Bitcoin Debate: Pomp DESTROYS Peter Schiff

Peter Schiff is the host of The Peter Schiff Show podcast and a longtime economist and gold advocate. In this conversation, we break down real inflation versus the official CPI, the Fed's political motivations, and whether AI and tariffs are inflationary or deflationary. We also cover the Iran war's impact on oil, Social Security's looming collapse, and a five-year bet on bitcoin versus gold. =================== Arch Public is an agentic trading platform that automates investment strategies across Stocks, Commodities, ETFs and Crypto. Whether you’re rotating into AI & Gold, allocating to the S&P 500, or accumulating Bitcoin, Arch Public executes your plan 24/7 without ever taking custody of your assets or funds. Sign up today at https://www.archpublic.com, and start your FREE automated trading strategy! =================== Need liquidity without selling your crypto? Take out a Figure Crypto-Backed Loan, allowing you to borrow against your BTC, ETH, or SOL with 12-month terms, 8.91% interest rates, and no prepayment penalties. Or check out Democratized Prime (https://figuremarkets.co/pomp) and earn ~9% APY on real world assets, paid hourly. Unlock your crypto’s potential today at Figure! https://figuremarkets.co/pomp Figure Lending LLC dba Figure (NMLS 1717824). Loans subject to approval. Crypto collateral may be liquidated. Terms apply - see full disclosures at figure.com/disclosures/ =================== Looking for a better place to trade? BloFin gives traders access to deep liquidity, advanced futures products for crypto AND TradFi assets, fast execution, and a clean, intuitive interface—all in one platform. To celebrate their partnership with us, they're giving away $100,000 in Deposit & Trade Rewards. Deposit, trade, and earn rewards based on your activity during the campaign. Check them out at ( https://partner.blofin.com/d/Pomp ). =================== This episode is brought to you by mogul ( https://www.mogul.club/pomp ). Deloitte estimates that $4 trillion of real estate will move onto the blockchain over the next decade. Through tokenized residential real estate, mogul gives investors access to professionally managed properties with targeted yields, monthly rent payouts, and potential tax benefits — all without the headaches of being a landlord. Learn more and claim a special offer at https://www.mogul.club/pomp . See important disclosures at disclaimer.mogul.club. =================== 0:00 - Intro0:50 - How high is inflation really right now?14:36 - AI, robotics, tariffs & deportations: deflationary or not?25:24 - Will the Iran war make inflation worse?33:40 - Could inflation hit double digits? (Trump vs. Biden blame)40:29 - Social Security's looming collapse50:14 - Does Peter Schiff own bitcoin?52:43 - Bitcoin vs. gold: the real performance numbers1:00:45 - The bitcoin vs. gold bet1:05:40 - The "Crazy Uncle Portfolio"1:10:02 - What's actually in Peter Schiff's portfolio?1:18:54 - Outro

• 0:00Speaker 00

  20, 30,000 is still a big number for Bitcoins. It's a lot to pay for nothing. And if you look at the long-term trend line, that's about where the support is.

• 0:07Speaker 01

  If you believe what you're saying, let's make a bet. If from today, if Bitcoin outperforms gold, then you give me a Bitcoin. But if Bitcoin does not outperform gold, I'll give you a Bitcoin. What's going on, guys? Today, we got a great conversation with the one and only legendary Peter Schiff. Now, Peter Schiff is the host of the Peter Schiff Show Podcast. Great podcast. He's here, and I just give him a beating. Intellectually, this is just a absolute nightmare for him. We talk about the Fed. We talk about inflation. We talk about equity markets, about gold, Bitcoin, anything and everything that you want to know about finance and the economy. We probably talked about it. And I'm telling you, I got him to admit all kinds of crazy stuff. And I think that you're going to enjoy this conversation. So here's the latest one with Peter Schiff.

• 0:50Speaker 01

  All right, Peter, what do you think inflation is right now in the United States of America?

• 0:55Speaker 00

  What do I think it is? I think it's a big problem. I think it's a, it's a tax. It is the way the US government is currently funding a significant percentage of its spending.

• 1:06Speaker 01

  But what level do you think inflation is? Like the inflation? Yeah, the inflation numbers have come down recently. People are celebrating. But when I go out in the street and I talk to people, they say that inflation is incredibly high because everything's so expensive.

• 1:19Speaker 00

  Well, it is expensive. I mean, you know, just drive it in here. I, you know, I had, you know, I had a driver and, you know, and I was, this 40 bucks an hour. And so I thought, I thought it was 30. I remembered it being 30. He goes, well, you know, inflation, you know, so they raised their, they raised their prices. I mean, the price of everything is going up. And, you know, I mentioned on my own podcast, I think, last week, the same week that we got the CPI and the PPI. And the markets were relieved that these numbers were better than expected and they were declines. That same week, they released the import-export prices.

• 2:01Speaker 00

  And while the CPI was up 3.5% year-over-year, which is still, 3.5% is not nothing, right? I mean, but import prices were up 7.1% year-over-year. And that doesn't count tariffs, just without the tariffs. Import prices are up 7.1%. Export prices were up over 10%. Those numbers, to me, seem a lot more reflective of what consumers are actually paying. And, and those numbers, I think, are more honest because they're not adjusted. It's not like a select basket that changes. There's no substitution, hedonics.

• 2:42Speaker 00

  And, and even, to me, the, the export number is even more consequential. Not that we're, you know, we're not paying those prices. Our trading partners are, we're paying the import prices. But if we're having to raise our export prices by 10%, there's a good chance that, you know, Americans who buy those same products are also paying 10% more. Because pretty much everything we export, we also consume. We just produce more than we consume and we export the difference. But if the cost of production is going up and we're raising our prices to our foreign customers, most likely that those same companies are raising prices to their domestic customers.

• 3:28Speaker 00

  So, you know, inflation is a big deal. I mean, it's not anywhere near 2%. But I think of inflation, not just in terms of how much prices are rising. It's how much they otherwise would have fallen absent inflation. Because if you really understand what inflation is, it's the expansion of the money supply. That's what's being inflated, literally. It's money and credit. But if you create more money and as a result of that, prices, let's say, are 10% higher than they otherwise would have been. But that might not be, mean that they're up 10%.

• 4:09Speaker 00

  It may mean that they would have gone down 3%, but instead they went up 7%. The difference is 10%. That is a real loss to the consumer. I would have gotten to buy something 3% cheaper, but instead the government created inflation and now it's 7% more expensive. That's 10%. And that purchasing power didn't disappear. It was transferred to the government. And then the government gave it to somebody else. Because the government, you know, they wrote a check for social security benefits or welfare, food stamps or to pay the military. And they didn't collect it in taxes. So how does the government pay, pay out money that it didn't collect in taxes? It creates it.

• 4:52Speaker 00

  And when you create new money and you give it to somebody and they spend it, it just drives up prices. Because now you have more demand, you know, without a commensurate increase in supply. When the government raises revenue through taxation, that doesn't happen because it takes money away from me. So now I can't spend it. And now somebody else is spending the money instead of me. And so it doesn't push prices up the way just creating money. Now, if government workers were actually productive and, and added to the supply of goods, then their spending wouldn't push up prices. But if government workers aren't producing anything, but they're consuming, well, their consumption is going to push up prices.

• 5:35Speaker 00

  If it's paid for by new money creating as opposed to taxation. So when you see all these congressmen, we just had those, the testimony of, of Kevin, of Kevin Walsh. And the senators and the congressmen, you know, they're really upset at the Fed, like, hey, we got all this inflation. Like, what are you going to do about it? Well, they're part of the reason we have the inflation. It takes two to, to tango when it comes to inflation. Yes, the Fed is the principal bad actor, but it's acting in concert with Congress and the president. Because it's Congress that is passing the deficit spending that the Fed monetizes.

• 6:18Speaker 00

  And so that congressional spending is what manifests itself in inflation. And so they shouldn't be blaming the Fed. They should be accepting equal responsibility for having created it. And that's also why it's disingenuous and not, I think, even wrong when the Fed chair, whether it's Walsh or whether it was Powell or predecessors, not to opine on fiscal policy and claim that, you know, we're not allowed to talk about it. You can't talk about inflation or you can't do anything about inflation without considering fiscal policy when it's a driving force behind the inflation.

• 6:59Speaker 00

  So instead of like ignoring those questions or refusing to answer, the Fed should be holding Congress accountable. And say, look, if you want less inflation, then cut government spending. That's what you got to do. Because if you don't cut government spending and I don't create the inflation, we're going to have a financial crisis. We're going to have much higher interest rates. We're going to have a stock market crash, a real estate market crash. Do you want all those things? And it, because if you don't want inflation and then you don't want those, that other stuff, you got to cut government spending. And if you're not going to cut government spending, you got to raise taxes. And you, you can't just raise taxes on the rich because they're not going to really pay. You got to raise taxes on the middle class.

• 7:40Speaker 01

  Why won't the rich people pay the taxes?

• 7:42Speaker 00

  Well, you know, they have better ways of avoiding the tax. But if you're going to just raise the marginal tax on, on, on the wealthy,

• 7:57Speaker 00

  you're going to have less investment, you're going to have less income to tax. And when you, when you tax money that otherwise would have been saved and invested, you undermine the economy, you undermine economic growth, you undermine job creation. And it may end up leading to less tax revenue, even though you have higher tax rates. The only way to really get higher tax revenue is to go after the consumer spending. And sure, you know, you, you, you could have taxes on, on, on private jets and yachts, although the federal government can't really impose those because those are property taxes.

• 8:41Speaker 00

  But you have to tax money that would have been spent, which means if you want less inflation, you got to tax the middle class. And in fact, what, what the big beautiful bill did and why it was such a bad bill and shouldn't have been passed is it did the opposite because the big beautiful bill cut taxes, the very taxes that you would need to raise, cut taxes on tips, cut taxes on social security, cut taxes on overtime. This is money that is spent. And so when you cut taxes and you end up getting more consumption, you just get higher prices. You just get inflation. You don't get any economic growth out of that. You get economic growth from increasing investment,

• 9:24Speaker 00

  which comes from lowering the marginal tax rate, not just going after, you know, these, these middle-class tax, tax breaks. But so, nobody wants to do that. And the other thing they'd have to do is, well, cut spending, cut social security, cut Medicare. You know, they don't want to do that either. Because what happens when somebody gets social security checked? They go, I'll spend it. Right? That, that's the, that's what's pushing our prices. Because the people on social security, they're not out there producing anything. They're just consuming.

• 9:56Speaker 01

  If you believe the government's inflation number, which I don't think you or I do, but let's just say it's 3.5% year over year, the Fed, you would think would be draining their balance sheet. They would be hiking interest rates. They'd be doing all these things to combat higher inflation. But instead, they've actually increased or expanded their balance sheet by about $200 billion since like December of last year, while we had inflation that was closer to 4%. And then on top of that, it seems like now the Fed is not going to hike rates. The odds across the various markets are, you know, below 50%. And they may even try to cut rates this year. What's your analysis as to why they're doing this?

