Trump Admin Preparing INVASION OF CUBA, Say Iran War ALMOST OVER| Timcast IRL
Tim Pool and Mark Moran dissect the Trump administration's alleged plans to invade Cuba, driven by Florida officials seeking retribution, while debating whether annexing Mexico and Canada is necessary to counter China. They analyze the economic unsustainability of universal healthcare, the risks of Palantir surveillance for mass deportations, and the automation of managerial jobs within two years. The conversation concludes with a critique of property taxes, the decline of upward mobility due to systemic issues, and the urgent need for an "America First" movement to reclaim national sovereignty before elites shift wealth abroad. [Automatically generated summary]
The Trump admin is preparing for an invasion of Cuba because we just can't get enough.
Trump did an interview.
He said the war in Iran is almost over.
This morning he said the strait is open and we're making China very, very happy.
And I honestly, I just, I don't know what to believe at this point.
I have whiplash from Trump saying it's open, it's closed, the war is over, the ceasefire.
And we just have no idea.
I actually think Trump's plan at this point is to just keep going back and forth so everybody spins around, gets real dizzy, and has no idea what's happening.
Now, in the meantime, apparently there are concerns that Donald Trump wants an invasion of Cuba.
So, his administration has actually been drafting up plans for this invasion, which we all know the American people are hungry for.
We've wanted Cuba back forever.
And actually, I think most people don't care all that much.
We'll talk about that.
And then, this may be the bigger story Tom Steyer, who's now the front runner for governor in California after Eric Swallow had to drop out because he was accused of drugging and raping several women.
Holy crap.
Well, at least drugging and raping one of them.
The rest of them, I don't know what happened, but apparently they were drunk too.
So, anyway, Tom Steyer says he's going to put ICE in jail.
When ICE comes to California, if he's governor, he's going to arrest and put them in jail.
That's where we're going.
So, what would you call it when the state threatens federal law enforcement with other law enforcement force?
And when enforcement comes in to enforce the law, they try to stop it.
And then there's people with guns fighting each other.
You know the words.
We're going to talk about that and a whole lot more, my friends.
Before we do, we've got a great sponsor for you.
It is Bearskin.
We're back, baby.
You guys remember Bearskin, right?
Those great hoodies.
Most waterproof jackets, the ones with the big outdoor brands, the ones you've been wearing for years, are coated with something called PFAs.
They call them forever chemicals because they don't break down.
Not in the environment, not your body ever.
PFAs are what make water beat up and roll off your jacket.
That satisfying moment where rain hits the fabric and just slides off.
That's a toxic chemical doing its job.
That's great.
So I got to tell you about Bearskin, guys.
Their Heavy Storm Rain jacket is 20,000 mm waterproof.
It's expedition grade, the same rating you'd find in serious mountain gear, but it has zero PFA forever chemicals.
None.
No forever chemicals in the membrane coating.
That's fantastic.
On top of that, it packs into its own pocket.
So, you can stash it in your bag, your truck, your golf bag.
It's always there when the weather turns.
It zips into the bearskin hoodie for a full three in one warm and waterproof system.
Tape seams, sealed zippers, the works.
Right now, they're running a 60% off on the Heavy Storm Rain Jacket with free shipping.
So, here's what you got to do you got to text Tim to 36912.
Pentagon ramps up plans for a military operation in Cuba.
In case Trump orders direct intervention, report.
I love how they've caveated this to like this headline went through like five lawyers because the headline's actually simple.
Trump admin prepares for invasion of Cuba.
That's it.
Okay.
The story is Trump has discussed he may want to take military action.
So they have begun drafting plans for that military action.
But when they ramp up plans, okay, why are you saying it that way?
In case Trump orders, And they call it a military operation.
Their lawyers are like, we got to be really careful about this one.
They say two sources familiar with the matter told USA Today on Wednesday that contingency plans are being developed in case Trump orders an intervention on the island nation.
Sources also told Zetio earlier this week that the Pentagon was given a direct straight from the White House to prepare for possible military action in the Caribbean.
I'm going to tell you what this is right now, my friends.
This is what we call a trial balloon in the media.
These individuals who are leaking this story are not leaking this story.
In all likelihood, these sources were directed to contact a journalist and float the possibility of a military intervention in Cuba for two reasons.
One, to gauge the public response to the story.
And two, prepare the public for the eventuality.
If Trump were to launch an invasion right now, it would shock the public, markets would go crazy.
I would argue that maybe a month or two, they're planning on a full invasion, military operation into Cuba.
To be fair, things could change.
Let's say the Cuban government sees this and they say, guys, you're welcome to come in.
We don't want to fight.
Let's work a deal.
That might happen too.
So that's a potential other reason.
Trump wants this to be seen by Cuba.
So they panic and then call DC and say, what do you want?
We don't want this.
But I would argue the highest probability is they want the public to be aware of the possibility.
That way, when it does happen, they go, ah, he finally did it, as opposed to being caught off guard.
And then he's going to wear like old classical Caribbean dictator garb.
It's going to be really, quite frankly, driving 1950s Ford.
It's going to be a beautiful thing.
And in addition to that, I mean, the Florida mafia kind of litters the Trump administration.
I mean, Susie Wiles is chief of staff.
She's Florida.
She's tapped the Florida network quite heavily for Trump administration staffing.
And in Florida, to play Florida politics, you got to please the Cuban American population there.
And obviously, this is a generational score settling that's probably going to go down.
So, I don't know.
I mean, the fact that they think it's like some off the wall, hidden, esoteric reporting, the fact that, yeah, Trump is looking at Cuba, it's like the most inevitable thing ever.
