets to retirement age, There's not going to be any, there's no pension costs.
	Because we've seen that, haven't we?
	We've seen that increasingly with money printing, it's much, much harder for pension funds to find reliable returns.
	Yeah, I mean, one of the aspects that is making booms on average wealthier is the defined benefit pension schemes that have been closed out.
	So, I mean, your Gen X, some of Gen X will benefit from those, but not many.
	Most of it is going to be defined contribution at this point.
	So, people are getting heavily taxed.
	We've got all of this debt.
	So then you start to think, okay, well, you know, where is this money going?
	And effectively what it is, is it's mostly going on these big social insurance type schemes.
	So the biggest items of spending in the UK are going to be things like, you know, national health care, 210 billion, public pensions, that's 180 billion, social security, 142 billion.
	So what we're effectively doing, the analogy is, to look at it like this, is we are engaged in total war level of spending.
	But the thing is, when you're engaged in total war, at some point that war ends and the spending drops away.
	If you are in a total war spending situation against old age, infirmity and idleness, those wars don't ever end.
	So we've got this problem where that spending has led us to this point where we are vastly in debt and we're basically in a debt trap.
	What I mean by that is we're now spending about 120 billion a year on just servicing this debt.
	And the coupon that we have to pay on this, so the interest rate that we have to pay on it, is about 4-5%.
	But the economy is growing at about, well, 1.5-2%.
	Oh no.
	So because the debt is about the same size as the economy, it makes the maths very simple.
	Because if they're both the same size, it comes down to the growth rate of either.
	And the growth rate of the debt is twice the growth rate of the economy.
	So, what that does is that puts you in a debt death spiral, where basically the proportion of the debt just keeps getting larger and larger and larger all the time.
	So, you know, that's why we're in such a mess.
	And, you know, I sometimes listen to your sort of...
	You're London Calling with Tobes and that sort of fascinating debate that you have all the time.
	And I'm with you that there is a lot of malevolence and evil going along, especially at the sort of supranational level.
	But actually, at national level government, you can explain a lot of this simply because they feel that they've got to keep the show on the road.
	And it leads them into, you know, long gone are the days of government where, you know, they are attempting to solve the public's problems.
	They are now trying to solve the problem of the public because they've got to wring as much of them as they can.
	I agree with that point, Dan.
	But I think you're you're you're you're sounding dangerously team tobes there in excusing them.
	I give you net zero.
	Net zero is completely unnecessary.
	It's eye-wateringly expensive.
	Imagine if we just abandoned all so-called clean energy projects.
	If we just abandoned renewables and just went for fossil fuel power that actually works and is much more cost-effective.
	Yes.
	And we didn't hamstring motorists by forcing them to take increasingly difficult modes of transport like electric cars where we haven't got enough charging points and so on.
	These are artificial costs on the economy.
	They are not the act of politicians who are sincerely trying to deal with our debt problems.
	They are.
	Right, so Germany is going to be a brilliant example of this.
	Where do you stand on nuclear power, by the way?
	Are you pro that?
	Nuclear's fine.
	Okay, so Germany, as you know, a quick summary of Germany after the war, they built a whole load of nuclear power stations.
	They became an industrial superpower.
	They got infected with this sort of green ideology and they decided, OK, let's close down all the coal power plants.
	And then, bizarrely, they decided they're going to close down all their nuclear power plants as well and go all in on Russian energy.
	And then they decided to turn that off as well.
	So the German economy is a 2 trillion economy which is all based on, or a 3 trillion economy actually, which is all based on about 50 billion of cheap Russian energy.
	And that's just sort of been kicked out from under them.
	There's the whole question about the... If you were a German, you'd feel a bit better about that, wouldn't you?
	You'd think, hang on a second, I'm not going to be waving a blue and yellow flag outside my house.
	Well, it gets worse.
	It gets worse because they did this to themselves and then they sort of went into the last winter.
	Now, in some respect, they were incredibly lucky, really lucky, because the last winter was a super mild.
	I mean, it was just a historical aberration how mild the last winter was.
	Right.
	So that bailed them.
	But all the same, all the same, what they did is they just managed to get through that by going out and buying every single hydrocarbon they could get their hands on and they spent half a trillion buying hydrocarbons to get through one winter.
	Now with that same money they could have established an entire suite of modern new generation nuclear power plants ...that would have provided the German people with clean, reliable energy for the next two generations.
	They could have had that.
	Instead, they used that half a trillion to get through one winter.
	If they'd spent the half trillion on these fancy pants nuclear devices, how long would those have taken to install?
	Well, I mean, yeah, I mean, that is the issue because nuclear power stations are regulated in such a way as it makes them almost impossible to do.
	So you would need to address that as well.
	What about modular reactors?
	Yeah, I hear really good things about those.
	I've not looked into them as much as I have other things.
	The point is, the amount of money they spent, if they had the will to do it, they could have solved their energy problem for generations to come.
	And instead they used it on getting through one winter because they've become so twisted by this absurd green ideology that they got themselves into.
	So have I pulled you out of bed?
	I know you were like Morcombe and Wise, you and Toby there were in bed together.
	Again, that's not the way I look at it.
	I agree with you on the motivations, but a lot of that stuff is not going to be published and put in policy documents.
	And actually, a lot of this stuff, you can go a long way with just what they've said out loud.
	So, for example, there was a World Economic Forum global risk report that they put out recently.
	And I always encourage people to go and read these things because just what they openly admit to is horrifying enough.
	So they were basically saying that their global energy policies are going to cause geopolitical strife and conflict and famine, even under the best conditions.
	So that's what they're openly admitting to.
	And there's other fascinating stuff in there.
	They were basically saying that the top risk that they need to face is the populations pushing back against their policies.
	And then you link that to something like, you know, the 15 Minute City stuff that we're getting at the moment, where Oxford is saying, you know, we want to make your lives better by making everything as close as possible to you.
	And then you say, OK, well, are you going to be delivering any of that?
	It's like, no, we're not going to deliver that.
	But what we will deliver is cameras and barriers that go up everywhere.
	And then you look at the policy documents that sit behind that.
	That was something that came from C40, which is an offshoot of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
	And again, all of this stuff is published, so you can go and read it.
	You don't have to take my word for any of this stuff.
	They are looking to get into over a thousand cities all over the world.
	And they want to install these cameras and barrier systems which of course gives them a very effective level of control against any pushback from the popular.
	So you can imagine something like the truckers protest or the Dutch protest.
	Once cameras and barriers are in establishment all over the country in every city it becomes very easy to just basically lock you up in your district to stop any of that happening.
	And it's openly talked about and then they go on to talk about okay how they're going to limit consumption on top of that as well.
	They're going to get people's car journeys down to nothing and you can only buy clothes three times a year.
	It's all in the bloody documents.
	So my point on this stuff, this Team Toby stuff, is if you just go and dig a bit you can find stuff which even Toby can't disagree with and that is more than malevolent enough.
	Toby thinks that the mere mention of Bill Gates is the equivalent of the Argumentum Ad Hitlerum.