• 10:35Speaker 00

  It's politics. That's the reason they're doing it. I mean, that's the reason they stopped hiking rates in the first place, because banks started to fail. It wasn't because they got inflation under control. In fact, that's the reason that interest rates got so low. And in fact, when the CPI finally got back above 2%, the reason that they came up with this idea of inflation averaging, all of a sudden, we want to average 2%. And so because we were below 2% for so long, we need to be a little bit above it to just average it out. That was all politics. Because they, they were looking for an excuse. They didn't want to raise rates. They didn't want to tighten policy. And then, of course, you know, when it got out of control, and when inflation became the number one issue in the country, well, then they had to start

• 11:19Speaker 00

  hiking rates. They had to start doing something about it, because they couldn't do nothing, because it was the main problem. And so they tightened rates until something broke, which, you know, was Signature Bank and Signature Valley, was Signature Bank is, what is it? What was it? Valley Bank?

• 11:35Speaker 01

  Silicon Valley.

• 11:35Speaker 00

  Silicon Valley Bank, a few others.

• 11:38Speaker 01

  Silvergate.

• 11:38Speaker 00

  Silvergate. Yeah, they started, they started to fail. And more banks would have failed if they would have kept hiking. Those were just, you know, kind of the first ones to go. So they cut rates, but they never should have cut rates. Rates are too low. I mean, and the way you know rates are too low is because credit continues to expand. You know, the government continues to go deeper into debt. Households continue to go deeper into debt. So inflation is not just money supply expansion. It's credit. And credit growth has continued. The entire time the Fed was supposedly fighting inflation, credit kept expanding, as did money supply. Money supply is up like 5.5% over the last year. That's a lot of money supply growth,

• 12:23Speaker 00

  especially if you're trying to fight inflation, when you're actually creating inflation by expanding the money supply. But it's not just money. Again, it's credit, because I don't need money to buy. I can buy with credit, just the same as buying with money. And, and so what you really need to do to slow inflation is you got to stop the expansion of the money supply and contract credit. And interest rates never rose high enough to do that. Had interest rates gotten high enough, let's say rates got to 10% or 12%, people might have said, I, I'm not going to borrow that much. I'm going to save. I'm going to put my money in the bank. I'm going to get some of that 10% yield. Right? I'm not, you know, we never got

• 13:05Speaker 00

  rates high enough to cause consumers to change their preferences from consumption to savings. And the government never cut back. The government didn't look at high interest rates and say, oh, we got to cut back on spending here. We can't borrow at these rates. The Fed, for political reasons, kept rates artificially low. But they had to pretend that they were fighting inflation. They couldn't admit that they're not. So they, they talk about, oh, we're fighting inflation. That's what Walsh is doing now. He's, he's, he's trying to get some credibility by, by talking about, you know, how much he's going to fight inflation, which I thought was funny when Senator Kennedy asked him, what are you going to do about

• 13:46Speaker 00

  inflation? And Walsh says, well, I have three things I'm going to do. And it amounted to nothing, because it was all talking about it. He said, we're, you know, we're gonna, we're gonna make sure everybody knows that we're serious about fighting inflation. We're going to own inflation and tell people that we won't quit until we get rid of it. We're going to study it. You know, we're going to look at our tools. Okay, but what are you going to do? You know, because the only thing he could do is dramatically increase interest rates and contract the money supply, which he's not going to do.

• 14:19Speaker 01

  And because of politics.

• 14:21Speaker 00

  Yes. He said, on many occasions, that inflation is a choice, which it is. We don't have to choose inflation. But if we don't choose inflation, then by default, we're choosing something else. And it's avoiding that other choice. That is the reason that everybody chooses inflation.

• 14:37Speaker 01

  What about artificial intelligence, robotics, deportations, tariffs? These things that people believe are deflationary, right? Are they having a big impact?

• 14:48Speaker 00

  Well, AI has the potential to increase productivity, which would result in more stuff at lower prices. That's a good thing. That's not deflation. Well, that's not, deflation is a contraction of the money supply, just like inflation is an expansion. But yes, a lot of people think of deflation as falling prices. But I don't like to call it deflation because for some reason, deflation has a bad connotation to it. But it's not. A lower cost of living is a good thing. Everybody wants their cost of living to go down. Everybody wants prices to be lower. Because if prices are lower, you can buy more stuff. Most people

• 15:32Speaker 00

  don't have an unlimited amount of money, but they do have an unlimited amount of desires. People want all kinds of things. And the cheaper stuff is, the more we can have. And so AI has the potential to make the things that we want and need a lot less expensive. That's a good thing. Tariffs, on the other hand, do the opposite. Tariffs make the things that we want more expensive. It's not inflationary, but it is going to increase the prices of a lot of the things that we want to buy. And so AI is good, tariffs are bad. Now, of course, the government needs revenue. So are tariffs the worst way for the government to raise revenue? No. I think the income tax is the worst way. The inheritance tax, the

• 16:17Speaker 00

  payroll tax. There are a lot worse taxes than tariffs. But what I didn't like about the president's tariffs is, is, A, I didn't like them being sold as if we didn't have to pay it. Like, hey, these are, this is a tax on China. This is a tax on Canada or Mexico. That was bullshit. They were taxes on Americans. Americans paid all the tariffs.

• 16:37Speaker 01

  We could debate that.

• 16:38Speaker 00

  But then you'd lose if you tried to debate that.

• 16:40Speaker 01

  Because if you go back and you look at the 2018 tariffs, every single one of those items, the price went down within 18 months.

• 16:46Speaker 00

  That, that doesn't mean that the tariffs weren't paid by, by Americans. Maybe the prices would have gone down by more. But you know, from, from definition, that the tariff is paid by the importer, not by the exporter. They collect it in the United States.

• 17:03Speaker 01

  Well, but if you go and you look, so there's this great study that showed the tariffs are put on China at 1.20%, right? And they went and they looked at, and at least the goods they view. So this isn't 100% of all goods, obviously it's a study. But what they found was the actual increase in prices of those specific goods, when there's a 20% tariff on China, was a 4% increase. From China-made goods coming to the United States, the consumer paid 4% more on those items.

• 17:28Speaker 00

  Well, then some American company must have absorbed that temporarily.

• 17:32Speaker 01

  Well, what their, what their argument was.

• 17:33Speaker 00

  China didn't cut their prices by 16%.

• 17:36Speaker 01

  What their conclusion was, that there are a lot of people in the supply chain. So there's the manufacturer, there's the logistics, you know, and kind of exporter on the Chinese side. Then there's obviously the travel to the United States. There's the importer, there's the distributor, there's the retailer, right? There's all these components. And basically, the conclusion of their piece was, a bunch of those players all eat a little piece of the tariff. Nobody does 16%, right? But if each player in the supply chain eats 1% to 2%, then all of a sudden, the end consumer. Now, in their conclusion, for that specific goods, there was an increase of 4%, right? So it did go up in that specific study. But their point was a 20% tariff didn't equal 20% higher prices on the specific US.

• 18:21Speaker 00

  You don't know what happened, other than, you know, other than that one price increase, what would have happened absent the tariff to those particular prices? Or, you know, companies could adjust in the short run. But a tariff is just like paying rent, paying salaries, paying insurance, paying rent. All of the cost of doing business ultimately has to get absorbed by the consumer in, in prices. And, you know, the, the reason that entrepreneurs are always looking for ways to lower their costs is so then they can charge less and, and make more money. They can, they can do higher volume.

• 19:03Speaker 01

  So put tariffs aside for a second, right? Just, just leave those there. Let's go to Elon Musk. He says that artificial intelligence and robotics is going to have such a profound impact on the economy that you're not going to need to have a job. You don't need to save for retirement. And he believes that there is going to be this supersonic tsunami of deflationary forces.

• 19:23Speaker 00

  Yeah, like my, like my kid.

• 19:24Speaker 01

  Right. But do you agree with Elon? Do you think that AI and robotics can create such a big deflationary force that actually the government's going to have to print more money rather than less?

• 19:34Speaker 00

  Well, the government won't have to print any money. I mean, doesn't mean they won't. But obviously, to the extent that we can have intelligent robots doing manual labor.

• 19:50Speaker 00

  And just AI, you know, computer programs doing intellectual labor. That means we don't have to do it. I mean, there are three factors of production, the basic economics, land, labor, and capital. And any business, you know, you combine all three. Well, labor is limited. Obviously, they're all scarce. The resource is not unlimited. But the labor is from human beings. And, you know, there's physical labor, there's, you know, skilled labor. And there's not an infinite supply of it.

• 20:29Speaker 00

  Well, AI and robotics have the potential over time to basically make labor or eliminate labor as a factor of production entirely. So that capital handles that, right? So your capital investment, because a robot would be capital. Robot wouldn't be labor. It would be your capital, a businessman. And so, you know, AI agents would be capital. They wouldn't be classified as labor. So to the extent that we don't need any labor anymore, that's a good thing, because that means we don't have to work. I mean, the whole goal of progress is so we, you know, can enjoy more for less work. Right? The early humans, all they did is work. They worked all day, right? Because if they wanted to eat, they had to work.

• 21:14Speaker 00

  Otherwise, they starved. They had to spend all day hunting, gathering. And as we started to invent things, then we didn't have to work as hard. And so all this would be progress. I don't know how long it's going to actually take. I think there's maybe a lot of people are overly optimistic about the timeframe for where none of us have to work.

• 21:38Speaker 01

  But do you think that we will get to that point?

• 21:41Speaker 00

  I think ultimately, we will. We don't destroy ourselves before we get there. But I think at some point in the future, humans won't have to work. We won't need to work because we'll have all the things that we want without having to work to create them. But I don't think government needs to get involved in that. Unfortunately, probably will. People think, oh, well, we're going to need government to have to have some universal basic income because people aren't going to have jobs. There will always be jobs, I think, for people who need them. Because machines will not do everything. There will be things that humans could do better. If they need to. I think more people in the future will have the option not to work.

• 22:26Speaker 00

  And if they do work, I think they'll have better jobs that will be available, that will be more intellectually stimulating or rewarding. A lot of the mundane jobs will be automated, right? The repetitive, you know, jobs, I mean, who the hell wants those jobs, right? And if we don't need those jobs, people forget, hey, you know, some people that, you know, were working in factories will won't be employed. But they won't need to be employed because all the things that those factories produce will be so much cheaper that people won't need as much money to afford them. They won't have to work as hard. And, you know, the money that you earn is really a function of your contribution to economic output, other than what government gives you.