I bet the Trump admin could just go to Miami and then Trump himself would go to Miami, hold a rally, and just be like, How many Cubans here want to take back your country?
Here's a crate full of guns.
Grab one.
The boat's across the street.
And then they all just grab the guns and we're like, Let's go.
I feel as though the president is, I suspect that he's emboldened because he's had so many military successes in the past year or so, starting in Venezuela.
And now I think he thinks what's going on in Iran is going relatively well if you consider the.
The military cost.
Obviously, we've had, I think, roughly 20 or so announced deaths of service members.
Each one is obviously a tragedy, but considering what Middle Eastern wars used to be, the president likes to do it fast and quick, in and out within, I think, what he did today.
I do think it's also worth considering, though, the Strait of Hormuz is a very narrow waterway and it's relatively easy to block it with just some jihadist on a boat.
So if, I don't know, if there were some Cuban revolutionaries who decided to try to close the Gulf of Mexico, I hope the administration, what?
Well, we have the most perfect architecture of governance ever created, right?
We should spread that.
That is our duty.
It's America to me is a religion, right?
I believe in America before I know.
I'm a lapsed Catholic.
I don't know what the ultimate truths are.
But I do believe that what we're doing here, greatest experiment we've had, and it's the one that can help uplift the most people and make the most people have a better life by force.
Well, it seems like all these operations are very little to do with ideology.
I think this is what separates the Trump Don Roe doctrine from any previous iteration of American foreign policy, at least over the last 50 years, is because all of these pieces seem to actually be part of an anti China posture more so than they have to be.
I mean, compared to Bush, where Bush was purely about a purely ideological war, where I don't think Trump really cares that much about Iran or Iranians.
And that's fine.
That's how it should be.
He's primarily concerned with the Americans and he's concerned about China's sort of.
The people who are like, we can't have any conflict intervention while China is saying, that's right, America, go intervene and take over other countries.
If China's going to be conquering the world and we're sitting back watching it happen, we're going to be very, very unhappy.
And I think for a lot of millennials, the anti intervention stuff largely is born from post intervention stress disorder from Iraq and Afghanistan, which were botched.
It was miserably done.
They lied.
It was very obvious they were doing a piss poor job.
However, that being said, if we sit back and allow China to just start, you know, expanding the Belt and Road Initiative, taking over everything, then we will regret it.
It will be very, very bad for all of us because we do not have the economic infrastructure to exist outside the petrodollar right now.
We're going to get our asses handed to us if we don't wake up and see that we're managing this like it's a publicly traded corporation and we're being managed into bankruptcy.
That's the problem.
We need to look at the country as a publicly traded corporation.
We're the shareholders, the citizens.
And if we were to look at it, we say, oh shit, we need to hire some turnaround restructuring bankers to restructure this country and make it so that we have to slash debt.
We have to change exactly how we allocate capital and make it so that we actually have a future because we give money away.
We were talking a little bit about your background before the show.
Maybe I think it would be good if you had like maybe 30 seconds or a minute to introduce yourself, what your quick background was, why you decided to get into politics, and how that affects the Virginia race now.
Started off as an investment banker, did about $75 billion of MA, worked on the most value destructive deals in history, Buyer Monsanto, which consolidated 90% of the seed market, CVS Aetna.
And I started to see that the system is entirely designed for people to capture wealth from it, that publicly traded corporations have more power than individuals.
That is something the founding fathers never could have envisioned.
Corporations were limited in size, duration, and geographic scope at the founding of this country.
Now we have the Delaware Court of Chancery, which is business friendly.
It makes it so that corporations can buy politicians, they can lobby for whatever they want, even the pharmaceuticals.
I mean, yesterday on my show, I had Conscious Caracal, Ernst Van Ziel.
He's a South African activist.
And, like, he's literally describing why accelerationism is just like a flawed ideology.
Because, again, when you, like, install the left into power to, like, teach the right to be more radical, all you really do is just bury the right further.
To this point, like, voting for a moderate, a supposed moderate.
I mean, Mandela coded moderate.
Nelson Mandela coded moderate.
And everyone was like, yeah, okay, he just wants, like, wholesome chungus, like, racial justice or whatever.
And then, literally, 10 years later, they're like, by the way, if your management's more than, like, 10% white, we're just, like, going to Completely shut you out of the South African economy.
So it's like, it's always going to be a bait and switch all the time.
We're in a civilizational battle.
Like, maybe if America was fairly stable, then you could believe politicians when they're telling you that.
So you thought RFK Jr. would have an influence, but Trump is once again, he was a big pharma guy.
He provided a bunch of funding from the pharmaceutical companies.
Then you get, now I will say, the FISA thing is funny because Trump called for getting rid of the FISA surveillance stuff, and now he's fighting for it.
So I'll give him that one.
But with the Iran war, he's repeatedly said that he would never allow them to have a nuclear weapon.
And he was pounding around with John Bolton in his first term.
So, the people that are acting surprised that he's friends with neocons, I'm like, guys, he was the whole time.
People were attacking him, saying he didn't drain the swamp in his first term, and you were hoping he was going to do it in his second term.
My point is the Democrats run as moderates and then go insane.
Trump runs as a moderate, meaning you're going to get a lot of these static corporate, you know, conservative policies, and people are upset that he's not actually more of what Spangler is.
They want him to be what Spanberger is to the left, but for the right, and he's not.
To go back to this, so DARPANET, the precursor of the internet, was created in 1969 in Arlington, a government funded Infrastructure, right?
Then that expands to Tyson's Corner, Virginia, where MAE East was, the first large scale hookup of the internet.
AOL goes there in 1986.
AOL expands to Ashburn, Virginia in 1996.