	As soon as you've mentioned Bill Gates you've just revealed yourself to be a crazy conspiracy theorist because we all know that Bill Gates was just a very talented software designer who got very very rich with Microsoft and he's now a philanthropist who wears cuddly sweaters and is a bit geeky but How could anyone like that be harmful?
	Well, I'd just say to him, look, just go and look at the organisations that Bill Gates is funding, go to their websites, download their policy documents and read them.
	And all of that stuff is perfectly horrifying, so, I mean, you don't need... I mean, I think there probably is more malevolent forces going on there, but even if you just go on what's published, that alone is perfectly horrifying, and they're admitting to sort of global strife and famine and, you know, locking up the population and dividing us and all that kind of stuff.
	So, yeah, I decided to go there.
	Let's come back to the debt thing, because it's worth talking about how utterly screwed we are to get out of this situation.
	So, look, there are perhaps four solutions that come to people's mind when we're dealing with this debt, because it is a total debt crisis and we're going to spiral deeper and deeper into debt, so taxes are going to have to rise, freedoms are going to have to be restrained.
	I sometimes hear millennials saying that they're not going to get a house until their parents pass on.
	And I always have to say, well, actually, no, I mean, I'm pretty sure that inheritance tax is going to go through the roof as well.
	So, you know, don't think that you're going to be getting anything.
	I mean, it's just mathematics.
	The state has to capture all of it because of the growth in the debt payments that have to be made.
	It's either that or you default in some way.
	So let's look at those defaults.
	So the four options that people always come back to is, OK, well, we could just default on this debt, just say we're not paying it.
	We can cut spending, we can tax the rich, or we can raise growth.
	Right, so let's look at those.
	The first one, if we default on the debt.
	Even if you defaulted on all of this debt, we would still be running a deficit of 150 billion a year.
	Even if you knocked out the debt payments.
	And what that means is we'd be back in the situation we're now in 15 years.
	So even the defaulting on the debt doesn't do it.
	However, you can't do that because we've now set up our financial system in such a way that this debt is the collateral layer for banks.
	So if you default on the debt, we will then all discover that our money is gone.
	The global financial system will collapse.
	Now maybe that's a good thing in time, but it would be a hell of a thing to live through, because of course then you've got supply chains collapse, the farmer's got no incentive to deliver food to the wholesaler, the wholesaler has no incentive to deliver it to the shops, the energy system, the whole grid, it all goes offline.
	So defaulting on the debt doesn't work anyway, and you can't allow it to happen until there's a new financial system to take over from it, right?
	So second option then, okay, so why don't we just cut the spending?
	Sounds sensible, doesn't it?
	Okay, so let's say we set a reasonable task for ourselves.
	We want to repay this national debt over 20 years.
	So it's not too aggressive but you know we get it done.
	And to do that we need to turn that interest payment that we've got of 120 billion into a repayment so you know you send it 240 the other way so you're repaying it.
	What does that actually mean for government spending?
	Well what it means when you do the sums is a 36% reduction in government spending across the board.
	But, because a lot of government spending is not departmental spend, it's a lot of non-cash items in their depreciation and stuff, you basically have to cut the size of government.
	So that means you'd need to cut the size of the NHS in half.
	You'd need to cut the pension system in half.
	Why stop there?
	Well, yeah, no, it would be all of it.
	Basically all of it you'd have to cut in half.
	Now you might think, okay, well that's very sensible, let's do that.
	The problem is, is we have not had a government elected in this country in my lifetime that has felt safe going into a general election without promising to increase the NHS in real terms.
	Yeah.
	So you and I might be sold on this one.
	We might be listening to this thinking, oh yeah, that's sensible, let's do that.
	But there is absolutely zero probability of anybody getting anywhere near the reins of power by saying, OK, we're going to cut the NHS in half.
	We're going to cut education in half.
	The normies are just not there, right?
	So that is, you know, even though it would essentially, you know, tackle the issue, zero probability of that happening.
	OK, so, right, third option.
	Let's tax the rich, shall we?
	Now, again, I've done my sums on this one, and I think to myself, OK, let's not mess around, OK?
	Let's go in there guns blazing.
	So what we're going to do is we're going to take the Times Rich List, and we're going to take everything they have.
	That includes Rishi Sunak because I think he's on their number 222.
	But we're just going to take all of their money.
	The entire time it's a rich list.
	Is Gary Lineker on the list?
	Because I hope he is.
	He would be my prime target.
	He won't be near the top because he's not that rich is he?
	I mean he's only a few million.
	He's rich enough to Well, as we will discover, I mean, he will be on there anyway.
	So anyway, you take the entire Times Rich List and that gets you $650 billion.
	OK.
	What can you do with $650 billion?
	You can run the UK government for seven months.
	Right, so that doesn't work either.
	Or you can pay off 26% of the national debt.
	And at current levels, that means we're just going to be back where we are now in seven years.
	So even that doesn't work.
	And you might think, OK, well, instead of just the Times Rich List, we're going to go down and we're going to basically just take all of the wealth until we get there.
	That doesn't work either, because it basically means wiping out pretty much everybody.
	I mean, including you and me, you know, our houses.
	I mean, everybody.
	We're just total wealth confiscation at that point.
	You may be, Dan, because of your canny investments in Tesla.
	But I think I'm safe.
	No!
	No, you wouldn't be.
	You wouldn't be.
	Because the mathematics demand that basically they need to take everything from everybody.
	Right, so taxing the... because the debt's just too high.
	Okay, so taxing the rich doesn't work.
	Okay.
	And then you say, okay, and this is the one that right-wingers always go to.
	It is, okay, let's raise the growth.
	I started to talk about this earlier when I said that the growth of the debt is about 4-5% a year, so you need to grow at least that much to stand still, but the range for the UK is like between about 1.5% and 3%.
	And we're lucky to be getting that because we've got so much tax regulation and expensive energy that even getting that is difficult.
	So imagining a world in which we get to... I mean, you need to get the economy growing at sort of 6-7% a year.
	It's not going to happen.
	No.
	It's not going to happen.
	I mean, maybe somebody, with the way that AI is going at the moment, maybe somebody invents something there that, I mean, maybe we get an entire robot workforce or something.
	So it is conceptually possible, but I mean, we're kind of in science fiction imagination land at this point.
	Yeah.
	So basically, there's no option.
	There is no route out of it.
	Unless I've missed something, which I haven't because I've thought about this a lot.
	Money printing!
	Well, that is what they will do.
	It has to come down to money printing.
	And again, you start looking at the sums on that.
	It has to be several decades of money printing that gives you an inflation rate of at least 10%.
	It's going to need to be in the double digits.
	That's their solution, isn't it?
	Yeah, I mean, it's what they will do.
	I mean, they're going to try not to do it because it makes them look really bad.
	But the problem is, of course, is you then get into the sort of situation where... So the classic economist thing is they always think, OK, so countries like the US and the UK, they're never going to default because they can print their own money.
	Sounds reasonable, right?
	The problem is, a lot of what they owe isn't really just money.
	It's healthcare goods and services.
	And you can't print those.
	The sort of deal that we've got with the NHS is that you go to them and they will fix you up.
	You can't just print additional... Or they'll poison you.
	Yeah, or that.
	They'll fix you up good and proper, mate.