• 23:11Speaker 00

  So the people who are working in the factories have purchasing power because they worked in factories and they helped produce things. But if we can produce those things in factories without humans involved, and there's so much more production, then the prices will be a lot lower. And then the people won't have to work as hard at some other job to afford to buy what these factories have produced. But I do think that, you know, you have like two things that are happening at the same time. You have the positive developments from capitalism. And, you know, AI is part of capitalism and capitalism's, you know, creating abundance

• 23:52Speaker 00

  and increasing the quality and lowering the cost of things. And then you have the government that does the opposite, right? The government creates scarcity, redistributes wealth, destroys wealth, reduces quality and increases price. So you have these counterbalancing forces. The secret to real economic success is the degree to which you can keep government out, limit government's involvement and power to screw things up and to maximize the freedom of the people that operate in a market. But we also have this looming debt crisis coming from decades and decades of, you know, excesses. You know, we have a $40 trillion debt.

• 24:36Speaker 00

  That will be 50 trillion in a few years. We have an enormous interest expense. We have this complete bubble economy in the US. And so, you know, will we get a get out of jail free card with what's happening with AI? Or will the AI end up being the straw that breaks the camel's back? Because the cost of building out the AI infrastructure and the data centers could break us before we even get to the returns, right? We have to incur the costs. And we're already broke as a society. We don't have the savings to tap into because we've been tapping into the savings from the rest of the world. And, you know, we already owe the world more than we could ever repay. And they don't want to lend us anymore.

• 25:20Speaker 00

  And in the meantime, we started a war, which is complicating things even more.

• 25:24Speaker 01

  Do you think that the war will ultimately have a profound impact on inflation? Or was the spike that we saw temporary? Inflation has peaked in the official numbers and we should now expect to kind of go back to where we were?

• 25:37Speaker 00

  No, I mean, look, inflation was going to accelerate without the war. The war will make it worse because the war means bigger deficits and more inflation to finance them. But war also diverts production from civilian goods to military goods. I mean, if we're going to build more bombs, well, what aren't we building? So prices are going to be higher. Oil prices are certainly going to be significantly higher because of the war than they would have been absent the war.

• 26:11Speaker 01

  And you think that that's true long term, regardless of what happens with a war?

• 26:17Speaker 00

  Well, it's hard to say regardless of what happens. But as far as any likely possibility, I think oil prices go up. I think even if we manage to end this war, which seems unlikely anytime soon. But I think the peace, you know, will be fragile. Investors, countries, you know, there'll be a risk premium in oil that is higher than it otherwise would have been because who knows when, you know, the war might break out again. And I doubt that the Strait of Hormuz, there's going to be some kind of toll. Ships are going to be paying up to travel.

• 27:01Speaker 00

  And again, that's just going to raise costs, not just, you know, for anything that goes through there. That's just higher, higher costs.

• 27:07Speaker 01

  What do you think it'll take to end the war?

• 27:11Speaker 00

  I don't know at this point. I mean, we really basically have to surrender. But because, I mean, because I don't see how we're going to, Trump was again today posting on Truth Social about bombing the bridges again and bombing the power plants, which he didn't do, you know, he taco'd out of doing that last time, which I'm glad. I don't want him bombing civilian targets in Iran. But the only way we could actually win the war would be to actually invade the country. We'd have to go in there. I don't think we're going to win it by dropping these bombs. Because, you know, we already killed their leader. They just got new ones, right? I mean, and we're not going to, we can't go in there and start bombing the city and

• 27:55Speaker 00

  start killing civilians. I mean, so we actually have to go in there with troops. But then, once we're there, we just can't leave. We got to stay there.

• 28:04Speaker 01

  If we go with boots on the ground in Iran, he's going to lose all support of anyone who supports it.

• 28:11Speaker 00

  Which is why we can't win the war, which is why we have to surrender, which is what I said from day one. And I said from day one, this whole thing was a mistake. Because we're not going to be able to win and we're not going to be able to get out of it. So Trump has to, you know, surrender while making it look like we won. Which, you know, that's kind of what Trump does. He's just a bullshitter, right? So he could, he could claim this is the greatest victory in the history of warfare, yet still basically surrender. But I think Iran realizes that.

• 28:41Speaker 01

  Beautiful boats. Beautiful boats, they're all at the bottom of the sea now. Right? I mean, that's what he's been saying is I do think that and I've talked about this publicly that today's episode is brought to you by Arch Public. Arch Public has just expanded its agentic trading platform beyond crypto. So pay attention. This is a big one. Now they are automating strategies across stocks, commodities and ETFs. And I think that this is going to be huge. You can now automatically take profits when one market hits new all time highs and rotate that capital into other markets showing more opportunity. Whether you're rotating capital into AI stocks, gold, if you're investing in the S and P 500, or you're accumulating Bitcoin, Arch Public brings real discipline and automation to your investment strategy. Additionally, they've launched a powerful new tax loss harvesting tool. With crypto being so volatile and its

• 29:26Speaker 01

  exemption from the wash sale rule, Arch Public can offset gains with losses without compromising your long-term positions. It's exactly what every serious investor does. Institutional-grade automation that works across every major asset class. There's no more emotional trading, no more missing tax opportunities, just smarter, hands-free execution of your preferred strategies. Go to archpublic.com right now. Connect with their team, set up a time, bring your accountant if you'd like, then you can learn what automated trading can do for you. Archpublic.com. Today's episode is brought to you by Figure. We're living in a world of higher for longer rates, tighter credit, and fewer places to earn real yield. That's why Figure is interesting. Figure is the largest non-bank HELOC lender in the United States with over $22 billion unlocked

• 30:10Speaker 01

  for homeowners. They're now applying that same concept and innovation to crypto-backed loans and real-world asset yield. If you're holding crypto, which many of you are, Figure lets you borrow against it at 8.91% interest. That's 9.9% APR, and it's got a 50% loan to value. It gives you liquidity without selling, without triggering taxes, and without stepping out of the market. They use a decentralized MPC custody, so assets stay in segregated wallets, protected from rug pulls, and they've introduced liquidation protection to help manage downside volatility. And for investors looking for yield, Democratized Prime offers up to 9% APY, paid hourly, backed by

• 30:51Speaker 01

  real-world private credit. Real cash flows, not speculative token emissions. Figure is building a new capital market on blockchain. Now you have access to the upside. Check them out using the link in the description. Go to figuremarkets.co/pomp.

• 31:08Speaker 01

  If you were to go on the street right now in Manhattan and ask 20 people, are we currently engaged in conflict with Iran or not? Is the war on or off? Nobody knows. Because it's on one day, it's off the next, it's turned on in the morning, it's off by the afternoon, it's back on at night.

• 31:23Speaker 00

  The average person doesn't even know where Iran is.

• 31:26Speaker 01

  Yeah. Well, if the other component of this, I think, is what we all also are starting to see is very different technology on the battlefield. So we know that the drones in Ukraine became really big. We started to see quite interesting technology, you know, Iron Dome, all this stuff with Gaza and Israel, and then Iran shooting missiles, etc. But then, I don't know if you saw the video recently of the Sironic boat. It's basically an autonomous surface vessel, and it maneuvered itself into the port, and then it ran into a like a kind of like a port entry and blew itself up. It's like a kamikaze boat. And so you look at this, and you say,

• 32:08Speaker 01

  first of all, there's a lot of production going on there. Obviously, there's money changing hands if the government is using this technology. But the third thing is, there's no humans involved, right? In terms of, you know, it's an unmanned autonomous vessel. And so Andoril, these different companies, like they're starting to build all this technology. It does feel like the humans are getting taken off the battlefield. To your point, like, go in there, used to mean human boots on the ground. But we're kind of sending technology to go do that job now, right?

• 32:38Speaker 00

  I guess if we had, if we can just send robots.

• 32:41Speaker 01

  Well, isn't that what warfare is going to be?

• 32:42Speaker 00

  Well, that one of the reasons that people don't like boots on the ground is that a lot more people die, a lot more. I mean, we, a few of our soldiers have died, but not many, because we're just dropping bombs, you know, and we obviously have, you know, better aircraft and things like that, which is one of the reasons that you can have some more support for the war. When people stop coming home in body bags, you know, it's, it's, it's not good. But the problem with, you know, occupying a country, and we've seen that, is, okay, so you get in there, you take over, but then how do you get the hell out? And what happens when you leave?

• 33:19Speaker 01

  And should we care?

• 33:20Speaker 00

  Well, we should care, because what if we leave and we create a bigger problem than the one that we thought we solved? You know, it's the devil you know. You know, you create a power vacuum, and then it gets filled, and it maybe gets filled in a worse way than than it was before.

• 33:33Speaker 01

  Now, some of the lift in inflation, 60% of it, in some of the recent readings, was from energy. We have seen price of oil come down, then it goes back up. It's been very, very volatile.

• 33:44Speaker 01

  If the war was to end today, through the rest of the year, do you think that inflation would continue to fall? Or do you think that inflation is going to kind of U-turn now, and this recent drop in inflation is actually just a head fake, and we should expect to see, you know, 4.5%, 5% inflation later this year?

• 34:01Speaker 00

  Look, I think inflation, as measured by the CPI, or any way you want to measure it, is headed higher. I think it troughed a couple of years ago, and it's been trending up. The only reason we had some improvement in the official numbers in, in June, was we had a 30% drop in oil. And that's almost completely erased already in July, you know.

• 34:26Speaker 01

  But so this is almost like in the 80s, kind of a double top of inflation?

• 34:32Speaker 00

  No, we're not a double top. We're going to keep going up. I mean, I, I, I think that the high watermark for a year-over-year inflation is not going to be 9.1, which is what we hit.

• 34:42Speaker 01

  Oh, you think it's going to be higher than?

• 34:43Speaker 00

  Yes. Yeah, yeah. Well, I think we're headed higher.

• 34:45Speaker 01

  Like, how high do you think inflation could get?

• 34:47Speaker 00

  Oh, double digits for sure.

• 34:48Speaker 01

  Well, after nine comes 10, but like 10% or 20%?

• 34:52Speaker 00

  I just don't know what the first letter is, number is going to be. Will it be a one? Will it be a two?

• 34:56Speaker 01

  You think we could get to 20% inflation in America?

• 34:59Speaker 00

  Sure. Yeah. I mean, I don't know what's going to stop it. Especially if we get into a deep enough recession, and they have to, you know, they print enough money. If the dollar cracks, I mean, the key is going to be the dollar. If the dollar holds up against other currencies, we can keep importing. But if the dollar really tanks.

• 35:17Speaker 01

  What's the all-time high inflation number?

• 35:20Speaker 00

  Well, the highest we got officially in the 1970s, we might have got 14 or 15%, but we don't measure prices that way anymore. I mean, if we got to 14 or 15%, again, it'd be like 25 or something, because, you know, we, it's completely dishonest now, the way, I mean, pretty much a typical year now, the way we measure it would be, you know, a bit bad year if we measured it more accurately. And a lot of people, again, don't understand. They think that inflation was something that we got under Biden. We've been having inflation, you know, from one president to the next. We haven't been honest about reporting it. But the real

• 36:05Speaker 00

  big increase in inflation that we had in 2021, 2022, started under Trump in 2020 with COVID. It was the COVID monetary policy, the massive increase in the Fed balance sheet. That happened in 2020. Interest rates got slashed to zero in 2020. Donald Trump signed the PPP and, and all that massive stimulus spending. And even if you go back and look at when the CPI really started to go up, it was the last three or four months of Trump. And then it continued during the first few months of Biden, even though Biden hadn't done anything yet. None of Biden's bills

• 36:49Speaker 00

  had been passed. So that it started. So even had, even if Trump had a second term consecutively, inflation in 2021, 2022 would have been pretty much as bad as it was under Biden. Trump got lucky in that he got out of Dodge, and he was able to claim that it was Biden's inflation. It wasn't. Now, Biden didn't do anything to help it. Biden's policies made it worse.