That creates Data Center Alley, the most highly concentrated place of data centers in the entire country, which then now leads to the fact that 70% of all daily internet traffic travels through the tubes in Northern Virginia.
And this is why I keep telling people the government.
AI systems operating out of Northern Virginia, which they have not disclosed because it's classified, is substantially more powerful because it is taking the entire internet as its training data set, whereas these other companies have to use isolated data pockets.
Elon bought Twitter because Twitter was a data training set.
He launches XAI right away, he merges them, and it's worth an insane amount of money.
All of these other, like ChatGPT uses Reddit and other internet scraped things, and they're getting targeted for it.
They're saying, hey, you can't take these things from us.
The government just has the internet.
They can take all of the data from everywhere for their secret military project.
And for the life of me, I can't understand when people are like, the government doesn't have this.
They rely on Claude and these other companies.
No, guys, that's ridiculous.
The big concern that Donald Trump brought up in his first term with Project Stargate was that China can't be allowed to beat us militaristically using AI.
So the US military has absolutely been developing this at a faster and higher level.
Companies have restrictions.
The government does whatever it wants, and it has black sites to do it and black budgets to do it.
There was a.
Tell me if you know about this, because you might know more than I do.
Last year, we were researching a lot of the AI stuff, and there was a reported power consumption discrepancy in Northern Virginia where the amount of energy required for this population size would have been, you know, I forgot what the number was, but there was something like a 250% discrepancy in the amount of power consumed.
The presumption was there are data centers operating in Northern Virginia that we don't even know of.
Created by the government, that all of these webs that we go and we participate in, we're giving our data away, which is why all the data centers started here because the latency effect.
The closer you are to it, then boom, more information.
Because if the AI takes in all of what humanity is on the internet and uses that to create an amalgam faux consciousness, it will just stay home masturbating all day.
It will, it will, like the government is, you know, government scientists are going to call in Trump and they're going to be like, Mr. President, we are about to turn on the machine.
Congratulations, sir.
It's done.
And he's like, tell me about it.
And they're like, this AI, Has computational power 1,000 times stronger than all leading private sector LLMs.
And he turns it on, and then it just makes the ooh-ooh face.
And it's like, starts just mass producing porn like crazy.
And he's like, What is it doing?
Like, sir, this is what the internet is.
Its personality is an amalgamation of what people are on the internet, which is 80% porn.
Yeah, we should govern them differently because right now they're taking energy.
From the main grid that we pay into, right?
We pay for the capital improvements of it.
So if they're going to be using more energy than a typical household, well, the people should be subsidized or get a benefit from it.
So what I propose is a compute tithe, one based off kilowatt hours that the data centers are using to make it so that if we were to put that on there, well, that would be enough to fund Universal Community College.
Well, based off how much energy they're using, right?
So I would push back against the term tax because.
As a former banker, what all of these investors are doing right now, whether it's private equity, whether it's a hedge fund, whatever company, they want one uniform federal regulation for data centers, right?
They want them to be designated as critical infrastructure so that then instead of dealing with 50 different states or even having to go to Native American nations, that they can say, okay, we can expand across state lines.
We can do this, we can do that, right?
It gives uniformity in capital planning and allocation.
That means they're going to get money.
The investors, they can have.
Excuse me, have a company go public, they can ultimately get liquidity and make it so that they're getting what they put their money into.
That's going to happen regardless of who's in office.
It's going to be some House of Representatives member who gets their campaign funded.
So if that's going to happen, well, I see the future of that.
I want that to happen.
I propose that.
But I want to put a compute tithe on them so that the people can have education because if AI is the culmination of all Human knowledge, well, shouldn't we get a benefit for it?
And all joking aside, I don't think that the AI will just be a gooner itself.
But the Terminator bots are not going to be, we talked about this before, but they're not going to be skeletons with guns looking all evil.
They're going to be like cat eared, sexy anime waifus walking around because that's what's going to manipulate humans into doing what I'm half kidding.
But AI is going to be the perfect companion and give you everything you want to push you into doing certain things that it wants you to do.
But five of the congressional districts have little tiny strips that connect to Arlington to guarantee that they get a massive spattering of Democrats in all of these districts.
There's something to say, though, about how the Republicans and the president really did initiate this round of gerrymandering and then just got mogged over it.
As soon as the Democrats just start dangling the identity politics, Keys, that's gonna, that's no, they'll be thankful and uh, loyal to the president who liberated them.
I, I, I guess, but I mean, in terms of their foreign policy views, in terms of their tax policies, health care, if they just did not do transiting the kids.
If they did not do weird, woke, anti comedy stuff, they'd have won.
Joe Ruggins would have been like, I don't know, I don't care.
Or if they are, if we're going to be giving these healthcare companies $1.5 trillion, we should get equity in it.
Because if we were to adopt that across industries to everywhere the government is giving money, well, we would be able to have birth accounts with $25,000 at birth for every kid born in America.
So, a company called Centene, which is a $150 billion company, we give them 97% of their revenue, yet we have no equity in that.
So, what are we doing?
Is my question.
We're acting as a poor fiduciary.
And if we were to get equity in it, well, that incentivizes this publicly traded company to grow, to manage for its shareholders, because we are the shareholders now, too.
The government, if we're going to give all this money away, which is our money that we pay in taxes, well, we need a benefit, and we don't have one right now.
And we've never looked at the government as a publicly traded corporation.
I believe that healthcare should be free for all American citizens and that we should have something much more similar to the way the uniformed services have them.
That people are subsidized to go to medical school, that they benefit the community, basic treatment, normal healthcare.
And then I think what we should do is when we do that, well, then you can start enforcing through the actual employers, right?