	And that's why we're getting into the situation at the moment with the doctors.
	They're striking because they're saying, why can't you just give us more money?
	But the money has been so hollowed out, the value of the money is being eroded.
	It can't be afforded.
	There's no way to make this work.
	So the whole thing is going to go into this malaise over the course of the next decade, where we're going to have to have this really high inflation.
	They're going to have to sort of print the money, and what you're going to find is that all of the things that you think you are entitled to get from government, so whatever it is, NHS pension, the pension won't buy you anything, the social security won't buy anything, and they will tax us to the maximum possible extent because they will try and prevent this as much as possible.
	And yeah, ultimately the value of this stuff is just going to be completely eroded away.
	So we are in a proper mess.
	And I'm quite pessimistic about the 2020s.
	But at some point this is going to come to its logical conclusions.
	And we're going to have to come out the other side of this.
	And whether that is some sort of messy collapse or a switch to a new financial system, which could either be sort of central bank digital currencies, in which case all digital slaves, or it could be Bitcoin and, you know, perhaps there are other viable alternatives.
	But this cannot go on.
	So that's where we're at.
	Not cheery.
	Well, I'm just like on a massive downer now.
	I mean, you know, we may as well just pray for the moment when St. Michael and his army of white horses come down, the heavenly host, and say, Slay all the evil ones, and then we all get seamed into heaven, those who've been good boys and girls.
	Yeah, I mean, it's very difficult, and I hate to have to go there with the whole Peter Hitchens thing, but maybe young people should just bloody leave the country.
	Go somewhere where they're not going to be taxed, to the extent they are.
	Because young people in this situation, the level of taxation they're going to face while they try and hold this up, along with the fact that the printing is going to basically cycle wealth away from wage earners and towards those who hold assets.
	Because if you hold assets that can't be printed, your relative share of wealth is going to increase.
	But if you're a wage earner, the value of your wages is going to shrink all of the time.
	Where would you go to?
	Well, that's the problem, isn't it?
	Because all the Western world is in this situation.
	So I guess my approach is... Well, presumably on the Eastern as well, no?
	Well, there was the Asian financial crisis back in 1998, and they kind of got their house in order, because they got into a bit of a debt issue all those years ago, and they haven't followed us in making quite the same level of mistake as we are making now.
	So the Asian countries aren't so bad.
	Russia's actually in quite a good situation.
	They've got very low debt.
	Is that the issue?
	I mean, I fancied El Salvador, but you've got MS-13.
	if you live there.
	Is that the issue?
	I mean, I fancied El Salvador, but you've got MS-13.
	You know, it just needs one change of government.
	Yeah, but Cayley's been quite based.
	I mean, he is dealing with the situation.
	Have you seen those sort of mega prisons that they put up?
	I've heard about the tough measures they're taking against the gangs.
	And of course, they've got Bitcoin as one of their currencies.
	Yeah, they put that in as a currency.
	But these prisons are very base.
	They've got these sort of mega prisons that hold about 40,000 people.
	They've got these sort of large cells with about 80 metal slab beds on them and they put about 120 people in them and they say you can just rotate and they've got like a couple of toilets.
	And they basically said to them, you know, you're going to spend the rest of your life in here.
	Now that sounds very cruel, but if anybody's ever looked at what MS-13, the way that they treat people, you know, they're getting their comeuppance on that.
	So that aspect is being addressed.
	So, you know, maybe El Salvador is a viable option.
	Okay.
	Costa Rica is where all the cabal are headed.
	They've all got their hideaways.
	Yeah.
	It's nice Costa Rica.
	Yeah, but it's going to be a tough situation.
	The only thing I can think of, the only way that we could potentially get out of this is some of the technological trends that are going on at the moment.
	I mean, it's vaguely possible that AI could be a productivity miracle.
	And lift us out of this, but the problem is there is you can have a lot of disruption because the rate of job destruction is going to outstrip the rate of any job creation that comes on the other side.
	So either way you look at this, it's going to be a tumultuous 2020s.
	Yeah I find all this so sad because
	If you spoke to almost anyone about the kind of things they believe in, the kind of life they'd like to lead, setting aside the bizarre and unrepresentative activist groups, which I think are just funded by people like George Soros, the Extinction Rebellion, they're not representative of where anyone, I hate to use the word normal, but any reasonable person is.
	And if you ask them what they want and how they want to live their life, They want their children to grow up to be able to read and write and add up.
	And they'd like to use the produce of their local farm.
	They'd probably, if they had the chance, they'd probably like even raw milk.
	But they'd like the beef in their burgers or in their steaks.
	They'd like to know that it came from an animal that had been cared for and came from nearby, hadn't had to travel too many food miles and things like that.
	And they'd like maybe a couple of holidays every year.
	And a house.
	And a house.
	But these things don't seem to be too unreasonable and yet we're being punished by a system which has imposed these layers of costs on us which we'd never have voted for this if we'd had the vote on them.
	We'd never be voting for For the broken system that is the NHS.
	In a way, it was voted for.
	primarily the boomer generation who were voting a lot of this stuff in.
	Oh, but wait.
	But wait.
	You understand business.
	You understand You understand the concept of the false prospectus.
	These people were voting on something.
	They were low-information voters.
	They were not told the full picture.
	Yes, that is true.
	So they were completely unaware, for example, of the Flexner Report of 1910, 1911.
	Which completely transformed efficient medicine, working medicine, to Rockefeller medicine, to selling by-products of the petroleum industry, to push poison on the public, to keep them in a state of dependency on this corrupt system.
	Do you see what I mean?
	So it's all very well saying the people want the NHS, they heart the NHS, it's our national religion and stuff.
	It's only those things because they've been lied to relentlessly by a propaganda machine which is paid for by them.
	I agree with all of that.
	That's what I mean.
	That's why I think it has to come down to some sort of system collapse because the system as it is cannot produce anything other than these bad results.
	I've just run through all the numbers of what it would take to sort of fix this situation and it would be cutting the NHS and the education budget and the welfare budget and all of these budgets basically in half.
	If I went out with that as a political message I just wouldn't get anywhere near Well, that brings me back to my point about the dogshit yoghurt.
	I suppose the equivalent of the 0.5% dogshit would be something, I mean I think its dogshit content is higher than that, but it would be something like Richard Tice's sort of, we're not the Conservatives but we are really, party.
	That people vote for those, or people still say, you know, we need Nigel back in the fray.
	None of these alternative parties would get any traction if they were serious about doing what they said they were doing.
	So if, for example, Nigel Farage were genuinely an alternative to the system, and if UKIP had ever posed a genuine threat to the status quo, Farage would have been offed.
	He would have been taken out because that's how it works.
	Tice can just go around swanning around in his suits because he's part of that system.
	Okay, let's try this idea on.
	The way that we got into a lot of these big government programs and the leftist assumptions that dominate everything at this point was not, you know, we went from the 1950s straight into where we are now.
	It was done a millimetre at a time.
	It was the left claiming small victory after small victory after small victory and they add up substantially after decades.
	Yeah, that's Fabianism.
	Yeah, similar with the COVID stuff.
	I mean, they pushed and they pushed and they pushed until we're really at breaking point.
