Just before WW2, the USA had among the crappiest Army and Navy in the world. But by time WW2 ended, we were pumping out a mind-blowing battleship per week, and successfully waged a military war on two fronts, and nuked the hell out of Japan. That didn't happen because of magic, but because the USA had a massive industrial base created by capitalism, that in times of need could be drawn upon to wage war. It was never about the size of our military, but the size of our economic base. Today, the USA has a massive military, but we have no security because we have gutted our economy while China's economy grows huge. In order to have true security, we need to return to free markets.

There are tens and millions of young talented people in China who don't want to be there because the regime can crush their personal and economic liberties any time. Countries like the USA should really take advantage of that, to suck capital and talent out of China back to the USA.

IMO, the tax policy, monetary policy, and regulations are killing us. China didn't do that to us, we did. If we can get the government off our back, then we are more than capable of competing with China head on.

The thing is most people are W2. Their employer takes taxes out of their paycheck before they even see it. Of course, there are some jobs you can do as an independent or an entrepreneur, but there are also lots on ones where you just can't.

Literally. The Catholic Church was literally in bed with the state for 1000 years before the separation of church and state. Any bullshit that you can think of that the state tries to pull off, has already been tried. The doctrine, the social justice warriors, the guilt trips and fear mongering, the corruption, the control of the information. It's all there.

However, the protestant reformation was still pretty violent, but it was 1000's of regional conflicts over an extended period of time, rather than a massive decisive war like WW2, and a genocide of the people.

I think Schiff is sincere. I mean his dad was literally a martyr for opposing income taxes, and wrote the book on economic prosperity. I just think his argument is flawed. Also, I suspect bitcoin is indeed in a bubble right now, and gold is not, but I still believe bitcoin is a real phenomenon, and still useful. Housing was in a bubble too, but houses are still useful and valuable. I don't think bitcoin is going away.

With bitcoin and gold he may have some points, but with bitcoin vs the US dollar he claims that the dollar will always have more value because in the end the US government backs it by force. But that's exactly what drives up bitcoin value. The more governments impose inflation taxes, income taxes, transaction taxes, and currency controls (like they always do), the more attractive bitcoin looks as not only an alternative currency, but an alternative economy. I just don't buy his argument that the US dollar or any government currency is going to be a more trustworthy store of value over a long time, than bitcoin. I mean, is Schiff really going to argue that he would rather have Zimbabwe dollars, or Venezuela bolivars over bitcoins because those governments can back their money with force?

Seriously, of all the problems in the world ... government that is too small and powerless, is not one of them.

I'm painfully aware that Trump didn't decrease the size of government, inspite of appearing like he is on our side. But something else extremely important is happening. For years, the left has taken advantage of their near monopoly control over the media to try and morph and change the culture into a socialist shit-hole. Now that media is becoming decentralized, and impossible to control, the REAL culture has strongly reasserted itself and for the first time ever is pushing back, and it turns out that people don't want the government to baby them all the time, don't want to be in a constant war against the whites, men, and the rich, and would rather have decent paying jobs, the kind of jobs that only a functioning free market can provide.

Politics is downstream of culture, and the culture is distinctly becoming more libertarian, in spite of all the institutions attacking it.

It seems like the most likely path forward to get the government out of our money and finances.

The government is physical force, but you can't shoot information with a tank, their force and power isn't too useful to impose their will on information, or accounting, or money which is information about value.

Once information controls totally fail, they will probably try to revert back to physical force. It remains to be seen, how successful they will be.

Do you consider the United States to be the pinnacle of human freedom, so far?

1. Not the pinnacle, but as close as modern society has ever gotten to true freedom.

2. The founders were driven by the will to create retaliatory tariffs, but knew that such governments could easily become tyrannical, so put in a constitution to try and protect against that.

3. Well, the constitution has had a good run, but it's pretty obvious that it is failing now.

4. Neighbors probably won't be a problem. Part of the issue is that Washington DC is so isolated from the real world and real people.

5. Trump can't fix it, the problem wasn't leadership, it is structural.

6. I don't think we have a choice either way. The system is failing rapidly, with or without our help.

IMHO, not enough people realize how powerful of a tool philosophy is. The most recent example is covid 19, people could debate the science till they are blue in the face. Do studies, research cures, test effective approaches, implement 1000 different policies. But if you understand the philosophy of individual liberty, then you can make important and useful conclusions about the optimal way to act and deal with this that saves you centuries worth of damage and social destruction. A peon could make effective decisions, without knowledge of statistics or science at all.

That a libertarian world would be dog-eat-dog is a myth. Private individuals are always more charitable than the state, and the elite use the state as a regulatory tool to lock out competition, they need the state to maintain their cartels and monopolies. It's not a coincidence that the most free market economy in the world (early USA, in-spite of various regulations) created the largest middle class in the world. For all the ruthless competition and dog-eat-dog capitalism, it worked out pretty well for the common citizen.

The thing is, in the past most populist movements were socialist and leftist movements. Politicians promised the popular mob goods and services, support of the working man, paid for at the expense of somebody else, like the rich. But now a lot of populist movements are becoming libertarian. Rather than wanting to steal from the elite, the elite are using government taxes and regulations and monetary policy to fuck over the populist mob, and populist politicians are promising society to break free of those controls.