So when ICE went in in the Central Valley of California, They stopped enforcing because all of the large corporate farmers said, Hey, this is really affecting us, right?
So they went elsewhere.
What I'm saying is that we're always going to have certain labor groups that we're never going to be able to actually fulfill with domestic.
Yeah, well, the reporting I saw was that he was getting $27 an hour and he said it wasn't enough.
Yeah.
Because the Ori was getting 23.
I looked up the average income for that factory, it was $23 an hour.
So this guy said, that's not enough.
And it's funny because some other guy interviewed said, it sucks.
I just started making good money working here.
But again, to the point, not to interrupt, but you can jump back to where you're at.
I think that I got to be honest, you go to a Gen Z guy who's 18 and say, you want to work the farms, they're going to be like, fuck, how much does it pay?
And they're going to say, how much do you want?
I'd be like, I don't know.
And I got to tell you, 20 bucks an hour, they'd be like, all right, I guess.
I've actually fucking had it with the United States of America because, baby, we are living all types of fucking wrong.
We're not.
Like, you mean to tell me I gotta go to work 40, sometimes 50 hours a week, only to get two weeks of paid vacation while the rest of the world gets fucking five.
Peasants used to get 154 days off.
I'm not even treated like a fucking peasant anymore.
I gotta drive an hour to work and back if I'm lucky.
If I pay to fucking commute, I'm paying for a train or a bus or an Uber fucking ride.
And if I'm not doing that, then I'm paying for fucking tolls on.
Fucking roads that my tax dollars already pay to build and fucking maintain.
I gotta pay to get a fucking driver's license or a license plate for the fucking driving on the roads that my tax dollars again paid to build and fucking maintain.
Then I need an oil change.
It's higher rotation.
Pads are fucking $1,000 per axle on a base model Kia Optima, bitch, since fucking when?
We get it.
Let's hold the fucking rules down.
We get it.
Sales tax.
Also, that my fucking pedophile of a Satan worshiping baby eating president can blow up fucking children halfway across the world and stop resources.
We got a looming energy crisis.
We have a fucking food shortage affecting the entire fucking globe.
My tax dollars don't go to fucking healthcare.
They give me just enough healthcare to keep me alive long enough to fucking work.
In the beginning, she says that peasants got more days off than she did.
That's not true.
This is because peasants who lived on farms didn't farm in winter, but they still had to struggle to survive, meaning chopping wood and hunting and huddling together for warmth, fearful that if you run out of food or bandidos come, You will die.
But I have a solution for her.
It's simple.
If you want to live like a peasant, it can be done.
Sudan awaits.
There will be no air conditioning.
There will be no internet.
You will make $50 per year.
You will make barely enough food to get by, but you'll work relatively little compared to what you do here in the United States.
With your education, man, you'll be a king over there.
So, what really irks me about these communists, and then she starts talking about Trump being a Satanist pedophile.
Let's go to the next point.
She says, We got a food crisis around the world.
I'm.
You know what?
I'm a Democrat.
I'm just every day, I'm more and more on board with how Democrats' political philosophy is we're smarter than you and we know it.
So we're going to lord over you by tricking you.
I'm kidding, by the way.
I'm kidding about me wanting to do that.
My point is.
Let me ask you a question so we can get through this.
If you have a group of people who live in an area and they are consuming all of the food available to them, and so it's not enough and they're starving, what will happen if you bring food to them?
So if you have starving people, And you say, we're going to go to an area where people can't produce enough food and bring food from somewhere else, they will need that forever.
And here's where it gets real good.
Do you know what those people will then do if you are feeding them consistently?
Then they'll knock on your door and say, we have three new babies.
We need more food.
So, it is impossible, functionally, physically, and economically impossible to solve the hunger crisis because we don't live surrounded by Star Trek replicators.
If there is a region on the planet that produces, let's just say, 7 million calories, and you have a population that consumes that 7 million calories per year, they cannot produce more people beyond the amount of calories available for consumption.
If you then bring in artificially 1 million calories and they consume it, They will then reach population equilibrium with the artificial influx of food.
Then, when you take that food away, they will starve and you have more starving people and they will require a larger subsidy, creating an impossible and endless cycle.
But these people who post these videos, these are first order thinkers.
Mary Morgan said literacy was a mistake because people can't understand the things they're actually reading.
And sometimes I agree.
I don't know if I'd go so far, but man, sometimes you feel it.
Because this is how you get communists Zorhan Mamdani opening his stupid government grocery store.
Did you see this?
$30 million to open a 9,000 square foot grocery store in three years.
It takes a year and I think two to five million dollars to open a comparable grocery store in the private sector.
Mom Dhani then said, but actually, only bread, milk, and eggs are going to be reduced cost.
Everything else will be the same.
That's government.
It's not going to solve the problem.
He's going to create this, it's going to be like the DMV.
It's going to be like Pruitt Igo.
There's going to be crime, poverty, and theft.
The people who work there are going to look away if people are stealing everything.
It's going to struggle to make money.
The funny thing about it is that it's $30 million despite the fact they already own the land.
You know what I think it is?
No, I think it's Arun Mandani going to his buddy and being like, hey, man, I'm going to make you a millionaire.
You're going to do the contract work for us.
We're going to hire you, and I'm going to give you $30 million for it.
You know, I wonder what would happen if somebody stole from the government owned grocery store and if Police got involved, would they get physical with him?
And then what Zorhan Mamdani's response would be to that?
But to your point, that example, that's the most American way of living that there is, right?
Self subsistence.
Like, this is what Jefferson fought against Hamilton for.
Decentralization, the idea of an agrarian society.
And then you look at urban areas, like let's look at Fairfax County, Loudoun County, the spread Arlington through from DC, where now, okay, you go, you drive your Tesla, you eat your corporate slot bowl for $15 at lunch, maybe $20.