	They're like, OK, well, we're going to step back slightly on the vaccine passports, but we're just going to do a whole lot of work over here on digital IDs, and then we're going to start millimetering it forward again.
	So all of this stuff is this sort of continual push.
	So my defence of something like reform or reclaim would be We're not going to go there in one step, but can we start inching back in the direction we want to go?
	Have you looked at their policies?
	Have you looked at their policies?
	Which one of the...
	Well, I mean, okay, so for example, Tice never criticised the vaccines.
	He still refuses to admit that there was no such problem as man-made climate change.
	He buys into all the assumptions of the system.
	So the idea that by entertaining these clowns, even for a second, you are empowering different voices is just a joke.
	Yeah, I mean, but I mean, that takes us to, okay, what are our best steps?
	Is it to simply recognise that the system is broken and disengage from it?
	Yes.
	And wait for it to collapse?
	I mean, that is probably quite a sensible thing to do.
	Don't vote, don't participate.
	And that is kind of what I've done myself.
	I've bought my gold and I've bought my bitcoin and I'm looking at how I can extricate myself from the system as much as I possibly can, although it's difficult to do.
	But then at the same time, I'm not really going to beat up on people who are trying to inch us back in the other direction.
	They're not!
	They're not.
	That's the whole bloody point.
	I thought for a second, it's like, sorry, just to pick you up on this point.
	Richard Tice is Jordan Peterson, is Julia Hartley Brewer.
	They're not honest brokers.
	They're not good actors.
	They are part of the corrupt system.
	And until you accept that, put your trust in princes.
	These people are not good people.
	They are part of the problem.
	You cannot give them the benefit of the doubt because they prove beyond reasonable doubt that they do not deserve the benefit of the doubt.
	So, like I say, when it comes to practical measures of what I'm actually doing myself, I'm with you on this one.
	But at the same time, I don't really want to beat up on people who are at least wanting to be a bit more active in trying to push back the other way.
	Well, people who want to vote for any of these other political parties.
	People who want to feel like they are actively trying to move things back the other way.
	I mean, it would be great if it was true.
	If we could start inching back the other way.
	That would be fantastic if it's the case.
	It is difficult to have too much faith that that will actually be achieved in the end.
	But I don't really want to beat up on people who are, you know, making that attempt, even if it is... Yeah, you don't want to take people's hopium pipes away from them, but that's all it is.
	They're just sitting around in their hopium dens going, oh yeah, yeah, reform party, oh yeah man, they're just gonna... Ain't gonna happen.
	You might be right, but I can see the merit in making some attempt to take it back the other way.
	Maybe I'm not quite that nihilistic at this point.
	Toby.
	Toby lover.
	Yeah.
	So, OK.
	So, I suppose it's a guessing game, isn't it, on which assets they're going to tax most aggressively and which ones are going... I mean, they're going to come after us every which way.
	So how are you preparing?
	How are you thinking that one through?
	Well, I refer you back to that section of, yes, Prime Minister, when Appleby is explaining to the Prime Minister, you know, that's not quite how taxation works.
	They tax the maximum amount of everything that they possibly can and then decide how to spend it afterwards.
	So, I mean, I think we are certainly in that point where they are going to go after everything that they can.
	So what I want is things where that is more difficult than the rest of it.
	So I basically just like stuff that can't be printed, which is going to be things like physical gold.
	I'm a lot more cautious about the stuff that you need to have stored by somebody else, and I certainly don't like... I mean, if you are going to have a dematerialised form of some sort, you want at least a physical gold stored by somebody who's making that claim.
	You don't want paper gold, you don't want the derivative-based stuff.
	I like Bitcoin because, again, it can't be printed.
	It's a very secure network.
	It has at least the potential to offer an alternative financial system.
	And it can be quite encouraging in that respect.
	So, I mean, the Bitcoin network now is about the same size as the Internet was in 1997.
	The only difference is that it's growing twice as fast as the Internet was.
	and over the course of the next 10 years after 1997 of course the internet changed the world there is at least the potential for Bitcoin to do that but it needs to it needs to prove itself and establish so gold Bitcoin land is great but of course they can come and seize that as well and then if I'm going to go into stocks
	There is some interesting technology stuff coming, so I probably want to blend between real innovation tech stocks that have a potential to capture significant value, and that seems to be the way it's going.
	But I also recognise the stuff that you like, which is perhaps the more energy-based stuff.
	I mean, you're going oil producers and sort of miners, that kind of thing?
	No!
	I'm currently heavily exposed towards miners.
	Because if gold and silver do that, gold miners and silver miners do that, it's just historically that's how it works, isn't it?
	Yeah, the only thing with gold mining is it's a very energy intensive business.
	Yeah.
	So if you take the view that energy prices are going to be up significantly, then that is going to render the amount of gold that they don't have to sell to cover operations lower.
	So that comes into the trade-off as to whether you want to just hold the pure form or the miners.
	If they can produce at a viable cost, then yeah, the effect that you described, that you get that sort of multiply effect on top.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I mean, of course, the annoying thing about gold, if you're going to store it...
	And I think it should be offshore, you know, your physical gold.
	It shouldn't be, because we know from the confiscation of, was it 1933 when FDR confiscated people's golds?
	Yeah.
	And they had metal detectors so that if people went into their vaults and tried to remove their double eagles or whatever, the machine would go bleep and all their gold was confiscated and they were given it back at the state's value rather than the real value.
	Um...
	So you wouldn't want that to happen, and I'm sure that historical precedent suggests that they wouldn't be averse to doing it again.
	No, absolutely not.
	But then you've got storage costs, which is a pain, haven't you?
	So people like my entrepreneur brother, they hate gold.
	He hates gold because of that, because it doesn't do anything.
	It's almost like a sort of religious faith, isn't it?
	Gold bugs versus non-gold bugs, and bitcoiners versus no-coiners.
	You can see both sides.
	Yeah, I mean, you need to have, I mean, I see where your brother's coming from, but you need to have faith that the system is going to continue and that economy, and he could well be right because, I mean, these things do tend to struggle on.
	People's faith in the system can support it for a long time.
	And actually, that is going to be my base case.
	I mean, I do prepare myself for a complete system collapse with things like physical gold and Bitcoin.
	But actually, probably the more likely scenario is we just sort of go into this long malaise period where people get squeezed, where people increasingly think, OK, well, what's in it for me?
	Because especially for younger people, I can't buy a house.
	I'm getting taxed.
	I'm sort of trapped in this sort of rent world.
	And it probably is going to come back to the thing that we talked about earlier, just those high inflation rates to sort of squeeze out a lot of this debt over time.
	But unfortunately a lot of this isn't going to get, and this is quite brutal, but a lot of this isn't going to get solved until there are those demographic shifts.
	So you sort of take the those baby boomer peaks and you sort of run that out by life expectancy and you sort of look on the other side of that because once I mean it's very simply if you've got a smaller population supporting a larger population that isn't working it is very difficult to for there to be a good quality of life for the younger people that isn't getting squeezed away.
	So you're saying the boomers need to die?
	I was very careful not to say that.
	I know you were!
	I was exceedingly careful in the way that I phrased that.