• 37:18Speaker 01

  It's like if there's a book, it's like the trillion dollar men. They both are passing multi trillion dollar bills.

• 37:24Speaker 00

  But, but, but, but, but now inflation, it went way up and then it pulled back. So the last two years of Biden, the official inflation numbers were coming down. And so when Trump came in, he inherited that trend. But now inflation has bottomed out and now it's headed back up. And, and it's going to, and I, and I think just like Biden had the highest inflation during his first year or two. Trump's going to have the highest inflation during his last.

• 37:53Speaker 00

  And, um, yeah, that's going to be a big problem.

• 37:56Speaker 01

  You think that we could see double digit inflation under Trump in the second two, the last two years of his?

• 38:00Speaker 00

  Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. And certainly by the last year. But, uh, and a lot of it depends on what happens to the dollar and if it, but, but, you know, if the dollar is as weak as I think it could be, then yeah. And if the bond market breaks, because a lot of the impetus for inflation is going to come from the bond market. Because, you know, right now we're at, uh, 4.65 on a 10 year and 5.15 now on a 30 year.

• 38:29Speaker 01

  And is that good?

• 38:31Speaker 00

  No, not when you have a lot of debt, right? But I think maybe around 5% on the 10 year. We've already got there, you know, beyond on the 30 year, but we get to 5% on the 10 year. And now we might be 5.7 on the 30 year. At that point, I mean, that could be the breaking point, you know, uh, for the market.

• 38:54Speaker 01

  What would Kevin Warsh and the Fed do in that scenario, you think?

• 38:57Speaker 00

  Well, I, I think they're going to buy the bonds. I think they're going to monetize it because the alternative is, is, is something that politically they, they can't deal with. Because that would be, um, you know, defaults. That would be more bank failures. That would be, imagine what would happen to the housing market if mortgage rates turn out 8, 9%. You know, I mean, it's already is, um, the most unaffordable it's ever been. But interest on the national debt, just in May, I think was the last number I saw. If you annualized the interest payments, and I'm not netting out what the government pays itself, just total interest expense. It annualized to 1.6 trillion a year.

• 39:41Speaker 00

  That, that number keeps rising, but if the Fed doesn't monet, doesn't do something to bring rates down, you're going to be over 2 trillion very quickly in interest expense.

• 39:52Speaker 01

  And can we stop anything? Like, what, what could we do?

• 39:56Speaker 00

  What do you mean?

• 39:57Speaker 01

  Well, obviously we could stop spending money, which.

• 39:59Speaker 00

  Well, yeah, well, that, yeah, but.

• 40:01Speaker 01

  But what else could, what are there other options?

• 40:03Speaker 00

  Well, we can, we could raise taxes or we could cut spending. We could, you know, we could reduce the deficit, but the, the, the size of the tax hikes or the spending cuts would be substantial.

• 40:17Speaker 00

  And it couldn't be spending cuts in name only, where the spending cuts don't kick in for five years. They would actually have to cut spending so that people who are getting checks from the government get smaller checks right now.

• 40:30Speaker 01

  I have a crazy idea. We know that social security is one of the biggest, uh, line item issues that we're facing. We also see that the, um, budget office and, you know, these different groups, they all think that we're going to run out of money in social security. 2032, 2033, maybe 2034, maybe 2031, depending on how things go.

• 40:55Speaker 01

  We are still making that promise to people right now. We're telling them, if you keep paying into this, we're going to pay you in 2065 or, you know, whatever the year is, right? So if we could stop making the promise to net new people, that's different than saying to people, we already made the promise 20, 30 years ago, saying, hey, we know we promised you this thing, but we're not going to pay you. So if we could preserve the people that we already made the promise to, but stop making the promise to net new people, that again, it wouldn't solve the current problem, but at least it would change a little bit of the scenario.

• 41:28Speaker 00

  It's not even enough to make a difference because I think, I think obviously 20, 30 year olds that are paying social security taxes, they have no chance of ever seeing a social security.

• 41:38Speaker 01

  So here's, so here's my idea is the invest America accounts, you know, these Trump accounts, events of America accounts. If instead money is going into those accounts, right? The government starts with a thousand bucks, but if people can start to donate directly to the people.

• 41:54Speaker 00

  But you mean instead of paying social security tax?

• 41:56Speaker 01

  Correct.

• 41:56Speaker 00

  Then that just makes the problem worse right now. Because the government needs the social security taxes to pay the people that it made the promise to 50 years ago.

• 42:05Speaker 01

  But the people today are still going to have to pay that tax regardless.

• 42:08Speaker 00

  Yeah, and they're screwed.

• 42:09Speaker 01

  The government's not going to stop.

• 42:10Speaker 00

  Right, well.

• 42:10Speaker 01

  But there's a lot of people who do a lot of philanthropy. So hold on, just hear me out for a second. So if we go and we give however many kids, 20 million kids, whatever the number is, these Trump, uh, Trump accounts, these invest America accounts.

• 42:20Speaker 00

  Who's going to give them the money?

• 42:22Speaker 01

  Well, the government is starting with a thousand dollars.

• 42:24Speaker 00

  Yeah, but they had to borrow that money. So that's actually a net negative.

• 42:27Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 42:27Speaker 00

  Because those kids are going to inherit that debt. They'd be better off without the debt and without the Trump accounts.

• 42:32Speaker 01

  Hold on, now there's a bunch of people who every single year donate money. And rather than them give it to all these NGOs and bureaucratic organizations and all of the nonsense that has become this like global, you know, philanthropic, uh, network. They took that same money and they said, hey, I'm just going to give it direct to the kids. The reason why I like the invest America accounts is because you can make a donation and nobody gets their greasy little fingers on the money. There's no middleman in terms of an NGO or a bureaucratic organization. You are depositing the money directly into someone's account and so you're giving it to a kid.

• 43:06Speaker 00

  You were free to do that without the Trump accounts.

• 43:09Speaker 01

  Well, how are you going to, let's say that, for example, you said, uh, hey, I am in, uh, Puerto Rico and I want to adopt all of the kids in my local area. How would you give them 200 bucks each?

• 43:21Speaker 00

  Oh, you can just somehow make one contribution and someone's going to divvy it up.

• 43:24Speaker 01

  So that's what, that's what people have been doing. So for example, Michael Dell has given like $5 billion and it's being divvied up among a bunch of kids.

• 43:31Speaker 00

  Right, because each kid, each kid, because there's a max, each kid could get a maximum, I think, $5,000 a year.

• 43:37Speaker 01

  Correct. And so here's what I think is interesting is now all of a sudden, those kids, again, different than the people who are owed social security now, but those kids, we don't need to promise them social security because they are getting money directly from other citizens. Citizens are getting a philanthropic write-off, they're getting a tax break for doing it. And so what you do is you don't solve the existing problem.

• 43:59Speaker 00

  Yeah, but the money that they're getting in these so-called accounts is less than what they're paying in social security taxes. So they're still worse off. The, the problem is.

• 44:07Speaker 01

  Kids aren't paying anything in social security.

• 44:08Speaker 00

  Well, well, I guess when they're one and two or three.

• 44:12Speaker 01

  Or 16, 17.

• 44:13Speaker 00

  Yeah, but when they start working, they start paying a payroll tax if they, if they, if they start to work. The problem is the government created this Ponzi scheme in the first place and lied to people. Uh, and claimed that it was some kind of insurance program and that they were established in these trust funds. And that out of the trust funds, the benefits would be paid when the trust funds were a scam. In fact, you said they're running out of money. They ran out of money a long time ago. They never had any money. The minute they got money, the government took it and just deposited its own IOU. And the way.

• 44:44Speaker 01

  That was, that was the other problem is they should have put in the equity market rather than the bond market.

• 44:47Speaker 00

  Well, yeah, or they should have bought, you know, German bonds or somebody else, not their own bonds. But they loaned the money to themselves.

• 44:55Speaker 01

  Genius.

• 44:55Speaker 00

  But the problem, the problem is right now, this is not, you know, because for many, many years, the government collected more in social security taxes than it paid on benefits. And, and so that's what built up the so-called trust fund because the government took the excess and loaned it to itself. But what's been happening now, you know, since even before COVID, the current social security payroll taxes don't cover the obligations today of the recipients. And so what the social security trust fund is doing is selling government bonds to cover the shortfall. Well, even if those trust funds didn't exist, that's exactly what the government do.

• 45:38Speaker 00

  They would sell bonds to pay the beneficiaries. So that's what's happening right now. When they're talking about running out of money, they're just running out of bonds in, in one pocket. They obviously have the ability to issue new bonds. They would just now have to acknowledge it. And, you know, and right now that's part of the money that they don't try to claim. Well, we don't really owe that because the government owes it to itself. But the unfunded social security liabilities are enormous. You know, tens and tens of billions of dollars. And then you've got the unfunded Medicare liabilities. I mean, the unfunded obligation of the United States are over $100 trillion. I mean, they're much bigger than the funded debt, the, the, the $40 trillion national debt.

• 46:21Speaker 00

  So we're completely broke when you look at all of the obligations. So what, what we really should do with social security is acknowledge the fact that it's broke.

• 46:36Speaker 00

  And abandoned the whole system.

• 46:38Speaker 01

  You think just tell everyone that we said we're going to give you the money to say, hey, sorry, we're not giving you the money?

• 46:42Speaker 00

  No, well, the money's not there. So the only way we can get the money is to steal it from the young kids.

• 46:48Speaker 01

  Yeah, a hundred percent.

• 46:48Speaker 00

  I don't think it's we should.

• 46:49Speaker 01

  By the way, that's like, uh, people don't like when they hear this, but like, that's pretty much like the boomer strategy is the only way that they want their, uh, to monetize their homes. They want young people to pay up a significant amount.

• 47:01Speaker 00

  That's what Trump wants. Trump wants to keep home prices high so the boomers can stay rich.

• 47:05Speaker 01

  Well, this is what I'm saying. It is a very, and I use boomer as like a loving term, right?

• 47:10Speaker 00

  Yeah, cause I'm a boomer.

• 47:11Speaker 01

  I know. It's fine. Um, and a lot of it is predicated on the next generation will pay the existing generation. And so social security, home prices, equity prices, all that stuff, right? But now all of a sudden you got a bunch of people who are saying, wait a minute, either I can't afford it. I don't have the money. I maybe don't want a job where I make enough to pay all this stuff, to fund this stuff, or they will say some version of, I'm going to try to create some sort of political change to get out of this situation. It's a very fascinating thing.