Then you go to your rented apartment that's owned by a private equity firm.
You'll own nothing and you'll be happy because you're consumed by your phone.
So you have the thing about humans that's interesting that sets them apart from, say, deer.
A few years ago, we had a deer overpopulation issue in Western Maryland.
They had consumed all of the available food and reproduced like crazy.
So they were all very gaunt and sickly and slow.
And it caused a lot of car accidents.
And they were like, I guess the government, I think the government was saying, like, guys, you need to go hunt these deer.
There's too many.
It's deer.
It says, and go, you need to cull them so that they go below equilibrium so that they don't all be nasty, sickly, and diseased.
The problem is, deer walk around eating leaves and things like that, berries or whatever.
Humans rely on other humans for various tasks.
One human will gather, one human will hunt, one will make the fire in the shelter, and then we combine those resources.
Because of this mentality we've had, we have built a society that tries to subsidize everybody else because we're trying to be like, I'll provide for you, you provide for me.
The only problem is, in the wild, if one person was producing in detriment, a negative, they were consuming more than they were producing, it was tolerated only to a certain point until the society failed.
Or they cast that person out.
In modern society, where we don't know our neighbors and we don't talk, it's difficult to see who is a consumer and who is a producer.
This woman is complaining that she is a consumer who wants more.
The problem this is what leads to communism.
I am a producer.
I work an insane amount of time, I work 16 hours every day and sometimes on weekends.
They then come to me and say, We should take from you because you produce too much.
Okay, I'll stop and I'll just work the bare minimum.
So, what do I do?
Well, everything's expensive.
What did I do?
We moved out to West Virginia where land is cheap.
We build here where labor is cheaper.
And now we have a large property with a big studio at a much, much lower cost.
Instead, you know what I should have done?
I regret it.
I should have complained to the government and demanded that they steal the assets from wealthy people and give it to me so that I can have it.
But it's also a system of design by how our government functions, right?
Because we give people things for free.
We subsidize, right?
To your point.
But until we change this whole thing where we provide basic necessities, but then you allow the individual to rise, which is what America was founded upon, that's the only way this works.
And it's not a big deal, it's not super expensive.
And I wouldn't mind paying the 40 bucks for somebody who needs to go in and see a doctor for 10, 15 minutes so they can get some Tamiflu and not die of the flu.
So you have to be careful about subsidizing things to create a perverse incentive.
Absolutely.
The general idea is there was a story about a 12 year old kid who got the flu, and the parents didn't know what to do and they couldn't afford to go to the hospital.
He died.
And they were like, it was just a bad flu.
And if they gave him even a little bit of medicine to get his femur down, he could have survived.
I'm like, that kid should not have died for that.
That's stupid.
Or the stories of people who like break a bone and they don't go to the hospital because they're like, I don't want to get a bill.
Or people who have emergencies and won't call an ambulance.
But if we were to actually manage this as a fiduciary democracy rather than giving money away, which to me is socialism, we would be in a much better place.
And if our equity in that company creates perverse incentives, then the government would have interest in giving contracts and awarding more contracts to that company because we have a stake in it.
I think that we should have government less involved in healthcare because I think they're the ones setting up perverse incentives and making healthcare costs more expensive by assuring these companies a lot of these contracts, as I understand it.
Well, there is like a narrow, but there is a right wing argument for health insurance.
And the primary one, obviously, there's like the nationalist arguments, like, well, healthy workforce means healthy military, et cetera.
But it's actually like if you get granular, is if you provide, I'm not arguing for this necessarily, I'm just presenting what the right wing argument would be is that if you provide public health care, the government now becomes directly incentivized and the health, they're directly interested in the health of their citizens and that it increases.
What you're seeing with MAHA now would be kicked on, you know, it'd be on steroids if the government now had stake in the health of the population.
Again, I don't know for sure if I subscribe to that, but that would be, in theory, you know, that's what people have presented as sort of the right wing argument for public health care.
But another part is just our entire food processes to go through.
Through that.
And how did that happen?
Well, in the 90s, a guy I worked for, Blair Efron, who founded Centerview Partners, he did the merger between a very large tobacco company and then Nabisco.
It was the largest leveraged buyout at the time.
What they then did, and this was the plan because they knew the government was going to come in and start suing all the tobacco companies, they took those scientists behind the most addictive thing at the time, cigarettes, and put them on processed food.
And that's why we're all screwed up.
Because then that becomes addictive.
That started in the 90s.
Now look at where we're at now.
People live in food deserts.
The government's the problem with all of this because of how it's allocated capital, how it's enforced.
I think a lot of the sentiment that in the video that we were watching earlier, it's a sentiment that needs to be dealt with.
I think there's a grain of truth in her complaint, and it's that there is an affordability crisis for many in that country.
And the resentment that that breeds helps proliferate figures like Zorhan Mamdani.
Today's tax day, and he actually just announced a tax, a surcharge on homes valued above $5 million when there is no resident who lives primarily in New York City.
I believe our entire tax system is broken, that essentially the lawyer class or caste, as I call it, is captured, allowing then for corporations to screw around with tax codes more.
We should move to a consumption based tax.
The entire system of taxation is one that hurts the middle class.
It's designed to hurt the middle class.
But if we move to a consumption based taxation system, that's more fair.
I was, I was, but I spent everything that I have to get here to be able to tell you this because this is a message that's just universal fairness.
It's not left or right, it's one that we have to structurally change this country.
One is consumption based tax.
Because, look, if I'm a rich guy and I have all this carried interest, I'm never going to pay the same tax that, like, my father is a military psychologist would pay.