	Which in a way, that you can see, you could have been behind the Covid jab policy, couldn't you?
	I am not advocating it!
	I mean, that was what Midazolam was about, wasn't it?
	Yeah, it looks that way, doesn't it?
	When Matt Hancock ordered large... I'm going to do a podcast about this.
	like incontrovertible evidence that the UK government, and probably the US and other countries as well, bought in extra large quantities of midazolam.
	And I suppose one of the things they wanted to do was effectively to execute all the people with Alzheimer's in old people's homes.
	And even if it wasn't that just simply the fact that large amounts has been supplied out to every care home and they've got it on hand and then the guidance says okay you know you this is this is now a tool in your arsenal that you can use it's going to get used.
	So, I mean, don't accuse me of being a Toby here.
	I'm simply making the point that even without the malicious intent, which may well have existed, you can get an awful long way just on the bare bones of what actually happened.
	You know, if you've got a large quantity of midazolam sat there, people are going to use it.
	Oh, totally, yeah, yeah.
	I mean, I obviously...
	Disapprove of state murder.
	They do do a lot of it.
	I'm old-fashioned that way.
	I'd be curious to know, if you were of a psychopathic bent, It would be very attractive if you could take advantage of the fake pandemic to bump off people, unproductive members of the economy.
	You described at the beginning the problem with sort of unfunded pensions, liabilities and so on.
	Yeah, I mean you could address it other way through reforming how we fund and model these things.
	But the problem they've got is they are not willing to countenance any variation to the system, and the system basically just says tax more, spend more.
	Yeah, you're right, it is that.
	If you're willing to think outside the box, but then you can't get elected under that system, so you come back to it.
	But I mean, yeah, as for putting yourself in the head of a psychopath, that's really difficult to do though, isn't it?
	Because we just simply don't think on those... What would Bill Gates do?
	Yeah, we simply don't think on those terms.
	I hate to use the phrase what you're saying is, but I think what you're saying is that the government MPs, I mean they're so low grade anyway, they are too frightened to say to the electorate
	We cannot afford these pensions, we cannot afford this lifestyle for the elderly, in any way you've got more than working people.
	Therefore we are going to rein this in, we're going to cut back massively to sort of pre-war traditional levels, I mean indeed societal, historical societal levels.
	Well I mean ultimately what it would have to be, it would have to be a re-establishment of the family structures.
	Yes.
	That we just don't have in the West anymore.
	Yes, exactly.
	So you'd re-establish that.
	And I like that personally.
	I think that granny and grandpa should be living in a kind of granny flat.
	And entertaining grandchildren.
	Because, after all, grandparents love their grandchildren.
	And grandparents offer something that parents don't.
	Yeah, it is something that happened to, sort of, Western society, isn't it?
	There was this, sort of, real push for, sort of, individualism.
	It is, as soon as you, sort of, turn 18 or the earliest viable possible point, you must fly the nest.
	That was the thing.
	You must fly the nest, you must go out.
	And you must never reestablish that family structures.
	So Granny must live in her five-bedroom house, increasingly infirm, forever.
	She keeps falling down the stairs, but it's okay, we're just going to patch her up again and set her off again.
	We'll just bring the bed downstairs if we need to.
	You have these Western assumptions that people must be atomised and split out.
	I can well imagine that if there are boomers listening to this conversation, they will probably be getting quite annoyed with some of the things I've said.
	I'm not putting any of this on bad intentions, and I understand that if you have reached the point of retirement, you're going to be thinking to yourself, well I've been paying into this system my entire life, I'm entitled to it.
	The problem is, the whole way through, is you weren't paying into anything.
	You were paying out immediately.
	You were paying out for the people who were old when you were working.
	And as I've explained, the demographics simply are this.
	There was a lot of you paying for a few old people.
	And that's changed.
	Now it's a lot of old people and a much smaller number of working young people.
	So that tide has turned.
	So the system becomes unviable.
	It's just it's now a question of how do you want to watch it collapse?
	And the only alternative is going to be things like those family structures we just talked about.
	I'm very against this generational tension, which you hear, particularly from the young, this bitterness.
	I hear it from the old as well, it does tend to go both ways.
	Right, okay.
	But I think that this is why I am where I am, in terms of my understanding of the world.
	That I realise that all this stuff... It's division, isn't it?
	They want us fighting amongst ourselves rather than... We look at the history of the cultural Marxists, for example.
	Who was funding these people?
	The same people that are responsible for CBDCs, that were responsible for the Second and First World Wars, that were responsible for the French Revolution.
	There has always been this predatory elite, the Predator class, we'll call them, who were also a Parasite class, but I think Predator captures better the aggressive nature of the Enterprise, because they don't just merely feed off us, they
	They remake the world in a way that restricts our freedoms and impoverishes our lives and actually torments us in every which way.
	So yeah, the war on the family was part of their mission.
	The feminist movement designed to drive men and women apart, stop them forming family relationships while simultaneously bringing women into the tax base.
	And if only people... This is my frustration when I have this debate with Toby every week.
	Which is not really debate because we're just shouting at one another.
	It feels like you start again every single week.
	It's like, you know, whenever you sort of get him over the line on, you know, have you considered this, all of those lessons are forgotten the next week and it's straight back to, oh the newspaper said this, so this must be the case, or the government has said this, so he sort of resets to normal values every single week.
	Alan Watt, I think it's worth listening to some of Alan Watt's old podcasts.
	He explains how hard it is to escape the paradigm, because the paradigm is all-encompassing.
	It's really that Toby has not made, and probably will never make in my view, the heroic journey that is necessary, which starts from your Questioning everything you've got to examine the world from first principles and say well hang on a second the National Health Service Does it actually do what it says does it does it promote health or does it actually?
	jeopardize people's health and if it if as Curse of Examination will reveal it does more to jeopardise health than it does to ameliorate it.
	You then ask yourself, well, how come this creature is sucking up so much of our economy?
	Well, it's become a religion at this point, isn't it?
	Yeah, but then it's circular.
	Why has it become a religion?
	They made it into a religion in order to disguise its faults, so it was more about faith than about the reality.
	And we talk about it in those terms as well.
	I mean, we sort of treat the doctors more as priests than, you know, service providers.
	And there's this assumption that if we didn't have the NHS that the only other viable option is the American system or no healthcare whatsoever.
	You know, there are hundreds of countries out there with various different healthcare systems that we could adopt, that we could go to, but no, the debate is so limited.
	But here we are, you see, Dan, we're going back into conservative talking points, circa 2019.
	These debates are set up, and I could do them, and I could do them with my eyes closed.
	It was my livelihood for 25 years, coming up with these arguments about how... And you know, you've got people at the IEA.
	We've looked into this research and we've found that this healthcare system is better than that healthcare system.
	What it ignores is the key question, why are we even having healthcare systems?
	Yes.
	Why?
	So the one thing that I am extremely grateful to the whole Covid era is it was so revealing for so many people who I just assumed were on the same team.
	And then you go through that and you realise, oh actually no, these guys are, when push comes to shove, these guys are the enemies.
	You mean Chris Snowden?
	Well, I wasn't going to mention the name, but yeah, Snowden.
	It has been extraordinary, hasn't it?