• 47:42Speaker 00

  Yeah, look, I want to let home prices come down, which is what they would do absent government propping them up. And then it would be a lot more affordable. And I, I don't think that younger people should be paying payroll taxes so that older people, uh, you know, can play golf. And, and, you know, uh, we, we need to get rid of social security. Now, I understand that if we eliminate social security, there are some people, unfortunately, who without a social security check, they don't eat. So we have to deal with that problem as a welfare issue.

• 48:18Speaker 00

  Um, and so I would be in favor of a temporarily phased out, means tested substitute for social security.

• 48:29Speaker 01

  What does that mean? That sounds like a word salad. What's that mean?

• 48:32Speaker 00

  No, I mean, like a welfare program. Call it what it is. I mean, people think, hey, I paid into social security. Yeah, but the government stole all your money. It's gone, right? So there's nothing we can do about it, right?

• 48:41Speaker 01

  So this is like the equivalent. Remember when Leon Cooperman went on CNBC during COVID? And he's like, I'm a billionaire and I got a PPP check. He's like, how the hell did I get paid? This is all nonsense.

• 48:51Speaker 00

  He must've applied for one. They didn't just give them to you.

• 48:53Speaker 01

  No, it was, uh, it wasn't, um, like a traditional PPP check. It was like, I remember when they did the like Trump bucks or whatever? Like they, they gave out like $1,200 and it was all based on whatever income you reported.

• 49:04Speaker 00

  Yeah, look, my social security could be canceled. I'm fine with that. I don't need it. I paid it.

• 49:09Speaker 01

  Do you get a social security check?

• 49:10Speaker 00

  No, no, but I mean, I paid the same as that. Look, I, I, I, I do not, I should not get a social security check. There are a lot of people.

• 49:19Speaker 01

  That's very honorable of you.

• 49:20Speaker 00

  Well, but yeah, there's a lot of people who shouldn't get a social security check because look where the money is coming from. You're taxing young, poor people to subsidize, uh, rich, older people. And in many cases, what you're doing is you're allowing rich people to die with a larger estate that their children will inherit, inherit. So you're basically subsidizing the inheritance of one kid by taxing another kid who's not going to inherit anything. So if you have assets and you have wealth, then you need to spend your own money to cover your retirement. And if that means your kids don't inherit anything, well, they don't inherit anything.

• 50:02Speaker 00

  But I'm not, you can't tax some other kid who's not going to inherit anything anyway. Uh, so it's like, if, if you have assets, if you have income, you can't get social security.

• 50:15Speaker 01

  Do you own Bitcoin?

• 50:17Speaker 00

  No, I don't own Bitcoin. Yeah, I know. Unfortunately, people that have Bitcoin are going to be in a lot of trouble too. They're going to probably need some kind of bailout.

• 50:24Speaker 01

  You think so?

• 50:26Speaker 00

  Well, hopefully people aren't going to lose their retirement money in Bitcoin. But unfortunately, there's a lot of young people that, that have got money in Bitcoin that they're going to lose.

• 50:34Speaker 01

  I'm looking right now, so, uh, Today's episode is brought to you by Blowfin. If you're actively trading crypto, then you already know the platform matters. Execution speed matters, liquidity matters and reliability during volatile markets, that definitely matters. That's why more traders are starting to use Blowfin. They've built a trading platform focused on fast execution, deep liquidity, advanced futures products and a really, really clean user experience. They don't overcomplicate things. You can trade hundreds of spot and perpetual pairs. They integrate directly with TradingView and they've built a platform for both active traders and people who are just getting started. Security is a major focus, obviously. Assets are custody with fire blocks. They provide proof of reserves. And they've built a strong reputation for platform stability during those high volatility environments. And to celebrate the partnership with us, Blowfin is now giving away $100,000.

• 51:19Speaker 01

  That's right. Blowfin is going to give away $100,000 in deposit and trading rewards. So if you're looking for a better place to trade crypto, go check them out today using our link in the description. Again, that's Blowfin, the trading platform built for serious crypto traders. Go sign up, pay attention because we're giving away $100,000 in deposit and trading rewards. Today's episode is brought to you by Mogul. Legendary VC investor Tim Draper, he bought 29,656 Bitcoin. And he did it at a price of $632 in 2014. That trade is up roughly a hundred times. Clearly he knows a winner when he sees one. Now he's backing our new partner Mogul. Mogul is a real estate investment platform that puts property ownership on the blockchain.

• 52:00Speaker 01

  The founders built Goldman Sachs institutional, single family rental program, and they deployed over a billion dollars into it. Then they left to bring that same strategy to investors like you and me. They've launched over a hundred properties with 18.8% average annual IRR, roughly three times the other platforms. You get ownership in institutional quality rental homes, monthly rental income, real time appreciation, tax benefits and no tenant calls. Long story short, Draper backed it. The founders built the model at Goldman and now you can get all the financial benefits of real estate. Just head over to mogul.club/pomp, not mogul.com, mogul.club/pomp. And you can see important disclosures at disclaimer mogul.club today.

• 52:43Speaker 01

  Gold is up 21% over the last year. Bitcoin is down 45%. That means you're winning.

• 52:48Speaker 00

  I'm, well, how, it's, it's gold versus Bitcoin is the, well, the game.

• 52:52Speaker 01

  And then, uh, the S and P is up 18%. So gold's outperforming the S and P over the last year. Bitcoin is, uh, negative. But if you go back 10 years, the compound annual growth rate of Bitcoin has been 60%, gold has been 12 and the S and P has been 13. So actually over the last decade, gold and the S and P have pretty much given the same exact return. And then Bitcoin has been substantially more. Now I know people will say, oh, it's because it started a smaller base. It was a much smaller asset, blah, blah, blah, whatever.

• 53:16Speaker 00

  Yeah, you can't just dismiss that. That's the key.

• 53:19Speaker 01

  So, well, you can look at last four years. Bitcoin is compounded at 31%, gold is compounded at 24 and the S and P is compounded at 17.

• 53:27Speaker 00

  All right, but that's only because Bitcoin had a lot of volatility over the last four or five years. So it really depends.

• 53:34Speaker 01

  That's like saying, you know, uh, she gave birth to me. That's why she's my mother. Like, of course.

• 53:41Speaker 00

  Well, look, most people who have bought Bitcoin over the last five years are losing money. That's basically reality.

• 53:49Speaker 01

  Over the last what?

• 53:49Speaker 00

  Five years.

• 53:50Speaker 01

  Five years?

• 53:51Speaker 00

  Yeah, if you've been buying Bitcoin.

• 53:52Speaker 01

  The compound annual growth rate of Bitcoin over the last five years, 14%.

• 53:54Speaker 00

  Okay, so Michael Saylor is the biggest buyer of Bitcoin in the world. He's been buying for over five years. And his, he's down, his average cost is 75,000 on 60 some odd billion worth of Bitcoin. And Bitcoin is 65,000. He's down 10,000 per Bitcoin after having bought it over five years. So if his experience is typical of other people who have been average, well, I mean, he's been buying every week for years and years and years. And he's losing money, losing money.

• 54:27Speaker 01

  But.

• 54:28Speaker 00

  But what? There is no buts.

• 54:29Speaker 01

  A huge reason for that is because as he has grown in size, he has more and more access to capital. And so.

• 54:36Speaker 00

  And he bought Bitcoin with it.

• 54:38Speaker 01

  Correct. He's accelerated the purchases now. If you bought the same amount every single day or week for the last four or five years, the same amount the whole time, then you would be up significantly. You would not be down.

• 54:49Speaker 00

  Well, yeah, obviously he, he spent a lot more money when Bitcoin was higher than he did when it was lower.

• 54:55Speaker 01

  He is down.

• 54:56Speaker 00

  Yes, yes.

• 54:57Speaker 01

  That's how math works.

• 54:57Speaker 00

  Okay, I, I guess I will concede that point.

• 55:00Speaker 01

  Okay, that's, that's great.

• 55:01Speaker 00

  But, but if you look at where.

• 55:04Speaker 01

  We're making progress. It's like a therapy session. We're making progress.

• 55:07Speaker 00

  Bitcoin first got to 64,000 in April of 2021.

• 55:13Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 55:14Speaker 00

  It's barely higher than that now. Bitcoin got to 69,000 in November of 2021. It's lower than that now. So Bitcoin has not made any progress at all from where it was in 2021, from those highs. That is a significant development.

• 55:33Speaker 01

  Well, that is true today.

• 55:35Speaker 00

  Yes.

• 55:36Speaker 01

  But, hold on, but if you fast, or if you go rewind four months ago or five months ago, that was not true. So because of the volatility, you can pick, hold on, you can pick, okay, let me go back four years to the absolute top of that market. And then let me pick the bottom of this market and then they're equal.

• 55:54Speaker 00

  I'm, I'm just saying, here's where we are now, right? Forgetting about.

• 55:57Speaker 01

  You're like a technical analysis guy. Don't you guys draw like imaginary lines from tops and bottoms and they have line up?

• 56:03Speaker 00

  The other thing that you have to factor in is, okay, what has happened in the crypto industry over these last five years? And all the things that have happened are things that were positive for Bitcoin. Creating more demand for Bitcoin. The introduction of ETFs that didn't exist five years ago. The creation of Bitcoin treasury companies, not just strategy, but all the other ones. Countries like El Salvador, um, uh, countries having Bitcoin reserves. The strategic US reserve, Donald Trump, a Bitcoin cabinet, make America the Bitcoin capital.

• 56:46Speaker 00

  All these things to try to generate more demand, more adoption, more people. Yet despite all that stuff, the price is not higher than it was five years ago.

• 56:57Speaker 01

  Well, it's, it went two X higher. It went two X higher.

• 57:00Speaker 00

  Briefly, it couldn't stay there. It couldn't sustain it.

• 57:03Speaker 01

  Well, gold is down how much from its all time high?

• 57:05Speaker 00

  Yeah, not quite 20%, about.

• 57:08Speaker 01

  Okay, that's about 20%. Hold on, but, but just think about this for a second. So if gold's down 20% from its high and Bitcoin is down 50% from its all time high, right, which about the right numbers.

• 57:19Speaker 01

  Gold's volatility, I don't know what it is, but Bitcoin is caused like thirty-five, forty vol asset. So you would expect that ratio to generally hold. So both gold and Bitcoin are down off its all-time highs. When they go back up, which I think that both of us believe Bitcoin and gold will go back up, then you should expect for Bitcoin to outperform.

• 57:38Speaker 00

  I don't know why you'd expect anything of the sort, but if you go back to 2021, when Bitcoin peaked out at above sixty thousand, gold peaked out below nineteen hundred.

• 57:49Speaker 01

  Yeah, but for a decade before that, it was pretty much flat.

• 57:53Speaker 00

  Yeah, right. But gold is double what it was in two thousand and twenty-one, and Bitcoin is below where it was in twenty twenty-one.