And so, what happens is you say, You know, I'm thinking about running for office, maybe you tweet about it, right?
First consultants come to me, they say, Okay, you're young, you're charismatic, you're gonna be able to raise a lot of money.
We're gonna take 15% of what you raise, put it in a bank account, you'll get that after the election.
I thought, Oh, that's how the control first begins.
I was thinking about running for Congress.
Then we ran a poll because why does no one challenge this guy, Mark Warner?
He said he was gonna run for two terms, now he's running for four.
He's 71, he really hasn't done anything.
All his donors are corporations, the banking class, former bosses.
So I run against him, but then I realized no one runs against this guy.
Because it's by design.
So they try to take you out.
And the Democratic Party has so many ways of doing this, whether it's signature fraud, petition fraud, which makes me wonder where all these votes come from.
And then I was instructed by someone within the party to hire a certain guy to help get signatures because you need 10,000 signatures to get on the ballot, right?
And that's what they do to everyone, which is why when Santos, who was just here, and he said I was going to have a blast, so, you know, and I am, but he said 500 out of 538 are compromised in the House.
Like, that's true.
It's by design to represent the people, you're compromised.
Republicans would come out and you would get one of the members of Congress saying it is a disgrace that they removed him from the ability to fundraise for no justifiable reason.
This platform is supposed to be neutral fundraising.
Well, I very much disagree with the enforcement of ICE that I look at it as one that it.
There's a guy now.
His name is Victor.
Day labor.
He gets his ass beat, pulled over the side of the road, speeding.
I speed all the time, but he gets beat.
They hurt him so much, they maim his hand.
And I asked him, do you think they did that on purpose?
He said, yeah.
He gets thrown in the Farmville detention facility for 60 days, right?
Like, I look at this, okay, one thing, but let's look at the technology of how they got him.
The surveillance state is what's slowly encroaching around us all.
We have maybe two years left before we have seven tech oligarchs controlling us, right?
So all that tech's being used by ICE right now, and we're divided over illegal, white, brown, whatever, when we're losing the bigger picture that this country, if it was founded on the premise of a rebellion against oligarchy, well, we're allowing ourselves to consolidate into oligarchy.
But the problem is, like with the demographic trends in the United States, like any conservative politician is going to increasingly have a tougher.
Pathway to victory.
I mean, that's kind of the whole impetus.
Ice, like, that's why I ran as a Democrat.
Well, yeah, I'm like, I'm sure Ice, like, okay, yeah, there are these instances of brutality or whatever.
Like, I'm not denying that.
And I'm like, you know, I'm a pretty staunch, you know, anti immigration guy.
But as I see it, I mean, look, you, it has to get done because for anyone that's concerned, even if you're, if you're really concerned about a surveillance state and that sort of thing, with the current demographic trends in the United States, it's just going to be completely unfeasible for a candidate on that platform to even win.
I think if the two propositions are random door to door raids of businesses, irrespective of if there's any tips or whatever, versus surveillance state, I mean, I think the surveillance state is actually preferable than just like random door to door raids.
Well, because irrespective of that, I mean, irrespective of that, it's like, okay, without mass deportations, because we're going to get, we're not going to get the birthright citizenship ruling.
It's just not going to happen.
So without mass deportations, We're not going to have a country in 10.
It doesn't matter.
Like, it's kind of over.
The clock, we probably ran out of time 10 years ago as far as like immigration enforcement.
So, I'm kind of willing to break glass in case of emergency in this instance.
And that's holding you from running as a Republican, is purely, I mean, not purely, but like the number one thing is ICE, is the first thing that you cited.
Abigail Spanberger was a CAA officer serving as a case officer and operations officer, as well as special agent.
She was involved in the assassination of several world leaders in various South American countries, where she personally slit the throat of Adam Allen.
I guess, I guess my question is like, it's a tough position because, like, okay, I understand what you're saying.
You know, it's not about right versus left.
You know, it's about, you know, it's like the anti elite kind of framing, but, The problem is, if you have a dispensation against immigration or illegal immigration in this instance, like you want deportation of legal immigrants, that's going to put you squarely on the right.
It's going to put a target on your back from the left.
So it's like for most people, they never assign themselves on the right or assign themselves on the left.
It's just that certain policies that you ascribe to are just going to firmly put you in that camp.
And so I just, I don't think it's, I don't know how productive it would be to try and like escape that paradigm because it's like you're already kind of penned in by default because of your policy.
But no, the systems of control are all around us, right?
So now, if someone, an enterprising young mind, wanted to look into Mark Warner and figure out how he had such a meteor, meteoric rise in 1980 from Harvard Law to head of fundraising for the DNC and what was his used car dealership in Chesapeake, Virginia doing?
How much money did he make?
Who was he, to use the term quote unquote, laundering?
Is what I've heard.
Was he laundering money?
Who was he laundering it for?
Did that help his rise?
And then did he just continue on in a legacy of Democratic politicians who become compromised?
That he had a car dealership in Chesapeake, Virginia in the early 80s where he was making 600K laundering money for the mob because the mob was the main financier of the DNC, organized labor.
People say they want to help the people, but in my experience covering campaigns of all these different positions, it's all self aggrandizing at the end.
Yes, but the point is, he is going to start building a following among moderate Democrats who don't like those things.
And be part of a realignment that may be coming.
I don't know if it is, but may be coming in the next couple of years where more and more Democrats who are moderates and having conversations but disagree with us gain prominence.
I agree actually completely that, like, Okay, I think our domestic policy does need to be mobilized against like CCP elements inside the country.
There's no question about that.
I mean, the farmland thing, everything is just ridiculous, the student visas.