	It's like the scene in Where Eagles Dare, where one of them is a traitor.
	Who would have guessed it was?
	I can't remember which one it was.
	Is it the woman?
	I can't remember now.
	It's been years since I've watched that.
	Yeah.
	But yeah.
	The thing that I find interesting is, and this kind of goes back to what we've talked about off air before, is when you sort of go through this sort of experience and you realise that everything in the narrative is a complete load of BS.
	Yeah.
	And then you start looking backwards at events that have occurred through your life, or maybe even historical events, and you start to think, oh hang on a minute, maybe all that was lies as well.
	And it starts to really upend what you think you know about everything, if all of your base assumptions about your culture's history are possibly based on a whole bunch of fabrications.
	This is Delingpole's second or third theory, that the more a news event is imprinted on your consciousness, the more likely it is that event is fake.
	So you think that everyone can remember where they were when they heard Kennedy had been assassinated.
	So they say.
	I mean, I don't because I wasn't born.
	But they say that.
	And I remember when I first saw the planes flying into the Twin Towers and I remember I remember first hearing that Princess Di was dead and all these events, and I do remember watching the moon, one of the Apollo missions and all these things were
	To a greater or lesser extent was PsyOps.
	I got myself into trouble over the whole moon landing thing because it's just one of those things that you never question on any level.
	It's just a historical event.
	It happens.
	You know, it happened before I was born but, you know, it's just a historical thing, it's a thing that happened and you learn about it and people just talk about it in passing as it's happened.
	Okay, right, so I'd never questioned it and then we went through Covid and I started to think to myself, oh hang on a minute, if they can lie about that maybe some of this other stuff is lies as well.
	So my confidence level on the moon landings dropped from something like 100% confident that it happened to about 90% Purely because I now appreciate that the government are able to run a massive PsyOp.
	And I thought, oh I don't like this.
	Because, you know, if you are a moon landing, if you question that in any way, I mean, you're the worst of the worst.
	I mean, you are proper conspiracy theorists at that point.
	So I thought, I don't like this, so I want to get myself back up from 90% to 100%.
	So I started looking into it, right?
	And the more I looked into it, the more that 90% started to go down and down and down.
	Because I assumed that there would be really compelling evidence It was just there, it was just sat there, and all I had to do was go and look at it.
	And so I started digging into this, and these confidence levels, they just kept on going down.
	Anyway, so I got down to about 50%, and I thought, OK, I'm going to stop looking now, because I'm about to cross the threshold.
	So I'm going to stop there, I'm going to say, I have no idea whether it happened or not, but if I look into this any further, then I'm going to cross the line.
	Yeah, there are those who say that it is a complete waste of time.
	They say it's a distraction, you know.
	In a world where they're trying to introduce CBDCs and where they're killing young men and women with jams they don't need and when they're desperately trying to start a war with Russia over Ukraine and all the other things.
	Buying up farmland and taking away livestock and stuff.
	And people say, why can't you deal with the things now?
	But you can't understand what's happening now if you don't understand what they've been doing to us in the past.
	This is not a new thing.
	Suddenly these bad people have taken over the world.
	And before that it was great, and it was paradise.
	You know, like in the good old days of the war, when we all pulled together.
	But of course, everything we're told about the war is the blitz spirit.
	Well, I mean, that's the other thing, because I don't mind so much looking at stuff like the moon landings at 9-11.
	Like I say, I come away on the moon landings, I'm just going to get to 50% and I'm going to say, you know, I don't know if it happened either way.
	The 9-11 stuff, when you start digging into that more, because that was the question you asked me when I came to you last time, because you wanted to assess how far down the rabbit hole I was, and you said, where do you stand on this?
	And again, it's just one of those things I hadn't looked at for basically forever, and as soon as you start digging, you start getting into the details, especially the World Trade Center 7 stuff and the Pentagon stuff.
	It's the amount of questions that you start throwing out on that.
	But I mean, then if you sort of go back further and you're sort of alluding to, well, you know, a lot of the stuff around the war or, you know, any sort of, I mean, basically any previous piece of history, you just start to realise, you know, what the hell do I actually know about anything of the culture that I'm in and the assumptions I have about the history and everything that has gone into making up who we are as a people?
	I mean, what sits behind any of it?
	Is it all a tissue of lies?
	Yes.
	It is.
	And this is why I always fight back against those people who say, for example, why are you engaging in Paul is dead theories?
	This was a kind of fan theory of the Beatles and all that symbolism of Abbey Road where Paul is not wearing shoes or whatever and that's a symbol of blah blah blah.
	Here's the point.
	The Beatles were the world's most famous and influential pop band.
	Probably ever.
	Probably ever, ever will be.
	They were more likely than not created by the Tavistock Institute with a particular purpose, and it was the same purpose that the West Coast Music Sound was created in Laurel Canyon in the late 60s.
	It was designed to subvert youth culture.
	to divide young people from old people.
	It's always about divide and rule.
	Generational tensions, promiscuity, drug use, etc.
	Breakup of the family unit, destroy the anti-war movement, which was a viable and important thing.
	If they are capable of faking whole bands and whole pop music movements in order to subvert the culture and move it in a particular direction and weaken us, it's hardly a big stretch to imagine that the guy playing Paul McCartney is an Illuminati faker.
	I mean I don't know anything about this side of things so I mean is it the case you think that they were sort of manufactured or is it that you know they they look at the those that are rising and those that are doing well and they get their hooks into them and those who try and resist those hooks they don't get the institutional support to make it to the big big time something like that?
	I'm not sure Exactly how the mechanism works.
	I mean, the closest anyone's got is Weird Scenes Inside the Canyon, the Dave Goldman book, because he examined that particular scene.
	He noticed that most of the major pop stars of that era in the US came from came from military or spy or you know CIA backgrounds.
	Okay.
	They were part of the military industrial complex and weirdly a lot of them came from Virginia which is which of course Spooksville and Militaryville.
	They came from there to Laurel Canyon which had no real tradition of kind of pop music.
	It was just a kind of more of a more of a sort of satanic place.
	So there you can see fairly With a degree of accuracy how how the scene was was manufactured and manipulated that we don't know exactly that Brian Epstein seems to have been their controller in some way.
	We don't know.
	Why he died, how he died really.
	There's an official version but it's all a bit shady.
	I don't know what the role of George Martin was for example.
	I think he was probably another form of controller in some way.
	Gregory Paul Martin, George Martin's son, didn't like it when I started talking about he doesn't answer my Christmas cards anymore since I've been talking about this the the thing is people say oh yeah but you shouldn't get head up about this stuff it's just irrelevant it's just trivial but it's not trivial
	because if they can do this with pop music which after all is people talk about the soundtrack to their lives people you can play a song and it will take people back to where they were and it's not such a stretch to imagine that like how do they how do they
	If you look at the Manchurian Candidate and you look at how mind control programs work, what they do is that music is used as a trigger to put you in a particular state.
	So music is very powerful.
	So music is very powerful.
	So one more thing, one more thing on the apparently fruitless speculation about the meaning of the significance of the Abbey Road symbolism.
	Well, it's not fruitless.
	It's really important because signs and symbols is how these people operate.