• 58:01Speaker 01

  Yeah, but I can pick a random date, too. Let's go back to two thousand and ten.

• 58:04Speaker 00

  It's not a random date. I'm just picking the high point. But the public in America, for sure, invested, spent a lot more money buying Bitcoin than they did buying gold. They would have been much better off had they bought gold.

• 58:16Speaker 01

  You think so?

• 58:17Speaker 00

  Yeah, there wasn't much retail demand for gold. In fact, if, again, if you look at the ETFs, there were

• 58:22Speaker 01

  They told me Costco, it was popping.

• 58:24Speaker 00

  That was recently, the Costco started selling some physical gold. But there's not that many Costcos. You know, I mean, it's, you know, I mean, it's

• 58:30Speaker 01

  That's a suburban country club.

• 58:33Speaker 00

  McDonald's, like, there's one, or, like, there's not as many of them. But given all that stuff that has happened, that's a significant development that has failed to cause Bitcoin to go up. So I think that you have to just throw out the early returns for the first ten years.

• 58:54Speaker 01

  Well, if I was you, I'd want to do that, too.

• 58:56Speaker 00

  No, no, because I think they're irrelevant. Because if you're always going to go back to day one, let's say five years from now, five years from now, Bitcoin is at ten thousand. Let's say it's at ten thousand in five years. You could still say, well, over the past twenty years, it's outperformed everything, and you'd be correct. But it would be such an irrelevant time period for the vast majority of people who own it.

• 59:19Speaker 01

  But over the next five years, do you think Bitcoin outperforms gold?

• 59:22Speaker 00

  No, I think it goes down. I think, I think five years from now Bitcoin will be lower than it is today.

• 59:27Speaker 01

  Really?

• 59:27Speaker 00

  Yeah. Why? Well, I, same reason it's lower than it was five years ago. I just think that there's more people that are going to want to get rid of it than who are going to want to buy it. You know, it doesn't generate a return. It doesn't generate any income.

• 59:41Speaker 01

  Neither does gold.

• 59:41Speaker 00

  But gold has actual use.

• 59:43Speaker 01

  Which is?

• 59:44Speaker 00

  I mean, it's a metal. It's a precious metal. It's used in all kinds of things.

• 59:49Speaker 01

  Like?

• 59:50Speaker 00

  But, well, here, I have some in my watch.

• 59:52Speaker 01

  Seven percent of gold is jewelry?

• 59:54Speaker 00

  Well, about fifty percent of the demand every year is from jewelry. So it's a lot of the new demand. But, look, central banks use it as a reserve asset. It's now, it's replaced treasuries now, and it's heading much higher as far as its percentage of reserves. And as the dollar comes under pressure, central banks, you know, de-dollarizing, by definition, is buying gold. That's what they're doing. But I think that you're going to have more people who own Bitcoin who want to buy it, right? I mean, want to sell it, right? People bought it a long time ago.

• 1:00:26Speaker 01

  Is that a Freudian slip?

• 1:00:27Speaker 00

  No. People who bought it a long time ago are going to look to, you know, spend it, sell it, do something with it. But, you know, if, to the extent that you want crypto to use it as a medium of exchange, there are better alternatives than Bitcoin.

• 1:00:46Speaker 01

  I'll make a bet with you.

• 1:00:46Speaker 00

  And, you know, tokenized gold, I think, will be

• 1:00:49Speaker 01

  No, let's make a bet.

• 1:00:50Speaker 00

  Much more useful.

• 1:00:50Speaker 01

  We should bet one Bitcoin. Five years from now, that Bitcoin outperforms gold, you send me a Bitcoin. If gold outperforms Bitcoin, I send you a Bitcoin.

• 1:00:59Speaker 00

  Well, yeah, well, you can't send me, well, if you send me gold, I have, I mean, I have a bet.

• 1:01:04Speaker 01

  You can't sell it.

• 1:01:05Speaker 00

  I have, like, I don't know.

• 1:01:06Speaker 01

  That's a great bet. That's a great bet.

• 1:01:08Speaker 00

  I have one bet with a friend of mine. That's the only bet I have on Bitcoin. And the open bet I have, and we've been making bets back and forth, but we have an ounce of gold, and if it hits fifty thousand, I win.

• 1:01:21Speaker 01

  If gold hits fifty thousand?

• 1:01:22Speaker 00

  No, if Bitcoin hits fifty thousand, I win. If it hits a hundred and fifty thousand, I lose. So we made the bet a while ago. It was, it was when it was, you know, closer, was what would it go first? Hundred, one hundred and fifty or fifty? I took the fifty.

• 1:01:35Speaker 01

  Okay, but

• 1:01:35Speaker 00

  So we got an ounce of gold.

• 1:01:37Speaker 01

  But yeah, my bet was pretty good, right?

• 1:01:38Speaker 00

  Your bet is for five years. I don't know. It's five.

• 1:01:41Speaker 01

  If you believe what you're saying, let's make a bet. In that, if from today, if Bitcoin outperforms gold, then you give me a Bitcoin. But if Bitcoin does not outperform gold, I'll give you a Bitcoin.

• 1:01:53Speaker 00

  But what about the gold? What if, what if, what if Bitcoin, what if Bitcoin is actually less than gold? I still just get the Bitcoin?

• 1:02:00Speaker 01

  Yeah, it's a bet.

• 1:02:01Speaker 00

  So we're, so we're betting a Bitcoin, but I don't have any Bitcoin.

• 1:02:04Speaker 01

  That's fine. You can use one of those changers. You know, you send cash, it'll send me a Bitcoin.

• 1:02:09Speaker 00

  I have to go, I'd have to go buy you a Bitcoin. I don't know.

• 1:02:11Speaker 01

  That's fine.

• 1:02:11Speaker 00

  Because what if it goes up? I'm like unhedged on that. I like

• 1:02:14Speaker 01

  Well, I'm unhedged if it goes down.

• 1:02:16Speaker 00

  No, you own Bitcoin. You just give me one of your Bitcoin.

• 1:02:19Speaker 01

  All right. So we got a deal?

• 1:02:21Speaker 00

  I'll think about it. I'd have to buy, I, I, I think that it's, it's, yeah. I think, I think that Bitcoin is likely to go down. I think, I think that I'm more likely.

• 1:02:32Speaker 01

  So then you would win the bet.

• 1:02:33Speaker 00

  But I, you know, I don't have any Bitcoins. So if it goes up, you know,

• 1:02:36Speaker 01

  No, I'll give you your first Bitcoin if it goes down.

• 1:02:38Speaker 00

  I'd have to go, I'd have to go buy a Bitcoin. Then, then, then, then if it went up, I would have it. But now I'm screwed if it goes down.

• 1:02:45Speaker 01

  I'd give you your first Bitcoin if it went down.

• 1:02:46Speaker 00

  But now, but now if it goes down, I'm, now I'm dead. I'm dead if it goes down.

• 1:02:51Speaker 01

  All right. Do you use Sylvia? We were talking about this earlier. You don't even know what Sylvia is?

• 1:02:55Speaker 00

  No.

• 1:02:56Speaker 01

  It's like, you're Uncle Peter. This is Aunt Sylvia. We got to get you on Sylvia. Like, this is, you've been in the

• 1:03:02Speaker 00

  What is that, your company?

• 1:03:03Speaker 01

  You've been in the investment business for how long now? A long time, right? Thirty years, forty years, a hundred years? How long?

• 1:03:08Speaker 00

  Not a hundred years, but thirty years is closer to it.

• 1:03:11Speaker 01

  All right, thirty years. The two biggest things, my problem with the traditional financial system is, one, they think that individuals are idiots. They basically look at them, and they're the sucker at the table. Wall Street is designing products and services to move the individual's money from their bank account to the, to the bank or to the financial institution's account, right? I think you and I probably see very similarly that the individuals are probably smarter and should take more responsibility for their finances than what the institution can give them credit for. The second thing is, all this new technology is really powerful if used correctly. And so we built this product, Sylvia, that you go, you hook up all your financial accounts. So you give the context to the AI, and you talk to it. You ask it, you know, how do I get my tax rate down? How do I, you know, optimize my cash position? Or I'm looking at this stock or whatever?

• 1:03:56Speaker 01

  And the thing that we see that is really interesting is you get personalized insights. And where I think that that's pretty powerful is that the more assets you have, the more complexity in your financial life, the more valuable the AI is, right? Because it's good at the complexity. So like, you're like the perfect person. You're rich, you're smart, you understand some technology, like you should use Sylvia.

• 1:04:16Speaker 00

  But what do, what do you have to do with Sylvia?

• 1:04:18Speaker 01

  No, we built it. We built it for myself. We built it for myself. So my, my whole thing was

• 1:04:23Speaker 00

  Where'd you get the name Sylvia?

• 1:04:24Speaker 01

  It would have been my next kid if I had, if I had a little girl, but

• 1:04:28Speaker 00

  Because nobody names, it's a nice name. You don't get a lot of

• 1:04:30Speaker 01

  With an I, S.I.L.V.I.

• 1:04:32Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 1:04:32Speaker 01

  Right? So the, the, the key, though, is I was trying to use ChatGPT, and I was like screenshot stuff and uploading it, whatever, but it's a pain in the ass. So I said, why don't we just build the own thing? And so like, what do you use to manage all of your finances? You just got a spreadsheet?

• 1:04:46Speaker 00

  I don't do it. I got people for that.

• 1:04:48Speaker 01

  Yeah, okay, what do they use?

• 1:04:49Speaker 00

  I don't know.

• 1:04:50Speaker 01

  Right? But like, don't you want to know the answers? Like, rather than call them up and be like, hey, well, how much cash is it right now? Or like, what, you know, what's the positions or whatever?

• 1:04:58Speaker 00

  Yeah, I don't know. I'll have to look, I'll have to look into it. But, you know, I did, I did, so I did, in thinking about your bet, so if we do the bet.

• 1:05:05Speaker 01

  Oh, see, you're interested.

• 1:05:06Speaker 00

  No, because here's the, here's the dynamics of that bet. So let's say you're right, and Bitcoin goes to two hundred thousand dollars.

• 1:05:12Speaker 01

  Yeah, you're going to give me two hundred thousand.

• 1:05:14Speaker 00

  Right. And if I'm right, and Bitcoin goes to five thousand, all I win is five thousand dollars.

• 1:05:18Speaker 01

  Of course, Peter, that's why, that's why I designed the bet the way I designed it.

• 1:05:21Speaker 00

  Right, right, right. So if we were to do a bet like that, we should just bet an ounce of gold, either way. So it's irrelevant what Bitcoin

• 1:05:26Speaker 01

  I designed the bet specifically for a reason.

• 1:05:28Speaker 00

  Because if I lose, I don't, if I win, I don't win much.

• 1:05:31Speaker 01

  I mean, my friend, it took you six minutes to figure that one out. I'm surprised it took so long.