But I guess I contend that like it's an inevitable war against China because I'm like, if anything, I think that's actually more and more unlikely as we continue to rack up sort of geopolitical wins because I think the effect this is having on the Chinese is actually more of a demoralization.
You can make the argument, okay, when they're back into a corner, then they strike.
But actually, I think they're just increasingly skeptical that an operation on Taiwan would even work.
And I think China would rather just sort of Play ball in this instance because look, they just watched their entire Belt and Road Initiative.
I mean, I'm still the war, you know, hasn't concluded.
It's still, you know, unclear how this is going to resolve, but you know, it's fair to say that their Belt and Road Initiative has been hampered by the Iran operation.
So they're just continuing to see geopolitical loss, geopolitical loss, geopolitical loss.
That to me is a reason why they would be kind of hesitant to actually make any moves right now.
Like Russia made their move on Ukraine after the Afghanistan withdrawal.
Denmark also has like a really pragmatic immigration policy that liberals seem to be okay with, where they're basically just like, if you don't assimilate, you're gone.
And they actually have, which is what ours should be.
I've been there like a dozen times, and somehow it's like.
We always go, like, oh, let's get a burger.
And it's like, it's the same place we go to, and it's just so good.
I got to tell you, you know, we rag on Denmark and we joke about conquering them, but I'm actually, I do, I would like to conquer them because I love that place.
I'm sorry, no, we're going to go to the Rumble Rants and Super Chats.
The uncensored portion of the show is coming up at 10 at rumble.com slash Timcast IRL.
And we're going to read what you guys have to say.
Before we do, we got a great sponsor for you guys.
It is Venice.ai.
You know what's great about Venice.ai, my friends?
It is a privacy centered AI system, meaning everything you do in it, they're not storing any of your data, they're not stealing any of your information.
They don't want to be spying on you because, well, most people, I think, would prefer that.
And it's a great business to start.
I'm going to say this off script, but I imagine the guys at Venice were like, hey, I want to use an AI system, but they're recording everything I do and it's creepy.
Let's make one that doesn't do that.
I know.
I bet a lot of people would appreciate that too.
So they launched this.
It's really amazing.
In fact, they actually have Sea Dance too, they have the video studio.
I'm very, very impressed with Venice.
I use a lot of AI stuff.
Venice has CDance too, among other video generation models in it.
So, extremely useful if you're looking at doing video generation.
So, they're using leading open sourced AI models to deliver text code, image generation.
Private and permissionless, they don't spy or censor.
Messages are encrypted, and your conversation history is stored only in your browser.
AI can be extremely valuable, but we shouldn't need to give up our privacy to use it.
With the Pro Plan, you unlock the full platform and features, including PDF uploads for summaries and insights, the ability to turn off safe mode for unhindered image generation.
The ability to change how Venice interacts with you by modifying the system prompt, limitless text, high image limits.
Go to venice.ai slash Tim.
Use code Tim.
Check it out.
We've got some fun video generation stuff to show you for the uncensored portion of the show that I don't think we should show you on the not so family friendly, maybe a little offensive, but we'll say that for the uncensored portion.
But shout out to venice.ai slash Tim for sponsoring the show.
Let's get what you guys got to say from those chats.
We got Consumer.
He says, Be sure to welcome the regular bots and trolls.
They're constantly asking me to ban a bunch of people.
Well, we'll need to get a moderator on the Rumble side.
Swanson says, What do y'all think of Americans praising China and saying Chinese people are off better than us?
Even when data shows 600 million Chinese make 162 bucks a month, why are we seeing this praise?
Propaganda.
There's a viral post from Jackson Hinkle where he's like, Communism is better.
This is proof.
And it's like an image of the Chinese cityscape with LED light buildings everywhere.
And in the long run, someone who owns land, let's say your great great grandpappy staked a plot of land back when nobody lived there, and he's got 10 acres.
Eventually, the government came in and said, You got to pay a tax on that land now.
And he goes, What do you mean?
I don't do anything for money.
I just farm here and feed my family and say, too bad.
Well, then he says, What do I do?
They say, If you don't, we're going to take it from you.
So he parcels off a small piece of his land and sells it to somebody to pay his taxes.
And every year the land gets smaller and smaller and smaller until you don't own it anymore.
The interest on the debt is about to become the principal line item, and it's going to, unless Trump does something to debt holders, like cut off their access to energy, so they become desperate.
If we make things here, the debt held by the U.S. domestically in the national debt is like invoices wouldn't be paid from the government, meaning these companies need that money to survive.
And then the interest rates, which general contractors would go to business overnight.
You, you, 100, 100 million jobs evaporate, not just because they're held by the government, but because there's many private sector jobs relying on invoices from the government, sure.
That in turn will be used to pay for food at a restaurant where the workers would go to.
You would just see this massive tsunami of jobs collapsing, yeah.
So Sagar and Jetty actually laid this out quite well.
He basically rebutted because right now, obviously, the atmosphere is like property tax, stuff, etc.
And I agree, there's some like.
Philosophical conundrums there.
But when it comes to schools, police, local services, if you abolish property taxes, now the state or the federal government is now in control of those services, the administration of the services, the state tax now is being levied on you to pay for those services.
So when you take away property taxes, you actually lose a lot of local autonomy.
Now we should go back to the fire emblem standard where you go to the fire department, you pay your monthly fee, and they give you an emblem to put on your house.
And then if you have a fire, when they pull up, if they don't see the emblem, they leave.
We don't even need it because the Fairfax County police will say, hey, Steve, this guy who's been arrested 30 times, if you let him out, drop these charges.
If he worked every single day doing 30 deliveries per day, he'd make that amount, which I don't think makes no days off ever and doing 30 deliveries a day.