	It's part of the mind control.
	Their signs and symbols and sigils are everywhere, be it the single eye or the eye within the pyramid.
	It's all there.
	So you are well ahead of me on this stuff, I've got to say.
	It's exhausting.
	Yeah, I mean, first of all, I've never been much of a music fan in the first place, so I've tended not to follow a lot of this stuff.
	From my framework for looking at a lot of this stuff is I kind of see a world where you have an established system where you know those at the top increasingly share characteristics and the way that the system is set up rewards those people who sort of play the game and so many rising stars they want to sort of get their hooks into and sort of align them with what works for the system especially at the top end.
	So that goes to a lot of subversion.
	So I can totally see how a lot of people are basically either pulled into line, or if they won't play the game in the way that the game is supposed to be played, they are at least shut out.
	Something like that.
	So I can get rid of all of that.
	The bit that I've never been able to get my head around is why there is the need to put symbolism in, to sort of put this Not premonitions, what do you call it?
	It's sort of foreshadowing.
	I've never sort of understood that aspect.
	Oh, I see.
	It's about karma.
	You see, you're talking about the Babylonian mystery religions.
	This goes back a very, very long time.
	And essentially, you know that we live in a world of opposites.
	So you've got, on the most obvious level, good and evil.
	And the Babylonian mystery Religions are essentially in the service of what I would consider to be the forces of darkness, of evil.
	And part of the way they operate is through magic, these tricks.
	Because they also have a degree of control over the spiritual realm, or at least an affiliation with it.
	There are these dark forces, dark spirits, as well as the divine ones.
	And it depends on how far you want to go, but you're absolutely right about... I was going to ask you about this.
	When I was at university, I was upset that the MI5, MI6 recruiter, who's my Anglo-Saxon tutor, why he never tried to approach me.
	What I hadn't realised then is actually what you've hinted at, which is that They're on the lookout for psychopathy.
	They select for psychopathy and the people that they want to promote to rise in the system.
	You occasionally read in newspapers reports about what a high proportion of business CEOs are psychopaths.
	Well that's not an accident.
	It's because they've been selected for those traits and they've been groomed.
	Is it that they've been selected or is it that the system rewards that disproportionately?
	That would be a classic Team Toby response.
	There we go.
	I've done my best to skirt the line between the two positions.
	Look, obviously what you say is true.
	The system, the beast system, does reward ruthlessness.
	Although, having said that, I look at, well, for example, my brother.
	He's not a psychopath.
	He just wants to build a good business.
	That's all he cares about.
	He doesn't want to shaft people.
	He doesn't want to fuck them over unless they fuck him over first.
	It's not about...
	It's not about ruthlessness for ruthlessness' sake, so I don't really buy this idea that you need to be a psychopath to run a good business, and to generate value.
	Actually, talking about your brother, I had a fascinating conversation about the way that Woke worms its way into an organisation, in the HR and the marketing and all that kind of stuff, and he was saying, he doesn't encourage any of it, But he always finds it's worming its way in and he looks at some of the stuff that, you know, is coming out of the organisation.
	He sort of shakes his head at it.
	But I mean, his mindset is he doesn't want to sort of stop what he's doing and go and stamp it out all the time.
	He wants to just basically get on with making money.
	And, you know, that's part of the problem.
	Even the people who, I mean, I don't think, well, I mean, you've answered this better than me, but I don't think your brother is quite where you is.
	I mean, he's kind of low-key based, but he's not, but he's more focused on just basically making the money, and is kind of prepared to tolerate some of this stuff by default, just simply because it'd be too much effort to keep stopping and trying to stamp it out all the time.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Yeah.
	When you were in finance, did you find that psychopaths were rewarded?
	Or was it purely on performance and therefore irrelevant?
	Yeah, I've got to say, I didn't see it so much myself.
	But then I was dealing with smaller companies.
	Maybe they have different characteristics.
	Maybe the stuff that you're talking about is more the case in large organisations.
	Jamie Dimon?
	Yeah, I mean, whoever's head of Unilever.
	Yeah, but I mean, I was doing sort of venture capital stuff.
	So it was somebody who's had, you know, a brilliant idea and is prepared to work incredibly hard at sort of getting that over the line.
	And that was possibly a different mindset of the character than what we're talking about here.
	So I haven't personally experienced it, but you know, it wouldn't surprise me if it was true.
	Another point coming back on the things that you've talked about is, As we sort of talk about the way the system is set up and they like to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, you know, they love the intergenerational conflict, you know, the men versus women, you know, the different racial groups against each other.
	I'm sort of reminded that the only time in my life where we all seemed to have the right idea was shortly after 2008 with the Occupy Wall Street stuff or whatever it was at the earliest stages.
	Where left and right were pretty much unified in taking a good look at the top echelons of the financial system.
	Yes!
	And very very quickly Woke got institutional backing and if you look at the number of articles published pushing identity politics it was in the early stages of that all of a sudden they went through the roof.
	Maybe that was totally organic or maybe that got a push.
	Oh, totally.
	That's why one has to be very, very cynical about the organisations.
	Which organisations would have... the ones that help business shape their image?
	I suppose it would have been like Tim Bell's company that went bust.
	Those are the kind of companies that advise on that.
	Those are the image type people.
	Image, yeah.
	They work out strategies.
	No, no, no, I was talking more about the, you know, I noticed the press and the media suddenly adopted on force.
	Yes, yes, no, no, okay.
	So the media is bought and paid for, that's given.
	But what I, yes.
	I'm absolutely certain that this was deliberate and orchestrated.
	These are the sharks protecting their shoal.
	They don't like the attentions of And they managed to get us successfully fighting against each other and will continue to do so because there was that brief moment where a lot of people essentially recognised where it was appropriate to be directing your attention.
	And very, very quickly they managed to get us off that and that moment seems to have passed now.
	And now the divisions that don't matter occupy us on a daily basis at this point.
	Before we wrap up, because I'm thinking I need a coffee and a fag.
	I'd recommend to you is listen to a couple of the more representative, sort of general
	I love what you've been doing in the podcast though, more broadly, because you do the mainstream digging into the system stuff, but the turn that you've made for health stuff That has been quite fascinating, some of your guests on that.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	There's a whole bunch of them that I need to go back and re-listen to.
	So there's the amalgam filling guy, that was, I was saying, a whole bunch of these, I said to the wife, you know, you've got to listen to this stuff.
	But there was a whole bunch before that as well that I know I really need to go back on.
	Well, look, yes, I was going to mention this in a conversation earlier on.
	Look, Look at the way, read any newspaper and the chances are you will find a story about cancer.
	It'll be about a celebrity who is struggling with cancer, a celebrity who's beaten cancer, a celebrity who's died from cancer, in the health pages new Cancer treatments, in the insurance, other sections on how to get better health insurance, is it worth it?
	In the food section on sort of diets that might help you beat cancer, and so on.
	Cancer has been fetishised as this thing that, it is people's greatest fear, pretty much.
	And cancer is curable, and cancer's been curable for a long time.
	And you look at the 1939 Cancer Act, the Cancer Act forbids you from talking about these things.