• 1:05:35Speaker 00

  No, no, but I wanted to put it in like, in clear terms. It's like, the risk reward for me is just like, you know.

• 1:05:40Speaker 01

  All right, last thing I want to talk about is, have I ever told you my theory on the crazy uncle portfolio? I feel like you're the crazy uncle.

• 1:05:47Speaker 00

  You, well, you got a Peter Schiff portfolio?

• 1:05:48Speaker 01

  Yeah, crazy uncle.

• 1:05:49Speaker 00

  You should be doing well with that.

• 1:05:51Speaker 01

  The crazy uncle portfolio is the following. It's going to do really well. It's the thing that your crazy uncle would do and talk about when he comes drunk to Thanksgiving dinner. He talks about land, gold, Bitcoin, and guns. And I feel like those are the four things that if you had a portfolio of them, would do incredibly well over the next decade.

• 1:06:09Speaker 00

  Well, land, well, look, you know, land is scarce, and even if AI makes labor obsolete, it's not going to make land obsolete. We need land. In fact, land will probably be in more demand, especially, you know, certain types of land.

• 1:06:24Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 1:06:24Speaker 00

  But I, you know, I like, rather than raw land, I like income-producing properties, right? You know, so you generate

• 1:06:32Speaker 01

  You don't like that raw land?

• 1:06:34Speaker 00

  Well, look, if you have a lot of money, I mean, the problem is, you know, if you have, if you have to pay taxes on the land, and, and you're not collecting any rent, right? It's like a drain.

• 1:06:42Speaker 01

  So you like income-producing?

• 1:06:44Speaker 00

  Yeah, it's good to have as an investment.

• 1:06:45Speaker 01

  Like what? Like timber?

• 1:06:47Speaker 00

  Yeah, yeah, timber's good, because you can keep growing it.

• 1:06:50Speaker 01

  Yeah. And then what about like blueberry farms?

• 1:06:52Speaker 00

  Blueberries are great to farm, because they're high margin. Yeah, you just got to

• 1:06:56Speaker 01

  See, I know.

• 1:06:58Speaker 00

  Up here, you know, you got to do it down in South America and stuff.

• 1:07:00Speaker 01

  You're surprised I know that, right?

• 1:07:02Speaker 00

  All the blueberries. Yeah, I got some friends who are blueberry farmers.

• 1:07:04Speaker 01

  Yeah, okay.

• 1:07:05Speaker 00

  But yeah, there are a lot of high-margin crops. You know, look at coffee. A good friend of mine who's into Bitcoin, actually, is now a coffee, he's making a ton, and his coffee, look at coffee prices, all-time record highs.

• 1:07:16Speaker 01

  That, you know what coffee is, right? That's the gasoline for humans.

• 1:07:20Speaker 00

  All right. But, so I like land. I like, I like gold.

• 1:07:25Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 1:07:25Speaker 00

  I like, I like

• 1:07:26Speaker 01

  Guns?

• 1:07:27Speaker 00

  Well, you got it, yeah.

• 1:07:28Speaker 01

  Guns and ammunition?

• 1:07:29Speaker 00

  Yeah, but you don't need to have that much money in your guns and ammunition.

• 1:07:32Speaker 01

  No, no, I'm saying, but like, if the inflation is real, and there's

• 1:07:37Speaker 00

  Yeah, look, ammunition is going to have value. You can even barter it, you know, if you need, you know, if you have extra.

• 1:07:41Speaker 01

  You're sounding more and more like the crazy uncle as you're talking, but

• 1:07:45Speaker 00

  Yeah, I, I

• 1:07:46Speaker 01

  Okay, then you like Bitcoin, so you don't afford them.

• 1:07:48Speaker 00

  You know, that, now that would be crazy. There's no, you know, there's no reason to have Bitcoin in there. It doesn't really, I mean, like, again, you know, it's, it's unfortunate that, you know, you and so many, you know, younger people are in Bitcoin, although it's even worse for the older guys that are got, that are in Bitcoin. But, yeah, look.

• 1:08:08Speaker 01

  You should say younger and better-looking.

• 1:08:10Speaker 00

  Oh, younger.

• 1:08:14Speaker 00

  Um, but look, you know, Bitcoin was great for some people. I mean, I know people whose lives have been very positively impacted because they got into Bitcoin when they did get into Bitcoin. And for them, it's life changing and they made a tremendous amount of money and it's great. But for the people who got into Bitcoin in recent years, it's going to be the opposite experience. Now, for some people, it could also be life changing in a bad way if they end up losing their, everything that they've had. You know, to the extent that people didn't put too much money into Bitcoin and then they ended up losing it. Okay, lesson learned, move on, you know, don't do that again.

• 1:09:01Speaker 00

  But there, you know, there are going to be people who just got, you know, put too much in, people that listened to Michael Saylor and, and, and, and put everything in Bitcoin and borrowed money to buy Bitcoin and sold off their organs to buy Bitcoin, whatever the hell he was getting people to do. Uh, which is why, you know, I, I, I specifically don't like this stuff that he says because he does encourage excess speculation in a highly speculative asset and then downplays it. And he did, he did it even worse with Stretch. When he was telling people how safe it was, it was like a bank account, uh, you know, with a 10% yield.

• 1:09:40Speaker 00

  Yeah, you know, but you know, if you bought, if you put money into that bank, you've already lost 15% if you wanted to cash out right now.

• 1:09:49Speaker 00

  Uh, but you know, he, he's encouraged some real risk taking and a lot of people are going to lose a lot of money in these products. And a lot of people are going to lose money that they can't afford to lose.

• 1:10:02Speaker 01

  What do you like in your portfolio? Like what have you changed in your portfolio?

• 1:10:06Speaker 00

  I mean, I haven't really changed anything. I've been investing in the same stuff.

• 1:10:10Speaker 01

  For a long time.

• 1:10:10Speaker 00

  For a long time. And I mean, obviously I'd have done better if I had had more tech exposure. I have some tech exposure and I've had some tech stocks that have done really, really well. I just.

• 1:10:19Speaker 01

  Like which ones?

• 1:10:20Speaker 00

  Well, my best one, uh.

• 1:10:22Speaker 01

  Like a really micron investor?

• 1:10:24Speaker 00

  No, my best one percentage wise is the stock Delta Electronics. You can look it up in Thailand.

• 1:10:29Speaker 01

  In Thailand?

• 1:10:30Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 1:10:30Speaker 01

  How you find that?

• 1:10:31Speaker 00

  Well, I found it 20 years ago and, you know, it's almost a hundred times what I paid for it. So it's, it's done good.

• 1:10:37Speaker 01

  So in 20 years, you made a hundred X on a Thailand stock?

• 1:10:40Speaker 00

  Yeah, yeah.

• 1:10:41Speaker 01

  Okay. Okay. Why didn't you sell it all? I mean, when you were up 50X, you didn't want to sell?

• 1:10:45Speaker 00

  Well, I didn't really get up 50X until the last couple of years.

• 1:10:48Speaker 01

  Oh, so it's all like in the last couple?

• 1:10:49Speaker 00

  Well, not all, but I mean, it went up, you know, you know, the AI has helped it, you know, the demand for, for, for data centers and stuff, but.

• 1:10:58Speaker 01

  But like a stock like that, like you went and you, you found it, you analyzed that one single stock and picked a single name stock?

• 1:11:04Speaker 00

  Find it. I hadn't, you know, we, we, we bought it for managed accounts. I remember we bought, we're buying it for our customers and I bought some for myself. And unfortunately I, I think we ended up selling that one for customers. I just never sold it. But when we saw, you know, and it, and it didn't go anywhere for years and years. I had it in my portfolio and I just, you know, just left it there.

• 1:11:26Speaker 01

  All right. What else do you like?

• 1:11:27Speaker 00

  Well, I mean, you know, more than half my portfolio is mining, you know, and, and, and that was.

• 1:11:33Speaker 01

  Gold mining?

• 1:11:34Speaker 00

  Mostly gold and silver, but also copper and nickel and, uh, you know, metals in general.

• 1:11:39Speaker 01

  Those have done well?

• 1:11:40Speaker 00

  I like, yeah, yeah. Uh, recently especially, last few years, I've done well, but some of my stocks, you know, a lot, I had a lot of royalty companies did really, really well. You know, the whole time that gold was going up, because you know, when I first started buying gold and I owned physical gold and silver too. But when I first started buying these physical metals, gold was five bucks. And I mean, silver was five bucks.

• 1:12:01Speaker 01

  Oh, I was gonna say gold. We're going back to the 1900s.

• 1:12:04Speaker 00

  Was under $300. Now, gold was never five bucks. I mean, even, you know, but silver was a dollar for a long time, but I've been, but recently when I, you know, when I started my business, my broker dealer,

• 1:12:17Speaker 00

  uh, in the 1990s, and one of the things that we were doing for clients was encouraging them to buy gold and silver. And we actually were working with a Perth Mint back then, and we were setting up accounts in the 1990s for our brokerage customers where they can own physical gold and silver. And I was, you know, buying, buying them at the Perth Mint and it was $5 an ounce, $6 an ounce.

• 1:12:38Speaker 00

  And now it's 60.

• 1:12:39Speaker 01

  60. You've got 12X.

• 1:12:41Speaker 00

  Yeah. And, but this was silver. This was a safe thing. This wasn't, I, you know, wasn't a really risky deal. And when we were buying gold, it was under 300. But even though we had this big increase in gold and silver, the gold and silver stocks did not do what I expected them to do relative to gold and silver. Uh, because the cost of mining went up so much over the years that that increase in the cost of mining, you know, took away a lot of the benefit of the.

• 1:13:12Speaker 01

  So let's say that.

• 1:13:13Speaker 00

  On some of the royal, but I owned a lot, I owned some royalty companies like Silver Wheaton, Franco Devada, Agnigal Eagle. And these stocks did extremely well. They benefited.

• 1:13:22Speaker 01

  Let's say that, uh, gold and silver both around 12 to 15X. Sounds like since, from when you were started buying them to today ish. What did the mining companies on, on average, you think, versus the royalty companies?

• 1:13:37Speaker 00

  Not nearly as well. The royal companies, most of my royalty companies are, you know, about the same as the metal up 10X or, you know, they've kept. But a lot of the mining stocks have only doubled or tripled. And some are, you know, some are, you know, even lower than prices that I paid, but I averaged like, you know, what I did personally over time is when the stocks sold off 20, 30, 40%, I bought more.

• 1:14:01Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:14:01Speaker 00

  Right. What I didn't do and what I could have done is sold into the big rallies and then bought back and sold. So, you know, I, I, I didn't do it perfectly.

• 1:14:12Speaker 00

  But I've just been accumulating these positions and, you know, I, obviously I've, I've had a decent drawdown from where I was in February, March. Not enough yet that I've been buying more for myself. I would encourage people who don't have significant exposure to be buying this pullback. It's not quite big enough for me to think I need more because I already have so much. I've been doing, I've been adding to other things. And I've actually holding some cash now because I, I, I think we might get a bigger pullback in the overall markets.