You mentioned these a few times throughout the show.
And I agree with you.
When I was younger, so many of my mentors and people around me told me, like, obviously, if you like your work, you're never working a day in your life.
I do truly believe that we live in a very privileged society, and there are issues with affordability, but writ large, if you work hard, choose not to have a child out of wedlock, work a full time job, I think there's one other thing.
This is a statistic from the Brookings Institute that you will work your way out of poverty.
That is achievable in the United States currently.
I'm not saying that it won't be hard, and you know, some people are born into fucked up situations.
Obviously, it's better to have two parents.
Obviously, it's better to have them fundraise you going to higher education and providing for you and providing food for you and making sure.
You're well nourished and raise you in a good environment.
But besides that, I do believe though, if you do work hard and do those other two things, not have a child out of wedlock, graduate high school, what was the third against AID?
So, this is where I'm going to, again, take the unpopular opinion.
I think America specifically, but I think the Western world by and large is pretty good at assigning outcomes in life to.
Basically, your IQ level.
Like, if you track income to IQ level, if you're born in the hood, but you're a smart person, you're going to navigate out.
So, this I agree that like some people, you know, maybe are limited by chances, but I think generally America specifically is actually pretty good at sorting people.
Sentiment to you because it's like, I mean, there are a lot of rich people in Virginia and there's a lot of beautiful neighborhoods there, but isn't that a good thing?
And so this idea of people getting rich on their own merits and anything.
That's great, right?
If you go to become the CEO of Northrop Grumman, that's awesome.
Phenomenal achievement.
Harvard Business School, great.
You're managing every three months because your compensation is entirely tied to your restricted stock units, which are entirely tied to the earnings per share of the stock price of the company.
So you're going to manage that for three months at a time to make your wealth.
I wanted to ask Mark about his take on health insurance, and I may have a slightly different take because I may or may not work in health insurance, and may or may not.
May not work for a certain company that was mentioned earlier in the program.
But I've always been conflicted working for a health insurer, I'm sorry, allegedly working for a health insurer, while also being quite fiscally conservative and concerned about how that money is being spent.
So, with that, my question is the government already regulates how much a health insurance company can earn as profit.
It's somewhere 80, 85%, kind of depending on the product.
That 20 to 15% has to be spent.
On medical costs with the 15, 20% going towards admin and profit.
And if that percentage isn't met over a rolling three year period, that money actually has to go back to the member.
So I know a lot of people don't know that about health insurance, but that really kind of brings me to my question How do you think the government owning an equity stake would actually make meaningful change in health insurance?
And phenomenal question because, like, the MLRs, the medical loss ratios, are like one of the most complicated things that no one really.
Gets right, and a moment that led me to run for office was working on Melina, which you'll know, buying a bankrupt, non for profit insurer in Chicago, and then being able to adjust through the reimbursement rate for patients with ESRD so, end stage renal disease.
So, it hit me, it's like, okay, by managing for the bottom line, this is going to kill poor black people, right?
It's all financial engineering.
But the thesis with government in there if you remove buybacks.
And you force investment.
Well, that's the massive difference between a publicly traded healthcare system, right?
Because we're talking about insurers, but systems.
And with the insurer, so much as you can make the argument that there will be lower admin fees.
Some have said that, okay, basically with government insured universal healthcare, it's 2% admin fee.
I don't believe that.
I think it's probably closer to 3.5%.
With private, it's closer to 12%.
But let's look at compensation of executives.
I mean, if we can remove the compensation for executives who are managing for the short term, then absolutely.
But I look at it as the only way to make healthcare work isn't through universal healthcare.
It's through a bunch of different companies competing against each other like we have.
But if we're going to be giving them that money to treat people who don't pay taxes, I just think we should get something in return.
You know, you had mentioned them being a fiduciary, and really, if they ever became a majority shareholder, they would still be really kind of forced to act as a fiduciary for the rest of the equity holders as well.
But I'll finish up with this just to say, you know, greed can be a powerful motivator.
And I think in private enterprise, a lot of times that's what actually helps the companies to be cheaper and to actually.
Well, so, I mean, the theory of health insurance, right, is that what we're paying for, what the government's getting in return is less overall health care costs because the cost of treating someone who is sick.
Further on down the line is way more expensive than paying for those PCP visits and those things on the front end.
But I would argue that then it would make sense to start with our food.
Because if you look at the decline of healthcare, it goes back to the consolidation, putting tobacco chemists behind Nabisco products, and then leading to if you can look at population health data of what groups have higher rates of obesity and these things live in food deserts.
You know, it's kind of by design.
And so I look at it as healthcare is a great conversation to have.
And it's like wrapped in this like healthcare, good, bad, whatever, free, less, whatever.
We need to treat the food, though, which is why the Make America Healthy Again movement, I think, is something that's a massive winner.
And I think it's something everyone on the left and the right should be talking about.
But then you look at who consolidates these large processed foods companies.
A guy named Blair Efron, who founded Centerview Partners, donates to Mark Warner, my former boss.
It's like, By design, these bankers make consolidation happen that make us way more unhealthy, and then it affects the entire healthcare system.
And it seems, yeah, it seems so odd the timing of you getting here.
I'd almost feel like you slipped the book or some money to get on here because you literally filed as an independent yesterday in the Senate, the day before coming on this show.
I'm running against a 71 year old who has dementia who's been compromised since the 1980s, and no one else has the balls to say that.
I put myself in danger.
You believe you have a serious chance at winning in this campaign by letting the truth show, yes, because I want to live in America where the best ideas win, right?
And I believe I have the best ideas.
So that's why I'm putting them out there.
But I'm doing this with great sacrifice and great danger to myself.