	It's actually illegal to seek out, to promote effective treatments which aren't the kind of the big pharma-endorsed treatments, because big pharma makes a lot of money keeping people alive just about five years before they eventually die of the effects of the chemo.
	Keepers medicated, yeah.
	This is why I'm interested in health, apart from personal selfish reasons.
	It's all plugged into the bigger picture of healthcare and well-being are one of the things that they have co-opted for their malign interests.
	Therefore, one of the ways we can fight back is by rejecting their system.
	We were talking earlier about opting out of the system.
	It's my belief that if the NHS were to close down tomorrow, and no one were ever to be able to go and see a doctor or a nurse, and people were left to their own devices, the effect on the nation's health would be dramatic.
	People would get a lot, lot better.
	People would live longer.
	They'd live happier, healthier, more fulfilled lives.
	They wouldn't be being poisoned by this stuff.
	Yep, sure, OK.
	Some people would.
	Because the NHS is doing the same thing that your guests have railed against in the US, which is those sort of big professional bodies, who basically set the term of the debates and say, OK, you can look within this remit of options.
	And if you stray outside of those options we're going to take your professional license away.
	Or the NHS will be, you know, we're simply not going to fund or consider anything outside of these narrow range of options.
	And those options are increasingly set by the big pharma companies because they have the lobbying and they commission the studies and, you know, it is this system and structure thing that I keep turning back to.
	This is the way I sort of primarily perceive all of this, systems and structures.
	So what you're talking about there is if these either professional bodies or the commissioning body, which would be the NHS in the UK, were to go away, what would happen is you would have a much wider net of innovation-seeking.
	And some people would seek out innovative options that didn't go anywhere, and some people would seek out innovative options that were substantially better than the current narrow remit of options that we've got.
	And then you'd like to think that the people who got the significantly better results would then spread the word and, you know, by through this sort of fuzzy logic, you know, you would get to a substantially better series of results than we're at now.
	But what we do with our existing system is we say, no, we're going to restrict the debate to these incredibly.
	Well, I mean, that's the entire purpose of your form of profession, isn't it?
	It's media is to keep people discussing things within a very narrow band so that you don't threaten the establishment in any way.
	I mean, that's that's ultimately if you have that mindset, you can, you know, applies to finance, applies to health.
	It applies to politics and the whole bloody thing.
	Yes, that's that's exactly it.
	Imagine if we had a free market in medical ideas and in health care.
	Pretty soon people would gravitate towards the systems that work and reject the ones that don't work because there'd be too much anecdotal evidence.
	There'd be too much, you know, I tried this, just didn't do anything.
	I felt really bad and then I died.
	Or, no, look, last year I had terminal cancer and now here I am feeling great.
	Yeah.
	But we've got to shoehorn people into this narrow range because we can't tolerate a small number of people having a very bad outcome and a small number of people having a very good outcome.
	And then later us emulating the good outcomes is everybody has to have a moderately, slightly good or slightly crappy solution that basically keeps this thing trundling on and us keeping consuming the big pharma products.
	But that again actually is a bit of a Hello?
	Can I call you back in one second?
	I'm just doing a podcast.
	I won't be long.
	Okay, bye.
	Yes. - Um, What was I saying?
	You were about to make a point but I didn't know what it was.
	I was about to pick you up on the Normie strand.
	- It was a good one, whatever it was. - I was about to sort of pick you up on, again, a sort of normie strand that it is, so what I think I can safely say that what Team Toby would say is that because people can't bear the possibility that some people will get much iller and some people will get much better,
	Therefore it is an unattractive and indeed impossible proposition for the government to change the status quo because there is this public... Well I think that's a story they tell themselves.
	I mean really it's just because they like the control.
	But that's also the story that we are told and we are brainwashed with.
	Whereas the question that goes unasked by design is, since when was it the state's business to get involved in healthcare at all?
	And this is never asked.
	It goes back to the IEA thing.
	They've got all these little policy wonks who claim that they are libertarians or even free markets.
	But they're not.
	They're actually funded by the industry that has a vested interest in stopping you asking the question of government-funded healthcare.
	Because once government stops funding healthcare, people are going to start asking much tougher questions about the role of the pharmaceutical industry.
	They're not going to get these fat contracts.
	And you're absolutely right to put it back to these fundamental concepts.
	Because the thing is, you can get so sucked up in this, can't you?
	Because you spend your life with these base assumptions that weave through everything.
	And it is a conscious effort to go back and say, OK, well, let's actually unpick them.
	Let's let's ask these fundamental questions.
	It just it just never happens.
	But, you know, that but then that's why you're on the fringes as opposed to in the mainstream media, because they don't they don't want any of these fundamental assumptions picked up.
	It's like I was one of these people.
	Once.
	And I suppose I've got the zeal of the convert in that I look back on these people now and I kind of... I just... I despise them for being so... well, despite... maybe that's too strong a word, but I just... I can't understand why they cannot see things as... I'm so disappointed.
	So, for example, all the pieces that Dan Hannan writes about the English-speaking world and about Shakespeare.
	Well, Shakespeare was the Earl of Oxford.
	He ran a scriptorium, which is the best playwrights of the day.
	We're all working for the state, funded by Queen Elizabeth, churning out this stuff.
	So it's all very well talking about the genius of the Bard from Avon, but he didn't actually exist, or rather, he's a construct.
	I'm sure there was a bloke called William Shakespeare, a semi-literate bloke called William Shakespeare, who spelt his name in different ways, but he didn't write Shakespeare's plays.
	In the same way, I read an article by Douglas Murray or somebody like that talking about China.
	They set up this false opposition between the noble, freedom-supporting West and the evil commie bastards of the East.
	And you're thinking, the West is not free.
	The West is in its way as evil as the countries that you are trying to demonise because you are part of the machine.
	Yeah, I mean, I suppose on the sharp end, it's not as evil as some of these other countries, but that's because the propaganda that's pushed here is a lot more effective and a lot more people buy into it.
	And so, you know, the more brutal methods don't have to be used here because people are going to play the game and pay their taxes.
	Yes, well, that's probably true.
	They go willingly to the slaughter rather than being cajoled with cattle prods.
	That's the only difference.
	But we're all going to the slaughter all the same.
	Yeah, it looks that way.
	Well, Dan, I'm definitely going to have my coffee and cigarette now.
	Yes, time for a break.
	Where can people find you?
	So, I've got a Twitter account which is KingBingo underscore and you can find me at LotusEaters.com and I normally do a couple of shows on Tuesday.
	I do one reacting to the news and I do my economic series there.
	So go to lotuseaters.com, sign up.
	We've been demonetized off YouTube, but although you can find a few bits on there.
	So yeah, find me there.
	Good.
	And it only remains for me to say, I really appreciate all those of you who support me, whether by buying me a coffee, that seems to be quite popular right now, buy a coffee, or on Patreon, or on Locals, Substack, Subscribestar, it does make a difference.
	This is my living, I depend on you for your support, so please keep supporting me.
	Yeah, keep listening.
	I'll keep trying to provide entertaining content and speaking truth to power and white-pilling you as well.
	Thank you very much for listening and thanks again, Dan, for being on the show.
	Yeah, it was great to catch up.
	Good chap.

▲