• 1:14:45Speaker 00

  Especially if I, if we get to break down the bond market, which could put a scare into the equity markets. Um, you know, looking what's, look at SpaceX breaking down and, you know, there could be some other high profile names.

• 1:14:57Speaker 01

  Would you ever buy SpaceX stock at a certain price?

• 1:15:00Speaker 00

  Well, at a certain price, yeah. I mean, I'm just not interested in it at the current price.

• 1:15:04Speaker 01

  Is there a level that you'd look at? Like a hundred dollar stock?

• 1:15:07Speaker 00

  I, I'd have to look at what the company, I mean, I think, you know, I mean, the same thing with Tesla. I mean, these, these are very expensive stocks. They're more like a meme stock. Uh, but yeah, there's a lot of potential there. I just don't know how to value it.

• 1:15:23Speaker 00

  I'd rather buy something that I'm, I'm more comfortable with.

• 1:15:27Speaker 00

  Obviously if I could have got in on the ground floor of it or something like that, like had gotten it, you know, uh, I mean, you know, Elon Musk is a trillionaire, right? Based on the market cap of these companies. I, I don't expect that he's going to stay a trillionaire. Um, unless we're all trillionaires, right? One day we could be because of inflation. Uh, but it won't, it won't really mean anything. But I think there's going to be some major blowups. Like I think one of the big blowups is going to be strategy. I think that company is going to completely implode.

• 1:15:55Speaker 01

  You think so?

• 1:15:56Speaker 00

  And that's going to impact crypto and a big decline. And we could have a big decline in, in Bitcoin and crypto, which could also spill over into other risk assets in the overall economy.

• 1:16:08Speaker 01

  So, so there's a difference between not performing well versus a blow up?

• 1:16:11Speaker 00

  Yeah, yeah. I mean, just getting killed.

• 1:16:13Speaker 01

  Oh, so you don't think it'll like blow up, like go to zero? You're saying that just not perform well?

• 1:16:18Speaker 00

  No, no. I mean, well, I mean, ultimately I think strategy will, I think the equity, the common stock will be worthless for a strategy. I think whatever's left over will go to the debtors and the preferred shareholders. So I don't think there's going to be enough left over for the common stockholders.

• 1:16:35Speaker 00

  And they're already being sacrificed right now. I mean, every week they get diluted.

• 1:16:40Speaker 00

  Because, you know, Saylor doesn't want to sell Bitcoins, so he sells what he can sell, which is common. Uh, but every time he sells common, the Bitcoin per share for the common goes down. And so the common stock is worth less and less and less every time he sells more shares because he keeps creating more supply. But he's not adding any value. He's diminishing the value. But no, I, I, I could see a major crash in that stock. And, you know, the preferreds, but if Bitcoin goes down too, I mean, if Bitcoin holds, but if Bitcoin breaks, let's say I win my bet where it, it breaks 50,000. I think if Bitcoin breaks 50,000, it could go straight to 20, 30,000 very quickly.

• 1:17:25Speaker 00

  And, and, and, and, and you're laughing like that's, that's not a low price. Bitcoin was below 20,000 in 2020.

• 1:17:32Speaker 01

  I understand.

• 1:17:33Speaker 00

  It's not that long ago.

• 1:17:34Speaker 01

  The reason I'm laughing is not because of what you're saying. It's just that why not say 2000? Like I know you well enough that you're just like, what's the lowest number I could?

• 1:17:43Speaker 00

  It doesn't have to go to 2000 for this to happen. I'm just giving you, I'm giving you a price.

• 1:17:48Speaker 01

  Do you think Bitcoin has bottomed?

• 1:17:49Speaker 00

  No, not even close.

• 1:17:51Speaker 01

  Okay. So what do you think the actual, like if you had to pick a number, what do you think the bottom of the Bitcoin market is for this bear market?

• 1:17:57Speaker 00

  Oh, well, you know.

• 1:18:01Speaker 00

  I mean, even if it is bottom now at the 58,000 and you know, we technically rise, right? You know, I don't know that we make a new high and then we just go down again.

• 1:18:10Speaker 01

  I understand.

• 1:18:11Speaker 00

  But I think, I don't think, I don't, but I don't think this particular bear cycle is over. So I do think that, you know,

• 1:18:18Speaker 01

  There could be a lower low.

• 1:18:19Speaker 00

  We're going to make it lower low than that 58,000. I think around 50,000 could do it. But if you really look at the charts, if it gets down there, I don't see why it's going to stop. And 20,000 to me, 20, 30,000 is still a big number for Bitcoins. It's a lot to pay for nothing. And if you look at the long-term trend line, that's about where the support is. 20, 30,000 is somewhere around there. That's where, you know, the long-term uptrend is, which, once we break that, then, then yeah, you are talking 2,000 and lower, lower than that. But it's not going to take $2,000 Bitcoin to break strategy.

• 1:18:53Speaker 01

  We need to get to a head check.

• 1:18:56Speaker 00

  20, 30,000.

• 1:18:56Speaker 01

  Where do you want to send people after they listen to all your nonsense?

• 1:18:59Speaker 00

  Well, I don't want to, you never, I'm, I'm, you know, well, what I want to do, my goal, I gotta, I gotta catch you in X followers.

• 1:19:07Speaker 01

  In X followers?

• 1:19:08Speaker 00

  You got 2.2 million people that follow you.

• 1:19:11Speaker 01

  Okay, how many you got?

• 1:19:12Speaker 00

  1.6 million.

• 1:19:13Speaker 01

  You ain't never gonna catch me.

• 1:19:14Speaker 00

  No, I'm gonna catch you.

• 1:19:15Speaker 01

  No, you know why? You know why you can't catch me?

• 1:19:17Speaker 00

  I'll go.

• 1:19:18Speaker 01

  Because it's like, uh, people want to follow the truth. They don't want to follow nonsense. You're blabbing about all this nonsense. Nobody wants to listen to any of that. They want to hear the hard-hitting things. Did you see, have you seen my recent tweets? We didn't even get a chance to talk about your, uh, your brother.

• 1:19:37Speaker 00

  They're not tweets anymore, they're posts. I have a little respect for Elon.

• 1:19:39Speaker 01

  You, you, we didn't even get a chance to talk about your brother, Mom Donnie, who's running New York City now. I mean,

• 1:19:44Speaker 00

  My brother?

• 1:19:44Speaker 01

  Yeah, that's your brother. You, you and him both are socialist fans, I heard. All right, where did, so people on, uh,

• 1:19:50Speaker 00

  People, people should follow me, people who follow you on X should follow me to get the contrarian point of view.

• 1:19:57Speaker 01

  Okay, what is your, uh, handle?

• 1:19:59Speaker 00

  Peter Schiff.

• 1:20:00Speaker 01

  Just at Peter Schiff?

• 1:20:01Speaker 00

  I think so.

• 1:20:02Speaker 01

  Okay, don't misspell it. It's not Peter S H I T. It's Peter Schiff, right? Okay.

• 1:20:06Speaker 00

  Right, S C H I F F. But you're not on YouTube. I got about 630,000 subscribers.

• 1:20:12Speaker 01

  What are you talking about, I'm not on YouTube? Where do you think this is gonna go? Where do you think this is gonna go? I got multiple YouTube channels.

• 1:20:15Speaker 00

  How many subscribers you got?

• 1:20:16Speaker 01

  How many do you say you have?

• 1:20:17Speaker 00

  630,000.

• 1:20:18Speaker 01

  I got more than you, actually.

• 1:20:19Speaker 00

  You do?

• 1:20:20Speaker 01

  Yeah, I think so. How many, how many YouTube subscribers? I think we got 650.

• 1:20:24Speaker 00

  Oh, my gosh. You're beating me there, too.

• 1:20:27Speaker 01

  Imagine me beating you at a place you thought I wasn't even at. That's like nightmare fuel.

• 1:20:32Speaker 00

  Well, it shows you all the, all, all, all the,

• 1:20:33Speaker 01

  And that's just one channel. I got, I got another 50,000 channel over here. I bet you I could start another channel and beat you even again. Just beat you twice. All right, so go follow you.

• 1:20:42Speaker 00

  You got all these Bitcoin cults following you.

• 1:20:44Speaker 01

  Go, intelligent people.

• 1:20:46Speaker 00

  No, they are. I will tell you that Bitcoiners are some of the more intelligent people. They, they just overthink it. That's the problem. But, you know, but no, but there are some people.

• 1:20:58Speaker 01

  Do you need a friend? Is that what you're saying?

• 1:21:00Speaker 00

  There are some people that just buy Bitcoin. They don't know, they just buy it because it's going up. Look, yeah, there are people who have done a lot of analysis and you are good, and have unfortunately somehow, you know, gone off on this tangent. They got into Bitcoin. But, but I'm not saying they're, that they're, that they're not smart.

• 1:21:16Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:21:16Speaker 00

  Uh, they're just, you know, smart people can do foolish things.

• 1:21:19Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 1:21:19Speaker 00

  I mean, I've done some foolish things myself.

• 1:21:21Speaker 01

  Well, because you know, all right, at Peter Schiff on Twitter, or on X, and then, uh,

• 1:21:27Speaker 00

  It's just Peter Schiff is my YouTube channel.

• 1:21:29Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 1:21:29Speaker 00

  But you should follow me there.

• 1:21:30Speaker 01

  And then you, if, if they go do that, then you gotta go download and use CFO Sylvia dot com.

• 1:21:35Speaker 00

  I will, I will look at CFO Sylvia dot com.

• 1:21:39Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 1:21:39Speaker 00

  And, and,

• 1:21:40Speaker 01

  And sign up.

• 1:21:40Speaker 00

  Well, I mean, I don't know if I can,

• 1:21:43Speaker 01

  How are you gonna look at it if you don't sign up?

• 1:21:44Speaker 00

  Oh, you have to sign up to look at it?

• 1:21:46Speaker 01

  Well, you gotta use the product. It's like, you know, if you, uh, if you go to the grocery store and you're like, oh, that looks interesting on the shelf, but you don't try the food.

• 1:21:53Speaker 00

  But you said it's something for my business. I'm not, I'm not in the accounting.

• 1:21:55Speaker 01

  For you personally, for you personally.

• 1:21:56Speaker 00

  Oh, it's a personal thing?

• 1:21:57Speaker 01

  Yeah, it's personal finance.

• 1:21:58Speaker 00

  Oh, my personal.

• 1:22:00Speaker 01

  I think that we, we may be able to automate away some of your team and then you can save money.

• 1:22:04Speaker 00

  Really?

• 1:22:05Speaker 01

  That'd be interesting, right?

• 1:22:07Speaker 00

  I have a pretty lean ship in Puerto Rico.

• 1:22:09Speaker 01

  Yeah, don't worry. Well, we're gonna get you in a canoe. You know, you don't need that big ship. You just get in a canoe. All right. Thank you for doing this. We'll do it again in the future.

• 1:22:16Speaker 00

  All right.